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.

 Atropus wrote:

 Mad4Minis wrote:
Well, my answer has been "almost priced out"...but now Im changing to "yup, Im out". All it took was a trip to a LGS. My buddy and I took a trip this last weekend to look at 40k stuff and pick up a couple things. We were looking at the 40k stuff and calculating what it would take to finish off his GK and for me to build a whole Tau army. He has a couple squads but thats it. No rulebook, templates, dice, markers, codex, etc..and needs a few more units as well. I would be starting with nothing, so Id need all the same plus all the minis & models.

Then we got to looking at the Warmachine stuff, and the prices for that. The wheels started turning. The overall investment is so much less. I mean come on...a Warmachine rulebook and army book for a little less than just the 40k rulebook.

Then we decided to go to the tables and see what was being played. Besides the card game tourney there were 4 mini games going. All Warmachine & Hordes. Seeing the game being played sealed the deal. We are starting Warmachine.

We have been looking at the Warmachine rules and such online, and really like the general balance and adaptability of the game. We both agree that GW has the edge a bit in minis, but the general garbage of the rules and the sickening prices helped us walk away. The fact that another price increase is likely in the coming months wasnt in GWs favor either.

Sorry GW. Make some decent rules, get realistic about your prices, and we will give you a look again. Until then...bye bye.

The thing is, It wont take long for Warmachine/hordes to catch up prices. Once they have to start making a bigger investment in runs and product the prices will slowly creep up to make the bottom line higher... Enjoy the lower prices while you can..(and name another table top/model game that has survived more then 10 years.. I still have all my VOR stuff in my closet :/ )

BattleTech. Where's my prize?

 azreal13 wrote:
Nucflash, you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I give a monkeys.

By continuing to try and taunt me you are in danger of violating rule 1, please try and attack my point and not me.

Frankly, you accuse me of being ignorant, but by continuing to post in this manner you're coming across as massively immature, unless you are actually twelve and full of Red Bull and booze

Fixed it for you. Welcome to the world of a competitive gamer.

 azreal13 wrote:

Nucflash wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

For me Its about the WIN/the Kill.. that is the thrill... And I enjoy face stomping people... Strike Hard, strike Fast, NO mercy.. sweep the leg anything that gets me the victory...

 azreal13 wrote:

You have my sympathies.

We cant all love Unicorns and believe that there is gold at the end of the Rainbow..

A bunch of stuff that is slightly offensive and shows that my comments have likely touched a nerve.

Carebear? Lol

When I was younger I would probably have taken offense at that.

I'm going to hazard a guess that you're younger than me, maybe late teens, early twenties?

You care that you win, I understand, I was you once. I will always try to win, its not in my nature to do otherwise. But you don't appear to understand that chalking your results up on a massive whiteboard still doesn't make it important. Play for a weeks worth of food, or your rent for a month, then we can talk about the result being important.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and what the hell is disc golf? Is that like with frisbees or something.

You kids!

We can for argument sake say that Nothing is really Important in life.. Why? because we are all going to die.. Its just a about how we spend our time before its time to cheak out.. Your logic that not keeping track of winnings is not important is highly subjective.. Its not Important to you.. but it might be Important to me?.. Same as its not Important to me if you feed you cat yeasterday, but it might be important to you?
You think we should all play for fun and not take things to seriously.. that is the point you are trying to make? or is it that you think we are being silly for keeping track of our score, because according to your personal preference, such things are not important and in fact its nonsense and we should all bow our heads to your superior way of thinking?

As I said you are prejudice against people that do not conform to your way of thinking. What is important to people are very diffrent in diffrent parts of the world.. If we lived in Africa, getting clean water and food would be our number one priority. But now we live in a western society and prioritys change. I dont have to starve so I can make other things more Important in my life, like winning at boardgames and facestomping people for example.. why? because I think its fun, this is enough reason for pushing this up the list of prioritys for me personaly. You might not like it, but guess what that doent make it wrong. I personaly think people go overboard when they follow a soccer team.. they go to every game, they fight against other suporters in the street, but if we told them what you just said to me.. that what they do is not Important and they should rethink what they were doing" . We would probably get our teeth kicked in. What is Important is as I stated before highly subjective, and you are not the grand GURU of Tabletop gaming. So you cant really preach what is the best way of doing things and what should be Important and what should not be Important.. You understand my reasoning here?

