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.

Also considering that much, MUUUUUCH smaller miniature companies with objectively more complex games and similar numbers of units with distinct rules (See: Infinity) are able to maintain a much higher, more consistent level of balance with free electronic rules, I think this is do-able for the single most profitable UK company.

People talk about GW like they're three dudes in a backyard. They have 289 million dollars in yearly revenue (2018 numbers) to work with.

the_scotsman wrote:
Also considering that much, MUUUUUCH smaller miniature companies with objectively more complex games and similar numbers of units with distinct rules (See: Infinity) are able to maintain a much higher, more consistent level of balance with free electronic rules, I think this is do-able for the single most profitable UK company.

People talk about GW like they're three dudes in a backyard. They have 289 million dollars in yearly revenue (2018 numbers) to work with.

Which is the reason for such frustration. Smaller companies can do a much better job than a multi-million-pound company that purports to sell luxury products of the highest quality (they think they're Apple) and it's riddled with mistakes that even a cursory proofreading/QA before sending to the printers would discover.

the_scotsman wrote:
Also considering that much, MUUUUUCH smaller miniature companies with objectively more complex games and similar numbers of units with distinct rules (See: Infinity) are able to maintain a much higher, more consistent level of balance with free electronic rules, I think this is do-able for the single most profitable UK company.

People talk about GW like they're three dudes in a backyard. They have 289 million dollars in yearly revenue (2018 numbers) to work with.

AGAIN, they *could*, purely theoretically, but what incentive to do that is there when they are *already the single most profitable UK company*? We can argue til the cows come home about whether they *should*; I think we'd all agree that we might *like* it to be the case, but I just don't see that it's going to happen and, as such, it seems like the options open to people in terms of response are: 1. get over whatever quibbles we have with the way GW is doing things and focus on enjoying the game; 2. bin the game off until GW start doing things differently (which may never happen). Of course, there's option 3 – raging on the internet about it and coming up with pie-in-the-sky solutions, while telling anyone who isn't as concerned about it (i.e. Option 1) that the problem is how stupid they are, but what does that actually *achieve*? Literally bugger all.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Considering GW is swimming in money I am sure they can afford two minimum wage salarys to maintain FAQs and PDFs

Hell no. GW's biggest problem is it doesn't pay anywhere near enough to attract and retain talented and competent individuals. They don't need more minimum wage drones, they need an experienced, professional technical editor and game leads who will implement industry standard practices like proper document and versioning management, language guidelines and reference databases of existing rules. GW still seem to operate like they did in the 90s as a group of enthusiastic, passionate amateurs getting paid for their hobby. That was fine when their prices were pretty low and their output slow. It's not fine any more.

Hence the whole vitriol at people who accept it. Okay, I get the rules being good/fun is subjective. But seriously? People are okay paying premium-quality money for a product riddled with basic proofing errors? Even if the errors themselves aren't a big deal, you're okay with paying money for a product and getting subpar quality?

Wayniac wrote:
Hence the whole vitriol at people who accept it. Okay, I get the rules being good/fun is subjective. But seriously? People are okay paying premium-quality money for a product riddled with basic proofing errors? Even if the errors themselves aren't a big deal, you're okay with paying money for a product and getting subpar quality?

This is entirely my point. A lot of people clearly don't perceive them as being sub-par to the point of not being worth paying for. Few, if any, things one might be able to purchase are completely flawless; it's really just a matter of deciding whether something is good *enough* that you're willing to pay for it. All that's happening here is that *your* view of how good it needs to be – to which you are perfectly entitled – is out of alignment with that of a lot of other people. And there's enough of the latter to have sent GW's share price skyrocketing of late, and as such there's no commercial incentive for them to pivot to pandering to your view instead.

As for the "vitriol", it seems to be a bit unreasonable to get enraged at people simply for enjoying something.

the_scotsman wrote:
Also considering that much, MUUUUUCH smaller miniature companies with objectively more complex games and similar numbers of units with distinct rules (See: Infinity) are able to maintain a much higher, more consistent level of balance with free electronic rules, I think this is do-able for the single most profitable UK company.

