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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Gw has become better, but they've also decided on an absurd release schedule. It's really hard to playtest, edit, and release book after book after book. They're over extending their employees, but this is what we wan't isn't it? If the codexes weren't coming out at break neck speed people would be just as pissed for the opposite reason.

Usually, you would have a "plan" of how abilities and costing is to be figured out. Some guidelines on how to approach all factions.
Then the plan for the specific faction and what makes them different and unique.

I see things like flamer weapons "auto-hit" so they tend to price them more for those armies that have bad ballistic skill.
Bolter weapons both in Deathwatch and SM's in general have added bonuses due to their Codex rules, they should be priced with that considered.
Simple little rules or things to keep track of to ensure that no faction, squad, model, weapon gets too cheap or too expensive for what they do.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
...Gw has become better, but they've also decided on an absurd release schedule. It's really hard to playtest, edit, and release book after book after book. They're over extending their employees, but this is what we wan't isn't it? If the codexes weren't coming out at break neck speed people would be just as pissed for the opposite reason...

Most games a) don't burn their core rulebook and re-release it every 2-4 years, b) partially update armies instead of burning their "codex" and re-releasing it every 2-4 years, and c) release stuff for everyone all at once. GW's written themselves into a corner with the "Codex" release model that forces them to be kind of crappy at writing the rules/balancing the game.

 Talizvar wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Gw has become better, but they've also decided on an absurd release schedule. It's really hard to playtest, edit, and release book after book after book. They're over extending their employees, but this is what we wan't isn't it? If the codexes weren't coming out at break neck speed people would be just as pissed for the opposite reason.

Usually, you would have a "plan" of how abilities and costing is to be figured out. Some guidelines on how to approach all factions.
Then the plan for the specific faction and what makes them different and unique.

I see things like flamer weapons "auto-hit" so they tend to price them more for those armies that have bad ballistic skill.
Bolter weapons both in Deathwatch and SM's in general have added bonuses due to their Codex rules, they should be priced with that considered.
Simple little rules or things to keep track of to ensure that no faction, squad, model, weapon gets too cheap or too expensive for what they do.

It's a bit more complex than that. Your Deathwatch example - adding points to those units right now would crush that army. Even with 2 point SS they're weren't taking over the game. The only time you get concerned about things like flamer cost is when every model in the unit can take it like GSC, but even then those units, while brutal, aren't destroying the game (which ties into army design).

There's also design philosophy. Just look at how stratagems are worded in the new books as compared to the old.

And then there's the overall balance of the army. Adeptus Mechanicus can D3+1 repair and repair the same vehicle twice, but Iron Hands cannot, because they also have a repair spell as well as other tough units and relics to consider.

There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

You can be happy with the rules or not. It doesn't matter, as long as your attention is focused on the game. You can sing and dance, you can complain, you can debate, whatever, as long as you are talking about a game with a meta-economy controlled by GW.

But don't talk about the company's marketing practices. Every year, they increase prices. The real world buying power of the average player has not increased in over 30 years, yet GW raises prices annually (often at a cost exceeding inflation.) They're getting rich by screwing everyone who buys their products.

The more attention players give the game, the less attention they give to their consumer relationship with the company. GW releases new models with OP rules to increase sales, then walk them back a year later so consumers need to buy more models. GW releases broken rules and never clarify so consumers will argue about them endlessly instead of discussing the problem with broken rules. GW actively undermines the competitive scene through factional power imbalances such that the best army is usually about whoever brought the fanciest models instead of the quality of the player. Nothing is proven, it's just an exercise in smart shopping.

These faults wouldn't matter so much if GW models were priced a little lower. As it stands, GW is similar to Godiva Chocolate, all these retail outlets meant to push overpriced luxury goods with little worth after the initial purchase. Players should not be paying more for that every year, they should be demanding price and rules stabilization - no new rules until GW fixes the problems with the old ones (call it the "Grey Knights" principle.) You shouldn't have to keep paying more for a broken product that doesn't serve other players very well.

