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.
Anybody else enjoying finding cut-price GW models on ebay?
I am. SO far I and my friends have pretty much sworn to not give GW any money, but still allow ourselves to enjoy the modelling and gaming aspects of 40k.
As much as we like GW stuff (aside from rulesets, none of us have gone to 7th ed), we see no reason to give them money for acting callously towards their customers and those that sell their minis.
In an anecdotal vein, I played my first real game of 7th edition, 4000 points and did not enjoy it. There is literally too much bookkeeping now to really enjoy the game at this level. Part of the blame is on me for taking Grey Knights but having to deal with the sheer number of psychic phase shenanigans became very taxing and killed the enjoyment that I initially felt at having that many points on the board at one time. We didn't even bother with mission cards and all the other added nonsense but that would have just had me stopping after turn 1 and going to play xwing or join the werewolf game going on across the room.
My opponent played CSM and Daemons and I can't imagine how I could have won with my Tau or Dark Eldar because I would have had no way to stop him from summoning several hundred points in Daemons each turn.
The one thing I did like was the new D weapon rules. I played a couple of Knights and felt that they're much better balanced than when they first came out. They were tough but he was able to take them both down before the game ended. All in all I say that I probably would have enjoyed the game where it not for the psychic phase.
Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century: Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others; Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected; Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it; Refusing to set aside trivial preferences; Neglecting development and refinement of the mind; Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do
Toofast wrote: This is the age of unemployment, recession and new video game systems. What gaming company hasn't lost some profit since the 2008 recession?
The boardgame/wargame market is actually growing. GW is almost the only company to shrink.
From a gamer perspective, almost all other systems seem to work well. Some more than others, but it's still pretty easy to find players for Dystopian Wars, Firestorm Armada, Bolt Action, Infinity... Warmahordes is played almost everywhere.
What about GW? Well... Their most popular games in my aera are Bloodbowl and Mordheim.
It's pretty difficult to find WHFB/40k games. Too cumbersome. WHFB/40k mechanics haven't really evolved since the 90s. 8th edidion WHFB just feels like another 4th edition with some extra house rules, without magic cards and larger units. Allowing two ranks to fight, premesuring everything and putting sixes instead of dashes in a Strenght/Toughness chart are "updates" that could have been done by my 6 years old nephew.
There's also this cost issue. Being up to date is costly, and it's nothing compared to the starting cost. It's incredibly difficult to recruit new players, especially if you're trying to be honest about the value of all the games you play.
My club sometimes do events, people can come, discover wargaming... You've got this dad and his two children who really like the games, but you know how things works... hard times... dad asks you about the cost of the game.
I suppose I could compare apple to oranges, and push GW systems. You know, restrict your choices to 2 factions, take the most elite one, sell half your stuff, min-max you way to 800 pts, but I don't really see why I'd do that. I don't have anything to sell, I really don't care if they play X-Wing or WHFB, I just want these people to have fun, and enjoy this hobby.
Costs of some systems, for 2 players (no hobby supplies) :
HOTT/DBA: 40-50€. Rules + 3 armies cost me 55€ and I have enough spare units for a 4th player...
X-Wing: 100-120€. 2 core boxes + 2 or 3 extra ships. No "hobby supplies" cost.
Bolt Action: 100€. Rulebook, 2 infantry boxes and 1 tank box on each side. (in my aera, people usually play with 1/72 minis)
Bloodbowl: 100-120€. LRB + 2 teams.
FSA/DW: 150€. One rulebook + starters of the 2 factions + a couple blisters to add some squadrons.
WHFB: 1000-1200€. IoB/rulebook + two armybooks + 3 to 4 batallions per kid.
I've seen people who genuinely thought they could spend half a thousand euros (rules, 2 batallions, paints and modelling stuff) and make their kids happy, only for the kids to discover later that one does not play WHFB with one batallion, but at least 3 of them. Believe me, it's not pretty.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/20 14:07:12
Litcheur wrote: I've seen people who genuinely thought they could spend half a thousand euros (rules, 2 batallions, paints and modelling stuff) and make their kids happy, only for the kids to discover later that one does not play WHFB with one batallion, but at least 3 of them. Believe me, it's not pretty.
