I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
This is so cringe...
I get they are trying to hype the models up but this is ohh soooo cringe...
Essentialy what they are saying is: We know its a 1W T3 model with a 4+ save and we are going to charge you a disgusting amount of money for tomorrow.... Compared to say a box of primaris marines...
BUUUT its really good at killing other T3 1W models in melee! Isn't that great? Isn't this an amazing unit...!!! It can do specifically one thing just about maybe... Now you can kill those elite T3 1 W models that are ruining your day... (Because the same units you'd take to shoot the orc boys we talk about later couldn't possibly be used to kill these elite T3 1w enemy units...)
I mean what exactly scary T3 1 W models am I supposed to be concerned about that I need to bring banshees for? lol...
At least make it useful and suggest tagging large shooty things or something..
And let's not forget those amazing startegems we gave you in PA1..... ohh wait....
Sisters. They're pretty well built for tackling sisters of battle.
I mean, it's not like your other stuff couldn't also deal with sisters and at greater range, resulting in better safety, but...
Maybe next edition. Probably not, but maybe.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
This is so cringe... I get they are trying to hype the models up but this is ohh soooo cringe...
Essentialy what they are saying is: We know its a 1W T3 model with a 4+ save and we are going to charge you a disgusting amount of money for tomorrow.... Compared to say a box of primaris marines...
BUUUT its really good at killing other T3 1W models in melee! Isn't that great? Isn't this an amazing unit...!!! It can do specifically one thing just about maybe... Now you can kill those elite T3 1 W models that are ruining your day... (Because the same units you'd take to shoot the orc boys we talk about later couldn't possibly be used to kill these elite T3 1w enemy units...)
I mean what exactly scary T3 1 W models am I supposed to be concerned about that I need to bring banshees for? lol... At least make it useful and suggest tagging large shooty things or something..
And let's not forget those amazing startegems we gave you in PA1..... ohh wait....
Ok Rant/Vent done.
At least it's legal for Banshees to charge after they DS/get out of a Wave Serpent, unlike the brilliant tactic GW suggested of making an illegal with Nobz (which were terrible) charge after disembarking from a Gorkanaut (which was curiously also terrible) that was not an assault vehicle last edition. Banshees aren't really for killing, on a S3 2A model a power sword little better than a chainsword and 2A is nowhere near enough to seriously threaten Marines.
I think the key to being able to combat the heavier infantry around would have been well-balanced Shrine abilities and worthwhile Exarch weapon upgrades. Paying 1CP for +1 attack on a unit champion when Astra Militarum get serpent shields on a tank commander for 1 CP with tank aces is pretty insane. A +1 S unit-wide would have been really cool if you wanted to use them in an anti-firstborn way and making the bonus attack power more worthwhile along with a fairly priced executioner would mean you could tangle with Primaris. Correct me if I'm wrong but the two best powers are War Shout and Graceful Avoidance, whether you take one or both that just tells me that the unit is going to run in without taking overwatch and bad touch shooting units while being difficult to kill by those units and a little hard to remove with a weak counter-charge. Where is the "lethal swordmaster" power? It's in Piercing Strike which doesn't appear to actually increase damage against anything but T5-7 vehicles/monsters and not by enough to matter (7 rounds of combat to destroy a Rhino) and Whirling Blades which I already mentioned is blatantly unfair in how little it does. Where is the fight twice +1 S upgrade like WE Terminators get for 2CP? You can put that on a character with a relic and a WL trait creating an absolute butcher or on a unit of 10 Terminators (300+ pts). It's a blatantly OP stratagem which was needed to make up for the lack of another blatantly OP Stratagem with Endless Cacophony which is half the power budget of Chaos Terminators currently. Executioner is already very cheap if you want to give a stab at trying to kill something, I think maybe power swords should just be 1 pt/A. Mirrorswords 4 pts and AP-3 and Executioner 8-10 pts assuming you had better aspect powers.
I don't know if it's because of the custom Craftworlds which you can engineer to be much more effective for melee Aspects than any of the original Craftworlds that GW decided to hold back on Banshee aspect powers. You shouldn't have to bring Howling Banshees from an allied Craftworld to bring out half their offensive power and even with that you can't really make Howling Banshees kick real ass because they don't get worthwhile melee buffs from any of their aspect powers.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
So its not for anyone who plays 40k regularly. Gotcha!
People who don't play regularly will buy all the banshees after this article im sure..
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
This could be considered misleading advertisement though. Lying to the guillible to get them buy units based on bad advise.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
The Incubi Stratagem is nice, but what they really need is some more reliable means of getting into close combat; something like the ability to charge after disembarking.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
dude, everytime GW puts out a new unit or new rules for the unit they write an article like this, and just like this article, most aren't really very good at proper tactics. it's not some anti-xenos conspiracy. we see it with marine stuff too
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
That is a really good point. Also, by claiming skill is needed to operate them, they cover their arses from people coming back saying they suck.
The problem with banshees are primaris, from where I stand. Against guard GEQ stuff they might perform OK and have a role.
It really pains me seeing freaking elite units become some sort of disaposable tarpit.
In a primaris marine meta, I really dont see a role for them.
Also, every other melee focused force I see is some combination of smash captains and jump pack chargers. Walking seems to be for noobs and underpowered armies.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
Its easy, write the same thing, but make better rules that actually makes sense.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
But then the article is devious in nature. Some noob is going to buy them, because the article tells him the unit is good, they spend a lot of money on them, and then while playing they find out the unit sucks, and GW has no not working return policy.
To be fair, if any new release needed extra PR, it's this one. They realize perhaps this price point is way too intense for most people so why not try and snare the innocent by releasing such an article ?
This is the same company that tried to peddle a new, mini hard back rule book that was a literal reprint of the already kinda useless core rule book to sell it at premium price and wouldn't say it had no updates to it.
They are snake oil salesmen and you should read any of their drivel shill articles as the most flagrant trash it is.
Though I do kind of wonder how many really new players follow those articles over the more hardcore.
I expect them to rewrite rules for eldars when they relaunch them for 9th. At some point they will take a break from primaris and eldars seem popular enough to merit new sculpts.
Then, elite eldars will be ported properly to the new types of rules and all will be well until the next round of power creep.
I really wish someone would take rules from the greedy hands of the marketing folks; all of this is so cringe worthy.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
Indeed. It's such a shame GW has absolutely no control over the units they write the rules for, otherwise they could just give Banshees and Incubi good rules that would make them worth buying, rather than having to scam naive players into wasting money on them.
AngryAngel80 wrote: To be fair, if any new release needed extra PR, it's this one. They realize perhaps this price point is way too intense for most people so why not try and snare the innocent by releasing such an article ?
This is the same company that tried to peddle a new, mini hard back rule book that was a literal reprint of the already kinda useless core rule book to sell it at premium price and wouldn't say it had no updates to it.
They are snake oil salesmen and you should read any of their drivel shill articles as the most flagrant trash it is.
Though I do kind of wonder how many really new players follow those articles over the more hardcore.
Well it is not like they don't do it all the time. They knew that the centurion bomb exists in first or second week of RG codex being live, writing a FAQ that it does not work on centurions would take them 10 min, and puting in on the site max a day. yet they waited for a few months, and through a few fest so people buy them , only to nerf them later.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
So its not for anyone who plays 40k regularly. Gotcha!
People who don't play regularly will buy all the banshees after this article im sure..
Or maybe its for people who like banshees and will use them despite them not being great because its fun/themeatic. You know, like how most people who play 40k play the game?
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
So its not for anyone who plays 40k regularly. Gotcha!
People who don't play regularly will buy all the banshees after this article im sure..
Or maybe its for people who like banshees and will use them despite them not being great because its fun/themeatic. You know, like how most people who play 40k play the game?
I am honest, i bought models just because i like them and not because they perform on the table. However, at that pricetag they need all the help to shift them...
Heck 10 banshes cost more then the significantly larger (and more usefull) CSM starterbox. and that box has some options in there that are neither regarded as good nor has it a style that all people like.
The only unit worse prehaps are the new Primaris snipers, and they atleast cost enough points to fill up a list.
(not mentioning the insanity that is mekgunz, because at this stage we all have seen more kitbashed propper orky ones then the regular bought ones.)
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
Its easy, write the same thing, but make better rules that actually makes sense.
Sorry thats not your job, you're PR not the rules team, your job is to sell the unit the rules team wrote, not sell what you think it should be.
Or maybe its for people who like banshees and will use them despite them not being great because its fun/themeatic. You know, like how most people who play 40k play the game?
Why would people that like banshees no matter what, require an article to convince them to do it? It would be like making a special mini vodka advertisment targeting alcoholics.
And if the focus was for painters or peoples that like to remodel stuff, then there wasn't much focus put on either of those options.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! 785939 10729612 wrote:
I am honest, i bought models just because i like them and not because they perform on the table. However, at that pricetag they need all the help to shift them...
Heck 10 banshes cost more then the significantly larger (and more usefull) CSM starterbox. and that box has some options in there that are neither regarded as good nor has it a style that all people like.
The only unit worse prehaps are the new Primaris snipers, and they atleast cost enough points to fill up a list.
(not mentioning the insanity that is mekgunz, because at this stage we all have seen more kitbashed propper orky ones then the regular bought ones.)
where I live everyone just bought a unit of eliminators, 2 boxs of ETB reavers and build 9 eliminators out of those. Banshees don't even have that.
Banshees are very useful in certain builds but like a lot of eldar units it's best used in combination with other units and or buffs.
Being able to shut down overwatch to allow harder hitting units like wraith blades and spears to go in unharmed is very good, for example.
Or maybe its for people who like banshees and will use them despite them not being great because its fun/themeatic. You know, like how most people who play 40k play the game?
Why would people that like banshees no matter what, require an article to convince them to do it? It would be like making a special mini vodka advertisment targeting alcoholics.
And if the focus was for painters or peoples that like to remodel stuff, then there wasn't much focus put on either of those options.
Why does coca cola put up ads when its the most popular soft drink in the world? Thats how advertising works.
I swear its like people forget GW is an international business and expect them to operate like an FLGS.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
So its not for anyone who plays 40k regularly. Gotcha!
People who don't play regularly will buy all the banshees after this article im sure..
Or maybe its for people who like banshees and will use them despite them not being great because its fun/themeatic. You know, like how most people who play 40k play the game?
Then why bother to hype them emphasizing rules, which is where they suck? Just great a fluff article, talk about the sculpts and call it a day.
Obviously GW knows that power sells miniatures and a lot of new players expect to play the game.
The whole war hammer game is a balance between selling a game, selling hype, and selling overpriced sculpts. You cannot keep selling at this price without all the elements and GW knows that very well.
The price of the new sculpts is too High and the rules are bad. As I said, I expect a relaunch of the eldar aspect warriors with 9th. So banshees are probably just a bit poorly timed.
Or maybe its for people who like banshees and will use them despite them not being great because its fun/themeatic. You know, like how most people who play 40k play the game?
Why would people that like banshees no matter what, require an article to convince them to do it? It would be like making a special mini vodka advertisment targeting alcoholics.
And if the focus was for painters or peoples that like to remodel stuff, then there wasn't much focus put on either of those options.
Why does coca cola put up ads when its the most popular soft drink in the world? Thats how advertising works.
I swear its like people forget GW is an international business and expect them to operate like an FLGS.
some people I think just want reasons to be out raged at GW.
At the end of the day these articles are adverts and should be viewed as such. If you think they are flat out lying sue them but I'm not sure you'll get far!
Edit - I am not defending the practice but when it comes to shady business practices GW really aren't the worst out there by any stretch.
Edit, edit - Points already been made, should read whole thread.
If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
So now we're back to the idea that most 40k players are poor simpletons being taken advantage of? That they lack even the most basic agency to seek out independent advice from the myriad of platforms that exist before spending a lot of money?
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
Of course. I suppose I am reacting to the over-reactions like "snake oil salesman" etc. It's just capitalism, I have no idea how true or not what they say is within the context of all the "metas" and what have you but by all means call them out when necessary. On the other hand constant complaining and excessive language will lead to a "cried wolf" situation. Or possibly put people off getting into the game at all which I am sure most of us don't really want.
They are stupidly fast. 8” move, Advance (can guarantee 6” with strat), +3” on the charge, and the charge roll (~7”) means you are looking at covering about two feet of table to charge.
They ignore overwatch. This, combined with their speed, means they can be where they need and engage someone in CC. Now locking units up in combat isn’t what it it used to be, but not everyone can fall back and shoot with impunity. They can also be the first ones in to cover more vulnerable units that don’t feel like eating a face full of flamers (or worse)
They are not the walking blender murder machines they are made out to be. They are a big ol' monkey wrench that can be tossed at the foe to disrupt things.
Worth the points for that? Maybe not.
Worth the money? Well, they do look pretty...
Of course. I suppose I am reacting to the over-reactions like "snake oil salesman" etc. It's just capitalism,
They overhype a notoriously bad unit, this is just a dishonest way to advertise.