That won't happen until people can stop complaining. Honestly, attitudes towards GW mean nothing outside online forums. The company uses points / rules to sell models, the way they do it actively dilutes the value of what is essentially a luxury good. You can talk about attitudes all you want, but there's a point where your opinion devolves into an expression of how much this system has screwed you recently. You can talk about individual personalities within GW all you want, but the only one who matters is Kevin Roundtree who decides how this circus will play out year after year. You can talk about individual releases all you want, but GW is a billion dollar company who makes its money off volume of sales.

They could care less about you individually, it helps to have you pissed off because that means you are still thinking about the game. In that way, one could credibly state "all talk about GW is positive," since it depresses awareness of just how bad their marketing has become.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
...Gw has become better, but they've also decided on an absurd release schedule. It's really hard to playtest, edit, and release book after book after book. They're over extending their employees, but this is what we wan't isn't it? If the codexes weren't coming out at break neck speed people would be just as pissed for the opposite reason...

Most games a) don't burn their core rulebook and re-release it every 2-4 years, b) partially update armies instead of burning their "codex" and re-releasing it every 2-4 years, and c) release stuff for everyone all at once. GW's written themselves into a corner with the "Codex" release model that forces them to be kind of crappy at writing the rules/balancing the game.

A lot of people were predicting re-releases of codexes as in just rewrites with nothing new this year. Obviously we got marines, but with a substantial "value-add". Models can't all be ready at the right times. It just is what it is and its better for models to have rules when they come out, isn't it? The manner of the supplements is potentially good for gamers, because they don't have to re-buy the supplement when the core SM book gets updated. Will it pan out like that? No idea. It could be we would see 9th before that's a thing.

The CSM book was a tragedy, but it exists for new players not the old -- points should have been in the PDF for previous owners.

A subscription model would solve a lot of problems for them and us, but it probably won't happen for a while yet (partially because people really like books).

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a bit more complex than that. Your Deathwatch example - adding points to those units right now would crush that army. Even with 2 point SS they're weren't taking over the game. The only time you get concerned about things like flamer cost is when every model in the unit can take it like GSC, but even then those units, while brutal, aren't destroying the game (which ties into army design).
There's also design philosophy. Just look at how stratagems are worded in the new books as compared to the old.
And then there's the overall balance of the army. Adeptus Mechanicus can D3+1 repair and repair the same vehicle twice, but Iron Hands cannot, because they also have a repair spell as well as other tough units and relics to consider.

It is actually THAT simple.
You do understand I was talking how some things ARE already being applied in Codex books now?

The flamer example I gave because I DO see the point cost difference applied in the books.
Heck, they give differing prices for plasma pistols and other weapons depending if it is a character or a joe-grunt using it: differing levels of capability.
My intent was they show some degree of awareness in this regard and just have to apply it more consistently and thoroughly.

Every time a stratagem is developed for a faction like that very good example of methods of repair do have to be taken into account.
This is where keywords play such an important role because it was the ability to cross-buff from one faction to another that created huge unanticipated outcomes that did break the game, that is where 6th and 7th went a bit off the rails.

 techsoldaten wrote:
There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

K.

The real world buying power of the average player has not increased in over 30 years, yet GW raises prices annually (often at a cost exceeding inflation.)

What does GW have to do with the lack of meaningful wage increases in the world?

GW releases new models with OP rules to increase sales, then walk them back a year later so consumers need to buy more models.

You mean like how they increased the points on the Executioner before the supplements came out? Or how buggies were modestly priced? I don't see GSC bikes and vehicles storming the scene, do you? Were eliminators dead hard when they came out? What about suppressors? What's the state of Venomcrawlers and CSM? I could go on...

GW releases broken rules and never clarify so consumers will argue about them endlessly instead of discussing the problem with broken rules

Never clarifies? Give an example of which ones that have been missed by the 2 week and semi-annual FAQs.

GW actively undermines the competitive scene through factional power imbalances such that the best army is usually about whoever brought the fanciest models instead of the quality of the player.

K, well, let's ask those players about that then?

overpriced luxury goods with little worth after the initial purchase.

