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.

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

Here's an interesting quandry in the Sisters FAQ:

Q: Can allied Independent Characters benefit from Acts of Faith if the have joined an affected Sisters of Battle unit?
A: No

Q: Do Acts of Faith affect allied who have joined or been joined by Sisters of Battle independent characters or units?
A: Yes

So which is it? Are allies affected or not?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Here's an interesting quandry in the Sisters FAQ:

Q: Can allied Independent Characters benefit from Acts of Faith if the have joined an affected Sisters of Battle unit?
A: No

Q: Do Acts of Faith affect allied who have joined or been joined by Sisters of Battle independent characters or units?
A: Yes

So which is it? Are allies affected or not?

Both.
They do if they were already joined when AoF manifested.
Joining a unit that is already under effect of AoF does not transfer it to joining IC.

I would agree but all of the AoFs that I can think of happen in the shooting or assault phase and the joining occurs in the movement phase. Also none of the AoFs last longer than the phase that they are used so there shouldn't be any lag effects.
Maybe GW is thinking ahead (for once) and just putting this in there for future AoFs.

Why you would even take a normal dread now is beyond me.

That you write this garbage right after I explicitly explained why is beyond me.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

For one: GW has a long and storied history of using FAQ's to fix things that weren't broken, break things that were fixed, give people rules that they never had, and taking rules that were core aspects. All of this while leaving things unanswered that had been at the forefront of community consternation for some time. Delivering "more" of this is not necessarily an improvement. Especially now when they have to patch their earlier patches, and when these conflicting patches cause greater issues than if they'd just left well enough alone. I will grant you that at least TRYING means more to me than DOING NOTHING. It counts, even if it's causing new issues.

Secondly, enjoy your illusion of constant updates. I expect this to follow the exact same pattern as WHF8: New book, universal FAQ, then a universal patch to the FAQ and core rules that fixes practically nothing and breaks more, then SILENCE until you get your new book. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat. It'll give me a chance to use up some of that extra salt from Stickmonkey rumors...

Just realized:

Page 22 – Drop Pod Assault.
Replace this entry with the following rules:
“Drop Pod Assault: Drop Pods must enter play using the Deep
Strike rules. At the beginning of your first turn, choose half of
your Drop Pods (rounding up) to make a ‘Drop Pod Assault’.
Units making a Drop Pod Assault arrive on their controlling
player’s first turn. The arrival of the remaining Drop Pods is
rolled for as normal. A unit that Deep Strikes via Drop Pod
cannot charge in the turn it arrives.
Immobile: A Drop Pod cannot move once it has entered the
battle, and counts in all respects as a vehicle that has suffered
an Immobilised damage result that cannot be repaired in any
way.
Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of
impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe) then
reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order
to avoid the obstacle. Note that if a Drop Pod scatters off the
edge of the board then they will suffer a Deep Strike Mishap as
per the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.”

So no more Drop Pods for Black Templars Terminators, as they were granted permission to take them from the Drop Pod Assault rules.

The hell? Is GW on crack or do they just have a Vendetta (huehuehue) against Black Templars? Did a Templar burn down someone's collection of 40k fluff or something?

 Nagashek wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

For one: GW has a long and storied history of using FAQ's to fix things that weren't broken, break things that were fixed, give people rules that they never had, and taking rules that were core aspects. All of this while leaving things unanswered that had been at the forefront of community consternation for some time. Delivering "more" of this is not necessarily an improvement. Especially now when they have to patch their earlier patches, and when these conflicting patches cause greater issues than if they'd just left well enough alone. I will grant you that at least TRYING means more to me than DOING NOTHING. It counts, even if it's causing new issues.

Secondly, enjoy your illusion of constant updates. I expect this to follow the exact same pattern as WHF8: New book, universal FAQ, then a universal patch to the FAQ and core rules that fixes practically nothing and breaks more, then SILENCE until you get your new book. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat. It'll give me a chance to use up some of that extra salt from Stickmonkey rumors...

