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.

 Vector Strike wrote:

Peregrine wrote:
And the thunderwolves and flyers are awful ideas that never should have existed. Remove the Matt Ward era stupidity from the product line and you're left with an army that is just another space marine army with <SPACE WOLVES> chapter tactics and some characters.

Well, #TheWolfing was on Phil Kelly, not Matt Ward...

Yup. Not to mention the book had Marines pointlessly slaughtering Sisters of Battle and doing happy dances with best-friends-ever Xenos in their sacred halls on Fenris long before the internet singled out Ward for Marine-Xenos-alliances and Sisters-killing.

I had a friend who used to work at the head office of GW about 2 or 3 years ago. (He left because working as a janitor isn tescos paid more than GW so this information might be out dated) He told me that GW encouraged staff to sell rule books more than models (to the point giving bonuses to staff who sold more rule books). This suggests, to me, that they were preparing for this kinda push... or at least still have some data from that period on how much money they can make from just printing cheap books.

CelticKodiak wrote:


1. What other purchasing options do you have with 40k? You cannot 3d print your own models, you cannot buy models made by a 3rd party unless they are explicitly given permission from GW to make them. They have a stranglehold on their IP, so it correlates just fine.

2. Really? The vast majority wants incomplete codex for their armies that require a second codex just to fill in required roles? Okay.

3. Yet I skim other forums and see issues pop up everywhere about overpowered Eldar, underpowered GSC, completely useless Ruststalkers with no transport options, and terminators being entirely underpowered for their cost. Yes, it seems this is exactly what the community wants, you are right, I conjured up these issues, no one has these problems. Expecting common sense shouldn't be an expectation, it should be a requirement.

Uuh world is full of not-marines, not-ig and not-orks you can legally buy...

 Eldarsif wrote:
New factions or not there would still be rules bloat. Even if they were to combine factions there would still be rules bloat for the simple reason that all the sub factions that were to be removed would just translate instead into new models for existing factions making them even larger and more unwieldy(ie. rules bloat). This is why we have Primaris marines as they are new models to a market that has a lot of old space marine units that most people have. People that probably have stopped buying units unless GW throws something new and exciting at them.

Could also be the reason why they want you to mix and match allies in detachments. It gives the old curmudgeons a chance to expand their armies without stopping playing them(I know this has had an effect on me with the Aeldari in general).

Much like Magic The Gathering, Warhammer can only stay afloat as long as GW produces new stuff which will lead to rules bloat. The difference here between GW and magic is that WoC limits the amount of sets you can play with at a time. At best the only similar thing GW can do is to remove old models that are not made anymore.

Regarding the order of the codexes it's an interesting conundrum. Would love to know what the reasoning is behind it, but it must be there regardless of how valid one might consider it. Could be that they are releasing new models with SW and Orks which might explain the delay. Could also be that they are problematic to balance for some reason, or they just don't have a champion to work on them.

MTG has a....relatively structured ruleset, yes new rules are added, but the base gameplay is the same, and there are no specific factions that really stick around from set to set, except goblins and zombies, they are everywhere, unless they go with megasets like the old days that ran for a while. It has been a while since I played MTG, I played back in Apocalypse, and that had a long run with similar creature types throughout, I believe that is when Slivers became really popular.

You aren't wrong, Warhammer needs new things to stay afloat, but the way they are going about it is wrong. If you are adding something new that hasn't really been around before, or in such small numbers that rules for them were simple, then you throw together rules that seem to make sense, but not enough unit options to complete it, and require the purchase of additional books to complete the army, there is a problem. Anyone who plays any of the core armies, need one book, and they have a full, complete army, there are some rules issues with some of the units, but they still have other options to pick from. Elite armies are supposed to be small, yes, but tossing out a codex really early to fabricate some models for people to buy isn't a good way to go about it.

The order should have been simple, the core armies most people play, since most of the models are the same, with only one or two additional added for the 8th edition stuff. Then after really thinking about them, release the elite army codex, instead of sloppily releasing subpar, incomplete codex for them.

