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.

Hyd wrote:

Bastion of Mediocrity wrote:I agree with the original poster, I think the game is too stream-lined and is being made more for competitive play. I loved the 3.5 Chaos Marines codex and the Eldar Craftwords. I used to keep all of the White Dwarf Chapter Approved articles, even the ones about the hated loyalists.

I think for people who are more into the competitive nature of 40K you will find no agreement. Universal rules and limited codices make it easier to play a quick game and you break down each opposing codex into a short list of threats. It is concise and easier. . . but I find it more bland.

Those who love the fluff and want their chapter, craftworld, clan etc. love the morass of small, unique rules that make your army not just a different color. We love the difference, not the ease of play. I started 40K in 3rd edition and I enjoyed when I played a new faction with a new rule that I was not prepared for. It was not annoying, like it would be for a competitive player, it was an interesting surprise.

Uh, quick question.
Why does it read like the two are incompatible ?
Streamlining, the way I understand it, doesn't require getting rid of things such as 3rd edition CSM, which was indeed a blast. Snowflake special rules for everyone does get in the way of comfort of play to some extent, but a set of USR still allows for flavourful armies.

Good question, and I am only expresing an opinion here. I think it is hard to balance between competitive play and fluff-based armies, it is almost more like a spectrum than a this or that situation. Right now, to those of us who prefer flavor to crunch, it feels like a lot of interesting options were removed to speed up a game to make it better for that the competitive players. Is this wrong? No, it is just not to our taste.

Can they be compatible? I'm not sure. Most posters who would identify themselves as more competitive probably do not like sub-lists as they see them as wasteful and unnecessary. They also seem to dislike options in various sections of the codex that are sub-optimal in a competitive setting that could be fun in a friendly setting (such as a piece of gear that only targets a single army, like a Tau anti-human munition).

IMHO I think the ultimate codex would have two rule sets, or maybe qualifiers for each unit/gear that states such and such is for competitive play and this is not. It would be great for each book to be larger, hardback, and have a page with special rules for each legion, chapter, clan, craftworld, sept, etc. much like the 3.5 Chaos book had. That way we have ONE loyalist book and ONE chaos book, etc. I personally think this COULD be done in a way that does not unbalance the games, but I do not necessarily think it WOULD turn out that way.

Yet those were some of the most busted books ever made. lol
You'll never see a chaos 3.5 type of book again. The formatof the hq unlocked foc or various options is where theyre gonna stay.

Hückleberry wrote:I consider myself very lucky to have a group that plays a lot of different armies(all of them are played by someone except sisters). It keeps it fresh and entertaining. I can see where marine vs marine would get boring fast.

Same with me, we all stared different armies at first ( I had Marines , Dark Angels to be precise), the variety is great. When we stared other armies, most of my friends stared Marines, and I switched to Imperial Guard . Whenever we play we try not to have the same armies fight each other. We current have all armies except Tyranids and Sisters of Battle.

I miss the Space Marine mini-dexs, that was fun

Draigo wrote:Yet those were some of the most busted books ever made. lol
You'll never see a chaos 3.5 type of book again. The formatof the hq unlocked foc or various options is where theyre gonna stay.

And the New Grey Knights book isn't Busted/Broken?

The format isn't bad, but I would like to see it expanded. It would not take much to include another line or two for more rules. Say on the FOC or options to units that normally can't get those options. Just to make it feel more like the Army it is supposed to represent. Or just go back to the trait system. An leave out Special named characters all together. That would be fine with me. I in fact rather make my own characters.

To the others that were talking about tournement play. I think that is one of the biggest downfalls of 40k. I believe that tournement play ruined this game. It is not really designed for it. If GW wants it to be a hobby then drop tournement play all together and let us treat it like a hobby then and not just a game.

balsak_da_mighty wrote:

Draigo wrote:Yet those were some of the most busted books ever made. lol
You'll never see a chaos 3.5 type of book again. The formatof the hq unlocked foc or various options is where theyre gonna stay.

And the New Grey Knights book isn't Busted/Broken?

