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.

GW will make a summer codex with a very good army in it and in the fall it will be illegal to use.

kronk wrote:

This appears to be just a "campaign" between a couple of stores on the West Coast.

a campaign AMONG a couple of stores

Between for 2 items, among for 3 or more.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

kronk wrote:

This appears to be just a "campaign" between a couple of stores on the West Coast.

a campaign AMONG a couple of stores

Between for 2 items, among for 3 or more.

Between you and me, among is overrated.

Besides, it might only be two stores. Did you think of that? Huh? Didja Mr. Smarty Pants?

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

kronk wrote:

This appears to be just a "campaign" between a couple of stores on the West Coast.

a campaign AMONG a couple of stores

Between for 2 items, among for 3 or more.

Actually, if memory serves, between can be for more than 2 items--what matters is if the items are distinct. IE: "This is a grammar fight between you, Alpharius and myself" Compared to "This is a grammar fight among Dakka members"


Too bad I don't live closer, I would definitely chip in.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Actually, if memory serves, between can be for more than 2 items--what matters is if the items are distinct. IE: "This is a grammar fight between you, Alpharius and myself" Compared to "This is a grammar fight among Dakka members"


Too bad I don't live closer, I would definitely chip in.

Well if this is a grammar fight between me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then it means we 3 are of one mind and Kronk dissents.

But if it is a grammar fight among me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then we have 4 different points of view.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Actually, if memory serves, between can be for more than 2 items--what matters is if the items are distinct. IE: "This is a grammar fight between you, Alpharius and myself" Compared to "This is a grammar fight among Dakka members"


Too bad I don't live closer, I would definitely chip in.

Well if this is a grammar fight between me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then it means we 3 are of one mind and Kronk dissents.

But if it is a grammar fight among me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then we have 4 different points of view.

k.

Not sure what else to say here.

How about that mini-campaign between two stores or possibly among several stores with regards to WH 30k? Sounds sweet.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Well if this is a grammar fight between me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then it means we 3 are of one mind and Kronk dissents.

But if it is a grammar fight among me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then we have 4 different points of view.

At this point, either you have sufficiently confused me to the point that I cannot make a valid argument in defense of my position---or you're right and I'm wrong. I refuse to Google it and will live in uncertainty!

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

kronk wrote:

This appears to be just a "campaign" between a couple of stores on the West Coast.

a campaign AMONG a couple of stores

Between for 2 items, among for 3 or more.

Suddenly the thread takes a turn for the grammatical!

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Actually, if memory serves, between can be for more than 2 items--what matters is if the items are distinct. IE: "This is a grammar fight between you, Alpharius and myself" Compared to "This is a grammar fight among Dakka members"


Too bad I don't live closer, I would definitely chip in.

Well if this is a grammar fight between me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then it means we 3 are of one mind and Kronk dissents.

But if it is a grammar fight among me, Alpharius, Age of Egos and Kronk then we have 4 different points of view.

Well, KK's a fellow Mod, and Ryan's a fellow DD3 team member so...

Us against Kronk it is!

Aside from that, I really am hoping for more Pre-Heresy stuff from GW and FW.

So.... yeah.

Polonius wrote:Or, you can build a marine army (which is quick and easy, especially with HH era heraldry) and join in.

I totally would, but I've been spending mad money year-long building a Dark Eldar army (I've got at least 2k points, maybe more), so I'm a bit strapped now. And what irritates me the most is that I'm sure GW doesn't give a single gak about any of the money I've given them since I didn't spend it on Marines. At least I can say I put my money where my mouth was and supported the DE release I'd been crying about.

Besides, my favorite SM chapter is Salamanders, and while I don't know my HH history very well I'm pretty sure the Salamanders were devastated early on (nearly wiped out IIRC) and didn't have a big showing for the rest of the Heresy.

Sidstyler wrote:

Polonius wrote:Or, you can build a marine army (which is quick and easy, especially with HH era heraldry) and join in.

I totally would, but I've been spending mad money year-long building a Dark Eldar army (I've got at least 2k points, maybe more), so I'm a bit strapped now. And what irritates me the most is that I'm sure GW doesn't give a single gak about any of the money I've given them since I didn't spend it on Marines. At least I can say I put my money where my mouth was and supported the DE release I'd been crying about.

Honest question: do you think companies, in general, care about the money that a customer has already spent? It's always been my understanding that while you treat customers well, its out of sheer self interest: you want them to spend more money!

