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.

I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. This is only temporary and these FAQ's will be made available again in the very near future.

With regards to the blog content, this can be found via the icon of White Dwarf in the top right corner of the home page, although currently this is only archived as far back as the 9th of April. The web team are looking into increasing its back issues, although we have no set date for if or when this will occur.

I hope that this helps, but if you need anything further, please feel free to contact us again.
Kind regards
Lydia

 xttz wrote:
I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. This is only temporary and these FAQ's will be made available again in the very near future.

With regards to the blog content, this can be found via the icon of White Dwarf in the top right corner of the home page, although currently this is only archived as far back as the 9th of April. The web team are looking into increasing its back issues, although we have no set date for if or when this will occur.

I hope that this helps, but if you need anything further, please feel free to contact us again.
Kind regards
Lydia

Oh hey, that's different.
So...progress?

Uh... Hmm...

That's an incredibly stupid place to put the blog link. Not that I'd read it nowadays, but I genuinely had no idea it was actually there.

Let's all pray that's true, as assuming they're comprehensive, it would stop a lot of my complaints.

Were there always painting tutorials on the site? I can't remember seeing them before the update.

There was years ago, before they took them away.

But there was still things like the 'Paint Compatibility chart' for the old paints. Plus there was colour list for all the different armies that was much easier to view than the new painting page.

 xttz wrote:
I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. ...

I suppose that's reasonable. I mean, it's not like the studio guys would have known months ago that the website was being redesigned so that they could have had these ready to go for the launch...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Meanwhile, is there some obvious link between 'picture of a White Dwarf magazine' and 'Here be a Blog, yar!' that I'm missing? How on earth is anyone supposed to find that?

 Compel wrote:
There was years ago, before they took them away.

But there was still things like the 'Paint Compatibility chart' for the old paints. Plus there was colour list for all the different armies that was much easier to view than the new painting page.

Hm now they are back it seems, though in the form of videos instead of articles.
That's a plus I suppose.

There are quite a few videos on there, most are not much of a help though I wont complain.


http://www.youtube.com/user/GamesWorkshopWNT/videos

 xttz wrote:
I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. This is only temporary and these FAQ's will be made available again in the very near future.

With regards to the blog content, this can be found via the icon of White Dwarf in the top right corner of the home page, although currently this is only archived as far back as the 9th of April. The web team are looking into increasing its back issues, although we have no set date for if or when this will occur.

I hope that this helps, but if you need anything further, please feel free to contact us again.
Kind regards
Lydia

Hey! I know that member of staff who replied! Huzzah! Someone I know!

So, in summary they're doing an overhaul of the FAQs, good, good. God knows Tyranids want one.

Yeah, I'd love a tyranids FAQ...

 Sir Arun wrote:

Schmapdi wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
I am drunk but this is a serious saving from buying individual kits right?

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-IE/Hammer-of-Cadia

It's about 25% off - or what you'd save shopping elsewhere.

If they let 3rd parties have it - then yeah it's a steal.

They do.

Total Wargamer is offering the deal at 30% off for around 140 pounds. Pretty hilarious, eh?

I cannot recommand Total Wargamer. Placed an order on their site end November, still waiting for it. I believe plastic kit are much safer than finecast regarding the state of my command nevertheless. I think wayland game is far safer still. Anyway, if you want to buy on Total Wargamer I hope you will be fine, but be ready to wait. Good luck !

November, that's far more patient than I was... There's a whole thread about them here.

In short, I suggest demanding an immediate refund, if they don't get it to you in 5 days, (and assuming you did it on a credit card) claim it back from your bank.

The link to the blog page is hilarious. How in the hell are people supposed to know that's there? I actually noticed the picture earlier and didn't register that might be the blog even though I know the name of the blog was white dwarf daily. For someone not so old and crotchety... I mean "experienced" with GW, they're never going to find the link, lol.

 insaniak wrote:

 xttz wrote:
I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. ...

I suppose that's reasonable. I mean, it's not like the studio guys would have known months ago that the website was being redesigned so that they could have had these ready to go for the launch...

Actually, I have several theories why it hasn't been updated

1) They were all working on dataslates

2) There were so many errors in the codices / army books that an astromical amount of work was needed to get them back into shape.

3) They are completely rebalancing the books instead of just clarifying rules. As in, adding warlord traits, changing points values, nerfing D weapons, etc etc.

4) Their computer crashed, and they lost everything.

 Compel wrote:
November, that's far more patient than I was... There's a whole thread about them here.

In short, I suggest demanding an immediate refund, if they don't get it to you in 5 days, (and assuming you did it on a credit card) claim it back from your bank.

I would not recommend using Total wargamer, waited for weeks, asked for a refund, again waited for weeks had to get bank involved. Buyer beware!

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 xttz wrote:
I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. ...

I suppose that's reasonable. I mean, it's not like the studio guys would have known months ago that the website was being redesigned so that they could have had these ready to go for the launch...

Actually, I have several theories why it hasn't been updated

1) They were all working on dataslates

2) There were so many errors in the codices / army books that an astromical amount of work was needed to get them back into shape.

3) They are completely rebalancing the books instead of just clarifying rules. As in, adding warlord traits, changing points values, nerfing D weapons, etc etc.

4) Their computer crashed, and they lost everything.

Everything you have been told is a lie!!!

5. It didn't occur to them that it would be a good idea until the complaints rolled in about the new website.

How long have painting videos been produced for free?

I know they included a DVD in the painting guide but I thought most guides were now of the "Buy for the iPad" variety.

