Sorry if this has been discussed previously. Discussion on Warseer (confirmed by Brimstone) that he is leaving. No confirm on Alessio also leaving.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128708&page=2


Brimstone:

Second yes Gav is leaving GW, he's put in a hell of a contribution both to Games Workshop and Warseer and I'm going to miss him.

I'm pretty sure Alessio is not leaving however.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh well now!

Isn't he responsible for the current C:CSM?

So that leaves Alessio and (the relatively new guy) Phil Kelly, and a bunch of guys I don't know anything about. Jervis goes without saying.

- Salvage

Good news. I don't think I recall him ever writing anything good.

I wonder why people switch sides when someone they once hated leaves. It was fun to read that thread.

I believe Phil Kelly did the eldar codex (and the ork one???) They seem the better of the new group of codexes.

Kelly is doing the Xenos codexes apparently, and knocking them out of the park. Jerv & friends are meanwhile beating the marines down to a lower balance of power. As I mused last Friday at the game store, it's looking like ...

Marines vs Marines = good game, few heavy weapons, basically equal armies with unique units and options, lower amount of carnage means objectives more important

Xenos vs Xenos = good, tactically challenging high stakes game, loads of powerful specialist troops great at what they do, high amount of carnage

Marines vs Xenos = marines cannot bring enough specialist kit needed to crush xenos, but xenos have many weapons designed to obliterate MEQ, making for an "unforunate" game and match up as far as the marines go

I also proposed an apparent division of 40k into "Jervishammer" and "Kellyhammer," but that's pretty extreme and quite off topic :S

- Salvage

The funniest thing I read from Gav ever, was his tactic suggestions in the...6th edition Dwarf Armybook. Solid gold right there.

The examples used a single enemy unit. Because we know how often dwarfs outnumber their opponents...

Greets
Schepp himself

My first thought was whether there are other shoes to drop. Seems like they've lost a lot of talented creative people in the past few years (Gav wasn't the best rules-writer, but he was a good writer and probably strong on the conceptual side). Of course, Jes is still there, but he supposedly makes a lot of bread.

My second thought was that the time is right for Phil Kelly to pick up the mantle of 40K Overfiend. I'd be interested to see how the studio would do with Phil in charge leading some new blood.

Boss_Salvage wrote:Isn't he responsible for the current C:CSM?

No, he wrote most of the fluff for it, but most of the rules were by Alessio. Mr. Thorpe just put up with the abuse for it.

The studio isn't, hasn't been, divided into fantasy/40k/LOTR teams for ages. They pretty much all work the codices and move around as required.

AFAIK, Gav was working on the Dark Elf army book for later in the year. Only things I've heard about that are : regenerating hydra (well DUH !), plastic cold one riders--maybe a chariot perhaps, plastic corsairs and "something" that can be bought to make the whole army stubborn. that is NOT their special rule apparently.

Obviously they are rumours but from generally good sources.

reds8n wrote:"something" that can be bought to make the whole army stubborn. that is NOT their special rule apparently.

All stubborn, blech. Though funnily I was thinking about it the other night and wondered if they'd give all dark elves poison or some nonsense

- Salvage

You know, I never took sides on Gav because everyone I ever heard talk about him colored him 15,000 different shades of suck-ass. Me, I tend to look at the body of work as a whole: if something sucks, it's because the people at the top either employed the wrong people, put them on the wrong projects, failed to guide the artsies properly (which goes right along with proper artsie placement, of course), or put into production a piece of work that was actually a piece of crap. Or, they just let it fly out there in an attempt to sell more models, money being the great motivator in business (SUPRISE!!!).

If GW puts out a crappy product, do you blame the person who deposited the turd, or the person who authorized mass production of said turd?

Speaking of leadership? How much control does an "overfiend" have of his games system? One would guess from the name that it would be all-consuming, however that doesn't match up to what I heard about Andy and his departure. Yeah, I keep out of touch, it's an interest thing.

Gav sucked at writing 40k rules because he scoffed at game balance. Everything he wrote for 40k was terrible.

Fantasy players seem to love him though. They should have just left him on the fantasy team and he wouldn't have been so hated.

grizgrin wrote:If GW puts out a crappy product, do you blame the person who deposited the turd, or the person who authorized mass production of said turd?

Fair point, and it's why I don't give Gav and Alessio complete blame for the recent Chaos stuff. Seems like they must have had a lot of internal constraints and pressures.

Speaking of leadership? How much control does an "overfiend" have of his games system? One would guess from the name that it would be all-consuming, however that doesn't match up to what I heard about Andy and his departure. Yeah, I keep out of touch, it's an interest thing.

No direct knowledge, but in my mind the Overfiend would be the guy with the vision for the game who also gives direction to the people working on it. Jervis is kind of in a vision role, but I don't think he's really involved in the nuts and bolts of it in terms of rules, etc.

my faith is now reaffirmed and my prayers have been answered...... oh happy days !!!!!! now if Tuomas Pirinen comes back all will be well in warhammer. although alessio has done good work on his books in the past.... anyway i cant stop dancing !! WOO HOO !!!

Which codex was he responsible for?

I know he did the Original Blood Angels. What else did he do?

Gav gone? Ok!

Alessio not gone? Hmmm...

Wasn't he responsible for the horror that is the Skaven army book?

Nice! I saythis not as a gamer, but as someone that occasionally likes to read some 40k/WFB related fiction (those Kage books are so bad).

Alpharius wrote:Gav gone? Ok!

Wasn't he responsible for the horror that is the Skaven army book?

horror ? what a ridiculous statement ! that book was brilliant ! 4 different clans to play, competative in tournaments for the power-gamers, yet you can still build balanced armies for the comp-queens and the fluff-nutters still had room to build their armies.

compare that with Gavs Dark ELf book . nobody was happy with that non-sense. even GW had to admit it and they released a fix for the dark elves. fluff changed, lists were boring and uncompetitive. much like his attempt at dwarves.

Alessio also wrote the Vampire counts book, which repeats my statement about skaven, its a book that appeals to all 3 player archtypes. Alessio played in tournaments and wrote his book with that in mind, while gav wrote fluffy storied in white dwarf and wrote his books from that point of view.

Gav could not write rules for a game of rock paper scissors much less a wargame, he will not be missed. Hopefully they will pull in Rick Preistly and Robin Dews since they are ushering in the return of the old crew. The stupidest thing GW ever did was get rid of Tuomas Pirinen, that man could write rules. GW Hire back Tuomas to save your core games!

KiMonarrez wrote:Which codex was he responsible for?

I know he did the Original Blood Angels. What else did he do?

He gave us T8 Wraithlords and the oh noes Starcannon from the 3rd ed Eldar book, which resulted in much bally-hooing from Marine players. That plus the Rhino rush BA codex made him one of the more maligned designers. That's not saying the BA book wasn't creative.

It was creative, as long as you wanted to field a Rhino Rush BA Army. If you wanted to do anythign else with that army, aside from fielding 6 Dreads, you were SOL.

Not only did he give us "T8 Wraithlords and the oh noes Starcannon", he also gave us Shining Spears that cost 50 pts. and had a single S5 non-PW attack each. Oh, and a pew-pew laser attack, great! And let's not forget the 4+-to-wound Wraithguard! That he could think up all of these and put them in the same codex proves without a doubt that he had no clue as to how the game was played.

gorgon wrote: My second thought was that the time is right for Phil Kelly to pick up the mantle of 40K Overfiend.