The format isn't bad, but I would like to see it expanded. It would not take much to include another line or two for more rules. Say on the FOC or options to units that normally can't get those options. Just to make it feel more like the Army it is supposed to represent. Or just go back to the trait system. An leave out Special named characters all together. That would be fine with me. I in fact rather make my own characters.

To the others that were talking about tournement play. I think that is one of the biggest downfalls of 40k. I believe that tournement play ruined this game. It is not really designed for it. If GW wants it to be a hobby then drop tournement play all together and let us treat it like a hobby then and not just a game.

The problem with just making a non-competitive-capable game is that you can get free rules that do the same thing that 40k does, but without much or any playtesting at all. Just throwing marbles at each others' minis can be fun over a drunken evening, I think i'd rather have a robust set of rules that will work in tournaments than cater deliberately to someone who's just interest in "hobby". This is not to say that GW's rules are particularly robust, but it's certainly more so than it used to be.

Though I kind of agree with the sentiment, marines should be just one codex with a number of options, rather than having almost half the armies being space marines or MEQs.

balsak_da_mighty wrote:

Draigo wrote:Yet those were some of the most busted books ever made. lol
You'll never see a chaos 3.5 type of book again. The formatof the hq unlocked foc or various options is where theyre gonna stay.

And the New Grey Knights book isn't Busted/Broken?

The format isn't bad, but I would like to see it expanded. It would not take much to include another line or two for more rules. Say on the FOC or options to units that normally can't get those options. Just to make it feel more like the Army it is supposed to represent. Or just go back to the trait system. An leave out Special named characters all together. That would be fine with me. I in fact rather make my own characters.

To the others that were talking about tournement play. I think that is one of the biggest downfalls of 40k. I believe that tournement play ruined this game. It is not really designed for it. If GW wants it to be a hobby then drop tournement play all together and let us treat it like a hobby then and not just a game.

Hhmm the strength of the craftworld book and chaos 3.5 had a more prominent impact on the game as a whole. But I think the main issue those books ran into was making models for each line. You may like to make your own but thats not the case with every player. People sit in anticipation for the models to be released. GW invalidated many of their old models like wulfen, cypher etc but released new codexes like 5th nids, sw, crons etc but have yet to release models for the newer unit like twc, tyranofex etc.

As far as trait system and named characters I think theyre doing the new system to streamline the game. Think from the perspective of a new player trying to plan an army but to do so you need to find this model, that white dwarf, their codex and have to track down all these things to make a salamander army OR you buy vulkan and some vanilla marine boxes. May not be good for the old guard but it certainly is easier for the newer lot joining the game now who GW wants. Its the same reason they invent new stuff like dk, storm ravens etc since most the old guard already has everything and may be less likely to get a new army.

What about us that learned back in 3rd. We did fine. It took me alittle while to learn but I did. If you think dumbing down ( I mean streamlining it) is better then I feel sorry for you. I think dumbing down is the worst thing you can do. The people that want more out of there hobby/game is feeling left out because it is so dumbed down. I want a hobby that I can actually use my brains and not just build the best list that the codex can produce. That is what is happening with the next generation of players. At least IMHO.

They did not invalidate them. They just are not widely used like they once were. There are still Wulfen in the army. No not like they used to be. Cypher can still be used, maybe not as Cypher but the model is still valid. I agree on GW needed to get there products out faster. That is one probelm they have alwyas had. But the way they do things is the way they do things. It doesn't make it right or make us happy, but until they fix it we have to deal. Or maybe make our own models. And yes you are right not everyone wants to make there own, but I do see alot of people doing so. After all that is part of the hobby right? In fact I think someone mentioned that is what GW thinks of the hobby more then the game side of it. I personally agree for the most part. A game is not a hobby, but a hobby can be a game. That is what we have here.

Don't worry guys, years of experience on the World of Warcraft general forums has taught me what to say to people quitting. I got this.

Can I have your stuff?

Alexzandvar wrote:Don't worry guys, years of experience on the World of Warcraft general forums has taught me what to say to people quitting. I got this.

Can I have your stuff?

Ha ha ha, very funny. Not really, thanks for your imput. If you have read any of this. No one said I wanted to quit. I am just not thrilled at the direction of the game 40k. Do you understand now?

balsak_da_mighty wrote:

Alexzandvar wrote:Don't worry guys, years of experience on the World of Warcraft general forums has taught me what to say to people quitting. I got this.