It doesn't matter if they're not broken, they're re-balancing the game and making tweaks to make sure it's fresh and doesn't conform. The paladins are a great example; They made all of them characters and a lot of people picked up on it to an extent where GW felt they had to regulate it. I just bought and painted 1850 worth of draigowing the past month, so I'm acutely aware of how annoying having to start over is, but I'm thrilled they're paying this much attention.

Also, continual patch is the way the games industry works by the way. Play league of legends? Balancing every three weeks. Play EVE Online? Patches every 2-3 months. This is how games are made today.

I can't tell you if GW are going to continue doing this. I hope they are, because it would mean a drastic improvement of the product. So far they have and you can either enjoy the fact that they're doing well or be bitter and whine about how it might not last.

Regardless of what, GW seems to have made huge strides this past year and listen to the whining on this board is godawful.

A lot of these internal balance issues should have been resolved before publication. Wholesale rule changes, (not FAQ clarifications) should not be being made this close to the original release. It goes to show insufficient play testing or lack of care considering the resources available to GW.

UNCLEBADTOUCH wrote:
A lot of these internal balance issues should have been resolved before publication. Wholesale rule changes, (not FAQ clarifications) should not be being made this close to the original release. It goes to show insufficient play testing or lack of care considering the resources available to GW.

No this happens pretty much in any live product ever. Welcome to games.

It does raise questions regarding the playtesting and GW's methodology for releases. Warmachine .2 was playtested in beta by the community for a while before book release, it allowed the company to have much of the crap ironed out by the very people they then sold the book to, that seems like a great idea.

Hellblades are swords :(
Kinda glad i didnt give any letters axes.

Just a shame since the last series of letters looked amazing, but had an axe :(

 Jackal wrote:
Hellblades are swords :(
Kinda glad i didnt give any letters axes.

Just a shame since the last series of letters looked amazing, but had an axe :(

Kinda of expected, really, since the current model itself shows a sword.
But then again, the old (and superior versions, imo) had an axe.
I'd hate to see the reaction of an old demon player who had the old bloodletters.

I don't understand why full reserve armies are not allowed. What is the point in giving full reserve armies an auto lose at the end of turn 1? It should be at the end of Turn 2 or after that you lose if you are tabled so you can use Flyers, Deep Strikers, and other dynamic parts of the game properly. It sucks the flavor out of my armies if I have to hide a unit or two on the board during deployment just so I can run the rest of my army the way I want. It's not like full reserve armies were top tier anyway, I just played it that way for fun... now I just lose at the end of Turn 1.

My Grey Knight Stormraven army and my Red Hunters (BA) all jump pack DoA army are not pleased. My Daemons are ROFLing at them since Daemonic Assault is way cooler while my Black Legion are pouting until their new book comes out.

 Stoffer wrote:

UNCLEBADTOUCH wrote:
A lot of these internal balance issues should have been resolved before publication. Wholesale rule changes, (not FAQ clarifications) should not be being made this close to the original release. It goes to show insufficient play testing or lack of care considering the resources available to GW.

No this happens pretty much in any live product ever. Welcome to games.

Trying to be patronizing. Ha ha funny guy.

There is not one game I have bought in the past 24 years that had a rule completely changed to the extent of the sudden LOS change GW has pulled within 3 months of release. Rules clarifications via FAQ's yes, full rules changes, no.

I'm not saying the change is good or bad. Just saying GW has become exceptionally lazy and standards are dropping When it comes to rules and publications. Look at the demon supplement, notice any problems there? What about the fact the publish photos of blu tacked models falling over, or the bendy lightning claws in the veteran bits packs.

These aren't oversights, when it reaches this extent its corporate attitude.

Awaits stoffers no doubt insightful and hilarious response.

