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 here's a question: There's a lot of things that are rendered worthless from edition to edition. Old codices get out dated rules that generally don't make sense and cause head scratching and utterances of 'huh?' When you realize that something has lost all its value. For example, the Soace Wolf's 'Wolf Tail Talisman' can be bought for a Rune Priest, giving a 5+ chance to ignore psychic powers cast on him. However, he's already got a 4+ ignore AND a 5+ DTW.
Or, if I recall there is a Tyranid model who must come in from reserves but his power doesn't work while he is in Reserves.
Various weapons with godlike fluff and descriptions of how infinitely deadly they are, which are AP3.
There are others, I just can't think of any right now.

In some cases these are FAQd, (for example, the laughable way they FAQd the Vindicaire's ability to ignore Look Out Sir,) so why don't they just outright fix things? Give Boneswords AP2, Wolf Talismans give +1 to DTW, etc.
They already have Errattas and FAQs which psuedo fix things, so why not just change them outright to make them work as the rulebook updates?

What? You want them to actually make things correctly? That has literally never happened! For example, why can't we have a DOW that actually has all the races? That's a bicker for another time though. Actually making things correct to the story, and yet balanced and game-worthy takes way to much time and effort when all you want is money.

People often forget that the vast majority of infantry units in this game have armor saves of 3 or worse. A weapon that can easily bypass everything but the absolute best personal protection systems has all the right to be called "deadly" in my books.

Yeah, AP3 ignores everything up to and including power armour. That seems pretty gosh-darned deadly to me.

The Wolf Tail is a definite loss with 6th edition... There's just no point taking it any more with the change to only allowing one chance to deny a power.

Probably the only reason to take a WTT is for a cheap way to differentiate your 4 wolf lords as they can't all be equipped exactly the same. Or any 4 identical HQ types.

 jy2 wrote:
Probably the only reason to take a WTT is for a cheap way to differentiate your 4 wolf lords as they can't all be equipped exactly the same. Or any 4 identical HQ types.

FOUR Wolf Lords? Holy crap... What size point value are you PLAYING at?

Well, on the primary question, because it would require effort and not make money, although I guess it has been done because Tau did get an "update for 6e" online FAQ back when they weren't flavor of the month (I know it's weird, but I kind of wish the new codex never came out. I liked playing something that not everybody and his dog was running).

Waaaghpower wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Probably the only reason to take a WTT is for a cheap way to differentiate your 4 wolf lords as they can't all be equipped exactly the same. Or any 4 identical HQ types.

FOUR Wolf Lords? Holy crap... What size point value are you PLAYING at?

The 4 Horseman of the Apocalypse or Hero-hammer space wolves:

4 TWC Wolf Lords, all with 2+/3++ and different weapons with either a unit of 15 fenrisian wolves or 5 TWC.

It was a common 5E deathstar build and some people still run it in 6E. At 2K, you then fill in 3x5 missile long fangs and MSU troops in transports.

Because they dont care. They have really low opinions of their customers and ideally they want to sell stuff to children with rich parents.

is a kid going to realize how crap the rules are? probably not right away, it's going to take awhile to click in and by then GW has already made their money.

It is short sighted and i think is already starting to come and bite them. If they put real effort into the gameplay they would make alot more money in the long run.

yay! another "GW sucks!" thread!

FAQs and errata clear up 90% of most situations. "Fixing" codexes to current rules usually includes a full update. Considering the blistering rate of codex rollout right now, it may be better to calm down and just play.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Considering the blistering rate of codex rollout right now, it may be better to calm down and just play.

I would agree with this somewhat, if not for the number of errors in those still-smoking codexes.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
yay! another "GW sucks!" thread!

FAQs and errata clear up 90% of most situations. "Fixing" codexes to current rules usually includes a full update. Considering the blistering rate of codex rollout right now, it may be better to calm down and just play.

I don't think they suck, nor did I ever say that. I was just asking why they don't fix these certain problems.
As for the FAQs and erratas, they clear up a lot of inconsistencies and errors. I'm not talking errors, so that is pretty irrelevant. Errors would be a rule that doesn't work or are unclear with the 6th edition rulebook. (For example, if someone had a rule saying they counted as rolling an automatic '6' for their fleet movement, how would that work with the new fleet, etc?)
I'm talking about rules that still are legal with 6th edition, but become pointless or irrelevant and have no reason to be taken.