Really? Little worth? For models that hold their value for decades? You should recgonize that worth is underpinned by the luxury bar set by GW.

demanding price and rules stabilization - no new rules until GW fixes the problems with the old ones (call it the "Grey Knights" principle.) You shouldn't have to keep paying more for a broken product that doesn't serve other players very well.

The first is the consequence of the world. You can ask. You might not receive. The second is being asked for often and is received on a far more regular basis than before. Is it perfect? No.

The company uses points / rules to sell models, the way they do it actively dilutes the value of what is essentially a luxury good. You can talk about attitudes all you want, but there's a point where your opinion devolves into an expression of how much this system has screwed you recently. You can talk about individual personalities within GW all you want, but the only one who matters is Kevin Roundtree who decides how this circus will play out year after year. You can talk about individual releases all you want, but GW is a billion dollar company who makes its money off volume of sales.

And these things are demonstrably false. Feeling burned by the CSM update taking second fiddle to Marines? I get that, but there's little reason to be absurd about everything to make that point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talizvar wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It's a bit more complex than that. Your Deathwatch example - adding points to those units right now would crush that army. Even with 2 point SS they're weren't taking over the game. The only time you get concerned about things like flamer cost is when every model in the unit can take it like GSC, but even then those units, while brutal, aren't destroying the game (which ties into army design).
There's also design philosophy. Just look at how stratagems are worded in the new books as compared to the old.
And then there's the overall balance of the army. Adeptus Mechanicus can D3+1 repair and repair the same vehicle twice, but Iron Hands cannot, because they also have a repair spell as well as other tough units and relics to consider.

It is actually THAT simple.
You do understand I was talking how some things ARE already being applied in Codex books now?

The flamer example I gave because I DO see the point cost difference applied in the books.
Heck, they give differing prices for plasma pistols and other weapons depending if it is a character or a joe-grunt using it: differing levels of capability.
My intent was they show some degree of awareness in this regard and just have to apply it more consistently and thoroughly.

Every time a stratagem is developed for a faction like that very good example of methods of repair do have to be taken into account.
This is where keywords play such an important role because it was the ability to cross-buff from one faction to another that created huge unanticipated outcomes that did break the game, that is where 6th and 7th went a bit off the rails.

Sure, I think they're getting better at it. Some things are still a little free-wheeling and others require a more delicate touch over hard and fast guidelines.

For most of us the issue is like was said before: It feels like Groundhog Day. They *don't learn* and keep making the same mistake year after year, edition after edition, and people continually make excuses for or give them a pass presumably because they feel mediocrity is "good enough" or like the models so much that they don't really care if they have to work the rules a bit to make them work better (or maybe they are lucky enough to be part of a group that doesn't mind house ruling or agreeing on things).

But there still remains the fact that we are paying a multi-million-pound company, with an international presence more money than we should (whether or not you feel it's justified, it's more than almost any other miniature manufacturer. There might be valid reasons i.e. the cost of maintaining stores, but it's still overpriced) for good models and probably the worst quality in rules (both from an actual rule design standpoint and quality as there are always tons of proofing errors or just poor wording that needs to be fixed), something that likely would never fly in any other product. That's the most frustrating part, is that it's gone well beyond can they and into the realm of "they don't want to" which makes it worse because it's baffling to have game designers who don't actually want to make a good game.

Wayniac wrote:
For most of us the issue is like was said before: It feels like Groundhog Day. They *don't learn* and keep making the same mistake year after year, edition after edition, and people continually make excuses for or give them a pass presumably because they feel mediocrity is "good enough" or like the models so much that they don't really care if they have to work the rules a bit to make them work better (or maybe they are lucky enough to be part of a group that doesn't mind house ruling or agreeing on things).

But there still remains the fact that we are paying a multi-million-pound company, with an international presence more money than we should (whether or not you feel it's justified, it's more than almost any other miniature manufacturer. There might be valid reasons i.e. the cost of maintaining stores, but it's still overpriced) for good models and probably the worst quality in rules (both from an actual rule design standpoint and quality as there are always tons of proofing errors or just poor wording that needs to be fixed), something that likely would never fly in any other product.

Fair points. I don't agree that they don't learn, however. The newest books are proof of that despite the perceived power levels. They are better and more carefully written.

