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.

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

Any event that mandates you follow rules that were released after the list submission deadline is just silly.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
The London GT, the second largest Warhammer event in the world, and the largest in Europe, is in May, list submission is final at the end of April.

This could very well impact that event, particularly if it comes out after the deadline for list submission but before the event...

Lol. That would be awful. Hilarious too if there's a rule put in place like the commander battlesuit rule for tau but for other armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Byte wrote:
I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

Ugh. That would suck. I suppose if they actually got things out in March like they said they would you'd have a couple weeks to scramble to come up with something.

Hopefully event organizers are understanding and put in a bit of a delay for when changes like that go into effect.

 Chamberlain wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
The London GT, the second largest Warhammer event in the world, and the largest in Europe, is in May, list submission is final at the end of April.

This could very well impact that event, particularly if it comes out after the deadline for list submission but before the event...

Lol. That would be awful. Hilarious too if there's a rule put in place like the commander battlesuit rule for tau but for other armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Byte wrote:
I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

Ugh. That would suck. I suppose if they actually got things out in March like they said they would you'd have a couple weeks to scramble to come up with something.

Hopefully event organizers are understanding and put in a bit of a delay for when changes like that go into effect.

While I hate unimaginative spam armies, I would still feel worse if the nerf wasn't a commander style nerf, but a direct Hive Tyrant nerf that didn't effect points.
It would suck a little to base your list around something, and then for that something to be completely changed after you submitted your list, but in such a way your list was still legal.

I'll likely be fine unless they do in fact repoint guardsmen or mess with allies, but given I have to ensure everything is painted to a high standard, I'm nervous about changes in April forcing me to make suprise changes that could lead to changes in models and thus paint jobs.

Thanks guys, Ill adapt if the unthinkable happens lol. 5 wonderfully painted Flyrants. However, I have got to play them for years.

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

 Byte wrote:
Thanks guys, Ill adapt if the unthinkable happens lol. 5 wonderfully painted Flyrants. However, I have got to play them for years.

Congratulations on finding a event that meets you rigorous standard for disciplinary action. Hope you don't get flogged for any transgressions.

 quickfuze wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

Yeah, screw the guy with models that are honestly probably painted better than most people's here!

 quickfuze wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

THat's pretty rude, considering it wasn't an issue for most people until Adepticon. Also, broken is a harsh word. Efficient and 'needing adjustment' probably, but it's not broken.

I also have an even on April 14th and depending on the FAQ could ruin my nid list.

I do have a secondary list ready just in case that happens though.

If they just limit us to one flyrant per detachment I'm good, if they nerf points I'm using the other list.

How and when did this thread get so hostile? Jeez guys, it's just a game, balance is balance and the way we play is up to the people playing on their own time. Casual and competitive games are very different things so let's all just chill and let people play how we want. Balance is good, washed out is bad, but GW are never going to wash the game out, look at all the codexes they're producing. But they seem to be trying to give everyone a more balanced experience, which is all we can really ask for in a game with so many factions and units.

Can we go back to talking about wish listing changes or something?

quickfuze wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

Wow man. Quality input. Because I foresaw some clowns would play Flyrant spam and make Adepticon sad.

Crimson Devil wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Thanks guys, Ill adapt if the unthinkable happens lol. 5 wonderfully painted Flyrants. However, I have got to play them for years.

Congratulations on finding a event that meets you rigorous standard for disciplinary action. Hope you don't get flogged for any transgressions.

Thanks?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

Yeah, screw the guy with models that are honestly probably painted better than most people's here!

They do look sweet, thank you.

Carnikang wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

THat's pretty rude, considering it wasn't an issue for most people until Adepticon. Also, broken is a harsh word. Efficient and 'needing adjustment' probably, but it's not broken.

Agreed, I played anti-meta and now its "meta". Try being me. Thank you for looking out. "Whack-a-mole" syndrome out of control right now.

Neronoxx wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
So, show of hands, who is actually impacted by this delay? Were there lists that you are playing that you might not after the FAQ? Are there opponents among your local community that are playing the type of list against you that might get errata'd here? Is there an upcoming even you are planning an army/painting project and this delay is actually impacting you in terms of getting and painting an army?

