Many of these discussions are motivated by a general dissatisfaction of the "status quo".
It is also interesting to point out what may be done right we should see more of.
Reward good behavior and punish / ignore the bad?
Whining is a constant in life, it is performed by those who believe they are powerless to achieve change and are unhappy.
You vote with your dollars so whining is not the last effort available and it really costs the audience little and I find funny that people get "tired" of it... skim and move-on.
GW really has gotten better in the last year for producing bundles that actually have a monetary deal.
The mini-games are a fantastic way to get a starter-army going and yet have a complete game.
They have opened up more avenues of customer engagement and appear to be using media better.
The White Dwarf has become a little more wider in scope than it had been before.
Good baby steps.
I have always liked the models.
Love the fluff and it keeps getting better.
The day I become a "white knight" is if they actually get serous about cleaning up the rules.
They are a frightful mess in need of a flow-chart and a pruning down to the stump.
There was a time I would have been afraid of an Age of Sigmar treatment, not so much now.
Yeah, I'm not exactly bullish on GW, but they're showing signs of life, and a few areas seem to be getting better.
Really though, the rules are simply byzantine. It's like 2nd edition AD&D, with a half dozen books required to play many common armies. The amount of unnecessary rolling, rules that ignore other rules, and patched nonsense to avoid using basic modifiers makes it a much more difficult game to play than if they just went to a simple modifier system.
Polonius wrote: Yeah, I'm not exactly bullish on GW, but they're showing signs of life, and a few areas seem to be getting better.
Really though, the rules are simply byzantine. It's like 2nd edition AD&D, with a half dozen books required to play many common armies. The amount of unnecessary rolling, rules that ignore other rules, and patched nonsense to avoid using basic modifiers makes it a much more difficult game to play than if they just went to a simple modifier system.
One other thing I think is good, is that GW is sending out review copies of their books now. They are mostly sending them to enthusiast blogs so the reviews will tend to skew positive, but you can look at many of the thousand sons rules, decide what minis ( if any) you want to buy and make a much more inforder purchasing decision.
I really hope they are using all the feedback ( good and bad) from this to fine tune 8th edition.
If they really do adopt the living rule book approach that Aos is using and do yearly point adjustments, it will solve a lot of people's issues.
I think the improvements of late are undeniable but 8th edition is the real litmus test. It could usher in the next golden age of GW, or it could kill everyone's hopes that 40k will ever be a genuinely good game again.
Polonius wrote: I just don't think prices are the whole, or even main, reason for declining sales. I think the games just aren't great, and people are playing better games.
Yeah I can agree with that.
I do think pricing is a problem, but how big of a problem is really hard to say. Even though GW has more data than us, I don't trust they are doing the best thing. History is littered with the corpses of publicly traded companies that are dead or dying, so that's hardly reason enough for me to think they know what they're doing.
Personally, pricing is only a tangential issue. If they lowered their prices they'd get me to buy more, but not a lot more, mostly enough to finish off the armies sitting in my drawers that never get played with anyway.
I think pricing is a big part of what killed WHFB in 8th, the biggest? Maybe, maybe not. Every edition change you're going to get people who don't like it and you just hope the new blood influx and the excitement of existing players buying more compensates for the people who don't like it. But I think pricing was a big reason there was no one impulse buying to compensate for the people leaving, when you have to buy 3 or 4 boxes of Orcs just to make a single bloody regiment, things get a little bit stupid.
In the context of 40k and even AoS? I think pricing is less of a problem, but it's still a problem IMO.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
-Loki- wrote: Buying one box of Gaunts, for a painter, gives you some fun models and options to paint. For a gamer, that one box represents a minimal investment into a squad, and minuscule investment into an army. An army which is very likely to lose 90% of the time simply due to being the red headed step child of the studio.
Yeah this is what I was trying to get across earlier.
Where the pricing hits home is models like Cadians, Orks or Gaunts, $29 for 10 to 12 of the bastards and you might have to buy 5+ boxes of them and really you can't tell me they look better than anything Perry offers for a fraction of the price. Or Mek Gunz, a nice looking model but $46 for 27 to 39 points worth of models depending on how you equip them.
I don't have a huge problem with the likes of Krom Dragongaze being $30 (though I still think he could be cheaper). But the bigger problem is they price every model like a boutique model, even the ones that might look average and/or are going to be speed painted in bulk by the majority of customers.
Let's just all accept that GW will never be what we truly want. The prices will always be a tad outrageous(Which is why you don't buy from GW, but third parties), the game will always be somewhat convoluted, but we buy and play for a reason.
We love what they've made.
The models are phenomenal these days, the universes GW have created are in-depth and exceptionally well-done. And, despite how thick the rules are with cheese, the game is still enjoyable because of how loose you can make it. You never need all the rules to play.
JustaerinAtTheWall wrote: Let's just all accept that GW will never be what we truly want. The prices will always be a tad outrageous(Which is why you don't buy from GW, but third parties), the game will always be somewhat convoluted, but we buy and play for a reason. We love what they've made. The models are phenomenal these days, the universes GW have created are in-depth and exceptionally well-done. And, despite how thick the rules are with cheese, the game is still enjoyable because of how loose you can make it. You never need all the rules to play.
Look, here speaks the guy that is painting tens of Tempestus Scions currently (all from Ebay) but this is not always true. Since 5th edition, they are losing ground in the fluff department and minis concept.
5th started with wolfy wolfity, now the new Fenris story with is mediocre and contrived.
The aesthetic of the models too can be not for everybody. Myself, I find Skitarii and Genestealer cult very good (excellent, actually) and respectful of the old blanchian art, but new stuff like Archaon or Magnus is for me big, dumb, very poligonal and action-figurey.
And there is a point in which people will be tired of your rules and drop the game en-masse. Happened in 8th WHFB, can happen with 40K. Keep repeating ourselves that GW quality is the bestest evar does not bring to anything good, IMHO.
As long as the prices remain gak and the rules are worse than gak, any small things like Star Collecting boxes and re-releasing Space Hulk are just ephemeral. The core problems with GW haven't shifted, with the exception of their interactions with their community which are starting to move from an adversarial/necessary evil style to a "Holy gak this Internet fad isn't going away, so let's use it somehow!".
Here's the thing right, I want to play 40K. I long to play 40K. I haven't played it in a couple of years (played plenty of the RPGs and their board games though - Silver Tower is great, not Old Quest great, but still great) but I just can't as long as their rules remain utter dog gak. I mean, take the most recent book, where the Thousand Sons are getting the due after so many years in the wilderness (even in the 3.5 days, when Chaos was actually a proper army, the 1KSons were the red-headed step children of the Legion armies). And what do we have?
A table you roll on, where one of the results is to roll for every unit on the table, where on a certain result you roll a random number of hits on that unit, and then roll to wound with those that hit, and then the opponent makes saves, and then Soulblaze kicks in. That's 6 layers of dice rolling that could potentially affect every single unit on the table. And to think that I took supreme issue when they made it so every blast marker had to be scattered, 'cause it was just a waste of time and more dice rolling. Boy if only I'd knew the dark, pointless, time consuming depths 40K'd sink to by the end of 7th Ed.
I remember the end of 3rd Ed, where every army had a Codex, sometimes a "supplement" book that went with that main Codex (Blood Angels, Craftworld Eldar, etc.), several FAQs, some Chapter Approved articles, and a few other things here and there. It's 10x worse now, and the game is such an unwieldy mess that I just cannot stand it, which is so unbelievably painful in a period where they have released armies that have wanted for 20-something years (Ad Mech, Deathwatch, Genestealer Cults and the soon-to-return Traitor Legions, a thing of such wonder that it made me change my avatar even though I know the rules will continue to be dog gak).
And then they have the hide to make 1KSons Terminators the single most expensive Terminator kit outside of the Cataphractii kit. I mean what the feth are they thinking?
SKR.HH wrote: Okay... We're certainly start to run in circles...
You mean the thread or GW?
This thread.
Well I suppose that as long as people will repeat the Rountree meme, people will answer saying that the changes are purely cosmetic.
Also: look at H.B.M.C.'s post. You can see the "change" of GW. More expensive books, that apparently give the fans finally what they want (part of the Rountree meme) but with clunky, abysmal rules. Deal with GW is like dealing with a psychopath. He will answer yes and tell you all the things that he thinks you want to hear, but there is no true depth. There is no depth because he/she has no way to connect and to understand how an actual human being works and what are the needs of a person. Any sloppy or brutal behaviour will be justified by the people still under the psycho's charm.
So H.B.M.C. writing that stuff is not "running in circle" is bringing more evidence, and we have to bring more until people will stop to support this absurd stance that "things changed with Rountree".
SKR.HH wrote: Okay... We're certainly start to run in circles...
You mean the thread or GW?
This thread.
Well I suppose that as long as people will repeat the Rountree meme, people will answer saying that the changes are purely cosmetic.
Also: look at H.B.M.C.'s post. You can see the "change" of GW. More expensive books, that apparently give the fans finally what they want (part of the Rountree meme) but with clunky, abysmal rules.
Deal with GW is like dealing with a psychopath. He will answer yes and tell you all the things that he thinks you want to hear, but there is no true depth. There is no depth because he/she has no way to connect and to understand how an actual human being works and what are the needs of a person. Any sloppy or brutal behaviour will be justified by the people still under the psycho's charm.
So H.B.M.C. writing that stuff is not "running in circle" is bringing more evidence, and we have to bring more until people will stop to support this absurd stance that "things changed with Rountree".
Is a meme. Is better than this one:
Spoiler:
Is newer and funnier, but is still a meme.
Well, for the last time from my side:
Yes, they are expensive. But it seems to me that their pricing (outside AUS) has been stagnating.
Yes, the rules are bloated. No, I don't think that anything below a new edition will resolve this eventually (--> AoS showed how this could be done --> Move the rules to unit cards).
No, I don't think that the above reasons undermine my impression of GW getting better because:
- Return of specialist games
- Return/Introduction of armies highly anticipated
- Hugely discounted bundles/ Start Collecting Boxes
- Warhammer TV / Warhammer Live
...
You have a different priority (which is fine)... I and obviously other see it differently...
Do you really think either of us will change their opinion here?
This strikes me as particularly surprising. We should be grateful because.... they changed advertisement style?
If this includes daily painting tips and tutorials. And have you actually watched one of their streams last weekend? While quality was not the best it was quite entertaining to watch...
Please point me to another model manufacturer who offers something similar...?
This strikes me as particularly surprising. We should be grateful because.... they changed advertisement style?
If this includes daily painting tips and tutorials. And have you actually watched one of their streams last weekend? While quality was not the best it was quite entertaining to watch...
Please point me to another model manufacturer who offers something similar...?
Painting tutorial are ok, but that's about it. And still, one would want to play with those models. As you said, priorities.
Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
Noone can argue against the simple fact that the rules plain suck tyranid balls, because they do.
Creating a new ruleset takes time, as long as you don't want it to be 6th/7th level of copy&paste.
Rules are bad. Fact.
Still GW improved vastly on customer support, customer interaction, additional services, additional product etc.
That still qualifies as "better".
You CAN NOT deny they have improved.
That improvement didn't reach the core game mechanics yet.
You can drum on that fact like a gorilla with rabbies on bongos, still does not change the fact that we now have a GW that is as open as not seen this decade and possibly the last (not around for that long). Both sides are right.
Yet one side keeps repeating that GW did not improve at all and this is what rattles the other side.
Thairne wrote: Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all. Noone can argue against the simple fact that the rules plain suck tyranid balls, because they do. Creating a new ruleset takes time, as long as you don't want it to be 6th/7th level of copy&paste.
Rules are bad. Fact.
Still GW improved vastly on customer support, customer interaction, additional services, additional product etc.
That still qualifies as "better". You CAN NOT deny they have improved. That improvement didn't reach the core game mechanics yet.
You can drum on that fact like a gorilla with rabbies on bongos, still does not change the fact that we now have a GW that is as open as not seen this decade and possibly the last (not around for that long). Both sides are right. Yet one side keeps repeating that GW did not improve at all and this is what rattles the other side.
This is like ask someone to train the dog to do not s**t on the carpet, and then, after a month, see that the dog still s**ts on the carpet, but is able to do all sort of tricks and games with a ball. I want a clean carpet THEN we can talk.
H.B.M.C. wrote: And then they have the hide to make 1KSons Terminators the single most expensive Terminator kit outside of the Cataphractii kit. I mean what the feth are they thinking?
They're £35, the same as the other new Terminator kits - Blood Angels and Deathwing (but the Cataphractii are a bit on the high side).
Denying that the dog can now do those tricks however is.
You simply pick and choose the facts to suit your oppinion and disregard the others.
You could, ya know.. try and admit that GW has improved, just not in the area you consider the most important, which is, again, true.
H.B.M.C. wrote: And then they have the hide to make 1KSons Terminators the single most expensive Terminator kit outside of the Cataphractii kit. I mean what the feth are they thinking?
They're £35, the same as the other new Terminator kits - Blood Angels and Deathwing (but the Cataphractii are a bit on the high side).
H.B.M.C. wrote: And then they have the hide to make 1KSons Terminators the single most expensive Terminator kit outside of the Cataphractii kit. I mean what the feth are they thinking?
They're £35, the same as the other new Terminator kits - Blood Angels and Deathwing (but the Cataphractii are a bit on the high side).
Note the Oz flag...
Just looked on the Oz site - what the hell?!?! My apologies H.B.M.C.
Thairne wrote: Denying that the dog can now do those tricks however is. You simply pick and choose the facts to suit your oppinion and disregard the others. You could, ya know.. try and admit that GW has improved, just not in the area you consider the most important, which is, again, true.
No, the point is that there are, in life and games, priorities. You cannot enjoy the funny ball tricks if the room smells of s**t.
The fact that rules are clunkier and fluff is dumber makes all the new shiny stuff pointless.
Yes, finally 1k Sons! .... with the same basic crappy rules Yeah new blue paint! ... to paint those parody of marines YEESSS WARHAMMER TV... that explains me how to paint models with fluff and crunch ruined.
All these are accessories, you appreciate where is due (and Duncan Rhodes is better than the whole design team together, sleepy, drunk and with an arm behind his back). But the core must be solid, there must be structure, priorities.
Can I say "Ordnung muss sein", perhaps, if is the right context?
It doesn't make it pointless.
The new shiny stuff includes things like gathering user feedback on the next General's Handbook. That is significant.
You entirely disregard that. The point and question asked however "Has GW improved" and not "Has GW improved the rules".
If it was the latter, there would be no argument. Because they didn't. Because they CAN'T.
Factually, they have improved. You deny that by saying "they didn't do X" and ignore the rest. Ignoring the rest, not conceding the point that these facts exist, is bad discussion culture.
It may not mean anything to you, but they have improved. Denying that makes you look bitter.
Or, in other words... let me ask you a question.
Do you deny that
- Return of specialist games
- Return/Introduction of armies highly anticipated
- Hugely discounted bundles/ Start Collecting Boxes
- Warhammer TV / Warhammer Live
was in existance before? Does their existance now not conduct an improvement to times before they existed?
If you answer "no" this discussion is done. Because then you are so focused on the rules that nothing else will be seen.
I for one wonder when they'll stop being misers and give them good cameras and mics for the tournament reports. Speaking of warhammer TV, do they still have the last week's tournament coverage on twitch?
Thairne wrote: It doesn't make it pointless.
The new shiny stuff includes things like gathering user feedback on the next General's Handbook. That is significant.
You entirely disregard that. The point and question asked however "Has GW improved" and not "Has GW improved the rules".
If it was the latter, there would be no argument. Because they didn't. Because they CAN'T.
Factually, they have improved. You deny that by saying "they didn't do X" and ignore the rest. Ignoring the rest, not conceding the point that these facts exist, is bad discussion culture.
It may not mean anything to you, but they have improved. Denying that makes you look bitter.
Or, in other words... let me ask you a question.
Do you deny that
- Return of specialist games
- Return/Introduction of armies highly anticipated
- Hugely discounted bundles/ Start Collecting Boxes
- Warhammer TV / Warhammer Live
was in existance before? Does their existance now not conduct an improvement to times before they existed?
If you answer "no" this discussion is done. Because then you are so focused on the rules that nothing else will be seen.
You are being purportedly stubborn here. I am done.
Sounds like a few arguments splitting hairs.
How about "Has GW gotten better in a significant way in the last year?"
We could say that too depends on what is important to you.
Cost is important(ish) to me and some steps are made with the start collecting packages.
Models we read about in fluff they are getting out, who would of thought we would be seeing Custodes or Sisters of Silence?
GW certainly needs to improve from where they are.
X-wing has great rules and has great looking models and you can play straight out of the box rather inexpensively. I think you could say that for most FFGSW franchise anything.
Malifaux has interesting rules, amazing models and has a fairly well fleshed-out fluff stories/world.
Bolt Action I would say is the 40k ruleset taken to a logical and MUCH more streamlined level.
If I was to give a suggestion on the direction for 40k to go is to clean the rules up to a Bolt Action level and maybe a little less emphasis on the "pin" accumulation and focus on where they are already: a slightly larger game above squad level. We are used to the big stomping, crushing creatures, robots and tanks. They look awesome and it truly differentiates the game from others.
It is just the rules are so unwieldy the games take forever to play.
There are a lot of gw gamers that don't actually play any other games, so that will heavily limit the discussion and ability to understand that other options exist.
It's unfortunate as I think it mimics how gw also operates, IE from an ivory tower devoid of different viewpoints
Thairne wrote: It doesn't make it pointless.
The new shiny stuff includes things like gathering user feedback on the next General's Handbook. That is significant.
You entirely disregard that. The point and question asked however "Has GW improved" and not "Has GW improved the rules".
If it was the latter, there would be no argument. Because they didn't. Because they CAN'T.
Factually, they have improved. You deny that by saying "they didn't do X" and ignore the rest. Ignoring the rest, not conceding the point that these facts exist, is bad discussion culture.
It may not mean anything to you, but they have improved. Denying that makes you look bitter.
Or, in other words... let me ask you a question.
Do you deny that
- Return of specialist games
- Return/Introduction of armies highly anticipated
- Hugely discounted bundles/ Start Collecting Boxes
- Warhammer TV / Warhammer Live
was in existance before? Does their existance now not conduct an improvement to times before they existed?
If you answer "no" this discussion is done. Because then you are so focused on the rules that nothing else will be seen.
They've improved a lot, but its still polishing a turd.
So we have our answer, apparently all those products that slap a new and improved graphic on their packaging are automatically better because they have made change.
The day I become a "white knight" is if they actually get serous about cleaning up the rules.
They are a frightful mess in need of a flow-chart and a pruning down to the stump.
There was a time I would have been afraid of an Age of Sigmar treatment, not so much now.
Just want to point out that you will probably see more balancing and development on the AoS side right now than 40k. The rule designers working on AoS are current and active tournament players. Ben Johnson who was featured in the November WD just won a 40 man AoS tournament. We can keep talking about turd polishing, but I am optimistic that it is heading in a much better direction than it was when launched. They are doing a lot of right things there (free unit rules, changing broken unit rules, active FAQ, requests for feedback, living point values) which hopefully can be applied to 40k. The negatives like silly rules have been left with the legacy characters and rules which reprint some of those characters have the silly rules removed (the dancing with the Masque is gone and replaced by a conditional bonus).
Thairne wrote:Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
Noone can argue against the simple fact that the rules plain suck tyranid balls, because they do.
Creating a new ruleset takes time, as long as you don't want it to be 6th/7th level of copy&paste.
Rules are bad. Fact.
Still GW improved vastly on customer support, customer interaction, additional services, additional product etc.
That still qualifies as "better".
You CAN NOT deny they have improved.
That improvement didn't reach the core game mechanics yet.
You can drum on that fact like a gorilla with rabbies on bongos, still does not change the fact that we now have a GW that is as open as not seen this decade and possibly the last (not around for that long). Both sides are right.
Yet one side keeps repeating that GW did not improve at all and this is what rattles the other side.
Very well said. and agreed. Maybe we should be saying this then. GW hasn't gotten better for me. Why? They took the closed the closest GW store and opened it another one further away from me. So made it harder to buy their product. Then when I did find closer gaming stores, it was the prices. Ok I can understand paying a high price if it's WORTH it but sadly, this is where GWhasn't changed.
As was said before, rules are crap. We can see with the latest Chaos releases it's still the same GW bad rules that make the high prices not worth it. I don't care for Twitch or YouTube or the new White Dwarf, or the "Community pages" or anything on the internet. What matters most for me, is buying new minis and having more fun playing where GW has actually gotten worse than better.
Thairne wrote: Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
He said, like that wanting good rules in a game you play with rules was somehow an absurd or minor complaint.
The feth... ?
What, you don't describe the GW hobby as a messy rule system with overpriced miniatures, but other than that they're better than they were, and have new players that can't wait to start?
Thairne is completely justified.
Now which smiley is it that represents spewing sarcasm from every offifice?
Thairne wrote: Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
He said, like that wanting good rules in a game you play with rules was somehow an absurd or minor complaint.
The feth... ?
Yeah... GW exclusively equals WH40K...
Do you ignore the title on purpose?
AoS is a no-no for me (I will never buy the game they killed WHFB for, never, ever). I buy Lotr on ebay and the new hobbit rules have additional, pointless stupidity, or ignores former design paradigm. No need to go on. No interest in boxed games. Blood bowl suffers the new mini design (and they will eventually add changes for the sake of it, ruiningin it), if I want to build a team of orcs is better use bits and convert.
40k is or was the biggest beast. So yes, is the most relevant thing for people because is the only one that makes them interested in the first place.
Thairne wrote: Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
He said, like that wanting good rules in a game you play with rules was somehow an absurd or minor complaint.
The feth... ?
Yeah... GW exclusively equals WH40K...
Do you ignore the title on purpose?
AoS is a no-no for me (I will never buy the game they killed WHFB for, never, ever).
I buy Lotr on ebay and the new hobbit rules have additional, pointless stupidity, or ignores former design paradigm. No need to go on.
No interest in boxed games.
Blood bowl suffers the new mini design (and they will eventually add changes for the sake of it, ruiningin it), if I want to build a team of orcs is better use bits and convert.
40k is or was the biggest beast. So yes, is the most relevant thing for people because is the only one that makes them interested in the first place.
And still quite a lot of the points I already mentioned multiple times are affecting 40K as well..
Thairne wrote: Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
He said, like that wanting good rules in a game you play with rules was somehow an absurd or minor complaint.
The feth... ?
Yeah... GW exclusively equals WH40K...
Do you ignore the title on purpose?
AoS is a no-no for me (I will never buy the game they killed WHFB for, never, ever). I buy Lotr on ebay and the new hobbit rules have additional, pointless stupidity, or ignores former design paradigm. No need to go on. No interest in boxed games. Blood bowl suffers the new mini design (and they will eventually add changes for the sake of it, ruiningin it), if I want to build a team of orcs is better use bits and convert.
40k is or was the biggest beast. So yes, is the most relevant thing for people because is the only one that makes them interested in the first place.
And still quite a lot of the points I already mentioned multiple times are affecting 40K as well..
Alas... AS LONG AS THE PRICES yadda-yadda-yadda
For me, the price are a least concern. But in any case, since this stuff is paid with money and is really pricey, I think you should be concerned a company you care about (for any reason) risks to price itself out of the market.
