Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 12:10:28


Post by: Overread


So perhaps the biggest news from the LVO last night is that GW is going to do another big community survey. Let us not forget after the last one we got a LOT of things which were politely asked for in the survey, including Plastic Sisters of Battle.

I would thus like to get started on what ideas and themes people might think are worth putitng into the survey this time around. Even though we don't have it yet its a good idea to have some thoughts before it lands so that we don't forget anything.


Myself I think that GW is in a very good place right now and that many armies and games are working (at a very fast rate) toward a very good standing. So much of it is keep going as you are. There are, a few things that I'd like to highlight though:

1) Bring back Tomb Kings for AoS. Many of their models still fit in the epic fantasy setting; mostly its just their core models that need a rework and, of course ,a battletome. They are very iconic and their removal was a big shock at the start of AoS.

2) Bring back a cavalry focused human faction for AoS. Perhaps less chance as it would require entirely new models; but GW has really pushed the boat out on impressive cavalry and mounts as of late. Whilst Bretonnians are likely gone in terms of theme (though they do feature in some of the Inferno stories before the Rise of the Chaos Age) it would be ideal to see if GW could be convinced to bring back the themes that that faction evoked. Esp if they could be adapte to worshipping another god or deity or ideal other than Sigmar - many kingdoms fell and whilst he is the god of many I think he needs some competition; plus there was a thousand years of chaos - plenty of time for people to give up on Sigmar and find others.

3) Longer preview/release plans. Esp for things like Battletomes and Codex, but esp for AoS it would be good to knwo a longer timeframe on releases and what armies are going/staying. Though I appreciate this one might be abit late to ask once you factor in the time to read and digest the survey results; but I think it worth putting in.

4) Using GW's new community video setup to do a "how its made" from start to finish of a GW model. I think it would be a great feature and give many an idea how much work and how many hours and what the time frames are for a model in development. From the idea to the design all the way to a plastic model with rules in our hands. I think it would go some way to easing concerns from some who can't appreciate the timescales in production that take place.

5) An tightening up of cards in their boardgames. Games like Shadspire are great, but GW keeps releasing universal cards in faction specific packs. This seems odd, esp as they've not done the game in a "collect and swap the cards" style approach. It means dedicated fans either trawl ebay (which means money is going from them to other gamers or 3rd parties and not to GW as a product is being sold twice); or have to do without certain tricks and abilities.

6) More info in the open on when products are going to leave the store. The recent removal of Greenskins really took AoS fans by surprise because of how they were mentioned as specific allies; had a White Dwarf issue the week or two before that showed the getting started in a splash page of other "skirmish" packs. Basically the army went from "oh maybe new battletome one day" to "GONE" without any so much as a word from GW. Similar there's confusion over the Killteam card packs suddenly going last chance.
GW needs to get the community site to step up their game in communicating these things BEFORE they happen and also to explain and highlight them WHEN they happen. It's not as if gamers don't notice these things and its always a negative connection when we notice and its too late or its sudden with no warning or explanation. Far more so than explaining and being up front about such matters.

7) It has no effect on me but I fully expect the international side to complain about the price hike on FW products. I also fully expect Ozland and Hobbitland to complain about the very steep rises in prices on their products compared to other territories.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 15:24:05


Post by: Tyranid Horde


I have comparatively few things to suggest but here are a few:

1) Eldar are consistently one of the top factions through soup or mono-faction, but the line desperately needs some plastic Aspect Warriors. Even the older plastics could at least do with a re-tool like the Guardians or the Falcon chassis. The details are now soft, the models are gappy and they could pack a lot more into a new sprue.

2) I would like them to open up the comments section of their youtube channel. While you'll get the obvious trolls, having open comments to ask questions or get responses like you see on platforms such as Instagram would put a lot of faith into the community and improve things even more.

3) Seconded for Bretonnians, they were a faction I wanted to start around the time of the End Times and to see that they're gone is disappointing. I know nothing of the lore, they were just a cool faction.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 15:30:01


Post by: Skinnereal


Merging FAQ and errata into books between print-runs, and digital versions. Rules and points are updated quite regularly, and knowing that what you have in front of you is wrong is frustrating. New players should not need to know to forget or ignore parts of the books they just bought.
It might also mean GW would put more effort into proofreading, and getting it right the first time around.

This would mean printing dates or versions would be needed. I open drop into Warhammer Digital to download rulebooks I bought there, hoping to see changes, but there is no way to tell until you find any.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 15:32:14


Post by: StraightSilver


One of the biggest issues for me personally with a lot of GW releases as of late is the rapid turnaround with FAQs, Errata and updated rules for Codexes/Battletomes.

As a 40K player I now have to carry around multiple books and printouts to a game and when writing an army list have to consult a minimum of 3 different publications just to work out my points.

I don't know how this would be resolved but one suggestion would be to publish a beta version of the codex in White Dwarf or online a month or so before it goes to print so that any changes brought about by community/playtester feedback can go into the publication.

I also never, ever thought I would say this but I'd like them to slow down their release schedule.... I can't keep up, lol.

Edit: ninja'd by Skineereal.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 15:34:39


Post by: Horst


StraightSilver wrote:
One of the biggest issues for me personally with a lot of GW releases as of late is the rapid turnaround with FAQs, Errata and updated rules for Codexes/Battletomes.

As a 40K player I now have to carry around multiple books and printouts to a game and when writing an army list have to consult a minimum of 3 different publications just to work out my points.

I don't know how this would be resolved but one suggestion would be to publish a beta version of the codex in White Dwarf or online a month or so before it goes to print so that any changes brought about by community/playtester feedback can go into the publication.

I also never, ever thought I would say this but I'd like them to slow down their release schedule.... I can't keep up, lol.

Edit: ninja'd by Skineereal.


The solution unfortunately is to just use Battlescribe to make your lists, and only bother with hard copies of the rules when going to tournaments.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 17:05:55


Post by: Blastaar


I will be asking for sane prices across the board, a deep tactical ruleset for 40k, and a tactical/narrative ruleset for Kill Team. And dropper bottles.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 17:55:59


Post by: Lord Damocles


Maybe we can ask them to actually share the results this time like they promised to last time.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:00:13


Post by: leopard


I want an integrated army builder for 40k that gets official updates and stamps of approval, with the ability to drop out data cards in the current format (and an outline ink saving version) with the stats for the selected weapon options and rules only.

either as a subscription service or as in a nominal sum to 'unlock' either given units or armies


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:03:19


Post by: Overread


 Lord Damocles wrote:
Maybe we can ask them to actually share the results this time like they promised to last time.


In fairness if its as open as the last one was its likely not very practical to show us the results. It's one thing if its just a "tick on a scale of 1 to 5" then its very easy; but when there are a lot of open text boxes the results can be tricky to tally and the results are likely more complex to display.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:10:13


Post by: Lord Damocles


 Overread wrote:
In fairness if its as open as the last one was its likely not very practical to show us the results. It's one thing if its just a "tick on a scale of 1 to 5" then its very easy; but when there are a lot of open text boxes the results can be tricky to tally and the results are likely more complex to display.

Presumably GW were able to take conclusions from the open text box answers - even if that's just 'loads of people want lower prices' or similar, and they could have shared that information.
Instead all we ever got was that people wanted Sisters of battle - and they were most likely going to be revisited at some point anyway.

In fact, besides Sisters of battle did we ever get anything else which was directly referenced back to the survey results?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:19:02


Post by: Necros


I'd like to see them bring back the fantasy Old World and make it a real thing again. They can use the AOS rules if they want. I mean, you could play AOS now just using models that existed back then, but I think it would be better as a real supplement or expansion. There's tons of lore and history they built up over the years, feels like it's all just dead and gone now.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:23:51


Post by: Overread


Lord Damocles wrote:
 Overread wrote:
In fairness if its as open as the last one was its likely not very practical to show us the results. It's one thing if its just a "tick on a scale of 1 to 5" then its very easy; but when there are a lot of open text boxes the results can be tricky to tally and the results are likely more complex to display.

Presumably GW were able to take conclusions from the open text box answers - even if that's just 'loads of people want lower prices' or similar, and they could have shared that information.
Instead all we ever got was that people wanted Sisters of battle - and they were most likely going to be revisited at some point anyway.

In fact, besides Sisters of battle did we ever get anything else which was directly referenced back to the survey results?


Podcasts and comics. I think as well as supporting what GW were doing and wanting more there was also bringing stuff back. If you consider that GW didn't put Sisters of Silence into Custodes (despite SS having basically 1 kit) then it might well be surmised that their original plan was retire Sisters of Battle and make Sisters of Silence the "new" female marines faction. IT might also have moved them to update Sisters of Battle with more than a token update.

Necros wrote:I'd like to see them bring back the fantasy Old World and make it a real thing again. They can use the AOS rules if they want. I mean, you could play AOS now just using models that existed back then, but I think it would be better as a real supplement or expansion. There's tons of lore and history they built up over the years, feels like it's all just dead and gone now.


Honestly I think its just wishlisting. GW has moved on from the Old World; at best we are getting the old books being redone in new editions and collected volumes from Black Library and there's Warhammer Total War. Game licences as the most likely place to see the old world now and even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:33:59


Post by: DrGiggles


Updated Khorne Berzerkers with more chainaxes would be nice.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:36:31


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Squats.

Yes. I’m being quit’s serious. We’ve seen the Imperium expanded in terms of armies. And Chaos has had some of the same treatment with Legion Codecies. But Xenos are lagging behind with just GSC (very nice they are too)



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 18:55:26


Post by: BrookM


New or updated Imperial Guard infantry plastics. The current range of Cadian and Catachan plastics are woefully underwhelming at this point.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 19:03:17


Post by: H.B.M.C.


1. Prices. They're insane.
2. Regular Prices. Why are people overseas sometimes paying double for what the minis costs people in the UK?
3. FW Prices. Why did FW prices basically double overnight for Oz/NZ/Japan/etc., especially when the items are being shipped from the same place. You can't even use the "importing is expensive" excuse?
4. Cards. Sort your gak out GW and either invest in your own printing services, or stop making cards that are intrinsic to gameplay but cannot be purchased 'cause you ran out and can't get more.
5. Marines. Will we ever get a new Marine release, or is 100% Primaris 100% of the time from now on?
6. Miniature design. Your miniatures look better than ever, but are less modular and more restrictive than they have been since days of mono-pose 2-piece Warhammer minis. Please stop that.




GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 19:45:06


Post by: Sqorgar


1. AoS Kill Team (assuming Warcry isn't already it). Especially the killzones and terrain.

2. Not sure if this counts as GW, but I think Specialist Games need more frequent releases. Necromunda is moving at a crawl, and while AT seems like it is doing fine, but I think everybody is waiting for it to turn into Epic and don't want to wait 6 years for that to happen. And if they are planning on Battlefield Gothic, quarterly releases just won't cut it. Blood Bowl is fine with quarterly releases, but that's the only one. And they need more plastic releases instead of relying on the absurdly expensive ForgeWorld stuff (I mean, I need my kidneys, so make products I can afford without selling them).

3. Jesus Christ, would it kill GW to produce cards that are regular sized? It is impossible to find card sleeves or convenient storage solutions.

4. They stopped doing full painting tutorials on Warhammer TV. I guess knowing how to paint just a model's pants has some value, but I really liked when a new starter set came out and they showed you how to paint everything in it, start to finish. That really helped me as an inexperienced painter, and I'd like for them to return to doing those more often. Especially stuff like Blackstone Fortress and Rogue Trader should have more beginning-to-end painting tutorials for all the models.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 19:45:57


Post by: Formosa


1: Scrap Chapter approved as it is and roll any changes out at a single PDF

2: Fix the Eldar range, its awful and no i dont care if you "like it" or its "held up well" the models are old and need sorting out, they are near chaos levels of bad right now.

3: Create a set of rules akin to WFB to allow people the option to play legacy hammer rather than AOS with AOS models.



Pie in the sky stuff

1: remove primaris marines and have them as upgrades to current marines, so a tactical squad can upgrade to primaris tacticals and keep all options, including transport options.

2: bring back tomb kings

3: remove allies as an option for matched play or severely limit the ability to share CP
















Fix grey knights


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 19:57:39


Post by: H


 Overread wrote:
1) Bring back Tomb Kings for AoS. Many of their models still fit in the epic fantasy setting; mostly its just their core models that need a rework and, of course ,a battletome. They are very iconic and their removal was a big shock at the start of AoS.


Yeah, seriously this. The Warsphinx and Tomb Guards are already fairly "modern" kits. Skeletons wouldn't be hard to design. Chariots either, really.

Or at least do a "Made to Order" for the stuff that exists, especially the plastics. The cost to crank out a run of Sphinxes would be laughably small, because the mold already exists.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 20:09:28


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Sqorgar wrote:
3. Jesus Christ, would it kill GW to produce cards that are regular sized? It is impossible to find card sleeves or convenient storage solutions.
Well of course not. How else are they going to sell you their card sleeves?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 20:54:29


Post by: Overread


but they don't sell warscroll card sleeves!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 21:17:04


Post by: Sqorgar


 Overread wrote:
but they don't sell warscroll card sleeves!
They are basically 4"x6", but are just slightly too wide. You can make them fit by shaving off just a fraction of a fraction of an inch from the card, or by using 4x6 top loaders, which are designed for sleeved cards so they have just a little bit extra width inside. They also fit the big cards in Monsterpocalypse and the character cards from Blackstone Fortress - luckily, cards that are few in number so that having giant hard sleeves isn't a problem.

And for the mission cards in Kill Team, they make 5x7 photo portfolios that fit the cards perfectly, so you can keep a little book of mission cards that you can flip through.

The real problem is that oversized tarot cards they use in Necromunda, Blood Bowl, and everything else. They don't fit any sleeves and though you can put them in index card boxes, there's a lot of space at the top which causes them to knock around a lot. I'm looking forward to the Necromunda sleeves SO MUCH.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 21:36:55


Post by: Thargrim


I'd like them to start making their own cards/dice and accessories in house. So there isn't a supply issue and them having to commission another print run from god knows where.

But I will be asking for a chaos dwarf blood bowl team, at the very least.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 22:15:16


Post by: timetowaste85


If it comes before the Slaanesh news, I’m asking for a named Keeper of Secrets (practically a given), Azazel getting a new sculpt and rules (going back to the old world, he’s Sigmar’s most hated foe, and more than worthy of being a major antagonist in AoS), and Heralds on chariots/steeds actually existing in the codex and not just the index. I’ll be happy with that. Oh, and infantry that look like Hellstriders as well.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 22:21:48


Post by: oni


1. SLOW THE feth DOWN!!!
2. STOP PUTTING RULES IN WHITE DWARF!!! This practice is so disastrous; such a lousy and terrible idea. 'Let's make game rules that will be published and only available for a month or two before becoming scarce and eventually unattainable.'
3. Cards... Get your gak together!
3a. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
3b. Don't short change us on needed cards (e.g. The AdMech pack should have contained cards for the Canticles.)
4. Despite being beautiful, please stop making models that are completely impractical to use in a game, nigh impossible to handle without breaking and even more difficult to transport.
5. Return to completely painting newly released models on WarhammerTV.
6. Be forthcoming with the fate of Space Marines.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 22:54:08


Post by: cuda1179


Fix Grey Knights

40k Arbites Rules

Squats, or something like them.

Kroot Merc. Rules


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/08 23:39:26


Post by: DanceOfSlaanesh


1. PLEASE, don't just stealth remove stuff from the webstore. Give AT LEAST 1 week last chance to buy.

2. Bring back old dogs of war for made to order.

3. And a new dogs of war range for AOS

4. Open youtube comments.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 01:05:16


Post by: Dr Coconut


1. Primaris... No! They are out of scale for 40k, so release more proper marines. Treating them as specialist troops is ok(ish), but not at the expense of real marines.
2. Warhammer TV is a great tool for painting, it helps with seeing what the detail is intended to be (some of us are getting old )
3. Don't forget Inquisition, Rogue Traders and other 'minor' factions of the Imperium need a codex. No problem with them all lumped together in one, or in their own book.
4. There have been 2 Rogue Traders released in games, both have the same stats, same fixed load out and that is all they have in common. The keywords are different, and 5 points difference. Include game figures in the FAQ when rules are supplied for their use in 40k.
5. Kill Team... make enough copies to last until the next starter set. Keep the cards in stock, even if on a kanban/JIT system.
6. Red plastic!! It is a pain to paint.
7. Loving '40,000 Conquest'. Consider a similar subscription system for AoS and/or Kill Team. On the subject of Conquest, bring back Frankie and his tutorials.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 cuda1179 wrote:
Kroot Merc. Rules


If you mean what I hope you do.... YES!!!!!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 01:57:36


Post by: petrov27


-plastic Eldar aspects and phoenix lords
-Squats
-more painting videos of new releases as they were doing
-a little more variety in the Primaris releases (god not another Lt holding a sword up) and options (let 'em ride in other transports for pity's sake...)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 04:14:04


Post by: Ghaz


 Tyranid Horde wrote:
2) I would like them to open up the comments section of their youtube channel. While you'll get the obvious trolls, having open comments to ask questions or get responses like you see on platforms such as Instagram would put a lot of faith into the community and improve things even more.

They've covered this on Facebook before. They don't have the manpower to cover the comments on over 1,100 videos. You can still ask your questions via Facebook and it's much easier for them and the rest of the community to have all of the discussion in one place..