Just look at how often explosions are now tied to unmodified rolls rather than subject to modifiers.

I think it is unfair to compare video games, unless those are mobile games, to w40k. It is really hard to spend as much money on a game. For 800$ one can get a laptop good enough to play a lot of games. Same money spend on w40k, may give an army with all the required books, but that is it.


also a language quesiton. Can passion in english be negative, or is there a different word used for ti then?

Karol wrote:
I think it is unfair to compare video games, unless those are mobile games, to w40k. It is really hard to spend as much money on a game. For 800$ one can get a laptop good enough to play a lot of games. Same money spend on w40k, may give an army with all the required books, but that is it.

An $800 laptop gets you nothing capable of playing any modern video game. Many popular video games also contain loot boxes or season passes. The cost of video gaming is pretty high compared to the models I had for 25 years still doing service and the new ones I have I expect to last just as long.

also a language quesiton. Can passion in english be negative, or is there a different word used for ti then?

It depends. One can have a passion for something negative, but to them they don't likely perceive it as negative.

An $800 laptop gets you nothing capable of playing any modern video game. Many popular video games also contain loot boxes or season passes. The cost of video gaming is pretty high compared to the models I had for 25 years still doing service and the new ones I have I expect to last just as long.

my sister got a tablet for half of that, 2 years ago, works fine, she can do anything with it. My step brother got a PC last year, for a bit over 900$ and he runs most games he likes on it all the time. So yeah maybe 800$ is not enough to play at best settings, but for us it is enough. 700$ right now doesn't even give an army with all the books needed to be played. And as far as loot boxs go, well w40k is full of those too, there is a yearly seson pass book too. Can't play the game without buying a new CA.

One can have a passion for something negative, but to them they don't likely perceive it as negative.

So passion as a word is considered something good. thanks for explaining.

Karol wrote:
700$ right now doesn't even give an army with all the books needed to be played. And as far as loot boxs go, well w40k is full of those too, there is a yearly seson pass book too. Can't play the game without buying a new CA.

Let's assume Primaris

CA - $35
Codex - $40
Supplement - $30
Primaris Start Collecting - $105 x 2 (assuming more expensive than current SC boxes)
ETB Redemptor - $40 x 2
Intercessors - $60
Invictor - $60 x 2
Librarian - $30
Captain - $35
Land Speeder - $35 x 3

That's $745 for 20 Infiltrators, 10 Intercessors, 6 Suppressors, 6 Eliminators, 2 Phobos Lts, Lib, Cpt, 3 Speeders, 2 Invictors, 2 Redepmtors at full retail price. That's damn near 2K points for a valid army. You can easily get all of this on eBay for 15% off (roughly $633).

Then you could say it's an average $50 a year in book refreshes. That laptop will be largely useless in 2 to 3 years.

So passion as a word is considered something good. thanks for explaining.

One can have a passion for murder or eating too much cake, so, not always good. So the determination of "good" is in the context of the situation and the observer.

That's $745 for 20 Infiltrators, 10 Intercessors, 6 Suppressors, 6 Eliminators, 2 Phobos Lts, Lib, Cpt, 3 Speeders, 2 Invictors, 2 Redepmtors at full retail price. That's damn near 2K points for a valid army. You can easily get all of this on eBay for 15% off (roughly $633).

and then you get to pay import tax, and 23% vat. And because the stuff costs more then a monthly salary here, the customs guys will open it 100% of time. Meaning you are paying more then 700$. But really am not going to argue about 10%. The difference is that a laptop or PC can be used for many things, and worse your watching movies on it. if you spend 600$ on a bad army, then paying 50$ per year to get updated rules sucks, specially when the updates don't fix a thing.

Then you could say it's an average $50 a year in book refreshes. That laptop will be largely useless in 2 to 3 years.

well good for you. I am using an 9 year old laptop right now, and I can tell you that is more useful then my army right now. more fun to use too.

One can have a passion for murder or eating too much cake, so, not always good. So the determination of "good" is in the context of the situation and the observer.

That is interesting. Always good to get to know new things about different stuff. The context thing decided by the observer is a very interesting thing.

