If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes. Why would GW get him to write yet another one? I know that GW isn't exactly caring of their customers, but outright ignorance of their feedback just seems beyond even them, especially with something as simple as hiring somebody else.

Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

Do you mean people not on the internet feel differently or something?

The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

And no, I just think it's a lot of Vocal people who have hate for Ward, certainly not the vast majority.

Hating his fluff is completely justifiable. His rules are generally quite balanced for 5th edition, while sometimes poorly written.

Matt Ward hate is just a popular bandwagon that a lot of people attach themselves to.

I think it is mostly people joining the bandwagon.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

This, a million times over.

Not just that, it may seem like most people hate ward. But the point is, the haters are all loudmouths. The vast majority has given up defending anything he writes because you just get shouted down by the "haters" anyway.

Because they know that matt ward doesnt write the fluff alone (or at all? I cant remember but either way theres a team for that which will do it or help him).
And that he doesnt make the rules alone. That the rules are play tested and many people have given the thumbs up to it.

Because from that point of view he might actually be doing nothing wrong or you can blame it on someone else.

or GW like the way he is going with his stuff even though it is not what the customers want.

yamgrenade wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

Do you mean people not on the internet feel differently or something?

Most likely, I know for a fact that the majority of the people in my FLGS simply do not care who wrote it. Mat Ward gets a lot of hate, some of it may be jutsified for his horrible writing style, but here's another fact: there's a development team. Mat Ward certainly did not make any of the codices himself, they all had a hand in it. Ward gets the hate because his name is printed on the cover. I think it's really disheartening to see the amount of hatred thrown as someone how clearly loves the 40k universe, and has dedicated himself to trying to help shape it.

Thranriel wrote:Because they know that matt ward doesnt write the fluff alone (or at all? I cant remember but either way theres a team for that which will do it or help him).

This.

For all we know, there might be a new guy on the Studio fluff commitee, who's first project was the new BA codex, and he added all the OTT stuff people are raging against and Mat Ward just approved it and slapped his name on it.

Sasori wrote:The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

And no, I just think it's a lot of Vocal people who have hate for Ward, certainly not the vast majority.

Hating his fluff is completely justifiable. His rules are generally quite balanced for 5th edition, while sometimes poorly written.

Matt Ward hate is just a popular bandwagon that a lot of people attach themselves to.

forruner_mercy wrote:I think it is mostly people joining the bandwagon.

Coolyo294 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

This, a million times over.

Soladrin wrote:Not just that, it may seem like most people hate ward. But the point is, the haters are all loudmouths. The vast majority has given up defending anything he writes because you just get shouted down by the "haters" anyway.

Couldn't have said it better myself guys

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes. Why would GW get him to write yet another one? I know that GW isn't exactly caring of their customers, but outright ignorance of their feedback just seems beyond even them, especially with something as simple as hiring somebody else.

I have this crazy idea - and I do realize that it is probably too radical for most of the people here - but I present it anyway:

How about actually READING the new Necron codex before starting another Ward-hate thread? I mean, sheesh, the goddam book isn't even out yet.

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes. Why would GW get him to write yet another one? I know that GW isn't exactly caring of their customers, but outright ignorance of their feedback just seems beyond even them, especially with something as simple as hiring somebody else.

Probably because Matt Ward codices sell. GW's overall direction during 5th edition has been more towards selling miniatures over anything else.

Personally I dislike Matt Ward codices because the over all quality is not up to scratch from a product I would expect from GW. There’s more to codex writing then just “how much damage it can do”. They often have comic book style fluff, zany special rules and follow a cheaper point cost model (deduced via comparing Matt’s BA book with his vanilla book and his GK book with his BA book). Also contrary to popular belief, I don’t find Matt’s codices balanced either. They might not be gamebreaking OP, but they are unbalanced (although nothing errata couldn’t fix).

Backfire wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes. Why would GW get him to write yet another one? I know that GW isn't exactly caring of their customers, but outright ignorance of their feedback just seems beyond even them, especially with something as simple as hiring somebody else.

I have this crazy idea - and I do realize that it is probably too radical for most of the people here - but I present it anyway:

How about actually READING the new Necron codex before starting another Ward-hate thread? I mean, sheesh, the goddam book isn't even out yet.

I'm not judging that, it's just that he's had (Three?) chances and none of them have been that great.

And whats the team? I haven't heard anything about it.

yamgrenade wrote:

Backfire wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes. Why would GW get him to write yet another one? I know that GW isn't exactly caring of their customers, but outright ignorance of their feedback just seems beyond even them, especially with something as simple as hiring somebody else.

I have this crazy idea - and I do realize that it is probably too radical for most of the people here - but I present it anyway:

How about actually READING the new Necron codex before starting another Ward-hate thread? I mean, sheesh, the goddam book isn't even out yet.

I'm not judging that, it's just that he's had (Three?) chances and none of them have been that great.

And whats the team? I haven't heard anything about it.

The SM codex is fairly competetive yet balanced and has some good fluff and some fairly good ideas for fluffy lists.
The BA codex should never have existed so it's hardly his fault.
The GK codex wasn't all it could have been but as a codex it's balanced has some good fluff (Ignoring internet hyperbole) but in some places suffers from lack of detail (read Bloodtide)
By and large he has done a good job (From what has been attributed to him) and frankly i like it.

He really isnt that bad hes more of a joke to me now than anything else.

People dislike Mat Ward because he writes like an annoying internet fanboy and sounds like one in interviews and videos, and he wrote two of the worst books for WHFB, one at the bottom of the heap and one that damn near killed the game.

Like it or not, Ward's name is in the book as the author. Each codex has a list of who worked on it and in what capacity. Guess who's the only one with writing credits in his books? Those thinking or trying to argue his books aren't almost entirely his are deluding themselves.

Ward had enough leeway to change the transport capacities for drop pods and land raiders in C:SM without it getting stopped by IP control until release after which he "got his knuckles wrapped" for it in his words and subsequently didn't carry over.

His books have awful, atrocious fluff with random zany rules, and nobody likes a fanboy, hence why many dislike him.

Wards works have high sales because they're already very mainstream, relatively popular armies, and, especially in the case of GK's, very easy to start given brand new kits and super small model requirements for certain builds. SM's are always going to sell well regardless for a huge number of reasons no matter who writes them.


That said, there's something to be said about his books so far in 5E in terms of balance *relative* to other authors, though the only other two 5E codex writers have fewer books to their credit this edition to judge by and one of them was a massive 5 year reboot project while another was hamfisted into a release slot to keep theme with other releases so make of that what you will.

Oh man, it's been at least 3 weeks since I got to read one of these threads. What fun!

People on the Internet whine about it disproportionally. Yeah, he has some dumb fluff. His rules are generally pretty good, and have pretty good internal balance. The Necrons look awesome, and the vanilla Codex: Space Marines is a great book.

Mat Ward keeps getting codices because the people who bitch and moan about his fluff, myself included, do so after they've laid down a ridiculous amount of cash money to purchase said fluff.

The answer to any and every question regarding why GW does anything is the same: because it makes (or they think it will make) money.

Well look at it this way. Necrons needed big sweeping changes in fluff and rules, but mat ward was the only one with the gonads to do it.

Another idea, they like him because he is new and can give a fresh look on old armies.

Maybe the choices of who makes the codex is based on a giant spinning wheel.

nomotog wrote:Well look at it this way. Necrons needed big sweeping changes in fluff and rules, but mat ward was the only one with the gonads to do it.

He was the one given the assignment. That's not to say another author may not have done something similar, we'll never know, but attributing the massive changes in Necron fluff purely to Mat Ward's will to do so is rather silly.

I tend to agree with Vaktathi for the most part. However, the amount of hate and related threads is just annoying. I don't like what happened to Grey Knights, and the Space Marine book is a bit of an Ultramarine fan spank, but definitely nothing to lose sleep over. You can't change it, and you can't stop it, so its best to just suck it up deal with it.

On an unrelated note, I can't help but miss Brother SRM's old Duke Nukem avatar. Throws me off.

Vaktathi wrote:

nomotog wrote:Well look at it this way. Necrons needed big sweeping changes in fluff and rules, but mat ward was the only one with the gonads to do it.

He was the one given the assignment. That's not to say another author may not have done something similar, we'll never know, but attributing the massive changes in Necron fluff purely to Mat Ward's will to do so is rather silly.

Maybe I didn't put it right. They (GW) needed (maybe just wanted) massive changes to the necrons, so they called up there youngest freshest writer (MW) to do it. I mean if you wanted to completely rip apart a codex and rebuild it all from the ground up, who would you pick for the job.

nomotog wrote:Well look at it this way. Necrons needed big sweeping changes in fluff and rules, but mat ward was the only one with the gonads to do it.

I’m going to debunk this comment as well. Necrons was always due for some sort of overhaul and this isn’t specific to Matt Ward as the general pattern so far is that any sort of faction with a very old codex gets some sort of overhaul.

Blacksails wrote:On an unrelated note, I can't help but miss Brother SRM's old Duke Nukem avatar. Throws me off.

I had the vow to keep it til the game came out, and I ended up keeping it until I made Spehs Mehren a week or two ago. Part of my poorly thought out marketing strategy, as it were.

One thing people forget is that what is in the codex is rarely the work of one person. For example: The dreadknight is in the GK codex because someone at GW said "Grey Knights need something big", the sculptors sculpted up one, and told Mat Ward to write rules for it.

Sasori wrote:The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

And no, I just think it's a lot of Vocal people who have hate for Ward, certainly not the vast majority.

Hating his fluff is completely justifiable. His rules are generally quite balanced for 5th edition, while sometimes poorly written.

Matt Ward hate is just a popular bandwagon that a lot of people attach themselves to.

Regardless of who wrote C:SM it WOULD get played.

Cause he is cheaper than <censored by mommas boy inquisitor> so he gets to write so much. He may suck but he sucks for a lot less than a high quality writer. I may or may not be implying he is a whore.

I have a feeling that perhaps Wards writings are going to become standard. Perhaps he does favor the SM and the GK a little too much, or maybe he'll be giving every race he writes the Over-powered and ridiculous treatment. So far, he seems biased. We shall see.

I'm holding out judgment untill I actually read the codex. And since necrons have always been a favorite army, albeit a shelved one lately, I'm looking forward to picking up the book. If it has any glaring issues or other terribleness then will deal with it at that point.

In either case I am just waiting or the "omg necrons are OP, and can't be beat" threads, not to mention the probally no less then 5 separate undying YMDC debates about how certain new rules or wargear work. Ultimately we will have said threads locked pending the FAQ.

But at least wait for the book to release before judging.

Because his books sell.

Yes, the fluff is bad, and he is a very bad writer who is also bad.

But his armies are also genuinely fairly balanced and fun to play, and IMO most players don't seem to care too much about the fluff in the codex, in comparison to the crunch.

Due to this, his codices sell.

McNinja wrote:I have a feeling that perhaps Wards writings are going to become standard. Perhaps he does favor the SM and the GK a little too much, or maybe he'll be giving every race he writes the Over-powered and ridiculous treatment. So far, he seems biased. We shall see.

I have the same feeling as well that the “Matt Ward” style of rules design might become mainstream as far as GW rules are concerned. It would be a shame if other codex writers started to mimic his style.

In regards to Necrons, I don’t see them generating as much negativity as BA and GK. Yakface has already posted 95% of the special rules in the News forums and so far, the only thing that stands out to me is the Stormlord, when used in conjunction with Cryptek to create night fighting shenanigans.

What's the "Mat Ward" style of rules design you're talking about? If you think it's "X is overpowered" you're sorely, sorely mistaken. Also he has some dumb fluff, but the new Necron fluff owns bones.

Taking it objectively, most players probably aren't concerned with fluff and aren't hardcore gamers and such but just play because its fun. They take the dex, look at the models, and enjoy the game for what it is and not the made up stories surrounding their plastic toys.

Brother SRM wrote:What's the "Mat Ward" style of rules design you're talking about? If you think it's "X is overpowered" you're sorely, sorely mistaken. Also he has some dumb fluff, but the new Necron fluff owns bones.

Because dem bones is borrowed from the tomb kings.

Varrick wrote:Because dem bones is borrowed from the tomb kings.

I'd rather have Tomb Kings in Space (which Necrons kinda were already) over boring robots with no personality in space.

Brother SRM wrote:What's the "Mat Ward" style of rules design you're talking about? If you think it's "X is overpowered" you're sorely, sorely mistaken. Also he has some dumb fluff, but the new Necron fluff owns bones.

I was not referring to the level of power but rather the style of rules written by Matt Ward.

Specifically, I’m referring to his tendency for zany/unclean/needlessly over the top special rules such as Deepstriking LRs, Bloodtalons, GK grenades, 5th Ed Nemesis Force Weapons. Again, this is not referring to the level of power but rather the style/quality.

candy.man wrote:Specifically, I’m referring to his tendency for zany/unclean/needlessly over the top special rules such as Deepstriking LRs, Bloodtalons, GK grenades, 5th Ed Nemesis Force Weapons. Again, this is not referring to the level of power but rather the style/quality.

Okay, that I'll give you. He does have some rules that are remarkably silly, regardless of how good they are. I'm trying to think of Necron ones but I'm having a hard time. I think it's something a bit more contained to the GK and BA codices.

Sasori wrote:The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

And no, I just think it's a lot of Vocal people who have hate for Ward, certainly not the vast majority.

Hating his fluff is completely justifiable. His rules are generally quite balanced for 5th edition, while sometimes poorly written.

Matt Ward hate is just a popular bandwagon that a lot of people attach themselves to.

A large majority of GW gamers play Mat Ward codices
Many wargamers don't even play GW

As for being a money maker, surely it wouldn't matter who wrote the codices, 40k fans would still buy them?

Brother SRM wrote:I'd rather have Tomb Kings in Space (which Necrons kinda were already) over boring robots with no personality in space.

Your own perception of the fluff =/= what is actually written down.

The new fluff is trash.

The problem with the Necrons was the lack of emphasis on certain aspects of their fluff, not what was thematically present.

Void__Dragon wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:I'd rather have Tomb Kings in Space (which Necrons kinda were already) over boring robots with no personality in space.

Your own perception of the fluff =/= what is actually written down.

Hmmm, so Opinion doesn't equal quality of fluff

Void__Dragon wrote:
The new fluff is trash.

