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.

Admittedly I have bought I think all of the white dwarfs since the revamp but they don't last me anywhere near as long as they used to.

Back in the issue 180-300 era I think I pretty much bought every issue religiously (I used to have boxes full of them) but that was, imo, the golden era of the magazine.

A very small percentage of the magazine was devoted to new product advertising, with the remainder chock full of battle reports, terrain and conversion articles, fiction, new rules such as chapter approved and letters from readers.

This is how it should be imo. I do regret paying £5.50 a month for what is basically a glorified catalogue but I guess I am a sucker because of all the new codexes/army books they have brought out recently.

To me the highlight of a new release was the articles from the designers discussing the army and their thoughts during the design process. It was fascinating to read about how GW went about designing their armies and the play test process (back when they actually playtested new rules).

To be fair though, I do enjoy the fact that they have started using players own armies in some of the battle reports.

I would like to see a return to some of the good old days of WD with more descriptive battle reports (proper maps and turn by turn accounts would be nice) rather than just:

Turns 1-2 The Daemons move up a bit and get shot some
Turns 3 -4 The Daemons kill a few marines and get shot some more
Turns 5-6 More marines and daemons die and the plaguebearers sit on some objectives

The end

That is not a battle report worthy of the name to me.
We also need a lot more insight into the minds of the players and how they went about creating their army for the game rather than them just talking about how they want to show off the new stuff in the army that has just got a new codex.

One point that no-one has made - back in the day, even the adverts were enjoyable to me. WD magazine's ads were the main way of finding out what was available. I remember liking the ads almost as much as the features, just dreaming about how I was going to spend my pocket money. Nowadays, the main way to find out what products are available is the internet, and thus the adverts section of WD loses its relevancy. For some reason, they keep expanding this section of the magazine. I wonder if the people behind that decision are "old school" folks who don't realise that the majority of people reading the magazine these days are probably so computer-literate that the ads are completely irrelevant to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rohansoldier wrote:


Turns 1-2 The Daemons move up a bit and get shot some
Turns 3 -4 The Daemons kill a few marines and get shot some more
Turns 5-6 More marines and daemons die and the plaguebearers sit on some objectives

The end

Cool report bra' - where can I buy some plaguebearers?

I remember when White Dwarf was a thin little magazine, with mostly black & White pages... with rules and scenarios for:
Dungeons & Dragons
Call of Cthulhu (some great scenarios!)
Paranoia
RuneQuest....
Traveller (and a comic to go with it!)
And Monster Mark, for the win! (Yeah, I used to have issue #1....)

What I consider the best issues... may differ from those that like Warhammer (not around yet) or 40K (orks and dwarfs in space? Nah... can't be....)

The Auld Grump

 Fifty wrote:
I wonder if the people behind that decision are "old school" folks who don't realise that the majority of people reading the magazine these days are probably so computer-literate that the ads are completely irrelevant to them.

I'm pretty sure the people behind GW these days assume their customer base is either completely computer illiterate or simply stupid. Exhibit A: Closing down 3rd party online stores. Exhibit B: Their "one click" bundles on their website that assume people are too stupid to construct their own cart.

5 years No
10 Years Maybe
15 Years YES!

I've divested myself of all WD's post 2000, so most of my WD's are from the 90's. I'm not sure what the exact dates of transition are, but stuff pre-2000 does seem to have more content, more freebies and more variety.

Don't get me wrong, 1990's WD was still an advertisement first and foremost, but it was an advertisement that actually gave you more usefull stuff. And that's even before the free set they gave you with a years subscription.

 Fifty wrote:
I remember liking the ads almost as much as the features, just dreaming about how I was going to spend my pocket money. Nowadays, the main way to find out what products are available is the internet, and thus the adverts section of WD loses its relevancy.

Definitely this.

All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

 oni wrote:
All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

Unlucky there mate.

I think that it's current incarnation is actually very good.

The type of magazine it was before we had Blanchitsu and the articles about random hobby-related stuff was absolutely horrible.

I didn't think it was that great around issue 300 either, although we did get free stuff.

I also noticed that the magazine showed you how to make your own terrain around issue 200 or so as well.

