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.
2014/01/21 18:30:03
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
LordofHats wrote: The ability of some to blidnly adhere to GW's byline baffles me. I get that sometimes the hate is too strong and maybe people wish for the end of GW too much but really? beer and pretzels game? Beer and preztle games can be played with some cups and a quarter. Beer and preztle games don't cost hundreds of dollars per person.
You can play 40K with cups and coins, too. You don't *have* to buy the models. Download the BRB. Go to town.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
2014/01/21 19:25:47
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
Barfolomew wrote: Your analogy is bad. I will us American Football as an example, as I am not as familiar with FIFA to use them as an example.
FIFA does the same thing, changing rules to make the game more "fair" or incorporating new technology to keep the fans from having a bad taste in their mouth. FIFA doesn't benefit, but the people who "pay the bills" benefit because rule changes will keep the public involved and thus sell more tickets and merchandise.
It just so happens that GW is both the rules writer and the company who makes the profit. The two universal complaints about GW is that their prices are too high and their rules suck. The rules can be changed without drastically affecting profits, and that point of contention goes away. The issue with GW is that they change the rules to sell new models, while not keeping the game fair or interesting
Yes, I do understand American Football. Giants fan. This year, not such a good thing : ). Though disputing my analogy by making up your own different one and shooting that down is a bit odd : ). Though I think you go on to say the same thing.
The people responsible for devising and updating the rules of the game have a monopoly on the sale of the items associated with the game. And the majority of their income comes not from the game being played or watched or the rulebooks being bought but from the sale of those items. So their shareholders want them to sell more items. They don't care whether this makes the game better or worse. They want to sell more items. Or the same items at a higher price. Or, ideally, more items at a higher price. How to get each customer to buy more items and to buy more big ticket items? Why, the rules of course ! Into which I include army lists etc. Will people buy new units if they are weaker and worse than the existing ones? No! So they have to be better, more powerful, etc.
That this eventually makes the game bad is not a problem for the shareholders because they probably don't intend to still be shareholders in 5 or even 2 years time.
Whenever money and umpiring come too closely together, it is bad news for the game in question. In that respect at least I don't think FIFA is a bad analogy.
LordofHats wrote: The ability of some to blidnly adhere to GW's byline baffles me. I get that sometimes the hate is too strong and maybe people wish for the end of GW too much but really? beer and pretzels game? Beer and preztle games can be played with some cups and a quarter. Beer and preztle games don't cost hundreds of dollars per person.
You can play 40K with cups and coins, too. You don't *have* to buy the models. Download the BRB. Go to town.
Beer and pretzels is a stretch for a game with a 440 page rulebook.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/21 19:32:12
greyknight12 wrote: GW did not break 40K, to say otherwise is like blaming Blizzard for the kids who broke Starcraft with memorized build orders and keystroke sequencing. The players broke 40K, plain and simple. And in a game this expansive, there is always going to be a level of imbalance...some people will take advantage of that. Games Workshop does have sloppy rules, but ultimately it comes down to someone finding the best possible combo (like a re-rollable 2++) and exploiting it.
There is nothing remotely as broken in Starcraft as there is in 40K. That's a horrible analogy. It is not the players' fault for using LEGAL NON-AMBIGUOUS options for their lists. Quit enabling GW; GW is like a crack addict profiting off people willing to give them as pass for any garbage they write.
greyknight12 wrote: GW did not break 40K, to say otherwise is like blaming Blizzard for the kids who broke Starcraft with memorized build orders and keystroke sequencing. The players broke 40K, plain and simple. And in a game this expansive, there is always going to be a level of imbalance...some people will take advantage of that. Games Workshop does have sloppy rules, but ultimately it comes down to someone finding the best possible combo (like a re-rollable 2++) and exploiting it.
There is nothing remotely as broken in Starcraft as there is in 40K. That's a horrible analogy. It is not the players' fault for using LEGAL NON-AMBIGUOUS options for their lists. Quit enabling GW; GW is like a crack addict profiting off people willing to give them as pass for any garbage they write.
Not since Blizzard patched out the worst of the exploits, true.
Is it not the player's "fault"? They built the list, knowing what it could do. If that makes their opponents at the FLGS butthurt, then either than can continue to play other people who are taking the 2++ rerollables (or whatever other cheese people come up with in the current edition), or they can say "you know what? This is fethin' broken! Let's not play with this" and decide not to do that.
