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.

If you think there's nothing wrong with 40K, then this might not be the thread for you. If you think formations are cool, and they're in the best interest of a balanced game, then this thread might not be for you. If you think GMCs and Super-heavies belong in a standard game of 40K, well, I think you understand that we will disagree

But, how does GW fix what it has broken: a hopelessly complicated and unbalanced melange of codexes, supplements, webstore exclusive formations, and one-off rules additions? I don't think it can. I don't foresee a time when GW tells its customers that all of these formations and gigantic $100+ models are no longer welcome in a standard game. How could it? What would be the backlash to such a complete walk-back of existing rules?

So, if GW is unable or unwilling to fix its game, what chance is there of an independent ruleset being introduced and widely played? Ninth Age and Kings of War have had decent success, but they stepped in to a void that GW created with its abandonment of WFB. Can a new, independent ruleset be created and adopted by players while GW still actively produces an official version of 40K?

I see threads created about fixing this unit or that codex, and it never ceases to amaze me that the majority of the suggestions to fix something almost invariably involve MORE RULES: this gun needs rending, this unit needs FNP, or this codex needs this set of special rules. Needless complexity and never-ending, cascading rules are what's wrong with 40K. It's like looking at a rotting building with structural problems, and thinking "If we just add a few more floors and extra rooms..." 40K needs a complete re-thinking of its core mechanics. It would need a complete re-balance and re-write of every single codex in one fell swoop. GW will never do this. It is not their financial interest to do so.

TL;DR Can a third-party created 40K ruleset be successful while GW still actively promotes its bloated, broken version of 40K? Are a significant number of people so hopelessly wed to GW that they are willing to circle the drain for as long as an official ruleset (no matter how bad it may be) exists?

GW cant fix it game. However GW AND the playerbase can. If GW would listen to us and maybe fully playtest its rules with people outside of GW then I think you will see a better edition. Let GW make a codex and not release it. Then ask for volunteers on their website to recieve an un published codex to test the rules and have them give feedback.

I think that GW saw what PP did with warmachine and hordes, making everything balanced by making it all over powered. Rather than de-escalating the game, GW seems to be trying to fix the kiln by burning out the heating coils.

Look at the Tau Codex: Tau players were fully expecting some nerfing of the codex, with the mildest being a 15 point increase for the Ion Accelerator. That didn't happen. GW proceeded to take some of the most broken units and allowed them to be taken in multiple model units rather than monats, and Stormsurges as GMCs instead of SHW to maintain the feel of the codex.

If 8th isn't a de-escelation ala 3rd after RT, I may just give up on this game.

I get the feeling GW really has put itself into a spot where the only way to go is up. That is stronger units, powers what have you. So fantasy end times style pretty much. Which isn't what I'd want. I don't mind the whole MORE rules thing. As long as it adds flavour and doesn't break the game.
I don't think 7th edition is that bad either. I mean, all of GW's rules could use a revamp and some tweaking to actually work the way they should. And they definitely need some kind of layer/timing system -_-. But I don't think it's the base rule set that is so broken. That came with the power avalanche.

That said, they should rethink the whole game system and then reboot from there. Not changing it so much in spirit, but in mechanics. GW being who they are though, I am pretty confident they are unable to fix the game... like... ever. Nor do GW have any intention to do so. They clearly don't care about the actual game.

I'm not so sure anybody else could pick it up if it ever breaks either. I like to believe that most people play the game because of the lore for the most part. Not in the sense of building fluffy armies, but it is what drives people to play 40k. The whole grimdark thing and art design is just so awesome.
Take that away and there isn't really much left. The actual gameplay isn't all that engaging with no in game formations/flanks mattering or tactics in the sense of hidden tricks. Epic or armageddon would fare better I think. Armageddon mostly because it looks so darn awesome lol

Xerics wrote:GW cant fix it game. However GW AND the playerbase can. If GW would listen to us and maybe fully playtest its rules with people outside of GW then I think you will see a better edition. Let GW make a codex and not release it. Then ask for volunteers on their website to recieve an un published codex to test the rules and have them give feedback.