The thing is, unless those things are particularly important to the army, there's no real need to fix them.

The Wolf Tail, for example... sure it would be great if it did something. But not taking it anymore doesn't disadvantage Space Wolf armies, since they get the same benefit through DTW anyway.

Having said that, it was the FAQ changing the rules to only allow a single chance to deny a psychic power that killed the WTT, not the change to 6th edition specifically.




I'm more disappointed that Venerable Dreadnoughts didn't get a tweak, since Venerable really isn't anywhere near as useful with the way vehicle damage works now.

New editiona rendering something useless is understandable, and its usually faq'd if its important pretty quickly.

What i dont get is brand new rules have glaring holes in them, and arent noticed by gw at all or not for awhile. Ymdc threads are full of examples.
Or rather than a rule, a new or pre-existing unit in a new codex doesnt get fixed to atleast have a fun factor level of use. Vespid come to mind on this one. Was trash before, still is. I dont even know how i would just mess around with them theyre so bad lol

The only people who are worse game designers than GW are their fans.

While the occasional person complaining about something on the internet might accidentally bring about a few useful bits of advice, most players are greedy idiots who just want GW to make their faction more powerful so that they can put less effort into winning games.

The best thing GW can do, in almost every occasion, is to ignore threads like this.

 Ailaros wrote:
The only people who are worse game designers than GW are their fans.

While the occasional person complaining about something on the internet might accidentally bring about a few useful bits of advice, most players are greedy idiots who just want GW to make their faction more powerful so that they can put less effort into winning games.

The best thing GW can do, in almost every occasion, is to ignore threads like this.

exactly. this is why I think fandexes are huge wastes of time.

You know, that's actually not that bad of a solution.

If you think something is broken, then do a write-up of your fixes and bring them to your games and ask your opponent if you can play with your house rules. If he thinks they actually fix things, then you are always free to modify games of 40k with your opponent's permission.

That said, I can't imagine many people would go along with the rules that anybody came up with. At least, not more than once.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
The only people who are worse game designers than GW are their fans.

While the occasional person complaining about something on the internet might accidentally bring about a few useful bits of advice, most players are greedy idiots who just want GW to make their faction more powerful so that they can put less effort into winning games.

The best thing GW can do, in almost every occasion, is to ignore threads like this.

exactly. this is why I think fandexes are huge wastes of time.

First off: No. This isn't a thread whining about how one codex is too weak or they need to make something stronger. Inferring that completely misses the point of what I'm asking.
Second off: No. Fandexes aren't a waste of time if someone enjoys playing with them or making them. If you don't like them? Don't play with them. But calling something a waste of time because you dislike it is like calling music a waste of time because you dislike the sound or calling books a waste of time because you don't like reading.

This isn't a hate thread. It's not a complaint thread, either. I just wanted speculation on why certain things were fixed, but others weren't. If you don't have input on that subject, please don't respond to this thread.

Aside from custom terrain rules because what you have or made is a bit fuzzy on the rules anyway, i wouldnt suggest house ruling anything more than board setup. You get used to it, then goto a tourny and go crap, i cant do that here....fml

I think GW honestly trusts their players to ignore the obvious discrepancies. A 5th codex in a 6th world should have some discrepancies, or the game isn't changing much.

UnadoptedPuppy wrote:
I think GW honestly trusts their players to ignore the obvious discrepancies. A 5th codex in a 6th world should have some discrepancies, or the game isn't changing much.

i disagree. it looks lazy like you're playing some alpha game full of bugs. for the ammount theyre charging it should be a fully up to date polished finished product.

codexs should be in pdf format, they could constantly update the rules as needed and keep a record of what theyre changing. of course they will never do this because theyre money grubbing and couldnt give two feths about the game quality.

game developers release good update patches with all kinds of stuff CODED into their games and gw cant even be bothered to type up a few sentences

UnadoptedPuppy wrote:
A 5th codex in a 6th world should have some discrepancies, or the game isn't changing much.

Well of course it will.

The crazy thing is that anyone would think that is perfectly acceptable, rather than a reason for the codexes to be properly updated for the new edition...

The overarching reason is simple: money.

GW are a company and are therefore here to make money. They won't make money by updating every single Codex until it's perfect before releasing a new edition - that'd mean spending a lot of money on the manpower to do so without any new product to show for it until right at the very end. It would also mean a ridiculously diminished revenue stream because suddenly you've gotten rid of the majority of Codex sales over the next few years, since they're all updated with the new version release.

