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.

Wait, like PP does!?

All kidding aside, GW does a fine job. They do a good job at what they do, it's just the rules for their games don't interest me. I feel their releases aren't bad, and are doing some necessary adjustments with each wave. It just so happens that each release they do has the same shortfalls in the model range.

I've been playing 40k since 2008 and this is the most exciting time I've experienced.

Bland? No. Not by any use of the word.

All i play are DE and i am working on GK at this moment, for me it is not a problem seeing that i do not know how it used to be, because while i am older than some people i know who play 40k i didnt have the cash to get started when i was younger.

From a modeling/painter perspective i love seeing what i cannot afford.

I think instead of just updating codexes in a hurry with like 3 new units, a price increase and a new codex they should spend alot more time on it and make sure that it is good and by that I mean balanced and fun in relation to the other books. Not to mention they shouldn't be pulling tricks like taking the same dire avengers kit without any re modelling or adding of options, halfing the amount of models you get, raising the price and re-releasing it in a new box.



Not too mention they give more attention to marines than anyone else, releasing a multitude of marine codexes which are essentially just the same army give or take a few units and special rules. I think and pardon me for thinking outside the GW rhino, maybe its time for a new army altogether, let's get some new xenos teams with different play styles or a mercenary codex or something, just anything as long as it has some more flavours than vanilla marine with some green or grey sprinkles.

 Easy E wrote:

 Flashman wrote:
For my part, I usually like the infantry kits such as Pathfinders, Wraithguard and Shadow Warriors, but the big stuff leaves me cold and I couldn't care less about the fliers, which I maintain are ridiculous in a 28mm scale game.

Exalted.

Flyers and super-heavies in 28mm are stupid, full stop.

Artillery pieces are even further along the path of implausibility.. not only stuff like the Basilisk, but the thought of the deathstrike missile being used at such range is hilarious.

Although.. I realise we are talking about a universe where people have guns, yet run towards each other to stab their opponent with chainsaws

 kronk wrote:
I've been playing 40k since 2008 and this is the most exciting time I've experienced.

Bland? No. Not by any use of the word.

No, not by your use of the word.

I on the other hand would describe some - an increasing number - as bland.

Some - sadly, also an increasing number - I describe as cartoony. And cartoony bothers me a great deal more than bland. (Bland actually does not bother me much at all.)

And a diminishing number I would describe as 'Wow, that mini is hot! Had a loverly moment of that looking at some of the GW elven cavalry in the IoB box - something that I was not expecting.

And, of course, a small number of miniatures qualify for 'What the heck is that supposed to be?!' - mostly Hobbit related right now. (Not singling GW out there - every miniatures company has one, now and again. That GW has more flops is more because of the quantity that they are churning out.)

Which means... not a whole lot, my tastes are not your tastes, and we are each allowed to like the miniatures that we like. We even likely agree on some.

But 'Not by any use of the word' is just wrong. Too many on this very thread are already using that very term....

The Auld Grump

 FenWulf29 wrote:

 Nafarious wrote:
There is not a single problem with the new tau riptide. Or the wraith knight.

So it not a problem that GW are charging super heavy tank prices for and upsized wraithlord.

Why does the fact that it's "superheavy tank prices" matter?
The Wraithknight is not small. It might have spindly limbs; but it is by no means small.

I would love to hear the reasoning as to why this is such a big deal.

I really like the rapid rate GW is releasing codex's, its nice to see a lot of armies get the spot light, which gives a great variety.

However, I do think the new releases are bland, but my reason for that is pretty personal. I am much more of a fan of infantry, and dont like those amazingly expensive walkers/fliers, so I just don't get very excited.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 FenWulf29 wrote:

 Nafarious wrote:
There is not a single problem with the new tau riptide. Or the wraith knight.

So it not a problem that GW are charging super heavy tank prices for and upsized wraithlord.

Why does the fact that it's "superheavy tank prices" matter?
The Wraithknight is not small. It might have spindly limbs; but it is by no means small.

I would love to hear the reasoning as to why this is such a big deal.