And I'm over 30 .As I said My gaming group are grumpy old men, who like to facestomp one another Take away the Scoreboard and I think most of us would lose Interest in gaming. That is what motivates us, to get down to our gaming Club.. without it I think many would stay at home.. And yes Disc Golf is golfing with a frisbee.. or alot of frisbees... there are drivers, putters... just like in real golf.. accept that its diffrent kinds of discs..

This is why I so love PP's famous "page 5" rules, which culminate in "play like you have a pair". Because we see the alternative above: emotional blackmail. Oh, you brought a hard list? Well, you're just a bad person. What's especially amusing is how the adherents of this position think they are the mature ones.

Perhaps it is me but with the PP crowd that I have been dealing with, even in my crushing losses, I did not get the feeling of getting it rubbed in my face. On the contrary I've got lessons learned on what I should have done to counter my opponents actions and why did my opponent made those actions in the first place.

The current meta for GW is just not very much fun anymore. And even though I am well off, just because of my many years in this hobby. I know how much it costs to make the models. I know the corporate structure that many of the former employees have commented about on previous topics.

You can not be on top of your niche market for long by the current actions being done by GW. Other companies are putting great effort in a support structure on cultivating new comers while trying to keep your older "veteran" customers happy as well.

If they would have done a decent job on the rule sets and codexs the corporation would have gotten a lot less negativity about their product.

What happened in 8th WHFB is starting to happen to 40K. The loss of their customer base on their main product.

Treat your customers well and they become returning customers.

 azreal13 wrote:

the 'competitive' player is, to me, the one who rules lawyers his opponent into submission, and who plays his game with no concern for making the experience fun for his opponent, or even for him. He has no concern with exploring the game, or trying new things, he simply wants the most efficient thing and the most of it he can get.
.

This is what gripes people. It is very condescending on your part to assume those you have listed above. A competitive player gets his fun with trying as hard as possible to win, hopefully with an opponent doing the same.

Getting your fun is different for everybody. Saying your way of getting fun is wrong is very patronizing, not to mention judging them to be younger than you. Even so, being older doesn't mean your opinions are more valid. It just means you are older.

This is what I think WotC did with M:tG that GW didn't do: address that people have different ideas of fun and how to get them, and cater to them all. They have three archetypes: the more casual gamer who likes to do awesome things, the competitive player, the thinker who wants to find hidden gems and combos, and the fluff guy. In contrast to GW, they neglect the competitive player (which is a big part of their player base) by not supporting tournaments, releasing poor rules and making the game very unbalanced. I do not see how having tournaments and good rules would be detrimental to a casual crowd.

 azreal13 wrote:
Nucflash, you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I give a monkeys.

By continuing to try and taunt me you are in danger of violating rule 1, please try and attack my point and not me.

Frankly, you accuse me of being ignorant, but by continuing to post in this manner you're coming across as massively immature, unless you are actually twelve and full of Red Bull

But you have to agree that the video was kinda fun, and to the point muhaha.. But I think You should start playing Warmachine/hordes.. because by reading some other posts you have made, I can see that you might still be playing GW games. And those are awfull when it comes to playing competativly. Playing warmachine/hordes is more like playing a game of chess, you cant really Rules Lawyer people in Warmachine.. everything is very straight forward and all the rules are very tightly writen.

Its not the same way as running into someone in Warhammer 40k with an Owerpowerd list and a bunch of cheese rules... Who destroys your fun..

Seriously more of you GW people need to play other games.. because I think you dont know what you are missing....

Nucflash wrote:

We can for argument sake say that Nothing is really Important in life.. Why? because we are all going to die..

When I next teach my goddaughter a new word, or make my little niece laugh at something, I'll remember that and appreciate how wrong you are.

Nucflash wrote:
Your logic that not keeping track of winnings is not important is highly subjective..
Same as its not Important to me if you feed you cat yeasterday, but it might be important to you?

