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.

Not flame bait... seriously. After adding the house rule "2 detachments max, LoW/Fortifications need to have substitute points incase opponent doesn't want to deal with them, Battle forged only, only primary detachment units and allied troops score" I think I'm good. My club won't bat an eye at that restriction and after we get over that this is a really good edition.

I love the objective placement, psychic, jink, allocation, and scoring changes. Cover tweaks are better, Str D is better, Vehicle damage is much better as are Walker, MC special rules. The change to night fight is huge (for good), I'm good with the FMC changes (like them in fact).

Don't like:
Too much battle bro-fisting
Can't assault out of stationary vehicle... that's about it

Don't mean to sound dismissive, but what's all the troubles gents? I've read every stinking post in the News Rumors threads and most here, and I'm just not seeing any problems once you get over the FoC issues. The rage quitters and edition banners just seem to be generating nerd-rage white noise. Seriously, look at the armies I play (sig). The ones I run the most are Daemons/CSM allies (lots of FMC), SM varieties, Guard. I play against/with a ton of Tau, Cron, Eldar, Nids. I don't see any of these getting overtly nerfed.

All in all this a fairly subtle and needed edition change. I don't see these rules as complex (not at all). Come on. I think a deep breath, a moment of mature calm reflection, and taking a step back is needed for the DakkaDakka community as a whole. IMO 6th was the best edition yet (played at least a little of all, owned models since the RT days) and in 7th I see only improvements if you have a club of even barely socially aware, reasonable people. If you don't why would you play there anyway?

If you've looked at my posts, I'm hardly a glass half full guy or a GW apologist (those epic, morons), but I'm a big enough man to give the rules a fair shake and it looks good to me.

Not flame bait... seriously. After adding the house rule "2 detachments max, LoW/Fortifications need to have substitute points incase opponent doesn't want to deal with them, Battle forged only, only primary detachment non troops score" I think I'm good. My club won't bat an eye at that restriction and after we get over that this is a really good edition.

But that is like playing a totaly different game then w40k rules say.

And If demons are your main army , then I am sure your happy for 7th , they got better. On the other hand tau got nerfed a lot . My AM won't work unless I take ally . I for example have nothing that can counter a demon spawning list that drops 2-3 squads of horrors per turn , while buffing their invs and stoping my two casters from doing anything.

Makumba wrote:

Not flame bait... seriously. After adding the house rule "2 detachments max, LoW/Fortifications need to have substitute points incase opponent doesn't want to deal with them, Battle forged only, only primary detachment non troops score" I think I'm good. My club won't bat an eye at that restriction and after we get over that this is a really good edition.

But that is like playing a totaly different game then w40k rules say.

If people are unwilling to get together and make a minor tweak (whatever that needs to be for their meta... I'm not even suggesting people adopt my houserule) that changes a game/edition that they're ready to quit/ignore/nerd rage post etc about... well stupid them. So because a conversation might take some effort, and a club/FLGS might have to have a 10min meeting to set down a sentence of house rules to bypass GW's epic inability to think things through, people are willing to walk away from part of a hobby that they've sunk hundreds or thousands of dollars into? I dunno... little hard not to judge.

I and the folks where I play are tentatively excited. To be fair, the places I play at do not have a glut of people who look for rules to abuse so many of the lines of how broken things will be here (unbound, daemon summoning) are really nto coming up as a big issue. And while none of us are particularly hardcore tournament players, we've all been playing for at least 2 editions now, most more than that.

The biggest issue I have with 7th really is the speed of its release. It is fast and it strikes me as unusual.

But in all, I exalt this because this whole 7th thing is showing the worst side of Dakka. There are legitimate questions and concerns, but they are drowned out by histrionics and nonsense yelling without any kind of complete picture to react on.

how is any of those you listed minor. Battleforged only removes 50% of all possible lists taken. Thats more then saying no to FW.. Main change in 7th is that everything is scoring , your version of the game has only troops scoring , more only troops from the primary detachment.

I say that is playing a whole different game then w40k . You could as well say that power dice cap at 10 dice or that all base cover is suddenly +4 or limit ally and formations in some way.

