Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

After October's Space Wolf themed disaster of an issue, we're not making much progress in this month's Skaven spectacular.

As you would expect, we have the Skaven army book overview. This seems more of a cursory glance than an overview, with the intriguing sounding Hell Pit Abomination and Plague Claw Catapult mentioned only in passing. The new approach appears to be if we we don't have miniatures for them yet, we're not going to talk about them. Where they do have new miniatures (Queek, the Deathmaster etc) they are annoyingly vague about what they do (the Deathmaster is pretty good in close combat apparently, well duh!). There are however lots of pictures of the new clanrats, stormvermin, screaming bell etc for people who don't have access to the internet

The battle report is ok, crap mapping as always, but the battle itself is quite a nicely themed towards Skaven. Two rival skaven hordes take on a Dwarf army. The skaven players are technically playing together, but are allowed to hinder each other in the fight for the objective as there are bragging rights for the Skaven general who controls it.

Not an issue for 40K players, unless you've been desperate for advice on how to paint Kosharro Khan or can't make up you own scenarios for your new shiny Space Wolf army. The countless hordes of Easterling LoTR players are well served though with rules for fat arabs carrying big swords.

JJ is in nostalgic all new technology is bad mode, because it will affect GW sales if everybody stops painting miniatures and buggers off to play on the Xbox 360.

What I will applaud however, is the return of the back page diorama. Classic

Flashman wrote:JJ is in nostalgic all new technology is bad mode, because it will affect GW sales if everybody stops painting miniatures and buggers off to play on the Xbox 360.

Just about sums up GW's attitude: blame the world for their lost profits instead of their craptacular pricing scheme and the lack of a single original idea in 10 years.... Waaaa waa waa... isn't the modern world a nasty place for us crumbly old fossils...

Pathetic drivel!

It's interesting to read in the latest Wargames Illustrated the review of "Black Powder" (the new wargames rules for the period 1700 - 1900 published by Warlord Games and written by Messrs Priestley and Johnson). THeir is an interview with Priestley and he talks at length about what he thinks is a good game, and basically it boils down to "get drunk, pile every model you own on a feth off big table and roll dice". No wonder WFB and 40k are in such a mess if this is the kind of game that they like. Sure it can be fun, but its the kind of thing wargamers have been doing since Donald Featherstone's days in the 1960's. It was an esoteric minority sport then and it is now. Talk about out of touch with things! Where's the imaginative plan to tighten up the release schedules and bring a real fun, affordable gaming experience to the market place? Nowhere, that's where!

Message to GW: People would still buy your gak if you sold it well and priced it right!

Nah. GW has become fossilised and unimaginative and deserves to die like the dodo it is.

Fethers!

(P.s. Increasingly glad that my WD sub died a while back and didn't get renewed. By this issue's review it barely seems worth the effort of flicking through on the newsagent's shelf, let alone the cover price!)

Osbad wrote:

Flashman wrote:JJ is in nostalgic all new technology is bad mode, because it will affect GW sales if everybody stops painting miniatures and buggers off to play on the Xbox 360.

Just about sums up GW's attitude: blame the world for their lost profits instead of their craptacular pricing scheme and the lack of a single original idea in 10 years.... Waaaa waa waa... isn't the modern world a nasty place for us crumbly old fossils...

Pathetic drivel!

It's interesting to read in the latest Wargames Illustrated the review of "Black Powder" (the new wargames rules for the period 1700 - 1900 published by Warlord Games and written by Messrs Priestley and Johnson). THeir is an interview with Priestley and he talks at length about what he thinks is a good game, and basically it boils down to "get drunk, pile every model you own on a feth off big table and roll dice". No wonder WFB and 40k are in such a mess if this is the kind of game that they like. Sure it can be fun, but its the kind of thing wargamers have been doing since Donald Featherstone's days in the 1960's. It was an esoteric minority sport then and it is now. Talk about out of touch with things! Where's the imaginative plan to tighten up the release schedules and bring a real fun, affordable gaming experience to the market place? Nowhere, that's where!

Message to GW: People would still buy your gak if you sold it well and priced it right!

Nah. GW has become fossilised and unimaginative and deserves to die like the dodo it is.

Fethers!

(P.s. Increasingly glad that my WD sub died a while back and didn't get renewed. By this issue's review it barely seems worth the effort of flicking through on the newsagent's shelf, let alone the cover price!)