 Stoffer wrote:

 Nagashek wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

For one: GW has a long and storied history of using FAQ's to fix things that weren't broken, break things that were fixed, give people rules that they never had, and taking rules that were core aspects. All of this while leaving things unanswered that had been at the forefront of community consternation for some time. Delivering "more" of this is not necessarily an improvement. Especially now when they have to patch their earlier patches, and when these conflicting patches cause greater issues than if they'd just left well enough alone. I will grant you that at least TRYING means more to me than DOING NOTHING. It counts, even if it's causing new issues.

Secondly, enjoy your illusion of constant updates. I expect this to follow the exact same pattern as WHF8: New book, universal FAQ, then a universal patch to the FAQ and core rules that fixes practically nothing and breaks more, then SILENCE until you get your new book. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat. It'll give me a chance to use up some of that extra salt from Stickmonkey rumors...

It doesn't matter if they're not broken, they're re-balancing the game and making tweaks to make sure it's fresh and doesn't conform. The paladins are a great example; They made all of them characters and a lot of people picked up on it to an extent where GW felt they had to regulate it. I just bought and painted 1850 worth of draigowing the past month, so I'm acutely aware of how annoying having to start over is, but I'm thrilled they're paying this much attention.

Also, continual patch is the way the games industry works by the way. Play league of legends? Balancing every three weeks. Play EVE Online? Patches every 2-3 months. This is how games are made today.

Does EVE online charge you $200 for its mandatory patches? Does League of Legends? Does League of Legends even CHARGE you?!? Poor examples. Try this: WoW pushes out a patch after a new expansion drops. This expansion wipes any characters that players have on their accounts that are Warlocks, forcing you to reroll your warlock from scratch and put in another 48hours of solid play time to max your level, redo your professions, and start gearing for endgame content. You can only start rerolling your Warlock if you purchase a WoW subscription for the next 14 mos.

On top of that, they "fixed" the problem where a Paladin's Seal of Justice procced for 5k points of damage too many by removing the Divine Shield from the game. Also the log-in servers crash every Friday at 1800 and have since release, leaving many people unable to play for hours at a time, but they are consumed by tweaking Cooking and can't be bothered to fix it.

Now you have some idea how people who played certain, once viable GW builds feel when those builds are rendered unplayable, illegal, or just plain unfun. In order to fix what is newly broken or illegal, one must invest MORE money into the hobby, then invest more TIME into the hobby, just to be able to PLAY as much as they used to. I've been playing WoW since patch 1.6. $15 a month since 2006. Core game. 3 expansions. That's about $1240. That covers the cost of one of my NINE armies between WHFB and WH40k. I get to play WoW a few hours each day. I get to play or paint Warhammer a couple hours once a week. If GW wants to start modelling itself after online gaming, it's going to need to lowering its costs. I've been playing my Dark Eldar since last October, so less than a year. 6 years for the cost of WoW versus less than one year of Dark Eldar. My Dark Eldar army is now needing a $200 repair bill to be viable, and I'm staring as much in now worthless models that can gather dust, and that's even if the new build can compete against how everything else works in 6e.

"It doesn't matter if it's not broken?" Do you even know how that sounds? Here's one, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Or "Fix what IS broke first." Anything else is a waste of time.

 Pyriel- wrote:

Why you would even take a normal dread now is beyond me.

That you write this garbage right after I explicitly explained why is beyond me.

I don't see how complainin about the venerable is a defense of the non venerable dread. Other than double autocanons no dread variant is particularly useful or viable anymore (and even that ones losing its usefulness). They pay too much for a close combat statline that is borderline useless.

I have a question for those poor people who bought the LE Rulebook. Did that lacquered book sleeve come with an additional LE sleeve or compartment for the ream of FAQ pages?

This is more sad due to the fact that this is a 25th anniversary rules set. Have to agree with the crowd that says they needed some due diligence before releasing such a limited and revered product.

