GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
1 three model big infantry model kit.
1 Riptide sized giant unit
2-4 fewer named characters.
1 obligatory day 1 DLC unoriginal codex supplement with no new models.
GW finally releases a new Mini Rule Book... for US$58.
Couple things here:
1. The full size rulebook, fluff book, and art book that's sold in a set is U$85.
2. Dark Vengeance, which includes 50 miniatures, dice, templates, and a small paperback rulebook, is US$110.
3. eBay has the full sized rulebook going for US$30-$40.
4. If you buy the book through the US GW Webstore, it DOES NOT qualify for free shipping, and will cost you an extra US$9. Or you can spend an extra US$7 to get the free shipping (I have yet to find anything on the GW Webstore that sells for less then US$10).
How is GW meeting player demand here? Are they really listening to us by providing us with a smaller rulebook? I'd say this book is worth MAYBE US$35 to me... maybe. I'd still hesitate at that price. US$58?
If you are happy with this direction GW is going, it means you are happy about incomplete army releases. What I mean is the upcoming Tyranid release will be a bare bones codex, followed by 2-3 extra supplements with the rest of the Tyranid army rules- just like the Dark Eldar, Space Wolves, and Orks releases so far. There will be no new units, but a couple BIG model kits.
But, hey! The choices! I don't have to buy those supplements! I don't have to buy the new kits. Nope. Not at all. Why would I want to buy all the rules and models for an army?
GW is certainly trying.
But, is this really what the game needs?
GW PLC needs to get money in, and as fast as possible. See the limited edition books and models.
But, if GW did things in a more controlled and transparent manner, we would be able to save up our gaming budgets and plan when to spend on the next big thing. If they expect us to buy everything they release, we only buy bits. Telling us when a codex is getting an update, and when that would be, we can plan to splurge on the whole lot at once, but when we want to, not when they tell us to.
Also, putting the prices at such high levels just puts us off. That trickle of unexpected stuff stays on the shelf, as we hope the next load will be better, and worth buying. If they released the rules in all the formats at the beginning, we might buy a box to begin with, and plan to buy a small version later on. By keeping the small version back, and not even hinting it's coming at all, people see the huge 3-book box and avoid 7th ed altogether.
GW is doing it all wrong, and can't see that their secretive and expensive practices are keeping money out of their pockets.
A lot of what GW does these days is "Good idea, bad execution". Releasing a new series of campaign books to renew interest in one of their lagging games? Good idea. Making the rules LE? Bad execution.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
Good for you.
Now I hate LoW on normal games because they are a NPE if you aren't prepared to face them, I hate flyers since they have no place in a game with the scale of 40k, I hate allies since all they do is dilute each army individual "flavour" and allow min-maxing to reach unprecedented levels, I hate unbound because they remove structure from the game and make pre-game negotiations even more difficult, I hate the "magic phase" since its just another random addition that doesn't accomplish anything other than making the game take even longer, I hate the way the GW removes units from codexes just so that they can sell DLC... And that is just from the top of my head, so no, there really isn't more good than bad. In fact the bad outnumbers the good by a big freaking margin and none of that bad of it is solved or ameliorated by releasing models out of cycle!
To be honest, while their business practices are somewhere beteween irritating and insulting, the direction they're taking the game in. More options is always good for players like myself that don't give a damn about effectiveness, I like th fact you can do so much with your army now, and for all the complaining about supplements and dataslates being overpriced (and I do agree there), you don't need them at all, and if you do want to use them, the information isn't that hard to come by between forums, blogs and the like.
For all the flak it gets, I still love 40k; I had my first game in months the other day, a 4500 point megabattle, and for all the cleanness of Infinity or the uniqueness of Malifaux, nothing quite matches the awesome spectacle and hours of fun that a game of 40k can provide.
I'll admit, I haven't bought a GW product nearly all year until recently.
I've been really impressed with the End time stuff, it's gotten me back into fantasy.
The new Tyranid stuff was the shot in the arm I really needed to get my love for the army going again. While the first week of releases sucked due to lackluster rules, the second week has been amazing!
Hmm...so you are happy with spending a crazy amount of money...
I will admit they aren't getting worse but they are still insane never the less. They still write unbalenced rules wich does not lean in there favour, so if they at least fix up the rules and write them like lotr (balanced and fair) and if they downed the prices I would like them. So at the moment IMO they are still insane and an evil company.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
Nobody is saying that GW hates us or is out to make us nerd rage. Most people here genuinely enjoy the 40k universe.
The problem is that they're releasing tons of stuff at a very fast rate with a very high rate of absurdly poor execution, power levels are wildly variable, and on top of all that the rules support (FAQ/errata) is abysmal and slow, with prices that are generally increasing at a rate out of all proportion with inflation along with an increasingly confused ruleset that doesn't really know what it wants to be.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
GW is responsible for 3 out of 4 shops closing in my area and 1 moving to CCG and not supporting GW stuff. I have no place to play. This is more then hate. It is like selling someone a boat and then stealing all water in his country.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
With FW, multi CAD, ally, formations the game was toned down
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
Cool thing your happy. But please don't force me to act happy, when my community dies and am left with 600$+ of stuff I can't use. If I bought a playstation with the money I would have fun and no problems .
Tamwulf wrote: GW finally releases a new Mini Rule Book... for US$58.
Couple things here:
1. The full size rulebook, fluff book, and art book that's sold in a set is U$85.
2. Dark Vengeance, which includes 50 miniatures, dice, templates, and a small paperback rulebook, is US$110.
3. eBay has the full sized rulebook going for US$30-$40.
4. If you buy the book through the US GW Webstore, it DOES NOT qualify for free shipping, and will cost you an extra US$9. Or you can spend an extra US$7 to get the free shipping (I have yet to find anything on the GW Webstore that sells for less then US$10).
How is GW meeting player demand here? Are they really listening to us by providing us with a smaller rulebook? I'd say this book is worth MAYBE US$35 to me... maybe. I'd still hesitate at that price. US$58?
If you are happy with this direction GW is going, it means you are happy about incomplete army releases. What I mean is the upcoming Tyranid release will be a bare bones codex, followed by 2-3 extra supplements with the rest of the Tyranid army rules- just like the Dark Eldar, Space Wolves, and Orks releases so far. There will be no new units, but a couple BIG model kits.
But, hey! The choices! I don't have to buy those supplements! I don't have to buy the new kits. Nope. Not at all. Why would I want to buy all the rules and models for an army?
The mini hardcover rulebook is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. The mini softcover rulebook is FREE, if you find someone at your FLGS gaming group and be nice to them (I've given away three!), and the full size set includes two more (fluff) books and can be had at discount around $70-$75.
Besides, why on earth would you want to carry around a heavier book, if your goal is portability?
Oh yes, the 3 bookmarks, that must be it
To the point of the original topic, though, I have no issue with the direction of GW. I like a company that releases new stuff every week, even if I don't like every new release and think some are silly.
Of course GW doesn't hate us. They love us so much they just held an event where we could pay to get in and buy their product at full price. They love us so much that, during this event that was focussed on all things GW, they decided not to tell us about any of the products that were to be released even just two weeks after that event.
1 three model big infantry model kit.
1 Riptide sized giant unit
2-4 fewer named characters.
1 obligatory day 1 DLC unoriginal codex supplement with no new models.
Nope.
Dark Eldar (No giant unit)
Grey Knights (No giant unit, no new infantry, no day 1 DLC)
Space Wolves (No 3 model big infantry kit)
Astra Militarum (No giant unit)
Space Marines (No giant unit)
etc. so on.
I am back in GW's corner, after a long time on the fence, simply because of how much life they have breathed into Warhammer Fantasy with the End Times. New, fantastic (If a little to large) models and advancing the story line has done wonders for the range as a whole. I haven't seen as much interest in Fantasy in all my years of Fantasy (which was before my 40K), and now when i go into my local GW i can actually get a pick up game of Fantasy.
With this decision working so well (All the End Times Books have sold out near me, so i assume they are selling well) i wouldn't be overly surprised if this carries over to 40K, and for all my skepticism, i can only hope it turns out as well as the Fantasy one.
I have deleted the off-topic tangent from the thread. Please stick to discussing the topic, rather than complaining about people having a different opinion to your own.
If you see posts that you feel break the rules (ie: are rude, or off topic, or spam), the appropriate response is to hit the Mod Alert button so that we can deal with it as we feel appropriate, not spark off-topic side-tracks by making snarky comments about them.
I am happy to a degree. The constant influx of new material is keeping the hobby active where before it was stagnating. I only wish that they would do a better job in terms of playtesting it.
i do fear for what happens when they get everything caught up. I dont want them to immediately redo everything again once it's updated. Hopefully, they will then move on to fantasy (looking that way) so that we have a few years of use out of all this new material.
I agree with Daly for once. I don't necessarily like flyers, LoWs etc, but I do appreciate them trying new things. Rising prices is happening in all sectors, and has been since about 1913.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
No, they really aren't, and that's the problem. What we're getting is minimum-effort releases from a company that proudly declares that they're a "model company" selling to "collectors" and the rules don't really matter.
It's the general direction of the game that I'm most displeased about. There's too much randomness in the game and that takes away player involvement and not enough strategy. The codexes have gotten better in terms of external balance but still there are external and especially internal balance issues that are very frustrating.
If the game wants to go bigger, the rules and pricing need to adapt or they're going to price themselves into extinction.
I don't like LOW in normal games and the flier rules are horrid. (especially the lack of good AA options in some armies.)
The end of times stuff is really good and 40k could definitely use something like that.
I don't think GW hates us, but I do think they don't care. They're a group of yes-men trapped in a bubble with little to no idea what's going on in the real world.
As a company they're pretty terrible, both financially and morally.
The 40k gaming group in my area had officially died two weeks ago at the local hobby store.
It ALWAYS had been running for years.
What they are doing is becoming less relevant in my area.
MTG, Malifaux, X-wing, Flames of War and Warmachine / Hordes are pretty much all that remain.
GW has been sending more free stuff to the store owner but he has said "it is not worth the space stocking".
OP: being happy about their direction is your prerogative but there is some unease with their shrinking market share.
Talizvar wrote: The 40k gaming group in my area had officially died two weeks ago at the local hobby store.
It ALWAYS had been running for years.
Ive seen that this happens just about everywhere. tthese games cycle. You'll get a lot of players (maybe even enough to start a club) of one game. Over time, players grow bored or another catches their attention or key members move away and it fizzles out for a while.
tttthen later, it resurfaces when it is once again "fresh". Fresh in that it hasnt been played for a while and players have grown bored of a different game that had been popular for a while.
True, there is a lot GW could do to keep it fresh and I feel that is what they are trying to do. I think they have just gotten out of touch in how to do it effectively. Personally, I think when they starrrrted phasing out the old timers (people like Andy Chambers), they stttttarted losing the soul of the company which was the "gamer".
i read in an article on BOLS, where GW vetoed the ickstarter idea for a computer game because it looked "tacky" (my take on the whole spiel). Personally, I think it would be a good idea and that letting the market have a say in the actual creation (of their other games like 40k as well), could bring in fresh and possibly radical changes that are needed but would never make it past the board room.