Can I have your stuff?

Ha ha ha, very funny. Not really, thanks for your imput. If you have read any of this. No one said I wanted to quit. I am just not thrilled at the direction of the game 40k. Do you understand now?

No, I understood the entire time I just wanted to make a joke .

balsak_da_mighty wrote:Ok, seems like some of you missed the point of my thread.

The whole thing with the He'stan and Salamander was really an example. The same can be said for Craftworld Eldar, Guard and the lack of different types of guard, The different Clans of Orks. These all fight differently then what there codex's show. A Biel-tan army would have more in the ways of Aspect warriors then anything else. That is what they are known for. But with the Eldar codex you can still only have 3 units of aspect warriors. (Dire avengers not included in this statement) Iyanden Eldar should be able to take more of the ghost warriors. ie the Wraithguard and Wraithlords, They used to be taken as troops. Alaitoc had more Pathfinders then most and had a cool little chart to screw around with enemy deployment and stuff. Ok now we go to Guard. Catachans had infiltrate all over. They were limited on the vehicles they could take. There play style was a in your face and attack more then the normal Guard of sitting back and shooting. You do not get any kinda feel with the Catachans now even if you take the characters they say are Chatachans. Where is the Mordians, Valhallans just to name a couple? Now we can go to Orks clans. Where are the Goffs? They should have the biggest and badest of the Orks. What about the Bad Moons? Having a unit in the Ork codex does not make a Bad Moons army. ie Flash Gitz

This statement is insane.

Space marine armies are more diverse than ever. Salamanders have lost their own codex, but the other divergent chapters have become their own armies instead of C:SM + some small stuff.

That Alaitoc "cool little chart" was incredibly broken, far beyond anything ever seen in modern 40k.

You can take 60 wraithguard and 3 wraithlords in a FOC-legal Eldar list, that's not enough? Same with rangers, you can take 60! Do you need more?

Valhallans = IG with focus on platoons, conscripts + artillery. Easy to make.
Mordians = What was special about them again?
Catachans, granted, have lost quite a bit. However, that codex was very poor for general play. Really awesome if you played on jungle terrain, useless on the normal table. All armies should work on any table. You still get lots of "catachan" options in the IG codex.
Ork clans = easy to make. Speed freeks = lots of trukks and bikes. Goffs = lots of boyz

The problem lies with you. You have a nostalgic view on 40k that distorts your view of current 40k. Current 40k is the most balanced that the game has ever been. The decision to condense the codexes is great. We do not need a codex for every marine chapter or for every IG world. GW does not have the capacity to update the amount of codexes they have now, and you want tons more "minor divergent" codexes?

Also, non-SM codexes are very competitive.F.ex: DE, IG, necrons are all great codexes. You have also never seen more IG/DE players than in 5th ed.

I am sorry, but you have become a grumpy old man.

"When I was a lad, goblins where 7 feet tall with teeth like longswords and arms like tree-trunks"

"When I was a lad, goblins where 7 feet tall with teeth like longswords and freeway off-ramps for arms!"

Fixed that for you.

Grumpy old man huh? Thanks you little whiper snaper. No I just like what I like, is that so hard to understand?

Space marine armies are more diverse than ever.

Oh really? What about the last ed codex. You know the one with the trait system. That codex was the best Marine codex that I have ever played. You had plenty of options and rules to pick and choose what you wanted to do. Now you have one character to make a list for you. Which by the way is kinda boring and foolish if you ask me. What if I don't want to play using He'stan? How do I get the feel of a Salamander army then?

How can you codense armies when there are so many different armies out there in this vast universe? Not all marines are the same but you are implying that they are. Or at the very least you want them to be. That is pure insane. Do you have any care for the background of this unverse or the armies that you play? If not then I am sorry for you. That is what brought me to the hobby. The story of why Orks are what they are, why Marines are what they are. Not just to simple play a game. But if that is what you want then you should be happy. That is not what I want. I want something more from the hobby I love. When you have a puplication like you do with White Dwarf then you might as well us it for something more then the same thing every month. We get pages of LoTR, pages of 40K, and pages of Fantasy that really doesn't show us anything but promote there cool new models. It should be more of a hobby book helping with painting and helping with army building or what not. What happened to the Chapter approved section? That is where these new additions to lists could be. Not that big of a deal if you ask me. Just because there is an addition to a list or and amendium to a list there doesn't need to be cool new models.