This is like looking at all the various books in D&D 3.5 and building a character that could kill any living opponent on an attack roll of 15+... rolling that attack 6 times in a round. Only needed 1 15 or better, which will happen more often than not, really, in a given session of D&D. Yes, you can do this, and yes, it's kind of awesome to take the worst class in the game and min-max it into an utterly-lethal melee combatant... but it's very, very damaging to cohesive group play, or story cohesion. It forces the DM to completely rewrite his game to provide a challenge to the entire party when your one death-dealer super-built is slaughtering its way through (literally) hundreds of foes in a round.
Part of that is, too, WotC (or GW's) fault for not playtesting their rules sufficiently... but the onus is also on the player to recognize something that is broken as hell and just not use it.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
2014/01/21 20:22:43
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
No, it's not the player's fault in an adversarial game like 40K. My objective is to build a superior force and command it to victory.
Self-nerfing is not something you can expect from wargamers as a general rule.
I don't want to have to do GW's editing job for them. I want the best from my codex to be able to hang with the best from my buddy's codex. Is that too much to ask? That way, no one has to self-nerf. Again, how do the broken combos make it to print? That is NOT the players' fault!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/21 20:23:21
2014/01/21 20:26:09
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
LordofHats wrote: The ability of some to blidnly adhere to GW's byline baffles me.
Why is that more baffling than those who blindly adhere to the GW-hatedom?
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life.
greyknight12 wrote: GW did not break 40K, to say otherwise is like blaming Blizzard for the kids who broke Starcraft with memorized build orders and keystroke sequencing. The players broke 40K, plain and simple. And in a game this expansive, there is always going to be a level of imbalance...some people will take advantage of that. Games Workshop does have sloppy rules, but ultimately it comes down to someone finding the best possible combo (like a re-rollable 2++) and exploiting it.
Maybe, just maybe, some of us actually think its the company's responsibility to fix any broken aspect of the game when its been raised. Maybe take part in the community and listen to feedback. Maybe play test thoroughly before releasing a half finished product. Maybe even consider balance internally and externally.
But you're right, we should just be happy eating beer and drinking pretzels and close our eyes to all the problems and continue to shell out money for an inferior product.
Never the company's fault, always the players.
If your eating beer and drinking pretzels, The game is least of your problems.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
2014/01/21 20:39:06
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
LordofHats wrote: The ability of some to blidnly adhere to GW's byline baffles me.
Why is that more baffling than those who blindly adhere to the GW-hatedom?
Because you are finally at the point where it has been proven that people are quitting the game in greater droves than the people joining the game.
Because GW as a company is getting smaller. It's losing share. It's losing in the market with an old model that the new generation of smaller games with tighter rules that don't require a 4x8 table or initial $750 outlay is eating it alive in.
Because GW has A Big Problem.
The last 5 years has basically been the GW white knight fanboy "winning" the argument; GW continues to churn out shoddy rules to create cartoonish cinematic 'battles' that allow grown men to buy toys and throw dice at each other. The result is that is now the only playerbase left, as the "non-casuals" have simply gone on to something else. Result: Death spiral.
So that's why it's a problem. The fanboys can crow superiority over the haters and give GW a pass while they end up with fewer and fewer people to play games with.
2014/01/21 21:22:52
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
LordofHats wrote: The ability of some to blidnly adhere to GW's byline baffles me.
Why is that more baffling than those who blindly adhere to the GW-hatedom?
Because you are finally at the point where it has been proven that people are quitting the game in greater droves than the people joining the game.
Because GW as a company is getting smaller. It's losing share. It's losing in the market with an old model that the new generation of smaller games with tighter rules that don't require a 4x8 table or initial $750 outlay is eating it alive in.
Because GW has A Big Problem.
The last 5 years has basically been the GW white knight fanboy "winning" the argument; GW continues to churn out shoddy rules to create cartoonish cinematic 'battles' that allow grown men to buy toys and throw dice at each other. The result is that is now the only playerbase left, as the "non-casuals" have simply gone on to something else. Result: Death spiral.
So that's why it's a problem. The fanboys can crow superiority over the haters and give GW a pass while they end up with fewer and fewer people to play games with.