Sadly it seems we will never get to see Codex or Army book Fishmen. I was so eagerly awaiting it release.

Rats fleeing a sinking ship perhaps?

carmachu wrote:Rats fleeing a sinking ship perhaps?

Maybe he just got tired of the crap. I'm sure when you've worked for a company before they go public and then after things seriously change. He might have just been fed up with the business decisions.

stonefox wrote:Good news. I don't think I recall him ever writing anything good.

I wonder why people switch sides when someone they once hated leaves. It was fun to read that thread.

This is so true. I for one will laugh like a maniac when whoever replaces him writes stuff even worse than him. It will serve everybody right for saying he was bad for the hobby.

Meh. People come and people go. Change is a good thing.

I don't know - I don't see it as rats fleeing a sinking ship. It's just turnover - the folks that have been leaving GW lately have been with the company a while now. It can't be too surprising that they're leaving.

As far as Gav, specifically, leaving, I'm in the "glad to hear it" camp. It's not just his rules that were bad, his fluff was bad, and his writing was bad. I know all the DA players were ga-ga over Angel of Darkness, but while it might have given more info on the origins of Cypher and the nature of the Unforgiven, the writing was still crap.

This best describes why Gav had to leave:

3) What were the games designers thinking when they gave falcons the ability to have extra armor so all hits are always glancing, unless you can shoot them on turn 1 before they move and have a fair chance of killing them?

GAV
They were thinking that Falcons are Armour 12 so anything with S6 and above can potentially destroy them 1/3 of the time even with a glancing hit. Perhaps players should try less lascannon-like weapons for the job, and more multilasers and assault cannons.
And is there an chance the unbalanced rule may be altered in the future?
The only time rules would change would be in a new Codex: Eldar, which obviously wont be for many years yet.

and of course for the fantasy players here's this little Jewel:

7) Does taking a Steam Tank down to half wounds net you half VP's for that model, or do you have to kill it outright to gain any VP's whatsoever? Is it a warmachine or a unit?

GAV
Warhammer, P102: Models that fight on their own and not in unitsK are worth half their points value in VPs if reduced to half their starting number of wounds or less. Thats crystal clear. Sorry, that was a bit of a waste of a question.



you can find the Q and A with Gav from the Necro at this link: http://thenecro.yuku.com/topic/365?page=5

Honestly, I don't rate Gav's codexes nowhere near to work by say Phil Kelly - but he's been around long and was liked within the GW and clearly loved the worlds of warhammer, so I am not sure its a good thing he goes. Then again, it felt so horrible to hear Andy C leave, and it turned out allright, and I really liked Andy's work.

Andy C couldn't write rules either, he just had a better imagination than the rest of them, was extremely enthusiastic about everything, and came up with lots of great conceps (something GW is, historically, quite good at doing, yet they're terrible at executing these concepts). Without him, Sisters players would have joined the ranks of the Squat players (and, now, the LatD players as well) long ago.

Gav going... hmm... I can't imagine it having a big effect. I mean, he writes bad rules, but it's not like Jervis won't take his place there without too much trouble.

What happened to Andy H?

BYE

wasn't Gav the guy they only hired to be GWs scapegoat for everything?

I don't see it as rats fleeing a sinking ship. It's just turnover

you mean like they did in "at world's end"?

jeremycobert wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Gav gone? Ok!

Wasn't he responsible for the horror that is the Skaven army book?

horror ? what a ridiculous statement ! that book was brilliant ! 4 different clans to play, competative in tournaments for the power-gamers, yet you can still build balanced armies for the comp-queens and the fluff-nutters still had room to build their armies.

Yeah, sure you COULD do that...

You could also build one of the most over the top really not fun to play against SAFH too.

Seriously, you're telling me you haven't seen that monstrosity fielded?

Really?

But anyway, that was Alessio, not Gav, so, whatever.

thehod wrote:This best describes why Gav had to leave:


7) Does taking a Steam Tank down to half wounds net you half VP's for that model, or do you have to kill it outright to gain any VP's whatsoever? Is it a warmachine or a unit?

GAV
Warhammer, P102: Models that fight on their own and not in unitsK are worth half their points value in VPs if reduced to half their starting number of wounds or less. Thats crystal clear. Sorry, that was a bit of a waste of a question.

Yeah, he's a petulant kid, isn't he? I truly hope he doesn't pop up at one of the other gaming companies that I like.

Gitkika, thehod: I have to admit, that just sounds like Gav being British. They can be a bit blunt, and some can be a bit nasty just as a matter of course.

I will miss him like Craftworlds... NOT!!!

Well GW still has Andy Hoare who I believe has written some very solid codices such as both Ordo as well as the list for 13th Company. His army rules tend to be well thought out with a lot of character and are not typically over-powered (Tau is exception though IMO).

- G

Symbio Joe wrote:I will miss him like Craftworlds... NOT!!!

I happen to miss taking Dark Reapers as Troop, backed up by Wraithlords.

I just miss 3-shot Starcannons.

Gav the Noob leaving is a good thing for 40k, its about darn time that they started cutting the chaff.

He didn't even know how the rules tied into the game to write some of the foolishness that he did. I blame him for the current anarchy that 40K has become and I can say without a doubt that the game will improve now that this crumbsnatcher is gone.

Ask him how much of a good thing it was to gut the rules in 3d edition, bring in a 54MM miniature game that sucked that many eggs, and how he could justify changing the rules to fit the fluff in regards to the infamous Eldar / heavy weapon discussion.


I especially like Warseer trying to defend this tool. Good job Brimstone.


Make sure he changes the paint water one last time, that mutt.


Thank you for finishing off a great day

jfrazell wrote:Sorry if this has been discussed previously. Discussion on Warseer (confirmed by Brimstone) that he is leaving. No confirm on Alessio also leaving.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128708&page=2


Brimstone:

Second yes Gav is leaving GW, he's put in a hell of a contribution both to Games Workshop and Warseer and I'm going to miss him.

I'm pretty sure Alessio is not leaving however.

No effects will be seen until at least the next edition. They already have new rules and a couple of codexes pretty much finished... so we'll have to wait for awhile for the last of Gav's influence to "pass" thru GW and onto paper...

I think there will be a pretty glaring change seen at the first codex that comes out that Gav didn't "contribute" too...

so now all we need is Jervis to retire, Alessio to be made redundant and Andy C to come back and I might care about 40k again...

grizgrin wrote:Gitkika, thehod: I have to admit, that just sounds like Gav being British. They can be a bit blunt, and some can be a bit nasty just as a matter of course.

Americans are fat and stupid.

Jazz-Two words-Nuclear ing Weapons. They win.


Lol

OT- Can only be a good thing if Gav leaves.

Grot 6 wrote:
I especially like Warseer trying to defend this tool. Good job Brimstone.

QFT!

Yep, warseer really has become almost as bad as the old GW community forums.

And British are slim and smart... just look at Austin Powers original teefus. Of course he was played the part by an American.

- G

Off topic- Mike Myers (Austin Powers actor) is Canadian.