I have no idea how true or not what they say is within the context of all the "metas" and what have you but by all means call them out when necessary.
Exactly what is going on.
On the other hand constant complaining and excessive language will lead to a "cried wolf" situation.
Since you haven't checked whether it is in a good state (rules wise) or not, how can you say it is excessive?
Or possibly put people off getting into the game at all which I am sure most of us don't really want.
People who start playing should be aware of how GW conducts business. If being exposed leads to people being put off it is their own fault. Maybe next time they'll think twice before pulling on of these tricks.
The only thing keeping companies "honest" are discerning consumers and, for the most clearly predatory cases, legislation.
Before I hear anything along the likes of "it is just a game". It might be a game, but the money spent in it is very real.
Finally, from an old player coming back:
How the heck can be that site called "warhammer community"? It is one long bad infomercial and it doesn't have a single place that I could see where one could leave any feedback. Had there been comments accepted on the post, it would have been rightfully shredded.
Let's say you have a big unit of shining spears in the webway for a turn two charge using ghost walk to make that a 7" charge but the enemy's tau or IF aggressors that would be big problems for the spears so you send in a unit of five banshees and the spears can go in unmolested.
Or you could use them to tie up something with thunder hammers combined with the exarch power and the drain psychic power to make the banshees -3 to hit to tarpit that unit.
On their own banshees aren't very killy but they are a good utility unit when used correctly.
How the heck can be that site called "warhammer community"? It is one long bad infomercial and it doesn't have a single place that I could see where one could leave any feedback. Had there been comments accepted on the post, it would have been rightfully shredded.
Probably the same reason that so many dictatorships used to go around calling themselves 'The People's Republic of _____'.
'Warhammer Community' sounds much nicer and friendlier than, say, the Warhammer Company Propaganda Page.
Joking aside, I do agree with you that calling it 'community' is laughable when they designed it so that there would be no actual contact with the players, nor any way for them to even leave feedback.
Of course. I suppose I am reacting to the over-reactions like "snake oil salesman" etc. It's just capitalism,
They overhype a notoriously bad unit, this is just a dishonest way to advertise.
I have no idea how true or not what they say is within the context of all the "metas" and what have you but by all means call them out when necessary.
Exactly what is going on.
On the other hand constant complaining and excessive language will lead to a "cried wolf" situation.
Since you haven't checked whether it is in a good state (rules wise) or not, how can you say it is excessive?
Or possibly put people off getting into the game at all which I am sure most of us don't really want.
People who start playing should be aware of how GW conducts business. If being exposed leads to people being put off it is their own fault. Maybe next time they'll think twice before pulling on of these tricks.
The only thing keeping companies "honest" are discerning consumers and, for the most clearly predatory cases, legislation.
Before I hear anything along the likes of "it is just a game". It might be a game, but the money spent in it is very real.
Finally, from an old player coming back:
How the heck can be that site called "warhammer community"? It is one long bad infomercial and it doesn't have a single place that I could see where one could leave any feedback. Had there been comments accepted on the post, it would have been rightfully shredded.
You mean literally the same way every business has conducted its advertising since advertising was invented?
Sorry I just don't understand the mentality that GW is obligated to say "this unit has contextually bad rules and is too expensive but here's their fluff and you don't have to buy it if you don't want to".
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
I'll give this a go. I'm not sure I can match the word count of GW, however;
We have these NEW Banshee sculpts and THEY'RE NOT FAILCA- FINECAST I mean!! Woohoo! Take your sexy Femdar fantasies to the NEXT LEVEL and get these bad bo- girls before all those other sneaky knife ears steal them to make conversions of units they can't play!! Awww Yeaaaaa Banshees, awesome and very cost effective models*.
You mean literally the same way every business has conducted its advertising since advertising was invented?
Sorry I just don't understand the mentality that GW is obligated to say "this unit has contextually bad rules and is too expensive but here's their fluff and you don't have to buy it if you don't want to".
You do know that you can sue companies for false advertising? I am not saying this would be easy in a case like this, but there are regulations regarding advertising.
Some people seem to think we live in a jungle and that GW can do whatever the heck they want because "it is capitalism" / "all companies do the same" / "it is just a game" / "it is not so bad".
At the very least, I hope that anyone thinking of buying those cool but overpriced sculpts reads this thread.
Next time, perhaps Warhammer Community is a bit more careful with what they write, and their rules team is allowed some say over the bean counters.
How the heck can be that site called "warhammer community"? It is one long bad infomercial and it doesn't have a single place that I could see where one could leave any feedback. Had there been comments accepted on the post, it would have been rightfully shredded.
Probably the same reason that so many dictatorships used to go around calling themselves 'The People's Republic of _____'.
'Warhammer Community' sounds much nicer and friendlier than, say, the Warhammer Company Propaganda Page.
Joking aside, I do agree with you that calling it 'community' is laughable when they designed it so that there would be no actual contact with the players, nor any way for them to even leave feedback.
First time I had a look since I came back I spent a good 30 minutes looking for forums or any community interaction.
I remember when white dwarf was freely available in their stores (or at least I was always gifted mine, this is decades ago) and it had lots of stuff about conversions and what not.
Now you got to pay for it and, from what I have seen, is again an infomercial.
Wake up, GW! You used to be a company of board game players.
Sim-Life wrote: Sorry I just don't understand the mentality that GW is obligated to say "this unit has contextually bad rules and is too expensive but here's their fluff and you don't have to buy it if you don't want to".
That seems to be what they did anyway. This article is about how Banshees require careful play because they are easy to kill, only really good at killing specific units (and might need stratagems or character support to get the job done) and need a delivery system to not get shot to ribbons. I really can't see how this overhypes banshees unless you are easily confused by exclamation marks.
BrianDavion wrote: Sorry thats not your job, you're PR not the rules team, your job is to sell the unit the rules team wrote, not sell what you think it should be.
C'mon now, you're not seriously suggesting some rules haven't been written just as a marketing tool?
The ones that you imagine when thinking about how awesome they are in the fluff.
Seriously, I can't believe they advocated deep striking a wave serpent to protect them. Let me just dedicate one of the toughest transports to a unit that isn't really a threat to anything. And I'll just deep strike the tank because my opponent is so likely to focus these game-winning assets, while my uberpowerful striking scorpions clear all the chaff.
Apologies for the salt, but this article struck a nerve. I'd at least have respected it if they'd talked about using banshees as fast overwatch denying fodder. That's not what they're supposed to be, but it is what they're good for currently at least.
Grey40k wrote:You do know that you can sue companies for false advertising? I am not saying this would be easy in a case like this, but there are regulations regarding advertising.
So put your money where your mouth is.
If you're going to imply this is false advertising, I await your attempt to legally call GW out on it. Otherwise, you're just making claims with no legal backing.
Wake up, GW! You used to be a company of board game players.
Speaking from experience, most of their WarCom team are. It's not hard to track them down on other media outlets and see that they're all pretty hobby-first guys and gals.
The sad thing is that it seems like it really wouldn't take *that* much to at least make Banshees decent, but GW constantly misses opportunities.
For example, Phoenix Rising gave each aspect warrior a whole table of Exarch Powers to choose from. I think something as simple as '+1 strength for the unit' would have gone a long way.
Instead, all but one of the Exarch Powers only helped the Exarch herself (and, in most cases, not by much). And the only power that affected the entire unit was defensive.
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
So now we're back to the idea that most 40k players are poor simpletons being taken advantage of? That they lack even the most basic agency to seek out independent advice from the myriad of platforms that exist before spending a lot of money?
Stupid argument. This game is sold to literal children. At least they can sell the kit based on it's qualities and not give bad advice to children.
Yeah my point was; they might as well not have bothered. I mean the ynnari strat requires you to have a full ynnari detatchement of each Cwe, harlies and DE (with all the ynnari characters). Thats how far they are reaching.
Yeah its just a grumble. But as others have said, people that are going to buy them will buy them anyway.
But lets not try to make it out to be something its not and expose the disconnect between warcom gw and the "community". Never said its a conspiracy etc. Just compared to similiarly priced kit.
It is what it is obviously they had a job to do. But could have just posted some nice pictures and said : the new pretty plastic banshees are up for pre-order dont forget. Lol
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
So now we're back to the idea that most 40k players are poor simpletons being taken advantage of? That they lack even the most basic agency to seek out independent advice from the myriad of platforms that exist before spending a lot of money?
Stupid argument. This game is sold to literal children. At least they can sell the kit based on it's qualities and not give bad advice to children.
Children, of course, being well known for only competing at the highest level of competitiveness and the most very cutting edge meta lists.
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
So now we're back to the idea that most 40k players are poor simpletons being taken advantage of? That they lack even the most basic agency to seek out independent advice from the myriad of platforms that exist before spending a lot of money?
Stupid argument. This game is sold to literal children. At least they can sell the kit based on it's qualities and not give bad advice to children.
Children, of course, being well known for only competing at the highest level of competitiveness and the most very cutting edge meta lists.
Do you need to be in a cutting-edge meta environment for Howling Banshees to do squat to anything and then die in every game?
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
So now we're back to the idea that most 40k players are poor simpletons being taken advantage of? That they lack even the most basic agency to seek out independent advice from the myriad of platforms that exist before spending a lot of money?
Stupid argument. This game is sold to literal children. At least they can sell the kit based on it's qualities and not give bad advice to children.
Children, of course, being well known for only competing at the highest level of competitiveness and the most very cutting edge meta lists.
Do you need to be in a cutting-edge meta environment for Howling Banshees to do squat to anything and then die in every game?
Well it depends if our fictional 10 year old goes to his local tournament or is playing with his friend who brought some hormogants because they looked cool.
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
The price of banshees isn't really the discussion because you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks its acceptable.
Edit: I also like that now our fictional, tournament going, meta chasing 10 year old has his own income?
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
Of course that balance matters, that is one of the basic premises of most games.
Saying that balance doesn't matter because people who just play for fun have fun anyway is a clumsy attempt to sweep aside an important concern.
Would kids have less fun if the game were to be better balanced? Nope!
Would the game be better for everyone, or at least not worse, if the rules were better balanced? Yep!
So why isn't it balanced? Because GW tampers with rules for business purposes. This game has been going strong for more than two decades and balance is no better than when I played; even after dumbing down / simplifying lots of mechanics.
Is it that hard not to get a faction going up to 65% win rate and utterly crushing some of the factions (75% win rates)? At the very least this points to insufficient testing.
GW might be good at creating fluff and getting the sculpts to be played across the world, but they certainly aren't good at keeping functioning rules for it. IMHO rules ought to be taken out from the business equation; if GW is unable to do that, ETC or ITC or whatever player run organization needs to step up.
In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
The price of banshees isn't really the discussion because you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks its acceptable.
Edit: I also like that now our fictional, tournament going, meta chasing 10 year old has his own income?
So selling bad units to kids is OK because they don't know any better? It is hard to see this as a justification.
Next we should be telling them to just bang them against each other instead of using GW rules because that might be more balanced.
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
The price of banshees isn't really the discussion because you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks its acceptable.
Edit: I also like that now our fictional, tournament going, meta chasing 10 year old has his own income?
Its kind of relevant though isint it ? Especialy if your fictiona 10 year old Timmy now has to save up 4 weeks worth of hi £10 pocket money to get banshees and have 7.50 left while timmy will save up 4 Weeks worth and get 22 hormogaunts.. or 10 intercessors/start colelcting or whatever.
Grey40k wrote:
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
Of course that balance matters, that is one of the basic premises of most games.
Saying that balance doesn't matter because people who just play for fun have fun anyway is a clumsy attempt to sweep aside an important concern.
Would kids have less fun if the game were to be better balanced? Nope!
Would the game be better for everyone, or at least not worse, if the rules were better balanced? Yep!
So why isn't it balanced? Because GW tampers with rules for business purposes. This game has been going strong for more than two decades and balance is no better than when I played; even after dumbing down / simplifying lots of mechanics.
Is it that hard not to get a faction going up to 65% win rate and utterly crushing some of the factions (75% win rates)? At the very least this points to insufficient testing.
GW might be good at creating fluff and getting the sculpts to be played across the world, but they certainly aren't good at keeping functioning rules for it. IMHO rules ought to be taken out from the business equation; if GW is unable to do that, ETC or ITC or whatever player run organization needs to step up.
In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
I don't think anyone at GW is going to read this or care. Writing emails and going on FB to bash them might though as it seems to have worked for a bunch of stuff... I do almost kind of feel sorry for their PR dept... However, price per model is not something that they would ever back track on. The best thing that can happen is people complain about these kits, don't buy them and let GW know why they are not buying them. Maybe they will take notice for future releases. But im not holding my breath lol.
Take the elimantor kit as another recent example.. The plus side of those is youd only ever field 3 units (3 boxes) to field 30 banshees Id need 6 boxes...
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
Of course that balance matters, that is one of the basic premises of most games.
Saying that balance doesn't matter because people who just play for fun have fun anyway is a clumsy attempt to sweep aside an important concern.
