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.

Gwar! wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:Now, before you say that they could "FAQ & Erratta" it, remember that not everyone has internet access. You can't (well, SHOULDN'T) change the way an entire army works with Erratta & FAQ's. Not everyone has internet access.
Eric

That is a flawed argument. If your playing a Game like 40k that requires such a substantial investment, you have internet access. Don't even try and argue otherwise. It would be very, VERY simple to errata the BA and DA codex's (and all the others) in one fell swoop, but they don't because they are too lazy.

And even if you dont, so what? you just play the game without the errata. If your going to an official tournament (i.e. a GW run one not anything else) you'll need the internet also.

So, sorry, the argument of "not everyone has internet access" doesn't cut it mate.

Whatever.
The bottom line is that you're trying to compare an old edition codex and a new one to find your complaint.
Complain about something more sensible.

Yes we are. Jervis was down on record saying he wanted to simplify codex's and make sure everyone had the same equipment etc etc.

While I appreciate he doesn't have the final say in much it's still a kick in the teeth to Dark Angel and Blood Angel Players (as a Space Wolf Player I sympathise with them, even though I get all the spangly new toys )

Of *course* the different chapters will have different toys. My company has a bunch of Ford E250 vans; and my friend works at a company with a bunch of Ford E250 vans. Guess what... they are *not* identical. The two companies have different priorities and needs, and thus have two different versions of the same item.

If you need a 'reason' beyond 'dems da rulz'... then how about the 'new' storm shields do something that interfere with the technology that lets the DA termies DS on the first turn.

I see lots of complaints that DA termies dont' get 3++ storm shields, but very few complaints that they get to DS on the first turn.

Gwar! wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:Now, before you say that they could "FAQ & Erratta" it, remember that not everyone has internet access. You can't (well, SHOULDN'T) change the way an entire army works with Erratta & FAQ's. Not everyone has internet access.
Eric

That is a flawed argument. If your playing a Game like 40k that requires such a substantial investment, you have internet access. Don't even try and argue otherwise. It would be very, VERY simple to errata the BA and DA codex's (and all the others) in one fell swoop, but they don't because they are too lazy.

And even if you dont, so what? you just play the game without the errata. If your going to an official tournament (i.e. a GW run one not anything else) you'll need the internet also.

So, sorry, the argument of "not everyone has internet access" doesn't cut it mate.

You are quite wrong. I get several calls a day from those without internet access. Don't just assume everyone does. It'd be nice, but it's not true.

So what? You deliberately curtail the enjoyment of 90% of the playerbase to cater for the 10% without Internet?

I imagine that posting updates in white dwarf could be a good complement to the internetbased FAQ-documents. That should leave most of the playerbase covered.

Mellon wrote:I imagine that posting updates in white dwarf could be a good complement to the internetbased FAQ-documents. That should leave most of the playerbase covered.

The problem there is they tried that, and it didnt work because they didnt back it up with internet based acess to the updates as well. Nowadays they could do both quite easily.

As I have said before, it wont affect people without internet in the slightest because they will either:

a) Play people who also don't have internet, and use the game without the errata (similar to how people with Old Magic Cards and no Internet use the cards without it.) They still have fun, no biggie.
b) Play people who DO have internet, and can get a copy off their mates/local store, thereby avoiding the need for internet at all. It also improved "official" tournament play by making each codex more competitive and, to be honest, worthwhile. You still have to bring your rulebooks and FAQ shenanigans to tournaments anyway. One Extra page wont hurt.

Honestly. I cannot see it being that complicated, even if you have to adjust the points of options and weapons to bring it in line with the current costs. Hell I am sure I could do it in a few weeks. I have plenty of free time and access to every codex.

OffTopic: I'm one such magic player. When I try to play with the kids at my flgs I get beaten by cardtypes I didn't even know existed. But I play regularly with my old crew, using decks that even were tournament legal lat 90-ies. I havn't seen a cardlist or errata in ages, I have fun anyhow.

On topic again. Please do make a collected "rules"document were you sort out the most common conflicting rules and makes weapon work the same way nevermind who is holding it. Maybe even out some pointscosts. If you want inspiration, do a google for "fluid 40k" It's a set of reasonable houserules that I like to use.

Mellon wrote:I imagine that posting updates in white dwarf could be a good complement to the internetbased FAQ-documents. That should leave most of the playerbase covered.

Yeah, but who wants to pay THAT ridiculous price to get a dang FAQ?

Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:

Mellon wrote:I imagine that posting updates in white dwarf could be a good complement to the internetbased FAQ-documents. That should leave most of the playerbase covered.