Historically, GW has not given much thought to its customer's desires when it comes to games design. Previous FAQs have been seemingly random fixes either to questions that were never asked or, worse, created new questions that needed to be further clarified. There also seems to be a major disconnect between RAW and RAI: honestly, we don't know what a given designer is thinking because they do not share any of their thought processes beyond some tepid White Dwarf articles the week a new release hits the shelves.

carldooley wrote:
If 8th isn't a de-escelation ala 3rd after RT, I may just give up on this game.

I would agree with the need to bring the game back down to a more manageable level, but how exactly is that possible? How do you tell someone who bought in to the Gladius Strike Force that all those Rhinos and Drop Pods now have a points cost again? How do you tell the guy with the Imperial Knights codex that his Adamantine Lance is no longer game legal? I just do not see an 8th Edition that turns the clock back to a 3rd-5th Edition paradigm of single FOC, no allies, no free stuff, and no LoWs gameplay.

All they need is WD40 and some duct tape... Or wood glue and a tack hammer.

Judging by the average crap Chaos and Orks just got compared to the OOT Marine stuff I dont think they have the ability or inclination.

 the_Armyman wrote:
I would agree with the need to bring the game back down to a more manageable level, but how exactly is that possible? How do you tell someone who bought in to the Gladius Strike Force that all those Rhinos and Drop Pods now have a points cost again? How do you tell the guy with the Imperial Knights codex that his Adamantine Lance is no longer game legal? I just do not see an 8th Edition that turns the clock back to a 3rd-5th Edition paradigm of single FOC, no allies, no free stuff, and no LoWs gameplay.

By doing it? Apoc is quite likely still going to be a thing, and you are mentioning things like Knight Lances and so on? GW is in the business of selling models - and it won't just be knight players who will have models that they cannot use anymore (or make centerpieces); tau have the stormsurge, eldar have the wraithknight, etc. I play tau, but I also have Coteaz and a bunch of assassins. If they limit us back to solo CADs with no allies, are people likely to toss their partial armies that used to be acceptable allies, or will people acquire more models to make those detachments into legal CADs?

Frankly, I was surprised that the Ally schtick lasted beyond 6th. I expected it to be a solo edition move to sell more models.

No. The game is going exactly how GW wants it to go. They release a large plastic model or a box set with minimum models in it at rediculiously high prices and people still buy three of them because they release a rule set that allows them too.

In GWs eyes, there is nothing to fix.


As for a third party, any rules set released by anyone that scales to include 28mm models can be used with gw models. Heck I just played an game of infinity that was DE vs Space Wolves. (Aleph vs. Pan-O) It's all count as and infantry based, but it was cool looking.

You give them money and the wheels keep turning.

The only way to change the game is to not play or buy anymore.

You want to make a difference? Vote with your wallet because money talks and Bull***** walks.

I honestly don't think GW can fix 40K. Thankfully my group spun off half way through the 5th Ed - we could see the writing on the wall back then. Unfortunately most players don't have a regular cadre of players with similar tastes or the desire to 'fix the game' to an acceptable standard...it takes a fair bit of work. The trouble was worth it for us, and don't see any of us going back to chasing GW's latest insult. It's a shame this just isn't practical for most people.

As mentioned in the OP, it's ridiculous how so many players accustomed to the GW mindset try to solve mistakes with more layers of the same kind of tripe. I sympathize with those caught in GW's incessant maelstrom, but unless they find an alternative the future for them is bleak.

Eldarain wrote:Judging by the average crap Chaos and Orks just got compared to the OOT Marine stuff I dont think they have the ability or inclination.

Jayden63 wrote:No. The game is going exactly how GW wants it to go. They release a large plastic model or a box set with minimum models in it at rediculiously high prices and people still buy three of them because they release a rule set that allows them too.

In GWs eyes, there is nothing to fix.


As for a third party, any rules set released by anyone that scales to include 28mm models can be used with gw models. Heck I just played an game of infinity that was DE vs Space Wolves. (Aleph vs. Pan-O) It's all count as and infantry based, but it was cool looking.

Sounds about right. And I think Amanita is right - I don't think they can, either. Warhammer 40K is broken beyond repair simply because GW has made too many choices (I don't want to say mistakes because it's too easy for us to say that in hindsight) that haven't been to the benefit of the game.

