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.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
We live in a universe where the negative views of some users on DakkaDakka are the major turn-off from the game while simultaneously the negative users are an unprepresentative minority because there are far more people who like the game who never visit forums.

Schrödinger's Hater?

Maxwell's Demon Hater, perhaps?

In the sense of the Hater being a gatekeeper who when you look at the realities cannot do the work needed.

To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.

If this is true, wasn't it a serious strategic error for GW to turn their enthusiastic veterans into Haters? It didn't happen overnight, it took over five years.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.

While I like the game, it's mostly because of the efforts the ITC and others put into the hobby as a whole. I can not in good faith recommend the game to new players though, simply due to GW's business practices and treatment of their product.

 Tinkrr wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.

While I like the game, it's mostly because of the efforts the ITC and others put into the hobby as a whole. I can not in good faith recommend the game to new players though, simply due to GW's business practices and treatment of their product.

I'll do the quoteception thing here as I'm responding and agreeing at the same time. I too used to encourage people to play WH40K. I no longer do this - instead I have successfully encouraged 2 friends to take up SAGA, another friend to take up Ronin (because while borrowing my models is nice, they want their own Buntai now) and Once I'm confident enough with Frostgrave, I may encourage others then too. Lion Rampant I've encouraged a further three people to get the rulebook for.

That's 5 people (one of them took up two games) who I have encouraged to start different gaming systems who *could* have been ushered towards GW (for additional detail, two of them were previous 40K players who were considering maybe playing again and buying more models to make their army usable, untill I pointed out that for one Riptide they could buy an entire, large 6pt SAGA army - the other friend that for the Imperial Knight they could have an entire large 6pt SAGA army AND rulebook AND the fancy gaming dice).

It didn't take much convincing really.

To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.

Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?

Makumba wrote:

To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.

Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?

Well pretending we speak of a person that is old enough to earn said 700 bucks... well as long as he is aware of that investment. its the person that decide how to spend that money. i would neighter encourage or discourage him. everyone that earns enough money to spend 700 buck for toys should be adult enough to resonable act.

Makumba wrote:

To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.

Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?

We'd inform him that Eldar is the army little kids buy so that they have enough overpowered gak to compete with the adults. It's an effective and easy to play handicap for inexperienced players that know nothing about wargaming. As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 hanshotfirst wrote:
i like 30k

This game is more balanced - Marines vs. Marines.
Here the rule book has not so much influence on the game when you run Marines, a few transports, and a Primarch, and the opponent does the same.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Actually, in earlier editions, warseer was called whineseer and was considered the negative forum. It was filled with people ranting non-stop about how the game sucks and various other issues people had.
Bolter and chainsword was considered....I don't know a nice way to say it, but it was more for children. It was filled with people rping as space marines, poorly, and the quality of advice was pitiful.
Dakka was considered the more competitive forum/modeling forum. The tactics and modeling threads on here were big draws, and you saw the highest amount of GT winners/players here.
The warhammer forum was also for more serious players, but had a smaller amount of activity. I think it was mainly based in the UK and centered around fantasy, but then the races individual forums took off in a big way (starting with empire, bug mans, druchii, and ogre stronghold later on being the big ones).

You speak in simple past. Do the forums have changed?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "Do the forums have changed?" unless you are attempting to mock my grammar for some reason?
The use of simple past here is fine, imo, though I'd be hard pressed to find a moment where the forums changed. Obviously it was a gradual shift that took a while, though it was pretty dramatic to someone who had been on them as a lurker for a long time
My guess would be 6th edition, a few months in, was when the forums started to become closer to what they are today, though the warhammer forum died when fantasy did.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.

Exactly.

I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

 Grumblewartz wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.

Exactly.

I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

Exalted for truth.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

So that new players in the process of deciding whether to invest in 40k (or how much to invest) can see a broader set of perspectives and come to a more informed decision.