So, according to you, anybody who simply doesn't hate GW and enjoys their products is an intellectually inferior "white knight" and somehow makes the wargaming community a worse place to be?
I enjoy 40K because I prefer the bigger battles, with the 4x8 table and the massive armies. I enjoy collecting, painting and modelling a huge force of warriors, ranging from simple troops to colossal monsters. I enjoy the vast background and epic storyline of a space opera plunged into the depths of madness. I don't play 40K for the rules. I play the rules for 40K. My liking GW's creation doesn't make me some kind of drooling, plebian idiot, nor a crowing, smug, deluded fanboy. I can see the appeal of smaller games like Warmahordes and Infinity. I actually quite like some of the Warmahordes models (particularly the Cryx) and I certainly don't believe I need to insult people who like Warmahordes. I just prefer 40K.
Judging by this post and your highly inflammatory signature, however, you feel the need to assert that your choice of toy soldier game is "better" than everybody elses, and that the opposing product, and people who like that product, are detestable peasants who need to be educated. Your argument is highly patronizing and reeks of snobbery.
The quality of a game is a highly subjective thing, and declaring that your choice of game is "simply a better game" than mine is both fallacious and insulting. Preferring a particular games system to another is acceptable. Outright hating the other game system, its creator and its fanbase, and feeling the need to assert your own game's superiority is actually quite laughable.
Please come down off your high horse (or should that be jack?) and learn to be a little more tolerant.
Squigsquasher, resident ban magnet, White Knight, and general fethwit.
buddha wrote: I've decided that these GW is dead/dying threads that pop up every-week must be followers and cultists of nurgle perpetuating the need for decay. I therefore declare that that such threads are heresy and subject to exterminatus. So says the Inquisition!
2014/01/21 21:49:08
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
I find this discussion fascinating,
I play because I like seeing what crazy, heroic, frustrating and funny things will happen when my friends roll well or role terrible and we drink a few beers and smoke a few smokes. i enjoy when they reveal the new miniatures they have been working on and then see what it does on the table.
We enjoy the universe that GW has so lovingly made. We also play 4th edition and see no reason to move forward to new rules, we simply integrate current flyers, squads,
weapons, into the game if we decide use them.
For example, we just got the rules for the Thunderfire cannon online and integrated into play.
The rules can be as complicated as you want them to be.
Now a small Tangent,
GW is making bad business decisions in my opinion, but its like when you see your brother doing stupid things in his life, you wish he would stop, but also wish him the best.
I believe the game is meant to be played with your friends, indeed, if I played my Army in a tournament, I would be thrown out of the building because I use Old Crow, Hasslefree, Kabuki, Copplestone and RAFM miniatures with GW ones.
GW should embrace the Miniature Wargame community and seems to be alienating more and more of us.
My local Harley Davidson dealership has outdoor events all the time, they dont throw people off the lot because they ride a Triumph or Victory or Honda, why? Because these are possible future customers. Part of a COMMUNITY.
Do I think the rules are broken? No. Do I think GW is? Yes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/21 21:50:36
"Some people call me the space cowboy"
2014/01/21 22:22:07
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
Squigsquasher wrote: So, according to you, anybody who simply doesn't hate GW and enjoys their products is an intellectually inferior "white knight" and somehow makes the wargaming community a worse place to be?
Nope. It's because GW is collapsing under its own business model, which is basically built to abuse people just like you, and if it doesn't turn it around (probably by doing the opposite of what it's currently doing) then it will go from being the only name in tabletop wargaming to 'owned by someone else' in a span of roughly 10 years.
Judging by this post and your highly inflammatory signature, however, you feel the need to assert that your choice of toy soldier game is "better" than everybody elses, and that the opposing product, and people who like that product, are detestable peasants who need to be educated. Your argument is highly patronizing and reeks of snobbery.
Do you know what really makes my argument patronizing? That it is actually correct, that GW is beginning to enter that death spiral, and that the company as it stands today will either look materially different, and more like its competitors, or it will be owned by someone else who does largely the same, or it will not exist.
This isn't really "my opinion" at this stage, either. It's my opinion that they're going to continue this slide and ultimately get bought out by someone else, but the issue at stake is the collective "failure" of game players to bother buying GW models in spite of a frenetic release cycle, edition change, and a pandering to the 'cinematic, pewpew' crowd by hurling Forgeworld and Superheavies into the standard game format.