That being said, this is why you can House Rule things and, especially in a more casual setting and/or with mates, you can be selective about which rules you do and do not use. [This obviously isn't going to work with many strangers or acquaintances at your FLGS or at Tournaments]. There are often been times when I've used House Rules, and it's a fantastic way to try and balance the game, but as far as GW doing it? They're too far up crap creek with too small of a paddle to do anything about it now.

With all that in mind, I think a Third Party Rule Set could work just fine as long as GW would be willing to outsource such a thing to somebody else. Without the express permission of GW, I don't think it can work purely because a Third Party trying to do it would either be a company or organisation trying to do it (who would be immediately sued for Copyright Infringement because they don't have GW's permission), or a person or small group of people who I would bet would run out of steam before getting to the end.

TLDR? I think it can deffinitely work as long as GW is willing to outsource the creation of Rule Sets to a Third Party. For now, either not playing or House Ruling will work.

Grief wrote:You give them money and the wheels keep turning.

The only way to change the game is to not play or buy anymore.

You want to make a difference? Vote with your wallet because money talks and Bull***** walks.

As seemingly noble and logical as that idea sounds, I get the feeling that would more likely lead to bankruptcy than a fixed, balanced game that we can all enjoy. So this may not be the best solution if you want to be able to come back to the hobby one day when it's balanced and fair [because there may not be a hobby to come back to if everyone does this]. The other thing is that they are a modelling company first and a games company second (ironic given their name, right?), so at the very least it should be no surprise they're not getting the rules right.

Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

Maybe another company can buy their IP. If not who cares. Another company can finally step up and fill the void with their own IP. If GW doesnt exist, then they cant sue people for making stuff very similar to their designs.

GW owns non miniature games such as Dawn of War and Battle Fleet Gothica, Blood Bowl, and that Warhammer Total War. GW cant truly go bankrupt if they can make money off of those games.

But havent you noticed something? They remade blood bowl, Battlefleet gothica and total war: warhammer on a digital platform?

What if, wh40k finally becomes unprofitable they stop making minatures. Years latter they try to reboot it digitally. No not like Dawn of War, but how they did battle fleet gothica to closely resemble the table top version.

Think about it.

Grief wrote:
Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

But in the context of the OP's question, this is one of the worst things that can happen. We're taking about dishing out the rights and ability to make a coherent, balance Rule Set to a Third Party, not "Starving GW Out" to the point where they don't even make the models anymore. What would be the point in that? We would have a company that isn't making models or rules anymore because it no longer has the capacity to do so. Also, I doubt any Third Party will create a Rule Set to pair with a set of models that is no longer in production.

Whether or not GW can be successful by simply making games on a digital platform has nothing to do with what the OP asked. Absolutely nothing.

 the_Armyman wrote:


TL;DR Can a third-party created 40K ruleset be successful while GW still actively promotes its bloated, broken version of 40K? Are a significant number of people so hopelessly wed to GW that they are willing to circle the drain for as long as an official ruleset (no matter how bad it may be) exists?

Yes, but the fans won't let this happen.

Put any two 40k fans together and try to get them to agree to (a) what the problems are and (b) what is the solution to said problem. Won't happen, because everyone and their monkey has a different idea of how this should be done (and their way is the Right Way). Now multiply this by thousands.

House rules and home brews work, but on a local scale with small groups of like minded individuals. But for anything larger scale thry cause as many problems as they solve. The other problem is you end up with dozens of competing sets of fan made comps, and most fan designed systems (designed my amateurs essentially, and I mean no disrespect by that!) for all their enthusiasm, are often somewhat lacking in quality and direction most of the time, as a lot of the, are about playing the game 'the RIght WAy' and punishing those that want to have fun in different ways.

Aos has gone down this direction with various fan comps. And there is already disagreement as to what gets used where. Or whether to stick with the official 'pointless' approach and just 'eyeball' the balance. And Aos is a 'new' game. With a small playerbase. Try doing that to what still remains one of the largest single games in the niche...