Are you really, genuinely, seriously asking this question?

 azreal13 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 FenWulf29 wrote:

 Nafarious wrote:
There is not a single problem with the new tau riptide. Or the wraith knight.

So it not a problem that GW are charging super heavy tank prices for and upsized wraithlord.

Why does the fact that it's "superheavy tank prices" matter?
The Wraithknight is not small. It might have spindly limbs; but it is by no means small.

I would love to hear the reasoning as to why this is such a big deal.

Are you really, genuinely, seriously asking this question?

Yes, I am.

Do you actually have some kind of serious answer or are you just going to be snarky?

I honestly don't know where to begin!

I mean seriously Kan, I know you have WK credentials, but if you genuinely can't see the issue to the point where you ask that question, it probably isn't worth getting into.

 azreal13 wrote:
I honestly don't know where to begin!

I mean seriously Kan, I know you have WK credentials, but if you genuinely can't see the issue to the point where you ask that question, it probably isn't worth getting into.

Look, the Wraithknight's price?
Yeah, it's a hefty price tag.

But at this point we have NO CLUE what is being done with superheavies. For all we know, the Baneblade and Stompa are going to be in the next Guard and Ork codices.

I really do want to know why people think the Wraithknight's price tag is such a big deal.

I don't know about an actual Baneblade. I can see a tank bigger than a Russ, maybe 14/14/12, 4 hull points and a slew of weapons (multiple twin-linked punisher cannons! BS4 upgrade!). I would probably buy that regardless of price epic tanks are awesome.

m14dude wrote:
Wait, like PP does!?
.

Actually, yes.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I honestly don't know where to begin!

I mean seriously Kan, I know you have WK credentials, but if you genuinely can't see the issue to the point where you ask that question, it probably isn't worth getting into.

Look, the Wraithknight's price?
Yeah, it's a hefty price tag.

But at this point we have NO CLUE what is being done with superheavies. For all we know, the Baneblade and Stompa are going to be in the next Guard and Ork codices.

I really do want to know why people think the Wraithknight's price tag is such a big deal.

It's £70 for one model!

It's £70 for one model that doesn't appear to use any more material than a Riptide, which is notably less money.

It's £70 for one model that doesn't appear to use any more material than a Riptide, which is notably less money and other manufacturers offer similar scale kits for dramatically less.

It's £70 for one model that doesn't appear to use any more material than a Riptide, which is notably less money and other manufacturers offer similar scale kits for dramatically less and costs more in other parts of the world for no good reason

Other than that? No problem at all!

How many points is it? Assuming it's more than 180 it's probably less expensive per point than three chimeras.

They absolutely aren't bland. Bland would be a subjective term so to judge it we'd have to look at what the critics would previously have considered "not bland".

We are getting up to date codex's that are not ridiculously overpowered as previous complainents would say but fit quite nicely. Chaos, Dark Angels, Tau and Eldar are 6th edition and not one seems ridiculous like the Wardian criticisms of the last edition. Tau are perhaps the only ones with detractors yet I see many BR of people beating them.

Models are more detailed than a few years ago, ten times more detailed than years before that. The Chaos range is quite frankly gorgeous. I'd be surprised if I didn't see the Eldar new releases in a new light. The fact that there is no new Dire Avenger sprue is a great disappointment BUT there are some nice models out there and if the price is waiting for new sculpts but getting up to date rules, well yeah I'll take it and it still doesn't make it bland.

The fact is what they do release is not bland, codex updates shouldn't be equated with absolute new army update. A codex update is just that it just so happens to coincide for good reasons of course with new models. The models they do release are gorgeous.

If not for the updates the very things that Eldar were good at wouldn't exist. Tau would be languishing without an update. Instead every codex is rapidly being updated to 6th rules. At least this way we won't have what we had in 5th, Orks and Black Templars sitting with nth year old codexs that aren't even that relevant.

cowen70 wrote:
They absolutely aren't bland. Bland would be a subjective term so to judge it we'd have to look at what the critics would previously have considered "not bland".

