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.

So there is now 2 ways to play them?

A 40k set in the WD and a 30k set in the FW books?

Davor wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Would be pretty stupid as half the suits of Cataphractii would be in the hands of traitors, for whom the last 10k years were not as long for many due to warp shenanigans.

Someone like the Black Legion should actually have a larger chance to still have functioning suits than the Ultramarines or Dark Angels. Would be more fluffy than their "pre-Heresy" suits being the mark that is generally seen as "post-Heresy".

I don't think Dark Angles have access to this if I read a post correctly. Only SM faction can use them, so that means no BA, DA, GK, SW or anyone else not in the SM codex.

As of right now, only Vanilla Marines have access to the BaC models since their rules have only thus far been released in Angels of Death, a Vanilla Marines supplement. I do think that they will be expanded into other Marine chapters (and hopefully even made available to CSM) when those chapters get new supplements (and the WD rules may change this as well).

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
So there is now 2 ways to play them?

A 40k set in the WD and a 30k set in the FW books?

Well the FW books deal with 30k rules right? Not that surprising 30k rules differ from 40k rules.

Fun conversation with the manager of my local GW today when I went to grab some new paints, even he's now at the point where he referred to the next box as "The worst kept secret we have ever done" in regards to the Mk3 armour being in it.

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes I would. Also that wasn't my point though.

tneva82 wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
So there is now 2 ways to play them?

A 40k set in the WD and a 30k set in the FW books?

Well the FW books deal with 30k rules right? Not that surprising 30k rules differ from 40k rules.

Yes, but AFAIK you could use the HH books in 40k.

I didn't think you needed a different set of 40k rules for the 30k models.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
So there is now 2 ways to play them?

A 40k set in the WD and a 30k set in the FW books?

Well the FW books deal with 30k rules right? Not that surprising 30k rules differ from 40k rules.

Yes, but AFAIK you could use the HH books in 40k.

I didn't think you needed a different set of 40k rules for the 30k models.

You can only use the HH books to make a Crusade Legion army. This is not the same as a Space Marines army. There is some overlap of models and unit names (just like there is between Blood Angels and Space Marines, for example) but they are different lists. You might be able to play a HH army against a 40k army, as they're the same games (mostly) mechanically, but they're balanced and designed differently, and not intended to be used against each other.

 Bi'ios wrote:

You might be able to play a HH army against a 40k army, as they're the same games (mostly) mechanically, but they're balanced and designed differently, and not intended to be used against each other.

To be fair, that can be said for most of the 40K army's against each other as well

Ah I see. So the Chappy and Tac squad are no different from the C:SM, but the HQ, Cataph Termies, and Dread got their own updated rules. So since the Cont Dread has fleet, does that mean it can't use a drop pod?

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes it is a sale but it would give the wrong feedback to the higher ups, common sense would dictate that people would buy them because the models are cheaper than buying them individual, GW seems to think we buy them just because they are cool and we are willing to pay the price they dictate. Selling so many BaC may give the wrong impression that lot of boardgame people are buying BaC. We assume that it is mostly modelers that buy extra copies of the game, and it isn't the first time GW made some uhm illogical decisions based on sales information.

But hey a sale is a sale right?

Someone mentionned MK III armour and no one picks up on that, or gives me more info? Come on, people!

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Ah I see. So the Chappy and Tac squad are no different from the C:SM, but the HQ, Cataph Termies, and Dread got their own updated rules. So since the Cont Dread has fleet, does that mean it can't use a drop pod?

The first part is correct.

RE the Contemptor, I know can use a Dreadnought drop pod, although not as a dedicated transport (I think, I don't have the Imperial Armour book with its rules). If you're using that book though, you may as well use its rules for the contemptor, too, though. It's got more options. I dont know about a regular pod. I only have the HH rules for them.

If anyone else knows better than I do, I readily acknowledge that I don't know its 40k rules

Contemptor Dreadnoughts can ride in a FA Drop Pod since they are a Dreadnought of any type.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes it is a sale but it would give the wrong feedback to the higher ups, common sense would dictate that people would buy them because the models are cheaper than buying them individual, GW seems to think we buy them just because they are cool and we are willing to pay the price they dictate. Selling so many BaC may give the wrong impression that lot of boardgame people are buying BaC. We assume that it is mostly modelers that buy extra copies of the game, and it isn't the first time GW made some uhm illogical decisions based on sales information.

But hey a sale is a sale right?

