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.

 Brother Castor wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
In 2019; when did you think?

Okay then, which month

I don't care. it'll come when it comes. In the meantime, if you think of something that you think GW really ought to know, uk.custserv@gwplc.com

I've nothing urgent to tell them but wasn't around for the last one so intrigued to see what they ask.

Does anybody when the survey will take place? I really want to participate.

Based on the way these two discussions have gone thus far, I think I'm going to have add a request for new Inceptor/Suppressor sculpts that allow for those models to be modeled standing, rather than on flying bases in a way that looks natural, and without any requirement for remodeling. I know it's a near certainty that nothing could possibly come of such a request, but I really do feel that these floaty bois are some of the worst things to come out of the design studio since the taurox, and I feel like I really do have to mention it to them.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Based on the way these two discussions have gone thus far, I think I'm going to have add a request for new Inceptor/Suppressor sculpts that allow for those models to be modeled standing, rather than on flying bases in a way that looks natural, and without any requirement for remodeling. I know it's a near certainty that nothing could possibly come of such a request, but I really do feel that these floaty bois are some of the worst things to come out of the design studio since the taurox, and I feel like I really do have to mention it to them.

No kidding. That argument about modeling for advantage reminds me of the old Little Rascals fight (see 4:20 - 4:50)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8DPjFapdVA

It would be awesome if GW would make standing/landed versions of their inceptors and anything else that would work just as well sans the teetering flying base method.
Be happy for 'em to do that for the spindly winged sigmarine flyers, too, for that matter.

The date has just been announced - April 15th.

They're expecting everyone to be too busy watching Game of Thrones to fill in the survey!

Those dastardly rascals!!!

edit: whoops way too old comment to be of relevance

Time to beg and plead for a limited-time release of Bretonnia again.

Gawd just let me fix the mistake of selling everything I owned before they were squatted!

I'd love it to death if GW would do some runs of older plastic kits, I wouldn't even care if it was direct online only.

Same as last year for me: I want WHF back as a going concern, decoupled from Age of Sigmar, which should have been in its own alternate reality from day one. Retcon away the version of the End Times they sharted out to kill off WHFB, and get a wee team going at Specialist Games to do a new *proper* Mordheim(ie rules and setting), to be followed up if successful in the same way they're planning to expand N17; pick out other times and places on the world that fit the format and explore those in similar detail. Warmaster would be cool to see again as well.

It's almost certainly just pishing into the wind, but anything else I'd like them to do is even less likely so why not eh.

Im gonna request both new plastic guard regiments, and a new non sigmar worshipping Human order faction in AoS (basednoff Duncans “Solakian spearmen” conversion. I'll also bring up how GW should have a copyright on “Solkan” an old lore god of order...

Other things I want a new lizardmen, fimir, and a Hun style destruction human faction AoS side.

40K side I want more xenos stuff, and more decent prices on blackstone fortress expansions.

et voila

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/04/15/apr-15-big-community-survey-2019gw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-1/

Given my feedback.

Asked for tweaks to help curb Soup Abuse. It’s not that I particularly begrudge the classic examples (Loyal 32 type stuff), so much that it’s a trick only one faction can do, Imperium. I suggested tweaks to how they generate CP, and/or who can use them.

I also asked for BSF to keep to the shadowy regions of 40k lore, and to use that to demonstrate more Xenos species, specifically referencing those glimpsed in this pic.



20 years ago they teased me with that. Now it’s time for pay-off

Remember the Tomb Kings!!!

Also one thing of note - under AoS the Beastclaw Raiders and Gutbusters are listed under a single "Ogors" segment - strong suggestion there that they will get a combined tome

 Overread wrote:
Remember the Tomb Kings!!!

Yeah, I mentioned that and asked why it would be that Made to Order can't be expanded to plastic kits as well.

fairly similar,

asked for reasons to take a 'pure' faction in matched play (so either bonuses for that or removal of reasons to have the whole imperium turn up at every battle to supply command points etc)

more exploration of deep background(eg Necromunda, BSF) etc

and I know the majority will disagree but more crazy random nonsense for the orks, but this time the reward (sometimes) needs to balance the risk

Welp, did my part for the plastic Aspects.

I asked for dropper bottle paints and a digital subscription-based service for a single source for all rules.

As announced it was a little too focused on stuff that isn't on my mind, really. But...

Tomb Kings got their due mention (three times ), along with more equipment options in kits and rules, so I got my say well enough.

Sterling191 wrote:
Welp, did my part for the plastic Aspects.

Ditto.

Done the survey - its a lot more guided than last time. Putin the typical complaint that they cost too much, and I feel like I’ve really learned that I like games like Blackstone Fortress and Kill Team moreso than the all-out rumble that is 40K (I like my vehicles, but I wish 40K was downsized to 2E levels of models. Modern 40K has become Apocalypse levels of absurdity)

Also, asked, nay begged, for Epic.

Specifically army selection from 2nd Ed (Company Card, 0-5 Support, 1 Special), but Unit profiles from Epic Armageddon (Weapons with dual profile for infantry and vehicles).

2nd Ed army selection really helps sell the scale of the game, in that we’re largely picking from ‘background compliant’ army structure, with the Support Cards giving flexibility. Lovely method, and a great deal of fun.

Done, feel they needed some more comment sections.
My end comment ended up being a bit long >.< as I was trying to give comments on like 10 things in a little space.

The only thing I didn't like in the survey was when they broke the lore segments for codex/battletomes down into rankings.

Asking if history, stories, unit details, maps and one other thing to be ranked in importance is a bit like being asked to rank which is more important in a trilogy or even single story.

Sure the beginning might not be the most exciting thing, but its critical to the rest of the parts working. For me the lore works like that - sure maps might not be as important as, say, a story; but the maps make the story work and give grounding on where its happening in the world; they let you track elements of the history which in turn influences how you can read the stories and all that ties into the unit information etc...



A few more wordy bits would have been nice, but I think with this one they wanted a faster result (more things that were tickbox) so that they coudl see that they were mostly on the right track. Lets not forget they are more open to user feedback in general tahn ever before (they are engaging directly with their market now at a higher level than just the shop staff)

Completed it. Didn't like how leading it was, and how some questions had the term collect/collector/collection in them, as though we as gamers just collect models! I doubt anything I said in the few boxes you could say something in will make a difference. It will all fall on deaf ears, because I don't partake in buying their latest (overpriced) models every week, nor playing their latest games, bar 40k 8th - everything else I play is from the 90s, i.e. Space Hulk, and Warhammer Quest.

They seem only interested in kids with bank accounts of rich mummy and daddy, tournament players, and those who simply collect models to wave their manhoods around, anyone else is an afterthought...

Well goody, I got halfway through and it crashed and booted me back to the beginning. FFS.

EDIT: And now it's crashed on the final page. Eh, feth it, I wouldn't have won anyway and it's not like they're actually going to listen to entreaties to bring back WHF.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Well goody, I got halfway through and it crashed and booted me back to the beginning. FFS.

Same thing just happened to me.

I participated. It was longer than I was expecting and was a bit more leading than I would have liked. I tried to keep my responses brief since it didn't seem like the survey wanted anything more than a couple of lines of text.

I grumbled about the price a bit especially with the bundles being the exact same cost of its component parts. Why even bother having bundle options if it is the same price anyways?

I complained about the prices, asked for a plastic varghulf and a WH underworlds seraphon team.