Smells like Opinion to me,


Get off your high horse, you think the new fluff is trash, Brother SRM thinks the new fluff is ok

neither is correct, its just opinion.

Grey Templar wrote:Hmmm, so Opinion doesn't equal quality of fluff

Opinions are better when based on facts. Crying "OPINION!" isn't some get out of jail free card for forming views which are frankly not based on facts.

Maybe I jumped the gun on assuming something that Brother SRM believes (Or rather, the basis for that belief), but frankly, "robots with no personality" comes off as frankly ignorant of what is actually in the old codex.

Once more, it's a problem of emphasis, the original Necron codex did not emphasize the character of the sentient Necrons nearly as much as it should of, to solve this problem, what came before didn't have to get a complete retcon. Perhaps that is what he meant, if it was I would agree.

Smells like Opinion to me,

Get off your high horse, you think the new fluff is trash, Brother SRM thinks the new fluff is ok

neither is correct, its just opinion.

Perhaps "trash" was too brazen and confrontational, and for that I apologise to Brother SRM for biting his head off in my previous post, but I would vehemently disagree with the notion that the complete retcon of everything that truly defined the Necrons, of every thematic element, was necessary to make them more "accessible" for other players. It was a shoddily done retcon, and even if the new fluff is good (And it probably won't be), it completely retcons the Necron faction, and has made them nigh-unrecognisable.

Brother SRM wrote:

candy.man wrote:Specifically, I’m referring to his tendency for zany/unclean/needlessly over the top special rules such as Deepstriking LRs, Bloodtalons, GK grenades, 5th Ed Nemesis Force Weapons. Again, this is not referring to the level of power but rather the style/quality.

Okay, that I'll give you. He does have some rules that are remarkably silly, regardless of how good they are. I'm trying to think of Necron ones but I'm having a hard time. I think it's something a bit more contained to the GK and BA codices.

Phill Kelly stated something at GD about codices being written as a group effort. I also heard that the new Necrons fluff wasn’t written by Ward. Perhaps there will be more collaboration with future books. All I hope is that the quality is up to scratch and the power creep contained with the next CSM book.

Void_Dragon wrote:The new fluff is trash.

Void__Dragon wrote:Your own perception of the fluff =/= what is actually written down.

You're funny!

Why thank you, so nice of you to say so.

I dunno. the comment about "only loud mouths hating Ward" certainly isn't true in my gaming group. Most of them aren't on forums and don't get up on their soap box, but his name is still banned around the gaming table. When he's mentioned, everyone winces.

I'm hopeless with mechanics, I'll admit that, but my gaming group are pretty good with rules and they're not exactly fans of Ward.

As for fluff, I know my gaming group, which is pretty diverse and has some fairly serious players, is very concerned with fluff.

Yeah. Necrons and Blood Angels are best buddies. ARGH.

CadianCommander wrote:
Yeah. Necrons and Blood Angels are best buddies. ARGH.

This makes more sense with the new codex. It's still silly though.

What personality did the necrons have before? None. They were emotionless robots that strolled around ruining people days basically for the lulz and the amusement of the c'tan. They were the most shallow army in wh40k, unless someone thinks that being unthinking mind-slaves somehow gives the army their personality. I don't. They very sorely needed a new identity, and now they have one.

I don't know if gw is reigning mat ward in on this and future codices, or if we have yet to see some crazy necron rule, but I do hope that the new fluff is at least somewhat restrained, because as one poster already pointed out, Matt ward writes like a fanboy, and even though he loves the game you cannot write like one and still be considered a professional.

Brother SRM wrote:

Varrick wrote:Because dem bones is borrowed from the tomb kings.

I'd rather have Tomb Kings in Space (which Necrons kinda were already) over boring robots with no personality in space.

Granted but it is a VERY silly way of going about the change. Now i just see them as metal tomb kings with a stupid ultra marines symbol for a ship.

Sasori wrote:The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

That's quite disingenuous. He wrote the Marine Codex. Most 40K players are Marine players. Most Games Workshop customers are Space Marine players. Anyone could have written the Marine Codex and it would still be a big selller as Marines are the big seller. Throw Blood Angels into the mix and it only gets bigger. If he'd've written the Wolf Codex then he'd probably be the writer of the books 2/3rds of all GW customers use.

He is their biggest selling writer by default.

McNinja wrote:What personality did the necrons have before? None.

Wrong.

They were emotionless robots that strolled around ruining people days basically for the lulz and the amusement of the c'tan.

Also wrong.

They were the most shallow army in wh40k,

Debateable.

unless someone thinks that being unthinking mind-slaves somehow gives the army their personality.

Well I guess it's a good thing they weren't all unthinking mind-slaves then.

I don't. They very sorely needed a new identity, and now they have one.

Or GW could of showed a surprising degree of competence by retaining their old identity and thematic elements, but put greater emphasis on some uncomfortably vague and lacking elements of the army in the codex. Aka, don't retcon, expand and improve upon.

The upper echelons of the Necrons did have personalities, sentience. They were singular of purpose, which does not equal completely mindless. Their singularity of purpose (A hatred of life that united a species) drove them to make a deal with the devil, that damned their race to achieve their goal, which is what still drives them today. You could say that makes them shallow. I would say it makes them alien. But the upper echelons were capable of more than merely "kill for lulz".

Once again, it was a problem of emphasis, in the old codex.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Sasori wrote:The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

That's quite disingenuous. He wrote the Marine Codex. Most 40K players are Marine players. Most Games Workshop customers are Space Marine players. Anyone could have written the Marine Codex and it would still be a big selller as Marines are the big seller. Throw Blood Angels into the mix and it only gets bigger. If he'd've written the Wolf Codex then he'd probably be the writer of the books 2/3rds of all GW customers use.

He is their biggest selling writer by default.

Maybe the necron codex will bomb and they will think he is a failure. I feel sorry for the crons if so but consider it vengeance if he feths up your army. Admit it; if he made your army into a laughable tomb kigns variant wouldn't you want his job and head on a pike? Then hope sales bomb when he does that to necrons.

I actually take it a step further and sometimes wish GW would go bankrupt.

I think I might be a bad person.

Void__Dragon wrote:I actually take it a step further and sometimes wish GW would go bankrupt.

I think I might be a bad person.

Nah, not a bad person. If this happened, somebody would pick up the pieces. We wouldn't be without our plastic crack for too long.

Brother SRM wrote:

CadianCommander wrote:
Yeah. Necrons and Blood Angels are best buddies. ARGH.

This makes more sense with the new codex. It's still silly though.

It might seem cynical, but sometimes I just get the feeling he's included the "sometimes Necrons make alliances" part into their fluff just to cover his stupid mistake in the BA dex

Personally I think the fluff shift is mostly an improvement, looking at it from the outside in. But I think its worrying that the people that are least happy with this (soon to be) 'dex are the people that actually play it already. If someone totaly changed the fluff for Eldar in their next codex I'd be livid, that shouldn't be what happens when an army you've loved for years finally gets the attention it deserves.

Gosh, what a surprise, a ward hate thread

Fact: he makes interesting books full of a wide variety of units from which you CAN build a wide variety of effective and fun armies with

Fact: the MOANING about the fluff is ridiculously overblown. The hyperbole is shocking, seriously so. Is some of the fluff over the top? Yes. Is it actually very similar to RT 2nd ed fluff - you know, that era that people view through rose tinted glasses, yet complain when someone actually incorporates it into the codex? Yes.

Surprise, GW can never win, haters gonna hate no matter what, and can be dutifully ignored as an irrelevance.

Void Dragon - I suggest you actually read the rumour threads, as nothing you have stated as "fact" about Necron fluff is true. It really isnt.

As I see it people are entitled to an opinion about the background of their armies and may not like developments to stories that made them want to play an army in the first place. There is a lot of investment not just in terms of cash into collecting and playing.

The problem is that there can no longer be any useful discussion on the matter.
What happens is a polarisation and any justified complaints get lumped in with the "haters".

Comments like "GW can never win" and "haters gonna hate" are also an irrelevance.

Though it is fair comment imho about the levels of unjust complaining about Mat Ward.

IMHO, rulewise Ward's codices aren't bad... indeed, I think that grey knights have a very balanced codex, and personally I didn't find so many OTT rules... it's difficult to find no-brainer choices or very poor ones in ward's codices.
His fluff is horrible, I agree, but I really like the rules...
IMHO, rule-wise, codex-space wolves by Phil kelly, for example is much more unbalanced and full of OTT units next to obviously poor choices...(and to a lesser extent also Codex DE suffer a similar problem)

IMHO Ward thinks good but write that idea totally wrong.
The real reason why peole hate him is because his obsession with Ultramarines, and his comments and writings about how they are coll and supreme and how all other Space Marines wants to be Ultramarines and to see Guiliman as their leader. While all others ( Blood Angels, Black Templars, Space Wolves etc... ) are just genetic mistakes and will die out soon enough.

I hate his Ultramarine fanboyism, his overpowered characters who alone smash army's and monsters and his hate toward Sisters of Battle.
But I don't have anything against his other stuff, I now actually like Necron - Blood Angel temporary pact against Tyranids since this new codex explains this.

punkow wrote:IMHO, rulewise Ward's codices aren't bad... indeed, I think that grey knights have a very balanced codex, and personally I didn't find so many OTT rules... it's difficult to find no-brainer choices or very poor ones in ward's codices.

It's not hard to find issues with the GK book, 5pts for psybolt ammo on dreads with two TL'd autocannons (don't tell me that isn't a no-brainer option I don't think I've seen a GK army without psyrifleman dreads), the incredible min/max & spam capabilities that coteaz/henchmen builds offer (552pts for 6 scoring units with 6AV11 boxes sporting TLLC's), etc? The GK book is probably the least well balanced of Ward's books.

Granted SW's were very poorly done as well, possibly moreso, but GK's have some very clear (again...5pts for psybolt ammo on dreads? how was that not obvious?) design issues.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:As I see it people are entitled to an opinion about the background of their armies and may not like developments to stories that made them want to play an army in the first place. There is a lot of investment not just in terms of cash into collecting and playing.

The problem is that there can no longer be any useful discussion on the matter.
What happens is a polarisation and any justified complaints get lumped in with the "haters".

Comments like "GW can never win" and "haters gonna hate" are also an irrelevance.

Though it is fair comment imho about the levels of unjust complaining about Mat Ward.

Remember Chibi:

It's only overblown hyperbole when you dislike Ward's stuff. If you like it, you're 'being reasonable'.

I just can't stand the lack of elegance with which he writes rules. Everything is a big ugly sledgehammer of a rule. Good rules piggyback on existing game mechanics to represent new things. Matt Ward likes to invent totally new things that the game has never cared about previously.

Doot doot doot, ignore this

Just remember:
It doesn't have to always or even usually win to warp the metagame in an unhealthy way.

I don't think JotWW was written by Mat Ward.

Oh crap, you're right.

Would it be better if the extent of difference in armies was which units contained which special rule as stated in the big rulebook? Personally, I like a little more difference in my armies than "my unit with infiltrate is in my fast attack slot, while yours is in your elite slot".

Oh yes... psyfleman... I'm so concentrated about not putting them in my lists that I tend to forgot the huge unbalance of psybolt for 5 points... Yes you're right about that but sincerely the inquisitorial henchmen don't seem so OTT to me and I think their point cost is pretty fair if you considr that each squad takes a FOC slot... purifiers are balaned IMHO since they are extremely killy but as killable as other marines where pallies have the right balance between cheese and point cost...
There are several different competitive builds in the GK dex, while you can't say the same about SW and DE for example... even admitting the fact that psybolt and fortitude are undercosted, I still think that GK is a good dex (the only complaint I have is that they're not so strong with teleport assault... sigh...)

Considering the Necron book isn't even out, yet, I'd say this thread was created in bad form. The OP is simply trolling or grinding his axe.

Move along.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

QFT

Most players that DON'T use forums have no idea who even writes codexes, nor do they care enough to incessantly complain about them.

What does all this complaining accomplish? GW clearly isn't going to fire him, or re-write the codexes, or do anything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kronk wrote:Considering the Necron book isn't even out, yet, I'd say this thread was created in bad form. The OP is simply trolling or grinding his axe.

Move along.

Also QFT

I'd *love* for MW to write the new chaos dex, as we'd get a LARGE interesting book FULL of different units, reasonable internal balance (compared to the horrible mess Kelly, Cruddace do to dexs) between units, and a few dozen ways to build fun, interesting and fairly competitive armies.

HBMC - why is it hyperbole to chart the middle course? I dont like all his fluff - the way Draigo was written was inelegant, even if the concept behind what he represents is very good - but to lump him in with game breakers such as Kelly and Cruddace massively misrepresents the sheer stupidity inherent in the SW and IG dexes.

Saying you like parts of X but not all of it is not hyperbole. Incessantly deriding the books he produces, showing no reasoned thought but just jumping on the bandwagon and, frankly endlessly regurgitating tired, tired memes that were never, ever funny or apropos IS.

Ward writes, in the main, very well internally balanced books, with a large variety in armies that can be produced from them. The other two writers DONT.

punkow wrote:Oh yes... psyfleman... I'm so concentrated about not putting them in my lists that I tend to forgot the huge unbalance of psybolt for 5 points...

Yeah, 140pts for 4 S8 BS4 TL'd 48" shots that can move and shoot to full effect, ignores shaken/stunned results >90% of the time and has powerful psychic defense is a bit low.

Yes you're right about that but sincerely the inquisitorial henchmen don't seem so OTT to me and I think their point cost is pretty fair if you considr that each squad takes a FOC slot...

It's not about the FoC slot, they're mostly irrelevant. It's the fact that you can pack in 6 scoring units in 6 metal boxes with accurate long range AT guns for about a quarter of your points in a 2000pt game with over 1300pts (assuming coteaz is already taken) to spend on all the super killy/shooty stuff. Combined with psyrifle dreads, it allows a ridiculous amount of *very* accurate long range heavy firepower coupled with plenty of points left over for lots of what are amongst the best CC units in the game.

There are several different competitive builds in the GK dex, while you can't say the same about SW and DE for example...

I think that's the first time I've heard that. It's hard to go wrong with SW's as long as you aren't trying to load up on "-claw" units, iron priests and fenrisian wolves, and DE have lots of cool and viable army builds (assuming of course you don't end up having to play against IG) with the only common thread being that DE armies generally need to be mechanized (which was true of the last book as well).

