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.

 frozenwastes wrote:

Odds are though that for each of the people who want high quality rules there are out there, there's a hundred players who either just want a beer and pretzels pew-pew fest with big armies on the table or who never actually play their game..

Just on this, when I hear "beer and pretzels game", I think of something with a low buy-in, where you can quickly set up and learn the rules (possibly while slightly drunk), play it without having to flip through the rulebook, and be done in an hour at the most.

Chikout wrote:Well this interview offers a lot of insight into what went wrong with GW over the last few years and why it is in a better place now. https://trackofwords.wordpress.com/2017/02/11/black-library-there-and-back-again-with-laurie-goulding /
It shows how the changes are much more than just the community stuff. It also shows the impact of the new ceo.

Thank you for the link. That was insightful and a good read. So it seam that what went on with GW is just what goes on with any company. Really nice to know people working on the game are really not idiots like we claim they are. While it's not fun to play with, at least now I can understand and I should stop blaming the writers of codices now for being inept.

 Elemental wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:

Odds are though that for each of the people who want high quality rules there are out there, there's a hundred players who either just want a beer and pretzels pew-pew fest with big armies on the table or who never actually play their game..

Just on this, when I hear "beer and pretzels game", I think of something with a low buy-in, where you can quickly set up and learn the rules (possibly while slightly drunk), play it without having to flip through the rulebook, and be done in an hour at the most.

Not sure about the hour at the most... you do want to have multiple beers, right?

You can always play more than one game

Plus, would you want to spend a lot of your drinking time looking up rules?

 Elemental wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:

Odds are though that for each of the people who want high quality rules there are out there, there's a hundred players who either just want a beer and pretzels pew-pew fest with big armies on the table or who never actually play their game..

Just on this, when I hear "beer and pretzels game", I think of something with a low buy-in, where you can quickly set up and learn the rules (possibly while slightly drunk), play it without having to flip through the rulebook, and be done in an hour at the most.

That's my understanding as well; I can't imagine that the casual gamers want low quality rules, they'd benefit from good rules more than the serious players.

Casual games to me are things like X-Wing, Zombicide.
Serious games to me are things like Napoleonics

Gimgamgoo wrote:For a company that has a large retail chain, all filled with players, playing their games exclusively.... and they can't somehow think of a way of playtesting... ?

Sheesh. GW has the best possible way to playtest. A dedicated sycophantic playerbase that turn up at their exclusive stores to game. Given a chance to playtest, they'd bite peoples nuts off for the chance. GW should have the most playtested bang on perfect games out there. But no, they used all those editions to bring in enough changes to force people to buy new versions and the latest models, rather than actually fix the game and problems. Here's hoping the new 40k version is an improvement.

One salaried playtest coordinator as part of their new community site could do exactly this. GW used to leverage volunteers very, very well. It's something that got lost in the shuffle after the LOTR boom bust. Citadel Journal, the Outrider program and so on. All gone. They should bring them back and involve the community even more.

Elemental wrote:
Just on this, when I hear "beer and pretzels game", I think of something with a low buy-in, where you can quickly set up and learn the rules (possibly while slightly drunk), play it without having to flip through the rulebook, and be done in an hour at the most.

Sure, I guess that works. I was thinking the type of game where the beer, pretzels and company of friends is more important than the activity itself. If you want, you can read all future uses of "beer and pretzels" by myself as "bucket of dice lark."

Herzlos wrote:
I can't imagine that the casual gamers want low quality rules, they'd benefit from good rules more than the serious players.

They don't want low quality rules. They just buy the product anyway despite low quality rules.

Of course good rules are better for everyone. I'm just making the case that GW is only willing to invest so much money into the quality of their rules and it could be that they are investing just enough (eg. general's handbook) whereas in previous years they invested too little (eg. original AoS launch rules).

