Switch Theme:

GW telling us how it is.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Anyone else wish that GW would give us information about their future products. I love the new Havocs, they look amazin;g rules are as expected, but I'm not going to buy them unless they are in the World Eaters codex. I just wish they could say, 'yeah these will be in the WE codex in the future' its probably unreasonable to ask that of GW, but I don't think it could hurt their business by doing that.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/05 22:55:47


 
   
Made in ca
Fresh-Faced New User




I think it would take away from the awe factor if they completely revealed future plans. I mean, if they said 'this model comes out in two months' it allows a customer's interest time to fade. It also could line up disappointment if plans change. Plus, if they reveal something there's definitely going to be criticisms and suggestions before the model is even out, so they can avoid that pressure as well.

I like that they work in the shadows. Finding teasers and trying to make predictions is fun for a lot of people.
   
Made in gb
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets





Cardiff

I mean, they haven’t announced a WE Codex, so not sure how they could say these guys will be in a book they haven’t announced.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in us
Stalwart Space Marine





You would think they would want to give information on what products they're working on to excite their customers.

"Discipline is the soul of an army. It makes small numbers formidable; procures success to the weak, and esteem to all."

– George Washington 
   
Made in us
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control






Across the Rubicon

Since this if Games Workshop we are talking about here, I kinda like how the 80 days of Vigilus worked. Games Workshop basically said in 80 days Abbadon/CSM stuff would probably be happening but exactly what and how much was left unsaid. So someone like me could put some money aside/hold off on somethings knowing something was on the horizon I might want to pick up. The actual release was much larger than I thought would be, but I still have enough money from the heads up to get pretty much what I wanted from it.

No doubt, I would like a better release schedule from GW. At the same time, I know I don't like setting deadlines that I don't have to so I can't disappoint others. So I understand why GW doesn't really inform their customers too far out. Epsecailly when that knowledge might curtail spending.

So I think the best we can get is GW making these 'fluff' announcements of some faction enacting a major operation in the so-and-so sector and they are expected to show up in XX days. This makes the 40k setting feel a little more alive, gives hints to which faction is likely to see some new stuff but at the same time, doesn't lock GW into making sure certain models get released at a set time. Sure, it is possible, and likely, that the customers could see the occasional Orktober, but as long as most of the releases go like the recent CSM (and they don't even need to be nearly as big either), I think the system works well enough for all parties involved.


   
Made in us
Stalwart Veteran Guard Sergeant





What's the upside for GW in this situation?
-Some customers might make purchases they'd otherwise hold off on.
-Hobbyists with long term plans would be happy.

The downsides would be:
- Some folks hold off on purchases they otherwise would have picked up. You lose both impulse purchases and the impetus to build out new armies from small pieces.
-Lose customer enthusiasm over long lead times.
-If something changes in development or production, they're opening themselves up to accusations of breaking promises or actively misleading customers.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/05 23:36:28


   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






 Formerly Wu wrote:
What's the upside for GW in this situation?
-Some customers might make purchases they'd otherwise hold off on.
-Hobbyists with long term plans would be happy.

The downsides would be:
- Some folks hold off on purchases they otherwise would have picked up. You lose both impulse purchases and the impetus to build out new armies from small pieces.
-Lose customer enthusiasm over long lead times.
-If something changes in development or production, they're opening themselves up to accusations of breaking promises or actively misleading customers.


Yeah but anyone with any sense would fall into the 'impulse' buying etc. There are far more people I would wager like my who won't buy stuff unless they know it will be in the codex. As for the changes in development, I can see that as being a big problem, but If they said 'look we are probably going to add these to the codex' I can live with that if they are being honest and they had to change the development, I could live with that and probably find away to proxy the havoc's.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




I honestly get where the OP is coming from. All Death Guard players and Thousand Son players lost a TON of units they had access to just an edition before. It's kinda silly.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I honestly get where the OP is coming from. All Death Guard players and Thousand Son players lost a TON of units they had access to just an edition before. It's kinda silly.


Exactly, I collect Death Guard and SM's as well as the whole khorne daemonkin thing, so that's where my 'if it isn't in the codex, I'm not buying it' comes from. Its not the money that I have an issue with, its the long long hours of painting and I hate to see those units or models just collecting dust when I find out they aren't in the codex.

I mean its a double edged sword, either they sell them as is and people like me don't buy them or they give us information that stops other collectors buying them, who had planed to before the info. I'd rather have the advanced info.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/04/06 00:01:21


 
   
Made in us
Horrific Hive Tyrant




Tampa, FL

This is how most other companies do things, but GW seems to want to have the "OOH WHAT IS COMING OUT THIS WEEK BETTER RUSH TO YOUR LOCAL GW AND BUY IT!" factor.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Wayniac wrote:
This is how most other companies do things, but GW seems to want to have the "OOH WHAT IS COMING OUT THIS WEEK BETTER RUSH TO YOUR LOCAL GW AND BUY IT!" factor.