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 06:39:56


Post by: privateer4hire


 oni wrote:
1. SLOW THE feth DOWN!!!
2. STOP PUTTING RULES IN WHITE DWARF!!! This practice is so disastrous; such a lousy and terrible idea. 'Let's make game rules that will be published and only available for a month or two before becoming scarce and eventually unattainable.'
3. Cards... Get your gak together!
3a. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
3b. Don't short change us on needed cards (e.g. The AdMech pack should have contained cards for the Canticles.)
4. Despite being beautiful, please stop making models that are completely impractical to use in a game, nigh impossible to handle without breaking and even more difficult to transport.
5. Return to completely painting newly released models on WarhammerTV.
6. Be forthcoming with the fate of Space Marines.


You said, Brother. And how! Number 4 is an especially big one on my/our local list.
Spindly toothpick winged sigmarine flyers. Inceptor marines held up by guaranteed-to-not-hold micro-mini connection points to flight stands.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 11:30:47


Post by: Grimtuff


Agree wholeheartedly with HBMC on the minis. Far too restrictive in poses and as a result stymie conversions and cross-compatibility.

40k wise:

-Get rid of CP farming. It's a blight on the game and hurts some of 40k's biggest selling points (as the rules aren't it)
-Consistency across the ranges. Why can I not take a Nurgle Chaos Lord simply because GW do not produce one? It's petty and daft that they lack DR and T5 for no reason at all (this is an example, I'm sure there are more like that scattered across the range)
-More Xenos. A Tau auxiliary codex is a great jumping off point here. Utilize this point of their background.
-Stop removing options willy nilly. It makes a lot of armies look the same and boring to see the same stuff equipped the same way in several games.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 13:33:16


Post by: Nevelon


Get rid of “No model, no rules” Yes, it might make it simple for new players, but it makes no sense from an in-game POV and restricts modeling and legacy players.
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.
Re-cut/resculpt old kits. Yes new models are nice, but things like most of the Eldar range, and SM bikes/dreads/scouts are either finecast or ancient plastics from a less advanced time. Bring the core elements of the army up to modern standards rather than just bolting new crap on. The SM codex is a bloated mess right now partially because of this.
Price. It’s always going to be an issue. What gets me is what they charge for some of those mono-pose HQs. Why am I paying the same for one guy over a full squad? I understand the economics of it, but it’s still a bitter pill to swallow.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 13:50:14


Post by: nou


I'm glad to see that with plastic sisters finally out of the way people start to focus on demanding plastic Eldar aspects and other finecast-to-plastic range updates.

Other than that - ease on the whole Imperium vs Chaos centrism, all Xenos need more love and GSC show that it can pay off nicely.

Game wise - make optional terrain rules mandatory for Matched Play so people stop complaining about already existing rules being nonexistent.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 14:18:35


Post by: Dr Coconut


 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.


You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 15:29:03


Post by: Tyranid Horde


 Ghaz wrote:
 Tyranid Horde wrote:
2) I would like them to open up the comments section of their youtube channel. While you'll get the obvious trolls, having open comments to ask questions or get responses like you see on platforms such as Instagram would put a lot of faith into the community and improve things even more.

They've covered this on Facebook before. They don't have the manpower to cover the comments on over 1,100 videos. You can still ask your questions via Facebook and it's much easier for them and the rest of the community to have all of the discussion in one place..


Fair enough if it has been, I don't use Facebook to follow my hobby and doesn't stop me from asking for it. You wouldn't have to enable comments on all of the previous videos, just the ones going forward. Most of the time comments aren't replied to outside of the first few hours anyway and commenting with the video as reference actually makes it easier to respond to. There's a community of 270k subscribers on Youtube, it isn't hard to respond to couple of comments that they can cherrypick themselves.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 16:00:33


Post by: An Actual Englishman


1. A new Ghazzy model in the vein of the Primarchs and likely Abaddon. A character centrepiece for Orks instead of the mini me model we have now.
2. Replacement models for those we lost to our codex. I don't care if they have new names. 'Big Dok on Bike'. Megaboss. Big Mekaniac on bike. Whatever. Replace them GW.
3. New Boys models. They're showing their age and look poor compared to the newer sculpts. Replace the finecast garbage. A nonmetal warboss with Big Choppa and Kopta would be nice too.
4. Faster, free reactions to balance. I'm not paying for CA once a year to rebalance the meta of 6 months ago.
5. Better communication regards balance decisions. Why do 4 ppm Infantry and Castellans still exist at their points cost? Do GW know how good they are?
6. More varied boxed sets. It was refreshing to have Ad Mech vs Necrons last year. Why not go mad and have xeno vs Chaos or even xeno vs xeno sets?
7. More 40k Primarchs please.
8. Update all finecast/metal models.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 16:11:47


Post by: Ghaz


 Tyranid Horde wrote:
 Ghaz wrote:
 Tyranid Horde wrote:
2) I would like them to open up the comments section of their youtube channel. While you'll get the obvious trolls, having open comments to ask questions or get responses like you see on platforms such as Instagram would put a lot of faith into the community and improve things even more.

They've covered this on Facebook before. They don't have the manpower to cover the comments on over 1,100 videos. You can still ask your questions via Facebook and it's much easier for them and the rest of the community to have all of the discussion in one place..


Fair enough if it has been, I don't use Facebook to follow my hobby and doesn't stop me from asking for it. You wouldn't have to enable comments on all of the previous videos, just the ones going forward. Most of the time comments aren't replied to outside of the first few hours anyway and commenting with the video as reference actually makes it easier to respond to. There's a community of 270k subscribers on Youtube, it isn't hard to respond to couple of comments that they can cherrypick themselves.

Which would still present the exact same problem. Too many individual videos for one guy to cover. If you want to comment on them then bite the bullet and do so on Facebook.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 16:31:59


Post by: auticus


Community surveys are useless to me if they don't share the results. So I don't really have any interest in participating in this one since they never shared the results of the last one.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/09 19:15:19


Post by: Alpharius


I'd really like Space Marine/Titan Legions/Epic to return - so I'll ask for that.

And if everyone else could too, that would be appreciated!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/10 12:49:32


Post by: Nevelon


 Dr Coconut wrote:
 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.


You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?


I was more thinking codexes.

You can get the core rules for free (good step, I approve)
You can get abbreviated units rules included with most models. (I’m not sure if every box comes with full dataslates, especially older kits with more options)
But that last step, the army-wide rules, stratagems, armory, and full dataslates for everything together, still requires a book.
Plus points, but that looks to be more a Chapter Approved thing now, rather than a Codex thing.

So they are almost there, but not quite. And by switching to a free/digital system, they remove barriers to play, enable easy updates and generate goodwill. They will loose some revenue from not selling them, but collectors buy the special editions, so there is a market for people paying extra for something they enjoy. I don’t think book sales would hit zero. People who were going to pirate the rules will still do so, many people who want the paper will still buy it. More people will be playing and starting new armies.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/10 13:38:19


Post by: The Forgemaster


1. summarise all FAQ's over the year into the next Chapter Approved.
2. Have one location for any beta rules (e.g. a place on the community site.)
3. Don't short change us on needed cards (e.g. The AdMech pack should have contained cards for the Canticles.)
4a. Spell Check/Proofread all codexes/publications before printing.
4b. A beta codex in a white dwarf the month before (no points included, only power levels) so that any glaring issues can be fixed before the final print runs.
5. Chapter Approved should not have any artwork/stories/timeline advances - save those for campaign suppliments. rules only here please.
6. Basic infantry - e.g. marines/CSM/Guard/Skitarii/FIrewarriors these should stay as models that can be kitbashed easily - like they are at the moment (if they ever get around to updating them), I don't mind monopose models as much for non-troops choices. but it would still be nice to do so.
7. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
8. Stop with the multi-coloured plastic - especially red, it is a pain to paint over it. e.g. for AdMech - not everyone wants to run Mars...
9. start converting finecast models to plastic or bring out new sculpts to replace them.
10. Get rid of “No model, no rules” Yes, it might make it simple for new players, but it makes no sense from an in-game POV and restricts modeling and legacy players.
11. update really dated models to new scuplts looking at you CSM - more people will go for an army if the basic troops models look better and are in line with current modelling techniques.
12. and finally let us know the result of the quiz. if a lot of people want one particular item show us what this might be.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/10 14:19:31


Post by: Lord Damocles


 The Forgemaster wrote:
4b. A beta codex in a white dwarf the month before (no points included, only power levels) so that any glaring issues can be fixed before the final print runs.

a) One month before wouldn't be anywhere near enough time to actually implement any changes.
b) White Dwarf is written four months in advance, which creates additional timing issues. You'd have to be finalising Codexes six months or more earlier than currently.
c) White Dwarf is poor enough value as it is, without it becoming a monthly paid for beta rules delivery system.
d) It shouldn't be necessary for (paying) customers to be proof reading and playtesting GW's rules for them. They literally employ people whose job that is. If they're not capable of doing that job, they should be replaced.
e) If GW want/require people to check their shoddy work for them, then the absolute least that they should do is offer those beta rules for free.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/10 14:38:43


Post by: The Forgemaster


 Lord Damocles wrote:
 The Forgemaster wrote:
4b. A beta codex in a white dwarf the month before (no points included, only power levels) so that any glaring issues can be fixed before the final print runs.

a) One month before wouldn't be anywhere near enough time to actually implement any changes.
b) White Dwarf is written four months in advance, which creates additional timing issues. You'd have to be finalising Codexes six months or more earlier than currently.
c) White Dwarf is poor enough value as it is, without it becoming a monthly paid for beta rules delivery system.
d) It shouldn't be necessary for (paying) customers to be proof reading and playtesting GW's rules for them. They literally employ people whose job that is. If they're not capable of doing that job, they should be replaced.
e) If GW want/require people to check their shoddy work for them, then the absolute least that they should do is offer those beta rules for free.


How about instead they have some free rules on the community page that:

1. have "BETA" stamped accross them,
2. are not quite what the rules will be, i.e. slightly less powerful (to discourage copy&paste for free)
3. are taken down when the codex is published

the reason why I suggested this is because us as a community seem to be very good at finding ways to break the codexes/ finding loopholes in the rules. if they then had someone monitoring sites such as Dakka (or a place to feed official feedback into) they would quickly work out what rules needed changing.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/10 17:05:40


Post by: Brother Castor


 The Forgemaster wrote:

1. summarise all FAQ's over the year into the next Chapter Approved.

All non-beta matched play rules make it in already.

 The Forgemaster wrote:

5. Chapter Approved should not have any artwork/stories/timeline advances - save those for campaign suppliments. rules only here please.

I really like the current format of CA. It reminds me of the RT Compendium and Compilation expansions and the extra content means you get more for your money.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/10 18:09:40


Post by: Dr Coconut


The Forgemaster wrote:2. Have one location for any beta rules (e.g. a place on the community site.)

Hopefully that's what the download section of community is for.

The Forgemaster wrote:7. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
8. Stop with the multi-coloured plastic - especially red, it is a pain to paint over it. e.g. for AdMech - not everyone wants to run Mars...

Agree, a basic version should be available for the life of its requirement. Special/limited/faction edition versions can come and go as often as gw want.

I hate red plastic. It's mainly Kill Team and game based figures that are the issue. E2B DG are on green plastic, Pri maris marines are on blue plastic, both of which kind of fit with the official paint colours. They can do the same sprue in grey, you get it in the "Start collecting" box. Fortunately, I like to create my own armies, so my AdMech use red, but aren't Mars. I wanted my rogue trader to wear white, but the plastic is red, so required LOTS of coats
The Forgemaster wrote:10. Get rid of “No model, no rules” Yes, it might make it simple for new players, but it makes no sense from an in-game POV and restricts modeling and legacy players.

"No model (never has been, never will be), No rules" is fine, but to wipe decades of models from the setting, pure madness. If there has been official models, and/or can be created easily from fantasy/AoS, it should stay. Rough riders are a good example... Freeguild Outriders with guard parts, simple.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 07:24:13


Post by: tneva82


 Horst wrote:
StraightSilver wrote:
One of the biggest issues for me personally with a lot of GW releases as of late is the rapid turnaround with FAQs, Errata and updated rules for Codexes/Battletomes.

As a 40K player I now have to carry around multiple books and printouts to a game and when writing an army list have to consult a minimum of 3 different publications just to work out my points.

I don't know how this would be resolved but one suggestion would be to publish a beta version of the codex in White Dwarf or online a month or so before it goes to print so that any changes brought about by community/playtester feedback can go into the publication.

I also never, ever thought I would say this but I'd like them to slow down their release schedule.... I can't keep up, lol.

Edit: ninja'd by Skineereal.


The solution unfortunately is to just use Battlescribe to make your lists, and only bother with hard copies of the rules when going to tournaments.


And then end up in errors. Plenty errors there both in army building(so better be at least well versed on how you make valid legal army) and in rules for in game usage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 The Forgemaster wrote:
8. Stop with the multi-coloured plastic - especially red, it is a pain to paint over it. e.g. for AdMech - not everyone wants to run Mars...


We have these things called "spray paints" (or for me airbrush) for putting up whole new colour over it though ;-)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 09:33:45


Post by: XuQishi


I wanted my rogue trader to wear white, but the plastic is red, so required LOTS of coats


That's what primer is for. I don't care about the colour of the plastic - my minis are all black before the first brush touches them.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 09:40:27


Post by: Skinnereal


 Dr Coconut wrote:
 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.
You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?
That I didn't beleive until I DL'd it to have a look:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Warhammer-40k-Battle-Primer-English-3.pdf
"Warhammer 40,000 – Battle Primer - Updated 25/01/2019"
Cor! (I haven't checked it for errrata yet though)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 13:50:27


Post by: lord_blackfang


I wish people were as motivated to ask for Tomb Kings as they were for Sisters.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 13:53:33


Post by: Hanskrampf


 Skinnereal wrote:
 Dr Coconut wrote:
 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.
You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?
That I didn't beleive until I DL'd it to have a look:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Warhammer-40k-Battle-Primer-English-3.pdf
"Warhammer 40,000 – Battle Primer - Updated 25/01/2019"
Cor! (I haven't checked it for errrata yet though)

Don't bother. It's horribly outdated. That's just the upload date, not an update date.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 14:58:04


Post by: Herzlos


Longevity; nothing sucks more than finally deciding to buy something to find that it went silently OOP ages ago. Maybe not so big a deal for regular players but for the casual ones it's a deal breaker.

Like the Space Hulk re-release of a few years ago, it brought hundreds of long lapsed gamers in only to be told it's sold out. It happens with all of the boxed games, some still have expansions coming out but the core box seems to have been a single run so if you weren't in on it in the first wave or can't find it on an FLGS shelf or the used market, you've got no chance.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 15:09:17


Post by: shinros


 lord_blackfang wrote:
I wish people were as motivated to ask for Tomb Kings as they were for Sisters.


Yup, I thought I would see lots of Bretonnia and TK requests on reddit and here, guess I was wrong lol. Worst of all look at how many up votes a topic has on warhammer reddit asking for a black templar codex.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 15:33:57


Post by: auticus


40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 16:46:25


Post by: oni


I'm going to chime in here again and say...

Please stop with the kid friendly "Warhammer Adventures" nonsense. "Warahmmer Adventures" greatly and significantly undermines your core products. Catering to youngsters with heavily watered down product will not gain you customers. "Warhammer Adventures" is like giving them Duplo blocks when what they really want to play with are the cool-kid / big-boy Lego sets.



Edit: Grammar fail.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 16:58:53


Post by: Overread


 oni wrote:
I'm going to chime in here again and say...

Please stop with the kid friendly "Warhammer Adventures" nonsense. "Warahmmer Adventures" greatly and significantly undermines your core products. Catering to youngsters with heavily watered down product will not gain you customers. "Warhammer Adventures" is like giving them Duplo blocks when what they really want to play with are the cool-kid / big-boy Lego sets.



Edit: Grammar fail.



The thing is if the customer already wants Warhammer as it is then they don't need the Adventures product; they are already under the sway of GW current marketing and are already a potential fan. Warhammer Adventures is not for them just as its not for existing fans nor adult nerds totally swept up in the whole grim-dark thing.

Warhammer Adventures is for gamers nerds who have kids to introduce them to warhammer and for new potential younger people to get them interested in the game. The whole concept of them is an outreach product designed to appeal to new potential fans at a young age and draw them into 40K and AoS and the GW games. They get in on the Duplo and eventually advance up to the "cool kid" lego and then Lego technick.

You don't start everyone with lego technick, you have stages of products designed for different markets that appeal and are suited to them. Duplo is the very young kids market (where in all honestly lego is dangerous due to swallowing risk); ideally suited to fingers not yet suited to small intricate assembly. The kids get hooked on that and as they grow up they leave it slowly behind and advance into Lego. Sure Duplo fits Lego, but steadily they leave one behind and move on. The same will happen for Adventures. The young will get hooked on that, read into it and follow that title and series and steadily advance into Warhammer and 40K proper; picking up the more mature themes as they themselves mature and grow older. Sure if Adventures does really well they'll likely make some snap-fit models for the characters; they might even make an adventures game (just like there was Space Crusade for kids back in the 80s).


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 18:19:48


Post by: Vankraken


Only thing I can put in the survey is that 8th edition killed my enjoyment of the game. Really dislike most of the design changes they did with the core rules and how they stack the gameplay into stratagems and faction traits. Not that it really matters when sales numbers are through the roof and 8th is treated like the best thing ever.

Also Primaris are just so much meh and feels like a marketing ploy to force obsolescence on the entire marine model line so marine players will rebuy entire new armies while gutting the usable supply of used models.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 19:23:44


Post by: shinros


auticus wrote:
40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.


Thats the thing people have been shrieking about these two armies being squatted, I expected those players to be out full force like the SOB players.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 20:11:03


Post by: Overread


Bretonians is a bigger amount of work to bring back - Tomb Kings they can basically get away with it with just new basic troops - ergo the most high volume sales product and thus the one that should be the most easy to justify for a new mould casting.

I hope that AoS players in general get out in full force - I really thing TK have a big chance.


