It took a bit longer than expected but we finally posted our Warmachine Prime Remix review on TGN.

Great review as usual.  My only comment:

In your conclusion I think an additional "pro" for Prime Remix is value.  Priced at $25 (US) for the soft cover and $35 hard cover, in full color, the quality of this book is unmatched at this price point. 

The only reason I mention this is that I've found myself using Prime Remix as a new benchmark when looking at new rule books.  For example:

When looking at Aeronautica Imperialis at Adepticon, there are 20 pages of rules (B&W) then about 130 pages of color pictures and background material.  It is hard cover, but at a price point of over $60 US, I was stunned as I though Prime Remix was a better looking product at roughly half the price. 

Just think "porsche" when you look at AI, Russ. In fact, as it's from FW, think "heavily aftermarket-customized porsche."

(It is a game with interesting potential, though.)

You are also looking at a much more limited run for AI, which usually means an increase in cost.

Not much stuns me anymore Russ, every day I am at the gas pump I think how much gaming stuff is worth it.

Seems like a good time to finally get off the GW horse and climb on the WM bandwagon. New Core Rulebook with all the trimmings . . .

I have a review of AI coming, based on reading through the book and watching 4-5 games played over the weekend. It is a cool game concept, but price point and availablity (i.e. distributed by Forgeworld) will make it very difficult to achieve any kind of main stream success.

I didn't mention the price as it is in line with the other PP rulebook releases. It wouldn't be fair to drag AI or some other title into the review unless there was a reason to be comparing them.

AI is expensive. I am guessing that AI has about a tenth of the press run of Remix and printing costs are front-loaded on print runs. So typically the more you do the cheaper it is per unit.

And, it must be said, it is an FW book. They are routinely more expensive than a comparable book. I think you'd be better off comparing it to Dark Age or Infinity in terms of prices since those books are also priced as entry vehicles into a gaming system

Yep, agreed.

And Prime is a good buy if you are new to the game or getting back into it, and it also makes the old rulebooks really cheap on ebay if you just want to take a look at it.

No you're right, a direct comparison to another product might be inappropriate in a review.  However I think the value is still great, even within the PP brand.  The book is priced at EXACLTY the same cost of the original Prime, but now it's full color with all new artwork!

Also, look across the industry.  Is there a similar book in size and quality (new art, color) at that price point?  $25 is a great price for that book, or any book of similar quality.  Even in the RPG arena.  I'm not trying to pick on GW, but rather applaud this particular product.  I don't know of another game book (miniature, RPG, etc) produced at this price with such high production value.

e.g. When reviewing a camera, reviews often comment that the MSRP is a tad high for this feature set, or conversely, the camera is a great value given its features and price point.  Is such a comment inappropriate for games?

Regardless of the reason (large first printing, etc.) the book is arguably the best value in the industry right now.  With a bit of luck other manufactures will follow suite and the price of core rule books will come down, while quality goes up. 

But it is also just a reprint..... that begs to be bought because it is clarified and FAQ'd. I don't really need new artwork and background as I don't care much for either.

Now you want cheap... heck Urban Mammoth and Metropolis. Now that is cheap (free).

Posted By Toreador on 04/10/2007 8:14 AM
But it is also just a reprint...

A reprint would be the same material. Remix has new art, new fiction and all the rule clarification and changes in it.

Its a significantly different book than Prime was so I don't think its justified to call it a reprint.

Okay, not a reprint

But it is just everything new organized into another book, that is a lot like the previous book that was out. To me it was only a good buy because I had previously sold my other book. Most in our group didn't bother to buy the new one as it's mostly a rehash.

Posted By RussWakelin on 04/10/2007 8:04 AM

e.g. When reviewing a camera, reviews often comment that the MSRP is a tad high for this feature set, or conversely, the camera is a great value given its features and price point.  Is such a comment inappropriate for games?

Its not inappropriate, I just think there needs to be a context for comparison.

For example, my AI review, which I am currently working on, will compare Remix and the AI rulebook (and Infinity as well) in terms of design and layout but only because I am trying to make a point about the design of the AI book.

In that case I think it is appropriate.

I think comparing the price of Remix and AI would have been appropriate if they were comparable books. But they are different types of games and different genres and even different books physically so adding comparisons to AI would have been quite a stretch and FW would have, I think, been justified in critiquing me for doing so.

I think that you are all correct that the price could have been mentioned and I will add that to the review as a small update.

Posted By Toreador on 04/10/2007 8:36 AM

To me it was only a good buy because I had previously sold my other book. Most in our group didn't bother to buy the new one as it's mostly a rehash.

I think the convenience alone is worth the price. I now have all the rules, errata and clarifications in a single book. I never liked having to print out FAQs and errata and carry them around... maybe I'm just too darned lazy :-)

Posted By thegrognard on 04/10/2007 7:47 AM
Seems like a good time to finally get off the GW horse and climb on the WM bandwagon. New Core Rulebook with all the trimmings . . .

Try the game first. Some people don't enjoy the playstyle and
prefer the squad level stuff and customizability of 40k.

I agree. The play styles are totally different and comparing the two doesn't make sense. I like both for different reasons.

Warmachine is a lot like a cardgame. It's all about the combos. You have to really be up on what your opponents stuff can do individually, and how that will all work in concert. I have seen many a game where one player is on the ropes badly, but can pull a specific combo off and get a caster kill. It is a very different beast than most miniature games out there. I am still very much on the fence about it.

Posted By Toreador on 04/10/2007 9:10 AM
Warmachine is a lot like a cardgame. It's all about the combos. 

Warmachine is nothing like a card game. And while there are stackable effects in the game it isn't all about combos. This is a bit of an over-generalization.

Edit: When you first play the game, especially with starter set games, it can seem as if the entire thing is decided by someone using a Feat. That is not the case once you start playing 500pt games.

Meh, that is my impression about the game. It is a lot like it, but with more maneuver on the tabletop. The army list building is all about the combos you get, and how you can use that to win the game, also with units. Adding special models to units to get more effects, and boost the power. To me it plays like MTG with miniatures.

And yes, that is just my opinion, and does generalize it, but that has been my overall impression of the game since it's inception. I am not saying it is bad, but it works a lot different than say Flames of War or WHFB.

Posted By Toreador on 04/10/2007 9:28 AM
Adding special models to units to get more effects, and boost the power. To me it plays like MTG with miniatures. 

Its more accurate, I think, to refer to it as stacking effects. Magic can generate huge amounts of damage or excessive effects from particular combos and this doesn't have a counterpart in Warmachine.

Magic is indeed all about combos but Warachine has a lot more going for it than just the stackable spell effects in the game.

I think its a matter of degree. Magic is solely focused on building combo effects and often dealing with universal effects (like Goblin attack decks that use global effects to boost Goblin stats) that have no counterpart in Warmachine

And is more apparent in different Factions in Warmachine, and is very apparent in some caster kill combinations. It also has "power pool" management that is also part of some card games.