Unless of course, we're talking about updating Codexes to the new version... which warrants a new sale... THEN releasing a brand-new version a little further down the line, which would spark even more cries of outrage regarding their business practices. "I only bought this updated Codex 6 months ago and it's already outdated?!" etc etc.

The best middle-ground is what's being done at the moment - quick and dirty FAQs to catch the most egregious problems until the new Codex comes out. However, the staff aren't perfect - nobody ever is - and not everything gets caught. But again, it isn't worth the time and effort involved to go trawling the net for examples, or playtesting every single unit from every Codex to make sure nothing's been missed, for an update that again generates no revenue and in fact costs money and time.

This is why you'll see only the occasional FAQ after the first one and when they do come a few years into an edition, a few come at once. It's because someone finally decided a problem was big enough to warrant investigating and making changes, and they've been given the time to catch other outstanding issues at the same time.

GW's FAQ page says this:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440134a&categoryId=1000018§ion=&aId=3000006

Contact Us With Your Questions!

The Games Development team is constantly looking for ways in which we can improve the quality of the material that we provide, and we believe that our Amendments, Errata and FAQ PDFs are an important part of this process. If you have noticed any errors which you believe need fixing, or have encountered any rules for which you require clarifications, we are always grateful for your feedback; please email this to us at Gamefaqs@gwplc.com and we will do our best to answer your questions as quickly and clearly as possible in future updates.

So, if you think there's a problem, email it to Gamefaqs@gwplc.com.
GW's line would be "no-one told us there is a problem, so we didn't fix it"

 Ailaros wrote:
The only people who are worse game designers than GW are their fans.

While the occasional person complaining about something on the internet might accidentally bring about a few useful bits of advice, most players are greedy idiots who just want GW to make their faction more powerful so that they can put less effort into winning games.

The best thing GW can do, in almost every occasion, is to ignore threads like this.

This x1000000...

The new CSM codex isn't perfect for example, but it's nowhere near as bad as the vocal minority make it out to be. Almost every single argument I've seen/heard about it all come back to either "3.5 was the best" or "they're 10000 year-old veterans and should be waaaaaay better!", which basically is nothing more than nerd-speak for "my army should be over powered and instantly roflstomp everyone else!"

People keep preaching they want balance. What people really want though is for their army to get a chance to repeat the same old mistakes of past editions and get their turn to ruthlessly curbstomp everything.

Experiment 626 wrote:


People keep preaching they want balance. What people really want though is for their army to get a chance to repeat the same old mistakes of past editions and get their turn to ruthlessly curbstomp everything.

Pretty much, this ^^^…

I played Dark Angels in 5e and didn't whine about assault marines being overcosted or elite scouts. I played and I won sometimes, too. When the new book came out, I still.play DA. And I win sometimes.

It's a game, people, not life support.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:


People keep preaching they want balance. What people really want though is for their army to get a chance to repeat the same old mistakes of past editions and get their turn to ruthlessly curbstomp everything.

Pretty much, this ^^^…

I played Dark Angels in 5e and didn't whine about assault marines being overcosted or elite scouts. I played and I won sometimes, too. When the new book came out, I still.play DA. And I win sometimes.

It's a game, people, not life support.

Even though the thing is, you can still play DA as it is, as either green or the wings, Chaos still is comprised of four gods and legions stuffed in one book.

Me for example, I want to be able to equip my things with 3.5's sonic gear again. Sonic preds, sonic terminators, the works.

I could give a damn about anything else besides making units balanced in cost. (Thousand sons havn't been good SINCE 3.5)

I would love to play with Asmodai's old rule Hunt for the Fallen, scoring extra VPs just for killing one guy, but its not happening.

Move on.

 insaniak wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Considering the blistering rate of codex rollout right now, it may be better to calm down and just play.

I would agree with this somewhat, if not for the number of errors in those still-smoking codexes.

errors and down right broken rules

I imagine for several reasons. One could be that the dev team doesn't have time to be going through and updating all the old staff. Another is that there is no commercial incentive that GW can find and another could be that GW don't care and over-ride the creative side of the company. I'm gonna assume it's a mix of all those things.

The best thing to do is just accept that GW has a standard of quality well below thier prices when it comes to anything that isn't an actual miniature.