The last two things I bought from GW were to be used with other rules. A box of wood elf cavalry ended up being a full unit of legion cavalry and a solo in a wood elf proxy hordes army (legion beasts replaced with woodland monsters like dryads and the like). In WHFB 7th (?) at the time, those 8 wood elf glade riders would have been like 90 points in a 2000 point army and were largely irrelevant. In my Hordes army, they represented a third of the army and the rules meant they contributed massively to a game. They felt awesome in play. I want that kind of awesome low model count support before I play a GW game again.

As it stands, the games seem to be about only having the huge monsters and vehicles actually having a big impact and AoS seems to be chocked full of spill over model removal. They're meant for large games because GW wants to sell the idea of large collections. They brought out a Kill Team box, but have done nothing else with it and it's sold out now. My guess is that they were experimenting with different starter box products rather than actually deciding to support lower model count play. As well, Kill Team isn't really what I'm talking about either as it still uses the basic 3rd edition 40k system as its base. It's no wonder it makes individual models irrelevant though as it started out as Rick Priestly's home rules for World War 1 historicals that got rushed into a 40k adaptation.

 frozenwastes wrote:


They don't want low quality rules. They just buy the product anyway despite low quality rules.

I agree, there are a hell of a lot of people that buy the models without ever playing a game, GW know this and that is one of the reasons they have only done the bare minimum game wise for such a long time, there are also people buying these newer boxed sets soley for the cheaper models and totally disregarding the rules, this is also telling them that the rules are not so important to everyone.


Thankfully, it seems that they have finally clicked on to the fact that better rules mean more people will play the game, which in turn is better for everyone, despite what the collectors / painters do, and it looks like they are actually play testing stuff properly nowadays, or at least trying to.

 frozenwastes wrote:
My argument is not against it, but that it's tangential to GW's purposes.

I didn't say it was... ?

 frozenwastes wrote:
Actual design work is time intensive. You've got to come up with the base system, test it and then theoretically test new releases against the existing stuff. Writing whatever and forgetting all that means the studio budget can be spent on packaging design, painting up models for the product shots, making product shots, writing contentless puff pieces about the new releases, and a host of other things that are not a balanced, streamlined and tight set of rules.

Thing is they have a base system already. They've had it since 3rd Ed and that base hasn't changed. They're just added patch after patch after patch to it, like an old Marine you've test painted a thousand times over until he no longer resembles a Marine.

It's time for some simple green, so to speak. Burn away the unwieldy top-heavy unworkable mess that 40K has become and start from that base, working your way up.

 Elemental wrote:
Just on this, when I hear "beer and pretzels game", I think of something with a low buy-in, where you can quickly set up and learn the rules (possibly while slightly drunk), play it without having to flip through the rulebook, and be done in an hour at the most.

That's a good point. I interpret that in much the same way, and in its current state it doesn't fit that bill. We spent a weekend a fortnight ago playing Silver Tower. Got about 3 games in. That worked as a 'beer and pretzels' experience. Couple of weeks before that, a whole day of actual Warhammer Quest. A bit more involved, but it still worked. 40k? I wouldn't even know where to begin.

It's not simple. It's not newbie friendly. It's barriers to entry are still far too high. It's ---not--- a casual game.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
For a company that has a large retail chain, all filled with players, playing their games exclusively.... and they can't somehow think of a way of playtesting... ?

Having come at this from multiple angles (got my start as a playtester... well... I got my start by being a loudmouth on the Internet, which got me into playtesting, but whatever), I've done the whole play testing thing on tons of different products and it can be quite a chore, but the the changes that I've seen with the start and end point of various products makes it always worth it IMO.

Unfortunately despite GW's glacial change, they are still slaves to this insane secrecy nonsense. Their big 'here's what's coming next' exposes on their community website pretty much only happen after some chucklehead stuck in an earthquake with nothing better to do than take crappy photographs has got their hands on a copy of an upcoming WD.

And even if they don't go out to the community at large for help with making 40K great again, then as has been suggested, why not use the damned gaming hall to do it? The fact that they seem to be reaching out to the AoS community and not the 40K one makes no sense, unless it's the secrecy thing.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:
My argument is not against it, but that it's tangential to GW's purposes.

I didn't say it was... ?

