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.
Except I'm not claiming that my opinion is objective truth, I'm simply critiqueing the opposite, that they are objectively awful. My own opinion is that yes there are a lot of areas where the rules could be clearer but I'm not going to claim that the rules as a whole are unworkable or too bad to be unplayable when they are demonstrably not.
And no one is claiming the rules as a whole are unworkable or unplayable.
If you're going to discuss something, at least have the courtesy to understand what other people are saying.
The whole point, is that the rules have many vague areas; the old LoS rules are a great example of this for many reasons. I don't understand what you're not understanding about this and why you're so fervently arguing against it.
I've seen some people claim the rules to be utterly broken or terribad in general. Some here called them broken too.
Thing is - people that try to prove that GW's rules are ambiguous often go to the opposite extreme, trying to ridicule through exaggeration to prove their point, but then some random sensationalist will pick it up and live by those words like they weren't exaggerated at all, making things like lack of eyes in LOS rule such a huge issue that normal, reasonable folk will just facepalm at. You know what's worst? When confronted about some of those "problems" and proven that they're not even remotely a 'real' issue the answer is always the same "but it's about the principle, not this particular issue". No matter how many of those terrible broken rules issues you topple and prove to be a matter of a very simple interpretation, they will still say that it's not about the particular examples but something that turns into some kind of a mythical land of problems that lies somewhere near the Atlantis. Everyone heard about it, some preach about it, but noone has actually seen it, because strange men in black suits and shades stormed into their houses and erased their memories, planting in the terrible thing called "house rules" to cover up the ugly truth.
Every single issue I have ever read about was so minor it could've been ignored by giving it 2 seconds of reasonable thought. Yet they're somehow combined into giant blob of a problem when mentioned in a conversation.
Not saying the rules are perfect, but they're far, far from being "broken", "unplayable" and "terrible". GW definetely should finally assume that players actually are idiots and that they need to be spoon-fed with idiot-proof rules so noone can ever come up with such stupid problems. Again - reasonable people don't have issues with the rules. Sure, it sometimes takes an interpretation(which some will call house ruling, but whatever), but if someone can't really figure out a solution to a 'problem' like that, he probably should consider changing hobby over to something that doesn't require using brain. Yes, 'figuring out' stuff should not be a thing when it comes to rule, I understand that, but a few small cases, if not overblown by some internet arguists, aren't really a sign that the whole game is broken or terribly written. Vast majority of rules works perfectly fine and the game is -very- playable.
Someone else who is missing the point.
RAW, the pre-7th edition LOS rules (as the primary example in this discussion) were utterly broken and unplayable, because it instructed to use a models eyes, didn't explain what to do if the model lacked eyes, and models existed which didn't have what one would conventionally call eyes.
Therefore, in order to make the game work, the player base, subconsciously in many cases, simply house ruled that on a model that didn't have eyes, you used the most eye-like equivalent, or merely used the model's head.
This is fine until you get into things like artillery, which aren't given permission to use vehicle rules (use the barrel) and don't have a logical analogue for eyes, face or head.
Once again, for the I don't know how many times-th time, nobody is saying that this wasn't something that was worked around by the community at large, what people are saying, repeatedly, is that this was a badly written rule, which was open to exploitation, that required house ruling by the entire 40K community in order to function, that took 20 odd years to fix and was an incredibly easy fix once they could be arsed.
The argument isn't that it couldn't be worked with, the argument is that it should either have been caught pre-publishing, or at the minimum only taken an edition to rectify.
There is nothing to understand - you are choosing to miss-interprit the rules to an hilarious extent. Even I could find a rule that seemed vague or unclear, but you keep banging the drum on that one single rule that no single person I have ever met has ever had a problem with. Unless you have actually enforced this in a game - and please god tell me you have tried to do this - your point is self-defeating. You insist that the rule doesn't work and yet thousands of people play with it every day without having a problem with it. Therefore, the problem is with you, not GW.
You get that this is a hypothetical example right?