On topic- Just read through warseer forums and the mods were warning people for saying that Gav leaving was a good thing for GW. Frankly I hope GW takes the opportunity to get some new blood and some better fiction writers.

Jazz: what, exactly, did you hope to accomplish with that comment? Please, do share.

returning a dig at the nationality that took a dig at his I'm guessing
play nice!

Well, I had some fun with the Chaos army books for 6th edition WHFB, but I have to say that I don't appreciate any of Gav's 40K offerings. You seem like a nice enough guy, Gav, but I won't be mourning your loss.

Its a mixed bag for me.

On the one hand, I think Gav isn't that great at writing rules, as we have all historically have seen.

But I really did like his fluff.
Its not the best written stuff in technical terms, but thats not the point. The point is that is was creative. Whether the creativity of his writing can be attributed to him or others is academic, but the point is that he is credited with writing some very good fluff.

The Thorian source book for the Inquisitor game has some quite outstanding background material. One of his best things.

The ironic part was is that he hates the term "fluff".

grizgrin wrote:Jazz: what, exactly, did you hope to accomplish with that comment? Please, do share.

He was pointing out the absurdity of categorizing all of a nation's people into a single stereotyped group.

Here I was thinking I was the only person who saw that...

BYE

yakface wrote:

grizgrin wrote:Jazz: what, exactly, did you hope to accomplish with that comment? Please, do share.

He was pointing out the absurdity of categorizing all of a nation's people into a single stereotyped group.

Stupid Americans need their smilies to get these jokes...

edit: dumb joke.

I wonder what his future plans are.

If we weren't all so fat, the smilies would actually work. :(

I wasn't going to post in this thread but for some stupid reason I clicked on the Warseer thread. OMFG there are some really asshats there that need to get a life. Normally I don't like nasty comments and try not to originate them, but the quote below deserves it

"This is sort of like Jesus leaving heaven. " Snurl @ warseer.

@ fullheadofhair- I agree with your exclamation.

That quote reeks of 'fanatcism ad nauseum'

Snurl seems to need a significant other, so they can curb his/her ridiculous statements....ie

"If you post that on the internet Snurl, you aren't getting any action----this year!"

Hellfury wrote:Its not the best written stuff in technical terms, but thats not the point. The point is that is was creative. Whether the creativity of his writing can be attributed to him or others is academic, but the point is that he is credited with writing some very good fluff.

I have to agree 100% with Hellfury here. While he might not be the most technically proficient writer when it comes to prose, so much of his stuff was just 'good fluff' and, most important of all, it was fun.

I even said this in my Chaos Codex Review:

I wrote:This section details Chaos quite nicely. It talks about the creation of the Chaos Gods, the essence of Chaos, and the Champions of the Chaos Gods. We may make fun of Gav for a lot of things, and lot of them are justified as well, but one thing I’ve always liked is his writing style. I loved his Last Chancers books and, although not high literature or art, they were fun. The fluff in this Codex is also fun.

Emphasis mine.

I've been reading through the Inquisitor stuff recently, and whilst as a game it fails in all the areas that matter, the sheer volume of interesting and useful background material is just staggering, and we should thank Gav Thorpe for that at the very least, even if we hate the rules he writes.

BYE

It's an odd thing that these guys have so many people keeping an eye on their comings and goings. I'm eyeing the market myself right now, but the forums will not light up with commentary if I do move jobs. Granted it's not as many people as watch Jason Kidd get traded to the Mavericks, but it's still a got to be a few hundred folks at least...

What makes it even stranger, is that a guy like Gav Thorpe basically has the same sort of salary range (I assume) as many folks on this board. I'm a software engineer, I'd actually be surprised if I don't make more than he does... So this guy changes jobs, probably because he wants a nicer flat (as the slim, intelligent Brits call them), or or maybe a new motor scooter, and we all comment on it, what a doucheball we think he was, or wasn't, etc. etc.

Funny thing, that...

Anyway, I don't want to be too hard on a guy that was a longtime contributor to a favorite hobby of mine, but I do have to say that I've considered him the primary offender at GW for some time.

That's not to say other guys don't have black marks on their records, they all do... Even Phil Kelly, who I consider their current star, still has the Falcon, the Dakkafex and the cocked up Shoota Nob Klaw rules to his name...

But Gav Thorpe was just constantly associated with crap. The Alaitoc Disruption Table, for me, is the best example of just how totally clueless he was. Maybe he also hatched some great fluff, and considering how critical the fluff is to 40K that might make him a critical employee, but if you chart all the datapoints of broken, crap, stupid and unfun rules, he's close to far more of those than anybody else, including Jervis, and that's saying something.

Hellfury wrote:Its a mixed bag for me.

On the one hand, I think Gav isn't that great at writing rules, as we have all historically have seen.

But I really did like his fluff.
Its not the best written stuff in technical terms, but thats not the point. The point is that is was creative. Whether the creativity of his writing can be attributed to him or others is academic, but the point is that he is credited with writing some very good fluff.

The Thorian source book for the Inquisitor game has some quite outstanding background material. One of his best things.

The ironic part was is that he hates the term "fluff".

That is kinda like saying I found a cubic zirconia after manually filtering through 10 metric tons of poo with my teeth. No thanks.

Dice Monkey wrote:That is kinda like saying I found a cubic zirconia after manually filtering through 10 metric tons of poo with my teeth. No thanks.

That pretty much sums up how I feel playing GW games for me, lately.

A new CEO coming into to struggling company will often fire the top management. They are often part of the problem and intransigent to change.

The one thing that Gav always did well was writing battle reports. I was reading through some of the older gorkamorka battle reports that he did a while back and they were absolute top quality - the perfect mix of fiction and fact that a battle report needs to be interesting. If I miss him for anything it will be that (and the fact that yet another familiar face is leaving).

GW is loosing all of its old crew and its sales and popularity is dropping like never before.. strange that pepole dont see any connection between the two.

Replace enthusiasts with money hungry stock holders and see what happens.

Kallbrand wrote:GW is loosing all of its old crew and its sales and popularity is dropping like never before.. strange that pepole dont see any connection between the two.

Even if changes were made immediately, the public wouldn't see changes for at least a year. GW is going to have to make strategic changes in it's business model in order to get the business back on track. The reason GW is dropping off is because of past descisions have not played out well by the current / old, employees. Due to the current poor performance, the middle / upper management will get changed out.

Current / Past Business Model for increase sales:
- Restrict internet sales to the GW website
- Each army list is more powerful than the previous
- Issue a new codex
- Issue a new edition, even if it's only minor changes
- Make what was once good, bad and what was once bad, good
- Horde armies > specialist armies

Current / Past Business Model for increase profit:
- Raise prices every 6 months
- Reduce bits service
- Instead of changing a model, repackage it with new box art
- Have ZERO sales
- Update army books over 10 years instead of at edition release
- Use the same staff for all game systems

The Current / Past Business Model is not working and as such, people need to be replaced.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Andy C couldn't write rules either, he just had a better imagination than the rest of them, was extremely enthusiastic about everything, and came up with lots of great conceps (something GW is, historically, quite good at doing, yet they're terrible at executing these concepts). Without him, Sisters players would have joined the ranks of the Squat players (and, now, the LatD players as well) long ago.