Also, non-SM codexes are very competitive.F.ex: DE, IG, necrons are all great codexes.

I like that the fact you have mentioned the newest of codexes. Of course they are the greatest they are the newest. I bet the next codex that comes out is going to be the greatest as well. Thgese codexes are great if all you want to do is win games. They however are not great with fluff and interesting ways to play. All they do is make you win with the most powerful new rules and untis. Hey it works though GW is selling alot of new models this way. That is the reason why these codexes are the way they are. Not to site interest into the hobby for there customers, but to make the customers buy the newest powerful models. Why the're rules are the way they are. But you seem to think they are great so good job on GW's part.

I remember Dondrekhan has this problem, and I did slightly at one point.

I would recommend just taking a break for several months or a year, and hopefully you will be more into it after that.

Reading through this i think i see where you are going balsak_da_mighty

the game has lost a lot of what made it good, hell i have only played for about 2 yrs and i can see that

but unfortunately there is no going back to the days where everything was shiny and new and the fluff mirrored the rules.... or is there


Have you ever thought of simply using a codex you liked and thought was well written? Ex) i <3 Chaos 3.5 sure some of it is weird and should have been fixed but it was a fun codex

So what do i do?

i play Chaos 3.5

If there was a codex or particular thing that you enjoyed playing with whats to stop you? you have already said you don't do tournaments and being in the hobby for so long i am sure you have made some friends that wouldn't mind at all if you played that old salamanders codex? since power gaming doesn't appeal to you don't do it. find a group of people that you enjoy playing against and play that old codex. you will have more fun and it *might* make you enjoy 40K again.

if not then know that i there are people out there (as previously shown in this thread) that feel the same.

Hopefullly you can find a couple at your local FLGS

Best of luck

-Marmaduke

balsak_da_mighty wrote:What about us that learned back in 3rd. We did fine. It took me alittle while to learn but I did. If you think dumbing down ( I mean streamlining it) is better then I feel sorry for you. I think dumbing down is the worst thing you can do. The people that want more out of there hobby/game is feeling left out because it is so dumbed down. I want a hobby that I can actually use my brains and not just build the best list that the codex can produce. That is what is happening with the next generation of players. At least IMHO.

They did not invalidate them. They just are not widely used like they once were. There are still Wulfen in the army. No not like they used to be. Cypher can still be used, maybe not as Cypher but the model is still valid. I agree on GW needed to get there products out faster. That is one probelm they have alwyas had. But the way they do things is the way they do things. It doesn't make it right or make us happy, but until they fix it we have to deal. Or maybe make our own models. And yes you are right not everyone wants to make there own, but I do see alot of people doing so. After all that is part of the hobby right? In fact I think someone mentioned that is what GW thinks of the hobby more then the game side of it. I personally agree for the most part. A game is not a hobby, but a hobby can be a game. That is what we have here.

I would disagree vehemently when you say it's dumbed down and you don't have to use your brain anymore. I don't think in a game of dice that the top players would be top if they didn't use their brains. I can also tell youre not looking at this from a business perspective. Why should GW spend more money on things that won't sell? This isn't mtg where your just printing out cards and people can have dozens of duplicates for various decks. Once people buy a model the average person won't rush out to buy half a dozen more.

When you say what about us who did learn I think why would gw cater to that? Yu've already bout most your army. They could be catering to a newer audience who still will buy an entire army. The bandwagoners are gw's friends not a guy who kit bashes a character using extra bits. lol

If you haven't noticed the over complication and lack of model support has actually pushed many 40k players to warmachine/hordes. Their games have lower model count in the average game and the guy you buy is what you get. It's only the combos and tactics that people use that seperate the lists. So when competing with games like this gw can't afford to get overly crazy or they'll push more away to other games. This isn't as much of a underground hobby anymore. It's getting more mainstream and having to compete with things like video games, warma/hordes, etc.

Oh boy, where to start...