 Stoffer wrote:

 Nagashek wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

For one: GW has a long and storied history of using FAQ's to fix things that weren't broken, break things that were fixed, give people rules that they never had, and taking rules that were core aspects. All of this while leaving things unanswered that had been at the forefront of community consternation for some time. Delivering "more" of this is not necessarily an improvement. Especially now when they have to patch their earlier patches, and when these conflicting patches cause greater issues than if they'd just left well enough alone. I will grant you that at least TRYING means more to me than DOING NOTHING. It counts, even if it's causing new issues.

Secondly, enjoy your illusion of constant updates. I expect this to follow the exact same pattern as WHF8: New book, universal FAQ, then a universal patch to the FAQ and core rules that fixes practically nothing and breaks more, then SILENCE until you get your new book. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat. It'll give me a chance to use up some of that extra salt from Stickmonkey rumors...

It doesn't matter if they're not broken, they're re-balancing the game and making tweaks to make sure it's fresh and doesn't conform. The paladins are a great example; They made all of them characters and a lot of people picked up on it to an extent where GW felt they had to regulate it. I just bought and painted 1850 worth of draigowing the past month, so I'm acutely aware of how annoying having to start over is, but I'm thrilled they're paying this much attention.

Also, continual patch is the way the games industry works by the way. Play league of legends? Balancing every three weeks. Play EVE Online? Patches every 2-3 months. This is how games are made today.

I can't tell you if GW are going to continue doing this. I hope they are, because it would mean a drastic improvement of the product. So far they have and you can either enjoy the fact that they're doing well or be bitter and whine about how it might not last.

Regardless of what, GW seems to have made huge strides this past year and listen to the whining on this board is godawful.

If they made huge strides in this past year they wouldn't have thrown the game balance out the window with sixth by making anything close combat oriented useless, and released a rulebook that required dozens of pages of FAQs to be playable without constant rules disputes. People defending GWs rules reminds me of battered housewife syndrome, no matter how many times they feth everything up royally they'll always have a loyal core of people who just don't know the difference between whats good and bad.

The Only way I would even listen to an argument like this is if you were a Tyranid player. You most likely built a gimmick army and now you are upset you can't pull shenanigans on people. T

This just in build solid armies that are balanced and you wont have anything to worry about. Now that GW puts out FAQ's in a quicker pace this will save you time and money.

 MDizzle wrote:
The Only way I would even listen to an argument like this is if you were a Tyranid player. You most likely built a gimmick army and now you are upset you can't pull shenanigans on people. T

This just in build solid armies that are balanced and you wont have anything to worry about. Now that GW puts out FAQ's in a quicker pace this will save you time and money.

Yes, blood angels using rhinos is gimmicky. Clearly I never should have done the thing that is described in the codex as how the army operates. Clearly they got the fast rhinos so that they could put sternguard in them, not assault troops.

But seriously. Where were the buffs to assault armies? They got worse with overwatch, lessened cover, less useful transports, weapon ap changes, atsknf changes, rapid fire changes, scenario changes, night fight changes, the addition of flyers, the addition of flying monstrous creatures, reserve changes, flanking changes, infiltrate changes.

Where did they get better to make up for the fact that they got nerfed in almost every part of the game they participated in? Hmm? Where?

 MDizzle wrote:
The Only way I would even listen to an argument like this is if you were a Tyranid player. You most likely built a gimmick army and now you are upset you can't pull shenanigans on people. T

This just in build solid armies that are balanced and you wont have anything to worry about. Now that GW puts out FAQ's in a quicker pace this will save you time and money.

Actually I love the FAQ clarification, it doesn't invalidate any of my armies or builds. What I hate is that my $100 dollar, ten pound monstrosity just gained more weight At this rate we will be up to 15lbs in no time

What kills me more is that they didn't even put the "fix" in the starter set. So now I have to print tiny faq pages or clumsily fold them in half to put them in my now no longer convenient "little" rulebook

@ShumaGorath Rhinos do not an army make bro you can do lots of nasty stuff with BA. As for the assault nerf I was they type of guy that would build lists with no shooting and just assault only. Assault is nerfed big time GW wants to take the game in a new direction now with assaults you have to pick your spots and choose your units wisely and they can have a great effect if people are not prepared for it.