We are getting up to date codex's that are not ridiculously overpowered as previous complainents would say but fit quite nicely. Chaos, Dark Angels, Tau and Eldar are 6th edition and not one seems ridiculous like the Wardian criticisms of the last edition. Tau are perhaps the only ones with detractors yet I see many BR of people beating them.

Models are more detailed than a few years ago, ten times more detailed than years before that. The Chaos range is quite frankly gorgeous. I'd be surprised if I didn't see the Eldar new releases in a new light. The fact that there is no new Dire Avenger sprue is a great disappointment BUT there are some nice models out there and if the price is waiting for new sculpts but getting up to date rules, well yeah I'll take it and it still doesn't make it bland.

The fact is what they do release is not bland, codex updates shouldn't be equated with absolute new army update. A codex update is just that it just so happens to coincide for good reasons of course with new models. The models they do release are gorgeous.

If not for the updates the very things that Eldar were good at wouldn't exist. Tau would be languishing without an update. Instead every codex is rapidly being updated to 6th rules. At least this way we won't have what we had in 5th, Orks and Black Templars sitting with nth year old codexs that aren't even that relevant.

No, bland is a subjective term so whether or not a given figure is bland differs depending on viewer - usefulness does not enter into the equation....

Every viewer is a 'critic' - not just professional critics.

And, sorry... but if a theme is repeated over and over... even if the first iteration was not bland it is quite likely that the fifteenth iteration is.

The amount of detail has little bearing on whether a miniature is bland, banal, or just plain blah.

Your definition is lacking in substance. Little, if anything that you mention has anything to do with whether a miniature is bland.

But, again... Bland =/= Bad.

You or I... either and/or both of us are allowed to like something that is bland.

I like vanilla ice cream.

Some of my favorite miniatures are in relaxed, calm, kind of boring poses.

The Auld Grump

1. I didn't state usefullness as being equivalent to bland. What I did state was that a product of faster releases was to the benefit of armies. It is a consideration, the fact that there isn't a ton of new releases with the codex is a reflection of the speed of updates.

2. every viewer...what? Not relevant, no idea what you are talking about.

3. Repitition doesn't equal bland.

Lacking strong features or characteristics and therefore uninteresting

Having something remain the same does not equate to the above.

4. The other things I mention are more than relevant as to the reasons why people are bitching about new codex releases, they expect vast new updates along with the codex...I mentioned that was why I brought it up perhaps I wasn't clear.

5. The usage of bland is generally judged to be pejorative.

cowen70 wrote:
1. I didn't state usefullness as being equivalent to bland. What I did state was that a product of faster releases was to the benefit of armies. It is a consideration, the fact that there isn't a ton of new releases with the codex is a reflection of the speed of updates.

2. every viewer...what? Not relevant, no idea what you are talking about.

3. Repitition doesn't equal bland.

Lacking strong features or characteristics and therefore uninteresting

Having something remain the same does not equate to the above.

4. The other things I mention are more than relevant as to the reasons why people are bitching about new codex releases, they expect vast new updates along with the codex...I mentioned that was why I brought it up perhaps I wasn't clear.

5. The usage of bland is generally judged to be pejorative.

Look up the definition of bland....

1. pleasantly gentle or agreeable: a bland, affable manner.
2. soothing or balmy, as air: a bland southern breeze.
3. nonirritating, as food or medicines: a bland diet.
4. not highly flavored; mild; tasteless: a bland sauce.
5. lacking in special interest, liveliness, individuality, etc.; insipid; dull: a bland young man; a bland situation comedy.

Notice number 5? Lacking in individuality? Repetition does factor into whether something is bland...

Notice also that most of the definitions are about the subject being unobjectionable - not a perjorative term at all.

I study the English language, and I stand by my above statement. Many of GWs releases are bland. Some go so far as to be boring - which I will grant as a negative. Some few are blah which is a colloquialism combining bland and boring with a negative identifier - which is most definitely a pejorative.

The Auld Grump

 kronk wrote:
I've been playing 40k since 2008 and this is the most exciting time I've experienced.

Bland? No. Not by any use of the word.