Would kids have less fun if the game were to be better balanced? Nope!
Would the game be better for everyone, or at least not worse, if the rules were better balanced? Yep!
So why isn't it balanced? Because GW tampers with rules for business purposes. This game has been going strong for more than two decades and balance is no better than when I played; even after dumbing down / simplifying lots of mechanics.
Is it that hard not to get a faction going up to 65% win rate and utterly crushing some of the factions (75% win rates)? At the very least this points to insufficient testing.
GW might be good at creating fluff and getting the sculpts to be played across the world, but they certainly aren't good at keeping functioning rules for it. IMHO rules ought to be taken out from the business equation; if GW is unable to do that, ETC or ITC or whatever player run organization needs to step up.
In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
The price of banshees isn't really the discussion because you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks its acceptable.
Edit: I also like that now our fictional, tournament going, meta chasing 10 year old has his own income?
So selling bad units to kids is OK because they don't know any better? It is hard to see this as a justification.
Next we should be telling them to just bang them against each other instead of using GW rules because that might be more balanced.
I'm beginning to wonder if anyone on this board has ever met or even been a child.
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
Of course that balance matters, that is one of the basic premises of most games.
Saying that balance doesn't matter because people who just play for fun have fun anyway is a clumsy attempt to sweep aside an important concern.
Would kids have less fun if the game were to be better balanced? Nope!
Would the game be better for everyone, or at least not worse, if the rules were better balanced? Yep!
So why isn't it balanced? Because GW tampers with rules for business purposes. This game has been going strong for more than two decades and balance is no better than when I played; even after dumbing down / simplifying lots of mechanics.
Is it that hard not to get a faction going up to 65% win rate and utterly crushing some of the factions (75% win rates)? At the very least this points to insufficient testing.
GW might be good at creating fluff and getting the sculpts to be played across the world, but they certainly aren't good at keeping functioning rules for it. IMHO rules ought to be taken out from the business equation; if GW is unable to do that, ETC or ITC or whatever player run organization needs to step up.
In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
The price of banshees isn't really the discussion because you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks its acceptable.
Edit: I also like that now our fictional, tournament going, meta chasing 10 year old has his own income?
So selling bad units to kids is OK because they don't know any better? It is hard to see this as a justification.
Next we should be telling them to just bang them against each other instead of using GW rules because that might be more balanced.
I'm beginning to wonder if anyone on this board has ever met or even been a child.
It has been a while since I was a child lol.. Not sure about you. But I do remember my expensive metal hive tyrant dying to the seer council every game, and loosing against my friends eldar every time we played. And that's why we stopped playing...
I certainly didn't know why and as a kid yes, you want cool models and dont really think mathhammer. You just want your units to fight and do stuff right ? But if you loose the fight every time... whats the point?
Hence I think this is a bit of an issue. And you can bet your behind the shirts at GW stores will be force sellling these to kids and their parents...
Of course. I suppose I am reacting to the over-reactions like "snake oil salesman" etc. It's just capitalism,
They overhype a notoriously bad unit, this is just a dishonest way to advertise.
I have no idea how true or not what they say is within the context of all the "metas" and what have you but by all means call them out when necessary.
Exactly what is going on.
On the other hand constant complaining and excessive language will lead to a "cried wolf" situation.
Since you haven't checked whether it is in a good state (rules wise) or not, how can you say it is excessive?
Or possibly put people off getting into the game at all which I am sure most of us don't really want.
People who start playing should be aware of how GW conducts business. If being exposed leads to people being put off it is their own fault. Maybe next time they'll think twice before pulling on of these tricks.
The only thing keeping companies "honest" are discerning consumers and, for the most clearly predatory cases, legislation.
Before I hear anything along the likes of "it is just a game". It might be a game, but the money spent in it is very real.
Finally, from an old player coming back:
How the heck can be that site called "warhammer community"? It is one long bad infomercial and it doesn't have a single place that I could see where one could leave any feedback. Had there been comments accepted on the post, it would have been rightfully shredded.
I don't disagree with you, I've just become a bit jaded with the whole everything is either "garbage or OP" thing. Not aimed at the OP as they seem a good poster.
Grey40k wrote:In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Implying that the "real" community can only hold these beliefs?
Quit with the talk of "real" community - that's a completely subjective belief. If you like 40k or interact with it in any way, you're part of the community.
Grey40k wrote:In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Implying that the "real" community can only hold these beliefs?
Quit with the talk of "real" community - that's a completely subjective belief. If you like 40k or interact with it in any way, you're part of the community.
Read my post! I meant the real community, not that website called "Warhammer Community" where there isn't any way to interact with the players.
So, key concept here "interact". Not much of that going on on Warhammer community grounds, that I can see.
Grey40k wrote:In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Implying that the "real" community can only hold these beliefs?
Quit with the talk of "real" community - that's a completely subjective belief. If you like 40k or interact with it in any way, you're part of the community.
Read my post! I meant the real community, not that website called "Warhammer Community" where there isn't any way to interact with the players.
So, key concept here "interact". Not much of that going on on Warhammer community grounds, that I can see.
His point is what is the real community? The narritive players? The meta chasers? The newbies? The under-12s?The WAAC players? The CAAC players? All of these people will have different opinions on how to play the game.
Grey40k wrote:In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Implying that the "real" community can only hold these beliefs?
Quit with the talk of "real" community - that's a completely subjective belief. If you like 40k or interact with it in any way, you're part of the community.
Read my post! I meant the real community, not that website called "Warhammer Community" where there isn't any way to interact with the players.
So, key concept here "interact". Not much of that going on on Warhammer community grounds, that I can see.
Yes, I read it. Define "real" community - as far as I'm concerned, calling WarCom not a "real"community is putting up arbitrary limitations.
And besides, I feel that WarCom interacts fine, IMO.
I'm Canadian, so the presale hasn't gone up yet and I don't know the price CAD.
I've always liked Banshees, Incubi and Jain Zar. I didn't like Drazhar until this sculpt. That's as far as model aesthetics go.
Rules wise, I do think both Incubi and Banshees have a place; both units have better rules now than they did before PA. I don't have a force for the Banshees to fit into yet, but I've got a fledgling DE army for the Incubi. I'm playing them campaign style and growing the army organically, so the mercenary aspect of Incubi is perfect for a campaign, because they will act as allies for a force that doesn't have the reputation to attract specialist units.
As for high prices, that's always been an issue for GW, and I do see it as a legitimate complaint. Business/ capitalism is weird to me; I always feel like the loss in sales volume eats away at any advantage the company gets by raising prices. I bought somewhere in the neighbourhood of 1.5k worth of GW last year, But I probably would have spent more if was getting slightly more for each dollar- there are a lot of things I wanted to buy but didn't due to cost.
As to the Community, I also agree that it could be more engaging. I check it pretty much every day, but on most days, I don't find anything that scratches the itch. I come here, or go to B&C.
I think there were a few comments early in the thread about getting better in a re-release for 9th. I've said before, and often, that while I don't dismiss the possibility of 9th, I really don't think it's coming any time soon, if ever. I really like the PA method of every single faction gets something new every year.I also like the fact that NEW things are being created.
And I think all of that goes away if there's a 9th.
Finally, I suppose my biggest fear is that a boycott of these models makes GW think that Aspects aren't worth resculpting. I think that's the reason I try to defend, redirect when I see a lot of negative talk.
Grey40k wrote:In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Implying that the "real" community can only hold these beliefs?
Quit with the talk of "real" community - that's a completely subjective belief. If you like 40k or interact with it in any way, you're part of the community.
Read my post! I meant the real community, not that website called "Warhammer Community" where there isn't any way to interact with the players.
So, key concept here "interact". Not much of that going on on Warhammer community grounds, that I can see.
His point is what is the real community? The narritive players? The meta chasers? The newbies? The under-12s?The WAAC players? The CAAC players? All of these people will have different opinions on how to play the game.
Exactly. Implying there's one big "real" community is like calling people out as "fake fans", a form of gatekeeping I despise.
40k is divided into so many communities it's no use trying to imply that there's a "real" one out there.
Grey40k wrote:In the meantime, every time they post a misleading infomercial in their so-called Warhammer community site I hope the real community posts something like this. That'll teach them!
Implying that the "real" community can only hold these beliefs?
Quit with the talk of "real" community - that's a completely subjective belief. If you like 40k or interact with it in any way, you're part of the community.
Read my post! I meant the real community, not that website called "Warhammer Community" where there isn't any way to interact with the players.
So, key concept here "interact". Not much of that going on on Warhammer community grounds, that I can see.
Yes, I read it. Define "real" community - as far as I'm concerned, calling WarCom not a "real"community is putting up arbitrary limitations.
And besides, I feel that WarCom interacts fine, IMO.
How the heck does "WarCom" interact with the community? We can't really post in there anything. Anything that is not writen by an employee has been 100% handpicked by GW employees.
Finally, I suppose my biggest fear is that a boycott of these models makes GW think that Aspects aren't worth resculpting. I think that's the reason I try to defend, redirect when I see a lot of negative talk.
There is money to be made, no need for us to be quiet when they do things wrong. At least in tournaments, eldars are still among the biggest factions.
Grey40k wrote: How the heck does "WarCom" interact with the community? We can't really post in there anything. Anything that is not writen by an employee has been 100% handpicked by GW employees.
What am I missing? Honestly, I am puzzled.
You can comment on their Facebook, instagram, and Twitter posts, no?
The WarCom website is creating things for the community, and the community can interact via social media channels.
Grey40k wrote: How the heck does "WarCom" interact with the community? We can't really post in there anything. Anything that is not writen by an employee has been 100% handpicked by GW employees.
What am I missing? Honestly, I am puzzled.
You can comment on their Facebook, instagram, and Twitter posts, no?
The WarCom website is creating things for the community, and the community can interact via social media channels.
I we have a completely different idea of what interacting with the community means, or what a "community" portal ought to look like.
I do not see the Warhammer Community website as any sort of community hub since no player can actually leave a comment there in any form.
That said, probably no point arguing with you over it since both our positions are clear.
PenitentJake wrote: I'm Canadian, so the presale hasn't gone up yet and I don't know the price CAD.
I've always liked Banshees, Incubi and Jain Zar. I didn't like Drazhar until this sculpt. That's as far as model aesthetics go.
Rules wise, I do think both Incubi and Banshees have a place; both units have better rules now than they did before PA. I don't have a force for the Banshees to fit into yet, but I've got a fledgling DE army for the Incubi. I'm playing them campaign style and growing the army organically, so the mercenary aspect of Incubi is perfect for a campaign, because they will act as allies for a force that doesn't have the reputation to attract specialist units.
As for high prices, that's always been an issue for GW, and I do see it as a legitimate complaint. Business/ capitalism is weird to me; I always feel like the loss in sales volume eats away at any advantage the company gets by raising prices. I bought somewhere in the neighbourhood of 1.5k worth of GW last year, But I probably would have spent more if was getting slightly more for each dollar- there are a lot of things I wanted to buy but didn't due to cost.
As to the Community, I also agree that it could be more engaging. I check it pretty much every day, but on most days, I don't find anything that scratches the itch. I come here, or go to B&C.
I think there were a few comments early in the thread about getting better in a re-release for 9th. I've said before, and often, that while I don't dismiss the possibility of 9th, I really don't think it's coming any time soon, if ever. I really like the PA method of every single faction gets something new every year.I also like the fact that NEW things are being created.
And I think all of that goes away if there's a 9th.
Finally, I suppose my biggest fear is that a boycott of these models makes GW think that Aspects aren't worth resculpting. I think that's the reason I try to defend, redirect when I see a lot of negative talk.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'm beginning to wonder if anyone on this board has ever met or even been a child.
My experience of playing 40k at 12 mostly consisted of a friend getting mad at me about how unbeatably strong Mechdar were (mid 4e) and eventually ragequitting the game.
Write your own. There are a lot of hurdles to making 40k better that are just built into the basic core rules, but there are really simple patches (one-Battalion-only, Highlander, stratagem banlists, the 25% rule, hit-mod caps...) that can improve casual play.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'm beginning to wonder if anyone on this board has ever met or even been a child.
My experience of playing 40k at 12 mostly consisted of a friend getting mad at me about how unbeatably strong Mechdar were (mid 4e) and eventually ragequitting the game.
Write your own. There are a lot of hurdles to making 40k better that are just built into the basic core rules, but there are really simple patches (one-Battalion-only, Highlander, stratagem banlists, the 25% rule, hit-mod caps...) that can improve casual play.
No I mean how do you boycott rules in a way that's obviously distinct to GW than boycotting a model. If I refuse to buy a model because it has bad rules that's indistinguishable from me not buying a model because it's overpriced or ugly.
Grey40k wrote:That said, probably no point arguing with you over it since both our positions are clear.
Perhaps, but I can certainly highlight about your idea of a "real" community, and how that kind of rhetoric leads to gatekeeping.
