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.

Stalin ate them all.

It seems to me that the biggest issue with GW's rules has always been that they play in a very specific and, often, very poor (tactically speaking) way. It's common knowledge that the design team, White Dwarf team etc. play what are basically fluffy armies and pick things for looks, not effectiveness.

The end result is that they don't know how to balance things because they're incapable of seeing how things work in tandem. You see OP units because they don't use them in the same number/combination as a competitive player, so they never realize that X + Y + Z is crazy powerful as they would never think of taking X, Y and Z in the same force. On the flip side you see things that are underpowered because they play in a very lax and laid back way, so maybe the underpowered things don't show to be completely worthless when you aren't trying to push them to do a particular thing.

The fact that in the past there has been actual articles from the designers that basically stated picking units based on how well they play is bad and you should feel bad* speaks volumes for the fact that they play in a particular way, and make the game under the assumption everybody else plays that way too. It's not necessarily incompetence as much as it comes off as arrogance and ignorance. They don't know or care how others play the game.

Look at the Librarian and Chaplain issue others have mentioned. To GW, Librarians weren't being used at all, it was mostly Chaplains and Captains. So they nerfed Chaplains and buffed Librarians to compensate for what they saw as a problem. The issue, of course, is that they play stupidly, lazily and poorly so they were picking bad units and not the good units because they're just poor players. While there's nothing wrong with playing casually, the problem is their lackadaisical attitude infests everything else, but you'll never see them restrict the game to their playstyle because they want it to be as open as possible, even though that leaves it wide open to abuse that they'll never see because they would never dream of taking multiple cheap units to spam Wave Serpents or allying 2-3 different armies to get an advantage.

I saw a similar thing during D&D 3.5: Wizards would publish books and had example characters that were absolutely terrible, and often had broken combos because they would never consider all the book as a whole, instead writing each book in a vacuum when hardly anybody playing the game outside of the company did that.

* See this thread for quotes from the June 1998 White Dwarf on the "Spirit of the Game": http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/625074.page

It seems that they just grab random crap from the studio armies, toss them on the table and roll random dice while snapping pictures.

 MWHistorian wrote:
It seems that they just grab random crap from the studio armies, toss them on the table and roll random dice while snapping pictures.

They used to. It used to be common knowledge that the Studio Army was built to show off the range, not to be good on the table, so usually the battle reports featured lackluster choices because that was all that was available (which they even acknowledged and even lamented sometimes). BUT, at least when I last really looked at White Dwarf, they were using their own armies not the studio armies.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
It seems that they just grab random crap from the studio armies, toss them on the table and roll random dice while snapping pictures.

They used to. It used to be common knowledge that the Studio Army was built to show off the range, not to be good on the table, so usually the battle reports featured lackluster choices because that was all that was available (which they even acknowledged and even lamented sometimes). BUT, at least when I last really looked at White Dwarf, they were using their own armies not the studio armies.

Sadly, that's probably how they do their playtesting as well.

 Blacksails wrote:
Do you not have jokes in Poland?

In Soviet Poland, joke tells you!

You are laughing at your own joke lol.

 Blacksails wrote:
Do you not have jokes in Poland?

About a 50 year long occupation that made my country poor and pushed it back civilisation wise around 30 years or more behind western countries? No we don't joke about that. Specialy what is going on right now . If you want to know more, we also don't joke about what nazis did in Poland and how their occupation was fun either.

In Soviet Poland, joke tells you!

You know what soviets did to my family ? Not only did my whole family on my other side lose all their homes, but they had to work in siberian camps, half the people that went there didn't come back and the last uncle returned with his family from that hell hole in 1963. There is nothing funny or joke worthy in soviets.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/forum_rules.jsp

Rule 1: Be Polite
This seems obvious, however many folks can sometimes forget that common courtesy goes a long way to lending respect to both you and your opinions. Just because you don't see the other users' faces doesn't mean they don't have feelings and won't be hurt by rude comments or offensive images. When you see something that you find silly, rude or insulting first assume that perhaps there is more to it than you initially thought. Look at it again, keeping in mind that tone and inflection is difficult to convey in a visual format. It may be that the person is attempting a joke or is exaggerating on purpose. It is best to politely request clarification before accusing someone being ignorant, a liar, or worse.

If after clarification you still disagree with the person then politely outline your points. Try to avoid name-calling or even implying insults wherever possible. These tactics generally only inflame a situation and lead to what are known as "Flame Wars." Whenever a flame war starts it usually ruins a perfectly good discussion. Others will lose interest in the thread and the site in general if this kind of interchange becomes a common occurrence.