I've got to agree, at least for the armies I play. I've been playing GW games of various types since about 1992, and the sort of stuff they're giving us in plastic now I never even dreamed they'd do at all back then. Something like the Winged Tyrant or the Tervigon, or even something as simple (now) as plastic Gargoyles, back then would have been laughed off as never going to happen material. Add to that how much Forgeworld as exploded, originally a company made up of tread heads making some super heavy tanks for Guard turned into making 40k scale Titans, additional models with rules for nearly every army in the game, and even expanding to Warhammer Fantasy and the bloody Horus Heresy, including models of Primarchs..

Sure, GW itself has been making fething dumb decision after fething dumb decision. The price has gotten fairly well out of control (to the point that the niche Forgeworld products, always the more expensive stuff, is now almost on price parity), GW have been making every effort to piss off as many customers as they can and they've dropped support for plenty of stuff (specialist games, official tournaments, games day in various areas, etc).

However, I can't complain about 40k and Warhammer Fantasy the games. Codex and Army book releases have quickened lately, army model ranges have gotten amazingly large with huge amounts in plastic, and my friends and I still have an absolute blast playing them.

I just wish GW corporate would get their heads out of their shareholders asses.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

cowen70 wrote:
1. I didn't state usefullness as being equivalent to bland. What I did state was that a product of faster releases was to the benefit of armies. It is a consideration, the fact that there isn't a ton of new releases with the codex is a reflection of the speed of updates.

2. every viewer...what? Not relevant, no idea what you are talking about.

3. Repitition doesn't equal bland.

Lacking strong features or characteristics and therefore uninteresting

Having something remain the same does not equate to the above.

4. The other things I mention are more than relevant as to the reasons why people are bitching about new codex releases, they expect vast new updates along with the codex...I mentioned that was why I brought it up perhaps I wasn't clear.

5. The usage of bland is generally judged to be pejorative.

Look up the definition of bland....

1. pleasantly gentle or agreeable: a bland, affable manner.
2. soothing or balmy, as air: a bland southern breeze.
3. nonirritating, as food or medicines: a bland diet.
4. not highly flavored; mild; tasteless: a bland sauce.
5. lacking in special interest, liveliness, individuality, etc.; insipid; dull: a bland young man; a bland situation comedy.

Notice number 5? Lacking in individuality? Repetition does factor into whether something is bland...

Notice also that most of the definitions are about the subject being unobjectionable - not a perjorative term at all.

I study the English language, and I stand by my above statement. Many of GWs releases are bland. Some go so far as to be boring - which I will grant as a negative. Some few are blah which is a colloquialism combining bland and boring with a negative identifier - which is most definitely a pejorative.

The Auld Grump

When I said the way Bland is being used I was more focused on how it is used "here" not in general and no the definition no5 does not to me apply to repetitiveness. I don't find the new releases to be boring but again this is subjective. They are far more interesting than before to my subjective sense, they are certainly more detailed, they are varying in details like size in comparison to before...honestly I can't help but think people considering bland now as being new to the hobby because first edition to now...sorry but no comparison. If we start going Orks, well yes took a more serious turn but for the best and in need of new releases but no bland doesn't fit anywhere if apply anything but personal opinion. By any measurable criteria they really aren't and quite frankly I can't understand how anyone would say they were.

I'd happily join the queue to gak all over GW for not remaking the Dire Avengers but that isn't a release that is just gak they ain't done.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I like vanilla ice cream.

Oh! Oh! Can we now have whoever that donkey-cave was who got crimes-against-humanity level offended about using 'vanilla' to mean 'plain' (cause the vanilla bean is actually an amazing and exotic flavor, and anyone using it to mean commonplace or regular is WRONG!!!!!!) come to this thread and lead us to another epic derail to ward off potential blandness?

 -Loki- wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I've been playing 40k since 2008 and this is the most exciting time I've experienced.

Bland? No. Not by any use of the word.

I've got to agree, at least for the armies I play. I've been playing GW games of various types since about 1992, and the sort of stuff they're giving us in plastic now I never even dreamed they'd do at all back then. Something like the Winged Tyrant or the Tervigon, or even something as simple (now) as plastic Gargoyles, back then would have been laughed off as never going to happen material. Add to that how much Forgeworld as exploded, originally a company made up of tread heads making some super heavy tanks for Guard turned into making 40k scale Titans, additional models with rules for nearly every army in the game, and even expanding to Warhammer Fantasy and the bloody Horus Heresy, including models of Primarchs..