I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

No sympathy. You know it's broken and you know you can expect a nerf based on the Tau precedent. I would suggest building another list.

Rude af, go somewhere else please?

Agreed, not a reasonable response. Thank you.

I'm now starting to see the problem with a delay like this. Everyone thought anything they needed to change would be known in March and now it's going to be some other time in the future. So all the event organizers who booked space/rented halls and took registration fees for their event have players that are in a state of uncertainty about what the rules for the event might be. And some will only have a very short time to adapt.

At least if it was done on the last day of March you'd have a couple weeks for the events in mid April.

Is GW going to put an "effective date" on the FAQ to give some people breathing room? Magic does this with their banned and restricted announcements. Changes to Modern, for example, didn't go into effect until the week after a major upcoming event. They actually stuck to their schedule though.

 Chamberlain wrote:
I'm now starting to see the problem with a delay like this. Everyone thought anything they needed to change would be known in March and now it's going to be some other time in the future. So all the event organizers who booked space/rented halls and took registration fees for their event have players that are in a state of uncertainty about what the rules for the event might be. And some will only have a very short time to adapt.

At least if it was done on the last day of March you'd have a couple weeks for the events in mid April.

Is GW going to put an "effective date" on the FAQ to give some people breathing room? Magic does this with their banned and restricted announcements. Changes to Modern, for example, didn't go into effect until the week after a major upcoming event. They actually stuck to their schedule though.

I think they would, if they knew exactly what their workload is.
Much of the FAQ writing workload seems hard to approximate. It could be 5000 responses + tournament results + testing, or 12, million responses plus the above.

Reason why I'm okay with being patient and it taking longer

 Chamberlain wrote:
I'm now starting to see the problem with a delay like this. Everyone thought anything they needed to change would be known in March and now it's going to be some other time in the future. So all the event organizers who booked space/rented halls and took registration fees for their event have players that are in a state of uncertainty about what the rules for the event might be. And some will only have a very short time to adapt.

At least if it was done on the last day of March you'd have a couple weeks for the events in mid April.

Is GW going to put an "effective date" on the FAQ to give some people breathing room? Magic does this with their banned and restricted announcements. Changes to Modern, for example, didn't go into effect until the week after a major upcoming event. They actually stuck to their schedule though.

Check with your TO for the event. They probably already have a cut off date for new codexes and FAQs.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
I'm now starting to see the problem with a delay like this. Everyone thought anything they needed to change would be known in March and now it's going to be some other time in the future. So all the event organizers who booked space/rented halls and took registration fees for their event have players that are in a state of uncertainty about what the rules for the event might be. And some will only have a very short time to adapt.

At least if it was done on the last day of March you'd have a couple weeks for the events in mid April.

Is GW going to put an "effective date" on the FAQ to give some people breathing room? Magic does this with their banned and restricted announcements. Changes to Modern, for example, didn't go into effect until the week after a major upcoming event. They actually stuck to their schedule though.

Check with your TO for the event. They probably already have a cut off date for new codexes and FAQs.

Yeah, adepticon wouldn't of been using the FAQ even if it had come out in March. Most large tournaments have a 30 day moratorium on new rules.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
The London GT, the second largest Warhammer event in the world, and the largest in Europe, is in May, list submission is final at the end of April.

This could very well impact that event, particularly if it comes out after the deadline for list submission but before the event...

Lol. That would be awful. Hilarious too if there's a rule put in place like the commander battlesuit rule for tau but for other armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Byte wrote:
I have an event Apr 15th. A Flyrant nerf would invalidate my army.

Ugh. That would suck. I suppose if they actually got things out in March like they said they would you'd have a couple weeks to scramble to come up with something.

Hopefully event organizers are understanding and put in a bit of a delay for when changes like that go into effect.

While I hate unimaginative spam armies, I would still feel worse if the nerf wasn't a commander style nerf, but a direct Hive Tyrant nerf that didn't effect points.
It would suck a little to base your list around something, and then for that something to be completely changed after you submitted your list, but in such a way your list was still legal.