So to summarize:

Golden age: issue 200-ish
Silver age: A tie between now and around issue 300 (I really like Blanchitsu and free stuff!)
Not even bronze age because it was so bad: Any issues between the 'free stuff' issues and Blanchitsu issues.

Please note that posters do not count as free stuff.

There was a Standard Bearer in a relatively recent one where Jervis Johnson goes on about how the most important rule exists so GW doesn't have to write tight, clear rulebooks. He spends the whole thing saying that we have the roll off rule so we shouldn't complain when we don't know how a rule should be played, and that sometime the game designers themselves don't know how it should be played so they roll off. It also felt a little confrontational in a 'if you don't agree with me you're not my target audience so neeer' kind of way.

I was under the impression his column was one of the only good things left but needless to say after my friend showed me that I was more than content to continue not buying WD.

 oni wrote:
All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

Perhaps that's the problem for a lot of readers? If you enjoy what Games Workshop is releasing now, and the way they go about it, then no doubt the magazine supports that well. I imagine if I'd spent 100 or so on some new releases in a store, just got the magazine thrown on the top of the pile for a fiver, and wanted to spend 10 minutes reading something on the train home then I might well be satisfied.

The problem is though of course, in terms of purely journalistic content (and perhaps the one area where it could trump the internet) the magazine is not a patch on its former self. There isn't really any content, and the whole thing just feels shallow, and soul-less despite all the nice pictures and high-grave cover.

omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

To be honest, it was a better catalogue back in the day too.

The catalogue section at the back of the book, generally listed new releases, old products that complement them and anything listed in the book in case you wanted to buy it.

Generally they also had 1 or 2 special deals, based on whatever GW was clearing out at the time. I remember drooling over a high elf army that was 30% off in a large bundle, only available for the month after that white dwarf came out.

These days are long gone.

 kevlar'o wrote:
omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

You know what's worse than folks whinging about something?

Folks whinging about the fact that folks are whinging about something....

If you don't like these threads then leave them alone.

If GW was keeping the spouse happy then the marriage wouldn't be on the rocks.

The Auld Grump

 kevlar'o wrote:
omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

Check Dakka Rule #1.

OP- Its a magazine... Its not going to save a marriage or win you a game. Its designed to showcase new releases and have vague BATREPs in order not to give up rules. It is what it is. I get more info from online Blogs. It wasn't that good 10 years ago and its not that good now.

Free scenery.

Free figures.

Free games.

Additional rules content.

Additional stories and fluff.

Multi month gaming events with free maps, scenery stuff, scenarios, how to's, unit and upgrades.

seasonal campaign materials.

Discussion.

Q and A's from designers/ sculpters.

Contests.

and...

FAQ's.



just saying......

 kevlar'o wrote:
omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

First you are dangerously close to breaking rule #1.

Second you are not in a position to prohibit a discussion on this forum because you don't like it. I suggest you 'omg lets stop looking at these 'white dwarf is crap' discussions' if they bother you. You are more than welcome to weigh in with your opinion, but if the only thing you have to say is 'everyone shut up' then that's not gonna work.

Thanks for listening.

Everyone else let's please move on without re-quoting this post a million times.


Back OT.

I was very hopeful with the revamp and promises a few months ago... in some ways things have improved, but in many ways they have become worse. I feel the pros and cons leave us with a net zero gain... same old in a lot of ways. Abolishing the points values in the battle reports though seems a bit much.

I think that the current lack of WD content is just another symptom - being a publicly held company is the disease.

Selling shares allowed them to expand quickly, but the share holders, for the most part, have little to no knowledge of the hobby.

What works for them is the Churn - folks in for the short time.

Not at all certain that there is a cure, outside of a buy back - which is unlikely in the extreme.

I have noticed none of the many companies that have been founded by ex-GW folks have gone public. Privateer, Mantic... both are doing okay, could be better, could be worse - but in the end they only have to answer to themselves and the folks buying their products.

The Auld Grump

The white dwarf was better during the 40k second edition era by far. However, even then it varied a lot month to month.