Coming from a long time wargamer, that has played card games, it seems to me more akin to that than a "traditional" wargame. Started with Menoth and now play Cryx, which is all about the combos.

At least you don't have the "building" part of Magic, ie "Deckbuilding".

/shudder

(that and random card draws)

I must admit that I enjoyed Magic for what it was, but when I look back
on it I wish the game had another power limiting factor in place of "Rares"
and "Ultrarares"

I had fun playing WM when it first came out, but as the number of units and casters started to grow, and when the combos started becoming harder and harder to predict (I'll use this guy's special ability to do this, then cast this spell, then channel through this guy to use this, then pop my feat, then... my brains started bleeding), I kind of lost interest as I just had to stay on top of new units/combos too much.

I only played MTG when it first came out and started getting popular, but I remember the same thing. Kitting out a deck to get the quick player kill with combos and generally not being fun anymore.

That being said, I'll still probably pick this Remix up. It saves me having to carry around a ton of books in order to game and since WM is becoming more and more popular (I even lost my main WHFB opponent to it), I better start studying...

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Posted By Ozymandias on 04/10/2007 10:39 AM
I had fun playing WM when it first came out, but as the number of units and casters started to grow, and when the combos started becoming harder and harder to predict (I'll use this guy's special ability to do this, then cast this spell, then channel through this guy to use this, then pop my feat, then... my brains started bleeding), I kind of lost interest as I just had to stay on top of new units/combos too much.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Wait...so you're saying that you don't like it because it's not predictable?

j/k...I know what you mean. I just played my first game against a Hordes list (Vayl-Seraph-spam) and was completely rocked due to not knowing a thing about them. That being said, I've now got a much better idea about how I could have handled it.

What I like about WM over 40k is that it *is* more unpredictable - even the fact that everything is sum of 2d6 or 3d6 means that you can pull off some bs moves in a pinch.  However, there are fewer "can't be beat by anything" builds in WM.  If you've ever played multiple games against a Drop Pod Marines, Daemonbomb, pure ZillaNids, Tau Air Force, or 4-Ord/9-Oblit Iron Warriors, you know what I mean.  Sure, there exists a rock for each of those 40k scissors armies, but most armies will be reduced to just hoping for good dice and bad scatters.

/ontopic:  Remix Good!  Great to only have to carry around one book.  And my Repenter's flamethrower now causes Fire, yippee!

I have seen games of Warmachine where one side hasn't lost a fig and utterly destroyed the other. Haven't seen that in too many other games,.... yet

Early on with Menoth I couldn't win a game against Khador. With more units and abilities it evened out the field, but with just the original book I couldn't do anything game after game. It is what made me sell my first bunch of WM figs on Ebay.

Remix also toned down 2 of the casters that were hard to win against. Just for that it is a good buy.

You've NEVER seen this done in 40k? Really?

Maybe he meant it the other way? Lots of stuff was killed but
the other side won?

I have never seen it in 40k. Aways a few figs here and there lost, but never without any figs lost at all. Bigger games and more figs also though.

I've seen it in patrol games with Tau armies. But not in larger 40K games

In W40K, it happened to me at least twice - when I uttterly destroyed a Grey Knight force in a tournament, and a Dark Angel force in casual play, with my 3rd edition Eldar. I felt sorry for my opponents in those games - it wasn't fun to crush opposition to this point for neither of us.

Incidentally, it never happened to me in a 500 pts game of Warmachine.

So what's the point?

I've been in 40k games (1500 & 1750) where I've won without loosing a model. I've also been destroyed to the model while my opponent has lost nothing. Sadly the later is more common than the former in my case.

Of course... I've played a lot of games.

WM is similar, although because there is a single model that can end the game at below 1000 points, zero casualty victories are more common. But at higher point values (750) it also becomes difficult to win at WM with no losses. At 1000 points it is extremely tough.

WM is like chess in that respect. An inexperienced player in chess can get mate'd in 2-3 moves if he really screws up without a single piece being traded. In WM if you are not careful with your caster, the same can happen.

Been playing a long time too Russ, just have never seen it happen. Not a lot of games give you an auto victory for taking out a piece. (wargames that is)

The point is that it is a different style of game than most tabletop miniature games. Not saying it is a bad thing, but it has a very different play style.

Agreed. And I know you've been playing awhile, which is why I was surprised you never witnessed anyone get totally nerfed in 40k. It usually happens when some poor bastard (me, in many cases) is trying out some wacky new list concept and goes up against a veteran player with a min/maxed force.

Heh heh, even in bad luck I have seen at least a single kill

But, the world is a very very big place!

Here's one to try: KOS vs 2 monolith necron force.

"Plant more 'shrooms ma, wez all outta boyz"

That is a rather extreme example, Russ.

I don't think I've ever been in a game in which one side didn't kill a model, though I've been in some pretty one-sided games (out of how many hundred? Do you still have Dakka stats somewhere?).

The issue is less about how many models you kill, however, and more about the character-centric rule of most WM scenarios that caster kill trumps all. In some ways it's a good thing. It gives a player who is losing, even badly, a way out and some excitement. OTOH, it also makes all other tactical considerations, and superior play up to that point in the game, basically irrelevent if you make a (sometimes very small) mistake with your caster. This, to me, is a serious problem with the game. Not enough to keep me from playing it regularly, but certainly one which annoys me pretty much every time I play.

Perhaps, but it is also a true story.

Ragnar you've also wipped me out to the model and lost nothing in the past.   You may not remember those bad beats... but they haunt my dreams.  HAUNT I tell ya. 

You guys just need to play orks more.

Posted By RussWakelin on 04/11/2007 12:53 PM

That is a rather extreme example, Russ.

Perhaps, but it is also a true story.

Ragnar you've also wipped me out to the model and lost nothing in the past.   You may not remember those bad beats... but they haunt my dreams.  HAUNT I tell ya. 

You guys just need to play orks more.

You're right, I don't remember wiping you to the model without losing anything.  Because it never happened.   I do remember getting my clock cleaned by your orks in my second league, but even in that game, I at least killed a few guys.

Posted By RussWakelin on 04/11/2007 12:18 PM

Heh heh, even in bad luck I have seen at least a single kill

But, the world is a very very big place!

Here's one to try: KOS vs 2 monolith necron force.

"Plant more 'shrooms ma, wez all outta boyz"

Much worse than that is the old Virus Outbreak card on Imperial Guard.  I saw one guy loose 90% of his army before the first turn.  The everything left was shot up and his Leman Russ blew up and tumbled over his last squad causing them to break and run off the board. All over in half a turn.

Playing Orks this weekend in a mini tourney

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/11/2007 12:45 PM

The issue is less about how many models you kill, however, and more about the character-centric rule of most WM scenarios that caster kill trumps all. In some ways it's a good thing. It gives a player who is losing, even badly, a way out and some excitement. OTOH, it also makes all other tactical considerations, and superior play up to that point in the game, basically irrelevent if you make a (sometimes very small) mistake with your caster. This, to me, is a serious problem with the game. Not enough to keep me from playing it regularly, but certainly one which annoys me pretty much every time I play.