Oh no, you're hilariously choosing to misunderstand everything anyone else writes.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:10:42
Captain Killhammer McFighterson stared down at the surface of Earth from his high vantage point on the bridge of Starship Facemelter. Something ominous was looming on the surface. He could see a great shadow looming just underneath the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, slowly spreading northward. "That can't be good..." he muttered to himself while rubbing the super manly stubble on his chin with one hand. "But... on the other hand..." he looked at his shiny new bionic murder-arm. "This could be the perfect chance for that promotion." A perfect roundhouse kick slammed the ship's throttle into full gear. Soon orange jets of superheated plasma were visible from the space-windshield as Facemelter reentered the atmosphere at breakneck speed.
If I enjoy something, and beyond interpersonal interaction with my buddies or people I randomly game with at an FLGS, cannot even begin to attempt to converse about it through the popular/regular channels without having to wade through a sea of negativity and outrageous, often completely out of touch perspectives on what should for all intents and purposes be something that is purely meant for fun and an outlet from the real stress in life, the problem is not with me. It's the community, or to be more specific, a small group of stubborn like-minded disgruntled 'veterans of the long war against GW'.
Why on earth would that be an insult?
If you find that diverging opinions from your own, influence you so much that it lowers your actual enjoyment of the game, then maybe you should consider joining B&C or some other forum like that. From what I've heard they toe the GW party line much more closely than Dakka and would probably better suit your needs of being surrounded only by people that agree with you.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:12:25
If I enjoy something, and beyond interpersonal interaction with my buddies or people I randomly game with at an FLGS, cannot even begin to attempt to converse about it through the popular/regular channels without having to wade through a sea of negativity and outrageous, often completely out of touch perspectives on what should for all intents and purposes be something that is purely meant for fun and an outlet from the real stress in life, the problem is not with me. It's the community, or to be more specific, a small group of stubborn like-minded disgruntled 'veterans of the long war against GW'.
Why on earth would that be an insult?
If you find that diverging opinions from your own, influence you so much that it lowers your actual enjoyment of the game, then maybe you should consider joining B&C or some other forum like that. From what I've heard they toe the GW party line much more closely than Dakka and would probably better suit your needs of being surrounded only by people that agree with you.
This has nothing to do with whether or not people agree with me. I have never personally stated that GW, or the collective game does not have its share of problems. I take issue with the way people approach said problems or cannot seemingly overcome them, and how downright poisonous some people are.
We have people that no longer play this game that literally lurk in order to copy and paste their repeated arguments whenever an opportunity arises, or to purposely sway people away from the game. Their very reason for existing, it seems, is to churn out GW propaganda and start arguments.
Also, for the record, ending every post with a laughing emoticon isn't a terribly effective way to convince someone that you aren't being condescending.
Your damn right that I'll do my utmost to sway people away from the game. Its a pretty bad game and overpriced to booth, made by a terrible company that sees its customers only has walking wallets. I would be making the gaming community a terrible service if I let anyone start spending money in a game like that.
Also, for the record, ending every post with a laughing emoticon isn't a terribly effective way to convince someone that you aren't being condescending.
I'll stop with the laughing emoticons then.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:18:30
Your damn right that I'll do my utmost to sway people away from the game. Its a pretty bad game and overpriced to booth, made by a terrible company that sees its customers only has walking wallets. I would be making the gaming community a terrible service if I let anyone start spending money in a game like that.
Also, for the record, ending every post with a laughing emoticon isn't a terribly effective way to convince someone that you aren't being condescending.
I'll stop with the laughing emoticons then.
Thanks for proving my point.
Good luck with your tireless crusade, and enjoy posting in a forum dedicated to a hobby that you clearly dislike.
People have entirely too much time on their hands.
XenosTerminus wrote: Good luck with your tireless crusade, and enjoy posting in a forum dedicated to a hobby that you clearly dislike.
The tabletop game isn't the extent of the hobby. We love the 40k setting, most of the models, the novels, the video games, whatever. We may even have loved the tabletop game. No longer loving it doesn't mean we can't enjoy the rest of 40k, or do what we can to try to improve the tabletop game - the only known way of doing so being to hit GW where it hurts, right in the profits.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:25:49
XenosTerminus wrote: Good luck with your tireless crusade, and enjoy posting in a forum dedicated to a hobby that you clearly dislike.