So true. My parents were outrageous when they found out exactly how expansive my hobby was. They have come to terms with it now a bit more, but they still complain whenever I buy something new. It is one of the main reasons I started Dystopian Wars, which is delightfully cheap compared to 40k. I am lucky enough to earn some good money for miniatures with delivering newspapers, but GW has really priced most younger players out of the hobby.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/20 15:06:23
Litcheur wrote: I've seen people who genuinely thought they could spend half a thousand euros (rules, 2 batallions, paints and modelling stuff) and make their kids happy, only for the kids to discover later that one does not play WHFB with one batallion, but at least 3 of them. Believe me, it's not pretty.
So true. My parents were outrageous when they found out exactly how expansive my hobby was. They have come to terms with it now a bit more, but they still complain whenever I buy something new. It is one of the main reasons I started Dystopian Wars, which is delightfully cheap compared to 40k.
I am lucky enough to earn some good money for miniatures with delivering newspapers, but GW has really priced most younger players out of the hobby.
I can only assume that their target demographic is, almost literally, spoiled rich kids. No other young player could afford it.
I haven't paid directly for GW product since the Tau Riptide. Everything since then has been second hand.
With the edition changes and inconsistency of codex balance, 40k has died down quite a bit in my area. Infinity, Warma-Hordes, and Mordhiem have increased significantly. Warhammer Fantasy has had a consistent small following. X-wing is growing and pulling in new gamers. Malifaux had a following, but died down with local college semester changes.
From seeing whats going on in my local area, GW is loosing ground. The community is steadily growing, but GW isn't part of that growth.
"Accept that Tzeentch has a place for all of us in his grand scheme, and be happy in the part you have to play." "This is Chaos. We don't "ka-frickin'-boom" here."
I was speaking with one of the folks that's "in the know" at my local game store, and year over year of GW sales is way down and board games are up. Folks would rather pay $40~$80 for a complete game, play it 20~30 times and get another one versus keeping with a wargame with the costs of 40k.
There is being a slow shift to other skirmish games, too. It seems like mainly the super competitive 40k guys are still around and the younger dudes who cannot afford a shift.
Shine on, Kaldor Dayglow!
Not Ken Lobb
2014/07/20 18:53:19
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
Wolf Lord Balrog @ Warseer wrote:
I recently had an opportunity to have a lengthy discussion with a member of GW's lower management about the company's strategy and its vision of itself. There are two key assumptions that GW operates under that I don't think most people understand. First, they believe that their product is so good, that people will pay whatever price tag they put on it. Second, they see themselves as totally without serious competition in wargames, that their only competition is from other hobby activities.
They totally and completely believe these things, they are articles of faith for every member of management (or if they feel differently they don't dare say so where another employee might hear). You think about it, and this alone explains much.
---
Some more bits I remembered from that conversation: If you have any qualms about prices, you are not GW's target market. They believe that there are sufficient 'collectors', for whom GW's 'super-ultimate-quality' will always trump price, that they don't need anybody for whom money is an issue. Similarly, if you aren't starting a new army, they don't care about you. New armies mean sales of their 'core' products, which is what they care most about. It is also true that GW doesn't care about the rules' 'balance' or tournament playability, not even a little bit. The rules are there to add value to the models, and so they can sell rulebooks as well as models, no other reason.
Take note, this isn't your standard internet 'whinging', or loose inferences from quotes in White Dwarf or a blog interview from somebody who used to work there years ago. These are the apparently deeply-held, current views of the company management, as described to me by a current member of management.
If they believe people will pay any price, why did another management representative recently acknowledge there was consumer resistance to pricing? (And why have they introduced bargain "campaign boxes").
If they believe other wargames manufacturers aren't competition, why did they spend $1m suing Chapterhouse?
If they don't care about the rules at all, why do they employ people to design them, and spend 8 or 12 pages talking about them in White Dwarf every week?
If we're going to slate GW, let's do it for real failings, not imaginary , nonsensical "secrets" someone got off someone's else's auntie or pet dog.