Just being clear about what I'm on about. I don't know how many times I've read people on this forum say that bad rules are fine for people who don't take the game seriously. While I am also saying that they are fine, I'm saying "fine as a marketing tool (but not as a game)." I'm hoping that distinction is clear.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Thing is they have a base system already. They've had it since 3rd Ed and that base hasn't changed. They're just added patch after patch after patch to it, like an old Marine you've test painted a thousand times over until he no longer resembles a Marine.

It's time for some simple green, so to speak. Burn away the unwieldy top-heavy unworkable mess that 40K has become and start from that base, working your way up.

So you want the 3rd edition core as the basis of a revised 40k? I don't. Like at all. It was about as blatant of a model count inflation for sales purposes as it gets. "Make things faster so we can keep the game size in points the same, but half the number of points each model costs. All the people who want to collect a standard "army" will buy twice as much!" I want the wargames I play to be designed with decisions focused on the best game play, not pushing model sales.

 Elemental wrote:
40k? I wouldn't even know where to begin.

It's not simple. It's not newbie friendly. It's barriers to entry are still far too high. It's ---not--- a casual game.

Since I'm the one that brought up 40k's sufficiency as a game that people can play without taking it seriously, I meant the way people actually do that with 40k. Not that it is optimal at all for it. Just that it is sufficient. Or maybe that people even do it despite its characteristics. When I say 40k is good enough for GW's purposes (provide a framework for model sales, be playable by a portion of their customer base) I'm not praising it as optimal for those purposes.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Unfortunately despite GW's glacial change, they are still slaves to this insane secrecy nonsense. Their big 'here's what's coming next' exposes on their community website pretty much only happen after some chucklehead stuck in an earthquake with nothing better to do than take crappy photographs has got their hands on a copy of an upcoming WD.

The secrecy thing is a direct result of other manufacturers being faster to get things to the market than them. Though in this day of 3d design and lowered master production turn around times, they can't win. When the latest release has a new heavy weapon or something, resin bits makers can design, master and cast their version in a matter of days, still beating them to the market. What GW doesn't get is that these accessories are not a threat. So everything is sooper secret even if the cost of lost hype and talk and planning up coming purchases or preordering is higher than a bit of money being diverted to 3rd party bitz manufacturers. <-- not saying it is for sure, just that it's possible.

There's a small gaming convention the next city over and the local GW store is actually involved and one of the conditions is that the GW games have no third party models or bits allowed. So the entire event is manufacturer locked. Playing Bolt Action there? You can only use Warlord 28mm WW2 guys and vehicle kits. The funny thing is that it's actually preventing GW models from hitting the table as the Kings of War community is half made up of people who use GW's fantasy miniatures.

 frozenwastes wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Unfortunately despite GW's glacial change, they are still slaves to this insane secrecy nonsense. Their big 'here's what's coming next' exposes on their community website pretty much only happen after some chucklehead stuck in an earthquake with nothing better to do than take crappy photographs has got their hands on a copy of an upcoming WD.

I know it's irrelevant to the discussion really, but that quote was H.B.M.C. not me.

Sorry about that! Fixed it.

 frozenwastes wrote:


There's a small gaming convention the next city over and the local GW store is actually involved and one of the conditions is that the GW games have no third party models or bits allowed. So the entire event is manufacturer locked. Playing Bolt Action there? You can only use Warlord 28mm WW2 guys and vehicle kits. The funny thing is that it's actually preventing GW models from hitting the table as the Kings of War community is half made up of people who use GW's fantasy miniatures.

Why would GW Games>GW model only rules also force other company games to follow the same rule? Warlord actively promote other company models within their rulebooks, so its not locked into "wanna play Bolt Action? WARLORD ONLY"

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:


There's a small gaming convention the next city over and the local GW store is actually involved and one of the conditions is that the GW games have no third party models or bits allowed. So the entire event is manufacturer locked. Playing Bolt Action there? You can only use Warlord 28mm WW2 guys and vehicle kits. The funny thing is that it's actually preventing GW models from hitting the table as the Kings of War community is half made up of people who use GW's fantasy miniatures.