One man's trash is another man's treasure.  I really like the "alternate win condition" system in Warmachine.  While I do agree that assassination should not have a place in every mission, I do like the fact that an otherwise loosing army always has that chance to make a comeback, even in the late game...

In 40k, usually if one side has taken 75% casualties, the game is effectively over.  While it can be argued that achieving 75% casualties should entitle the dominant side to a victory... I feel that having an objective to achieve, even if it is assassination is far more satisfying than GW's straight VP system...

Example: 

In one 500 point game, my high reclaimer had 32 focus one turn.  This meant that 27 friendly trooper models had DIED in his control area the previous turn (or I had just taken 78% casualties over the course of one enemy turn - damn bile thralls + venom). 

In a normal game, this would be a rout.  However, we were playing the mission where you had to cross the middle line and prevent enemies from entering your half of the table...  My opponent got so carried away slaughtering my army, that he forgot the objective, and my badly wounded paladin was all that I needed to reap the one control point and win.  I believe I had 3 models alive at the end of the game.  (Even without this condition, with 32 focus and stuck with the stats of a Jr. Warcaster, I might have been able to kill Deneghra, dead, Dead, DEAD!)

This kind of win would NEVER happen in the GW system, since the VP differential for loosing 92% of your army and inflicting 12% casualties on your opponent would completely negate the feeble VP bonus that GW gives out for mission objectives.  While this is not a fault of the game system, I feel that this mode of mission design encourages a very rigid playstyle based on VP ROI trumping all other considerations.

Anyhow.  YMMV of course. 

I play Cryx so I'm all for the alternate win. Sometimes. Well it depends... Well it helps me but sometimes I feel cheap killing a 'caster just to pull out a win. Well no, I lie. I love it. I played a game against Trollbloods the other day and I killed only one model. It was Doomshaper so I won.
I'd be nakkered if I had to kill all those trolls...
It makes any game a close game. Even what looks like a blowout. I like it.

Wow. Assassinating a warlock takes some doing (like overexposing a warlock
and burning all your fury I guess).

Doesn't GW have quarters claiming type objectives?

Yeah, GW has a number of missions where the mission objective trumps all. OTOH different people people play it differently, so...

I like the alternate win conditions in WM, it does allow a player whose forces have been devastated to pull out a win. In the SR3 missions, you win either by objectives/control points, or by Caster Kill. VPs *only* matter if time is called before anyone has done either of those two.

There seems to be much less "VP denial" in WM than 40k. People don't just hide half of their army (either behind terrain, or in indestructible skimmers), because if they do, they can't defend their warcaster/warlock or achieve the mission The game structure very much encourages aggressive play, which makes for a more fun game.

Posted By keezus on 04/11/2007 2:54 PM

In 40k, usually if one side has taken 75% casualties, the game is effectively over.  While it can be argued that achieving 75% casualties should entitle the dominant side to a victory... I feel that having an objective to achieve, even if it is assassination is far more satisfying than GW's straight VP system...

This kind of win would NEVER happen in the GW system, since the VP differential for loosing 92% of your army and inflicting 12% casualties on your opponent would completely negate the feeble VP bonus that GW gives out for mission objectives.  While this is not a fault of the game system, I feel that this mode of mission design encourages a very rigid playstyle based on VP ROI trumping all other considerations.

In this you're simply incorrect.  In Alpha missions (1/3rd of all games played, according to the rules) this is always possible.  I've gotten my army thoroughly mauled but still drawn or WON the game based on having my few surviving units holding quadrants.

This is also part of why GW jacked the VP awards for the objectives in 4th.  In a 1500pt Gamma Cleanse, controlling a neutral quadrant is worth 375pts.  Controlling your opponent's home quadrant is worth 750.   Eaither can easily turn a loss into a win.

Very true.
I really must look into hordes/warmachine some day. The trollblood miniatures are brilliant. Do all factions get equal support from PP?
(My biggest personal bugbear about GW)

Yep, they do. This is one of the nicest things about PP. Everyone gets regular infusions of new stuff.

Hmmm.
I'd need to hook a bunch of friends on it, but I'm good at that...

"This kind of win would NEVER happen in the GW system, since the VP differential for loosing 92% of your army and inflicting 12% casualties on your opponent would completely negate the feeble VP bonus that GW gives out for mission objectives."

I think you nailed it in your own post -

" While it can be argued that achieving 75% casualties should entitle the dominant side to a victory..."

If I take out +90% of your army, while losing neglible forces on my side, the game should be mine. And to be fair, the VP bonuses in 40k can actually be quite substantial - if you play Secure and Control at 1500pt, and only roll 3 Loot counters, each counter is worth 500 VPs - or  over 30 dead Space Marines. Even if you roll an average of 4 Loot counters, each counter is still worth a meaty 375 VPs.

And as Mannahnin stated, in Alpha missions, it's all about the objectives. In my gaming group, we pick armies, then roll mission, then roll mission difficulty (Alpha, Gamma, Omega.) I know some people look down on Alpha as "baby-level," but I feel the chance of playing Alpha forces you to pick a better balanced list (something that doesn't rely on Infiltration or Deep Strike,) just as Omega discourages you from taking totally Mechanized armies.

But you're right, to each his own, some prefer the alternate win condition, some don't. Good gaming!

Zoned

I have never quit a game of Warmachine/Hordes because simply the game isn't over until its over. As a opposed to some other games where it is apparent who will win on turn four. And suffering through the rest of it is not worth it. But knowing that regardless of how badly I'm mauled I can still mount a come back is an important part of the fun to me.

I have the exact same experience with 40k though. I once had both of my Falcons dropped on turn one before I got to move, and came back to score a Draw with the VP differential in my favor.

40k really does support come from behind wins too. It just doesn't make them so easy by making one hero more important than the rest of your army put together.

Qoute:

I have never quit a game of Warmachine/Hordes because simply the game isn't over until its over. As a opposed to some other games where it is apparent who will win on turn four. And suffering through the rest of it is not worth it. But knowing that regardless of how badly I'm mauled I can still mount a come back is an important part of the fun to me.

I played a game of WM last night and had only about 313 of my Menoth ready. My opponent had 500 in Trolls. I played to that fact that he was overwhelming in points and that I wouldn't stand a chance. I waited for that one moment were he was a little overconfident and killed his caster. You can give up some attrition to set up an unwise opponent and that's what I like about Warmachine. One moment of laxity and it's game over. Both systems are great and have different playing styles but I think a little luck plays a bigger role with 40K than warmachine.

Heh heh, I would say that luck can play a HUGE roll in both systems. It can entirely change a gameplan. I have seen "sure things" in both games wif, and in so doing change the entire course of that battle. That nice caster kill isn't always a given, even when you set it up all nice. And that grot herd sometimes can hold up the strongest assault from Khorne Berzerkers for the whole game....