Samus_aran115 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

QFT

Most players that DON'T use forums have no idea who even writes codexes, nor do they care enough to incessantly complain about them.

Maybe not by name, but "codex creep" is definately noticable amongst players.
Not every unit needs to have a long list of individual special rules.
Not every mechanic of the game needs to have a unit that interacts with it in some way.
I bet you any day soon there'll be a special charector that lets you steal initiative (which is stupid enough anyway) on a 5 or 6.

Vaktathi wrote:Yeah, 140pts for 4 S8 BS4 TL'd 48" shots that can move and shoot to full effect, ignores shaken/stunned results >90% of the time and has powerful psychic defense is a bit low.

And yet comparable to a 130 point 6-man long fang squad with missile launchers.
Vehicle balance is interesting, given that one krak missile could blow it up or kill off half the guns, and would end up only electing a 4+ save from the long fangs, at worst killing one guy and not taking any of the special weapons.

While the autocannons are twinlinked and effectively relentless, they're not AP3, and don't have a frag mode like the long fangs do.

It has a psychic defense bubble allowing for it to protect nearby squads from a handful of powers, but on the other hand, Long fangs can also split fire.

And then it has the ability to ignore shaken/stunned most of the time (assuming there isn't a hood around somewhere), but then again, Long Fangs basically have the same odds of resisting getting pinned, and there are far fewer weapons that effect pinning than there are weapons that can glance a dreadnought.

140 seems appropriately balanced with SW, actually.

It's not about the FoC slot, they're mostly irrelevant. It's the fact that you can pack in 6 scoring units in 6 metal boxes with accurate long range AT guns for about a quarter of your points in a 2000pt game with over 1300pts (assuming coteaz is already taken) to spend on all the super killy/shooty stuff. Combined with psyrifle dreads, it allows a ridiculous amount of *very* accurate long range heavy firepower coupled with plenty of points left over for lots of what are amongst the best CC units in the game.

So... you're angry that they have an IG like build?

Vaktahi - SW and DE have far fewer semi competitive builds than GK. As in, they have more no brainer choices.

Venoms with trueborns and blasters >> Venoms and elite wytches, for example.

Joey wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

QFT

Most players that DON'T use forums have no idea who even writes codexes, nor do they care enough to incessantly complain about them.

Maybe not by name, but "codex creep" is definately noticable amongst players.
Not every unit needs to have a long list of individual special rules.
Not every mechanic of the game needs to have a unit that interacts with it in some way.
I bet you any day soon there'll be a special charector that lets you steal initiative (which is stupid enough anyway) on a 5 or 6.

You are a bit late I think.

Vect and the Stormlord can both seize it on a 4+.

If they even did retcon rebalancing - so that regular SM could have cheaper dev squads I think people would be happy. I hope that in te next edition they take a more privateer view (not excessively) but in regards to online updates/interactions

daedalus wrote:
And yet comparable to a 130 point 6-man long fang squad with missile launchers.

140pts actually, though still easily undercosted by 30pts. I'd still consider them viable and competive at 165-175pts.

140 seems appropriately balanced with SW, actually.

Which is to say, poorly, as both are noticeably undercosted. Relative to each other, probably fairly well balanced. Relative to their capabilities, plainly undercosted.

So... you're angry that they have an IG like build?

IG don't have force weapon wielding, power armored psyker shock troops to go with their MSU heavy weapons spam, nor generally the accuracy that TL'd BS4 provides nor the same kind of mobile effectiveness on most of their ranged AT firepower

Granted there's always the vendetta, which is just as bad as the Psyrifleman and Long Fangs in terms of firepower for the points paid, though it's generally significantly easier to get neutralize or mitigate given its size, height and lack of anything like fortitude.

Vaktahi - SW and DE have far fewer semi competitive builds than GK. As in, they have more no brainer choices.

Venoms with trueborns and blasters >> Venoms and elite wytches, for example.

if you're talking elites units and venom sure, but you probably would run elites wyches in a raider anyway with greater numbers. When it comes to Troops units, none of the DE troops are particularly poor choices next to each other.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You are a bit late I think.

Vect and the Stormlord can both seize it on a 4+.

):

Elite wytches are terrible compared to trueborn.

Hardly anyone uses wytches as troops, and you only use wracks as 30 point cheap scoring units - nothing more. kabalites with a blaster are generally better - they at least have some form of armour save and some antitank.

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes.

You aren't.

His work sells product.

DarknessEternal wrote:

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes.

You aren't.

His work sells product.

The product would sell regardless of who worked on it because he's only written SM books which sell like hotcakes regardless for many reasons. So far he's really only gotten books that would sell no matter what he did with them. In the case of the GK's, the biggest thing holding that army back was the fact that it was so expensive and all metal and much of it direct order only. Widely available plastic kits tend to change that.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Elite wytches are terrible compared to trueborn.

They're a much more niche unit, the Trueborn are more universally useful true, but doesn't make them an auto-no-brainer.

Hardly anyone uses wytches as troops,

News to me, they appear fairly popular to me.

and you only use wracks as 30 point cheap scoring units - nothing more.

Also news to me, they are by far the toughest available DE troops unit and aren't exactly terrible in CC, no worse than Assault Marines, better against weenier enemies and super tough enemies in fact.

kabalites with a blaster are generally better - they at least have some form of armour save and some antitank.

A 5+sv over a 6+ means nothing. Against shooting it's almost never going to get used, and in CC the 5+sv isn't beating a 4+invul or 6+/4+FNP. The ranged AT is nice yes, but it's also fairly short ranged unless it's a dark lance that isn't moving (in which cost most other weapons probably aren't being used either).

Matt Ward's fluff writing makes me angry at the English language. I do not appreciate his blatant favoritism and fanboyish devotion to the Ultramarines ruining a codex called "Space Marines" (implying that there should be more than just Ultra spank contained in its pages). I wouldn't object to him writing a ton of Ultramarine-related fluff, but he seems incapable of writing it without belittling everyone who plays a chapter that isn't the Ultras, and he also made the Ultramarines flat out boring.

Well, more boring than they already were.

He doesn't seem to come up with new ideas with armies, he just takes one aspect and magnifies it to ridiculous levels. With the Ultras it was their super-best-bestiness (yes, ok Mat, they are the best. Now tell us WHY). With BA it was Blood-everything. With GK it was super-duper-mega-special incorruptibility. I haven't read Necrons yet, but I'm sure he's taken one aspect of their character and cranked it to 11, too.

I can't speak about his rules-writing, because I haven't played against any of his armies yet. I do like most of what's in codex SM, but I dearly miss the Chapter Traits...

As for why GW keeps giving him dexes to write: I get the feeling that he is FAST. How many codexes has he written? Back to back? Look at the release schedule they have been able to keep up for dexes since handing most everything over to Ward. He writes like a Rhesus monkey on crack cocaine, and I think GW likes being able to get dexes out quickly, especially with a new edition coming up. It's possible the other dex writers are working on the new edition, while Ward finishes up writing codexes for armies that 5th (and 4th) edition ignored.

Vaktathi - elite wytches accomplish no more than troop wytches do, and arent scoring. Compared to a cheap unit that can be anti tank, take the ever useful antihorde venom and are cheap - they are a no brainer. You're essentially arguing the GH arent a no brainer, because claws in a raider with a priest are a niche use.

All around trueborn have far far far higher utility than wytches.

As for not using wytches as troops - you dont see them spammed, as you need higher numbers to make them viable, usually need to spend a pain token haemi on them so when their vehicle explodes (not if) they dont all die like wet paper, etc. All this costs more points than 5 guys in a venom.

5+ vs 6+ with free FF means that you;re losing half the guys to an explosion, and also rolling fewer dice means you're less likely to match odds and take enough casualties to prompt a morale test (see: binomial approximation to the normal and increasing data points) meaning you run away less, on average. You're also protecting just the one important guy (blaster) vs essentially the unit, as wytches only work through weight of attacks. 18" is short ranged? He's got at least a 30" range (12" move plus disembark) when mounted, 24' when not. That isnt "short"

Maybe the US is vastly different (well, you do play silly point values by default - 2k is vastly different to 1500/1750) but you just dont see big wracks units. Real CC units you send in wytches, if you must, or you instead shoot to death with poison spam.

squidhills wrote:I can't speak about his rules-writing, because I haven't played against any of his armies yet.

So you don't actually have the codexes then?

nomotog wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

nomotog wrote:Well look at it this way. Necrons needed big sweeping changes in fluff and rules, but mat ward was the only one with the gonads to do it.

He was the one given the assignment. That's not to say another author may not have done something similar, we'll never know, but attributing the massive changes in Necron fluff purely to Mat Ward's will to do so is rather silly.

Maybe I didn't put it right. They (GW) needed (maybe just wanted) massive changes to the necrons, so they called up there youngest freshest writer (MW) to do it. I mean if you wanted to completely rip apart a codex and rebuild it all from the ground up, who would you pick for the job.

A respected author? Rather than one people kind of expect to do some OTT fluff and weird units?

Durza wrote:

nomotog wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

nomotog wrote:Well look at it this way. Necrons needed big sweeping changes in fluff and rules, but mat ward was the only one with the gonads to do it.

He was the one given the assignment. That's not to say another author may not have done something similar, we'll never know, but attributing the massive changes in Necron fluff purely to Mat Ward's will to do so is rather silly.

Maybe I didn't put it right. They (GW) needed (maybe just wanted) massive changes to the necrons, so they called up there youngest freshest writer (MW) to do it. I mean if you wanted to completely rip apart a codex and rebuild it all from the ground up, who would you pick for the job.

A respected author? Rather than one people kind of expect to do some OTT fluff and weird units?

We have Three choices with authors. Kelly, Ward and Cruddance. I want to say now, that I would GLADLY take Matt ward over Cruddance, any day of the weak. IMO, Cruddance is significantly worse than ward. I love Phil Kelly though.

All the others have written OTT fluff, and weird units. So, I would expect them in any book, regardless.


And another thing, it was entire TEAM that wrote the Necron Codex. So far, everything is looking pretty good as well.

Trouble is Kellys last 3 codex's have been broken, broken, slightly broken

Eldar exemplified everything that was broken about 4th edition: you could quite easily go through an entire game without killing a SINGLE eldar model, and hideous internal balance

Space Wolves broke 5th edition, with super cheap super effective troops (GH), stupid cheap missile LF, the best psychic defence in the game, on average, and some of the most over powered psychic powers in the game. Oh, and hideous internal balance.

DE - yawn, yet more light vehicle spam, poison on everything negating high T benefits and pretty poor internal balance.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Trouble is Kellys last 3 codex's have been broken, broken, slightly broken

Eldar exemplified everything that was broken about 4th edition: you could quite easily go through an entire game without killing a SINGLE eldar model, and hideous internal balance

Space Wolves broke 5th edition, with super cheap super effective troops (GH), stupid cheap missile LF, the best psychic defence in the game, on average, and some of the most over powered psychic powers in the game. Oh, and hideous internal balance.

DE - yawn, yet more light vehicle spam, poison on everything negating high T benefits and pretty poor internal balance.

I would say that IG broke 5th far more than Space Wolves did.

Don't get me wrong, SW isn't that well balanced. I just thing it's Better balanced than the IG codex.

To me, Cruddance wrote the biggest Game Breaker (IG) and the Worst book in 5th so far, Tyranids.

Yeah, 4E eldar were a stupid, stupid army. Though much of that blame lies with the 4E skimmer rules themselves, Eldar had wargear to counteract the few downsides of skimmers, and Holofields were just plain stupid. (hooray 1/36 chance to kill on a successful armor glance, as compared to the 1/6 kill chance on glance or 1/2 kill chance on pen for everyone else!)

I actually really like the Blood Angel book he wrote with the exception of awful stuff like tactical squads and scouts having no purpose (and storm ravens being a bit weak)

Yeah.. his naming conventions aren't that great and his fluff is average but the book itself has been fun to use. The real issue is the Grey Knight book

Better than Cruddace!

Sasori wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Trouble is Kellys last 3 codex's have been broken, broken, slightly broken

Eldar exemplified everything that was broken about 4th edition: you could quite easily go through an entire game without killing a SINGLE eldar model, and hideous internal balance

Space Wolves broke 5th edition, with super cheap super effective troops (GH), stupid cheap missile LF, the best psychic defence in the game, on average, and some of the most over powered psychic powers in the game. Oh, and hideous internal balance.

DE - yawn, yet more light vehicle spam, poison on everything negating high T benefits and pretty poor internal balance.

I would say that IG broke 5th far more than Space Wolves did.

Don't get me wrong, SW isn't that well balanced. I just thing it's Better balanced than the IG codex.

To me, Cruddance wrote the biggest Game Breaker (IG) and the Worst book in 5th so far, Tyranids.

How is IG "broken"?

Joey wrote:

Sasori wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Trouble is Kellys last 3 codex's have been broken, broken, slightly broken

Eldar exemplified everything that was broken about 4th edition: you could quite easily go through an entire game without killing a SINGLE eldar model, and hideous internal balance

Space Wolves broke 5th edition, with super cheap super effective troops (GH), stupid cheap missile LF, the best psychic defence in the game, on average, and some of the most over powered psychic powers in the game. Oh, and hideous internal balance.

DE - yawn, yet more light vehicle spam, poison on everything negating high T benefits and pretty poor internal balance.

I would say that IG broke 5th far more than Space Wolves did.

Don't get me wrong, SW isn't that well balanced. I just thing it's Better balanced than the IG codex.

To me, Cruddance wrote the biggest Game Breaker (IG) and the Worst book in 5th so far, Tyranids.

How is IG "broken"?

Is this a Joke?

What? No. I've not even heard anyone mention IG being broken, ever.

Joey wrote:What? No. I've not even heard anyone mention IG being broken, ever.

They are.

Mostly thanks to the Absurdly cheap point values on just about everything in the codex.

The best example, would be to look at the points cost for a Vendetta, which is probably one of the worst offenders in the codex.

One over powered (and grossly expensive £-wise) does not make the codex OP.
The "bread and butter" of IG, platoons, veterans and Leman-Russes aren't particularly OP.

How are IG broken as a codex?

Too many no brainers. Veterans with triple melta for next to no points. Cheap Chimera. Vendetta, Manticore and Hydra.