People want quality for an high price. GW sells an hobby, and an hobby is made of components like game, models, paints, etc. If you sell a whole package, quality must be good. For every component. GW rules are now currently like GW glue: bad quality due to cut corners.
Your points are irrelevant. Keep repeating they are does not conceal the truth. Less blabla, more quality. Until then, no relevant GW improvement. End of discussion.
I tell you when they will improve: when they will fire en masse the design team. Every single one of them.
Thairne wrote: Much vitriol in this thread comes from the simple fact that some consider the rules and prices to be the end all.
He said, like that wanting good rules in a game you play with rules was somehow an absurd or minor complaint.
The feth... ?
Yeah... GW exclusively equals WH40K...
Do you ignore the title on purpose?
AoS is a no-no for me (I will never buy the game they killed WHFB for, never, ever).
I buy Lotr on ebay and the new hobbit rules have additional, pointless stupidity, or ignores former design paradigm. No need to go on.
No interest in boxed games.
Blood bowl suffers the new mini design (and they will eventually add changes for the sake of it, ruiningin it), if I want to build a team of orcs is better use bits and convert.
40k is or was the biggest beast. So yes, is the most relevant thing for people because is the only one that makes them interested in the first place.
And still quite a lot of the points I already mentioned multiple times are affecting 40K as well..
Alas... AS LONG AS THE PRICES yadda-yadda-yadda
For me, the price are a least concern. But in any case, since this stuff is paid with money and is really pricey, I think you should be concerned a company you care about (for any reason) risks to price itself out of the market.
People want quality for an high price. GW sells an hobby, and an hobby is made of components like game, models, paints, etc. If you sell a whole package, quality must be good. For every component.
GW rules are now currently like GW glue: bad quality due to cut corners.
Your points are irrelevant. Keep repeating they are does not conceal the truth. Less blabla, more quality. Until then, no relevant GW improvement. End of discussion.
I tell you when they will improve: when they will fire en masse the design team. Every single one of them.
And once more I disagree. Things like Kill Team and introduction of new factions keep me exiceted... Besides that I do like AoS.
And once more I disagree. Things like Kill Team and introduction of new factions keep me exiceted... Besides that I do like AoS.
Kill team can be very fun, but is severely unprofessional in the way has been conceived. It looks more like a good homebrew, improvised ruleset from a bunch of young guys with good potential than the work of a professional studio. They do not take in account too many factors that can make the game wonky and skewed, they do not consider that some models pay points in their profile that cannot spend in KT, is all a bit of a mess. OK for an homebrew system, but you would expect a walkthrough and at least some quick fix from the designers. And KT is one of the best stuff along with Combat Patrol, because you avoid the biggest ridiculousness.
GW designer suffer:
- Math problems: is more than clear that many people in the team do not grasp probability and statistics. Many monsters are underpriced because the designer did not get the basic math behind the chance to hit, wound, and saves. Think about the Riptide. Jeremy Vetock cannot do math, full stop. He has to go back. In school.
- Overdesign: they introduced rules that added no true value to the game, but are something new to remember. Think about Salvo, that is ignored or worked around with relentless platforms.
- Love for randumb: the number of rolls added since 3rd edition is huge. Most of these rolls are not desired by the player base (like the introduction of WHFB-like psionics in 7th, or the Chaos Boon Table. That table is an example of something that hit the mark of everything wrong in design. It looks fake for how bad it is. Kelly is an hack).
- Bookeeping out of control: stuff like Soul Blaze should not exist. I see you like DoT in videogames but keeping track of this on the tabletop is a nightmare. And this adds up to all sort of other rolls.
- Sloppy design: small armies like the Tempestus would have benefited immensely from a small point reduction of vehicles and a better order system (most of these orders were already in the IG book). Is not even creating stuff, is copying the right ones. The lack of care and allegedly of playtest is disconcerting. They even added "gets hot" on the already dubious Volley Guns. They errataed that soon, but even thinking about adding that rule means that you did not playtest.
- Pet armies: some armies are treated "better" because they belong to a designer. Space Wolves and Eldar for Phil Kelly. Cruddace, on the other hand, ruined Tyranids forever. Orks? Who cares. This led too, to the increase of stupidly powerful weapons, high rate of fire, creation of stuff against the fluff, and the decline of iconic units like the tactical squad because they had to push each his own special snowflake.
- General lack of vision: they do not know which army should be better at what, they do not know the scale of the game and how to integrate small infantry and big super heavy. Point cost is all over the place. Dumb units are fixed with formation, that leads to Spamhammer and barrier entry for newbies.
These people are absolutely terrible at their job and a good part for the frustration of the player base is because they, every time, address the wrong problems in the game (to an extreme, see AoS for WHFB after that abomination of 8th edition).
Kaiyanwang wrote: - Pet armies: some armies are treated "better" because they belong to a designer. Space Wolves and Eldar for Phil Kelly. Cruddace, on the other hand, ruined Tyranids forever. Orks? Who cares. This led too, to the increase of stupidly powerful weapons, high rate of fire, creation of stuff against the fluff, and the decline of iconic units like the tactical squad because they had to push each his own special snowflake.
This is a huge problem, and arguably it's been for quite a while. Basically, outside of marketing powerhouses like Spess Mehreens, armies get attention and love if there happens to be a designer truly interested in them. When there is not, said army is pretty much doomed to receive half-assed updates. CSM could be used as a perfect example for this. In 2nd edition they had a great codex because Chambers, the guy behind it, was a huge fan of the Chaos theme in general. Then came the simplification of 3rd edition, and one of the dullest codices ever for Chaos, courtesy of Jervis (someone who looks like a pretty decent chap and has really nice ideas from time to time, but who simply does not have the right mind to be a professional games designer). Pete Haines was mostly responsible for the 3.5 codex, a work of true love for the army, even if he overdid a few things... that would have been easy to fix and adjust, but Cavatore and Thorpe just didn't care, and the massacre of the 4th edition codex happened. Phil Kelly cared even less, and the great changes from 5th to 6th edition meant that a codex clearly designed for 4th/5th play was quickly rendered obsolete in the 6th/7th scheme of things.
And some armies have had it even worse. It seems nobody truly cared for Fantasy's Chaos Dwarves outside of Priestly, and the army was left to rot until he could give them another go at Forgeworld. Same for Sisters of Battle (as silly as these things sometimes sound like, a woman or two could have done a lot of good in that studio). Nobody cared much for Squats, and we know what happened. Theirs was actually the case that should have set off all the alarms: a fully functional army with a complete model range (as complete as model ranges were at the time), abandoned and forgotten just because noone at the studio gave two pennies about them. Jervis' excuses are almost painful to read.
The GW studio guys may be quite enthusiastic geeks, but are certainly not a professional bunch.
And some armies have had it even worse. It seems nobody truly cared for Fantasy's Chaos Dwarves outside of Priestly, and the army was left to rot until he could give them another go at Forgeworld.
And still FW made an half-arsed job. Then decided to abandon them (albeit they are back with AoS) wondering why and half-finished army would not sell.
Sometimes I wonder if they all have some condition that makes them oblivious to social clues, hints, and norms. This would explain the AoS scrolls debacle.
EDIT: Also, if you think about it, they are going to do it on the whole setting. They will shift the focus of 8th edition on the returning primarchs, so Xenos and minor empire faction will fade to the background with more sloppy updates, if any. This because 30k is successful, but they did not get WHY is successful - the primarch themselves are just one component, and they work well... in 30k.
Korinov wrote: . In 2nd edition they had a great codex because Chambers, the guy behind it, was a huge fan of the Chaos theme in general. Then came the simplification of 3rd edition, and one of the dullest codices ever for Chaos, courtesy of Jervis (someone who looks like a pretty decent chap and has really nice ideas from time to time, but who simply does not have the right mind to be a professional games designer).
Second Edition Chaos codex was by Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.
Korinov wrote: . In 2nd edition they had a great codex because Chambers, the guy behind it, was a huge fan of the Chaos theme in general. Then came the simplification of 3rd edition, and one of the dullest codices ever for Chaos, courtesy of Jervis (someone who looks like a pretty decent chap and has really nice ideas from time to time, but who simply does not have the right mind to be a professional games designer).
Second Edition Chaos codex was by Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.
How much of the rules did Jervis write, though? Because he strikes me as a fluff guy rather than a crunch guy.
But to get back to the OP; yes, I do believe GW has improved - communicating with customers, the return of Specialist Games, the Generals Handbook for AoS; all of these are improvements.
The issue is that, while these are improvements, it's like replacing the wornout tassels, bells and paint on a bike - sure, it makes a difference, but it's all a little pointless while the busted wheels (rules and prices) are left unattended.
Korinov wrote: . In 2nd edition they had a great codex because Chambers, the guy behind it, was a huge fan of the Chaos theme in general. Then came the simplification of 3rd edition, and one of the dullest codices ever for Chaos, courtesy of Jervis (someone who looks like a pretty decent chap and has really nice ideas from time to time, but who simply does not have the right mind to be a professional games designer).
Second Edition Chaos codex was by Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.
How much of the rules did Jervis write, though? Because he strikes me as a fluff guy rather than a crunch guy.
Knew that was coming, due to the Anti Jervis sentiment this forum has. He could have written 99.9% for all we know and Andy Chambers chipping in with fluff ideas and writing the designers notes as a favour. Theres no indication.
Jervis also wrote Blood Bowl and Epic:A, two very solid rulesets and co-wrote Black Powder - another good ruleset.
Korinov wrote: . In 2nd edition they had a great codex because Chambers, the guy behind it, was a huge fan of the Chaos theme in general. Then came the simplification of 3rd edition, and one of the dullest codices ever for Chaos, courtesy of Jervis (someone who looks like a pretty decent chap and has really nice ideas from time to time, but who simply does not have the right mind to be a professional games designer).
Second Edition Chaos codex was by Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.
How much of the rules did Jervis write, though? Because he strikes me as a fluff guy rather than a crunch guy.
Knew that was coming, due to the Anti Jervis sentiment this forum has. He could have written 99.9% for all we know and Andy Chambers chipping in with fluff ideas and writing the designers notes as a favour. Theres no indication.
Jervis also wrote Blood Bowl and Epic:A, two very solid rulesets and co-wrote Black Powder - another good ruleset.
Well, we can look at the codex which Chambers helped write and the one which came after which he didn't. If Jervis was the person pushing for the rules in the Chambers/Jervis codex then surely some of those rules and style would have carried over into the one which Chambers didn't do?
Okay, there has been a lot of discussion here, some good, some not so much. Some I agree with, some not so much!
I guess the question is, will 8th edition fix all the screw ups and be a solid rules set? Oh, and how many Codex will need to be tweaked to work with this edition?
I gave up on buying anything from them over 4 years ago. I like the game, house ruled what we didn't like and play fairly regular. Our group is happy and has a few more $ towards drinks to assist in the enjoyment!
Polonius wrote: Yeah, I'm not exactly bullish on GW, but they're showing signs of life, and a few areas seem to be getting better.
Really though, the rules are simply byzantine. It's like 2nd edition AD&D, with a half dozen books required to play many common armies. The amount of unnecessary rolling, rules that ignore other rules, and patched nonsense to avoid using basic modifiers makes it a much more difficult game to play than if they just went to a simple modifier system.
Tara wrote: Okay, there has been a lot of discussion here, some good, some not so much. Some I agree with, some not so much!
I guess the question is, will 8th edition fix all the screw ups and be a solid rules set? Oh, and how many Codex will need to be tweaked to work with this edition?
I gave up on buying anything from them over 4 years ago. I like the game, house ruled what we didn't like and play fairly regular. Our group is happy and has a few more $ towards drinks to assist in the enjoyment!
T...
We won't know if 8th is any better until it drops. Until then its purely speculation. Based on GW's history, I'd wager it won't do nearly enough and we'll likely end up with most of the problems that plague 7th, just with a different dressing.
We won't know how the old codices interact with 8th until it drops as well.
I'd be shocked if GW rebooted the game hard (like it frankly needs to be), but we can hope in the meantime.
Well, I don't give the argument of any behaviors or expectations from GW beyond the last 18 months any certainty because they've clearly changed way more than I expected, faster and still are. Just IMO.
VeteranNoob wrote: Well, I don't give the argument of any behaviors or expectations from GW beyond the last 18 months any certainty because they've clearly changed way more than I expected, faster and still are. Just IMO.
Their ability to write rules, however, has not changed, and is as poor or even worse than its ever been.
So with regards to expectations for 8th, I imagine everyone is better off setting the bar super low and being surprised if its decent rather than setting the bar high based on GW discovering the internet is not in fact a fad and being disappointed by another poorly written rulebook.
Blacksails wrote: Their ability to write rules, however, has not changed, and is as poor or even worse than its ever been.
So with regards to expectations for 8th, I imagine everyone is better off setting the bar super low and being surprised if its decent rather than setting the bar high based on GW discovering the internet is not in fact a fad and being disappointed by another poorly written rulebook.
So no change in expectation since two revisions back?
It would be really nice to see if they hire or contract some people who have made a few game rules... you know, to show they are serious at addressing the main engagement issues they have with their customers.
They are so close to turning things around it is almost maddening.
That's the frustrating part watching them release rules. They are one of the longest running miniatures/rules writing companies with one of the largest budgets. By any account, they should have the most experience to draw on, and have the most money to ensure they hire and retain the best talent and ensure the product is properly written and tested.
Its even funnier watching ex-GW game designers make successful rival games, like Dropfleet Commander for example.
They've done some progress, mostly when it comes to release some factions people were clamoring for. In the last 2 years, we had Harlies, CM, GC and DW, and it seems like we might get SOB soon. That's simply fantastic. The reintroduction of SG is also a huge step in the right direction. They also started to interact more with the community, which was long overdue. Still, they also took a few steps backward. I won't even go into AOS, since I've stated my opinion about it often enough. What bothers me a lot is this new trend of nickel and diming the customers (paid video, paid virtual cards for ST). And the price are as bad as ever, or maybe even worse than ever. The price of their clampack models is now truly ridiculous. They were about 15$ when they were introduced, and now they are more than double that price. In only a few years. Truly scandalous
New SOB would be nice but for the poor slob like me that built a SOB army 8 years ago and been hoping since it is a bit late, and now they are going to drop one of the vehicles I hear. GEEEZZZZ
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Second Edition Chaos codex was by Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.
And 3.5 codex was written by Andy Chambers, Pete Haines, Andy Hoare, Phil Kelly and Graham McNeill, as far as the book credits go. However we do know that Haines was the main designer behind it.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Well, we can look at the codex which Chambers helped write and the one which came after which he didn't. If Jervis was the person pushing for the rules in the Chambers/Jervis codex then surely some of those rules and style would have carried over into the one which Chambers didn't do?
Exactly.
If Chambers+Jervis=good, Jervis alone=extremely uninspired, and no Jervis=great again, I think it's easy to draw a pretty solid conclusion.
As I did in my previous post, I'll acknowledge again that Jervis has nice ideas from time to time, but he's just extremely hit and miss, and tends to miss more than he hits.
Knew that was coming, due to the Anti Jervis sentiment this forum has.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I've arrived at a pretty strong anti-Jervis stance simply by virtue of the things he's said and the things he's done.
There's little to be argued based on past glories of 20 years ago (and let's be fair, BB may be a fun game, but it is also a poster child for all the random nonsense that has been a hallmark of his rules writing and the attitude he's expressed in editorials, it just so happens to be in a context that's appropriate.) I also resent the implication I've seen from him that if I don't like his way, that somehow is my problem.
I don't think that post 5th 40K has come in for the criticism is has in some quarters and the lack of another "name" core rules writer post Alessio is coincidental. I believe we're seeing 40K as JJ sees it, without the moderating voice of someone with a better idea of good rules design. One can only hope that the commercial pressures of the last few years have resulted in a review of how much influence one guy apparently had over the direction of the game.
Yeah, I'd really hope that GW learned from the lessons of the past and don't hand someone their OWN army's book to write. I think Alessio Cavatore may be the exception to this, or maybe Chambers with the Ork codex, but it should be a rule.
The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
I thought they did.
I was thinking of things like "Movie Marines"; blatantly unbalanced or ridiculous things that are meant for more a unconventional experience than the regular games.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
They don't really count as free when you need a paid-for supplement to make them usable.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
They don't really count as free when you need a paid-for supplement to make them usable.
Yeah .... paid supplement.
It's like air... it's free but you need an air conditioner to make it usable when you live in Dubai.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
They don't really count as free when you need a paid-for supplement to make them usable.
Yeah .... paid supplement.
It's like air... it's free but you need an air conditioner to make it usable when you live in Dubai.
It ain't free bro !!!!
And soon AC won't be enough it'll be 150 Celsius by the end of the century, unlivable.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
They don't really count as free when you need a paid-for supplement to make them usable.
Yeah .... paid supplement.
It's like air... it's free but you need an air conditioner to make it usable when you live in Dubai.
It ain't free bro !!!!
And soon AC won't be enough it'll be 150 Celsius by the end of the century, unlivable.
But then, heat will be free, but you'll still need an air conditioner to make it usable for anything else than cooking.
I was actually referring to the difference in balance required for an addition to the core rules as opposed to something free you could just use for fun.
Jervis writes things that are for fun.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
They don't really count as free when you need a paid-for supplement to make them usable.
What are you talking about? They are perfectly usable. People just choose not to use them. There is a difference between they can and choosing not to.
Despite my anti-GW stance, I'm trying to be neutral on this, but it amazes me how a company like GW actually survives.
For example, they can't be making a profit on hobby supplies, if my buying patterns are reflected across the community.
Even when I was buying GW stuff, I was still getting my hobby supplies elsewhere, either because they were better, cheaper, or cheaper and better.
Poly Cement: Revell is cheaper, better and has a better nozzle IMO.
Primer: I've started using Vallejo and Tamiya brush on primers and they are cheaper and better IMO.
PVA glue is sold cheaply by the gallon in art and craft stores.
Sand: free from my local beach.
Slate: free again from the surrounding world
And so on and so on.
So where is GW making the money from? Miniatures? That used to be and is probably still the case, but rivals are starting to match and surpass them on this.
One thing for sure - it's certainly not hobby supplies.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
They don't really count as free when you need a paid-for supplement to make them usable.
What are you talking about? They are perfectly usable. People just choose not to use them. There is a difference between they can and choosing not to.
You guys miss the point (and hence it means I was has been unclear). The gorilla joke was about silly supplements and how their humour just sucks, at least in base of the AoS free rules.
Herzlos wrote:
What are you talking about? They are perfectly usable. People just choose not to use them. There is a difference between they can and choosing not to.
Ok, usable in a pick-up sense. From what I can tell, everyone uses the GH book now for some sort of balance.
I'm sure the base rules are usable for the unbound play, but for everyone else, you need the GH.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Despite my anti-GW stance, I'm trying to be neutral on this, but it amazes me how a company like GW actually survives.
For example, they can't be making a profit on hobby supplies, if my buying patterns are reflected across the community.
Even when I was buying GW stuff, I was still getting my hobby supplies elsewhere, either because they were better, cheaper, or cheaper and better.
It's a combination of huge mark-up (they don't need to sell many glues), people not knowing better (mum buying a starter for Timmy), people valuing convenience (I do this with paint, as Vallejo is harder to get locally), and the... <unexplained factor> My gaming buddy rants about how fething useless GW poly cement is, but refuses to buy anything else because it's not the right stuff. Won't touch non-GW paints, or brushes, or minis. He's got a thing about doing things right, using the best/original company, and in his mind that's GW.
He's a bit weird though; it's taken me nearly 20 years to get him to try a hamburger.
I'm still amazed at how they survive, but that's more based on how badly they seem to run everything and still somehow get away with it. They are pretty much a model of how not to do business, but they've got such a perfect fan-boy technique somehow that they seem completely invulnerable to even the most incompetent management.
Herzlos wrote:
What are you talking about? They are perfectly usable. People just choose not to use them. There is a difference between they can and choosing not to.
Ok, usable in a pick-up sense. From what I can tell, everyone uses the GH book now for some sort of balance.
I'm sure the base rules are usable for the unbound play, but for everyone else, you need the GH.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Despite my anti-GW stance, I'm trying to be neutral on this, but it amazes me how a company like GW actually survives.
For example, they can't be making a profit on hobby supplies, if my buying patterns are reflected across the community.
Even when I was buying GW stuff, I was still getting my hobby supplies elsewhere, either because they were better, cheaper, or cheaper and better.
It's a combination of huge mark-up (they don't need to sell many glues), people not knowing better (mum buying a starter for Timmy), people valuing convenience (I do this with paint, as Vallejo is harder to get locally), and the... <unexplained factor> My gaming buddy rants about how fething useless GW poly cement is, but refuses to buy anything else because it's not the right stuff. Won't touch non-GW paints, or brushes, or minis. He's got a thing about doing things right, using the best/original company, and in his mind that's GW.
He's a bit weird though; it's taken me nearly 20 years to get him to try a hamburger.
I'm still amazed at how they survive, but that's more based on how badly they seem to run everything and still somehow get away with it. They are pretty much a model of how not to do business, but they've got such a perfect fan-boy technique somehow that they seem completely invulnerable to even the most incompetent management.
I knew somebody like that as well - I spent years trying to tell them that PVA glue is PVA glue, and poly cement is poly cement, regardless of what label is on it.
I used the digestive biscuit example i.e Britain's top brand for this also makes digestive biscuits for supermarket own brands.
There's probably only one or two paint factories in Europe that make the stuff for everybody, and the only difference is usually the label.
He remained unconvinced.
I told him that companies like Honda let other companies make and use their engines under licence, as long as they don't call it a Honda engine, even when for all intensive purposes it is a Honda spec engine...
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
The issue there, is that those "silly free rules" came alongside in the complete destruction of the fantasy game system and world, rather than being a new, fun alternative that could be used instead or alongside it if the players wanted to.
It is akin to GW dropping Orcs and Gobbos as a fantasy army but saying it's all okay because they released the rules for Brewhouse Bash for free.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
The issue there, is that those "silly free rules" came alongside in the complete destruction of the fantasy game system and world, rather than being a new, fun alternative that could be used instead or alongside it if the players wanted to.
It is akin to GW dropping Orcs and Gobbos as a fantasy army but saying it's all okay because they released the rules for Brewhouse Bash for free.
Except that fantasy game system and world was selling like heaters in Dubai they tried something new and it backfired, but what they eventually ended up with (after modifying it due to customer input/nagging) isn't half bad and is actually selling well.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
The issue there, is that those "silly free rules" came alongside in the complete destruction of the fantasy game system and world, rather than being a new, fun alternative that could be used instead or alongside it if the players wanted to.
It is akin to GW dropping Orcs and Gobbos as a fantasy army but saying it's all okay because they released the rules for Brewhouse Bash for free.
Except that fantasy game system and world was selling like heaters in Dubai they tried something new and it backfired, but what they eventually ended up with (after modifying it due to customer input/nagging) isn't half bad and is actually selling well.
And there is no reason that it couldn't have sold well alongside the already existing Fantasy game. It is not a zero-sum game where in order to launch new game systems and rules requires the complete destruction and removal of your other game, especially when the rules you release take up a single A4.
Herzlos wrote:
What are you talking about? They are perfectly usable. People just choose not to use them. There is a difference between they can and choosing not to.
Ok, usable in a pick-up sense. From what I can tell, everyone uses the GH book now for some sort of balance.