Bretonnians I think could happen, a human faction with a knight system focused on cavalry can happen ;but its likely goign to require new models from the ground up. There's also the subtle element that technically Brets ARE in the game - they are just Flesheater Courts.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/11 20:30:17


Post by: lord_blackfang


Bretonnian battletome is on preorder right now


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 08:25:03


Post by: Herzlos


 oni wrote:
I'm going to chime in here again and say...

Please stop with the kid friendly "Warhammer Adventures" nonsense. "Warahmmer Adventures" greatly and significantly undermines your core products.


It really doesn't. It just isn't aimed at you.

Lots of GW gamers, current and lapsed, will have kids now some of which will be at reading age. This brings a way to introduce those nurglings to the fold (if it's done well), and it also provides a new avenue for younger readers to fall in love with the lore and the worlds.

The teen players will want something more grown up and adult, but those younger than that have nothing.

This idea that something cheapens the brand because you like it is nonsense. If anything, I'd say the crapping out of mobile phone game licenses and GW branded tat (like mugs and bags) is what cheapens it.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 08:39:20


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Warhammer Adventures is incredibly dumb and stupid and is something I would never ever read!!! Even if it were the last book on Earth, I'd sooner burn it for warmth than sully myself with reading it. However, luckily for Warhammer Adventures, I'm not its target demographic, so who the hell cares what I think about it?

Always remember kids:

Creating a new product to target a non-core demographic? Good!
Changing your existing products to target a non-core demographic? Bad!

GW is doing the former.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 09:25:01


Post by: Herzlos


What is GW changing about 40k/AoS to fit in Warhammer Adventures?

It's the same worlds, but from a different, more child friendly perspective. You'll still have Murder mcMurderfang from the Planet Murder with his Murder Claws.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 09:37:43


Post by: Overread


Herzlos wrote:
What is GW changing about 40k/AoS to fit in Warhammer Adventures?

It's the same worlds, but from a different, more child friendly perspective. You'll still have Murder mcMurderfang from the Planet Murder with his Murder Claws.


It's not really changing much save that its not all "super grim dark like my blackest of black coffee". The artistic style is less bloody, the overall tone is going to likely have a more upbeat ending and the characters are likely not going to be quite as downtrodden.

Heck lets not forget one of them opens with a slave escaping by killing her owner (or something to that effect I only glanced at the opening presented). So its hardly as if there isn't some fighting going on. It's just going to be closer to something like Treasure Island rather than a blow by blow of the most bloody things Captain Morgan did in vivid detail.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 09:50:32


Post by: Herzlos


Which doesn't seem unreasonable - someone in the extended universe must be doing something beyond mindless, miserable drudgery all the time and there must be some happy-ish endings.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 09:58:15


Post by: Overread


If you read into the short stories there's love, victories, success and noble heroes all the time. Heck a lot of them are closer to wartime adventures than purist Grim Dark. In fact I'd say the whole Grim Dark is born more out of the artwork that GW makes and the imaginations of players and the overarching story structure than anything else.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 10:00:20


Post by: Hanskrampf


Herzlos wrote:
Which doesn't seem unreasonable - someone in the extended universe must be doing something beyond mindless, miserable drudgery all the time and there must be some happy-ish endings.

Sounds a lot like heresy.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 10:37:05


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Herzlos wrote:
What is GW changing about 40k/AoS to fit in Warhammer Adventures?
Nothing. That was my point.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 11:01:29


Post by: Lord Kragan


 Overread wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
What is GW changing about 40k/AoS to fit in Warhammer Adventures?

It's the same worlds, but from a different, more child friendly perspective. You'll still have Murder mcMurderfang from the Planet Murder with his Murder Claws.


It's not really changing much save that its not all "super grim dark like my blackest of black coffee". The artistic style is less bloody, the overall tone is going to likely have a more upbeat ending and the characters are likely not going to be quite as downtrodden.

Heck lets not forget one of them opens with a slave escaping by killing her owner (or something to that effect I only glanced at the opening presented). So its hardly as if there isn't some fighting going on. It's just going to be closer to something like Treasure Island rather than a blow by blow of the most bloody things Captain Morgan did in vivid detail.



The bit of less downtrodden is the most humorous, because Kiri, the protagonist of the Sigmar novel, literally sees her mother die in a slave camp from starvation before fleeing and having had to kill a man (chapter 1). She then spends an entire year living in misery and running for dear life until, right after being chased by wolves, she discovers that what her mother dreamed off may have never existed and that Kiri was just listening to a deluded cop-out as she sees the ravaged ruins of the place. (chapter 2)

Like, that is a very high bar in terms of fethed up, about on par with Dante's story if you ask me.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/12 11:10:49


Post by: Overread


Lord Kragan wrote:
 Overread wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
What is GW changing about 40k/AoS to fit in Warhammer Adventures?

It's the same worlds, but from a different, more child friendly perspective. You'll still have Murder mcMurderfang from the Planet Murder with his Murder Claws.


It's not really changing much save that its not all "super grim dark like my blackest of black coffee". The artistic style is less bloody, the overall tone is going to likely have a more upbeat ending and the characters are likely not going to be quite as downtrodden.

Heck lets not forget one of them opens with a slave escaping by killing her owner (or something to that effect I only glanced at the opening presented). So its hardly as if there isn't some fighting going on. It's just going to be closer to something like Treasure Island rather than a blow by blow of the most bloody things Captain Morgan did in vivid detail.



The bit of less downtrodden is the most humorous, because Kiri, the protagonist of the Sigmar novel, literally sees her mother die in a slave camp from starvation before fleeing and having had to kill a man (chapter 1). She then spends an entire year living in misery and running for dear life until, right after being chased by wolves, she discovers that what her mother dreamed off may have never existed and that Kiri was just listening to a deluded cop-out as she sees the ravaged ruins of the place. (chapter 2)

Like, that is a very high bar in terms of fethed up, about on par with Dante's story if you ask me.


Darn it now I actually want to read the story!



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 09:28:35


Post by: Geifer


 shinros wrote:
auticus wrote:
40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.


Thats the thing people have been shrieking about these two armies being squatted, I expected those players to be out full force like the SOB players.


Since I don't habitually shriek I don't know if my opinion is of any use here, but I suspect that for plenty of people the world has simply moved on.

The Tomb Kings range is in dire shape because the update didn't redo the core skeletons and instead gave us new kits that inherited their bobbleheads, and since I very much doubt that an eventual return will see the last plastic kits remade in addition to necessary core kits, it just doesn'T strike me as something GW is likely to put enough effort into the army even if enough people petition for it.

The background is not going to be the same anyway. We have an entirely different setting now in which such a thing as Nehekhara has no history, which would give us Tomb Kings only in name.

Compare that to Sisters which have to put up with background changes to the setting only in a marginal way (so far as we know until the codex hits). And unlike Tomb Kings they are getting a full redo in plastic because their range is in that bad a shape.

And most importantly, GW squatted Tomb Kings but kept Sisters around. The result for players is largely the same, but it sends a message that GW might consider one of these still viable, but not the other.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Warhammer Adventures is incredibly dumb and stupid and is something I would never ever read!!! Even if it were the last book on Earth, I'd sooner burn it for warmth than sully myself with reading it. However, luckily for Warhammer Adventures, I'm not its target demographic, so who the hell cares what I think about it?


The target demographic is ages 8+. You're 8+, aren't you?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 13:14:12


Post by: Ginjitzu


When the actual survey comes along, I'll boil this down to my top three, but currently my list of requests in no particular order is as follows:

Updated Eldar range.
Consolidate all FAQ/errata and points changes into Chapter Approved.
Plastic Death Korps of Krieg or new Steel Legion range.
Do not discontinue the oldmarines product line yet.
Absolutely do not open the YouTube comments section.
Please don't bring back any dead Primarchs.
Cheaper, softcover codices.
Please, please improve your publication proofing process.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 15:45:14


Post by: Just Tony


WFB Legacy edition for Specialist Games, even if it's only rules. Though if they had some VS sets it wouldn't be a bad thing. Just reissue the rule set plastics in a box together.

At least still sell squares for those of us who use them. Limit print runs if you must, but make them available.

BRING BACK CAPTAIN CORTEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 16:47:20


Post by: Geifer


 Ginjitzu wrote:
Please don't bring back any dead Primarchs.


We should organize a campaign and ask them to bring back a dead Primarch. Just to see if they do it.

 Just Tony wrote:
BRING BACK CAPTAIN CORTEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ballerina-Captain Cortez 2.0 or a good sculpt this time around?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 17:08:53


Post by: Just Tony


 Geifer wrote:
 Ginjitzu wrote:
Please don't bring back any dead Primarchs.


We should organize a campaign and ask them to bring back a dead Primarch. Just to see if they do it.

 Just Tony wrote:
BRING BACK CAPTAIN CORTEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ballerina-Captain Cortez 2.0 or a good sculpt this time around?


Ideally I'd just like a fiction note that he singlehandedly escaped the Dark Eldar and fought his way back to Imperial space with nothing but a case of Hoffbrau and a whiffle ball bat.


Just kidding, but an official statement of life would be enough as far as fluff. I play 3rd Ed. so my rules are already covered.


If they want to make a new model that isn't a damn Primaris, I'd be on board. If not, I'm content with the one I have. It'd be nifty if someone would make an add on sprue for the multi part Captain kit so I could just use it. I REALLY hate pewter.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 19:04:50


Post by: tneva82


 Overread wrote:
Bretonnians I think could happen, a human faction with a knight system focused on cavalry can happen ;but its likely goign to require new models from the ground up. There's also the subtle element that technically Brets ARE in the game - they are just Flesheater Courts.


Last time I checked flesheater courts have no cavalry but all infantry. Doesn't sound that bretonnian to me.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/13 19:50:54


Post by: Overread


tneva82 wrote:
 Overread wrote:
Bretonnians I think could happen, a human faction with a knight system focused on cavalry can happen ;but its likely goign to require new models from the ground up. There's also the subtle element that technically Brets ARE in the game - they are just Flesheater Courts.


Last time I checked flesheater courts have no cavalry but all infantry. Doesn't sound that bretonnian to me.


Well I believe some of them think they are still on horses from how fast they move; others are riding noble pega....dragons!
Plus they did just get a horse endless spell (its probably hard to keep horses around them right now cause they are more likely to eat them and compliment each other upon the fine boar and hunt)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 08:07:05


Post by: H.B.M.C.


I fully intend to take them to task with the FW international currency disaster. They don't get a pass with that.

 Geifer wrote:
The target demographic is ages 8+. You're 8+, aren't you?
Ah... I... I've got nothing. Well played.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 08:16:09


Post by: Lord Kragan


 Geifer wrote:
 shinros wrote:
auticus wrote:
40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.


Thats the thing people have been shrieking about these two armies being squatted, I expected those players to be out full force like the SOB players.


Since I don't habitually shriek I don't know if my opinion is of any use here, but I suspect that for plenty of people the world has simply moved on.

The Tomb Kings range is in dire shape because the update didn't redo the core skeletons and instead gave us new kits that inherited their bobbleheads, and since I very much doubt that an eventual return will see the last plastic kits remade in addition to necessary core kits, it just doesn'T strike me as something GW is likely to put enough effort into the army even if enough people petition for it.

The background is not going to be the same anyway. We have an entirely different setting now in which such a thing as Nehekhara has no history, which would give us Tomb Kings only in name.

Compare that to Sisters which have to put up with background changes to the setting only in a marginal way (so far as we know until the codex hits). And unlike Tomb Kings they are getting a full redo in plastic because their range is in that bad a shape.

And most importantly, GW squatted Tomb Kings but kept Sisters around. The result for players is largely the same, but it sends a message that GW might consider one of these still viable, but not the other.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Warhammer Adventures is incredibly dumb and stupid and is something I would never ever read!!! Even if it were the last book on Earth, I'd sooner burn it for warmth than sully myself with reading it. However, luckily for Warhammer Adventures, I'm not its target demographic, so who the hell cares what I think about it?


The target demographic is ages 8+. You're 8+, aren't you?


To be pedantic, the target demographic is ages 8 to 12, as per the first article from Warhammer Community.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 10:29:10


Post by: Overread


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I fully intend to take them to task with the FW international currency disaster. They don't get a pass with that.


Honestly that was one of the worst bits of management they've done in a long while when they gave a big preview of "new cheaper shipping" and then sprung a surprise "massive price hike" on all the stock for overseas. I fully expect that to get brought up by people overseas. Less so from those in the UK, but certainly the USA and Australia I expect to be big shouts about it.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 10:32:43


Post by: Hawky


For me, it would be:

A new plastic kit for Veteran Guardsmen.
Veterans get doctrines and specialized wargear, Carapace Armor, Hellgun too.
Vanquisher Tank to be actually useable.
New Regiments/Regiment builder.
No new Primarchs and if, not those who are dead for good! And if then: Wulfen Russ, cloned Ferrus, Khan, Lion or Vulcan are the only options.
No new Imperium factions. We already have enough.
New, less-humanoid Xenos race (Reptilian, Avian, Molluscoid, Anthropoid (Stellaris has some good ideas), Goo or sentient machines (Yes, Men of Iron)), or some of the existing, Hrudd, Slann etc....
All point cost/rule changes in a free, regularly updated summary/PDF. (CA would be purely a supplement)
More Killteam expansions, some focused on roleplay (I miss the old Mordheim)

can't think of anything else right now, that has not been said elsewhere.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 10:45:20


Post by: tneva82


 Overread wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I fully intend to take them to task with the FW international currency disaster. They don't get a pass with that.


Honestly that was one of the worst bits of management they've done in a long while when they gave a big preview of "new cheaper shipping" and then sprung a surprise "massive price hike" on all the stock for overseas. I fully expect that to get brought up by people overseas. Less so from those in the UK, but certainly the USA and Australia I expect to be big shouts about it.


Thing is though that was GW standardising their system. This is 100% same as GW main. Almost certainly decision by upper GW command who didn't want to have 2 different systems to upkeep.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 10:48:40


Post by: Overread


tneva82 wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I fully intend to take them to task with the FW international currency disaster. They don't get a pass with that.


Honestly that was one of the worst bits of management they've done in a long while when they gave a big preview of "new cheaper shipping" and then sprung a surprise "massive price hike" on all the stock for overseas. I fully expect that to get brought up by people overseas. Less so from those in the UK, but certainly the USA and Australia I expect to be big shouts about it.


Thing is though that was GW standardising their system. This is 100% same as GW main. Almost certainly decision by upper GW command who didn't want to have 2 different systems to upkeep.


Aye I can see the logic, however what I can't fathom is who in management thought it was a good idea to stealth the release. Instead of like with the getting started sets (and thus might have been them learning from the FW lesson); they instead hinted at price reductions for overseas people. LOADS of overseas customers were encouraged to wait for the updated prices with models in carts to buy and then BAM on the day the prices all went up.

Instead of a potential sales increase before the rise and then a reduction after they likely saw a whopping drop in overseas FW sales. All that investment from GW and FW scuppered with reduced sales coupled to a pretty major negative backlash from the international community.

It was just totally the wrong way to handle things unless their entire end goal was to reduce FW sales abroad.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 10:49:19


Post by: H.B.M.C.


tneva82 wrote:
Thing is though that was GW standardising their system. This is 100% same as GW main.
It 100% is not the same.

GW's overseas prices are ludicrous, but even I'll admit that them being higher than the UK does have some merit because it does have to be shipped and those costs do have to be put onto the consumer end in some respects.

Forge World? I'm paying the shipping. It's coming from their factory directly to me, not to a distribution hub/warehouse where it sits in inventory taking up space before being sent to numerous costly own-brand retail stores where it sits taking up valuable shelf-space and then I purchase it. It's no different to someone in Nottingham ordering form FW, it just comes further, and I pay that difference. Yet for some reason I'm paying 40%+ more for the product because... why again?

And for them to tell me that everything is fine and nothing is broken because I no longer have to pay expensive currency conversion fees (that were never expensive, a few bucks) compared to some items that doubled in price overnight?

It is -NOT- the same. Don't pretend that it is.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 11:13:03


Post by: Eiríkr


Update some core ranges, those that are desperate for a refresh in plastic.

- Ork Boyz
- Imperial Guard Troops
- Eldar Aspect Warriors

I was terribly disappointed to see that 'Orktober' amounted to a handful of new vehicles launched on the back of a boxed game. GW pushed it way too hard, I was half-expecting a new kit of plastic Ork Boyz with a suitably resized Ghazghkull to lead them. IG Guardsmen are looking a little long in the tooth now. I don't mind so much that they're Cadian, it's a fairly bland and inoffensive sci-fi human design, but it would be nice to see an updated box. The Elucidian troopers from the Rogue Trader box are perfect; more of that please. Oh, and maybe the return of Valhallans/Mordians/Steel Legion. Plastic aspect warriors, nothing more needs to be said on that. All of these should be multipose kits, I'm tired of seeing Death Guard figures in the same ETB poses.

MORE TITANICUS.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 11:19:02


Post by: Ginjitzu


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Thing is though that was GW standardising their system. This is 100% same as GW main.
It 100% is not the same.

GW's overseas prices are ludicrous, but even I'll admit that them being higher than the UK does have some merit because it does have to be shipped and those costs do have to be put onto the consumer end in some respects.

Forge World? I'm paying the shipping. It's coming from their factory directly to me, not to a distribution hub/warehouse where it sits in inventory taking up space before being sent to numerous costly own-brand retail stores where it sits taking up valuable shelf-space and then I purchase it. It's no different to someone in Nottingham ordering form FW, it just comes further, and I pay that difference. Yet for some reason I'm paying 40%+ more for the product because... why again?