Subjectively it may be important to you who wins and loses, objectively, nobody else cares, so it really isn't important. Equally, whether I fed my cat or not is objectively more important to the cat.

Nucflash wrote:
You think we should all play for fun and not take things to seriously.. that is the point you are trying to make? or is it that you think we are being silly for keeping track of our score, because according to your personal preference, such things are not important and in fact its nonsense and we should all bow our heads to your superior way of thinking?

I think there are things in life that are way more deserving of being taken seriously than a game.

Nucflash wrote:
What is important to people are very diffrent in diffrent parts of the world.. If we lived in Africa, getting clean water and food would be our number one priority.

Such as this.

Nucflash wrote:
But now we live in a western society and prioritys change. I dont have to starve so I can make other things more Important in my life, like winning at boardgames and facestomping people for example..

Actually our priorities don't change, you just have them taken care of, and this does read like wargaming is top of your list after food, water and shelter. I'm sure that isn't your intent, or that would make your priorities really screwed.

Nucflash wrote:
What is Important is as I stated before highly subjective, and you are not the grand GURU of Tabletop gaming. So you cant really preach what is the best way of doing things and what should be Important and what should not be Important.. You understand my reasoning here?

Frankly I haven't seen too much reason in any of your posts in this thread. You say it's subjective, yet seem to be offended that I approach it differently to you, I didn't say my way is the right way, I just have a problem with WAAC players and douchey behaviour, and they unfortunately go together quite frequently.

Nucflash wrote:
And I'm over 30 ..

With all due respect, your posts don't read like it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nucflash wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Nucflash, you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I give a monkeys.

By continuing to try and taunt me you are in danger of violating rule 1, please try and attack my point and not me.

Frankly, you accuse me of being ignorant, but by continuing to post in this manner you're coming across as massively immature, unless you are actually twelve and full of Red Bull

But you have to agree that the video was kinda fun, and to the point muhaha.. But I think You should start playing Warmachine/hordes.. because by reading some other posts you have made, I can see that you might still be playing GW games. And those are awfull when it comes to playing competativly. Playing warmachine/hordes is more like playing a game of chess, you cant really Rules Lawyer people in Warmachine.. everything is very straight forward and all the rules are very tightly writen.

Its not the same way as running into someone in Warhammer 40k with an Owerpowerd list and a bunch of cheese rules... Who destroys your fun..

Seriously more of you GW people need to play other games.. because I think you dont know what you are missing....

No, I didn't watch the video, I inferred the tone of the content from your post and saved myself some time.

I've played Warmahordes a couple of times, it's not a bad game but I think the minis are fugly. I'm in the process of starting Infinity but I enjoy 40k, because I don't take it too seriously I don't get frustrated by the shortcomings. I've 25 years of wargaming experience, I know what's about, I'm happy to continue playing GW games, I just go out of my way to minimise the amount of money GW get from me for doing it in the hope that things will change for the better

 azreal13 wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:


Magic: the Gathering and Warmachine/Hordes accomplish this as well as anyone in their respective fields. GW, by contrast, simply doesn't give a crap.

This is why I so love PP's famous "page 5" rules, which culminate in "play like you have a pair". Because we see the alternative above: emotional blackmail. Oh, you brought a hard list? Well, you're just a bad person. What's especially amusing is how the adherents of this position think they are the mature ones.

I respectfully disagree. It''s nothing to do with game balance, necessarily, although it can obviously be a factor, but often attitude.

Perhaps I can better explain myself with what I mean by competitive. There are players that play to win, I have no issue with them, the 'competitive' player is, to me, the one who rules lawyers his opponent into submission, and who plays his game with no concern for making the experience fun for his opponent, or even for him. He has no concern with exploring the game, or trying new things, he simply wants the most efficient thing and the most of it he can get.

Now, in a competitive environment like a tournament, then these guys have a place, but not in the slightly less confrontational nature of the local club or FLGS.

I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Take a step back and look for a moment at what you wrote there. That "these guys have a place, but not in..."; do you even realize how offensive and entitled that is? Do you have a guy at the door to say "we don't serve their kind here"?