 IllumiNini wrote:

Grief wrote:
Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

But in the context of the OP's question, this is one of the worst things that can happen. We're taking about dishing out the rights and ability to make a coherent, balance Rule Set to a Third Party, not "Starving GW Out" to the point where they don't even make the models anymore. What would be the point in that? We would have a company that isn't making models or rules anymore because it no longer has the capacity to do so. Also, I doubt any Third Party will create a Rule Set to pair with a set of models that is no longer in production.

Whether or not GW can be successful by simply making games on a digital platform has nothing to do with what the OP asked. Absolutely nothing.

As long as people give money to GW, GW doesn't have to fix the game.

Only when GW cant make money off of wh40k then they can scrap wh40k and stop making models. There is enough wh40k modes floating around on ebay and 3rd party resellers.

Only then can wh40k can be fixed by making rule without the intentions to sell the models.

Grief wrote:
Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

30K/40K is very good. GW is done good except in gaming. You can fix these by using different rules. Lore and models are good IMO. Setting is superb.

You can use old rules if you want. But it is not easy because other people uses different rules, we need a strong gaming community if we want use a other rules than current gw rules.

Wants GW fix 40k?

 Draco wrote:

Grief wrote:
Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

30K/40K is very good. GW is done good except in gaming. You can fix these by using different rules. Lore and models are good IMO. Setting is superb.

You can use old rules if you want. But it is not easy because other people uses different rules, we need a strong gaming community if we want use a other rules than current gw rules.

That's a matter of opinion. Because I know some people, myself included that hate the retconning of the Necrons and also Wolfy McWolf Wolf riding his WolfWolf of Wolfyness.

Rules are a mess that GW won't fix, because people have already fixed it for them (see FLG, house rulings, etc). They're looking to sell their big kits as much as possible

Grief wrote:

 IllumiNini wrote:

Grief wrote:
Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

But in the context of the OP's question, this is one of the worst things that can happen. We're taking about dishing out the rights and ability to make a coherent, balance Rule Set to a Third Party, not "Starving GW Out" to the point where they don't even make the models anymore. What would be the point in that? We would have a company that isn't making models or rules anymore because it no longer has the capacity to do so. Also, I doubt any Third Party will create a Rule Set to pair with a set of models that is no longer in production.

Whether or not GW can be successful by simply making games on a digital platform has nothing to do with what the OP asked. Absolutely nothing.

As long as people give money to GW, GW doesn't have to fix the game.

Only when GW cant make money off of wh40k then they can scrap wh40k and stop making models. There is enough wh40k modes floating around on ebay and 3rd party resellers.

Only then can wh40k can be fixed by making rule without the intentions to sell the models.

3rd Party Re-sellers of models aside: You want GW to give up what they do best (Creating models) because they can't do rules (Which - I'll remind you again - is something that is secondary to models for them)?

And you want to get better rules for the models they create by driving them from the tabletop industry entirely? Which, mind you, could send them bankrupt. I'm not talking "Our tabletop division is flopping - let's stick to other platforms and games", I'm talking flat out, 100%, GW doesn't exist anymore bankrupt. That won't help W40K, it will destroy it.

But what if somebody else picks up the IP? My bet is that it will take them years to bring it back up to speed. And what's to say that if somebody else pick up the IP, that they won't make the same sorts of choices and mistakes that GW have?

What you're suggesting we do is essentially destroy a company in the hopes that the MIGHT pull their act together in some way or another and eventually allow for a better version of the game to be born. I feel very confident in saying that your idea will NOT work.

And in all honesty, I'd rather a hobby centered around a set of models with a set of broken rules than a hobby centered around buying used models and outdated rules off of online stores that are overpriced because it's a discontinued line of products.

Draco wrote:

Grief wrote:
Thats the whole point. Starve GW out. Put them out of business.

30K/40K is very good. GW is done good except in gaming. You can fix these by using different rules. Lore and models are good IMO. Setting is superb.

You can use old rules if you want. But it is not easy because other people uses different rules, we need a strong gaming community if we want use a other rules than current gw rules.

I agree with this. Everything apart from the rule set is fantastic. Obviously due to the scope, there's always going to be elements that I do and don't like, and any other given person isn't going to necessarily agree with me, but such is the way of things with such a big fictional universe. But as I have said repeatedly - they are a model company above all else, and realistically, that's the only thing we can almost surely trust them to get right.