So true. Thanks for explaining better than me.

"Hey look. Betrayal at Calth is our best selling stock last year. Let's scrap or change 40K into BaC rules because that is what everyone is buying and seems to want".

Yup, a sale is a sale and it tells what people want.

If they did scrap/change 40k into BaC I'd buy back into 40k. It's a really good rules engine.

But Cat Termies still can't deep strike, correct?

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
But Cat Termies still can't deep strike, correct?

They can deepstrike with the 40k rules. The difference is a 4++ save, and Slow and Purposeful, rather than relentless.

Weren't the 40k rules also in the BaC set?

Is there anything different between them and the WD article?

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
Someone mentionned MK III armour and no one picks up on that, or gives me more info? Come on, people!

Honestly, I'd rather it was Mk II. Still, we'll see what else is in the box.

 Moopy wrote:
Weren't the 40k rules also in the BaC set?

Is there anything different between them and the WD article?

There were no rules for anything in the set.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes it is a sale but it would give the wrong feedback to the higher ups, common sense would dictate that people would buy them because the models are cheaper than buying them individual, GW seems to think we buy them just because they are cool and we are willing to pay the price they dictate. Selling so many BaC may give the wrong impression that lot of boardgame people are buying BaC. We assume that it is mostly modelers that buy extra copies of the game, and it isn't the first time GW made some uhm illogical decisions based on sales information.

But hey a sale is a sale right?

I think GW are more than aware that the majority of people are buying the box set for the model content, not its board game content. This whole "False Sale" bs is a complete red herring. They aren't some mindless drone servitor helming an out of control business based on sales data and sales data alone. I'm sure they are more than capable of seeing that trend, especially when they are the ones who are making the miniatures, and have seen that people are willing to pay nearly £100 to get their hands on those MKIV marines, and that they could probably sell them at a considerable mark up.

Oh and wait...here comes Davor to make build a wild strawman argument based on GW seemingly replacing 40k with a BaC style game based off the sales figures. Do pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
Someone mentionned MK III armour and no one picks up on that, or gives me more info? Come on, people!

Edit: Found the quote. GW managers are now a source? Since when do they get informed about such releases months in advance? I cant believe this even if I wanted to.

Sad Panda told us that 30k Thousand Sons and Ahriman will come in plastic. The former was posted here in the HH 2nd board game thread, so it is very likely plastic 1k Sons will be in that set as one faction. Release of the board game will be in fall 2016.

 General Kroll wrote:

Spoiler:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes it is a sale but it would give the wrong feedback to the higher ups, common sense would dictate that people would buy them because the models are cheaper than buying them individual, GW seems to think we buy them just because they are cool and we are willing to pay the price they dictate. Selling so many BaC may give the wrong impression that lot of boardgame people are buying BaC. We assume that it is mostly modelers that buy extra copies of the game, and it isn't the first time GW made some uhm illogical decisions based on sales information.

But hey a sale is a sale right?

I think GW are more than aware that the majority of people are buying the box set for the model content, not its board game content. This whole "False Sale" bs is a complete red herring. They aren't some mindless drone servitor helming an out of control business based on sales data and sales data alone. I'm sure they are more than capable of seeing that trend, especially when they are the ones who are making the miniatures, and have seen that people are willing to pay nearly £100 to get their hands on those MKIV marines, and that they could probably sell them at a considerable mark up.

Oh and wait...here comes Davor to make build a wild strawman argument based on GW seemingly replacing 40k with a BaC style game based off the sales figures. Do pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants.

If you're actually unable to grasp the point he was making in light of the above, there's no hope.

You're making the mistake of thinking like a hobbyist, not like someone who works for the company who isn't necessarily a gamer and whose job revolves around simply analyzing the data.

For what it's worth I think GW probably does realise this is the case, they're more open than they have been for some time, it's obviously a strategy to bundle high price stuff at a discount to solve the can't cut prices/need to be cheaper dichotomy so it isn't impossible this was the intent all along.

But we are discussing a company that has been so insular that they felt that chaplains needed reining in and let librarians carry on as the most potent HQ based, if anecdotes can be believed, solely on the use of them by one member of the studio.

To disagree with Davor is one thing, but to dismiss the history and precedent behind his thinking in the tone you are only reflects badly on you and demonstrates an apparent ignorance of the last few years of GW conduct.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
*clicks on General Kroll's profile*

Have been backing in the hobby for just over a year now. Loving 40k and GW releases right now.