I believe Andy C. wrote the LatD list. Which you and I know isn't perfect, but is ironically more balanced than Haines' CSM codex, and IMO is one of the better army lists they've ever done. If the apocryphal story about him presenting a new ruleset to GW for 4th edition is true, I give him a lot of credit. He saw the quagmire coming.

What happened to Andy H?

That's a very good question.

Hellfury wrote:

Dice Monkey wrote:That is kinda like saying I found a cubic zirconia after manually filtering through 10 metric tons of poo with my teeth. No thanks.

That pretty much sums up how I feel playing GW games for me, lately.

It's sad ... but I couldn't agree more.

gorgon wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Andy C couldn't write rules either, he just had a better imagination than the rest of them, was extremely enthusiastic about everything, and came up with lots of great conceps (something GW is, historically, quite good at doing, yet they're terrible at executing these concepts). Without him, Sisters players would have joined the ranks of the Squat players (and, now, the LatD players as well) long ago.

I believe Andy C. wrote the LatD list. Which you and I know isn't perfect, but is ironically more balanced than Haines' CSM codex, and IMO is one of the better army lists they've ever done. If the apocryphal story about him presenting a new ruleset to GW for 4th edition is true, I give him a lot of credit. He saw the quagmire coming.

What happened to Andy H?

That's a very good question.

Andy Hoare is still doing his thing in the developers arena. someone earlier mentioned that His (Andy Hoare) codecies (with the exception of Tau codex) were some of the most balanced out there. (I am paraphrasing so forgive if I misquoted) I will throw my hat into that arena as well. I enjoy the enthusiasm and luster of Mr. Hoare's hard work.

The Current / Past Business Model is not working and as such, people need to be replaced.

Agree, but what exactly can they do? Can they actually lower prices, or will people just continue to go to online discounters? They can't stop churning out the codices and rulebooks or else the rightly-peeved owners of older ones get even more pissed. I've always said that GW surprised me since not even WotC, who practically have a monopoly of the card game and clix markets, folded up and closed their stores (which even sold all types of games products).

Also, what exactly is too powerful about Tau? Given I haven't played 'em since late fall '06, but lately I've seen posts cropping up about how powerful they are. I imagine it's just the assault guys whining about how they can't reach around the skimmer wall, though.
(PM me about this)

OT: Tau are tough because they play very differently to most armies. They are a glass hammer army, though, and can be cracked if you know how. (No holofields, after all. ) Tau can fire through terrain with a lot of weapons, and with markerlights they can spread their AT throughout the army, making it hard to avoid specific threats. Mech Tau are especially problematic as they are relatively protected, but side armor 12 or 11 is not that hard to deal with, it just takes some planning. Most folks go wrong by rushing forward thinking they have to get into hth where Tau suck, and they fall right into a trap. It takes a few rounds of shaking/stunning (or killing) transports and support tanks before you can push on a well organized Tau player with success. Thats my 2 cents. (Of course I play Tau and think they are the most balanced army of all time. )

Back on topic, I just read through the Warseer post and cannot believe all the moaning. I've always thought it would be good to see Gav go; his codices always seemed problematic. The few times I tried to read his fiction, it was just awful, especially compared to someone like Dan Abnett.

There is so much crying going on in some corners of the interwebs, but I have to say that Andy Hoare, Phil Kelly, and the rest of the design team should be more than up to the task ahead of them. Game design is not rocket science, and what GW needs more than anything are people who are willing to shake things up. 40k especially is a weird game that has been evolving by steps out of Fantasy Battles in Space, and needs someone who can take a fresh look at it.

I believe Andy C. wrote the LatD list. Which you and I know isn't perfect, but is ironically more balanced than Haines' CSM codex, and IMO is one of the better army lists they've ever done. If the apocryphal story about him presenting a new ruleset to GW for 4th edition is true, I give him a lot of credit. He saw the quagmire coming.

I thought Andy Hoar wrote the LatD list? Anyway, if GW had any sense at all they would beg Andy C. to come back and double his salary. His time of 40k overfiend was the best sales and participation they ever had for a reason. He was good and kept things fresh with his Chapter Approved articles. Admittedly there were too many loopholes in the rules and too many FAQS had to be written, but the hobby was more fun anyway. Bring back Andy C. and give him a large group of power gamers and rule benders to keep his accuracy in check.

My 2 cents

A lot of FAQ's was a funny thing.

Having Chapter Approved articles all the time made the hobbyists feel like we were getting some sort of game support, made us feel like we mattered to GW.

And then they published all the Chapter Approved articles into a book, which was mostly just a cut and paste job.

So, not too difficult, to produce new books, which meant new book sales, which meant more revinew....

How was getting rid of Andy C. and Chapter Approved a good idea again? [/sarcasm]

grizgrin wrote:Jazz: what, exactly, did you hope to accomplish with that comment? Please, do share.

Yah, I think that was meant as a joke and a funny little riposte, nothing more.

I'm right there with you, KiMonarrez. Chapter Approved articles couldn't have been more expensive to write than the revenue that the books brought in. It seems ridiculous to have gotten rid of those. HEck, they could have used edited fan-written content and still gotten away with that model. And then White Dwarf might be worth buying. One freaking page of rules per issue would do it.

KiMonarrez wrote:A lot of FAQ's was a funny thing.

Having Chapter Approved articles all the time made the hobbyists feel like we were getting some sort of game support, made us feel like we mattered to GW.

[/sarcasm]

It's interesting how closely non-electronic game publishing can come to the software lifecycle. Software giants shy away from ongoing support- REAL ongoing support that gathers user feedback and fixes things often with patches and small upgrades, not years of brokenness with very rare version releases that fail to address user complaints while introducing many new glitches. Big companies are afraid that real support is a financial commitment that could overwhelm them. In the software world (and with liablity and stuff) that's actually somewhat understandable, but with GW it's ludicrous. They would make so much more money if they were a bit more open with their rules and invested in bite-sized bits of content to keep players buying their mags and minis.

I love it when differing realms of geekdom collide.

Back on topic, seems like even those of us who hated Gav's rules are sad to see the departure of another of the old guard (well, middle guard) from GW. Maybe he'll link up with Andy C. on some of his newer projects. Um, uh oh.

Was he fired or did he leave voluntarily? The Finnish guy who wrote the (original Citadel Journal) Kislev army list and the 6th edition WHFB (among others) did leave because he could got much more paid in the computer games industry.

I was never impressed with Gav's rule-writing ability but he's been a fixture of the game for as long as I've been playing so I'm sad to see him leave.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

According to wikipedia, Andy Chambers has moved onto video games as he is the Creative Director for Starcraft II over at Blizzard.

http://au.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/starcraft2/news.html?sid=6171178&mode=all

now there are some good news. and when GW breaks down, he comes back, brings Blizzard with him and we finally get Starcraft miniatures


there's room for space orks and zombies in that game, isn't there?

jfrazell wrote:Sorry if this has been discussed previously. Discussion on Warseer (confirmed by Brimstone) that he is leaving. No confirm on Alessio also leaving.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128708&page=2


Brimstone:

Second yes Gav is leaving GW, he's put in a hell of a contribution both to Games Workshop and Warseer and I'm going to miss him.