EVIL INC wrote: i read in an article on BOLS, where GW vetoed the ickstarter idea for a computer game because it looked "tacky" (my take on the whole spiel).
It was nothing to do with Kickstarter looking 'tacky'. GW supposedly were worried about a failed Kickstarter potentially devaluing their brand.
EVIL INC wrote: i read in an article on BOLS, where GW vetoed the ickstarter idea for a computer game because it looked "tacky" (my take on the whole spiel).
It was nothing to do with Kickstarter looking 'tacky'. GW supposedly were worried about a failed Kickstarter potentially devaluing their brand.
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/10/games-workshop-and-kickstarter-hidden.html Sorry. I was mistaken. With 12 hour shifts and 3.5 travel time for work laus helping run the family business of rental properties, I confused the editorial with the exerpt running the two together in my mind. While this sort of thing might be one of the unofficial reasons for it, that would only be speculation.
Good catch.
While I feel the guy writing the article has a point and I can see where he is coming from, I feel he is dead wrong. It would be a show of them caring or not really caring but of pardon the expression, them pulling their heads out of their backsides and listening to their customer base.
I disagree with many here on subjective items such as about which sets of rules I like better or less, but on this we seem to be on the same page.
You're apparently seeing something in Kickstarter projects that I've missed. How is running a Kickstarter a sign that a company is listening to feedback from their customers?
As a whole, GW has become less focused on the customer and more focused on their stockholders, to the detriment of both.
They de-emphasized the hobby aspects.
They de-emphasized the tournament aspects.
They de-emphasized strategic play and player control in favor of randomness.
They emphasized "forge the narrative" which is an excuse for poorly written rules and lack of focus.
it may be that I am not 100% sure of what it is. I am thinking its where you give cash up front for a small discount on upcoming items that the cash is going towards dev and production. I would think that if they didnt follow through with items the way the contributes wanted, the next time, the contributers wouldnt give. This would , I think, be a definate sign of disapproval. Would be nice if this sort of thing allowed contributers a more direct say.
EVIL INC wrote: . I would think that if they didnt follow through with items the way the contributes wanted, the next time, the contributers wouldnt give. This would , I think, be a definate sign of disapproval. Would be nice if this sort of thing allowed contributers a more direct say.
I'm not seeing how this gives people a 'more direct say' than just waiting for something to be released and buying or not buying it?
And also still missing how that shows that the company is listening to their customers. Either way they're just offering for sale whatever they want to offer for sale. The only difference a Kickstarter makes is that you pay for it before it has actually been made.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
I think the prices, not the stuff you're talking about, are causing fatigue. The company really needs to allow its entry level games be distributed more widely and stop gashing.
It's never been, in my mind (and I am definitely sure there are people who disagree) that the game is near as terrible as some whiners make it out to be. It has been the extreme sscalation in price. and it's not a SMALL thing. It wasnt incremental either. It was jarring.
Example: I used to be able to walk in and get an ork kannon for what, a $15 blister? Now it's a $46. $46? Yes.
Example: Obliterators went from $12 to $17 apeice or some such. And if you want to buy a Devilfish it's $38 instead of $25 but if i buy a VoidRaven... $80? TYet the Space Wold Flyer... $131?
It's $81, the page has a thing up for $131 for a flyer plus 5 termi's.
It's still not a cheap kit at all.
To me the bigger eye-opener is that back in 2007 Land Raiders were $55, now they're $75. At least the loyalist one got some extras, all three options are now in one kit, but the CSM one is identical to what it was seven years ago, and is actually slightly more expensive than the loyalist one ($76 vs $74.25). The Baneblade is another one, it was $90 seven years ago, now it's got some variants but it's $140, a 55% price increase in 7 years
I've been wanting to get a Knight, the models really are pretty cool. Had they been $90 like the Baneblade was in 2007, I'd certainly have at least one, maybe two or three. At $140, I've purchased zero.
Funny the op mentions the fresh new take that GW has taken. If you pick up a few old WD publications you can clearly see that they are merely rehashing old ideas. Knight Households? Yeah, those came out shortly after Titans hit the shelves for epic. Tactical Cards? Yeah, same thing. The new psychic phase is just a return to form, albeit FB style. Space Hulk returns? See where I'm going here?
If I had to guess, the next thing GW will do is a very limited Blood Bowl run, they'll bring out a "new" Knight model, probably the Castellan and they might even resurrect some other old ideas too.
I'm okay with GW going back to its roots, taking inspiration from past successes but I gotta admit, the drive to sell new models is very apparent. You have to remember though, that we are dealing with Englishmen and even at the best of times we can be a dreary sort.
I've been wanting to get a Knight, the models really are pretty cool. Had they been $90 like the Baneblade was in 2007, I'd certainly have at least one, maybe two or three. At $140, I've purchased zero.
IMHO, GW is not only pricing themselves out of the market through situations like you describe above, but they are also turning away potential new customers, and destroying the goodwill of existing customers...through what is basically greed and gouging.
1. the rules are more or less the same cluttered,unwieldy barely make sense and comprehensible
2. codex's still vary wildly from being terrible to being good
3. many units in various codex's are still useless
4. many older kits are not being updated or replaced, just new large offering's which are good but mostly meh
5. go out of their way to destroy FLGS's with ridiculous restrictions of selling their products
6. removed characters which don't have models (this is a hobby after all you know like kit-bash your own?)
7. pricing of their printed materials is just frankly insane and both insulting due to the grudgingly necessary purchase of them
8. moved their focus to essentially retail only
9. the hobbying aspect has generally dissapeared
10. dataslates/formations/supplements are more or less a page of rules which can be easily inserted into codex's but rather split them up and charge money for them
11. the fact that in australia when i purchase a codex (83$) and the rulebook (140$) im basically broke before even buying a model kit
12. constantly recycled fluff plus other ridiculous crap they have come up with
13. random rolls, tyranids,centurions, ripide etc
14. limited edition novella's that are absurdly priced
the list of grievances continues
but unfortunately for me i cannot continue with GW they were ok a few years ago but now it's unbeareable. for a stage i was just purchasing black library as i really like the heresy novels, however this is now out of the question with thier new ridiculous limited edition pricing schemes is frankly to much
Personally I can't be happy with the direction they are going when their competition are doing everything right.
I have very little interest in warmahordes but privateers magazine is exactly what I'd want white dwarf to be. Sure there are some ads but it is packed full of real hobby articles like terrain building, in depth painting articles, stuff for their RPGs, competitions and battle reports wort reading.
That right there is just super simple stuff that GW used to do but has completely abandoned lately.
It's really sad looking at the evolution of White Dwarf.
The first White Dwarves had tons of Dungeons and Dragons content, how to make your own dungeons and alternate experience systems and the like and reviews of new games by various companies. As GW came out with their own things, it turned into the primary way to disseminate new content for their own games, fluff, rules, battle reports, etc. Now it's just a lame preview catalog of whatever comes out next week.
In 5th and 6th edition i was an active player that played at least 1-2 games a week.
When 7th hit i was excited first but than i didnt want to go through the hustle to relearn the game at that time so i played some FOW and Mantics Deadzone.
When the space wolves codex hit i was really really excited. It released on my bday so my friends got me the flyer right away as a present. I was excited in that moment, too. I went and painted the flyer ASAP.
I have yet to play a game with the flyer and the codex because after initial excitement faded i completely lost my interest in the game. It could be a personal thing but i see that "burn out" on a lot of players in my group.
Most other available games (i play FoW, Deadzone, Dreadball, Dystopian Wars, WM/H) feel a lot better for me nowadays. I cant even tell what it is. Its certainly not their pricing because everyone has everything anyway nowadays and most of the time when someone has a birthday our group buys him that newflyer/newMC/newTank anyway if he cant afford it. Its maybe the hustle of having to discuss your list before you even started building one with your opponent to get an enjoyable game out of it (Yes or No to LoW or unbound or whatever). When playing the aforementioned other games i dont have to discuss anything besides point cost in advance which is convenient to say the least.
So no im not happy with the direction 40k took to be honest. I just started Bolt Action and tbh it just looks like the better 40k to me nowadays. GW lost me as a customer for sure i wont buy anything from them anyomre the competition is just plain better nowadays from a gamers perspective. Did they lose me completely? No, never! i love my space wolves and they will definitely see the table again eventually. But not because i enjoy 40k but because i want to see my space wolves on an awesome table going against another painted army. Who needs rules for that at all?
I've seen the burnout over the years. Thats part of the cycle or rotation of games that you see in shops. 40k will be big for a year or so, then fantasy, then bolt action or warmachine, then back to 40k again and so on and so forth.
Totally agree with theaddition of lords of war type stuff. before it was one thing to face someone who just had a cheesy list formed of "normal" stuff from codices, now with the addition of the super heavies and such, youare forced to tailor for them which in turn leaves you weak against an army that doesnt have it. It essentially removes the effectiveness and desire for a take all comers army.
I liked it better when they were optional and you talked with or discussed it before the game so as to be forwarned. Of course, thats just my opinion.
The "direction" of GW is at least an obvious push for more and larger models.
It is VERY exciting for those who like a more "Epic" look to 40k.
I think I have personally experienced the "burn-out" discussed with GW.
My friends keep getting distracted by "something shiny" of other game systems.
40k takes a great deal of time to get a nice force together, many of the new upstarts take little effort.
I find as focus moves away from 40k I drop it like a hot rock for new projects that become useable in a couple hours or immediately (thinking X-wing).
If you have a fixation on 40k the size and scope of it can be exciting but it is playing more and more like Armageddon: time to play a game is steadily increasing.
Not a fan of the direction of 40K/GW. Rules are a mess and prices are absurd. In 2006 I could buy a codex for tyranids for about $25 and have all the rules for a standard game of 40k for my army. Today the dex is $60+, dataslates $50+, FW rules for nids cost ?, now a bunch of new models with rules in the kit? or I have to buy the WD. So to cover all the rules for nids for a standard game of 40k could cost a couple hundred dollars. The dex alone is a huge increase in price in only a few years.
Then comes the issue of the nid dex itself. It is bland, unimaginative and still has many of the same problems the previous mess of a dex had (trygon tunnel anyone). Shouldn't much of the new kits (units) and rules in all these supplements have been in the dex itself? The dex was just released this year. What is next, separating the dex into the HQ dex and the Elite dex and Troop dex, etc and charging $50-60 for each? GW releases the dex with spore pods removed and then a few months later reintroduces the pod - to get the rules pay more.
Sure it is nice for nids, like any army, to get some attention and new models but the mess is of GWs creation. If a year after the release date of the nid dex a new unit or special formation was added that might work fine and would be better than the wait 4+ years for a new dex before anything new arrives. But releasing new rules along side the dex and a few months later new kits to make the army work better because the dex is done so badly is not something to celebrate. Players just have to pay a heck of a lot more to try to get the same play out of their army.