But in MTG there is always key cards that you need, there has been times where every top deck had the same 2 cards in it, even if they needed to splash in 2-3 mana for those cards. Thats the same as Soup armies, we have some units that are key and everyone takes them.

Literally the same thing IMO

jcd386 wrote:
I don't think there is any harm is then making a full book for a faction with a smaller number of units in it if people want to play that faction.

Having more rules, strategems, powers, relics, etc makes the game more interesting. It's more interesting for a blood angel player with a full codex than it is a salamander player with 1 strategem, relic, character, and so on, even if half the BA options are the same.

Balance is always going to be an issue, but I think it's a mostly separate one.

To me the main downside of the smaller faction books is they likely have smaller numbers of players, and so are irrelevant to more people, and it can be frustrating to see them come out before the army you play and are waiting for. So it would have made more sense, perhaps, to come out with factions in the order of their popularity in order to appease more people. But in a year or so when everything is released, this will be much less of an issue, and I have a hard time seeing why you'd be upset that a book like GK or GSC exists.

Rules bloat would be one issue, and it is already one before all the codex are out. If you want a fair game between you and another person, you have to know your armies rules, and theirs, to make sure they aren't trying to pull a fast one and get in an extra roll they weren't supposed to have. Multiply this by how many armies there will be, and it is a nightmare. This and balance go hand in hand, as they are going to get information about a certain unit, do a wide nerf that not only affects that unit, but other, similar units in other armies, that will then need a fix. At this point, I don't think GW will be able to balance much of anything, as they will balance for the single army, and not take into account any other armies rules, since there are so many of them, they will most likely forget.

Regardless of how few players a faction has, the codex needs to be well thought out, and have enough units in the roster to build a well rounded army, regardless of how few units you can field. So far, based on the elite army codex that have come out, I dread to see the upcoming elite armies. I am also not upset about GK or GSC existing, I have an issue with their lack of any functional balance, even before the GK book dropped they had issues, and they still have those issues now, so effectively nothing was changed to make them more usable, just giving them 8th edition rules and smacked into a codex.

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
What moral concessions you choose to make to is up to you.

What moral concessions? I didn't choose to run a company that makes a game that heavily runs on stats and rules that requires the company to balance for competitive play. I didn't choose to overextend the companies resources on so many codex that balance is nearly impossible or takes so long it doesn't matter. It is called choosing to be above their bull and play the game because you want to. You have never worked with someone you disliked, but kept working there because the job was really good? I mean you can be a hypocrite all you want and lord over everyone on some moral high ground you think you have, but you will be treated as anyone else that acts the same way, by being ignored.

You're "choosing to be above the bull" is subsidizing GW for behavior you find objectionable. If you really believed the gak you said you would have difficulty supporting them. You can throw around accusations of hypocrisy all you want. It doesn't change the fact your actions emasculate your argument.

So again, I should drop my ISP, the only one in my area, because I think far less of them than I do GW. I mean, based on what you are saying, I am not allowed to purchase and play any game from a studio I have a negative bias towards. That would severely limit what I can play seeing as most games come out of larger companies with less than stellar records. According to you though, to see that a company is using greed to propel mediocre sales, instead of listening to its player base, which would produce much higher income, as people are less cynical of the company and would be willing to buy more than what they need as opposed to buying exactly what they need and being done, means you cannot play their game, it is against some moral code you stand by. Well guess what, sometimes, if you want to play a game with your friends, you have to bite the bullet and buy things from a company you don't think highly of.

Don't get me wrong, I like the game and how it works, I watch batreps all the time, and I want to join my friends who play, but that doesn't mean I am required to like the company. That seems to be something you are not grasping, or are too naive to see, there are very few companies that all people trust 100%, but they buy the products because they have no where else to get them, it is that simple.

People online have built up this narrative of GW as an incompetent, greedy, morally bankrupt, evil empire. I'm simply pointing out that if you truly believed that you would be morally compromised for supporting them. If you look at Peregrine's arguments in totality, there is no way you can believe all of that and not look foolish for having a continued involvement with GW.