Wolf Lord Balrog @ Warseer wrote:
I recently had an opportunity to have a lengthy discussion with a member of GW's lower management about the company's strategy and its vision of itself. There are two key assumptions that GW operates under that I don't think most people understand. First, they believe that their product is so good, that people will pay whatever price tag they put on it. Second, they see themselves as totally without serious competition in wargames, that their only competition is from other hobby activities.
They totally and completely believe these things, they are articles of faith for every member of management (or if they feel differently they don't dare say so where another employee might hear). You think about it, and this alone explains much.
---
Some more bits I remembered from that conversation: If you have any qualms about prices, you are not GW's target market. They believe that there are sufficient 'collectors', for whom GW's 'super-ultimate-quality' will always trump price, that they don't need anybody for whom money is an issue. Similarly, if you aren't starting a new army, they don't care about you. New armies mean sales of their 'core' products, which is what they care most about. It is also true that GW doesn't care about the rules' 'balance' or tournament playability, not even a little bit. The rules are there to add value to the models, and so they can sell rulebooks as well as models, no other reason.
Take note, this isn't your standard internet 'whinging', or loose inferences from quotes in White Dwarf or a blog interview from somebody who used to work there years ago. These are the apparently deeply-held, current views of the company management, as described to me by a current member of management.
If they believe people will pay any price, why did another management representative recently acknowledge there was consumer resistance to pricing? (And why have they introduced bargain "campaign boxes").
Because falling sales have proven this attitude to be, ahem, incorrect?
If they believe other wargames manufacturers aren't competition, why did they spend $1m suing Chapterhouse?
Because those filthy gypsies were taking a free ride on GW's imperious coat tails, that's why! *deadpan*
If they don't care about the rules at all, why do they employ people to design them, and spend 8 or 12 pages talking about them in White Dwarf every week?
Because, evidently contrary to your belief, even poor quality rules don't spontaneously spring into existence, even if Tom Kirby wishes ever so hard.
If we're going to slate GW, let's do it for real failings, not imaginary , nonsensical "secrets" someone got off someone's else's auntie or pet dog.
If you're going to leap to GW's defence, I'd pick easier fights to win. Regardless of whether this is actually the case, the fact that something like this can actually be entertained as plausible in the context of how GW appears to go about there business is symptomatic of a problem, whether it's real or not.
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
1) If they believe other wargames manufacturers aren't competition, why did they spend $1m suing Chapterhouse?
2) If they don't care about the rules at all, why do they employ people to design them, and spend 8 or 12 pages talking about them in White Dwarf every week?
If we're going to slate GW, let's do it for real failings, not imaginary , nonsensical "secrets" someone got off someone's else's auntie or pet dog.
1) Becouse they do not understand what competition is or they wouldn't of gone after a aftermarket company. One people still need your product, the other your product isn't need at all. Guess witch one Chapterhouse falls under.
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
Peter: As we all know, Christmas is that mystical time of year when the ghost of Jesus rises from the grave to feast on the flesh of the living! So we all sing Christmas Carols to lull him back to sleep.
Bob: Outrageous, How dare he say such blasphemy. I've got to do something.
Man #1: Bob, there's nothing you can do.
Bob: Well, I guess I'll just have to develop a sense of humor.
2014/07/20 20:18:26
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
Shine on, Kaldor Dayglow!
Not Ken Lobb
2014/07/20 20:51:53
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
"Confessions of a Warhammer Games Designer: The Dark Years, Or How I Sold My Soul To Plastic Toy Soldiers - Volume 1"
2014/07/20 20:54:27
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
Which just goes to show that they don't understand their own company at all. Or how to do business in general...
Testing and verifying the quality of your product is an integral part of being an manufacture.
But then again, they probably couldn't care less. Given their rather low opinion of their own customers, it's not really surprising that they thought they could get away with doing no testing.
2014/07/20 21:32:59
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
Which just goes to show that they don't understand their own company at all. Or how to do business in general...
Testing and verifying the quality of your product is an integral part of being an manufacture.
But then again, they probably couldn't care less. Given their rather low opinion of their own customers, it's not really surprising that they thought they could get away with doing no testing.
The word of mouth is also complete bollocks, as usual.
Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
2014/07/20 21:35:11
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
What an insightful post. Pray tell what led you to this profound conclusion?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Question it more than some random guy who claims to know people in the studio? If they play with their rules at all, then clearly they do playtesting wrong. Hint: Playtesting isn't just playing a game and seeing what happens, playtesting is setting up specific conditions to see what happens under those circumstances. If you just play a normal game and walk away saying "Wellp, those rules work great, we had no issues" you're doing it wrong.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/20 21:36:57
Hint: note the utter lack of qualification I made on how they test? Nope, just more supposition on your part, assuming a position that is easy to attack and then attacking it. Now THAT is a strawman...
And by question it I do not mean "trust me", as I try to avoid fallacies such as argument from authority. I just get amused by those repeating only the rumours that confirm their opinion, without questioning source, veracity, or really applying much cogent thought at all. No, what I mean is: talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to. Then, if you're still not convinced, you've done something a damn sight more worthwhile than just only hearing what fits your preconceived notions. Or talk to people you trust who have talked to the designers, to at least get so etching second hand but more reliable.
Or instead, repeat yet another rumour. Maybe "they not only don't play test, they also have"mock customers day", where they read feedback in a patronising tone and work it how best to screw them over next release" - at least that's interesting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/20 21:49:29
2014/07/20 21:50:46
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
A worse thought than "GW don't play test" is "GW actually try to play test quite hard"
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
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
To be fair - I've met jervis and thought he was a very pleasant guy to chat to. Even did a q&a for us a few years ago.
I have friends whose names appear in the special thanks section of the codices. There are 'feelers' put out - gw don't always listen, but they do look for 'some' external input. Maybe it's not enough, or maybe there is too much 'push' from elsewhere in the company, or the design team is often stuck with a deadline and a design brief that they just adhere to, rather than creative freedom.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
To be fair - I've met jervis and thought he was a very pleasant guy to chat to. Even did a q&a for us a few years ago.
I have friends whose names appear in the special thanks section of the codices. There are 'feelers' put out - gw don't always listen, but they do look for 'some' external input. Maybe it's not enough, or maybe there is too much 'push' from elsewhere in the company, or the design team is often stuck with a deadline and a design brief that they just adhere to, rather than creative freedom.
Very interesting to talk to.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
Yes, because I find basing my opinions on multiple real life experiences, such as the ones I had today, much much better than taking one idiots responses and extrapolating out from a single data point. But hey, don't let "facts" or "logic" or even a passing nod to "balance" get in the way of another good anti-GW rant!
Next up: GW eat babies! A rumour said so!
2014/07/20 22:42:06
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Uhh... this verifies the rumour. That if there's testing, it's not on the clock as part of a larger development plan, but on their own time with a small circle of volunteer yes-men friends.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/20 22:49:37
Balance in pick up games? Two people, each with their own goals for the game, design half a board game on their own without knowing the layout of the board and hope it all works out. Good luck with that. The faster you can find like minded individuals who want the same things from the game as you, the better.
2014/07/20 22:46:48
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
Some small city in nowhere, Illinois,United States
To answer the question to the Original Poster, I would have to say yes, but with a few caveats (which I will get to in a minute):
The first being that while the Miniature Wargaming market has been growing as whole slowly but steadily, Games Workshop has not been experience this growth very much (if not at all). One can look at the different amount of new games that have came out in a two year period and how much others have grown (which has coincided with the release of 6th edition almost). This suggest a shift in the overall community to some degree where alternatives are becoming more preferable than Games Workshop.
As well, there is Wayshuba's insight into this, which seems to suggest that GW financially is just managing to make a little profit due to cutting most things as they view as 'unnessacy cost'. Let alone how most of their actions seem to mirror a company that is in decline (Wayshuba, I do not mean to twist your words at all if I did, I was referring to your post since you do make some very good points).
EDIT: While GW still has a large majority of the market share, this has managed to slip away in more recent years as well but still has a monopoly presence in the hobby to some degree.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/20 22:55:06
The obligatory non-40K/non-Warmahordes player in the forum.
Hobby Goals and Resolution of 2017: Paint at least 95% of my collection (even if getting new items). Buy small items only at 70% complete.