It's my opinion that X-wing, Warmachine, and Malifaux are better game systems that have evolved tabletop gaming in new and interesting ways. It's objective fact that GW is losing customers and sales. Do I want GW to fail? For so long as they persist in doing the wrong things, by their customer base and by failing to adapt their model, I absolutely expect them to fail. You can't do the wrong things, serially, and not fail, it's just not how markets work.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/21 22:44:15
2014/01/21 22:58:53
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
The centre of a massive brood chamber, heaving and pulsating.
sourclams wrote:
Squigsquasher wrote:So, according to you, anybody who simply doesn't hate GW and enjoys their products is an intellectually inferior "white knight" and somehow makes the wargaming community a worse place to be?
Nope. It's because GW is collapsing under its own business model, which is basically built to abuse people just like you, and if it doesn't turn it around (probably by doing the opposite of what it's currently doing) then it will go from being the only name in tabletop wargaming to 'owned by someone else' in a span of roughly 10 years.
10 years is a long time businesswise. GW changed a lot in 10myears and I wouldn't be surprised if they changed a lot more in the next 10 years, for better or for worse.
sourclams wrote:
Squigsquasher wrote:Judging by this post and your highly inflammatory signature, however, you feel the need to assert that your choice of toy soldier game is "better" than everybody elses, and that the opposing product, and people who like that product, are detestable peasants who need to be educated. Your argument is highly patronizing and reeks of snobbery.
Do you know what really makes my argument patronizing? That it is actually correct, that GW is beginning to enter that death spiral, and that the company as it stands today will either look materially different, and more like its competitors, or it will be owned by someone else who does largely the same, or it will not exist.
This is the same logic people use whenever Nintendo reports a decrease in revenue. As much as a cough and everybody is bandwagoning that Nintendo is dying and that it's time to support a different company and WAKE UP SHEEPLE etc. And yet Nintendo remains a hugely strong and successful business as it has for over a hundred years. A bad profit turnout =/= "death spiral".
Also, claiming outright that the reason I find your argument patronizing is because you're "actually correct" proves my point. That's on a par with "You're just angry because you know I'm better than you!".
sourclams wrote:This isn't really "my opinion" at this stage, either. It's my opinion that they're going to continue this slide and ultimately get bought out by someone else, but the issue at stake is the collective "failure" of game players to bother buying GW models in spite of a frenetic release cycle, edition change, and a pandering to the 'cinematic, pewpew' crowd by hurling Forgeworld and Superheavies into the standard game format.
Soooo, people who enjoy games with big, impressive looking models are somehow contributing to the game's downfall, and should not be "pandered to"? These models wouldn't exist if there wasn't a market for them. I for one much prefer painting big monsters like the Tyrannofex than little scuttly things like Termagaunts.
The sad thing is that, to an extent, I agree with you. GW does need to change its business model and pricing structure. However, you are putting your argument across so poorly that quite frankly I find it impossible to side with you.
Squigsquasher, resident ban magnet, White Knight, and general fethwit.
buddha wrote: I've decided that these GW is dead/dying threads that pop up every-week must be followers and cultists of nurgle perpetuating the need for decay. I therefore declare that that such threads are heresy and subject to exterminatus. So says the Inquisition!
2014/01/22 01:23:05
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
A bad profit turnout DOES equal a death spiral if for the past few years the only thing giving you a good profit turnout was cutting costs and increasing prices. Now it looks like we have hit the point where there is nothing left to cut and people aren't paying the higher prices, this leaves GW hemorrhaging sales and nothing to plug the hole.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/22 01:23:22
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
2014/01/22 01:35:51
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
A good amateur wiki describing an alternate 40k universe might help. Get the basics down, playtested and balanced and when GW release a new model simply post an alternative interpretation of its abilities, points, etc. But who has the time for that?
I WOULD LOVE TO DO THIS
What is the strongest weapon of mankind? The god-machines of the Adeptus Mechanicus? No! The Astartes Legions? No! The tank? The lasgun? The fist? Not at all! Courage and courage alone stands above them all!