Joey wrote:One over powered (and grossly expensive £-wise) does not make the codex OP.
The "bread and butter" of IG, platoons, veterans and Leman-Russes aren't particularly OP.

I only gave you the Vendetta as single example. There are plenty more in the codex.

If you really want to read into it, just do a search on the internet. There are Plenty Of threads on the subject matter.

You know....after seeing many of Mat wards creations, Im not completely pissed at the guy. Honestly. He comes up with some pretty stupid stuff for sure, and I hate it just as much as the next person, but that being said I commend him for trying to break the
mold of the same old story. I mean 40K has such a great back story it doesn't need alot of changing, but once in awhile it's nice to see some changes.

Example- new Crons. I really didnt wanna see them become tomb kings in space, I really like the old kind of grim reaper feel. The one thing I dont mind is that at least Ward attemped to give some form of back story
to crons, rather than mindless space robots. I think it would have been cooler to reshape the old fluff a bit more, but that's ok. Im not afraid of change.

Only thing about Mat Ward that really turned me off recently was this, posted on the GW website. It was an article he wrote about his impressions on the new crons.

Because of their programming, the Necron race must attempt to rebuild the glorious Necron Dynasties and reclaim the galaxy (the galaxy that they once tore apart, but we won't go into that just yet). However, they are also very pragmatic, which means that on occasion, a Necron Overlord will have to agree to an alliance with another race to ensure victory or survival - an utterly abhorrent situation, but one of necessity. Besides, when all things are considered, they can always attack their allies at a later date. Necrons are immortal, their foes (and necessary allies) are not.

It was an obvious attempt to cover his past fluff abuse of the BA alliance. I don't mind if someone writes something that is a little dumb, but at least have the stones to admit to the community that didn't like it that you
may have went a bit overboard.

But all in all, we will see if things get better in the future.

IG not broken? ... Uhmmmm...
... About GK... yes... you can pack 6 cheap scoring units ... just like IG (and just like wolves IMHO)...
And I think that SW are much more limited... you are almost always spamming MSU with a few spicy adds like long fangs or thunderwolves...
Grey knights offer you very different builds: Pallies, Purifier spam, inquisitorial army, footslogging or teleported termies and more... I think it's a greater variety... in addition there isn't a single choice in the dex that do not find a place somewhere (apart from brother-captains... I still do not understand them).
BA are the same... MSU, tank spam, DoA...
I do not find all this variety in other dexes... this is why I think that Ward's codices are actually pretty good... obviously there are OTT choices somewhere (every codex have one or two i think) but overall they seem balanced to me... Obviously this is my humble opinion

P.s. I wasn't sarcastic in my previous comment... I actually try not to use psyfleman because they are a little bit OTT (and not so much fun IMHO)

IG aren't broken. I'll admit they're not VERY far off, having absurdly cheap vehicles and all, but they haven't quite gotten to the point where railguns are insufficient for clearing away armour.

daedalus wrote:

squidhills wrote:I can't speak about his rules-writing, because I haven't played against any of his armies yet.

So you don't actually have the codexes then?

I don't buy codexes for armies I don't own. I haven't got that kind of money. I have looked through the fluff in my friends' codexes, and I find it hateful. The rules however, I'm not as good at deciphering without running into them on the table. for example, I still think IG Stormtroopers are a good idea, because I haven't used them in the new rules.

im2randomghgh wrote:IG aren't broken. I'll admit they're not VERY far off, having absurdly cheap vehicles and all, but they haven't quite gotten to the point where railguns are insufficient for clearing away armour.

Feel free to read the first few posts of this thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/408024.page

If after that, you still feel that they aren't broken, please post your reasoning in that thread.

Although I'm not a Space Marine player (and have never purchased any Codex Mentioning them), I think the Matt Ward hate is a bit misplaced. After reading the White Dwarf about the Necron's new fluff, I was a little perturbed on the C'tan switch, but I got over it. I liked the fluff about the Bone Worlds where the Flayed Ones run amok and try devouring rotten flesh, specifically about the overlord there is nothing but a head.

Imagine modeling a Overlord modeled from a servo skull? Pure hilarity.

I think people who 'hate' Matt Ward should bounce to Robin Cruddace.

Wth Cruddace; you can give a Infantry Squad Sergeant a power weapon but not a las gun?! Heresy! Slay him!

squidhills wrote:

daedalus wrote:

squidhills wrote:I can't speak about his rules-writing, because I haven't played against any of his armies yet.

So you don't actually have the codexes then?

I don't buy codexes for armies I don't own. I haven't got that kind of money. I have looked through the fluff in my friends' codexes, and I find it hateful. The rules however, I'm not as good at deciphering without running into them on the table. for example, I still think IG Stormtroopers are a good idea, because I haven't used them in the new rules.

Well, that's honest. I can respect that.

I guess fluff 'quality' really just comes down to being a matter of expectations. I'm less horrified by the fluff because I feel it's there to pad the book and 'justify' some of the rules. For me, the fluff is an (not necessarily unbiased) account of things that happened. I expect there to be exaggeration involved, for one, because they don't have 500+ pages to build up to events and every subtle nuance of a character's personality, and for another, because it's the filler text for a game I play. When I played MtG 500 years ago, I didn't read cards for the two-liners at the bottom of each card. They were there, they sometimes made sense, they were sometimes stupid, but it was cool because I didn't expect it to be Dostoyevsky, Lovecraft, or even that guy that wrote the Goosebump novels all the kids read 15 years ago.

I mean, the 40k premise is a poorly cobbled together Frankenstein of Heinrich, Giger, Tolkien, Christianity, and a handful of sources of traditional mythology. I really think that people expect too much out of it.

And Stormtroopers ARE awesome. Anyone trying to convince you differently doesn't have your best interests at heart.

His fluff is indeed terrible, it's not "bandwagon" to say it.

Harriticus wrote:His fluff is indeed terrible, it's not "bandwagon" to say it.

It's not that bad...

Harriticus wrote:His fluff is indeed terrible, it's not "bandwagon" to say it.

Actually yeah. It is.

I'm willing to hazard a guess, with a 90% certainty rate, that most of the people complaining about his stuff haven't read any of it. It's by no means top notch--but it's nowhere near the ridiculous level of bad that it gets painted as.

The hyperbole surrounding his codices is, quite frankly, churlish pettiness and brought about by either a complete lack of contextual knowledge or someone looking at it through rose-tinted glasses.

I think its gained bandwagon status because people jump to the thought of hitler murdering a kitten while Vader jacks off to it(that kind of horrible evil); and that wouldn't be so if people were more descriptive. Of course some are VERY descriptive and only get called bandwaggon jumpers all the same.

In the defense of people that have not read his fluff directly but read it when it was posted to 40k wiki or lexicanum; it is pretty impossible, unthinkable, ridiculous(by 40k standards) and in some cases its almost a meme. I think he has 4 memes made from his fluff by now; its that laughable.

Varrick wrote:
In the defense of people that have not read his fluff directly but read it when it was posted to 40k wiki or lexicanum; it is pretty impossible, unthinkable, ridiculous(by 40k standards) and in some cases its almost a meme. I think he has 4 memes made from his fluff by now; its that laughable.

Which is exactly the problem. Lexicanum or 40kwiki generally do not actually post the exact text. They post the author of the page's perception of the text.

Lexicanum or 40k Wiki, like Wikipedia proper, should never be considered as a source. It's more of a reference point to find a source.

Sasori wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:IG aren't broken. I'll admit they're not VERY far off, having absurdly cheap vehicles and all, but they haven't quite gotten to the point where railguns are insufficient for clearing away armour.

Feel free to read the first few posts of this thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/408024.page

If after that, you still feel that they aren't broken, please post your reasoning in that thread.

They are perfectly beatable by any army with untailored lists.

GK, SW, Orks and a few others are stronger than them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

StormForged wrote:Although I'm not a Space Marine player (and have never purchased any Codex Mentioning them), I think the Matt Ward hate is a bit misplaced. After reading the White Dwarf about the Necron's new fluff, I was a little perturbed on the C'tan switch, but I got over it. I liked the fluff about the Bone Worlds where the Flayed Ones run amok and try devouring rotten flesh, specifically about the overlord there is nothing but a head.

Imagine modeling a Overlord modeled from a servo skull? Pure hilarity.

I think people who 'hate' Matt Ward should bounce to Robin Cruddace.

Wth Cruddace; you can give a Infantry Squad Sergeant a power weapon but not a las gun?! Heresy! Slay him!

Matt Ward's fluff is terrible, though based on what I have heard from Necrons, it seems he has actually done a decent backstory, though I am betting that the section of specific battles for necrons will be facepalm worthy.

BTW, totally random, has anyone else ever thought that the IG would wipe the galaxy if they had the lasguns from Dune instead? Cuz they're basically lances.

Disclaimer: I dislike Matt Ward's writing, in respect to rules, fluff, and style. I don't think his rules are innovative, or well-designed, or elegant. I don't think that his contributions to the fluff are up to par with those of other writers. I don't think that his writing style is polished, mature, or even a good fit with other works in the 40K universe. =

Here's why he gets to write the books:

You have to assign a writer to a codex which will probably sell anyway (Space Marines, Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Necrons).

You can give it to someone who will do a good job, write some interesting rules, reinforce the background, tell some cool stories, and probably take serious time and effort to do it.

or

You can give it to Matt Ward, who will throw a lot of "interesting" ideas and wacky crap into a book, probably in half the time and half the cost.

It will sell the same either way.

Might was well let the hyper-active fanboy churn that one out. Give the codex which might need some actual skill and talent to someone else.

To put it bluntly:

We don't actually know what parts of the fluff are Ward's contributions or those of the other members of the design team. For all we know, it's Cruddace coming up with the stupid crap and Ward taking the heat for it because his name is on the book's front page.

Kanluwen wrote:To put it bluntly:

We don't actually know what parts of the fluff are Ward's contributions or those of the other members of the design team. For all we know, it's Cruddace coming up with the stupid crap and Ward taking the heat for it because his name is on the book's front page.

Exactly. There'in lies the problem. Everything that gets written goes through Matt Ward and get's his mark. So regardless if he wrote it, he is the ultimate say if something gets published or gets cut.

Actually no. He does not get "ultimate say" if something gets published or cuts.

From what I've been privy to, the studio is...fairly democratic, in that designers can be voted down or voted up.

Things also might just slip through the cracks or be turned in too late for final revisions to be made.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Void Dragon - I suggest you actually read the rumour threads, as nothing you have stated as "fact" about Necron fluff is true. It really isnt.

Then please by all means point out what I said that is false.

Kanluwen wrote:Actually yeah. It is.

I'm willing to hazard a guess, with a 90% certainty rate, that most of the people complaining about his stuff haven't read any of it. It's by no means top notch--but it's nowhere near the ridiculous level of bad that it gets painted as.

The hyperbole surrounding his codices is, quite frankly, churlish pettiness and brought about by either a complete lack of contextual knowledge or someone looking at it through rose-tinted glasses.

Or you know, people could have read it, and disliked it.

Is it as bad as places like 1d4chan would lead you to think? Probably not, the Blood Angel/Necron "alliance" in particular was the most overblown thing ever.

But is some of it bad? I'd definitely say a very good portion of the fluff is, from some subtle alterations in the Space Marines codex for the sake of his fanboyism (Naming Tigurius as rather than one of the most powerful psykers in the Imperium, as the outright strongest if he indeed contacted the Hive Mind), to Draigo holding down Mortarion like his kid brother.

He's not the worst writer I've ever seen, but he is certainly not good, IMHO.

Though, I'll admit to having some weird fondness for the fluff in his Blood Angels codex.

And while you can say "Ward is not the only one writing the codex," well... Can you point us to someone else we can look at and place the blame on them? Or really, what makes you say he is not entirely responsible for the actual writing of the fluff?

The only one I know of that has been confirmed to be not just Ward's work is apparently the Necron codex, him asking for help on writing the fluff from someone else on the design team.

Believe me when I say I try not to hold animosity against Ward, I really, sincerely do, since I do get the impression that he is trying is hardest and is amazed to be doing what he does, and loves it. If nothing else, he has the enthusiasm. But that also doesn't mean that all protests against something he seems to be responsible for should be muffled down by other posters and shouts of "WHINER" and "GET OFF THE WARD HATEWAGON," as though it's stupid to feel some negative emotional response towards what is written in the codex. But by that same brand of logic, the same should be done to those who praise and enjoy what Ward does (And such people do indeed exist, and I can't fault them, since I'll readily admit he makes varied, fun to play codices with, as far as my own admittedly limited understanding tells me, pretty balanced crunch) should get the same reaction.

This is a message board, and as such negative opinions, if they are presented from a rational point of view, should be no more frowned upon than positive opinions are, discussions would be incredibly boring here without some manner of conflict between opinions.

I'm not really saying this to you in particular, only voicing my opinion on a practice I've noticed distressingly often on messageboards.

I'd love to point you towards whoever writes the things--but it is no longer actually stated who the 'mains' are, as we saw on Codex: Dark Angels.

What I can tell you, confidently, is that it is not a single person doing these things. They have people writing the rules, others writing the fluff, and a team that sees all of them together and puts it into practice.

I will say this though. I have no problems with people articulately putting forward what they do not like about Matt Ward's work. What I have problems with is the constant whining that he needs to be fired. We have a rule about "no personal attacks" here at Dakka, and doing things like calling him names is stepping over that line.

I'll admit, when it comes to certain Black Library authors--I regularly step over that line. I'm personally trying to cut back--and I'd suggest others do the same on Ward. Critique the writings, not the writers.

Kanluwen wrote:Actually no. He does not get "ultimate say" if something gets published or cuts.

From what I've been privy to, the studio is...fairly democratic, in that designers can be voted down or voted up.

Things also might just slip through the cracks or be turned in too late for final revisions to be made.

What, you mean, almost like in the way an actual company would handle things? That almost makes sense.

I swear, people must actually think GW is a group of 4 people operating out of one of the resident rooms of an asylum.

Void__Dragon wrote:
Believe me when I say I try not to hold animosity against Ward, I really, sincerely do, since I do get the impression that he is trying is hardest and is amazed to be doing what he does, and loves it. If nothing else, he has the enthusiasm. But that also doesn't mean that all protests against something he seems to be responsible for should be muffled down by other posters and shouts of "WHINER" and "GET OFF THE WARD HATEWAGON," as though it's stupid to feel some negative emotional response towards what is written in the codex. But by that same brand of logic, the same should be done to those who praise and enjoy what Ward does (And such people do indeed exist, and I can't fault them, since I'll readily admit he makes varied, fun to play codices with, as far as my own admittedly limited understanding tells me, pretty balanced crunch) should get the same reaction.