I'm sure the base rules are usable for the unbound play, but for everyone else, you need the GH.
And what is wrong with that? Are we actually arguing GW trying to fix something when people complained it was broken? Heaven forbid GW trying to do something that people have asked for.
Yes GW made a mistake. Yes they admitted to it and trying to rectify it. Are you saying GW shouldn't have bothered and just left it as it was? No Generals Handbook?
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
The issue there, is that those "silly free rules" came alongside in the complete destruction of the fantasy game system and world, rather than being a new, fun alternative that could be used instead or alongside it if the players wanted to.
It is akin to GW dropping Orcs and Gobbos as a fantasy army but saying it's all okay because they released the rules for Brewhouse Bash for free.
I meant that, and the fact that the silly rules are dumb and not fun.They are like the jokes of Uncle Frank he keeps joking and thinks he is a fun man but you are actually faking a laugh because you think uncle Frank is a good man but is really unfunny, but you do not want to make him feel bad, especially after the divorce with aunt Henrietta, and all is very embarrassing but you will look back at the scene in his deathbed with a mix of revamped embarrassment and nostalgia for a period in which this was the worst of your problems, and that time he brought you to the Luna Park... But I digress.
Once, he made us walk back to the GW to buy a box set, that he was holding in his hands already at an FLGS across town, despite it being (a) the same thing and (b) the same price.
Herzlos wrote:
What are you talking about? They are perfectly usable. People just choose not to use them. There is a difference between they can and choosing not to.
Ok, usable in a pick-up sense. From what I can tell, everyone uses the GH book now for some sort of balance.
I'm sure the base rules are usable for the unbound play, but for everyone else, you need the GH.
And what is wrong with that? Are we actually arguing GW trying to fix something when people complained it was broken? Heaven forbid GW trying to do something that people have asked for.
Yes GW made a mistake. Yes they admitted to it and trying to rectify it. Are you saying GW shouldn't have bothered and just left it as it was? No Generals Handbook?
No I'm fine with them fething up and fixing it. I was objecting to the notion that AoS is free, when the reality is that you'll need to buy the Generals Handbook in order to actually play it, thus completely negating the "free" part.
I think there is a good method to that madness, personally. When you make the basic, fundamental concepts/rules free it allows people to test the game prior to buying in. I don't see that as a bad thing. Now, if you promote is as "everything is free!" you're getting into the "Free to play" nonsense you see with video games.
But as something that younger person can try out (particularly if they have models/figures from another game) for a reduced cost...not a terrible thing.
The only game I sell at the moment has a free 85-page rulebook. This is mainly due to the cost of printing, but it allows people to check out the rules before buying any of the necessary components.
Joyboozer wrote: The only problem I have with Jervis is GW not knowing the difference between giving away unofficial fun rules in White Dwarf as opposed to selling them as official updates/ supplements.
Something that might be a good idea: releasing "silly supplement rules" on the webby for free - it'd certainly be another step towards improving public relations.
*looks at 800-pounds gorilla with a "AoS Free Rules" sign in the hands*
The issue there, is that those "silly free rules" came alongside in the complete destruction of the fantasy game system and world, rather than being a new, fun alternative that could be used instead or alongside it if the players wanted to.
It is akin to GW dropping Orcs and Gobbos as a fantasy army but saying it's all okay because they released the rules for Brewhouse Bash for free.
Except that fantasy game system and world was selling like heaters in Dubai they tried something new and it backfired, but what they eventually ended up with (after modifying it due to customer input/nagging) isn't half bad and is actually selling well.
And there is no reason that it couldn't have sold well alongside the already existing Fantasy game. It is not a zero-sum game where in order to launch new game systems and rules requires the complete destruction and removal of your other game, especially when the rules you release take up a single A4.
Alongside it? Doubtful. Trying to push a new fantasy game that plays completely different and isn't a boardgame alongside their traditional fantasy game that both use the same models (or factions) would be worse than what they did to WHFB. I doubt veteran players would have tried AoS if it was released as a new game. Why would they? WHFB would still be supported and existing, there'd be no reason for them to try it out. Besides, neither game would be well supported, as now they have to manage 3 games, 40k, WHFB, and AoS.
I'm not saying GW did the right thing by pissing off a lot of people, destroying the whole lore and theme of WHFB, but saying that WHFB wasn't an anchor dragging them down is a fallacy.
Herzlos wrote: [No I'm fine with them fething up and fixing it. I was objecting to the notion that AoS is free, when the reality is that you'll need to buy the Generals Handbook in order to actually play it, thus completely negating the "free" part.
Actually, I think they would have tried it because it plays differently.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
AoS would have been infinitely better if GW had just tweaked their War of the Ring rulebook a bit; they'd have cut the play-slowdown elements of WHFB and left an interesting game behind instead of cutting the interesting things and leaving the play slowdown behind. They had the simple solution and they chose not to take it.
The weird thing is if they introduced whfb expansion AoS with new rules. I would of tried it or atleast kept playing 8th.
But since they killed 8th and tomb kings also Brits I kinda quit. Even if they said we no longer will support whfb behond aos til further notice I would of kept playing and buying.
Hell at the first of the year I had 2 armies to build in fantasy and to finish off my other 3. Then buy more Titans and start a Minotaur army.
After January I slowly quit gamesworkshop all together as time goes on my faith in them has gone out the window. They seem to be going with a bomb theory burn as bright as you can throw a bunch of crap out make money then dump it and move on.
I need a game with a more slow burning time to build style. I needed a year or two to buy my armies I need, my project is... Was going to cost 8 thousand if not more to build. I'm not a fan of save a bunch of money see a release buy it then done crap. Which sadly is what gamesworkshop and a lot of kids have become.
My best example are
Farsighted enclave
Ghazskull
Kill team
My guess soon to be
Gene stealer cult
Will never get any more support, so you buy a lot and in a year it is gone. Would you buy a 2000$ tv that would last only a year, you still keep it just it doesn't do anything anymore?
A Town Called Malus wrote:Actually, I think they would have tried it because it plays differently.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
That is what I thought so as well, but from experience and reading on various forums we are to fault why that doesn't work. I seen it too many times in 40K, and it's the reason why I never started Fantasy. People kept saying "sorry I don't play 1000 points, it has to be 1500 points" or someone else would say "Sorry we don't play 1500 points, come back when you have 1850 minimum and better 2000."
I think for Fantasy a lot of people wouldn't even look at you if you had less than 2000 points for Fantasy. So hence the buy in was huge not because of GW but because the Gaming Community said so. Just like you can't play without points in Age of Sigmar or play Unbound in 40K even thought GW says you can the Gaming Community says you can't. I just experienced this a few months ago so it's still like that now.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Actually, I think they would have tried it because it plays differently.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
That is what I thought so as well, but from experience and reading on various forums we are to fault why that doesn't work. I seen it too many times in 40K, and it's the reason why I never started Fantasy. People kept saying "sorry I don't play 1000 points, it has to be 1500 points" or someone else would say "Sorry we don't play 1500 points, come back when you have 1850 minimum and better 2000."
I think for Fantasy a lot of people wouldn't even look at you if you had less than 2000 points for Fantasy. So hence the buy in was huge not because of GW but because the Gaming Community said so. Just like you can't play without points in Age of Sigmar or play Unbound in 40K even thought GW says you can the Gaming Community says you can't. I just experienced this a few months ago so it's still like that now.
But that is because the rules were designed for that level of buy in. If you wanted to be able to use the cool parts of your army, beyond basic troops and bare-bones characters, you had to play at a high points level.
If GW had made a game designed for lower points values, say with rules that allowed you to pay points for individual models rather than minimum unit sizes to create your own merry little ragtag warband without having to worry about minimum unit sizes or whatever, and if that game played fast as a small scale skirmish game should then that would not have been a problem.
The problem which leads to people turning down small games is not having a ruleset designed for small games.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Actually, I think they would have tried it because it plays differently.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
That is what I thought so as well, but from experience and reading on various forums we are to fault why that doesn't work. I seen it too many times in 40K, and it's the reason why I never started Fantasy. People kept saying "sorry I don't play 1000 points, it has to be 1500 points" or someone else would say "Sorry we don't play 1500 points, come back when you have 1850 minimum and better 2000."
I think for Fantasy a lot of people wouldn't even look at you if you had less than 2000 points for Fantasy. So hence the buy in was huge not because of GW but because the Gaming Community said so. Just like you can't play without points in Age of Sigmar or play Unbound in 40K even thought GW says you can the Gaming Community says you can't. I just experienced this a few months ago so it's still like that now.
But that is because the rules were designed for that level of buy in. If you wanted to be able to use the cool parts of your army, beyond basic troops and bare-bones characters, you had to play at a high points level.
If GW had made a game designed for lower points values, say with rules that allowed you to pay points for individual models rather than minimum unit sizes to create your own merry little ragtag warband without having to worry about minimum unit sizes or whatever, and if that game played fast as a small scale skirmish game should then that would not have been a problem.
The problem which leads to people turning down small games is not having a ruleset designed for small games.
Yeah, 8th edition especially encouraged large unit sizes and to have those large units and still have diversity, the games got bigger.
I don't necessarily think those changes were bad from a gameplay perspective (pros and cons) but I do think it pushed up all the unit sizes people would choose to take which pushed up the game size which made it inaccessible to new customers.
When you go online and see questions "what is the optimal number of models for elite unit X" you get people recommending crazy numbers compared to previous editions where elites were often only taken in 1 or 2 ranks of 5 or 7 wide.
I think GW should have pushed a format similar to "Warbands" like they did a few editions ago, where you encourage people to buy armies under 700pts and have rules that actually make it viable and interesting to play games of that size. Then you get people interested, hopefully get people buying multiple small armies, then push the larger game which is designed for the 2000+pt range and hope people start expanding their small armies to big ones.
Funny thing is, when 3rd 40K came out and 6th WFB, we had no problem getting 1,000 pt. games in across the board. Most of the time it was even encouraged as it gave the new guys an easier number to shoot for. That, and with veteran players to spot a squad/regiment or two, they could get stuck in while feeling their army out. When a unit needs 50 models to be effective in the meta, you don't get that.
Elbows wrote: I think there is a good method to that madness, personally. When you make the basic, fundamental concepts/rules free it allows people to test the game prior to buying in. I don't see that as a bad thing. Now, if you promote is as "everything is free!" you're getting into the "Free to play" nonsense you see with video games.
But as something that younger person can try out (particularly if they have models/figures from another game) for a reduced cost...not a terrible thing.
The only game I sell at the moment has a free 85-page rulebook. This is mainly due to the cost of printing, but it allows people to check out the rules before buying any of the necessary components.
One of the common arguments I've heard, especially early in its lifetime, is that Age of Sigmar isn't meant to be played as a "pitched battle game", but should rather be played with scenarios. Fair enough, except when the rules were first released, and even now, you're not provided with any scenarios to run the basic four page rules with.
Meaning, if this is your first tabletop game, you're either gonna have to invent your own scenario (which might be difficult if this is your first tabletop game), or... play it as a pitched battle game, since the rulebook never even told people that it was designed to be played with scenarios. Wasn't that the reason so many complained when the rules first came out that they were a downgrade from WHFB? Because they were playing the rules the only way the they could, because GW didn't even bother informing you what they had in mind when they designed the rules?
Not to mention that, for all the talk of the rules being "free", the only way to get the scenarios the rules were designed to play with is to fork over money for the hardcover rulebooks anyway.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Scenarios are free.............you just make them up. Takes about 3 minutes of thought and discussion.
Coming up with good scenarios is a bit more work and generally requires clear understanding of the rules and some experience with the game. You or I (20 year veteran gamer) could probably read the rules in a sitting and write a handful of decent scenarios that evening. New players, who've never wargamed before, might not find it so easy.
Are we going for an unbalanced scenario? How unbalanced? What should the victory conditions be to compensate for that?
TBH, I don't think AoS is a very good scenario game either, if you're expecting anything resembling fair. It's a good throw-minis-on-the-table game, in the classic all your stuff Vs all my stuff style I used to play 20 years ago with my Chaos Dwarf/Dwarf/Orc/Empire alliance.
Just Tony wrote: Funny thing is, when 3rd 40K came out and 6th WFB, we had no problem getting 1,000 pt. games in across the board. Most of the time it was even encouraged as it gave the new guys an easier number to shoot for. That, and with veteran players to spot a squad/regiment or two, they could get stuck in while feeling their army out. When a unit needs 50 models to be effective in the meta, you don't get that.
My best games were 1000 pts WHFB, me Chaos vs High Elven friend in 6th. You would see some light cavalry or Fury try to flank or disturb the War Machines, but mainly was heavy cavalry and infanty take position, and then the game would play on a failed (estimated) charge, a failed impact, or a nice game of "chicken", a well planned flanking, a final fortune, a bait-and-flee-the-charge.
Why they decided to pass from THAT game to 8th edition, it will always baffle me.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Actually, I think they would have tried it because it plays differently.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
That is what I thought so as well, but from experience and reading on various forums we are to fault why that doesn't work. I seen it too many times in 40K, and it's the reason why I never started Fantasy. People kept saying "sorry I don't play 1000 points, it has to be 1500 points" or someone else would say "Sorry we don't play 1500 points, come back when you have 1850 minimum and better 2000."
I think for Fantasy a lot of people wouldn't even look at you if you had less than 2000 points for Fantasy. So hence the buy in was huge not because of GW but because the Gaming Community said so. Just like you can't play without points in Age of Sigmar or play Unbound in 40K even thought GW says you can the Gaming Community says you can't. I just experienced this a few months ago so it's still like that now.
But that is because the rules were designed for that level of buy in. If you wanted to be able to use the cool parts of your army, beyond basic troops and bare-bones characters, you had to play at a high points level.
If GW had made a game designed for lower points values, say with rules that allowed you to pay points for individual models rather than minimum unit sizes to create your own merry little ragtag warband without having to worry about minimum unit sizes or whatever, and if that game played fast as a small scale skirmish game should then that would not have been a problem.
The problem which leads to people turning down small games is not having a ruleset designed for small games.
I disagree again. We have rules for smaller games, and people still refused them. We even have Kill Teams and a lot of people still keep saying, "Sorry don't want to play 200 point games, but when you have 1500+, then let's game".
Just because there are rules for smaller games, nothing will change because people still want to play the bigger point games. Maybe not in your area, but from what I have seen, you need bigger points because a lot of people don't want to play small point games. I haven't really seen it on the internet and I haven't seen it where I play. Outside the 400 point league we had, nobody wanted small point games and minimum was 1000 points. While 1000 points is not a lot, still if you want smaller games, the gaming community doesn't want it. Speaking from experience.
Kill Team is still not well designed for interesting small games because it fails to remove minimum unit size limitations, along with some other limitations that it adds in, which makes playing with a combination of the cool toys you can take in an army difficult.
hobojebus wrote: Fan made killteam rules you can get for free leave GW's attempt in the dust.
GW relying on fan made rules is not really a "So, can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?" point (not saying that was what you were saying). They should be able to do that on their own and they are still failing at rules, albeit slightly less than before but for many it's still not good enough and that's why they say that GW hasn't gotten better.
To paraphrase a quote: "If somebody stabs you and the retracts the knife halfway they are not really helping you".
hobojebus wrote: Fan made killteam rules you can get for free leave GW's attempt in the dust.
GW relying on fan made rules is not really a "So, can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?" point (not saying that was what you were saying). They should be able to do that on their own and they are still failing at rules, albeit slightly less than before but for many it's still not good enough and that's why they say that GW hasn't gotten better.
To paraphrase a quote: "If somebody stabs you and the retracts the knife halfway they are not really helping you".
I would say that would mean the bastards are going in for a second stab.
So My guess is the end times hit 40k. Squat everything that people love. Leave only super heavies 100$+ models. Unit size dont matter, gear again doesnt matter, you can bring as many as you can afford with your bank account and point wise 5 are the same as 90000. Base size increase by 20% and you measure by tip of toes only. They bring back all daemon primarchs/ primarchs and require atleast 1 to be in your army. The model cost will be a gentle 150$ plus.
Call it age of empires then cut the rules down to a single sentence " You make the call" Totally age of sigmar 40k.
hobojebus wrote: Fan made killteam rules you can get for free leave GW's attempt in the dust.
GW relying on fan made rules is not really a "So, can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?" point (not saying that was what you were saying). They should be able to do that on their own and they are still failing at rules, albeit slightly less than before but for many it's still not good enough and that's why they say that GW hasn't gotten better.
To paraphrase a quote: "If somebody stabs you and the retracts the knife halfway they are not really helping you".
I would say that would mean the bastards are going in for a second stab.
So My guess is the end times hit 40k. Squat everything that people love. Leave only super heavies 100$+ models. Unit size dont matter, gear again doesnt matter, you can bring as many as you can afford with your bank account and point wise 5 are the same as 90000. Base size increase by 20% and you measure by tip of toes only. They bring back all daemon primarchs/ primarchs and require atleast 1 to be in your army. The model cost will be a gentle 150$ plus.
Call it age of empires then cut the rules down to a single sentence " You make the call" Totally age of sigmar 40k.
I'm pretty sure there's an argument inside those borderline madman-grade ravings/strawman. Because guess what: no one brought as much stuff as their bank account could afford, no one ever brought the infamous ten nagashes or sixteen cannons. Unit size and wargear DID matter (the first because of the victory conditions and bravery effects and bonuses, the latter because... really you aren't going to bring high rend/low attacks to face a horde army) and they did bring in other stuff aside from big monsters. . "You make the call" is something we do on a regular basis on 40k and AoS, we have a whole subforum to the early.
I guess you like and don't mind the bloated mess of rules that we have right now, with 5 phases per turn (the aerial, movement, psychic, shooting, and assault) with a plethora of convoluted rules with regular games that take 4 hours (a third-at least- of which will be book-keeping, specially if you play chaos) and two headaches to finish. Seriously though, I know you're posting an extreme example but it ain't (nor has) happening (but we need some serious trimming).
auticus wrote: GW won't get any credit until the following things occur:
* the price for a standard sized army (standard being whatever the community's default tournament size is) is roughly $250 or so.
* GW actively starts fixing their very bad balanced points.
* GW's new edition of 40k is more conducive of a static tournament game and less a narrative random dice roll game.
* GW continues to actively support tournaments (this has begun again)
Those are the things that I read pretty much on a regular basis.
Basically this, in all honesty. They are improving, and it is quite enjoyable to play their games and read their lore, but until they fix these main issues, all these little things they're doing will mean nothing and people will still complain to GW.
Oh, all of these and... Basically the whole of AoS. What were they thinking. They destroyed everything Warhammer was, lore and game wise, and threw in space marines and expected everyone to be pleased. And yet I'm still playing it and I have no clue why....
Oh, all of these and... Basically the whole of AoS. What were they thinking. They destroyed everything Warhammer was, lore and game wise, and threw in space marines and expected everyone to be pleased. And yet I'm still playing it and I have no clue why....
Yeah, it has gotten a lot of flakk for the destruction. Honestly? Give it half a decade to build up, we still need mores stuff to go by and if the rumors are any indicators we are going to get it within this year or half of the next.
And because the stormcasts couldn't be more different to space marines? XD I mean, look at Josh Reynolds' take on it (which is what sold me into the game, tbh) and draw conclussions
"Well, for starters, Space Marines are chosen as children, tortured by SCIENCE!, and then drafted into an eternity of being monastic murder machines whose sole purpose is to hold up the crumbling foundations of an omnicidal dystopia in the name of a rotting carcass that eats psykers like chiclets. They're emotionally stunted orphans who were brainwashed and weaponized before being unleashed on a galaxy where EVERYTHING is trying to kill them. They never even had a chance to be people before someone turned them into a gun instead.
Stormcast, on the other hand, are dead heroes, chosen for their valour and faith, resurrected and sent to free the Mortal Realms from the abominations currently running the show, on behalf of a benevolent God-King (Though benevolent is seriously up to debate). They're traumatized heroes who had lives, personalities and histories prior to being crammed into primary colored hulkbuster armor and filled full of lightning so that they could go save their descendants from the eldritch horrors of a nightmare dimension. They endure death after death, losing a bit more of their soul each time, in order to prevent anyone else from suffering the fate which befell them.
One group are so far removed from humanity as to be utterly alien. The other group are so human it causes them pain. One group feels little in the way of emotion, the other group feels emotion as strongly as they did before death. One group hates and fears the alien. The other group allies regularly with space-lizards, skeletors and green monster-men. One group is the personification of the grim future in which they live. The other is a thing born of hope.
The similarities are cosmetic: big guys in easily paintable armor sell better than little dudes with fiddly bits. But the context for those cosmetic similarities is quite different. Think of it this way...Space Marines are Batman and Stormcast are Captain America. Both are super-heroes, both wear costumes, both punch bad guys, both save people. But they ain't the same, are they?"
Plus they are more interesting to read than space marines as they ain't demigods but your average joe who's scared to die (mainly because they don't want to lose their identities and scar their friends with the experience of seeing them as nigh-soulless husks... plus the fact that they cannot be re-reforged more than twice.)
You show some good points, milord. Kudos, you've altered my opinion slightly, though I still think fantasy was better, and Total War: Warhammer keeps reminding me of it.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Kill Team is still not well designed for interesting small games because it fails to remove minimum unit size limitations, along with some other limitations that it adds in, which makes playing with a combination of the cool toys you can take in an army difficult.
Please stop moving the goal posts or making excuses for your debate. You said there was no alternative to play small point games, I just showed you there is a way to play small points.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @ Lord Kragen, you say "they aren't the same" regarding Stormcast Eternals and Space Marines. I say they are the same. 5+5=10. 7+3=10. 1+5+2+2=10. Basically they are all the same just told differently.
In other words you are going by one aspect that is different. What about they are in most cases faceless look like but are different from humans? Same.
They wear armour that is suppose to be like Knights. Same.
They are made by one person? same.
There are numerous of them and have like god powers compared to humans. Same.
OH and how about when they become these super soldiers, they loose who they once were and are "transformed" into someone new. For a lot of Space Marines they are mind wiped are they not? Same for Stormcast Eternals. Same.
So while the formula you are using in the end they are the same. So telling the same story differently and visually the same makes GW better? If anything how can you say "regurgitating" the same story over again is getting better?
I am not saying Age of Sigmar is bad, I like it. Thing is, to say something is better how can they get better when they are doing the same thing?
One is Knights in Space. The other is Space Knights in a Fantasy setting. Is that really getting better? I say it's lazy, not innovative and show no innovation. That getting better or improving?
I guess it all depends on how you like it. If you love it, then GW has improved. If you like it, it's stalemate. They are the same. If you hate it, they definitely didn't improve at all.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Kill Team is still not well designed for interesting small games because it fails to remove minimum unit size limitations, along with some other limitations that it adds in, which makes playing with a combination of the cool toys you can take in an army difficult.
Please stop moving the goal posts or making excuses for your debate. You said there was no alternative to play small point games, I just showed you there is a way to play small points.
I never moved the goalposts, Kill Team failed to meet the standards I set out in my initial posts about what is required for a low point game to work. Not to mention that my initial post was about Fantasy, not 40K. So unless you can find a Fantasy equivalent of Kill Team that was actively supported by GW during 8th edition, then my initial post saying that there were no rules specifically designed for low points fantasy gaming in the Warhammer world is correct.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
If GW had made a game designed for lower points values, say with rules that allowed you to pay points for individual models rather than minimum unit sizes to create your own merry little ragtag warband without having to worry about minimum unit sizes or whatever, and if that game played fast as a small scale skirmish game should then that would not have been a problem.