@ShumaGorath Rhinos do not an army make bro you can do lots of nasty stuff with BA.

If I convert 50 models to have jump packs that I have to buy on ebay yeah, the army would become barely functional and still non viable. Doesn't sound worth the effort when one flyer can kill all the assault marines in the world without fear of reprisal.

As for the assault nerf I was they type of guy that would build lists with no shooting and just assault only. Assault is nerfed big time GW wants to take the game in a new direction now with assaults you have to pick your spots and choose your units wisely and they can have a great effect if people are not prepared for it.

No, what you do is you don't pick assaults at all. There's nothing forcing players into take sub optimal choices except for the fact that they already purchased them. When the best builds for blood angels feature no assaulting troops I hang up my hat and wait for them to fire mister ward.

 Nagashek wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:

 Nagashek wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

For one: GW has a long and storied history of using FAQ's to fix things that weren't broken, break things that were fixed, give people rules that they never had, and taking rules that were core aspects. All of this while leaving things unanswered that had been at the forefront of community consternation for some time. Delivering "more" of this is not necessarily an improvement. Especially now when they have to patch their earlier patches, and when these conflicting patches cause greater issues than if they'd just left well enough alone. I will grant you that at least TRYING means more to me than DOING NOTHING. It counts, even if it's causing new issues.

Secondly, enjoy your illusion of constant updates. I expect this to follow the exact same pattern as WHF8: New book, universal FAQ, then a universal patch to the FAQ and core rules that fixes practically nothing and breaks more, then SILENCE until you get your new book. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat. It'll give me a chance to use up some of that extra salt from Stickmonkey rumors...

It doesn't matter if they're not broken, they're re-balancing the game and making tweaks to make sure it's fresh and doesn't conform. The paladins are a great example; They made all of them characters and a lot of people picked up on it to an extent where GW felt they had to regulate it. I just bought and painted 1850 worth of draigowing the past month, so I'm acutely aware of how annoying having to start over is, but I'm thrilled they're paying this much attention.

Also, continual patch is the way the games industry works by the way. Play league of legends? Balancing every three weeks. Play EVE Online? Patches every 2-3 months. This is how games are made today.

Does EVE online charge you $200 for its mandatory patches? Does League of Legends? Does League of Legends even CHARGE you?!? Poor examples. Try this: WoW pushes out a patch after a new expansion drops. This expansion wipes any characters that players have on their accounts that are Warlocks, forcing you to reroll your warlock from scratch and put in another 48hours of solid play time to max your level, redo your professions, and start gearing for endgame content. You can only start rerolling your Warlock if you purchase a WoW subscription for the next 14 mos.

On top of that, they "fixed" the problem where a Paladin's Seal of Justice procced for 5k points of damage too many by removing the Divine Shield from the game. Also the log-in servers crash every Friday at 1800 and have since release, leaving many people unable to play for hours at a time, but they are consumed by tweaking Cooking and can't be bothered to fix it.

Now you have some idea how people who played certain, once viable GW builds feel when those builds are rendered unplayable, illegal, or just plain unfun. In order to fix what is newly broken or illegal, one must invest MORE money into the hobby, then invest more TIME into the hobby, just to be able to PLAY as much as they used to. I've been playing WoW since patch 1.6. $15 a month since 2006. Core game. 3 expansions. That's about $1240. That covers the cost of one of my NINE armies between WHFB and WH40k. I get to play WoW a few hours each day. I get to play or paint Warhammer a couple hours once a week. If GW wants to start modelling itself after online gaming, it's going to need to lowering its costs. I've been playing my Dark Eldar since last October, so less than a year. 6 years for the cost of WoW versus less than one year of Dark Eldar. My Dark Eldar army is now needing a $200 repair bill to be viable, and I'm staring as much in now worthless models that can gather dust, and that's even if the new build can compete against how everything else works in 6e.