I'll likely be fine unless they do in fact repoint guardsmen or mess with allies, but given I have to ensure everything is painted to a high standard, I'm nervous about changes in April forcing me to make suprise changes that could lead to changes in models and thus paint jobs.

Yeah, I emailed the LGT team the day after the delay announcement raising the potential concern this delay could have.

Zach responded saying he understands the potential concerns but doesn’t think it is a serious risk at this point. As a lead play tester they apparently drafted the deadlines around knowledge of these things.

He did also say

“Should there be an unforeseen delay with release of the FAQ then I will consider revising the LGT deadlines.”

So, while there is a possibility of it getting delayed and delayed and delayed, we should hopefully see the LGT deadlines get revised if required.

I do have sympathy for people like Byte who suddenly find a unit they have maxed out on is suddenly gutted in effectiveness just before a tournament.

HOWEVER
What were you expecting? This isn't the old days any more when an OP unit remains OP for X years until the next codex rolls around - you knew the unit you were spamming was OP, and rolled the dice to maximise on it before an FAQ came around.

People these days who spam OP units must expect their composition and strategy to have the shelf life of an FAQ window.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yeah, screw the guy with models that are honestly probably painted better than most people's here!

What, being a good painter entitles you to special consideration now? Do we need to start prefacing our posts with photos of our models and/or any painting awards we might have gotten just so you know we're good enough?

So, figure the FAQ is going to be this week or? Right after Adepticon would have been last Saturday, so...

Sometimes I feel bad when a FAQ nerf someone, other times it's well deserved. Other times I have mixed feelings.

Obviously broken things need to be fixed. If even having one of something is an obvious "auto include" it needs the nerf bat.

If one of something isn't too bad, but a TFG taking 6 of them ruins the game, minor points adjustment or limitations isn't going to ruin it for the casual gamer that only took one anyway.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yeah, screw the guy with models that are honestly probably painted better than most people's here!

What, being a good painter entitles you to special consideration now? Do we need to start prefacing our posts with photos of our models and/or any painting awards we might have gotten just so you know we're good enough?

I'm glad I'm not the only person wondering what the quality of someone's paint job had to do with the issue of FAQs and army composition.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yeah, screw the guy with models that are honestly probably painted better than most people's here!

What, being a good painter entitles you to special consideration now? Do we need to start prefacing our posts with photos of our models and/or any painting awards we might have gotten just so you know we're good enough?

I'm glad I'm not the only person wondering what the quality of someone's paint job had to do with the issue of FAQs and army composition.

Guy said he was going to tournaments. In tournaments you can bet your ass the other people will also bring their waac lists. You don't go to have fun, you go into a battlefield of rules lawyers and half-inch-debaters. You better be prepared. As long as the FAQ is not out, he is entitled to play all his flyrants.

As for the painting stuff, it is important - especially nowdays- to remember that warhammer is more than the strategic part of a battle. It used to be so that well painted armies actually received extra victory points in tournaments. I feel that nowdays people go around discussing the FAQ and the nerfs and the balance, and they completely skip the biggest part of the hobby because of it. The guy bought 5 flyrants and spent the effort and time to paint them nicely. He is obviously affected multiple ways if GW decides to change their ruleset every 3 months (ie decide to make Flyrants 0-1 per detachment like the commanders). Not only due rules/play wise, but also because it could be that he is stripped off all the effort and time he spent in case he now has to either shelf his flyrants or buy more troops to make them playable again. Warhammer is not a computer game, where you get to restart with new units 5 mins later. It takes money and effort and time, storage space and transportation.

Bottom line:

1. GW should playtest more.
2. Guy is allowed to bring a -for the moment- legal list to a tournament, even if the list is waac. People who also go to the same tournament will bring their own waac too.
3. It is not ok for people to go apeshit on someone because they want to play a strong list at the tournament.
4. More aspects than plain rules matter to the hobby. I would gladly accept to play against 7 excellently painted flyrants, even if I knew I would probably lose. I would probably not accept to play against a guy who brings 7 empty bases and says "ok proxy flyrants". That's because I can see and appreciate the effort spent by the first dude, and I know there's more in his list than just his desire to win.
5. GW should playtest more. Before they release armies.