Sorry to go off topic, but I find this statement a little harsh. I know I'm going to be insulted for this, but I still like GW. Sure, the prices just aren't right and they can't move with the times, but the fact is that GW got me into wargaming. If I'd never found them, I suspect I'd just be another one of those yob's in the street who you Dakkites bitch about on a regular basis. Yes, Thir old fashioned. And in a world seemingly dominated technology companies racing to beat each other, I love that about them.

Another thing, I fail to see how their paint schemes are "Craptacular", as you so eloquently put it.

But, I agree that this issue truly was dire. The Synopsis (I think thats the word) of the Skaven book boiled down to "Skaven have the bestest stuff but always run away unless you buy a million billion clanrats hurr.", and the "Battlefield challenge" was just a joke-Congratulations you have realised after 4 months what we realised in 4 seconds, that you can combine normal games, planet strike rules and Nightfighting to make a new scenario!
Despite this, the raging Fanboi ( ) inside me has to say this-while the scenario's themselves were fairly pathetic, I did appreciate the background on The invasions of Fenris. While in love with the fluff, I don't browse Lexcanium very often, so this is the sort of thing that I don't see very often.

LLF

There is much truth in what Osbad posted though he was somewhat acerbic in the style of his comments.

5e is a modest development of 3e and has taken 10 years to bring about and is still full of issues.

Codexes are issued on a most unsatisfactory schedule. Anyone who isn’t Spase Mariens is treated as second class if not third class. A lot of the fluff is recycled.

Release of FAQs and errata is also lamentable.

There’s no sense of development or excitement in the background. Much of the book publishing surrounds events which occurred hundreds or thousands of years ago in the timeline.

The summer campaigns have gone, which were an exciting and unifying focus for all players even if they just observed.

Considering the size of the company, there is huge bloat in the mechanism for marketing what they’ve got, instead of extending and developing it. It’s like a ship with a huge crew whose job is to move it through the water, but the ship itself carries hardly any cargo or passengers.

The models and books are savagely expensive, with no justification other than the weight of unproductive studio and retail chain they have to support.

My comments ignore WHFB and LoTR, but consider, GW is a £125 million company. Much smaller companies like the Flames of War guys or Perry Brothers, produce new stuff at a much higher rate proportionally.

My comments ignore WHFB and LoTR, but consider, GW is a £125 million company. Much smaller companies like the Flames of War guys or Perry Brothers, produce new stuff at a much higher rate proportionally.


This is why I get a little pissed when the price hike and such happens. And still, the smaller companies seem to be doing it right. Im willing to bet its because the smaller companies still, at least half ass, think about the consumers.

Was the Battle Report played on a Realm of Battle Board?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Was the Battle Report played on a Realm of Battle Board?

Lol, at first glance no, but then I spotted the skull pits and realised it had been heavily disguised with some dwarf stronghold scenery.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Was the Battle Report played on a Realm of Battle Board?

Doubtlessly.

KingCracker wrote:
This is why I get a little pissed when the price hike and such happens. And still, the smaller companies seem to be doing it right. Im willing to bet its because the smaller companies still, at least half ass, think about the consumers.

QFT

Since I just started playing 40k (been reading the books and varies fluff for a long time) I thought getting the White Dwarfs would be good.
AHAHAHAHA! What a damn waste of money.
I've bought the last 6 and doubt I'll buy another unless they have something in them worth the slowed cover price.
A guy at the local shop has just about every WD produced up to a year or two ago and I can't believe the cool stuff that used to be in them.
WTF happened? Oh, yeah... board of directors.

I would happily keep paying GW's bs prices if they at least improved in everything else...and I imagine a lot of other people probably would, too.

Better-written rules, more comprehensive FAQs, better/more content in White Dwarf/on the website, etc. etc.

Was the Battle Report played on a Realm of Battle Board?

You're funny...

i feel the OP and Osbad either didn't read the article or didn't understand what JJ was talking about.

he was talking about how the hobby shouldn't/wouldn't change to keep up with the times meaning it won't become virtual or simulated.

He wasn't bitching about how video games and DVDs and computers and such are ruining life ect. he actually like computers, the hobby wouldn't be the same without the CAD system (something which uses computers).

twistinthunder wrote:i feel the OP and Osbad either didn't read the article or didn't understand what JJ was talking about.

he was talking about how the hobby shouldn't/wouldn't change to keep up with the times meaning it won't become virtual or simulated.