I'm pretty sure Alessio is not leaving however.

I took a quit jaunt over to Warseer. I was not very impressed with what I saw going on.

If you think that's bad you should see this forum:

http://warhammer.org.uk/PhP/viewtopic.php?t=39178&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

This is not as bad as Andy Chambers leaving.

I wonder how this'll impact on the rules.

And weren't the Dark Elves corrected with much feedback from Druchii.net? That would be good to see with most 'dexes. The FAQs are coming along and will likely be released bundled with DN:Forever.

EDIT: Besides, blaming him for all the horror that 40k or Fantasy have been through makes me wonder how many people here know what goes into developing a book like that. I just find it silly to insult someone on a personal level, no matter how funny the metaphor might be, because he wrote X/Z/Y.

Well, criticizing someone's writing skills often reflects upon their personality as well. Take Alessio: he's got a rep as a cheesy powergamer and rules lawyer, to the point that it was joked about nervously in White Dwarf when he was hired. Take a look at the codices that he had a hand in for Fantasy, and you see his favorites ending up brokenly good while his formerly least liked opponent lists end up weak. And then the main rules rewrite, where his obvious love of special-rules block movement (Brettonians, Skaven) makes him nerf skirmishers by march-blocking them within 8" of the enemy, effectively removing an entire class of (very historical and common) light infantry tactics from the game. Cheesy reworking of the basic rules to favor a class of army that was already quite powerful. Classic Alessio.

People write bad rules because of something in their character. Whether that be boundless creativity tainted with a bit of sloppiness (Andy Chambers), failure to think beyond the (very good) fluff to hard rules consequences (Gav), or biased favoritism written into fiddly rules (Alessio), it's people's strengths that also create weaknesses in their work. So things get a bit personal when you're analyzing what it is about someone that makes them write poor rules, even when you only know them through their work and a few interviews.

Boy, it would be interesting to see Gav working on Warcraft. I'm not a fan of that game or world, so I'd be interested to see whether he improved or damaged it if Blizzard hired him to do their non-electronic material background stuff (fluff for short).

Do I count two kittens dead because of you?

Anyway, I remember the WD where they presented "gaming supremo" Alessio, but as I´m not into Fantasy I can't really comment on his work. Though I kind of know what you mean as it's some of what was seen through the work of Pete Haines and his Iron Warriors.

Still, hardly a reason to rejoice or make more than the occasional poke. I can see Gav as being good intentioned rather than outright decided to make his favourites the best, and I think that it'd be hard for anyone to have his position and still make out a list that's 100% balanced against all comers, either for better or worse. Considering we're a community and there's probably some limit to who he can talk to about that, I'd guess this was a major factor.

Gee, what is GeDub going to do without good 'ol Gav? Is he now going to concentrate on his fruitful book-writing career? Please tell me he's not going to Battlefront or someone else with a successful game. Oh, the horror.

Gav was the worst employee in the studio, based on his work. This news makes me happy...but not happy enough to stop trying to screw GW on every single corner and sale that I can...

KiMonarrez wrote:A lot of FAQ's was a funny thing.

Having Chapter Approved articles all the time made the hobbyists feel like we were getting some sort of game support, made us feel like we mattered to GW.

And then they published all the Chapter Approved articles into a book, which was mostly just a cut and paste job.

So, not too difficult, to produce new books, which meant new book sales, which meant more revinew....

How was getting rid of Andy C. and Chapter Approved a good idea again? [/sarcasm]

They got rid of Chapter Approved because there was a lot of noise about people not wanting to have to bring a BBB, a codex, three Chapter Approved books, and miscellaneous other White Dwarf issues to the table to ensure that they had all the rules. Which is a good point.

It was also removed ecause a lot of people kvetched about the semi-legal status of CA stuff in tourneys. Which is further emphasis that the emphasis on tournament play has done little but hurt the game.

Salvation122 wrote:It was also removed ecause a lot of people kvetched about the semi-legal status of CA stuff in tourneys. Which is further emphasis that the emphasis on tournament play has done little but hurt the game.

Isn't it odd how GW only seem to listen to feedback when they're choosing to not to do something.

VermGho5t wrote:According to wikipedia, Andy Chambers has moved onto video games as he is the Creative Director for Starcraft II over at Blizzard.

http://au.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/starcraft2/news.html?sid=6171178&mode=all

Good for him. Chances are his pay is close to an order of magnitude higher than what he was getting at GW. I recall R. Talsorian Games basically going on hiatus for a decade while it's eponymous figure did games dev at Microsoft. After a decade he returned with enough cash to basically retire and write the game books he liked as a hobby without needing to worry what others thought.

They would make so much more money if they were a bit more open with their rules and invested in bite-sized bits of content to keep players buying their mags and minis.

AND...

a lot of people kvetched about the semi-legal status of CA stuff in tourneys. Which is further emphasis that the emphasis on tournament play has done little but hurt the game

Seems like GW recognizes this a bit, and is splitting the game into tournament 40k and Apocalypse 40k. The new codexes are clamping down on options (10-man formations, no alternate legions/ chapters/ craftworlds/ clans, etc) while Apocalypse loosens things up.

So we'll have "official tournament 40k" with fewer choices that should (hopefully) be easier to keep balanced. And we'll have "players' consent Apocalypse 40k" with more, goofier choices for people who don't care about tournament play - not just huge armies, but oddball armies. We already have alternate army datasheets (Kroot, Court of the Young King, Kult of Speed, Lost and the Damned) and are rumored to be getting the Chaos Legions as well.

So maybe Apocalypse becomes the loosey-goosey fluff 40k and normal 40k becomes more streamlined and tournament-friendly.

Or maybe I'm just talking myself into it because I would like to see the return of more funky Chapter Approved variants in any form whatsoever.

A fair number of RPG and board game people have gone into the video games industry.

hubcap wrote:So maybe Apocalypse becomes the loosey-goosey fluff 40k and normal 40k becomes more streamlined and tournament-friendly.

Or maybe I'm just talking myself into it because I would like to see the return of more funky Chapter Approved variants in any form whatsoever.

Well we're getting the Liber Apocalyptica in the anniversary edition of WD--340 in the UK numbering. Along with the "rules" for Apoc. style fantasy games.

Think we get a big Emp's children noise weapon cult list or something similar in the Liber, I assume we'll get something for every legion/cult.

Alessio needs to be the next to go.

Care to elaborate why?

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Heritor wrote: Alessio needs to be the next to go.

Alessio is the only one who should stay.
his books are the best. powerful enough to stand up to almost 5 years warhammer and yet the fluffers can find plenty of units to make their happy little armies.

Skaven and Vampire counts are the two books that i feel have given me the best value for my dollar.compare that to my dark elf book, which sucked from day 1.
keep the tournament players involved in writing books,when tournament players are happy with their books, then everyone else will fall in line. fluffers and comp-queens will always have something to complain about.

WHO should stay or go is irrelevent. What the new guys bring to the table, now that is the question.

The biggest gripe I have about the Infamous departures is the passing of the gauntlet, as in Continuations from one guy to the next for this company SUCK.
The stability of these guys and thier different ways and thought processes conflict, and ruin the game.