Makumba wrote:

And If demons are your main army , then I am sure your happy for 7th , they got better. On the other hand tau got nerfed a lot . My AM won't work unless I take ally . I for example have nothing that can counter a demon spawning list that drops 2-3 squads of horrors per turn , while buffing their invs and stoping my two casters from doing anything.

I play everything. I've truly got know in-game loyalties or bias. In fluff, I like Ultramarines and enjoy the "newb" label I get for it (playing 40k since early 90s). I'm neither so self absorbed or dense to evaluate an edition based on my armies. I run Tau, Guard, etc. I'd gladly take a Tau force to a tourney still. AM with an ally will work fine... really well infact. Look at the actual rolls needed to pull off the daemon spawning you're all worried about. It just isn't that bad... surely not ignores cover, riptide, buff commanders, hammerhead, skyfiring broadside bad. and the amount for fire a good IG list can put out is just wicked. IG are top tier and are their to stay until assault rules fundamentally change.

Can you run the same lists you did in 6th, probably.. they're going to need a tweak though.

I liked some of the changes they made to 7th. But in general, there are too many other games available that are cheaper, easier to play, involve more critical thinking, and are just flat out more fun.

The great majority of the games of 40k that I have played recently were more or less decided by turn 2. Close games that truly exhibit each players own abilities are pretty rare in 40k. That will not be changing in 7th edition.

Which does not mean that I will give up on 40k. I'll still pull out the models from time to time. I just stopped spending money on Games Workshop products. I'm sure their fanbase is large enough to support them, they don't need my assistance.

I'm curious to see the changes. I'll most likely be spending most of the next year painting my army and not playing, however.

Makumba wrote:
how is any of those you listed minor. Battleforged only removes 50% of all possible lists taken. Thats more then saying no to FW.. Main change in 7th is that everything is scoring , your version of the game has only troops scoring , more only troops from the primary detachment.

I say that is playing a whole different game then w40k . You could as well say that power dice cap at 10 dice or that all base cover is suddenly +4 or limit ally and formations in some way.

The point isn't about my scoring house rules at all... but whatever. No, I'm saying ALL UNITS in primary score, only troops from allies... but if you leave it ALL UNITS score, who cares? Sure. Do that then. The point being that a very small, reasonable change lets everyone play their armies and move on. 50% of possible lists may have disappeared but no models or codices did. Saying no to FW would remove models. I edited original post for clarity.

Putting reasonable limits on lists makes the game predictable enough for people to have fun. If that generates rage for you, that's on you.

I’m OK with what I’ve heard about 7th. I wouldn’t say “pumped” but mildly optimistic. One of my big issues is the Business side of GW vs. the Gaming side. I like the mechanical bits I’ve seen, but the $85 book after 6th only went 2 years is a major cloud hanging over 7th. I’m waiting for a small book before I pick it up, but that has nothing to do with the rules themselves.

My local group never saw any of the truly abusive things in 6th. I suspect that for ordinary joes playing fun games, 7th is going to be a refined 6th. Minor tweaks for the most part, but in the right direction. Sure you can break it, but that’s been true about 40k for a while now.

One thing I like is that I don’t see any "must haves". When 6th dropped, it was a scramble for air cover. Once I read the book and FAQs, I drew up a short list of things I needed to buy before I to hit the table in any sort of competitive fashion. While I don’t have the whole picture on 7th yet, I don’t see anything paradigm shifting lurking about. I’m going to keep fielding my mono-Ultramarine, TAC lists.

 Lobukia wrote:
Not flame bait... seriously.
Don't mean to sound dismissive, but what's all the troubles gents? I've read every stinking post in the News Rumors threads and most here, and I'm just not seeing any problems once you get over the FoC issues. The rage quitters and edition banners just seem to be generating nerd-rage white noise. Seriously, look at the armies I play (sig). The ones I run the most are Daemons/CSM allies (lots of FMC), SM varieties, Guard. I play against/with a ton of Tau, Cron, Eldar, Nids. I don't see any of these getting overtly nerfed.

All in all this a fairly subtle and needed edition change. I don't see these rules as complex (not at all). Come on. I think a deep breath, a moment of mature calm reflection, and taking a step back is needed for the DakkaDakka community as a whole. IMO 6th was the best edition yet (played at least a little of all, owned models since the RT days) and in 7th I see only improvements if you have a club of even barely socially aware, reasonable people. If you don't why would you play there anyway?