"It doesn't matter if it's not broken?" Do you even know how that sounds? Here's one, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Or "Fix what IS broke first." Anything else is a waste of time.

Games workshop doesn't charge you for changes to the game either, they charge you for models which you can choose to buy, or not to buy. Your old models aren't obsolete, they might just be a bit less efficient which makes people like you upset, because you feel you have some sort of entitlement to win forever because you bought a certain model x years ago.Anyway, back to the point. Much like the games you mention, 40k runs by the exact same principle that changes not only help the balance of the game, but are good for business. League of Legends for example: You can buy their champions, but there are no guarantees that your particular champion will stay useful. In fact, they do patches to re-balance champions at least once a month, so you'll be "inspired" to try other champions. That's healthy for two reasons; 1. It makes the game seem fresh for the player, extending the lifetime of the product continually. 2. it makes you buy more champions. Sound familiar? That's because 40k works that way as well.

WoW isn't a good enough example because they don't really have the width in classes to do that, but if they had, you could be pretty certain they'd do the same. Oh and also, you pay a monthly fee to play wow AND you have to buy their stupid expansions. If you want to talk about being "forced to pay", WoW is a great example. 40k certainly isn't, if you have an army done, that army can play (with different efficiency, granted) for years.

Dumb companies balance because things are broken, smart companies balance because that's how you keep your game alive for 25 years. League of Legends is currently one of the most popular games in the world. They are so because of their frequent updates, not based on "things being broken", but shifting the balance of power constantly, meaning that no gamer can ever "settle" and be at the highest efficiency with a single hero for the rest of his life. It's smart and while you may be upset that it hurts your wallet from time to time, that's how good companies operate.

 Red Corsair wrote:
This is more sad due to the fact that this is a 25th anniversary rules set. Have to agree with the crowd that says they needed some due diligence before releasing such a limited and revered product.

Surely no GW product has ever been revered.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:

 Nagashek wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Stoffer wrote:
Are you people really complaining about them frequently updating the ruleset to make the game better? Talk about bitter vets. GW are doing exactly what digital companies are doing (and should be doing), they're "patching" their game to fix flaws. The fact that they're doing it so often shows you that it's a company going in the right direction.

I kinda find it funny, 5th was complaining how little things were faq'ed, how they often had to figure out things on their own or roll them off.

And now they do more FAQ's people bitch about to many FAQ's, really now? Have any of you played DA or BT when they were stuck in limbo with their ORIGINAL space marine stats when C:SM and others were getting boosted? And it took them a long time to update them to the new stuff?

For one: GW has a long and storied history of using FAQ's to fix things that weren't broken, break things that were fixed, give people rules that they never had, and taking rules that were core aspects. All of this while leaving things unanswered that had been at the forefront of community consternation for some time. Delivering "more" of this is not necessarily an improvement. Especially now when they have to patch their earlier patches, and when these conflicting patches cause greater issues than if they'd just left well enough alone. I will grant you that at least TRYING means more to me than DOING NOTHING. It counts, even if it's causing new issues.

Secondly, enjoy your illusion of constant updates. I expect this to follow the exact same pattern as WHF8: New book, universal FAQ, then a universal patch to the FAQ and core rules that fixes practically nothing and breaks more, then SILENCE until you get your new book. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat. It'll give me a chance to use up some of that extra salt from Stickmonkey rumors...

It doesn't matter if they're not broken, they're re-balancing the game and making tweaks to make sure it's fresh and doesn't conform. The paladins are a great example; They made all of them characters and a lot of people picked up on it to an extent where GW felt they had to regulate it. I just bought and painted 1850 worth of draigowing the past month, so I'm acutely aware of how annoying having to start over is, but I'm thrilled they're paying this much attention.

Also, continual patch is the way the games industry works by the way. Play league of legends? Balancing every three weeks. Play EVE Online? Patches every 2-3 months. This is how games are made today.

