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.

SpookyRuben wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
They could never satisfy everybody, but they could do a hell of a lot better than they are. EVERYONE benefits from a balanced and clear set of rules, and everyone benefits from having things fairly close in balance.

Everyone except Games Workshop that is. Why would they change a business model that has worked for 20 years?

Yeah it's not like markets and consumers can change over years and things that use to work no longer work.

 MWHistorian wrote:

Talys wrote:


I collect WMH models as well, and frankly, PP releases (books and models) are not cheap. Their plastics are as expensive as the priciest 40k kits, and their solo models (which I love!) cost more than 40k solo models. There are also never "cheap bundle" releases like stormclaw or deathstorm, or even a decent model-count starter like dark vengeance (you get a crappy 17-20 plastic models out of either of the two starter boxes, with none of them being hellbrute, dreadnought, or carnifex sized).

The reason WMH players don't feel as beat up on, though, is that list building is less important, and there aren't really crazy overpowered units. Even so, some units are obviously inferior, everyone is playing with colossals now (which are not cheap!), and there are just as many dicks whom I would never play a second game with in WMH as any other game. And to put it into perspective, just buying starter box units is not any more playable (or competitive) than using starter box units from DV.

PP books aren't cheap, but they're far cheaper than GW's books. (And not necessary to play.)
Solo models more expensive than 40k solo models?
$12 for metal a Steel Soul protector.
#30 for a plastic librarian.
In Warmachine there aren't cheap large army bundles because the army has to be built around your playstyle. A boxed army might be amazing to some but completely suck for other players. The game was designed to slowly add on units you think fit your army.
"Model count starter." The game wasn't meant for large scale battles, so why would they have large armies in their starter? It's a skirmish game. And warjacks are roughly the same size as dreadnaughts and all intro box sets come with at least one.
The beginner boxes are indeed far more playable than the DV one because yes, you can and often do play at those size games (my FLGS just had a league where the first week's battles were 15pt battle box games) and they're a great way to learn new units and army playstyles. Also, the armies are balanced so unlike the unbalance DV boxset, both players have a roughly equal chance of winninng.
List building is important, just not in the way you're thinking of. Your list has to be built carefully to work well together. There's no spamming Wave Serpents or such nonesense.

No disagreement with anything you say, except for the price of models.

Plastic is irrelevant because all GW models are plastic (or resin), and librarians are particularly expensive (compare with Urien Rakkarth, or the Succubus, for example). A lot of newer PP models have more plastic/resin too. Also, Librarians are extremely well crafted models. The average cost of a 25mm base model on a tactical squad is $30/10 = $3; for a specialist squad it's $30/5 = $6, both of which are much cheaper per model than anything you can get from PP. Solos like Bradigus are $30+, Borka $60, and those are not large models.

For comparison, a dreadnoughts, dreadknights, riptides are all in a good modelling value, and superheavies and vehicles are generally more complex (more pieces) and larger models than colossals.

I'm not knocking PP; I still buy 50% of their new releases. I'm just saying, keeping up with their new models is not cheap either, and you generally can't buy any models that are less than $10 per piece.

Nobody will argue that one *needs* less playing pieces in WMH.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

And regardless, even if you could demonstrate the above to be true. What? They produce a great set of rules that are really tight and work really well, and cover all the bases and have almost no ambiguity. Then what?

We wont need new codex's because we have a good and balanced rule set. We don't need new editions, well... maybe every 10 years because our books will be worn out from so much play time!. And as an added bonus, they will enclose all new rules with models made after this great leap forward AND they will post them in PDF format on their website for free.

I don't mean to sound pessimistic. But the truth is GW is not going to 'see the light' and do a 180 any time soon.

SpookyRuben wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

And regardless, even if you could demonstrate the above to be true. What? They produce a great set of rules that are really tight and work really well, and cover all the bases and have almost no ambiguity. Then what?

We wont need new codex's because we have a good and balanced rule set. We don't need new editions, well... maybe every 10 years because our books will be worn out from so much play time!. And as an added bonus, they will enclose all new rules with models made after this great leap forward AND they will post them in PDF format on their website for free.

I don't mean to sound pessimistic. But the truth is GW is not going to 'see the light' and do a 180 any time soon.

Have you read the last two financial reports? Less revenue, less sales. Their plan is failing and needs reworking.

SpookyRuben wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

The last two financial reports have shown a sharp decline, when the rest of the wargaming hobby is growing.

WayneTheGame wrote:

SpookyRuben wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

The last two financial reports have shown a sharp decline, when the rest of the wargaming hobby is growing.

Ah yes. Roll out the old financial report argument. I hear the price of oil is dropping too. It doesn't make me an expert on the oil industy.

Now I won't claim to know what anyone's back ground is here. And in case you were wondering, I do have a background in manufacturing, retail management, and now I work on a ship. But unless you are well versed in finances, retail management, manufacturing, and sales; you're really just talking smoke, or repeating something you read on the internet.

I am not going to comment any further, I think we have gotten way off topic in the last few pages from discussing the "The Spirit of the Game"; to "If Only GW Would See the Light".

That said, could things be better. Absolutely! Personally I think the recent push to publish codex's in a more timely manner is great. As for myself,
make no mistake, I hold no ill will towards GW; I don't think they are EVIL. I enjoy doing my 40k thing, playing with others, modelling, painting, even reading these boards for the past couple of years etc...But in the end GW is doing what it does; selling product to consumers. And that's okay, take it or leave it, or just take the bits you want.

SpookyRuben wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

SpookyRuben wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

The last two financial reports have shown a sharp decline, when the rest of the wargaming hobby is growing.

Ah yes. Roll out the old financial report argument. I hear the price of oil is dropping too. It doesn't make me an expert on the oil industy.

Now I won't claim to know what anyone's back ground is here. And in case you were wondering, I do have a background in manufacturing, retail management, and now I work on a ship. But unless you are well versed in finances, retail management, manufacturing, and sales; you're really just talking smoke, or repeating something you read on the internet.

I am not going to comment any further, I think we have gotten way off topic in the last few pages from discussing the "The Spirit of the Game"; to "If Only GW Would See the Light".

That said, could things be better. Absolutely! Personally I think the recent push to publish codex's in a more timely manner is great. As for myself,
make no mistake, I hold no ill will towards GW; I don't think they are EVIL. I enjoy doing my 40k thing, playing with others, modelling, painting, even reading these boards for the past couple of years etc...But in the end GW is doing what it does; selling product to consumers. And that's okay, take it or leave it, or just take the bits you want.

People with financial backgrounds as well as former global executive experience have analyzed the financials, FYI.

SpookyRuben wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

SpookyRuben wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

The last two financial reports have shown a sharp decline, when the rest of the wargaming hobby is growing.

Ah yes. Roll out the old financial report argument. I hear the price of oil is dropping too. It doesn't make me an expert on the oil industy.

Now I won't claim to know what anyone's back ground is here. And in case you were wondering, I do have a background in manufacturing, retail management, and now I work on a ship. But unless you are well versed in finances, retail management, manufacturing, and sales; you're really just talking smoke, or repeating something you read on the internet.

I am not going to comment any further, I think we have gotten way off topic in the last few pages from discussing the "The Spirit of the Game"; to "If Only GW Would See the Light".

That said, could things be better. Absolutely! Personally I think the recent push to publish codex's in a more timely manner is great. As for myself,
make no mistake, I hold no ill will towards GW; I don't think they are EVIL. I enjoy doing my 40k thing, playing with others, modelling, painting, even reading these boards for the past couple of years etc...But in the end GW is doing what it does; selling product to consumers. And that's okay, take it or leave it, or just take the bits you want.

I think these two conversations are linked. The corporate aspect of GW has infected the gamming aspect to the point where the two blend together like a runny water painting. corporate strategy has come to dictate how the game should be played.

 RunicFIN wrote:
I guess most don´t even consider the option of the game designers not being allowed to change the core rules, and therefore they have to deal with 15 year old stuff and try to make something out of it. Nope, just label them as "incompetent idiots" instead like someone already did.

The point you're missing here is that GW's current behavior lines up very nicely with the attitudes revealed in the OP. The 15 year old article just makes it explicit.

BTW, I don't just call GW's rule authors incompetent idiots for this. I call them incompetent idiots for their current stuff too, and I'm entirely justified in doing so.

If one of you ever makes it to being a GW rules designer, go meet the CEO and say you´re about to go demolition derby on the core and renew everything from the ground up.

"Dear CEO: we have two choices here. We can keep the rules the same and continue to lose sales because the customers are not happy, or we can redo the rules and start getting our market share back. Would you prefer certain failure or a risk of failure?"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WayneTheGame wrote:
People with financial backgrounds as well as former global executive experience have analyzed the financials, FYI.

And, more importantly, the financial report isn't all that complicated. We aren't looking for subtle details and exact future predictions, we're just pointing out the obvious: revenue is down, sales volume is down, market share is down, and profits are down. Since the rest of the industry does not seem to be having these problems we can safely conclude that something is wrong with GW, even if we can't be 100% sure what it is.

The trend in this thread is trying to do the classic: "First you need to recognize a problem in order to do something about it.".
The hope is the financials causing that strange feeling in GW management that a change just may be needed.
Copying prior success could be warranted (1998 was prior to the starting decline of GW, funny enough blamed on collectable card games like Pokémon and Magic).

It seems a shame that so many successful tabletop games are seeing interest and GW is not taking steps to capitalize on the renewed interest in this genre / platform of gaming.

Conspiracy theory time: what if, at some point imbalanced rules was a deliberate choice?

Now, there is a segment of model buyers that are 40k fans plain and simple. They will buy, paint and play models they like, regardless of how good they are. If you keep making interesting fluff and/or good looking models these guys will keep buying.

Then there's a segment that's comprised by people who value winning (more, or less). these guys might like a faction, or a particular model and might include them in their army, but mostly their army will be made of models with good rules. Once one of these guys completes his army, odds are his future purchases will be sporadic (he has what he wants). Unless, you can invalidate his good rules by turning them into bad rules, therefore forcing him to buy new models, with the new good rules. Of course, a lot of that falls apart when apart from 'lose' and 'buy new models' the 3rd option, 'invest in a more balanced game made by somebody else' appears.

Maybe this is a little far-fetched, but in my limited experience with 40k, pretty much every codex release I've seen invalidated a lot of previous comps and pushed previously unused models to the front.

LordBlades wrote:
Conspiracy theory time: what if, at some point imbalanced rules was a deliberate choice?

Now, there is a segment of model buyers that are 40k fans plain and simple. They will buy, paint and play models they like, regardless of how good they are. If you keep making interesting fluff and/or good looking models these guys will keep buying.

Then there's a segment that's comprised by people who value winning (more, or less). these guys might like a faction, or a particular model and might include them in their army, but mostly their army will be made of models with good rules. Once one of these guys completes his army, odds are his future purchases will be sporadic (he has what he wants). Unless, you can invalidate his good rules by turning them into bad rules, therefore forcing him to buy new models, with the new good rules. Of course, a lot of that falls apart when apart from 'lose' and 'buy new models' the 3rd option, 'invest in a more balanced game made by somebody else' appears.

Maybe this is a little far-fetched, but in my limited experience with 40k, pretty much every codex release I've seen invalidated a lot of previous comps and pushed previously unused models to the front.

Many have thought of this, but the issue is it would require GW to do market research into why people buy their minis. They've stated in their investment report, and lying on an investment report when you're a public company can get you in deep gak, that they do not do marketing research. In fact Kirby has seemed to forgotten the game even exists in the last report.

Of course it's entirely possible that Jervis and co themselves pay attention to the state of the game independently of the company, but game designers don't usually think in terms of how many models they can force sell.

SpookyRuben wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

SpookyRuben wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Because it is starting to stop working.

Really? That's a bold statement to make. Why? What is your reasoning?

The last two financial reports have shown a sharp decline, when the rest of the wargaming hobby is growing.

Ah yes. Roll out the old financial report argument. I hear the price of oil is dropping too. It doesn't make me an expert on the oil industy.

Now I won't claim to know what anyone's back ground is here. And in case you were wondering, I do have a background in manufacturing, retail management, and now I work on a ship. But unless you are well versed in finances, retail management, manufacturing, and sales; you're really just talking smoke, or repeating something you read on the internet.

Ok, well qualifications in Business and Economics, retails sales, retail management, directorship of my own Ltd company.

Good enough for you?

Although, that's irrelevant, because if I make an assertion and can back that assertion up with evidence and well reasoned arguments then it doesn't matter if I'm a fishmonger or a fighter pilot. There are plenty of people who have sufficient money to invest that they have a good working knowledge of what they're doing with it, and I've yet to see anyone with even a tenuous stated grasp of how to read a balance sheet try and claim anything other than "things need to change."

Not only have GW's most recent reports shown a sharp decline, but, once you plot their revenue and adjust it for inflation, their revenue in real terms has been on a consistent decline for a decade, since the post LotR boom. Couple that with the drastically increased prices over the same time period, and it's not hard to see that not only are they bringing in less money than they used to, they're moving less product, fewer people are buying fewer kits and books and whatnot.

 Blacksails wrote:
The reason people label the GW design team as incompetent idiots is because most of what we've seen these last few years shows a large amount of incompetence, ignorance, and general stupidity.

If you have a counter argument to make, just make it. You don't need to put people on the defensive by saying 'Let's see you try!'. Many people have on this board. I recall in 5th edition quite clearly that a user JustDave made a few fan codices that were far above and away superior to what GW had released for those factions. They were not only more balanced, but had more options and playstyles to boot.

By the "let´s see you try" - I didn´t refer to trying to make rules, I referred to the very thing that my post implies. I know many can write better and more enjoyable rules, that was not the point I was making.

I already made a point about this not necessarily being because a design team is incompetent or ignorant, it can possibly also be caused by them not being allowed to change everything they´d like, in essence forcing them to make due with partially 15 year old things in the core rules. I don´t believe for one second the rules designers at GW have the liberty to change the core just like that, and it doesn´t make them incompetent.

Sometimes it seems people forget to think about the fact GW consists of people who are working, and who have superiors and rules. It´s not a single hivemind entity that goes "let´s be evul and annoy them."

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen ( I think by now every user knows who they are ) have arrived into this GW oriented thread, in the 40K forum area for some reason. It´ll just be others trying to discuss something and them throwing snarky GW/40K -critical remarks inbetween from here on out, this I base on evidence of behaviour of the past, so I´ll just leave it at this.

Well I found this very interesting indeed.

It is true: we focus enormously on list building. And it's also true that the ART of it is somewhat undermined by the science of trying to win.

It's just true. And I like these excerpts because they kind of illustrate the intent of the game very clearly. Thanks for sharing them.

I think (not sure) what evil inc meant was that the original 40k (rogue trader) was more of a rpg with a gamesmaster that featured minis (although this changed with the addition of army list books, etc before 2nd ed officialized it). Whereas ever since then it's been a gm-less pvp ttmg ever since.

I can see how the design staff could still be playing off the 'original' mentality, but the problem is it just doesn't come through in the rules and what they produce. Which feeds into my criticism of their games design. If they advertised the game as needing 3 players (1 a gm) and devoted a substantial portion of the rules book to gming (most rpgs have some sort of gm book) it might (might) make a difference to me. But usually its a case of might have a vague reference or two to a gm, that is otherwise unsupported by the rules.

How can players adopt a culture that is vaguely referenced at best? But that question is much like rules interpretation: how can players determine if the poorly worded rule is meant to be played one way or another? Roll a D6, winner gets to choose if the players will play a hardcore or fluffy game (which is a ludicrous dichotomy in itself).

I do agree with runicfin though, i don't think the game devs are actually allowed to do much in the way of game designing these days. I think thats why a number of the good designers have left the company over the years and gone on to found their own companies which are now providing decent competition to gw. The spirit of gw itself has become: "people will buy what we tell them to" and that has permeated into almost every fibre of the company.

 RunicFIN wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
The reason people label the GW design team as incompetent idiots is because most of what we've seen these last few years shows a large amount of incompetence, ignorance, and general stupidity.

If you have a counter argument to make, just make it. You don't need to put people on the defensive by saying 'Let's see you try!'. Many people have on this board. I recall in 5th edition quite clearly that a user JustDave made a few fan codices that were far above and away superior to what GW had released for those factions. They were not only more balanced, but had more options and playstyles to boot.

By the "let´s see you try" - I didn´t refer to trying to make rules, I referred to the very thing that my post implies. I know many can write better and more enjoyable rules, that was not the point I was making.

I already made a point about this not necessarily being because a design team is incompetent or ignorant, it can possibly also be caused by them not being allowed to change everything they´d like, in essence forcing them to make due with partially 15 year old things in the core rules. I don´t believe for one second the rules designers at GW have the liberty to change the core just like that, and it doesn´t make them incompetent.

Sometimes it seems people forget to think about the fact GW consists of people who are working, and who have superiors and rules. It´s not a single hivemind entity that goes "let´s be evul and annoy them."

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen ( I think by now every user knows who they are ) have arrived into this GW oriented thread, in the 40K forum area for some reason. It´ll just be others trying to discuss something and them throwing snarky GW/40K -critical remarks inbetween from here on out, this I base on evidence of behaviour of the past, so I´ll just leave it at this.

So we shouldn't call the design team incompetent and stupid, just GW as a whole and/or upper management?

I'd counter that by pointing out the second part of Blacksails' post. I never saw those 5th ed fandexes but I have seen some for 8th ed Fantasy and even working entierly within the core rules that every other GW publication used people have made objectively better army books. They had better balance as well as more options, better themed lists and, surprisingly, the artwork and fluff looked just as good as any codex I've ever seen.

 jonolikespie wrote:
So we shouldn't call the design team incompetent and stupid, just GW as a whole and/or upper management?

I'd counter that by pointing out the second part of Blacksails' post. I never saw those 5th ed fandexes but I have seen some for 8th ed Fantasy and even working entierly within the core rules that every other GW publication used people have made objectively better army books. They had better balance as well as more options, better themed lists and, surprisingly, the artwork and fluff looked just as good as any codex I've ever seen.

For working at gw and not expecting this sort of targeting, for sure. But as far as being on the ground, the games designers themselves would be shown the new model and given a brief on what to make. If they don't create rules that fit the brief they have to redo it. If they refuse to obey their directives, they get shown the door. GW is a business, the game designers are employees not the boss. Like any good employee they produce what they're told to produce. Like you said, people with far less resources can produce fandexes that are better. When you go back to the head honcho's line of: "people get too busy writing rules and forget we're about selling toy soldiers only" you can see exactly who is setting the agenda on what gets created.

 Torga_DW wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
So we shouldn't call the design team incompetent and stupid, just GW as a whole and/or upper management?

I'd counter that by pointing out the second part of Blacksails' post. I never saw those 5th ed fandexes but I have seen some for 8th ed Fantasy and even working entierly within the core rules that every other GW publication used people have made objectively better army books. They had better balance as well as more options, better themed lists and, surprisingly, the artwork and fluff looked just as good as any codex I've ever seen.

For working at gw and not expecting this sort of targeting, for sure. But as far as being on the ground, the games designers themselves would be shown the new model and given a brief on what to make. If they don't create rules that fit the brief they have to redo it. If they refuse to obey their directives, they get shown the door. GW is a business, the game designers are employees not the boss. Like any good employee they produce what they're told to produce. Like you said, people with far less resources can produce fandexes that are better. When you go back to the head honcho's line of: "people get too busy writing rules and forget we're about selling toy soldiers only" you can see exactly who is setting the agenda on what gets created.

I think most successful gaming groups have house rules and "fandexes" that modify the game to suit their membership. I certainly won't argue that many players, including me, think that the point values for some stuff is out of whack, and some special abilities are just too good.

But that's a far cry from saying that GW is incompetent, and even further from saying that they don't care or are purposely writing crap.

In my mind, it's always easy being a critic; it's much harder being an author. To their credit, many small *companies* have started up and made great, interesting products. Unfortunately, they just don't have a very compelling model selection and fluff to suck me in.

I also think that some people forget or don't know how hard it is to create change in a large company, and how much more work just about anything is to accomplish.

So they are a buissness? Then can someone explain to me why they make units with new models, so bad people don't want to buy them ?
There can't be so cut of from the game to not know that ogryns or raptors with better rules will find more buyers.

 RunicFIN wrote:


By the "let´s see you try" - I didn´t refer to trying to make rules, I referred to the very thing that my post implies. I know many can write better and more enjoyable rules, that was not the point I was making.

And had you read my post, you'd find that the point I made still illustrated that the design team isn't particularly competent, seeing as how a forum user in their spare time wrote a better codex.

I already made a point about this not necessarily being because a design team is incompetent or ignorant, it can possibly also be caused by them not being allowed to change everything they´d like, in essence forcing them to make due with partially 15 year old things in the core rules. I don´t believe for one second the rules designers at GW have the liberty to change the core just like that, and it doesn´t make them incompetent.

Once more, had you read my post in its entirety, you'd find that I mentioned how people on this forum have written better codices. Oddly enough, a codex doesn't change the core rules. Given that codices are constantly changing, and yet have haven't improved, I stand by my stance that the design team is still incompetent, regardless of the incompetence of upper management influencing the decisions.

Sometimes it seems people forget to think about the fact GW consists of people who are working, and who have superiors and rules. It´s not a single hivemind entity that goes "let´s be evul and annoy them."

So, most of GW is incompetent then?

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen ( I think by now every user knows who they are ) have arrived into this GW oriented thread, in the 40K forum area for some reason. It´ll just be others trying to discuss something and them throwing snarky GW/40K -critical remarks inbetween from here on out, this I base on evidence of behaviour of the past, so I´ll just leave it at this.

How awful it must be to read stuff that isn't total and complete praise. I mean, the only people who have valid opinions on these forums are the people who think GW and 40k are the greatest things ever without fault. Anyone who holds even the tiniest sliver of negative thoughts about 40k or GW is a horrible person who's voice is totally and completely irrelevant in a discussion about 40k.

Grow up Runic. If you want a reasonable discussion, you have to put in the effort too.

 RunicFIN wrote:

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen

Oooh, is that me?

Can I be Death? I always wanted a white horse, but all my ponies were various shades of brown! (Oh, no, I did have a grey, but that's like having a white horse that needs a hot wash.)

 Azreal13 wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen

Oooh, is that me?

Can I be Death? I always wanted a white horse, but all my ponies were various shades of brown! (Oh, no, I did have a grey, but that's like having a white horse that needs a hot wash.)

Of course you can have a white horse.
And his name is Binky.

 Jancoran wrote:
Well I found this very interesting indeed.

It is true: we focus enormously on list building. And it's also true that the ART of it is somewhat undermined by the science of trying to win.

It's just true. And I like these excerpts because they kind of illustrate the intent of the game very clearly. Thanks for sharing them.

Please explain how 'trying to win' is a bad thing in a two player competitive war game?

I know maybe if w40k wasn't a table top game, but an RPG. In RPG the people playing are not trying to fight the GM, but the objectives. At least technicly, but I don't see any RPG aspects in w40k. Few to non narrative options, low customisation level and super high cost.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen

Oooh, is that me?

Can I be Death? I always wanted a white horse, but all my ponies were various shades of brown! (Oh, no, I did have a grey, but that's like having a white horse that needs a hot wash.)

You, MWH, Blacksails and either me or Peregrine, I'd guess.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:

Anyway, the Four Anti-GW Horsemen

Oooh, is that me?

Can I be Death? I always wanted a white horse, but all my ponies were various shades of brown! (Oh, no, I did have a grey, but that's like having a white horse that needs a hot wash.)

You, MWH, Blacksails and either me or Peregrine, I'd guess.

There's nothing like dehumanizing your opponents to discount their opinion.

Remember, he also said we have a secret club...or was it a chat room. I forget. Either way, I imagine it like the Legion of Doom.

I suppose its nice I'm being recognized for something anyways.

I shotgun War.

The irony being I love 40K as a universe/setting, still put more hobby time into painting and modelling 40K stuff than any other system, play regularly (albeit not for about 6 weeks, does that mean I've quit in the Runicverse?) passionately want the people making the decisions about the future of the game to treat it with the same affection I feel for it, and I'm happy to praise GW if they do something I feel is worthy of praise (which is why I frequently say that if I come across as anti-GW, it says more for GW's actions than it does for my attitude, I have no compunction about coming across as a raving fanboy if GW start knocking it out of the park.)

I haven't quit, I don't intend to quit, but I certainly avoid giving GW money for things I don't think are of sufficient quality to deserve it as much as possible.

But yeah, I'm (possibly) one of the four anti-GW Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Or perhaps I'm just one of the four GW-critical Infantrymen of the Escalation?