He was bitching about how video games and DVDs and computers and such are ruining life ect. he actually like computers, the hobby wouldn't be the same without the CAD system (something which uses computers).

Hmm... I believe I got "the point" of the article, but behind that is a recognition that GW have genuine competition for our disposable income. He was basically saying that computer games represent the same type of distraction for would be gamers now as comic books did in the 70s and 80s. My response would be that you can get lost in a computer game for a lot longer than you can with a comic book. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the "don't let wargames become computerised" sentiment, but GW will have to do a bit more than nostalgic ramblings to win over the Xbox 360 crowd.

It's overpriced, but we still buy it. If you look at some of the older WD's you think...OMG, THIS IS AWESOME. So I bought a new copy. What a load of bs. Apart from the csm battle reports (the ones where they win).
Anyway, I have a xbox 360, 2 laptops and a big plasma (or at least the family does ).
But I prefer the hobby. I only use the plasma to watch kewl stuff like Star Wars Movies (the old ones or Ep 3 )
But anyway, I think GW is moving towards a better future. They're making new website articles, and some of the new dexes really have good material in them (with the exception of new csm dex...i'm still simmering, rawr )
Anyway, in short, GW ain't that bad-we all play their products, and technology only serves to enhance my hobby experience.

Kilkrazy wrote:
My comments ignore WHFB and LoTR, but consider, GW is a £125 million company. Much smaller companies like the Flames of War guys or Perry Brothers, produce new stuff at a much higher rate proportionally.

Wargames Factory has 5 employees. They've been putting out a plastic kit a month.

Now GW might be spacing stuff out to spare our wallets but the delay in wave 2s leaving us without models is just unacceptable.

I think the complete lack of knowledge for upcoming releases - and not just when a model is coming, but if a model is coming - that's unacceptable.

Kilkrazy wrote:5e is a modest development of 3e and has taken 10 years to bring about and is still full of issues.

Codexes are issued on a most unsatisfactory schedule. Anyone who isn’t Spase Mariens is treated as second class if not third class.

A bit OOT, eh?

4E cleaned up the whole WD/TAR/TVR/Errata/FAQ rules mess that we had at then end of 3rd, and we should all be thankful for that. 5E did a fine job of cleaning up the odds and ends from 4th, while advancing the state of play by moving to Objectives, but actual 5E issues are minimal. If you've got them, state them. As far as I know, the only real issues are from old Codices, and you can't blame the base rules for the Codices that preceed them.

Codices are on a reasonable schedule for the main armies. If you're Space Marines, Orks, Eldar, or any other major army, you can reasonably expect an update within 5 or 6 years. If you're a sublist (Dark Angels, Black Templars, etc.), then you have to wait a bit more. The only advantage Space Marines have is that they're among the first to get an update each edition, so are on a 4-5 year schedule.

JohnHwangDD wrote: As far as I know, the only real issues are from old Codices

Except kill points, troops only scoring, and strength 4 defensive weapons.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Codices are on a reasonable schedule for the main armies. If you're Space Marines, Orks, Eldar, or any other major army, you can reasonably expect an update within 5 or 6 years. If you're a sublist (Dark Angels, Black Templars, etc.), then you have to wait a bit more. The only advantage Space Marines have is that they're among the first to get an update each edition, so are on a 4-5 year schedule.

Sorry what? Sub-list?

An army is an army, these aren't supplements to the army lists for fringe groups, some like necrons and dark eldar are most certainly stand alone armies.

The underlying truth of what you've written is that there is a two tier system in place that prioritises the highest selling armies and fails to properly support the other ones.

Codices are most certainly not on a reasonable schedule. Ask a C'tan.

Those aren't rules problems.

I happen to like all three of them as fixes to their predecessors.
____

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Codices are on a reasonable schedule for the main armies. If you're Space Marines, Orks, Eldar, or any other major army, you can reasonably expect an update within 5 or 6 years. If you're a sublist (Dark Angels, Black Templars, etc.), then you have to wait a bit more. The only advantage Space Marines have is that they're among the first to get an update each edition, so are on a 4-5 year schedule.

Sorry what? Sub-list?

An army is an army,

You read it, so you understand it. This pattern has been pretty well-established for a couple generations, so I don't know why you ask the question. Core armies get updates more frequently than others. That's a fact.

Armies are NOT equal. Never have been, never will be. If you can't deal with it, you know where the door is. Try not to let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.

The idea that the support is improper is odd. If the army gets an update, it's supported.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Codices are on a reasonable schedule for the main armies.