Well, to jump right in with both feet, 40K has gone from a game driven by fluff and community to a game driven by powergaming, tournament minded, munchkins. These people who wouldn't know the difference between Salamanders, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Dark Angels etc...Basically if you said make one codex for all Space Marines, this means you...if they shoved a bolter in your rear and cleared your sinuses.

The Eldar Craftworlds and their obvious differences that are really non-existent in the current rules as well as the Chaos Gods warring with one another as much as the rest of the universe, the Myriad different guard regiments and their different fighting styles and specializations etc etc are really not available. Its Cookie Cutter, its boring and why even use models? If you just wanna roll dice...roll dice. Or better yet, stick to Dawn of War or the Space Marine game!

Now, that I have ranted a bit...

I have no real issues with the current base rule set. Its not THAT different from other editions and the game play works. There are issues that are usually dealt with between players or the vague FAQs or WD articles...so, the core isn't the issue.

Its the feeling and character of the game. The lack of detail put into the codices to allow for the countless army options out there. IE: Catachan Guard is dead in the new codex. Yes, regardless of how many times you put Iron Hand Strakken in a Cadian army and call it Catachan, the regiment is effectively dead. With many other examples like this in other codices..Ie: Raven Guard (and yes, you can use Blood Angels...but then its watered down Blood Angels...hmmm)

Other issues, like seeing Assault troop/Speeder w/flamer in Salamanders armies JUST so you get the benefit of Vulkan...*sigh* Read the fluff people. And for those who know not what I speak of...Salamanders come from a high gravity world where training with these weapons is minimal if at all (jump packs and speeders that is).


Now, you might say that less customization makes the game "Less cluttered with rules"....When what you really mean to say is..."This lets me make one strategy against the tournament effective Guard, one strategy against the tournament effective Space Marines, Nids, Orks, Dark Eldar, etc etc" and you can follow that up with " I wouldn't know how to actually think of a strategy or army idea that didn't have .com behind it". Every game isn't 'Ard boys people...and there is an enormous amount of history and story set behind each of the armies in the 40K universe. You should look into it and try a game with fluff armies.

What Balzak is talking about is the lack of originality, the lack of classic fluff and feel, the lack of attention to detail of the universe and progression of the story, and the WIDE use of cookie cutter play styles, power gaming/math hammer army creation and the general degeneration of the community of the hobby that comes with these kind of players.

Happy Gaming folks,
John






Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh, and by the way.....I am not looking at these games from a business standpoint...BECAUSE I AM A PLAYER! And if you are NOT a GW employee, why the hell should you care about the business side of the arguement over whats best for the community? Its like arguing for a government pay raise just because they are the government and its what they do...think folks

I started way back with Rogue Trader and along with the other vets have seen the game etc evolve into what it is today. What is different from then and now is the style of play, what is prevelant and clear is that competitive army builds seem to be the order of the day. Many players seem intent on building the most powerful force simply to win rather than actually play the game for what it is; a game. This is where the fluff is being lost/sacrificed, its an overpowering need to be the winner.
I've never played/collected to win, I collect/play the force I want to use; not the one to grind an opponent into the dust, where's the fun in that?
I think a major mistake that GW made was to create characters that you can use in any chapter, I'm sorry(and don't ask me to try and clarify why) this sole idea is wrong on any level. I could have Vulkan lead my DAs, does that make my force Salamanders, or just a leader leading an army who is masquerading? The whole army needs to be Salamanders not just the one, who has different fighting characteristics/abilities that do not mesh with the 'feel' of the army?
When it comes down to it all marine codexes all basically do the same with one or two small tweaks but consider this;
1) Blood Ravens are described as having higher than average numbers of librarians. Pity the rules do not allow for this! To my mind each part of this army should have the option of having a librarian of some sort. When it boils down to it a Blood Ravens force with only one librarian does not reflect the fluff/background. What you have is a dark red vanilla army of charlatans.
2) The Salamanders. Again where are the masses of flamer/melta etc units? Oh look, tactical units are restricted to 1 assault and 1 heavy weapon. Guess what other marine armies have the same makeup? All of them!
3) Even Dark Templars are vanilla! They should perhaps have access to a fair number of Chaplains in any of their forces to reflect their monastic style. Where are they?
The game has definitely become more regimented(no pun intended) It seems to be a case of you must do this, do that, you're not allowed to do that. Everything seems to be restricted even down to the missions, do we really need to be told what force makeup we use for any mission? Should it not be a case of being able to use what we have? I might only have access to a tactical force yet the mission demands assault.
Each new release of the rulebook has the usual selections of missions and I think this also jades the spirit of the game. Ah another meatgrinder, another take and hold, get the artefact. Do we really need to be led by the nose?
No.