People talk about GW like they're three dudes in a backyard. They have 289 million dollars in yearly revenue (2018 numbers) to work with.

I actually started playing infinity over the xmas vacation and oh my god are the rules much better and in-depth than 40k. 40k was my only experience with tabletop wargaming before but now im probably only going to play it exclusively against opponents i know are fun to paly agaisnt in super relaxed games. And GW is 100% not getting my money for a while, at least until they hopefully fix the core issues with their game.

the_scotsman wrote:
Also considering that much, MUUUUUCH smaller miniature companies with objectively more complex games and similar numbers of units with distinct rules (See: Infinity) are able to maintain a much higher, more consistent level of balance with free electronic rules, I think this is do-able for the single most profitable UK company.

People talk about GW like they're three dudes in a backyard. They have 289 million dollars in yearly revenue (2018 numbers) to work with.

2018 was 229M (incl royalties) with 154M in costs. That remainder takes a 20% hit on taxes. 50M more of that went to dividends. So, 10M or 4% of the revenue remains.

The prior year they spent 9M expanding the studio and 3M for new tooling. In 2018 they started building another factory. I guarantee that eats up a ton of money.

So, no, there really isn't a large pile of cash floating around doing nothing unless you want them to ignore their fiduciary duty to shareholders. We may not like the dividends, but it is just a fact of life at this point.

It's also not like they are so poor that they couldn't hire two people to create processes to ensure content quality.

 Jidmah wrote:
It's also not like they are so poor that they couldn't hire two people to create processes to ensure content quality.

It isn't always about throwing money at the problem. If they're not listening to the playtesters then more people who are min wage aren't going to get through the roadblock.

The other point being there is a LOT more things GW has to tackle as a business apart from some guys writing rules and making models. Including now tv shows, a new ERP system, a new factory, etc. Production staff went from 143 to 198. Almost two hundred people just to run the factory.

At that level of business is requires really good leaders to keep teams on point.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
It's also not like they are so poor that they couldn't hire two people to create processes to ensure content quality.

It isn't always about throwing money at the problem. If they're not listening to the playtesters then more people who are min wage aren't going to get through the roadblock.

which is the next issue, communication. Especially in the rulesteam. They might don't list the main author anymore but it seems still very much the one dude writes the one book, and is not concerned what the other 12 dudes are doing.


then the playtesting themselves. With prebuilt armies and lists, is hardly, playtesting.

And the playtesters themselves maybee also an issue due to potential format bias. Depending on who get's a say in it.


Really overall put there is a lot wierd going on in the rules department.

Better communication between the people working on the various books alone would help with balancing factions. That doesn't cost anything.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
It's also not like they are so poor that they couldn't hire two people to create processes to ensure content quality.

It isn't always about throwing money at the problem. If they're not listening to the playtesters then more people who are min wage aren't going to get through the roadblock.

which is the next issue, communication. Especially in the rulesteam. They might don't list the main author anymore but it seems still very much the one dude writes the one book, and is not concerned what the other 12 dudes are doing.


then the playtesting themselves. With prebuilt armies and lists, is hardly, playtesting.

And the playtesters themselves maybee also an issue due to potential format bias. Depending on who get's a say in it.


Really overall put there is a lot wierd going on in the rules department.

A big thing too is it's so opaque that we have no idea how it actually works, because all they say its bits and pieces. But it sounds like:

1) The miniature design team comes up with models independently of the rules, without knowing/caring what the rules might be or what the game needs, and then it gets handed to the rules team to fit it into the game. This is all but confirmed, although to what level we don't know. If the models are designed with zero input from the rules team then this is the biggest issue of all because there's no communication between teams about what might be good for the game and it seems to be the models are designed without consideration and would explain why we get new things when old things need updating if the model team needs to decide to rework something first without the rules team saying hey this might be worth remaking.