Please remember that posting and reading online is a visual format and as such the spelling, grammar and look of your posts is the only way others understand what you are saying. Therefore, in order to be polite, all users are expected to make an effort to use proper spelling, grammar and punctuation and should refrain from using internet shorthand or other distracting methods of writing, such as writing a post completely bolded, with capital letters, in a strange color, etc.

It also should go without saying that swearing, profanity, sexual references, etc, are strictly forbidden, including all images that are posted on or uploaded to our site. Remember that we have users of all ages and that Dakka should be a welcoming place for everyone to enjoy.

Seriously.

GW doesn't care about balance. They want to sell their narrative and a feth-ton of models.

 ImAGeek wrote:

david choe wrote:

Makumba wrote:
I don't think they do anything for fluff or for balance. It is a simple cash grab. Stuff that should have been in one book gets choped up and divided in to 2-3 books. I mean people are forced to buy the fortress assault book only to be able to use fortification legaly, when the same fortifications had rules in the main rule book an edition ago.

Big time. I don't understand why we have GW apologist defending a company that over priced their products with sub par quality rules.

I used to smoke and I enjoyed cigarets and I don't blame them for my addiction.... But I do think that cigarets company are a dishonest and has an agenda to get people addicted to their products.

GW could be a better company and truly support players and give us what we want....but I don't see that. They might be 20 years ago....something happens in 2000s. I remember their GW forum with Tim Huckelberry answering questions and Fat Block White Dwarf has useful article.....now...I see GW as soulless company out to squeeze every penny and don't care about customer. It is a ready bad company that should be more customer friendly.

You do realise that saying 'they don't make imbalanced rules on purpose, it's mostly incompetance' is not being a GW apologist or defending the company right?

Agree to disagree. Seriously.... they can't proof their RAW? I used to work in a Testing Company... we have editors, test developer , etc... and we do screw up here and there... but that is because we make new items almost every 6 months. They are using the same damn game for 30years! As a person who deal in printing and creating "reading" and "communication" materials... nobody who make millions can be this incompetence...unless it is with intent. I can even do this gak ... alone if I have 30 YEARS to do this.

There are several quality issues with the 40k rules.

a)The 'technical aspects of printing literature ' eg professional editing and proof reading, are sadly lacking in GW printed product.
This means the instructions should be well written in terms of clarity. EG you can read the rules and KNOW EXACTLY what the rules actually mean.
Correct use of terms like 'only' ,' may',' must', and 'always'.Would help.

B) The 'technical aspect of game play'.Using the most suitable game mechanics and resolution methods for the game play you want to arrive at.
Using the best 'game engine , for the game you want to develop is very important to allow the best game balance and highest level of rules clarity.
(Reduces complication, without reducing complexity.)

C)'Internal' and 'external' balance in the army compositions.
All choices in a force , should be equally viable,depending on the style of play the player prefers. EG no obvious over or under costed units.

All units of the ability should cost the same P.V.
If something is counter back ground or scales synergistic effect in a non proportional way,
The unit should be restricted by rarity eg 0-1 , 0-2 etc.
Or cost the synergistic bonus of spamming units.
EG
1 x unit A=50 pts.
2 x unit A =120 pts.
3 x unit A =200 pts

All allowable forces selected from army composition lists should be equally powerful.(Not really noticed by the majority of players.)

Current 40k gives the illusion of player choice .But in reality so many force selections will be tabled, or never get a game because of accusations of being WAAC,

The experiences of new player , that is not put off by the cost in money, or the cost in time to work through poorly worded rules.
Can still be deterred by very poor game balance.

I think the dis connect is between what the GW studio are producing' an informal starting point for you to develop your own games from.'
A free PDF would be acceptable for this type of product.

And the way the GW sales department want to use this informal product to try to drive sales.
And try to infer it is a balanced rule set suitable for pick up games.

I am sure the GW studio write rules for the way they play the game.But fail to express how they play the game in the rules that GW publish.

 MWHistorian wrote:
It seems that they just grab random crap from the studio armies, toss them on the table and roll random dice while snapping pictures.

I don't think they even roll any dice, they just write up a story that sounds like it would have been a fun game and take some pictures to match. They've openly admitted in the past that if they roll dice and don't get a result they like they just ignore it.

Makumba wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Do you not have jokes in Poland?

About a 50 year long occupation that made my country poor and pushed it back civilisation wise around 30 years or more behind western countries? No we don't joke about that. Specialy what is going on right now . If you want to know more, we also don't joke about what nazis did in Poland and how their occupation was fun either.

In Soviet Poland, joke tells you!