And for them to tell me that everything is fine and nothing is broken because I no longer have to pay expensive currency conversion fees (that were never expensive, a few bucks) compared to some items that doubled in price overnight?

It is -NOT- the same. Don't pretend that it is.

Damn! I had no idea about that. Forge World's always been out of my price range anyway, but man, litterally presenting a price hike as a price cut. That sounds so horribly cynical; Orwell himself would be impressed by such doublespeak. When exactly did this happen BTW? I only ask because I wonder if it was a remnant of the Kirby Heresy, or is Lord Commander Rowntree not the messiah many of us see him as?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 11:30:10


Post by: H.B.M.C.


This happened late last year.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 13:12:13


Post by: Geifer


 Just Tony wrote:
Spoiler:
 Geifer wrote:
 Ginjitzu wrote:
Please don't bring back any dead Primarchs.


We should organize a campaign and ask them to bring back a dead Primarch. Just to see if they do it.

 Just Tony wrote:
BRING BACK CAPTAIN CORTEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ballerina-Captain Cortez 2.0 or a good sculpt this time around?


Ideally I'd just like a fiction note that he singlehandedly escaped the Dark Eldar and fought his way back to Imperial space with nothing but a case of Hoffbrau and a whiffle ball bat.


Just kidding, but an official statement of life would be enough as far as fluff. I play 3rd Ed. so my rules are already covered.


If they want to make a new model that isn't a damn Primaris, I'd be on board. If not, I'm content with the one I have. It'd be nifty if someone would make an add on sprue for the multi part Captain kit so I could just use it. I REALLY hate pewter.


I think there's no chance at all that we'll see another normal Marine like that. If Cortez returns, he'll be primarisized, no question.

Doesn't hurt to ask for more models for the best legion, though. Got to remember it when the survey rolls around.

 Overread wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
 Overread wrote:
Bretonnians I think could happen, a human faction with a knight system focused on cavalry can happen ;but its likely goign to require new models from the ground up. There's also the subtle element that technically Brets ARE in the game - they are just Flesheater Courts.


Last time I checked flesheater courts have no cavalry but all infantry. Doesn't sound that bretonnian to me.


Well I believe some of them think they are still on horses from how fast they move; others are riding noble pega....dragons!
Plus they did just get a horse endless spell (its probably hard to keep horses around them right now cause they are more likely to eat them and compliment each other upon the fine boar and hunt)


My take is that this is simply a limitation of using avialable models at the time the gave them their battletome, and now updating it without introducing further models. There's really no reason why they couldn't have voracious ghoul ponies that share the fantasy with the rest of the court. Not that I remember from the background of the first book anyway.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Geifer wrote:
The target demographic is ages 8+. You're 8+, aren't you?
Ah... I... I've got nothing. Well played.






Lord Kragan wrote:
Spoiler:
 Geifer wrote:
 shinros wrote:
auticus wrote:
40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.


Thats the thing people have been shrieking about these two armies being squatted, I expected those players to be out full force like the SOB players.


Since I don't habitually shriek I don't know if my opinion is of any use here, but I suspect that for plenty of people the world has simply moved on.

The Tomb Kings range is in dire shape because the update didn't redo the core skeletons and instead gave us new kits that inherited their bobbleheads, and since I very much doubt that an eventual return will see the last plastic kits remade in addition to necessary core kits, it just doesn'T strike me as something GW is likely to put enough effort into the army even if enough people petition for it.

The background is not going to be the same anyway. We have an entirely different setting now in which such a thing as Nehekhara has no history, which would give us Tomb Kings only in name.

Compare that to Sisters which have to put up with background changes to the setting only in a marginal way (so far as we know until the codex hits). And unlike Tomb Kings they are getting a full redo in plastic because their range is in that bad a shape.

And most importantly, GW squatted Tomb Kings but kept Sisters around. The result for players is largely the same, but it sends a message that GW might consider one of these still viable, but not the other.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Warhammer Adventures is incredibly dumb and stupid and is something I would never ever read!!! Even if it were the last book on Earth, I'd sooner burn it for warmth than sully myself with reading it. However, luckily for Warhammer Adventures, I'm not its target demographic, so who the hell cares what I think about it?


The target demographic is ages 8+. You're 8+, aren't you?


To be pedantic, the target demographic is ages 8 to 12, as per the first article from Warhammer Community.


Ah, but they did change it to 8+ later. I believe it was when they announced the audio books. I remember remarking on the change.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 22:18:54


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Dumb question, but they didn't say when this survey would occur, right?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/14 22:34:32


Post by: Overread


No just that it was coming up


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/15 09:10:53


Post by: Skinnereal


Are they just waiting for us to ask them to ask us the right questions?
Only then can they send it out.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/16 14:05:58


Post by: Binabik15


Brets back. If not them, human knights on horses, not zebras, not rhinos, not starving demigryphs, HORSES. At least I got a ptetty sizeable army and had a great ebay deal last year.

Tomb Kings line needs to AT LEAST get the Necrosphinx out for a M2O run. That kit is aleays listed at astronomical prices and clearly OTT enough for AoS.

A good Mordheim clone or Mordheim itself, preserved in a bubble of warpstone-based insanity bending time and space or whatever. Supported by warband releases like the Gellerpox and the RT dudes sprues with a variety of shapes, sizes and unit types on a big sprue.


Kill off the "no models, no rules" policy at least in so far aa not nuking megabosses and squad leader gear.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/16 16:19:41


Post by: Yodhrin


If you're going to ask for Mordheim, at least ask for the real thing even if GW's likely response to a surge in interest would be some AoS'ified nonsense.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/16 16:41:05


Post by: Voss


Id like them to be open about AoS. What's going to be a permanent (foreseeable future) part of the product line and what's going away. And they to get on that and get whatever other factions they intend on the table already rather than re-re-releasing Sigmarines and yet more Blood Blooders.

Which they're doing again.

At this point they openly and happily axed Brets and TK, and now greenskins have been quietly purged with little fanfare at all. I'd very much prefer the former than the later.
Granted, it was just the 'common' orcs and gobbos (and trolls), and Gloomspite is rather well done, but the sudden assassination of the core greenskin line is kinda foul play.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/16 16:47:57


Post by: Galas


 Yodhrin wrote:
If you're going to ask for Mordheim, at least ask for the real thing even if GW's likely response to a surge in interest would be some AoS'ified nonsense.


Thats unfair. Bloodbowl is Bloodbowl, not AoS Bloodbowl.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/16 17:30:38


Post by: Overread


Bloodbowl technically never fit into the Old World perfectly either, it was always a bit of a stone throw to the side.

I would wager any Mordheim return would be in an AoS city and setting. It just makes no sense for GW to formally return to the Old World; esp as it would cut out all the new factions (Idoneth, KO, Stormcast, Gitmob etc....).


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 00:25:19


Post by: privateer4hire


 Overread wrote:
Bloodbowl technically never fit into the Old World perfectly either, it was always a bit of a stone throw to the side.

I would wager any Mordheim return would be in an AoS city and setting. It just makes no sense for GW to formally return to the Old World; esp as it would cut out all the new factions (Idoneth, KO, Stormcast, Gitmob etc....).


And if they did release it (either as AoS-fied or original recipe), there's a good chance they're gonna drip feed it like they did for Necromunda.
That's apparently proven successful for them as people bought a quarterly update book for a year and then some/many/most bought the N18 version.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 00:35:11


Post by: Overread


 privateer4hire wrote:
 Overread wrote:
Bloodbowl technically never fit into the Old World perfectly either, it was always a bit of a stone throw to the side.

I would wager any Mordheim return would be in an AoS city and setting. It just makes no sense for GW to formally return to the Old World; esp as it would cut out all the new factions (Idoneth, KO, Stormcast, Gitmob etc....).


And if they did release it (either as AoS-fied or original recipe), there's a good chance they're gonna drip feed it like they did for Necromunda.
That's apparently proven successful for them as people bought a quarterly update book for a year and then some/many/most bought the N18 version.


Yep and the drip-feed system means if its going wrong GW can:
1) adapt the next dripped content to suit the customer market.

2) Drop the system whilst leaving what is released in a functional state. Even if people hate things to end or be dropped, it at least means its not left "half baked" in limbo.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 01:54:29


Post by: Yodhrin


If they did real Mordheim, I would tolerate the drip-feed without a single peep of complaint. It would still annoy the piss out of me, but having a fresh crop of players to recruit from and hopefully new miniatures at least somewhat in the classic style would be worth it.

They did AoSheim...well, lets just hope they don't.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 03:54:23


Post by: Voss


 Overread wrote:
Bloodbowl technically never fit into the Old World perfectly either, it was always a bit of a stone throw to the side.

It was in a parallel universe. Bloodbowl wasn't part of the Old World.
Yes, that's dumb, but there isn't any way around the fact that orcs are playing spikey ball with humans rather than ripping open their spleens and burning the whole place down.


But yeah, I wouldn't expect a 'classic Mordheim.' Especially if rumors about the skirmishy Allpoints game turn out to be somewhat true.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 09:08:12


Post by: orkybenji


I’m surprised to see people clamoring for new ork boys, I think the sculpts look great.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 09:22:29


Post by: An Actual Englishman


orkybenji wrote:
I’m surprised to see people clamoring for new ork boys, I think the sculpts look great.

Well it's all subjective but they are incredibly old sculpts.

*Notices you like Slaanesh*
*Looks at the booty on those old Ork boys*

I think I understand why you like them.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 10:31:25


Post by: Grimtuff


 An Actual Englishman wrote:
orkybenji wrote:
I’m surprised to see people clamoring for new ork boys, I think the sculpts look great.

Well it's all subjective but they are incredibly old sculpts.


They're really not. They got redone in late 2008. 10 years old is hardly "old" in terms of miniatures.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/17 10:39:53


Post by: Yodhrin


Also, a lot of the time when I see folk criticizing Orks/Orcs for being "old" what they mean is "I don't like the gorilla-esque anatomy", but that's a design choice not a tech limitation, and one I hope they don't change.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 00:21:25


Post by: Argive


1. Better written and thought out rules so less FAQ & erratas. Its an absolute quagmire if you are late to the party..

2. Get rid of resin/finecast and replace it with plastic.That stuff is evil and must be purged from this world with hellfire.. Please save peoples hands from being mutilated by exacto...Yeah I know its expensive but consider the fact that people are paying more $$ on ebay for OOP metal models so they don't have to deal with it... Id personally like to see Eldar aspect warriors in plastic and maybe even re-sculpted but am generally happy with anyone not having to deal with that crap.

3. New xenos faction or tau auxiliaries for more variety.




GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 01:23:22


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Yodhrin wrote:
Also, a lot of the time when I see folk criticizing Orks/Orcs for being "old" what they mean is "I don't like the gorilla-esque anatomy", but that's a design choice not a tech limitation, and one I hope they don't change.
The idea that people would want to ditch the Nelson Orks is just... heresy!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 11:04:59


Post by: Ginjitzu


When is this stupid survey supposed to happen anyway. I want to opine gosh dag namit!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 12:44:17


Post by: Waaaghbert


Reasonable pricing: why do 5 wracks cost more than 10 kabalites/Wyches for instance.

Update old kits before releasing new units with flashy kits.

Stop this "no modell - no rules" crap! I want a Mek with KFF WITHOUT Mega Armour, a Warboss WITH Mega Armor and Autarchs with their Stuff!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 13:02:59


Post by: Herzlos


 Binabik15 wrote:
Brets back. If not them, human knights on horses, not zebras, not rhinos, not starving demigryphs, HORSES.

It'll never happen, because it's too easy to proxy in humans on horses. They need to have some unique trademarkable hook.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 15:22:11


Post by: Hollow


PLASTIC GUARD!
I really don't see why GW, at this point, can't go all out and make plastic kits for 4-6 different regiments. Look at the Necromunda kits, great squads full of flavour.

Have a 10 man kit for Cadians, Catachans, Talleran, Valhallan, Mordian Iron Guard and Steel Legion. A character kit for each, a vehicle conversion kit for each, and a large weapons kit or two that could be used in conjunction with any of the 10 man infantry kits. Each of the 10 man kits would have two models crouching and kneeling. They could be fitted with Lasguns but could also fit into Heavy Weapons within the weapons kit. Man would that weapons kit sell. Just have tonnes of cool options. Melta, Plasma, Flamers, Grenades, Rocket Launchers, Power Weapons in one kit and HW in another.

PLASTIC ASPECT WARRIORS!

My first army was Eldar way back in 2nd edition and it's crazy to think that if I wanted to restart an Eldar army today, I would be using a lot of the same models! Be bold GW, clear the entirety of resin models from the Eldar line and go for it.

NEW STUFF!

Let's start seeing some new parts of the 40k Universe. At the scale of 40k we should be able to field warbands and small armies of Kroot Mercenaries, Druids, Squats, Vespid and some new guys. The Galaxy is a big place! Also... not every race needs to bigger and more powerful than the last.

THE WEBSITE SHOULD BE COMPLETELY OVERHAULED!

Come on. it's 2019! The website is really tired. Especially the shop side of things. You should feel, as a customer, that you are exploring the worlds of 40k and AOS when you go onto the site. If you take the example of what I suggested above about the PLASTIC GUARD. It would be cool if you could go and select a tab for one of the 6/7 regiments, it would then take you to the world of say 'Valhalla' and would give you in-depth information about the planet, it's standing, stats and data. The models would be laid out in a force-organisational chart kinda way. With HQ, TROOPS etc represented under tabs where you would read about, buy, learn to paint and... wait for it. READ ITS RULES!!

I really think that GW needs to consider what's going to happen over the coming years. They can't just keep on pumping out books the way they are currently, as well as try and keep on top of the rules with ever-expanding FAQ's etc.

They should also integrate an army builder to the website so when browsing I can put together an army list and the items would automatically consolidate within my shopping cart. Different combinations of purchases could trigger discounts or special offers and it would allow you to be able to knock together different armies and see the cost. It would be great to be able to go on, put together a 2000 point army list, see all its rules in a nice digital army list, all the models in the shopping cart with applied bonuses and discounts, all the suggested videos and painting and related media. Can download the army list with all its corresponding rules and print it or keep it digital.

SORT OUT YOUR SCENERY!

Why can't I go onto your website and buy a fully fledged Gaming Tables with scenery? (Maybe even some fun unique rules) representing different parts of the 40k and AOS Universes? Tables at 2x2, 4x4, 4x6! That also DONT' cost hundreds and hundreds of pounds! A price of 2x2 - £50, 4x4 - £100, 4x6 -£150 would seem fair by most As long as the box came with plenty of buildings and cool stuff. A nice one stop shop for that would be very successful IMO.

Learn from what happened when you priced the Primaris characters at £22.50. They didn't sell nearly as well as you had hoped for, did they? That's why you went for £20 for the Kill Team characters. I've always thought the pricing was ok generally, but it's a fine line guys. Don't squander goodwill with greed.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/21 16:39:02


Post by: Togusa


There are a couple of things I'm going to bring up when the survey is available.

First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.

Secondly, I'm going to mention the need for updated plastic eldar models, not just aspects, but guardians and characters also need to at least be considered and discussed as open for possible updating.

Thirdly, I'm going to make known my wish and love for a new Battlefleet Gothic game.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/22 02:14:03


Post by: H.B.M.C.


An option to "clear cart" on the website sure would be a nice addition.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/22 03:38:36


Post by: Sqorgar


 Hollow wrote:

SORT OUT YOUR SCENERY!

Why can't I go onto your website and buy a fully fledged Gaming Tables with scenery? (Maybe even some fun unique rules) representing different parts of the 40k and AOS Universes? Tables at 2x2, 4x4, 4x6! That also DONT' cost hundreds and hundreds of pounds! A price of 2x2 - £50, 4x4 - £100, 4x6 -£150 would seem fair by most As long as the box came with plenty of buildings and cool stuff. A nice one stop shop for that would be very successful IMO.
Isn't that pretty much just KT Killzones?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/22 07:09:05


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Those are out of print (mostly).


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/22 19:44:23


Post by: oni


Togusa wrote:First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.


They had one a long time ago, but it devolved into a massive dumpster fire. They needed to kill it and were right in doing so. I assume it's part of the reason comments are disabled on their YouTube channels. We will never see another GW forum again thankfully.

MtG finally killed their forum several months ago for the same reason.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/22 19:47:18


Post by: Overread


 oni wrote:
Togusa wrote:First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.


They had one a long time ago, but it devolved into a massive dumpster fire. They needed to kill it and were right in doing so. I assume it's part of the reason comments are disabled on their YouTube channels. We will never see another GW forum again thankfully.

MtG finally killed their forum several months ago for the same reason.


Actually forums are on the way out in a lot of places; mostly because a LOT of young and older people now use Facebook groups instead. For GW it makes sense to have facebook as their primary point of community contact and let their mods moderate there rather than spreading things thin over loads of alternate channels and formats. Basically if you want to chat go to facebook.
Now personally I prefer forums, but I can appreciate why GW will likely just stick to Facebook.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 12:14:09


Post by: Geifer


 oni wrote:
Togusa wrote:First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.


They had one a long time ago, but it devolved into a massive dumpster fire. They needed to kill it and were right in doing so. I assume it's part of the reason comments are disabled on their YouTube channels. We will never see another GW forum again thankfully.

MtG finally killed their forum several months ago for the same reason.


No more a dumpster fire than Dakka or any other forum. The worst quality of the GW forums was that it was a company forum and had restrictive rules about negative comments on GW's doings. I haven't looked at GW's modern Facebook presence, but by all accounts that's exactly what they are doing there, too.

I suspect shutting down that forum was just another of Kirby's brilliant ideas. Imagine, hearing the customer's thoughts might be considered dangerously close to market research, and we can't have that, can we?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 12:26:03


Post by: Overread


I think the GW forums also got a lot of trolls near the end; however overly positive moderation and removal of any negative comments I think GW also missmanaged the forum and bred their own problems that exacerbated issues.