When I visited Dakka for the first time after getting into 40k, I got a pretty positive vibe about the game. There was a bit of grumbling about how many toys the new Space Wolves had, but otherwise people still seemed pretty hopeful about what the upcoming codexes would bring. It encouraged me to continue purchasing because the negative views here hadn't brought up any "deal-breaker" issues for me. Since that time, there has been a substantial change of direction at GW, and the game has become very difficult for me to play (and difficult to get my friends playing) and it is valuable for others to hear about such things, lest they end up with an army's worth of buyers remorse.

Dakka cannot control what people decide to buy. However, if people come here and read about the issues with the game and decide for themselves that those issues are a deal-breaker, that isn't Dakka's fault. And every person that gets turned off from the game, whether from bad word-of-mouth from veterans that have been priced out or had their armies obsoleted, or from hearing about GW's bizarro, awful legal practices, or from reading about how playing a game often requires an hour of discussion and/or 4+ rolls to determine how the rules work, or any of the other myriad problems with 40k today, that's a bit less $ on GW's revenue sheet. As that number declines, GW is a tad more likely to change direction and/or business models, which means potentially seeking to develop their product in a direction that is more desirable to more people. (Not that I'm necessarily optimistic about that, but it's still possible).

Besides, complaining about complaining adds nothing to a discussion. You're just covering your ears and saying "lalalalala I don't wanna hear it!"

That would be fine if that was what people do. But the majority lurch from one hyperbole to another. X codex is completely useless. X unit has broken the game. It isn't rational at this point. I have already stated that there are legitimate reasons to dislike GW or 40k, so the ad hominem attack is quite inaccurate, but it does serve to elucidate my point. I am asking for people stop spewing hate and that is your response.

Regardless, I will reiterate. If you have stopped playing the game years ago, then please stop bashing GW and 40k at every turn. You aren't even up-to-date with your hatred. If you have a legitimate point, then make it and let it go. No need to spam every conversation.

Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?

 vipoid wrote:
Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?

You have so incredibly oversimplified the point that I and other posters were making. Seriously.

I think it's not really worth getting into discussion with Grumble.
Not sure how his approach to 40k is.
We in our gaming group are mostly veterans. We like the game, want to have fun, and like the competition. But what GW offers us in return is more and more not what we want to see and have. High prices, crappy rule set, and a negative image we have from the company.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Spoiler:

 Xca|iber wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

So that new players in the process of deciding whether to invest in 40k (or how much to invest) can see a broader set of perspectives and come to a more informed decision.

When I visited Dakka for the first time after getting into 40k, I got a pretty positive vibe about the game. There was a bit of grumbling about how many toys the new Space Wolves had, but otherwise people still seemed pretty hopeful about what the upcoming codexes would bring. It encouraged me to continue purchasing because the negative views here hadn't brought up any "deal-breaker" issues for me. Since that time, there has been a substantial change of direction at GW, and the game has become very difficult for me to play (and difficult to get my friends playing) and it is valuable for others to hear about such things, lest they end up with an army's worth of buyers remorse.

Dakka cannot control what people decide to buy. However, if people come here and read about the issues with the game and decide for themselves that those issues are a deal-breaker, that isn't Dakka's fault. And every person that gets turned off from the game, whether from bad word-of-mouth from veterans that have been priced out or had their armies obsoleted, or from hearing about GW's bizarro, awful legal practices, or from reading about how playing a game often requires an hour of discussion and/or 4+ rolls to determine how the rules work, or any of the other myriad problems with 40k today, that's a bit less $ on GW's revenue sheet. As that number declines, GW is a tad more likely to change direction and/or business models, which means potentially seeking to develop their product in a direction that is more desirable to more people. (Not that I'm necessarily optimistic about that, but it's still possible).

Besides, complaining about complaining adds nothing to a discussion. You're just covering your ears and saying "lalalalala I don't wanna hear it!"

That would be fine if that was what people do. But the majority lurch from one hyperbole to another. X codex is completely useless. X unit has broken the game. It isn't rational at this point. I have already stated that there are legitimate reasons to dislike GW or 40k, so the ad hominem attack is quite inaccurate, but it does serve to elucidate my point. I am asking for people stop spewing hate and that is your response.