The problem which leads to people turning down small games is not having a ruleset designed for small games.
Kill Team as a ruleset designed for small games fails because it keeps many of the restrictions inherent in the 40K ruleset, such as minimum unit sizes, which limit the choices of players in constructing their forces. So players are given less actual force organisation choices when building what should be a more personalised small force. Why do I have to pay points for 3 stealth suits in my Kill Team? Why not one or two? Why can a Chaos player not buy a single Raptor or Warp Talon for their Kill Team?
Oh, all of these and... Basically the whole of AoS. What were they thinking. They destroyed everything Warhammer was, lore and game wise, and threw in space marines and expected everyone to be pleased. And yet I'm still playing it and I have no clue why....
Yeah, it has gotten a lot of flakk for the destruction. Honestly? Give it half a decade to build up, we still need mores stuff to go by and if the rumors are any indicators we are going to get it within this year or half of the next.
And because the stormcasts couldn't be more different to space marines? XD I mean, look at Josh Reynolds' take on it (which is what sold me into the game, tbh) and draw conclussions
"Well, for starters, Space Marines are chosen as children, tortured by SCIENCE!, and then drafted into an eternity of being monastic murder machines whose sole purpose is to hold up the crumbling foundations of an omnicidal dystopia in the name of a rotting carcass that eats psykers like chiclets. They're emotionally stunted orphans who were brainwashed and weaponized before being unleashed on a galaxy where EVERYTHING is trying to kill them. They never even had a chance to be people before someone turned them into a gun instead.
Stormcast, on the other hand, are dead heroes, chosen for their valour and faith, resurrected and sent to free the Mortal Realms from the abominations currently running the show, on behalf of a benevolent God-King (Though benevolent is seriously up to debate). They're traumatized heroes who had lives, personalities and histories prior to being crammed into primary colored hulkbuster armor and filled full of lightning so that they could go save their descendants from the eldritch horrors of a nightmare dimension. They endure death after death, losing a bit more of their soul each time, in order to prevent anyone else from suffering the fate which befell them.
One group are so far removed from humanity as to be utterly alien. The other group are so human it causes them pain. One group feels little in the way of emotion, the other group feels emotion as strongly as they did before death. One group hates and fears the alien. The other group allies regularly with space-lizards, skeletors and green monster-men. One group is the personification of the grim future in which they live. The other is a thing born of hope.
The similarities are cosmetic: big guys in easily paintable armor sell better than little dudes with fiddly bits. But the context for those cosmetic similarities is quite different. Think of it this way...Space Marines are Batman and Stormcast are Captain America. Both are super-heroes, both wear costumes, both punch bad guys, both save people. But they ain't the same, are they?"
Plus they are more interesting to read than space marines as they ain't demigods but your average joe who's scared to die (mainly because they don't want to lose their identities and scar their friends with the experience of seeing them as nigh-soulless husks... plus the fact that they cannot be re-reforged more than twice.)
Going by statlines, purpose, and everything Davor already pointed out, they basically ARE Space Marines. I realize you are a staunch supporter and jump to AOS's defense readily, but step back two steps and look at the whole picture.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Kill Team is still not well designed for interesting small games because it fails to remove minimum unit size limitations, along with some other limitations that it adds in, which makes playing with a combination of the cool toys you can take in an army difficult.
Please stop moving the goal posts or making excuses for your debate. You said there was no alternative to play small point games, I just showed you there is a way to play small points.
I never moved the goalposts, Kill Team failed to meet the standards I set out in my initial posts about what is required for a low point game to work. Not to mention that my initial post was about Fantasy, not 40K. So unless you can find a Fantasy equivalent of Kill Team that was actively supported by GW during 8th edition, then my initial post saying that there were no rules specifically designed for low points fantasy gaming in the Warhammer world is correct.
For years players had been asking for small scale skirmish rules to serve as the gateway game to get new players in. Something that is designed to work starting at around the model count of Mordheim and increasing up until you're approaching the lower end of your standard WHFB army.
Age of Sigmar could have been that game and I think current players would have given it every chance.
If GW had made a game designed for lower points values, say with rules that allowed you to pay points for individual models rather than minimum unit sizes to create your own merry little ragtag warband without having to worry about minimum unit sizes or whatever, and if that game played fast as a small scale skirmish game should then that would not have been a problem.
The problem which leads to people turning down small games is not having a ruleset designed for small games.
Kill Team as a ruleset designed for small games fails because it keeps many of the restrictions inherent in the 40K ruleset, such as minimum unit sizes, which limit the choices of players in constructing their forces. So players are given less actual force organisation choices when building what should be a more personalised small force. Why do I have to pay points for 3 stealth suits in my Kill Team? Why not one or two? Why can a Chaos player not buy a single Raptor or Warp Talon for their Kill Team?
You are talking for Age of Sigmar? I was talking about 40K. There lies our miscommunication then.
One group are so far removed from humanity as to be utterly alien. The other group are so human it causes them pain. One group feels little in the way of emotion, the other group feels emotion as strongly as they did before death. One group hates and fears the alien. The other group allies regularly with space-lizards, skeletors and green monster-men. One group is the personification of the grim future in which they live. The other is a thing born of hope.[/i]
You started to lose me here. Which group is which? The Space Marines remember some of their humanity, and some have emotions which they suppress, fighting a never ending war in a dystopian future, where their life essence can be resurrected in another body. They have humanity, sort of.
The Stormcast remember some of their humanity, and and some emotions which fade over time, fighting a never ending war in a dystopian past, where their life essence can be resurrected in another body. They have humanity, sort of, but less of it over time.
There are some cosmetic differences, sure; Space Marines were orphans turned into warrior monks, Stormcast are ressurected heros. But in most other regards they are essentially the same, looking so similar that you could field Stormcast in a Space Marine* army and people wouldn't find them out of place.
One group are so far removed from humanity as to be utterly alien. The other group are so human it causes them pain. One group feels little in the way of emotion, the other group feels emotion as strongly as they did before death. One group hates and fears the alien. The other group allies regularly with space-lizards, skeletors and green monster-men. One group is the personification of the grim future in which they live. The other is a thing born of hope.[/i]
You started to lose me here. Which group is which? The Space Marines remember some of their humanity, and some have emotions which they suppress, fighting a never ending war in a dystopian future, where their life essence can be resurrected in another body. They have humanity, sort of.
The Stormcast remember some of their humanity, and and some emotions which fade over time, fighting a never ending war in a dystopian past, where their life essence can be resurrected in another body. They have humanity, sort of, but less of it over time.
There are some cosmetic differences, sure; Space Marines were orphans turned into warrior monks, Stormcast are ressurected heros. But in most other regards they are essentially the same, looking so similar that you could field Stormcast in a Space Marine* army and people wouldn't find them out of place.
* Blood Angels and offshoots, at least.
Hm, not really. Stormcast remember pretty much everything and have all the humanity they began with. In their downtime some of them even go out and "bother their ancestors" for a laugh according to fluff. They only start to lose their memories when they're killed and resurrected. And even then they only lose a fraction of it each time.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Kill Team is still not well designed for interesting small games because it fails to remove minimum unit size limitations, along with some other limitations that it adds in, which makes playing with a combination of the cool toys you can take in an army difficult.
Please stop moving the goal posts or making excuses for your debate. You said there was no alternative to play small point games, I just showed you there is a way to play small points.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @ Lord Kragen, you say "they aren't the same" regarding Stormcast Eternals and Space Marines. I say they are the same. 5+5=10. 7+3=10. 1+5+2+2=10. Basically they are all the same just told differently.
In other words you are going by one aspect that is different. What about they are in most cases faceless look like but are different from humans? Same.
They wear armour that is suppose to be like Knights. Same.
They are made by one person? same.
There are numerous of them and have like god powers compared to humans. Same.
OH and how about when they become these super soldiers, they loose who they once were and are "transformed" into someone new. For a lot of Space Marines they are mind wiped are they not? Same for Stormcast Eternals. Same.
So while the formula you are using in the end they are the same. So telling the same story differently and visually the same makes GW better? If anything how can you say "regurgitating" the same story over again is getting better?
I am not saying Age of Sigmar is bad, I like it. Thing is, to say something is better how can they get better when they are doing the same thing?
One is Knights in Space. The other is Space Knights in a Fantasy setting. Is that really getting better? I say it's lazy, not innovative and show no innovation. That getting better or improving?
I guess it all depends on how you like it. If you love it, then GW has improved. If you like it, it's stalemate. They are the same. If you hate it, they definitely didn't improve at all.
Davor I can't help but facepalm at many of your points.
a)They don't lose the memory when they become super-soldiers, that only happens after being reforged/reincarnated. If having your soul gnawed away in a deathly countdown hard-capped at 2 more attempts equals mindwipe (and there's no third chance), then I have nothing more to say. And they never lost ANY of their memories at the beginning of their life as a stormcast, where the hell does that come that from? (Pre-reincarnation, that is) It's explicidly stated they remember everything (albeit in some cases the memories are a bit murky from the trauma experience in the reforging and the previous death). The only exception is the Celestant-Prime and that's to keep a your-dudes approach. But it's not just remembering. It's caring. A space marine won't give a damn, it was something before he entered into the emperor's service. A stormcast who hasn't lost their memories will treasure those moments and hold them tightly, be the source of their determination and at the same time something that will instill a sense of preservation, least he loses them. Heck, if the persons within those memories are still alive the stormcast will try to spend time with them, because they ARE part of his life. Service to Sigmar isn't their whole being like 99.999999999999999999% of the marines.
feth, they know fear unlike space marines, and they are terrified to die least they lose their memories of the past (yeah, I wonder how many marines are scared of losing their mindwiped memories). A marine will NEVER feel that. The closest they are to space marines would be the rubricae by the time they hit the second reincarnation, all while being extremely different prior to that point.
b) The numerous part is an outright stupid argument to make , they are an army for gods sake. You NEED numbers to go to battle and do an occupation effort. And space marines numerous? Uhm, hello, the average chapter is a thousand-ish members, and will usually send only 2-3 companies worth, stormhosts usually number ten to a dozen times more than a chapter and will usually fight as a single uni. Sometimes they send warrior chambers (which are like 300-500 stormcasts each), but that's not the norm, unlike space marines which are said to never fight as a whole in a single battle. And they are certainly not godlike. They are stronger than humans by several times, but you won't see a single stormcast take down a hundred enemies alone in the lore (and space marine lore once said: a marine is worth a hundred guardsmen and with a good captain he's worth ten times more, then Gaunt's ghosts itself-dunno if it was traitor general or the first one- said that a single chaos space marine squad/a handful of them could annhilate whole regiments/armies). If we use that indicator too, then the brutes from halo which were numerous and were extremely stronger and faster than humans would qualify as space marines. Irrelevant and totally wrong.
Furthermore, they are stated to be pretty much mortals in their day to day life. They need to eat regularly (if they can go a bit more frugal than regular humans, but you still need to feed them thrice a day, unlike astartes). They need to sleep regularly and more or less the same hours as you and me. They certainly get bored (I want to know how many times do space marines go and play dice and other things like that, I can count a few examples of stormcasts making implied statements on them going to gamble when they have the chance), they certainly want to have fun as a general note, not a one-off chance that some members of certain chapters go do.
c) Space marines have females too, don't they? Oh wait, no they don't. They also don't have undead (lord relictors say hi!), elves and dwarves (even orcs, but those are a bit of a rarity). Not the same.
d) Their approach is entirely different. How often you find marines willing to cooperate with greenskins or necrons? You'll see stormcasts willingly cooperate with undead and orcs. A space marine is a psychotic murdermachine pumped on steroids. A stormcast is an average human empowered but the psyche is intact who has a clear goal: take home back and rebuild. A space marine is a zealot (not saying there aren't SE zealots, it's not their shtick), a stormcast would think of using dialogue and even try to redeem by non-killing methods the chaos worshippers. THIS, this point alone should utterly diferentiate them from space marines to anyone's eyes.
e) Do I really have to point out that this is a medieval-esque setting and in their case the armor is "natural"?? Your argument again is like saying knights of WHFB were space marines because they had knightly armor.
f) They weren't made by one person. They were made by grugni and a bunch of smiths. Sigmar just goes and jacks off a couple of lightnings onto them and calls it a day.
How about this: they look like Space Marines and they are an elite army.
Besides, since we don't really care for AoS or even WHFB, it makes a lot of sense that the only thing we notice is visuals: wtf are those space marines doing in fantasy ?
A Town Called Malus wrote: Kill Team is still not well designed for interesting small games because it fails to remove minimum unit size limitations, along with some other limitations that it adds in, which makes playing with a combination of the cool toys you can take in an army difficult.
Please stop moving the goal posts or making excuses for your debate. You said there was no alternative to play small point games, I just showed you there is a way to play small points.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @ Lord Kragen, you say "they aren't the same" regarding Stormcast Eternals and Space Marines. I say they are the same. 5+5=10. 7+3=10. 1+5+2+2=10. Basically they are all the same just told differently.
In other words you are going by one aspect that is different. What about they are in most cases faceless look like but are different from humans? Same.
They wear armour that is suppose to be like Knights. Same.
They are made by one person? same.
There are numerous of them and have like god powers compared to humans. Same.
OH and how about when they become these super soldiers, they loose who they once were and are "transformed" into someone new. For a lot of Space Marines they are mind wiped are they not? Same for Stormcast Eternals. Same.
So while the formula you are using in the end they are the same. So telling the same story differently and visually the same makes GW better? If anything how can you say "regurgitating" the same story over again is getting better?
I am not saying Age of Sigmar is bad, I like it. Thing is, to say something is better how can they get better when they are doing the same thing?
One is Knights in Space. The other is Space Knights in a Fantasy setting. Is that really getting better? I say it's lazy, not innovative and show no innovation. That getting better or improving?
I guess it all depends on how you like it. If you love it, then GW has improved. If you like it, it's stalemate. They are the same. If you hate it, they definitely didn't improve at all.
Davor I can't help but facepalm at many of your points.
a)They don't lose the memory when they become super-soldiers, that only happens after being reforged/reincarnated. If having your soul gnawed away in a deathly countdown hard-capped at 2 more attempts equals mindwipe (and there's no third chance), then I have nothing more to say. And they never lost ANY of their memories at the beginning of their life as a stormcast, where the hell does that come that from? (Pre-reincarnation, that is) It's explicidly stated they remember everything (albeit in some cases the memories are a bit murky from the trauma experience in the reforging and the previous death). The only exception is the Celestant-Prime and that's to keep a your-dudes approach. But it's not just remembering. It's caring. A space marine won't give a damn, it was something before he entered into the emperor's service. A stormcast who hasn't lost their memories will treasure those moments and hold them tightly, be the source of their determination and at the same time something that will instill a sense of preservation, least he loses them. Heck, if the persons within those memories are still alive the stormcast will try to spend time with them, because they ARE part of his life. Service to Sigmar isn't their whole being like 99.999999999999999999% of the marines.
feth, they know fear unlike space marines, and they are terrified to die least they lose their memories of the past (yeah, I wonder how many marines are scared of losing their mindwiped memories). A marine will NEVER feel that. The closest they are to space marines would be the rubricae by the time they hit the second reincarnation, all while being extremely different prior to that point.
b) The numerous part is an outright stupid argument to make , they are an army for gods sake. You NEED numbers to go to battle and do an occupation effort. And space marines numerous? Uhm, hello, the average chapter is a thousand-ish members, and will usually send only 2-3 companies worth, stormhosts usually number ten to a dozen times more than a chapter and will usually fight as a single uni. Sometimes they send warrior chambers (which are like 300-500 stormcasts each), but that's not the norm, unlike space marines which are said to never fight as a whole in a single battle. And they are certainly not godlike. They are stronger than humans by several times, but you won't see a single stormcast take down a hundred enemies alone in the lore (and space marine lore once said: a marine is worth a hundred guardsmen and with a good captain he's worth ten times more, then Gaunt's ghosts itself-dunno if it was traitor general or the first one- said that a single chaos space marine squad/a handful of them could annhilate whole regiments/armies). If we use that indicator too, then the brutes from halo which were numerous and were extremely stronger and faster than humans would qualify as space marines. Irrelevant and totally wrong.
Furthermore, they are stated to be pretty much mortals in their day to day life. They need to eat regularly (if they can go a bit more frugal than regular humans, but you still need to feed them thrice a day, unlike astartes). They need to sleep regularly and more or less the same hours as you and me. They certainly get bored (I want to know how many times do space marines go and play dice and other things like that, I can count a few examples of stormcasts making implied statements on them going to gamble when they have the chance), they certainly want to have fun as a general note, not a one-off chance that some members of certain chapters go do.
c) Space marines have females too, don't they? Oh wait, no they don't. They also don't have undead (lord relictors say hi!), elves and dwarves (even orcs, but those are a bit of a rarity). Not the same.
d) Their approach is entirely different. How often you find marines willing to cooperate with greenskins or necrons? You'll see stormcasts willingly cooperate with undead and orcs. A space marine is a psychotic murdermachine pumped on steroids. A stormcast is an average human empowered but the psyche is intact who has a clear goal: take home back and rebuild. A space marine is a zealot (not saying there aren't SE zealots, it's not their shtick), a stormcast would think of using dialogue and even try to redeem by non-killing methods the chaos worshippers. THIS, this point alone should utterly diferentiate them from space marines to anyone's eyes.
e) Do I really have to point out that this is a medieval-esque setting and in their case the armor is "natural"?? Your argument again is like saying knights of WHFB were space marines because they had knightly armor.
f) They weren't made by one person. They were made by grugni and a bunch of smiths. Sigmar just goes and jacks off a couple of lightnings onto them and calls it a day.
Yes, they are totally the same, aren't they?
Actually they are pretty much the same, I think we all agree AoS is sifi fantasy at best.
Also marines and sigmarines are pretty much the same.
Elite soldiers marching around the galaxy or stargates svaing humans that where cut off during the dark age check.
Made by the god emperor that you should worship if your a human check
poster boys that shoot lightning from their butt cracks as they fly around check
armour that is so over sized it would just be easier to put wheels on their feet and have a guy push them around. They try and get away with it in 40k with saying it is motorized assisted.
They have chaplins or reflectors or what ever their names are.
The give a younger audience a "oh this guy is me and he changes the world with his awesomess and try to get them to right their own fan fiction"
The have names that no one in the world would ever call a living thing outside 2000BC
morgoth wrote: How about this: they look like Space Marines and they are an elite army.
Besides, since we don't really care for AoS or even WHFB, it makes a lot of sense that the only thing we notice is visuals: wtf are those space marines doing in fantasy ?
Heck, even the elite army isn't that true with things like Ironjawz (hell, I bring less orcs than my opponents bring stormcasts on a regular basis by almost a 2:1 ratio), Warherds,Everchosen (an 2000pts army of thirteen models is possible and quite viable if you don't go full cheese), Beastclaw raiders, Skryre and Deathlords. I've seen plenty of competitive stormcast and, while not outright so, they tend a bit to be horde of bodies... unless the player goes full stardrake on you, but that's a knight-level model. Yeah, more elite than humans but... the point is sooo superficial.
Lord Kragan wrote: [
Actually they are pretty much the same, I think we all agree AoS is sifi fantasy at best.
Also marines and sigmarines are pretty much the same.
Elite soldiers marching around the galaxy or stargates svaing humans that where cut off during the dark age check.
Made by the god emperor that you should worship if your a human check
poster boys that shoot lightning from their butt cracks as they fly around check
armour that is so over sized it would just be easier to put wheels on their feet and have a guy push them around. They try and get away with it in 40k with saying it is motorized assisted.
They have chaplins or reflectors or what ever their names are.
The give a younger audience a "oh this guy is me and he changes the world with his awesomess and try to get them to right their own fan fiction"
The have names that no one in the world would ever call a living thing outside 2000BC
Except there's no advanced science in it, everything is said to be involved with magic. Even the steampunk-stuff the dwarves will bring in the new setting is implied to be fueled by magic by some of the rumors.
1) Yes, not gonna deny that, then again it's a bit of a generalization and a 40k space marine isn't really that anymore.
2) Only that they weren't made by sigmar and they don't force you to worship you. Plus there was a whole pantheon and it's almost outright stated that anyone could worship anyone they wanted (so yeah, you could have humans worship gork and mork, and there's still humans worshiping nagash and other servants of him as demi-gods). Furthermore, they don't go around praying to sigmar around, not because they don't believe in him as a god, but because they aren't a monastic order in space, I still have yet to read them doing stormhost-wide prayers like the marines do.
3) Yeah, relictors go giving sermons and monitoring the purity of their soldiers all the time... oh wait, they don't. Also chaplains go and wrestle with death whenever their soldiers die...not really, don't they? if anything they "are" apothecaries and even then they really have a rather different portfolio. Hell, even the castelant which has the portfolio of chaplains (avoid chaos corruption) has a differen job into it as he basically just points his lantern shaped anti-chaos hose and spurts the stream of Sigmar-approved purfying light and calls it a day, no need to make you pray and repent and pull a big-brother on the soldiers, which is what chaplains do.
4) WoW, and Warmahordes do sin a bit of that armor part. Does that mean that mean they are space marines too?
5) Same could happen in the guard, the empire and its knights and every single gakking army in any other game, any single faction in ANY genre. Look this is my awesome and cool vampire lord, Lord Edwyle. Look this is my tomb king Goodatra the Just, he was a great ruler and he'll restore nekhekara to its glory. Look this is Tree-huggael the elven lord, an awesome sniper that will beat chaos back! Literally every single army, guard included: this is Joe, an awesome soldier who's killed thousands of baddies and yada yada. If people want a sue, they'll make it regardless of the story. For hell's sake, I once saw an eshin skaven who my opponent-a thirty years old, mind you- called Kenshiro the Wanderer, a skaven raised by a human mage and who was actually a good guy infiltrating the evil skaven, and helping save people while being BBF with Tirion and an Uber-Swordsman. Special Snoflakes don't give half a crap about armies, your argument is baseless.
6) Jump pack and wings are quite different to say the least, and I still have to see regular marines go and ride dragons. Nevermind that I haven't seen those guns that shoot electricity in the marine range.
I'd say that only in Sigmar's realm of the heavens and the Seraphon using ancient vessels to move through the aether. Though as Lord Kragon said, it's all magic.
Otherwise it's a (mostly) high fantasy setting with heroic and sword & sorcery adventures.
@Davor,
They are made by one person? same.
Well I guess a technicality but it's Grugni who forged the armor first and then passed it down to seven apprentices(iirc) when he left. So 8 people are needed to make Stormcast.
There are numerous of them and have like god powers compared to humans.
Haha, not sure if they're godly. They have super strength and advanced speed but they're usually outclassed by the likes of vampires and chaos champions.
There are some with magic like the Relictor and knight questor but it's pretty minor.
Just my two cents though. Sorry to nitpick!
[Edit]: Further reading shows me that Lord Kragon already said all this. Sorry, it was really late when I posted.
Well I guess a technicality but it's Grugni who forged the armor first and then passed it down to seven apprentices(iirc) when he left. So 8 people are needed to make Stormcast.