2) The designers work in isolation on different books, with little or no communication between them about what they've done in the past or what's been changed or what may or may not fit. This could indicate why books that follow each other are often wildly different; because it's different people almost 100% writing the book with different ideas about how the army should work. Also would explain why certain books seem to ignore or forget errata that has been done previously to similar books.

3) Playtesting, from what little has been gathered since playtesting is kept under NDA, is mostly "use this premade list and see if everything 'feels' good" and not "See what is broken/can be abused so we can fix it" so there's no chance to actually show what is broken when you combine multiple factions or whatnot, just if it "feels" like it works On this note we don't know if the playtesters are using ITC rules or other house rules which might skew their tests.

4) At least some time in the past, even if the designers wanted to adjust something sales might dictate otherwise. See the Wraithknight story about how it was made stronger and the team wanted to increase its points but some suit said to keep it undercosted so it would sell more. That was from the Kirby era, however, so there's no telling if it still happens or not.

5) There doesn't see to be a core area for rules updates/errata since something changed previously may or may not be remembered in a new book.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
It's also not like they are so poor that they couldn't hire two people to create processes to ensure content quality.

It isn't always about throwing money at the problem. If they're not listening to the playtesters then more people who are min wage aren't going to get through the roadblock.

The other point being there is a LOT more things GW has to tackle as a business apart from some guys writing rules and making models. Including now tv shows, a new ERP system, a new factory, etc. Production staff went from 143 to 198. Almost two hundred people just to run the factory.

At that level of business is requires really good leaders to keep teams on point.

People creating processes aren't minimum wage people, quite the opposite. Proper processes could also fix communication problems.

When you read DEV blogs from MtG, they have design and development processes defined with fixed steps in them which you can't just forgo - like checking for mistakes they have done in the past. And they have software in place to help with those processes. I wouldn't be surprised if GW's design process is based on excel, email and maybe a wiki which is hopelessly out of date.

 Jidmah wrote:

People creating processes aren't minimum wage people, quite the opposite. Proper processes could also fix communication problems.

When you read DEV blogs from MtG, they have design and development processes defined with fixed steps in them which you can't just forgo - like checking for mistakes they have done in the past. And they have software in place to help with those processes. I wouldn't be surprised if GW's design process is based on excel, email and maybe a wiki which is hopelessly out of date.

Very much this. Good software eliminates these issues. Someone made the foundation of CA19 with copy pastes from older sources and there was no change history to compare to. And there very likely is no database housing values to make it easy to run the numbers.

That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

Karol wrote:
That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

I mean i get copy/paste to save time, but JFC double check it.

Wayniac wrote:

Karol wrote:
That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

I mean i get copy/paste to save time, but JFC double check it.

And maybee just look what unit is x and it's role and Model.

Because 55pts acolyths is hillarious, Same as 5pts cultists and 33 pts Chaos spawn.
...

Not Online!!! wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

Karol wrote:
That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

I mean i get copy/paste to save time, but JFC double check it.

And maybee just look what unit is x and it's role and Model.

Because 55pts acolyths is hillarious, Same as 5pts cultists and 33 pts Chaos spawn.
...

It iis Neos who went to 55. Acos are still 7 (thankfully). That just means someone typing it in hit the key twice, because they're 5 points. And it tells me they're massively overworked if they didn't catch that sort of blunder.

Well maybe, question is what are they doing if most of the rules end up copy paste or are created with a clear patern for everyone.

And then there is stuff like reprinting an old core rule book, without any changes or even a warrning that there is 2 years of change stuff in it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wayniac wrote:

Karol wrote:
That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

I mean i get copy/paste to save time, but JFC double check it.

They would have to have people playing or at least knowing the rules for the armies they check in depth. If the person checking doesn't know the army it is kind of a hard to pick up errors, or even less stuff that clearly won't work aka won't be bought.

 Nazrak wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
I think what everyone's failing to realise in terms of their proposed "solutions" to this ("Pull 18-hour workdays playtesting before release!" "Every Codex comes with a voucher for a free, updated-monthly PDF of the rules!" "Hire a small army of editors and proofreaders!") is that they all cost GW more money, in terms of the resources required to implement them, and don't *make* them any more money.