A lot of people don't know how to moderate and companies can get really wound up tight trying to "hide" negative comments. Thing is that actually makes things worse because people see the hiding happen and that makes them think the problems are WAY worse than they actually are. Letting people air bad thoughts is better, company representatives can also step in to resolve matters. Sure the original person might be dead set in their viewpoint, but all those around the conversation can see that the company is aiming to resolve, tackle or at least address and acknowledge that the problem is there.

However they get worried and sometimes I think they hope that forums or such can be just positive advertising platforms that they control etc...

Other times they don't realise that the internet can blow something up over a day and by three days later most people have forgotten all about it. Ergo drama can be very loud, very strong but very fast to burn itself out.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 18:25:31


Post by: H.B.M.C.


I don't think GW would open their own forums. It's just end up being the usual litany of screaming GW-can-do-no-wrong fanboys, people endlessly complaining about stuff, and constant accusations of mass post deletion.

It's why I don't see them ever opening up comments on YouTube either.




GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 20:03:23


Post by: Dysartes


 Overread wrote:
 oni wrote:
Togusa wrote:First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.


They had one a long time ago, but it devolved into a massive dumpster fire. They needed to kill it and were right in doing so. I assume it's part of the reason comments are disabled on their YouTube channels. We will never see another GW forum again thankfully.

MtG finally killed their forum several months ago for the same reason.


Actually forums are on the way out in a lot of places; mostly because a LOT of young and older people now use Facebook groups instead. For GW it makes sense to have facebook as their primary point of community contact and let their mods moderate there rather than spreading things thin over loads of alternate channels and formats. Basically if you want to chat go to facebook.
Now personally I prefer forums, but I can appreciate why GW will likely just stick to Facebook.


Yeah, I just found out that the Steamforged Games forums are shutting in a couple of weeks, which is a bit of a shame.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 22:47:15


Post by: Grimtuff


 Overread wrote:
 oni wrote:
Togusa wrote:First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.


They had one a long time ago, but it devolved into a massive dumpster fire. They needed to kill it and were right in doing so. I assume it's part of the reason comments are disabled on their YouTube channels. We will never see another GW forum again thankfully.

MtG finally killed their forum several months ago for the same reason.


Actually forums are on the way out in a lot of places; mostly because a LOT of young and older people now use Facebook groups instead. For GW it makes sense to have facebook as their primary point of community contact and let their mods moderate there rather than spreading things thin over loads of alternate channels and formats. Basically if you want to chat go to facebook.
Now personally I prefer forums, but I can appreciate why GW will likely just stick to Facebook.


The thing is though, forums serve a completely different purpose to Facebook. FB discussions are all about the now and aren't sustainable like forum threads are which can go on for weeks, months or even years at a time. I don't know where they want people to to discuss this hobby in depth in any meaningful way. FB doesn't support that format, neither does Reddit (plus their whole upvote/downvote system stymies proper debate, but that's a whole 'nother topic there... ). Which leaves forums. Privateer Press went through this (fairly) recently with their forum users drawing the same conclusions I did, which is why they went and made their own forum (with Blackjack, and hookers! ).


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 22:55:49


Post by: Overread


Oh I agree forums are superior for actual discussion! They are a great platform they are just not the "cool new hotness" of the moment. Plus Facebook has most people cornered these days with no need to register or anything; its right there and people pay attention to it. I can see why companies focus their resources there rather than on forums.

I fully expect that the market might come back to forums in time once someone makes some nifty website app that makes them sound fancy and new. It will probably come with obnoxious interface designs and big shiny icons that don't mean anything instead of words like "post" and "thread"


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/23 23:08:59


Post by: Azreal13


 Dysartes wrote:
Spoiler:
 Overread wrote:
 oni wrote:
Togusa wrote:First and foremost, I'm going to be asking them to consider opening their own community forums attached to the community site.


They had one a long time ago, but it devolved into a massive dumpster fire. They needed to kill it and were right in doing so. I assume it's part of the reason comments are disabled on their YouTube channels. We will never see another GW forum again thankfully.

MtG finally killed their forum several months ago for the same reason.


Actually forums are on the way out in a lot of places; mostly because a LOT of young and older people now use Facebook groups instead. For GW it makes sense to have facebook as their primary point of community contact and let their mods moderate there rather than spreading things thin over loads of alternate channels and formats. Basically if you want to chat go to facebook.
Now personally I prefer forums, but I can appreciate why GW will likely just stick to Facebook.


Yeah, I just found out that the Steamforged Games forums are shutting in a couple of weeks, which is a bit of a shame.


Thing is, that place has been on life support for a while now. It's a shame that people didn't use it more, but the GUBS and Sales/Trade pages on FB are infinitely more active, and given SFG stated aim of narrowing the range of contact options to improve focus, I can see why they chose to close it.

The rules thing was the best bit, and getting official answers to queries from the Lawyers Guild in short time frames is going to be a big miss.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 02:09:59


Post by: Argive


Problem is that free speech and business just doesn't gel..
How long before a PR gakstorm because someone's son/daughter Snowlake felt like they got bullied because someone said a perceived mean thing to them about their army/idea/opinion...


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 08:20:46


Post by: Dr Coconut


 Dr Coconut wrote:
1. Primaris... No! They are out of scale for 40k, so release more proper marines. Treating them as specialist troops is ok(ish), but not at the expense of real marines.
2. Warhammer TV is a great tool for painting, it helps with seeing what the detail is intended to be (some of us are getting old )
3. Don't forget Inquisition, Rogue Traders and other 'minor' factions of the Imperium need a codex. No problem with them all lumped together in one, or in their own book.
4. There have been 2 Rogue Traders released in games, both have the same stats, same fixed load out and that is all they have in common. The keywords are different, and 5 points difference. Include game figures in the FAQ when rules are supplied for their use in 40k.
5. Kill Team... make enough copies to last until the next starter set. Keep the cards in stock, even if on a kanban/JIT system.
6. Red plastic!! It is a pain to paint.
7. Loving '40,000 Conquest'. Consider a similar subscription system for AoS and/or Kill Team. On the subject of Conquest, bring back Frankie and his tutorials.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 cuda1179 wrote:
Kroot Merc. Rules


If you mean what I hope you do.... YES!!!!!


Been thinking more on this....

8. Give units/individuals the same points/power level across the range for each setting. Opening up game characters for use as not just 'counts as'. Necromuna has some cool characters for this. I want to take Gor Half-horn as himself when used with my inquisition, not as an acolyte.
9. Identify rulebooks and codex on the cover regarding version. Just on the external cover, a publishing date or note stating it is intended for x th edition and later. I don't believe any rule books actually state which edition they are, and shops (non GW still have old copies on the shelves)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 09:45:31


Post by: JohnnyHell


Open their own Forums? Hah. Will. Not. Happen. A fresh pool for the saltier folks to piss in, is all that would be. Impossible to police so as to be a nice place, and derided as ‘suppressing opinions’ if they do. Heck, the mods have a rough enough time on here when some of our more difficult community members get bored of their MRA subreddits and come to trash threads. They’ve already had to outright ban politics. A GW forum would just be trolls shrieking about prices and nerfs and Bretonnians. I shudder to think how vile it would get, quickly.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 10:35:57


Post by: Brother Castor


 Dr Coconut wrote:
Identify rulebooks and codex on the cover regarding version. Just on the external cover, a publishing date or note stating it is intended for x th edition and later. I don't believe any rule books actually state which edition they are, and shops (non GW still have old copies on the shelves)

Apart from CA (which is versioned by year), which rulebooks does GW update?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 17:21:12


Post by: Dysartes


 Brother Castor wrote:
 Dr Coconut wrote:
Identify rulebooks and codex on the cover regarding version. Just on the external cover, a publishing date or note stating it is intended for x th edition and later. I don't believe any rule books actually state which edition they are, and shops (non GW still have old copies on the shelves)

Apart from CA (which is versioned by year), which rulebooks does GW update?


Well, the 8th ed versions of codexes have used the same art on the cover as the 7th ed, in a lot of cases. I can see possible confusion there.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 17:53:14


Post by: Platuan4th


 Overread wrote:
even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


Except one of the recent interviews for Chaosbane outright stated GW are shopping around the AoS license and companies are refusing it and instead demanding Old World access for their games. Companies don't want AoS and GW would rather have Old World licensed games than no licensed games.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/24 19:28:00


Post by: Brother Castor


 Dysartes wrote:
 Brother Castor wrote:
 Dr Coconut wrote:
Identify rulebooks and codex on the cover regarding version. Just on the external cover, a publishing date or note stating it is intended for x th edition and later. I don't believe any rule books actually state which edition they are, and shops (non GW still have old copies on the shelves)

Apart from CA (which is versioned by year), which rulebooks does GW update?


Well, the 8th ed versions of codexes have used the same art on the cover as the 7th ed, in a lot of cases. I can see possible confusion there.

Okay, I see what he meant now. GW don't really refer to the game by editions though so I doubt they're going to do that. In fact, I suspect it's the reason why there are a lot of threads asking what rulebooks are needed to have the latest rules in 8th edition too (i.e. the BRB and latest CA) - GW don't want to publicise that they're constantly updating the game and that players will have to fork out for new rulebooks on a regular basis...


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 08:28:49


Post by: Ginjitzu


 Platuan4th wrote:
Spoiler:
 Overread wrote:
even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


Except one of the recent interviews for Chaosbane outright stated GW are shopping around the AoS license and companies are refusing it and instead demanding Old World access for their games. Companies don't want AoS and GW would rather have Old World licensed games than no licensed games.

Can you share a link to that interview?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 09:02:51


Post by: filbert


 Dysartes wrote:
 Brother Castor wrote:
 Dr Coconut wrote:
Identify rulebooks and codex on the cover regarding version. Just on the external cover, a publishing date or note stating it is intended for x th edition and later. I don't believe any rule books actually state which edition they are, and shops (non GW still have old copies on the shelves)

Apart from CA (which is versioned by year), which rulebooks does GW update?


Well, the 8th ed versions of codexes have used the same art on the cover as the 7th ed, in a lot of cases. I can see possible confusion there.


It is a real pain. I have been organising my collection and gaming room with a view to finally once again playing 40K again. To that end, I have been going through the absolute mountain of rulebooks and codexes I have from each edition and trying to work out what is/isn't current. I have to have the Lexicanum codex page open on my iPad at the same time just to work out which version is which and as you say, in some cases, artwork has been reused. It is an absolute nightmare.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 09:39:20


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Platuan4th wrote:
 Overread wrote:
even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


Except one of the recent interviews for Chaosbane outright stated GW are shopping around the AoS license and companies are refusing it and instead demanding Old World access for their games. Companies don't want AoS and GW would rather have Old World licensed games than no licensed games.


A source for that if you'd be so kind?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 09:56:01


Post by: Overread


I can believe it on a few angles

1) Those coming after the licence are OldWorld fans so that's the kind of game they've wanted to make for years and still want too

2) Old World has a more developed and easier to access lore and setup; AoS is all big sparkly realms and such which is harder to visualise and some realms are hard to put into a game without more effort (eg you do the land of metal and you've got a lot of work custom building the whole thing; go for a generic old-world medieval setting and a lot of assets might be in-house made or easily bought and put together)

3) Total War Warhammer is still a thing and a big thing so many might be wanting to jump on its back and ride that popularity wave. Meanwhile AoS games have been fewer and often mobile focused (most are not that good there's yet to be a really GREAT and BIG AoS game)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 10:14:31


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


I'd still like to see a link to an actual source where the above has been stated.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 10:22:37


Post by: YeOldSaltPotato


There's also the fact that game development of any quality takes a while and they were most certainly well invested into vermintide and total warhammer before AOS was the big thing.

AOS being denied seems like a bit of fan spank, give it a few more years and if there's more old world properties then maybe, but right now? No, not really. At best we'd be seeing the first real AOS game about now if they'd gotten someone on it immediately.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 10:25:53


Post by: Overread


Personally the way that CA has setup the Total War story I wager that they are at least planning on doing AoS at some point in the future. That the first and second games start to setup the end of the magical vortex and a huge influx of Chaos demons by the 3rd game suggests nicely that they can end the world with Chaos and lead into their own opening of AoS.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 10:31:57


Post by: Grimtuff


 filbert wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
 Brother Castor wrote:
 Dr Coconut wrote:
Identify rulebooks and codex on the cover regarding version. Just on the external cover, a publishing date or note stating it is intended for x th edition and later. I don't believe any rule books actually state which edition they are, and shops (non GW still have old copies on the shelves)

Apart from CA (which is versioned by year), which rulebooks does GW update?


Well, the 8th ed versions of codexes have used the same art on the cover as the 7th ed, in a lot of cases. I can see possible confusion there.


It is a real pain. I have been organising my collection and gaming room with a view to finally once again playing 40K again. To that end, I have been going through the absolute mountain of rulebooks and codexes I have from each edition and trying to work out what is/isn't current. I have to have the Lexicanum codex page open on my iPad at the same time just to work out which version is which and as you say, in some cases, artwork has been reused. It is an absolute nightmare.


With the 7th and 8th books- If they have a border around the art on the front cover it's 8th, if not; 7th.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 13:08:49


Post by: Lord Kragan


 Platuan4th wrote:
 Overread wrote:
even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


Except one of the recent interviews for Chaosbane outright stated GW are shopping around the AoS license and companies are refusing it and instead demanding Old World access for their games. Companies don't want AoS and GW would rather have Old World licensed games than no licensed games.


I am going to ask for the specific clip, just in case it's not taken out of context or misquoted.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 13:34:57


Post by: Platuan4th


 Ginjitzu wrote:
 Platuan4th wrote:
Spoiler:
 Overread wrote:
even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


Except one of the recent interviews for Chaosbane outright stated GW are shopping around the AoS license and companies are refusing it and instead demanding Old World access for their games. Companies don't want AoS and GW would rather have Old World licensed games than no licensed games.

Can you share a link to that interview?


Been looking, but it's a bear to find a specific post on Facebook.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lord Kragan wrote:
 Platuan4th wrote:
 Overread wrote:
even there I'd wager GW is now signing AoS titles not Old World ones. I don't think they can go back now; AoS has been out too long and had too much invested into it to turn the tables back.


Except one of the recent interviews for Chaosbane outright stated GW are shopping around the AoS license and companies are refusing it and instead demanding Old World access for their games. Companies don't want AoS and GW would rather have Old World licensed games than no licensed games.


I am going to ask for the specific clip, just in case it's not taken out of context or misquoted.


Not a clip, written article.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 14:07:35


Post by: Semper


Better Rule Management - Merge FAQ's, Chapter Approved Changes etc into existing books so there's mitigated paper creep.
Forge World Utility - Review forge world model points costs in matched play as they're quite frankly ridiculous in some circumstances.
Model prices - in general they're huge in cost. £25 for Ahriman? Jesus... Even if they don't permanently reduce them, at least have a sale once in a while.
Mono-pose - dumpster it or give us a choice. I like my models customisable so I can put my own filter on them plus some times I genuinely don't like some models (I think the new Calagar model is ghastly).
Rule Broadness - I'm not saying we need the ability to have rules for every combination imaginable but it doesn't need to quite be as strict as 'no model, no rules'. There's clearly a comfortable middle ground.
Rule Broadness 2.0 - Give characters more flexibility again. I remember the days where we had a very nice armoury to choose from. It's ok to have a LITLLE diversity...
Campness - Drop the pantomime. I like my Grim Dark and grit. If I see one new model looking like it belongs in a cartoon or one more daemon that doesn't sincerely look like something's nightmare ima write a letter... This isn't a game for kids (I thought we had AOS for that). We don't need to be child friendly.
Availability - More short-term availability of old models. I want to buy more Juan Diaz Daemonettes without tussling with some neck beard on eBay who wants £50 per model.
Inquisitor - Bring it back with a new rule book that contains all the Inferno rule sets.




GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 14:46:56


Post by: Not Online!!!


Forge World Utility - Review forge world model points costs in matched play as, they're quite frankly, ridiculous in some circumstances.


What about a general review of the Corsair, R&H,DKoK and Elysian lists?



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 15:48:30


Post by: Semper


Not Online!!! wrote:
Forge World Utility - Review forge world model points costs in matched play as, they're quite frankly, ridiculous in some circumstances.


What about a general review of the Corsair, R&H,DKoK and Elysian lists?



Every single forgeworld point in every single incarnation of forgeworld and point needs a review. If i'm still paying 650pts for a GBS next year well i'll, i'll... just continue to occasionally use it but i'll be more butt hurt (demonstrated by passive-aggressive in-person winging and the occasional disappointed sounding sigh) and I may even post online about it.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 16:17:00


Post by: Not Online!!!


Semper wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Forge World Utility - Review forge world model points costs in matched play as, they're quite frankly, ridiculous in some circumstances.


What about a general review of the Corsair, R&H,DKoK and Elysian lists?



Every single forgeworld point in every single incarnation of forgeworld and point needs a review. If i'm still paying 650pts for a GBS next year well i'll, i'll... just continue to occasionally use it but i'll be more butt hurt (demonstrated by passive-aggressive in-person winging and the occasional disappointed sounding sigh) and I may even post online about it.


Well, in case of the index lists not only points need a look at.....
(Covenants for R&H come to mind, Random LD, rules interactions still not looked at, missing stratagems, etc.)
Points are just half the issue at this moment i feel.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 16:25:17


Post by: Overread


I think part of the issue for FW is that GW's own internal setup is strict about leaks. So the FW team likely has no idea what the 40K team is doing - apparently even AoS when it launched, was a big surprise to the FW team.