I am not happy with the direction GW has taken in the last ten years. And by direction, I mean absence of release of any new model for my army. And not even giving any of our unit access to anti-air.
I don't enjoy gw 'as is', to the point i refuse to buy or play their games/products. I have nothing against people who do buy, play and/or enjoy their products (when they act civilized and decent).
I just have this burning urge to point to the yearly financials *every year* and say: hey, something must be going wrong because the numbers keep going down while the cost cutting keeps going up.
I think the game is horribly broken. But then i'm not a big fan of drinking either, and lots of people do that. If you enjoy it, have fun.
Torga_DW wrote: I don't enjoy gw 'as is', to the point i refuse to buy or play their games/products. I have nothing against people who do buy, play and/or enjoy their products (when they act civilized and decent).
I just have this burning urge to point to the yearly financials *every year* and say: hey, something must be going wrong because the numbers keep going down while the cost cutting keeps going up.
I think the game is horribly broken. But then i'm not a big fan of drinking either, and lots of people do that. If you enjoy it, have fun.
Maybe that's my problem. I don't drink and one needs to be inebriated to enjoy 40k?
The game is broken as hell now. If they are trying to innovate, the only thing they succeed is in alienating all players of 40K. Imbalance is blatant. Cheese bs are everywhere. Unless there is a house rule to override all these or people showing sportsmanship, there is no way this game can be fun.
Torga_DW wrote: I don't enjoy gw 'as is', to the point i refuse to buy or play their games/products. I have nothing against people who do buy, play and/or enjoy their products (when they act civilized and decent).
I just have this burning urge to point to the yearly financials *every year* and say: hey, something must be going wrong because the numbers keep going down while the cost cutting keeps going up.
I think the game is horribly broken. But then i'm not a big fan of drinking either, and lots of people do that. If you enjoy it, have fun.
Maybe that's my problem. I don't drink and one needs to be inebriated to enjoy 40k?
bibotot wrote: The game is broken as hell now. If they are trying to innovate, the only thing they succeed is in alienating all players of 40K. Imbalance is blatant. Cheese bs are everywhere. Unless there is a house rule to override all these or people showing sportsmanship, there is no way this game can be fun.
Well the OP is a fan of the more imbalanced aspects of the game (going by prior posts) so the negative stated here is a positive by another viewpoint.
bibotot wrote: The game is broken as hell now. If they are trying to innovate, the only thing they succeed is in alienating all players of 40K. Imbalance is blatant. Cheese bs are everywhere. Unless there is a house rule to override all these or people showing sportsmanship, there is no way this game can be fun.
I've had no such issues and I play 3 different armies in a competitive meta. Sounds like you just gotta adapt to the current meta.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I am not happy with the direction GW has taken in the last ten years. And by direction, I mean absence of release of any new model for my army. And not even giving any of our unit access to anti-air.
Most armies are lacking any real AA unit options.
Eldar get a choice to upgrade Dark Reapers, to make an expensive unit horrifically expensive. That's it. [Oh, and the flier, which is really good at AA. My bad]
But, the quad-gun is in the fortifications book, Stronghold Assault. I know I keep going on about it, but it is an option open to all armies.
bibotot wrote: The game is broken as hell now. If they are trying to innovate, the only thing they succeed is in alienating all players of 40K. Imbalance is blatant. Cheese bs are everywhere. Unless there is a house rule to override all these or people showing sportsmanship, there is no way this game can be fun.
I've had no such issues and I play 3 different armies in a competitive meta. Sounds like you just gotta adapt to the current meta.
Or, you know, your experience doesn't indicate anything outside of your own meta.
bibotot wrote: The game is broken as hell now. If they are trying to innovate, the only thing they succeed is in alienating all players of 40K. Imbalance is blatant. Cheese bs are everywhere. Unless there is a house rule to override all these or people showing sportsmanship, there is no way this game can be fun.
I've had no such issues and I play 3 different armies in a competitive meta. Sounds like you just gotta adapt to the current meta.
Or, you know, your experience doesn't indicate anything outside of your own meta.
From my experience most if the competitive metas will have the same things to look out for:
Riptide tau with missle broadsides
Wave serpent spam
Seer council
2++ reroll able save inquisition
Av13 spam necrons
Centurion star
Dread knight spam grey knights
Wyvern/ parking lot IG with pask
Etc etc.
Those are alive and well in all the metas I have lived in. I.e. Las Vegas, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Florida. Etc
And that kind of goes contrary to the whole "forge the narrative" BS that GW spouts out, doesn't it? If you don't play competitive (not a competitive game, remember that line of gak?) then you'll get steamrolled by the skew lists with little or no chance of winning because you aren't doing a skew list yourself.
WayneTheGame wrote: And that kind of goes contrary to the whole "forge the narrative" BS that GW spouts out, doesn't it? If you don't play competitive (not a competitive game, remember that line of gak?) then you'll get steamrolled by the skew lists with little or no chance of winning because you aren't doing a skew list yourself.
And that's supposed to be a good thing?
People who face cheese (as that was the initial above complaint) put themselves in that environment. Those builds occur at tournaments. If people don't want to face those lists or play in that environment don't go to competitions. There's plenty of room for people to make friends and plan "fluff battles".
It's pretty much like, if you only want to play flag football, don't go to your college and tryout for their full contact football team. (Talking American football here, not soccer).
WayneTheGame wrote: And that kind of goes contrary to the whole "forge the narrative" BS that GW spouts out, doesn't it? If you don't play competitive (not a competitive game, remember that line of gak?) then you'll get steamrolled by the skew lists with little or no chance of winning because you aren't doing a skew list yourself.
And that's supposed to be a good thing?
People who face cheese (as that was the initial above complaint) put themselves in that environment. Those builds occur at tournaments. If people don't want to face those lists or play in that environment don't go to competitions. There's plenty of room for people to make friends and plan "fluff battles".
It's pretty much like, if you only want to play flag football, don't go to your college and tryout for their full contact football team. (Talking American football here, not soccer).
Bad news man, normal people at FLGS bring those kinds of lists too, not just to tournaments.
WayneTheGame wrote: And that kind of goes contrary to the whole "forge the narrative" BS that GW spouts out, doesn't it? If you don't play competitive (not a competitive game, remember that line of gak?) then you'll get steamrolled by the skew lists with little or no chance of winning because you aren't doing a skew list yourself.
And that's supposed to be a good thing?
Or, you approach the game with a less competitive attitude, and play with players that hold similar views. I appreciate not everyone can do this, but plenty of people can, will and do. 40k is at its most broken when people go out of their way to break it, like by taking the best of everything rather than actually building to a narrative-driven army and game. This is the direction GW clearly want to push the game in, whether people like it or not.
To answer the question and general topic for myself:
I have been playing from around the start of 5th, through 6th and soon might look at 7th, or at least a hybrid of 6th and 7th. In that time, I have played in a couple of groups, one of close friend and another of mostly strangers, and through that period, I've found the experience to get more and more fun. In that time, I have consistently seen the game as nothing more than a chance to meet up with like-minded people, tell a cool story and laugh at the fortunes and misfotunes on both sides of the table. I've never built lists to win, or given thought to making an army stronger, because in the environments I'lve been playing in, there has basically been no issues with balance. The players that have won more are the ones that are more skilled, not the ones that build the best lists.
So yes, I like the direction 40k is going in, if not GW as a business, because most of the additions have made it more possible to enjoy the game in the way I like to. From being able to lob grenades to challenging characters, or from fortifications being part of the game to allies and now the very flexible Force selection rules, everything has catered to people who want to make the game their own, make it that much maligned word cinematic, and want to 'forge a narrative' (and I use the term without any irony)
I've always sais 40k is what you make it, and what I make it is a shared experience to tell a cool story and have a good time. I could be losing games 10 times a week and I'd still love it, because the result doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. As a group, we've never had any issues with balance because we've never gone looking for them, which is where so many of the issues come from. You need to trust the integrity of the players, and be sure to share with them and reach a compromise on what you want the game to be, but yes, 40k has only got better and better over the last few years.
WayneTheGame wrote: And that kind of goes contrary to the whole "forge the narrative" BS that GW spouts out, doesn't it? If you don't play competitive (not a competitive game, remember that line of gak?) then you'll get steamrolled by the skew lists with little or no chance of winning because you aren't doing a skew list yourself.
And that's supposed to be a good thing?
People who face cheese (as that was the initial above complaint) put themselves in that environment. Those builds occur at tournaments. If people don't want to face those lists or play in that environment don't go to competitions. There's plenty of room for people to make friends and plan "fluff battles".
It's pretty much like, if you only want to play flag football, don't go to your college and tryout for their full contact football team. (Talking American football here, not soccer).
Bad news man, normal people at FLGS bring those kinds of lists too, not just to tournaments.
Hence why I said to make some friends and schedule games. If your friend are bringing cheese to fluff games, you're making the wrong kinds of friends.
Bad news man, normal people at FLGS bring those kinds of lists too, not just to tournaments.
And why do they bring them? Because, whether they're in a tournament or not, they're still building lists to win, so working on exactly the same mindeset. Again, it all comes down to playing with like-minded players, so the players looking for a narrative game can have one while on the next table along, two optimised listscan battle to the death.
Communication could fix so many of these problems.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: I've had no such issues and I play 3 different armies in a competitive meta. Sounds like you just gotta adapt to the current meta.
Difference between "couldn't" or "wouldn't".
The advertising for GW is to pretty much play what you want: everything has a point value so there is a token attempt at being fair right?
No.
It is no great stroke of genius to play the current "meta" army lists but then we are limited to a rather narrow number and permutations of builds right?
Kinda boring, not as advertised.
LoW has further separated the decision of trying to get a "take all comers" army together as looking not even remotely viable.
Just widening the gap of the army selection rock-paper-scissors game.
The "direction" of GW right now if I was to go by your method with the armies I have is:
- Field an AM/IG army with Pask.
- Throw in a Baneblade for giggles.
- Get an Imperial Knight allied in if you want that extra big unit but is not a big deal points-wise.
- Have a bunch of conscripts for a meat shield.
- Scrape together any remaining points for veterans in Chimeras to grab objectives.
You know that wouldn't be that bad, at least most of it would be IG. The thing is that the best list, unless someone plays eldar, is some sort of amalgamat of 3-4 codex in form of multi CAD and ally. Even worse is the fact that some units don't make sens without ally or forifications. Grav centurions need either a pod or escape hatch, purfires need a pod. IG blobs work best with azrael inside. The game in 2 editions I played went from, I want to play IG to I have to play IG with marines a Knight or Inquistion ally or else why bother. I get the whole new codex makes old good stuff bad, but why suddenly GW forces people to buy multiple books to get one army is beyond me. How many people have the cash to support something like that, specialy when it can be invalidated by a single codex update.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: I've had no such issues and I play 3 different armies in a competitive meta. Sounds like you just gotta adapt to the current meta.
Difference between "couldn't" or "wouldn't".
The advertising for GW is to pretty much play what you want: everything has a point value so there is a token attempt at being fair right?
No.