You're under no obligation to love or like GW. You personally seem to be lashing out because the Space Wolf codex isn't out yet. You want someone to rage at, and they are an easy target. How you choose to live your life is up to you. But don't expect a pass when your action deviate from your words.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
But in MTG there is always key cards that you need, there has been times where every top deck had the same 2 cards in it, even if they needed to splash in 2-3 mana for those cards. Thats the same as Soup armies, we have some units that are key and everyone takes them.

Literally the same thing IMO

In MTG you build a deck around a few key cards, yeah. In 8th edition, you take a unit or two that works well on its own, but works even better in numbers, and spam that unit instead of making a well rounded army. Most Custodes army lists are Dawneagle Jetbikes, with Dawneagle Jetbike HQs, and some more Dawneagle Jetbikes. The troop choice is too expensive for what they bring to the table, the named HQ is too expensive for what he brings, and why have a Land Raider that effectively costs 1/4th your armies cost at 2000 points, when you can just bring a bunch of Dawneagle Jetbikes? Death Guard spam Poxwalkers and Cultists, Eldar spam bikes and hover tanks, Tyranid spam Flyrants, should I continue? Every army has some spammable unit that does well, sure you will eventually run into an army that directly counters your spam, but having that issue speaks volumes.

CelticKodiak wrote:

jcd386 wrote:
I don't think there is any harm is then making a full book for a faction with a smaller number of units in it if people want to play that faction.

Having more rules, strategems, powers, relics, etc makes the game more interesting. It's more interesting for a blood angel player with a full codex than it is a salamander player with 1 strategem, relic, character, and so on, even if half the BA options are the same.

Balance is always going to be an issue, but I think it's a mostly separate one.

To me the main downside of the smaller faction books is they likely have smaller numbers of players, and so are irrelevant to more people, and it can be frustrating to see them come out before the army you play and are waiting for. So it would have made more sense, perhaps, to come out with factions in the order of their popularity in order to appease more people. But in a year or so when everything is released, this will be much less of an issue, and I have a hard time seeing why you'd be upset that a book like GK or GSC exists.

Rules bloat would be one issue, and it is already one before all the codex are out. If you want a fair game between you and another person, you have to know your armies rules, and theirs, to make sure they aren't trying to pull a fast one and get in an extra roll they weren't supposed to have. Multiply this by how many armies there will be, and it is a nightmare. This and balance go hand in hand, as they are going to get information about a certain unit, do a wide nerf that not only affects that unit, but other, similar units in other armies, that will then need a fix. At this point, I don't think GW will be able to balance much of anything, as they will balance for the single army, and not take into account any other armies rules, since there are so many of them, they will most likely forget.

Regardless of how few players a faction has, the codex needs to be well thought out, and have enough units in the roster to build a well rounded army, regardless of how few units you can field. So far, based on the elite army codex that have come out, I dread to see the upcoming elite armies. I am also not upset about GK or GSC existing, I have an issue with their lack of any functional balance, even before the GK book dropped they had issues, and they still have those issues now, so effectively nothing was changed to make them more usable, just giving them 8th edition rules and smacked into a codex.

All good points. I think part of the issue is that GW has only recently started to care about balance. In 6th and 7th they explicitly resisted competitive playing and balance in general, and created a lot of additional factions and units and so on. It's not really feasible for them to go backwards and unmake factions, even though that might result in a more balanced game, but I agree that any new books would have to work hard to not just be bloat.

My hope is that they come out with all of the books for 8th they've come out with previously, and then spend some time balancing things.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
What moral concessions you choose to make to is up to you.

What moral concessions? I didn't choose to run a company that makes a game that heavily runs on stats and rules that requires the company to balance for competitive play. I didn't choose to overextend the companies resources on so many codex that balance is nearly impossible or takes so long it doesn't matter. It is called choosing to be above their bull and play the game because you want to. You have never worked with someone you disliked, but kept working there because the job was really good? I mean you can be a hypocrite all you want and lord over everyone on some moral high ground you think you have, but you will be treated as anyone else that acts the same way, by being ignored.

You're "choosing to be above the bull" is subsidizing GW for behavior you find objectionable. If you really believed the gak you said you would have difficulty supporting them. You can throw around accusations of hypocrisy all you want. It doesn't change the fact your actions emasculate your argument.

