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.

*Warming up for rant* Morning Dakka,

I have been defending White Dwarf for ages when people have said that it wasn't any good and the old style was much better however this month's detritus has gone too far! Before I go off on one I will say that I think the 'eavy Metal Tutorials have been and are fantastic and it is good that when a new unit/army comes out they focus on that so that people get immediate help with the painting. I also like the articles that discuss the new armybook/codex and give a brief synopsis of how the army will work on the table and a pen picture of their fluff.

Now onto the bits I don't like:

1) THE BATTLE REPORT: First off I realise that it would not be a good thing if the new army gets tabled but this month has gone too far. First of all if Andrew Kendrick is meant to be such a good Imperial Guard General then why did he use such a crappy list - 3 infantry platoons with very little upgrades on the command squads, no chimeras and only two infantry squads in each. I have only been playing guard for about six months but I have won three tournaments with them and have never lost a game (this is not trying to sound arrogant just to put in place the fact I know how to win with guard). There was very little synergy in his list and I am pretty sure that no one has ever used that list and won a game so is it any surprise he got smashed. Why can't these supposedly awesome generals ever pick competitive lists? Ok I don't want to see tournament winning lists every month but I would like to se some variety between fluffy lists, competitive list and down right evil lists but this should be balanced by both players picking the same kind of list. Apart from when LOTR is the featured report I have never stopped reading the battle report but this month was just ridiculous. I think I have said enough about the Battle Report now if anyone wants to pick up on it I can moan some more later.

2)THE CONSTANT ADVERTISING: Fine White Dwarf is the main form of hard copy advertising that GW has but why do it to death some times GW marketing department less is more: when you send me an email with a couple of photos of a new range you capture my interest and actually make me want to go to a store and check them out 'in the flesh' which makes me more likely to buy something. When you show me every little thing in minute detail and I have no desire to collect the army my interest is satiated and I no longer want to go and look at the stuff I'll wait till I play against it.

3) JJ - sometimes he is good this month I get the feeling he had a couple of weeks off with his family and wrote Standard Bearer the night before the deadline. What an awful topic I am sure most people are able to collect an army and think through everything he said with a minimum of effort. If this is all advice for kids produce another magazine called Pink Fluffy Dwarf.

Anyway I am sure you are bored of reading so I'll open the floor for debate.

Thoughts?

It just sounds like more of the same for me...

I miss Jake Thornton, Nigel Stillman, Paul Sawyer, Tuomas Pirinen, Adrian Wood...

I haven't bought a white dwarf in years and neither has anyone I know of in my gaming circle. That's pretty bad for a magazine who's entire content is targeted for you.

Haha! You bought a White Dwarf.

You deserve everything you get, really.

Thanks for that truly helpful comment that furthers debate and makes my time typing worthwhile.

You're welcome

Hey, I still buy it every month, it's the only drug I use. Most of the issues in the last years have been rather useless for me. I think I've only enjoyed the painting articles.

Yeah i've noticed the battle reports are slightly (massively) rigged. They play several battles and choose the one they think reflects the new army best i suppose i find them enjoyable.

Erasoketa wrote:You're welcome

Hey, I still buy it every month, it's the only drug I use. Most of the issues in the last years have been rather useless for me. I think I've only enjoyed the painting articles.

Sorry dude I meant H.B.M.C his comment really wasn't helpful

I only buy it if the painting articles are any use to me, if this one is all Dark Eldar I'll be getting it...

Mick

It is all Dark Eldar in the painting articles and it covers most of the models released this month.

I understand where you are coming from but given that you appear to be a fairly long time WD reader, I am surprised that this has got to the point of annoyance. It has always been thus with WD. I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the amount of times that the new release army has lost a battle report (and most of the time when they fail to win, the game ends in a draw rather than a loss). This is standard fare for WD; as integral to the magazine as the advertising. The battle report is nothing more than an advert in itself.

Take the mag for what it is - a way to sell more minis. Glean from it what you will (some articles are good despite what this board would have you believe) and take it with a pinch of salt. Personally, I buy WD but then again, I am under no illusions as to what I receive. Its expensive, but then again, so is everything GW, and it provides me with enough diversion and amusement to justify the cost. When it stops doing that, I will stop buying it.