Regardless if WarCom is a community or not, "real community" is a pretty loaded term.
well size makes stuff real. Football is a real sport, curling is not. Now localy there maybe fluctuation, but stuff like rule of 3, match played points is a thing people play and build their armies with those rules in ming. In my country, ITC is not a thing, in US it is a thing. On the other hand something like open or narrative, as a real way to play, makes as much sense as someone claiming fire isn't hot.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: You can comment on their Facebook, instagram, and Twitter posts, no?
The WarCom website is creating things for the community, and the community can interact via social media channels.
yeah and they delete or ignore those posts, while other people are making fun of your army choice.
The mods here delete posts. And they have no obligation to respond to everything. They've made it clear that they are happy to take criticism and suggestions via their email site, and often do make that aware in comment threads.
Grey40k wrote:That said, probably no point arguing with you over it since both our positions are clear.
Perhaps, but I can certainly highlight about your idea of a "real" community, and how that kind of rhetoric leads to gatekeeping.
Regardless if WarCom is a community or not, "real community" is a pretty loaded term.
well size makes stuff real.
Not really, at least, not in any of the examples you give.
Football is a real sport, curling is not.
Curling is a real sport. Just goes to show your argument's flaws, eh?
Now localy there maybe fluctuation, but stuff like rule of 3, match played points is a thing people play and build their armies with those rules in ming. In my country, ITC is not a thing, in US it is a thing.
Unofficial or not, ITC is real, and a valid way to play 40k, just like any other.
On the other hand something like open or narrative, as a real way to play, makes as much sense as someone claiming fire isn't hot.
Absolutely untrue, and a backhanded insult to anyone who plays those methods.
Putting up arbitrary boundaries and gatekeeping phrases like "this isn't the *real* way to play" or "my group is the REAL community" is dismissive in the extreme of other groups, and only serves to foster animosity and hostility. Regardless of how you play, that is valid, and you are part of the community. Play Matched with the latest FAQs and Errata with competitive play and aiming to win? That's fine. Play Open with the datasheets from the boxes that you've just bought, with Power Level, aiming to enjoy yourself and just roll dice on a kitchen table? That's fine. They're both real, and both valid members of the Warhammer Community.
Grey40k wrote:That said, probably no point arguing with you over it since both our positions are clear.
Perhaps, but I can certainly highlight about your idea of a "real" community, and how that kind of rhetoric leads to gatekeeping.
Regardless if WarCom is a community or not, "real community" is a pretty loaded term.
well size makes stuff real. Football is a real sport, curling is not. Now localy there maybe fluctuation, but stuff like rule of 3, match played points is a thing people play and build their armies with those rules in ming. In my country, ITC is not a thing, in US it is a thing. On the other hand something like open or narrative, as a real way to play, makes as much sense as someone claiming fire isn't hot.
What a world it would be if any group of people could invalidate another because they said so.
That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
No it isn't, that's how thugs work. Even on this forum there are others from Poland who manage to play narrative stuff quite fine (nou springs to mind), despite your local meta being composed of shadier folks.
Karol wrote: That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
Saying that someone playing Narrative isn't part of the "Real" 40k community isn't excusable, nor is it anywhere near on the socio-political scale as gang warfare, civil war, or international conflict.
If you play or enjoy 40k in any capacity, you are part of the community, simple as.
You wouldn't suggest that someone wasn't a football fan because they supported a different team, would you?
jeff white wrote: Yeah. Bait and swiich or plain bait ... which form of marketing do you orefer
unless bait and switch means something very very differantly in Netherlands from what it means in the rest of the world this isn't bait and switch.
Well sure. Means that you sell x as y, then change x to z.
After the commitment to the transaction.
So in slow motion, banshees went from awesome to eek. No.
Unless you like that. Then it is just bait for sucker fish...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nevelon wrote: Banshees are not without a few high points.
They are stupidly fast. 8” move, Advance (can guarantee 6” with strat), +3” on the charge, and the charge roll (~7”) means you are looking at covering about two feet of table to charge.
They ignore overwatch. This, combined with their speed, means they can be where they need and engage someone in CC. Now locking units up in combat isn’t what it it used to be, but not everyone can fall back and shoot with impunity. They can also be the first ones in to cover more vulnerable units that don’t feel like eating a face full of flamers (or worse)
They are not the walking blender murder machines they are made out to be. They are a big ol' monkey wrench that can be tossed at the foe to disrupt things.
Worth the points for that? Maybe not.
Worth the money? Well, they do look pretty...
They are cc fodder. Def not what they are made out to be. No wonder elders are dying out... they waste all their women on killing grots.
Canadian price and preorder up now- $65 CAD per box of 5. That's in the neighbourhood of quite a few of the 5 model terminator squads- some of those costing as much as $80 CAD.
Still overpriced, but there are other precedents for it.
Ten Primaris in a box for just $5.00 more does sting a bit, though I think both of these kits are better models aesthetically.
Thinking about a battalion with the Children of Khaine CW trait- Asurmen and Jain Zar for HQ, 3x5 dire avengers for troops and 3x5 Banshees. Probably max out exarchs, but not sure about the second CW trait and Specific Exarch powers.
Argive wrote: I'm just going to vent a bit here because I read this and quite frankly I wish they didn't bother trying to write this shpiel as its just insulting to anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta...
Have you considered that "anyone who understands how to play 40k and understands the current rules and meta..." ... isn't the target audience this was written for?
I would suggest that an understanding of the current meta isn't even required.
It's a shill article for new players because they've likely seen the backlash of expecting people to pay the same price for 5 Banshees that people pay for 10 Primaris Marines and are trying to counter.
It's very obvious and reeks of greed.
I could of written their article in a few sentences;
Banshees can act as a T1 roadblock unit if you invest a few psychic powers into them. They will kill nothing/little but keeping the opponent in their deployment zone is oftentimes worth it. If you go second they are an easy kill, keep them out of LOS or expect them to die.
Ok genius, now go write an article that SELLS me (pretend I'm a new player) a unit of Banshees.
You've got exactly the same word-count GW used in their article, you're not allowed to say anything untrue about them, and you cannot focus on whatever their negatives are.
I'll give this a go. I'm not sure I can match the word count of GW, however;
We have these NEW Banshee sculpts and THEY'RE NOT FAILCA- FINECAST I mean!! Woohoo! Take your sexy Femdar fantasies to the NEXT LEVEL and get these bad bo- girls before all those other sneaky knife ears steal them to make conversions of units they can't play!! Awww Yeaaaaa Banshees, awesome and very cost effective models*.
Karol wrote: That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
Can you stop with this might is right nonsense every other post. You are incorrect and humanity would be in a sorry state indeed if you were correct. This is a wargaming forum and people do not want to be debunking this toxic nonsense constantly.
Karol wrote: That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
Can you stop with this might is right nonsense every other post. You are incorrect and humanity would be in a sorry state indeed if you were correct. This is a wargaming forum and people do not want to be debunking this toxic nonsense constantly.
Eh, Karol is wrong about a lot of stuff - but he's pretty spot on with this.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'm beginning to wonder if anyone on this board has ever met or even been a child.
My experience of playing 40k at 12 mostly consisted of a friend getting mad at me about how unbeatably strong Mechdar were (mid 4e) and eventually ragequitting the game.
Write your own. There are a lot of hurdles to making 40k better that are just built into the basic core rules, but there are really simple patches (one-Battalion-only, Highlander, stratagem banlists, the 25% rule, hit-mod caps...) that can improve casual play.
No I mean how do you boycott rules in a way that's obviously distinct to GW than boycotting a model. If I refuse to buy a model because it has bad rules that's indistinguishable from me not buying a model because it's overpriced or ugly.
Oh. You can't. GW gives no f***s about what anyone thinks of their rules because people still buy models. You can't change GW's behaviour by boycotting rules, all you can change is whether you have fun with the game.
Karol wrote: That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
Can you stop with this might is right nonsense every other post. You are incorrect and humanity would be in a sorry state indeed if you were correct. This is a wargaming forum and people do not want to be debunking this toxic nonsense constantly.
Eh, Karol is wrong about a lot of stuff - but he's pretty spot on with this.
Karol wrote: That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
Can you stop with this might is right nonsense every other post. You are incorrect and humanity would be in a sorry state indeed if you were correct. This is a wargaming forum and people do not want to be debunking this toxic nonsense constantly.
Eh, Karol is wrong about a lot of stuff - but he's pretty spot on with this.
Karol wrote: That is more or less how companies, countries, religions and any big group work. Try walking around mediolan in a Latzio shirt, claiming AC Milan is not the one and only.
Of course every group wants to dominate every other group, and wants to see things done their way. That is why we get wars on a state and neighbour families scale, and everything in between.
Can you stop with this might is right nonsense every other post. You are incorrect and humanity would be in a sorry state indeed if you were correct. This is a wargaming forum and people do not want to be debunking this toxic nonsense constantly.
Eh, Karol is wrong about a lot of stuff - but he's pretty spot on with this.
How are these misleading statements? Did any of you other people read the article or did you just jump on the rage bandwagon?
Despite their killing power in melee, Howling Banshees and Incubi come with a low Toughness value and only a single Wound. This means that simply throwing them at the enemy lines will likely see them wiped out having only achieved limited success. That being the case, there are two main considerations when taking the fight to the enemy with the Aeldari – picking the correct target(s) to attack and getting there safely.
The best targets for Aeldari melee specialists are small, elite units of enemies – preferably comprising models with a single Wound – so that you can hopefully wipe them out on the turn that you charge to avoid suffering their return attacks. Avoid engaging enemy vehicles* or large units of expendable infantry such as Ork Boyz or Termagants, as you’ll likely end up getting bogged down and hit by a fatal counter-attack. These units should be eliminated by units more suited to engaging hordes, such as Wyches or Striking Scorpions in close combat and Kabalite Warriors or Dire Avengers at range.
So Banshees aren't Primaris, so what? Did GW make claims they would murder everything they hit?
But let's think about it.
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
Grey40k wrote: ...snip...
Next we should be telling them to just bang them against each other instead of using GW rules because that might be more balanced.
I had a little chuckle at this because banging the models together while making pew pew noises would be horribly unbalanced. A lot of Xenos and Daemon models are terribly flimsy, while a properly glued together Land Raider or Russ could be used to bludgeon goats to death.
Grey40k wrote: ...snip...
Next we should be telling them to just bang them against each other instead of using GW rules because that might be more balanced.
I had a little chuckle at this because banging the models together while making pew pew noises would be horribly unbalanced. A lot of Xenos and Daemon models are terribly flimsy, while a properly glued together Land Raider or Russ could be used to bludgeon goats to death.
Dreadsock can bludgeon your opponent to death. Not a lot of xenos lead in that weight class. Although some is spiky. I’d not want my metal avatar thrown at me.
How are these misleading statements? Did any of you other people read the article or did you just jump on the rage bandwagon?
Despite their killing power in melee, Howling Banshees and Incubi come with a low Toughness value and only a single Wound. This means that simply throwing them at the enemy lines will likely see them wiped out having only achieved limited success. That being the case, there are two main considerations when taking the fight to the enemy with the Aeldari – picking the correct target(s) to attack and getting there safely.
The best targets for Aeldari melee specialists are small, elite units of enemies – preferably comprising models with a single Wound – so that you can hopefully wipe them out on the turn that you charge to avoid suffering their return attacks. Avoid engaging enemy vehicles* or large units of expendable infantry such as Ork Boyz or Termagants, as you’ll likely end up getting bogged down and hit by a fatal counter-attack. These units should be eliminated by units more suited to engaging hordes, such as Wyches or Striking Scorpions in close combat and Kabalite Warriors or Dire Avengers at range.
So Banshees aren't Primaris, so what? Did GW make claims they would murder everything they hit?
But let's think about it.
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
How do you get a 72% charge out of Deepstrike?
Why are you arming the Intercessors with a Thunderhammer, when they're generally better off with more bodies and a Chainsword?
How are these misleading statements? Did any of you other people read the article or did you just jump on the rage bandwagon?
Despite their killing power in melee, Howling Banshees and Incubi come with a low Toughness value and only a single Wound. This means that simply throwing them at the enemy lines will likely see them wiped out having only achieved limited success. That being the case, there are two main considerations when taking the fight to the enemy with the Aeldari – picking the correct target(s) to attack and getting there safely.
The best targets for Aeldari melee specialists are small, elite units of enemies – preferably comprising models with a single Wound – so that you can hopefully wipe them out on the turn that you charge to avoid suffering their return attacks. Avoid engaging enemy vehicles* or large units of expendable infantry such as Ork Boyz or Termagants, as you’ll likely end up getting bogged down and hit by a fatal counter-attack. These units should be eliminated by units more suited to engaging hordes, such as Wyches or Striking Scorpions in close combat and Kabalite Warriors or Dire Avengers at range.
So Banshees aren't Primaris, so what? Did GW make claims they would murder everything they hit?
But let's think about it.
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
How do you get a 72% charge out of Deepstrike?