They've also had a lot of restructuring over the last year it seems. From forming and then disbanding a dedicated AoS team to inventory changes - I think FW is possibly in a bit of a mess. Granted the end result is hopefully a lot better, but I think they might still be in the middle of lots of changes. Plus don't forget the insane popularity of a lot of the specialist games.

Rules wise I always got the feeling that FW are still on the "once and done" pattern from the old era of 40K and AoS. Ergo they do it once and then don't have to worry about it till next edition. It might explain why some points are still not adjusted; it could also be that FW's team has been changed around so much they don't have a rules person or don't have time in their new jobs etc...

Really what GW should do is bring FW models under regular rules teams when it comes to balancing and setting up the rules. By all means keep them in their own PDF on the website as an addendum to the core game, rather than putting them in the Battletome/Codex; but at least balance them along with the rest.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/02/25 16:27:55


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Overread wrote:
I think part of the issue for FW is that GW's own internal setup is strict about leaks. So the FW team likely has no idea what the 40K team is doing - apparently even AoS when it launched, was a big surprise to the FW team.

They've also had a lot of restructuring over the last year it seems. From forming and then disbanding a dedicated AoS team to inventory changes - I think FW is possibly in a bit of a mess. Granted the end result is hopefully a lot better, but I think they might still be in the middle of lots of changes. Plus don't forget the insane popularity of a lot of the specialist games.

Rules wise I always got the feeling that FW are still on the "once and done" pattern from the old era of 40K and AoS. Ergo they do it once and then don't have to worry about it till next edition. It might explain why some points are still not adjusted; it could also be that FW's team has been changed around so much they don't have a rules person or don't have time in their new jobs etc...

Really what GW should do is bring FW models under regular rules teams when it comes to balancing and setting up the rules. By all means keep them in their own PDF on the website as an addendum to the core game, rather than putting them in the Battletome/Codex; but at least balance them along with the rest.


Didn't they do that in CA atleast point wise and it went horribly wrong?

I could name you a lot of changes that were done in CA that supposedly balancd with the rest but made the sitaution even worse.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/03 11:32:45


Post by: Brother Castor


So when are we getting this Community Survey then?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/03 11:44:41


Post by: AndrewGPaul


In 2019; when did you think?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/03 11:56:13


Post by: Brother Castor


 AndrewGPaul wrote:
In 2019; when did you think?

Okay then, which month


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/03 14:16:14


Post by: Overread


Only GW knows.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/04 09:34:54


Post by: AndrewGPaul


 Brother Castor wrote:
 AndrewGPaul wrote:
In 2019; when did you think?

Okay then, which month


I don't care. it'll come when it comes. In the meantime, if you think of something that you think GW really ought to know, uk.custserv@gwplc.com


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/04 14:15:57


Post by: Brother Castor


I've nothing urgent to tell them but wasn't around for the last one so intrigued to see what they ask.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/04 22:44:46


Post by: herjan1987


Does anybody when the survey will take place? I really want to participate.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/22 03:23:44


Post by: Ginjitzu


Based on the way these two discussions have gone thus far, I think I'm going to have add a request for new Inceptor/Suppressor sculpts that allow for those models to be modeled standing, rather than on flying bases in a way that looks natural, and without any requirement for remodeling. I know it's a near certainty that nothing could possibly come of such a request, but I really do feel that these floaty bois are some of the worst things to come out of the design studio since the taurox, and I feel like I really do have to mention it to them.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/22 05:21:42


Post by: privateer4hire


 Ginjitzu wrote:
Based on the way these two discussions have gone thus far, I think I'm going to have add a request for new Inceptor/Suppressor sculpts that allow for those models to be modeled standing, rather than on flying bases in a way that looks natural, and without any requirement for remodeling. I know it's a near certainty that nothing could possibly come of such a request, but I really do feel that these floaty bois are some of the worst things to come out of the design studio since the taurox, and I feel like I really do have to mention it to them.


No kidding. That argument about modeling for advantage reminds me of the old Little Rascals fight (see 4:20 - 4:50)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8DPjFapdVA

It would be awesome if GW would make standing/landed versions of their inceptors and anything else that would work just as well sans the teetering flying base method.
Be happy for 'em to do that for the spindly winged sigmarine flyers, too, for that matter.



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/28 05:34:21


Post by: Brother Castor


The date has just been announced - April 15th.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/28 06:51:28


Post by: H.B.M.C.


They're expecting everyone to be too busy watching Game of Thrones to fill in the survey!

Those dastardly rascals!!!



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/28 07:58:41


Post by: tneva82


edit: whoops way too old comment to be of relevance


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/28 09:46:33


Post by: Eiríkr


Time to beg and plead for a limited-time release of Bretonnia again.

Gawd just let me fix the mistake of selling everything I owned before they were squatted!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/28 11:01:58


Post by: Just Tony


I'd love it to death if GW would do some runs of older plastic kits, I wouldn't even care if it was direct online only.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/03/30 18:10:24


Post by: Yodhrin


Same as last year for me: I want WHF back as a going concern, decoupled from Age of Sigmar, which should have been in its own alternate reality from day one. Retcon away the version of the End Times they sharted out to kill off WHFB, and get a wee team going at Specialist Games to do a new *proper* Mordheim(ie rules and setting), to be followed up if successful in the same way they're planning to expand N17; pick out other times and places on the world that fit the format and explore those in similar detail. Warmaster would be cool to see again as well.

It's almost certainly just pishing into the wind, but anything else I'd like them to do is even less likely so why not eh.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/02 01:05:50


Post by: Carlovonsexron


Im gonna request both new plastic guard regiments, and a new non sigmar worshipping Human order faction in AoS (basednoff Duncans “Solakian spearmen” conversion. I'll also bring up how GW should have a copyright on “Solkan” an old lore god of order...

Other things I want a new lizardmen, fimir, and a Hun style destruction human faction AoS side.

40K side I want more xenos stuff, and more decent prices on blackstone fortress expansions.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:05:00


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Given my feedback.

Asked for tweaks to help curb Soup Abuse. It’s not that I particularly begrudge the classic examples (Loyal 32 type stuff), so much that it’s a trick only one faction can do, Imperium. I suggested tweaks to how they generate CP, and/or who can use them.

I also asked for BSF to keep to the shadowy regions of 40k lore, and to use that to demonstrate more Xenos species, specifically referencing those glimpsed in this pic.



20 years ago they teased me with that. Now it’s time for pay-off



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:17:47


Post by: Overread


Remember the Tomb Kings!!!

Also one thing of note - under AoS the Beastclaw Raiders and Gutbusters are listed under a single "Ogors" segment - strong suggestion there that they will get a combined tome


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:20:11


Post by: H


 Overread wrote:
Remember the Tomb Kings!!!


Yeah, I mentioned that and asked why it would be that Made to Order can't be expanded to plastic kits as well.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:23:46


Post by: OrlandotheTechnicoloured


fairly similar,

asked for reasons to take a 'pure' faction in matched play (so either bonuses for that or removal of reasons to have the whole imperium turn up at every battle to supply command points etc)

more exploration of deep background(eg Necromunda, BSF) etc

and I know the majority will disagree but more crazy random nonsense for the orks, but this time the reward (sometimes) needs to balance the risk


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:31:29


Post by: Sterling191


Welp, did my part for the plastic Aspects.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:32:56


Post by: Horst


I asked for dropper bottle paints and a digital subscription-based service for a single source for all rules.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:40:37


Post by: Geifer


As announced it was a little too focused on stuff that isn't on my mind, really. But...

Tomb Kings got their due mention (three times ), along with more equipment options in kits and rules, so I got my say well enough.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:46:34


Post by: John Prins


Sterling191 wrote:
Welp, did my part for the plastic Aspects.


Ditto.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:48:59


Post by: Stormonu


Done the survey - its a lot more guided than last time. Putin the typical complaint that they cost too much, and I feel like I’ve really learned that I like games like Blackstone Fortress and Kill Team moreso than the all-out rumble that is 40K (I like my vehicles, but I wish 40K was downsized to 2E levels of models. Modern 40K has become Apocalypse levels of absurdity)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 18:59:39


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Also, asked, nay begged, for Epic.

Specifically army selection from 2nd Ed (Company Card, 0-5 Support, 1 Special), but Unit profiles from Epic Armageddon (Weapons with dual profile for infantry and vehicles).

2nd Ed army selection really helps sell the scale of the game, in that we’re largely picking from ‘background compliant’ army structure, with the Support Cards giving flexibility. Lovely method, and a great deal of fun.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 19:03:10


Post by: Apple fox


Done, feel they needed some more comment sections.
My end comment ended up being a bit long >.< as I was trying to give comments on like 10 things in a little space.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 19:12:49


Post by: Overread


The only thing I didn't like in the survey was when they broke the lore segments for codex/battletomes down into rankings.

Asking if history, stories, unit details, maps and one other thing to be ranked in importance is a bit like being asked to rank which is more important in a trilogy or even single story.

Sure the beginning might not be the most exciting thing, but its critical to the rest of the parts working. For me the lore works like that - sure maps might not be as important as, say, a story; but the maps make the story work and give grounding on where its happening in the world; they let you track elements of the history which in turn influences how you can read the stories and all that ties into the unit information etc...



A few more wordy bits would have been nice, but I think with this one they wanted a faster result (more things that were tickbox) so that they coudl see that they were mostly on the right track. Lets not forget they are more open to user feedback in general tahn ever before (they are engaging directly with their market now at a higher level than just the shop staff)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 19:37:04


Post by: Rob Lee


Completed it. Didn't like how leading it was, and how some questions had the term collect/collector/collection in them, as though we as gamers just collect models! I doubt anything I said in the few boxes you could say something in will make a difference. It will all fall on deaf ears, because I don't partake in buying their latest (overpriced) models every week, nor playing their latest games, bar 40k 8th - everything else I play is from the 90s, i.e. Space Hulk, and Warhammer Quest.

They seem only interested in kids with bank accounts of rich mummy and daddy, tournament players, and those who simply collect models to wave their manhoods around, anyone else is an afterthought...


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 19:39:51


Post by: Yodhrin


Well goody, I got halfway through and it crashed and booted me back to the beginning. FFS.

EDIT: And now it's crashed on the final page. Eh, feth it, I wouldn't have won anyway and it's not like they're actually going to listen to entreaties to bring back WHF.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 19:44:31


Post by: oni


 Yodhrin wrote:
Well goody, I got halfway through and it crashed and booted me back to the beginning. FFS.


Same thing just happened to me.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 20:40:42


Post by: Saturmorn Carvilli


I participated. It was longer than I was expecting and was a bit more leading than I would have liked. I tried to keep my responses brief since it didn't seem like the survey wanted anything more than a couple of lines of text.

I grumbled about the price a bit especially with the bundles being the exact same cost of its component parts. Why even bother having bundle options if it is the same price anyways?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 20:44:41


Post by: Thargrim


I complained about the prices, asked for a plastic varghulf and a WH underworlds seraphon team.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 21:14:32


Post by: Togusa


I decided to focus on prices and rules updates and balance. Instead of spamming I want model/faction "X"

Hopefully this will result in some great stuff!


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 21:39:57


Post by: Lord Damocles


I'm pretty sure that GW is aware that people want plastic Aspects and Tomb Kings, anyway.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 21:49:33


Post by: The Forgemaster


Done, I went for better and more frequent balancing & rules updates, and expansion of small factions.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 21:49:56


Post by: Voss


Had to explain that 'organized play' wasn't a thing that happened around here.

Was it just me, or were they talking around the possibility of the return of Games Day or similar events?


I participated. It was longer than I was expecting and was a bit more leading than I would have liked. I tried to keep my responses brief since it didn't seem like the survey wanted anything more than a couple of lines of text.

Thing is, large text inputs tend to get problematic for surveys. If you want actionable, quantifiable input you need some leading, and less text boxes.

There were definitely too many text boxes, some of them attached to questions that didn't even make sense. What new 'features' would I like on WarCom? Especially followed by what types of articles I would prefer. I... don't have any use for whatever a 'feature' would be on a website. I mostly want preview articles. And fewer terrible comics.

That said, I found myself having to explain the existence of some of their old games and that PC and Console games are different things.


 Lord Damocles wrote:
I'm pretty sure that GW is aware that people want plastic Aspects and Tomb Kings, anyway.

I'm not. I'm not even sure that the survey writers were aware older GW games/products/model lines even exist. If they were, they were very, very careful never to mention them.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 21:58:38


Post by: Lord Damocles


Voss wrote:
I'm not. I'm not even sure that the survey writers were aware older GW games/products/model lines even exist. If they were, they were very, very careful never to mention them.

They were very careful to either not mention at all, or limit comment on a lot of subjects, it seems.

White Dwarf was just glossed over, for example with no opportunity to point out/comment on the generally terrible quality of the product. I assume that they're gearing up to scrap it entirely in favour of an an expanded online offering - hence the questions which essentially asked 'what content from White Dwarf do you want Community to publish?'


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 22:51:52


Post by: Argive


Lets all band together and ask for Plastic eldars/Plastic models in general and a big rolling FAQ PDf doc that can be updated regularly rather than 90+ baby FAQ's.

I also mentioned that I'm most unhappy when they don't get their rules correct.



We have the power for we are many and mighty!!! We can do it my brothers and sisters!



GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 22:57:04


Post by: Saturmorn Carvilli


 Lord Damocles wrote:


White Dwarf was just glossed over, for example with no opportunity to point out/comment on the generally terrible quality of the product. I assume that they're gearing up to scrap it entirely in favour of an an expanded online offering - hence the questions which essentially asked 'what content from White Dwarf do you want Community to publish?'


That does make a lot of sense. I don't think I personally would bother even going to my local Games Workshop to pick up a White Dwarf for free since that isn't my FLGS despite being closer. I don't have any nostalgia of it, and I can't see any content that won't be on the internet in some way or another even bother making the trip and having a physical product I don't want to keep and therefor generating more waste. Magazines are pretty much a dead medium especially one that offers no real content save advertising single brand with a very narrow product range. I certainly can't see White Dwarf even breaking even and have my doubts about its power of advertising since it is probably preaching to the choir so to speak.

Anything worth bothering putting in White Dwarf would be excellent material for the Community page. And their community page is only a couple of buttons away from their marketplace and probably much cheaper to maintain to boot. While I would be hard pressed to actually order anything directly from the Games Workshop site since they well out of impulse purchase prices, I think the idea of funneling people to your site with the idea that they might visit and buy things there is sound. Or at very least keeping Game Workshop fresh in the minds of their customers. It probably worked on me with this recent Chaos Space Marine release.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 23:09:09


Post by: McMagnus Mindbullets


One thing I really liked was that in many of the multiple choice questions, there were options that I wouldn't have thought would be included. The option for points changes every 3 months? Yes bloody please. I advocated that.

I liked it overall, although it was quite long winded, I like how they had it in sections. It's very nice to know they are focusing on events, even though their throne of skulls are the ideal thing for me, that they want to expand and get better at doing large events.

Mentioned digital books with updates after FAQ's, mentioned about more options in codexes and freedom to convert, like everyone else straight up told them stuff costs A LOT.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/15 23:31:42


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


Only thing i really asked them was that when a product is announced, if they can give a release date so it can be budgeted for accordingly rather than playing the guessing game of if and when.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 03:51:44


Post by: chaos0xomega


This is what I (and about a dozen others who copypasta'd) said:

Oi, listen up ya gitz! Dis is Da Red Gobbo, and I heard you lot was takin a survey of da Kommunity. Im here to giv ya da perspektiv of the Grotletariat on behaff of da Gretchin Revolushunary Kommittee and make shure our voices git herd ova the shoutin and yellin of the Borkgeoisie. Below is our Manyfesto of Demandz:

1. (Re)Introduction of Rebel Grotz as a playable faction on the tabletop - We'z all green, after all, and our revolushunary compatriorks on Vigilus alreddy seemz to be risin up to throw off da shakkles of servitude

2. Bring back the Black Gobbo - As a young snotling new ta da hobby, da red gobbo enjoyed readin his feetured kolumn on yer website every week - betta den da White Dwarf e wuz, bring 'im bak on WarCom!

3. (Re)Introduction of Kroot Mercenaries as a playable faction on the tabletop - Dey may not be Grots, but dey is more dan willin' to take ar teef n' help us fight da Orks! I rekkon day also haz a Revolushun of their own to fight wit dem blueboys on T'au.

4. Additional Auxiliary Races for the T'au - No Taxashun Witout Representashun! Or sumfin' like dat. Dey is under-represented minorities dey is, dey deserv mor' opportoonity on da table, 'speshully since dem blueboys keep tellin' everyone that dey is sum sort of multi-rashul Empire. Allz dey got iz dem poor bird-brained Kroot and the buzzyboy Vespids. We knowz dey got some humies workin' wit dem too, and rumor iz dey got sum rock-krystal peeple in sekret.

5. Rough Riders for Astra Militarum - Kannon to da right o dem, Kannon to da leff o dem, Kannon in front o dem, Volley n Thund'r! Kno' who likes a gud horsey-boy? Da Red Gobbo does, n lotsa Guard playas do too!

6. More unit options for the Militarum Tempestus - Da poor gitz don't even hav a heavy support or fast attack choice, poor ladz cannae take a Brigade Detachment. Howz bout a Snipa Team (wit anti-tank rifles!) or Kombat Enguneers? Or a rite n proppa assault buggy!

7. Plastic Aeldari Aspect Warriors - Hasnt it been long enuff? N DONT FORGET DA FEENIX LORDS!

8. Introduction of Crone World Aeldari and Aeldari Exodites as playable factions - Pointy-ears ridin' lizzards! Pointy-ears ridin' daemons! Do tha thing!

