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.

When the Nids Codex came out there was a rumour that it was considered so bad by the design team that no one wanted to put their name on it, hence why it was credited to the "Games Workshop design team". As an irritated Nid player, I liked this explanation, but I also heared a ton of other explanations for the credit, from GW moving from single credits to avoid "Ward-hate", "Cruddace-hate", etc, to GW firing the entire design team and handing the job over to the interns.

Anyways, I'm curious to see if someone can confirm who the Astra Militarum Codex is credited to because it'll help to confirm or disprove some of these rumours and satisfy my own curiosity.

The development team.

It's how they're getting around people hating individual authors - by spreading the blame.

Ah ok, well that makes sense. On the plus side, at least the AM Codex doesn't suck (excepting the removed special characters of course).

Who does it look like via the nuances of the writing?

It looks most like Vetok's style to me, maybe Ward but he's been shut out of 40k recently so I'm not so sure on that one.

Wards been shut out of 40k? Why?

I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

My guess is that it was an actual collaboration. The changes are so relatively slight and conservative, it almost feels like it was written by a committee.

 -Loki- wrote:
Wards been shut out of 40k? Why?

Ward said at the last Games Day that he's not currently working on rules, and his involvement is more fluff based. Likewise we can rule out Phil Kelly as he's on the fluff rotation at the moment too.

I have a feeling we're missing some names on who else may be involved here.

CS Goto clearly

I tried to find the design studio credits but only found the playtesters. At least this shows that they have some. (-:

 Trickstick wrote:
I tried to find the design studio credits but only found the playtesters. At least this shows that they have some. (-:

Yup. All internal and likely playing a different meta than the community is.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Yup. All internal and likely playing a different meta than the community is.

Well meta is not a singular thing, it is a spectrum. It is as varied as the amount of games be played.

 Trickstick wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Yup. All internal and likely playing a different meta than the community is.

Well meta is not a singular thing, it is a spectrum. It is as varied as the amount of games be played.

And while you're correct, you're forgetting that it can drastically influence how you play the game. GW has shown plenty of staff armies full of units and options your average player outside of Nottingham wouldn't touch with a barge pole. They play what "looks cool" over what is "good" and that shifts their perspective drastically away from the crunch focused on the community has.

I'm not saying either approach is wrong, but everyone needs to be one the same page to make the game the best it can be.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Yup. All internal and likely playing a different meta than the community is.

Well meta is not a singular thing, it is a spectrum. It is as varied as the amount of games be played.

And while you're correct, you're forgetting that it can drastically influence how you play the game. GW has shown plenty of staff armies full of units and options your average player outside of Nottingham wouldn't touch with a barge pole. They play what "looks cool" over what is "good" and that shifts their perspective drastically away from the crunch focused on the community has.

I'm not saying either approach is wrong, but everyone needs to be one the same page to make the game the best it can be.

True, but GW has to consider their entire customer base when play testing. I think people underestimate just how many people use units simply because they look cool, or don't even play the game at all. The majority of customer spending likely comes from the super-casual type, the people who just make lists of cool stuff they have and mess around. It is hard to say without a detailed survey but the idea that "the meta" has any relevance on more than a minority of people is unlikely. Not to say I think it is a reason for sloppy play testing, I think a solid rule set would benefit everyone. Just that they obviously test the game according to where the money is at, so the money is probably in the "looks cool" demographic.

I would have to guess it was written by the same person who wrote the Nid dex, seems like a similar effort and approach was put into it, maybe slightly better.

I don't think it was Cruddace. It might actually have been some combination of tiny amounts of input taken from the entire design team, both times, hence the author listed. I mean, when have GW ever cared about community response?

[On the flipside of the coin, they do love to be faceless, so this could very well be the next step towards making individual authors faceless as well]

True, but GW has to consider their entire customer base when play testing. I think people underestimate just how many people use units simply because they look cool, or don't even play the game at all. The majority of customer spending likely comes from the super-casual type, the people who just make lists of cool stuff they have and mess around. It is hard to say without a detailed survey but the idea that "the meta" has any relevance on more than a minority of people is unlikely. Not to say I think it is a reason for sloppy play testing, I think a solid rule set would benefit everyone. Just that they obviously test the game according to where the money is at, so the money is probably in the "looks cool" demographic.

That is not even true for UK and totaly not true for Poland and Czech republic. The only people that buy bad units ,that look cool , are those that do painting commisions or go to painting events.

 Ailaros wrote:
I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

You mean like the Dark Angels codex?

Your hatred of Tau is pretty thorough.

 Ailaros wrote:
I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

Codex: Dark Angels.