The tabletop game isn't the extent of the hobby. We love the 40k setting, most of the models, the novels, the video games, whatever. We may even have loved the tabletop game. No longer loving it doesn't mean we can't enjoy the rest of 40k, or do what we can to try to improve the tabletop game - the only known way of doing so being to hit GW where it hurts, right in the profits.
I get that, I really do. The hobby is more than the rules.
Then why do so many people feel it is necessary to post about rules if they don't care about them? How many times do these people need to repeat their stance? don't post about the rules and stay in the hobby sections maybe?
XenosTerminus wrote: Good luck with your tireless crusade, and enjoy posting in a forum dedicated to a hobby that you clearly dislike.
The tabletop game isn't the extent of the hobby. We love the 40k setting, most of the models, the novels, the video games, whatever. We may even have loved the tabletop game. No longer loving it doesn't mean we can't enjoy the rest of 40k, or do what we can to try to improve the tabletop game - the only known way of doing so being to hit GW where it hurts, right in the profits.
I get that, I really do. The hobby is more than the rules.
Then why do so many people feel it is necessary to post about rules if they don't care about them? How many times do these people need to repeat their stance? don't post about the rules and stay in the hobby sections maybe?
Because the rules enable the game and it's bs to have crap rules when you're paying almost $100 , more than anybody else, for them?
XenosTerminus wrote: Good luck with your tireless crusade, and enjoy posting in a forum dedicated to a hobby that you clearly dislike.
The tabletop game isn't the extent of the hobby. We love the 40k setting, most of the models, the novels, the video games, whatever. We may even have loved the tabletop game. No longer loving it doesn't mean we can't enjoy the rest of 40k, or do what we can to try to improve the tabletop game - the only known way of doing so being to hit GW where it hurts, right in the profits.
I get that, I really do. The hobby is more than the rules.
Then why do so many people feel it is necessary to post about rules if they don't care about them? How many times do these people need to repeat their stance? don't post about the rules and stay in the hobby sections maybe?
Because the rules enable the game and it's bs to have crap rules when you're paying almost $100 , more than anybody else, for them?
Then don't spend $100 on the rules.
It's really quite simple. If you dislike an aspect of the game, no amount of complaining is going to change things. Clearly. GW's business methods, whether you agree with them or not, have largely remained unchanged since 4th edition.
Embrace what you enjoy about the hobby and disregard what you don't. Look for the positives in things instead of lingering on the negative. Don't try to lessen others enjoyment in something because you yourself are cynical and jaded.
It does nobody any good to tirelessly preach on a street corner- eventually people get annoyed after hearing the same thing repeated.
XenosTerminus wrote: Good luck with your tireless crusade, and enjoy posting in a forum dedicated to a hobby that you clearly dislike.
The tabletop game isn't the extent of the hobby. We love the 40k setting, most of the models, the novels, the video games, whatever. We may even have loved the tabletop game. No longer loving it doesn't mean we can't enjoy the rest of 40k, or do what we can to try to improve the tabletop game - the only known way of doing so being to hit GW where it hurts, right in the profits.
QFT.
This is how I feel. I've only recently turned against GW and now that I'm standing on the other side I feel that GW is cheapening the IP that I love by turning it into a poorly thought out short termed money grab.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
XenosTerminus wrote: Then why do so many people feel it is necessary to post about rules if they don't care about them? How many times do these people need to repeat their stance? don't post about the rules and stay in the hobby sections maybe?
We *do* care about the rules. This also isn't the rules section - it's 40k general. How long? Until GW listens I guess ; ) It works for other companies - customers got Microsoft to change their Xbox One "features" before launch thanks to loud complaining. It'll work here too - it'll just take longer and go the indirect route of hitting GW in the profits.
MWHistorian wrote: This is how I feel. I've only recently turned against GW and now that I'm standing on the other side I feel that GW is cheapening the IP that I love by turning it into a poorly thought out short termed money grab.