 Chamberlain wrote:
Lol. That would be awful. Hilarious too if there's a rule put in place like the commander battlesuit rule for tau but for other armies.

Yeah, my army with three chapter masters will be totally invalidated.

Oh wait

 Tiberius501 wrote:
washed out is bad, but GW are never going to wash the game out

I take you never took a look at last three DW rule sets. Each one worse and blander than the last, including especially laughable Index section in 8th.

I'd love for the 8th edition Codex DW to prove me wrong, but that's not going to happen unless they finally give the army to someone other than Kelly/Cruddace wunderteam.

 MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:
People these days who spam OP units must expect their composition and strategy to have the shelf life of an FAQ window.

Correction - it's not OP stuff that gets nerfed these days. It's what people whine most often about. See SM guns nerf, rather dumb one as it affected things that now have superior Tau/Eldar equivalents, for cheaper, just because xeno players were upset the SM Codex was slightly better than their Index stuff (and now that their Codex stuff is considerably superior, the change of course wasn't reversed, because reasons). Ditto for dumb Commissar nerf that came after the real problematic unit, conscripts, was virtually deleted from the Codex. Was the change reverted after Tyranids, Eldar, Tau, and now Dark Eldar got even better, free, unkillable equivalents of their own? Nope, because again, the change wasn't about balance, it was about silencing loud whining noises. Imperial soups can still finagle fearless blobs if they want in the number of ways, the only ones that were really affected were poor non-souping IG players who were left with for all intents and purposes removal (I can't call making unit actively harming and never helping owning player otherwise) of iconic 40K unit from the game...

At this point, I have no pitty for someone forced to shelf models because GW nerfed them.

GW brought the hammer down on Storm Ravens, Brimstones, Assaultcannon razorbacks and more before Codex:Tyranids was even released. If you bought, build and painted seven flyrants to do well in 8th, you must have done so with the knowledge that the army might be invalidated within three to six months.

The quality of a paint job is also utterly irrelevant to the game. I have played against awesome people with marines of the Grey Chapter and I have played against TFGs with armies that would make a golden daemon winner cry in envy.
I also have one friend how sells his entire army and builds up and paints a new one every two or three months or so. He is a very talented and very fast painter, so he could simply switch to whatever the flavor of the month is at the drop of a hat. Luckily he is just constantly selling his armies because he gets bored with them and wants to play something different.
Plus selling fully painted armies every few month is a great way to earn hobby money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irbis wrote:
Correction - it's not OP stuff that gets nerfed these days. It's what people whine most often about. See SM guns nerf, rather dumb one as it affected things that now have superior Tau/Eldar equivalents, for cheaper, just because xeno players were upset the SM Codex was slightly better than their Index stuff (and now that their Codex stuff is considerably superior, the change of course wasn't reversed, because reasons). Ditto for dumb Commissar nerf that came after the real problematic unit, conscripts, was virtually deleted from the Codex. Was the change reverted after Tyranids, Eldar, Tau, and now Dark Eldar got even better, free, unkillable equivalents of their own? Nope, because again, the change wasn't about balance, it was about silencing loud whining noises. Imperial soups can still finagle fearless blobs if they want in the number of ways, the only ones that were really affected were poor non-souping IG players who were left with for all intents and purposes removal (I can't call making unit actively harming and never helping owning player otherwise) of iconic 40K unit from the game...

The real problem child of 8th so far has been the ally system, so as long as that remains unchanged, pure imperial and chaos armies will suffer when certain units become to powerful when played as part of a soup army.
You cannot have the best screen in the game combined with the best guns in the game and the best support character in the game in one army, because that army is going to be the best army in the game.

You will always get side effects when trying to cure symptoms instead of rooting out the problem.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yeah, screw the guy with models that are honestly probably painted better than most people's here!

What, being a good painter entitles you to special consideration now? Do we need to start prefacing our posts with photos of our models and/or any painting awards we might have gotten just so you know we're good enough?

I'm glad I'm not the only person wondering what the quality of someone's paint job had to do with the issue of FAQs and army composition.