So again, I should drop my ISP, the only one in my area, because I think far less of them than I do GW. I mean, based on what you are saying, I am not allowed to purchase and play any game from a studio I have a negative bias towards. That would severely limit what I can play seeing as most games come out of larger companies with less than stellar records. According to you though, to see that a company is using greed to propel mediocre sales, instead of listening to its player base, which would produce much higher income, as people are less cynical of the company and would be willing to buy more than what they need as opposed to buying exactly what they need and being done, means you cannot play their game, it is against some moral code you stand by. Well guess what, sometimes, if you want to play a game with your friends, you have to bite the bullet and buy things from a company you don't think highly of.

Don't get me wrong, I like the game and how it works, I watch batreps all the time, and I want to join my friends who play, but that doesn't mean I am required to like the company. That seems to be something you are not grasping, or are too naive to see, there are very few companies that all people trust 100%, but they buy the products because they have no where else to get them, it is that simple.

People online have built up this narrative of GW as an incompetent, greedy, morally bankrupt, evil empire. I'm simply pointing out that if you truly believed that you would be morally compromised for supporting them. If you look at Peregrine's arguments in totality, there is no way you can believe all of that and not look foolish for having a continued involvement with GW.

You're under no obligation to love or like GW. You personally seem to be lashing out because the Space Wolf codex isn't out yet. You want someone to rage at, and they are an easy target. How you choose to live your life is up to you. But don't expect a pass when your action deviate from your words.

You are at least the 10th person to think I am angry about SW not having a codex. Seriously, why is anything anyone says online that is even slightly negative towards a company instantly put into, "they are so angry". There are plenty of armies that I have interest in playing, and plan to do so over the SW, I just wanted to see what they bring to the table since their Index units had and have a lot of promise.

Oh, and that narrative people "built up" is well founded, things don't form out of thin air, they have a basis, no matter how much die hard fans refuse to see it. I expect no pass whatsoever, I just want to see GW be smarter about their codex releases, and take the time required to release them complete, so the people who actually want to play those armies aren't locked into a unit spam list like Custodes and those damn jetbikes.

Gw still doesn't care about balance. Just about shifting meta

CelticKodiak wrote:

Spoiler:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
What moral concessions you choose to make to is up to you.

What moral concessions? I didn't choose to run a company that makes a game that heavily runs on stats and rules that requires the company to balance for competitive play. I didn't choose to overextend the companies resources on so many codex that balance is nearly impossible or takes so long it doesn't matter. It is called choosing to be above their bull and play the game because you want to. You have never worked with someone you disliked, but kept working there because the job was really good? I mean you can be a hypocrite all you want and lord over everyone on some moral high ground you think you have, but you will be treated as anyone else that acts the same way, by being ignored.

You're "choosing to be above the bull" is subsidizing GW for behavior you find objectionable. If you really believed the gak you said you would have difficulty supporting them. You can throw around accusations of hypocrisy all you want. It doesn't change the fact your actions emasculate your argument.

So again, I should drop my ISP, the only one in my area, because I think far less of them than I do GW. I mean, based on what you are saying, I am not allowed to purchase and play any game from a studio I have a negative bias towards. That would severely limit what I can play seeing as most games come out of larger companies with less than stellar records. According to you though, to see that a company is using greed to propel mediocre sales, instead of listening to its player base, which would produce much higher income, as people are less cynical of the company and would be willing to buy more than what they need as opposed to buying exactly what they need and being done, means you cannot play their game, it is against some moral code you stand by. Well guess what, sometimes, if you want to play a game with your friends, you have to bite the bullet and buy things from a company you don't think highly of.

Don't get me wrong, I like the game and how it works, I watch batreps all the time, and I want to join my friends who play, but that doesn't mean I am required to like the company. That seems to be something you are not grasping, or are too naive to see, there are very few companies that all people trust 100%, but they buy the products because they have no where else to get them, it is that simple.

People online have built up this narrative of GW as an incompetent, greedy, morally bankrupt, evil empire. I'm simply pointing out that if you truly believed that you would be morally compromised for supporting them. If you look at Peregrine's arguments in totality, there is no way you can believe all of that and not look foolish for having a continued involvement with GW.