Yeah, I wish there was a best of both worlds though.
   
Made in au
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan





Yeah, sorry but OP is right. It's an INCREDIBLY risky time to buy into WE or EC - and that's with full awareness of the possibility that a codex isn't even coming. That's the exact problem, we don't know. And from a business standpoint, it probably makes sense - they WANT you to buy the Havocs and the possessed, they don't want you choosing not to because a World Eater dex got announced and they said Havocs won't be included.

P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it. 
   
Made in us
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

Honestly, I feel this with just buying models in general.

I've started collecting my renegade guard as Scions, Admech and Imperial Guard (Traitor Scions, SkeleingtonMech, and Ratguard), and for all I know a lost and the damned codex could come out this year or next and invalidate my purchases, I wish they would just tell us what they're doing.

"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel






It's no different to buying a model only to find that a week later it gets nerfed into the ground.

Buying any model is 'risky' from both a competitive and a casual perspective. My KFF Big Mek can attest to that.

If GW release an EC book and Havocs aren't included who cares? Just ally them as another detachment in a soup list if you want to use them so badly, otherwise if you only want to play pure EC don't buy until a pure EC dex is released.

E - sp

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/06 08:15:41


 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




Well GW has a facebook and their own web page. Nothing stoping their design people from writing down a list of units they think are over performing and under perfoming, which they plan to change in some way. this way we can avoid people waiting for castellan changes in 2018 CA, and getting nohing.

They could do the same with new stuff. They don't have to say what they are going to give a faction. But they can say that lets say for the next 6 month they plan this and that faction, and two new products. Which can be anything new games, new systems, a new type of WD etc.
   
Made in gb
Smokin' Skorcha Driver




London UK

Every single new kit has a number of units that it has to sell to break even on the development costs. They would be stupid to release any info that might jeopardize current sales over future ones.

I would take that wager, I think there are far more people that would impulse buy than wait for future knowledge. They'd rather spend the next year to 2 years playing witht he kit in lists and risk souping for the future than hold off.

Given that world eaters and emp children chapter trait is in the codex reprint I would suggest that a world eaters codex is at the least a whole edition away.
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




I can imagine this does make GW more money, but it is based on mobile game mechanics or stuff EA does with their games. And just because GW can do such stuff, doesn't make it right.
I do agree that they won't change their way though, if they have been doing this since forever, they won't do it now and they are too big for anyone to force them. And on top of that they trained their buyers to be ok with that.
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




UK

With GW now giving us around 3 months or so notice before releases I think we are getting news at a good rate. The only line that I think would benefit overall from a long term prognosis is AoS and then only in terms of how they are going to formally take each army forward and which, if any, will be lost. I think GW has "sort of" done that around Christmas when they reorganised the listings; however since then we've seen several armies recombined and even lost one (greenskins) we are still left unsure. I think it might be that GW is using this to help their produciton side so that they phase each army in and then take on the bulk of ordering load then; rather than announce all their plans and get a mass ordering fiasco on a whole range.



What I'd rather GW did was give us formal notice on when models are removed from sale. Now I can fully accept that sometimes a mould will suddenly break on an old/slow selling model or GW has very low to no stock and doesn't want a sales spike and thus things do vanish without much upfront warning. But I'd at least like them to announce that models are removed and the thinking behind it.
I think it would make it far easier to support and be on board with them to know the reasoning for their choices rather than being left in the dark seeing models just "vanish" from the store. It's not as if they get away with it - most things that vanish get noticed pretty quickly.

A Blog in Miniature - now featuring reviews of many new Black Library books (latest Novellas) 
   
Made in gb
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




United Kingdom

The other thing to consider is if they announce something, they're giving 3rd Part Manufacturers time to get their own version out - look at all of the not-SOB, for example.
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




UK

beast_gts wrote:
The other thing to consider is if they announce something, they're giving 3rd Part Manufacturers time to get their own version out - look at all of the not-SOB, for example.


Aye and GW doesn't want 3rd parties profiting before GW can at least compete. Sister of Battle its probably not as much of an issue for them since they were already out and GW hasn't told us of any "new" models; just reworks of existing ones. Though the new of a new codex comiing will have boosted the 3rd party interest.

I can side with GW on this one, they pretty much are alone in the market in having 3rd party companies making specific alternate sculpts for their game. Heck companies ilke Raging Heroes make whole alternate armies for multiple lines of GW models. You don't see other companies having to deal with that kind of competition (you might argue that Reaper sort of does because they make a lot of generic fantasy models, but their core market is the RPG sector rather than the wargame sector). Warmachine doesn't have to contend with Raging Heroes making a whole alternate line of models so they can freely show pre-release stuff knowing that when they put it on sale that's when the first one of that kidn of model will be sold anywhere.