Check the monetization of the new 40K MMO, it's shocking. $35 for a bolter skin, there are $450 pre-order packs and even buying the full game ($40) doesn't give you full access. GW is only getting worse as time goes on and people keep enabling them.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:42:58
Yonan wrote: The definition of "eye" is very specific:
eye
noun
1.
each of a pair of globular organs of sight in the head of humans and vertebrate animals.
When the model does not have one, it is unclear exactly what to do. Do you use the optical sensor if it has one? Do you use this other thing that could be an optical sensor? How about the antennae because it's a networked drone receiving orders from a controller? Maybe the model detects its surroundings with its tongue like a snake? Does it use echo location like a bat? Due to this ease of confustion, should you instead use the tip of the gun barrel? They've all viable alternatives, as are others. When there are multiple viable options you could say it's "unclear" of which to use.
This is where common sense comes into play. An optical sensor is an eye in fact, just an eye for technological things, it serves the same function. If you need to be told that, something is wrong with you, not the rule.
The whole point, is that the rules have many vague areas; the old LoS rules are a great example of this for many reasons. I don't understand what you're not understanding about this and why you're so fervently arguing against it.
Because at some point, things are just obvious as to how they should be handled and those complaining about GW so far, obviously don't know how to handle issues because they are not spelled out for them.
And no one is claiming the rules as a whole are unworkable or unplayable.
I've seen some people claim the rules to be utterly broken or terribad in general. Some here called them broken too.
Thing is - people that try to prove that GW's rules are ambiguous often go to the opposite extreme, trying to ridicule through exaggeration to prove their point, but then some random sensationalist will pick it up and live by those words like they weren't exaggerated at all, making things like lack of eyes in LOS rule such a huge issue that normal, reasonable folk will just facepalm at. You know what's worst? When confronted about some of those "problems" and proven that they're not even remotely a 'real' issue the answer is always the same "but it's about the principle, not this particular issue". No matter how many of those terrible broken rules issues you topple and prove to be a matter of a very simple interpretation, they will still say that it's not about the particular examples but something that turns into some kind of a mythical land of problems that lies somewhere near the Atlantis. Everyone heard about it, some preach about it, but noone has actually seen it, because strange men in black suits and shades stormed into their houses and erased their memories, planting in the terrible thing called "house rules" to cover up the ugly truth.
Every single issue I have ever read about was so minor it could've been ignored by giving it 2 seconds of reasonable thought. Yet they're somehow combined into giant blob of a problem when mentioned in a conversation.
Not saying the rules are perfect, but they're far, far from being "broken", "unplayable" and "terrible". GW definetely should finally assume that players actually are idiots and that they need to be spoon-fed with idiot-proof rules so noone can ever come up with such stupid problems. Again - reasonable people don't have issues with the rules. Sure, it sometimes takes an interpretation(which some will call house ruling, but whatever), but if someone can't really figure out a solution to a 'problem' like that, he probably should consider changing hobby over to something that doesn't require using brain. Yes, 'figuring out' stuff should not be a thing when it comes to rule, I understand that, but a few small cases, if not overblown by some internet arguists, aren't really a sign that the whole game is broken or terribly written. Vast majority of rules works perfectly fine and the game is -very- playable.
Sorry, the bolded part made my day. I noticed and have been saying this since I joined these forums. Reasonable people. no problems. Those who cannot reason, mucha problemas.
So now people are idiots because they insist that a product that has the highest price tag on the market, also should have the quality to go along with it?
You guys are hilarious, you really are. Its no wonder that GW continues to rise prices and lower quality when you guys just gobble it all up and attribute all the problems that might happen to your fellow gamers instead of the company that actually made the rules!
I put five minutes into building a list for WM, over $400 easily. I've put less than $250, not counting paints into my 40k army. Who has the highest price tag again? A box of guys for $50+ unless a sale happens, a starter set that offers less models at the same price as GW, seriously, your point is so bad here it's laughable.