I take it they are ashamed for releasing products of such a low quality, at such a high price. Funny enough, Forgeworld´s Horus Heresy´s books have a name on it: Alan Bligh. But then again, they have been written by someone who loves the setting and cares about doing a good job.

Alan Bligh can be proud of what he is doing.

"The Development Team", however, better keep hiding. They have nothing to be proud for. If they dare to show themselves, they will get no love from the customers, just like they showed no love for the setting.

GW, probably in response to just about every codex author who has written something in the new 10s getting pages upon pages of vitriol, has probably decided to duck the blame by making it's codex writers anonymous.

So now the hate is directed at all the people who are on the team rather than any singular entity.

Genius.

They should just name the author Alan Smithee.
The reaction from the player base would be hilarious.

Trickstick wrote:True, but GW has to consider their entire customer base when play testing. I think people underestimate just how many people use units simply because they look cool, or don't even play the game at all. The majority of customer spending likely comes from the super-casual type, the people who just make lists of cool stuff they have and mess around. It is hard to say without a detailed survey but the idea that "the meta" has any relevance on more than a minority of people is unlikely. Not to say I think it is a reason for sloppy play testing, I think a solid rule set would benefit everyone. Just that they obviously test the game according to where the money is at, so the money is probably in the "looks cool" demographic.

Better game balance hurts no one.

SHUPPET wrote:I don't think it was Cruddace.

Agreed. Cruddace has a style that reads a lot like a nature documentary being narrated by someone who is half asleep. This doesn't.

SHUPPET wrote:It might actually have been some combination of tiny amounts of input taken from the entire design team, both times, hence the author listed. I mean, when have GW ever cared about community response?

[On the flipside of the coin, they do love to be faceless, so this could very well be the next step towards making individual authors faceless as well]

I'm willing to bet that we may be seeing the "rest" of the design team on this. The nameless other devs we've suspected were in the background instead of the ones we've known about.

da001 wrote:"The Development Team", however, better keep hiding. They have nothing to be proud for. If they dare to show themselves, they will get no love from the customers, just like they showed no love for the setting.

I wouldn't go that far, you're definitely making a lot of assumptions about their character in saying that. Frankly it's these kind of reactions that make me wonder why GW didn't go to this method of crediting the team sooner.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:They should just name the author Alan Smithee.
The reaction from the player base would be hilarious.

A lot of them would probably miss the joke and send him angry letters and complaints and bitch about how he's the worst dev ever.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
They should just name the author Alan Smithee.
The reaction from the player base would be hilarious.

I hear he's made some awful films. Bet he'd suck at codex writing too

 soomemafia wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

Codex: Dark Angels.

I don't understand, what you are trying to say.

 sing your life wrote:

 soomemafia wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

Codex: Dark Angels.

I don't understand, what you are trying to say.

I think the point is that Vetock (who wrote Tau) also wrote one of the much more bland books that we've gotten so far in the Dark Angels so to try and imply that all he does is overpowered rules is a bit much.

 Trickstick wrote:
I tried to find the design studio credits but only found the playtesters. At least this shows that they have some. (-:

Okay, they have play testers?

We have seen a lot of battles described in WD played by employees of GW who are inolved in different departments (but there seems to be no ''play testing'' department).

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 sing your life wrote:

 soomemafia wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

Codex: Dark Angels.

I don't understand, what you are trying to say.

I think the point is that Vetock (who wrote Tau) also wrote one of the much more bland books that we've gotten so far in the Dark Angels so to try and imply that all he does is overpowered rules is a bit much.

He also wrote Ogres and Orcs and Goblins for that fantasy note.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
I tried to find the design studio credits but only found the playtesters. At least this shows that they have some. (-:

Okay, they have play testers?

We have seen a lot of battles described in WD played by employees of GW who are inolved in different departments (but there seems to be no ''play testing'' department).

That's their "Part 2" Playtesting.

"Enter the Citadel" had them describe Playtesting as being two part: Part One is the Devs doing it, Part Two are games played by other people in the company.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 sing your life wrote:

 soomemafia wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
I doubt it's Vetok. It's not hideously overpowered with complete nonsense rules.

Codex: Dark Angels.

I don't understand, what you are trying to say.

I think the point is that Vetock (who wrote Tau) also wrote one of the much more bland books that we've gotten so far in the Dark Angels so to try and imply that all he does is overpowered rules is a bit much.

He also wrote Ogres and Orcs and Goblins for that fantasy note.

And the only thing I know about that book is that some people on the internet hate it.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

some people on the internet hate it.

Isn't that basically everyone and everything other than Emma Watson?

Tactical_Genius wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

some people on the internet hate it.

Isn't that basically everyone and everything other than Emma Watson?

I assume somewhere there is someone who hates Emma Watson. Mostly because there are people who hate kittens.