Why would GW Games>GW model only rules also force other company games to follow the same rule? Warlord actively promote other company models within their rulebooks, so its not locked into "wanna play Bolt Action? WARLORD ONLY"

That's because they're tiny and poor entities trying to grab a market share.

Of course they're whoring out, that's how you get there.

Then you cash in.

morgoth wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:


There's a small gaming convention the next city over and the local GW store is actually involved and one of the conditions is that the GW games have no third party models or bits allowed. So the entire event is manufacturer locked. Playing Bolt Action there? You can only use Warlord 28mm WW2 guys and vehicle kits. The funny thing is that it's actually preventing GW models from hitting the table as the Kings of War community is half made up of people who use GW's fantasy miniatures.

Why would GW Games>GW model only rules also force other company games to follow the same rule? Warlord actively promote other company models within their rulebooks, so its not locked into "wanna play Bolt Action? WARLORD ONLY"

That's because they're tiny and poor entities trying to grab a market share.

Of course they're whoring out, that's how you get there.

Then you cash in.

I mean within the convention. GW only want GW stuff being used in their games, fair enough, but why are other games also manufacturer locked? They'll be free to have their own approach unless GW has insisted on it as a blanket rule across the whole event?

I thought they had, now I'm less sure as they seem to slip a tiny bit again.

On the subject of 'hush-hush, secret squirrel' stuff....

The pace may not be as glacial as first thought. Remember, they're doing a Studio Seminar at Adepticon this year, and have promised...

Warhammer Community post wrote:We’re going to be showing off some upcoming releases for the first time. We can’t say much more at the moment but rest assured, we’ll be showcasing some very cool stuff.

So that in itself is a big old change. They've done Studio Seminars before, but a long old time ago. Sadly, I can't for the life of me remember if they did sneak peaks at those.

But it's a definite shift. Now, how much they show off, who knows? Will it be a collection of forthcoming 'Rumour Engine' style teaser close ups, or full pics of the forthcoming kits? Will it even be kits, or just a run down of books to come? Just got to wait and see.

Are you sure that quote was GW? It sounds exactly like Palladium Books...

Lifted straight from the Warhammer Community post

Joyboozer wrote:
Are you sure that quote was GW? It sounds exactly like Palladium Books...

It's from here.

Games Workshop Studio Preview

Wednesday – 8:00 PM and 10:00 PM

This is cool.

We’re going to be showing off some upcoming releases for the first time. We can’t say much more at the moment but rest assured, we’ll be showcasing some very cool stuff.

Herzlos wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Well if you are happy with older models why not just keep using them? Old models are perfectly fine and legal models so unless you hate the look no reason to not use them.

If you use models old enough, there's a chance you'll get pulled up for using non-GW models in stores, as the staffer probably won't recognise them. How much effort you wanted to put in from that point is up to you, but the tab that says "GW" will be well hidden by the base.

Doubtful there's really that many models where GW style is hard to spot though. And that's like '80's models probably.

Hmmm Curious since Apeticon is in March will GW preview 8th edition instead of just minis? What do you think, possible or not? I mean anything is possible but do you think the new GW would do this since the old GW would never do this.

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I mean within the convention. GW only want GW stuff being used in their games, fair enough, but why are other games also manufacturer locked? They'll be free to have their own approach unless GW has insisted on it as a blanket rule across the whole event?

For the record this has nothing to do with Warlord Games. GW and a couple local retailers are running the event and the GW manager and the two other store owners arrived at this policy for their event. It's obviously aimed at keeping non-GW parts out of the games there, but has had an inadvertent chilling effect. There's also a prohibition on electronic rules at the event even though the manufacturers of the games that will be played sell ebooks of their rules. This same convention in question also banned X-Wing from being played there.

Basically it's a handful of small retailers and one GW manager trying to put the genie back in the bottle in terms of the internet being both a means of letting people know about all sorts of miniatures and model kits and being an easy means of transferring rules information through electronic rulebooks.