You're under no obligation to love or like GW. You personally seem to be lashing out because the Space Wolf codex isn't out yet. You want someone to rage at, and they are an easy target. How you choose to live your life is up to you. But don't expect a pass when your action deviate from your words.

You are at least the 10th person to think I am angry about SW not having a codex. Seriously, why is anything anyone says online that is even slightly negative towards a company instantly put into, "they are so angry". There are plenty of armies that I have interest in playing, and plan to do so over the SW, I just wanted to see what they bring to the table since their Index units had and have a lot of promise.

Oh, and that narrative people "built up" is well founded, things don't form out of thin air, they have a basis, no matter how much die hard fans refuse to see it. I expect no pass whatsoever, I just want to see GW be smarter about their codex releases, and take the time required to release them complete, so the people who actually want to play those armies aren't locked into a unit spam list like Custodes and those damn jetbikes.

Well you being a "Disgruntled Space Wolf" is a well founded narrative.

This is one if thise topics where someone has confused the accepted internet "wisdom" on units and list writing as how 100% of the player base plays the game at all times.

CelticKodiak wrote:

Spoiler:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
What moral concessions you choose to make to is up to you.

What moral concessions? I didn't choose to run a company that makes a game that heavily runs on stats and rules that requires the company to balance for competitive play. I didn't choose to overextend the companies resources on so many codex that balance is nearly impossible or takes so long it doesn't matter. It is called choosing to be above their bull and play the game because you want to. You have never worked with someone you disliked, but kept working there because the job was really good? I mean you can be a hypocrite all you want and lord over everyone on some moral high ground you think you have, but you will be treated as anyone else that acts the same way, by being ignored.

You're "choosing to be above the bull" is subsidizing GW for behavior you find objectionable. If you really believed the gak you said you would have difficulty supporting them. You can throw around accusations of hypocrisy all you want. It doesn't change the fact your actions emasculate your argument.

So again, I should drop my ISP, the only one in my area, because I think far less of them than I do GW. I mean, based on what you are saying, I am not allowed to purchase and play any game from a studio I have a negative bias towards. That would severely limit what I can play seeing as most games come out of larger companies with less than stellar records. According to you though, to see that a company is using greed to propel mediocre sales, instead of listening to its player base, which would produce much higher income, as people are less cynical of the company and would be willing to buy more than what they need as opposed to buying exactly what they need and being done, means you cannot play their game, it is against some moral code you stand by. Well guess what, sometimes, if you want to play a game with your friends, you have to bite the bullet and buy things from a company you don't think highly of.

Don't get me wrong, I like the game and how it works, I watch batreps all the time, and I want to join my friends who play, but that doesn't mean I am required to like the company. That seems to be something you are not grasping, or are too naive to see, there are very few companies that all people trust 100%, but they buy the products because they have no where else to get them, it is that simple.

People online have built up this narrative of GW as an incompetent, greedy, morally bankrupt, evil empire. I'm simply pointing out that if you truly believed that you would be morally compromised for supporting them. If you look at Peregrine's arguments in totality, there is no way you can believe all of that and not look foolish for having a continued involvement with GW.

You're under no obligation to love or like GW. You personally seem to be lashing out because the Space Wolf codex isn't out yet. You want someone to rage at, and they are an easy target. How you choose to live your life is up to you. But don't expect a pass when your action deviate from your words.

You are at least the 10th person to think I am angry about SW not having a codex. Seriously, why is anything anyone says online that is even slightly negative towards a company instantly put into, "they are so angry". There are plenty of armies that I have interest in playing, and plan to do so over the SW, I just wanted to see what they bring to the table since their Index units had and have a lot of promise.

Oh, and that narrative people "built up" is well founded, things don't form out of thin air, they have a basis, no matter how much die hard fans refuse to see it. I expect no pass whatsoever, I just want to see GW be smarter about their codex releases, and take the time required to release them complete, so the people who actually want to play those armies aren't locked into a unit spam list like Custodes and those damn jetbikes.