Wrong. Reducing the number of books will reduce the number of errors. An error free product will make them more money, because more people will buy it. I wouldnt mind paying 5 more euros for an error free codex.

That's subjective, i wouldn't.
And i don't think that the presence or not of errors in the books changes significantly the number of books sold.

Exactly. They release fewer books in the same amount of time, they make less money. Also, what is an acceptable number of mistakes? Because as the number of mistakes approaches zero, the amount of time required to produce that book vastly increases. If you're saying any amount of mistakes renders the book not worth buying, you're not a potential customer that it makes any amount of business sense pursuing.

Also, I think people on this forum vastly overetimate how many people out there are saying "I'd play 40K, and happily pay a lot more for the books, if only they were completely error-free." As evinced by how well GW's doing at the moment, a pretty significant chunk of people out there are willing to overlook the errors and buy the books.

That last part is the big problem: Enough people, for whatever reason (ignorance, GW fanboys, who knows) don't care about quality in rules/materials other than miniatures. That's the root of the issue: These people continue to buy and make GW profitable DESPITE the huge issues that any other company would get raked over the coals with, so what reason do they have to do anything better? 8th edition showed how gullible the majority of players were in that they ate up all the smoke & mirrors bullgak GW spewed on their community site, lauded them for pulling their heads out of their asses and using social media like everyone else has the last decade, and in general doing the bare minimum with the game to be able to say "Hey look we changed, see?" like a politician who lies through their teeth to be elected and then goes back and says well I didn't "actually" say I'd do X, I said I'd do Y which sounded very close to doing X; not my fault you misunderstood.

We lost our window for actual change, because that was the leadup to 8th and all it showed GW is that they can still do garbage and be rewarded massively for it.

I got a big whiff of a "STOP HAVING FUN" vibe from this rant.

Indeed. Anyone willing to overlook the issues with some of the rulebooks (by whatever means) and just crack on with having fun *playing a game* is, apparently, in the wrong. Toy spacemen: extremely serious and important business.

Ok, I'd like to see the numbers of people who might actually buy more, if they pumped out less. I, for one, would. First off, it would feel a hell of a lot less like burn and churn as it does now. Now, it feels more like you should wait two weeks, minimum, before you even touch a book release as it could end up changed a lot from initial release to how it'll look in a couple weeks, or it could make absolutely no sense in some areas, until they fix issues. That will cost them sales. Claiming none of this matters because profit, yet again I'd love to know how many of these sales are new customers, and how many of these are just the whales that buy everything by the bucket load regardless of cost just because GW, of which I've known a few. It's easy to make huge profits when you over cost everything you put out and some don't care one iota and buy more than any normal customer might. Those things can give an idea of great consumer trust when really its bloated prices floating the ship under a small percentage of players that buy 10 players worth of product alone.

To be fair neither of us can really prove this one way or the other and I doubt GW themselves have these numbers or care so long as they are selling. It is however, something to think about.

I do as well have to say, no one is expecting entirely error free releases from now till forever. However, there is a huge difference between accepting zero errors or mistakes, which can happen, to accepting that every release will have issues day 1 and then we will need a fix 2 weeks down the road each and every time. That isn't demanding the world to want quality on release with the errors being few and far between as opposed to errors and faulty product being part of each and every book drop, which is where we are at currently. When a whole army can cost around half a thousand dollars US, it isn't a game of toy soldiers and saying you shouldn't expect more from a product of that cost is not a small nothing concern.

I speak regularly with people who used to buy all the books GW released when they were cheaper and released with more time between them but now dont buy a single extra book. Some like me buy 0 books and some only the books that affect them directly, no one buys everything anymore though. Too many books with too many rules spread out that its more of a hassle to use physical copies rather than have them all in pdf format on their phone. Especially since you still need a pdf FAQ or errata anyway for that book most likely so why not just go all pdf? You will be using battlescribe to list build anyway and carrying 5pound/2kg worth of books with you is such a chore even those who bought the books dont carry them around with them if there isnt a tournament.