9. Introduction of Agents of the Imperium as a playable faction - MAKE INQUISITORS GREAT AGAIN! Giv' us Rogue Traders too!

10. Introduction of Dark Mechanicus as a playable faction - 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01101011 01101110 01101111 01110111 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110111 01100001 01101110 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00101100 00100000 01110111 01100101 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100001 01101100 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01111001 00100000 01110100 01100101 01101100 01101100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110111 01101111 01110010 01101011 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101111 01101110 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 01101101

11. Give Chaos Daemons access to Daemon Engines - Com on ya gitz, the name "Daemon" is rite their in da title! Da Red Gobbo is very angry dat his collection of forgeworld blood slaughterers, brass skorpions, and blight drones dont fit inta iz daemon armies anymore like dey did in 6th n 7th edishuns.

12. Mutalith Vortex Beasts should be a Daemons unit - Same goes for da Slaughterbrute. What is a creature of da warp if it is not a daemon?

13. New plastic guardsmen minis - Da guard might not a broke, but der planet sure did! Cannae Cadian Shock Troopas witout a Cadia, time for a new regiment!

14. Emperors Children and World Eaters get the Death Guard treatment - Deez blokes deserv der own books wit der own Primarks I rekkon, not fair dat da dusty boyz and bloaty boyz get all da glory! Speakin of dusty boyz...

15. Thousand Sons get the Death Guard treatment (again) - Poor ladz play secund fiddle to da beaky-beastie-boyz in der own codex, wut givz? Da Tousand Sonz need some more karakter and dedicated legion unitz like da bloaty boyz get wit da Plagueburst Crawler n da Bloat Drone.

16. Another Imperial Primarch - Rowboat Gillyman is a weaklin', Rogal Dorn could pummel im gud wit iz hand cut off! I hear dat El'Jonson bloke is also havin imself a wee bit o a nap, maybe its time for him to wake up? How bout Vulkan? Russ? Khan? Corax? Anybody? Dis ting on?

17. Bring back the Wall of Martyrs terrain line (Firestorm Redoubt, Aquila Strongpoint, Plasma Obliterator, Vengeance Weapon Batteries) - Dey is outta produkshun, but da red gobbo wants em (n doesnt wanna give hundreds o teef to da freebotaz on orkbay!)

18. Balance Necrons - All dem skelly boyz is still overcosted points!

19. Make Terminators more survivable - Da brainboyz suggested the following rule fer termies:

Terminator Armor - Weapons with an AP value of -1 are treated as having an AP value of 0 instead. Units with Terminator armor may re-roll failed saves against weapons with a modified AP value of 0.

20. Make Power Armor more survivable - Da brainboyz suggested the following for mahreenz:

Power Armor - Units with Power Armor may re-roll failed saves against weapons with an AP value of 0.

21. Update Forgeworld rules to bring them in line with the Codexes - No Chapter Traits fer Carcharadons or Minotaurs? Death Korps n Elysians witout Doctrines? No strategems for anyun? Wot givs mate?

22. Better terrain rules - We'z needz betta terrain rules. We want Area Terrain and non-true Line of sight, like in 4th edishun (but betta!).

23. Reintroduction of The Lost and The Damned as a playable faction - Not jus' traitor guardsmen, but mixed forces of renegades n traitors as iz right n proppa!

24. Reintroduction of Eldar Corsairs as a playable faction - Forgeworld did em dirty, bring em back!

25. Give us an app - Jus like the one fer Age of Sigmar, wit datasheets n rulez at ar fingatips n buyable bookz n a built in army builder.

26. Clearer indicators of which products have limited availability - Da Red Gobbo gets confused bout wut he should spend his teef on, sumtimez he tries to buy a box n finds out that the box is out of producshun n innit comin back.

27. Netflix/HBO & Chill - Da Red Gobbo is very sad that Game o Thrones is comin to n end... maybe you lot haz sumfin you can bring to the telly to fill da void?

28. Age of Sigmar - My cuzzin in da Mortal Realms tells me you lot iz doin good there, keep doin what ya doin (and giv them humie gits a cogfort).

29. Battlefleet Gothic - Bring back da spaceshipz!!

30. Man O War - Bring back da wetshipz too!! My cuzzin in da Mortal Realms says dey got plenty of water ta float on.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 04:07:13


Post by: Ginjitzu


Argive wrote:Lets all band together and ask for Plastic eldars/Plastic models in general and a big rolling FAQ PDf doc that can be updated regularly rather than 90+ baby FAQ's.

I also mentioned that I'm most unhappy when they don't get their rules correct.



We have the power for we are many and mighty!!! We can do it my brothers and sisters!


I echoed most of your sentiments Argive. I grumbled about prices when they asked what the biggest barrier to entry was. I asked to have most old FAQs all bundled into one downloadable file. I also mentioned the poor quality of their written publications. I did not, however ask for plastic aspects as I had planned. The issues I encountered with the new flight pegs recently bought those to the forefront for me, so I chose to mention those as the "one thing" I would change.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 05:08:18


Post by: Excommunicatus


Whinged about monopose and price.

Told it a million times I don't play organized events, still had to answer a bunch of questions about organized events.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 09:56:45


Post by: Slipspace


Mainly complained about balance but to be fair it did come up in a lot of places (events, what to improve in general etc). I also feel some of their sections were a bit leading, and the WD section was pretty pointless because it didn't really provide anywhere to explain why I don't rad it any more.

Similarly, they don't ask why you don't play AoS or Adeptus Titanicus, for example. That feels like a huge missed opportunity.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 10:18:25


Post by: Skinnereal


The lack of support for specialist games in GW stores.
We wanted to get into Blood Bowl last year, and nowhere had it in.
The same with Necromunda. Getting a new player started stops when they drop in to get a squad, and there's no sign on the shelves.
Online-only is not an impulse-buy.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 10:38:45


Post by: Voss


Slipspace wrote:
Mainly complained about balance but to be fair it did come up in a lot of places (events, what to improve in general etc). I also feel some of their sections were a bit leading, and the WD section was pretty pointless because it didn't really provide anywhere to explain why I don't rad it any more.
.

There was a question on, I think, frequency (how often you bought WD) that had a text box option. I just added 'not this century' there,


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 11:56:26


Post by: H.B.M.C.


I was worried that there wouldn't be a place to take them to task on one specific topic, but thankfully that last page came about.

"If Games Workshop could do one thing..."

What I said wrote:I've said my piece on the state of 40K's rules (specifically that of the Force Org Chart and how it is meaningless).

I've said my piece on the design ethos of making everything more mono-pose and removing options that I believe is stifling creativity, infecting the rules (the Chaos Lord vs. Death Guard Chaos Lord example I gave), and even the artwork (no mini = no rule = no artwork).

But there is one last (double-barrelled) thing that needs to be addressed, so let's get to it:

Now I'm certain that the poor damned souls deep in the Administratum that are reading these survey results will be sick to their eyeballs about hearing about prices, but my issue here isn't just "OMG! Such high prices!", it is in fact more specific to two areas. May get a little mad with the second point, so be forewarned.

1. Regional Pricing.

This is a big problem.

I fully acknowledge that as an Australian I live a long way from everywhere else in the world. However large the continent of Australia may be, we are still a small southern hemisphere country thousands and thousands of miles away from the larger population centres of the world.

Australians (and our little brothers in Kiwiland) all understand that shipping to Australia will add to the cost of products, and that local prices have to reflect the realities of rental costs for your GW stores and the overheads of maintaining a warehouse full of products on the other side of the planet to your main production hubs.

-BUT-

The price differential that people outside of the UK, especially in places such as Oz, NZ, Japan, Brazil and a few others is simply ludicrous. I cannot -CANNOT- stress this enough.

Picking a not-so-random example:
Blightlord Terminators. AUD$98. £35. £35 is, roughly, AUD$65.

Why is someone in Australia paying 150% the cost for something that is the same product?

Shadowspear. $290 £105. Converted we are paying roughly 158 quid for something you get for £105.

Freight/shipping costs aren't a valid excuse.
"Minimum wage" isn't a valid excuse.
Even shifting exchange rates don't work as an excuse.

This is absurd and you need to get a handle on it. It is punishing to be a Warhammer fan the further you get outside of the UK.

Worse, you won't even let us purchase overseas due to your trade terms with independent stockists.

And the reason I said "not so random" choices is because the price for this survey lists multiple products worth £35 each, which indicates to a lot of us that that's what a box of 10 Sisters will cost. 10 Sisters will therefore end up costing around AUD$100, more than your already super-overpriced 7-man Deathguard squad that costs as much as 10 Rubric Marines.

The days of across-the-board GW prices rises may have ended, but you appear to shift the price goal posts with each new release, and it only gets harder for us across the pond to keep up.

2. Forge World Regional Pricing.

This is the big one, the one you really screwed up the most with, and the one I've been -itching- to get off my chest.

For years I've been getting FW catalogues with FW products. They were a cool way to show off the whole range (now shrinking for some reason). The weird part about these catalogues was that they contained £, USD and AUD pricing.

Bit weird, eh? You only charge in pounds, so why would there be other prices? And why would the prices for US and Oz players be higher than the UK ones. Never made sense.

Then you announced regional pricing. I watched a lot of people celebrate this idea, but I immediately knew what was about to happen. Those weird prices that were never charged in all the FW catalogues? Those were about to become a reality.

And overnight - literally overnight - the prices of FW products to Australians went up by between 50% and 100%.

Now, as I said in point 1, we Australians acknowledge that we are very far away, and that there are logistical costs involved in shipping mass product to our tiny corner of the world.

But Forge World has no such overheads.

Forge World isn't being stocked in stores.

Forge World send orders out on an individual basis, and charge shipping. So why am I paying more for the -same product- that's coming from the -same factory- in the UK.

The only difference is that it's going to an AUD address rather than a UK address, and somehow this comes with a price increase is 40%-100%???

ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MINDS???

WHY am I paying more for this? What justification is there for this? I am paying shipping costs already, shouldn't a higher shipping costs (and the sales tax our government adds on) be the only difference? Why is the initial price of the product itself more expensive?

Explain this!!!

But you made it worse. Oh yes. You foisted the -LIE- that it was a benefit as we no longer had to pay "expensive" currency conversion fees. I've never paid an "expensive" currency conversion fee in. my life.

The largest FW order I ever did was about AUD$1300, and I paid import taxes on that, and that's fine 'cause that's the law. The currency conversion fee, was a few bucks. Nothing more. And certainly nothing to justify such a massive regional price increase.

This is the worst thing you have done in the past year, and it is something you need to fix immediately.

I -WILL NOT- pay more for the same product from Forge World when it is coming from the same damned factory in the UK, and I'm already paying shipping.

You won't like this being said to you, but I'm part of a number of 40K buy/sell/swap groups, and as soon as you made this regional pricing decision the talk of recasting went through the roof (and not just because recasters often have better QA than FW does... but that's a different issue).

FW regional pricing is basically a scam to get additional money out of non-UK residence and there is literally no benefit in doing so. It's like being able to buy something in a store near you, but you move 2 blocks down the road, and suddenly they charge you more just because you're further away when you're making the trip to the store.

Fix this. Immediately. And apologise for your deceptive and outright pathetic "expensive currency conversion fee" nonsense. It's worse than when you tried to pretend that "Finecast" was somehow better quality (look how that turned out!).

Told you I'd get mad in the second point.


Then in the final thoughts I said that they were good, but need to be better.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 12:51:42


Post by: Hawky


A new plastic kit for Veteran Guardsmen.
Veterans get doctrines and specialized wargear, Carapace Armor, Hellgun too.
Vanquisher Tank to be actually useable.
New Regiments/Regiment builder.
No new Primarchs and if, not those who are dead for good! And if then: Wulfen Russ, cloned Ferrus, Khan, Lion or Vulcan are the only options.
No new Imperium factions. We already have enough.
New, less-humanoid Xenos race (Reptilian, Avian, Molluscoid, Anthropoid (Stellaris has some good ideas), Goo or sentient machines (Yes, Men of Iron)), or some of the existing, Hrudd, Slann etc....
All point cost/rule changes in a free, regularly updated summary/PDF. (CA would be purely a supplement)
More Killteam expansions, some focused on roleplay (I miss the old Mordheim)


Veterans addressed
Vanquisher addressed
Regiments addressed
Primarchs forgotten
No new imperium factions forgotten
New senos race forgotten
Points rules forgotten
Killteam expansion forgotten

However,

AdMech having identity crysis addressed additionally
Tanks/transports for AdMech addressed additionally
Scions having identity crysis addressed additionally
Scions being good only as suicide units addressed additionally
Flamers being useless addressed additionally
IG codex bloat addressed additionally, requested making units more stronger rather than cheaper
Macharius tanks being useless addressed additionally
Avenger Strike fighter having 7 shots while Knight has 12 shots with the same weapon addressed additionally
Mordheim revival addressed additionally
CP farms/Soup stratagem limitations addressed additionally

Hope it's all...


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 13:14:24


Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl


 Lord Damocles wrote:
I'm pretty sure that GW is aware that people want plastic Aspects and Tomb Kings, anyway.

Well it worked for Sisters of Battle didn't it?

I wrote this
My “least favorite things about GW”:

- The lack of transparency, and the lack of sustainability of the various range and armies. No way to know how much support an army is going to get in the support. Some armies may be neglected for decades (Sisters of Battle), some might be completely abandoned (Kroot mercenaries, Dogs of War for WFB), some entire game system may disappear.
- The new 40k lore, which focus way too much on being a story instead of being a setting. I don't want to play subfactions (chapters, regiment, craftworld, …) and characters that were created and designed by GW, I want them to give me rules and inspiration to create my own. All 40k lore should be about fleshing up more different aspect of the setting, not an advancing story with a few characters that influence the whole setting! And I especially dislike the fleshing out and the return of primarchs (old legends are so more interesting as legends than as actual characters), and the return of technological advancement through primaris marine, which remove the quite unique and very interesting theme of technological decay from 40k.
- Please please please stop keeping the name in English in the middle of French texts, at least when the translation already exist in the real world! I don't mind if genestealers stay genestealers, but commissars should be commissaires!!!
- Profile creep, i.e. the profile of new weapons being way stronger than old weapons. For instance, the new Chaos rotor cannon being so much stronger than a heavy bolter, while the weapon is about the same size, even if balanced by point cost, make the heavy bolter seem like a WEAK weapon…


New functionality for Warhammer-Community:
RSS FEEDS!!!!

One thing to make GW stuff more enjoyable:
Take clear engagement and make those explicit about faction support. Be honest if a faction is likely to get dropped in next edition (say, Kroot mercenaries), have a clear (if approximate) schedule about when each faction is getting new models, …


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 13:35:50


Post by: Tyranid Horde


What I asked Santa for the Big FAQ:

Plastic aspect warriors
Blackstone Fortress expansions focusing less on Chaos and more on lesser known Xenos/ Xenos in general.
A proper thought process when it comes to fragile models. Eg Eldar ranger from BSF (Rifle snapped instantly)
A serious consideration for updating digital books to match FAQs, there is no point in digital editions without the updates
I asked for a nerf of soup again, because I don't enjoy that part of the game outside of narrative or open play.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 13:41:29


Post by: Overread


I noted the issue with fragile models as well - I've got some slaanesh fiends infront of me and they are darn fantastic looking models but my gods they are fragile!

The originals in all metal were tough - these ones the tail is thin, the arms are long and thin, the hair is thin , the tongues are thin - you almost can't grab any part of it without touching something fragile. It's fine on the table away from anything else, but moving, transporting, living with them is a bit more tricky.
Heck Khinerai are even worse as they wobble some on their tail connections to the base - again fantastic looking sculpt don't get my wrong I love owning them. I just feel that GW should do some more work making models a bit less display adn a bit more practical play.

Size is also an issue - esp with fragile parts because it makes them that much harder to transport. Time once was most things were easy to throw in a foam box - now I'm looking at fiends and thinking "darn it how do you even put that in a foam holder without it catching/snagging on the foam and snapping an end of plastic off.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 14:48:11


Post by: Tyranid Horde


A legitimate option now is to use magnetic trays, which I'm considering for my Dark Eldar and Eldar, but the issue arises when you have a fragile model in a boxed game and that might be the person's first intro to Warhammer. You've paid a premium for a board game with models only for it to break without play. CAD models are nice but I think there's a loss in translation when they produce the finished piece.

The more I think about the questions asked, the more I could have written. :/


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 16:38:05


Post by: the_scotsman


Spoiler:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Given my feedback.

Asked for tweaks to help curb Soup Abuse. It’s not that I particularly begrudge the classic examples (Loyal 32 type stuff), so much that it’s a trick only one faction can do, Imperium. I suggested tweaks to how they generate CP, and/or who can use them.

I also asked for BSF to keep to the shadowy regions of 40k lore, and to use that to demonstrate more Xenos species, specifically referencing those glimpsed in this pic.



20 years ago they teased me with that. Now it’s time for pay-off



Necron, Clawed Fiend, Harlequin Neuro Disruptor, tyranid spore mine, Kroot, Ambull....I see three things on this bit of pencil-drawn rogue trader art that do not have current official models. Not counting the power maul, since we have those in many different forms.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 17:52:37


Post by: Lord Damocles


 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 Lord Damocles wrote:
I'm pretty sure that GW is aware that people want plastic Aspects and Tomb Kings, anyway.

Well it worked for Sisters of Battle didn't it?

Did it though?

I know that GW claim that they decided to revisit Sisters because of the 2017 survey, but it's not like GW don't blatantly lie... (remember that time they claimed they wanted feedback on 8th edition rules when the book must have already been printed? yeah.)

They revisited Genestealer Cults - are we really supposed to believe that Sisters weren't on their radar already? They referenced the plastic Sisters meme before Celestine was released, so they were obviously aware that there was a desire to see plastic Sisters prior to the survey.