This is my favorite aspect of Privateer, their system of new releases is brilliant. 

Instead of releasing new army lists (codex's) they release new game supplements, which are big books.  Each supplement includes new units and material for all the forces in the game.  For example, Apotheosis introduced giant "Unique Warjacks" and "Epic Warcasters" to the WM game, and each faction got one.  Superiority introduced Cavalry to the game, and each faction got mounted units, etc.

This is fairly crafty on many levels:

• No race is ever neglected, each release has something for everyone.  (One could argue the mercs were a bit neglected until Superiority, but they weren't really a core faction until then)
• Game balance is easier to maintain, as all factions get new toys at the same time.
• The new books sell better, as ALL fans of the game system will buy the books, since there is something for everyone.
• All factions get new models at the same time.  Other companies might have all the releases in a given quarter dedicated to a specific faction, PP has all the releases dedicated to a specific expansion.  i.e. Over 3 months everyone gets new unit attachments, cavalry, etc.
• Shorter waits for new stuff for your favorite faction. 

There is a down side, however, and that is the above method makes it more challenging to support a lot of factions.  WM supports 5 factions this way, any more would be VERY difficult to keep between the pages of one supplement.

PP mitigated this problem with another clever idea, release a SECOND game with 4 new factions, but make it compatible with the first. Hordes releases work just like WM, and all Hordes players are very excited about this summer's "Evolution" release, which will give all Hordes forces new units like the massive alpha warbeasts and cavalry.

This means that there are now effectively 9 faction choices in the Iron Kingdom games of WM and Hordes that can all play against each other.   It is true that Hordes releases don't contain much for WM factions, nor do WM releases give much to Hordes, but each release does update all the factions in the given game. 

I think the guys over at Battlefront Miniatures are toying around with a similar concept for Flames of War, releasing army books for "Theaters of War" instead of army books for just a specific country.  I could be wrong about that, but that's what I thought I read someplace.

If other companies could figure out how to emulate PP on this one it would be good for all.  But I can certainly understand how extremely difficult a shift it would be for a large company with many armies to support to manage such a change.

 

---

Side note: I'd just like to commend everyone in this thread for discussing such a hot topic about two games we're all passionate about and keeping it civil.  Kudos!

Who would have thunk that would happen on Dakka? Geesh.

The one thing that makes me curious, is just how long can a system like that keep doing that? I mean, Confrontation ran into the same support problem with multiple armies. It starts to weigh itself down. How long can you keep pushing stuff out before the entire thing weighs itself down?

Well, it has weighed down a bit. There's no Warmachine expansion this
year but instead we're going to see Hordes in summer and magazine preview
expansions for Warmachine. So slower, yes, but until they expand the
game size to 2000 pts, the nature of the game will change only so much.

To Russ' list of advantages, I'd add another: the ability for everyone to know what's in other army lists, ie. to limit cheat. I can't number how many times a "creative" opponent invented special abilities to his/her units or just improved their profile.

Posted By malfred on 04/13/2007 10:19 AM
Well, it has weighed down a bit. There's no Warmachine expansion this
year but instead we're going to see Hordes in summer and magazine preview
expansions for Warmachine. So slower, yes, but until they expand the
game size to 2000 pts, the nature of the game will change only so much.

Yowza.  I can't even imagine playing WM at that size.  The rules set is just too focused on individual models.  How long would that take?  I've had a couple of really tactical 500pt games of WM take two hours or so, and at this point  I'm reluctant to expand to 750.  The additional levels of complexity and length of game time needed with multiple casters does not appeal to me at all.   1k still doesn't get you the model count or "full size battle" feel of Warhammer, but it actually takes longer to play and has a lot more stuff to keep track of.  2k just seems insane to me, unless they change the rules substantially.

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/12/2007 8:10 PM
I have the exact same experience with 40k though. I once had both of my Falcons dropped on turn one before I got to move, and came back to score a Draw with the VP differential in my favor.

40k really does support come from behind wins too. It just doesn't make them so easy by making one hero more important than the rest of your army put together.

I find that to be more of an exception than a rule for 40k. I like the game and I'm one of the few remaining players of it at my LGS. And I've managed some come from behind wins. But you have to admit that too often its very much like rock/paper/scissors.

Posted By Toreador on 04/13/2007 9:29 AM  How long can you keep pushing stuff out before the entire thing weighs itself down?

I completely agree, Toreador.  I really do feel that Rackham's woes are a harbinger for Privateer Press.  At some point, supporting the old stuff (as PP has gone on record as being committed to) becomes a liability.

I'm not shouting doom or anything, just advancing with trepidation.  I particularly feel that Superiority's focus on infantry and solos was a disservice to the their own game.  Infantry and solos have stolen a large part of the warjack's thunder. (Vilmon can junk a warjack while a Marauder can't even touch him.)  And infantry's supposed weakness has been severly diluted by the number of fearless troops and incredibly high leadership scores. (A lesson they should have learned from Games Workshop.)

I only think these sorts of issues will compound (there are two warjacks and four solos scheduled for the Pirate release and the next Warmachine expansion is supposed to focus on 'Characters') and there will come a time when a blinking 'Reset' button will start to look very attractive.

That said, Hordes is an amazing game.  The value of warbeasts is programed right into the most basic mechanic.  Warmachine is my first love but Hordes, I think, is a much better game.  (Even though they still have some silliness like eight wound infantry.)

Posted By Crimson Devil on 04/13/2007 10:35 AM

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/12/2007 8:10 PM

40k really does support come from behind wins too. It just doesn't make them so easy by making one hero more important than the rest of your army put together.

I find that to be more of an exception than a rule for 40k. I like the game and I'm one of the few remaining players of it at my LGS. And I've managed some come from behind wins. But you have to admit that too often its very much like rock/paper/scissors.

Only if people aren't building take-all-comers lists, IME. There are a few just terrible matchups (Orks vs monoliths, for example), but I rarely see those come up.

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/13/2007 10:28 AM

Posted By malfred on 04/13/2007 10:19 AM
Well, it has weighed down a bit. There's no Warmachine expansion this
year but instead we're going to see Hordes in summer and magazine preview
expansions for Warmachine. So slower, yes, but until they expand the
game size to 2000 pts, the nature of the game will change only so much.

Yowza.  I can't even imagine playing WM at that size.  The rules set is just too focused on individual models.  How long would that take?  I've had a couple of really tactical 500pt games of WM take two hours or so, and at this point  I'm reluctant to expand to 750.  The additional levels of complexity and length of game time needed with multiple casters does not appeal to me at all.   1k still doesn't get you the model count or "full size battle" feel of Warhammer, but it actually takes longer to play and has a lot more stuff to keep track of.  2k just seems insane to me, unless they change the rules substantially.

I remember that oomiestompa and Darth Thanatos played a four hour 2000 pt. game or something like that.

I like the epic warcasters, so I prefer 750 games.