If you've looked at my posts, I'm hardly a glass half full guy or a GW apologist (those epic, morons), but I'm a big enough man to give the rules a fair shake and it looks good to me.

Says he's not flame baiting, then calls anyone with a criticism "rage quitters."
Okay, ignoring the obvious flame baiting....
So, you read 200+ pages of the news and rumors thread and you're still clueless as to what the criticisms actually are?

Okay, I'll break it down for you, though its been broken down by people in that previous thread and far more eloquent than I can manage.

For one, you've made a lot of house rules to make the game playable. You've said that you had a game club of like minded individuals. Of course you're going to be OK with this edition. That's who 7th was made for. For everyone that's not in your exact same situation (yes, there are actually people like that) people that have to rely on pickup games, it's made the pre-game negotiation much more difficult and the chances for an actual fair game far less likely. "So, are super heavies in? What about unbound or Battle forged? D weapons? FOC shennanigans? Etc etc...) No one I know brings their whole collection to a pick up game just to see what they're actually able to play.

Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons? Totally legit now. That goes against everything 40k has been about since my RT days. Yes, I know a marine will occasionally fall to Chaos, but not to the point where it should ever be represented on the tabletop like this. Unbound armies with Wraithknights, riptides and Vendetta all working together? Sure. That's totally narrative.

It's too soon for me for a new edition, especially not at this price range. For some, it's worth it. But not for me.

Unbound and demon summoning weren't added to improve the game. It's all just an obvious cash grab by a increasingly desperate GW.

I'm not happy with the pyschic phase thing because neither of my armies have psykers and that seems to be a handicap now. Also, its adding a lot more complexity and an additional turn to the game.

Random charts for everything. They love the term "narrative" but don't actually know what it means. Random charts aren't narrative.

GW business practices help keep me away.

Basically its become a huge unbalanced mess that moves further and further away from a well balanced, good rule set and more into a "feth it, just do whatever you want" kind of ruleset. Not paying $85 for that.

Does that clear it up for you or are you still going to pretend problems don't exist? You may disagree with some, but at least try to see why people have criticisms.
I'm not a GW hater, I've been playing since I was 9 years old. I love the game and the universe of 40k, but I hate what the game's becoming because of shady, poor and ill conceived business practices by GW.

So, yes, I'm sitting 7th out.
(Side note: Still no friggin' legions and still NOTHING new for Sisters of Battle.)

 Nevelon wrote:
I’m OK with what I’ve heard about 7th. I wouldn’t say “pumped” but mildly optimistic. One of my big issues is the Business side of GW vs. the Gaming side. I like the mechanical bits I’ve seen, but the $85 book after 6th only went 2 years is a major cloud hanging over 7th. I’m waiting for a small book before I pick it up, but that has nothing to do with the rules themselves.

Yeah, this complaint really does hold with me too. While I'm fine getting a new book (only $60 ish for the papercopy through other retailers), I do wish GW would get Orks and BA out and then lift up a bit on the pace. I've always thought their pricing was self-destructive (and the numbers show that) and their financial acumen weak. But that doesn't impact my ability to appreciate the new edition.

I was actually kind of surprised at how much I liked this edition. A lot of the major changes seemed to be in there to tone back some of the crazier armies (FMCs can't assault on the turn they drop, Psychic Phase makes casting a lot more difficult), and there are a bunch of smaller, subtler changes that, I think, change things for the better. I love that there are no more rules for setting up a table, it's just a matter of making one that looks scenic.

Even the Unbound stuff, which I completely expected to hate, isn't too bad in the context of everything being scoring again. Taking objectives is now a major aspect of the game with the Maelstrom of War missions, and Unbound armies are going to be at a major disadvantage in that department.

On the loyalists summoning demons thing:

Nobody is forcing you.

Sure it’s powerful, and tempting. But Evil and wrong. I like that they include the option. There are a lot of cases in the fluff where good people do dabble in the dark arts. "Using the enemies tools against them” and such. And while I as a fluff adherent Ultramarine will never do so, I am not offended that they include the option for those with more flexible world views.

I will gladly administer a good purging to those that do on the tabletop though. Filthy heretics. And while it might be a rare occurrence in the fluff, the games we play on the tabletop don’t represent the average day-to-day battle of the galaxy, but the exceptional ones.