They are definetly losing some players due to this rapid release schedule and it might harm them in the future. At least hurt 40k since in my club and another club in town people are now more and more interested in AoS, HH and Kings of War and maybe other games I dont know of.

There are other companies and franchises who have managed to grow new markets and reach new audiences that increase their sales for a few years despite shortcomings in the main product but the new people make up for that in the short run but when more and more people see the wrongs the profits will just start decreasing despite the company not doing anything differently. Just because things sell well doesnt mean they are doing the right thing in the long run. Just having a few extra staff members checking books and rules for errrors and imbalance might seem like a waste of money since stuff sell already but maybe they could sell more if they had better quality. Maybe not in the short run it would be a noticeable difference but if they keep people in the game for longer and build up a better reputation for their products it could lead to higher profit.

I have probably met enough people disgrunted with GW books the last year alone that if they bought more books the profit from just these people alone could almost afford a well payed staff member to fix some of the problems in this thread.

Klickor wrote:
I speak regularly with people who used to buy all the books GW released when they were cheaper and released with more time between them but now dont buy a single extra book. Some like me buy 0 books and some only the books that affect them directly, no one buys everything anymore though. Too many books with too many rules spread out that its more of a hassle to use physical copies rather than have them all in pdf format on their phone. Especially since you still need a pdf FAQ or errata anyway for that book most likely so why not just go all pdf? You will be using battlescribe to list build anyway and carrying 5pound/2kg worth of books with you is such a chore even those who bought the books dont carry them around with them if there isnt a tournament.

They are definetly losing some players due to this rapid release schedule and it might harm them in the future. At least hurt 40k since in my club and another club in town people are now more and more interested in AoS, HH and Kings of War and maybe other games I dont know of.

There are other companies and franchises who have managed to grow new markets and reach new audiences that increase their sales for a few years despite shortcomings in the main product but the new people make up for that in the short run but when more and more people see the wrongs the profits will just start decreasing despite the company not doing anything differently. Just because things sell well doesnt mean they are doing the right thing in the long run. Just having a few extra staff members checking books and rules for errrors and imbalance might seem like a waste of money since stuff sell already but maybe they could sell more if they had better quality. Maybe not in the short run it would be a noticeable difference but if they keep people in the game for longer and build up a better reputation for their products it could lead to higher profit.

I have probably met enough people disgrunted with GW books the last year alone that if they bought more books the profit from just these people alone could almost afford a well payed staff member to fix some of the problems in this thread.

I was sure I wasn't the only one who saw this and heard of the discontent.

Wayniac wrote:
Hence the whole vitriol at people who accept it. Okay, I get the rules being good/fun is subjective. But seriously? People are okay paying premium-quality money for a product riddled with basic proofing errors? Even if the errors themselves aren't a big deal, you're okay with paying money for a product and getting subpar quality?

you could go play games from a differant company and just have fun with that? this is a fething hobby not a social movement.

Karol wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

Karol wrote:
That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

I mean i get copy/paste to save time, but JFC double check it.

They would have to have people playing or at least knowing the rules for the armies they check in depth. If the person checking doesn't know the army it is kind of a hard to pick up errors, or even less stuff that clearly won't work aka won't be bought.

Agree - personally, I wouldn't have caught the Space Wolf or GSC errors, simply because I don't know those armies at all, nor do any of my regular opponents play them.
Then again, it's not my job to know those things.

BrianDavion wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Hence the whole vitriol at people who accept it. Okay, I get the rules being good/fun is subjective. But seriously? People are okay paying premium-quality money for a product riddled with basic proofing errors? Even if the errors themselves aren't a big deal, you're okay with paying money for a product and getting subpar quality?

you could go play games from a differant company and just have fun with that? this is a fething hobby not a social movement.

Some people’s hobby is complaining online, don’t forget.