Depends, is "incessant fatigue" an emotion? That's what I felt when the GK codex came out. There was actually about a two week period after that in which that I stopped visiting Dakka outside of the Mosh Pit just because the constant whining about him was that bad. Yes. Whining. It's a fething game, and "you people" are like an echo chamber. You actually DO get stuck on Ward, for some completely uncomprehendable reason, and you can't let it go. I could search Dakka, right now, and find at least one thread a day where someone whines about him. Matter of fact, I just did. I could go back as far as October 20th. At least one thread a day, someone mentions him in a negative light. THE WARD HATEWAGON is real, and the only reason why you can't see it is because you're laying in the back of it with your eyes closed.

This is a message board, and as such negative opinions, if they are presented from a rational point of view, should be no more frowned upon than positive opinions are, discussions would be incredibly boring here without some manner of conflict between opinions.

I'm not really saying this to you in particular, only voicing my opinion on a practice I've noticed distressingly often on messageboards.

Discussions don't HAVE to have conflict. They really don't. The purpose of a discussion can also be to inform.

Da Butcha wrote:

You can give it to Matt Ward, who will throw a lot of "interesting" ideas and wacky crap into a book, probably in half the time and half the cost.

Counterpoint: JotWW, Doom of Malanti, Al-Rahem's platoon with valkyries, Deff Rollas

All screwball rules scenarios, some handled by GW after the fact, some not. All conjured up by Cruddace and Kelly. And this a non-exhaustive least I came up with off the top of my head. I'm SURE I could come up with at least 20 or 30 examples spending even a few minutes cruising through YMDC.

I like the "interesting" ideas, as painful as they make the game sometimes. The stuff you can do with the Brotherhood Champion is REALLY cool, and makes sense. Servoskulls are cool. Playable armies that only have 10 models are cool.

This is stuff that's not been done before. If they can't put new stuff in the game because it's too 'wacky', then why produce new material? It sounds to me like you would be a lot happier if you found a group that was still playing 4th edition and you pretended that 5th never came out.

Kanluwen wrote:

Harriticus wrote:His fluff is indeed terrible, it's not "bandwagon" to say it.

Actually yeah. It is.

I'm willing to hazard a guess, with a 90% certainty rate, that most of the people complaining about his stuff haven't read any of it. It's by no means top notch--but it's nowhere near the ridiculous level of bad that it gets painted as.

The hyperbole surrounding his codices is, quite frankly, churlish pettiness and brought about by either a complete lack of contextual knowledge or someone looking at it through rose-tinted glasses.

I have all codices written by Matt Ward and all codices for every army past 3rd edition for that matter, there is a lot of ground to criticize Ward on regarding the fluff he writes. It's easily the lowest quality. His biggest problem is while all the codices hype their faction to be unstoppable (save perhaps Eldar/Dark Eldar) Ward takes it to the extreme and warps the entire 40k setting to fit these rather ridiculous scenarios in a negative direction for the pre-establish grimdark setting. But how the Necrons could have been given more character without removing everything they were is a very lengthy topic indeed. There's also the issue of making blanket statements that interfere with the greater setting, such as "all Space Marines want to be Ultramarines". This is simply a ridiculous statements that interferes with the entire persona of most pre-established Space Marine forces such as Space Wolves, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Blood Angels, etc.. who clearly have no desire to be Ultramarines and are very proud of their heritage. Moreover, the ridiculous escapades of Draigo basically rampaging around the Warp at will doing things like making Daemon Primarchs his playthings and turning the Grey Knights into a nigh-unstoppable force from a fluff perspective also is a fine example of Ward screwing with the established setting just to hype his own codex. Yes, all codex's hype their armies immensely but Ward takes it a step further.

Kanluwen wrote:I'd love to point you towards whoever writes the things--but it is no longer actually stated who the 'mains' are, as we saw on Codex: Dark Angels.

What I can tell you, confidently, is that it is not a single person doing these things. They have people writing the rules, others writing the fluff, and a team that sees all of them together and puts it into practice.

I will say this though. I have no problems with people articulately putting forward what they do not like about Matt Ward's work. What I have problems with is the constant whining that he needs to be fired. We have a rule about "no personal attacks" here at Dakka, and doing things like calling him names is stepping over that line.

I'll admit, when it comes to certain Black Library authors--I regularly step over that line. I'm personally trying to cut back--and I'd suggest others do the same on Ward. Critique the writings, not the writers.

That's true, looking at a lot of old codices I have noticed that there used to be more than just a single person's name put on the codex. It wouldn't really surprise me if Ward gets blamed for a lot of things he didn't do. Actually, I can think of at least one thing he does get blamed for, the whole "Tigurius makes contact with the Hive Mind" thing, which was in the 4th edition codex.

I try to refrain from making personal attacks on the character of the writer (Though like you, I will admit I've done so in the past here), or on something regarding them in real life (The jab at GW going bankrupt was a joke, lol). I try to make only critique of the work itself, and will try to keep in mind in the future that not everything in the codices is written or conceived of by Ward.

daedalus wrote:Depends, is "incessant fatigue" an emotion? That's what I felt when the GK codex came out. There was actually about a two week period after that in which that I stopped visiting Dakka outside of the Mosh Pit just because the constant whining about him was that bad. Yes. Whining. It's a fething game, and "you people" are like an echo chamber. You actually DO get stuck on Ward, for some completely uncomprehendable reason, and you can't let it go. I could search Dakka, right now, and find at least one thread a day where someone whines about him. Matter of fact, I just did. I could go back as far as October 20th. At least one thread a day, someone mentions him in a negative light. THE WARD HATEWAGON is real, and the only reason why you can't see it is because you're laying in the back of it with your eyes closed.

I'm not entirely sure why you think you can take a condescending tone on someone and make pseudo-personal attacks regarding them taking a (Implied by you) nonsensical emotional investment in something, while yourself getting worked up and emotional against a fellow poster who hadn't made a single personal attack against you. Oh, and apparently you also took a sabbatical from DakkaDakka because you grew stressed from the "whining". One could easily ask you to stop becoming whining about people whining about Ward, and to not be so emotionally invested in a forum on the internet. I on the other hand am completely calm, and am more self-aware about my bouts of nerdrage when they arise (And they do indeed arise) than you seem to believe.

Also, "you people"? Lolwut?

I also find it mildly amusing you immediately associate me with all whiners of Ward, when I try to only approach his work (If it indeed is his work) from a rational point of view, and stated why I don't like it. Do note I only do this regarding the fluff, since not only do I find nothing wrong with the gameplay aspects of his codices, I'm frankly unqualified to make a verdict on it.

I am not part of the "Ward Hatewagon," if you interpeted my words before to mean that I believe no such thing exists, you were incorrect to do so. People do hear about what Ward has allegedly done and whine about it, without reading the codex and fairly oftentimes getting their facts or context wrong. I am not one of those people. I have read every single Ward codex released in 40k (Except the Sisters codex and, obviously, the Necron codex), from front to back, and formed an opinion on it.

Is some of the hate overblown? Oh, absolutely, you will get no argument from me regarding that. I am not trying to justify the people who have an ill-informed opinion on Ward and trash his name or his work with no regard for eloquence or rational thought, especially when such people's sources include sites like 1d4chan. But likewise, IMO, there is a lack of quality regarding some of the fluff within his codices. That you seem to be of some laughable impression that I am not allowed to voice my opinion on this on the forum is, well, frankly laughable.

In short, No U.

Discussions don't HAVE to have conflict. They really don't. The purpose of a discussion can also be to inform.

Of course they don't have to be, but you seem to interpret "conflict" as being inherently bad. When two opposing viewpoints on the setting meet on the forum, conflict and differences of opinion can be put against one-another. I've been in arguments with posters on this forum (And others, but that's not important), and left the argument while on pretty good terms with the other poster. A recent example would be when I debated iproxtaco regarding whether or not signifigant thematic changes occurred in the Necron fluff (Please don't try to counter this in any way, shape, or form, I don't want to bring that argument here), and afterwards we left on good terms, I don't fault him for liking the new Necron fluff, and we apparently formed a Dork Triumvirate. That you don't wish to partake in debates of whatever nature is fine, but similarly do not fault me for enjoying a decent debate every now and then.

Seriously, whysohostilebro?

Void__Dragon wrote:
I'm not entirely sure why you think you can take a condescending tone on someone and make pseudo-personal attacks regarding them taking a (Implied by you) nonsensical emotional investment in something, while yourself getting worked up and emotional against a fellow poster who hadn't made a single personal attack against you. Oh, and apparently you also took a sabbatical from DakkaDakka because you grew stressed from the "whining". One could easily ask you to stop becoming whining about people whining about Ward, and to not be so emotionally invested in a forum on the internet. I on the other hand am completely calm, and am more self-aware about my bouts of nerdrage when they arise (And they do indeed arise) than you seem to believe.

You mistake "disappointed due to lack of content" as "stress". I have plenty of stress in my life. Dakka is one of the places I go when trying to avoid it, and when the most recent post in every 40k subforum is Ward/GK complaining, then it becomes disappointing. To be fair, I'm documented at getting just as irritated over having yet another "Master Chief/Space Marine/Jedi" thread every three days..

Also, "you people"? Lolwut?

I had put "you people" in quotes to try to capitalize on the belief that there are polarized camps of people who either like Ward or don't. And there actually is a body of people who DO deride the people who wildly proclaim that they love everything Ward does.

I also find it mildly amusing you immediately associate me with all whiners of Ward, when I try to only approach his work (If it indeed is his work) from a rational point of view, and stated why I don't like it. Do note I only do this regarding the fluff, since not only do I find nothing wrong with the gameplay aspects of his codices, I'm frankly unqualified to make a verdict on it.

See above. It's late here, and I was out drinking last night instead of sleeping, so in my 2 day insomnia haze, I are not as clever that I thought I did. (that was intentional)

I am not part of the "Ward Hatewagon," if you interpeted my words before to mean that I believe no such thing exists, you were incorrect to do so. People do hear about what Ward has allegedly done and whine about it, without reading the codex and fairly oftentimes getting their facts or context wrong. I am not one of those people. I have read every single Ward codex released in 40k (Except the Sisters codex and, obviously, the Necron codex), from front to back, and formed an opinion on it.

Is some of the hate overblown? Oh, absolutely, you will get no argument from me regarding that. I am not trying to justify the people who have an ill-informed opinion on Ward and trash his name or his work with no regard for eloquence or rational thought, especially when such people's sources include sites like 1d4chan. But likewise, IMO, there is a lack of quality regarding some of the fluff within his codices. That you seem to be of some laughable impression that I am not allowed to voice my opinion on this on the forum is, well, frankly laughable.

Well, you were defending the hate, without acknowledging the possibility that a lot of it is overblown. You only seemed to have any sort of criticism for those who were calling out the complaining. I don't think it is such a stretch to see the interpretation of you being a, well, for lack of a better word, bandwagoner.

In short, No U.

Eh, you get that sometimes.

Of course they don't have to be, but you seem to interpret "conflict" as being inherently bad. When two opposing viewpoints on the setting meet on the forum, conflict and differences of opinion can be put against one-another. I've been in arguments with posters on this forum (And others, but that's not important), and left the argument while on pretty good terms with the other poster. A recent example would be when I debated iproxtaco regarding whether or not signifigant thematic changes occurred in the Necron fluff (Please don't try to counter this in any way, shape, or form, I don't want to bring that argument here), and afterwards we left on good terms, I don't fault him for liking the new Necron fluff, and we apparently formed a Dork Triumvirate. That you don't wish to partake in debates of whatever nature is fine, but similarly do not fault me for enjoying a decent debate every now and then.

Seriously, whysohostilebro?

Debate is one thing, but it's just always the same arguments over and over again. "Draigo this, Dreadknight that, Force weapons on everyone?!, these cost too much when I compare them in a vacuum to tac marines, oh look, someone posted that Dreadknight with Ward's mug plastered all over it. Never seen that before."

And I mean, if there was some Hate Tank to keep threads like that in, that would be fine, but it just seeps into everything. You can't have a GK (or even in a lot of cases, BA) thread without someone injecting a "Oh, and MAT WARD derp" somewhere in it, derailing the thread.

daedalus wrote:You mistake "disappointed due to lack of content" as "stress". I have plenty of stress in my life. Dakka is one of the places I go when trying to avoid it, and when the most recent post in every 40k subforum is Ward/GK complaining, then it becomes disappointing. To be fair, I'm documented at getting just as irritated over having yet another "Master Chief/Space Marine/Jedi" thread every three days..

I guess that's fair enough. I'll admit I've seen threads that make me do nothing but groan as well.

I had put "you people" in quotes to try to capitalize on the belief that there are polarized camps of people who either like Ward or don't. And there actually is a body of people who DO deride the people who wildly proclaim that they love everything Ward does.

I try not to do that, like with bombboy for example, who does like Ward's codices. I'll argue for my interpretation/whatever regarding the fluff if he's game, but I do my best not to fault people like him for enjoying something I do not (Though, sadly, it does happen). I didn't pick up on the sarcasm, sorry about that.

See above. It's late here, and I was out drinking last night instead of sleeping, so in my 2 day insomnia haze, I are not as clever that I thought I did. (that was intentional)

Lol all right, sorry for taking you so seriously, as far as I can tell you were completely serious and just started attacking me. And Kaelis Ra knows I have to defend my internet honor.

Well, you were defending the hate, without acknowledging the possibility that a lot of it is overblown. You only seemed to have any sort of criticism for those who were calling out the complaining. I don't think it is such a stretch to see the interpretation of you being a, well, for lack of a better word, bandwagoner.

Fair enough, I should of made that a bit more clear. I certainly should of made it clear that I don't approve of unconstructive criticism, or criticism based on ignorance or falsehood.

Debate is one thing, but it's just always the same arguments over and over again. "Draigo this, Dreadknight that, Force weapons on everyone?!, these cost too much when I compare them in a vacuum to tac marines, oh look, someone posted that Dreadknight with Ward's mug plastered all over it. Never seen that before."