Unless you are brand new to the hobby and age 12 the WD is pointless now, I dont understand why any adylt would waste ten bucks on it.

Koppo wrote:

And the results:



So the new WD has more model show cases, less adverts, less gaming, and more descriptions than 5 years ago and about the same painting and modelling but event coverage has vanished, it costs a quid more in real terms.

Ok, but first explain how model showcasing and description is not advertising.

Yeah those 'results' are pretty inaccurate. I mean, 50 pages of new releases isn't adverts? Three "articles" on that month's FW releases in the same issue isn't repeat advertising? Come on.

 Surtur wrote:


Ok, but first explain how model showcasing and description is not advertising.

Certainly [from the 1st post]:

Product Description: Shows a fully painted/complete product with a description of background but no rule details other than names, no stats or points costs
Model Showcase: Shows an example of a product as an example of painting and/or modeling. Includes 'Evay Metal, readers armies, golden demon etc. Does not show step by step guides or paint names. Not enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it
Gaming: An article about tactics, a battle report, rules etc. If rules and/or point costs are included it’s a gaming article.
Modelling/Painting: Shows step by step guides and/or paint names. enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it, may be a detailed parts listing of a box.
Advert: Has a price or a product code in it.
Opinion: Usually standard bearer or similar. Does not include editorials.
Event: An article about an event, either upcoming or past. It can be very similar to an advert.
Store Listing: The store listing, store openings and other gumph that appears in that section of the mag.
Previews: Shows a green or details about a product without a release date

The categories are somewhat arbitrary but I decided to have a showcase separate from advertising as show casing includes non-WD staff/studio armies (such as GD entries and armies on parade) and they include conversions, example paint schemes and exemplar models. They may also include snippets of background about the fluff or decisions taken in painting or building/converting the model. The definition of an advert, for the analysis, was a page containing a product code and/or price and so did not actually have to include any pictures of any models at all (which if memory serves was a format that appeared in the older magazines).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah those 'results' are pretty inaccurate. I mean, 50 pages of new releases isn't adverts? Three "articles" on that month's FW releases in the same issue isn't repeat advertising? Come on.

You are of course quite welcome to do the analysis yourself and compare your results to mine, I believe I have posted enough of my method for you do so. If you need further information as to how I obtained my results I will endeavour to assist you. If you believe my method flawed, could you be helpful enough to point out how so and where and how an improved method could be developed.

I do clearly define what I considered adverts for the analysis. If you think that a product description (as defined in the method) = advertising then I'd suggest combining the two values in any comparisons you make while coming up with your opinions.

Personally I feel the results are fairly accurate and fairly well described and qualified insomuch as necessary for a bit of random number crunching I've done for an internet forum as a bit of nerdy fun for myself.

Oh, gak, sorry. You're the OP. I didn't realise.

Yeah. The new WD is terrible. Pages and pages of big pictures, no text, no real content, paint-by-trademarks painting guide, and nothing of value. But I won't got on, Grot 6 very eloquently put up a list of reasons why new WD is just a coat of paint on the same rusty chassis.

Koppo wrote:

 Surtur wrote:


Ok, but first explain how model showcasing and description is not advertising.

Certainly [from the 1st post]:

Product Description: Shows a fully painted/complete product with a description of background but no rule details other than names, no stats or points costs
Model Showcase: Shows an example of a product as an example of painting and/or modeling. Includes 'Evay Metal, readers armies, golden demon etc. Does not show step by step guides or paint names. Not enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it
Gaming: An article about tactics, a battle report, rules etc. If rules and/or point costs are included it’s a gaming article.
Modelling/Painting: Shows step by step guides and/or paint names. enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it, may be a detailed parts listing of a box.
Advert: Has a price or a product code in it.
Opinion: Usually standard bearer or similar. Does not include editorials.
Event: An article about an event, either upcoming or past. It can be very similar to an advert.
Store Listing: The store listing, store openings and other gumph that appears in that section of the mag.
Previews: Shows a green or details about a product without a release date

The categories are somewhat arbitrary but I decided to have a showcase separate from advertising as show casing includes non-WD staff/studio armies (such as GD entries and armies on parade) and they include conversions, example paint schemes and exemplar models. They may also include snippets of background about the fluff or decisions taken in painting or building/converting the model. The definition of an advert, for the analysis, was a page containing a product code and/or price and so did not actually have to include any pictures of any models at all (which if memory serves was a format that appeared in the older magazines).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah those 'results' are pretty inaccurate. I mean, 50 pages of new releases isn't adverts? Three "articles" on that month's FW releases in the same issue isn't repeat advertising? Come on.