Uhm, I guess this also makes it the same, The Emperor didn't actually make the space marines or Primarchs as well since it was his scientists who actually did all the work as well. So another similarity.
Well I guess a technicality but it's Grugni who forged the armor first and then passed it down to seven apprentices(iirc) when he left. So 8 people are needed to make Stormcast.
Uhm, I guess this also makes it the same, The Emperor didn't actually make the space marines or Primarchs as well since it was his scientists who actually did all the work as well. So another similarity.
Only that the Emperor didn't leave the work to them. Guy was stated to have done the template upon which the scientists worked upon. He DID intervene and was the one to give the first blue-print, the primarch project, and made the foundations for the development of the soldiers. Sigmar on the other hand most likely went: Grugni, grab some brain-cases and brain-storm (uh storm, sounds like a nice name!) a way to get stronger and tougher warriors. NOW!
Hell, the HH books states that all the scientists did was oversee the growth of the test subjects the emperor did and were afraid of what would happen if things went wrong. The emperor did the heavy lifting mainly for the first project, then left the luna scientists the rest for the main project.
Every single source states he's the one behind the Primarch project, I seriously don't know where the hell did you get that idea.
And I'm pretty sure all marine recruits ask for becoming marines, never being forced into it or taken off as tithes, right? Not really, meanwhile stormcasts are offered the choice or outright ask for the power to reap vengeance without it being offered a priori (example the celestial vindicators). There's a fine difference in being whiling (and conscious about the decision) and being forced as a child.
Well I guess a technicality but it's Grugni who forged the armor first and then passed it down to seven apprentices(iirc) when he left. So 8 people are needed to make Stormcast.
Uhm, I guess this also makes it the same, The Emperor didn't actually make the space marines or Primarchs as well since it was his scientists who actually did all the work as well. So another similarity.
Only that the Emperor didn't leave the work to them. Guy was stated to have done the template upon which the scientists worked upon. He DID intervene and was the one to give the first blue-print, the primarch project, and made the foundations for the development of the soldiers. Sigmar on the other hand most likely went: Grugni, grab some brain-cases and brain-storm (uh storm, sounds like a nice name!) a way to get stronger and tougher warriors. NOW!
Hell, the HH books states that all the scientists did was oversee the growth of the test subjects the emperor did and were afraid of what would happen if things went wrong. The emperor did the heavy lifting mainly for the first project, then left the luna scientists the rest for the main project.
Every single source states he's the one behind the Primarch project, I seriously don't know where the hell did you get that idea.
And I'm pretty sure all marine recruits ask for becoming marines, never being forced into it or taken off as tithes, right? Not really, meanwhile stormcasts are offered the choice or outright ask for the power to reap vengeance without it being offered a priori (example the celestial vindicators). There's a fine difference in being whiling (and conscious about the decision) and being forced as a child.
So this makes everything different then and that makes them not the same?
Stormcast were inspired by marines does not mean they are exactly the same fluff wise. Just like the later editions of WOC inspired by SM/CSM we all know they are different fluff wise.
shinros wrote: Stormcast were inspired by marines does not mean they are exactly the same fluff wise. Just like the later editions of WOC inspired by SM/CSM we all know they are different fluff wise.
Really? We are going to say because they are not 100% EXACT means they are not the same?
Why are people having a hard time with people saying they are the same or the very least are very similar and get upset when someone says they are Fantasy Space Marines?
shinros wrote: Stormcast were inspired by marines does not mean they are exactly the same fluff wise. Just like the later editions of WOC inspired by SM/CSM we all know they are different fluff wise.
Really? We are going to say because they are not 100% EXACT means they are not the same?
Why are people having a hard time with people saying they are the same or the very least are very similar and get upset when someone says they are Fantasy Space Marines?
I could list off their differences if you want me to Davor. Honestly I am not upset it's clear what's GW goal with stormcast is but fluff wise after reading about them they are different just like warriors of chaos, personally I think they are more relatable than space marines because of it.
shinros wrote: Stormcast were inspired by marines does not mean they are exactly the same fluff wise. Just like the later editions of WOC inspired by SM/CSM we all know they are different fluff wise.
Really? We are going to say because they are not 100% EXACT means they are not the same?
Why are people having a hard time with people saying they are the same or the very least are very similar and get upset when someone says they are Fantasy Space Marines?
I could list off their differences if you want me to Davor. Honestly I am not upset it's clear what's GW goal with stormcast is but fluff wise after reading about them they are different just like warriors of chaos.
And people can list the similarities. Your point is?
shinros wrote: Stormcast were inspired by marines does not mean they are exactly the same fluff wise. Just like the later editions of WOC inspired by SM/CSM we all know they are different fluff wise.
Really? We are going to say because they are not 100% EXACT means they are not the same?
Why are people having a hard time with people saying they are the same or the very least are very similar and get upset when someone says they are Fantasy Space Marines?
I could list off their differences if you want me to Davor. Honestly I am not upset it's clear what's GW goal with stormcast is but fluff wise after reading about them they are different just like warriors of chaos.
And people can list the similarities. Your point is?
Yes on the surface level in terms of some of their weapons and looks but beyond that? The sheer fact they are both male and female pretty much out right separates their fluff from the get go and they feel fear. There is a lot more than that but hey I don't think I will convince you.
Well I guess a technicality but it's Grugni who forged the armor first and then passed it down to seven apprentices(iirc) when he left. So 8 people are needed to make Stormcast.
Uhm, I guess this also makes it the same, The Emperor didn't actually make the space marines or Primarchs as well since it was his scientists who actually did all the work as well. So another similarity.
Only that the Emperor didn't leave the work to them. Guy was stated to have done the template upon which the scientists worked upon. He DID intervene and was the one to give the first blue-print, the primarch project, and made the foundations for the development of the soldiers. Sigmar on the other hand most likely went: Grugni, grab some brain-cases and brain-storm (uh storm, sounds like a nice name!) a way to get stronger and tougher warriors. NOW!
Hell, the HH books states that all the scientists did was oversee the growth of the test subjects the emperor did and were afraid of what would happen if things went wrong. The emperor did the heavy lifting mainly for the first project, then left the luna scientists the rest for the main project.
Every single source states he's the one behind the Primarch project, I seriously don't know where the hell did you get that idea.
And I'm pretty sure all marine recruits ask for becoming marines, never being forced into it or taken off as tithes, right? Not really, meanwhile stormcasts are offered the choice or outright ask for the power to reap vengeance without it being offered a priori (example the celestial vindicators). There's a fine difference in being whiling (and conscious about the decision) and being forced as a child.
So this makes everything different then and that makes them not the same?
No that plus the whole plethora of things I've pointed out that outright disprove your paper thin arguments that don't hold up.
God I'm leaving this before I throw my computer off the window from degrading my mind furhtermorer arguing with you in this matter. Because seriously your last two comments are almost like saying NU-UH! And expecting they'll win the conversation.
Again, why is it so bad people think they are the same? If that is what we think why are you trying to prove us wrong?
You will need to try harder and continue harder if you want to prove me wrong. I will not be changing my mind. Come to think of it, why do you even care if I think Stormcast Eternals are Fantasy Space Marines?
Does my opinion really that matter? I am just a smuck. Why are you spending so much energy, time and emotion into what I think?
Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Davor wrote: Again, why is it so bad people think they are the same? If that is what we think why are you trying to prove us wrong?
You will need to try harder and continue harder if you want to prove me wrong. I will not be changing my mind. Come to think of it, why do you even care if I think Stormcast Eternals are Fantasy Space Marines?
Does my opinion really that matter? I am just a smuck. Why are you spending so much energy, time and emotion into what I think?
Guess you aren't related with the theory of games, specially the case of the hundred dollars' bet.
Baron Klatz wrote: Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Yeah well locking the story behind £30 and £45 pound books will do that.
The novels aren't exactly that much, they aport a very important part of the story. Also, considering you don't need to pay 100+ euros in books and cards just to play (20 euros if you want matched play and enjoy the tourney-AOS experience) buying one of the 46 euros books, which DOES include new ways to play (My personal favorite was the orb-infernia scenario: Imagine the trepidation that is facing an army 4 times your size and still win-if barely- thanks tot he scenario. It was extremely trepidating) doesn't sound that bad. And I'm pretty sure no one's tried to pull of a jack-sparrow on Gee Dubs ever. Nope, I legally bought the extremis chamber book.
Davor wrote: Again, why is it so bad people think they are the same? If that is what we think why are you trying to prove us wrong?
You will need to try harder and continue harder if you want to prove me wrong. I will not be changing my mind. Come to think of it, why do you even care if I think Stormcast Eternals are Fantasy Space Marines?
Does my opinion really that matter? I am just a smuck. Why are you spending so much energy, time and emotion into what I think?
Guess you aren't related with the theory of games, specially the case of the hundred dollars' bet.
Googling that turned up nothing but gambling sites. What is the case of the hundred dollars' bet?
Oh yeah that's how we call the "dollar auction" (I blame the shoddy translator and my teacher who gave me the vice using always a hundred dollar scale):
Idea: the two individuals slowly scalate, all apparently rational. Then they reach a threshold and things get out of hands. It's not rational to continue but tehy still are at it, all while making the whol affair more ridiculous and escalating involvement and effort.
SCIENCE FANTASY:
A hybrid and subset of speculative fiction describing worlds in which either both magic and science work, science is so sophisticated it simulates magic, or characters possess psychic powers so strong they resemble magic. Eric S. Nylund's A Game Of Universe is a science fantasy of the first type (an assassin who can cast spells travels through space in search of the Holy Grail), as is Sheri S. Tepper's The Family Tree (which includes time travel, genetic engineering, and wizards). Anne McCaffrey's Dragonrider series is a science fantasy of the second and third types (genetic engineering on an alien reptile species has created "dragons" that breathe fire and who communicate telepathically with their riders). Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover series (concerning the history of a planet whose industry is not based on machines and physical labor, but on the potent psychic powers of the inhabitants) are science fantasies of the third type.
Huh, that's interesting. Thanks for clarifying what you meant by that.
The way you said it earlier made it sound like you thought all if AoS was just lower-scale 40k with ridiculous concepts in it. (That latter part comes from your "colorful" thoughts on the Stormcast.)
Would that make works like Lovecraft "Science Fantasy" since it has otherworldly beings in it that demonstrate psychic abilities and (a type of) genetic engineering through their powers on lesser beings?
Also, I guess Wfb was Science Fiction in a sense since the Old Ones set so much of the planet up through their designs. Though it's a bit unclear if they were technological or purely magical..
SCIENCE FANTASY:
A hybrid and subset of speculative fiction describing worlds in which either both magic and science work, science is so sophisticated it simulates magic, or characters possess psychic powers so strong they resemble magic. Eric S. Nylund's A Game Of Universe is a science fantasy of the first type (an assassin who can cast spells travels through space in search of the Holy Grail), as is Sheri S. Tepper's The Family Tree (which includes time travel, genetic engineering, and wizards). Anne McCaffrey's Dragonrider series is a science fantasy of the second and third types (genetic engineering on an alien reptile species has created "dragons" that breathe fire and who communicate telepathically with their riders). Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover series (concerning the history of a planet whose industry is not based on machines and physical labor, but on the potent psychic powers of the inhabitants) are science fantasies of the third type.
So ya age of sigmar is sifi fantasy.
And WHFB and 40k too. Though I'm not too sure on which parts of AoS would count as the hard part of sci.
Baron Klatz wrote: Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Yeah well locking the story behind £30 and £45 pound books will do that.
You can get a lot of the story and information in the 7-10 pound books on the BL website or as been said you can ask free of charge. The campaign books are more "general" fluff the books go into more detail of a specific battle in the campaign book also the campaign books are full of rules, battleplans and formations for each battle. The lord of undeath novel was made out of a short story in a campaign book and two pages from all - gates.
Hell josh reynolds is answering AOS lore questions on ask fm for free.
Lord Kragan wrote: The novels aren't exactly that much, they aport a very important part of the story. Also, considering you don't need to pay 100+ euros in books and cards just to play (20 euros if you want matched play and enjoy the tourney-AOS experience) buying one of the 46 euros books, which DOES include new ways to play (My personal favorite was the orb-infernia scenario: Imagine the trepidation that is facing an army 4 times your size and still win-if barely- thanks tot he scenario. It was extremely trepidating) doesn't sound that bad. And I'm pretty sure no one's tried to pull of a jack-sparrow on Gee Dubs ever. Nope, I legally bought the extremis chamber book.
Compared to what I usually pay for novels online the prices are extortionate, and it makes no logical sense to pay for books about a setting I don't actually care about just to learn a facts about sigmarines.
Baron Klatz wrote: Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Yeah well locking the story behind £30 and £45 pound books will do that.
You can get a lot of the story and information in the 7-10 pound books on the BL website or as been said you can ask free of charge. The campaign books are more "general" fluff the books go into more detail of a specific battle in the campaign book also the campaign books are full of rules, battleplans and formations for each battle. The lord of undeath novel was made out of a short story in a campaign book and two pages from all - gates.
Hell josh reynolds is answering AOS lore questions on ask fm for free.
Baron Klatz wrote: Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Yeah well locking the story behind £30 and £45 pound books will do that.
You can get a lot of the story and information in the 7-10 pound books on the BL website or as been said you can ask free of charge. The campaign books are more "general" fluff the books go into more detail of a specific battle in the campaign book also the campaign books are full of rules, battleplans and formations for each battle. The lord of undeath novel was made out of a short story in a campaign book and two pages from all - gates.
Hell josh reynolds is answering AOS lore questions on ask fm for free.
Baron Klatz wrote: Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Yeah well locking the story behind £30 and £45 pound books will do that.
You can get a lot of the story and information in the 7-10 pound books on the BL website or as been said you can ask free of charge. The campaign books are more "general" fluff the books go into more detail of a specific battle in the campaign book also the campaign books are full of rules, battleplans and formations for each battle. The lord of undeath novel was made out of a short story in a campaign book and two pages from all - gates.
Hell josh reynolds is answering AOS lore questions on ask fm for free.
Nope, but considering that he writes his statements in his novels (and those ARE canon) it doesn't really matter. Whatever you see in those pages is highly likely to end up in one of his novels and he's the guy behind the biggest portion of works in the setting so guy's word has quite lot of weight.
Baron Klatz wrote: Well, it's not really you Davor but the ton of misinformed Old Guard that only take in appearances and off-hand comments to judge AoS.
Lord Kragon is more trying to argue against the tide of "it's just fantasy 40k" and "the setting has nothing in it". The number of people who still think regular people don't exist, Slaneesh is dead and Stormcast are hollow shells is quite depressing.
That's what Lord Kragon is really arguing with, ignorant fan rage. Best of luck to him with that unending battle.
As for the negativity of fantasy marines, I really don't understand it either. It's all just different flavors of bad@ss knights.
Though for whatever reason, it still is seen as a stigma by the Old Guard of AoS being shallow. Even though a (god)king having a army of armored elite is pretty basic stuff.
Yeah well locking the story behind £30 and £45 pound books will do that.
You can get a lot of the story and information in the 7-10 pound books on the BL website or as been said you can ask free of charge. The campaign books are more "general" fluff the books go into more detail of a specific battle in the campaign book also the campaign books are full of rules, battleplans and formations for each battle. The lord of undeath novel was made out of a short story in a campaign book and two pages from all - gates.
Hell josh reynolds is answering AOS lore questions on ask fm for free.
Has GW rescinded their statement that what Josh says is non-Canon?
Well I only ask questions that relate to the novels he writes. Like what does nagash see in mannfred?, How do mortals of shyish worship nagash? and even How do they view vampires compared to other realms? It's still interesting to get a writers perspective on lore and he is writing a book on what people do in the general AOS setting, how their cities work, how a slum looks like in AOS, who patrols the walls etc. How they view the crazy chaos warriors and daemons So I think he knows what he is talking about. I don't ask far "out" questions.
Still as always because I would get a response like this I always state it's his "Opinion" like he says himself still I would trust his perspective on a certain subjects because he written quite a lot of the lore for the setting I enjoy.
So the bully who use to beat us or tease us has grown, he is well dressed now and is very polite and doesn't beat up on us for 2 years now. Has he changed? Now after two years while he doesn't swear, doesn't put down people down now, he just gave you a punch in the gut.
Has he changed? Just punched you in the gut after two years of no abuse but he is well dressed, well mannered. Does that mean he has changed or he is the same?
For all the Facebook chatter, for all the "communication" people think are going on for all the GW has gotten better, until the rules have become better, GW will have never really change. After all getting a punch in the gut clearly reminds you of why GW is bad in the first place. The Sisters of Battle seems to show us GW hasn't changed, and shows no sign of really changing the most important problem. The rules.
Here is another PERFECT opportunity to show GW has changed and they want to give the people what they want, they just show, that GW does the same old, COPY/PASTE and they can't be original or any DESIRE to improve. Yes they have changed on the outside, but on the inside, it's the same old person you have to worry about giving you a punch in the Gut at any moment.
So have they really changed? Sadly now, while I was so excited for their "changes" it seems at it's heart, GW is the same old same old, and I really don't want to wait another 6 months to see if the actual changes will be or not.
I actually think GW is trying to improve the rules, but just doesn't have the expertise and mindset to do a good job of it. Take AoS; hreat idea, terrible execution.
Davor wrote: So the bully who use to beat us or tease us has grown, he is well dressed now and is very polite and doesn't beat up on us for 2 years now. Has he changed? Now after two years while he doesn't swear, doesn't put down people down now, he just gave you a punch in the gut.
Has he changed? Just punched you in the gut after two years of no abuse but he is well dressed, well mannered. Does that mean he has changed or he is the same?
For all the Facebook chatter, for all the "communication" people think are going on for all the GW has gotten better, until the rules have become better, GW will have never really change. After all getting a punch in the gut clearly reminds you of why GW is bad in the first place. The Sisters of Battle seems to show us GW hasn't changed, and shows no sign of really changing the most important problem. The rules.
Here is another PERFECT opportunity to show GW has changed and they want to give the people what they want, they just show, that GW does the same old, COPY/PASTE and they can't be original or any DESIRE to improve. Yes they have changed on the outside, but on the inside, it's the same old person you have to worry about giving you a punch in the Gut at any moment.
So have they really changed? Sadly now, while I was so excited for their "changes" it seems at it's heart, GW is the same old same old, and I really don't want to wait another 6 months to see if the actual changes will be or not.
Companies don't do all this social media out of the good of their heart it's about money. GW is doing this for money but now they are actually being smart about it. The bundles, Getting input to improve a product for the consumer, bringing back certain armies etc.
As soon as GW stop all the social media stuff is when I will stop giving them my money since I feel it's a hobby and to improve and bring in new blood to the hobby the company needs to interact with the community which is what GW is doing. Hell Duncan's videos are to sell paints but it's still useful to the community if they want to know how to paint a certain thing.
I think the fluff has definitely gotten worse in the last year, for me personally anyway.
I just could not get into the AoS stuff at all, it seems miles away from the old fantasy stuff, there seems to be so much random stuff explained with " its magic ".
I was never a massive fan of the old fantasy setting that much either, but it was streets ahead of this stuff story wise.
The 40k fluff seems to have gone off the rails a bit for me too with all this Primarch coming back malarky, I can understand the traitor lads coming back to kick off but the Loyalist ones showing up again just really does not do it for me at all.
Eventually theres not going to be that much to leave to the imagination with all the mystery, intrigue and unknown coming to light and for me these are the things that the background as built upon.
Maybe I am reading too much into it or maybe im just averse to change ! but thankfully, I am still quite liking the HH stuff and there are occasional 40k releases that are coming good, regardless of the fluff, such as the stealers and the mechanicus.
What GW made right is the BB release.
New teams in plastic, awesome look, and new pitches, die and whatnot.
In AoS, GW have seemed to lose pace. Where are the Aelf?
In 40k, the situation is not satisfactory. New chaos releases but no new codices. Just some formations which are semi useful.
Rayvon wrote: I think the fluff has definitely gotten worse in the last year, for me personally anyway.
I just could not get into the AoS stuff at all, it seems miles away from the old fantasy stuff, there seems to be so much random stuff explained with " its magic ".
I was never a massive fan of the old fantasy setting that much either, but it was streets ahead of this stuff story wise.
Oh yes... oh god, it was SOOOOOO bad the first works. Like, I can't seriously stop thinking about how much some sucked balls so bad.
But in AoS defence not everything isn't explained by magic. Mawkrushas shouldn't be able to fly but they can't, not because of magic but because the laws of physics are afraid of pissing them off. That and that orc aren't idiots, just utterly ignorant.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
wuestenfux wrote: What GW made right is the BB release.
New teams in plastic, awesome look, and new pitches, die and whatnot.
In AoS, GW have seemed to lose pace. Where are the Aelf?
In 40k, the situation is not satisfactory. New chaos releases but no new codices. Just some formations which are semi useful.
Elves are getting screentime next year, considering that All-Gates says they are up to something HUGE (ie: the chaos forces in their realms have gone silent) and they are getting a starter of sorts in the form of the battle of the dawnspire.
I actually like the new aos fluff quite a lot. The best way to describe it is as apocalyptic fiction. The apocalypse in this case being the coming of chaos. The heroes in these books are all fighting to reclaim what is lost, while realising that this is ultimately futile.There is a strong sense of melancholia running through both the slyvaneth and the fyreslayers book.
What is interesting now, with how the first campaign has gone, is that they now have the opportunity to tell the story of the building of a new civilisation. That is actually pretty unique in fantasy fiction.
It was a shame the the first couple of books were not very good. I think they put people off, but the books have come a long way since then.
Yes on the surface level in terms of some of their weapons and looks but beyond that? The sheer fact they are both male and female pretty much out right separates their fluff from the get go and they feel fear. There is a lot more than that but hey I don't think I will convince you.
Space Marines *feel* fear alright, they just don't *know* fear.
Something bout their cognitive abilities I suppose...
wuestenfux wrote: What GW made right is the BB release.
New teams in plastic, awesome look, and new pitches, die and whatnot.
A positive so far, but still with some odd choices in the initial wave - no faction booster for Orcs & Humans to fill out the roster; the Skaven box also being 12 players rather than a full team; no Big Guys or Star Players released yet (not even a re-release of old sculpts); the BB referee figures being a one month limited run from Forge World; etc.
Don't get me wrong, the core box set is great - I assembled the Orcs from it yesterday - but there are elements about the release that have me nervous at present.
That, and if they were going to mess with the pitch size, why not go the whole hog to 40mm squares, even if you stick with 32mm bases for most players?
wuestenfux wrote: What GW made right is the BB release.
New teams in plastic, awesome look, and new pitches, die and whatnot.
A positive so far, but still with some odd choices in the initial wave - no faction booster for Orcs & Humans to fill out the roster; the Skaven box also being 12 players rather than a full team; no Big Guys or Star Players released yet (not even a re-release of old sculpts); the BB referee figures being a one month limited run from Forge World; etc.
Don't get me wrong, the core box set is great - I assembled the Orcs from it yesterday - but there are elements about the release that have me nervous at present.
That, and if they were going to mess with the pitch size, why not go the whole hog to 40mm squares, even if you stick with 32mm bases for most players?
Its a good start, not more.
Expansions are necessary for full 16 player rosters including star players and filling out the teams.
For Orks, you get 4 Blitzers and 4 Black Orks instead of the resp. 2 in the box.