Also, take any person: If they are in this hobby for the gaming while at the same time they find the rules unbearably broken, then this is not the hobby for you. Period.

Rules need to be rebuilt from the ground up honestly. If the cores rotten it doesn't matter how much work you out into codexes and units.

The very core of the game is conflicting. They need to pick to either be a smaller platoon scale type game with cool character and detail (Bolt action scale of say 30-50 infantry and a vehicle or two tops per side) or go for a more streamlined mass battle game.

To do the former, more strict limits need to be put on units that belong in apocalypse (knights, riptides, baneblades, etc.) And toning down on weapons and abilities like invisibility or D spam. Rules that support using "fodder" like orks and guardsmen need to be put in place to make them relevant. More emphasis can be put on characters and special rules, with a heavy emphasis on UNIVERSAL special rules used over each unit getting its own special snowflake rules in its codex, with a couple flavor abilities kept in each book like orders for IG and Waaaagh for Orks.

To do the latter, the game needs to be streamlined, quite ruthlessly in many places. The "hit/wound/save/potential second save" system works fine with a few squads are on the table, but when it's a platoon of guardsmen shooting at a mob of boyz it's hell. Honestly, a "shooter rolls to hit/defender rolls to save" system would work just as well, with perhaps a few modifiers for special situations like cover or range bonuses/penalties and heavier weapons giving a basic penalty to the save the defender can make. Thus cutting the rolling in half. Characters need to have their insanely long lists of special rules slashed and simplified if there's going to be dozens of models per side. Casualty removal would need to go back to owner chooses unless models have precision shot. I can go on and on.

Dropping the outdated "move/shoot/ charge" system at IGOUGO and embracing things like alternating unit activation (ala dropzone commander/bolt action) freedom to do actions in any order with a limit of the amount (like starship trooper's 'two actions, in any order or even the same twice") and embracing some sort of reaction mechanic to keep the opposing player engaged while you're moving would all help too (Starship troopers,/bolt action) We've come a long way in game design in the past two years, and it makes me really sad to see 40k stuck in the mud as all these cool new ideas pop up.

Too true. I love Infinity ARO's.

"Sir! The Tyranids are coming! Return fire!"
"Belay that! It is their turn, we must let them shoot at us! I welcome our new alien overlords!"

GW can easily fix the game. They just have to 1) admit the game is important to selling models, 2) admit there is a problem, and 3) hire good rules writers who will 4) platest.

 jonolikespie wrote:
1) admit the game is important to selling models

Probably not going to happen. Why? I've said it a million times already.

 jonolikespie wrote:
2) admit there is a problem

Haha yep. We can hope. I'll be the first person to admit that when there's a problem caused by me or with me, I'm probably going to be down low on the list of people admitting it out aloud. What makes you think that GW is going to hold a different mentality to this?

 jonolikespie wrote:
3) hire good rules writers who will 4) playtest.

I don't think their rule writers are bad per se, but I think the writers need to take a step back and take a look at the big picture of what they've created. I reckon @MrMoustaffa isn't very far off the mark at all when (s)he says that they need to look at the very core rules, restructure or rewrite them, and then work from there. But I honestly don't think they're going to do anything remotely like this. A Third Party might if the writing of rules was outsourced to them. It'd definitely be easier for a Third Party to do it as well. I mean, you remember looking over your maths homework or your english essay and finding no problems, but the minute somebody else looks at it, they pick out all the problems and help you fix it? That's what it will be like, but the Third Party won't be helping GW fix it, the Third Party will be doing it themselves.

That brings up the question though: If it's only a matter getting an outside perspective, why don't GW do that? Or listen to its fans/customers? Simple - for whatever, reason, that's not really how GW works in the grand scheme of things.

The big problem is that GW is essentially asking novelists to design a statistics/numbers based game. Leave the novelists to the fluff, hire a couple statisticians to write the rules and assign stats/point values. The writers are out of their depth.

 slip wrote:
The big problem is that GW is essentially asking novelists to design a statistics/numbers based game. Leave the novelists to the fluff, hire a couple statisticians to write the rules and assign stats/point values. The writers are out of their depth.