Regardless, I will reiterate. If you have stopped playing the game years ago, then please stop bashing GW and 40k at every turn. You aren't even up-to-date with your hatred. If you have a legitimate point, then make it and let it go. No need to spam every conversation.

The sad part is that it's not hyperbole that he BA codex is worthless. You can literally do every BA build better with vanilla. So that's where my bitterness comes from. And yes, I've been playing other games more and more.

I agree that they have it pretty rough, but worthless is still an overstatement and the fact that people don't recognize it as hyperbole is part of the bigger problem. I am not trying to insult you in anyway, and I am not saying you are wrong. But, the usability of the codex is relative to the gaming environment, which is a point that is all too often ignored. If the gaming group consists of say BA, Imperial Guard, Tyranids, and Chaos, for example, the BA codex isn't "useless." It is an outdated codex, no doubt. That is a valid point and I am not trying to minimize it. However, it is perfectly playable in many gaming environments. The spirit of 40k has always been about groups making up their own gaming environment - that is one of the most attractive elements of the game, imo.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.

Exactly.

I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

I think the important point is that people like me left 40K because we disliked various changes that GW made to the game, and now we bash it because it is the other way (as well as not buying anything) to pressurise GW to change the game back.

IG, Tyranids, Orks and Chaos are all less worthless because the marine codex does not have all the same stuff except BETTERER on every page. The BA are a very special case in that they are quite literally worthless compared to vanilla marines.

Also, mysteriously, those lists don't get used much anymore where I play.

 Grumblewartz wrote:
I agree that they have it pretty rough, but worthless is still an overstatement and the fact that people don't recognize it as hyperbole is part of the bigger problem. I am not trying to insult you in anyway, and I am not saying you are wrong.

That's one hell of a contradiction right there.

You are, by definition, telling Martel that he's wrong. If he's not wrong, then 'worthless' isn't hyperbole or an overstatement - it's an accurate assessment of BA.

 _ghost_ wrote:

Makumba wrote:

To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.

Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?

Well pretending we speak of a person that is old enough to earn said 700 bucks... well as long as he is aware of that investment. its the person that decide how to spend that money. i would neighter encourage or discourage him. everyone that earns enough money to spend 700 buck for toys should be adult enough to resonable act.

But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.

As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.

Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?

Thank you for explaining your perspective. I can understand where you are coming from. My point is that the GW hate frequently ends up making players and hobby enthusiasts who enjoy the game suffer, rather than GW, by hijacking forums (I am not accusing you, just making a general point about what I have noticed).

No one can do anything to GW except not buy their stuff. So the next best thing is venting.

But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.

As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.

Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Spoiler:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.

Exactly.

I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

I think the important point is that people like me left 40K because we disliked various changes that GW made to the game, and now we bash it because it is the other way (as well as not buying anything) to pressurise GW to change the game back.

Thank you for explaining your perspective. I can understand where you are coming from. My point is that the GW hate frequently ends up making players and hobby enthusiasts who enjoy the game suffer, rather than GW, by hijacking forums (I am not accusing you, just making a general point about what I have noticed).

Yes, I am afraid there is an element of that, but it is the price we pay for having a forum for discussion rather than an echo chamber containing only one point of view.

I sometimes get annoyed by so-called "white knights" (a term I dislike and do not use, but you understand the concept) who apparently feel obliged to defend GW from any point made against them, sometimes with increasingly ludicrous arguments, but I recognise they have the right to express their opinion.

As long as we all do it politely and with reference to reasonable facts and arguments, it can't do any harm.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Exactly.

I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high.

So?

You don't need to play the game to have a right to comment here. Only a minority do. Plenty folks follow 40k for the lore. Plenty are involved In Terms of just painting and converting. And for plenty others, it's simply an interesting topic to follow and be involved in. And it's easy to be aware and knowledgeable of the state of play to make informed opinions.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it?

Because there are valid reasons to dislike gw and 40k?

 Grumblewartz wrote:
You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that.

Why? Their reasons are still valid.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why?