Let's also recognize the loaded terms you're using: the "rules lawyer", "no concern" for his opponent, etc, etc. All of these terms reflect, ironically, problems that are endemic to GW games but mostly absent in PP games. "Rules lawyers" are not a creature of balanced games, but unbalanced, poorly written games. PP (and WotC) take notice of prevalent rules questions and try to make sure unintended interactions don't rampage out of control. GW?

Spamming efficient units? Again, almost unknown in WM/H, prevalent in GW games.

Let's also be honest, the term you are describing isn't "competitive", you're describing a jerk.

I'm not trying to beat up on you, but you're placing the blame in the wrong place. I've played plenty of games against people I don't like, and had fun.. if it was a tight game system. GW games? Ugh.

To just revisit your example of the MtG netlist: I'm sure that wasn't fun. But was it any less fun then deploying your army and seeing an IG "leafblower" on the other side, or a blasterborn list or longrifle spam? The same hard lists exist in GW games, the only difference is that while that "blue-white denial deck" was only a top deck for a season, a GW codex can be broken for years on end.

 azreal13 wrote:
I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Sounds like what I'd describe as a calm ragequit

But seriously, he was probably bored out of his mind too, maybe you should be more thoughtful of your opponents' fun instead of just being selfish and only thinking about what makes it fun for you

azreal13 wrote:With all due respect, your posts don't read like it.

With all due respect, neither do yours. You may be old, but your posts sure don't make you sound mature. Mostly sounds like typical school yard arguments to me.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Sounds like what I'd describe as a calm ragequit

But seriously, he was probably bored out of his mind too, maybe you should be more thoughtful of your opponents' fun instead of just being selfish and only thinking about what makes it fun for you

azreal13 wrote:With all due respect, your posts don't read like it.

With all due respect, neither do yours. You may be old, but your posts sure don't make you sound mature. Mostly sounds like typical school yard arguments to me.

Hey, I can only work with the material I'm given, and no, he wouldn't have been bored, he's still my friend but he's not the most exciting man on earth and he played a variant of that deck forever!

 azreal13 wrote:
I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Wait. You quit playing Magic because of the perception of unbalanced lists, looked for a game that didn't have that and started playing Warhammer? No offense, but if that's the case I've got some wonderful waterfront property in Arizona to sell you...

Nucflash wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Nucflash, you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I give a monkeys.

By continuing to try and taunt me you are in danger of violating rule 1, please try and attack my point and not me.

Frankly, you accuse me of being ignorant, but by continuing to post in this manner you're coming across as massively immature, unless you are actually twelve and full of Red Bull

But you have to agree that the video was kinda fun, and to the point muhaha.. But I think You should start playing Warmachine/hordes.. because by reading some other posts you have made, I can see that you might still be playing GW games. And those are awfull when it comes to playing competativly. Playing warmachine/hordes is more like playing a game of chess, you cant really Rules Lawyer people in Warmachine.. everything is very straight forward and all the rules are very tightly writen.

Its not the same way as running into someone in Warhammer 40k with an Owerpowerd list and a bunch of cheese rules... Who destroys your fun..

Seriously more of you GW people need to play other games.. because I think you dont know what you are missing....

I'll admit that I've been toying with the idea of starting a Warmachine army in the past, but the super-competitive style doesn't really appeal to me. I can appreciate that allure that it has for you (and others), but a full-on tactical gauntlet isn't something that I find fun (at least not all the time). And that's a point that you seem to refuse to accept - some people derive their fun from things other than the win, and that it is equally as valid as yours. And just to be perfectly clear, I'm not saying that yours is wrong, or that mine is the "one true way" to play.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:


Magic: the Gathering and Warmachine/Hordes accomplish this as well as anyone in their respective fields. GW, by contrast, simply doesn't give a crap.

This is why I so love PP's famous "page 5" rules, which culminate in "play like you have a pair". Because we see the alternative above: emotional blackmail. Oh, you brought a hard list? Well, you're just a bad person. What's especially amusing is how the adherents of this position think they are the mature ones.

I respectfully disagree. It''s nothing to do with game balance, necessarily, although it can obviously be a factor, but often attitude.