Why are you arming the Intercessors with a Thunderhammer, when they're generally better off with more bodies and a Chainsword?
To make the math of this story work of course, duh.
How are these misleading statements? Did any of you other people read the article or did you just jump on the rage bandwagon?
Despite their killing power in melee, Howling Banshees and Incubi come with a low Toughness value and only a single Wound. This means that simply throwing them at the enemy lines will likely see them wiped out having only achieved limited success. That being the case, there are two main considerations when taking the fight to the enemy with the Aeldari – picking the correct target(s) to attack and getting there safely.
The best targets for Aeldari melee specialists are small, elite units of enemies – preferably comprising models with a single Wound – so that you can hopefully wipe them out on the turn that you charge to avoid suffering their return attacks. Avoid engaging enemy vehicles* or large units of expendable infantry such as Ork Boyz or Termagants, as you’ll likely end up getting bogged down and hit by a fatal counter-attack. These units should be eliminated by units more suited to engaging hordes, such as Wyches or Striking Scorpions in close combat and Kabalite Warriors or Dire Avengers at range.
So Banshees aren't Primaris, so what? Did GW make claims they would murder everything they hit?
But let's think about it.
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
How do you get a 72% charge out of Deepstrike?
Why are you arming the Intercessors with a Thunderhammer, when they're generally better off with more bodies and a Chainsword?
Also you just assumed id waste a craftworld trait detatchment and 1 cp to give the banshees a second ability, and a further 1 CP to D S them.. And all this just to make this 102pt unit perform... that seems.. unrealistic no? Why dont you throw in that id invest ghostwalk, enhance, and enrevate from 3 character slots sources plus a doom? While we at it lets say ive doomed and jinxed the primaris marines.
Also you just assumed id waste a craftworld trait detatchment and 1 cp to give the banshees a second ability, and a further 1 CP to D S them.. And all this just to make this 102pt unit perform... that seems.. unrealistic no? Why dont you throw in that id invest ghostwalk, enhance, and enrevate from 3 character slots sources plus a doom? While we at it lets say ive doomed and jinxed the primaris marines.
I mean you dont need warshout unless you expect to get hit or care about survival. It wouldn't be hard to squeeze a patrol in if you really needed them.
And you'd walk them in, because I keep forgetting the +3 is after advance only.
3x5 is 165 points.
The point being it doesn't need to be a monolith of a unit to be worth it.
If you wanted to doom Cents/Aggs, and shoot them with Spears, and OW block with banshees, and charge with spears then go for it.
Units dont have to live in a vacuum.
If people can accomplish the same goal with other units, great.
I'm genuinely surprised at the pricing. Really feeling good that I got Drazhar and Incubi from a bits store when BotP came out for £20 and £25 respectively.
Da Boss wrote: If GW put up articles on their community site that are gak, surely it is not a big deal if people want to talk about them?
Giving new players bad advice to sell them over priced miniatures is not very nice. As people said, just sell them on their strong points - the designs and the background.
Of course. I suppose I am reacting to the over-reactions like "snake oil salesman" etc. It's just capitalism, I have no idea how true or not what they say is within the context of all the "metas" and what have you but by all means call them out when necessary. On the other hand constant complaining and excessive language will lead to a "cried wolf" situation. Or possibly put people off getting into the game at all which I am sure most of us don't really want.
First, snake oil salesmen were business men too and for all the honesty of those articles they might as well say the new banshee models cure gout while they are at it. Banshee-cura ! For second point of order, the absurd price will get people to not get into the game at all as the price point is nuts for this squad so they better have magical cure all properties.
Argive wrote: considering our fictional kid would drop £32.50 on 5 banshees while the hormogaunt kid would get around 18 hormogaunts for the same price tag....
The price of banshees isn't really the discussion because you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks its acceptable.
Edit: I also like that now our fictional, tournament going, meta chasing 10 year old has his own income?
That fictional kid would have to have his own income as his fictional parents would laugh him right out the fictional room if he asked for that money for that purchase and his fictional feelings would be hurt as well.
To make the math of this story work of course, duh.
It's not like the LVO winner wasn't packing TH on his units, right guys? ....guys?
On 10 man units though.
The problem is this combined arms approach inevitably throws up chances to go wrong. Your banshees can fail the charge. Your other unit (spears or otherwise) can fail the charge. You can roll a bit cold on damage output.
These are problems with assault generally - but its why good assault units have to skew the damage so high that if they make the charge its hopefully all over. In this scenario its entirely possible you bounce off the Primaris, who then run a bit hot and do disproportionate damage back. 5 man squads are instagibbed by almost anything - and arguably 10 man is still too few to be useful. If you could take units of 20 they might at least have some weight on the table.
If 10 Banshees run into say 10 Intercessors or 30 Boys they do a relatively small amount of damage and will then get smashed by the end of your opponents turn. If they run into something with T6 they do very little damage. Stopping shooting on ye olde guard tanks that have to fall back and be useless is nice, but its quite a niche thing, and you could just put your points into stuff that would kill things. If they are ever in LoS of something and not in cover, they will just get shot off the table, because defensively they are fire warriors at a 50%+ points premium. And if the squad is knocked down to 4-5 guys, yes you still ignore overwatch/tie things up, but you quickly reach the point where you don't kill *anything* and almost anything swinging back will kill you.
The argument I guess becomes "just take 3 units of 10 if you want a blob. 20~ banshees will mess up a 10 man Intercessor squad just as much as a 10 man unit messes up a 5 man intercessor squad". True - but thats just more charges with the potential to fail. More units you need to hide out of LoS. You are not getting the concentration of killing power, and they don't stack as well with stratagems etc.
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
I was a bit surprised, so I run myself the numbers using:
4 intercessors for 85 points (troop) and 1 sarge with a chain sword vs 7 banshees and an exarch with executioner and graceful avoidance (91 points).
Suppose the banshees get the charge.
14 attacks from the banshees for 2.59 wounds (7*2 attacks, 4/6 of hitting, 2/6 of wounding, 5/6 not being saved by armor = 4/6*2/6*5/6*14 -- I double checked just in case).
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
For a total of almost 4 wounds, so let's say 4 wounds and 2 marines dead (we have sarge and 2 more guys alive). A possible issue here would be high variance.
Now the intercessors hit back; all survivors have same profile of attack so I add up the attacks.
8 attacks (4+4) for less than 1 wound.
Obviously banshees can get shot to pieces on approach and so on, but they didn't do terribly in that melee. A different issue is whether they are cost effective compared to other options.
Sudowoodo1 wrote: As a personal anecdote on how badly priced these releases are, I work in a UKFLGS.
Preorders for Banshees, Incubi, Jain Zar and Drazhar went live at 10am GMT.
At 7pm when I left, we had 0 (zero) preorders for the new stuff.
We offer 20% off, and still couldn't get a sale in 9 hours.
I'm on my way back in now, I'll edit to update how many orders we've taken overnight for them. I'm not expecting many.
Ooof , that is impressing, considering how itching eldar Players were for new aspects.
Problem is, Spears aside, the CC Aspects are 2 or 3 editions behind every other factions melee troops with low number of attacks with low damage output, being made of tissue and glitter, Speesah Marines have long been a struggle for them but 2W marines is a brick wall
but as ever its a first craftworld problem as the codex has a lot of better options that a few duff units dont really matter
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
I was a bit surprised, so I run myself the numbers using:
4 intercessors for 85 points (troop) and 1 sarge with a chain sword vs 7 banshees and an exarch with executioner and graceful avoidance (91 points).
Suppose the banshees get the charge.
14 attacks from the banshees for 2.59 wounds (7*2 attacks, 4/6 of hitting, 2/6 of wounding, 5/6 not being saved by armor = 4/6*2/6*5/6*14 -- I double checked just in case).
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
For a total of almost 4 wounds, so let's say 4 wounds and 2 marines dead (we have sarge and 2 more guys alive). A possible issue here would be high variance.
Now the intercessors hit back; all survivors have same profile of attack so I add up the attacks.
8 attacks (4+4) for less than 1 wound.
Obviously banshees can get shot to pieces on approach and so on, but they didn't do terribly in that melee. A different issue is whether they are cost effective compared to other options.
Are we going to have to eat crow here, folks?
Or did I do anything wrong? Still rusty!
Intercessors have 3 attacks on the charge or when being charged... because marines are just not powerful enough without angels of death.. So thats 6 for the troopers and another 4 for the sargt with chainsword.
Sudowoodo1 wrote: As a personal anecdote on how badly priced these releases are, I work in a UKFLGS.
Preorders for Banshees, Incubi, Jain Zar and Drazhar went live at 10am GMT.
At 7pm when I left, we had 0 (zero) preorders for the new stuff.
We offer 20% off, and still couldn't get a sale in 9 hours.
I'm on my way back in now, I'll edit to update how many orders we've taken overnight for them. I'm not expecting many.
Ooof , that is impressing, considering how itching eldar Players were for new aspects.
Problem is, Spears aside, the CC Aspects are 2 or 3 editions behind every other factions melee troops with low number of attacks with low damage output, being made of tissue and glitter, Speesah Marines have long been a struggle for them but 2W marines is a brick wall
but as ever its a first craftworld problem as the codex has a lot of better options that a few duff units dont really matter
I guess still, it's signature units and that is a real shame.
5 Primaris with a TH - 101 points. Certainly scary.
9 2D on unmod 6tW & +1A w/i 3" of OBJ Banshees w/ 1 Executioner, War Shout, -2A to one model - 102 points.
Banshees have a 72% success rate on charges out of deepstrike. On the table they can move 8", CP advance 6" and charge an average of 10" - so 21 to 24" effectively. They cannot be overwatched.
//splitting wounds between 1 and 2 damage procs
3 * .666 * .167 * .833 * 3 = 0.8 //DD3 weapon so leaving it at 3 in the math with the +1 proc
3 * .666 * .333 * .833 * 2 = 1.1
One banshee dies - two under full rerolls to hit for marines. If the Primaris were on an objective they would likely all die.
It seems that should someone be so inclined they could find ways to use Banshees (like overwatch blocking to get spears into Cents or Aggressors), but they're not killing things like Centurions (or Primaris) so I guess they're trash.
You do have a good point though. They are ridiculously priced.
I was a bit surprised, so I run myself the numbers using:
4 intercessors for 85 points (troop) and 1 sarge with a chain sword vs 7 banshees and an exarch with executioner and graceful avoidance (91 points).
Suppose the banshees get the charge.
14 attacks from the banshees for 2.59 wounds (7*2 attacks, 4/6 of hitting, 2/6 of wounding, 5/6 not being saved by armor = 4/6*2/6*5/6*14 -- I double checked just in case).
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
For a total of almost 4 wounds, so let's say 4 wounds and 2 marines dead (we have sarge and 2 more guys alive). A possible issue here would be high variance.
Now the intercessors hit back; all survivors have same profile of attack so I add up the attacks.
8 attacks (4+4) for less than 1 wound.
Obviously banshees can get shot to pieces on approach and so on, but they didn't do terribly in that melee. A different issue is whether they are cost effective compared to other options.
Are we going to have to eat crow here, folks?
Or did I do anything wrong? Still rusty!
I'm getting different numbers for both sides running the math.
* assuming you always roll a 2 damage result. In reality there's a 1/3 chance of rolling a 1, but that would complicate the calculation by a bit.
So 2 primaris die. The remaining 2 + chainsword sarge get 11 attacks in return, killing 1.6 banshee.
11 × 4/6 × 4/6 × 3/6 × 4/6 (fnp) = 1.6*
1.8 banshees die if they took warshout instead.
* assuming no rerolls
So abstracting this the banshees kill 37 points worth of intercessors, and suffer 18 points worth of damage in return.
I do wonder how likely/meaningful this scenario is. Why are they charging a 5 man troop unit, a unit they on average can't wipe even with a full 10 elf squad? How haven't they been shot up before arriving (especially given that the opponent knows their fnp is melee only)? Is it ok that 8 banshees are only dropping 2 numarines? Is it ok this is all they accomplish before the marines inevitably fall back and some other 5 man unit evaporates what remains of the banshees?
You get different numbers for two reasons: I) you didn’t roll damage with the exarch, II) I forgot marines get +1 attack also when defending from a charge.
Truth is, you d probably be better off running 2x5 banshees for exarchs if you are not planning on buffing then.
Here we go, again:
4 intercessors for 85 points (troop) and 1 sarge with a chain sword vs 7 banshees and an exarch with executioner and graceful avoidance (91 points).
Spoiler:
Suppose the banshees get the charge.
14 attacks from the banshees for 2.59 wounds
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
For a total of almost 4 wounds, so let's say 4 wounds and 2 marines dead (we have sarge and 2 more guys alive).
Now the intercessors hit back; all survivors have same profile of attack so I add up the attacks.
10 attacks (6 troopers, 4 squad leader) for 1.1 wounds
So one banshee dead.
Next round of attack
12 banshee attacks for 2.22 wounds
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
Let's say they only kill a marine and wound another (sarge and 1 wounded man alive).