Great points.

Longevity:  You guys are right, while I like a lot about PP, they still haven't proven the long test of time yet.  Say what you want about GW, but you have to give them props for being around as long as they have, and for growing most of that time.  That is no easy feat in this industry.   My guess on how PP will continue to grow the Iron Kingdoms franchise is follow the current model.  I think WM (the 4 core factions) is essentially done, i.e. I'm not sure there is that much more to add.  There are, of course, the new Merc factions (pirates...arrrgh) but I think the growth now will be similar to how Hordes 'expanded' WM.  New "Games" that link in to the existing products. 

At some point you do have to say stop, i.e. This game has all the factions and unit options it can handle.  Jervis essentially just said that about 40k at Adepticon, that GW is going to cap the number of codex's in 40k at 12-15. 

Perhaps what we're learning here (gamers and the industry) is that there is a delicate balance between too few faction options (arguably the reason Starship Troopers never took off) and so many factions that the game becomes unstable and difficult to balance/support.

Rackham: I've tried to get into Rackham games in the past and just couldn't.  My biggest problem is I dislike their rule sets.  While their sculpts are amazing, I think it  is their game rules that has given that company the most problems.  I'd chalk that up to trying to grow a game on a weak foundation.   Again I'd like to throw some props to GW in this area, in the early days they recognized that some of the fundamentals of 40k were weak, and weren't afraid to do a total re-write.  Version 2 and Version 3 are good examples of this.

WM Game Size: My current favorite game size in WM is 750.  In terms of game length it feels to me like playing a 1800-2000 point game of 40k.  Against some players I can get done in a little over an hour, against others it can take 4.  (Against poor Bill last league I won a 750 point game in 20 minutes...sorry Bill, I'll get ya that rematch.  Next time keep Karchev AWAY from the Hunter and Ironclad. :S ) 

I don't think the game mechanics of WM make the game slow at 750, I think what happens is the tactical options grow exponentially as game size increases.  Players get overwhelmed with all their choices each turn, and end up thinking for long periods before moving a model.  I've taken to using a simple chess timer (you can download them for free on a PDA) when playing and it ads to the excitment.   Sure both sides make mistakes, but the game plays smoother and has a bit more of the hectic feel of actual combat. 

I've never tried 1000 points, but i do think it would be fun.  I can't see an untimed 1000 point game getting done in less than 3 hours.  I'm guessing that'd be like 2000+ point 40k game in terms of length.  2000 points of WM would, indeed be an insane game size for WM, just as a 4000 point battle of 40k would be quite a conflict. 

 

This is my favorite aspect of Privateer, their system of new releases is brilliant. 

Instead of releasing new army lists (codex's) they release new game supplements, which are big books.  Each supplement includes new units and material for all the forces in the game.  For example, Apotheosis introduced giant "Unique Warjacks" and "Epic Warcasters" to the WM game, and each faction got one.  Superiority introduced Cavalry to the game, and each faction got mounted units, etc.

 

And as I see it, it's a TERRIBLE system.  Ok, great, when a supplement is released, everyone gets something.  Since I only have interest in one faction, I absolutely 100% do not care that the other three get identical somethings.  Does that make me selfish?  Most likely.

 

To make it worse, even when things are "released" with a new Privateer supplement, they aren't really released.  It has happened before that it's 6 months (or more) before the models ever hit the shelves.  If the models I wanted out of a supplement are the last ones scheduled for production, I'm totally screwed.  So far I think that's happened every time. 

 

Yeah, I know that this is in some respects the case for GW and all other manufacturers.  But I've never felt the animosity towards GW's release schedule that I have towards Privateer Press'.  At least when GW tells you it's coming out, it actually is, and in a resonable time period.  For the most part, I vastly prefer GW's codex release schedules.

Posted By Bob Lorgar on 04/13/2007 12:27 PM

 I've never felt the animosity towards GW's release schedule that I have towards Privateer Press'.  At least when GW tells you it's coming out, it actually is, and in a resonable time period.  For the most part, I vastly prefer GW's codex release schedules.

I had to read this four times to make sure I was correct in interpretting your meaning.

You clearly don't play orks.

On Rackham: I have to agree with you, Russ.  The rules are all but indecipherable and even when they are agreed upon by opponents, they clank and grind like an old transmission on its last legs.

(CAUTION...SARCASAM AT WORK)


Come on Red Stripe, be fair, the ork codex is ONLY 8 years old. Just because there is still no Zzap gun trukk model or battle wagon model or decent trukk model or ...

And it's not like Eldar players had to wait THAT Long for a wave serpent.

I'm sure that Space Marine drop pod will be ready any day now...

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/13/2007 10:50 AM

Posted By Crimson Devil on 04/13/2007 10:35 AM

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/12/2007 8:10 PM

40k really does support come from behind wins too. It just doesn't make them so easy by making one hero more important than the rest of your army put together.

I find that to be more of an exception than a rule for 40k. I like the game and I'm one of the few remaining players of it at my LGS. And I've managed some come from behind wins. But you have to admit that too often its very much like rock/paper/scissors.

Only if people aren't building take-all-comers lists, IME. There are a few just terrible match ups (Orks vs monoliths, for example), but I rarely see those come up.

Ork vs anything is a terrible match up. I would like to see GW get pass the point where list construction is the game. Of course I don't subscribe to the theory that its the player's fault if the game isn't balanced. If I give a monkey a gun and he shoots somebody with it. Who really is responsible?

A bit late...
No, I'm just that good.

I too am a huge fan of PP's model for releases.
I dont' care that it takes 6 months for that beasty it'll all be worth it in the end since there will be something you didn't know about waiting in the wings bfore you know it.
"Splash Releases" GW style never realy did it for me. I was on cloud 9 when the new edition hit followed by a huge Marine retool (I've got BA and DA) but it faded fast. I'm all PP right now.

@PP
You´ve got some interesting points red stripe and I agree on many with you.
I think that PP will run faster into the problems than the other companies especially because their system is so succesfull. Hordes nearly killed PP and only money from the outside rescued them. Rackham has over 10 years on its back with Confro and I think that´s the longest you can run a skirmish system before it goes down under it´s own weight.

I see the following coming in one years time:
- PP will go for plastic miniatures ond probabaly for prepainted as well
- 2008 Hordes and Warmachine Redux (Redux) will be published
- PP will realise that it also has to go for Rank+File

Also PP has to decide which way to go with its miniatures, while most are really great, some are rather old school and can´t compete on the market, they will have to go for one style.

@Rackham
They have learned and the conversion of Confro tells a lot about it. Also with the AT-43 rules they have proven that they can write rules finally. http://www.at-43.com/pdf_multi/AT-43extraits_EN.pdf Check it out here.

It remains to be seen whether they are able to use the advantage of being on of the first with prepainted/plastic.

Those are some horrible predictions, all going against the stated interests of the game company, and/or the game play of the game.