I hate the way when Noob took over when they all the sudden decided out of the blue to scrap the whole system. Alessio was on bord in the vampire count days, when they came up with the new types and models, and considering the stuff they pulled on them this time around, My gripes hold true.
A perfect example is the stupidly new Vampires, who were already given the "New and Improved with more Vitamin C", what ever happened to the Skaven, or dark elves, or the chaos, or the high elves? one or two new guys doesn't count as a revamp. ( he he)
Of all of the armies NOT to mess with, they have to retread the Vampire Counts, and not just bring back the UNDEAD? !@#$ vampires. They are tired and already played out before boreing us to death( or undeath).

If they can't come up with new stuff, why bother continuing the madness?

Techboss wrote:I took a quit jaunt over to Warseer. I was not very impressed with what I saw going on.

I think this sums up Warseer pretty succinctly.

hubcap wrote:So maybe Apocalypse becomes the loosey-goosey fluff 40k and normal 40k becomes more streamlined and tournament-friendly.

I doubt it. Normal 40k will continue to be just as loosey-goosey as it's always been. The difference is that in Apocalypse they've admitted that they're not even trying.

reds8n wrote:Think we get a big Emp's children noise weapon cult list or something similar in the Liber, I assume we'll get something for every legion/cult.

Yeah that's much better than giving them real rules. Unbelievable.

Am I the only one who's seriously fed up with this Apocalypse crap? Apocalypse: where anything goes... with opponent consent (and nothing goes without it). Well then what the hell do I need GW for? I mean if I need my opponent's consent to use my ing army then what's the point even having official rules?

Sure, no problem dude! You can play your Emperor's Children army - just as long as you let me play my Space Marine Custodian Primarch Titan Legion with Harlequin Solitaire Black Library Strike Force and Adeptus Mechanicus Necron C'tan Machine Cult allies (don't worry, it's cool - I made my own datasheets for them!) - now let's play some WARHAMS! Ok, I take Flank March and put all my Solitaires, C'tans and Primarchs in reserve. Hurr! Gee, thanks for the rules "support" GW.

Go send Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, and Black Templars to Apocalypse and then maybe we can talk.

>>Am I the only one who's seriously fed up with this Apocalypse crap? Apocalypse: where anything goes... with opponent consent (and nothing goes without it).

I have rate Apoc low since the start. Mind you, horses for courses, a lot of people love it.

>>Well then what the hell do I need GW for? I mean if I need my opponent's consent to use my ing army then what's the point even having official rules?

Don't forget the golden rule, you can always D6 for whether an army is allowed or not :-)

Sure, no problem dude! You can play your Emperor's Children army - just as long as you let me play my Space Marine Custodian Primarch Titan Legion with Harlequin Solitaire Black Library Strike Force and Adeptus Mechanicus Necron C'tan Machine Cult allies (don't worry, it's cool - I made my own datasheets for them!) - now let's play some WARHAMS! Ok, I take Flank March and put all my Solitaires, C'tans and Primarchs in reserve. Hurr! Gee, thanks for the rules "support" GW.



I got a solid Lawl out of that. Thank you, good sir.

And yes, I completely agree. The whole- "You can do whatever the hell you please" schtick is bollocks. there is no point in having rules at this point. Lest just go play RISK 2210 and be done with it.

Yup. Hear hear on the "Apocalypse is crap" vote. Why do I need GW's shiny expensive book to allow me (and my 17 mates) to dump anything and everything 40k-related on a single table and make"kapow kapow" noises?

So far I haven't come across anyoone over the age of around 8 who gives Apoc the time of day:

Anyone over the age of 8 with 2 brain cells to rub together could cobble up a "mass participation" game and didn't need the book. Anyone under 8 with or without the braincells just uses it as a licence to play Army Men with their unstoppable grey horde of Space Mareenz.

At this point with regard to GW's complete lack of any desire to produce an actual "game" its not just the little boy pointing at the emperor and shouting "Look mum, he's got no clothes", its actually the damned emperor himself running butt naked down the high street shouting "Wheeeeee, freedom! Everyone look at my willy!"

Gav's out? That nearly ensures my 40k 'comeback' with 5th Ed..
Just hoping to see some Inquisitionstuff soon then, but it's probably not done by Gav, wich is a very good thing in the first place.

Cheers!

ps: Skirmish Games rock!

Tetchy wrote:AAAAAPPPPPOOOOCCCCCAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLYYYYYYYYPPPPPPPPPPSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEE

Same reaction I had, but they needed some sort of excuse to create boxes of overstocked models, didn't they? So why not also make a simple book and charge for it?

I am over the age of 8 and I have been playing Mega Battles for a long time. I do like Apocalypse, it gives some cool ideas in it. Some people like to come up with their own material some would rather have someone else do it for them.

I am sorry to see Gav leave even though I was not a big fan of his stuff. He was always nice to talk to at events and he did have some good ideas. I hope the next person will do great things as well.

see, I've been loving apocalypse
I like the setup
I like the formations
I like the FO big games you get to play
and you know what, my friends like it, and they're the people I enjoy playing with, so no hassle with the cheeseball armies, or flailing kiddies

Tetchy wrote:So far I haven't come across anyoone over the age of around 8 who gives Apoc the time of day

Perhaps this reflects more on how you choose to play 40k, rather than what the rest of the gaming community might prefer.

I know one group which is practically switching over entirely to Apocalypse gaming. And surprise, surprise, they're all adults. Many of them are even married. Oddly, they don't have the issues with made-up stuff that you seem to be afraid of. You see, they focus on Apocalypse games to have fun, rather than bringing WAAC where it doesn't belong.

Savnock wrote:Well, criticizing someone's writing skills often reflects upon their personality as well. Take Alessio: he's got a rep as a cheesy powergamer and rules lawyer, to the point that it was joked about nervously in White Dwarf when he was hired. Take a look at the codices that he had a hand in for Fantasy, and you see his favorites ending up brokenly good while his formerly least liked opponent lists end up weak. And then the main rules rewrite, where his obvious love of special-rules block movement (Brettonians, Skaven) makes him nerf skirmishers by march-blocking them within 8" of the enemy, effectively removing an entire class of (very historical and common) light infantry tactics from the game. Cheesy reworking of the basic rules to favor a class of army that was already quite powerful. Classic Alessio.

People write bad rules because of something in their character. Whether that be boundless creativity tainted with a bit of sloppiness (Andy Chambers), failure to think beyond the (very good) fluff to hard rules consequences (Gav), or biased favoritism written into fiddly rules (Alessio), it's people's strengths that also create weaknesses in their work. So things get a bit personal when you're analyzing what it is about someone that makes them write poor rules, even when you only know them through their work and a few interviews.

Boy, it would be interesting to see Gav working on Warcraft. I'm not a fan of that game or world, so I'd be interested to see whether he improved or damaged it if Blizzard hired him to do their non-electronic material background stuff (fluff for short).

I didn't play a whole lot of 6th Edition, but from what I understand and read about it back before 7th was that people were bitching about Skirmishers a lot and about how they were way too good.

Even now, they're still great, especially if you're playing skirmishers who want to be in combat, since 360 LOS and movement is a really big deal in WHFB. Their ability to redirect is also really damn good too. So seeing as how they're still great rules and that only a few armies really take and rely on big blocks of infantry and stay "competitive", I'm not seeing this as "Alessio buffing Skaven & Bretts" so much as "GW fixing something the player base saw as overpowered".