Because there are valid reasons to dislike gw and 40k? Because gw have burned and pissed off so many former customers and thry don't want anyone else to go down the same road? Because explaining your reasoning behind a negative view being dismissed as a 'seething pile of hate' is juvenile, short sighted and akin to attempting to whitewash the debate.
If someone wants to get into the game, an honest opinion of the downsides and pitfalls and negative aspects of the hobby is still relevant.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

It has long since ceased being constructive.

'Constructive' means honest.

And an honest opinion of the downsides, pitfalls and negative aspects of the game is still 'constructive'. It's giving an accurate picture. You don't get to censor the stuff you disagree with and whitewash the responses here.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?

Then talk positive about the game. No ones stopping you. But don't be surprised or hostile when someone offers an alternative opinion, or points out the negative aspects of the game and says that it isn't all sunshine and rainbows.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

If the gaming group consists of say BA, Imperial Guard, Tyranids, and Chaos, for example, the BA codex isn't "useless." .

And when the group consists of anything else? Here's the thing mate - defining a codex as ok when based against a limited and selectively defined collection of underpowered and poorly constructed codices doesn't mean it isn't 'useless'. It just means you might be able to make it work under very specific circumstances, and when those stars don't align, you're outta luck. But we're not allowed to provide an Honest assessment, or talk about that or display our displeasure at this appalling sense of balance begins this, are we? Coz we're just haterz and grumble sez only approved posters with approved positivity can post....

 Grumblewartz wrote:

I The spirit of 40k has always been about groups making up their own gaming environment - that is one of the most attractive elements of the game, imo.

Which falls down the second one person says 'I want to play blood Angels', and the other says 'I want to play saim hann!'. Talking about the 'spirit of 40k' is quicksand. It's a cAtch all term to be all high and mighty and dismiss everyone else for having fun the wrong way whole whitewashing all the problems and genuine issues.

Deadnight wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Which is why you can't compare Infinity to 40k. They are on a fundamentally different scale, with the only similarity that they both make use of miniatures. It is somewhat like the difference between buying a Nintendo DS and buying a super high-end gaming PC. The DS allows you to fully play games at a much lower cost than the PC. The PC gives you more, but at higher costs. Just as playing a game of 40k gives you much more miniatures on the table than playing a game of Infinity will. That said, the big question, is gaming on that expansive PC really more fun than gaming on the DS? Maybe the DS games are actually better designed and more fun? The answer to that will depend on the player. Personally, I enjoy wargames with lots of miniatures better than wargames with less miniatures.
Regardless, the whole argument is invalid because you can also play a game of Kill Team with only 10 GW miniatures. Therefore GW still is much cheaper than CB
.

He, to be fair - it Depends what ten miniatures you take though. Ten Bolter marines? Sure, why not. Now chuck in that ba chaplain, some vanguard, stern guard or whatever and the price rocks up. Meanwhile I can go with some Caledonians and some single model blisters or whathaveyou. Absolutist statements that 'gw is still much cheaper' fall apart under a bit of scrutiny (or at best, aren't as clear cut as you'd like them to be) and will get you into trouble here,

In any case, Kill team isn't 40k. so there's that. :p it's not the main game. Its a very stripped back game using some elements and game mechanics of the main parent 40k game, and a whole bunch of limitations, restrictions and bans a heck of a lot of stuff you'd normally see etc. so let's talk about a generic 300pt infinity list versus a generic 1850pt 40k list. Is gw cheaper? Probably not.

Sure as hell not. But the 1850pts 40k list will also give you a lot more toys than the 300pts Infinity list will.

Deadnight wrote:
Fo me, what's galling isn't necessarily the price tag per mini - I don't mind paying. It's the cynical cash grabs - halving the contents of the boxes while jacking up the prices, invalidating codices and models to force you to buy the next shiny and keep up with the meta. Then there are the rulebooks and codices and so on...

I agree with you here.

Deadnight wrote:
And to be fair, you can very much compare and contrast infinity and 40k. They're both wargames using 28mm models. You can compare rules, model quality, price to play etc. strengths, merits and differences.

Oh, you can compare all right. But just as with comparing apples to oranges, you have to wonder whether that comparison has any meaningful value.