The one thing I’ve seen so far in 7th that does bother me is the lumping of guard in with the IoM. One of the things about the guard codex is that it could be used to represent traitor guard, or other normal human forces fighting in a lot of situations. The new ally chart makes that a little rough for them.

I agree with OP. I started in 3rd, skipped 4/5, like 6, and like the changes coming in 7th.

 MWHistorian wrote:

Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons?

Don't do it, then.

 MWHistorian wrote:
.
Says he's not flame baiting, then calls anyone with a criticism "rage quitters."
Okay, ignoring the obvious flame baiting....

How cute, I'm calling the rage quitters, rage quitters.... cause they're in a rage... and quitting... all over Dakka, everywhere (and we know they'll mostly be back in 6 months).

For one, you've made a lot of house rules to make the game playable. You've said that you had a game club of like minded individuals. Of course you're going to be OK with this edition. That's who 7th was made for. For everyone that's not in your exact same situation (yes, there are actually people like that) people that have to rely on pickup games, it's made the pre-game negotiation much more difficult and the chances for an actual fair game far less likely. "So, are super heavies in? What about unbound or Battle forged? D weapons? FOC shennanigans? Etc etc...) No one I know brings their whole collection to a pick up game just to see what they're actually able to play.

Where on earth do you play? It has to be a place owned by someone who has said "you can play 40k here at such and such time at such and such points". There has to be frequent players at that place, or you're not having pick up games. Either the people playing or the owner now has to say "you can play 40k here at such and such time at such and such points and follow such and such list building guidelines" Is that so beyond the abilities of the typical gaming group to pull off?

Look, I'm not saying its good that GW is making us nerds have to reach a consensus on something instead of them writing a tight rule set. But Magic and other games do this. "only these cards from these decks on these nights". Are we so inept as a community that instead of being mature about this game we'd rather whine and moan.

Should Gdub have not gone all "KraZy HAts MOAR KRazy RULES!!! use EVERYTHING!!!" Yes, of course yes. They're idiots. They just are. But we're equally pathetic if we can't look past one page in a whole rulebook that marketing/JJ put in there and put on big boy pants and treat 40k game night at our local club/FLGS as something that might need a minimal amount of ground rules and structure.

Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons? Totally legit now. That goes against everything 40k has been about since my RT days. Yes, I know a marine will occasionally fall to Chaos, but not to the point where it should ever be represented on the tabletop like this. Unbound armies with Wraithknights, riptides and Vendetta all working together? Sure. That's totally narrative.

Ok, but if I want to play an UM-successor renegade chapter that still fights sorta like the UM but is willing to run the very real risks of summoning a daemon to put down a foe (which is tough for SM to pull off in 7th, I might add... game mechanics and all that), then that hardly breaks fluff.

It's too soon for me for a new edition, especially not at this price range. For some, it's worth it. But not for me.

Unbound and demon summoning weren't added to improve the game. It's all just an obvious cash grab by a increasingly desperate GW.... GW business practices help keep me away.

No arguments, a part of GW is stupid.

I'm not happy with the pyschic phase thing because neither of my armies have psykers and that seems to be a handicap now. Also, its adding a lot more complexity and an additional turn to the game.

Random charts for everything. They love the term "narrative" but don't actually know what it means. Random charts aren't narrative.

I really think the psychic powers just got a HUGE nerf. I'm amazed more aren't seeing this (some are, most aren't). FAQs could prove me wrong, but as it stands, things aren't that bad.

(Side note: Still no friggin' legions and still NOTHING new for Sisters of Battle.)

I feel bad for SoBs... but Legions won't happen. GW is letting FW do that. Its pretty clear that's the route you need to go for those (and the 30k stuff is looking really really good, I can't wait to see what they do as legions get more chaos-y.

 MWHistorian wrote:

(Side note: Still no friggin' legions)

Army lists for the Emperor's Children, Death Guard, Sons of Horus, World Eaters, Word Bearers, Night Lords, Iron Hands, Salamanders, Iron Warriors, Alpha Legion, Imperial Fists and Raven Guard can be found in these 2 books. Bam.