Perhaps I can better explain myself with what I mean by competitive. There are players that play to win, I have no issue with them, the 'competitive' player is, to me, the one who rules lawyers his opponent into submission, and who plays his game with no concern for making the experience fun for his opponent, or even for him. He has no concern with exploring the game, or trying new things, he simply wants the most efficient thing and the most of it he can get.

Now, in a competitive environment like a tournament, then these guys have a place, but not in the slightly less confrontational nature of the local club or FLGS.

I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Take a step back and look for a moment at what you wrote there. That "these guys have a place, but not in..."; do you even realize how offensive and entitled that is? Do you have a guy at the door to say "we don't serve their kind here"?

Let's also recognize the loaded terms you're using: the "rules lawyer", "no concern" for his opponent, etc, etc. All of these terms reflect, ironically, problems that are endemic to GW games but mostly absent in PP games. "Rules lawyers" are not a creature of balanced games, but unbalanced, poorly written games. PP (and WotC) take notice of prevalent rules questions and try to make sure unintended interactions don't rampage out of control. GW?

Spamming efficient units? Again, almost unknown in WM/H, prevalent in GW games.

Let's also be honest, the term you are describing isn't "competitive", you're describing a jerk.

I'm not trying to beat up on you, but you're placing the blame in the wrong place. I've played plenty of games against people I don't like, and had fun.. if it was a tight game system. GW games? Ugh.

To just revisit your example of the MtG netlist: I'm sure that wasn't fun. But was it any less fun then deploying your army and seeing an IG "leafblower" on the other side, or a blasterborn list or longrifle spam? The same hard lists exist in GW games, the only difference is that while that "blue-white denial deck" was only a top deck for a season, a GW codex can be broken for years on end.

I think we have a slight issue with our definitions of competitive. I guess those I label competitive would probably be better described as over competitive. Those that you think of competitive I probably call play to win. Hopefully that adjusts the context of my comments a little. Its late here, I'm not at my sharpest!

 Dheneb wrote:
I'll admit that I've been toying with the idea of starting a Warmachine army in the past, but the super-competitive style doesn't really appeal to me. I can appreciate that allure that it has for you (and others), but a full-on tactical gauntlet isn't something that I find fun (at least not all the time). And that's a point that you seem to refuse to accept - some people derive their fun from things other than the win, and that it is equally as valid as yours. And just to be perfectly clear, I'm not saying that yours is wrong, or that mine is the "one true way" to play.

I think a lot of this thread is a case of people talking around each other: What a lot of people are saying is that there are games like Warmachine where there's competitive players, fluff players, casual players, and other sorts, who all play the same game against each other without having any issues. The separation between casual and competitive is something that you only really see in rulesets that have massive gaping flaws.

 Laughing Man wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Wait. You quit playing Magic because of the perception of unbalanced lists, looked for a game that didn't have that and started playing Warhammer? No offense, but if that's the case I've got some wonderful waterfront property in Arizona to sell you...

This was almost 20 years ago, the internet was barely a thing, and I already played 40k, would have been 2nd edition. I moved on to Decipher's Star Wars CCG and L5R. Don't/can't play either any more, but regard both with great affection.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Laughing Man wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I quit Magic when one of my friends dropped a tourney deck on me, a netlist clone of a blue-white denial deck, many years ago. I sat there for 20 mins and did almost nothing but draw cards and take small hits from his tiny creatures. It was tedious and boring. I didn't ragequit, I simply decided that I didn't want to play a game where that sort of thing could happen and moved onto other things. Never once regretted it.

Wait. You quit playing Magic because of the perception of unbalanced lists, looked for a game that didn't have that and started playing Warhammer? No offense, but if that's the case I've got some wonderful waterfront property in Arizona to sell you...

This was almost 20 years ago, the internet was barely a thing, and I already played 40k, would have been 2nd edition. I moved on to Decipher's Star Wars CCG and L5R. Don't/can't play either any more, but regard both with great affection.

Wait, so... your arguments on the nature of the game vis-a-vis GW are all basically from the Clinton era (mid-90's)?