Suddenly all becomes clear, if you've only been back for a year or so prior to your registration, no wonder, you've missed most of the really bat gak crazy nonsense.

Welcome back though!

And good to hear about the updated rules.

Thanks!

 Moopy wrote:
Weren't the 40k rules also in the BaC set?

Is there anything different between them and the WD article?

no. They were in Angels of Death and those were straight reprinted in White Dwarf.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Spoiler:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes it is a sale but it would give the wrong feedback to the higher ups, common sense would dictate that people would buy them because the models are cheaper than buying them individual, GW seems to think we buy them just because they are cool and we are willing to pay the price they dictate. Selling so many BaC may give the wrong impression that lot of boardgame people are buying BaC. We assume that it is mostly modelers that buy extra copies of the game, and it isn't the first time GW made some uhm illogical decisions based on sales information.

But hey a sale is a sale right?

I think GW are more than aware that the majority of people are buying the box set for the model content, not its board game content. This whole "False Sale" bs is a complete red herring. They aren't some mindless drone servitor helming an out of control business based on sales data and sales data alone. I'm sure they are more than capable of seeing that trend, especially when they are the ones who are making the miniatures, and have seen that people are willing to pay nearly £100 to get their hands on those MKIV marines, and that they could probably sell them at a considerable mark up.

Oh and wait...here comes Davor to make build a wild strawman argument based on GW seemingly replacing 40k with a BaC style game based off the sales figures. Do pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants.

If you're actually unable to grasp the point he was making in light of the above, there's no hope.

You're making the mistake of thinking like a hobbyist, not like someone who works for the company who isn't necessarily a gamer and whose job revolves around simply analyzing the data.

For what it's worth I think GW probably does realise this is the case, they're more open than they have been for some time, it's obviously a strategy to bundle high price stuff at a discount to solve the can't cut prices/need to be cheaper dichotomy so it isn't impossible this was the intent all along.

But we are discussing a company that has been so insular that they felt that chaplains needed reining in and let librarians carry on as the most potent HQ based, if anecdotes can be believed, solely on the use of them by one member of the studio.

To disagree with Davor is one thing, but to dismiss the history and precedent behind his thinking in the tone you are only reflects badly on you and demonstrates an apparent ignorance of the last few years of GW conduct.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
*clicks on General Kroll's profile*

Have been backing in the hobby for just over a year now. Loving 40k and GW releases right now.

Suddenly all becomes clear, if you've only been back for a year or so prior to your registration, no wonder, you've missed most of the really bat gak crazy nonsense.

What's the point that you're actually trying to make here Azrael? Other than perhaps having some kind of little dig at me? Because from what I can see, you seem to be agreeing with my overall point that GW can probably grasp that customers aren't buying Calth for the board game element of the boxed set, and thus won't be extrapolating any kind of data from the sales in order to drive their rules direction for the next edition for 40k

So what on earth are you talking about? Other than perhaps an attempt to somehow insinuate that somehow the fact that I've only recently got back into the hobby should mean that my opinion has less validity than anyone elses around here, or that my understanding of the situation is in any way lesser in some way. It's a pretty low thing to do in my book, to shut down debate, by calling into question someone's validity rather than simply discussing the argument at hand. Perhaps it shows a little something about your honour maybe I've read you wrong but that's how I see you so far from our interactions and your interactions with others.

I'm well aware of GWs past exploits into madness and their statements on market research etc. So what? Things have clearly changed since then. I'm not sure bringing up the worst excesses of the Kirby era are relevant to the current trend of discounted Start collecting box sets, FAQs, community interaction, and rumours of (you guessed it) market research.

So anyway, we are getting far and away from the original problem. Its a bit of a hypothetical dead end to suggest that because these individual boxes are priced higher, that the BaC will start selling in greater numbers all of a sudden, and this will somehow equate to "false sales" this is nonsense of the highest order. The idea that someone walking into a GW will spend £100 on BaC because the MKIV marines are £5 more than the normal tactical marines is crazy for a start. That's a bit of a non starter. Someone might buy Calth if they are starting an army, maybe. But they would have done that anyway, and GW already knew this and were frankly hoping for it from the start, hence all the FW bundles with the legion specific stuff when Calth was released. But I guess all those were false sales as well, because they were all for people playing the board game, and the FW HH line is going to be changed to the Betrayal at Calth rules....