2014/01/22 09:29:56
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
My beer and pretzels game has been Magic: The Gathering for exactly eighteen years now (I did buy my first booster of Ice Age on January 22, 1996).
I'm playing it again tonight at a friend's kitchen table, everybody is bringing cards that cost no more than two or three Euros (barring one or two lucky draws from boosters), we're playing competitive decks, decks which follow very uncompetitive themes, and decks which are designed to completely alter the game for everyone. We play duels, multi player, alternate play modes and expansions like Planeshift and Archenemy.
Do you know what's best about it? In all of 2013 we had two rules disputes. Both could be resolved within seconds by looking at the FAQs WotC provides in their searchable rules database called Oracle. We can actually spend the rest of the evening playing games, having fun and reducing the amount of beer and prezels available.
People who think that good rule don't make your beer and prezels experience better are fools. GW is indoctrinating their customers for decades now with this nonsense for decades, and it's now rooted pretty deeply now, as seen among some of the posters in this thread.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2014/01/22 10:33:39
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
Honestly, I think the fact that they are splitting up the "mini codices" are good.
Heres why.
I mainly play BA, but these days they are 25% more costly then DA or SM, so I bought DA and SM and played a bit.
The SM codex offers a great number of chapters with different stuff to use, nice good.
The DA is well Da, and while a fine codex offers little in the way of diversity.
If I want to ally with elders I can buy the elder but if thats not enough! -I can further specialize the eldar with a minidex.
I´d much prefere to be able to Choose NOT to buy the minidex- rather then having a more expensive Main Codex.
That said I like SM and thing all codices in the future should offer at least a few specialists on their own (then weather you want to expand is up to you)
I take the new multiple releases and merger with FW as a good sign, and only wish I had more $ to spend on my hobby lol
2014/01/22 11:01:31
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
seaplace wrote: I´d much prefere to be able to Choose NOT to buy the minidex- rather then having a more expensive Main Codex.
But that isn't an option. You still need to buy the "parent" codex because the "mini" codex doesn't have all of the necessary rules. So you're just paying a lot more money than if everything was in one codex.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/01/22 13:45:11
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
seaplace wrote: I´d much prefere to be able to Choose NOT to buy the minidex- rather then having a more expensive Main Codex.
But that isn't an option. You still need to buy the "parent" codex because the "mini" codex doesn't have all of the necessary rules. So you're just paying a lot more money than if everything was in one codex.
You're right, all the SM codices should be in one book! That'll reduce the number of codices by almost half, thus speeding up production!
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/01/22 13:48:38
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
In an ideal world All the Codexs would receive a general update at each new release with the Codex release bringing new stuff / ideas/ etc.
Alternatively the community would (somehow) agree on fixes to all the problem areas and publish it as a dcoument - but thats likely even more impossible than the former.
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/01/22 14:12:08
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
Melissia wrote: Pfft, the community's never agreed on anything.
Isn't that something we can all agree to?
I'm expecting an Imperial Knights supplement dedicated to GW's loyalist apologetics. Codex: White Knights "In the grim dark future, everything is fine."
"The argument is that we have to do this or we will, bit by bit,
lose everything that we hold dear, everything that keeps the business going. Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky."
-Tom Kirby
2014/01/22 14:17:42
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
seaplace wrote: I´d much prefere to be able to Choose NOT to buy the minidex- rather then having a more expensive Main Codex.
But that isn't an option. You still need to buy the "parent" codex because the "mini" codex doesn't have all of the necessary rules. So you're just paying a lot more money than if everything was in one codex.
You're right, all the SM codices should be in one book! That'll reduce the number of codices by almost half, thus speeding up production!
Not sure if you said that seriously or not, but yes that's what it should be. It's garbage that some armies have to wait basically until the end of the edition's life to even see a codex while there are 4 or more Marine codexes put out.
I say just go back to the Black Codex style. After all they aren't a game company, so they should focus on miniatures and not rules. At least with a "black Codex" style everyone was on the same page for a while.
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2014/01/22 14:54:49
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
Melissia wrote: Pfft, the community's never agreed on anything.
Isn't that something we can all agree to?
No. Plenty of people think the community agrees on things.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/01/22 17:01:50
Subject: The "Problem" with 40K today or, "Did GW Break 40K?"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/22 17:03:07
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress 
