Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

FW= a subcompany of GW. Based on my experience of subcos they likely have their own T&Cs, management, ethos and culture.

But once again, the OPs survey is to collate data to potentially send to GW. Nothing he mentioned wants to influence or change FW.

The results of the (paraphrased) "do you wish GW would answer some fetching rules questions?" Question has me amused. It's the most pac-man-ish looking circle graph.

Bora77 wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Several of the questions are biased, making any data collected suspicious as to intent.

SJ

The intend is clearly stated on the first page of the survey. I am a private person, a 40k player and fan.

Of course I am biased, nobody pays me to be neutral after all. I am one of the player base and I am asking questions that came out of my own head, so they cannot be neutral.

I want to know what others think and lots of others are interested in the results too...

If we get around 5-10k people to participate, I am sure GW as a serious business cannot afford to ignore the result either, so I will send it to them - for whatever they want to do with it.

If you have suggestions for improvements, please clarify - I can change the wording of the questions still, or take it into consideration for next years survey.

The results are functionally useless due to the bias, as all it can do is reinforce the bias. But good luck with that.

SJ

 Ratius wrote:
FW= a subcompany of GW. Based on my experience of subcos they likely have their own T&Cs, management, ethos and culture.

But once again, the OPs survey is to collate data to potentially send to GW. Nothing he mentioned wants to influence or change FW.

Not really, they're all in the same office, use the same factory are part of the management structure, aren't a registered company. If I e-mail or write to them, I am writing to GW head office. And, well, that's not what the OP said either:

Bora77 wrote:

I took the time to make a detailed Warhammer 40k survey, because I am very interested to see the state of mind within the Warhammer 40k community as a whole and not just wihtin my gaming circle.

Bolded the important part. You can't have a full survey to gauge perceptions of the entire playerbase if it excludes certain bits arbitrarily. I play 40k. I play with the rulebook, some codexes and some Imperial Armour as well as the odd dataslate. In other words, a legitimate, standard 40k game. I also have never, in the last 6 years at least, played a game without any FW in my army. My main armies are mainly Forgeworld lists - Elysians and, recently Eldar Corsairs.

I find it interesting how the dakka community differs to others I am participating in... the amount of negativity (usually from the same folk in most threads..) has even been noticed by others who PM'd me, telling me to ignore it.

While I understand that my survey is in no way perfect or 100% representing every player there is, I wonder what makes people believe that this constitutes for critizing my work as they do.

Maybe it is because GW themselves have failed to make this kind of survey on their own in a more professional way (and I doubt they would do it better) and your expectations have grown so high after many years of neglect from your favourite gaming company?

Anyhow, please do not forget, this is something I did in my spare time, nobody is paying me for it and I am no professional writer either. I did it to the best of my knowledge and the way it is done 1.400 people were happy to participate already within less than 24h.

I am not looking for praise here, but I would also ask you kindly to formulate you criticism in a constructive way, rather than simply throwing verbal excrement at it, as is the dakka way.

By the way, I did leave out FW on purpose, to me FW produces additional elements for factions introduced by GW themselves. So if you play some kind if Imperial Army derivate, that counts as Astra Militarum to me. So do Corsairs as Eldar, they use 95% the same models and rules.
I haven't included supplements for the same reason either.

The logic the survey is created by is: "If it doesn't have a GW codex, it won't be listed".

Of course this was just my personal opinion at the time I had created the survey, I would surely have a more detailed questionnaire if I did it again, so less people feel left out!

Not really, they're all in the same office, use the same factory are part of the management structure, aren't a registered company.

Fair enough, thats my ignorance on that one.

I am very interested to see the state of mind within the Warhammer 40k community as a whole and not just wihtin my gaming circle.



Bolded the important part.

Granted, however I took this part from his poll:

you never know, maybe GW might see the results and change things?

Anyway, you dont want to vote, cool, thats your choice.

I find it interesting how the dakka community differs to others I am participating in... the amount of negativity (usually from the same folk in most threads..) has even been noticed by others who PM'd me, telling me to ignore it.

I think you're doing great and if you manage to merge results of several forums polls, you'll have some reliable data to answer your casual question.

AFAIC, I found the initiative pretty interesting and I learned some things despite your audience spectrum is not wide enough at the moment.

Don't let people despise your legitime curiosity! You're not surveying in order to write a fething master thesis so keep going !

Done.

I did it as well.

 Ratius wrote:

Anyway, you dont want to vote, cool, thats your choice.

Actually, I really do, but this:

Bora77 wrote:


The logic the survey is created by is: "If it doesn't have a GW codex, it won't be listed".

Means I am not the target audience for the survey. Pity.

To the OP - there's no negativity from me, just disappointment that I can't air my opinions in your survey. Recommend that you adjust the wording in your opening topic from saying "Warhammer 40k community as a whole" to "The Warhammer 40k community who mainly play Codex only games" or some variation of.

If you do decide to do further surveys, recommend you be wider reaching including those that play with no restrictions in the rulesets used, those who play campaign games, 30k "Age of Darkness" games, etc. It'd be interesting to see how different people play 40k and in what fashion.

zedmeister, I will include all factions and subfactions if there will be future surveys, however to do that I probably would need naother survey just to make sure I dont leave out some niche factions ;-)

Didnt take your comment as negative, I really understand your sentiment.

I think there should be another question that includes multiple choices
In case you buy models/books second hand or from recasters/reprint and not directrly from GW, what is the reason for this?

[ ] I buy EVERYTHING from GW
[ ] I find GW prices too high
[ ] I'm not happy enough with the rules to support GW
[ ] Yar har, fiddle di dee, Being a pirate is alright to be, Do what you want ‘cause a pirate is free, You are a pirate!