Yeah, but who wants to pay THAT ridiculous price to get a dang FAQ?

Eric

Hence the ones put up on the internet?

And its not like they will print ONLY the FAQ/errata and charge you full price (Though I would not be surprised if they did). They'd put it in as well as the rest of the useless rubbish in it.

Gwar! wrote:So what? You deliberately curtail the enjoyment of 90% of the playerbase to cater for the 10% without Internet?

No, we treat our customers the same. We've done the whole updating an army book by FAQ/Errata/White Dwarf, it didn't work so well(Dark Eldar/Dark Elves). It promotes the idea that if one were to complain enough, the rules would get changed(as happened with Dark Elves).

Besides, it would be pretty bad to sell a codex that wasn't even correct. A couple of erratas for legit errors is Ok, but to update the Dark Angels(for example) online would make the Codex almost useless.

But that's just my 2 cents. I have no real insider info on this, just my speculation.

::Waiting for the lock::

Gwar! wrote:So what? You deliberately curtail the enjoyment of 90% of the playerbase to cater for the 10% without Internet?

It's easy to make up statistics, and it makes you seem smarter!

JohnOSpencer wrote:

Gwar! wrote:So what? You deliberately curtail the enjoyment of 90% of the playerbase to cater for the 10% without Internet?

No, we treat our customers the same. We've done the whole updating an army book by FAQ/Errata/White Dwarf, it didn't work so well(Dark Eldar/Dark Elves). It promotes the idea that if one were to complain enough, the rules would get changed(as happened with Dark Elves).

Besides, it would be pretty bad to sell a codex that wasn't even correct. A couple of erratas for legit errors is Ok, but to update the Dark Angels(for example) online would make the Codex almost useless.

But that's just my 2 cents. I have no real insider info on this, just my speculation.

And having a codex that is 90% useless compared to C:SM is soooo much better. (i say 90% because Deathwing is still the only way to field termies as troops)

JohnOSpencer wrote:
No, we treat our customers the same. We've done the whole updating an army book by FAQ/Errata/White Dwarf, it didn't work so well(Dark Eldar/Dark Elves). It promotes the idea that if one were to complain enough, the rules would get changed(as happened with Dark Elves).

Well, you can call it listening to customer feedback if it feels better :-)

JohnOSpencer wrote:Besides, it would be pretty bad to sell a codex that wasn't even correct. A couple of erratas for legit errors is Ok, but to update the Dark Angels(for example) online would make the Codex almost useless.

Then I'd reccomend you stop selling a defunct codex. I guess you are already using digital printing so it wouldn't be horribly costly to print updated codexes once per year and let your resellers return the outdated ones. Combine this with clear version numbers/update number. It will cost you some more.

Another creative way to keep your codexes up to date is to post some rules updates at a separate section in each new edition of the new 40k-rulebook.

It will cost you some more.

HAHAHAHA..... that is funny. "some more"

yeah, that *minimal* cost of effort to reprint eveything, *and* ship it, and have the resellers track what they have, and ship it back, and all the requisite book keeping, etc. etc.

And like thats not going to piss of the stores that have to package up their codices and send them back?


The point is, the game still works when there are different versions of the Land Raider. And it even still makes sense. Not every chapter is going to have the *exact same* options on their vehicles. Hell, the same plane sold to the US airforce and the US navy may be significantly different.

It makes perfect sense that what one chapter uses as a psychic hood works differently than what another chapter uses as a psychic hood.

Stop the whining.

Agreed...especially since this post has mutated I think it should be purged with the Emperor's fire!

Wow just wow...

* facepalm *

What's with all this bitterness? Lighten up please. We are talking about our toy soldiers afterall.

G

Hymirl wrote:

Gwar! wrote:That is a flawed argument. If your playing a Game like 40k that requires such a substantial investment, you have internet access. Don't even try and argue otherwise.

You can even prove your point by asking all the people without internet access to raise their hand.


..



..




See, not one person posted to say they don't have internet access. You're competely right. Oh, wait a minute... theres something wrong with that logic....

So, sorry, the argument of "not everyone has internet access" doesn't cut it mate.

Just because you're rich enough to have internet and are sufficently an enthuisast with enough free time to download and read all the FAQs doesn't mean everyone is. Stop being so self-centred. Its a perfectly reasonable point of view for GW to want everyone playing on the same page, without people bringing in reams of printout and copies of White Dwarf for obscure and random extra rules.

It does cut it, and you're wrong.

it was a cut and dry question that just snowballed into an argument about errata.