You are of course quite welcome to do the analysis yourself and compare your results to mine, I believe I have posted enough of my method for you do so. If you need further information as to how I obtained my results I will endeavour to assist you. If you believe my method flawed, could you be helpful enough to point out how so and where and how an improved method could be developed.

I do clearly define what I considered adverts for the analysis. If you think that a product description (as defined in the method) = advertising then I'd suggest combining the two values in any comparisons you make while coming up with your opinions.

Personally I feel the results are fairly accurate and fairly well described and qualified insomuch as necessary for a bit of random number crunching I've done for an internet forum as a bit of nerdy fun for myself.

Okay, you don't seem to understand this but product description and showcase ARE ADVERTISING. It's showing off a product with the intent to make it attractive to the buyer. It doesn't need a price tag at the end to make it advertising.

Last high point for me WD wise was back in 2009 with the Baddice Battle Report where they had Ben Johnson and Ben Curry face off and write about it. One of the best battle reports ever in WD. Also they still had the Masterclass painting articles which were great. Fun fact, the Ben vs. Ben game was played in Tom Kirby's office while he was away.
Flipped through some my old ones a while back after the last "Old vs. New WD" thread. There were some good issues, but there were some bad issues. The mid to late 90's had some truly atrocious issues that would make the current WD look like a tome of knowledge and wisdom. Paul Sawyer might be fondly remembered, but he put out some dog issues himself.
Sadly some of my really old ones got thrown out by my Mom years ago. Those include the cutout to make a paper Baneblade. Oh those were the days......

Though I never remember any of those free figs in issues. Only free kit I remember was the goblin/dwarf sprue at the start of 7th. I suspect the store owner pulled off all the minis and sold them in the "used" bin :(

silent25 wrote:


Though I never remember any of those free figs in issues.

The mid to late 90's WDs would have free figs from time to time. I still have a sister, necron, and a little flying 'nid.

I'm relatively new to the hobby in it about two years now. Went to a used game auction and picked up a ten pound box of white dwarfs from '97 and older. most were in between 189-210
but some were as far back as 136. paid $15. I found good content, they way things were seemed much less pushy towards buying something. Instead of hearing about how awesome it was they kinda give ya something for it, rules to see, applications for it, stories for the figs in a bit of depth. that was a cool thing to see. also seeing the prices made me feel slightly better for today's figs. I do like the "conversion corner" the newer WD's, but that's about it.

 Surtur wrote:


Okay, you don't seem to understand this but product description and showcase ARE ADVERTISING. It's showing off a product with the intent to make it attractive to the buyer. It doesn't need a price tag at the end to make it advertising.

I thought I had explained my reasons for the different categorisations. While I could count description and showcases as advertising by the same token I could count battle reports, painting articles, modelling articles or any mention of anything to do with wargaming in gerneral (as they talk about the models in use and e.g. provide a sample of usefulness for the product).

Like I said previously if you think that the categories I have used are essentially sub categories of some other super-category then feel free to add them together should you wish to use them to form a reasoned argument surely the break down is better than not having it. Other wise the table would be WD 329 pages 128, pages of advertising 128, WD 364 pages 120, pages of advertising 120 etc.
And that would be of no use to anybody.

The thing I noticed, aside from the actual content, in the last White Dwarf I looked at was the sheer amount of white space remaining unfilled. Especially on some new product pages and painting articles, photos of figures floating in a white void. It just wasn't like that, text and photos used to fill the page. It's just lazy, the 'new products' section at the front and the store listing and guff at the back have grown over the years and not added anything at all to the magazine. That's a big problem before you even look at actual articles inbetween.

one of the things i miss in the White Dwarf