You know what soviets did to my family ? Not only did my whole family on my other side lose all their homes, but they had to work in siberian camps, half the people that went there didn't come back and the last uncle returned with his family from that hell hole in 1963. There is nothing funny or joke worthy in soviets.

Not to mention there is no such thing like soviet Poland and such ignorant BS shouldnt be shruged off as 'joke'. There never was a soviet Poland, we were not in a fething union it was a straight occupation with labor camps, torture and stealing majority of produced resources throughout all of it. There never will be such thing like soviet Poland, anyone who doesnt believe can look up the Battle of Warsaw which took place in 1920 when servants and peasants willingly went to fight bolsheviks instead of joining the revolution, no communism in Poland because it's carved in hearts. I wonder show many countries at the time would have such luck with its culture btw.

But hey maybe it's all normal for Gorgeous Azrael, after all Adolf and Joseph might have taken a hint or two about governing other nations from British Empire, like concentration camps or slave labour camps or sth. Honorable Winston Churchill didnt seem to loose sleep over Yalta either, what were his noble words to Polish soldiers? 'If I had to choose from all nations, Id choose you' after battle for Monte Cassino, then 'no Poles or other firemen' when it came to win defilade and he didnt want to annoy his friend Stalin? Loose translation mind you people but I think I captured the sense well.

Oh and since we play the nation stereotyping game, I guess all Canadians are like Ricky from TPB. I mean I love the man but he's a bit limited.

Good lord, talk about a sense of humour failure.

If every Brit got up in arms about jokes about colonialism, every American about poor education or obesity, Canadians about being too polite etc, rather than taking it in the spirit in which it is (usually) intended, there would be threads grinding to a halt all over the shop.

My comment was meant as a harmless bit of good natured fun, I can guarantee Blacksails' was as well, if you don't find it funny, fine, move on, don't drag the thread off into a mire of patriotic outrage.

 dragoonmaster101 wrote:
pLease kill this thread with fire preferably khornate fire

Instructions unclear, tried using Tzeentch water.

WayneTheGame wrote:
It's common knowledge that the design team, White Dwarf team etc. play what are basically fluffy armies and pick things for looks, not effectiveness.

Yup. Add to it that they have the dev right there to clear up any rules questions (or were involved in writing them) and don't really approach the game with a "let's take 10 units of Cantopek Harvests" mentality and you can quickly see why the rules aren't the clearest, there are serious exploits available in some armies and the tone feels a lot more laid back.

I really think GW's playstyle is the "one of everything" sort of lists we used to see in WDs.

Ho boy, 'Soviet Poland' was a reference to the common 'Soviet Russia' joke, only I used your nation instead of Russia. Seriously, it was a joke. The two of you are looking for every reason to take offense and taking far deeper meaning than was ever intended.

Anyways, I know more people like Bubbles than Ricky up here, but close enough I suppose.

Yes you have no honour anymore and little to defend so youre mostly left with jokes. Soviet Poland is an insult not a joke btw, it's not the same as your examples.

But yes enough of it.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Good lord, talk about a sense of humour failure.

If every Brit got up in arms about jokes about colonialism, every American about poor education or obesity, Canadians about being too polite etc, rather than taking it in the spirit in which it is (usually) intended, there would be threads grinding to a halt all over the shop.

My comment was meant as a harmless bit of good natured fun, I can guarantee Blacksails' was as well, if you don't find it funny, fine, move on, don't drag the thread off into a mire of patriotic outrage.

Yes, this.

Lighten up.

Lanrak wrote:

C)'Internal' and 'external' balance in the army compositions.
All choices in a force , should be equally viable,depending on the style of play the player prefers. EG no obvious over or under costed units.

All units of the ability should cost the same P.V.
If something is counter back ground or scales synergistic effect in a non proportional way,
The unit should be restricted by rarity eg 0-1 , 0-2 etc.
Or cost the synergistic bonus of spamming units.
EG
1 x unit A=50 pts.
2 x unit A =120 pts.
3 x unit A =200 pts

I would drop the game immediately if this were the case. Armies that have a "rare" object in the fluff still organize those objects into organized, multi-object units. For example, Baneblades are comparatively rare, and Baneblade companies even moreso, and Baneblade regiments moreso still, so do we do 0-1 baneblade per player and screw the Baneblade Company and Regiment players? or 0-1 Company?

What about Angron's 100 bloodthirsters from the First War on Armageddon? What if a player wanted to make that into an unbound list? Currently allowed in the rules (though the points would be a bit ) but would not be allowed in your system. What, would the hundredth bloodthirster cost 30,000 extra points or something?

Hell, Space Marines are rarer than Baneblades - are Space Marines 0-1?

And on that note