Warlord is not in any way involved except through any involvement they might have through the local retailer who sells their product. I have no idea what their current convention support approach looks like.

There's actually a surprising amount of gaming going on in the middle of nowhere across the prairie provinces of Canada, but getting gamers to actually come out to public events and meet one another has always been an uphill battle. Store politics and policies like this have contributed to the obfuscation of the gaming scene going back decades. Fortunately the internet/social media has finally started to change things and it is now very easy to find local opponents without the involvement of the local store interests.

This has nothing to do with GW as a whole except for how the closest GW store manager happens to be working with a couple other store owners for an event where they dictate what can and can't happen there down to not mixing miniatures with rules made by other companies. The GW store sells 40k and AoS, one other store sells Bolt Action and one other store sells all three as well as Flames of War and other stuff. So it makes sense that they want to be the source for those games and don't want people who are there to find out about miniature gaming to know they can a) use whatever miniatures they want with whatever rules they want, b) that rules can be had in electronic formats and that c) you can even get miniatures on the internet and there are all sorts of companies that make them.

Their self interest here makes sense, it's just laughable and out of touch given that it's 2017 and not 1997.

-

 frozenwastes wrote:

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I mean within the convention. GW only want GW stuff being used in their games, fair enough, but why are other games also manufacturer locked? They'll be free to have their own approach unless GW has insisted on it as a blanket rule across the whole event?

For the record this has nothing to do with Warlord Games. GW and a couple local retailers are running the event and the GW manager and the two other store owners arrived at this policy for their event. It's obviously aimed at keeping non-GW parts out of the games there, but has had an inadvertent chilling effect. There's also a prohibition on electronic rules at the event even though the manufacturers of the games that will be played sell ebooks of their rules. This same convention in question also banned X-Wing from being played there.

Basically it's a handful of small retailers and one GW manager trying to put the genie back in the bottle in terms of the internet being both a means of letting people know about all sorts of miniatures and model kits and being an easy means of transferring rules information through electronic rulebooks.

Warlord is not in any way involved except through any involvement they might have through the local retailer who sells their product. I have no idea what their current convention support approach looks like.

There's actually a surprising amount of gaming going on in the middle of nowhere across the prairie provinces of Canada, but getting gamers to actually come out to public events and meet one another has always been an uphill battle. Store politics and policies like this have contributed to the obfuscation of the gaming scene going back decades. Fortunately the internet/social media has finally started to change things and it is now very easy to find local opponents without the involvement of the local store interests.

This has nothing to do with GW as a whole except for how the closest GW store manager happens to be working with a couple other store owners for an event where they dictate what can and can't happen there down to not mixing miniatures with rules made by other companies. The GW store sells 40k and AoS, one other store sells Bolt Action and one other store sells all three as well as Flames of War and other stuff. So it makes sense that they want to be the source for those games and don't want people who are there to find out about miniature gaming to know they can a) use whatever miniatures they want with whatever rules they want, b) that rules can be had in electronic formats and that c) you can even get miniatures on the internet and there are all sorts of companies that make them.

Their self interest here makes sense, it's just laughable and out of touch given that it's 2017 and not 1997.

-

You're mostly right, but I wouldn't want to play against KoW fillers if I was playing WHFB, and I generally hate most non-GW models in 40K, including the plastic-toy-like IK replacement by dreamforge, etc.

It just breaks the setting, like those pink armies with butterflies on them.

That's like... your opinion dude.

There should never ever be a strict rule to demand a Ruleset to only being played with the ruleset's designers company's miniatures. Never ever.

morgoth wrote:


You're mostly right, but I wouldn't want to play against KoW fillers if I was playing WHFB, and I generally hate most non-GW models in 40K, including the plastic-toy-like IK replacement by dreamforge, etc.

It just breaks the setting, like those pink armies with butterflies on them.

Wow really? So if someone had a fantastic looking painted converted army with a mix of GW and non-GW parts you wouldn't play them?

That's not what he said.

Even GW tournaments at Hq were permissive of using bits from elsewhere.