I can't congratulate them for doing what most other companies do for free but it could be a hint that not all is lost.

alphaecho wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 xttz wrote:
I saw this posted on another forum by two UK guys (they apparently both received the same copy/paste bit about the FAQs):

Hi XXXX

Thanks for the email regarding the FAQs on the new website.

Currently the FaQ's are not available on the website, as the design team are taking this opportunity to fully update all the FAQ and Errata articles. ...

I suppose that's reasonable. I mean, it's not like the studio guys would have known months ago that the website was being redesigned so that they could have had these ready to go for the launch...

Actually, I have several theories why it hasn't been updated

1) They were all working on dataslates

2) There were so many errors in the codices / army books that an astromical amount of work was needed to get them back into shape.

3) They are completely rebalancing the books instead of just clarifying rules. As in, adding warlord traits, changing points values, nerfing D weapons, etc etc.

4) Their computer crashed, and they lost everything.

Everything you have been told is a lie!!!

5. It didn't occur to them that it would be a good idea until the complaints rolled in about the new website.

So...#1 then? You can't have the writers do nothing; they have to do something. That something was most likely the dataslates.

I'm going to laugh so hard if, when FAQ's are brought back, they turn it into a new digital product and make you pay for them.

You know they want to.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
[
Actually, I have several theories why it hasn't been updated

1) They were all working on dataslates

2) There were so many errors in the codices / army books that an astromical amount of work was needed to get them back into shape.

3) They are completely rebalancing the books instead of just clarifying rules. As in, adding warlord traits, changing points values, nerfing D weapons, etc etc.

4) Their computer crashed, and they lost everything.

You're probably right on all counts. Scheduled Work + New Work + IT Complications = Missed Deadline.

I doubt if they'd delay the new webstore just because of missing FAQs.

 Sidstyler wrote:
I'm going to laugh so hard if, when FAQ's are brought back, they turn it into a new digital product and make you pay for them.

You know they want to.

I'd honestly be surprised if they didn't.

That'd open a whole can of worms, because if providing errata and FAQs went from being a community service to a sold commodity that would open them up to a load of extra obligations and entitlements with regard to "fit for purpose" and other Sale Of Goods Act buzz words.

I suspect it would make a difference if they offered them as individual free downloads but sold them as an autoupdated single file with chapters.

I'd actually, relatively contentedly, pay for an auto updating FAQ app, as long as it was offline (can't always get a data signal in the hall where I game)

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:
I'm going to laugh so hard if, when FAQ's are brought back, they turn it into a new digital product and make you pay for them.

You know they want to.

I'd honestly be surprised if they didn't.

They've already proved that people will buy errata with the Stronghold Assault book.

 insaniak wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:
I'm going to laugh so hard if, when FAQ's are brought back, they turn it into a new digital product and make you pay for them.

You know they want to.

I'd honestly be surprised if they didn't.

They've already proved that people will buy errata with the Stronghold Assault book.

I... I have no words.

You know, it's just extraordinary, is there any build that's worse than a Power Fist with a Plasma Pistol right now?

I mean, it's a specialist weapon and you're paying an arm and a leg for it, why would you spend that much more on a pistol?

It's good that the model looks great, but it's unplayable. For $30, only monopose and no wargear, and even then only after you pay $80 on their website?

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Cadian-Defence-Force

You can actually save money on this bundle.

$40 for a HWT, $29 for a Cadian squad x2, $37 for a chimera and $49 for a Leman Russ, $25 for a Cadian Command Squad works out to $209

Cadian Defense Force runs for $165 and it doesn't have bad unit picks either, not a lot of dead weight that you could never use and over $40 or 26% off compared to buying them each separately.

as an abstract concept; offer a voucher for a 2nd limited edition mini is perfectly sensible. The idea is to get return business, and push often curmudgeony gamers into buying those products they've been humming over for a while. The problem is, GW hasn't provided a good incentive; the model is alright and all, but $30 individual, monopose models are not popular. The most expensive Forgeworld models, sans the Primarchs, are all below that, it's obscene for normal, run of the mill models you could make, mostly, from normal bits.

Lord Skullington at least is somewhat unique by virtue of loads of skulls, and is free; there's an incentive, as even though I'd have to take a file to him to reduce the grimderp, it's free, and if there's something I wanted already, why not? $30 monopose model which is not unique or even reasonably effectively equipped? I'll pass. I didn't buy the Librarian, which was a genuinely nice model, but massively overpriced, nor any of these new, obscene single models. I pause at FW's $25 models, but at least I don't get a Canadian 20% markup on them because reasons, and they're of absolutely superb quality, not just "alright."

In fact, I don't think my FLGS has sold more than 10% of the ones they've got; the only ones buying are ones with large collections, so a limited edition, single model, even if expensive, represents their only expense, so why not.

 MajorStoffer wrote:
The idea is to get return business, and push often curmudgeony gamers into buying those products they've been humming over for a while. The problem is, GW hasn't provided a good incentive; the model is alright and all, but $30 individual, monopose models are not popular. The most expensive Forgeworld models, sans the Primarchs, are all below that, it's obscene for normal, run of the mill models you could make, mostly, from normal bits.

I'll agree it's overpriced, but I still think it's a good idea because it, as you said, is a method of promoting return business.

I just made a purchase an imperial knight and one large oval base. Comes to $162 and the captain appears automatically. Was going to buy from a local shop but the difference was only 11 as they charge shipping and I think the free mini is worth more than that