I think we have a slight issue with our definitions of competitive. I guess those I label competitive would probably be better described as over competitive. Those that you think of competitive I probably call play to win. Hopefully that adjusts the context of my comments a little. Its late here, I'm not at my sharpest!

See, the problem seems to be that you're missing my point here: competitive, over competitive, whatever. The problem isn't the player, it's the game.

You can be ultra-competitive in WM/H and your list basically looks like the list of everyone else, because it's a balanced system.

If you're ultra-competitive in GW games, your list is instantly identifiable as different from a casual list, and because the rules are so badly done, there is nothing to do but try and exert social pressure. Which is to say, in the end, call people names because the guys making the games couldn't be bothered to actually make the game worth a damn.

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Wait, so... your arguments on the nature of the game vis-a-vis GW are all basically from the Clinton era (mid-90's)?
.

Christ no. I was on sabbatical but have been playing actively since mid-5th

Yes the system is vulnerable to abuse, yet some players seem able to refrain from doing so. Others can't help but push the system to breaking point.

Now I concede your point that the company should design the game to avoid this, but GW has said it isn't interested in this aspect. Therefore anyone bemoaning that they can't play 40k competitively is effectively trying to return their sports car to the dealership because of its atrocious off roading abilities.

By all accounts, Warmahordes is better suited, so it would be perhaps advisable for players seeking a more competitive experience to try this. As I've said, I don't look for that, so still quite enjoy 40k.

It's not your list.... It's you.

Granted some of it may be off topic with some back and forth, but I think it should also be noted at this point, that this is nearly 50 pages worth of forum space, almost completely comprised of people saying they have stopped buying GW due to price. Of course, statistics can be debated and it is never clear what percentage or proportion of gamers Dakka 'represents' but still, one would hope if GW did maintain a cursory glance at online forums to gauge the weather, these sorts of thread should be concerning them. When large sections of your fan-base are saying they are stopping buying your product then clearly there is an issue and one GW would do well not to ignore.

Edit: It should also be noted that we get these threads on a fairly regular basis (at the least yearly) but this one is by far the longest running one. The fact it is still provoking comment and is still at the top of the page speaks volumes IMO.

This one might still be going by the time the next price rise comes

There was a rumor it would be april this year instead of june and even if it isn't I am sure that this thread will get a lot of attention next month when the daemon codex/armybook drops.

It would make sense. June price rises are now pretty well prepared for, and they must see huge spikes in orders towards the end of May.

As such, I'm sure they reckon that if they bump the prices up early, everyone ordering to avoid the price hikes will just pay the full price...

 Adam LongWalker wrote:

This is why I so love PP's famous "page 5" rules, which culminate in "play like you have a pair". Because we see the alternative above: emotional blackmail. Oh, you brought a hard list? Well, you're just a bad person. What's especially amusing is how the adherents of this position think they are the mature ones.

Perhaps it is me but with the PP crowd that I have been dealing with, even in my crushing losses, I did not get the feeling of getting it rubbed in my face. On the contrary I've got lessons learned on what I should have done to counter my opponents actions and why did my opponent made those actions in the first place.

I feel the same, the PP crowd have been great! One of my first games was with someone who tuned his list down a notch and gave me many useful tips. I still lost, but it was a good loss. Then again, the WM players are older than the 40k players, generally, so that may have had something to do with it.

Thats the problem though. If they keep on running this road, they are going to run themselves out of the industry.

I'm past the point of hating GW's BS to the point of moving on, but even me, "the hatingist hater" sees that if they continue, they will have pretty much driven off thier players/ collecters/ peons/ plebes, or whatever cutsey little nickname they are calling thier customers these days.

I, have moved on to other systems, and even I am starting to see the trend of people dropping GW's games in droves. Look over there- "HOW MUCH CAN I GET FOR....." All they are now is a secondhand sale. How does it look when everyones just wants to drop that stuff off on feebey, or swap it for warmahordes, or infinity... or anything else other then GW.

We have never seen thie issues pile on this badly in the past. It is almost comical, if it wasn't so worrying to me that I won't be able to shill off my own GW stuff.

Not to mention all of the old Gamers/ Designers have moved on to bigger and better things, and the company is hiring bra salesmen, bean counters, and mutts to fill the losses.