JohnHwangDD wrote:I know one group which is practically switching over entirely to Apocalypse gaming. And surprise, surprise, they're all adults. Many of them are even married. Oddly, they don't have the issues with made-up stuff that you seem to be afraid of. You see, they focus on Apocalypse games to have fun, rather than bringing WAAC where it doesn't belong.

That's fantastic. If people enjoy Apocalypse then more power to them. But the fact still remains that when you make everything require opponent consent then "rules" cease to be rules and become more like "suggestions".

Abadabadoobaddon -

That's fantastic. If people enjoy Apocalypse then more power to them. But the fact still remains that when you make everything require opponent consent then "rules" cease to be rules and become more like "suggestions".

Lucky 'Everything' isn't up to your opponent's consent then Sir.....

Of course, many of 40k's rules (LOS, terrain) are largely suggestions - hence the FAQs.

So choosing to have a looser approach (i.e. no FOC, unrestricted Allies) versus a tighter approach (tournament-style 40k) hardly matters. Besides, a lot of Apocalypse is implied consent, such as Codices and GW-published datasheets being presumed to be allowed.

I guess the thing is whether or not The Most Important Rule (p.5) really is the most important rule.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Oddly, they don't have the issues with made-up stuff that you seem to be afraid of. You see, they focus on Apocalypse games to have fun, rather than bringing WAAC where it doesn't belong.

But there you see we have the classic response. And I give the classic rebuttle: Producing a tight ruleset in no way reduces the "fun" players of the game can have. It is easy to "fluff up" and have fun with a tight ruleset if that is your preference. It is downright difficult to "tighten up" and have fun with a fluffy ill-thought-through ruleset, on the other hand.

I'm not afraid of making stuff up. But sadly I don't have the time. As I am paying the rule designers to design a game - I want precisely that - a game that works, not one i have to make up (or hunt for) a load of house rules to decide whether something works or not. Sure I can d6 it, sure I can come to a friendly understanding (which is more normally the case), but I shouldn't *have to* if I have paid a fortune for a rulebook, and a codex or twenty and the game is in its umpteenth edition.

And that is why I play other games, because the outlay of similar amounts of money results in a game my mates and I can play without a bazillion unanswered questions and house rules.

So the question remains, why pay for Apocalypse when all it amounts to is a load of suggestions, most of which are just common sense anyway?

As I implied, "mature gamers" who like large games have already been playing large games and don't need GW's permission and suggestions to do so. Those "immature gamers" who like large games have a right to their own enjoyment of course, and if GW is content to peddle stuff aimed at them and not at the "mature gamer", then so be it... Its no skin off my nose if people want to piss their money down the drain for something of little worth.

Tetchy wrote:Producing a tight ruleset in no way reduces the "fun" players of the game can have. It is easy to "fluff up" and have fun with a tight ruleset if that is your preference. It is downright difficult to "tighten up" and have fun with a fluffy ill-thought-through ruleset, on the other hand.

Which is exactly why we're seeing a return of the strong, flexible core list codex and the option-heavy variant armies that were previously based on an existing core list are being shuffled off to the looser ruleset game. They're "tightening up" the rules. Apocolypse is becoming the catch-all for so much stuff that people want "real rules" for because the latter half of 3e and the first part of 4e saw a great experiment in variant lists which were relatively unbalancable in the increasingly tournament-style-centric basic rules. That experiment failed, and now the design team is moving away from having varient lists for every sub-force that has ever appeared in the fluff cluttering up the main rules.

Tetchy wrote:I'm not afraid of making stuff up. But sadly I don't have the time. As I am paying the rule designers to design a game - I want precisely that - a game that works, not one i have to make up (or hunt for) a load of house rules to decide whether something works or not.

Again, that's precisely what's happening, albiet admittedly as a damage control procedure. The horse is out of the barn and the pooch has been screwed...players now expect that an all-Noise Marine Emperor's Children list exist, so the game needs a place to keep it without it screwing up the main rules balance.

Tetchy wrote:Sure I can d6 it, sure I can come to a friendly understanding (which is more normally the case), but I shouldn't *have to* if I have paid a fortune for a rulebook, and a codex or twenty and the game is in its umpteenth edition.

The fact that the game and that codex is in its "umpteenth edition" is fair warning that armies change. It's been that way for 25 years now, counting all the games GW produces. The rules are cyclic, and the effectiveness of specific army builds is therefore equally cyclic. Despite the popularity of the tournament scene, the nature of the cyclic rules release model assumes that you are collecting as much of and as variety a collection of an army as you can, as a labor of love and a hobby. As such, collections geared to a highly specialized force usually suffer the most when their turn in the cycle comes up, because the game rules and the effectiveness or availability of specific units therein changed to keep the game more interesting and support the business model by making new units and minatures more attractive.

I'm not saying that this cyclic rules model is wrong or right, I'm saying that this is the way the game is. It's not a recent innovation undertaking to screw your army of expensive minatures, it's just another stage in a cycle that's been in progress for over two decades now. It's not something you have to accept but rather something that, by buying that first codex or model, knowingly or unknowingly, you have already accepted. This part of the metagame. It happens.

Tetchy wrote:So the question remains, why pay for Apocalypse when all it amounts to is a load of suggestions, most of which are just common sense anyway?

As I implied, "mature gamers" who like large games have already been playing large games and don't need GW's permission and suggestions to do so. Those "immature gamers" who like large games have a right to their own enjoyment of course, and if GW is content to peddle stuff aimed at them and not at the "mature gamer", then so be it... Its no skin off my nose if people want to piss their money down the drain for something of little worth.

Because, as I said earlier, Apocolypse is damage control in new release format. GW stood by idly for too long while the tournament scene was allowed to infect all aspects of both games. Now they have to release a book just to remind some player that it's okay to play with wacky houserules, crazy formations, less restrictions, and above all [/i]just for freaking fun[/i]. It's a reminder that you can always carefully select a friend or friends that you can trust not to screw you over with WAAC and make up whatever you want to in games with them, and it's aimed at those players who either have let that aspect of the game slip away from them or those gamers too new to remember days when you got that kind of crazy crap in White Dwarf all the time.

Cities of Death is sort of the same thing, in its own way. They're making the core game "serious business" play (which any group can take less seriously, if they so choose) while allowing for less refined, restricted play in thematic books like Cities of Death or Apocolypse (or the rumored upcoming Planetstrike and the Kill-Team/small games book). I for one think it's an interesting new model. At least they're finally doing something we've been griping about for years now - throwing veterans a few bones now and again.

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

Techboss wrote:

Am I the only one who's seriously fed up with this Apocalypse crap? Apocalypse: where anything goes... with opponent consent (and nothing goes without it). Well then what the hell do I need GW for? I mean if I need my opponent's consent to use my ing army then what's the point even having official rules?

Sure, no problem dude! You can play your Emperor's Children army - just as long as you let me play my Space Marine Custodian Primarch Titan Legion with Harlequin Solitaire Black Library Strike Force and Adeptus Mechanicus Necron C'tan Machine Cult allies (don't worry, it's cool - I made my own datasheets for them!) - now let's play some WARHAMS! Ok, I take Flank March and put all my Solitaires, C'tans and Primarchs in reserve. Hurr! Gee, thanks for the rules "support" GW.