Kilkrazy wrote: I think GW's assumption is that a lot of their customers, especially the new, younger ones, have never read a set of wargame rules and don't care how they are written as long as the text is carried along by a general theme of enthusiasm and fun.
Or GW realizes that people will take the game for what it is, a game and stop whining and moaning about every little thing they come across. Mind you the playerbase actually whining and complaining, isn't even a majority of the players.
Therefore, in order to make the game work, the player base, subconsciously in many cases, simply house ruled that on a model that didn't have eyes, you used the most eye-like equivalent, or merely used the model's head.
This point, obvious. You are playing in a 40k setting, there will be robots and alien races with different optical parts/pieces than humans. It becomes a little obvious if you simply look at the model and stop looking for a literal sentence always telling you what to do.
MWHistorian wrote: Please stop this nonesense about "LOS and eyes." It does neither side any credit. There are bigger and more pressing issues than that.
Issues to some, not all and those issues, are solved by common sense.
Because the rules enable the game and it's bs to have crap rules when you're paying almost $100 , more than anybody else, for them?
Outside of the rulebook, the prices per model, when looking at infantry is roughly higher for Warmachine, seen this myself. Warmachine is cheaper for solo units which I'll grant them and rulebooks for armies, at least the troll one is roughly the same as what I paid for my Tyrannid rulebook. Overall GW rulebook is a little high, but you are not just buying a rulebook, you're getting a lot of lore and some sweet pics. Also, it isn't almost $100, I paid $81 and change for 6th edition rulebook which was a little high and I paid nada for 7th, but that's another story.
You're whining about the price on things you can easily work around, no basis for argumentation there sir. Prices are high, you get a good product, don't like it, don't buy, simple as that.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:48:12
In the works
Warhammer 40k. Enjoy it or go play something else. Life is too short to complain.
Lobomalo wrote: This is where common sense comes into play. An optical sensor is an eye in fact, just an eye for technological things, it serves the same function. If you need to be told that, something is wrong with you, not the rule.
It's funny you should say that, because my group decided - based on common sense - that because of the widely varying nature of models, it was better to use the tips of weapons for LOS. The weapons are always WYSIWYG, the rest of the model... who knows.
Lobomalo wrote: This is where common sense comes into play. An optical sensor is an eye in fact, just an eye for technological things, it serves the same function. If you need to be told that, something is wrong with you, not the rule.
It's funny you should say that, because my group decided - based on common sense - that because of the widely varying nature of models, it was better to use the tips of weapons for LOS. The weapons are always WYSIWYG, the rest of the model... who knows.
That's another way you could do it, but as those are not eyes or any type of optical tool on a model, you'd be doing it wrong, but it is an idea I've heard before
In the works
Warhammer 40k. Enjoy it or go play something else. Life is too short to complain.
Getting back to a broader theme, GW "win" if they increase sales and profits. This means they have to create and retain happy customers.
The increasingly widespread complaints and criticism about GW -- rules, expense, balance, codex releases too slow/too quick -- seem to show that there is a problem with some of the veterans. The question for GW is whether they can create new customers at a sufficient rate to balance the loss of old ones, or maybe keep some old customers and sell them more stuff each.
The sales figures suggest GW are just about succeeding, as revenues have been relatively constant for some years. (Except the dismal Dec 13 interim results.)
The danger for GW is that by pissing off enough veterans, they may create a situation in which the virtuous circle of supporters becomes a vicious circle of detractors. In other words, rather then newcomers being welcomed into a widespread and growing hobby with many happy users to tutor them in playing and modelling, newcomers are greeted by a shrinking circle of players many of whom have become actively hostile to the point they promote rival rules and models.
Going to have to disagree that it's any more wrong than the other interpretations sorry, but we've been there.
edit: Those sales figures should be out pretty soon I hope. Next 6 months will be more telling as the cannibalization from the early 7th will start to show, but will still be interesting to see.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:54:03
XenosTerminus wrote: Then why do so many people feel it is necessary to post about rules if they don't care about them? How many times do these people need to repeat their stance? don't post about the rules and stay in the hobby sections maybe?