Look at how everyone has moved on to thier own... scifi thing. Even to the point of direct competition, they are going at it right out of the gate, and games are really coming out by the week now. I can shake my left one and hit a new game coming out every other day/ week.

By and BY- WHO is exactly "Working" those games when all your seeing anymore is half hearted attempts and grasps at nastalga? the Bra salesmen/ woman? What happened to that "New and Improved" White Dwarf? What happened to that bang up 6th edition? Whats going on with the nonattention to detail? I could even keep going with the units and models themselves...

They can't keep peeing on thier shoes and think they are going to stay viable. if they do, they are more foolish then they let on...

Personally? I see them as a joke. The d-bag elietist attitude, the lost goodwill, the consistant boneheaded plays, the loss of the fun that they used to have, I could keep on going.

It isn't so much the price, either. Anymore the "games" are just not there. They might think they are a porshe, but all I see with them now is a one trick poney. Doing mutt plays without even knowing who they are selling to and what exactly they are about. They don't even know thier own product, how sorry is that?

"Oh, yes, we bring in tones of cash to the point where we are padding Kirby's retirement, but we don't know exactly why..."

Worst thing about it is that they reaped what they sowed and brought it in on themselves.

No sympathy here. let them feel the pain and take it in the hindquarters. ( Maybe they can raise the price to over a million pounds so the only two people left playing the game can foot Kirby's slush fund.

A common arguememt anti-Warmahordeers use is the "page 5 play like you got a pair" Waac reputation it has.

I actually think PP supports fluff/theme lists more by giving subpar units tangible buffs when used in their proper setting; Each caster has 4 levels of a tier list (and some casters have multiple tiers), each accumulating a new set of bonuses!
Usually these are upgrades to "inferior" units to bring them up to the "optimal" units standards. Thus in my Baldur army it's better to have the in-tier ranged infantry (woldstalkers) because they get additional deployment as well as a building block to the next tiers bonuses while in my Grayle army I prefer a the in-tier ranged infantry (reeves) to synergize with his tiers additional war wolves... Thus each general has multiple "most competitive" lists, one in tier and one out of tier; couple that with 5-10 casters in each faction and you see a lot more competative variety per faction as well as a lot more potential use out of each unit.

To GW players it can easily seem like everyone is Waac, because almost anyone can make multiple competitive lists for any faction, when in reality it's just a matter of balanced game mechanics that the newcomer doesn't understand yet. Especially coming from GW games where "competitive lists/players" have a tendency to "find the most efficient unit per force org and spam it".

A strange corollary is that minis tend to retain market value much better: there is no "this is the best ___" as all units can find a productive place in at least one of the list/tier varieties, so there is always someone looking to pick up whatever unit your looking to get rid of.

Secondly it makes large collections worth a ton more to resale; in GW games I've noticed that the larger, more personalized, and more extensive armies have a hard time finding a match second hand. Simply put, if someone is gonna drop 500+ on an army, they want it to have everything they are looking for... which usally doesnt exactly mesh with the sellers thoughts on equipment options, transports, color scheme. Eventually the buyer weighs "what I'm getting at discount" vs "the stuff i dont want, but I'm buying just because its in the lot". Since Warmahordes varies the power level of units depending on caster and tier, you find that even the "undesirables" are desired.


Disclaimer: There is still a hierarchy of power in Warmahordes; some casters are downright brutal in certain situations, while others struggle against particular matchups. But the field is somehow much broader in potential winning lists, and much tighter in competition between them. That to me is the mark of a good game.

I dislike GW and PP's systems, but if a gun was put to my head and I was forced to play one of them I'd choose WM/H every time. Much, much better rules, cheaper overall.

I think that something is getting lost in the WAAC vs Casual player argument here: There is no reason that any army should be severely handicapped due to lax rule writing, be it due to its mechanics being drastically affected by core rules re-writes (Eldar's reliance on rules-exceptions and specialist nature gets kicked in the teeth every edition revision), or just plain neglect (10 year lapse between V3 Orks and V5 Orks). Armies low on the power curve are going to be inherently disadvantaged casual formats or not.

