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.

Ironhide wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ironhide wrote:I notice they didn't say anything about TWC base sizes. Makes me think they don't have a forthcoming model; or if they do, they haven't decided on a base size yet.

Where have you been?

They've been confirmed as on Forge World's "Things to Do" list for quite awhile. The issue is we don't know when we'll get them. Could be a few months, could be tomorrow, or could be the summer.
I'd guess March, however.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That came out too harsh. My bad.

But yeah.
Thunderwolf Cavalry ARE on Forge World's list of things to do. Nothing more than that is really known.

No prob. So if it is on their "to do" list, why can't they give a ruling on the base size for the model then?

I was unaware there was an issue with base size?

Seems like they'd be the standard walker sized base.

I've seen that base size used and I've seen cavalry bases used. Both sides have good arguments as to why they use the bases they use. I have no problem with either so long as the person informs what base size he is using before we play. Tourney players on the other hand, tend to argue over which is correct.

It's hilarious but not suprising that GW copy pasted Gwar's work without crediting him.
Sorry to hear about that, man.

Da Boss wrote:It's hilarious but not suprising that GW copy pasted Gwar's work without crediting him.
Sorry to hear about that, man.

I have half a mind to Go to the Dublin GW in a Top hat and Monocle and start lording it over you common folk.

Da Boss wrote:It's hilarious but not suprising that GW copy pasted Gwar's work without crediting him.
Sorry to hear about that, man.

think of it from their point of view, they have no idea where Gwar gets his information from.

You'd not find me gaming there, I'm afraid- Gamer's World around the corner on Thursdays is my usual.

You should come down for a game sometime though!
Make sure you get a cane with a silver knob on the end too- very classy, those.

Da Boss wrote:You'd not find me gaming there, I'm afraid- Gamer's World around the corner on Thursdays is my usual.

You should come down for a game sometime though!
Make sure you get a cane with a silver knob on the end too- very classy, those.

Hmm, I should at that. However, I currently have a load of Unpainted and Unbuilt Models rather than an army, because I suck so much at painting its not even funny

So, I got a reply from GW Legal.

They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Ah well, C'est la vie!

Gwar! wrote: "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions."

Then how do they know what the "frequently asked questions are?

Gwar! wrote:So, I got a reply from GW Legal.

They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Ah well, C'est la vie!

you should send them a C&D Gwar.

Gwar! wrote:So, I got a reply from GW Legal.

They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Ah well, C'est la vie!

Why not ask if the Design Studio has any interest in outsourcing the compilation and the "hard work" of spotting the issues to yourself and other rules lawyers?

It's no external playtesting, but it's one step closer.

It would save Alessio some time so he could concentrate on writing stuff with fewer mistakes in it.

Kilkrazy wrote:It would save Alessio some time so he could concentrate on writing stuff with fewer mistakes in it.

I suspect that they did consider that at one point...

Then Jervis came in and they lost the roll off.

Karon wrote:Yes, my Deffkoptas fall in the crack in the earth, oh wait, they're FLYING.

From a fluff perspective this is particularly annoying, especially for models that completely ignore terrain (like Wraiths and C'Tan for us Necron players).

Something to remember about the Jaws of the World Wolf is that all the unit-types affected are affected when that 24" line is drawn. There's a powerful likelihood of friendly fire if you approach the Rune Priest from the direction of friendly troops.

Throw a Carnifex in a Mycetic Spore, land him between the Rune Priest and any Long Fangs or Thunderwolves that may be in the same army, and if he doesn't zap it because he doesn't want the risk of friendly fire then trap him in close combat.

BluntmanDC wrote:Just shows that GW don't play test enough before they print a codex, but its good that Gwar! has actually done something about it.

Fixed

Gwar! wrote:So, I got a reply from GW Legal.

They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Ah well, C'est la vie!

Is that the whole sum of their reply to you?

If so, that is rather pathetic.