We *do* care about the rules. This also isn't the rules section - it's 40k general. How long? Until GW listens I guess ; )
MWHistorian wrote: This is how I feel. I've only recently turned against GW and now that I'm standing on the other side I feel that GW is cheapening the IP that I love by turning it into a poorly thought out short termed money grab.
Check the monetization of the new 40K MMO, it's shocking. $35 for a bolter skin, there are $450 pre-order packs and even buying the full game ($40) doesn't give you full access. GW is only getting worse as time goes on and people keep enabling them.
A company will only charge what consumers are willing to pay (the greatest common denominator, or majority), especially in a niche market. Many argue that GW's policies are not sustainable- this may be true in the long run, but right now people are still willing to pay for their products based on what they are charging, despite so many people online suggesting the game is too expensive.
It's basic economics. GW, for all their faults with the actual product, are behaving exactly how a company in their position does, regardless of the product type. If they finding their current methods to be profitable, even if it is a short-term goal, they are perfectly within their rights to do so.
You as a consumer have the ability to choose whether or not to support a company. GW has cut most ties with the community, and clearly doesn't forum ranting seriously (evident by the closure of their very own forums).
Am I suggesting this is good in any way? No. I think GW is shooting themselves in the foot. But here the thing- if they are no longer finding profits to be sustainable, they will be faced with difficult decisions. Things will have to change in order to keep the shareholders happy. Until then, though, they are fully within their rights to operate their business however the hell they want to whether you agree with it or not. Don't like it? Don't support it.
But please, for love of God, if you have literally zero interest, involvement, or have nothing positive to say- EVER- don't try to detract from others enjoyment simply because you can. Do I agree with everything GW does? No, I do not.
Do I find their prices too high? No, because I don't blow hundreds of dollars on this game every month. I will buy a kit every few months, if that. I largely play with the collection I already have. I apply common sense and play the game with like-minded and mature functional adults.
We find no serious issues with the game- and it's just that.. a game. It isn't some incredibly serious and life altering activity that needs to be taken as seriously as it is to some people, regardless of how much you may or may not have invested in it.
That's life, folks. Things change. Sometimes for the worse. You move on and adapt. Don't like GW or the game anymore? Tough. Other people clearly still do, and you are doing nobody any favors by self-loathing and tirelessly whining about the days of yore.
Check the monetization of the new 40K MMO, it's shocking. $35 for a bolter skin, there are $450 pre-order packs and even buying the full game ($40) doesn't give you full access. GW is only getting worse as time goes on and people keep enabling them.
40$ gives you the full game, it just doesn't give you access to the fancy skins and such in the cash shop.
I apply common sense and play the game with like-minded and mature functional adults.
We find no serious issues with the game- and it's just that.. a game. It isn't some incredibly serious and life altering activity that needs to be taken as seriously as it is to some people, regardless of how much you may or may not have invested in it.
That's life, folks. Things change. Sometimes for the worse. You move on and adapt. Don't like GW or the game anymore? Tough. Other people clearly still do, and you are doing nobody any favors by self-loathing and tirelessly whining about the days of yore.
Can I play with you, you seem like a reasonable fellow?
Check the monetization of the new 40K MMO, it's shocking. $35 for a bolter skin, there are $450 pre-order packs and even buying the full game ($40) doesn't give you full access. GW is only getting worse as time goes on and people keep enabling them.
40$ gives you the full game, it just doesn't give you access to the fancy skins and such in the cash shop.
Which is entirely normal and fine as MMO's nowadays run on micro-transactions anyway
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, that $450 is for all the extra perks, not the game, don't complain about it, you don't need to buy it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/27 15:57:09
In the works
Warhammer 40k. Enjoy it or go play something else. Life is too short to complain.
XenosTerminus wrote: That's life, folks. Things change. Sometimes for the worse. You move on and adapt. Don't like GW or the game anymore? Tough. Other people clearly still do, and you are doing nobody any favors by self-loathing and tirelessly whining about the days of yore.