balsak_da_mighty wrote:

What if I don't want to play using He'stan? How do I get the feel of a Salamander army then?

Kitbash custom character counts-as Vulkan. Really, what's hard about it?

And the whole "I pity you, people who disagree with me" thing doesn't really help you come across the interwebs as a reasonable person, for what it's worth.

Kitbash custom character counts-as Vulkan. Really, what's hard about it?

Its not a matter of the model. Its a matter of not using HIM. The fact that you need He'stan to make a Salamander army is my point. Geessh!

@Wild

Why worry about the business side? Because that what motivates them for gods sakes. If you don't understand the others side you can't properly examine or argue properly. Most debates require an understanding of both sides. Saying you don't care cause your a player sounds like a mad 5 yr old.

Draigo wrote:@Wild

Why worry about the business side? Because that what motivates them for gods sakes. If you don't understand the others side you can't properly examine or argue properly. Most debates require an understanding of both sides. Saying you don't care cause your a player sounds like a mad 5 yr old.

While I see your point, I think he certainly has a right to be more concerned with the player or community side of things.

Draigo wrote:@Wild

Why worry about the business side? Because that what motivates them for gods sakes. If you don't understand the others side you can't properly examine or argue properly. Most debates require an understanding of both sides. Saying you don't care cause your a player sounds like a mad 5 yr old.

Draigo,

I owned a game shop in Jacksonville Fl (my air traffic control career took precidense over my shop). I understand the business side of the hobby VERY well. I have watched what the power gaming, win at all costs types have done to the atmosphere of the game and it IS NOT good for business. What we have told GW as store owners is that the tournament gamers ARE NOT the ones they should cater to, because they don't buy to collect and convert. Rarely do they ever actually buy models they have to build or paint themselves, especially since they have dumbed down or completely removed hobby scores from tournaments...Why paint your own models if you aren't interested in the hobby? Just ebay away and there we go.

As far as not caring about the business side...Why should I? They don't seem to care about what we fluff gamers think or want. All they seem to care about is forcing out the next overpowered, bland, single element codex for the mainstream tournament gamers, who as said above, aren't going to actually purchase new models normally, but ebay painted forces and then claim they painted them.

I have, on several occassions, written GW letters and sent packets of suggestions as a courtesy. I have recieved letters saying that "We are not currently taking suggestions from gamers. We thank you for your patronage and we are certain that you will enjoy the products that we have coming out to you. For the Emperor". And yes, this is what I recieved. So, I ask you once again, why should I care about a company that has no regard for its most loyal gamers?

As far as what the other poster said about people going to Warmachine and Hordes away from 40K because of lower model counts and rules...They left because of beautiful models, an interesting rule set, and AMAZING fluff-based units. Ever read WM/Hordes rule books and unit entries? OMG! Now, don't get me wrong...the game plays like MTG on a table top. Lots of cheese and big booms...but players overlook it because of the interesting universe...something that 40K has lacked now for years.

Cheers,
John

Wild_Portals_Hobby wrote:

Draigo wrote:@Wild

Why worry about the business side? Because that what motivates them for gods sakes. If you don't understand the others side you can't properly examine or argue properly. Most debates require an understanding of both sides. Saying you don't care cause your a player sounds like a mad 5 yr old.

Draigo,

I owned a game shop in Jacksonville Fl (my air traffic control career took precidense over my shop). I understand the business side of the hobby VERY well. I have watched what the power gaming, win at all costs types have done to the atmosphere of the game and it IS NOT good for business. What we have told GW as store owners is that the tournament gamers ARE NOT the ones they should cater to, because they don't buy to collect and convert. Rarely do they ever actually buy models they have to build or paint themselves, especially since they have dumbed down or completely removed hobby scores from tournaments...Why paint your own models if you aren't interested in the hobby? Just ebay away and there we go.