Guy said he was going to tournaments. In tournaments you can bet your ass the other people will also bring their waac lists. You don't go to have fun, you go into a battlefield of rules lawyers and half-inch-debaters. You better be prepared. As long as the FAQ is not out, he is entitled to play all his flyrants.

As for the painting stuff, it is important - especially nowdays- to remember that warhammer is more than the strategic part of a battle. It used to be so that well painted armies actually received extra victory points in tournaments. I feel that nowdays people go around discussing the FAQ and the nerfs and the balance, and they completely skip the biggest part of the hobby because of it. The guy bought 5 flyrants and spent the effort and time to paint them nicely. He is obviously affected multiple ways if GW decides to change their ruleset every 3 months (ie decide to make Flyrants 0-1 per detachment like the commanders). Not only due rules/play wise, but also because it could be that he is stripped off all the effort and time he spent in case he now has to either shelf his flyrants or buy more troops to make them playable again. Warhammer is not a computer game, where you get to restart with new units 5 mins later. It takes money and effort and time, storage space and transportation.

Bottom line:

1. GW should playtest more.
2. Guy is allowed to bring a -for the moment- legal list to a tournament, even if the list is waac. People who also go to the same tournament will bring their own waac too.
3. It is not ok for people to go apeshit on someone because they want to play a strong list at the tournament.
4. More aspects than plain rules matter to the hobby. I would gladly accept to play against 7 excellently painted flyrants, even if I knew I would probably lose. I would probably not accept to play against a guy who brings 7 empty bases and says "ok proxy flyrants". That's because I can see and appreciate the effort spent by the first dude, and I know there's more in his list than just his desire to win.
5. GW should playtest more. Before they release armies.

Nothing you just said has anything to do with what Aggamemnon and I were actually responding about.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, you just may want to re-read the quote chain and its actual context.

You guys should really try building a Tau list on Battlescribe before you say the Tau nerf is something good to spread to other armies. Build a farsight brigade. Build 3 Battalions of any sept besides T'au. Now apply the same nerf to all HQs. Make 2-3 SoB battalions. Make a non-Mars admech Brigade. Count how many non-stacking ability HQs you have to use as a tax. Oh and remember the ban is based on the keyword not the name of the unit. So if you want to play Space Wolves you can only have 1 Wolf Lord/Wolf Priest per Detachment. Edit: In b4 a commander stole my baby and Tau needed a nerf despite rarely placing well in tournaments

 Platuan4th wrote:


Nothing you just said has anything to do with what Aggamemnon and I were actually responding about.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, you just may want to re-read the quote chain and its actual context.

this has to do:

What, being a good painter entitles you to special consideration now?

I said that in previous years, well painted armies really got awarded extra victory points in tournaments, even official GW ones. And I agree to that. So yeah, if you are a good painter you should get special consideration. Because you promote the hobby better than others (me included).

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:


Nothing you just said has anything to do with what Aggamemnon and I were actually responding about.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, you just may want to re-read the quote chain and its actual context.

this has to do:

What, being a good painter entitles you to special consideration now?

I said that in previous years, well painted armies really got awarded extra victory points in tournaments, even official GW ones. And I agree to that. So yeah, if you are a good painter you should get special consideration. Because you promote the hobby better than others (me included).

Yeah, I was around for those years. But that's not really special consideration, just part(or not these days) of the event and still isn't addressing the actual thing that Slayer-Fan was saying.

What Aggamemnon is saying as special consideration is more akin to those stupid "painted armies get Preferred Enemy against unpainted" type rules. Or in this case that well painted armies should be allowed to ignore certain army build rules because they're well painted.

Edit: Or that being a good painter suddenly lends you more weight in a discussion about FAQs and army comp.

 Jidmah wrote:

The real problem child of 8th so far has been the ally system

2nd edition had endless issues when played competitively, but people abusing the Allies system was one of the reasons it was all but eliminated from the game from 3rd through 5th editions (multiple-FOC games were very rare). Was it hubris for them to reintroduce it, and then make matters worse in 8th edition? Devil only knows.