First, the game already has rank and file. I know my Menoth opponent always ranks up his Flameguard, and I frequently pile up the skorne models in line. Do you have anything that gets a shieldwall bonus? You're putting it in a line then.

What I think you meant was "PP is going to have to go with large mass units", aka 20-40 man units, instead of max 10-man units. I just don't see that happening. You're talking about a different game at that point.

And you obviously don't know Mike McVey (one of the principles of the company), if you think they'll go pre-paint. He's probably the most arrogant "purist painter" on the planet, there's no way in hell PP ever goes pre-paint. No Way. Ever.

Finally, they agonized for 2 years over the decision to do warmachine Prime, so I can't see them combining the 2 rulesets into one. What's the value add there? What do you get out of it, that you didn't already get out of warmachine prime? Just adding in warlock/beast rules? Nope, there's just no need, they won't do it.

I also don't get the constant comparisons of Rackham to Privateer Press. Hell, I didn't even know Rackham had a frigging game system for at least 2 years after I saw their models on the net! With Warmachine, however, my first exposure to the game was their free downloadable rules, even though they didn't have any models. I just don't see how you can compare the 2 companies. Rackham was clearly focused on producing high quality models, and slapped a game around it. PP has always been focused on producing a high quality game, with high quality models used to play the game.

Ah yes, also--never been wiped off the board in WM or Hordes without losing a model, in 200+ games. Had it happen, once, in 40k, in 400+ games. I was playing Kroot Mercs, and got wiped off the board against Black Templars, without killing anything.

Your full of crap.

Try being an ork player. Or a sisters player. Or a woodelf player. YEARS go by before the army gets any attention, instead of you being impatient for a couple months for a model or two you want, that you could prozy because at least you have the rules.

Well, RnF does not really apply to the rules of PP now, since zhey are simply skirmish. But you observed it right. Some armies have enough units to field a RnF army. And there is the problem. How do you sell more minis to the already established gamers. Bringing new factions on the market that may interest players is risky and adding to existing armies a much shurer way of doing it. You can argue it any way you want. You need to make the gamers buy more. If they are thinking of anything different at PP they don´t know nothin about business.

They might be opposed officially against prepainted, but how often have they said they won´t do what GW does just to do it anyway. The same people that railed against LotR publishing policy of the books now welcome Redux. I think many still see PP as a rebel against GW and because of this are more prone to let it run with something they would mob another game company for. Take for example the whole supply stuff they are producing now. I can still remember the nice day at SPIEL when one of them said that they would not produce colors, because they don´t want to emulate GW. It´s one thing what you want to do, but another thing what pays your bills.

But, we will see in one years time what will have happened until then.

No.

People are willing to give PP more slack for the simple reason PP does what it says, it communicates with its customer base, and is fairly honest.

GW has had years of antaganizing its customer base, jerking them around, and being condesending in its own magazine to its customers.

People are willinng to give PP much more slack than GW simply because PP treats them better. Peroid. Its something GW needs to relearn.

Look at it this way Duncan:

When PP screwed up in superiority with leaving text out, they came out and TOLD their public what happen, why, apologized for it AND importantly what they were doing to correct it.

When GW has a priniting problem.....they just reprint the codex without telling anyone. Ala chaos codex(which has FOUR different printings)


When PP has to delay a release, like the new releases last year in september, the came out and TOLD us why they push new releases back, and the reasoning behind it. Since they have been fairly straight folward....people are ok with it. Or at least can be patient about it.

When GW comes out and says the ork book is delayed again....becuase they're having problems with the vehical kits.....no one really believes it, because we heard the lies and stories before.


Its something GW needs to learn. To communicate with its customer base effectively instead of locking themselves in the ivory tower.

Customers have rule questions or complaints....so GW's solution is to close down the boards that are their only communication.

Customers have rules questions and complaints.....PP answers the rules querries with a living FAQ and sets up a board on their webpage where you can complain and *female dog* about things......

GW needs to learn about communication. Its really that simple.

Posted By carmachu on 04/14/2007 7:22 AM

People are willing to give PP more slack for the simple reason PP does what it says, it communicates with its customer base, and is fairly honest.

GW has had years of antaganizing its customer base, jerking them around, and being condesending in its own magazine to its customers.

People are willinng to give PP much more slack than GW simply because PP treats them better. Peroid. Its something GW needs to relearn.

Relearn? That implies they've actually known how to do it, which in my experience has never been the case. They've consistently followed their current line of thought as far back as I dare recall.

Relearn. I dont know how far back you go, but RT and early to mid 2nd they were quite receptive. The studio was approachable and open.

I'm not sure when it all changed, perhaps when they went to a publicly traded company.

I'm curious whether or not the private business model is sustainable. With the
corporate model, you have an entity protecting an IP. Do you think 40k would
have lasted 30 years under the control of a smaller entity?

No, from a certain point on you need external money. But if you really need to put as much stock into the hands of others as GW did, well that´s rather a question how fast you need the money. Old rule: keep more than 50% in your hands.

Games Workshop and Warhammer have stood the test of time. How many games have come and gone trying to compete? Some were even around for a couple of years before they faded into obscurity.

Warzone, Chronopia, Vor...etc. And now we have Confrontation, Warmachine, etc. Will they last out?

I think it will be more interesting to see what Privateer Press is doing 5 years from now. IE, will we see Warmachine 2.0? Will we have new factions, an advancing story? Will there be a new game mechanic? Will some of your old stuff become unusable as the game gets revised? And if it doesn't, then what incentive is there to get new stuff?

AND BACK ON TOPIC!

I got Remix, and damn its a nice book. I started with the Hordes book anyway, so I didn't even realize that the original warmachine didn't have stuff like base sizes and what not listed in the stats! Anyway, great book!

The story has been advancing for your FYI

The story advances, but because of the hero-centrism they've found funny
ways of "killing off" characters.

Most of the time, they just hurt them real bad.

And then they resurrect the dead ones.

I'm worried that the story will turn into a bad version of the X-men-- so many
powerful characters that they start introducing neuter characters that later
become super-powerful just to justify their existence.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/14/2007 2:57 PM
No, from a certain point on you need external money.

GW is a public company because they over-extended themselves financially at one point and required external capital to keep the company solvent.

GW is also a horrible company in relation to its customers specifically because it is publicly held and its #1 priority is to its shareholders. If they can keep their shareholders happy by coming yo your house and kicking you in the teeth they would. In fact if shareholders felt it was the best policy they would be legally required to.

PP is privately held and is responsible ultimately to its customers. Hence the difference in their approach to their customers. GW thinks that it can continue to burn through 12 year old 40K players to maintain its profits. And consequently they do.As long as this burn rate is enough to maintain profitability they will do so.

PP has no such option. If they want to retain their customer base they have to keep them happy, GW has a well established business model that does not require them to keep their existing customers happy.