As far as not caring about the business side...Why should I? They don't seem to care about what we fluff gamers think or want. All they seem to care about is forcing out the next overpowered, bland, single element codex for the mainstream tournament gamers, who as said above, aren't going to actually purchase new models normally, but ebay painted forces and then claim they painted them.

I have, on several occassions, written GW letters and sent packets of suggestions as a courtesy. I have recieved letters saying that "We are not currently taking suggestions from gamers. We thank you for your patronage and we are certain that you will enjoy the products that we have coming out to you. For the Emperor". And yes, this is what I recieved. So, I ask you once again, why should I care about a company that has no regard for its most loyal gamers?

As far as what the other poster said about people going to Warmachine and Hordes away from 40K because of lower model counts and rules...They left because of beautiful models, an interesting rule set, and AMAZING fluff-based units. Ever read WM/Hordes rule books and unit entries? OMG! Now, don't get me wrong...the game plays like MTG on a table top. Lots of cheese and big booms...but players overlook it because of the interesting universe...something that 40K has lacked now for years.

Cheers,
John

Then quit.. If you feel its that desperate its very simple solution. Why sit around a wallow in pity and misery thats self induced? I have read warma/hordes stuff. I play it regulary because a few of my friends switched to it from 40k. They didn't wallow. They didn't like it and took their money elsewhere. It's that simple.

Is that the answer to everything. Quit? If you have invested so much into something would you just quit?

That is the most horrible answer anyone can say. It does nothing to help the situation it is juvenale at best.

I personally went to Warmachine/hordes for a while because it was interesting and new. I totally love the world and the fluff or background of that game as well. The play style however is something to be desired. I hated the game play fully. It is worse then 40k it the respects of power gaming. How fun is it to lose turn 1? Well that happened to me and that was the end. It was not fun putting all of my models on the board just to lose without even moving a single model. And this is what people are going to. Sounds odd to me. But that is this generation of gamers. Like Wild said win at all cost attitude. It saddens me a bit for sure.

balsak_da_mighty wrote:Is that the answer to everything. Quit? If you have invested so much into something would you just quit?

That is the most horrible answer anyone can say. It does nothing to help the situation it is juvenale at best.

I personally went to Warmachine/hordes for a while because it was interesting and new. I totally love the world and the fluff or background of that game as well. The play style however is something to be desired. I hated the game play fully. It is worse then 40k it the respects of power gaming. How fun is it to lose turn 1? Well that happened to me and that was the end. It was not fun putting all of my models on the board just to lose without even moving a single model. And this is what people are going to. Sounds odd to me. But that is this generation of gamers. Like Wild said win at all cost attitude. It saddens me a bit for sure.

Is it less juvenile to whine how the game isn't going your way? They don't care. This isn't a democracy. lol

Who is whinning. This is a descusion board is it not? I think people can have a view about something without it being a "whine". Or am I wrong?

You never know who might read this stuff. Maybe they have employees that read about what people are thinking. Yes it is a long shot, but hey it could happen. And as it seems I am not the only one that feels this way.

So shouldn't that tell you alittle something?

balsak_da_mighty wrote:Who is whinning. This is a descusion board is it not? I think people can have a view about something without it being a "whine". Or am I wrong?

You never know who might read this stuff. Maybe they have employees that read about what people are thinking. Yes it is a long shot, but hey it could happen. And as it seems I am not the only one that feels this way.

So shouldn't that tell you alittle something?

Not particularly, in fact it seems very similar to people "discussing" politics but never do anything to change how things are. If you really want them to listen you'd need a boycott of their product. Because for every one who has a different pt of view there are a new nobbie noobs dropping money to buy a new army. Unfortunately for you the only people who will listen are those that may agree but without action nothing will change. The games bigger now then it ever was so I do't see how one post will change that.

Well thanks for you optimism.

You maybe right. But I still feel there needs to be a change. Whether that change is me quiting or dealing with it is my choice to make. But I like to way my options and see others views on the matter. Whether they disagree or agree.