GW have obviously been pushing more female models over the last couple of years, but apparently they didn't consider redoing the primary female faction until the survey results came in? Even after releasing Celestine?

The iconography concept designs which they released are marked copyright 2017 - the survey was conducted in November, so within a month they had analysed the results, decided to redo Sisters (did they have nothing else taking up the design time?) and started cranking out concept art, presumably all before Christmas?

We don't even actually know whether loads of people did mention Sisters on the 2017 survey, since GW never gave us any feedback on the results beyond that singular point (despite saying that they would share the results at the outset).


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/16 21:56:19


Post by: Not Online!!!


I wanted them to fix up their terrain rules,
Propperly update all armies (fw index lists - GK)
Stop selling the balance Patch,
adressing soup,
Their pricing,
Pricing in conjunction with the new boxes (basic equipment not even available for the whole squad cough.)

Stopping the fact that there are now 90 documments for the game.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/17 10:56:46


Post by: Ginjitzu


Hawky wrote:

No new Primarchs and if, not those who are dead for good! And if then: Wulfen Russ, cloned Ferrus, Khan, Lion or Vulcan are the only options.
No new Imperium factions. We already have enough.
New, less-humanoid Xenos race (Reptilian, Avian, Molluscoid, Anthropoid (Stellaris has some good ideas), Goo or sentient machines (Yes, Men of Iron)), or some of the existing, Hrudd, Slann etc....
More Killteam expansions, some focused on roleplay (I miss the old Mordheim)


That's ironic. I actually asked for no new xeno races, because I feel like we already have enough, and fewer or no new KillTeam expansions.

---

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
New functionality for Warhammer-Community:
RSS FEEDS!!!!

Is RSS still a thing? I thought that went the way of MiniDisc and WAP.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/17 13:08:24


Post by: Hawky


 Ginjitzu wrote:
Hawky wrote:That's ironic. I actually asked for no new Xeno races, because I feel like we already have enough, and fewer or no new KillTeam expansions


That's interesting. Why no new Kill Team expansions? They are all non-mandatory to play. And co-op/roleplay one (team or just specialists against hordes of Orks, Nids, zombies with an ocassional boss to defeat etc...) would surely be at least interesting to see.
And I think we have TOO many Imperial factions, some new xeno would be a welcome change in my opinion.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/17 18:16:38


Post by: Just Tony


Slipspace wrote:
Mainly complained about balance but to be fair it did come up in a lot of places (events, what to improve in general etc). I also feel some of their sections were a bit leading, and the WD section was pretty pointless because it didn't really provide anywhere to explain why I don't rad it any more.

Similarly, they don't ask why you don't play AoS or Adeptus Titanicus, for example. That feels like a huge missed opportunity.


They think everyone IS playing AOS, so no need to ask the question...


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/17 18:46:37


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


I don’t know that it is.

People have different tastes. Someone who loves Sci-Fi may not enjoy Fantasy, and vice versa.

Adeptus Titanicus is still a niche game within a niche Hobby. And it’s a cracking game enjoyed by a lot of people. If you ask why others don’t play it? Well, that’s a question with a mind boggling number of answers. And if it’s gameplay? It doesn’t mean the current gameplay is flawed etc.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/18 04:11:30


Post by: Ginjitzu


Hawky wrote:
 Ginjitzu wrote:
Hawky wrote:That's ironic. I actually asked for no new Xeno races, because I feel like we already have enough, and fewer or no new KillTeam expansions


That's interesting. Why no new Kill Team expansions? They are all non-mandatory to play.
Well, I mean nothings mandatory to play. I just don't like it.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/18 07:34:19


Post by: Hawky


Has anyone addressed the invulnerable save bloat? I kinda forgot.
(Invulnerable saves on already though models that go as high as 3+, making the unit pain in the arse to kill)


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/20 03:43:05


Post by: Mr.Church13


 Hawky wrote:
Has anyone addressed the invulnerable save bloat? I kinda forgot.
(Invulnerable saves on already though models that go as high as 3+, making the unit pain in the arse to kill)


With the new AP system they have to up invul saves, because armour saves mean virtually nothing nowadays. Just look at the entire Space Marine line. They pay a crap ton of points for virtually the same save as a guardsman.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/21 19:30:57


Post by: Earth127


The problem there is in Gw overcosting durability/ undercosting firepower.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/24 13:08:18


Post by: Dysartes


Mr.Church13 wrote:
 Hawky wrote:
Has anyone addressed the invulnerable save bloat? I kinda forgot.
(Invulnerable saves on already though models that go as high as 3+, making the unit pain in the arse to kill)


With the new AP system they have to up invul saves, because armour saves mean virtually nothing nowadays. Just look at the entire Space Marine line. They pay a crap ton of points for virtually the same save as a guardsman.

I do like the smell of hyperbole in the afternoon...


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/24 17:32:16


Post by: meatybtz


 Dysartes wrote:
Mr.Church13 wrote:
 Hawky wrote:
Has anyone addressed the invulnerable save bloat? I kinda forgot.
(Invulnerable saves on already though models that go as high as 3+, making the unit pain in the arse to kill)


With the new AP system they have to up invul saves, because armour saves mean virtually nothing nowadays. Just look at the entire Space Marine line. They pay a crap ton of points for virtually the same save as a guardsman.

I do like the smell of hyperbole in the afternoon...


Indeed, but he isn't wrong on the core issue. I've beat this horse till it's dead but 8th edition was sold as a more model removing edition. Aka, all about the dakka. More death. Structurally though they got there by rendering durability almost negligible, in the conventional sense. So badly did they do this that they were forced to bolt on all kinds of nonsense to counter it. It ends up clunky.

No saves against mortal wounds, except, this not save save and this randomly named not save after save save.

Also this is probably he cheesiest edition of 40k to date. We all thought the 7th ed combos and crazy stuff like super friends lists and worse was bad.. Then 8th came in and said.. naww hold my beer and watch this. CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESE.

Worse it's got holes in it and is stinky cheese. People have exploited every gigantic hole GW tossed into this pile. In fact I think the focus on Nurgle this edition rotted their brains because this is one rotting heap of rules.

Never before were things "unhitable" now you can cheese it and make a Space Marine an Ork. Make Orks and Guardsmen unable to hit in Range and Melee! Yes and re-roll those re-rolls of re-rolls because saves of saves of saves not saves are awesome.

I mean the Dakka-Ception is Three layers deep on models now. All the new vehicles are ridiculous gun platforms. We heard you like dakka so we put some dakka on your dakka and then dakka in your dakka so your Knight is now a Dakka Knigh because knights needed more dakka for their dakka.

Least we not forget "death blossom mode" is on every vehicle as that Land Raider pirouettes on one track like a fine ballerina firing lascannons from opposite sides of itself at the same target. Its like magic. Oh and you cannot fall back and fire unless we say so because we have all these exceptions to hard rules and then exceptions to the exceptions because we can't keep anything straight and Whose Line is it Anyways.. the game where the rules don't make any sense and the points mean nothing.

I know they were creeping that direction and who didn't read the How to Sell New Eldar Jetbikes when they broke the hard-fast rules of two decades and made them 3/3 heavy weapon platforms w/o the usual price boost. The Dakka Writing was on the Wall. Dakka Sells models.

So lets Dakka Knight and Rotor Cannon happily along with our Deathblossom spinning magical tanks of whirling death spraying while we stack more and more dice into every time saving roll.. and reroll.. and not save save and not save save re-roll because look at all that time savings! Wow.. much time saving...

8th Edition 40k.. when jumping the shark and nuking the fridge is for posers and n00bs.


There is so much nonsense that the brain spins. The one Race who literally should have dakka stacked on dakka, the Orks, still have vehicles with ONE weapon on them. ONE. These are Orks. They will duct-tape a gretchin and something that shoots onto every available surface and forget about ammo because they will believe it never runs out so it won't. yet the buggies... one weapon.. koptas.. one weapon.. trakks one weapon. Derrrrrh. ORKS, they'll bolt on a big shoota even if it means hanging their mate by one toe so he can shoot it.


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/25 01:59:28


Post by: Ginjitzu


meatybtz wrote:
Spoiler:
 Dysartes wrote:
Mr.Church13 wrote:
 Hawky wrote:
Has anyone addressed the invulnerable save bloat? I kinda forgot.
(Invulnerable saves on already though models that go as high as 3+, making the unit pain in the arse to kill)


With the new AP system they have to up invul saves, because armour saves mean virtually nothing nowadays. Just look at the entire Space Marine line. They pay a crap ton of points for virtually the same save as a guardsman.

I do like the smell of hyperbole in the afternoon...


Indeed, but he isn't wrong on the core issue. I've beat this horse till it's dead but 8th edition was sold as a more model removing edition. Aka, all about the dakka. More death. Structurally though they got there by rendering durability almost negligible, in the conventional sense. So badly did they do this that they were forced to bolt on all kinds of nonsense to counter it. It ends up clunky.

No saves against mortal wounds, except, this not save save and this randomly named not save after save save.

Also this is probably he cheesiest edition of 40k to date. We all thought the 7th ed combos and crazy stuff like super friends lists and worse was bad.. Then 8th came in and said.. naww hold my beer and watch this. CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESE.

Worse it's got holes in it and is stinky cheese. People have exploited every gigantic hole GW tossed into this pile. In fact I think the focus on Nurgle this edition rotted their brains because this is one rotting heap of rules.

Never before were things "unhitable" now you can cheese it and make a Space Marine an Ork. Make Orks and Guardsmen unable to hit in Range and Melee! Yes and re-roll those re-rolls of re-rolls because saves of saves of saves not saves are awesome.

I mean the Dakka-Ception is Three layers deep on models now. All the new vehicles are ridiculous gun platforms. We heard you like dakka so we put some dakka on your dakka and then dakka in your dakka so your Knight is now a Dakka Knigh because knights needed more dakka for their dakka.

Least we not forget "death blossom mode" is on every vehicle as that Land Raider pirouettes on one track like a fine ballerina firing lascannons from opposite sides of itself at the same target. Its like magic. Oh and you cannot fall back and fire unless we say so because we have all these exceptions to hard rules and then exceptions to the exceptions because we can't keep anything straight and Whose Line is it Anyways.. the game where the rules don't make any sense and the points mean nothing.

I know they were creeping that direction and who didn't read the How to Sell New Eldar Jetbikes when they broke the hard-fast rules of two decades and made them 3/3 heavy weapon platforms w/o the usual price boost. The Dakka Writing was on the Wall. Dakka Sells models.

So lets Dakka Knight and Rotor Cannon happily along with our Deathblossom spinning magical tanks of whirling death spraying while we stack more and more dice into every time saving roll.. and reroll.. and not save save and not save save re-roll because look at all that time savings! Wow.. much time saving...

8th Edition 40k.. when jumping the shark and nuking the fridge is for posers and n00bs.


There is so much nonsense that the brain spins. The one Race who literally should have dakka stacked on dakka, the Orks, still have vehicles with ONE weapon on them. ONE. These are Orks. They will duct-tape a gretchin and something that shoots onto every available surface and forget about ammo because they will believe it never runs out so it won't. yet the buggies... one weapon.. koptas.. one weapon.. trakks one weapon. Derrrrrh. ORKS, they'll bolt on a big shoota even if it means hanging their mate by one toe so he can shoot it.


I prefer that firing arcs are gone. Sure the immersion suffers a bit, but it improves the flow of the game. But what's this about triple save rolls? I can only think of saving rolls and ignore damage rolls. What's the third?


GW 2019 Community Survey -- live page 6/now @ 2019/04/25 15:39:08


Post by: meatybtz


 Ginjitzu wrote:
meatybtz wrote:
Spoiler:
 Dysartes wrote:
Mr.Church13 wrote:
 Hawky wrote:
Has anyone addressed the invulnerable save bloat? I kinda forgot.
(Invulnerable saves on already though models that go as high as 3+, making the unit pain in the arse to kill)


With the new AP system they have to up invul saves, because armour saves mean virtually nothing nowadays. Just look at the entire Space Marine line. They pay a crap ton of points for virtually the same save as a guardsman.

I do like the smell of hyperbole in the afternoon...


Indeed, but he isn't wrong on the core issue. I've beat this horse till it's dead but 8th edition was sold as a more model removing edition. Aka, all about the dakka. More death. Structurally though they got there by rendering durability almost negligible, in the conventional sense. So badly did they do this that they were forced to bolt on all kinds of nonsense to counter it. It ends up clunky.

No saves against mortal wounds, except, this not save save and this randomly named not save after save save.

Also this is probably he cheesiest edition of 40k to date. We all thought the 7th ed combos and crazy stuff like super friends lists and worse was bad.. Then 8th came in and said.. naww hold my beer and watch this. CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESE.

Worse it's got holes in it and is stinky cheese. People have exploited every gigantic hole GW tossed into this pile. In fact I think the focus on Nurgle this edition rotted their brains because this is one rotting heap of rules.

Never before were things "unhitable" now you can cheese it and make a Space Marine an Ork. Make Orks and Guardsmen unable to hit in Range and Melee! Yes and re-roll those re-rolls of re-rolls because saves of saves of saves not saves are awesome.

I mean the Dakka-Ception is Three layers deep on models now. All the new vehicles are ridiculous gun platforms. We heard you like dakka so we put some dakka on your dakka and then dakka in your dakka so your Knight is now a Dakka Knigh because knights needed more dakka for their dakka.

Least we not forget "death blossom mode" is on every vehicle as that Land Raider pirouettes on one track like a fine ballerina firing lascannons from opposite sides of itself at the same target. Its like magic. Oh and you cannot fall back and fire unless we say so because we have all these exceptions to hard rules and then exceptions to the exceptions because we can't keep anything straight and Whose Line is it Anyways.. the game where the rules don't make any sense and the points mean nothing.

I know they were creeping that direction and who didn't read the How to Sell New Eldar Jetbikes when they broke the hard-fast rules of two decades and made them 3/3 heavy weapon platforms w/o the usual price boost. The Dakka Writing was on the Wall. Dakka Sells models.

So lets Dakka Knight and Rotor Cannon happily along with our Deathblossom spinning magical tanks of whirling death spraying while we stack more and more dice into every time saving roll.. and reroll.. and not save save and not save save re-roll because look at all that time savings! Wow.. much time saving...

8th Edition 40k.. when jumping the shark and nuking the fridge is for posers and n00bs.


There is so much nonsense that the brain spins. The one Race who literally should have dakka stacked on dakka, the Orks, still have vehicles with ONE weapon on them. ONE. These are Orks. They will duct-tape a gretchin and something that shoots onto every available surface and forget about ammo because they will believe it never runs out so it won't. yet the buggies... one weapon.. koptas.. one weapon.. trakks one weapon. Derrrrrh. ORKS, they'll bolt on a big shoota even if it means hanging their mate by one toe so he can shoot it.


I prefer that firing arcs are gone. Sure the immersion suffers a bit, but it improves the flow of the game. But what's this about triple save rolls? I can only think of saving rolls and ignore damage rolls. What's the third?

Its not really third, more like there are three mechanics for damage resistance (if you will), though several go by different names they are the same mechanic. Those three are: armor/invuln, wound dice reduction (from a D3, or D6 wound weapon down to 1 wound), and what we call Feel No Pain or direct wound mitigation. The problem arises when you have them stacked (which can happen) and then you cheese it for re-rolls.

They claimed to save time and dice rolls but instead you are rolling more dice and there are certainly more re-rolls in this edition than any previous edition. It's out of hand really.

As for Firing Arc, well it was part and parcel of the game designed to prevent dominance of "super weapons" and everything else sucks (which we have today). Sure you could take a super vehicle. It will likely only have 3 weapon systems if not super heavy, though some had 4. But you can't shoo them all at once target unless facing it. Players had to pay attention to facing, that is tactics, but more than anything it was "heavy weapon control". Which has always been a thing since RT. Sure you can have an assault cannon but it might blow up or jam. Your heavy bolter could fire up to 6 shots (yes six, 2D3, or 2xFF dice) but that was now two times the chances to roll a jam which would put the Heavy weapon out of action for a full turn (or explode and kill the bearer). Artillery was controlled by the now defunct artillery dice which always gave you a chance for a bad ending.

The change, like all changes in the game really, were to sell more models. The higher priced "uber models" and kits are priced more than the "troops" kits. In order to make them sufficiently attractive you take away the negatives. But over time your game becomes LasCannonHammer or whatever.

I liked firing arcs because it made a player choose, decide, turn to face all guns on target but then your rear armored posterior is being waggled in the breeze or... take the reduced firepower for more protection.

But it is what it is, it's just with each codex or new release the game keeps getting more ridiculous. As for scale creep it is more in line with AoS where they moved players more and more to smaller number larger models rather than the old WHFB of blocks of troopers. Just look at the latest Chaos Releases and you see guys riding big things so 40K is headed towards what amounts to an "elite battle" or a "horde battle" for the two formations. No real balance or variation. You either spam all you can or ride giant beasts and models into battle in super elite high wound models with saves on top of saves with re-rolls because you painted it blue (death skulls "luck" rule).

Mind you I am not all salty. I frankly laughed my butt off when they released the new Chaos Havocs and only put one of the MUST HAVE weapons in the box. I laughed when people started buying multiple boxes and said, well played GW. Esp because a nerf is most certainly incoming. But they will wait until all the "must have its" have bough enough (by tracking sales rates). So I get to laugh my butt off again when it gets nerfed and people complain after having spent extra money to be "uber". I recall when people complained about Devestators and only having 2 grav cannons when devs=gravcannon was a thing. GW learned from that and made sure to increase sales by including only ONE of the uber, must have weapon.