It is no great stroke of genius to play the current "meta" army lists but then we are limited to a rather narrow number and permutations of builds right?
Kinda boring, not as advertised.
LoW has further separated the decision of trying to get a "take all comers" army together as looking not even remotely viable.
Just widening the gap of the army selection rock-paper-scissors game.
The "direction" of GW right now if I was to go by your method with the armies I have is:
- Field an AM/IG army with Pask.
- Throw in a Baneblade for giggles.
- Get an Imperial Knight allied in if you want that extra big unit but is not a big deal points-wise.
- Have a bunch of conscripts for a meat shield.
- Scrape together any remaining points for veterans in Chimeras to grab objectives.
It would be easier with Tau or Eldar.
Most of that is how I would play at a tourney. I enjoy pask, baneblades, a big ole vostroyan platoon, etc.
RTT and GT tourneys offer rules prior to sign ups. Don't like those rules, saw your money and doń attend. Instead invite your buddy over for a nice foots logging unit banning fluffy game.
Cool, but how does it help people in places where flats are smaller and you only play at shops.
Although I must say that being forced to buy a car, to transport the multiple army collections you need to get 1 good army, a flat , to have a place to play, and all the Iclass stuff to get the DLCs and codex in non back breaking size, would be funny as entery cost for a game.
Makumba wrote: Cool, but how does it help people in places where flats are smaller and you only play at shops.
Although I must say that being forced to buy a car, to transport the multiple army collections you need to get 1 good army, a flat , to have a place to play, and all the Iclass stuff to get the DLCs and codex in non back breaking size, would be funny as entery cost for a game.
Or people in America who don't have the space for gaming at their house?
Also, transporting multiple armies for PUG's is too big a PITA. Without multiple lists finding a PUG that isn't embarrassingly lopsided is "problematic" at best.
Hobbies aren't meant to be accessible to everyone. I would love to collect motorcycles. I don't have the means to do so. All things to consider while gauging whether or not to be involved in something.
Although if you make pals, can't you guys negotiate what to bring at play at your shops available?
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Hobbies aren't meant to be accessible to everyone. I would love to collect motorcycles. I don't have the means to do so. All things to consider while gauging whether or not to be involved in something.
Although if you make pals, can't you guys negotiate what to bring at play at your shops available?
True, but at what point does it become too unaccessible for most players and forces GW under?
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Hobbies aren't meant to be accessible to everyone. I would love to collect motorcycles. I don't have the means to do so. All things to consider while gauging whether or not to be involved in something.
Although if you make pals, can't you guys negotiate what to bring at play at your shops available?
True, but at what point does it become too unaccessible for most players and forces GW under?
Doubtful. GW is the best of its kind on its scale. The other war games are mostly skirmish. NOT to mention it has the best models and best background.
Yeah the eldar players will say they want to play with their serpents, the necrons with their walls, the GK will spam their NDKs, everyone will want to ban FW, because it is too hard to get and check rules for. Because of the cost of the game everyone will concentrate on the best units and to keep cheating and anger in check tournament rules would be enforced as rules for normal games,ETC in case of Poland. Then some years later GW would decide that it is time to get rid of all the B&M stores .What would be big hit for people around the world, but stomached in places where there are GW stores and clubs. For places GW stores are one per country or less, and clubs are just as rare it would be rather shity.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Hobbies aren't meant to be accessible to everyone. I would love to collect motorcycles. I don't have the means to do so. All things to consider while gauging whether or not to be involved in something.
Although if you make pals, can't you guys negotiate what to bring at play at your shops available?
True, but at what point does it become too unaccessible for most players and forces GW under?
Doubtful. GW is the best of its kind on its scale. The other war games are mostly skirmish. NOT to mention it has the best models and best background.
Totally didn't answer my question at all. Like, not even remotely.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Hobbies aren't meant to be accessible to everyone. I would love to collect motorcycles. I don't have the means to do so. All things to consider while gauging whether or not to be involved in something.
Although if you make pals, can't you guys negotiate what to bring at play at your shops available?
True, but at what point does it become too unaccessible for most players and forces GW under?
Doubtful. GW is the best of its kind on its scale. The other war games are mostly skirmish. NOT to mention it has the best models and best background.
Oh bullgak. GW is probably one of the worst rules out there. The models and background are at least good (I would not say "the best") but games-wise it's a joke, and it's not really as a big a size as you are claiming unless you constantly play Apoc-sized games. A typical 40k army isn't that much more than Bolt Action or even an infantry-heavy Warmachine force; it's larger than Infinity or Malifaux for sure, but those are specifically for small games. 40k tends to look larger because you count transports as individuals, but even then something like an Iyanden army is going to be about the same size as a 50-point Warmachine army if you discount the Wave Serpents. Outside of Ork/Nid horde armies, 40k isn't really that large compared to other games.
The biggest irony for me is that GW claims the game isn't competitive and wants you to have a narrative, but their rules are so bad that you can't compare the two. If I want to play an all-Terminator army because it's a cool narrative, I'd get steamrolled even against a fluffy army because the rules for the models aren't fair to where a small but hard-hitting force can hold out against a larger but more fragile force.
Oh bullgak. GW is probably one of the worst rules out there. The models and background are at least good (I would not say "the best" but games-wise it's a joke, and it's not really as a big a size as you are claiming unless you constantly play Apoc-sized games. A typical 40k army isn't that much more than Bolt Action or even an infantry-heavy Warmachine force; it's larger than Infinity or Malifaux for sure, but those are specifically for small games. 40k tends to look larger because you count transports as individuals, but even then something like an Iyanden army is going to be about the same size as a 50-point Warmachine army if you discount the Wave Serpents. Outside of Ork/Nid horde armies, 40k isn't really that large compared to other games.
The biggest irony for me is that GW claims the game isn't competitive and wants you to have a narrative, but their rules are so bad that you can't compare the two. If I want to play an all-Terminator army because it's a cool narrative, I'd get steamrolled even against a fluffy army because the rules for the models aren't fair to where a small but hard-hitting force can hold out against a larger but more fragile force.
Wow, that's harsh. 40k games can easily have fewer or more models on the table as Warmahordes. Like any wargame, more models = longer game, and not everyone wants an epic 6 hour battle, but pick Eldar, IG, SM, or Orks, and I can field 10,000 points of well-painted models and fill up (I do mean PACK) two 6x4 tables joined end to end with models and terrain. The game will also take days and many pizzas to finish.
To say that you'd get steamrolled with all-Terminator army -- what's wrong with that?! Allied forces in World War 2 would also have been flattened if they had deployed only tanks, with no infantry, aircraft, or command and control. Chess would be a terrible game if you replaced all your units with knights. Being able to field an army that's homogenous is not the markings of a good wargame >.<
I'm certainly not saying GW has the BEST ruleset, but look at any game, and there are people unhappy with the rules in some way.
To say that you'd get steamrolled with all-Terminator army
See there is a problem with that. If GW first hypes up terminator armies or any other kind of army, but then the rules for it suck your end up with sad people. If someone builds an army of X and there is no way to make it viable, then the army and rules for it better be free.
To say that you'd get steamrolled with all-Terminator army -- what's wrong with that?! Allied forces in World War 2 would also have been flattened if they had deployed only tanks, with no infantry, aircraft, or command and control. Chess would be a terrible game if you replaced all your units with knights. Being able to field an army that's homogenous is not the markings of a good wargame >.<
Well, 40k isn't reality, so comparing balance of a game to history is a pretty poor comparison. Likewise, Chess is a game of homogeneous armies; 40k and other wargames are not. It is expected that a legal army list that covers the basics of how to deal with most enemies should be balanced where the outcome of the game is predominantly decided on player decisions, not on codex selection.
So yes, an all terminator army that brings a balanced set of special and heavy weapons with the right support should be able to go toe-to-toe with a Guard mech heavy list, or a Tyranid monster mash, or an Ork horde; because all of those things should be balanced enough you're not working against a severe handicap from the get go.
I'm certainly not saying GW has the BEST ruleset, but look at any game, and there are people unhappy with the rules in some way.
Certainly, someone somewhere is going to upset about something, however small or insignificant. I debated at great length about whether a model should have +1 or +2 extra inches of total movement on the Spartan forums. We're talking an inch on a model already moving 9"/turn. That said, what you have to realize is the quantity and significance of the issues and the people unhappy with the rules.
Its unfortunate because GW has written some top notch rules in the past, but has seemingly forgotten how with 6th and 7th. Even some small things like random victory points on Maelstrom; its another layer of randomness on a layer of randomness.
To say that you'd get steamrolled with all-Terminator army -- what's wrong with that?! Allied forces in World War 2 would also have been flattened if they had deployed only tanks, with no infantry, aircraft, or command and control. Chess would be a terrible game if you replaced all your units with knights. Being able to field an army that's homogenous is not the markings of a good wargame >.<
I'm certainly not saying GW has the BEST ruleset, but look at any game, and there are people unhappy with the rules in some way.
According to GW's own fluff, Terminators are the best of the best of the best and can subjugate an entire world. Comparing it to the allies in WW2 deploying only tanks is idiotic and ridiculous. An all-Terminator army is supposed to be something that happens in 40k (the 1st Company of a Marine Chapter), so there's no reason other than lazy design and poor balance why they would get crushed just for being an all Terminator army.
According to GW's own fluff, Terminators are the best of the best of the best and can subjugate an entire world. Comparing it to the allies in WW2 deploying only tanks is idiotic and ridiculous. An all-Terminator army is supposed to be something that happens in 40k (the 1st Company of a Marine Chapter), so there's no reason other than lazy design and poor balance why they would get crushed just for being an all Terminator army.
Question: Have you actually tried playing an all-termie army, or are you just taking internet hyperbole based on the assumption that every opponent is bringing otimised GT-crushing lists to friendly games? Because I have played All--Terminator or Terminator-heavy armies many times, and have a majority win rate with them.
Have you actually tried playing an all-termie army, or are you just taking internet hyperbole based on the assumption that every opponent is bringing otimised GT-crushing lists to friendly games? Because I have played All--Terminator or Terminator-heavy armies many times, and have a majority win rate with them.
You know thinking this way every army and every unit is good, if we assume opponent always bring unoptimised and bad lists. And yes we had a friend play with terminators the GK ones. His army was horrible, we didn't even knew to do with him as no one wanted to play him. And then the new codex came and he bought 3 NDKs and his army works.
We had a guy from germany that was trying to play DA terminators here. I think he stoped coming after his 20+lost game.
Have you actually tried playing an all-termie army, or are you just taking internet hyperbole based on the assumption that every opponent is bringing otimised GT-crushing lists to friendly games? Because I have played All--Terminator or Terminator-heavy armies many times, and have a majority win rate with them.
You know thinking this way every army and every unit is good, if we assume opponent always bring unoptimised and bad lists. And yes we had a friend play with terminators the GK ones. His army was horrible, we didn't even knew to do with him as no one wanted to play him. And then the new codex came and he bought 3 NDKs and his army works.