It's a pleasure to be speaking again.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The real world buying power of the average player has not increased in over 30 years, yet GW raises prices annually (often at a cost exceeding inflation.)

What does GW have to do with the lack of meaningful wage increases in the world?

Models get more expensive every year. They're expensive as it is, eventually they will be overpriced. It relates to salary in that eventually GW will hit a ceiling (they may already be hitting it with some boxed sets.)

 Daedalus81 wrote:

GW releases new models with OP rules to increase sales, then walk them back a year later so consumers need to buy more models.

You mean like how they increased the points on the Executioner before the supplements came out? Or how buggies were modestly priced? I don't see GSC bikes and vehicles storming the scene, do you? Were eliminators dead hard when they came out? What about suppressors? What's the state of Venomcrawlers and CSM? I could go on...

I was thinking mostly about NuMarines, whose new rules fundamentally affect the mechanics of the game. Chaos' recent zenith was short lived.

But sure, there are exceptions to the OP factor. Just because something is not game changing does not mean it doesn't make another unit obsolete in terms of points efficiency.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

GW releases broken rules and never clarify so consumers will argue about them endlessly instead of discussing the problem with broken rules

Never clarifies? Give an example of which ones that have been missed by the 2 week and semi-annual FAQs.

Grey Knights. Necrons. Old Marines. Entire factions with expensive models made obsolete through the introduction of subsequent rules.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

GW actively undermines the competitive scene through factional power imbalances such that the best army is usually about whoever brought the fanciest models instead of the quality of the player.

K, well, let's ask those players about that then?

I'm not sure a poll is necessary. I'm taking about marketing strategies not attitudes towards the game.

Sure, there are some Nick Navarati types who can prevail through advanced strategies. They succeed at the larger tournaments. Look at the winning factions for smaller ones and you find a picture similar to what I described.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

overpriced luxury goods with little worth after the initial purchase.

Really? Little worth? For models that hold their value for decades? You should recgonize that worth is underpinned by the luxury bar set by GW.

If I buy a box of models from GW and try to resell it on eBay, the return I can expect will be 25% - 50% lower if it's shrink wrapped.

If I assemble and paint a model, the return I can expect is maybe 30% of MSRP.

There are plenty of things I have that I can't sell, there are no buyers.

The cost to build a decent army using one of the popular factions is $1,000+. That's a pretty high cost of entry for something that immediately declines in value.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

demanding price and rules stabilization - no new rules until GW fixes the problems with the old ones (call it the "Grey Knights" principle.) You shouldn't have to keep paying more for a broken product that doesn't serve other players very well.

The first is the consequence of the world. You can ask. You might not receive. The second is being asked for often and is received on a far more regular basis than before. Is it perfect? No.

Not sure I agree, but sure - maybe I ask for too much.

If prices stabilized for a few years, it would be cheaper to start playing the game. Maybe we could grow the community of players.

If rules stabilized for a few years, it would be easier to use the collections you already have. I'm not saying no new rules, I'm saying focus on balance.

Either way, there's a certain class of player who is skeptical about things like Psychic Awakening, Vigilus Ablaze, the Supplements, etc. What they add to the game leaves many factions further behind. There's a clear benefit to Space Marines right now, not really to other factions, and that's part of a cycle used to sell new models. While it's fine from the standpoint that GW is a business and can do what it wants, players should realize it's in their common interest to have some kind of stability in the game.

Going back to cost for a minute, let's say I spent $1500 on my Grey Knights army. Selling it right now would get me very little in return, the rules are so bad no one wants them.

If we're going to be asked to spend more and more relative to what we earn, it should be reasonable to ask that the game be maintained. Otherwise it has less objective value. GW is a business and we are consumers. Acting like our interests are immaterial is silly.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

The company uses points / rules to sell models, the way they do it actively dilutes the value of what is essentially a luxury good. You can talk about attitudes all you want, but there's a point where your opinion devolves into an expression of how much this system has screwed you recently. You can talk about individual personalities within GW all you want, but the only one who matters is Kevin Roundtree who decides how this circus will play out year after year. You can talk about individual releases all you want, but GW is a billion dollar company who makes its money off volume of sales.