Not sure if they release 0-1 choices like Trolls or Ogres.
I can kind of get behind the idea that are too stupid to realize that stuff shouldn't work and getting away with it, or that they genuinely believe that red makes things go faster. But that stuff can actually fly because gravity is scared of it is just... awful.
If it was more that they found/created beasts and have no idea how they can fly but just go with it, I could handle that. Or even magic is better.
The scale alone makes me not really care about the stakes in AoS. Expanding the Chaos wastes over most of the WH world would have been okay. Space for floating cities and stuff and near unlimited space, considering how Chaos can distort reality (even if we don't have as much "warp"stuff as 40k happining in WHFB. Advanced timeline,still manageable. If tvose ruined citie and lost people have their roots insomething I care about they'd have an impact when fought over in WD pictures, artwork, stories and my own table. Now they're as interesting as random movie ruins made from styrofoam and grey paint, maybe pretty to look at, useful as cover but nothing that feels worth the blood shed over it.
GW as a whole is starting to get me back, though. Last year it was a box of Skitarii and Ghouls to make arco-flaggrlelants and an AoS starter to test the game while getting Khorne stuff at the same time, but this year ST Overkill, SC, Gorechosen, Prospero, ugh, as well as several boxes of stuff to convert Kill Teams (HoR rules, though) or just build cool stuff. Now X mas sees THREE battleforces under our trees! I guess it's a mix of excitement over armies like AdMech and GSC coming out, KS burnout, the pound making imports affordable and GW bundles with cheaper Pound (stop going up, though!) breaking the price barrier from strictly unreasonable to "this is what it should've costed to begin with".
If they ever put out good rules for their main games again (Aos is okay for a light skirmish but I won't use it for real armies, 40k is a mess I won't try to get back into) they might actually see me as someone who plays and builds armies again instead of small hyper-customised warbands and KTs. As cool as Blood Warriors with Tartaros lower legs and Termi pads look used as true-scale Berzetkers they won't be able to bring back my friends and relatives that want to plunk down their nids, GK, Orks etc and play an entertaining match in a reasonable timeframe.
Herzlos wrote: I can kind of get behind the idea that are too stupid to realize that stuff shouldn't work and getting away with it, or that they genuinely believe that red makes things go faster. But that stuff can actually fly because gravity is scared of it is just... awful.
Yep, agree. Don't get the difference means don't get the difference between good and bad writing.
You guys are taking it out of context and way too seriously.
They are even capable of a semblance of flight with their stubby wings, thought it has been suggested that this is more the result of gravity not wanting to mess with them.
It matches the tone of the rest of the writing in the book.
Crimson Devil wrote: You guys are taking it out of context and way too seriously.
They are even capable of a semblance of flight with their stubby wings, thought it has been suggested that this is more the result of gravity not wanting to mess with them.
It matches the tone of the rest of the writing in the book.
Yea that was an element of humour more than anything, there is a lot of that and I was not too keen if I am honest, not that im a miserable sod, just did not do much for me.
A friend of mine reckons that the overall humour surrounding AoS, the game and the books, has been toned down recently and was encouraging me to give the more recent books a go, as it happens.
They are even capable of a semblance of flight with their stubby wings, thought it has been suggested that this is more the result of gravity not wanting to mess with them.
That really doesn't read well, but I can't place why. I can accept that it's a joke and not a real explanation which fits with orcs.
Has GW gotten better? Let's see, GW is saying a product is being replaced, but yet that product is still being sold? Using same practices as before doesn't mean change.
So I guess we can say GW has not changed in that regard where they will still sell something while knowing it will be outdated. (As a side note, Warhammer Fantasy 8th edition is still being sold as well. What is up with that? Off topic I guess but still saying how GW is selling product that is no longer "officially" used"
I am curious to any Sister players out there. For all the good GW just did, did they just piss it all away? GW started really well to start of the year only to ruin it all at the end of the year?
Thought it was nice that a) they released Bloodbowl again but b) didn't do something like add to the pitch size (number of squares) or do something else crappy to the rules.
Bloodbowl has such a massive player community, you get hundreds of people at tournaments, and a different game format would have rent that community asunder (as happened with Fantasy/AoS).
I suppose we don't know whether this is because they have genuinely become more player-orientated since the death of WHFB, and were mindful of that longstanding community, or just didn't have the rules resource to change the rules at that point! Guess only someone who was in with the design process of the new release would know.
The Blood Bowl rules guys have been very vocal on the facebook and they have said many times that they wanted to honor and revere the current system and the work the fans had put into it.
They are even capable of a semblance of flight with their stubby wings, thought it has been suggested that this is more the result of gravity not wanting to mess with them.
That really doesn't read well, but I can't place why. I can accept that it's a joke and not a real explanation which fits with orcs.
It reminds me of the old Disney thing from The Plausible Impossible: The character will only notice he's standing on thin air if he looks down, until then he can walk on air because he doesn't realize the solid ground is gone.
Anyways RE: Topic, I think they still kind of do the same thing, but less antagonistic. So like before, it was obvious they didn't care about anything but your money. Now it looks like they are more involved, and they are in some regards, but not enough things have changed to make it anything more than trying to get good PR again. It's like a company being in the news for a scandal and then suddenly being in the news for donating to all these charities and such, it's just to deflect the fact they are a bad company with some good moves, while behind the scenes still doing the same thing.
They put out new things, great. It still sells out immediately. Blood Bowl re-released, but the range is incomplete and you have to wait for the new teams (i.e. you can't just start a league without a lot of conversion), and the refs are Forgeworld Only. Hobbit/LotR supplements come back out, but only through ForgeWorld so cost an arm and a leg in shipping for most of the world. They come out with rules for Traitor Legions after 10 years, great. Supplement, not a codex, so points costs are still all over the place and no new base CSM models. A new SoB model after forever and a day, but it sells out immediately and the new book which includes the rules gets rid of an iconic character (who will likely be back, but who knows when).
It's just like.. they do something good, but immediately add something bad to counter-balance it and make it seem like the old GW. They aren't innovative enough yet. and still fall back to their old tricks with everything good that they do. The proof will be when 8th edition 40k comes out; if it fixes the issues it will be great, but for 4 editions now they've basically changed rules simply to invalidate purchases and not to actually clean up the game so there's no reason to expect anything but the norm and then it's back to Space Marine codexes every other month while other factions have to wait forever for a basic codex and midway through they'll change direction but never update the old ones.
NEW CSM Books, Some new models, Great rules.
Mini game releases
BB release
And a nice hefty profit according to a UK Article,
I would say it has gotten way better, and is moving along nicely.
GW started so great in 2016, only to become what they were in 2015 and wash it all away? It does seem so in that thread. I don't know about the wash it all away because they did do good, and I bought so much in 2016 than I have in the last few years, but this does seem proof they haven't changed on the inside and changed on the outside, so smoke and mirrors like I have been saying. I was so hoping to be proven wrong but in the end when it comes to the most important part, the rules and having fun, it's the same old GW.
So instead of GW bringing in more fun and enthusiasm with the Codex:Imperial Agents, they just brought in more toxicity. Is the community to blame for this? Well yes in a way because we can control how we act, but this is also GW fault for releasing Codex:Imperial Agents the way they did, and could have done it differently.
There is the internet meme that things changed under him. But is a meme. Is only cosmetic. But every time one points out one of the many flaws or contradiction, the meme come back. "B-but now Rountree is here everything is changed". False. Is a meme, nothing else.
I'm a sucker for space cathedrals. That said, the human fleet for DFC is pretty stellar looking. Didn't back the KS as I wanted to wait and see what the community thinks of the game.
SKR.HH wrote: Oh gosh... Reading all this I really hope they finally squat SoB.
I don't care that much about sisters but that is very mean.
I took it to mean that he wants them put out of their misery because he's a Sisters fan, and doesn't want them to receive the same treatment as everyone else.
GW's reached a point where people actually want their armies to be neglected, because it's better than the alternative.
SKR.HH wrote: Oh gosh... Reading all this I really hope they finally squat SoB.
I don't care that much about sisters but that is very mean.
I took it to mean that he wants them put out of their misery because he's a Sisters fan, and doesn't want them to receive the same treatment as everyone else.
GW's reached a point where people actually want their armies to be neglected, because it's better than the alternative.
With the sisters in particular there's also the case that they have been neglected and written off as dead by GW years ago and it'd probably be merciful to be upfront with Sisters fans and let them have some clousure, rather than string them along for a further decade.
Sisters of battle are like a relative in deep coma at this point. At some point you might as well pull the plug and move on.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: If people keep buying and you can drag money out of them every few years, then keep it going with as little as possible.
Now if people just stopped buying, then they'd end it.
As long people buy anyway and wait the it gets strung out.
While this makes sense, you can't tell someone not to do something when they want to do it then. You really shouldn't be putting the blame on people who keep buying a product when they want it.
Let me clarify my points in that post. I do think they've gotten better and, even better, I think they are trying to get better. I look to Warhammer TV, the Facebook pages, Regimental Standard, the fact that they actually respond to rumors (in their own unique way). I, personally, like Traitor Legions; it's not a new CSM 'dex, but it gave a lot of Chaos players something good, for once. Then C:IA drops and it's like a blast from 2014, I'm hoping it's a blip on the radar rather than a sign of things. I will say, my biggest shock and the thing that worries me the most, was their reply to the questions about the plastic sisters. Like I said in that post, that kind of tone-deafness was shocking and shows just how far they still have to go. Have they gotten better? Yes, but they were so far down, that better is still bad.
Yeah, just like that White Dwarf model that was just a re-colored Unforged model(to be fair though, the magazine only recently returned to it's old glory so there was no time for a new model)
They're still gonna make mistakes like anything run by people. As long as there's only one mistake for every five right things (low-balling) I don't see the reason to say they're the same as the previous years of silence.
Well, I didn't read all 27 pages so forgive me if I'm overly repetitive.
To me in order to truly be great there needs to be some sort of balance between codices. I thought this was happening during basically the entire 2014 year. Nids, AM, Orks, SW, GK, DE, BA scaled back power levels and seemed to represent a curbing of power creep. Then Crons hit with Decurion, Total buff to an already top 5 army with absurd free formations and buffs on buffs. Fast forward 1 year and the haves and have nots are so dramatically seperated that basically any pre-2015 codex is almost worthless in a competitive sense.
2016 had basically ignored updated codices in general for campaign books and supplements, which has done little to counteract 360 in design philosophy that occurred prior to 2015. I solely wish for a full codex revamp where GW can stick to a single design philosophy,but even should this happen it would still take years,
I like that GW has seemed to respond to customer feedback far more than in previous years. Given my previous optimism i would like to see more consistency before I declare the mild dysfunction that is GW good.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: If people keep buying and you can drag money out of them every few years, then keep it going with as little as possible.
Now if people just stopped buying, then they'd end it.
As long people buy anyway and wait the it gets strung out.
While this makes sense, you can't tell someone not to do something when they want to do it then. You really shouldn't be putting the blame on people who keep buying a product when they want it.
People put up with substandard product and still keep buying it, then they only have themselves to blame. Gw didn't "improve" out of the goodness of their hearts, they did it because money dropped to a point where they had to reengage and get people buying again.
Let me clarify my points in that post. I do think they've gotten better and, even better, I think they are trying to get better. I look to Warhammer TV, the Facebook pages, Regimental Standard, the fact that they actually respond to rumors (in their own unique way). I, personally, like Traitor Legions; it's not a new CSM 'dex, but it gave a lot of Chaos players something good, for once. Then C:IA drops and it's like a blast from 2014, I'm hoping it's a blip on the radar rather than a sign of things. I will say, my biggest shock and the thing that worries me the most, was their reply to the questions about the plastic sisters. Like I said in that post, that kind of tone-deafness was shocking and shows just how far they still have to go. Have they gotten better? Yes, but they were so far down, that better is still bad.
Thanks for the intervention, I felt a bit bad to link like that. Next time, I will PM the author. Bad, bad Kaiyanwang.
I've been with GW for a while, and to me they have made some very solid improvements. I bought my first models since the last Tyranid release this month. That says something.
I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.
That being said, I think AoS looks pretty fun. A few people I have talked to that play it locally really enjoy it.
So far, I'm happy with the direction GW is going. Those that are saying there has been no change, or it's merely cosmetic are quite wrong. Even GW latest financial report seems to indicate that they are moving more product, which is a far cry from the consistently decreasing sales that Kirby had the past several years.
Herzlos wrote: They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.
If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.
Miindhaze wrote:Well, I didn't read all 27 pages so forgive me if I'm overly repetitive.
To me in order to truly be great there needs to be some sort of balance between codices. I thought this was happening during basically the entire 2014 year. Nids, AM, Orks, SW, GK, DE, BA scaled back power levels and seemed to represent a curbing of power creep. Then Crons hit with Decurion, Total buff to an already top 5 army with absurd free formations and buffs on buffs. Fast forward 1 year and the haves and have nots are so dramatically seperated that basically any pre-2015 codex is almost worthless in a competitive sense.
2016 had basically ignored updated codices in general for campaign books and supplements, which has done little to counteract 360 in design philosophy that occurred prior to 2015. I solely wish for a full codex revamp where GW can stick to a single design philosophy,but even should this happen it would still take years,
I like that GW has seemed to respond to customer feedback far more than in previous years. Given my previous optimism i would like to see more consistency before I declare the mild dysfunction that is GW good.
A 360 is a circle, meaning they didn't change directions at all. I think you meant 180.
The new rerelease of sorts of the IoB minis with squares leads me to think that maybe GW IS listening, and that in and of itself is an improvement. How much they listen, now THAT is another story. And, well, given some of the hair brained ideas coming from the player base from time to time I hope they don't listen to everything.
Herzlos wrote: They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.
If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.
Herzlos wrote: They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.
If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.
Regardless, they are getting my money again.
Increased product range, yes. But once you factor out the royalty payments and the reduced margins on the goods sold, they are selling less actual boxes of toys. It's been a fairly consistent but gradual decline.
Herzlos wrote: They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.
If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.
Regardless, they are getting my money again.
Increased product range, yes. But once you factor out the royalty payments and the reduced margins on the goods sold, they are selling less actual boxes of toys. It's been a fairly consistent but gradual decline.
I don't actually think it declined all that much the last financial report, prices were reasonably stable and even ignoring royalties revenue didn't go down all that much. The big drops in goods sold were the preceding few years where revenue was dropping significantly in the face of rising prices.
DalinCriid wrote: Well, a 10 girl squad of Sisters (metal) is 50 pounds. You are damn right we are in a new "golden" age.
You referring to me? I never said anything about a "golden" age.
Simply that the last financial report - ie. 2015/16 - didn't see a major drop in revenue even if you ignore royalties and in that same period I don't believe prices were significantly higher than the previous year (except maybe closer to the start when some early AoS stuff rolled in, but then we also know the latter half was when most of the good sales numbers came in).
The SoB's are a terrible measure of anything because they're ancient metal models and I don't think much of GW's sales comes from ancient metal models (any ancient metals that have been selling have probably been converted to resin or plastic by now).
I think GW had big drops in sales volume in the years since mid 6th edition, but it seems to have stabilised last FY.
Let me clarify my points in that post. I do think they've gotten better and, even better, I think they are trying to get better. I look to Warhammer TV, the Facebook pages, Regimental Standard, the fact that they actually respond to rumors (in their own unique way). I, personally, like Traitor Legions; it's not a new CSM 'dex, but it gave a lot of Chaos players something good, for once. Then C:IA drops and it's like a blast from 2014, I'm hoping it's a blip on the radar rather than a sign of things. I will say, my biggest shock and the thing that worries me the most, was their reply to the questions about the plastic sisters. Like I said in that post, that kind of tone-deafness was shocking and shows just how far they still have to go. Have they gotten better? Yes, but they were so far down, that better is still bad.
Thanks for the intervention, I felt a bit bad to link like that. Next time, I will PM the author. Bad, bad Kaiyanwang.
It's all good, I thought it was kinda cool that someone would link to one of my posts. I did want to clarify though, as that post was in the context of the other thread, and I thought it would be a good idea to bring my thoughts into the context of this thread.
A few people: Yea, they have been doing some good things and addressing some problems.
Someone: a step in the right direction, but they still have a long way to go...
Someone else: BUT THIS THING!
*argue about that thing*
*end up arguing about how GW runs their business and the success thereof*
Sasori wrote: I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.
Something you're neglecting to mention there is that many players lay the blame for the game dying firmly at GW's feet. It wasn't a natural death, but one caused, or at the very least hastened, by chronic mishandling over several editions. The negative reaction to AOS wasn't simply a reaction to change, but a reaction to change that people hadnt wanted and frustration that it need never have happened. End Times was largely well received, it seemed, but then nobody knew what was coming.
Sasori wrote: I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.
Something you're neglecting to mention there is that many players lay the blame for the game dying firmly at GW's feet. It wasn't a natural death, but one caused, or at the very least hastened, by chronic mishandling over several editions. The negative reaction to AOS wasn't simply a reaction to change, but a reaction to change that people hadnt wanted and frustration that it need never have happened. End Times was largely well received, it seemed, but then nobody knew what was coming.
For the most part, End Times was well received, although some of the magic was crazy powerful, as were new units like Nagash.
Sasori wrote: I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.
Something you're neglecting to mention there is that many players lay the blame for the game dying firmly at GW's feet. It wasn't a natural death, but one caused, or at the very least hastened, by chronic mishandling over several editions. The negative reaction to AOS wasn't simply a reaction to change, but a reaction to change that people hadnt wanted and frustration that it need never have happened. End Times was largely well received, it seemed, but then nobody knew what was coming.
For the most part, End Times was well received, although some of the magic was crazy powerful, as were new units like Nagash.
I think many people were happy WHFB was finally getting some attention even if much of it was a departure from WHFB's previous style... but when it started to be revealed the End Times might REALLY be the end, a lot of people just got really hesitant. Then the 6 month silence before AoS... GW handled it so incredibly poorly.
I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.
People are mad at the mishandling.
5th edition WHFB was herohammer. Fun, with some problem. 6th edition was redone, more focus on units, perhaps too strong cavalry, magic with dice and out of control if tournament restrictions were not enforced. probably the best period, shame some Army got a bad book. 7th edition started a power game escalation and the game broke finally, bleeding players, with Daemons, Vampires and Dark Elves 8th edition was a soft reboot containing all sort of randumb, huge infantry units that skyrocketed the entry level, even less focus on tactics and more focus on big things and broken spells. More bleeding. End of times was rushed and mishandled (plus awful writing, really awful).
People are mad at GW incompetence (and greed - their game designers are hacks, but the big infantry units was greed) and I frankly see a similar, albeit not that bad pattern in 40k.
As a former WHFB player, I will never spend one dime in AoS. Is forbidden for me, it would be rewarding GW for their greed and stupidity.
DalinCriid wrote: Well, a 10 girl squad of Sisters (metal) is 50 pounds. You are damn right we are in a new "golden" age.
You referring to me? I never said anything about a "golden" age.
Simply that the last financial report - ie. 2015/16 - didn't see a major drop in revenue even if you ignore royalties and in that same period I don't believe prices were significantly higher than the previous year (except maybe closer to the start when some early AoS stuff rolled in, but then we also know the latter half was when most of the good sales numbers came in).
The SoB's are a terrible measure of anything because they're ancient metal models and I don't think much of GW's sales comes from ancient metal models (any ancient metals that have been selling have probably been converted to resin or plastic by now).
I think GW had big drops in sales volume in the years since mid 6th edition, but it seems to have stabilised last FY.
I was referring to none in particular. It was more like of an analysis of mine. I don't mind spending 50 bucks on sisters, but I would like them to be plastic with SM quality at least...
I would mind given the mould hasn't changed and the metal they use now is left over stuff from yonks ago, there's no good reason they shot up in price so dramatically.
Companies don't do all this social media out of the good of their heart it's about money. GW is doing this for money but now they are actually being smart about it. The bundles, Getting input to improve a product for the consumer, bringing back certain armies etc.
Malecowshirt!
Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:
"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."
Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.
Herzlos wrote: Most people were put off enough by the free stuff to want to pay anything to see if it's not as bad as they thought.
On release, gw portrayed them as shallow space marine clones, snd that furst impression will last a long time.
But lets be fair; everyone loves space marines
Herzlos! I like your comments, but I dont like Space Marines. Guard and Sisters for the win!
Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:
"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."
Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.
Well considering he's not the CEO anymore.. What relative nature should I take this quote to now?
Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:
"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."
Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.
Well considering he's not the CEO anymore.. What relative nature should I take this quote to now?
The simple fact that they are doing the same stuff, just with a sugarcoated aproach. Which is still shows that they throw mud on the wall and see what does stick.
Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:
"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."
Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.
Well considering he's not the CEO anymore.. What relative nature should I take this quote to now?
The simple fact that they are doing the same stuff, just with a sugarcoated aproach. Which is still shows that they throw mud on the wall and see what does stick.
Still does not change they are largely(looks at imperial agents) doing what the community wants bundles, community interaction (new general handbook looking for idea's and feedback) and their warhammer community website. It's baby steps but they are going in the right direction if you want your wargame/minature hobby to survive you need to invest in the community which also helps gain new blood. Which the new CEO understands and it seems to be working, for example the very first AOS book it's not the greatest book in the world hell I don't even like it much but they are offering the ebook for free.
People seem to be enjoying on the grand allaince community but small things make a difference. As I said they are not doing this out of the good of their heart it's a business they need to make money but I as a consumer am confident to invest in the product because they are supporting the community aspect which I feel is the most important in a miniature hobby.
Has GW changed? Nuff said. In the end this is all that matters. The rules. I don't care how well dressed you are. I don't care how well spoken you are. If the rules are still crap, we still have random on random and it still seems the rules are not for fun but to get the most money out of your customers, is what matters in the end.
I say all the good GW has done in 2016 seems to have come to a sour at the end of 2016. Way to go. Get the stench of Kirby off only to have it back at an end of a great year. That is Merry Christmas for you right there.
*edit*
That said, it may seem I am negative on GW, but I really do like what they are doing. I have spent so much money on GW this year that I haven't done in the last few years so the work they did, worked at least on me. Thing is, if the rules in the end are not awesome, no matter how great GW improves, I will stop buying. I still haven't bought anything for my 40K armies because of the rules are crap in my opinion. I collect Tyranids and Dark Angels. I did buy Genestealer cult codex but haven't bought any of the minis till I know the rules well get better for 40K. I am liking the direction of Age of Sigmar and that is where a lot of my purchases are from as well.
I am just shocked with all the "change" GW has been doing, they are taking their time in the important part that [b]needs to change[\b] and that has slowed my purchases now. Bling, flash and glitter only get you so far.
Has GW changed? Nuff said. In the end this is all that matters. The rules. I don't care how well dressed you are. I don't care how well spoken you are. If the rules are still crap, we still have random on random and it still seems the rules are not for fun but to get the most money out of your customers, is what matters in the end.
I say all the good GW has done in 2016 seems to have come to a sour at the end of 2016. Way to go. Get the stench of Kirby off only to have it back at an end of a great year. That is Merry Christmas for you right there.