Those other people don't seem to care about us no longer enjoying a part of the hobby we've invested $000's into, so why should we care about their enjoyment in our attempts to get change? That would be a pretty bad stance to take though wouldn't it?
BTW, I'm not a veteran. I arrived on the tail of 5th so I'm not pining for the days of yore. It didn't take me long to realize GW were horrible at rule writing. Doesn't mean I can't do whatever I can to remedy that to make the hobby more fun.
Check the monetization of the new 40K MMO, it's shocking. $35 for a bolter skin, there are $450 pre-order packs and even buying the full game ($40) doesn't give you full access. GW is only getting worse as time goes on and people keep enabling them.
40$ gives you the full game, it just doesn't give you access to the fancy skins and such in the cash shop.
$40 gives you the full game - up to 2 months later than people who paid more for it. Or did you not read about the tiered content releases post launch?
Lobomalo wrote: Also, that $450 is for all the extra perks, not the game, don't complain about it, you don't need to buy it.
The extra perks cut from the games content to sell piecemeal to you. Iconic bolter skins should not be gated behind further paywalls. It's a bad model. I have no intention of paying for it, and the majority of MMO players I've talked to about it have all heavily criticized it. For that and other reasons.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/06/27 16:03:16
All the other rules sets I use to enjoy my hobby of table top war gaming , allow me to turn up , set up the table and play anyone who has read the same rule book as me straight away.
Eg
' X-Wing 50pts?'
'Yeah cool'.
Play and enjoy.
FoW 'Late war 1750 pts'
'Ok lets play..'
Play and enjoy .
The last '40k bring and battle' at my FLGS involved 2 hours 'heated debate ' over what source material to use, unbound lists,or not,then arguing on how to 'interpret' or 'house rule' the new 7th edition.
Obviously the 5 regulars had arrived as a common 'interpetation'.But the players from surrounding clubs had not arrived at the same interpretations.
So if you find needless discussion on how to interpret rules that you paid premium prices for enjoyable.Do not assume every one will feel the same way.
Also do not assume everyone has the luxury of a fixed group of friends who can mutually agree to edit the rules GW sell them to find the game they enjoy.
If you acknowledge GW plc sell 40k as suitable for pick up and play games in stores.Then the prerequisite of this function is being able to use 'Rules As Written'.
It is not fun arguing over the intent of the rules writer when the rules as written are not defined to a professional* standard.(*Proof read and edited.) .IMO.
XenosTerminus wrote: That's life, folks. Things change. Sometimes for the worse. You move on and adapt. Don't like GW or the game anymore? Tough. Other people clearly still do, and you are doing nobody any favors by self-loathing and tirelessly whining about the days of yore.
Those other people don't seem to care about us no longer enjoying a part of the hobby we've invested $000's into, so why should we care about their enjoyment in our attempts to get change? That would be a pretty bad stance to take though wouldn't it?
BTW, I'm not a veteran. I arrived on the tail of 5th so I'm not pining for the days of yore. It didn't take me long to realize GW were horrible at rule writing. Doesn't mean I can't do whatever I can to remedy that to make the hobby more fun.
There is a difference between attempting to make the hobby more enjoyable and simply complaining that it isn't more enjoyable.
GW has given us a toolbox to do whatever we want, within reason. This is absolutely fantastic for people that just want to disconnect and enjoy a game with beautifully sculpted miniatures that we all spend countless hours painting, converting, and crafting into coherent forces based on lore we all hold dear.
Whether GW purposely keeps their rules gray or up for interpretation or not and masks this with a 'forge the narrative' methodology, the very definition of 'remedying the problem' is doing whatever you, and the greater collective of players can, to enjoy the game anyway they can.
The issue is some players are incapable of doing this. They pine for complete balance, meticulously spelled out rules, and various other ways things are handled from a company perspective.
The problem is that this is not how 40k is, or has ever been, give or take subtleties from prior editions. Instead of MAKING 40k the game they want, often with little effort required, these people want everything spelled out or spoon-fed to them. They either lack effort or imagination.