Go send Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, and Black Templars to Apocalypse and then maybe we can talk.

I agree. I don't play apocalypse but think its great if others like it. But its a different system and has become the be-all and end-all excuse for a lack of effort by GW or GW actively killing my lists. "Just use apocalypse" er no.

Psychopomp wrote:Apocolypse is becoming the catch-all for so much stuff that people want "real rules" for because the latter half of 3e and the first part of 4e saw a great experiment in variant lists which were relatively unbalancable in the increasingly tournament-style-centric basic rules.

Yes, it's a good thing they're getting rid of all the unbalanced variant lists by sending them to Apocalypse. That must be why the Blood Angels' White Dwarf list is Apocalypse-only.

Oh wait, it isn't. But that's ok, we can make an exception in their case - it's not as though they were 3rd editions most glaring example of an unbalanced variant list.

Oh wait, they were.

Except that Blood Angels weren't a variable list, they had their OWN codex.

Nice try though, I appreciate the effort.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

I think the 4th edition Blood Angels Codex is all they need. I would have preferred the Dark Angels and Black Templar books to be as short, sharp, to the point, and down-loadable.

Yeah abby RED MARINES are not just a variant of BLUE MARINES they are their own special tactical force (army) and you'll hurt their feelings if you dare suggest otherwise.

Remember, orks with trucks is a variant list. Space elves with a super-secret council of doom is a variant list. But red marines are a distinct army type.

Blood Angels have had a codex since 2nd Ed, how long have the Emps Children had theirs? Oh wait....

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Ozymandias wrote:Blood Angels have had a codex since 2nd Ed, how long have the Emps Children had theirs? Oh wait....

Ozymandias, King of Kings

You got it, Ozy. BA are the original-and-best(TM) variant army.

Except of course for chaos in RT and Space Wolves in 2nd ed. The First! The Furry! get used to it!

Well Chaos was just marines with spikes. Hardly variant. I'd consider them the original converted army list or counts-as army list. Unlike furry marines or goth marines, they aren't cool enough to join the super variant list club.

But, I did forget the furry marines. I don't know if you could really give it the "best variant list" title since GW hasn't given them a recent WD list, though. They're just there by the roadside, hoping someone driving along will pick up some poor, hungry puppies.

jfrazell wrote:Except of course for chaos in RT and Space Wolves in 2nd ed. The First! The Furry! get used to it!

Space Wolves in RT, White Scars in RT Ultra-marines in RT, I could go on...

Maybe they'll bring in somebody that can actually win a battle report to replace him.

Well, the very first Codex was Space Wolves wasn't it? In fact, BA/DA got a Codex (with a capital "C") before Chaos did.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

jfrazell wrote:Except of course for chaos in RT and Space Wolves in 2nd ed. The First! The Furry! get used to it!

Give me back random roll Kustom Kombi weapons and Retribution of the Emperor templates that are a yard wide.

Ozymandias wrote:Well, the very first Codex was Space Wolves wasn't it? In fact, BA/DA got a Codex (with a capital "C") before Chaos did.

So? Emperor's Children had their own army list before there was even such a thing as a Codex (with a capital "C"). I don't understand your strange preoccupation with the chronology of codex releases (which didn't even begin until 2nd edition).

Sturmtruppe wrote:Maybe they'll bring in somebody that can actually win a battle report to replace him.

The latest UK WD indicates that Robin Cruddace has joined the design team. You can see some of his stuff here

Okay, so he can paint. But how is he at game design?

George Spiggott wrote:

jfrazell wrote:Except of course for chaos in RT and Space Wolves in 2nd ed. The First! The Furry! get used to it!

Space Wolves in RT, White Scars in RT Ultra-marines in RT, I could go on...

Did they have separate lists? The pups were the first marine variant codex in 2nd edition. Wolfguard Terminatorzzz HURR!!!

jfrazell wrote:Did they have separate lists? The pups were the first marine variant codex in 2nd edition. Wolfguard Terminatorzzz HURR!!!

Yes, the Space Wolves are in the book of the Astronomicon, there's a bunch of named characters (Commander Enoch, Captain Storm etc.) and variant squad types (Howlers, Snarlers, Tearers and Trackers). later on some Space Wolf characters (Ragnar & 'Nigel' Stormcaller IIRC) got rules for RT.

What are Wolfguard Terminators? They're not in the RT list; are they some sort of upgrade for the Bullock jet-cycle squads?

Cool I didn't know there were variants at all in RT. I thought RT was one big fuzzy d1000 variant list

Death By Monkeys wrote:Okay, so he can paint. But how is he at game design?

Well, he's got a PhD in Physics... Not sure whether that's good or bad, but its something!

So why is he screwing around as game designer? Is he like our McDonalds employees in the 80's all having geology degrees?

jfrazell wrote:So why is he screwing around as game designer? Is he like our McDonalds employees in the 80's all having geology degrees?

But they needed those as the McMuffinz in Egg McMuffins are made of potash feldspar.

Maybe he got a little tired of the whole physics thing. Maybe he made enough in his past career that now he doesn't NEED to work and works for GW for fun.

I don't know whether I'd sign up for a physics class if Dr. Thorpe taught it.

However, if this Dr. Thorpe taught the class, I might.

No one actually works for fun.

jfrazell wrote:No one actually works for fun.

Comedy gold!

jfrazell wrote:No one actually works for fun.

I disagree. When I was in training, in upstate New York, I knew this rich guy who sold hot-dogs from a hot dog stand for fun. Cool guy too.

Do you have proof he was rich?

I'll restate. Absent the occasional aberration, no one actually works for free. They may like what they do, they may take a pay cut to do that type of job, but if they are paid US$0 they are not going to come to work.

My copy of Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness has an Emperor's Children army list in it...

BYE

Scientists don't make a lot of money in the UK. It's one of the reasons we are no longer Top Nation.

They also don't work for free. I can't think of anyone outside of a charity context that works for free.

jfrazell wrote:They also don't work for free. I can't think of anyone outside of a charity context that works for free.

the employees that work for the charity don' t work for free either. only the volunteers do that. and usually they get some sort of "bonus" for their efforts. non-profit just means there is nothing made over expendatures. so salaries are included in that..

I meant volunteers, sorry.

For proof of his riches, all one had to do was notice the Jaguar he drove... and said same Jaguar being parked in front of the big fricken mansion on the way to work.

I agree, he was an aberration. He looked like Santa Clause, and always played him at Christmas time.

Gav designed the Harlequin codex that was quite good, but a bit imbalanced.

By the way, who is in charge of the 5th ed codex? I'd like to slap this guy...

Tetchy wrote:

Death By Monkeys wrote:Okay, so he can paint. But how is he at game design?

Well, he's got a PhD in Physics... Not sure whether that's good or bad, but its something!

Well at the very least that means that he has a knowledge of high school-level mathematics, which is apparently in short supply in the design studio.

Then again, I once took a physics class at an Ivy League university in which a full professor spent an entire lecture proving the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle only to find that when he got to the final expression at the end his inequality sign was facing the wrong way.

Maybe he uses the international / metric inequality sign?