We had a guy from germany that was trying to play DA terminators here. I think he stoped coming after his 20+lost game.
To which I would say that almost every unit is good. Maybe not the best, but there's not a unit in the game that is worse than playing that many points down. And I assume opponents will bring non-optimsed lists because, in my experience, they do, and from what I've seen, the same is true of many if not most areas. In your area, it seems everyone shares your mindset of playing optimised ultra-competitive lists built purely for winning, but I am confident in saying this is, worldwide, the exception rather than the rule.
Offhand, I would say that if you like the game, play and enjoy it. Dont try to force liking it down someone elses throat.
Likewise, if you dont like it, dont play it. Move on to whatever game you like and the forums for that game and dont spend your time trying to ram your dislike down others throats who do like it.
of course, thats just my viewpoint.
EVIL INC wrote: Offhand, I would say that if you like the game, play and enjoy it. Dont try to force liking it down someone elses throat.
Likewise, if you dont like it, dont play it. Move on to whatever game you like and the forums for that game and dont spend your time trying to ram your dislike down others throats who do like it.
of course, thats just my viewpoint.
I don't think anyone is trying to force anyone to like or dislike anything. You have an amazing ability to completely misrepresent any discussion into something it was never about. Oddly enough, you can discuss the quality, flaws, and positives without forcing anything on anyone.
This also painfully ignores how someone can criticize something yet still enjoy it.
EVIL INC wrote: Offhand, I would say that if you like the game, play and enjoy it. Dont try to force liking it down someone elses throat.
Likewise, if you dont like it, dont play it. Move on to whatever game you like and the forums for that game and dont spend your time trying to ram your dislike down others throats who do like it.
of course, thats just my viewpoint.
Well said!
Although if this was aimed in part at my own defence of 40k, I'm not so much trying to force it on anyone, just show that a different outlook on the game can make it more enjoyable for all involved. It pains me to hear people who have spent money on it finding they don't enjoy the game, so I just try and help there.
I discuss both positives AND negatives. I also make it plain that my views are purely my opinion and support the right of others to disagree without harrassing them or contesting each and every point of view they have. It is all about attitude and treating others with dignity and respect.
I guess you could say that being "happy" (content, indifferent, un-inspired, apathetic.. new word! "insouciance") with GW's 40k is less the question than being MOAR! happy with other games.
EVIL INC wrote: I discuss both positives AND negatives. I also make it plain that my views are purely my opinion and support the right of others to disagree without harrassing them or contesting each and every point of view they have. It is all about attitude and treating others with dignity and respect.
Yeah, I discuss positives and negatives too. I don't feel the need to constantly repeat that I do that either.
It should also go without saying that subjective statements are also opinion based. Further, who isn't supporting anyone's right to disagree, let alone harass others?
You can disagree with someone while treating them with dignity and respect.
Once more, if you have something to say, just say. You grandstand about posting etiquette more than you post. Someone disagreeing or holding a differing opinion than you isn't grounds for you to remind everyone about everything you write is your opinion and we should respect it.
We shouldn't forget that the Nid codex dropped lacking a bunch of units, and that these new toys should have been included on day 1, but it does show...well...something anyways on GW's behalf.
I suspect we'll see something more like this before Christmas, and I'm curious if their sales will reflect that. Will it be enough to keep plodding along, or even turn back the fall from the last report? Who knows.
I'm really not a fan of the bugs so the release has no interest for me, but something Guard related might sway me out of a few dollars if its good enough.
Just as a straw poll, how many other games do people who self identify as happy with 40K play/have played?
You cant be implying that they're happy because they're ignorant. Can you?
In a manner of speaking, but I am genuinely interested if there's any correlation between people who seem to enjoy the game disproportionately. I mean, I'm happy to criticise plenty about it, but I'll be the first to admit it is still possible to have fun, but then I've played all of GW's major systems except LotR, Battletech, the first Warzone, a handful of Warmachine games, some Infinity, I own the rules to DZC and Bolt Action and I've seen FoW played, on top of all that I've played multiple CCGs, from the obscure ones like Alien vs Predator and ?
The X Files to the forgotten ones like Decipher's Star Wars CCG, the still hanging in there ones like L5R and, of course, Magic. All of these going back over twenty years gives me, I feel, a solid platform for comparison.
I wonder if there is anyone with a similar, or superior, gaming CV (so to speak) who still thinks 40K is the be all and end all, or if there is a heavy bias towards those with limited experience of other systems, or even multiple editions of 40K.
If there's a strong correlation between 40K advocates and those who have limited experience of other systems, it would certainly endorse GW's closed eco system approach.
To say that you'd get steamrolled with all-Terminator army -- what's wrong with that?! Allied forces in World War 2 would also have been flattened if they had deployed only tanks, with no infantry, aircraft, or command and control. Chess would be a terrible game if you replaced all your units with knights. Being able to field an army that's homogenous is not the markings of a good wargame >.<
I'm certainly not saying GW has the BEST ruleset, but look at any game, and there are people unhappy with the rules in some way.
According to GW's own fluff, Terminators are the best of the best of the best and can subjugate an entire world. Comparing it to the allies in WW2 deploying only tanks is idiotic and ridiculous. An all-Terminator army is supposed to be something that happens in 40k (the 1st Company of a Marine Chapter), so there's no reason other than lazy design and poor balance why they would get crushed just for being an all Terminator army.
It's best to read such fluff as largely a degree of propaganda of sorts, a few dozen dudes, no matter how powerful, aren't going to conquer anything on their own against an opponent with any sort of functioning command structure and relevant numbers (they just can't be everywhere they need to be and their enemies would be easily able to encircle them and pound them to dust with heavy weapons) though they may be able to knock off whatever administration rules a world if they have surprise, but, even in the fluff, fall prey to all sorts of weapons that are fairly common. On a table, much the same thing happens, they get outmaneuvered, tarpitted, and pounded by heavy and specialist weapons. One will also note the Ultramarines 1st company was entirely destroyed last time it deployed as one big terminator force
There's also a big difference between a 40k game and 40k fluff, in that most 40k games are pitched battles of a sort. The Dark Eldar for instance would never directly attack an Imperial Guard mechanized battlegroup arrayed for battle from the front as a 40k game would normally be set up, that would be insane for them (as it often bears out to be so on the table), instead they're going to try and strike before the Imperial Guard get to their positions or engage the IG's support/logistics elements, or move around an outflank them, but the game just isn't capable of effectively portraying such things.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
I like the direction of the game. Toned down power levels, model releases outside of codex time. I LOVE LoW in regular games. I love flyers. There's more good than ba and at least they aren't regurgitating the same old junk.
When we stop hyper focusing on negativity, and start smelling the roses. I'm very happy with their single model releases and not just doing it at codex time with these nids. Let's hope this is a trend.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Hobbies aren't meant to be accessible to everyone. I would love to collect motorcycles. I don't have the means to do so. All things to consider while gauging whether or not to be involved in something.
Although if you make pals, can't you guys negotiate what to bring at play at your shops available?
True, but at what point does it become too unaccessible for most players and forces GW under?
Doubtful. GW is the best of its kind on its scale. The other war games are mostly skirmish. NOT to mention it has the best models and best background.
Mine lack an AA option. Forget about the distinction between “real” options and “unreal/useless/uneffective” options. And that is just the icing on the cake of the “no new release for the last ten years”, by the way.
EVIL INC wrote: Offhand, I would say that if you like the game, play and enjoy it. Dont try to force liking it down someone elses throat.
Likewise, if you dont like it, dont play it. Move on to whatever game you like and the forums for that game and dont spend your time trying to ram your dislike down others throats who do like it.
of course, thats just my viewpoint.
I've found that people who have claimed they don't play 40k anymore come to this forum quite often and put the game down. If I quit 40k, I wouldn't be on its forums. I've always found this hysterical.
Paradigm wrote: Communication could fix so many of these problems.
You know what else would have fixed those problems? Making it harder to build non-fluffy, cheese-fest lists, instead of just making the FOC optional ...
EVIL INC wrote: Offhand, I would say that if you like the game, play and enjoy it. Dont try to force liking it down someone elses throat.
Likewise, if you dont like it, dont play it. Move on to whatever game you like and the forums for that game and dont spend your time trying to ram your dislike down others throats who do like it.
of course, thats just my viewpoint.
I've found that people who have claimed they don't play 40k anymore come to this forum quite often and put the game down. If I quit 40k, I wouldn't be on its forums. I've always found this hysterical.
Azreal13 wrote: I wonder if there is anyone with a similar, or superior, gaming CV (so to speak) who still thinks 40K is the be all and end all, or if there is a heavy bias towards those with limited experience of other systems, or even multiple editions of 40K.
If there's a strong correlation between 40K advocates and those who have limited experience of other systems, it would certainly endorse GW's closed eco system approach.
Played 40k since 3rd edition.
Always liked 40k "fluff" and the wide variety of "iconic" units.
If not for the fiction and esthetic of the setting, I would have little interest to play from a tactical standing.
I have little else to say other than it is a very weak means of employing tactics in a way that has meaningful logical impact.
The spectacle of it and the uneven gameplay of it does make for all manner of ups and downs emotionally.
Due to the extreme amount of randomization in the game tactical decisions seem more like "suggestions" than commands carried-out.
As pointed out, there is definitely more control exerted in list building than inside the actual game.
Based on other games I listed earlier; it is far more satisfying to play other games for a true tactical challenge with logical outcomes.
It is unfortunate that the two groups of players could not be better combined, it feels like a missed opportunity.
Paradigm wrote: Communication could fix so many of these problems.
You know what else would have fixed those problems? Making it harder to build non-fluffy, cheese-fest lists, instead of just making the FOC optional ...
Actually, I think that would annoy just as many people. There are people that play the game just to build those 'non-fluffy, cheese-fest lists' and pit them against others of a similar calibre, and even though I am at pretty much the opposite end of the spectrum, I would not want those options taken away from those players, as I imagine to them it would be just as annoying as it would be to me if a new edition rolled around and my Deathwing were non-playable, for example. For everyone that has used the new army selection rules to build a super-cheese-list-of-doom, there is someone who has been able to run non-Deathwing 1st Co lists, all-tank IG lists without Forge World, or that scenario-specific army they've always thought was cool.
With 7th Ed, GW has given us the option to take the game to either extreme, and it is up to us as players and individuals to decide what we make of those options.
I dont know if playing 7 non GW games regularly counts...
But the big difference to me (not talking about anything but gameplay) is the fact that after a game, win or lose, its not "what units should I replace/change" its always "I think these need to be used differently". Thats a huge difference in my opinion. How you use models is far more important than what models you have.
I only feel the need to change models when I simply want a new models to toy with or add to my collection. I dont feel the need to buy to compete.
40k and fantasy are the games I put on the bottom two shelves of my display. Lord of the rings however is amazing... We where shocked to find it was made by GW when playing it.
BUT I agree with the above, communication fixes 99% of the problems people have with 40k.