*edit*
That said, it may seem I am negative on GW, but I really do like what they are doing. I have spent so much money on GW this year that I haven't done in the last few years so the work they did, worked at least on me. Thing is, if the rules in the end are not awesome, no matter how great GW improves, I will stop buying. I still haven't bought anything for my 40K armies because of the rules are crap in my opinion. I collect Tyranids and Dark Angels. I did buy Genestealer cult codex but haven't bought any of the minis till I know the rules well get better for 40K. I am liking the direction of Age of Sigmar and that is where a lot of my purchases are from as well.
I am just shocked with all the "change" GW has been doing, they are taking their time in the important part that [b]needs to change[\b] and that has slowed my purchases now. Bling, flash and glitter only get you so far.
I wouldn't say it has come to a sour end for the Year. Maybe CIA wasn't impressive, but the Traitor Legions and WoM are a really big hit. A LOT of people are happy with that.
I think we will have to see what 40K 8th edition brings right now. Between WoM and Traitor Legions, they seem to be pretty in tune with what a lot of players have been asking for. CIA may be a mess, but I haven't really followed it. I think CIA is also in the unfortunate position of being a "Stopgap" for the moment.
I think we will have to see what 40K 8th edition brings right now. Between WoM and Traitor Legions, they seem to be pretty in tune with what a lot of players have been asking for. CIA may be a mess, but I haven't really followed it. I think CIA is also in the unfortunate position of being a "Stopgap" for the moment.
You did not get it? CIA is 8th edition. Is clear that they will fragment everything in sub-formations. They will make official what they tried with unbound. No pesky army lists to hamper our impulse buys.
Companies don't do all this social media out of the good of their heart it's about money. GW is doing this for money but now they are actually being smart about it. The bundles, Getting input to improve a product for the consumer, bringing back certain armies etc.
Malecowshirt!
Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute
*Comic book guy voice on*
Worst. Comparison. Ever
*Comic book guy voice off*
GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world - and they're the top seller.
HP sells utter crap, and Dell is between crap and OK.
If you want to compare GW product to electronics that go stale in two or three year, then compare it with the ex-IBM range from Lenovo - although they don't really hold the same position in sales rankings.
I think we will have to see what 40K 8th edition brings right now. Between WoM and Traitor Legions, they seem to be pretty in tune with what a lot of players have been asking for. CIA may be a mess, but I haven't really followed it. I think CIA is also in the unfortunate position of being a "Stopgap" for the moment.
You did not get it? CIA is 8th edition. Is clear that they will fragment everything in sub-formations. They will make official what they tried with unbound. No pesky army lists to hamper our impulse buys.
This is pure conjecture on your part, So please do not bandy it about as a fact.
morgoth wrote: GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world.
In your opinion, of course.
Which would change if anyone would point me to a miniature range that can compare.
But strangely enough, when it comes to proving their point, all the GW nay-sayers have to talk about is a few miniatures which are indeed better, but nothing close to a full range spanning 1-500 models armies with multiple types of vehicles, titans, super heavy flyers, ...
If you believe X-Wing and GW are in the same space ... sure why not.
X-Wing seems far closer to a board game than a war game tbh, how many miniatures do you field for a regular game ?
Don't they come pre-painted ?
Because if you go to board game territory, I'm sure many things outsell X-Wing too ...
Since when is assembly or painting a requirement to count as a wargame? It's totally a miniatures wargame and the ICV2 charts put it ahead of 40K in sales. The model count is low in a standard game, yes, but that means that that high sales volume corresponds to a LOT of players.
If you look at Amazon sales rankings for 40K and X-Wing stuff, X-Wing is beating 40K by a huge margin. And if the marketing push from the lineup of upcoming Star Wars movies continues the way its looking, X-Wing is probably just going to continue to grow.
Honestly Since i have been doing so much in other games, I have found GW as a whole has a rather Avg line of miniatures. They seem to have so many holes to there line that i feel I need to look else ware with there games.
They do do nice miniatures, and a few are great.
But i would say Avg there line as a whole.
There specialty lines are woeful, and seems to be they only really care about one faction. And when it comes to a balanced Release and maintenance, Awful is about the only word that comes to mind.
If you believe X-Wing and GW are in the same space ... sure why not. X-Wing seems far closer to a board game than a war game tbh, how many miniatures do you field for a regular game ? Don't they come pre-painted ?
Because if you go to board game territory, I'm sure many things outsell X-Wing too ...
Moving the goal posts now? They are miniatures, not sure why you are changing the facts. Oh I see where you are coming from. Just like when I was 7, my Star Wars action figures are not dolls. Also you might want to stop while you can before you make it more embarrassing. I mean after all if you are fielding less miniatures like you claim as if that is a bad thing, how come they are selling more and making more money with less to play? Or are you going to change the goal posts again to prove your point?
Yes they are pre painted. It doesn't stop them from being a miniature. One you put together, the other you don't. They are still both miniatures.
As for being a board game? No difference. 40K/AoS is played on a table just like X-wing. You don't even need to play on a "board" but just a floor or empty table if you want. Monopoly you need to play on a board. Chess you need to play on a board. So if X-wing is a board game so is 40K/Aos/Warmahordes etc as well.
And once again for funsies, to have less playing pieces but to sell more, I am sure, GW cronies are asking themselves now why are they doing more and making less. After all GW is the epitome in business of doing more with less.
Over on the x-wing forums we have a whole sub forum dedicated to painting and conversion as well as scratch build projects.
X-wing is absolutely in the same bracket as 40k, it's just got superior rules, cheaper to play and a company that cares about balance and actively breaks the meta to keep things fresh.
I think it's fair to say that GW's model line is the widest and of highest quality. Emphasis here on line. No other company can compare if we take entire line vs entire line.
Kit by kit though: I'd say there's rather few kits where there don't exist at least one comparable one of better quality from another manufacturer. For any large GW monster, there's a better looking one from Mierce, Scale75 etc. For every large tank or machine there's Gundam bots, roughly one million accurately scaled tanks with brass components, crazy detail etc. So while GW might have the best line, they sure don't have the best models. And this is without factoring in the price. Do that and the comparisons generally start looking worse.
GW had (and to an extent still has) a huge edge in multipart plastic infantry. But on the fantasy/historical side that's debatable now with all the kits from Warlord, Perrys, Fireforge, Victrix etc and more fantasy focused companies like Avatars of War and Shieldwolf. Especially if we factor in price.
Sci-fi infantry Is GW's last bastion. Some of the new stuff is gorgeous, and they've started to get back to more realistic (and thus better) scaling of their humans. (Compare the genestealer and chaos cultists with the bulging ape-mutants that is the old Cadian or Catachan guard.) In the fantasy realm though, the models they put out is sadly increasingly out of any reasonable scale, overly greebled and thus more and more irrelevant for anyone outside the small diehard AoS community.
GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world - and they're the top seller.
If you want a single source, and want massive impractical models, or models specifically set in the 40K universe, then yes, GW has the widest range.
If you're happy mixing ranges and shopping around, and don't mind deviating slightly from 40K canon, you'll find GW's range isn't that impressive and the quality, whilst high, is not world leading.
GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world - and they're the top seller.
If you want a single source, and want massive impractical models, or models specifically set in the 40K universe, then yes, GW has the widest range.
If you're happy mixing ranges and shopping around, and don't mind deviating slightly from 40K canon, you'll find GW's range isn't that impressive and the quality, whilst high, is not world leading.
I think even considering there own universe they are rather lackluster, They are missing entire portfolios of potential races.
And even some of there factions seem to be missing key figures that should have got a model years ago, As well as models with no update within some time.
If you do not play space marines you may not even get an update for an entire lifetime of a edition of the game, does any other game even come close to that.
GW does have good technology, But they certainly do not have all there model lines up to date.
Zywus wrote: I think it's fair to say that GW's model line is the widest and of highest quality. Emphasis here on line. No other company can compare if we take entire line vs entire line.
Exactly my point.
And while I like Gundams, I really wouldn't want an army of them.
If you believe X-Wing and GW are in the same space ... sure why not.
X-Wing seems far closer to a board game than a war game tbh, how many miniatures do you field for a regular game ?
Don't they come pre-painted ?
Because if you go to board game territory, I'm sure many things outsell X-Wing too ...
Moving the goal posts now? They are miniatures, not sure why you are changing the facts. Oh I see where you are coming from. Just like when I was 7, my Star Wars action figures are not dolls. Also you might want to stop while you can before you make it more embarrassing. I mean after all if you are fielding less miniatures like you claim as if that is a bad thing, how come they are selling more and making more money with less to play? Or are you going to change the goal posts again to prove your point?
Yes they are pre painted. It doesn't stop them from being a miniature. One you put together, the other you don't. They are still both miniatures.
Hey whatever floats your boat man.
Quite clearly the X-wing toys are much closer to matchbox than war games but if you feel like they're in the same market, I can tell you I believe Lego is in the same market too and vastly outdoes x-wing.
You're the one setting goal posts exactly where you want them, just before GW and just after X-Wing... good for you, you won the argument, here's a medal, and a coupon too !
GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world - and they're the top seller.
If you want a single source, and want massive impractical models, or models specifically set in the 40K universe, then yes, GW has the widest range.
If you're happy mixing ranges and shopping around, and don't mind deviating slightly from 40K canon, you'll find GW's range isn't that impressive and the quality, whilst high, is not world leading.
Exactly my point.
There are, outside of GW, single models or small lines of models which are of a better quality, the immense majority of which are resin.
Like there are, within GW's line, plastic models that completely blow away entire ranges of models, both from GW and from other companies.
But nowhere is there anything that comes close to offering a range that enables me to collect a 100,000 point army equivalent that is visually and structurally coherent.
So basically GW plc have listened to the easiest to please, and put in minimal effort to just claim the low hanging fruit.
'Here are some minatures our loyal fans wanted us to make.'
The sort of loyal fan who will spend £1000s on collecting minatures, even getting 10,000 to 100,000 pts worth of a partucular army, just because they like the look of the minatures GW makes.Which is fine .
However, GW plc have continued to ignore the war gamers who would like a well defined concise rule set to use 1500pt armies in random pick up game , with enough focus on tactical game play and balance to make it worth the effort of taking the minatures out of thier cases.
And so when war gamers find other game that deliver what they want at a fraction of the price GW plc want to charge.They are quite happy to let everyone know about it.
As GW plc depends on word of mouth marketing,having such a horrible mess of a rule set for their 'most popular flagship game',is still causing them far more damage in terms of sales growth,than the ridiculous pricing.
Great rules add value to the minatures.
Bad rules just devalue the minatures.
By what standard is X-Wing not a wargame? Just because you don't like the models? It has had tournaments with over 250 people in them. Dismiss it all you want, a lot of people take the game very seriously.
TheWaspinator wrote: By what standard is X-Wing not a wargame? Just because you don't like the models? It has had tournaments with over 250 people in them. Dismiss it all you want, a lot of people take the game very seriously.
On the basis of 'It's not GW! Waaaaahhhh!'
Is it a simple wargame? Yes.
Does that mean that it is not a wargame? No.
I will admit that Star Wars is not my cup of tea, there are games that I would much rather be playing (and some of them are 'board games' - Deadzone, and Mars Attacks, for example).
But I would rather play Star Wars than the current incarnations of either WH40K or WH.
Deadzone and Mars Attacks are in a weird pseudo-board-game category because they use a grid but in a way that placement within the spaces matters more than it does it most grid-based games. But yeah, X-Wing is not a board game by any meaningful standard. Having defined spaces (squares, hexes, circles, whatever) is kind of a key requirement. X-Wing doesn't have that. It's rules are relatively simple by the standards of something like 40K, true, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of strategy or that people don't like it (whether for playing or modelling).
LEGO and Matchbox, while popular, are not sold primarily for use in a game (though people totally do that). X-Wing is and therefore is a very reasonable comparison.
morgoth wrote: X-Wing seems far closer to a board game than a war game tbh, how many miniatures do you field for a regular game ?
About 3-8 per side for a typical 100 point game, more for larger games. But what's your point? Skirmish-scale miniatures games like Infinity/WHM/etc are still clearly miniatures games, having a low model count doesn't make a game a board game. In fact, GW has even made their own low model count miniatures games like Necromunda and BFG.
Don't they come pre-painted ?
Yes. Pre-painted miniatures are hardly a new thing in the industry.
TBH, it's not even that simple. Yeah, FFG have done a much better job than GW when it comes to writing straightforward and unambiguous rules, but IMO there's a lot more strategy in an average game of X-Wing than in most 40k games I've played. And in rules length/complexity it's actually more complicated than GW's Aeronautica Imperialis, a game I don't think anyone could seriously argue is not a miniatures game.
The game's also got over 200 upgrade cards now, split among the various expansions, so you can't even say it has a lack of variety. Between those and the various unique pilot abilities, that handful of models can have a pretty wide range of gameplay abilities.
TheWaspinator wrote: Deadzone and Mars Attacks are in a weird pseudo-board-game category because they use a grid but in a way that placement within the spaces matters more than it does it most grid-based games. But yeah, X-Wing is not a board game by any meaningful standard. Having defined spaces (squares, hexes, circles, whatever) is kind of a key requirement. X-Wing doesn't have that. It's rules are relatively simple by the standards of something like 40K, true, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of strategy or that people don't like it (whether for playing or modelling).
LEGO and Matchbox, while popular, are not sold primarily for use in a game (though people totally do that). X-Wing is and therefore is a very reasonable comparison.
I think it's rather reasonable to define GW's core business as warhammer 40.000.
I think that warhammer 40.000 is part of a certain category of games, which share the following properties:
Strong modelling aspect: your miniatures come on sprue and you have tons of work before you can play with them, in fact you have nearly as much work as with pure modelling products such as plane kits.
Matching this aspect is almost every miniature based game, but NOT X-Wing.
Large Scale Conflict: the game is designed for war simulations with 100+ models (and multiple scales: grot, Imperial Guard, Space Marine, Terminator, Centurion, Dreadnought, Riptide, WraithKnight, Warhound, Reaver, Warlord)
Again, most war games represent more than 100 base units (smallest model), X-Wing does not.
Fantasy / Science Fiction: the game is not based on real-world representations.
X-Wing matches this definition, but napoleonic or FoW don't.
I think that qualifies as one big category in which you can consider that GW is indeed the biggest dog.
And clearly, removing any of these aspects makes the target market radically different, so why blur enough just to include X-Wing in the comparison... doesn't make sense.
Well... you are interpolating the definition of a wargame out of the characteristics of WH40K. While I agree that this caters my personal taste as well I can acknowledge that other see different charcteristics...
SKR.HH wrote: Well... you are interpolating the definition of a wargame out of the characteristics of WH40K. While I agree that this caters my personal taste as well I can acknowledge that other see different charcteristics...
Not even close.
I just said: GW is the biggest dog in GW's market.
That's it.
I don't think X-Wing is in GW's market, and I think pretending is it is a huge stretch.
SKR.HH wrote: Well... you are interpolating the definition of a wargame out of the characteristics of WH40K. While I agree that this caters my personal taste as well I can acknowledge that other see different charcteristics...
Not even close.
I just said: GW is the biggest dog in GW's market.
That's it.
I don't think X-Wing is in GW's market, and I think pretending is it is a huge stretch.
Sure... if you want to segment the market that granularly. But in fact GW competes with those other markets/niches/whatever you want to call it as well.
SKR.HH wrote: Well... you are interpolating the definition of a wargame out of the characteristics of WH40K. While I agree that this caters my personal taste as well I can acknowledge that other see different charcteristics...
Not even close.
I just said: GW is the biggest dog in GW's market.
That's it.
I don't think X-Wing is in GW's market, and I think pretending is it is a huge stretch.
Sure... if you want to segment the market that granularly. But in fact GW competes with those other markets/niches/whatever you want to call it as well.
And that's exactly my point.
Those who put X-Wing as the market leader define a very specific granularity which makes little sense as it neither matches GW (40K) precisely nor X-Wing precisely.
morgoth wrote: Those who put X-Wing as the market leader define a very specific granularity which makes little sense as it neither matches GW (40K) precisely nor X-Wing precisely.
It makes a lot of sense if you consider what makes a miniatures game, and here are some standard traits:
* Played with miniatures on scenery representing the "real" unit and environment, not abstract tokens on an abstract grid/board.
* Rules written to be simulation of the "real" battle, not an abstract game of strategy (like chess).
* Distinct units/armies for each side, often customizable by each player, not "sides" which are just different colors for the pieces on the board.
X-Wing clearly meets that standard, as do Infinity/FoW/WHM/etc. Board games do not. And that matches anecdotal evidence of people already in the miniatures community moving to X-Wing as a new game (often at the expense of a GW game), and people who start X-Wing branching out into other miniatures games. It should also be noted that the people defining X-Wing as part of the same market as 40k are independent retail groups with no incentive to promote a biased comparison (after all, they make money from either product). The people whose job is to sell miniatures games are saying "these are competing products", so we should consider that a persuasive argument independent of anything else.
(And Matchbox/Lego/etc so clearly don't have anything to do with the characteristics of a miniatures game that it amazes me that you'd bother attempting such an absurd comparison.)
The modelling aspect of X-Wing is equal to that of Matchbox, i.e. none.
So what? We're talking about gameplay, not how many pieces you have to glue together before you can start playing. There have been plenty of miniatures games with pre-painted models, and judging by the number of gray plastic armies I've seen (often with assembly quality that the average five year old would be ashamed of) the modeling aspect is hardly an essential or enjoyable part of the game for most GW customers.
TheAuldGrump wrote:But I would rather play Star Wars than the current incarnations of either WH40K or WH.
The Auld Grump
At first I thought asking this question would be off topic but then thought no it's not since it would show if GW has gotten better or not with something to compare to. So my question is, how come since you don't care for Star Wars X-wing you would rather play that over Warmahordes? Or I should say what is wrong with Warmahordes that you don't like in it's current edition?
One could even argue that Lego is closer to 40K since there is some building involved, whereas there is none in X-Wing.
The modelling aspect of X-Wing is equal to that of Matchbox, i.e. none.
So is 40K not a wargame if I buy a pre-painted army? Or if I use wooden blocks?
The distinction lies in the tabletop nature - no board & free movement => tabletop wargame. Board and grid movement => boardgame. X-Wing => tabletop wargame.
If you seriously think most gamers wouldn't consider X-Wing and 40K in the same category, you have a severe case of fanboy blindness. Trying to disqualify the comparison by making assembly and scale requirements is horribly flawed.
Not everyone who plays 40K assembles or paints their own stuff. There's plenty of unpainted grey legions out there, too. And plenty of X-WIng players do painting and customization. The modelling hobby is frequently related to the wargaming hobby, but modelling by no means defines it.
As for scale and terrain, are you going to claim that Malifaux and Infinity aren't wargames because they don't have as large of standard-size amies? Or that Warmachine doesn't count because many people like 2D terrain?
Face it, the wargaming hobby is more diverse than just the way GW does it and it is foolish to define it by how one company does things. So yeah, this is on topic because the answer is that even if GW has gotten somewhat better, they've still got massive issues with rules quality compared to companies like Fantasy Flight and Privateer Press.
On a side note: the Matchbox thing kind of makes me laugh because it seems to be a "X-Wing doesn't count because it's a toy" argument. You realize 40K is also toys, right?
TheWaspinator wrote: On a side note: the Matchbox thing kind of makes me laugh because it seems to be a "X-Wing doesn't count because it's a toy" argument. You realize 40K is also toys, right?
To an outside observer, there is no difference between an out-of-the-box X-Wing spaceship and a Matchbox, that's all I'm pointing out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheWaspinator wrote: If you seriously think most gamers wouldn't consider X-Wing and 40K in the same category, you have a severe case of fanboy blindness. Trying to disqualify the comparison by making assembly and scale requirements is horribly flawed.
The vast majority of people who buy GW products is strongly affected by the assembly requirements, whether they love it, hate it, outsource it or anything else, it does represent a very large part of the hobby, for some more than half of it.
You are welcome to ignore this, as any other argument.
And most outside observers won't find much difference between an Imperial Knight and a Gundam except that the Gundam is a lot cheaper.
40K and X-Wing are sold as miniature games first. The figures exist for the game, not the other way around. If you want to start pushing the hobby modelling side as the primary part of the 40K experience, you're not going to like the outcome of a comparison between GW's kit quality and prices compared to the like of Revell, Bandai, and Tamiya.
You are welcome to ignore this, as any other argument.
Actually here is you that are ignoring specific points and setting artificial restraint for the sake of the argument.
You lost right here:
hobojebus wrote: Over on the x-wing forums we have a whole sub forum dedicated to painting and conversion as well as scratch build projects.
X-wing is absolutely in the same bracket as 40k, it's just got superior rules, cheaper to play and a company that cares about balance and actively breaks the meta to keep things fresh.
You are welcome to ignore this, as any other argument.
Actually here is you that are ignoring specific points and setting artificial restraint for the sake of the argument.
It's all a matter of point of view.
If you think X-Wing is a valid counter to "GW is the top dog in its market sphere", and purposefully pick a wider market sphere which happens to include X-Wing but not Matchbox and Lego, you demonstrate that you are willing to pick any arbitrary radius to support your opinion.
So basically, you're saying that my point is arbitrary because I picked a market radius that stops at wargame w/ modelling,
and you believe your point is not arbitrary because you picked a market radius that stops after X-Wing but before Zombicide
I mean... sure. why not.
At least, my market radius definition has meaning, whereas your camp has yet to properly define the market sphere that contains X-Wing, 40K, but no board games, etc. without resorting to hex vs no hex (hint: there are wargames with hexes.. a lot of them too).
The fact of the matter is, the immense majority of 40K model buyers are not going to divert disposable income from GW to FFG, because X-Wing just doesn't compete with 40K.
They're way too different, 40K is way more expensive, requires serious investment in modelling, table and terrain as well as tons of rules etc.
The vast majority of X-Wing players would never play if it required so much modelling and more investment than boxed painted ships and a space-themed paper mat, and that's one of the reasons X-Wing has so much success, and it's a good thing too.
It's just not addressing the same market, unlike Dust Tactics which could be seen as an alternative to 40K, or even Warmahordes, which is pretty far already but still in the same realm more or less.
If you seriously think GW hasn't been missing a lot of sales from people going to FFG instead, you really are blind. There are a LOT of X-Wing players who are fed-up ex-40Kers. This is not an obscure comparison at all.
The vast majority of people who buy GW products is strongly affected by the assembly requirements, whether they love it, hate it, outsource it or anything else, it does represent a very large part of the hobby, for some more than half of it.
Only because they come unassembled. If GW started producing pre-assembled/pre-painted mini's, nothing would change in the game of 40K.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
morgoth wrote: To an outside observer, there is no difference between an out-of-the-box X-Wing spaceship and a Matchbox, that's all I'm pointing out.
Except that one of them is part of a game and comes with rules, tokens and cards for that game, then I'd agree with you.
Of course, there's nothing stopping you making a game to play with Matchbox cars, I think GW made one in the long long ago.
Warhammer 40,000 (informally known as Warhammer 40K, WH40K or simply 40K) is a tabletop miniature wargame produced by Games Workshop, set in a dystopian science fantasy universe.
To an outside observer, there is no difference between an out-of-the-box X-Wing spaceship and a Matchbox, that's all I'm pointing out.
And to an outside observer there is no difference between an out of the box GW Land Raider and a Mark 1 tank by any of the historical model kit makers. Well, except for the sometimes huge price difference and lack of features like moving tracks and so forth.
So please tell us how this in any way helps 40K as a wargame compete with other wargames?