I do point out, we are on a forum, which involves debate and voicing of opinion and/or facts in various degrees. Trying to downsize or otherwise diminish the fact some don't appreciate a broken product released over and over with no change in sight is hardly baseless complaining.

If someone doesn't want to read it, then don't. I'd go so far as to say some peoples hobby is complaining about people complaining. Which is more odd to me, especially when they don't say the complaints are unfounded, simply they don't care about getting faulty product.

Nah, I just mean the hyperbolic levels the complaining rises to are not ‘discussion’ or ‘debate’. I love to discuss things. Just reading anecdotal rants presented as fact or one player’s experience extrapolated into some global pattern become kinda tedious after the thirtieth time. And occasionally the odd “objectively bad” thrown in for good measure. If people tone down and discuss that would be great.

Also there are some posters who don’t play at all, have stated so, yet pollute threads constantly. They bring nothing to this community but toxicity.

Whining pretending to be discussion is not discussion.

 Jidmah wrote:

Karol wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

Karol wrote:
That would explain why, if no one at the studio is interested on actualy working on new rules, the books are mostly a copy paste of an old book.

I mean i get copy/paste to save time, but JFC double check it.

They would have to have people playing or at least knowing the rules for the armies they check in depth. If the person checking doesn't know the army it is kind of a hard to pick up errors, or even less stuff that clearly won't work aka won't be bought.

Agree - personally, I wouldn't have caught the Space Wolf or GSC errors, simply because I don't know those armies at all, nor do any of my regular opponents play them.
Then again, it's not my job to know those things.

I think that's a big factor in ca. You'd expect that whoever was working on a codex would have an interest in that particular faction. Ca however covers everything and I doubt everyone working on it plays or cares about every faction.

I still think the reason almost every non knight super heavy in the game got a points cut except the hellforged/relic super heavys was because they literally just forgot about them and just copy pasted their prices from the last ca. No way anyone actually thinks their worth that.

I still have no theory on the pitiful cut they gave the stompa compared to the others however.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Nah, I just mean the hyperbolic levels the complaining rises to are not ‘discussion’ or ‘debate’. I love to discuss things. Just reading anecdotal rants presented as fact or one player’s experience extrapolated into some global pattern become kinda tedious after the thirtieth time. And occasionally the odd “objectively bad” thrown in for good measure. If people tone down and discuss that would be great.

Also there are some posters who don’t play at all, have stated so, yet pollute threads constantly. They bring nothing to this community but toxicity.

Whining pretending to be discussion is not discussion.

You know what I find toxic ? The vast amount of world spanning leeway given to a large by any measure company that can do better. I find that kinda toxic, but to each their own right ? I mean people toss the word toxic around so much it really doesn't have any meaning anymore, though I do approve of it being trotted out as a standard argument killing I win button always delightfully toxic.

There is nothing hyperbolic on wanting something working one day 1 without need of FAQ or Errata in 2 weeks every time.

You know what I find tedious ? Nothing being correct on release, that is kinda tedious. As well as having discussion on rules intent when it could be written clearly for at least two weeks. Wondering if strange points changes like say 5 to 55 pts was an actual change or just foul up ?

I mean, it could be made more fun, could be a mini game. Pick up the book hot on day 1, see how many mistakes and changes you get in two weeks, take bets, whoever is closest without going over gets a free Strat point in the next game, oh how exciting.

All you are ever going to read here is anecdotal as much of the raw facts probably no one has access to, even the company in question.

It's all a debate, and sometimes they don't come with facts but opinions and everyone, including your own post is quite rich in this sea of hyperbolic " Everyone does " " Everything is ".

I do actually play, and have for quite a long time, enough to be really tired of the status quo of how they run. I can both play the game and real dislike how they choose to do things and voice it honestly. Now if that is toxic, then call me a true avenger of that variety because I'll say it how it is.

Here though, let me add some sunshine, the new sisters I think look really good. So don't worry, be happy.

I would ask though, do people give smaller companies this level of understanding for such poor work ? I somehow doubt it, that would be the kiss of death.