Paradigm wrote: Actually, I think that would annoy just as many people. There are people that play the game just to build those 'non-fluffy, cheese-fest lists' and pit them against others of a similar calibre, and even though I am at pretty much the opposite end of the spectrum, I would not want those options taken away from those players, as I imagine to them it would be just as annoying as it would be to me if a new edition rolled around and my Deathwing were non-playable, for example. For everyone that has used the new army selection rules to build a super-cheese-list-of-doom, there is someone who has been able to run non-Deathwing 1st Co lists, all-tank IG lists without Forge World, or that scenario-specific army they've always thought was cool.
People were doing that before GW decided to just forget about the FOC.
Those people who like to build the hardest lists possible would still be able to do in a less unbalanced system. But if there was a little less power variation available from army selection, it wouldn't be as big a problem when those people run into players who aren't as into list optimisation.
Segregating the community off into different groups doesn't do anything positive for the game.
I think it's totally legitimate that some players prefer a game where unit choice is less important than unit tactics -- in other words, where units may have different abilities, but are versatile enough that they can adapt to any situation.
On the other hand, I also don't think a game is inferior if units are not perfectly versatile, and where all units are a tradeoff between strengths and weaknesses, and where army composition is very important.
I prefer the latter, because to me, building an effective army and experimenting with different units is a lot of fun. And, there SHOULD be a penalty for building an army that doesn't make sense. I agree that the opposite makes it easier to get into the game.
Swastakowey wrote: I dont know if playing 7 non GW games regularly counts...
But the big difference to me (not talking about anything but gameplay) is the fact that after a game, win or lose, its not "what units should I replace/change" its always "I think these need to be used differently". Thats a huge difference in my opinion. How you use models is far more important than what models you have.
I only feel the need to change models when I simply want a new models to toy with or add to my collection. I dont feel the need to buy to compete.
40k and fantasy are the games I put on the bottom two shelves of my display. Lord of the rings however is amazing... We where shocked to find it was made by GW when playing it.
BUT I agree with the above, communication fixes 99% of the problems people have with 40k.
I think it's totally legitimate that some players prefer a game where unit choice is less important than unit tactics -- in other words, where units may have different abilities, but are versatile enough that they can adapt to any situation.
On the other hand, I also don't think a game is inferior if units are not perfectly versatile, and where all units are a tradeoff between strengths and weaknesses, and where army composition is very important.
I prefer the latter, because to me, building an effective army and experimenting with different units is a lot of fun. And, there SHOULD be a penalty for building an army that doesn't make sense. I agree that the opposite makes it easier to get into the game.
What I mean is, you dont have units that are so useless or redundant that if you have purchased them you have to replace them to compete. The easy example is the rough rider. I personally think I have the coolest rough rider conversions I have ever seen, but ultimately they are useless. If I went to a tournament I would not be able to win even using them in the most efficient manner available. I would call that inferior because it forces you (if you wish to compete) to buy other units instead of working a way to use the units you have.
If someone has built sniper rifles on their army they are gonna regret it as well. Not because they cant learn how to use them, but because there is no point using them if you want to compete.
So in many ways I would say its inferior. Because a game that relies on you owning the right units pretty much gives you no options should you want to compete.
In contrast to all the games I play were everything is a decent option and can be used properly. Obviously my suicide Japanese with anti tank weapons are gonna be useless if no tanks are available, but one game allows me to trade them back for rifles, the other one gives me extra order dice to play with. A suicide team as a very specific task and opponent to do, and with no tanks in the area it literally cannot do anything besides move and defend itself in combat maybe. But both games offer a tradeoff IN game for them. As mentioned before. In 40k, if you have brought a lasgun to a game filled with platoon guardsmen its a useless unit and no matter how well you use it, you will go away from the game thinking how pointless all your tank weapons have become. Because there is nothing you can do about bringing anti tanks guns against an army with no viable targets. And in 40k anti tank guns can shoot infantry too. So in 40k units are actually more versatile (they can shoot anything and do anything) but are also more likely to be pointless. I dont have this problem in other games. yet.
I dont know if im explaining it right, games that rely on you having certain units and NOT having other units despite it looking like you can take them all is inferior to a game where you can take the units you need and want without them being wasted or replaceable because they are wrong?
EVIL INC wrote: Offhand, I would say that if you like the game, play and enjoy it. Dont try to force liking it down someone elses throat.
Likewise, if you dont like it, dont play it. Move on to whatever game you like and the forums for that game and dont spend your time trying to ram your dislike down others throats who do like it.
of course, thats just my viewpoint.
I've found that people who have claimed they don't play 40k anymore come to this forum quite often and put the game down. If I quit 40k, I wouldn't be on its forums. I've always found this hysterical.
That is all.
It matters because people who've quit consistantly put 40k down on the 40k sub forum of dakka. I find that silly. If I wasn't in the 40k hobby, I wouldn't be on the 40k sub forum. Plain and simple.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: It matters because people who've quit consistantly put 40k down on the 40k sub forum of dakka. I find that silly. If I wasn't in the 40k hobby, I wouldn't be on the 40k sub forum. Plain and simple.
If it got me angry enough for a rage-quit, discouraging others "for their own good"... it would be a public service, trying to help, make you feel warm and fuzzy inside.
You may be motivated for other reasons.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
GrafWattenburg wrote: Chaos got Drop Pods, Tyranids get decent units. I have hope for the future!
I must admit for the "hate" Tyranids had seen, it is like the abused being greeted with praise: the contrast is like rainbows and unicorns.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: It matters because people who've quit consistantly put 40k down on the 40k sub forum of dakka. I find that silly. If I wasn't in the 40k hobby, I wouldn't be on the 40k sub forum. Plain and simple.
If it got me angry enough for a rage-quit, discouraging others "for their own good"... it would be a public service, trying to help, make you feel warm and fuzzy inside.
You may be motivated for other reasons.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
GrafWattenburg wrote: Chaos got Drop Pods, Tyranids get decent units. I have hope for the future!
I must admit for the "hate" Tyranids had seen, it is like the abused being greeted with praise: the contrast is like rainbows and unicorns.
Nah I don't waste my time with things I've let go of. I'm not a vindictive girlfriend lmao.
Swastakowey wrote: What I mean is, you dont have units that are so useless or redundant that if you have purchased them you have to replace them to compete. The easy example is the rough rider. I personally think I have the coolest rough rider conversions I have ever seen, but ultimately they are useless. If I went to a tournament I would not be able to win even using them in the most efficient manner available. I would call that inferior because it forces you (if you wish to compete) to buy other units instead of working a way to use the units you have.
If someone has built sniper rifles on their army they are gonna regret it as well. Not because they cant learn how to use them, but because there is no point using them if you want to compete.
So in many ways I would say its inferior. Because a game that relies on you owning the right units pretty much gives you no options should you want to compete.
In contrast to all the games I play were everything is a decent option and can be used properly. Obviously my suicide Japanese with anti tank weapons are gonna be useless if no tanks are available, but one game allows me to trade them back for rifles, the other one gives me extra order dice to play with. A suicide team as a very specific task and opponent to do, and with no tanks in the area it literally cannot do anything besides move and defend itself in combat maybe. But both games offer a tradeoff IN game for them. As mentioned before. In 40k, if you have brought a lasgun to a game filled with platoon guardsmen its a useless unit and no matter how well you use it, you will go away from the game thinking how pointless all your tank weapons have become. Because there is nothing you can do about bringing anti tanks guns against an army with no viable targets. And in 40k anti tank guns can shoot infantry too. So in 40k units are actually more versatile (they can shoot anything and do anything) but are also more likely to be pointless. I dont have this problem in other games. yet.
I dont know if im explaining it right, games that rely on you having certain units and NOT having other units despite it looking like you can take them all is inferior to a game where you can take the units you need and want without them being wasted or replaceable because they are wrong?
Ok, yeah, I get it and am happy to concede that there are some 40k units that are clearly much better alternatives, making certain units obviously weak and inferior. I'm happy to agree that 40k would be a better game, if there were fewer of these issues.
It bothers me less for a couple of reasons. First, as a proportion of my entertainment gaming (I'm not including painting/modelling, as this is in the "hobby" bucket rather than entertainment gaming), 40k is a pretty small ratio of my time. I've spent a lot more time on computer games, including FPS and RTS; plus, in the past, Magic the Gathering, and in the present, Hearthstone (the computer TCG by Blizzard). You probably see where I'm going with this... the type of balance issue you describe (where there is one unit/card that is ridiculously better than another) is so prevalent that I've simply become desensitized to it, and I choose the superior alternatives.
Frankly, in tabletop boardgames it's less an issue, because most gaming groups I've been in have adjusted for these in house list adjustments. Also, when you say, "competitive", that assumes many things, most importantly, that you're matched with someone who is equally skilled and has similar experience and resources. This is just so rare for me. There's often people I pair with that have gimped armies, where I have to gimp my own list or play with fewer points for the game itself to be "competitive"... or... fun. In essence, I'm trying to correct the problem that you describe
Again, I do take your point and agree with it. 40k would be a better game if every model could be effective in a general way, without it either being a specific answer to an uncommon situation, or being simply obviously inferior to another available alternative (how many times have people asked, why take a chainsword instead of a bolt pistol?).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
GrafWattenburg wrote: Chaos got Drop Pods, Tyranids get decent units. I have hope for the future!
Tyranid Drop Pod too
I think I am going to have to start buying Tyranids, hehe. I've always loved so many of the models. This may put a crimp on ever getting my Dark Eldar army done!
1 three model big infantry model kit.
1 Riptide sized giant unit
2-4 fewer named characters.
1 obligatory day 1 DLC unoriginal codex supplement with no new models.
I counter with Dark Eldar...
We only got the 2nd 2... and it greatly affected my decision to continue not playing 40k. I like the direction GW is going... in fantasy. But for 40k they took my favorite army & the only one I truly enjoyed anymore & gave them the shaft.
1 three model big infantry model kit.
1 Riptide sized giant unit
2-4 fewer named characters.
1 obligatory day 1 DLC unoriginal codex supplement with no new models.
I counter with Dark Eldar...
We only got the 2nd 2... and it greatly affected my decision to continue not playing 40k. I like the direction GW is going... in fantasy. But for 40k they took my favorite army & the only one I truly enjoyed anymore & gave them the shaft.
The new DE book is very competitive. I just placed in a tourney with them. Beat space marines, eldar, and daemons.
The new DE book is very competitive. I just placed in a tourney with them. Beat space marines, eldar, and daemons.
Your dark Eldar army isnt even close to being painted. I doubt you have played in a tournament with your Dark Eldar... which you are trying to sell some of.
Unless you enter tournaments with unpainted armies in which case you are just being hypocritical.
Either way, take what this guy says with a grain of salt.
Not that it really matters, its just that comment annoyed me for some reason...
As for painting again it's technically on a tournament by tournament basis but the general trend is Fantasy requires it while 40k doesn't.
Wow, that's tough. Then again Games workshop dosent pass great tornements in stores anyway...
Seriously, if they want a game to sell they need to support it in all the areas where there is and/or a potential fan base. The US is a large place wich any other company would take advantage of. Bigger country ussaly means a larger fan base.