LINK

Other then a few very specific rules I am ok with 7th edition. The only thing that really bothers me is in the psyker rules saying that if one model gets denied a power then no other model in the unit can try and manifest the same power.

-2" charge range when assaulting into cover wasn't really needed either.

I am glad for the FMC changes. Makes them more durable but less assaulty as they have to spend an entire turn on the ground prior to assaulting. This was needed as was the change to Smash. Too much Smash shenanigans (myself included with the wraithknight).

Vehicles being more durable slightly effects my vehicles as most time all the pens will turn into glance (serpent shields) but it does make falcons, fire prisms, and nightspinners more durable. In addition you can fire off serpent shields and still be semi durable as long as nothing is shooting at you with AP1 or 2.

Some armies need their deny special abilities modified a bit (space wolves) in order to stop them from dominating over all enemy psykers due to a RaW in thier codex.

The new cards for objectives makes the game more dynamic (like a battlefield should be) and I can't wait to try them out.

I could have sworn FW was only doing 30K legions. This is shocking, but 30k And 40k are very different. Alot has happened to the legions in 10,000 years. So no, 40k still has no legion rules. Also just saying you don't have to use a stupid rule, doesn't make it not stupid.

 Lobukia wrote:

How cute, I'm calling the rage quitters, rage quitters.... cause they're in a rage... and quitting... all over Dakka, everywhere (and we know they'll mostly be back in 6 months).

This is flame bait, whether you think so or not. Few people are 'raging', though I'm sure many are quitting. Labeling them as raging completely dismisses any of their valid reasons for leaving or criticisms of the game.

If you start a thread with 'Not to flamebait', and then proceed to do exactly that, well, it shows you were never really interested in hearing the other side's case.

I'm glad you're liking the new edition (albeit with a dozen house rules for the most broken aspects, fair), but I didn't like the direction 6th took, and I don't like the continuation that 7th is taking. Combined with the shorten shelf-life of the last edition and the increase in price, and I may very well sit this edition out.

Lucky for me, I'm moving to a new city in a month, and there are some people I know who play. Maybe they think like me and I can play a heavily modified version of 40k.

My space marines largely profit from the changes and I also don't expect anyone in my vicinity to try one of the doom and gloom lists that people fear about the 7th. So I'm looking forward to it.

I really like the unbound idea. Sure it's a cash grab (grubby, stupid business trying to make money) but I love the fact that I can now browse the ENTIRE lineup of 40K and play pretty much whatever I want now. This is an exciting format for me, and I was so happy to see it. Sure there will be people who abuse this, but honestly, I game in a pretty small circle and guys at my FLGS aren't into that sort of thing.

I am very optimistic about this edition, and aside from the ludicrous price of the new rule book I imagine that this will make me enjoy the hobby even more.

I'm not calling the OP a blinded white knight, but he's a blinded white knight.



See how that works?
(I don't actually think that, I'm just making a point about obvious hypocrisy while being simultaneously condescending and dismissive.)

Makumba wrote:

Not flame bait... seriously. After adding the house rule "2 detachments max, LoW/Fortifications need to have substitute points incase opponent doesn't want to deal with them, Battle forged only, only primary detachment non troops score" I think I'm good. My club won't bat an eye at that restriction and after we get over that this is a really good edition.

But that is like playing a totaly different game then w40k rules say.

And If demons are your main army , then I am sure your happy for 7th , they got better. On the other hand tau got nerfed a lot . My AM won't work unless I take ally . I for example have nothing that can counter a demon spawning list that drops 2-3 squads of horrors per turn , while buffing their invs and stoping my two casters from doing anything.

How'd I get a buff? My herald can't shoot flickering fire in a unit of pink horrors and I can't assault after flying. The hard to drop and daemon summoning might help certain competitive lists though. Still bad to see another nerf to assault.

Besides it basically forced turn 3 assaults, made thirsters worse, made Khornate DP worse, and made assault oriented not FMC we will fly and spam shots and then assault to finish off dramatically worse.

Mixed opinions. I don't see either of my armies changing much(Legion and DE). I have some younger kids in my group(18-25) and they might go hog wild, however a simple No should suffice. Not a fan of Unbound and will not be playing it, will still play no lord of war unless the other player has a lord of war to balance it, and will continue to refuse to play against Screamerstars.