And I mean, if there was some Hate Tank to keep threads like that in, that would be fine, but it just seeps into everything. You can't have a GK (or even in a lot of cases, BA) thread without someone injecting a "Oh, and MAT WARD derp" somewhere in it, derailing the thread.

I guess that's a fair criticism, it would be better if threads regarding critique (Constructive or, more than likely, not) Ward or whatever factions he wrote could stay out of threads concerning them. I won't lie, I cringe every time someone posts that goddamn Blood Angel/Necron fistbump picture. It was kinda funny at first, but now it's overused and inherently overblown.

Hm. A "Hate Tank" might not be a bad idea, a more official "critique of the fluff" or whatever thread to help keep it out of threads that don't need it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_bias

This is one of those reason why it appears everyone hates Ward.

People dont go on the internet to go say meh, over and over again.

I agree that a discussion can be held without conflict, but I do disagree that a fruitful discussion can be held without conflict. Ideas must be tested against one another, mettle in clear view, the victorious swept forward to face the newest threats to its reign. And the cycle begins anew.

I'm still not quite sure, but I may be a member of the Triangle of Geek.

Edits: I like the hate tank. Call it something witty, or don't, but expect people to complain about it.

When it comes to business in general anymore, it seems like there has been more of a trend in assigning somebody to be in charge of a project, same way in politics.

Look at the House of Reps: the majority party could be throwing poop at each other but people will always blame the majority leader.

I really think that this could easily be the case at GW right now. Matt Ward sitting at a table while trying to control the rest of his team while they are throwing stupid fluff and rules at each others head. He does the best he can, and then gets the heat for the stuff that makes it through.

A good politician will get take responsibility when they succeed, and make damn sure its not their fault and everybody knows it when something goes wrong.

Joking.


Sorta...

Harriticus wrote:I have all codices written by Matt Ward and all codices for every army past 3rd edition for that matter, there is a lot of ground to criticize Ward on regarding the fluff he writes. It's easily the lowest quality. His biggest problem is while all the codices hype their faction to be unstoppable (save perhaps Eldar/Dark Eldar) Ward takes it to the extreme and warps the entire 40k setting to fit these rather ridiculous scenarios in a negative direction for the pre-establish grimdark setting. But how the Necrons could have been given more character without removing everything they were is a very lengthy topic indeed. There's also the issue of making blanket statements that interfere with the greater setting, such as "all Space Marines want to be Ultramarines". This is simply a ridiculous statements that interferes with the entire persona of most pre-established Space Marine forces such as Space Wolves, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Blood Angels, etc.. who clearly have no desire to be Ultramarines and are very proud of their heritage. Moreover, the ridiculous escapades of Draigo basically rampaging around the Warp at will doing things like making Daemon Primarchs his playthings and turning the Grey Knights into a nigh-unstoppable force from a fluff perspective also is a fine example of Ward screwing with the established setting just to hype his own codex. Yes, all codex's hype their armies immensely but Ward takes it a step further.

+1 to this comment.

I’ve said similar things in the past regarding Ward’s fluff. All his fluff has a comic book esque feel to them and whilst it would be appropriate for a videogame or movie, it’s usually not appropriate for codices.

My main beef however is Ward’s tendency to mess around with other unrelated fluff in order to make the faction appear “extra heroic”.

I've read Ward's fluff and I really dislike it. I do think he destroyed the soul of what the Grey Knights were, and I think he trivialised what the Blood Angels were about. His two worst creations - Draigo and the Sanguinor - read like adolescent author self-insertion fan fiction, and his writing method reminds me of me when I was six (And then, and then, and then).

I am always the kind've person who is very hesitant to criticise someone's writing style. I'm a writer myself who's just managed to get my foot in the door recently, and I know that I am far from perfect. So criticising plot elements and things like that, fine, but to criticise a writer for being a bad writer, I'd have to be dead sure of that before I did it. I dislike C.S. Goto's stuff not because of the way it is written, but because of the subject matter (and the laughable mistakes). Warrick Kinrade's IA3 drove me nuts because of the contrived plot, not because of the way he wrote it. I despise the current 'Chaos' Codex with the fiery fury of a thousand burning suns, but as I even said right from the beginning, I like the fluff in that book because no matter the rules Gav always writes fun fluff.

So, with that preamble said - I think Ward is a bad writer. Internally inconsistent. Externally inconsistent. Contradictory within the same story and with other stories. The whole Mary Sue/author self-insertion fantasy nonsense, and the points mentioned above my post (especially the 'extra heroic' part). It's one thing to dislike what's written (the Guard Codex may be dull, but it's not badly written), but it's another to both dislike what's written and how it's written.


So go on. Call me a hater, or a bandwagoner or whatever other jargon doublespeak ad hominem you need to concoct to dismiss my point of view. That's fine. Won't change my opinion.

You presented your opinion with an argument. One that was thoughtfully constructed, and on a subject that rarely ever receives any sort of critical interpretation.

You seem to fit into the "Critical Critic" mold more so than that of all the other definitions though.

Soladrin wrote:Not just that, it may seem like most people hate ward. But the point is, the haters are all loudmouths. The vast majority has given up defending anything he writes because you just get shouted down by the "haters" anyway.

This.

Mat Ward is far and wide the best Codex Writer GW has and ever had (rules AND fluff).

But it's tiresome trying to convince the haters who just hate, largely because it's the "in-thing" to do on the net these days.

CpatTom wrote:You presented your opinion with an argument. One that was thoughtfully constructed, and on a subject that rarely ever receives any sort of critical interpretation.

Your thought out and non-reactionary response gives me hope in humanity.

Zweischneid wrote:Mat Ward is far and wide the best Codex Writer GW has and ever had (rules AND fluff).

But it's tiresome trying to convince the haters who just hate, largely because it's the "in-thing" to do on the net these days.

And your's takes that hope and dashes it against the rocks...

Ruleswise - he has created far less broken concepts than either Kelly or Cruddace

Also - cruddace writes better fluff than Ward? Really? If boredom is better than sloppy writing then maybe...

One thing I'm a little uneasy about is a comment GW made: 'the dispersion shield has a habit of reflecting their shooting attacks back at them.' This would make it very dangerous to shoot at the Lychguard, and by extension the HQ choice that would be shielded by them.

yamgrenade wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Because internet hyperbole =/= reality.

Do you mean people not on the internet feel differently or something?

Yes, completely.

The people who post on DakkaDakka are generally older and more veteran. They have played 40k for many years and they're also more interested in warhammer in general. E.g. they might have more than one army, they think about strategy and game about once a week or more.

Dakkadakka posters are a tiny minority of wargamers and a tiny percentage of GW's customer base. Most GW customers are a lot more casual, just play/collect occasionally and certainly don't have a strong opinion about Matt Ward, nor even know/care who writes the codices probably.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Ruleswise - he has created far less broken concepts than either Kelly or Cruddace

He single-handedly destroyed WHFB 7th edition, no other rules author has managed to come close to this prowess before or after...

Zweischneid wrote:
Mat Ward is far and wide the best Codex Writer GW has and ever had (rules AND fluff).

But it's tiresome trying to convince the haters who just hate, largely because it's the "in-thing" to do on the net these days.

Whats the matter little fanboy, are your little feelings hurt? Tell me on the BA dolly where the bad man touched you...

PhantomViper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Ruleswise - he has created far less broken concepts than either Kelly or Cruddace

He single-handedly destroyed WHFB 7th edition, no other rules author has managed to come close to this prowess before or after...

Zweischneid wrote:
Mat Ward is far and wide the best Codex Writer GW has and ever had (rules AND fluff).

But it's tiresome trying to convince the haters who just hate, largely because it's the "in-thing" to do on the net these days.

Whats the matter little fanboy, are your little feelings hurt? Tell me on the BA dolly where the bad man touched you...

And when the arguments about Ward's sloppiness runs out, we get ad hom attacks. QED.

To be fair, he did pretty much break 7E fantasy with his Daemons book. 40k hasn't seen anything that broken since 2E Eldar.

Vaktathi wrote:To be fair, he did pretty much break 7E fantasy with his Daemons book. 40k hasn't seen anything that broken since 2E Eldar.

Sure it has. Primarily Chaos 3.5. Still the godfather of breaking games. 7E fantasy Daemons doesn't even come close to that POS. And 5th Edition IG with the 2nd-Ed Daemonhunter-allies came close too. As did 4th Edition Eldar Falcons.

Sasori wrote:The Vast Majority of Wargamers play Matt Ward Codexes. He is a money maker for GW.

And no, I just think it's a lot of Vocal people who have hate for Ward, certainly not the vast majority.

Hating his fluff is completely justifiable. His rules are generally quite balanced for 5th edition, while sometimes poorly written.

Matt Ward hate is just a popular bandwagon that a lot of people attach themselves to.

This. He writes fair rules & crap fluff. There is little else to say on the topic.

I can hear the sound of grinding up the mushrooms and worms that consumed the dead body of a horse

Agreed on bad fluff, decent non SC rules for the most part

Unless you're WE in which you're underpowered becuase of time

Zweischneid wrote:Sure it has. Primarily Chaos 3.5. Still the godfather of breaking games.

Uhh... no. 4 HS slots in one variant army does not a broken game create. Neither did Daemonbomb. 7th Ed Daemons broke the game.

Zweischneid wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:To be fair, he did pretty much break 7E fantasy with his Daemons book. 40k hasn't seen anything that broken since 2E Eldar.

Sure it has. Primarily Chaos 3.5. Still the godfather of breaking games. 7E fantasy Daemons doesn't even come close to that POS. And 5th Edition IG with the 2nd-Ed Daemonhunter-allies came close too. As did 4th Edition Eldar Falcons.

hrm, no. CSM 3.5 was nowhere near as broken as 7E daemons. Was CSM 3.5 abuseable? Yes. Was it unbeatable? Christ no. Were there other abuseable armies at the time? Yes. CSM 3.5 wasn't any tougher during its time than Tau or Necrons (if you remember back a few years before 5E, and especially in the tail years of 3E, Necrons and Tau were very powerful) or Craftworld Eldar/2006 Eldar during 3E/4E. DH allies for 5E IG was an e-fad that primarily made a couple popular builds unhappy but did relatively little to many opponents. None of these were as ridiculous as 2E Eldar or 7E WHFB Daemons.

7E Daemons were not only undercosted and overcapable, but they ignored many of the core mechanics of the game that many armies relied on for defeating opponents and made extensive use of morale on every single unit against opponents which primarily are Ld5-8. Within a year of that books release, the fantasy group at my local store devolved from a regular group of 7-10 guys to a couple guys playing on off-days with Daemons and Vampire Counts (another army that ignored two large core game mechanics).

Phantom et al - no, it was the combo of VC, Daemons and the FAR more broken DE that did 7th in. Guess how many of those dex's ward was responsible for.

Kelly managed to break 4th ed (Eldar) and damn near broke 5th (SW), so to claim "no other has come close" is fething rubbish as an argument.

Its one reason why I WELCOME them potentially redoing VC in January - they are so completely broken, along with DoC and DE, that they need a new book just to make them work in 8th without hideous comp requirements.

Ward's problem is fluff IMO, in that he can't write it reasonably. His rules could do with more clarity, but they work well enough.

I guess my problem with Ward's rules is not to do with balance issues, but just they are so much waffle. Actually, I'm wrong, it's not Ward in this specific regard - a lot of the current Codices suffer from this (DE has this problem is well).

They all have a lot of rules. A lot of wargear items - heaps of them. But they're just More Rules - they add lots of choice without adding any depth. Yeah it's great that the Inquisitor or the Grey Knight Grand Master or the Archon or the upcoming Cryptek has 30 different options. Who cares? They're all so shallow - just some slight variation on the same gun or the same sword or the same grenade that it doesn't add anything to the game bar more rules.

H.B.M.C. wrote:They all have a lot of rules. A lot of wargear items - heaps of them. But they're just More Rules - they add lots of choice without adding any depth. Yeah it's great that the Inquisitor or the Grey Knight Grand Master or the Archon or the upcoming Cryptek has 30 different options. Who cares? They're all so shallow - just some slight variation on the same gun or the same sword or the same grenade that it doesn't add anything to the game bar more rules.

What would you like to see them do then, if not add more rules? How do you give the wargear depth?

im2randomghgh wrote:Matt Ward's fluff is terrible, though based on what I have heard from Necrons, it seems he has actually done a decent backstory, though I am betting that the section of specific battles for necrons will be facepalm worthy.

Well, Necrons aren't Ultramarines or Grey Knights (I think they might not even be space marines!) - so maybe the Ward SM fanwank factor won't be turned up to 11 on this one.

Zweischneid wrote:Mat Ward is far and wide the best Codex Writer GW has and ever had (rules AND fluff).

I threw up a little bit in my mouth.

Zweischneid wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:To be fair, he did pretty much break 7E fantasy with his Daemons book. 40k hasn't seen anything that broken since 2E Eldar.

Sure it has. Primarily Chaos 3.5. Still the godfather of breaking games.

Right on! I mean, come on - the authors were such obvious Iron Warriors fanboys it's just ridiculous! Like, remember the part where Pete Haines created that warsmith special character who beat Rogal Dorn in single combat and then used his servo-arm to carve "IRON CAGE BITCH!" on the Imperial Fist primarch's forehead? Yeah, that was great...

I don't even bother to read the fluff in codexes any more. Haven't done in about 10 years.
I think people confuse "bad" with "terrible". Not everything is either amazing or dogshit.

3.5 Chaos were a powerful army but I beat them with virtually all of my armies. They were a GOOD and well diversified army imo, not like the current crap book

Fluff wise he is a little on the weak side. BUT keep in mind the audience that GW seems to be targeting. It's pretty well known that GW is targeting the younger audience. What does the younger audience respond to? Well, it's being the bestest! Draigo and Sanguinor were created to sell models. Fluff seems to be written that way as well.

Personally the major travesty of his codex writing was the Daemons book for 7E Fantasy. The result was a horrendously overpowered army that was not fun to play against. I did play against Daemons in 7E a few times. Wasn't impossible but knowing that you are at a disadvantage before even placing the models on the tablke can be annoying.

Currently I am neither a fan or hater of Mr.Ward. I think he is a game designer that was asked to write fluff that appeals to kiddies. He has done so brilliantly. My one fear for the Necrons is that something goes overboard. I like the new direction of fluff as it adds character but if we see more Draigo like stories it might get to be too much. I guess we shall see.