And these things are demonstrably false. Feeling burned by the CSM update taking second fiddle to Marines? I get that, but there's little reason to be absurd about everything to make that point.

I'm not trying to be absurd, I'm looking at the situation objectively and thinking about who benefits. If I'm wrong, tell me how without arguing about the rules. Part of my argument is that the rules system is being used to keep you from becoming aware how worthless the original purchase is.

I've tried to lay out the case for depreciation above, and think I was pretty gentle. Let me know your thoughts.

There's a relationship between price hikes and inflation, essentially GW jacks the price above the rate of inflation to continue increasing their bottom line. Models aren't just more expensive year to year, they are moving up the scale in class of goods.

GW has described it's corporate mission as finding people willing to spend money on high quality models. I take them at their word and believe my final point there aligns with their mission exactly. They do incentivize new model sales, even if not uniformly, that's their business model.

 techsoldaten wrote:
There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

And there we go. Ignoring anything and everything beyond this first sentence.

Karol wrote:

and then you get to pay import tax, and 23% vat. And because the stuff costs more then a monthly salary here, the customs guys will open it 100% of time. Meaning you are paying more then 700$. But really am not going to argue about 10%. The difference is that a laptop or PC can be used for many things, and worse your watching movies on it. if you spend 600$ on a bad army, then paying 50$ per year to get updated rules sucks, specially when the updates don't fix a thing.

The same wouldn't apply for a laptop? I totally get the frustration with GK. I expected GW to do more about them sooner. I'm at least partially optimistic that PA might give them more psychic prowess, but it otherwise seems like they're going to wait until they can rewrite a codex to update them. It's really quite confusing couple with the 'no primaris' tag line.

That is interesting. Always good to get to know new things about different stuff. The context thing decided by the observer is a very interesting thing.

Don't quote me on anything as I'm not a trained linguist and English is weird.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

And there we go. Ignoring anything and everything beyond this first sentence.

It was hyperbole to be sure, but you missed an otherwise decent post.

 amanita wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

And there we go. Ignoring anything and everything beyond this first sentence.

It was hyperbole to be sure, but you missed an otherwise decent post.

If you consider the opening statement of a post to be the introduction of your writing style and content, then opening it with hyperbolic negativity is a sure fire way to make me think "not really worth the time". Besides, I've probably already read whatever points are going to be made elsewhere already. I don't feel the need to dig through hyperbole to find worthwhile opinion that I've already gotten elsewhere.

And if the poster truly felt that there was "absolutely nothing positive about GW",

A: The poster would do well to acknowledge that there might be people in the conversation that might strongly disagree by softening the delivery of their opening and saving such statements for a conclusion.

B: There's probably so much disagreement between such a poster and myself that I hardly think I'd get any value out of reading it. For example, if said poster doesn't like ANY of the models produced by GW, regardless of price or function, then they're just operating from such a different base that I don't care what they have to say about the company as a whole.

Regarding models retaining "Value", the value is to the purchaser, not the resale.

I bought most of my Guardsmen when they were half the price they are now... maybe even less. Those Guardsmen have effectively appreciated in value, as to purchase them now would cost me at least twice as much.

While I couldn't sell the collection for what I paid... probably, I also couldn't *buy* the collection I have now for what I paid. Not even close. Yet I still get the same degree of enjoyment I would get if I purchased the models today.

I've bought a couple new boxes of dudes, NIB, this past year for KT. With the GK box, I hypothetically never need to buy more GK, as I should have all the options I'd ever need in the one box to play any KT I desire. And even if the price of plasti-crack goes up... my investment's value will also go up. I will always have that box's value worth of contents, to play with and appreciate as I see fit.

The value of models only drops when you lose interest in them. If try to sell them, the value drops. But if you keep them and play with them, the value remains the current value. If that makes sense.

I'm not angry. Frustrated? Disappointed? For sure. I'll beat the dead horse and say that GW was on the right track and veered back into crap-town. Oh well, I really like KT.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

and then you get to pay import tax, and 23% vat. And because the stuff costs more then a monthly salary here, the customs guys will open it 100% of time. Meaning you are paying more then 700$. But really am not going to argue about 10%. The difference is that a laptop or PC can be used for many things, and worse your watching movies on it. if you spend 600$ on a bad army, then paying 50$ per year to get updated rules sucks, specially when the updates don't fix a thing.

