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.

BrianDavion wrote:
can we PLEASE PLEASE stop suggesting "subscription based services" the 40k app is a pretty telling argument against it

The 40k app is evidence that GW/the 40k team doesn't have any clue how to pull it off, not that the entire concept is terrible. For AOS, I love my subscription. Azyr is great.

BrianDavion wrote:
can we PLEASE PLEASE stop suggesting "subscription based services" the 40k app is a pretty telling argument against it

Seconded. No way in hell gw would offer a decent enough service much less one that would even work propperly...

Not Online!!! wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
can we PLEASE PLEASE stop suggesting "subscription based services" the 40k app is a pretty telling argument against it

Seconded. No way in hell gw would offer a decent enough service much less one that would even work propperly...

The AoS app is glorious and I love it and it works excellently for my games and my purposes. The issue is the 40k team, not the concept of subscription rules in general.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
can we PLEASE PLEASE stop suggesting "subscription based services" the 40k app is a pretty telling argument against it

Seconded. No way in hell gw would offer a decent enough service much less one that would even work propperly...

The AoS app is glorious and I love it and it works excellently for my games and my purposes. The issue is the 40k team, not the concept of subscription rules in general.

Subscription service what is otherwise industry standard freely available is no matter how you slice it pretty gak.

But yeah, the AOS app is atleast competent.
diamond in the rough or some such..

Not Online!!! wrote:
Subscription service what is otherwise industry standard freely available is no matter how you slice it pretty gak.

I agree, though there's a whole "pay what the market will bear" thing. I am personally satisfied with paying for Azyr - I feel like my buck fifty is being fairly compensated. So yeah, free is better, but I don't mind paying for the quality.

The 40k app on the other hand............... *vomit*

You know, 5 bucks it was for it ?
How does that even fly honestly? Especially when the same bloody company has done the AOS one`?

the only thing i can think off is that GW thinks that it can milk 40k players anways with a substandard product regardles..

Yeah. I wouldn't even say Azyr is worth $5. If the 40k one was free until they fixed it / updated it / made the army builder actually work (like Azyr's does), then sure, $1.50, like Azyr.

Not sure what's up with 40k atm. I think GW just isn't as cautious with it, and they assume people will just buy things BECAUSE FOURTYKAY!!!!! (Note: The fact that GW believes this doesn't mean I'm actually knocking on 40k players. As one myself, I know we have better standards )

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeah. I wouldn't even say Azyr is worth $5. If the 40k one was free until they fixed it / updated it / made the army builder actually work (like Azyr's does), then sure, $1.50, like Azyr.

Not sure what's up with 40k atm. I think GW just isn't as cautious with it, and they assume people will just buy things BECAUSE FOURTYKAY!!!!! (Note: The fact that GW believes this doesn't mean I'm actually knocking on 40k players. As one myself, I know we have better standards )

I am unsure of that, the new bikers certainly weren't the beesknees and the Mariokart is basically just an insult to sm players.. as is the supplemental system because you are cashcow and yet still people just seem to accept that.
Granted Dakka grumbles at this but dakka grumbles regardless.
Dakka is basically gimli but overall GW still has a nimbus arround it which protects it from a lot of criticism and allows it to sell what other companies wouldn't even dare asking money for.

the_scotsman wrote:
The purpose of every rules release is to sell you the idea of the rules release, and to get you excited about the idea of buying models to go along with those rules.

I think this is a super interesting take on the subject. I often think about how much of what excites me about Warhammer is thinking about it. GW does an excellent job of selling you the promise of an engrossing, tactical, exciting game system with super awesome powerful units that work in a fluffy way, but by the time you've dropped your money and time, wrestled with their rules, and slogged your way through you first game, the chasm between the game you imagined in your head and the game that GW has given you becomes immediately apparent. Now, I think at this point a lot of players think its their fault - maybe they would have a better time if they bought a different army, or played some different units, or spent more time THINKING ONLY ABOUT GW. They then continue to engage with the system in an effort to bend the game into something that resembles the "fun" experience they imagine the game would be until they get so frustrated with the incongruities between their dream game and the game that exists and they bail.

40k seems like an concept that GW is trying to market. Playing the actual game seems akin to pinching yourself during a really awesome dream - you wake up and realize that the idea of 40k and the reality of 40k are two wildly different things.

In order to have a good codex you first need a good core rule set. Having a core rule set with a depth of game mechanics allows for a variety of game play possibilities within the universal rule set. With a rich set of core you can allow for the codexes (aka armies) to tap into the different mechanics in the game so units can play differently from one another without having to create a bunch of unique mechanics that are only within a certain codex. The codex should keep new mechanics to a small amount and instead be there to enhance different existing functions of the game to bring out that army's style and flavor. This allows for armies to play off each other's mechanics more instead of being hamstrung by a very limited set of ways to counter play.

What a codex should not do is be used to sell power. This just leads a codex arms race which causes older codexes (or ones that miss the mark a bit) to languish as things become more deadly, more durable, more speedy, more plentiful, and/or more uncounterable.

tyranidwarrior wrote:
I think this is a super interesting take on the subject. I often think about how much of what excites me about Warhammer is thinking about it. GW does an excellent job of selling you the promise of an engrossing, tactical, exciting game system with super awesome powerful units that work in a fluffy way, but by the time you've dropped your money and time, wrestled with their rules, and slogged your way through you first game, the chasm between the game you imagined in your head and the game that GW has given you becomes immediately apparent.

This can be said about many things and I don't think it is because of "false advertisement".

Two examples I would like to give are:
- League of Legends (or any other online, competitive game) and Dungeons&Dragons (or any other Pen&Paper RPG).

Chances are you experienced it before. You sit at work and think about playing a game on the weekend with your buddies. You saw the new champ released or the new skin that got you excited, or you finally found a GM for that system/setting you always wanted to try out.

Your anticipation is big about the build you want to try this time... and then the game happens. You got a feeding botlane, somebody ints on purpose and your jungler never comes to gank. The GM enforces weird houserules that you don't like or the adventure goes into a weird direction. At least one of the people you play with is smelly and that guy.

Mind you, I think both LoL and D&D are much more refined games and I do enjoy both of them, but still they come with regular disappointment in one way or the other.