One more thing. I love the Dreadknight. It reminds me of carrying around my son in the Baby Bjorn.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Phantom et al - no, it was the combo of VC, Daemons and the FAR more broken DE that did 7th in. Guess how many of those dex's ward was responsible for.

Kelly managed to break 4th ed (Eldar) and damn near broke 5th (SW), so to claim "no other has come close" is fething rubbish as an argument.

Its one reason why I WELCOME them potentially redoing VC in January - they are so completely broken, along with DoC and DE, that they need a new book just to make them work in 8th without hideous comp requirements.

WHFB UK GT 2008: How many Demon armies where there in the top 10? 7! SEVEN armies in the top ten!

Sure, VC and DE where popular because they where really the only ones capable of standing up to the abomination that was Chaos Demons, but the sole responsible for the destruction of WHFB 7th ed where Chaos Demons and the birth of the inbred retardationfest that is 8th edition WHFB and for that Mat Ward gained the privilege of being in my nerd-hate list right alongside George Lucas and Steven Spielberg.

2ed Eldar where close, but I was just starting back then so my losses against them where just as much a result of my mistakes as an imbalance in the codex.

Chaos 3.5 and IG + DH don't even play in the same league as those previous 2.

And how many Daemon armies weren't in the top ten? If more people play it because it is perceived to be powerful, it's more likely they will get into the higher ranks.

Durza wrote:One thing I'm a little uneasy about is a comment GW made: 'the dispersion shield has a habit of reflecting their shooting attacks back at them.' This would make it very dangerous to shoot at the Lychguard, and by extension the HQ choice that would be shielded by them.

IIRC from what's been revealed so far, the reflection effect only 'bounces' a shot up to 6 inches.

Bookwrack wrote:

Durza wrote:One thing I'm a little uneasy about is a comment GW made: 'the dispersion shield has a habit of reflecting their shooting attacks back at them.' This would make it very dangerous to shoot at the Lychguard, and by extension the HQ choice that would be shielded by them.

IIRC from what's been revealed so far, the reflection effect only 'bounces' a shot up to 6 inches.

That's less worrisome then.

d-usa wrote:
I really think that this could easily be the case at GW right now. Matt Ward sitting at a table while trying to control the rest of his team while they are throwing stupid fluff and rules at each others head. He does the best he can, and then gets the heat for the stuff that makes it through.

Except again, he's made statements to the effect that shows he has a lot of control and little oversight over the project (the LR/DP transport capacity for example), has made ridiculous statements about fluff outside the codexes as well ("Ultramarines are the Best Marines, Really!" almost word for word in WD), and he's listed as the sole author in the books, despite there being a rather detailed list in each of who worked on it and did what.

Vaktathi wrote:

d-usa wrote:
I really think that this could easily be the case at GW right now. Matt Ward sitting at a table while trying to control the rest of his team while they are throwing stupid fluff and rules at each others head. He does the best he can, and then gets the heat for the stuff that makes it through.

Except again, he's made statements to the effect that shows he has a lot of control and little oversight over the project (the LR/DP transport capacity for example), has made ridiculous statements about fluff outside the codexes as well ("Ultramarines are the Best Marines, Really!" almost word for word in WD), and he's listed as the sole author in the books, despite there being a rather detailed list in each of who worked on it and did what.

Phil Kelly is listed as the sole author in his books.
Robin Cruddace is listed as the sole author in his books.

And quite frankly, every designer talks as if they have a lot of control and little oversight over their projects. Every designer makes ridiculous statements about fluff outside the codices as well, especially in White Dwarfs where the release is being promoted.

To continually insist that this is somehow clear evidence that Ward does his own thing, whilst feeding off the collective eRage is absurdity at its finest.

Kanluwen wrote:
Phil Kelly is listed as the sole author in his books.
Robin Cruddace is listed as the sole author in his books.

Yup, you're point? They're just as responsible for that content as Ward is for his.

And quite frankly, every designer talks as if they have a lot of control and little oversight over their projects.

right, because they *do* have a great degree of control.

Every designer makes ridiculous statements about fluff outside the codices as well, especially in White Dwarfs where the release is being promoted.


To continually insist that this is somehow clear evidence that Ward does his own thing, whilst feeding off the collective eRage is absurdity at its finest.

I've never seen Kelly or Ward make statements as ridiculous as Ward has, or flat out state that one particular faction is point blank "the best, better than all others". There's a difference between promotional "These guys are cool" and fanboyish statements like "these guys actually are *THE BEST*, no really, they are!"

Phantom - you do realise the DE book was released late AUgust 2008, right? As in, assuming it was the old format of 3 heats finishing in October (i really cant remember right now) the book had been out barely a month when the final was played.

Look after those dates. DE start to outperform massively every other book out there, and still to this day require FAR more comping (see SC GT racial comping, note how much less is needed for DoC) than Daemons or Vamps.

DoC simply carried on the VC broken fest which was finished up, in every meaning, by DE.

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Phil Kelly is listed as the sole author in his books.
Robin Cruddace is listed as the sole author in his books.

Yup, you're point? They're just as responsible for that content as Ward is for his.

It's "your point".

And while they're "just as responsible for that content as Ward is for his", you don't hear people constantly complaining about how Cruddace "ruined the game" by inventing three new types of Leman Russes. You don't see them complaining about how Kelly has "completely ruined Space Wolves!!!1!!" by adding a character named "Canis Wolfborn" into the Codex.

And quite frankly, every designer talks as if they have a lot of control and little oversight over their projects.

right, because they *do* have a great degree of control.

No, they don't. I don't know who the hell started this crap about "they have unlimited power over their project", but I can say with a fair degree of certainty that Ward and Cruddace are answering to the "Senior" Studio staff in the form of Phil Kelly, Jes Goodwin, and Jervis Johnson.

Now, if you were to say that Kelly, Goodwin, and Johnson have "unlimited power over their projects"...you just might be correct, as Ward seems to follow Johnson's lead for the most part.

Every designer makes ridiculous statements about fluff outside the codices as well, especially in White Dwarfs where the release is being promoted.


To continually insist that this is somehow clear evidence that Ward does his own thing, whilst feeding off the collective eRage is absurdity at its finest.

I've never seen Kelly or Ward make statements as ridiculous as Ward has, or flat out state that one particular faction is point blank "the best, better than all others". There's a difference between promotional "These guys are cool" and fanboyish statements like "these guys actually are *THE BEST*, no really, they are!"

Firstly, they don't let Cruddace talk much. And Kelly's been around long enough to avoid the pitfalls that Ward's been tripping into.

If you look back in the day, Kelly did say many things like Ward says--particularly when it comes to his favorite armies.

Every fanboy will mentally jack off support to his favorite when he can do so. Thing is they ought to stop them by explaining what they are doing wrong. They may be find to let ward live out his "fanboy working for his IP" phase but he does a good deal of fething up that needs to stop.

Yes the fanboys should be given a chance but they should be kept on a leash when they might screw something up. a tight leash.

All the problems here could have been avoided had they kept him on a tight leash until he wore himself out and couldn't do much harm as he tried to make his favorites even better.

Course his fanboy side is actively being encouraged because it plays into the mentality of the 9 year olds GW is targeting.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Phantom - you do realise the DE book was released late AUgust 2008, right? As in, assuming it was the old format of 3 heats finishing in October (i really cant remember right now) the book had been out barely a month when the final was played.

Look after those dates. DE start to outperform massively every other book out there, and still to this day require FAR more comping (see SC GT racial comping, note how much less is needed for DoC) than Daemons or Vamps.

DoC simply carried on the VC broken fest which was finished up, in every meaning, by DE.

Dutch GT 2009:

Winner: Chaos Demons
4 Chaos Demons lists in the top 10
3 VC lists in the top 10
2 DE lists in the top 10

Again, I'm not arguing that VC and DE weren't a bit overpowered in 7th Ed, but you really can't compare them with CD. You are the only person I ever even heard of saying that DE where more overpowered than CD...

Kanluwen wrote:
It's "your point".

Right, what was the point of reiterating it back to me?

And while they're "just as responsible for that content as Ward is for his", you don't hear people constantly complaining about how Cruddace "ruined the game" by inventing three new types of Leman Russes.

he invented two (punisher and eradicator), that are literally just main weapon swaps (one a slight-rejigging of an already existing variant they didn't want to include a different profile for since it was obsolete primarily), not anything wildly outlandish that was entirely out of left field like the Stormraven.

The new IG units were pulled either from Epic, Forgeworld, older codecies, are weapon swaps on existing units, aside from basically the Armored Sentinel.

You don't see them complaining about how Kelly has "completely ruined Space Wolves!!!1!!" by adding a character named "Canis Wolfborn" into the Codex.

I certainly have seen complaints about Kelly's silly handling of Space Wolves and have made them myself, they're fairly common actually (just do a search and you'll find a couple in the last month I believe), but for Kelly the difference is that it's pretty much his only fluff flub book so far, whereas with Ward it's been pretty constant.

No, they don't. I don't know who the hell started this crap about "they have unlimited power over their project", but I can say with a fair degree of certainty that Ward and Cruddace are answering to the "Senior" Studio staff in the form of Phil Kelly, Jes Goodwin, and Jervis Johnson.

Nobody said unlimited, but they do have a fair degree of control and freedom, enough that they didn't catch the Land raider and drop pod capacity changes until it was too late to change and told Ward to change it back in following books by his own admission (I believe at GDUK2009?)

Firstly, they don't let Cruddace talk much.

They don't let or he just doesn't participate? That's entirely up to conjecture, however the fact remains he has yet to make any ridiculously fanboyish statements the way Ward has, at least that I'm aware of.

And Kelly's been around long enough to avoid the pitfalls that Ward's been tripping into.

And again, does not make the same fanboyish statements the way Ward has.

If you look back in the day, Kelly did say many things like Ward says--particularly when it comes to his favorite armies.

It's possible I guess, i just don't recall any or have any I can look up right here. I've posted before however the passage of Ward basically fan-servicing himself to the Ultramarines point blank stating that "Yes, Really, Ultramarines are the best Space Marines in the Galaxy!" or "it's so awesome your opponent will want to double check its rules!". I don't recall Phil Kelly making such statements, though I'll admit i may be unaware of all of his WD content as I own relatively few WD's (only a couple dozen) but from what I do see it's not as silly as Ward's.

Do any of you guys think that if Frank Herbert had been a 40k writer, that it would be so much better and cleaner? I have always thought this. It would eliminate the need for "writers" who need quotation marks (I'm look at you, Cruddace and Ward) and we could get some consistent background? I feel if there was a single especially talented writer who could have 100% of his work official canon and the other GW/BL write their stories using that single canonic storyline as their base...40k would be a lot more successful than it is.

Wishful thinking and fanciful thought, I know, but It's just something that popped into my head that I thought I'd share.

GW let's Ward run wild. He exerts power and influence well above his official position and is pretty much the unofficial CEO of games workshop

Er, I don't think that's really true leonard.

leonard wrote:GW let's Ward run wild. He exerts power and influence well above his official position and it pretty much the unofficial CEO of games workshop

Every post Leonard has made so far, has been completely moronic and devoid of any substance, what so ever.

Just ignore him.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

CpatTom wrote:You presented your opinion with an argument. One that was thoughtfully constructed, and on a subject that rarely ever receives any sort of critical interpretation.

Your thought out and non-reactionary response gives me hope in humanity.

Why thank you. Although now I feel compelled to do something to relieve the pressure of being your hope for humanity by childishly laughing at this Leonard character Sasori was so kind to point out to me.

Sasori wrote:Every post Leonard has made so far, has been completely moronic and devoid of any substance, what so ever.
Just ignore him.

Hahahahaha , Leonard, silly momo.

On subject, has anyone read the Necron stuff yet, and can give some insight into, what I'm going to go out onto a limb here and conjecture, are based on some past archetypes, but limited in presentation?

Sasori wrote:Every post Leonard has made so far, has been completely moronic and devoid of any substance, what so ever.

Just ignore him.

Lol all 15 of them?

Is this the best use of everyones time? Complaining about Matt Ward? It seems nearly constant. Who cares about the fluff if the rules are ok? Does it really matter that much??

The Grundel wrote:Is this the best use of everyones time? Complaining about Matt Ward? It seems nearly constant. Who cares about the fluff if the rules are ok? Does it really matter that much??

Primarily because this game, and Games Workshop, wouldn't exist without the fluff, there are plenty of other, better designed rules systems out there with excellent mini's. Few have fluff as awesome as 40k's. GW's biggest asset (according to their own admission) is their IP.

The only reason 40k so much as caught a mere moment of my attention is the fluff.

So... Yes, to me the fluff of 40k does matter.

Gah, and reading through the necron book it's as if Mat Ward decided to retcon the entirety of the Necron's Battlefleet Gothic nature as well. Necrons have the fastest fleet capabilities of anyone, yet Ward writes of their ships as slow vessels practically without interstellar capability...

Just play the game. If you dont like his rules,, dont play the friggen army. Simple

ParatrooperSimon wrote:Just play the game. If you dont like his rules,, dont play the friggen army. Simple

I'm not sure if you missed all 6 pages of discussion by some amazing chance or just ignored it, but that's not the issue.
Background is the issue being discussed, not the bloody rules. Arguably its also far more important, because if its no longer as captivating, then people just move onto systems with better rules, because lets face it the ones we have aren't exactly good.
In fact if all your for is the rule systems I find it strange that you chose this game based on that fact

Heres just my 2 cents on matt ward (after talking to everyone or nearly everyone at my local hobby store).

His fluff is ridiculous. (which is important for me) I tried to get into warmachine but the fluff just turned me off and i never touch those models i have. So 40k has kept me around because of fluff. I dont want to lose that too.

His rules are alright, however i do have a problem with exploits to the army lists, i find it very easy to write cheese/spammy lists with wards codexes.

Necrons (which i read through the other day at my local store) Actually have very balanced rules and the units themselves are not horridly ridiculous. But then you look at the points values. Necron warrior for 13 points? that still has gauss? say goodbye to your vehicles. And for an eldar player, that is a very essential component to my army.