 FabricatorGeneralMike wrote:

morgoth wrote:


You're mostly right, but I wouldn't want to play against KoW fillers if I was playing WHFB, and I generally hate most non-GW models in 40K, including the plastic-toy-like IK replacement by dreamforge, etc.

It just breaks the setting, like those pink armies with butterflies on them.

Wow really? So if someone had a fantastic looking painted converted army with a mix of GW and non-GW parts you wouldn't play them?

Actually, I would love to play them if they have non-GW parts that fit perfectly in the GW universe, I even own alternative sculpts which I love - but I picked them because they look awesome and fit perfectly in the existing GW product aesthetics (they also cost 2x the price of the GW minis...).

What I really profoundly dislike is when people get models that simply don't fit in the existing setting, even more so when it's obvious they did it for money saving reasons (like the Dreamforge Leviathan).

I, for one, support Event Organizers who try to ensure everyone has a great time in the fictional universe of their choice.

morgoth wrote:


You're mostly right, but I wouldn't want to play against KoW fillers if I was playing WHFB, and I generally hate most non-GW models in 40K, including the plastic-toy-like IK replacement by dreamforge, etc.

It just breaks the setting, like those pink armies with butterflies on them.

This is the problem with the hobby these days, people believe it's the hhhhobby.

My KoW armies are a nice mix of GW, Mantic and half a dozen other company's models. I can pick the figures that suit the stats and I like the look of most. So much freedom.

This ridiculous culture of "rules writer's models only" leads to poor rules that rapidly become unbalanced as new figures are released to sell them.

Also, Morgoth, you realise some companies just make rules and not figures? I guess we're meant to play them with counters.

#sigh

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

morgoth wrote:


You're mostly right, but I wouldn't want to play against KoW fillers if I was playing WHFB, and I generally hate most non-GW models in 40K, including the plastic-toy-like IK replacement by dreamforge, etc.

It just breaks the setting, like those pink armies with butterflies on them.

This is the problem with the hobby these days, people believe it's the hhhhobby.

My KoW armies are a nice mix of GW, Mantic and half a dozen other company's models. I can pick the figures that suit the stats and I like the look of most. So much freedom.

This ridiculous culture of "rules writer's models only" leads to poor rules that rapidly become unbalanced as new figures are released to sell them.

Also, Morgoth, you realise some companies just make rules and not figures? I guess we're meant to play them with counters.

#sigh

Good for you, it's not like bringing in non-Mantic models doesn't improve things anyway.

There's no ridiculous culture, WHFB and 40K go with a setting, with a universe which has clearly defined visual aesthetics.

I, and most people I know who have taken interest in 40K or WHFB, like the universe as it was defined.

You can't expect me to want to play against your little ponies or half-LoTR half-WHFB half-cheap fantasy army just because I would like to play a game of WHFB.


The companies you mention don't have a universe defined, so you can't really break the coherency by bringing anything.

But clearly, you do realize 40K has way more than just rules, it's a whole big package and people who like any parts of this package can have fun with people who like any other part of this package so long as everyone respects the package.

What's not to like about that?

So you wouldn't play against old armies than? Armies that do not fit the powerporn fantasy of 2017? Like 80s miniatures?

But clearly, you do realize 40K has way more than just rules, it's a whole big package and people who like any parts of this package can have fun with people who like any other part of this package so long as everyone respects the package.

What's not to like about that?

Replace 'package' with 'trap' and you might begin to understand. It's more about keeping you inside GW's ecosystem and away from anything else, than about fulfilling your every gaming need.

What makes it ironic is that Dreamforge's aesthetic should just scratch the surface of the variation of guard regiments suggested by the fluff in the 'package'. I remember 3rd ed mentions of feudal/medieval worlds, which should alllow you to stick a rifle in the hands of a Perry or Fireforge plastic figure. And what about the tiny handful of alternate guard miniatures (struggling against the Cadian monoculture) like Valhallans or Steel Legion? Do appropriate proxies from WWI - WWII ranges totally ruin that 40K aesthetic?