Intercessors fight back.
5 attacks for half a wound, best case scenario they kill 1 banshee.
Next round begins
10 banshee attacks for a little under 2 wounds.
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
With a tiny bit of luck this wipes the squad.
Outcome: 2 banshees dead, intercessors wiped.
Suppose instead that we fight 5 banshees vs 5 intercessors (assume you are trying to max exarchs and tie more units).
Spoiler:
1st round:
8 ban. for 1.4 damage
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
Worse case scenario 1 intercessor killed.
13 attacks back for 1.4 wounds
Best case scneario 1 banshee dead.
2nd round:
6 ban. attacks for 1.1 damage
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
Worse case scenario 1 intercessor killed
7 attacks (2x2, 1x3) for 0.7 wounds.
Worse case scenario 1 banshee dead.
3rd round:
4 ban. attacks for 0.74
3 attacks from the exarch for 1.39 wounds
Best case scenario 1 marine dead.
5 attacks for (2x1 + 1x3) .56 wounds.
and so on.
Outcome: pretty bloody affair that can swing either way.
My favorite strategy would be running 3x5 units of banshees against 2x5 units of intercessors (same points) then 2v1 one squad for a quick win, and stay in prolongued and cost efficient combat with the other.
I see some issues here:
1) Marines can both shoot and fight relatively effectively; i.e. they do not insta crumble when charged by banshees. Banshees can only melee and can only put damage reliably on at most MEQ.
2) Banshees are very vulnerable to marine fire, and generally speaking are less point efficient at tanking damage.
3) They don't feel elite.
4) Very high variance in performance for banshees (5+ FNP, wound on high rolls due to low strength).
Yes, you'll see 10 man intercessors and the comparison goes out of whack without adding more support.
JZ can get 5 or 6 attacks if Intercessors are in a line. If they are clumped she'll get 10.
10 * .833 * .888 * .833 * 2 = 12 (6 dead; 3 dead with only 5 models in range). Highly dependent on random damage, however.
Those remaining 7 marines with pillowfists and a chainsword can put 1 wound on her. And if they moved in to attack then she'll get 7 attacks next round. That's 115 points taking on 170 without blinking in a very easy to protect/hide model.
And she potentially guards your banshees from being swing on first in your opponent's turn.
Daedalus81 wrote: Yes, you'll see 10 man intercessors and the comparison goes out of whack without adding more support.
I am not sure that adding bigger squads to intercessors does them much good, in this case. Point by point you'll be able to outplay them.
The problem arises when you realize that you are subject to the rule of 3 and intercessors aren't. Using guardians to shoot intercessors probably isn't super cost effective either.
Banshees can put some hurt on troops, for sure. However, they lack the versatility that marine troops have.
And, finally, they are a elite troop that probably wouldn't be able to deal with elite that well.
For example, against centurions they can barely scratch a wound and only the exarch does decent work (centurions can kill 4 banshees in the 1 round, even without shooting).
They compare poorly to jump pack elites (every melee tourney list seems to rely on them), since those can clear troops, vehicles and characters alike.
And so on. I mean, there is a reason why no winning list carries them in competitive play.
H.B.M.C. wrote:This is the same GW whose "tactics" articles used to include putting 4 different heavy weapons in Marine Dev Squads.
This is during editions (most editions of the game, come to think of it) where squads all had to fire at the same target.
They don't play the same 40k as everyone else. This is why they're so bad at writing rules.
This weekend I re-read an old White Dwarf from around 2003. In an article on how to fight tanks, they advocated distributing your anti-tank firepower among all your units, and only in a 2000+pt game should you have a single unit equipped with dedicated anti-tank weapons.
This was either 3rd or 4th ed, so yeah, no split fire.
Maybe if GW brought in tournament players to write tactics articles we'd get something useful, but they'd never print advice that amounted to 'never take X because it's bad, always take Y because it's underpriced, here's a RAW trick you can do that the designers never thought of'.
Daedalus81 wrote: Yes, you'll see 10 man intercessors and the comparison goes out of whack without adding more support.
I am not sure that adding bigger squads to intercessors does them much good, in this case. Point by point you'll be able to outplay them.
The problem arises when you realize that you are subject to the rule of 3 and intercessors aren't. Using guardians to shoot intercessors probably isn't super cost effective either.
Banshees can put some hurt on troops, for sure. However, they lack the versatility that marine troops have.
And, finally, they are a elite troop that probably wouldn't be able to deal with elite that well.
For example, against centurions they can barely scratch a wound and only the exarch does decent work (centurions can kill 4 banshees in the 1 round, even without shooting).
They compare poorly to jump pack elites (every melee tourney list seems to rely on them), since those can clear troops, vehicles and characters alike.
And so on. I mean, there is a reason why no winning list carries them in competitive play.
These are all fair statements. What they lack in versatility they make up in raw speed. You won't see them winning top tables, but plenty of people can find their niche.
This weekend I re-read an old White Dwarf from around 2003. In an article on how to fight tanks, they advocated distributing your anti-tank firepower among all your units, and only in a 2000+pt game should you have a single unit equipped with dedicated anti-tank weapons.
This was either 3rd or 4th ed, so yeah, no split fire.
Maybe if GW brought in tournament players to write tactics articles we'd get something useful, but they'd never print advice that amounted to 'never take X because it's bad, always take Y because it's underpriced, here's a RAW trick you can do that the designers never thought of'.
Migth be more useful, but would read very poorly.
Have you seen a tournament / math hammer player unleashed?
They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis and form ugly and counterintuitive armies designed to play for points / play to win.
My beef is with the constant rule changes; they are clearly unable to keep up themselves (many units fall behind quite obviously). They should have hammered down better rules and simply kept introducing new modes of play + new units to keep the game fresh.
Grey40k wrote: ...They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis...
Maybe an incentive for GW to stop making trash rules if they had to actually worry about whether a tournament player would read them and say "This is garbage, never buy it".
Grey40k wrote: ...They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis...
Maybe an incentive for GW to stop making trash rules if they had to actually worry about whether a tournament player would read them and say "This is garbage, never buy it".
I do not disagree but it would probably be pretty bad as a marketing tool; that's all I was pointing out.
Grey40k wrote: ...They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis...
Maybe an incentive for GW to stop making trash rules if they had to actually worry about whether a tournament player would read them and say "This is garbage, never buy it".
I do not disagree but it would probably be pretty bad as a marketing tool; that's all I was pointing out.
Oh, definitely, I just think that if GW spent more time writing rules and less time marketing them the rules might be less bad and the marketing might be less dishonest.
catbarf wrote: Maybe if GW brought in tournament players to write tactics articles we'd get something useful, but they'd never print advice that amounted to 'never take X because it's bad, always take Y because it's underpriced, here's a RAW trick you can do that the designers never thought of'.
I don't even think they require that. Anyone with a basic grasp of how the rules worked could'a figured out that a Devastator Squad in 3rd/4th/5th/6th/7th edition equipped with a Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, Multi-Melta and Plasma Cannon was fething stupid idea.
Grey40k wrote: ...They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis...
Maybe an incentive for GW to stop making trash rules if they had to actually worry about whether a tournament player would read them and say "This is garbage, never buy it".
I do not disagree but it would probably be pretty bad as a marketing tool; that's all I was pointing out.
Oh, definitely, I just think that if GW spent more time writing rules and less time marketing them the rules might be less bad and the marketing might be less dishonest.
I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
I feel like whenever anyone makes a post bitching about GW they should think "there's already 20 users bitching about GW in this thread, what makes MY bitching different?". At least then we might get some new, interesting complaints instead of the same old ones we've been hearing since basically the invention of the internet.
Like here's one:
Why do GW keep changing the design of their paint pots? Now my paints are all different looking. Why can't they go back to hex pots?
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
I feel like whenever anyone makes a post bitching about GW they should think "there's already 20 users bitching about GW in this thread, what makes MY bitching different?". At least then we might get some new, interesting complaints instead of the same old ones we've been hearing since basically the invention of the internet.
Like here's one:
Why do GW keep changing the design of their paint pots? Now my paints are all different looking. Why can't they go back to hex pots?
You mean why cant GW move at least their Air range to dropper bottles?
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
I feel like whenever anyone makes a post bitching about GW they should think "there's already 20 users bitching about GW in this thread, what makes MY bitching different?". At least then we might get some new, interesting complaints instead of the same old ones we've been hearing since basically the invention of the internet.
Like here's one:
Why do GW keep changing the design of their paint pots? Now my paints are all different looking. Why can't they go back to hex pots?
Whenever people get creative with the bitching they get called out for being over the top and snarky. Some people just can't appreciate upbeat and artistic gak talk. I wouldn't blame the complainer, I'd blame the critics of good rage comedy.
Regarding the Banshees charging Intercessors, the math gets worse if you give them a Power Sword, which with Shock Assault isn't the worst investment for four points.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
I feel like whenever anyone makes a post bitching about GW they should think "there's already 20 users bitching about GW in this thread, what makes MY bitching different?". At least then we might get some new, interesting complaints instead of the same old ones we've been hearing since basically the invention of the internet.
Like here's one:
Why do GW keep changing the design of their paint pots? Now my paints are all different looking. Why can't they go back to hex pots?
You mean why cant GW move at least their Air range to dropper bottles?
No, definitely the old hex pots. I have paint that's still good in those 20 years later.
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
I feel like whenever anyone makes a post bitching about GW they should think "there's already 20 users bitching about GW in this thread, what makes MY bitching different?". At least then we might get some new, interesting complaints instead of the same old ones we've been hearing since basically the invention of the internet.
Like here's one:
Why do GW keep changing the design of their paint pots? Now my paints are all different looking. Why can't they go back to hex pots?
Are you suggesting that GW does fewer than 20 things wrong that need to be pointed out?
Sim-Life wrote: ...I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
While we're wishlisting here I'd like people to stop telling me "WE KNOW GW'S CRAP STOP GRUMBLING THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY ANYTHING COULD EVER BE ANY BETTER" while I'm trying to have a good kvetch about it.
I feel like whenever anyone makes a post bitching about GW they should think "there's already 20 users bitching about GW in this thread, what makes MY bitching different?". At least then we might get some new, interesting complaints instead of the same old ones we've been hearing since basically the invention of the internet.
Like here's one:
Why do GW keep changing the design of their paint pots? Now my paints are all different looking. Why can't they go back to hex pots?
You mean why cant GW move at least their Air range to dropper bottles?
No, definitely the old hex pots. I have paint that's still good in those 20 years later.
Those pots are good...because GW didn't make them.
catbarf wrote: Maybe if GW brought in tournament players to write tactics articles we'd get something useful, but they'd never print advice that amounted to 'never take X because it's bad, always take Y because it's underpriced, here's a RAW trick you can do that the designers never thought of'.
I don't even think they require that. Anyone with a basic grasp of how the rules worked could'a figured out that a Devastator Squad in 3rd/4th/5th/6th/7th edition equipped with a Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, Multi-Melta and Plasma Cannon was fething stupid idea.
But GW couldn't.
I agree, putting the MM in there isn't my idea of optimal (I like to put meltas all together & deepstrike them in pods). That's why my Devs often run with Lascannon x2, Plasma Cannon x1, Heavy Bolter x1.
2.5 weapons effective against medium + armor, everything effective vs troops & light armor. And each of my Tac squads receives an AT heavy weapon & an AP special or vise-versa. As I expect each of my squads to be able to fend for themselves when (not if) needed, this mix has worked out well for me over the editions (2e - present).
Grey40k wrote: ...They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis...
Maybe an incentive for GW to stop making trash rules if they had to actually worry about whether a tournament player would read them and say "This is garbage, never buy it".
I do not disagree but it would probably be pretty bad as a marketing tool; that's all I was pointing out.
Oh, definitely, I just think that if GW spent more time writing rules and less time marketing them the rules might be less bad and the marketing might be less dishonest.
I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
Have you heard of Freeman's Value Creation Stakeholder Management theory?
You mean why cant GW move at least their Air range to dropper bottles?
Don't the GW bottles waste more paint, and dry out faster? seems like a good thing for people to have to buy pain more often. At least from GWs point of view.
I think all companies could do it. They could do a phone, TV or freezer that works for 20 years, but then what would they be selling people. But if a freezer falls apart every 5 years, and the old parts for it and the work to fix it cost more, then a new freezer people will forced to buy new ones.
Grey40k wrote: ...They'd trash a lot of units in the analysis...
Maybe an incentive for GW to stop making trash rules if they had to actually worry about whether a tournament player would read them and say "This is garbage, never buy it".
I do not disagree but it would probably be pretty bad as a marketing tool; that's all I was pointing out.
Oh, definitely, I just think that if GW spent more time writing rules and less time marketing them the rules might be less bad and the marketing might be less dishonest.
I'd also like it if publicly traded international businesses did what was best for their customers instead of trying to make money for their shareholders. I'd also like several million euros, all my models to be painted and for none of my pets to ever die.
Have you heard of Freeman's Value Creation Stakeholder Management theory?
sure but the fact doesn't change that many companies clearly don't ascribe to that. yet again GW is a busniess. they'll do what makes them money.
sure but the fact doesn't change that many companies clearly don't ascribe to that. yet again GW is a busniess. they'll do what makes them money.
I hope they have more concerns than just making money. In any case, banshees do not seem to be making them much money as it is.
even if they'd been 15-20 bucks a pack cheaper I suspect that mighta been the case, I doubt there's much demand among eldar players for howling banshees.
sure but the fact doesn't change that many companies clearly don't ascribe to that. yet again GW is a busniess. they'll do what makes them money.
I hope they have more concerns than just making money. In any case, banshees do not seem to be making them much money as it is.
even if they'd been 15-20 bucks a pack cheaper I suspect that mighta been the case, I doubt there's much demand among eldar players for howling banshees.
When was the last time GW released a kit that was both abject crap from a rules standpoint but also a terrible points to money value? I think if you fixed one of those things at least, you'd see uptake. GW just made the baffling decision to make a kit whose only selling point is the sculpt quality.
sure but the fact doesn't change that many companies clearly don't ascribe to that. yet again GW is a busniess. they'll do what makes them money.
I hope they have more concerns than just making money. In any case, banshees do not seem to be making them much money as it is.
even if they'd been 15-20 bucks a pack cheaper I suspect that mighta been the case, I doubt there's much demand among eldar players for howling banshees.
Obviously I'm just one person but I went from planning on getting at least 2 boxes to getting 0 boxes with the price.
Stormonu wrote: Well, at least no one can accuse GW now of making their models pay to win.
Of course, I prefer the “pay to lose” model. I pay my opponent to lose. It’s usually cheaper - just a couple pizza slices and a coke.
nononooooooonononononononononono, you misunderstand. There is an inbuilt, ready made rationalization for WHY the evil GW sales driven model power theory can't possibly be wrong.
Spoiler:
-New model comes out that nobody asks for, is OP (ex: Knight Castellan, Wyvern, Sloptity Whopbopper, Disco Lord)
Explanation: Well of COURSE gw is pushing the rules for the new gak to drive sales, DUUUUUUUUH, you dummy dum dum
-New model that nobody asks for, is UP (ex: Knight Princeps, Admech Sicarians, Repulsor Executioner, Lord of Executions)
Explanation: HAha, looks like stupid dumb GW fethed up again, they tried to make their new unit OP but they're just so DUMB they couldn't even do it right! hahaahahahaah!
-New model that is highly anticipated, is OP (ex: Saint Celestine, Abbadon, Magnus, new sisters stuff)
Explanation: Psh, of COURSE gw is catering to the ravening fanboys giving them such utterly broken rules for their new toy to get them to buy the new model. Preeeeeeedictable.
-New model that is highly anticipated, is UP (New aspect warriors, new Shadowsun, every primaris marine for the first 2 years they existed, every new ork buggy, new CSM)
Explanation: Obviously gw knew that those models would sell regardless so they made their rules purposefully crap so they don't interfere with the sales of their real hot stuff that they have to make OP to push sales!
-Old model that's been out forever, is OP (Imperial Guard squads, Basilisks, Eldar Flyers, Dark Reapers)
Explanation: Oh hoh ho, GW, up to your rascally old tricks again! Trying to clear out all that old inventory I see with your purposefully making them OP to drive sales! Well we see through you and your wily schemes.
-Old model that's been out forever, is UP (oldmarines, necrons, grey knights)
Explanation: Obviously they're purposefully giving these units gak rules in order to 4-d chess mindgame us into HAVING to pick up shiny new kits that they push out. The fiends!
There is literally no combination on a matrix of newness and OPness that the "Grand GW Rules Fixing Conspiracy" does not have a baked-in explanation for. There is NO WAY that anything could accidentally end up with bad rules or good rules because GW doesn't know how to write rules well. EVERYTHING is on purpose, EXPLICITLY targeting you and your model collection personally.
THATS RIGHT, CRAIG.
WE KNOW ABOUT YOU CRAIG!
Automatically Appended Next Post: (I will never not include a first name because there is a nonzero chance that Stormonu's name is Craig, and one time I did that and absolutely NAILED that someone's IRL name was Steve and it super freaked them out.)
sure but the fact doesn't change that many companies clearly don't ascribe to that. yet again GW is a busniess. they'll do what makes them money.
I hope they have more concerns than just making money. In any case, banshees do not seem to be making them much money as it is.
even if they'd been 15-20 bucks a pack cheaper I suspect that mighta been the case, I doubt there's much demand among eldar players for howling banshees.
Obviously I'm just one person but I went from planning on getting at least 2 boxes to getting 0 boxes with the price.
It’s just to much for me to spend on models I don’t need, wouldn’t use and just want to paint.
Not in this market where I have hundreds of minis on my want list.
the_scotsman wrote: (I will never not include a first name because there is a nonzero chance that Stormonu's name is Craig, and one time I did that and absolutely NAILED that someone's IRL name was Steve and it super freaked them out.)
Well, you almost nailed it. I’m Stephen. Steve is my uncle, a cousin, an in-law and one of my coworkers. Don’t know any Craig’s.
the_scotsman wrote: nononooooooonononononononononono, you misunderstand. There is an inbuilt, ready made rationalization for WHY the evil GW sales driven model power theory can't possibly be wrong.
Spoiler:
-New model comes out that nobody asks for, is OP (ex: Knight Castellan, Wyvern, Sloptity Whopbopper, Disco Lord)
Explanation: Well of COURSE gw is pushing the rules for the new gak to drive sales, DUUUUUUUUH, you dummy dum dum
-New model that nobody asks for, is UP (ex: Knight Princeps, Admech Sicarians, Repulsor Executioner, Lord of Executions)
Explanation: HAha, looks like stupid dumb GW fethed up again, they tried to make their new unit OP but they're just so DUMB they couldn't even do it right! hahaahahahaah!
-New model that is highly anticipated, is OP (ex: Saint Celestine, Abbadon, Magnus, new sisters stuff)
Explanation: Psh, of COURSE gw is catering to the ravening fanboys giving them such utterly broken rules for their new toy to get them to buy the new model. Preeeeeeedictable.
-New model that is highly anticipated, is UP (New aspect warriors, new Shadowsun, every primaris marine for the first 2 years they existed, every new ork buggy, new CSM)
Explanation: Obviously gw knew that those models would sell regardless so they made their rules purposefully crap so they don't interfere with the sales of their real hot stuff that they have to make OP to push sales!
-Old model that's been out forever, is OP (Imperial Guard squads, Basilisks, Eldar Flyers, Dark Reapers)
Explanation: Oh hoh ho, GW, up to your rascally old tricks again! Trying to clear out all that old inventory I see with your purposefully making them OP to drive sales! Well we see through you and your wily schemes.
-Old model that's been out forever, is UP (oldmarines, necrons, grey knights)
Explanation: Obviously they're purposefully giving these units gak rules in order to 4-d chess mindgame us into HAVING to pick up shiny new kits that they push out. The fiends!
There is literally no combination on a matrix of newness and OPness that the "Grand GW Rules Fixing Conspiracy" does not have a baked-in explanation for. There is NO WAY that anything could accidentally end up with bad rules or good rules because GW doesn't know how to write rules well. EVERYTHING is on purpose, EXPLICITLY targeting you and your model collection personally.
So unbelievably accurate: I love it.
Surely we've seen enough examples to know that GW either don't, or are unable to do properly, intentionally fudge the strength of units to boost their sales?
Surely we've seen enough examples to know that GW either don't, or are unable to do properly, intentionally fudge the strength of units to boost their sales?
I'm not sure about this. They can fudge the strength of units easily by just making them cheap for their points.
The problem I think is that GW have relatively little internal testing, and what they do have seems to have a very weird meta. This has resulted in certain units being over/under costed.
Eventually someone seems to go "uh, this is bogus" and you get a new codex more reflective of what the game is actually like - or just an inexplicable power upgrade because someone clearly "loves" the army and they totally should be good - but unfortunately those units with printed rules are left in limbo.
At least with CA and occasionally the FAQsGW is trying to bring things back to a degree of balance - but some units still end up in no-mans land and really a rules change would be better.
Our friend the Squig buggy for instance could do with having twice (three times?) as much shooting on its guns rather get a points reduction to say 60 points - but thats not happened to date.
GW could print new datasheets in PA, but they have not typically done so.
the_scotsman wrote: nononooooooonononononononononono, you misunderstand. There is an inbuilt, ready made rationalization for WHY the evil GW sales driven model power theory can't possibly be wrong.
Spoiler:
-New model comes out that nobody asks for, is OP (ex: Knight Castellan, Wyvern, Sloptity Whopbopper, Disco Lord)
Explanation: Well of COURSE gw is pushing the rules for the new gak to drive sales, DUUUUUUUUH, you dummy dum dum
-New model that nobody asks for, is UP (ex: Knight Princeps, Admech Sicarians, Repulsor Executioner, Lord of Executions)
Explanation: HAha, looks like stupid dumb GW fethed up again, they tried to make their new unit OP but they're just so DUMB they couldn't even do it right! hahaahahahaah!
-New model that is highly anticipated, is OP (ex: Saint Celestine, Abbadon, Magnus, new sisters stuff)
Explanation: Psh, of COURSE gw is catering to the ravening fanboys giving them such utterly broken rules for their new toy to get them to buy the new model. Preeeeeeedictable.
-New model that is highly anticipated, is UP (New aspect warriors, new Shadowsun, every primaris marine for the first 2 years they existed, every new ork buggy, new CSM)
Explanation: Obviously gw knew that those models would sell regardless so they made their rules purposefully crap so they don't interfere with the sales of their real hot stuff that they have to make OP to push sales!
-Old model that's been out forever, is OP (Imperial Guard squads, Basilisks, Eldar Flyers, Dark Reapers)
Explanation: Oh hoh ho, GW, up to your rascally old tricks again! Trying to clear out all that old inventory I see with your purposefully making them OP to drive sales! Well we see through you and your wily schemes.
-Old model that's been out forever, is UP (oldmarines, necrons, grey knights)
Explanation: Obviously they're purposefully giving these units gak rules in order to 4-d chess mindgame us into HAVING to pick up shiny new kits that they push out. The fiends!
There is literally no combination on a matrix of newness and OPness that the "Grand GW Rules Fixing Conspiracy" does not have a baked-in explanation for. There is NO WAY that anything could accidentally end up with bad rules or good rules because GW doesn't know how to write rules well. EVERYTHING is on purpose, EXPLICITLY targeting you and your model collection personally.
So unbelievably accurate: I love it.
Surely we've seen enough examples to know that GW either don't, or are unable to do properly, intentionally fudge the strength of units to boost their sales?
I'm not saying it isn't occasionally a thing that they do. Certainly, the SM supplements/doctrines/etc were a definite attempt to increase the power levels of space marines, and as their most popular faction they obviously got a lot of extra attention from the GW design team to ensure that they got extremely extensive rules updates.
But do I think someone at GW said "hey, let's make sure these guys are the ONLY army we see in any tournament for months?" No. They clearly were just extremely concerned about the perceived low power level of marines and they wanted to give them a purposeful power boost with the supplements and 2.0 codex, and they overshot.
the_scotsman wrote: nononooooooonononononononononono, you misunderstand. There is an inbuilt, ready made rationalization for WHY the evil GW sales driven model power theory can't possibly be wrong.
Spoiler:
-New model comes out that nobody asks for, is OP (ex: Knight Castellan, Wyvern, Sloptity Whopbopper, Disco Lord)
Explanation: Well of COURSE gw is pushing the rules for the new gak to drive sales, DUUUUUUUUH, you dummy dum dum
-New model that nobody asks for, is UP (ex: Knight Princeps, Admech Sicarians, Repulsor Executioner, Lord of Executions)
Explanation: HAha, looks like stupid dumb GW fethed up again, they tried to make their new unit OP but they're just so DUMB they couldn't even do it right! hahaahahahaah!
-New model that is highly anticipated, is OP (ex: Saint Celestine, Abbadon, Magnus, new sisters stuff)
Explanation: Psh, of COURSE gw is catering to the ravening fanboys giving them such utterly broken rules for their new toy to get them to buy the new model. Preeeeeeedictable.
-New model that is highly anticipated, is UP (New aspect warriors, new Shadowsun, every primaris marine for the first 2 years they existed, every new ork buggy, new CSM)
Explanation: Obviously gw knew that those models would sell regardless so they made their rules purposefully crap so they don't interfere with the sales of their real hot stuff that they have to make OP to push sales!
-Old model that's been out forever, is OP (Imperial Guard squads, Basilisks, Eldar Flyers, Dark Reapers)
Explanation: Oh hoh ho, GW, up to your rascally old tricks again! Trying to clear out all that old inventory I see with your purposefully making them OP to drive sales! Well we see through you and your wily schemes.