The fact that there are 'main armies' is unacceptable.
I believe this was Killkrazy's point when he said:

Anyone who isn’t Spase Mariens is treated as second class if not third class.

Why is that unacceptable?

If you play the most common army (vanilla SM), you get updated on a 4-5 year schedule.

If you play a major army (Eldar, CSM, Orks), you get updated on a 5-6 year schedule.

if you play a minor army (Tau, Templars, Sisters), you get updated on a 6-8 year schedule.

if you play a tier-D army (DE, Daemons, DH, Dark Angels), you get updated when GW feels like it.

It's not news, and the only way to change it is via sales. So if that's a problem, then this isn't the hobby for you.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
You read it, so you understand it. This pattern has been pretty well-established for a couple generations, so I don't know why you ask the question. Core armies get updates more frequently than others. That's a fact.

Armies are NOT equal. Never have been, never will be. If you can't deal with it, you know where the door is. Try not to let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.

The idea that the support is improper is odd. If the army gets an update, it's supported.

So it's established, that they aren't treating all armies equally based on sales, and your fine with that? Again with the whole 'don't let the door hit ya' bull gak, I buy the product, I can voice my disappointment with what I consider substandard service. Don't tell me to bugger off if I don't like it, that trite soundbite gets wheeled out every time someone questions GW on this.

Why the feth should I not ask for army equality? Look what happened to orks, look at ork sales now, if they made half these other armies vibrant and put effort into them they would sell better. Instead the corporation is entirely happy to keep flogging space marines and harbours a secret hard-on for the idea that one day all players will bring space marines to the table.

Armies SHOULD be equal or carry a fething warning sign that 'Please be aware, you are purchasing a 3rd tier army and therefore should not expect an update for models or codex for the next 10 years, expect to be totally beaten down in every game for the next 3 editions of the rules that will be released in the meanwhile. They should be striving for balance in the game. I didn't buy a nonSM army just to play npc badguy for some smurf jockey.

skyth wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote: As far as I know, the only real issues are from old Codices

Except kill points, troops only scoring, and strength 4 defensive weapons.

are you trying to say troops only scoring is a bad decision.

well i'm sure gw is sorry they tried to make the game a bit more realistic.

i mean really you expect spec. ops would hold something down when there's a unit of normal troops capable of doing it? if you answer that question "yes" then you have problems.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Codices are on a reasonable schedule for the main armies. If you're Space Marines, Orks, Eldar, or any other major army, you can reasonably expect an update within 5 or 6 years. If you're a sublist (Dark Angels, Black Templars, etc.), then you have to wait a bit more. The only advantage Space Marines have is that they're among the first to get an update each edition, so are on a 4-5 year schedule.

Sorry what? Sub-list?

An army is an army, these aren't supplements to the army lists for fringe groups, some like necrons and dark eldar are most certainly stand alone armies.

The underlying truth of what you've written is that there is a two tier system in place that prioritises the highest selling armies and fails to properly support the other ones.

Codices are most certainly not on a reasonable schedule. Ask a C'tan.

i'm sorry what your saying makes no sense what so ever, a fringe group is a fringe group because almost no one plays them because they dont get updates which put people off, therefore there are 'fringe armies'

and dark angels and black templars ARE supplement to army lists because they aren't their own army they may move and fight as their own army but they're not, a chapter is part of the adeptus arstartes aren't they and before you say grey knight they are part of the adeptus arstartes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Why is that unacceptable?

If you play the most common army (vanilla SM), you get updated on a 4-5 year schedule.

If you play a major army (Eldar, CSM, Orks), you get updated on a 5-6 year schedule.

if you play a minor army (Tau, Templars, Sisters), you get updated on a 6-8 year schedule.

if you play a tier-D army (DE, Daemons, DH, Dark Angels), you get updated when GW feels like it.

It's not news, and the only way to change it is via sales. So if that's a problem, then this isn't the hobby for you.

gee i dont know erm maybe it's unacceptable is because everything should get an update at the same rate to keep everything on par with everything else.

it's unacceptable because everybody knows gw can update every army in a game, we know they can do it so why dont they. (im talking about WHFB, they update everything reasonably so why dont they do that with 40k)

"the only way to change it is via sales." well since sales would improve if the army got an update it would get an update more often, works both ways, sales are down because people don't want to start an army thats 'old'.

Troops scoring is both good and bad. It's good, because it encourages Troop heavy armies, which can often be more fun to play against. It's bad, because it doesn't make much sense. It also hampers some armies and helps others- Tau for example have no particularly durable troops for holding objectives.

Kill points are stupid, flat out. There was nothing wrong with victory points.

As for JWDD- he trots this stuff out a lot. I think he likes provoking extreme reactions. Some would call it trolling.

The fact is the release schedule for GW games is absolutely the worst thing about the company, bar nothing. If they fixed that, I would be far more positive about the games.

twistinthunder wrote:

skyth wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote: As far as I know, the only real issues are from old Codices

Except kill points, troops only scoring, and strength 4 defensive weapons.

are you trying to say troops only scoring is a bad decision.

well i'm sure gw is sorry they tried to make the game a bit more realistic.

i mean really you expect spec. ops would hold something down when there's a unit of normal troops capable of doing it? if you answer that question "yes" then you have problems.

It is not more realistic, it is less realistic and more gamey...And I would expect that if my special ops are holding something, then I would have it regardless of where normal troops are. Not to mention that troops tend to be the blandest (Ie least fun) unit to use makes it a bad idea.

Unless I'm mistaken, Spehss Muhrens make the most elite, hardcore Spec Ops forces look like little children, yet Astartes can hold objectives.

twistinthunder wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Codices are on a reasonable schedule for the main armies. If you're Space Marines, Orks, Eldar, or any other major army, you can reasonably expect an update within 5 or 6 years. If you're a sublist (Dark Angels, Black Templars, etc.), then you have to wait a bit more. The only advantage Space Marines have is that they're among the first to get an update each edition, so are on a 4-5 year schedule.

Sorry what? Sub-list?

An army is an army, these aren't supplements to the army lists for fringe groups, some like necrons and dark eldar are most certainly stand alone armies.

The underlying truth of what you've written is that there is a two tier system in place that prioritises the highest selling armies and fails to properly support the other ones.

Codices are most certainly not on a reasonable schedule. Ask a C'tan.

i'm sorry what your saying makes no sense what so ever, a fringe group is a fringe group because almost no one plays them because they dont get updates which put people off, therefore there are 'fringe armies'
and dark angels and black templars ARE supplement to army lists because they aren't their own army they may move and fight as their own army but they're not, a chapter is part of the adeptus arstartes aren't they and before you say grey knight they are part of the adeptus arstartes.

Your blurring the lines between the fluff/how the models look against what it does and how it plays.
Chapters of marines (non-codex astartes) that have their own lists are not supplements, they play differently, they are subject to special rules and that is why we have different codices for them. They are therefore separate armies.

My point is simple, GW should be obliged to treat all their customers fairly and without bias or prejudice based on whether they like a less popular miniatures range. In the same way that whilst I loathe the current dark eldar range and the way they were crowbarred into the fluff, the fact remains they were added and hyped and sold to people and now GW has an obligation to maintain that army and keep producing up to date rules for them.

I spend hundreds of pounds buying an ork army with the unspoken agreement that GW will continue to produce a codex for them and does not intend to 'retcon' them out of existence, in a similar way if some new player picks up a White Dwarf and says 'I like the range of armies you are offering me and I select Necrons as my army', he should in no way be subject to the current double (or even triple) standard that GW employs towards anyone who buys 'the wrong miniatures' from them. The disparity between codices and release dates, where the marines book ends up lapping other codices, sometimes twice, is ludicrous.

Something I never understand: Why does GW print a page showing what parts you get in the new kits? It just seems like a waste of paper.

I was rummaging through my room today and I found a White Dwarf dating to the Medusa V campaign, and I loved the way it was set out: the battles had their own plots, rather than mindless objectives. There was less of the "showing off minatures we've all seen before" thing which they do by dedicating about 4 pages to a member of staff. Instead, this issue had a small inset of a spectular Stealth Suit which actually looked invisible! That kind of painting is what should be in the magazine, not just some model which we've seen god-knows-how-many times before.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:So it's established, that they aren't treating all armies equally based on sales, and your fine with that?

Instead the corporation is entirely happy to keep flogging space marines and harbours a secret hard-on for the idea that one day all players will bring space marines to the table.

Armies SHOULD be equal or carry a fething warning sign

Dude, it's not that hard to comprehend. GW is sales driven, and they're not going to change things just because you whine on the Internet. Your whining is like whining that it's noisy living next to an airstrip or railyard, or smells bad living next to a pig farm - it was like that before you got there, and it'll be like that long after you're gone. So you have two choices: suck it up, or GTFO.