I agree I have always known that the battle reports are biased to the new army but this month seemed to go too far for the reasons I originally posted I also remember when a new army wasn't released every month and you used to get battle reports that where fair, unbiased and well written. Sigh *drifts off into dreamy revery of a time when Andy Chambers was at the heart of all that was good about GW*

I guess what you really lament is the subtle drift that WD has undergone from a hobby magazine that promoted GW stuff to a full blown catalogue that it is now. This is in part due to editorial changes, staff changes and management impositions.

I agree, I would love to see GW go back to its roots a little more but I cant see it happening. What I can see is readership tailing off and the mag being binned, however.

filbert wrote:I guess what you really lament is the subtle drift that WD has undergone from a hobby magazine that promoted GW stuff to a full blown catalogue that it is now. This is in part due to editorial changes, staff changes and management impositions.

I agree, I would love to see GW go back to its roots a little more but I cant see it happening. What I can see is readership tailing off and the mag being binned, however.

Absolutely this

I guess in a wider sense, WD is a microcosm of the changes that GW itself has undergone. What a shame it is when the bean counters get hold of the reins - its accountants that steer GW rather than hobbyists/fans/aficionados.

Remember GW's rule about having fun.

Battle reports in WD have always featured builds that are not competitive. Even when they get shop staff or tourney winners involved etc they always change their lists to make them a bit of everything.

'My list usually features lots of win x but seeing as I am in WD this month Ill use lots of crappy y and zees'

Is the formulaic comment.

The trouble is IMO the best way for GW to increase its sales is to listen to the people that have been in the hobby for a long time and keep things they really like whilst targeting the new market in different ways. Our hobby has a finite market share of the population (there are only so many geeks per capita) therefore I believe they should work as hard at retaining their customer base as they do attracting the kids to the hobby. Perhaps at 26 I am too much of an old fart for GW as they have had my business for the last 18 years

Ed_Bodger wrote:The trouble is IMO the best way for GW to increase its sales is to listen to the people that have been in the hobby for a long time and keep things they really like whilst targeting the new market in different ways. Our hobby has a finite market share of the population (there are only so many geeks per capita) therefore I believe they should work as hard at retaining their customer base as they do attracting the kids to the hobby. Perhaps at 26 I am too much of an old fart for GW as they have had my business for the last 18 years

Considering the customer base GW is most interested in, 26 is absolutely ancient.

Ed_Bodger wrote:The trouble is IMO the best way for GW to increase its sales is to listen to the people that have been in the hobby for a long time and keep things they really like whilst targeting the new market in different ways. Our hobby has a finite market share of the population (there are only so many geeks per capita) therefore I believe they should work as hard at retaining their customer base as they do attracting the kids to the hobby. Perhaps at 26 I am too much of an old fart for GW as they have had my business for the last 18 years

Its forever the complaint of the veterans on this board; GW ignore the veterans and it will cost them - that's the battle cry of the jilted generation, at least. So far, it hasn't seemed to have made a difference, GW still
seems to be able to attract new blood so I suppose they are doing OK. Doesn't mean I have to like it; I hate that they abandoned the specialist games and hung others out to dry (like 2nd Epic and Blood Bowl). But they still continue to post a profit....

The problem is that everyone here has an opinion on how we think GW should be run and we all think (well most of us) that they should pay more heed to their customers, fans and veterans but the truth is, GW is run by a board and CEO who have no interest in games or gamers and are all about the bottom line. The whole business model is set up to suck a newbie in, get them to drop £100 or so on new stuff and then they couldn't care less if they stay or go; its on to the next one. There doesn't seem to be much incentive to stick around with GW once you have bought in; this is demonstrated by the fact that most of us probably use ebay, swap shops and FLGS to buy stuff - as far as GW is concerned, we don't really matter. But it seems to work for them so who am I to criticise? I don't have a degree in Business Studies and corporate management so my opinion is fairly worthless.

I think I've purchased (with my own hard-earned) three issues in the last two years of WD.

It is not the mag it once was, this is true. These days, I'd much rather spend the same money on Military modeller or wargames Illustrated.

The same kind of painting articles (one of the MMs even had an article on sculpting hair onto 1/35 models - not too different from doing it to GWs Hydrocephalic 28mm, really) as well as "how to's" on weathering powders (the newest "new" thing that gaming modellers have latched onto (SF modellers were doing it to models in the 80s.

I wish I hadn't been bought a two year subscription last Christmas as I would be quite happy to never buy another copy of White Dwarf, I can pretty much get all the advertising spiel I can take from the GW website.