General Kroll wrote:[
I think GW are more than aware that the majority of people are buying the box set for the model content, not its board game content. This whole "False Sale" bs is a complete red herring. They aren't some mindless drone servitor helming an out of control business based on sales data and sales data alone. I'm sure they are more than capable of seeing that trend, especially when they are the ones who are making the miniatures, and have seen that people are willing to pay nearly £100 to get their hands on those MKIV marines, and that they could probably sell them at a considerable mark up.

Oh and wait...here comes Davor to make build a wild strawman argument based on GW seemingly replacing 40k with a BaC style game based off the sales figures. Do pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

I never said anything about BaC being turned into 40K. I was going by what a poster said if a sale is a sale, then that would mean those sales show people want or even desire BaC rules. If that is the case then GW could say lets turn 40K into BaC because of how the sales are going. Not a nice thought is it. Never said it was going to happen. Not sure why you think that is what I was spewing.

Again, nobody has argued against me when I said, why go through all the extra resources and time money and energy to make rules/ counters and a game for those minis if GW knew people wouldn't be using them and just buying for the minis. Wouldn't have GW just saved more money buy not bothering with the rules and just release the minis as is in the BaC box?

Again, heaven forbid if people have differing opinions. Now you have to try and embarrass them? Oh well I guess Dakka has officially become Whineseer.

Davor wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Davor wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The ridiculous pricing aside, i think this will increase the sales of Battle for Calth as the ebay sellers will see this as an opportunity to sell the mini's separatly. and GW will get more false sales information, see how many BAC we sold they must like it

How is that false sales information? A sale is a sale. The gnomes don't sneak the money back out of the gamesworkshop coffers every time a bits seller breaks a set of Calth minis and sells them seperately online. You know once they have our cash, they tick a little box and cable it a good old sale.

People like the BaC minis ergo they are buying the BaC box.

Huh? If BaC boxsets sell more now because of the individual prices are set now, that would mean those BaC sets wouldn't have sold as many copies now if the individual set prices were lower or not being released at all. So seeing an increase now in BaC is YES a false sales figure, it's not that people are liking the boxset for the game but just getting it for the minis because it's a cheaper option.

This is nonsense. A sale is a sale is a sale.

You would make a terrible businessman.

Yes it is a sale but it would give the wrong feedback to the higher ups, common sense would dictate that people would buy them because the models are cheaper than buying them individual, GW seems to think we buy them just because they are cool and we are willing to pay the price they dictate. Selling so many BaC may give the wrong impression that lot of boardgame people are buying BaC. We assume that it is mostly modelers that buy extra copies of the game, and it isn't the first time GW made some uhm illogical decisions based on sales information.

But hey a sale is a sale right?

So true. Thanks for explaining better than me.

"Hey look. Betrayal at Calth is our best selling stock last year. Let's scrap or change 40K into BaC rules because that is what everyone is buying and seems to want".

Yup, a sale is a sale and it tells what people want.

Looks like you said it to me. If you were intending to quote someone else, then maybe you should have used the quote function.

 General Kroll wrote:
[
What's the point that you're actually trying to make here Azrael? Other than perhaps having some kind of little dig at me? Because from what I can see, you seem to be agreeing with my overall point that GW can probably grasp that customers aren't buying Calth for the board game element of the boxed set, and thus won't be extrapolating any kind of data from the sales in order to drive their rules direction for the next edition for 40k

So what on earth are you talking about? Other than perhaps an attempt to somehow insinuate that somehow the fact that I've only recently got back into the hobby should mean that my opinion has less validity than anyone elses around here, or that my understanding of the situation is in any way lesser in some way. It's a pretty low thing to do in my book, to shut down debate, by calling into question someone's validity rather than simply discussing the argument at hand. Perhaps it shows a little something about your honour maybe I've read you wrong but that's how I see you so far from our interactions and your interactions with others.

I thought I'd pretty much stated my point explicitly?

To disagree with Davor is one thing, but to dismiss the history and precedent behind his thinking in the tone you are only reflects badly on you and demonstrates an apparent ignorance of the last few years of GW conduct.

Yup.

That you claim to be aware of what went on only harms your position. Davor made a perfectly sensible assertion that not understanding people's motivations for purchases may lead to incorrect assumptions on behalf of GW, that's not unreasonable, and certainly not worthy of mocking when you've little evidence to back up any real change just yet, because we've had Start Collecting on one hand but we're still getting £40 Terminator boxes and £20 characters on the other.