A Blog in Miniature - now featuring reviews of many new Black Library books (latest Novellas) 
   
Made in gb
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard




Nottingham

An Actual Englishman wrote:If GW release an EC book and Havocs aren't included who cares? Just ally them as another detachment in a soup list if you want to use them so badly, otherwise if you only want to play pure EC don't buy until a pure EC dex is released.
This. There's nothing stopping you from playing Open, or from just taking a Patrol/Vanguard/Spearhead/Outrider detachment of the unit you want to take.

Read the history of the Charadon Crusade: The Crusade of Fury was at an end.
Join the Crion Crusade: I think it's the combination of butt jokes, democratic necrons, explosions, and mind-fething that draws people to this Crusade like moths to a bug zapper - War Kitten
Rippy wrote:Never forgetti, template spaghetti.
DR:90S++G++MB+IPw40k07-D++A++/sWD366R++T(F)DM+ 
   
Made in gb
Princeps of the Emperor's Titan!






They do tell us what’s coming up?

We’re currently awaiting the following. And this may not be a complete list.

1. Forbidden Power
2. War Cry
3. Combat Zone
4. Renegade Heroes for BSF


Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives?Why not join us?

 
   
Made in au
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan





 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's no different to buying a model only to find that a week later it gets nerfed into the ground.

That couldn't be less true. It's very different. Many of us will happily play a model with bad rules, in fact I enjoy the challenge of making gak things have solid impact. Others of us play narrative. Above all, balance is changed from edition to edition, and something that is thoroughly garbage one edition is just as likely to be incredibly strong the next, just look at the ups and downs of a faction like GK, or Tyranids. There's a massive difference between weak rules, and "your models aren't even a part of this faction anymore".

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/06 11:27:13


P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it. 
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel






 SHUPPET wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's no different to buying a model only to find that a week later it gets nerfed into the ground.

That couldn't be less true. It's very different. Many of us will happily play a model with bad rules, in fact I enjoy the challenge of making gak things have solid impact. Others of us play narrative. Above all, balance is changed from edition to edition, and something that is thoroughly garbage one edition is just as likely to be incredibly strong the next, just look at the ups and downs of a faction like GK, or Tyranids. There's a massive difference between weak rules, and "your models aren't even a part of this faction anymore".

If you're going to play narrative you aren't constrained by the matched play rules that dictate that Havocs may or may not be part of an EC force?

Just make a fluff reason for the Havocs to be present if it turns out they're not part of an EC force according to their own codex if/when it arrives. Or ally in a detachment of another legion, as I suggested in my prior post and soup up to get around any matched play constraints.

Even if EC are not supposed to take Havocs if they eventually get their own codex, surely they'd be able to take them as an index option?
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 Jazzylee wrote:
You would think they would want to give information on what products they're working on to excite their customers.


You mean like the reveals they do about every 3 months? Or the Sisters project?

[im]https://imgur.com/kEUzFF0.png[im]

http://insighthammer.com/ 
   
Made in gb
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend





 SHUPPET wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's no different to buying a model only to find that a week later it gets nerfed into the ground.

That couldn't be less true. It's very different. Many of us will happily play a model with bad rules, in fact I enjoy the challenge of making gak things have solid impact. Others of us play narrative. Above all, balance is changed from edition to edition, and something that is thoroughly garbage one edition is just as likely to be incredibly strong the next, just look at the ups and downs of a faction like GK, or Tyranids. There's a massive difference between weak rules, and "your models aren't even a part of this faction anymore".


@SHUPPET - Look at the debacle that was Haarkon and that model's rules. Nerfed shortly after release the un-nerfed due to outrage

Not really arguing just providing an example.

I always preferred CSM when we had weak dexes. What I did not enjoy was the cry-fest.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/06 13:53:46


Please note, for those of you who play Chaos Daemons as a faction the term "Daemon" is potentially offensive. Instead, please play codex "Chaos: Mortally Challenged". Thank you. 
   
Made in au
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan





 An Actual Englishman wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's no different to buying a model only to find that a week later it gets nerfed into the ground.

That couldn't be less true. It's very different. Many of us will happily play a model with bad rules, in fact I enjoy the challenge of making gak things have solid impact. Others of us play narrative. Above all, balance is changed from edition to edition, and something that is thoroughly garbage one edition is just as likely to be incredibly strong the next, just look at the ups and downs of a faction like GK, or Tyranids. There's a massive difference between weak rules, and "your models aren't even a part of this faction anymore".

If you're going to play narrative you aren't constrained by the matched play rules that dictate that Havocs may or may not be part of an EC force?