Pul-leaze, GW isn't SM only. GW sells non-SM for SM to kill.

And people aren't smart enough to figure this out already? We don't warn n00bs about starting non-primary armies when they ask? Isn't that a warning sign? Or perhaps you're thinking of the formal, written, irrevocable, legally-insured and bonded guarantee made by GW Management that GW will always update every army, every edition, within a fixed timeframe. Somehow, in my decade-plus with GW, I'm sorry to confess that missed seeing it. You can kindly share with us where this is on GW's website or otherwise published, please do so. I'd be oh so very grateful.
____

twistinthunder wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Why is that unacceptable?

If you play the most common army (vanilla SM), you get updated on a 4-5 year schedule.

If you play a major army (Eldar, CSM, Orks), you get updated on a 5-6 year schedule.

if you play a minor army (Tau, Templars, Sisters), you get updated on a 6-8 year schedule.

if you play a tier-D army (DE, Daemons, DH, Dark Angels), you get updated when GW feels like it.

It's not news, and the only way to change it is via sales. So if that's a problem, then this isn't the hobby for you.

gee i dont know erm maybe it's unacceptable is because everything should get an update at the same rate to keep everything on par with everything else.

it's unacceptable because everybody knows gw can update every army in a game, we know they can do it so why dont they. (im talking about WHFB, they update everything reasonably so why dont they do that with 40k)

"the only way to change it is via sales." well since sales would improve if the army got an update it would get an update more often, works both ways, sales are down because people don't want to start an army thats 'old'.

I'm glad that you bring up WFB as a counterpoint. Right now WFB is Daemons and everybody else, with evidence major "codex creep". From a balance standpoint, WFB is far more degenerate than 40k. The recent WFB Ard Boyz shows this to be the case with 15 Daemon armies qualifying out of 11 events. In addition, 2 legitimate armies have been informally Squatted (Chaos Dwarves and Dogs of War). In my opinion, it's better to have slower updates that are less disruptive, than faster updates based on gross levels of Codex creep. IOW, if the WFB model were followed fo 40k, I guess we can kiss Dark Eldar goodbye forever, along with Necrons, and look forward to a decade of grossly-unbalanced matchups.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:So it's established, that they aren't treating all armies equally based on sales, and your fine with that?

Instead the corporation is entirely happy to keep flogging space marines and harbours a secret hard-on for the idea that one day all players will bring space marines to the table.

Armies SHOULD be equal or carry a fething warning sign

Dude, it's not that hard to comprehend. GW is sales driven, and they're not going to change things just because you whine on the Internet. Your whining is like whining that it's noisy living next to an airstrip or railyard, or smells bad living next to a pig farm - it was like that before you got there, and it'll be like that long after you're gone. So you have two choices: suck it up, or GTFO.

Pul-leaze, GW isn't SM only. GW sells non-SM for SM to kill.

And people aren't smart enough to figure this out already? We don't warn n00bs about starting non-primary armies when they ask? Isn't that a warning sign? Or perhaps you're thinking of the formal, written, irrevocable, legally-insured and bonded guarantee made by GW Management that GW will always update every army, every edition, within a fixed timeframe. Somehow, in my decade-plus with GW, I'm sorry to confess that missed seeing it. You can kindly share with us where this is on GW's website or otherwise published, please do so. I'd be oh so very grateful.

I'm finding your patronising and smug-choked posts somewhat irritating but I will reply nonetheless.

I comprehend just fine that armies are getting overhauls according to sales. I understand it. You however seem to have some kind of failure to absorb that what I am saying is they should have an obligation to maintain ALL armies they produce, not just the best selling ones. I don't want to go into the store and only find salt and vinegar crisps because they were the most popular flavour and that's the basis of GWs decisions.

Glad you had a decade with GW, I started in 88, 21 years ago and about 8 months after the release of Rogue Trader. So lets put that one away.

Buying models is a costly business, a full army is an expensive thing to acquire, when people buy them they do so with the understanding that the army won't be shelved or neglected and yet GW keep doing this.

What I find most boggling whilst discussing this with you is that you own a 'squatted' army, your Fantasy Dogs of War and are often to be found bemoaning their extinction, yet you find nothing wrong with a tiered and prejudicial system leaving the owners of other armies without updates and in certain cases also relegated to the scrap heap.

It's a clear double standard in what you're posting.