You did send them the 'point for point' comparison, right?

Unbelievable...

Unbelievable...

This IS GW we are talking about...

Alpharius wrote:

Gwar! wrote:So, I got a reply from GW Legal.

They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Ah well, C'est la vie!

Is that the whole sum of their reply to you?

If so, that is rather pathetic.

You did send them the 'point for point' comparison, right?

Unbelievable...

Pretty much. Oh, there was also the bit where they accused me of deriving from the SW codex and as they own the SW copyrights they don't have to credit me anyway.

Gwar! wrote:

Alpharius wrote:

Gwar! wrote:So, I got a reply from GW Legal.

They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Ah well, C'est la vie!

Is that the whole sum of their reply to you?

If so, that is rather pathetic.

You did send them the 'point for point' comparison, right?

Unbelievable...

Pretty much. Oh, there was also the bit where they accused me of deriving from the SW codex and as they own the SW copyrights they don't have to credit me anyway.

That is a ridiculous claim on their part. Better they just write back saying "no comment" than blatantly lie, or even just say "Yeah, he did. Suck it Gwar!"

I don't see why they'd lie, seeing as by Fair Use, you certainly don't qualify, unless by the fact the fact you are "criticising" their work, and it would be a bit of a stretch to say your FAQ offers a "critique". The Fair Use policy use of the word "criticism" is not meant in the sense of "being critical".

Ah well, GW do more needless antagonising. I'd have actually laughed and thought they were a little more human if they had written back saying "Yeah, we did, nur nur nur."

Gwar! wrote:
They "assured" me that "Alessio is a very busy man and does not have time to spend trawling forums to look for questions. In addition, he has confirmed that he was not aware of your FAQ page and so cannot have copied the text."

Sure Alessio is innocent. Some nameless minions did the dirty work of "trawling forums for questions". This way he can wash his hands of responsibility and claim innocence. I repeat my statement form another thread: I will be looking forward for the GW Tyranid FAQ with GREAT interest. If a similar "parallel evolution" down to the choice of words and punctuation happens AGAIN, I call BS .

Well, I doubt it will this time, since they've been, in effect, 'called on it'.

Still, you never know!

Yeah... they'll cover their tracks better.

I would love to see you send a C&D to Games Workshop because they send so many of these.
The good thing out of this is that we got a great FAQ .

I am wondering if you can take some legal action to better resolve this issue to your liking. We all know that GW has given public credit to yakface... Surely you deserve the same for your hard work.

G

Someone should ask yakface what he thinks about all this.

Green Blow Fly wrote:I am wondering if you can take some legal action to better resolve this issue to your liking. We all know that GW has given public credit to yakface... Surely you deserve the same for your hard work.

In all honesty, I don't care anymore. In Fact, I now realise it is a GOOD thing. a) It shows GWs true colours and 2) I don't want my name attached to to god awful other half of the FAQ (the bit they tried to write themselves )

Green Blow Fly wrote:We all know that GW has given public credit to yakface...

And by some reports copped quite a bit of flack for it. As did Yakface, for parts of the FAQ he had nothing to do with, as people just assumed that he had written the whole thing.

Which is quite possibly why they stopped adding credits on the bottom of them...

I respect Jon immensely for his tact and the contribution he has made towards interpreting the rules. Jon has excellent communication skills and comes across as a sincere person. I think GW having gave him credit is huge. The way he went about marketing (so to speak) his rules interpretations is why he was successful. He did a lot of research and for the most part went with what the majority thinks is right. I should add he had some help and those significant others also deserve their share of the credit. Jon always chooses his words wisely and I think that should serve as a lesson to us all. We can stand to learn at times, it's part of the human equation.

G

Gornall wrote:Yeah... they'll cover their tracks better.

Personally I find the idea of GW taking Gwar!'s Tyranid FAQ and rewriting the whole thing so it has different wording utterly delicious. They'd actually be putting effort into plagiarism!!!