Lastly Phil Kelly is the best codex author imo for 40k. Space wolves pushes it a bit, but Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Orks are 3 armies that have older books (orks and eldar anyways), but are still competitive imo, have balanced rules, and benefit more from making well rounded lists. i personally believe thats what any game should strive for, to have an effective balance of army composition and effectiveness on the table.

Oh and concerning whfb and ward, the magic phase is all his fault from what i can tell (he has an obsession with all things random in a game which i hate prioritising that) you can win a game with some good magic rolls whcih imo should never happen in a game. The reliance on dice for everything is even more apparent in wards work in lotr strategy battle game and war of the ring (which i also play both). All in all, matt ward wants to make gws games more like monopoly instead of chess, good rolls instead of good strategy, positioning, and board control.

Vaktathi wrote:Gah, and reading through the necron book it's as if Mat Ward decided to retcon the entirety of the Necron's Battlefleet Gothic nature as well. Necrons have the fastest fleet capabilities of anyone, yet Ward writes of their ships as slow vessels practically without interstellar capability...

Truth be told?

I'm okay with that. Previously, they just had a bit...too much if that makes any sense. The ability to somehow 'jump' right to Mars, bypassing all the defenses?

That's a deus ex machina if I've ever seen one.

Deadlytoaster wrote:
Lastly Phil Kelly is the best codex author imo for 40k. Space wolves pushes it a bit, but Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Orks are 3 armies that have older books (orks and eldar anyways), but are still competitive imo, have balanced rules, and benefit more from making well rounded lists. i personally believe thats what any game should strive for, to have an effective balance of army composition and effectiveness on the table.

Wait, the Dark Eldar Codex is "old"?

Just read the new codex(and played a game against it with my GKs)

1) yes, the fluff changed. But, as long as you arn't afraid of change, the fluff is really good.

2) VERY powerful rules, but balanced. I only lost the game by 2 Kill points and I had some sub-par rolling. Tesla is dangerous!

im2randomghgh wrote:Do any of you guys think that if Frank Herbert had been a 40k writer, that it would be so much better and cleaner? I have always thought this. It would eliminate the need for "writers" who need quotation marks (I'm look at you, Cruddace and Ward) and we could get some consistent background? I feel if there was a single especially talented writer who could have 100% of his work official canon and the other GW/BL write their stories using that single canonic storyline as their base...40k would be a lot more successful than it is.

Wishful thinking and fanciful thought, I know, but It's just something that popped into my head that I thought I'd share.

Considering how much 40k already borrows from Dune I don't think he'd be too happy
Having one writer take over the entire universe would be great, but that's honestly something that had to happen by 2nd edition. If someone were to write the entire universe all by his/her self now, a lot of people would be unhappy since some aspect of the fluff had been invalidated.

Deadlytoaster wrote:Lastly Phil Kelly is the best codex author imo for 40k. Space wolves pushes it a bit, but Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Orks are 3 armies that have older books (orks and eldar anyways), but are still competitive imo, have balanced rules, and benefit more from making well rounded lists. i personally believe thats what any game should strive for, to have an effective balance of army composition and effectiveness on the table.

The only reason that Eldar have been competitive can be summed up in the form of 'Eldrad'. The Eldar's access to Psychic powers through him are the only thing that is keeping them afloat competitively, and the effectiveness that that is having is decreasing due to the amount of psychic defence (e.g: Psychic hoods) that are floating around. So in a way, Eldar are sinking competitively. However, I would agree with you that out of Ward, Cruddace and Kelly, Kelly is the best Codex writer. However, despite all of the hate for Mat Ward, I still prefer his Codexes over Robin Cruddace, I think Cruddace should stick to WHFB, and Ward should stick to 40k.

Kanluwen wrote:
Truth be told?

I'm okay with that. Previously, they just had a bit...too much if that makes any sense. The ability to somehow 'jump' right to Mars, bypassing all the defenses?

That's a deus ex machina if I've ever seen one.

For a race 60 Million years old who fought and defeated enemies who shaped the universe and destroyed literal gods, whose surviving enemies still bear the scars of war in an age when dinosaurs roamed the earth, that's much less of a stretch than most of the Space Marine fluff we get these days. A bit silly perhaps, but certainly not on anything like the level of single Space Marine chapters destroying entire systems worth of enemy forces by themselves when outnumbered billions to one and the like. It's silly that the entire nature of their space fleet, literally what defined it (incredible speed) needed to be retconned. It feels more like, if anything, Ward simply hasn't ever read any of the BFG stuff, which, given his position, is rather silly.

I liked the Old necron fluff better, now they are more like any other 40k race and not as mystical as before.
Can se that people like the new fluff but I personally like the old so much more

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Truth be told?

I'm okay with that. Previously, they just had a bit...too much if that makes any sense. The ability to somehow 'jump' right to Mars, bypassing all the defenses?

That's a deus ex machina if I've ever seen one.

For a race 60 Million years old who fought and defeated enemies who shaped the universe and destroyed literal gods, whose surviving enemies still bear the scars of war in an age when dinosaurs roamed the earth, that's much less of a stretch than most of the Space Marine fluff we get these days.

You mean a race that before the C'Tan became part of the picture was forced to use stasis and "slow-burning torch ships" to colonize systems?

It's not that big of a stretch.

A bit silly perhaps, but certainly not on anything like the level of single Space Marine chapters destroying entire systems worth of enemy forces by themselves when outnumbered billions to one and the like.

I'm blanking on where anything like this has happened, but I don't read the Codex fluff but once or twice. Where was this?

It's silly that the entire nature of their space fleet, literally what defined it (incredible speed) needed to be retconned. It feels more like, if anything, Ward simply hasn't ever read any of the BFG stuff, which, given his position, is rather silly.

Does it say that this is the case for every ship in the Codex?

Because from what I recall, the ships that did the whole 'FTL' thing were the Shroud class light cruisers. There was a one-liner in the previous Necron codex, however, about how the ships were actually able to "Phase Out" when they suffered damage if they chose to disengage.

i don't have a problem with matt ward's codexes at all; the only beef is the accompanying creep.

i can't wait for him to get his hands on my beloved CSM.

This guy likes Necrons, who hate Chaos, and Ultramarines, who hate Chaos. Do you really want him anywhere near that codex? If anything he could see if he can make it any worse.

Because even GW recognises Matt Ward as their spiritual liege.

The slow-burning torch sips bit was when they first left their home system sure, that's probably how every race first traverses the stars in all likelyhood.

Check out the BFG stats for Necrons, they're ships have base movement speeds generally above average and then an Inertialess drive ability that allows them to practically zoom across the table. The fastest Imperial/Chaos vessels can go 30/35cm per turn, usually 20 or 25. Only the largest Necron ship goes only 20cm but can burst up to 80cm, whereas the fastest goes 50cm and up to 110cm in a turn.

Henners91 wrote:Because even GW recognises Matt Ward as their spiritual liege.

Does this make Goto their Malcador or their Horus?

Durza wrote:

Henners91 wrote:Because even GW recognises Matt Ward as their spiritual liege.

Does this make Goto their Malcador or their Horus?

Horus, surely? Back-flipping Terminators and transforming vehicles must be the trickery of Tzeentch!

hemingway wrote:i don't have a problem with matt ward's codexes at all; the only beef is the accompanying creep.

i can't wait for him to get his hands on my beloved CSM.

The thought of him writing their new book fills me with excitement and loathing.

Vaktathi wrote:The slow-burning torch sips bit was when they first left their home system sure, that's probably how every race first traverses the stars in all likelyhood.

Check out the BFG stats for Necrons, they're ships have base movement speeds generally above average and then an Inertialess drive ability that allows them to practically zoom across the table. The fastest Imperial/Chaos vessels can go 30/35cm per turn, usually 20 or 25. Only the largest Necron ship goes only 20cm but can burst up to 80cm, whereas the fastest goes 50cm and up to 110cm in a turn.

Yes the necrons ships in BFG are damn fast.
But if they are slow now then wont the same that happend to the "Planet Killer" (if you remember that story) happend to like every necron starship armada?

I think all the hate is really stupid IMO.

My SM codex is well written for the most part, but there are some vague bits in it, especially in the army list.

Vaktathi wrote:Gah, and reading through the necron book it's as if Mat Ward decided to retcon the entirety of the Necron's Battlefleet Gothic nature as well. Necrons have the fastest fleet capabilities of anyone, yet Ward writes of their ships as slow vessels practically without interstellar capability...

The Torch Ships were always there, even in the old Codex, as the first ships the Necrontyr used. I could be wrong, but the new Codex makes no mention of the ships used post-biotransference. The C'tan in the old book were what gave the Necrons the reality breaking Inertialess Drive, they didn't develop it themselves. From my reading of the new Codex it seems it skips from the Torch Ships to the moment when they breached the Webway. I find it difficult to believe the Necrons could have been winning the war when the thing which lost it for them the first time (slow as hell Torch Ships versus the webway) was still around. I'm inclined to believe they still have very fast ships, though webway travel (which they now use through their Dolmien Gates) allows them to move without the usage of their ships.

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct, the vast majority of wargamers feel that Matt Ward is terrible at writing codexes. Why would GW get him to write yet another one? I know that GW isn't exactly caring of their customers, but outright ignorance of their feedback just seems beyond even them, especially with something as simple as hiring somebody else.

I disagree, the codices he has made as of the last few years have been pretty balanced by giving the army a focus and not letting them go outside of it. Necrons are an army of glass cannons, if you want your army to be stronger, with more bodies and counter-assault capability, you give up your damage potential. Blood angels are an aggressive army, if you decide to play chicken and stay back and shoot at your opponent, you can do it, but not as well as space wolves/space marines since you pay a tax for your fast vehicles.

I think a vast majority of wargamers cannot comprehend the complexity of his codex design because they have trouble fighting things like draigowing (really?) or FNP BA.

I'll give ya'll out there who doubt me, a litmus test.

What are the weaknesses of the Grey Knights codex and what are the key differences between C:SM and BA codex design that make them different armies?

I'm sure half of the people out there understand the weakness in the GK codex, but for the second part of my test, I doubt people can do more than point out more than a few different units and a couple special rules. Just think about my question, no need to respond.

Dytalus wrote: The C'tan in the old book were what gave the Necrons the reality breaking Inertialess Drive, they didn't develop it themselves.

Nowhere is this ever stated, at all.

The C'tan transferred the Necrontyr into Living Metal bodies.

They did not give them super awesome technology in the old codex.

Even if they are the reason they know how to make them, they still knew how to make and use them.

That was one of the more annoying changes in the codex.

Necrons using the Webway ftw!

It wasn't stated in the Codex, but in extra fluff published on the website (now gone, obviously) that a lot of the Necron's uber tech was a gift from the Void Dragon who was capable of understanding and manipulating technology at a whim. The Inertialess Drive was one. His Necrons also had a massively more powerful lightning field weapon, and much larger more formidable living metal bodies. IIRC this fluff came alongside more fluff about the Outsider too with the Harlequin dance.

Regardless, nowhere in the Codex does it specifically state that the Necrons rely on Dolmen gates (or however you spell it). Only one Necron dynasty is expressly mentioned as needing them, and if they do use Dolmen Gates and webway travel only, how did Helbrecht ambush Imotekh? Why would Imotekh travel between worlds in a Torch Ship, not least for the slow speed but also because it would leave him vulnerable.

Dytalus wrote:It wasn't stated in the Codex, but in extra fluff published on the website (now gone, obviously) that a lot of the Necron's uber tech was a gift from the Void Dragon who was capable of understanding and manipulating technology at a whim. The Inertialess Drive was one. His Necrons also had a massively more powerful lightning field weapon, and much larger more formidable living metal bodies. IIRC this fluff came alongside more fluff about the Outsider too with the Harlequin dance.

Regardless, nowhere in the Codex does it specifically state that the Necrons rely on Dolmen gates (or however you spell it). Only one Necron dynasty is expressly mentioned as needing them, and if they do use Dolmen Gates and webway travel only, how did Helbrecht ambush Imotekh? Why would Imotekh travel between worlds in a Torch Ship, not least for the slow speed but also because it would leave him vulnerable.

Source?

For the first part? Gone now, but it was on the Games Workshop website back when each race had individual fluff pieces in their sections. I'll be honest, I don't remember it 100% so it's possible I'm mixing it up with something I read elsewhere.

EDIT: Found an archived version, and you're right it doesn't mention the Dragon granting the Necrons the Inertialess Drive just his fighting a bunch of Eldar proto-wraith guard. Now I can't remember where I read that at all, so I'll concede my mistake here. It's entirely possible I read it in a canon source but can't remember it, or that I read it as idle speculation and my memory has it as being legit. My bad. ; - ;

Dytalus wrote:For the first part? Gone now, but it was on the Games Workshop website back when each race had individual fluff pieces in their sections. I'll be honest, I don't remember it 100% so it's possible I'm mixing it up with something I read elsewhere.

In that case, its prolly been retconned if its that ancient

Dytalus wrote:For the first part? Gone now, but it was on the Games Workshop website back when each race had individual fluff pieces in their sections. I'll be honest, I don't remember it 100% so it's possible I'm mixing it up with something I read elsewhere.

Ok, I'm not disputing this but if it isn't extremely recent then it has probably been overwritten by the new Codexes fluff.

Rampage wrote:

Dytalus wrote:For the first part? Gone now, but it was on the Games Workshop website back when each race had individual fluff pieces in their sections. I'll be honest, I don't remember it 100% so it's possible I'm mixing it up with something I read elsewhere.

Ok, I'm not disputing this but if it isn't extremely recent then it has probably been overwritten by the new Codexes fluff.

That was my thought. Not that it matters, I edited my above post cos I found an archived version and unless I'm missing something it doesn't mention it. I herp'd. ; - ;

yamgrenade wrote:If I'm correct...

You're not. /thread

Dytalus wrote:For the first part? Gone now, but it was on the Games Workshop website back when each race had individual fluff pieces in their sections. I'll be honest, I don't remember it 100% so it's possible I'm mixing it up with something I read elsewhere.

EDIT: Found an archived version, and you're right it doesn't mention the Dragon granting the Necrons the Inertialess Drive just his fighting a bunch of Eldar proto-wraith guard. Now I can't remember where I read that at all, so I'll concede my mistake here. It's entirely possible I read it in a canon source but can't remember it, or that I read it as idle speculation and my memory has it as being legit. My bad. ; - ;

Yeah I figured you were talking about Dawn of the C'tan.

I didn't recall reading that either.