Sure, GW itself has been making fething dumb decision after fething dumb decision. The price has gotten fairly well out of control (to the point that the niche Forgeworld products, always the more expensive stuff, is now almost on price parity), GW have been making every effort to piss off as many customers as they can and they've dropped support for plenty of stuff (specialist games, official tournaments, games day in various areas, etc).

However, I can't complain about 40k and Warhammer Fantasy the games. Codex and Army book releases have quickened lately, army model ranges have gotten amazingly large with huge amounts in plastic, and my friends and I still have an absolute blast playing them.

I just wish GW corporate would get their heads out of their shareholders asses.

Sums up my thoughts perfectly. Exalted.

 Bookwrack wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I like vanilla ice cream.

Oh! Oh! Can we now have whoever that donkey-cave was who got crimes-against-humanity level offended about using 'vanilla' to mean 'plain' (cause the vanilla bean is actually an amazing and exotic flavor, and anyone using it to mean commonplace or regular is WRONG!!!!!!) come to this thread and lead us to another epic derail to ward off potential blandness?

Possibly because in some foods Vanilla is the base flavor to which other flavors are added?

But a nice French vanilla, with little flecks of the vanilla bean, and maybe a hint of rum....

As I have said - I have little to no problem with bland - but too many recent *cough* Chaos *cough, cough* miniatures weren't 'bland' they were 'bad', and not in a good way.

The high elf releases? A trifle bland, but aside from the kite being dragged by an eagle? Not bad at all.

The horse archers were very nice.

The Skaven in the IoB box... managed to be both bland and bad. Way too obvious that a bunch of pre-designed pieces were cobbled together to make miniatures.

The Auld Grump, at least the elves have escaped the Island of the Huge Hands....

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
funny, because a year ago everyone was whining that GW was updating the armies too slowly.

Can't please everyone all the time, I guess.

Let's try an analogy.

You go to a Burger King. They get your food to you, and it's pretty good, but it takes 4 minutes to get made.

As you're leaving, the manager asks how it was, and you say "I wish you could get me my food in 30 seconds".

The next time you go to that Burger King, your burger is completely raw, cold pink meat. When you complain, the manager says "well, you wanted it faster!"

Does this analogy help you understand that there are sometimes more than 2, equally insipid, choices? That sometimes as a major franchiser, you have an understanding of what your capabilities are, and that it's actually worse to try and fulfil customer demands if you know cannot reasonably do so?

I mean, I don't know if they're bland or not. I'm just trying to point out how clownshoes the false choice you presented was.

Problem with that analogy is that the codexes in 6th seem to be a lot better balanced than they were before. So they're more regular *and* they're more fun. I see nothing wrong with that.

I stated that I don't know if it's bland or not - indeed, I don't even own the 6th ed rulebook so I can't say anything about the ruleset.

I was solely referring to the counterargument that there are only 2 lousy options with no other solution.

Well before they were slow and crappy, now they're quick and good. People are still whinging.

I can see why people think that the new release schedule is bland. Like others have said, it seems that GW has a ticklist for each army that must be filled whether the army suits it or not.

Flyers - check!
Big kit - check!
Cut down old kits into smaller boxes - check!
Update one old metal kit to plastic - check!

The only exceptions to this I have seen are necrons and dark eldar as they needed a complete overhaul to make them viable armies.

I think the Tau needed less updating model wise than other ranges so they fit the formula quite well.

Eldar could do with the aspects, phoenix lords etc being updated to plastic in order to make the army easier and cheaper to collect from the start (although with GW cutting the avenger kit in half for the same price who can be sure it would be?) but with the finecast available for only slightly more money with an extra model it isn't drastic imo.

Plus I have 4000pts of Eldar so have pretty much all the aspects I will ever need (I only don't have swooping hawks, shining spears and striking scorpions which I will look at getting if the rules are up to scratch).