2014/07/20 22:46:51
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Uhh... this verifies the rumour. That if there's testing, it's not on the clock, but on their own time with a small circle of volunteers.
We have taken away the shovel yet he continues to dig...
Games Workshop Delenda Est.
Users on ignore- 53.
If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them.
2014/07/20 23:19:16
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
TheKbob wrote: The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time.
Problem is, they're not totally wrong.
Today's "broken armies" are not made of über-complex multiple interactions between buffs/debuffs à la Warmachine. It's not even close to the good old hilariously powerful Herohammer combos. Because most often than not, there's no combo at all. It's just about spamming six flyers, twelve Serpents...
We're not talking about complex combos or slight over/undercosts here and there, but about major balance issues.
Just ask any SoB player about Celestians from the infamous WDex. Or even more hilarious: preachers.
Spoiler:
You though Ripper Swarms were useless? Come on.
A Preacher is a regular IG grunt, with the regular carboard jacket and a (undervolted) laser pointer. Allow him to give a modest CC boost to his unit *if* you're stupid enough willing to waste one of your precious Faith Points on him instead of other units and *if* you're lucky enough to pass the Faith Test. Remember, you're denying useful buffs to other units to give a modest melee boost to one unit in an army that's only marginally better than IG in close combat (basic human in power armour vs basic human in flak vest...)
Give your preacher a Rosarius. That's right, regular human statline, T3/W1 + Rosarius. Oh, I'm slightly unfair here, he's got +1A / +1I (still has S3/WS3...)
1 preacher costs 45 pts. Yes, that's a one, and a forty five. Do you really need hours of playtesting to see something's wrong?
2014/07/21 00:34:18
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
TheKbob wrote: The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time.
Problem is, they're not totally wrong.
Today's "broken armies" are not made of über-complex multiple interactions between buffs/debuffs à la Warmachine. It's not even close to the good old hilariously powerful Herohammer combos. Because most often than not, there's no combo at all. It's just about spamming six flyers, twelve Serpents...
We're not talking about complex combos or slight over/undercosts here and there, but about major balance issues.
Just ask any SoB player about Celestians from the infamous WDex. Or even more hilarious: preachers.
Spoiler:
You though Ripper Swarms were useless? Come on.
A Preacher is a regular IG grunt, with the regular carboard jacket and a (undervolted) laser pointer. Allow him to give a modest CC boost to his unit *if* you're stupid enough willing to waste one of your precious Faith Points on him instead of other units and *if* you're lucky enough to pass the Faith Test. Remember, you're denying useful buffs to other units to give a modest melee boost to one unit in an army that's only marginally better than IG in close combat (basic human in power armour vs basic human in flak vest...)
Give your preacher a Rosarius. That's right, regular human statline, T3/W1 + Rosarius. Oh, I'm slightly unfair here, he's got +1A / +1I (still has S3/WS3...)
1 preacher costs 45 pts. Yes, that's a one, and a forty five. Do you really need hours of playtesting to see something's wrong?
Or that a Penitent Engine costs 85 points or that a Forgefiend and Riptide are just five points off or so.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/07/21 01:23:43
Subject: Re:Do you really think GW is "going under"?
Ok, so Mark Bolger was only one example, but has GW given us any reason to think they don't feel this way? Answer: no. They have not given us any reason to think otherwise.
While they are singing "what a friend we have in the greater good", we are bringing the pain!
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
To be fair - I've met jervis and thought he was a very pleasant guy to chat to. Even did a q&a for us a few years ago.
I have friends whose names appear in the special thanks section of the codices. There are 'feelers' put out - gw don't always listen, but they do look for 'some' external input. Maybe it's not enough, or maybe there is too much 'push' from elsewhere in the company, or the design team is often stuck with a deadline and a design brief that they just adhere to, rather than creative freedom.
Very interesting to talk to.
I would to know exactly *how* 1-man stores are a great concept. Perhaps I'm missing something with all that fat in my head?
They are a great concept because you only have to pay a single employee. Duh.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
"This is Chaos. We don't "ka-frickin'-boom" here." 