The same wouldn't apply for a laptop? I totally get the frustration with GK. I expected GW to do more about them sooner. I'm at least partially optimistic that PA might give them more psychic prowess, but it otherwise seems like they're going to wait until they can rewrite a codex to update them. It's really quite confusing couple with the 'no primaris' tag line.

Does most of that even apply to GW stuff? I didnt think there would be import tax between EU countries. Nothing I've ever bought from the EU (including stuff from Poland) has had it.

Poland also doesn't suffer from GWs dodgy exchange rates. Prices are virtually the same as UK.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

And there we go. Ignoring anything and everything beyond this first sentence.

It's worth the read because you'll miss out on gems like this if you don't:

I'm not trying to be absurd, I'm looking at the situation objectively and thinking about who benefits

The science is there guys, don't be an intentional poor balance sceptic. 93% of scientists agree. #woke

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
...Gw has become better, but they've also decided on an absurd release schedule. It's really hard to playtest, edit, and release book after book after book. They're over extending their employees, but this is what we wan't isn't it? If the codexes weren't coming out at break neck speed people would be just as pissed for the opposite reason...

Most games a) don't burn their core rulebook and re-release it every 2-4 years, b) partially update armies instead of burning their "codex" and re-releasing it every 2-4 years, and c) release stuff for everyone all at once. GW's written themselves into a corner with the "Codex" release model that forces them to be kind of crappy at writing the rules/balancing the game.

A lot of people were predicting re-releases of codexes as in just rewrites with nothing new this year. Obviously we got marines, but with a substantial "value-add". Models can't all be ready at the right times. It just is what it is and its better for models to have rules when they come out, isn't it? The manner of the supplements is potentially good for gamers, because they don't have to re-buy the supplement when the core SM book gets updated. Will it pan out like that? No idea. It could be we would see 9th before that's a thing.

The CSM book was a tragedy, but it exists for new players not the old -- points should have been in the PDF for previous owners.

A subscription model would solve a lot of problems for them and us, but it probably won't happen for a while yet (partially because people really like books).

...No, it's better for the writers/designers to plan their releases around giving everyone stuff in a more even manner instead of planning their releases around giving one army thirty thousand things at once and then not touching it for a decade.

a_typical_hero wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
It's just very hard for me to understand why someone else would suffer from anothers opinion of the game. Is it that strange to imagine people might make up their own decisions and not be swayed by the negative thoughts of another ?

I wrote something about that in my post at the end https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/781894.page#10614706

Not addressing you personally, but in general the vibe I get from some replies is "I simply want to complain and I don't care about the other half of your argument where you talk about what would be helpful to do after complaining". At least the latter part is never/seldomly questioned.



For the last time : Complain all you want, just don't stop there and wait for GW to make it better. Try to make it better yourself.

Good: I'm not a fan of the direction GW took with 8th edition, for reasons X, Y, and Z. (Stolen from the last reply, thank you )

Bad: Army xy is the most broken thing ever. Why would anybody ever play sub-faction xyz again (Paraphrased from one of the threads about blue Iron Hands...)

---

On a very interesting note, while I was looking for the biggest Warhammer forum online, I stumbled upon this thread on reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/4l0nnf/biggest_warhammer_forums/

No need to read all of it, but just the first few comments mentioning DakkaDakka and how those people perceived it at that time is very interesting, to say the least.
Is this really how we as a community want to present ourselves?

I get what you are saying but you can only do so much to make it better on your own. You give pie in the sky answers to problems. " Well, if your army sucks, get a new one " Not always is that even a real choice for time and money spent. " Well, get people to not take the armies they like " Yet again, not everyone that plays has every unit in an army, some only get the armies they want and can't really switch out whole lists on the fly to " make it fair " this is an expensive and time consuming hobby. " The price is too high " no real answer to this but to stop buying anything from GW. Sometimes all you have need of is a place to vent, and get how you feel out there with like minded folks.