In Ireland (Well the Rublic) there is only one official Games workshop store, though they do at least have regular events.
As for painting again it's technically on a tournament by tournament basis but the general trend is Fantasy requires it while 40k doesn't.
Wow, that's tough. Then again Games workshop dosent pass great tornements in stores anyway...
Seriously, if they want a game to sell they need to support it in all the areas where there is and/or a potential fan base. The US is a large place wich any other company would take advantage of. Bigger country ussaly means a larger fan base.
In Ireland (Well the Rublic) there is only one official Games workshop store, though they do at least have regular events.
Our issue IS our size. IT would take an immense amount of resources to expand to cover all the US. Plus GW stores suck compared to local ones.
GW Store:
Full retail - GW product only - Short staff - Focus on sales
Local Game Store:
10-20% off - Any gaming product I want - Usually multiple staff on duty - Focus on growing an enviroment to drive sales
In most U.S. tourneys, you can enter place or even win with unpainted armies.
Different tournies score differently. In my area, you get ..
1. A set # of points for a win
2. A set # of points for a loss
3. Extra points for secondary objectives.
4. 1 point for having your army painted
5. 1 point for having it based
...until you can get enough points for a full win if you have all of the hobby extras.
This means that if you have all the extras, you get a huge boost towards placing/scoring.
A guy playing with an unpainted/finished army who places therefore has to do very well which is a good view towards the player/skill/codex.
I usually place and have gotten 2nd once and 1st once with my guard but without the hobby extras, I would not have.
Of course, this is just in my area. other areas will score differently but I think variations of this are populer.
BUT, I can see the point. It doesnt seem the codex is any worse, just different from before in that you have to juggle stuff about to remain competetive. I did notice that model-wise, the DE were rather shafted (I think you cant totally seperate the painting/modeling from the game play for obvious reasons though. I feel that they could have gotten more new shinies like the other armies did. Of course, it may be that they will be upcoming like the bug players had to wait for.
I'm rather enthusiatic about things as well if they just finish up the Codexes for 7th leave things alone for a while ,but I know we are going to get 8th edition in 2 years, 2016 definitely.
I can understand the OP's view to some degree. It's not all bad with GW, there are some brighter moments:
+ Out-of-schedule model releases
+ Faster codex overhaul and model release schedule
+ rules for new units in WD (this is a mixed one, but I remember the lack thereoff being one of the major criticized points of the WDW)
However, I must agree, this looks too much like a shiny coat on a shoddy paintjob underneath:
- Pricing policy, from codexes to miniatures are way out of touch with what's agreeable, no discounts, sales or loyal-customer-premiums, no nothing...
- Supplements, Expansions, Dataslates, WDW, Forgeworld lists... you have to spend as much on paper as on plastic just to keep an overview of your options for the main army, never mind allies and formations from campaign books
- Ballance. Lots of the codices still suffer from auto-includes, auto-excludes and overall questionable ballance compared to other armies
- Supplements more often than not focussing on the most balnd and boring factions, e.g. Black Legion, Ghaz' Horde, etc instead of highlighting some of the more interesting, niche subfactions.
- Removal of beloved characters or units.
- Still no progress in the story
- Model release focussed on shiny new units and expensive kits while some armies are in need of core models (CSM, looking at you) or, really, any models at all (sororitas).
The new DE book is very competitive. I just placed in a tourney with them. Beat space marines, eldar, and daemons.
Your dark Eldar army isnt even close to being painted. I doubt you have played in a tournament with your Dark Eldar... which you are trying to sell some of.
Unless you enter tournaments with unpainted armies in which case you are just being hypocritical.
Either way, take what this guy says with a grain of salt.
Not that it really matters, its just that comment annoyed me for some reason...
Check out the date in which I was selling / trading them. Since, I've changed my mind and have done quite a bit of painting!
If it makes you feel better, I can did the Facebook post from the tourney I came in third with, with its results. Might take some digging as the event was on 10/18.
Glad I have fans. Haters keep me fueled, so thanks!
Marines were white scars with cents. Eldar was wraith knights with wave serpents and jet bikes, daemons were typical herald spam with fate weaver and lords of change and horrors.
Glad I have fans. Haters keep me fueled, so thanks!
Spoiler:
Azrael, you're another one of my fans! I've noticed you watch every topic I make and are sure to give me support. Without fans like you this wouldn't be possible. Thanks buddy!
Glad I have fans. Haters keep me fueled, so thanks!
Spoiler:
Azrael, you're another one of my fans! I've noticed you watch every topic I make and are sure to give me support. Without fans like you this wouldn't be possible. Thanks buddy!
You're finding a correlation where there isn't one, I'm on here reguarly, you post daft threads more often than any other poster I know of, it is inevitible that the two will overlap sometimes. Besides, I need to keep an eye so I can spot the alter egos that pop up when "daly" is out of comission, don't I Mike?
Users in this thread need to stop antagonising other users by calling them haters and intentionally ignoring the thrust of their posts. It's inflammatory and against the rules of dakka
I don't pay attention to who says what. Lately I can't see posters' avatars and that's how I kept track of who's who. I don't remember names. (When I write my books I have to keep a list of who's who.) So if you see me responding to a lot of someone's posts, its because I think something ridiculous or flat-out ignorant was said.
(For the most part. Sometimes in a thread, one person derails it to a degree that I have to take notice of the 'who.')
MWHistorian wrote: I don't pay attention to who says what. Lately I can't see posters' avatars and that's how I kept track of who's who. I don't remember names. (When I write my books I have to keep a list of who's who.) So if you see me responding to a lot of someone's posts, its because I think something ridiculous or flat-out ignorant was said.
(For the most part. Sometimes in a thread, one person derails it to a degree that I have to take notice of the 'who.')
I'm quite the opposite, I don't make any real effort to do it, and it sure as hell doesn't work IRL where it would be useful, but I find keeping track of different posters just happens somewhere in my brain, to the point I can recognise a poster's writing style without needing to see the username sometimes.
MWHistorian wrote: I don't pay attention to who says what. Lately I can't see posters' avatars and that's how I kept track of who's who. I don't remember names. (When I write my books I have to keep a list of who's who.) So if you see me responding to a lot of someone's posts, its because I think something ridiculous or flat-out ignorant was said.
(For the most part. Sometimes in a thread, one person derails it to a degree that I have to take notice of the 'who.')
I'm quite the opposite, I don't make any real effort to do it, and it sure as hell doesn't work IRL where it would be useful, but I find keeping track of different posters just happens somewhere in my brain, to the point I can recognize a poster's writing style without needing to see the username sometimes.
Odd. For me it's just random, faceless posters and only occasionally I see a pattern and I go "Oh, it's that guy again."
So for anyone feeling picked on, it only happens rarely when that person makes the thread about them.
Back to OP.
I always had a kind of frustrated anxiety about playing 40k due to codex and army imbalances. I never knew if I showed up with my SOB list and end up facing an bunch of heldrakes or flying crusant air-force or all IK. Or, heaven forbid, the WS eldar spam. Gross imbalances that determined victor before the game started made 40k very un-fun. For me, when I saw 7th, I saw an increase of all the things I didn't like about 40k. (lack of real strategy, imbalance, list min-maxing, pay to win.)
When I switched to other games I felt so much more relaxed that I can build an army I want and just play without worrying about being completely outmatched by list building.
Agreed, while I can still have fun playing 40K, I seldom feel like my decisons are really influencing the game, as every time I make a choice as a "general" my decison is filtered through any number of stages of dice rolling. I lose count of the number of occasions where I've made a plan for a turn, with adequate failsafes and redundancies and STILL not managed to execute what I intended.
Contrast that to X Wing, where if I lose I can nearly always pinpoint things I could have done differently. Sure, luck can be a factor ( I lost an Interceptor last time I played because my oppo rolled three hits and I rolled no evades on SIX defense dice!) but I feel like I have much more input into the outcome.
Yes, MWHistorian and Azreal13, you pretty much nailed it: way out of balance lists increasing odds of being stomped and so much random dice rolls taking away most tactical / planned outcomes.
Love the X-wing example, was playing it recently with my kids and we all had a great time. Most things happened as we intended, the feeling of control was quite uplifting.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
They're trying, or they're not trying. They're trying to make it all better, or they're trying to milk the fanbase before it dries. Who knows. For me it looks like a chaos stage that can create a new order or plummet into nothingness, also milking with selling rules that, adding insult to injury, are mediocore at best.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: GW despite what complainers think, don't hate us. They don't set out to make us nerd rage. They don't have a vendetta against the player base. They are trying to keep the game fresh. Innovation isn't always well received but at least they're freaking trying.
GW is responsible for 3 out of 4 shops closing in my area and 1 moving to CCG and not supporting GW stuff. I have no place to play. This is more then hate. It is like selling someone a boat and then stealing all water in his country.
Heh that is a funny analogy. My shop seems to show the back to GW too and if the latter opened somewhere close, that could be understandable, still a dick move but at least having some logic behind. But no its in Warsaw hundreds of kilometers of distance and they poison a shop with their dumb policies and it is going to cost them in customers.
On topic, I played regularly during 5th but since 6th dropped, I played a few games only and 7th I haven't yet read, reading summaries was enough to conclude that it is a waste of time because the ruleset is not even a bit more tactical, it lacks proper reactive fire mechanic that would reduce alpha strike and stop units free roaming the map in the shooting game. Its also still cinematic narrative look out sir which stink in a wargame, the narrative should "forge" itself through good rules and meaningful decisions. Atm Im retreating to home play only, writing my own rules and if those end up crap, moving to Epic or some conversion or even 5th edition as I have only a single flyer that is ork bommer for laughs. Also Im selling my more expensive armies ie FW nurgle to fund myself a new more badass PC and give even less crap about it all.
But when it comes to direction of the game, I am not exactly against it. Since I accepted that the tighter game where I can control the environment is gone, I kind of like the possibilities ie mechwarrior esqe lance of knights facing a pure flyer wing etc but a game like that requires a tight ruleset and a lot of effort to make it work, something that GW seems allergic to. Im not agains LoW in regular games but they should fire only every second turn or sth, to limit them and show that firing a d weapon is not a bolter shot. Im not aganst unbound as I cant see why mecha spam, all mawlock mining party, pure panzer division or biker army shouldnt exist but you need a spam tax for that ie 10% for each same codex entry that is already on the list, take your sixth riptide now hehe (that would still require balanced point costs so hm erm not really now at all). I am not aganst mixing skirmisch mechanics with titans on the table it makes the game kind of unique, it might be irritating in rts computer games (like a modded men of war vietnam, instead of few guys you get multiple squads and you simply dont have time to properly utilise single soldiers potential) but here I can spend half an hour more on the game .Problem is you need to make all that micromanagement tacticaly meaningful but no I still have to shoot my heavy weapon at the same target that my bolters fire at and making a formation for cc makes little sense.