The consensus pick for "best GW worldwide campaign" (which this event apparently isn't even close to being) was the Eye of Terror. Aside from the Cadian list, the armies featured most prominently required extensive modelling work (i.e.... buying more stuff). GW didn't produce and print a codex, and spend money on marketing as a really sweet "thank you" to it's loyal customers. It was a money making scheme.

So, while everybody mave love their delightful Necron v. Tau and Tyranid v. Orks games in what was ostensibly the Eye of Terror, those didn't make money.

If GW were to do a HH world wide campaign, and support it wil sprues and characters and rules and whatnot... wouldn't limiting it to the stuff that makes them money be smart?

Dont' get me wrong, I dont' understand why GW can't do two stripped down campaigns a year, without the model and rules support. Pick a few races, give them a reason to fight, and have those armies report results for three months. How is that not fun?

Polonius wrote:Dont' get me wrong, I dont' understand why GW can't do two stripped down campaigns a year, without the model and rules support. Pick a few races, give them a reason to fight, and have those armies report results for three months. How is that not fun?

It would be fun and I don't see it as that difficult to make up. You'd basically need a couple of creatives to come up with the fluff and artwork (which could easily be drawn mostly from existing GW stock artwork) for a small downloadable PDF explaining the campaign as well as an extra section of the existing GW website to track and post campaign updates every 2 weeks. The initial part would take maybe 2-3 workdays of effort from a team of 3 people (including one who can program HTML) and the updates would require only a morning's worth of effort. That seems eminently doable for a multinational corporation for not too much cost (easily recouped if only a dozen people worldwide buy full new armies to participate).

warboss wrote:

Polonius wrote:Dont' get me wrong, I dont' understand why GW can't do two stripped down campaigns a year, without the model and rules support. Pick a few races, give them a reason to fight, and have those armies report results for three months. How is that not fun?

It would be fun and I don't see it as that difficult to make up. You'd basically need a couple of creatives to come up with the fluff and artwork (which could easily be drawn mostly from existing GW stock artwork) for a small downloadable PDF explaining the campaign as well as an extra section of the existing GW website to track and post campaign updates every 2 weeks. The initial part would take maybe 2-3 workdays of effort from a team of 3 people (including one who can program HTML) and the updates would require only a morning's worth of effort. That seems eminently doable for a multinational corporation for not too much cost (easily recouped if only a dozen people worldwide buy full new armies to participate).

It wouldn't be Games Workshop if they didn't leave money on the table.

Polonius wrote:[Dont' get me wrong, I dont' understand why GW can't do two stripped down campaigns a year, without the model and rules support. Pick a few races, give them a reason to fight, and have those armies report results for three months. How is that not fun?

I don't think it would be all that crazy, really. You can include non-Marine armies and still use the thing as an excuse to encourage sales...they could design a campaign to push the two newest releases, Dark Eldar and Necrons, throw Marines/Guard in (obviously), and then pick one more to throw in...possibly a race that's slated to get an update in the near future (Eldar wouldn't be that much of a stretch if the codex is really coming out next year)? That seems like a brilliant idea to me, get people to buy an Eldar army for the campaign, and then a few months later BAM, new codex. Now all those people have a new Eldar army that they're going to be tempted to add to.

If nothing else it would be a much better way of trying to make money than just jacking the god-damned prices up every year.

Anyway, I dunno. I'm probably making a bigger deal out of this than I should (especially since this thread isn't about a global campaign and seems to be some dinky thing a couple of stores are throwing together on their own), it's just irritating because I'd like to participate in something fun like this, since I came into the hobby too late and just missed the Medusa V campaign, and there hasn't been another one since, but I'd appreciate something that was a little more inclusive. Like I said I just bought a new Dark Eldar army, and a global campaign would probably be enough to inspire me to finish them up and get them on the table (would also be a good excuse to release a new model or two, maybe one of the missing characters or something, so I can buy MOAR DE).

If it came down to it though I'd either buy a Marine army or just avoid playing in the HH thing. Fine, whatever, GW is obviously targeting Marine fans and I'm not one of them.

A prospective world-wide campaign should likely include all armies. Yes, SM may sell the most but it's not like the others don't sell at all. It would be more stupid to not include SM than to not include DE but not including DE is hardly a smart move.

EDIT: Obviously, I'm not talking about a HH campaign. The chances of a HH campaign coming from Nottingham anytime soon are, IMO, zero.

i don't see why a pre heresy campaign wouldn't include eldar. dark eldar, orks and necrons seeing as they were all active at the time. the only race i could see being left out are the tau

And even then, you could fit Tau in as some sort of 'counts as' Xenos race.

Same for Tyranids, who certainly come close to matching the alien race from one of the earlier HH books...