My vehicles got better and it looks like my assault squads can consolidate into combat after winning one. Nice for my Primarch

 StarTrotter wrote:

Makumba wrote:

Not flame bait... seriously. After adding the house rule "2 detachments max, LoW/Fortifications need to have substitute points incase opponent doesn't want to deal with them, Battle forged only, only primary detachment non troops score" I think I'm good. My club won't bat an eye at that restriction and after we get over that this is a really good edition.

But that is like playing a totaly different game then w40k rules say.

And If demons are your main army , then I am sure your happy for 7th , they got better. On the other hand tau got nerfed a lot . My AM won't work unless I take ally . I for example have nothing that can counter a demon spawning list that drops 2-3 squads of horrors per turn , while buffing their invs and stoping my two casters from doing anything.

How'd I get a buff? My herald can't shoot flickering fire in a unit of pink horrors and I can't assault after flying. The hard to drop and daemon summoning might help certain competitive lists though. Still bad to see another nerf to assault.

Besides it basically forced turn 3 assaults, made thirsters worse, made Khornate DP worse, and made assault oriented not FMC we will fly and spam shots and then assault to finish off dramatically worse.

Good points, StarTrotter... and you're proving my point

People who don't play Daemons, think Daemons are broken and will be spawning a hundred blood thirsters.... those who think through the new dynamic realize that for every buff there seems to be a nerf... and things that others are freaked out about are actually pretty tricky to pull off

Bikes got better (increased save) but nerfed (snapfire)

MC got worse, their never before 6th smash rule got knocked back to reasonable levels, but they can move through terrain better, assault through terrain better, and still can really hurt most vehicles.

This is a rebalance... and a tweak, cooler heads will prevail, but why does it take us a year to get there, and in all the negative pouting we turn off more people to the game. If people don't like a town, they move, but they don't try to set it on fire on the way out... why are gamers so willing to burn bridges and do damage on the way out?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I'm not calling the OP a blinded white knight, but he's a blinded white knight.



See how that works?
(I don't actually think that, I'm just making a point about obvious hypocrisy while being simultaneously condescending and dismissive.)

Wow. How about you make a point about avoiding the topic, and ignoring counter points to arguments? That would be even more clever witty and cutting

 Musashi363 wrote:
I could have sworn FW was only doing 30K legions. This is shocking, but 30k And 40k are very different. Alot has happened to the legions in 10,000 years. So no, 40k still has no legion rules. Also just saying you don't have to use a stupid rule, doesn't make it not stupid.

Actually, Legion rules, that I've seen, still make a lot of sense, both for representing the Chapters that were originally Legions and their successors in 40K, for both Loyalists and Traitors in lieu of the 'proper' 40K books.

Sure, it would take opponents permission, but the rules are out there to make a really fluffy, effective but not broken and fun Legion list.

 kronk wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

Fluff breakage. This is a big one for me. Oh, Ultramarine librarians summoning deamons?

Don't do it, then.

You'd say the same about allies shenanigans, death stars, D weapons, and all the other issues with 6th, right? I'm having trouble finding that in your post history.

Dismissing bad rules with, "Hey, don't use them," only gets you so far. Fewer people are buying GW products now than this time last year. They're not bringing in new blood. They've cut costs to the bone and are releasing entire editions on a whim in an effort to make EOTY figures look good. I'd say, "Don't do it, then," has gotten them as far as it's going to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lobukia wrote:
This is a rebalance... and a tweak, cooler heads will prevail, but why does it take us a year to get there, and in all the negative pouting we turn off more people to the game. If people don't like a town, they move, but they don't try to set it on fire on the way out... why are gamers so willing to burn bridges and do damage on the way out?

I find it fascinating you believe it's the "negativity" that's turning potential new people off rather than the $500+ start-up cost to get involved and the availability of cheaper, better alternatives out there.

 Triton wrote:
Fewer people are buying GW products now than this time last year. They're not bringing in new blood.

So true, their pricing and lack of rules support is killing them (as is the bafflingly bizarre one man store approach and their screw the FLGS tactics). Though a good chunk of the blame is at the feet of the bitter and self destructive vocal minority that's practicing a scorched earth policy on the old interwebz and the unwillingness of club/league/pick up game organizer to set ground rules.