So Im watching the game carefuly, in the meantime not buying codieces that replaced art for particular units with more pictures of cartoonish painted minis, so we have even more pictures of minis. Not buying minis themselves unless plastic greater daemons new tyranid beasts or starter sets to nurglify. Not throwing on dumb random tables and calling out guys for eleventy billion duels because grimdark war is all about duels. Hope they will make a balanced and tactical ruleset one day, hope is a fool's mother though they say here. Anyway, waiting for 8th.
Heh that is a funny analogy. My shop seems to show the back to GW too and if the latter opened somewhere close, that could be understandable, still a dick move but at least having some logic behind. But no its in Warsaw hundreds of kilometers of distance and they poison a shop with their dumb policies and it is going to cost them in customers.
It may be less of a dick move than you realise. GW has some pretty stringent/nasty trade terms to buy from them (as a shop). It may be a simple case of they can't afford to stock gw and still run any sort of successful business. Remember GW actively competes with the independant retailers it sells to, and mention of them in any given board report is generally not favourable.
No I meant GWs Polish branch dick move to undercut an flgs hundreds kilometers away, and GW poisoning flgs with their policies. Writing fail on my part.
Ah, k. Yeah, its hard to fathom sometimes why they do what they do. I still maintain that they could outcompete video games for kids if they did things right. Just imagine that for a minute, outcompeting video games.
Heh that is a funny analogy. My shop seems to show the back to GW too and if the latter opened somewhere close, that could be understandable, still a dick move but at least having some logic behind. But no its in Warsaw hundreds of kilometers of distance and they poison a shop with their dumb policies and it is going to cost them in customers.
It may be less of a dick move than you realise. GW has some pretty stringent/nasty trade terms to buy from them (as a shop). It may be a simple case of they can't afford to stock gw and still run any sort of successful business. Remember GW actively competes with the independant retailers it sells to, and mention of them in any given board report is generally not favourable.
Frankly, I don't think that GW is much competition for their FLGS retailers. First of all, and perhaps most importantly, price: every single FLGS in my area sells product at a discount from list -- anywhere from 10% all the way to 25%-30%, with the median being ~ 20%. For instance, a $60 codex will run $50; a $100 rules set can be had for $75. Also, most of the FLGS will do a deal if I dicker a little bit when I buy a lot of stuff. If I'm getting $500+, I can usually get better than 30% off of everything.
Also, there are many clearance items which can be great. Today, for example, I bought 2 boxes of 6 Eldar Fire Dragons for $30 Canadian (GW price is $60 Canadian), because Finecast wasn't moving for the FLGS. I've bought most of my LoTR and Hobbit miniatures for more than 50% discount when they are on clearance.
Second, almost all FLGS have much more in the way of hobbying supplies. Even the crappiest FLGS in my area, that has mostly Citadel stuff, still carries P3 supplies, and a few Army Painter primers, and some old GW items that are actually useful (like emery boards). The best one has TONS and TONS of hobby stuff. Airbrushes, tools, many brands of paint, and of course a store full of non-GW miniatures that are also fun to look at and collect
However, the GW store is kind of neat to visit. They have a LOT of GW product in stock, so I can look at boxes of things that aren't normally stocked at my stores, like RoB boards, all of the super-heavies, and many odd-ball units that are not very popular. I guess if you really want something NOW, you could go there and just walk out the door with the unit (I would rather wait 1 week and get it 20%+ off, but that's just me ). The employee at the GW store told me that they stock about 40% of the current products.
The GW store employee was also kind of a dick (to put it quite kindly), and I wouldn't buy product from him if he had the best price in town, but that's a whole other story.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Torga_DW wrote: Ah, k. Yeah, its hard to fathom sometimes why they do what they do. I still maintain that they could outcompete video games for kids if they did things right. Just imagine that for a minute, outcompeting video games.
C'est la vie.
I doubt it. Most kids don't have the funds to play 40k at today's prices... even at HALF of today's prices. And, video games give instant gratification, fit an attention deficit crowd better, and has a MUCH better matchmaking system than tabletop miniatures that allows you to play WAAC without being perceived as an antisocial jerk.
Talys wrote: Frankly, I don't think that GW is much competition for their FLGS retailers. First of all, and perhaps most importantly, price: every single FLGS in my area sells product at a discount from list -- anywhere from 10% all the way to 25%-30%, with the median being ~ 20%. For instance, a $60 codex will run $50; a $100 rules set can be had for $75. Also, most of the FLGS will do a deal if I dicker a little bit when I buy a lot of stuff. If I'm getting $500+, I can usually get better than 30% off of everything.
Also, there are many clearance items which can be great. Today, for example, I bought 2 boxes of 6 Eldar Fire Dragons for $30 Canadian (GW price is $60 Canadian), because Finecast wasn't moving for the FLGS. I've bought most of my LoTR and Hobbit miniatures for more than 50% discount when they are on clearance.
Second, almost all FLGS have much more in the way of hobbying supplies. Even the crappiest FLGS in my area, that has mostly Citadel stuff, still carries P3 supplies, and a few Army Painter primers, and some old GW items that are actually useful (like emery boards). The best one has TONS and TONS of hobby stuff. Airbrushes, tools, many brands of paint, and of course a store full of non-GW miniatures that are also fun to look at and collect
Its a question of margins. GW has already made their money when they sell to the indy. The indy has to offer incentive to buy (like offering discounts) while still meeting expenses. Then gw tries to compete with them via their online store (of which more and more product is moving to direct only). Thats why the trade terms are such a killer, gw is competing with the stores it sells its products to.
Talys wrote: I doubt it. Most kids don't have the funds to play 40k at today's prices... even at HALF of today's prices. And, video games give instant gratification, fit an attention deficit crowd better, and has a MUCH better matchmaking system than tabletop miniatures that allows you to play WAAC without being perceived as an antisocial jerk.
Yes.... thats the problem. They have all the equipment to mass produce and sell cheaply, yet they sell low volumes at boutique prices. Expenses much. As for video games - a pvp game is a pvp game. Video games work enough or they don't, there's no misinterpreting the rules or arguing them, something either works for you so you do it or else you get the blue screen of doom.
Frankly, I don't think that GW is much competition for their FLGS retailers. First of all, and perhaps most importantly, price: every single FLGS in my area sells product at a discount from list -- anywhere from 10% all the way to 25%-30%, with the median being ~ 20%. For instance, a $60 codex will run $50; a $100 rules set can be had for $75. Also, most of the FLGS will do a deal if I dicker a little bit when I buy a lot of stuff. If I'm getting $500+, I can usually get better than 30% off of everything.
That is cool for you. But in Poland they made every B&M store that wants to sell their models sign a contract that they won't be undercuting the price of the GW store in Warsaw . Which is the only GW store in the whole country. I can't even imagine why they did that. Even if they wanted to take the big FLGS stores out of buissness,where do they think people are going to play their game? And why they are doing this in cities where there is no GW store is beyond me. If no shop will support the game, then there will be no new players, and no new players means smalle sales. It is as if they had absolutly no idea how the table top market works in other countries then UK. And it isn't hard to check how it does, they already have the date from shops and what they ordered in years past. And it doesn't require any extra cash on research to find out that here good stuff sells bad and bad stuff doesn't sell at all. So if they leave FLGS with bad stuff and limit the good stuff, to their online store and ordering to their one per country store in Warsaw, they just kill the market.
Frankly, I don't think that GW is much competition for their FLGS retailers. First of all, and perhaps most importantly, price: every single FLGS in my area sells product at a discount from list -- anywhere from 10% all the way to 25%-30%, with the median being ~ 20%. For instance, a $60 codex will run $50; a $100 rules set can be had for $75. Also, most of the FLGS will do a deal if I dicker a little bit when I buy a lot of stuff. If I'm getting $500+, I can usually get better than 30% off of everything.
That is cool for you. But in Poland they made every B&M store that wants to sell their models sign a contract that they won't be undercuting the price of the GW store in Warsaw . Which is the only GW store in the whole country. I can't even imagine why they did that. Even if they wanted to take the big FLGS stores out of buissness,where do they think people are going to play their game? And why they are doing this in cities where there is no GW store is beyond me. If no shop will support the game, then there will be no new players, and no new players means smalle sales. It is as if they had absolutly no idea how the table top market works in other countries then UK. And it isn't hard to check how it does, they already have the date from shops and what they ordered in years past. And it doesn't require any extra cash on research to find out that here good stuff sells bad and bad stuff doesn't sell at all. So if they leave FLGS with bad stuff and limit the good stuff, to their online store and ordering to their one per country store in Warsaw, they just kill the market.
It is as if they didn't want more money.
Wow, sorry to hear that. I had no idea in Poland, stores had to sell at list. How awful.
I don't know how it is in Poland, but our FLGS can order everything that the GW store can sell, and sells the new releases on the same day as GW (they physically get them a couple days early, and some of them screw up and sell hard releases early). Our stores can sell at any price they want to, and not including Games Workshop, there are about 5 or 6 stores that sell GW product.
What i like about geedubs
their YT channel, i actually improved my painting skills from utter crap to pretty decent wirh their tutorials.
Toned down power levels in new codexes (yeah, eldar and Tau have an even more upperhand than before, but they will get slapped with nerfhammer soon)
Deals(atleast some of them) actually save 10ish pounds
Epic models Zhufor, Helbrecht, Lysander, Kharn....
what i don't like:
prices (on the other hand i know people are gonna hate me, but Warmahordes, Which DOES have smaller battle size than average game of 40k is IMO equally expensive to start, since no one is forbiding you to play 500 pts games of 40k, which can actually get enjoyable, and there is no need to buy truckloads of models in your first shopping , altough to be fair the prices COULD BE a wee bit lower-15% would seem ideal to me)
lords of war- if there were less guys who bring them without warning every game, it would be OK, and perhaps more VP if you destroy said LoW(note: i mean super heavy vehicles, LoWs like Kaldor Draigo are OK to me)
Removing characters which didn't have models ( doom of malantai, Grand master Mordrak (LOVE his fluff)
some armies (sisters of battle, and to a lesser extent, iron hands) should get MORE options to kitbash and convert
So in conusion: i like the way they are going, but i will be really happy when eldar get toned down wave serpents i.e. when the process they started with rebalancing gameplay gets finished, when top dog armies get toned down
I find the discussion of trade terms interesting... I was talking to the owner of my FLGS a few days ago about things in general. When they opened he wanted to stock GW products and they refused to allow him because there was another game store within a few miles that also stocked Warhammer products. He didn't go into more details, just that they refused to allow him to stock their products for some reason or another.
So instead, he got into Warmachine/Hordes and told GW to take a hike. Now that he moved to a bigger store, GW has been trying to get him to stock their stuff again and he's told them in no uncertain terms no way in hell will he stock anything of theirs. I don't even think he would allow people to play 40k on his gaming tables (not 100% sure about that one as that seems a bit extreme).
I could not be happier as I just got into Warmahordes recently and the store I had been frequenting misled me about the interest there (and has recently been shut down) and the only other store that had a big community was an hour away. So GW shot themselves in the foot and now the store has a budding community of Warmachine players instead of 40k players.