I also thought the Guard army selection was somewhat advantageous for the DE. In GW's slight defense i think this situation was aggravated somewhat by the limited model collection they have painted up and themed as Catachans.

Did make the FnP and pain counters look useful though eh ?

The report looked great however, and I was pleased to see the (slightly) expanded tactical decisions in a couple of parts -- like the assault on the tank for extra movement and the use of the jetbikes.

And those WFB scenery pieces are great.

I don't play it, but if I did the rules for the new LOTR models is a handy addition.

..quite intrigued by the inside back page too...

I'm eager to grab November's issue. The first one in eons speaking of a army I actually use.

reds8n wrote:..quite intrigued by the inside back page too...

Ooh, please share your wisdom

Wow, it's only 10:30 in the morning and I'm already asking satan for favours

S_P

filbert wrote:

Ed_Bodger wrote:The trouble is IMO the best way for GW to increase its sales is to listen to the people that have been in the hobby for a long time and keep things they really like whilst targeting the new market in different ways. Our hobby has a finite market share of the population (there are only so many geeks per capita) therefore I believe they should work as hard at retaining their customer base as they do attracting the kids to the hobby. Perhaps at 26 I am too much of an old fart for GW as they have had my business for the last 18 years

Its forever the complaint of the veterans on this board; GW ignore the veterans and it will cost them - that's the battle cry of the jilted generation, at least. So far, it hasn't seemed to have made a difference, GW still
seems to be able to attract new blood so I suppose they are doing OK. Doesn't mean I have to like it; I hate that they abandoned the specialist games and hung others out to dry (like 2nd Epic and Blood Bowl). But they still continue to post a profit....

The problem is that everyone here has an opinion on how we think GW should be run and we all think (well most of us) that they should pay more heed to their customers, fans and veterans but the truth is, GW is run by a board and CEO who have no interest in games or gamers and are all about the bottom line. The whole business model is set up to suck a newbie in, get them to drop £100 or so on new stuff and then they couldn't care less if they stay or go; its on to the next one. There doesn't seem to be much incentive to stick around with GW once you have bought in; this is demonstrated by the fact that most of us probably use ebay, swap shops and FLGS to buy stuff - as far as GW is concerned, we don't really matter. But it seems to work for them so who am I to criticise? I don't have a degree in Business Studies and corporate management so my opinion is fairly worthless.

Nuff said!

I got a subscription (sadly) right after the spearhead issue. Since then, i've gotten 5 issues, only 1 of which had any 40K content, sorta (daemons) and 0% of it was relevant to any of the armies I play. I don't remember the exact numbers, but pretty close to that.

I would really really like to know whether WD is self-sustaining on the backs of our subscription payments or whether it is subsidised by GW.

If the magazine is subsidised by the rest of GW (which I suspect, tbh), then the fact it is blatantly an advertising rag is pretty much forgiveable. Still though, there should be a clear separation between content and advertising, which there is not.

If GW does not subsidise the magazine and the costs of producing it are entirely borne by the readers, then it is unacceptable that there is advertising of any kind, especially the insidious advertising-as-content we get now.

What I would like to see is WD as a stand-alone, succeed-or-fail on its own merits venture. This would lead to a focus on producing articles people want, instead of articles that advertise whilst providing just enough content to justify calling it a magazine rather than a catalogue.

(And I say all of those things as someone who is fortunate enough to be afford a subscription despite not thinking the magazine is all that great.)

I sometimes wonder if WD has changed, or if it's the game and the hobbyists
who have changed.

Ed_Bodger wrote:Thanks for that truly helpful comment that furthers debate and makes my time typing worthwhile.

Sorry, but you have no excuse (or might not).

Buying a WD and complaining about the content is like walking into a tattoo parlour, asking for a tattoo and then complaining afterwards that you got a tattoo. You know what WD is*, it's been this way for years and years and years, so you got exactly what you paid for - a thick flashy advertising booklet masquerading as a hobby magazine.


* And if you didn't know what WD was like, then consider this a learning experience.

malfred wrote:I sometimes wonder if WD has changed, or if it's the game and the hobbyists
who have changed.

I dunno.

You tell me.

That's a good point.


I know, up to ..ooh...crikey .. over five years ago now where does the time go.. it was definately running successfully on its own. Not sure now though.