Deadnight wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

In my opinion, the comparison should therefore not be based on the costs of playing a single game (which in the end, you could make as big or small as you want it to be) but on the value you get for the money. When I buy a box of 10 GW figures, I get 10 highly customisable figures with lots of extra options. When I buy 10 Infinity miniatures, I get 10 monopose figures at a higher cost. Buying the GW box just gives me more stuff for less money, and therefore is imo cheaper. In the end, 10 miniatures are 10 miniatures, I can do the same things with them. I can even play a full game of Infinity with my 10 GW miniatures!
.

The 'value you get for your money' is open ended. I love infinity, so I get great 'value for my money' from that. Then there is buying second hand Etc. to have an honest conversation on this, you need to look at the go-to sizes and the total cost of play.

And I disagree with you. Those 10 miniatures are all well and good, but with infinity - that's you ready to rock and roll. In 40k, that's a squad. You can play Mickey Mouse games of kill team with it, and you can ignore those huge battles with loads of models that you claim to love as well and it's those things that really make 40k what it is. And you then still need a bunch more to get up to a 'normal' size. Cost of entry and costs of armies should be considered too, for the simple reason that the discussion doesn't end with ten models.

True. Yet to me, those 10 miniatures are a far higher value because I can assemble them in whatever way I want as part of a slowly expanding and unique personalised miniature army. In 40k, every group of Space Marines is unique, but in Infinity, all Caledonians look exactly like all other Caledonians, maybe just differently painted. As someone who values the miniatures far more than the actual game, this is extremely important to me. The greatest fun on 40k is not playing the game, it is building and collecting the army. Again, it is things like this that make Infinity and 40k really hard to compare.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
By the way, I might have issues with your proxies! then again, I have played intro games of warmachine with space marines too...

Who hasn't?

Deadnight wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

For the models, GW is expensive when compared to pure scale model companies, but not when compared to other wargame companies. It is also not expansive compared to most other hobbies. For what I paid for my mountainbike, computer games and sailing boat, I could have had a lifetime supply of all the 40k models I ever want.
.

And when compared to what I pay for my marathons (£50 to enter, and £100 for good trainers) it's a hell of a lot more expensive! For what it's worth though - don't talk about 'normal hobbies' in the same breath as sailing boats, mountain bikes and that - wow, that's a whole different level! I'm envious by the way. Now, if we're talking about boozing, then it's quite a bit cheaper!
Generally though I'll agree with you - I don't see wargaming as ridiculously expensive on the whole - it's easy enough to put aside £10 a week as a hobby budget that'll get you a decent chunk of stuff over a long period of time. For me, the problem is the bloody painting (looks at lead mountain and groans!)

Mountainbiking and sailing are rather normal hobbies afaik. I know a lot more people who mountainbike or sail than I know people playing miniature wargames, so what is the 'normal hobby' really?
(Also, with my boat, there is no need to be envious. It is over 50 years old and I bought it for about €500. The yearly harbour and maintenance costs are much more expansive than the boat itself! )


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Deadnight wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Exactly.

I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high.

So?

You don't need to play the game to have a right to comment here. Only a minority do. Plenty folks follow 40k for the lore. Plenty are involved In Terms of just painting and converting. And for plenty others, it's simply an interesting topic to follow and be involved in. And it's easy to be aware and knowledgeable of the state of play to make informed opinions.

If you don't play the game, it will be hard to make any insightful comments on it. At best you will be stuck echoing what others have said.

Deadnight wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:

I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it?

Because there are valid reasons to dislike gw and 40k?

Circular logic? You are better than that.

Deadnight wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:
You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that.

Why? Their reasons are still valid.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why?

Because there are valid reasons to dislike gw and 40k? Because gw have burned and pissed off so many former customers and thry don't want anyone else to go down the same road? Because explaining your reasoning behind a negative view being dismissed as a 'seething pile of hate' is juvenile, short sighted and akin to attempting to whitewash the debate.
If someone wants to get into the game, an honest opinion of the downsides and pitfalls and negative aspects of the hobby is still relevant.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

It has long since ceased being constructive.

'Constructive' means honest.