The fact of the matter is, the immense majority of 40K model buyers are not going to divert disposable income from GW to FFG, because X-Wing just doesn't compete with 40K.
They're way too different, 40K is way more expensive, requires serious investment in modelling, table and terrain as well as tons of rules etc.
I did. Admittedly, the fact I could get ships straight on the table and the simple rules were massive selling points. It was cheaper, easier and more fun; what's not to love?
I'm also far from alone - almost everyone in my gaming club has some X-Wing that probably came out of their hobby budget, meaning a lot of it came from potential GW sales.
The fact of the matter is, the immense majority of 40K model buyers are not going to divert disposable income from GW to FFG, because X-Wing just doesn't compete with 40K.
They're way too different, 40K is way more expensive, requires serious investment in modelling, table and terrain as well as tons of rules etc.
I did. Admittedly, the fact I could get ships straight on the table and the simple rules were massive selling points. It was cheaper, easier and more fun; what's not to love?
I'm also far from alone - almost everyone in my gaming club has some X-Wing that probably came out of their hobby budget, meaning a lot of it came from potential GW sales.
I'd say a lot of 40k model buyers are not going to divert disposable income from GW to FFG because they already HAVE diverted it away from GW and never diverted it back
Seriously, I'd bet money most X-Wing players are either current or ex-GW customers.
Pretty much every game on the shelf when you walk in to an FLGS is direct competition for GW and a source of them haemorrhaging money because most of the people who play those other games, even ones that aren't remotely like 40k, are potential GW customers. The ones that aren't ex-GW customers probably just haven't been around long enough and were put off by vets who are ex-GW customers.
Really, all this discussion shows is that some people have REALLY bought in GW's propaganda machine. The idea that 40K is a unique hobby with no rivals is a very nice myth to try to keep customers loyal.
Not to mention that it can only be argued by making broad, sweeping assumptions with absolutely no evidential support, and, in some cases, actually ignoring or contradicting the information and evidence available.
"Propaganda" is kind of a bad term for what we're seeing- it implies that GW is a totalitarian government trying to control the masses with fascist rhetoric. I'll grant you, when GW people talk about "The Games Workshop Hobby" I do feel like it is Big Brother talking to me.
Public Relations is what we call it when a corporation does this stuff. And the GW PR has been absolutely awful for many, many years- and in a lot of ways it has been worse than their other actions. I think it has gotten a lot better in the past year.
The biggest change is that they don't seem to be "Hobby Deniers" anymore (as in they no longer say crap that implies that no other company makes miniatures). They have a presence at Gencon- albeit a small one.
They don't seem to be denying their past, either- they're bringing back some of their old ranges and games. The rollout for Blood Bowl was pretty good. The General's Handbook went well too- it is an inexpensive book that turns their 4 page outline into a wargaming rules set. Sure- most of their boxed games are all about the 40k rattle value, but they're doing other things as well.
Does that necessarily mean a resurgeance of 40k? Not necessarily. Does it mean that 40k is secretly outselling X-Wing? The evidence we have says no. But GW have been afraid of having a diverse lineup of games for a long time- it is high time they went back to making and supporting several lines- even if they aren't the biggest lines they have.
So we're still waiting to see how the support for Blood Bowl goes (and some of us are still hoping Warhammer Quest gets support). We'll see, but it is not wrong to take hope from the changes they have implemented.
Eh, fair enough. "Propaganda" probably is a little extreme a term. But yeah, their marketing has been traditionally fairly arrogant. See the quote about marketing research being otiose.
Does that necessarily mean a resurgeance of 40k? Not necessarily. But GW have been afraid of having a diverse lineup of games for a long time- it is high time they went back to making and supporting several lines.
So we're still waiting to see how the support for Blood Bowl goes (and some of us are still hoping Warhammer Quest gets support).
I think they tried it at a time when it was too expensive to do so - and when they were their own main competitors - , and subsequently realized their mistake.
Nowadays, anyone and their friends can launch a kickstarter, have miniatures produced for a resonable cost and rules printed just the same, and I think they're waking up to that and resurrecting these otherwise profitless ventures.
Seriously, I'd bet money most X-Wing players are either current or ex-GW customers.
There's a huge number of X-Wing players that have never even touched GW before. Which is a big concern, because GW used to be the de-facto gateway into wargaming, and people are now finding other entrances. It's unlikely that people will convert back to GW once the veil is broken.
I'd bet that a huge percentage of self identified ex-GW customers (like me, haven't bought anything GW except paint since Finecast) will have played X-Wing.
Herzlos is right- games are becoming larger and larger- miniatures game included.
And in the current diverse marketplace, there are now lots of people who have never played 40k who are playing miniatures games. Some of them (a lot) are playing X-Wing, some are playing Warmachine, Malifaux or Infinity, and a lot of them are playing the many miniatures board games that have been booming like mad (Kingdom Death, Zombicide, Blood Rage, Super Dungeon etc).
The marketplace has definitely changed, and GW's old business practices are outdated (if they ever were legitimate).
One thing though- I don't think that X-Wing is the de-facto place for ex-GW gamers to go. The hobby and gaming elements are very different, so I can see how some of the (many) other games might appeal more.
Personally, I've been out of GW for years, but I really love Blood Bowl, and I like what they're doing with it. I don't hate GW, I just don't feel like I need to be interested in their minis/games when there are so many other fantastic minis/games out there.
TheWaspinator wrote: Really, all this discussion shows is that some people have REALLY bought in GW's propaganda machine. The idea that 40K is a unique hobby with no rivals is a very nice myth to try to keep customers loyal.
Agreed. It's the worst thing GW do to the hobby imo.
For example, all I see when Morgoth types is;
"Only GW make good GW models for my GW game. No other games count as they aren't made by GW".
These type of people will swear the only acceptable mini games are 40k and AoS. Then GW re-release Blood Bowl and they'll be all over it. If GW had sold BB rights to another manufacturer, they wouldn't touch it. GW is their god.
Personally, the best thing GW ever did was kill off my GW only hobby by bringing out the End Times. Since that pushed me out from the GW apron, I've found every single game system I've picked up since, to be far better games than anything GW has ever made.
Have GW got better this last year? Well... could they have got worse?
@Gimgamboo- Blood Bowl is good enough to have been made by not-GW standards.
I mean, it is a really great game, and stands far above every other rules set of theirs I've played (and I've played a lot). It isn't easily outshone by the many and varied games out there (while I feel that 40k and AoS are outshone in many respects by other rules sets).
Don't mean to just be contrary. I just love a game and want to spread the word (you know how gamers are).
I think the point he was making is that the quality of the rules is irrelevant, if it hasn't got "Games Workshop" on the box, there's a sub set of customers that won't touch it.
odinsgrandson wrote: @Gimgamboo- Blood Bowl is good enough to have been made by not-GW standards.
I mean, it is a really great game, and stands far above every other rules set of theirs I've played (and I've played a lot). It isn't easily outshone by the many and varied games out there (while I feel that 40k and AoS are outshone in many respects by other rules sets).
Don't mean to just be contrary. I just love a game and want to spread the word (you know how gamers are).
I wasn't digging at BB. However it's out there as free rules and loads of companies make figures for it. None of the GW devoted will touch it though. That is till the GW god of shiny things re-release it. Those fans obviously aren't fussed by the game or they'd already be playing it. It's the GW selling machine in force.
I think there is a customer base that GW had cornered the market on in the past and many people had been cast adrift for a while.
Competitive gamers.
In the age of competitive first person shooters, DOTA and StarCraft where gaming is considered a "sport" some customers are looking for a competitive forum.
The same types of players that may have been in the chess club. GW is still in the "lets just have fun!" stage of rules making and cannot really attract those people back as the rules stand now.
I like the comments on X-wing and say that it does scratch the more competitive itch and that is also why many ex-GW players have not looked back.
The "sport" has to be big enough to get pickup games and some good tiered competition.
You kinda need to be a bit of a rules-lawyer for competitive since you want to win "fair and square" and GW rules just suck for inexact language.
So official rules as they stand is the requirement with few if any added rules for tournaments.
It is certainly not a requirement to have good rules to buy GW product, they certainly have many other reasons but it would exclude certain former customers who believe the game is paramount.
morgoth wrote: To an outside observer, there is no difference between an out-of-the-box X-Wing spaceship and a Matchbox, that's all I'm pointing out.
To an outside observer there's no difference between 40k models and a cheap plastic toy from walmart. The ignorance of outside observers does not mean anything here.
The vast majority of people who buy GW products is strongly affected by the assembly requirements, whether they love it, hate it, outsource it or anything else, it does represent a very large part of the hobby, for some more than half of it.
You are welcome to ignore this, as any other argument.
Slogging through the bare minimum of something you hate is not part of the hobby for that person, it's an annoyance they have to put up with. That person who hates the modeling side of the hobby is going to make their buying decision based on other factors: fluff, rules, etc. They aren't going to look at a game like X-Wing and say "nah, I don't have to assemble those models, that's not competing for my money".
morgoth wrote: To an outside observer, there is no difference between an out-of-the-box X-Wing spaceship and a Matchbox, that's all I'm pointing out.
To an outside observer there's no difference between 40k models and a cheap plastic toy from walmart. The ignorance of outside observers does not mean anything here.
Well said, to most outsiders they look like pieces of plastic/resin/metal which we push around a board pretending to wage war with, which when you look it at a very basic level, is completely true. Not that I see it like that, but that's a completely different topic.
GWimo have gotten better over the last year, but there are still things they need to do to get themselves 'back in the game' - they were never really out of it, but you know what I mean!
- Lower prices, make initial costs lower, a good example of this is Warlords Gates of Antares rulebook - £30, but you can download get started rules for FREE! Compare this to 40k's rulebook price, and you can see what I mean.
- Strip the 40k gak - by this I'm talking about special rules, there are so many of them it is absolutely ridiculous. I mean its really nice to have all these unique and special armies, and I agree they should have some special rules, but strip a lot of the unnecessary stuff and streamline the rules for 8th ed. Don't Sigmarize it please because then you've got Sci Fi Sigmar and Fantasy Sigmar, whats the point in two games that have the same base rules, just perhaps in different settings? One of my favourite things about 40k is finding new previously little-known formations and detachments and trying them out, so don't make it mundane (for example I've heard that the Warmachine competitive scene is very predetermined in terms of 'you take this list, you win', please correct me if I'm wrong, but I wouldn't want 40k to become like this), keep the variety there but just streamline, and make it so players actually have chance of remembering all their rules!
TheWaspinator wrote: Really, all this discussion shows is that some people have REALLY bought in GW's propaganda machine. The idea that 40K is a unique hobby with no rivals is a very nice myth to try to keep customers loyal.
Agreed. It's the worst thing GW do to the hobby imo.
For example, all I see when Morgoth types is;
"Only GW make good GW models for my GW game. No other games count as they aren't made by GW".
These type of people will swear the only acceptable mini games are 40k and AoS. Then GW re-release Blood Bowl and they'll be all over it. If GW had sold BB rights to another manufacturer, they wouldn't touch it. GW is their god.
Personally, the best thing GW ever did was kill off my GW only hobby by bringing out the End Times. Since that pushed me out from the GW apron, I've found every single game system I've picked up since, to be far better games than anything GW has ever made.
Have GW got better this last year? Well... could they have got worse?
Thanks for the words you're putting in my mouth, they're really tasteful.
I totally respect the existence of other games and am very happy to hear that X-Wing is a roaring success, that still doesn't make me want to play it.
Also, I haven't played anything Fantasy for nearly 20 years, and I don't think I'll play again.
It's unfortunate that some people are so busy hating GW that they don't see the many great things they're doing lately - but then it's not like you could enjoy them with all that hatred so ... I guess it doesn't matter.
Oh please, you've spent the last however many pages doing down other games because they somehow don't fit an arbitrary set of criteria you've created to place 40K above them, then expect us to swallow that you're some sort of ultra magnanimous cosmo gamer?
But then in the next breath reduce anyone who still sees that most of the change is cosmetic as a hater?
DaemonColin wrote: I've heard that the Warmachine competitive scene is very predetermined in terms of 'you take this list, you win', please correct me if I'm wrong,
Ok, you are incorrect about Warmachine. Sometimes the player base sounds like this- this is because the player base for Warmachine is MUCH more competitive than 40k, and so they tend to separate things into "overpowered" and "useless" without there being any middle ground.
However, when two players battle, the battle tends to go to the better player- EVEN IF THEY HAVE A WORSE LIST. After the big tournaments most years, the Privateer Press forums are buzzing with "How did THAT win?" threads- because people can pull of big wins with supposedly underpowered models.
The game tends to be determined much more by the tactical choices each turn (they used to print up "chess puzzles" in No Quarter Magazine- you are given a situation and need to look for a creative win- assuming you get perfectly average dice rolls).
In addition- Privateer Press makes it a point to keep things even for the competitive gamers. So, if a certain faction or unit is over or under represented in the big tournaments, the PP rules guys are likely to add some errata to even things out more.
Not that I disagree with your sentiment about 40k. In fact, it irks me when armies have only one winning build- but I find it happens much more often in 40k than in Warmachine (and in Warmachine, some key component of said list would quickly be errata'd).
TheWaspinator wrote: Really, all this discussion shows is that some people have REALLY bought in GW's propaganda machine. The idea that 40K is a unique hobby with no rivals is a very nice myth to try to keep customers loyal.
Agreed. It's the worst thing GW do to the hobby imo.
For example, all I see when Morgoth types is;
"Only GW make good GW models for my GW game. No other games count as they aren't made by GW".
These type of people will swear the only acceptable mini games are 40k and AoS. Then GW re-release Blood Bowl and they'll be all over it. If GW had sold BB rights to another manufacturer, they wouldn't touch it. GW is their god.
Personally, the best thing GW ever did was kill off my GW only hobby by bringing out the End Times. Since that pushed me out from the GW apron, I've found every single game system I've picked up since, to be far better games than anything GW has ever made.
Have GW got better this last year? Well... could they have got worse?
Thanks for the words you're putting in my mouth, they're really tasteful.
I totally respect the existence of other games and am very happy to hear that X-Wing is a roaring success, that still doesn't make me want to play it.
Also, I haven't played anything Fantasy for nearly 20 years, and I don't think I'll play again.
It's unfortunate that some people are so busy hating GW that they don't see the many great things they're doing lately - but then it's not like you could enjoy them with all that hatred so ... I guess it doesn't matter.
I wasn't putting words in your mouth... just into my own ears.
Secondly, please don't brand me a hater of GW. I played WHFB from 1984 onwards, every edition since v2 through to the final version.
I run (or ran) a 40k club at the school I teach at till last summer. The reason it stopped... we had about 3-4 players in each of the 5 year groups. As the eldest leave, more join in the youngest year. For the last 4-5 years, people haven't joined - mainly because they see the price of a single clam pack hero and don't want to spend that kind of money on a single plastic toy soldier. So, the club collapsed last year as the last few players left school. A slow death of a game system by GW itself from overpricing.
However, once you actually go away and play any other mini wargame, you realise just how poor the rules of the GW games are. I'm not saying I haven't had fun playing them, it just took GW pushing me away to find much greener grass everywhere else. Although everyone talks of a new 40k v8 next year, I can't see me playing it again, despite having a wardrobe with 16 old GW hardcases of figures. Whatever guise new 40k comes in, it will still revolve around the current trend of massively oversized expensive models - rather than a boss, some troops and a few special models that made the army stand out.
As for one of the things you said several pages ago about a wargame needing our models building from plastic sprues.... I guess the 40k and WHFB I grew up with weren't wargames. We only had metal Citadel Miniatures back then.
I'm surprised at the plastic sisters, but last week I was really surprised at the lack of plastic sisters. I haven't seen all the pics yet- will it be enough to do a whole plastic sisters army, or just a few new units?
Are they also fixing the rules for a 'sisters only' 'dex? I heard that the agents book just reprinted the old sisters rules- but I know Celestine isn't in the new book (even though she's apparently getting a plastic kit).
I feel like they're currently doing some things to please the jaded gamers who rage quit over their beloved forces and games getting canned. I mean, I used to play Necromunda and Mordheim, and I never stopped playing Blood Bowl, so it is good to see those resurface as well. I used to have a Genestealer Cult army, and then they weren't updated into 3rd. Now they get to exist at the same time as Sisters of Battle. Forge World is doing Fimir for Age of Sigmar.
It is as though someone told them how much money they aren't making with all the games and stuff that they aren't doing anything with.
Makes me wonder if we'll see something spiffy show up for Squats, Kroot or Slaan. Who knows what' else they could bring back?
Azreal13 wrote: Oh please, you've spent the last however many pages doing down other games because they somehow don't fit an arbitrary set of criteria you've created to place 40K above them, then expect us to swallow that you're some sort of ultra magnanimous cosmo gamer?
But then in the next breath reduce anyone who still sees that most of the change is cosmetic as a hater?
Gimgamgoo has the right of it.
Yeah, you don't get to spend that long aggressively attacking the idea that X-Wing could be beating 40K as the premiere miniatures game and then pretend that you were just saying you personally don't like X-Wing. Because no, he was coming up with weird "it feels like a board game so it doesn't count" statements but never saying what about the game mechanics actually support that.
odinsgrandson wrote: Are they also fixing the rules for a 'sisters only' 'dex? I heard that the agents book just reprinted the old sisters rules- but I know Celestine isn't in the new book (even though she's apparently getting a plastic kit).
To my knowledge nobody knows anything or if they do know, are not saying anything. I know Lady Atia knows, but she is being mum on the subject.
All I can say is expect nothing, so no disappointments. My guess right now, is I would say no, no new Sisters of Battle codex. For all we know these plastic Sisters of Battles can be in a box set like the Horus Hersey games they released. It could be in a game with the Dark Elves what ever that is about. It could just even be a box, with Celestine and her 2 body guards and nothing else and have rules in a new book just like we had with Shield of Baal and other books after it. Never bought them so can't say for sure if it was like Shield of Baal or not.
All I can say is don't expect a new range of Sisters of Battle and codex and just take what little we have until 8th edition shows it's cards and what it will be like. Then again I could be wrong and they can have an entire new release for January/February and new codex.
odinsgrandson wrote: Are they also fixing the rules for a 'sisters only' 'dex? I heard that the agents book just reprinted the old sisters rules- but I know Celestine isn't in the new book (even though she's apparently getting a plastic kit).
To my knowledge nobody knows anything or if they do know, are not saying anything. I know Lady Atia knows, but she is being mum on the subject.
All I can say is expect nothing, so no disappointments. My guess right now, is I would say no, no new Sisters of Battle codex. For all we know these plastic Sisters of Battles can be in a box set like the Horus Hersey games they released. It could be in a game with the Dark Elves what ever that is about. It could just even be a box, with Celestine and her 2 body guards and nothing else and have rules in a new book just like we had with Shield of Baal and other books after it. Never bought them so can't say for sure if it was like Shield of Baal or not.
All I can say is don't expect a new range of Sisters of Battle and codex and just take what little we have until 8th edition shows it's cards and what it will be like. Then again I could be wrong and they can have an entire new release for January/February and new codex.
Honestly I rather expect a similar treatment like Battlezone Fenris. Setting up in a first book and then with a second one down the year we'll get SoB with complete range and codex...
SKR.HH wrote: Well... you are interpolating the definition of a wargame out of the characteristics of WH40K. While I agree that this caters my personal taste as well I can acknowledge that other see different characteristics...
No, no - Warhammer 40K isn't a 'wargame' it's 'forging a narrative', remember?
Incidentally, my saying that Star Wars is a a 'simple wargame' is not an insult - a good simple rules system is much to be preferred to an artificially complex rules system. (Then there are those rules systems that manage to be both bad and simple - hello AoS! GW is fixing the initial problems of AoS, but in the process making the game a bit more complex....)
The Auld Grump - to repeat, I am actually in the camp that believes that GW is getting better - but with the caveat that 'better' does not necessarily mean 'good'.
Seriously, I'd bet money most X-Wing players are either current or ex-GW customers.
There's a huge number of X-Wing players that have never even touched GW before. Which is a big concern, because GW used to be the de-facto gateway into wargaming, and people are now finding other entrances. It's unlikely that people will convert back to GW once the veil is broken.
I'd bet that a huge percentage of self identified ex-GW customers (like me, haven't bought anything GW except paint since Finecast) will have played X-Wing.
True, and I never said I'd bet a LARGE amount of money But I still think a large chunk of X-Wing players like most non-GW-games players are ex- or current-GW customers as well. If not at they're likely to have been influenced in their choices by ex- or current-GW customers. I know *all* the older guys at my local FLGS are ex-GW customers and they tend to be the ones giving advice on which games newbies should start.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
morgoth wrote: I totally respect the existence of other games and am very happy to hear that X-Wing is a roaring success, that still doesn't make me want to play it.
I can understand why someone might only want to play 40k, but it's also a pretty shallow to assume just because they only want 40k that all the other games on the market aren't in general competing with 40k.
Seriously, I'd bet money most X-Wing players are either current or ex-GW customers.
There's a huge number of X-Wing players that have never even touched GW before. Which is a big concern, because GW used to be the de-facto gateway into wargaming, and people are now finding other entrances. It's unlikely that people will convert back to GW once the veil is broken.
I'd bet that a huge percentage of self identified ex-GW customers (like me, haven't bought anything GW except paint since Finecast) will have played X-Wing.
True, and I never said I'd bet a LARGE amount of money But I still think a large chunk of X-Wing players like most non-GW-games players are ex- or current-GW customers as well. If not at they're likely to have been influenced in their choices by ex- or current-GW customers. I know *all* the older guys at my local FLGS are ex-GW customers and they tend to be the ones giving advice on which games newbies should start.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
morgoth wrote: I totally respect the existence of other games and am very happy to hear that X-Wing is a roaring success, that still doesn't make me want to play it.
I can understand why someone might only want to play 40k, but it's also a pretty shallow to assume just because they only want 40k that all the other games on the market aren't in general competing with 40k.
I think that you are missing part of the market in regards to X-Wing - unlike 40K, I can buy X-Wing at the local bookstore - which is something that has not been true about 40K since the Rogue Trader days. (Guess where I bought my copy of Rogue Trader - and it came with a box of beakie marines.)
X-Wing is cheaper and easier to get into - many of the folks that I have seen buying it have been less than a half my age (less than a third, truth be told).
GW needs a low entry point game again, and they really need to mend their fences with both the independent store owners and with the grey, grim, and grizzled grognards.
Right now, many of those grognards are plugging other games - in my case Kings of War, in other cases Warmahordes or Malifaux - but fewer are plugging GW games.
The latest edition of 40K led to my selling off the Dark Angels army that I had since the Rogue Trader days. (I had not played it since fourth edition - but I had always been more of a WHFB player in any event.)
If a remake of Mordheim or Necromunda is well done, then GW may well find some of those grognards suggesting their games again - I love Mordheim, and am willing to play Necromunda... but somehow find myself running a GorkaMorka game right now.... (Yes, I have hopes for a good Mordheim... but the bitter taste left in my mouth by AoS makes me cautious in that regard.)
Honestly I rather expect a similar treatment like Battlezone Fenris. Setting up in a first book and then with a second one down the year we'll get SoB with complete range and codex...
They're £35, the same as the other new Terminator kits - Blood Angels and Deathwing (but the Cataphractii are a bit on the high side).