Every internet post is full of hyperbole, even yours, you'd think from reading it we're all a bunch of monsters with only negative thoughts, we aren't. Yet again, this feels like a some people problem and not an everyone issue as most I've seen get proper answers on here.

As for what a post on reddit says about this forum, I really could not care any less what anyone on Reddit feels about anything really. You can't control how anyone chooses to want to view you, all you can control is how you view yourself and I think we're just fine. There, that's positive don't you think ? If you're so concerned about it, best not let on you come here, with all us evil fiends. Blood thirsty we are..and...Happy Halloween all you ghouls out there.

Sure on the other hand "my army sucks and I never win" can only be said so much before people get tiored of listening to the complaint. eventually they're going to tell you, "get a new army, stop playing, or discuss with your group some way to make it more fun" I do wanna stess that walking away from a game for a time can be healthy and people should be willing to do so. I've had other games I liked that I walked away from because of issues with it. (case in point I stepped away from D&D for the entire 4th edition)

 Daedalus81 wrote:
[

The real world buying power of the average player has not increased in over 30 years, yet GW raises prices annually (often at a cost exceeding inflation.)

What does GW have to do with the lack of meaningful wage increases in the world?

I'm not interested in addressing the rest, but this shouldn't be hard. Eventually GW will need to adjust to this economic reality or go back to being a niche luxury within a niche hobby for 50 year old greybeard sysadmins. Right now they're pretty mainstream compared to what the hobby used to be, but that could change quickly in a downturn once wallets start to close.

What also compounds the price is the game's appetite for models, with a lot of changes in game mechanics and points that push players to these huge model counts. Early edition armies were tiny compared to what we got now. Not sure whether that's better or worse for the game itself (I'd argue worse), but it's definitely worse for people trying to build an army on a hobby budget of like 50-100 usd/mo.

 Sentineil wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
There is absolutely nothing about Games Workshop to be positive about.

And there we go. Ignoring anything and everything beyond this first sentence.

It's worth the read because you'll miss out on gems like this if you don't:

I'm not trying to be absurd, I'm looking at the situation objectively and thinking about who benefits

The science is there guys, don't be an intentional poor balance sceptic. 93% of scientists agree. #woke

Haha, love it!

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:


GW actively undermines the competitive scene through factional power imbalances such that the best army is usually about whoever brought the fanciest models instead of the quality of the player.

K, well, let's ask those players about that then?

overpriced luxury goods with little worth after the initial purchase.

Really? Little worth? For models that hold their value for decades? You should recgonize that worth is underpinned by the luxury bar set by GW.

demanding price and rules stabilization - no new rules until GW fixes the problems with the old ones (call it the "Grey Knights" principle.) You shouldn't have to keep paying more for a broken product that doesn't serve other players very well.

The first is the consequence of the world. You can ask. You might not receive. The second is being asked for often and is received on a far more regular basis than before. Is it perfect? No.

The company uses points / rules to sell models, the way they do it actively dilutes the value of what is essentially a luxury good. You can talk about attitudes all you want, but there's a point where your opinion devolves into an expression of how much this system has screwed you recently. You can talk about individual personalities within GW all you want, but the only one who matters is Kevin Roundtree who decides how this circus will play out year after year. You can talk about individual releases all you want, but GW is a billion dollar company who makes its money off volume of sales.

And these things are demonstrably false. Feeling burned by the CSM update taking second fiddle to Marines? I get that, but there's little reason to be absurd about everything to make that point.

Demonstrate what? That GW doesn't use points/rules to make new models OP to drive sales?

For every new model you think is OP to drive sales I'm certain we can point to another that came out as a pile of crap. As already pointed out, for every Wraith knight there's a venom crawler.

I do find it strange how we're talking about holding value on our little plastic toys. I have to say, I'm not buying these as an investment. Buy shares in GW if that's what you're after.

We also don't NEED anything. This is a luxury hobby that we all buy into on our own accord.

 Sentineil wrote:

The science is there guys, don't be an intentional poor balance sceptic. 93% of scientists agree. #woke

87% of the statistics cited in the Internet are incorrect