And an honest opinion of the downsides, pitfalls and negative aspects of the game is still 'constructive'. It's giving an accurate picture. You don't get to censor and whitewash the responses here.

The critical comments are important, but I think the problem that Grumblewartz sees with it is that it is no longer constructive because too often it devolves into an unending repetition of the exact same opinions over and over and over again in every single thread about GW, and even worse, in many unrelated threads as well. That is where it goes from being constructive criticism to whining. Unfortenately some people just can't seem to pull themselves away from 40k, even if they hate it. That is why they keep coming back to post negativity, which greatly diminishes the fun of Dakka for people with more positive attitudes.
As an example: There is nothing constructive about posting "Go play something game X instead" in a thread of someone asking about how to get started 40k. That is just rude and off topic.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?

You have so incredibly oversimplified the point that I and other posters were making. Seriously.

Not really, because the reverse of what he said is what you're asking, and your finger-waving orkmoticon just makes you look like an ass.

The critical comments are important, but I think the problem that Grumblewartz sees with it is that it is no longer constructive because too often it devolves into an unending repetition of the exact same opinions over and over and over again in every single thread about GW, and even worse, in many unrelated threads as well. That is where it goes from being constructive criticism to whining. Unfortenately some people just can't seem to pull themselves away from 40k, even if they hate it. That is why they keep coming back to post negativity, which greatly diminishes the fun of Dakka for people with more positive attitudes.
As an example: There is nothing constructive about posting "Go play something game X instead" in a thread of someone asking about how to get started 40k. That is just rude and off topic.

Thats so true! Critik just for bashings sake is worthless and doesn't help to get a full picture. Especialy if someone wants to start a 40k army. Of Course he should be informed about problems, e.g. said BA codex doesn't work that well when set up against SM,Tau , Eldar. . But its a huge difference between " worthless forget it" and " Be aware that you will face serrious problems."

Suggesting sombody rigt out that he should forgett 40k at all seems always like a insult against said newbie. then instead of providing this guy the nessecary informationn in a objective way he gets the underlying message " you are to stupid to decide for your own! let me help you with this"

The flip-side to that is you get a newbie dead-set on playing BA, you tell them "this is an uphill struggle, but, here you go" and, six months later, newbie is back with a raging hatred for GW because he spent $500 on a BA army and is getting wiped off the board by his friend's Tau gunline or Eldar list by Turn 3 in every game.

You can then tell them that either they try to convince their friend to change their list, they buy a different army (another $500+ outlay), or to make up some variant rules (not always an option, depending on locale and local meta). You are more likely to end up with someone who says "Feth this", ebays their toys, and jumps to another game entirely and will never touch another GW product in their lives.

Better to be upfront and say "this army sucks right now, it might one day get an update and be much better, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen". This, though, leads to the promulgation of Tau and Eldar lists (or whatever the current hotness is, this is not just a modern problem) which is basically rewarding GW for creating unbalanced units, because you're pushing people to buy them, and that's bad for the game overall.

 _ghost_ wrote:
Suggesting sombody rigt out that he should forgett 40k at all seems always like a insult against said newbie. then instead of providing this guy the nessecary informationn in a objective way he gets the underlying message " you are to stupid to decide for your own! let me help you with this"

Not at all. The fact that said newbie is on a forum, asking questions, means he is looking for advice. It seems far more dishonest to try and pretend that everything is great - almost like you're trying to trick newbies into making bad investments.

That newbie has a right to know if his army will get its ass handed to it in virtually every game, regardless of how well he plays. He has a right to know that he'll receive no help whatsoever from GW, because they don't even consider 40k a game - just a load of models that they inexplicably provide rules for. They have a right to know that the rules in those £50 rulebooks and £30 codices are worse than the rules many other tabletop games give away for free.

If the newbie doesn't care about the game being a mess (or if that appeals to him), then he won't care about that stuff. If he's only interested in models or fluff, then he might not give a damn which army is best. And, as with any advice, he is free to ignore it. But, it is far better that he hears the full story before he makes a significant investment in the game. Honestly, unless you work for GW's marketing department, why sugar-coat the sorry state of the game?