I can't tell you if GW are going to continue doing this. I hope they are, because it would mean a drastic improvement of the product. So far they have and you can either enjoy the fact that they're doing well or be bitter and whine about how it might not last.

Regardless of what, GW seems to have made huge strides this past year and listen to the whining on this board is godawful.

If they made huge strides in this past year they wouldn't have thrown the game balance out the window with sixth by making anything close combat oriented useless, and released a rulebook that required dozens of pages of FAQs to be playable without constant rules disputes. People defending GWs rules reminds me of battered housewife syndrome, no matter how many times they feth everything up royally they'll always have a loyal core of people who just don't know the difference between whats good and bad.

People who don't understand that patches/updates are a good thing remind me that people don't understand games or game companies at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anyway, sorry for derailing, back to FAQ talk again

People who don't understand that patches/updates are a good thing remind me that people don't understand games or game companies at all.

That's like thanking a car company for paying for your mechanic when you have to go there two weeks after buying the car. And then two weeks after that. Sure, eventually you expected to have to use the service, things change and you wan't updates to make it all run smoothly.

It's not supposed to happen immediately though, that's a sign that you got ripped off.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
Hellblades are swords :(
Kinda glad i didnt give any letters axes.

Just a shame since the last series of letters looked amazing, but had an axe :(

Kinda of expected, really, since the current model itself shows a sword.
But then again, the old (and superior versions, imo) had an axe.
I'd hate to see the reaction of an old demon player who had the old bloodletters.

1st bloodletters had swords
2nd bloodletters had swords
3 rd bloodletters had axes
4th. Blood letters had swords
The axes were a abnormality.

 Stoffer wrote:

Games workshop doesn't charge you for changes to the game either, they charge you for models which you can choose to buy, or not to buy. Your old models aren't obsolete, they might just be a bit less efficient which makes people like you upset, because you feel you have some sort of entitlement to win forever because you bought a certain model x years ago.Anyway, back to the point. Much like the games you mention, 40k runs by the exact same principle that changes not only help the balance of the game, but are good for business. League of Legends for example: You can buy their champions, but there are no guarantees that your particular champion will stay useful. In fact, they do patches to re-balance champions at least once a month, so you'll be "inspired" to try other champions. That's healthy for two reasons; 1. It makes the game seem fresh for the player, extending the lifetime of the product continually. 2. it makes you buy more champions. Sound familiar? That's because 40k works that way as well.

WoW isn't a good enough example because they don't really have the width in classes to do that, but if they had, you could be pretty certain they'd do the same. Oh and also, you pay a monthly fee to play wow AND you have to buy their stupid expansions. If you want to talk about being "forced to pay", WoW is a great example. 40k certainly isn't, if you have an army done, that army can play (with different efficiency, granted) for years.

Dumb companies balance because things are broken, smart companies balance because that's how you keep your game alive for 25 years. League of Legends is currently one of the most popular games in the world. They are so because of their frequent updates, not based on "things being broken", but shifting the balance of power constantly, meaning that no gamer can ever "settle" and be at the highest efficiency with a single hero for the rest of his life. It's smart and while you may be upset that it hurts your wallet from time to time, that's how good companies operate

The biggest trend I'm seeing here is people complaining how little GW involve their own customers in these balancing processes. As I'm sure you're aware, it's becoming more and more common for games companies to involve fans with the development process to some degree (be that via community forums, beta tests, drunken pub crawls and so on). GW have always been incredibly insular with regards to their development processes, and that results in many situations that could easily be avoided. Sometimes you need to use a wider audience to bounce ideas off or to error-check things for broken-ness. Even putting aside situations with poor or ambigious rule phrasing, you end up with subtley broken codexes that game designers can easily miss.
The sad thing is that GW have a great opportunity in front of them - there's a rabid fanbase just begging to 'work' for free on improving their products. Instead they're too worried about leaking next month's releases to ask for that free help.

And in the spirit of community involvement please read my spergy thread
(not stalking you honest )