Well, PP has already overextended itself when they published Hordes and many in the business know that they got money from the outside to keep the business going. What we don´t know for sure is who gave them the money. They by now may not have gone public, but they owe someone something. So, they are somehow in a similar position as GW was in the past. Also you don´t need to put all your stocks on the market. Rackham has also gone public, but they held 75% of their stock, which I see as a wise decission. As long as they hold the bigger ammount of stocks the other holders will never have that much influence on them as they have on GW. And though they do not realize it that much, GW has to keep their customers happy to stay in business. And if I have a look at their sales, they still make a lot folks happy.

Posted By whitedragon on 04/14/2007 4:11 PM
Games Workshop and Warhammer have stood the test of time. How many games have come and gone trying to compete? Some were even around for a couple of years before they faded into obscurity.

Warzone, Chronopia, Vor...etc. And now we have Confrontation, Warmachine, etc. Will they last out?

I think it will be more interesting to see what Privateer Press is doing 5 years from now. IE, will we see Warmachine 2.0?

Going to call HORSEAPPLES unless you have some hard facts to back it up....you know, facts, links, or something to call proof...

 Edit: Language.  Watch it please.

Furthermore, if your looking at their sales and saying their still making alot of folks happy, you might want to try reading them again....its been steadily going down for years...at least in the US. And recently elsewehere...

Posted By carmachu on 04/15/2007 7:03 AM

Furthermore, if your looking at their sales and saying their still making alot of folks happy, you might want to try reading them again....its been steadily going down for years...at least in the US. And recently elsewehere...

"A lot of folks" is still right, even if it's a shrinking number.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/Forums/tabid/56/forumid/7/postid/153450/view/topic/Default.aspx

If they're making 25 million bases per year, that's a lot of model kits. 

Well, you remember the time when suddenly their release schedule wo top-down? And how they had problems delivering and suddenly they got rather fast on track?
But you won´t find a pdf on the net that substitutes my claims if you are asking for that. But as most folks her can attest I rather seldom say things that are not true. Some don´t want to believe, but in the end most of my "predictions" come true. Not because I am that good at guessing, but because me and some friends do work for several companies in the business and it is rather necessary to be in the know about your potential partners as a freelancer.

I would rather say that you should get a grade in accounting and business before you accuse others of not being able to read the numbers. A number alone says nothing, you need to know what led up to the number.

You made claims here about PP, now I ask you to back them up. If you cant, then its pure BS or specualtion. I can back all my claims up of GW....

Yes, I believe it was september last year or the year before. Tehy had to push back release a month to get caught up with prime stuff for new players.

So I should believe your story of a friend of a friend,a nd what you say is always true. You realize how rediculious that sounds right? You KNOW so I should believe you.



Ah yes, I should get a degree because you KNOW and I dont. Amusing.

I do have a degree in business. I run one small one. Borrowing like they do is not a good sign, especially twice in a row. Neither is declining sales for years in a row and ESPECIALLY declining again after you cut the fat and tighten the bootstraps, so to speak.

Perhaps your the one that needs a degree. GW's finacials are not looking so hot. Its scary when one of yoru major holders liquidates their holdings, like one did in Novemeber. Confidence in GW is not that good right now.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/14/2007 11:55 PM
So, they are somehow in a similar position as GW was in the past. 

Not really. A public company is legally responsible to its shareholders and can be sued for not trying to maximise shareholder value.

You aren't under the same obligations if you owe someone some money. I also have not ever heard anything about PP being financially overextended so I am not really even sure of the veracity of that rumour.

sorry.

Think what you want, I do know it from the source. And if you haven´t realized, I am definitely not a friend of GW on a personal basis, but financially one has to put personal views aside.

But back to topic, time will tell who of us was right.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/15/2007 11:48 AM
Think what you want, I do know it from the source. 

Which source?

As I said, this is the first I've ever heard of it.

I know something you dont dont know. neener neener neener!

I know PP's secrets and I know GWs release schedule. But I cant tell. I have a source, but trust me. Its gold jerry! GOLD!

I think comics are probably the closest comparison for the WM storyline- superpowered individuals battling for the fate of the world. Due to PP not wanting to alienate players, they have stated that no warcaster will truly "die" (that is, become unusable). However, death by plot has not been ruled out. Indeed, 2 have already. The Harbinger was slain and subsequently revived. Denegrha was slain by Haley. But since when is that a problem for the nightmare legions of Toruk? This prompted her epic ghostly incarnation.

As to Duncan_Idaho's comments and predictions:

What? I thought those predictions were an attempt at humor until I saw you defending them!

Plastic is not in the near future for a variety of reasons. Huge production setup costs being a big one. Plastic works for companies where the volume of sales offsets the enormous equipment investment. Rubber (as in the crappy clix minis) is easier, but, well, crappy.

Prepaints are HIGHLY unlikely from a company rolling out its own paint line.

And where are you getting this Hordes bailout stuff? There were production bugaboos getting orders filled when alot of production had been switched over to prepare inventory for the HORDES release (and the anticipated demand), but that worked its way through the pipes. Additionally, every indicator points to growth and very healthy sales for both PP lines.

In short, PP has people who seem to know what they are doing. Whether it will be sustainable remains to be seen. But I don't think comparing it to Confrontation's debacles is particularly illuminating, considering Rackham couldn't even seem to get decent English rules out. I'm just glad I can use their beautiful minis for Warhammer!

Well, there is something like NDA that keep one from saying everything or publishing some stuff. And sorry, you don´t know what has happened within Rackham the last two years from what you are telling, so how do you know that it is not likely what I say? Do you have information or are you just guessing.

Many want PP to be the little rebell company that goes against the GW Empire. In the end both want to make money, with the shrinking market of the pure hobbyists and ever more companies entering the market right now, they would be stupid not to look for new areas of customers. And that is what prepainted plastics do, they get those into the boat who have had not the time up untill now to do all the preparation work necessary in the past to play.

You don´t believe PP is going to hold on to "purism" while all other companies make money on prepainted plastics. How big is Mongoose compared to PP, and even they are doing it.

Do you really think Mongoose has a bigger market share than PP right now?

Well, Mongoose is smaller with regard to market share and when even they go for plastics this makes me wonder why PP shouldn´t be able to do it as well.

IIRC Mongoose had a lot of problems getting their plastics off the ground for SST (did they ever release the aircraft or plastic infantry?). I'm not sure that making the move to plastics is a "no brainer" business decision. It's a big investment, and a very different business strategy than what PP is currently doing.

It also may be a corporate culture issue for PP. The original page 5 from Prime had a statement something like "If you can't handle it, go play with plastic."

Posted By jmurph on 04/15/2007 8:37 PM
Plastic is not in the near future for a variety of reasons. Huge production setup costs being a big one. Plastic works for companies where the volume of sales offsets the enormous equipment investment. Rubber (as in the crappy clix minis) is easier, but, well, crappy.

To reinforce this. One a Yahoo group of which I am a member a participant who is in the miniature manufacturing business stated that the startup costs for plastic injection moulding are so high that you basically have to be selling ten to twenty times the number of a comparable metal mini to recoup the startup costs. He mentioned sales in the millions of units.