Not just novelists, but novelists that have a screwed perspective. They think that everyone enjoys the game purely based on the fluff, so "obviously they will not want to min-max at all! They will all want to recreate games from these awesome stories we're telling!"

We take the rules infinitely more seriously than the writers of the rules do.

 jonolikespie wrote:
GW can easily fix the game. They just have to 1) admit the game is important to selling models, 2) admit there is a problem, and 3) hire good rules writers who will 4) platest.

Whats worse is GW could get player feedback really cheap and easy by hosting tournaments and do quick quizzes.

 the_Armyman wrote:
.

TL;DR Can a third-party created 40K ruleset be successful while GW still actively promotes its bloated, broken version of 40K? Are a significant number of people so hopelessly wed to GW that they are willing to circle the drain for as long as an official ruleset (no matter how bad it may be) exists?

I for sure would like to play an unofficial 40k version with rebalanced point costs of everything.
I don't want other rules etc. I still want to play 40k and don't mind things being powerfull, what I do mind is players not paying enough points or too many points for those models. Just a rebalancing of points based on the community comp system or something similar would be good enough for me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A note such system should have been build by a larger group of sensible persons that play multiple armies and should also get lots of feedback based fine-tuning. I don't want to play a game rebalanced from the point of view from a single army / player who likes to play with rocks and thus nerfs paper.

 carldooley wrote:
I think that GW saw what PP did with warmachine and hordes, making everything balanced by making it all over powered. Rather than de-escalating the game, GW seems to be trying to fix the kiln by burning out the heating coils.

Look at the Tau Codex: Tau players were fully expecting some nerfing of the codex, with the mildest being a 15 point increase for the Ion Accelerator. That didn't happen. GW proceeded to take some of the most broken units and allowed them to be taken in multiple model units rather than monats, and Stormsurges as GMCs instead of SHW to maintain the feel of the codex.

If 8th isn't a de-escelation ala 3rd after RT, I may just give up on this game.

I certainly wasn't expecting any nerfing of the codex, as Tau have been lower-tier for a while now. Eldar, Necrons, even Space Marines (think Battle Company MSU) over took them.

What I'd like to see is IG, DE, Nids, Orks, CSM get a boost up to the top-tier in power level.

A simple errata would fix Eldar - make scatterlasers one per 3 bikes, add 100 points onto the Wraithknight, allow the warp spiders to jump only once per shooting phase.

But... as evidenced by the whole CSM debacle (two supplements, NO NEW CODEX...), geedubs are only (half?) listening.

I do think they are improving - but change is slow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IllumiNini wrote:

I don't think their rule writers are bad per se, but I think the writers need to take a step back and take a look at the big picture of what they've created. I reckon @MrMoustaffa isn't very far off the mark at all when (s)he says that they need to look at the very core rules, restructure or rewrite them, and then work from there. But I honestly don't think they're going to do anything remotely like this. A Third Party might if the writing of rules was outsourced to them. It'd definitely be easier for a Third Party to do it as well. I mean, you remember looking over your maths homework or your english essay and finding no problems, but the minute somebody else looks at it, they pick out all the problems and help you fix it? That's what it will be like, but the Third Party won't be helping GW fix it, the Third Party will be doing it themselves.

That brings up the question though: If it's only a matter getting an outside perspective, why don't GW do that? Or listen to its fans/customers? Simple - for whatever, reason, that's not really how GW works in the grand scheme of things.

They could do themselves a huge favour by outsourcing their games design to WotC or FFG.

I imagine most people like myself have bought a model they're not all that keen on the look of simply because it's required for your force to be effective, and it's usually dam expensive.
If Games Workshop are a model company first and gaming company second why do they still make overpowered rules for their latest kits whilst neglecting the old ones.
As with most things in the world it all sadly boils down to money.
Games Workshop won't fix 40k simply because it wouldn't make them more money, I also don't think they have the ability too either.
My guess is we'll soon have a new madatory unit type, maybe something like a massively overpowered burrowing unit (Morlocs for all) , or suddenly everyone will be given Hellicopters or boats will start making an appearance. Every one will buy them, and the old units will flounder, this will continue whilst it makes them money