The two usual responses to those complaining about balance is:

1. Use the effective units (WAAC) / Use less effective units (Casual)
2. Buy a new army.

Both of these are unsatisfactory outcomes. In the case of the player limiting themselves to the effective/ineffective units, this essentially strips the choice out of army selection. Considering the emphasis that most supporters of "casual 40k" place on "Rule of Cool", inevitably, someone is going to have a much stronger list by virtue of playing with a stronger codex. IMHO, attempting to artificially limit list strength is not the answer. In the case of "buy a new army", the cost of the "GW Hobby" these days is driving people to "start a new game" instead. GW could fix this through tighter rules writing, but instead choose not to - since GW introduces unbalance by design to drive model sales.

 filbert wrote:

Edit: It should also be noted that we get these threads on a fairly regular basis (at the least yearly) but this one is by far the longest running one. The fact it is still provoking comment and is still at the top of the page speaks volumes IMO.

What keeps this one going is that GW has essentially had three price hikes in a row with releases. The Hobbit, Dark Angels, and Warriors of Chaos. Each release had new items that pushed kit/figure prices further. It kept stirring the pot.

If prices for the new flyers next month go even further, like a $90 dark eldar bomber, the thread will keep going another month. Then we have the Demons of Chaos release. New greater demons for $100? Yea, another month. Then we will hit April and the annual price hikes normally get leaked at this point.

Yea, this thread could go to 100 pages.

GW lives in this bubble, ignoring the fact that there are other systems/miniature companies that have same or better value.
The only i still sometimes buy stuff is because i love the background story.

Kiwidru wrote:
A common arguememt anti-Warmahordeers use is the "page 5 play like you got a pair" Waac reputation it has.

I actually think PP supports fluff/theme lists more by giving subpar units tangible buffs when used in their proper setting; Each caster has 4 levels of a tier list (and some casters have multiple tiers), each accumulating a new set of bonuses!
Usually these are upgrades to "inferior" units to bring them up to the "optimal" units standards. Thus in my Baldur army it's better to have the in-tier ranged infantry (woldstalkers) because they get additional deployment as well as a building block to the next tiers bonuses while in my Grayle army I prefer a the in-tier ranged infantry (reeves) to synergize with his tiers additional war wolves... Thus each general has multiple "most competitive" lists, one in tier and one out of tier; couple that with 5-10 casters in each faction and you see a lot more competative variety per faction as well as a lot more potential use out of each unit.

To GW players it can easily seem like everyone is Waac, because almost anyone can make multiple competitive lists for any faction, when in reality it's just a matter of balanced game mechanics that the newcomer doesn't understand yet. Especially coming from GW games where "competitive lists/players" have a tendency to "find the most efficient unit per force org and spam it".

A strange corollary is that minis tend to retain market value much better: there is no "this is the best ___" as all units can find a productive place in at least one of the list/tier varieties, so there is always someone looking to pick up whatever unit your looking to get rid of.

Secondly it makes large collections worth a ton more to resale; in GW games I've noticed that the larger, more personalized, and more extensive armies have a hard time finding a match second hand. Simply put, if someone is gonna drop 500+ on an army, they want it to have everything they are looking for... which usally doesnt exactly mesh with the sellers thoughts on equipment options, transports, color scheme. Eventually the buyer weighs "what I'm getting at discount" vs "the stuff i dont want, but I'm buying just because its in the lot". Since Warmahordes varies the power level of units depending on caster and tier, you find that even the "undesirables" are desired.


Disclaimer: There is still a hierarchy of power in Warmahordes; some casters are downright brutal in certain situations, while others struggle against particular matchups. But the field is somehow much broader in potential winning lists, and much tighter in competition between them. That to me is the mark of a good game.

Just to add on to this thought. Most tournaments for WM/H are 2-3 lists. So you bring multiple casters and lists. This basically allows you to avoid the "Bad Match-ups" that can happen between casters. The games are truly designed to allow the better player/ person who makes the least mistakes win the game.

As to whole "competitive/fluff player" debate......

The object of the game is to win/ the purpose of the game is to have fun.....If these two ever come into conflict you need to take a good hard look in the mirror......