Just make a fluff reason for the Havocs to be present if it turns out they're not part of an EC force according to their own codex if/when it arrives. Or ally in a detachment of another legion, as I suggested in my prior post and soup up to get around any matched play constraints.

Even if EC are not supposed to take Havocs if they eventually get their own codex, surely they'd be able to take them as an index option?

I guess you can do that in casual play, you can probably do what you want in any sort of casual play though if your opponent will agree to it. You won't be able to in narrative events though, which is the coolest things (I wish there were more). The rest of my post still stands though. I don't want to buy Havocs to put them in a force that can't play them in matched play (the majority of my play), can't play them in narrative events, can't play them if my opponent isn't interested, and can't play them unless the narrative specifically demands it. For the most part though, the other reasons I gave are the big ones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
 SHUPPET wrote:
 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's no different to buying a model only to find that a week later it gets nerfed into the ground.

That couldn't be less true. It's very different. Many of us will happily play a model with bad rules, in fact I enjoy the challenge of making gak things have solid impact. Others of us play narrative. Above all, balance is changed from edition to edition, and something that is thoroughly garbage one edition is just as likely to be incredibly strong the next, just look at the ups and downs of a faction like GK, or Tyranids. There's a massive difference between weak rules, and "your models aren't even a part of this faction anymore".


@SHUPPET - Look at the debacle that was Haarkon and that model's rules. Nerfed shortly after release the un-nerfed due to outrage

Not really arguing just providing an example.


Exactly

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/06 14:18:15


P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it. 
   
Made in gb
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard




Nottingham

SHUPPET wrote:I guess you can do that in casual play, you can probably do what you want in any sort of casual play though if your opponent will agree to it. You won't be able to in narrative events though, which is the coolest things (I wish there were more). The rest of my post still stands though. I don't want to buy Havocs to put them in a force that can't play them in matched play (the majority of my play), can't play them in narrative events, can't play them if my opponent isn't interested, and can't play them unless the narrative specifically demands it. For the most part though, the other reasons I gave are the big ones.
Okay, so even if your opponent isn't okay with it, you can't put Havocs in your normal detachment in Matched, and you don't have a narrative that fits, why can't you make a second detachment to put your Havocs in?

Read the history of the Charadon Crusade: The Crusade of Fury was at an end.
Join the Crion Crusade: I think it's the combination of butt jokes, democratic necrons, explosions, and mind-fething that draws people to this Crusade like moths to a bug zapper - War Kitten
Rippy wrote:Never forgetti, template spaghetti.
DR:90S++G++MB+IPw40k07-D++A++/sWD366R++T(F)DM+ 
   
Made in au
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan





 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
SHUPPET wrote:I guess you can do that in casual play, you can probably do what you want in any sort of casual play though if your opponent will agree to it. You won't be able to in narrative events though, which is the coolest things (I wish there were more). The rest of my post still stands though. I don't want to buy Havocs to put them in a force that can't play them in matched play (the majority of my play), can't play them in narrative events, can't play them if my opponent isn't interested, and can't play them unless the narrative specifically demands it. For the most part though, the other reasons I gave are the big ones.
Okay, so even if your opponent isn't okay with it, you can't put Havocs in your normal detachment in Matched, and you don't have a narrative that fits, why can't you make a second detachment to put your Havocs in?

Because assuredly, EC and WE trait will be removed from the Dex the first update after they split from it, just like what happened with TSOns and DG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not to mention the requirements for taking another detachment if this wasn't the case

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/06 14:59:38


P.S.A. I won't read your posts if you break it into a million separate quotes and make an eyesore of it. 
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel






 SHUPPET wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
SHUPPET wrote:I guess you can do that in casual play, you can probably do what you want in any sort of casual play though if your opponent will agree to it. You won't be able to in narrative events though, which is the coolest things (I wish there were more). The rest of my post still stands though. I don't want to buy Havocs to put them in a force that can't play them in matched play (the majority of my play), can't play them in narrative events, can't play them if my opponent isn't interested, and can't play them unless the narrative specifically demands it. For the most part though, the other reasons I gave are the big ones.
Okay, so even if your opponent isn't okay with it, you can't put Havocs in your normal detachment in Matched, and you don't have a narrative that fits, why can't you make a second detachment to put your Havocs in?

Because assuredly, EC and WE trait will be removed from the Dex the first update after they split from it, just like what happened with TSOns and DG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not to mention the requirements for taking another detachment if this wasn't the case

What are you talking about? What "requirements" for taking another detachment?

You need a HQ and a unit. That's it. Take a patrol if you need to. If you must have CP take a specialist detachment for Havocs, the one where you need a HQ and 3 Heavy Support.

There is absolutely nothing stopping you buying Havocs (or any other CSM unit) now and IF they are removed from EC just ally them in as another detachment. This feels like a load of whinging for nothing to be honest.
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: