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.

 Vertrucio wrote:
There's another aspect to this.

We don't want to do the game designer's job, because we have our own jobs and lives beyond gaming and the hobby.

Hell, I'm already making my own game on the side, so that's me with a full time job, and every waking hour spent not at that job is spent working on my game. Where am I, or anyone supposed to find the time to tinker with someone else's half-baked rules when all I want to do is play in the limited time I have to play?

Well yes it's understandable when someone pays for something they shouldn't have to fix someone else bad job. What I don't understand here is if you have a full time job and every waking hour spent not at the job is spent working on your game, why are you here on a forum complaining about a product you don't like? After all your time is valuable, it seems you are wasting it complaining and not working on your own game.

So either "ever waking hour spent not on your job, but on your game" is false or "you or anyone else is supposed to find the time to tinker with someone lee's half-baked rules" are false. You have already shown something you have said is not true.

What I am trying to say is don't be so dramatic. Obviously you have time for other projects. You have time to work. You have time to work on your game. You have time to complain about a game. So yes you have time to tinker with half-baked rules. Don't say you don't have time to do so, when you can come on Dakka Dakka, read other people's threads and then complain about it.

You do have the time since right now it's not being spent on working on your game and you are not at work.

I'm going to boil down my initial response to this: No one on the internet, ever, is speaking for everyone.

But I'm very sure that I do speak for the vast majority of people. So even if you don't fall into this category, I'm confident that using "we" applies as the majority. You may not like being lumped in incorrectly, but just because there was that misunderstanding, does not mean I was wrong.

Nor, most importantly, does that mean that I was insulting you. In fact, I do wish I had more time to dive deep into the games I love.

Also, I hate line quoting because it destroys the gestalt of the post.

However, you also make the mistake of lumping me into someone that can't manage their own time. Thing is, there's just stuff I love just as much that just still take up time. You seem like you're telling me to, "Manage time better noob!"

No one is ever going to stop anyone from tinkering with rules, but people who will tinker are going to tinker regardless of whether rules are half-baked or fully fleshed out. Your desire for framework rules sets is completely separate from this discussion about the fall of Fantasy GW and the descent of its rules writers into madness. Moreover, your time is probably better spent on better written framework rules sets. But, that's for you to decide.

To me however, a multi million dollar company has no place trying to put out half baked rules and expecting players to fix or deal with them. And this Age of Sigmar mess is not a framework rules set created by a high minded rules writer meant to allow tinkerers like yourself to create a gaming utopia. It's a half-baked attempt from them to vomit something onto the market for the purpose of either seeing how much people will buy when they put in no effort (which history shows is a lot) or deliberately trying to tank the company so that they can sell, or both.

We are not at odds here. I'm just responding to those who want to waste your time fixing GW's mistake, when you could easily go with a different game and make something better out of it.

Deadnight wrote:

 Vertrucio wrote:
There's another aspect to this.

We don't want to do the game designer's job, because we have our own jobs and lives beyond gaming and the hobby.

We?

So... You speak for everyone?

Not being snarky mate - you don't want to do the game designers job. And fair play. Neither do I, all the time. I also have a job, a life outside of gaming and lots of miles to run for my marathons. Friday gaming though - I can see the value of a half hour chat that preps the game... And for what it's worth, some people enjoy that tinkering, and building a game into something different each time.

[...]

I have a job, a life and lots of bits on the side too. The problem you face is that all your time goes to your game. Which is fair enough. I get it. When I'm doing the big miles before a marathon (you know - those 20mile ruls) for several months at a time, along with multiple long runs during the week, other things fall by the wayside. Gaming is one. It's a matter of juggling priorities. But don't confuse your priorities and commitments- especially regarding what you devote to your game- with the idea that neither you nor anyone else can find the time to tinker with a half baked set of rules.

To answer your question - take time out from your game. One evening away from it won't make it crash and burn. As for anyone else? Well, with our Friday night gaming - which is pretty laid back and far from 'out of the box' gaming, we just chat about it, and shoot some ideas to each other. Normally we play flames of war, but it's heavily house ruled and we've chucked and altered a bunch of stuff. We just chat about new ideas and implement them if they sound interesting. Aos is a really silly game (it's more like a drinking game than anything else...) but if I was told 'make it work for me and my group', well, that's how I'd go about doing it...

[...]

And that's fair enough. But like I was saying earlier, maybe it's less about having a complete system, and more about a very basic framework, and you can do whatever you want with it? Fair enough - you want a complete system thst functions right out of the box, but not everyone wants or appreciates that rigidity....

And by the way, I'm not disagreeing with your pov. I feel the same. I'd rather have a decent set of rules to tinker with than the steaming pile of poo that is aos...

[...]

Agreed about other games point.

[...]

Agreed. If this was a game by a new company, it would be laughed out,

[...]

I'm talking about both, actually. There are plenty of great packaged games out there. This isn't one of them. Approaching it from the perspective of playing it as a packaged game is silly; the only way of making it work is if you approach it from a diy perspective. In my mind, it's just different, I guess. It could be so much more though.

Its just that it would have been SO DAMN EASY to add in points costs and tighten up the rules a little bit.
See, the rules have been known for all of a week, and players have identified 20+ things that just don't make sense. Would it really have killed GW to publish the SECOND (or Sigmar forbid, even the THIRD draft) instead of the first? Would that extra day of delay really spoiled things?

Take an extra week to add in points costs. They don't need to be perfect (no wargame is), they just need to be in the rough ballpark like 40k is, and people would have been happy.

The thing is it takes NOTHING away from the players who want to ride imaginary horses (<= my new term for ultra-fluff players), or who want to set up fantastical scenarios with weird victory conditions. All those things are equally possible regardless of what numbers are written on the rules cards. But it DOES satisfy those players who do want 'competitive' or 'pick up' games a little bit more.

The rules Imaginary Horses, Kneeling, Dancing etc, are literally more ridiculous than the 'rules' I used to use as a 5 year old when playing with green plastic army men. So I'm not sure who exactly GW thinks is going to find the game appealing.

I get that GW has some kind of problem with 'Competitive players'. But writing a game that appeals solely to the Imaginary Horses crowd and not at all to the competitive players crowd is just cutting off their nose to spite their face.

I'll have to read through the comments here, but this is a question I'd love to answer. Mainly because what GW has done so far to a game and a hobby that I really enjoyed and invested hundreds of dollars in. I'm a husband, a student, and I work, I'm one of those many people that just don't have alot of spare time for hobbies and leisure activities. Warhammer is the game I've always wanted to play. I tried to make up a game very much like Warhammer when I was in 4th or 5th grade with maps, combat rules, and paper cut out unit tokens for fantasy units. I just didn't have any friends interested in playing it with me. I've only been playing WHFB for about a year since a friend got me into it. I feel betrayed by GW, I hope this comes around and bites them hard. I won't say anything bad about AoS, other than it is a dumbed down game from WHFB. But I could have played a number of skirmish level games like AoS, and there are more promising Kickstarter skirmish games coming out. Warhammer Fantasy was pretty much it for massed fantasy army games. I can't even find a group that plays Mantic's Kings of War in my home state. And now it looks like GW has lost their collective minds and just abdicated their lead position in the massed fantasy army niche and turned their backs on the community that built itself up around their games for 30 years. I have hundreds of dollars of painted miniatures that I can either put on a shelf or sell for cheap. It's not even about being angry at them screwing up my favorite army faction. I expected to move forward into a new edition, not be faced with an entirely brand new game with very different rules. Well, one thing is sure, the money I had saved up for new miniatures releases from Warhammer 9th edition will not be going into GW's greedy hands. Now we just need a few hundred thousand ticked off people like me and we can really dent GW's overhead.




Of course there is a persistent rumor about an Age of Steel massed army game set of rules as yet to be released, so I might end up happily eating these angry words.

 Vertrucio wrote:
I'm going to boil down my initial response to this: No one on the internet, ever, is speaking for everyone.

But I'm very sure that I do speak for the vast majority of people. So even if you don't fall into this category, I'm confident that using "we" applies as the majority. You may not like being lumped in incorrectly, but just because there was that misunderstanding, does not mean I was wrong.

Nor, most importantly, does that mean that I was insulting you. In fact, I do wish I had more time to dive deep into the games I love.

Also, I hate line quoting because it destroys the gestalt of the post.

However, you also make the mistake of lumping me into someone that can't manage their own time. Thing is, there's just stuff I love just as much that just still take up time. You seem like you're telling me to, "Manage time better noob!"

No one is ever going to stop anyone from tinkering with rules, but people who will tinker are going to tinker regardless of whether rules are half-baked or fully fleshed out. Your desire for framework rules sets is completely separate from this discussion about the fall of Fantasy GW and the descent of its rules writers into madness. Moreover, your time is probably better spent on better written framework rules sets. But, that's for you to decide.

To me however, a multi million dollar company has no place trying to put out half baked rules and expecting players to fix or deal with them. And this Age of Sigmar mess is not a framework rules set created by a high minded rules writer meant to allow tinkerers like yourself to create a gaming utopia. It's a half-baked attempt from them to vomit something onto the market for the purpose of either seeing how much people will buy when they put in no effort (which history shows is a lot) or deliberately trying to tank the company so that they can sell, or both.

We are not at odds here. I'm just responding to those who want to waste your time fixing GW's mistake, when you could easily go with a different game and make something better out of it.

Let's be clear - I didn't take it as an insult, and I wasn't implying you can't manage your own time or to 'manage your time better noob' - so please, dont go jumping the gun here - I made it clear I am in exactly the same situation as you when 'running season' (ie not winter) is in and I have a marathon to prep for ie other things go on the back burner for a long time.

I agree one hundred percent with the rest of what you say, I loved organised play, I enjoy tinkering, it's better to tinker with a good set of rules than a bad - you get better results with half the hassle and it's not strictly needed to end up with something functional. With aos, it is. Aos is a minimum effort investment that's expecting the players to pick up the pieces. The kneeling and bearding rules wouldn't be out of place with a drinking game, but have no business anywhere else. And if I'm entirely honest, I'm not sold on the models either.

Trasvi wrote:
Its just that it would have been SO DAMN EASY to add in points costs and tighten up the rules a little bit.

GW catch flakk all the time for imperfect points values, so no I don't think it would be 'so damn easy'. Plus are the rules really that loose?

nareik wrote:
GW catch flakk all the time for imperfect points values, so no I don't think it would be 'so damn easy'.

Imperfect point costs are better than no point costs at all, so it really would be that easy. The only reason GW didn't include point values is that their rule authors are incompetent morons.

Plus are the rules really that loose?

Yes. If you'd showed me the rules without telling me that they are an actual product I would have laughed at them and assumed that they're a 10 year old's first attempt at making a game. It's almost unbelievable that a supposed professional rule author working for a legitimate game company could publish something so spectacularly bad.

nareik wrote:

Trasvi wrote:
Its just that it would have been SO DAMN EASY to add in points costs and tighten up the rules a little bit.

GW catch flakk all the time for imperfect points values, so no I don't think it would be 'so damn easy'. Plus are the rules really that loose?

They could literally have given everything from a Goblin to a Dragon a value of 1pt and it would have been better than it is now.
Thankfully, they've also spent the last 20 years getting things roughly in the right ballpark with points values, and everything save the brand new models already has points values, so... yeah, I think it might have taken them maybe a days extra effort to get it all roughly ok. Then at least they'd be catching flak for 'this game is unbalanced for tournament play' instead of 'this game cannot be played as a tournament game ever'.

This is their JOB. There are literally a dozen people working for Games Workshop, 9-5, five days a week, for the last 20 years, whose purpose it is to write these rules. They should be passably ok at it by now.


As for 'are the rules that loose?'... it depends. If you include the catch all 'rules are hard mmmkay, just roll a dice' rule at the start, then they account for every single possible situation! There are a bunch of things that don't make much sense but could be intended - ie, move, shoot, charge, melee all in a turn, or shoot in to combat with no penalty. On the other hand, if you want flying models to ever be able to get in to combat, or dragons to be able to turn around, or you aren't very good at miming an imaginary horse, or perhaps you don't like the Baseketball nature of the Aelf's haughty rule...

The truth about AOS is that it is a pretty crappy ruleset in the sense that it covers only the minimum basics of how to have a fantasy war-game, and there are many obvious problems (e.g. measurement) and omissions (e.g. balancing factors), as well as large sections of what normally goes into war-games (command and control, terrain effects, morale, tactical factors) that have been hugely simplified or even left out in order to get the rules down to four pages.

For all that, it does cover the absolute basics; magic, movement, and fighting. The rules as written allow the playing of a simple game that many people will enjoy and you can either ignore the problettes or find ways round them.

It is not Warhammer Fantasy Battle (that name no longer exists on the GW web site.) If you want that your choices are to carry on with 8th, or move over to Kings Of War or another rival system.

At least AOS is free to play.

Has Games Workshop abdicated their right to be considered the number 1 fantasy war-game company? Arguably so. But what does that matter? They were never a great design company, all things considered. What matters to GW is if they will increase sales through AOS compared to WHFB.

In a funny way I would like 40K to go down the same tube as WHFB. I stopped playing when the game became too expensive. I could have a pretty good time with a simple, free version.

Trasvi wrote:the players who want to ride imaginary horses (<= my new term for ultra-fluff players)

I like it.

Weyuhn wrote:I can't even find a group that plays Mantic's Kings of War in my home state.

You might do soon.

nareik wrote:GW catch flakk all the time for imperfect points values, so no I don't think it would be 'so damn easy'.

It wouldn't be all that impossible if they even tried. Plenty of other games with fewer resources behind them get playtested for a good long while and come out reasonably balanced. By all accounts playtesting at GW consists of a couple of the studio knocking about, 'forging a narrative' and riding imaginary horses, pulling that ballpark number out, and assuming their market is entirely people who want to play the same way. Never mind that, as people have said until they're blue in the face, a bit of balance would help imaginary horse riders and people who want a bit of a challenge.

Kilkrazy wrote:At least AOS is free to play.

The old chestnut 'you get what you pay for' isn't automatically applicable to wargames rules, but in this case...

Has Games Workshop abdicated their right to be considered the number 1 fantasy war-game company? Arguably so. But what does that matter? They were never a great design company, all things considered. What matters to GW is if they will increase sales through AOS compared to WHFB.

I don't know if I want GW to fail. I wouldn't mind if they suddenly because lucid, wailed 'what have we done?' and rushed to make a decent, proportionately priced game again. As opposed to just shilling as much plastic crack as they can for as much as they can get.
But on the other hand, I agree with the above quote. I bailed on WFB so long ago that I wouldn't cry if it, at least, died off completely and allowed another fantasy battle game (or a number of them) to rise to the top position. Most have better crafted rules for this kind of thing anyway. If Mantic took the spot (and used the boom to make better minis) I could live with that.

What I can't understand is why, given that GW had an effective blank slate to work with they chose to churn out another UGOIGO game with the same overwrought hit/wound/save mechanic as Fantasy Battle. LotR was better than this.

If you like 40k (but don't like AoS) you need AoS to fail otherwise GW will decide it was a great idea and start cross pollinating ideas. Probably starting with the scale creep and no points values.

 Peregrine wrote:

nareik wrote:
GW catch flakk all the time for imperfect points values, so no I don't think it would be 'so damn easy'.

Imperfect point costs are better than no point costs at all, so it really would be that easy. The only reason GW didn't include point values is that their rule authors are incompetent morons.

Eh. I hate it as much as you do, but GW put no points costs in to get money. When Little Timmy loses his 1500pt game of 40k, there's nothing he can really do to win next time, other than buy units he's told are good (which he won't know how to use anyway and so won't be good). Buying, assembling and painting an army is stretching most kids' patience as it is, and having to play multiple games in order to get good and hence wins is probably going to lead most to quit, which means no more money for GW. However, with AoS, if Little Timmy loses his first battle, he can simply buy more models, field them and he has a better chance of winning. If he still loses, then he buys more. And so on until Little Timmy plays with 1000 models every time he plays (as he's allowed to do, in the rules) and is chuffed every time he wins.

Yes that's an extreme, tongue in cheek example, but I'm pretty sure that's why GW have done what they've done, and it's clever.

Still, like people have said, it wouldn't have taken much time to add in points value, and you could have said the main version of the game doesn't use points values (like now) and that they're only there for people who want to use them. That way, in theory, Little Timmy still gets to stop people with his collection of 1000 models, and more veteran gamers can enjoy balanced games.

Anyone else seen this beauty yet?

The Shadow wrote:
Yes that's an extreme, tongue in cheek example, but I'm pretty sure that's why GW have done what they've done, and it's clever.

I used to think GW's main market was Little Timmies. Now I'm not so sure. (Especially after all these daft replacement rules about beards, moustaches and drinking) Although in that case I'm not altogether convinced it's very clever at all. 'Just buy more and bigger' has been the carrot waved in front of their noses for 40K and WFB, and that's failing for GW as it is. It's a lot of money (and potentially fed-up parents) just to try to win against other Little Timmies who are probably doing the exact same thing.
Even though many of GW's remaining grown-man fans seem to want to play like Little Timmies, I still don't know if it's too clever, for the same reasons. (barring fed-up parents, though I'm sure there are some who wish they could step in...)

 George Spiggott wrote:

If you like 40k (but don't like AoS) you need AoS to fail otherwise GW will decide it was a great idea and start cross pollinating ideas. Probably starting with the scale creep and no points values.

scale creep has been going on for a couple of decades already, in both Fantasy and 40K...
i have to say, i am happy for it...

my first minis were small, weedy Chaos Dwarfs back in 1984...
they had a lot of character, and i was sad when the Big Hats came in to replace them, but have to admit the Bull Centaurs looked a lot more impressive than the original anorexic Chaos Centaurs...
then we got Forge World's version, and holy cow did they look awesome...
the Bull Centaurs were absolutely incredible, and massive!!!

today's 5th generation Space Marine is a way cooler model, to me, than my original little Beakies...
i was stoked when the 2013 kit was actually just noticably bigger than the previous kit, and finally has a few straight legged poses...
if the next Marine kit is finally true-scale next to the current Guard minis, i will be even more happy...
Orks have gotten bigger with each generation, and look way better for it...

scale creep is also going on across the industry as a whole...
look at the size of the Dystopian Wars guys, or the new Infinity minis...
it is going on across many companies, because so many people complain about the smaller, more fiddly minis...
just look at the confusion about what is 28mm, what is 32mm, what is 35mm, what is heroic scale, what is true scale...
it's a huge jumble right now...

so yeah, i want AoS to succeed so that slightly bigger, more fun to paint models DO make it over to 40K...
the minis in the AoS box look great for Avatars of two different Gods...
the fact that a Marauder in Fantasy is nearly the same size as a Guard model in 40K, which is nearly the same size as a Space Marine, just shows that Space Marines do need to get bigger...

cheers
jah

 George Spiggott wrote:
Anyone else seen this beauty yet?

'While profits are down this year, we had to spend money on a solid gold Sigmarine for the outside of our HQ. It was absolutely necessary. The base is engraved with 'Property of Tom Kirby', and all insurance and ownership is made out in my name, just in case anyone decides to... steal it. Yeah, that's why.'

The apologist arguments for Games Workshop in this thread are embarrassing, and frankly indicative of a fundamental lack of critical thinking or informed decision making in this hobby's playerbase. Games Workshop is a company that literally flaunts the fact that it doesn't care about it's players, and they can do so because people remain willfully ignorant of their own hobby.

Let's discuss some of their aggressively awful business policies that actively hurt the hobby and the players. The first and primary issue is that they have an incredibly paternalistic approach to business; they know best about the hobby, while fans know nothing and can be ignored, They proudly claim that advertising, focus groups, and market research are unneeded. They don't have a Facebook page, there are no GW message boards, there is no direct line of conversation with the fans, they don't have any company community presence whatsoever. They don't even bother with one way communication, as they suddenly stop supporting factions people have invested hundreds of dollars without any announcements, will go years without releasing rules for less popular factions, and will stop production of entire variant game lines with no warning or communication, and definitely no regard to the people who were playing and putting time and money into those products. Now no one expects a business to continue ventures that aren't profitable, but there is a way to pull products while still showing a modicum of consideration for your customer. All companies ultimately prioritize their bottom line, but some are a lot better than others at attempting to engage the customers as as secondary objective. Almost every company is better than that than GW in this regard, which leads to my next topic.

How GW deals with competition. That is, they don't. They honestly think they have a god given right to the miniature market, and anyone else who wants to make miniatures is infringing on these rights. Historically their approach to dealing with any competitor was legally bullying them out of the market, which was very successful up until recently. Luckily judges have now decided that despite their delusions of grandeur, Games Workshop does not have the rights to things like Miniature Gaming Figurines, Orks, Elves, Marines in Space Armor, and other incredibly generic concepts. Competition is good for any market. It makes companies produce better quality products, pay more attention to fan desires, and cut prices. The fact that GW did not want to do these things, and instead simply wanted to exterminate the competition through external means speaks volumes. They clearly have no interest in changing the quality of their product or their business practices, which means they need to find other ways to stay in business...

When GW makes a poor decision, they double down on it instead of attempting an alternative plan of action. Now that they have no legs in a courtroom, and competitor companies are on the rise, their sales have started dropping. This is when a company might actually admit to some mistakes, take an honest look at why they are losing market share, and attempt to address those issues. Instead GW simply hike up prices to make their existing fanbase cover the difference. They prioritize model lines (Space Marines) that make money at the expensive of other factions, and that's why you see stuff like 2-3 sets of updated rulebooks for money-maker factions, while other less popular ones are left years behind. Not to mention the power creep that comes with new rules, which literally creates a pay to win environment, as the more popular factions require more frequent purchases, and become stronger with each update. They are 100% willing to sacrifice game balance for revenue increases, and don't care that the quality of the game suffers. They completely ignore the other viable business path: finding out why people left, and then improving the quality of the game to get these people back and attract new players. That would actually require engaging their playerbase with things like focus groups and direct communication though, and it's much easier to just let people leave, and let the idiots who stay pay the difference via price increases. (These are the people you see in this thread, who say things like "well price hikes are expected")


There is one common theme to all these grievances. They pretty much paint a picture of a company that is at best indifferent towards their playerbase and their product, and at worst shows active contempt for both by trying to dodge competition rather than improve the product, edging out fans of any product line that isn't a top seller, and forcing the remaining ones to pay more in compensation while continuing to ignore them. They really are an awful company, whose continued existence is terrible for the hobby. They continue to exist however, because the fans of this hobby are just sort of dense and ignorant in their misplaced loyalty to this company. Just read this thread. You have people saying things like "they deserve to do well because they were around way back when", "I'll support them because they made the hobby what it is today", "Price Hikes are expected", "It's expected that free rules should be less well made than paid for rulebooks". These are all very poor arguments that make little sense if actually explored, but they do illustrate how willingly people will jump to protect a company that shows such active contempt for them with their business practices. One thing I will point out that is particularly pathetic, is that if you look at the first two arguments (which come up a lot), GW has clearly not only managed to convince themselves that they have a basic fundamental right to the miniature market "just because", but also have managed to instill that in a large chunk of the playerbase as well. How they managed to do this given their complete indifference towards their fans is the real enigma, but I think it has more to do with the players' willful ignorance rather than any active measure on GW's part. If you find yourself supporting GW, you really should sit back and actually think about what you are doing with your money. I highly doubt you would be as willing to invest in a bank, restaurant, grocery store, tech company that treated you the same way. But hey man, GW has been doing it forever, so I guess they have the right to act like this, right? Nils Bejerot would be proud.

We may disagree with you too, but we don't think you're stupid for disagreeing with us.

Nkcell wrote:

Spoiler:

The apologist arguments for Games Workshop in this thread are embarrassing, and frankly indicative of a fundamental lack of critical thinking or informed decision making in this hobby's playerbase. Games Workshop is a company that literally flaunts the fact that it doesn't care about it's players, and they can do so because people remain willfully ignorant of their own hobby.

Let's discuss some of their aggressively awful business policies that actively hurt the hobby and the players. The first and primary issue is that they have an incredibly paternalistic approach to business; they know best about the hobby, while fans know nothing and can be ignored, They proudly claim that advertising, focus groups, and market research are unneeded. They don't have a Facebook page, there are no GW message boards, there is no direct line of conversation with the fans, they don't have any company community presence whatsoever. They don't even bother with one way communication, as they suddenly stop supporting factions people have invested hundreds of dollars without any announcements, will go years without releasing rules for less popular factions, and will stop production of entire variant game lines with no warning or communication, and definitely no regard to the people who were playing and putting time and money into those products. Now no one expects a business to continue ventures that aren't profitable, but there is a way to pull products while still showing a modicum of consideration for your customer. All companies ultimately prioritize their bottom line, but some are a lot better than others at attempting to engage the customers as as secondary objective. Almost every company is better than that than GW in this regard, which leads to my next topic.

How GW deals with competition. That is, they don't. They honestly think they have a god given right to the miniature market, and anyone else who wants to make miniatures is infringing on these rights. Historically their approach to dealing with any competitor was legally bullying them out of the market, which was very successful up until recently. Luckily judges have now decided that despite their delusions of grandeur, Games Workshop does not have the rights to things like Miniature Gaming Figurines, Orks, Elves, Marines in Space Armor, and other incredibly generic concepts. Competition is good for any market. It makes companies produce better quality products, pay more attention to fan desires, and cut prices. The fact that GW did not want to do these things, and instead simply wanted to exterminate the competition through external means speaks volumes. They clearly have no interest in changing the quality of their product or their business practices, which means they need to find other ways to stay in business...

When GW makes a poor decision, they double down on it instead of attempting an alternative plan of action. Now that they have no legs in a courtroom, and competitor companies are on the rise, their sales have started dropping. This is when a company might actually admit to some mistakes, take an honest look at why they are losing market share, and attempt to address those issues. Instead GW simply hike up prices to make their existing fanbase cover the difference. They prioritize model lines (Space Marines) that make money at the expensive of other factions, and that's why you see stuff like 2-3 sets of updated rulebooks for money-maker factions, while other less popular ones are left years behind. Not to mention the power creep that comes with new rules, which literally creates a pay to win environment, as the more popular factions require more frequent purchases, and become stronger with each update. They are 100% willing to sacrifice game balance for revenue increases, and don't care that the quality of the game suffers. They completely ignore the other viable business path: finding out why people left, and then improving the quality of the game to get these people back and attract new players. That would actually require engaging their playerbase with things like focus groups and direct communication though, and it's much easier to just let people leave, and let the idiots who stay pay the difference via price increases. (These are the people you see in this thread, who say things like "well price hikes are expected")


There is one common theme to all these grievances. They pretty much paint a picture of a company that is at best indifferent towards their playerbase and their product, and at worst shows active contempt for both by trying to dodge competition rather than improve the product, edging out fans of any product line that isn't a top seller, and forcing the remaining ones to pay more in compensation while continuing to ignore them. They really are an awful company, whose continued existence is terrible for the hobby. They continue to exist however, because the fans of this hobby are just sort of dense and ignorant in their misplaced loyalty to this company. Just read this thread. You have people saying things like "they deserve to do well because they were around way back when", "I'll support them because they made the hobby what it is today", "Price Hikes are expected", "It's expected that free rules should be less well made than paid for rulebooks". These are all very poor arguments that make little sense if actually explored, but they do illustrate how willingly people will jump to protect a company that shows such active contempt for them with their business practices. One thing I will point out that is particularly pathetic, is that if you look at the first two arguments (which come up a lot), GW has clearly not only managed to convince themselves that they have a basic fundamental right to the miniature market "just because", but also have managed to instill that in a large chunk of the playerbase as well. How they managed to do this given their complete indifference towards their fans is the real enigma, but I think it has more to do with the players' willful ignorance rather than any active measure on GW's part. If you find yourself supporting GW, you really should sit back and actually think about what you are doing with your money. I highly doubt you would be as willing to invest in a bank, restaurant, grocery store, tech company that treated you the same way. But hey man, GW has been doing it forever, so I guess they have the right to act like this, right? Nils Bejerot would be proud.

Wonderful post, though now you'll be labelled as one of the "haterz" by said people.

The thing is, a lot of us "haterz" do not want GW to die. Do they deserve to die? Absolutely. But that is something completely different.

Nkcell wrote:
The apologist arguments for Games Workshop in this thread are embarrassing, and frankly indicative of a fundamental lack of critical thinking or informed decision making in this hobby's playerbase. Games Workshop is a company that literally flaunts the fact that it doesn't care about it's players, and they can do so because people remain willfully ignorant of their own hobby.

Let's discuss some of their aggressively awful business policies that actively hurt the hobby and the players. The first and primary issue is that they have an incredibly paternalistic approach to business; they know best about the hobby, while fans know nothing and can be ignored, They proudly claim that advertising, focus groups, and market research are unneeded. They don't have a Facebook page, there are no GW message boards, there is no direct line of conversation with the fans, they don't have any company community presence whatsoever. They don't even bother with one way communication, as they suddenly stop supporting factions people have invested hundreds of dollars without any announcements, will go years without releasing rules for less popular factions, and will stop production of entire variant game lines with no warning or communication, and definitely no regard to the people who were playing and putting time and money into those products. Now no one expects a business to continue ventures that aren't profitable, but there is a way to pull products while still showing a modicum of consideration for your customer. All companies ultimately prioritize their bottom line, but some are a lot better than others at attempting to engage the customers as as secondary objective. Almost every company is better than that than GW in this regard, which leads to my next topic.

How GW deals with competition. That is, they don't. They honestly think they have a god given right to the miniature market, and anyone else who wants to make miniatures is infringing on these rights. Historically their approach to dealing with any competitor was legally bullying them out of the market, which was very successful up until recently. Luckily judges have now decided that despite their delusions of grandeur, Games Workshop does not have the rights to things like Miniature Gaming Figurines, Orks, Elves, Marines in Space Armor, and other incredibly generic concepts. Competition is good for any market. It makes companies produce better quality products, pay more attention to fan desires, and cut prices. The fact that GW did not want to do these things, and instead simply wanted to exterminate the competition through external means speaks volumes. They clearly have no interest in changing the quality of their product or their business practices, which means they need to find other ways to stay in business...

When GW makes a poor decision, they double down on it instead of attempting an alternative plan of action. Now that they have no legs in a courtroom, and competitor companies are on the rise, their sales have started dropping. This is when a company might actually admit to some mistakes, take an honest look at why they are losing market share, and attempt to address those issues. Instead GW simply hike up prices to make their existing fanbase cover the difference. They prioritize model lines (Space Marines) that make money at the expensive of other factions, and that's why you see stuff like 2-3 sets of updated rulebooks for money-maker factions, while other less popular ones are left years behind. Not to mention the power creep that comes with new rules, which literally creates a pay to win environment, as the more popular factions require more frequent purchases, and become stronger with each update. They are 100% willing to sacrifice game balance for revenue increases, and don't care that the quality of the game suffers. They completely ignore the other viable business path: finding out why people left, and then improving the quality of the game to get these people back and attract new players. That would actually require engaging their playerbase with things like focus groups and direct communication though, and it's much easier to just let people leave, and let the idiots who stay pay the difference via price increases. (These are the people you see in this thread, who say things like "well price hikes are expected")


There is one common theme to all these grievances. They pretty much paint a picture of a company that is at best indifferent towards their playerbase and their product, and at worst shows active contempt for both by trying to dodge competition rather than improve the product, edging out fans of any product line that isn't a top seller, and forcing the remaining ones to pay more in compensation while continuing to ignore them. They really are an awful company, whose continued existence is terrible for the hobby. They continue to exist however, because the fans of this hobby are just sort of dense and ignorant in their misplaced loyalty to this company. Just read this thread. You have people saying things like "they deserve to do well because they were around way back when", "I'll support them because they made the hobby what it is today", "Price Hikes are expected", "It's expected that free rules should be less well made than paid for rulebooks". These are all very poor arguments that make little sense if actually explored, but they do illustrate how willingly people will jump to protect a company that shows such active contempt for them with their business practices. One thing I will point out that is particularly pathetic, is that if you look at the first two arguments (which come up a lot), GW has clearly not only managed to convince themselves that they have a basic fundamental right to the miniature market "just because", but also have managed to instill that in a large chunk of the playerbase as well. How they managed to do this given their complete indifference towards their fans is the real enigma, but I think it has more to do with the players' willful ignorance rather than any active measure on GW's part. If you find yourself supporting GW, you really should sit back and actually think about what you are doing with your money. I highly doubt you would be as willing to invest in a bank, restaurant, grocery store, tech company that treated you the same way. But hey man, GW has been doing it forever, so I guess they have the right to act like this, right? Nils Bejerot would be proud.

Hey, just a quick suggestion, if you want the people that this diatribe is aimed at to read it, then a better choice of opening sentence would be advised.

Sheesh, so much griping over a luxury product. Three words come to mind:

FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS

But if GW is doing such a bad job, why doesn't everyone focus on a different company with a different game? There are boards for them here, the minis are available, yet most of what everyone's talking (complaining) about is GW. It's a game people, just have fun. And even if there was a point system, people would still complain about some perceived imbalance. And this:

 George Spiggott wrote:
Anyone else seen this beauty yet?

is totally awesome.

you really think that a guy's first post here, telling GW fans that they are dense, ignorant idiots is wonderful, Grimtuff???

he could have made his points just as easily without insulting people who want to enjoy GW products...
having an opinion on a company's behavior is one thing, but attacking the fans as mindless apologists is out of line...

some of us have done the critical thinking, and decided that we like GW minis just as much as we enjoy other companies' minis, and so will continue to buy GW products...
one does not have to be stupid to buy product that they like...
we are all free to spend our hard-earned money how we like, and should not be criticized for it...
it's not like we are talking about Blood Diamonds here, or products made with the modern equivalent of slave labor...
at the end of the day, it's just toy soldiers...

cheers
jah

 jah-joshua wrote:
you really think that a guy's first post here, telling GW fans that they are dense, ignorant idiots is wonderful, Grimtuff???

he could have made his points just as easily without insulting people who want to enjoy GW products...
having an opinion on a company's behavior is one thing, but attacking the fans as mindless apologists is out of line...

some of us have done the critical thinking, and decided that we like GW minis just as much as we enjoy other companies' minis, and so will continue to buy GW products...
one does not have to be stupid to buy product that they like...
we are all free to spend our hard-earned money how we like, and should not be criticized for it...
it's not like we are talking about Blood Diamonds here, or products made with the modern equivalent of slave labor...
at the end of the day, it's just toy soldiers...

cheers
jah

For sure, some people like stuff and some don't, telling those that don't agree with you that they are wrong is pretty pointless anyway.

i'm just trying to clarify if Grimtuff really thought that Nkcell's first post was really "wonderful", because i have never been put off by any of his posts in my 9 years on here...
i am a bit surprised, but like i said yesterday, this release has been quite polarizing...

did i tell anyone that they were wrong???
i just thought the guy could have made all those points very eloquently without making it a personal attack on the fans...
being angry with the company i can understand, but why be so pissed off at the fans, especially when some people, like myself, do feel that the miniatures are improving every year, and are worth the price...

cheers
jah

 pax macharia wrote:
Sheesh, so much griping over a luxury product. Three words come to mind:

FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS

But if GW is doing such a bad job, why doesn't everyone focus on a different company with a different game? There are boards for them here, the minis are available, yet most of what everyone's talking (complaining) about is GW. It's a game people, just have fun. And even if there was a point system, people would still complain about some perceived imbalance.

Because the vocal minority is online, meanwhile the quiet majority just simply fades away; unless of course you think absolutely everyone who is "griping" throughout the entire world is here on Dakka doing so, in which case, I have some swampland...errr ocean-front property to sale you.

Since you may not look elsewhere, people are walking away in droves to at least one other company; Mantic has said that they had a sudden rush of preorders for their upcoming KoW rules.

 jah-joshua wrote:
i'm just trying to clarify if Grimtuff really thought that Nkcell's first post was really "wonderful", because i have never been put off by any of his posts in my 9 years on here...
i am a bit surprised, but like i said yesterday, this release has been quite polarizing...

Why?

Do we want to see GW die? No. People's jobs are on the line and there is no guarantee their IP will be picked up by anyone.

Do they deserve to die? Absolutely. They're on a self destructive path that is like watching the world's slowest sinking ship. It's disheartening to watch this happen to them. Something you once loved and put so much of your time into be mismanaged and serving as a personal golden parachute for its Chairman.

Welcome, Nkcell. Man, that's a wall o' text I would be proud of. There's another reason why GW dying wouldn't be an entirely bad thing - the fans that stick around in the wargaming hobby would see that things can be done in a much better way.

 pax macharia wrote:
Sheesh, so much griping over a luxury product. Three words come to mind:

FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS

But Pax, we live in the first world. And plenty of other companies put out 'luxury products' without such a lack of care and respect.

But if GW is doing such a bad job, why doesn't everyone focus on a different company with a different game? There are boards for them here, the minis are available, yet most of what everyone's talking (complaining) about is GW. It's a game people, just have fun.

Normally I would agree with you. As hinted, just about any other game is more carefully constructed and conscentious about it's players. But the situation is that GW's two core games are still two of the biggest wargames with some of the biggest player bases and an awful lot of nostalgia, though rapidly slipping, and what seems plain is that the decline is down to the deterioration (and canning) of decent-good rules and the rise of a ruthlessly mercenary attitude. They could so easily be good again, and so many want them to be, but from appearances GW doesn't care. Not one jot. It's like talking to the wall. That's the problem.

Oh, and 'it's a game' is in no way a justification for why we shouldn't care, either.

And even if there was a point system, people would still complain about some perceived imbalance.

Maybe, but (blue in the face...) far fewer if GW actually cared about decent playtesting and working out a balanced points system. Or as close as is actually possible. Riding an imaginary horse and plucking a number out of the air =/= autobalance.

 pax macharia wrote:
Sheesh, so much griping over a luxury product. Three words come to mind:

FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS

And? So? Therefore?

Because I live in a developed nation I'm never allowed to complain about anything because other people have it worse? Should I also never feel happy because other people are better off?

Its just such a stupid and ignorant thing to say.

But if GW is doing such a bad job, why doesn't everyone focus on a different company with a different game? There are boards for them here, the minis are available, yet most of what everyone's talking (complaining) about is GW. It's a game people, just have fun. And even if there was a point system, people would still complain about some perceived imbalance.

People have and are moving on to other games. The rise of WM/H and Infinity spring to mind, not to mention the countless Kickstarters, several in the 6 figure range, a handful in the 7 figure range if memory serves. Games are popping up that are similar to the games GW axed from their specialist range. Its happening everywhere, and if GW financials are telling us anything, its happening at a consistent, if not accelerating rate.

The reason people are often found complaining about GW is that they're the largest and many people have or still play. People are invested, monetarily and emotionally. There's upwards of two decades of memories, friendships, and countless hours spent painting, modelling, and gaming within the universes GW have built. When they constantly produce gakky rules and produce uninspired writing and art, people are bummed out or irritated about it, and rightfully so.

Finally, if they had a point system, it would have to be a good one, otherwise, yes, people would complain. But that's a good thing. Accepting mediocrity under some pretense that not everyone will be happy or won't ever be perfect is absolutely idiotic. You should honestly feel bad if that's what you think. Good things deserve praise. Bad things deserve criticism. If GW releases a rule set that barely functions, your damn right people will complain, and they'd be right in doing so. When GW produces a rule set that functions as well as the likes of Infinity, or shows a dedication to improvement like Spartan, they'll get some praise.

Complaining is not inherently a bad thing. Frame it as criticism with some actual thought and effort. Ignore the people who spout unsupported nonsense, regardless of whether its praise or negative.

I still can't believe gak like this needs to be re-iterated constantly because some people are tired of listening to opposing view points about a company they like.

I would love to know the numbers of currently active players of WHFB, DBA and FoG. Probably there is no way of ever knowing.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I would love to know the numbers of currently active players of WHFB, DBA and FoG. Probably there is no way of ever knowing.

No, because that would require GW to perform market research.....you know, that thing so "otiose" to a niche market; it's much better to have no idea who you're selling your product to, obviously.