That is why Rackham and Mongoose are aiming their new plastic prepaint games to mass market audiences. They have to make big sales to begin to recoup their initial outlay for moulds. Plastic costs "adult money".

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/15/2007 11:59 PM
Well, there is something like NDA that keep one from saying everything or publishing some stuff. 

Which you've already broken since you've told us the information that would have been covered by the NDA.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/16/2007 6:35 AM
Well, Mongoose is smaller with regard to market share and when even they go for plastics this makes me wonder why PP shouldn´t be able to do it as well.

Mongoose might not be a big miniature manufacturer but they are a *huge* RPG publisher. Big enough that they are opening their own printing press. I would suspect that part of the sales from their RPG lines are going to fund the B:Evo range.

IIANM Rackham went public in part to fund AT-43.

PP has announced no plans to go public (that I know of) and also has a "Full Metal Fantasy" logo that they would have to rework :-) i think PP is quite happy with metal as it allows them to control their production process and they are also fans of metal minis. I don't see either of those factors changing.

There are more than one set of NDA out there.

We will see, PP has often enough claimed to not go the way of GW just to to it the next year.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/16/2007 8:57 AM
There are more than one set of NDA out there.

Indeed there are. I've never seen one that said you could spill any info you wanted to and just not release the source. Unless you are a reporter that seems like a strange arrangement for someone to have amde with you.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/16/2007 8:57 AM
We will see, PP has often enough claimed to not go the way of GW just to to it the next year.

Which really just makes it sound as if you have an axe to grind.

Maybe you do indeed have some "source" but this really just makes you sound as if you want to complain about PP and got yourself caught trying to rationalise your comments with some "source" you made up.

A word of advice: if you have inside info about things that you aren't meant to discuss then keep it to yourself... as you were probably asked to.

I am sure there are all sorts of people on Dakka that have information given to them or passed on to them that was meant to be confidential and they do indeed keep it to themselves.

Really you can't win. Either you are spreading a falsehood or you are releasing confidential information to score points with people on a messageboard. Either way you look bad.

You are reading too much into just a few comments. My informations have been sound if you look at my past comments. I agree that it was stupid of me arguing with you, cause it leads to nowhere. You have an opinion how the market has to go and you will not deviate from it. Also I don´t need to score with others but are always willing to share with others what I know for sure. My name shows up in books so, why do I need to score here? But there is also a reason why some colleagues do no longer share their knowledge on boards. In the past there were far more of us, now most are reading and not writing much. Very often they were accused of bragging with their knowledge while they only wanted to share.

BTW, out for posts or why do you post three posts in a row instead of editing? Do you need to score?

Psst.............I know a secret about Duncan Idaho...............he's a ghola.





Don't tell anybody.

In the end, this conversation has devolved into all the trappings of a bad debate.

Duncan, you just don't have a leg to stand on. You propose a position that you can't support, falling back on tried and true sophist rhetoric.

While I do find the comparison between Rackham and Privateer Press intensely intreguing, let us agree to call this conjecture and continue. Privateer Press has come out and stated very clearly that they are dedicated to metal. For now, that is all the evidence we have on their intentions towards plastics.

Rackham packages its model statistics in the blisters.
Privateer Press does the same.

I feel that this is a cornerstone comparison. Rackham's forthcoming revision is almost entirely inspired by this fact. To revitalize their system, they have to finally shuck the weight of burdensome legacy rules tied up in old models and cards printed years ago.

Will there come a time when trying to balance new releases against models printed years ago will become a liability for Privateer Press? I think so. I think this is particularly likely when Privateer Press -fails- to balance new models against the old (as Rackham has done) and the only way to renew interest in aging warcasters and warjacks is to simply revise their rules.

I think Privateer Press already realizes this. I think that the Special Detachment cards published in No Quarter several months ago were a test run for a revised card distribution system.

Pure conjecture, of course.

Posted By Duncan_Idaho on 04/16/2007 9:46 AM

BTW, out for posts or why do you post three posts in a row instead of editing? Do you need to score?

I actually like keeping my posts related to the comments that I am referring to and not string together long posts that are often, at least I find, to be difficult to read online.

But thanks for trying to make a personal comment about it. I'll refrain from taking the bait.

Posted By Crimson Devil on 04/16/2007 9:50 AM
Psst.............I know a secret about Duncan Idaho...............he's a ghola.





Don't tell anybody.

I wonder if the Bene Tleilaxu ever made a Duncan Idaho Ghola with borderline Trhola disorder. It would almost appear they have...

Especially when their only real retort is "Time will tell" over and over again. I think what Capt. Obvious is missing is that "Time will ALWAYS tell". Hardly very much to back an argument up with.

The sun will consume the earth! You'll see! Time will tell and you will be SOOOOOO sorry!

Yes indeed, time will tell.
Sooner than you might think too...

I think Mongoose and Rackham realized that the alternate hobby/gaming market
was going to PP and thus went to prepainted to get the gamer gamers who play
Dungeons and Dragons minis and the like.

Posted By Zubbiefish on 04/16/2007 11:08 AM
Yes indeed, time will tell.
Sooner than you might think too...

So very true. You'll all see!

Posted By Crimson Devil on 04/16/2007 9:50 AM
Psst.............I know a secret about Duncan Idaho...............he's a ghola.





Don't tell anybody.

But is he just a ghola, or one of the later serial gholas? I wouldn't trust the first one, but I would the latter.

Posted By fleshcross on 04/16/2007 4:05 PM

Posted By Crimson Devil on 04/16/2007 9:50 AM
Psst.............I know a secret about Duncan Idaho...............he's a ghola.





Don't tell anybody.

But is he just a ghola, or one of the later serial gholas? I wouldn't trust the first one, but I would the latter.

"Hayt" is such a strong and ugly word....

Oh noez! PP forums are down! It's just as GW predicted!

Posted By redstripe on 04/16/2007 10:20 AM

Will there come a time when trying to balance new releases against models printed years ago will become a liability for Privateer Press? I think so. I think this is particularly likely when Privateer Press -fails- to balance new models against the old (as Rackham has done) and the only way to renew interest in aging warcasters and warjacks is to simply revise their rules.

This doesn't ring true to me. How does nerfing two of the most used Warcasters renew interest in them?

I can see how this is the case for the warjacks with the proviso that interest in the revised warjacks was not renewed as there was no interest in them before .

Does WM have a balance issue on the horision? Yes all games go through this stage of evolution. What will matter is how PP will handle it.

On the Reveiw:

I really liked the Cryx artwork; with the exception of Deneghra the Scarre picture is particularly good. I understand why many long time WM players were disappointed by Remix although I myself was not disappointed.

By far the worst art in the book IMO is the Sorsha picture, she looks like a farm girl at a Christmas party. No, wait... scratch that. It's definitely Vlad, yes he's the worst picture by far.

WM needed Remix as Prime was lagging further behind with each release.