-Old model that's been out forever, is UP (oldmarines, necrons, grey knights)
Explanation: Obviously they're purposefully giving these units gak rules in order to 4-d chess mindgame us into HAVING to pick up shiny new kits that they push out. The fiends!
There is literally no combination on a matrix of newness and OPness that the "Grand GW Rules Fixing Conspiracy" does not have a baked-in explanation for. There is NO WAY that anything could accidentally end up with bad rules or good rules because GW doesn't know how to write rules well. EVERYTHING is on purpose, EXPLICITLY targeting you and your model collection personally.
So unbelievably accurate: I love it.
Surely we've seen enough examples to know that GW either don't, or are unable to do properly, intentionally fudge the strength of units to boost their sales?
I dunno they have been pretty consitent with shadowspear, ALL the SM stuff & characters, Ad mech boats..
Stormonu wrote: Well, at least no one can accuse GW now of making their models pay to win.
Of course, I prefer the “pay to lose” model. I pay my opponent to lose. It’s usually cheaper - just a couple pizza slices and a coke.
nononooooooonononononononononono, you misunderstand. There is an inbuilt, ready made rationalization for WHY the evil GW sales driven model power theory can't possibly be wrong.
Spoiler:
-New model comes out that nobody asks for, is OP (ex: Knight Castellan, Wyvern, Sloptity Whopbopper, Disco Lord)
Explanation: Well of COURSE gw is pushing the rules for the new gak to drive sales, DUUUUUUUUH, you dummy dum dum
-New model that nobody asks for, is UP (ex: Knight Princeps, Admech Sicarians, Repulsor Executioner, Lord of Executions)
Explanation: HAha, looks like stupid dumb GW fethed up again, they tried to make their new unit OP but they're just so DUMB they couldn't even do it right! hahaahahahaah!
-New model that is highly anticipated, is OP (ex: Saint Celestine, Abbadon, Magnus, new sisters stuff)
Explanation: Psh, of COURSE gw is catering to the ravening fanboys giving them such utterly broken rules for their new toy to get them to buy the new model. Preeeeeeedictable.
-New model that is highly anticipated, is UP (New aspect warriors, new Shadowsun, every primaris marine for the first 2 years they existed, every new ork buggy, new CSM)
Explanation: Obviously gw knew that those models would sell regardless so they made their rules purposefully crap so they don't interfere with the sales of their real hot stuff that they have to make OP to push sales!
-Old model that's been out forever, is OP (Imperial Guard squads, Basilisks, Eldar Flyers, Dark Reapers)
Explanation: Oh hoh ho, GW, up to your rascally old tricks again! Trying to clear out all that old inventory I see with your purposefully making them OP to drive sales! Well we see through you and your wily schemes.
-Old model that's been out forever, is UP (oldmarines, necrons, grey knights)
Explanation: Obviously they're purposefully giving these units gak rules in order to 4-d chess mindgame us into HAVING to pick up shiny new kits that they push out. The fiends!
There is literally no combination on a matrix of newness and OPness that the "Grand GW Rules Fixing Conspiracy" does not have a baked-in explanation for. There is NO WAY that anything could accidentally end up with bad rules or good rules because GW doesn't know how to write rules well. EVERYTHING is on purpose, EXPLICITLY targeting you and your model collection personally.
THATS RIGHT, CRAIG.
WE KNOW ABOUT YOU CRAIG!
Automatically Appended Next Post: (I will never not include a first name because there is a nonzero chance that Stormonu's name is Craig, and one time I did that and absolutely NAILED that someone's IRL name was Steve and it super freaked them out.)
This is pretty funny.
I can agree that sometimes we do have extreme suspition of anything they (GW) do and it might come across a bit like this.
That said, I still believe that they do tamper with rules to sell models. Perhaps not always, perhaps not every change they make, but I do believe they do engage in it.
Massive swings in metas is not something unique to GW, I have seen in happen in MORPGs, and other multiplayer games. It is a way to "keep things interesting" and make the players rotate through factions / characters and what not.
Theres a difference between tweaking things to alter the meta and engaging in the grand rulespiracy that folks like tneva continuously allege. That gets a little alex jonesian at times.
The most common rules conspiracy behavior is just "remember the hits, forget the misses"
Like the poater two aboge me here: pretty much every unit in shadowspear was utterly forgettable upon release. Venomcrawlers and Eliminators were ok, but are we seriously going to forget Oblitergate that fast?
And, ALL the sm characters? Really? Iron father brokenos, and tor garadon are good.
But remember My Chemical Shrikemance, Khan Im Still Not on A Bike, Salamander guy, Prigurius, and Dark Angel Man? None of those are competitive pieces, any more than any other forgettable midstrength footslogging beatstick named characters. Not to mention lieutenant Knifey, librario sneaksalot and captain Yelly Mcstealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: 95% of the new SM characters are just identical to the previous incarnation but without mobility, weapon options, +1A and +1W for a higher price.
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
the_scotsman wrote: Theres a difference between tweaking things to alter the meta and engaging in the grand rulespiracy that folks like tneva continuously allege. That gets a little alex jonesian at times.
The most common rules conspiracy behavior is just "remember the hits, forget the misses"
Like the poater two aboge me here: pretty much every unit in shadowspear was utterly forgettable upon release. Venomcrawlers and Eliminators were ok, but are we seriously going to forget Oblitergate that fast?
And, ALL the sm characters? Really? Iron father brokenos, and tor garadon are good.
But remember My Chemical Shrikemance, Khan Im Still Not on A Bike, Salamander guy, Prigurius, and Dark Angel Man? None of those are competitive pieces, any more than any other forgettable midstrength footslogging beatstick named characters. Not to mention lieutenant Knifey, librario sneaksalot and captain Yelly Mcstealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: 95% of the new SM characters are just identical to the previous incarnation but without mobility, weapon options, +1A and +1W for a higher price.
Thats not....good.
Im sorry that the new models you get are mediocare/servicible rather than bonkers OP...
Dawg i dont play aaaaaaaaany of those armies. Like it is very impressive that you went for the whole "you just dont think their rules are good cus you play them" angle and managed to try it on four whole factions I dont play, because I have models for like 10 factions.
All of those characters are amazing. Because they are all space marine characters and are essential fancy sculpts for xyz.
Each can be used as a basic chaptermaster, librarian etc. So yeah they may suck being played special character because not enough snowflakey rules and pts too expensive etc.
All of them are still strong because they can fulfil HQ role in the top tier faction used as sucessors etc...
Argive wrote: One hyperbolic statement begets another no ?
All of those characters are amazing. Because they are all space marine characters and are essential fancy sculpts for xyz.
Each can be used as a basic chaptermaster, librarian etc. So yeah they may suck being played special character because not enough snowflakey rules and pts too expensive etc.
All of them are still strong because they can fulfil HQ role in the top tier faction used as sucessors etc...
And a lot of factions would love to have their own similar models. Go ask a Dark Eldar player about their characters, or lack thereof.
Argive wrote: One hyperbolic statement begets another no ?
All of those characters are amazing. Because they are all space marine characters and are essential fancy sculpts for xyz.
Each can be used as a basic chaptermaster, librarian etc. So yeah they may suck being played special character because not enough snowflakey rules and pts too expensive etc.
All of them are still strong because they can fulfil HQ role in the top tier faction used as sucessors etc...
This is a new layer of the gwspiracy.
All models, no matter the rules, are amazing, and therefore gw always writes op rules for new things to drive sales!
Argive wrote: One hyperbolic statement begets another no ?
All of those characters are amazing. Because they are all space marine characters and are essential fancy sculpts for xyz.
Each can be used as a basic chaptermaster, librarian etc. So yeah they may suck being played special character because not enough snowflakey rules and pts too expensive etc.
All of them are still strong because they can fulfil HQ role in the top tier faction used as sucessors etc...
This is a new layer of the gwspiracy.
All models, no matter the rules, are amazing, and therefore gw always writes op rules for new things to drive sales!
I love it!
Model creep just like codex creep seems to be a trend... Call it what you want.
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
You mean that one guy who posted on Reddit about how the 7th Ed wraithknight didn't get a points increase because a GW suit said "eh whatever" to his suggestion that it was too cheap?
H.B.M.C. wrote: If GW are writing rules to push sales, then they're really bad at it.
And "My Chemical Shrikemance". Teehee!
GW is only interested in pushing models, rules are secondary. If the rules line up with making the model better, huzzah! If not, eh, well it looks pretty on the shelf - and even if it doesn’t, you still bought it, sucker.
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
*sigh* And only if they said those days are past and the WK was pretty much the only example and wasn't in the spirit claimed by posters. If only we could read the whole thing in context.
I guess we'll just be stuck arguing both sides of the coin, forever.
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
You mean that one guy who posted on Reddit about how the 7th Ed wraithknight didn't get a points increase because a GW suit said "eh whatever" to his suggestion that it was too cheap?
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
You mean that one guy who posted on Reddit about how the 7th Ed wraithknight didn't get a points increase because a GW suit said "eh whatever" to his suggestion that it was too cheap?
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
You mean that one guy who posted on Reddit about how the 7th Ed wraithknight didn't get a points increase because a GW suit said "eh whatever" to his suggestion that it was too cheap?
Kinda?
The ruleswriter posted on reddit about how the 7th Ed Wraithknight didn’t get a points increase because a GW suit said “the model needs to sell and lower points = more sales”.
IF ONLY SOMEONE WITH INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULES WRITING PROCESS COULD VERIFY THAT THESE THEORIES ARE TOTALLY INSANE, HUH?
Wait, they have? And......and they're saying that GWabsolutely write the balance of some units to drive sales?!?!?!!11212onetwoone
Mindblowninspace.gif
Scotsman's post highlights the cycle of release power, if anything. Repulsor Executioners, awful you say? Funny you say that because I distinctly remember a number of builds centred around them. In fact, the nerf to their rules seemed to be introduced right around the same time GW ran out of stock..... must be coincidence though of course.
I wonder why Mek Gunz are so strong, it's not like they're one of the most expensive pound-for-point mode--- oh wait.
*sigh* And only if they said those days are past and the WK was pretty much the only example and wasn't in the spirit claimed by posters. If only we could read the whole thing in context.
I guess we'll just be stuck arguing both sides of the coin, forever.
We’ve read it in context. You’re not entirely wrong, not entirely right either. He certainly didn’t say the WK was the only example. I take his point about those days being behind us with a hefty grain of salt when we see releases like the Castellan.
I just find it incredibly naive if you believe GW doesn’t see the simple fact that ‘good rules = more sales’. Why are TFC out of stock everywhere I wonder? How about Levi Dreads? The smallest LGS can show you evidence that rules drives sales. To think that GW don’t have this data is insane.
If you agree that GW has that data the next question is why you think they don’t use this to drive profits? Have they led anyone to believe that they are interested in anything other than profit? As someone said to me recently - ‘Games Workshop are a business enterprise operating within a capitalist system, not some club of little 10 year olds playing favourites’. GW are quite literally only interested in profits and the drive for growth of these profits.
To believe GW will think to themselves; ‘y’know what, let’s make this new, expensive model balanced so people can choose to buy it or not’ I find incredible.
I will concede that GW may not be very good at applying rules to units to encourage sales, but the intention is definitely there.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If GW are writing rules to push sales, then they're really bad at it.
And "My Chemical Shrikemance". Teehee!
As an unashamed washed up old emo boy I love that.
Back on topic I think GW genuinely believe that the quality of the miniatures will first and foremost sell them. If you look at reactions on FB to any new release this does seem to be the case for a lot of people.
GW wants it to be that way, or GW does not know what they are doing
The first one is the preferred one because investing a 1000$ into a game and after that acknowledge that the company doing that game does not know what they are doing would make people feel that the investment is wasted money.
So they rather say that GW knows exactly what they are doing and everything is fine.
Having model quality as the selling point is another thing.
Someone who claims that the Banshees are a model kit of such high quality that it is worth the price either has never ever bought/built a plastic kit before and just worked with GW Finecast/Metal models
Or is blinded by the GW that if they say that this is a high quality kit and therefore must be that expensive, it must be true (not talking about other companies, but even for GW standards it is not worth the price compared what you get with other boxes)
Gw obviously understands that good rules = good sales. But the very examples you give, which is the incredibly common pattern of an ancient old unit getting amazing rules and then immediately going out of stock and staying that way for months, is kind of what makes it clear there is no anime villain 4d chess going on.
You really think GW wants people buying ancient models they have to make to order out of a disconrinued material instead of the new plastic kits for banshees and incubi?
By your logic, every new plastic kit should be at least good, and every item that GW is making very little money off of (finecast, metal, heck discontinued items chappie dread says hi) should be kept purposefully bad.
For every castellan there is a princeps, which wss on release and is still the worst ik variant despite being the highest profit margin item in the new knights release, being one new sprue added in to an existing kit.
If gw always aims to get new units into the top 25% of models, but theyre incompetent so they miss the mark 75% of the time, how is that distinguishable from a normal game company?