The logic the survey is created by is: "If it doesn't have a GW codex, it won't be listed".



Means I am not the target audience for the survey. Pity.

Thats fair enough, it does limit certain factions and choices as a result.

koooaei,

those reasons are given or implicated in other answers in the survey already (value for money, quality, rules etc).

If you are interested on an individual "why this participant chose this" result, you could draw these conclusions from the data collected.

Thanks for oyur input anyhow!

 Ratius wrote:
Completed, I found it quite interesting., thanks.

Under age, seems the 12 year old brigade opinion is truely debunked (thank god) if this poll is representative.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Q3mp07LWw-Bz_hxksF08H0uYWSShcMeLPQFUDmBVEsY/viewanalytics?usp=form_confirm

Holy bajeezus I added up the amount of money people spend on 40k each year and it averages out at around 830 euro per person. That's heaps higher than I thought.

At a guess (based on their revenue) it means they only have about 100-200k active customers.

Which in tun is about 70 quid a month.
The price of one large kit and some paints (land raider) or perhaps two medium ons (2x tac squads).
Seems kinda logical.

 Ratius wrote:
Which in tun is about 70 quid a month.
The price of one large kit and some paints (land raider) or perhaps two medium ons (2x tac squads).
Seems kinda logical.

I expected more people who don't buy much to offset the plastic crack addicts buying 1-2 kits per month consistently over the course of a year.

Tried to do it but I'm from NZ. RIKT m8

My only issues with the survey was the blatant bias in the answers choices, and the overt sexism of one of the questions. The bias in he survey promotes responses that support the bias, while the sexism appears to be an attempt at being funny while in essence just showed contempt for women in general. This means any usable data points are inherently flawed.

SJ

MarsNZ wrote:
Tried to do it but I'm from NZ. RIKT m8

You are right and I changed Australia to Australasia, which is the region for both countries. Not pretty, but many countries are summed up in this survey, sorry. :-)

As for the money people spend on 40k, yes it is impressive.

I asked a friend of mine who manages the local GW store and he told me his yearly average turnover per client is far less than 100 EUR actually.

Some clients just drop by to see the new stuff and maybe buy some paint or a white dwarf etc... so the average volume is very low.

You should not forget that the participants in this survey are mostly people that read internet forums, so very dedicated gamers I would presume.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
My only issues with the survey was the blatant bias in the answers choices, and the overt sexism of one of the questions. The bias in he survey promotes responses that support the bias, while the sexism appears to be an attempt at being funny while in essence just showed contempt for women in general. This means any usable data points are inherently flawed.

SJ

MarsNZ wrote:
Tried to do it but I'm from NZ. RIKT m8

jeffersonian000, overt sexism, really?

The survey has no question regarding the sex of the participant and all replies regarding the partner are optional and formulated as he/she, so it is applicable to anyone.
I am really curious as to how you interpret sexism into this.

Please elaborate and spare us further trolling - instead give proper examples and how they can be amended according to you.

Wow. 1.800 participants until now, thanks for your time lads!

The pie charts are inherently worthless as they have no key.

zedmeister wrote:
Bolded the important part. You can't have a full survey to gauge perceptions of the entire playerbase if it excludes certain bits arbitrarily. I play 40k. I play with the rulebook, some codexes and some Imperial Armour as well as the odd dataslate. In other words, a legitimate, standard 40k game. I also have never, in the last 6 years at least, played a game without any FW in my army. My main armies are mainly Forgeworld lists - Elysians and, recently Eldar Corsairs.

See, I just assumed that Elysians would count as Astra Militarum and went with that option.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
The pie charts are inherently worthless as they have no key.

Maybe you missed it, but the charts have all mouseovers which give you the data.

After the survey is done I will present the excel file for everyone.

How does your spouse or significant other support you hobby?

Check "cleaning your hobby space right now" for sexism.

Both the question and the tongue in check answer demonstrate a contempt for one of two genders.

No trolling, just pointing out that the survey is biased, and that bias data is useless data.

SJ

Completed. Some very interesting results, although mostly what I would have expected.

The vast majority of the questions were biased though, very little objectivity in them, and often not enough possible answers.

Well done for setting it up

Done, but the marital status seemed somewhat immature. My GF enjoys painting, but not playing btw.

 zedmeister wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
Even though the OP said it was aimed at possibly influencing GW?
FW arent being aimed at here.....

But, they're the same company.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
Even though the OP said it was aimed at possibly influencing GW?
FW arent being aimed at here.....

FW = GW

No, they're not. GW owns FW. It's a subsidiary. Walmart owns Asda, but Asda isn't Walmart, nor vice versa.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
How does your spouse or significant other support you hobby?

Check "cleaning your hobby space right now" for sexism.

Both the question and the tongue in check answer demonstrate a contempt for one of two genders.

Wow, you are working WAY too hard to see sexism in anything you possibly can.

When I read that I didn't even consider gender, I just assumed it meant a lazy gamer who left their crap lying around and a spouse who had to clean it up

Granted those questions are biased by the fact they shouldn't be asked for people who answered "single" to the relationship status, but I think you're really working over time to read sexism in that.

Define table top standard of painting please. I have no idea what that means.

I am playing a Death Korps list as my main army, but my back up are the Tempestus Scion, so I voted for AM as both my main and my back up.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
How does your spouse or significant other support you hobby?

Check "cleaning your hobby space right now" for sexism.

Both the question and the tongue in check answer demonstrate a contempt for one of two genders.

No trolling, just pointing out that the survey is biased, and that bias data is useless data.

SJ

Well, it does say he/she. So, equal opportunity.