The reason you built up that persona, was because you came in complaining that armies you don't think should exist were getting priority over wolves and orks.

Custodes maybe do need more units but they can only do so much in 1 pass. They can only make so many kits at any given time and they clearly thought that was enough for custodes. You mention they're missing unit types to round them out, such as chaff or anti psykers, but ignore the fact they're meant to have those missing by intent due to their style.

Dudeface wrote:
Custodes maybe do need more units but they can only do so much in 1 pass. They can only make so many kits at any given time and they clearly thought that was enough for custodes. You mention they're missing unit types to round them out, such as chaff or anti psykers, but ignore the fact they're meant to have those missing by intent due to their style.

Yes you are EXPECTED to take detachment of other factions to fill out. Need cheap bodies? You are EXPECTED to take IG detachment along.

GW decided to forget about self-sufficient factions years ago. Why sell one codex and one line of models for player when you can sell 3!

tneva82 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Custodes maybe do need more units but they can only do so much in 1 pass. They can only make so many kits at any given time and they clearly thought that was enough for custodes. You mention they're missing unit types to round them out, such as chaff or anti psykers, but ignore the fact they're meant to have those missing by intent due to their style.

Yes you are EXPECTED to take detachment of other factions to fill out. Need cheap bodies? You are EXPECTED to take IG detachment along.

GW decided to forget about self-sufficient factions years ago. Why sell one codex and one line of models for player when you can sell 3!

Whilst this is a knock on of the allies systems, can you please back up that statement with where in the custodes book it tells me to refer to the IG book to fill out my army? GW don't expect anything of you, that's a personal/community driven opinion and is no more fact for being in caps.

CelticKodiak wrote:


1. What other purchasing options do you have with 40k? You cannot 3d print your own models, you cannot buy models made by a 3rd party unless they are explicitly given permission from GW to make them. They have a stranglehold on their IP, so it correlates just fine.
2. Really? The vast majority wants incomplete codex for their armies that require a second codex just to fill in required roles? Okay.

You have other game systems. You're not entitled to GW's IP. And you're not entitled to dictate how other people would enjoy it. GSC, Knights, AC, etc all have distinct fluff and (eventually) stratagems.

You can go check the poll I put up to view some of the community's sentiment on the issue in lieu of injecting your bias. If you have such a moral objection to the process surely you'd be able to convince your friends to play something else.

3. Yet I skim other forums and see issues pop up everywhere about overpowered Eldar, underpowered GSC, completely useless Ruststalkers with no transport options, and terminators being entirely underpowered for their cost. Yes, it seems this is exactly what the community wants, you are right, I conjured up these issues, no one has these problems. Expecting common sense shouldn't be an expectation, it should be a requirement.

Not sure what Eldar has to do with this. GSC doesn't have a codex yet and a lot changed this edition, so...yea. I don't see anywhere where the Knights book would have transports for Ruststalkers. Terminators are also completely unrelated to codex merging.

So, yes, you conjured these up to make a poorly constructed point. There's nothing precluding GW from adding units to existing factions. They're even doing it right now with Adeptus Custodes and FW dreads. Accept the reality that not all these factions will have every single tool under the sun and that the current release schedule doesn't allow for everyone to be a special snowflake.

Guys, if they were REALLY trying to just pull apart subfactions in order to get money, then Militarum Tempestus would have had their own book... Which they don't. They would have released a separate book with Ynnari... they didn't. They would have had 3 codexes for Dark Eldar (Cabals, Cults, Covens)... they didn't. I think this is textbook grumbling from someone who didn't get exactly what they wanted and are throwing a fit.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

CelticKodiak wrote:


1. What other purchasing options do you have with 40k? You cannot 3d print your own models, you cannot buy models made by a 3rd party unless they are explicitly given permission from GW to make them. They have a stranglehold on their IP, so it correlates just fine.

You have other game systems. You're not entitled to GW's IP.

Hah, yes. People/Organisations are supposed to have a "stranglehold" on IP that they create. That's the whole point.

If you want their IP then you have to get it from them or parties that they authorise or you get something different from someone else.

I'm curious how he thinks this is supposed to work?