40k is what you choose to make it. If you cannot embrace or accept that this is the way the game is, it's not for you.
I put five minutes into building a list for WM, over $400 easily. I've put less than $250, not counting paints into my 40k army. Who has the highest price tag again? A box of guys for $50+ unless a sale happens, a starter set that offers less models at the same price as GW, seriously, your point is so bad here it's laughable.
$400? I'd like to see that list.
Even without discounts, I've made pretty solid tourney lists with a good selection of units for £150-£200. My first circle army which dis extremely well cost me £90, and is still the core of a lot of my larger armies. I never 'sell' warmachine on the 'but it's cheaper!!11,' ticket, but it's a lot cheaper to buy in than 40k.
Similarly - it's my experience that $250 won't take you very far in 40k, especially if you play a hordey style army. Whenenever those pricing threads come up, I see $500+ price tags more often than not.
With respect, and out of curiosity, I'd like to see your lists, because neither represents the standard...
$40 gives you the full game - up to 2 months later than people who paid more for it. Or did you not read about the tiered content releases post launch?
So it just gives you early access then? It doesn't completely lock that content out from you?
The answer of which, is no.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/06/27 16:17:29
Because at some point, things are just obvious as to how they should be handled and those complaining about GW so far, obviously don't know how to handle issues because they are not spelled out for them.
I'm assuming you've read the whole thread, and yet you still seem to miss the point.
The point is not how the players can adapt, house rule, and otherwise apply basic logic, the point is that the rules are shoddy in many areas. The LoS issue is a single example, of which there are dozens more. So while the LoS issue is fairly easily resolved, it doesn't excuse GW from making a simple fix (which they have with this edition) for that rule. Further, the entire point is that GW can't seem to win because their rule writing ability is quite poor.
Yes, the LoS is a bit of an extreme example of RAW, but it is nevertheless an example of poor writing. There are, however, dozens of other issues among the codices and rule book proper where the solution is not clear and more than one interpretation of the rules may be correct, leading to conflicts.
Stop assuming the people who are making these points aren't using common sense. Many of these posters have been active on these boards for some time and participated in threads aimed at resolving the issues in the game. I understand full well how to fix the game and do when required, but once more, that doesn't excuse GW of poor writing or make it any less important for them to write better rules.
I don't need things to be spelled out for me; I need a game that I don't have to negotiate with my opponent about who's interpretation or application of common sense is more right. This isn't a difficult concept, nor something that should be dismissed because its seemingly too negative.
Once again; the LoS debate was an example to illustrate the greater issues that permeate the game. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm fully capable of applying common sense and making my games run smoothly. The point is, to reiterate once more, that once of the reasons GW can't seem to win is because their rule set is poorly written, which causes issues for many gamers. Never assume because your group of gamers all think and interpret the same way that other groups don't have issues with people not seeing eye to eye with a particularly vague rule.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
Lobomalo wrote: Except a sensor, isn't an interpretation of an eye. It serves the exact function, which is why common sense was applied to it.
Or do sensors no longer sense things and provide vision for robots?
Well, I'm no electronics engineer, but I'm aware of motion sensors, heat sensors, audio sensors, proximity sensors... Plus there's radar, sonar etc..
Plus what do we have, other than our own assumption, that what you've assumed is some sort of visual I out isn't, in fact, so,e sort of output device? Or a charging jack? Or any other number of hitherto unthought of things from an alien robot supposedly from 40,000 years in the future?
But, once again, you're arguing the minutiae of the example rather than the wider point.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
I put five minutes into building a list for WM, over $400 easily. I've put less than $250, not counting paints into my 40k army. Who has the highest price tag again? A box of guys for $50+ unless a sale happens, a starter set that offers less models at the same price as GW, seriously, your point is so bad here it's laughable.
The starter set for WM brings 2 fully legal lists, the one for 40k not so much. Number of miniatures is completely irrelevant if you can't play the actual game with them...
So show us those mythical 40k and WMH lists that somehow completely reverse the actual cost of both games. All I've seen from you so far is talk, time to actually deliver something.
In the works
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress 