Switch Theme:

Errata for Chapter Approved 2019?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Wayniac wrote:
I mean the issue is that you can't just treat every instance as its own thing.

"Hey can we both agree that they messed up on Ogryns and we use the previous cost until the FAQ?"

"Sure."

okay, now what about something else that may be off? Ask that too? And then the next? And the next?

That's why a precedent exists and has to exist. So you DON'T have to address everything which seems like it's a mistake or feels "off" without any clarification from GW.



It's literally a handful of things not the myriad scenarios you conjure out of thin air.

"But if this was wrong then could this be wrong, too?" No, just stop. The forum identified the weird things. They are known. Everything else is absolute until GW says otherwise.

If you just want to play stupid mental games I'll just claim your point drops were a typo and refuse to let you use them. Or that clearly GW meant to nerf that unit. How can you refute my opinion?

Then no one gets to play and we can sit on the forums like smug donkey-caves assured in our mental superiority.

   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Not Online!!! wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Could that be what's taking so long? Actually addressing the stuff they outright ignored? Because changing typos shouldn't take over a month.


I mean theorethically attempting to fix up what would that be? 2-3 lists..
And about 1-2 lists worth of additional models?

Yeah could be if they also would add in tests for beta stratagems etc.

But i assume that they just have deleted the file and now searched/ had to rewrite it

Deleted the file? Don't you mean lost the binder full of hastily written notes written on old napkins?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/01/12 23:12:53


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Halandri

Don’t dismiss old napkins!

When I met a couple of nameless old men they told me the rhino was first designed on the back of a beer mat at the pub!

   
Made in ch
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





nareik wrote:
Don’t dismiss old napkins!

When I met a couple of nameless old men they told me the rhino was first designed on the back of a beer mat at the pub!



Aye old napkins would probably have stuck around indeed.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units."
Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?"
Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?"
GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!"
Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.  
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Yeah, the 55 point GSC is an aberration but there are tons of other assumed mistakes in CA2019 that should have been errata'd day 1 (just like the SW codex...).

Another poster wrote that it's not like GW opens the product the same time it goes to the public. These issues should have been known about before it was shipped and a day 1 errata should have been issued.

If I make a mistake at my job that some how gets to the client I'm working all night (or however long it takes) to get it right. The whole time I'm burning with shame/guilt/embarrassment and Vacation/Christmas/death be damned because it's a mark of professionalism and personal pride to not allow such an easily rectifiable mistake to continue. Something as simple as a typo in a PDF should get fixed right away.

The fact that GW hasn't fixed it yet and is so far outside of their schedule hopefully points to the fact that something else is going on and GW knows that CA2019 was a mistake and they have lots of things to fix.

Typos and copy/paste errors should take minutes/hours to fix not days/weeks. "Oh, we put the wrong space wolf fast attack page in (I hope they did). John, put out a community post and Frank you put up the right PDF." How the hell does that take a month?

I haven't bought any GW product since the SM 2.0 + supplements debacle and hopefully others are too. I doubt GW misses my 100ish bucks a month but a couple hundred of us could impact the bottom line enough that GW would take these mistakes (and rule balance in general) more seriously. GWs cavalier attitude towards the rules/balance of their game will only be addressed when we start voting with their wallet.

The vitriol leveled at the "white knights" on dakka is because those of us fed-up with being taken advantage of by GW understand that as long as we are the vocal minority nothing with change.

I am a huge fan of this game. It is one of the few hobbies I crave time out of my busy schedule to enjoy and wish that GW cared as much about it as they care about coming up with new ways to get our money. As others have said, as long as people keep buying then GW has little to no reason to change.

I came back to 8th because of the promises of the new GW. Better marketing, better communication and "the most play tested edition yet" lured me back in from almost a decade away from the game. It's frustrating that the problems the game has now seem so easy to fix and yet GW won't put forth anything but the minimum effort to fix them.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Christ, can everyone just stop responding to BCB's ridiculous trolling? All they *ever* do is derail threads with willfully-idiotic, excessive pedantry, and then there's just page after page of arguing with somebody who's repeatedly demonstrated they're not interested in any sort of good faith discussion. It literally ruins this forum and I can't believe the little gak hasn't been banned.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

 Nazrak wrote:
Christ, can everyone just stop responding to BCB's ridiculous trolling? All they *ever* do is derail threads with willfully-idiotic, excessive pedantry, and then there's just page after page of arguing with somebody who's repeatedly demonstrated they're not interested in any sort of good faith discussion. It literally ruins this forum and I can't believe the little gak hasn't been banned.


Hear, hear.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




 Nazrak wrote:
Christ, can everyone just stop responding to BCB's ridiculous trolling? All they *ever* do is derail threads with willfully-idiotic, excessive pedantry, and then there's just page after page of arguing with somebody who's repeatedly demonstrated they're not interested in any sort of good faith discussion. It literally ruins this forum and I can't believe the little gak hasn't been banned.


BCB isn't trolling-they have a (quite poorly expressed) point. 55pt neophytes is probably unintended, being a massive increase with no improvement in their rules- -but GW hasn't acknowledged the error, or any other possible typos. Or bothered to explain their decision-making process when writing said rules. All we have to go on are what they print, and "forge the narrative." There is no solid, objective basis other than "I/we think X is wrong, and should be Y." Which leads to disagreement and potential abuse. This is why proper play testing, technical writing and proofreading are so vital.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/01/13 04:12:55


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





It isn't probably unintended it is certainly unintended. Pretending otherwise is just trolling.

GW will acknowledge the error. Do you want to acknowledge as many as possible or just one at a time as they are found? A little patience goes a long way.

If you can't find someone to agree to let you use neos at their previous 5 point cost you're better off not playing that person. TOs are also entirely capable of addressing the major issues without allowing people to drag out other bs with no validity.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




 Daedalus81 wrote:
It isn't probably unintended it is certainly unintended. Pretending otherwise is just trolling.


Name calling doesn't make you correct. GW hasn't said anything one way or the other, so w'ere really just making educated guesses. Is 55 points for a neophyte dumb? Yes, Do we know the rules people didn't actually think this was a correct cost for some reason? No. Do we know for certain neophytes weren't intended to be 4ppm, or 6ppm? No.

GW will acknowledge the error. Do you want to acknowledge as many as possible or just one at a time as they are found? A little patience goes a long way.



How long is reasonable to wait?


If you can't find someone to agree to let you use neos at their previous 5 point cost you're better off not playing that person. TOs are also entirely capable of addressing the major issues without allowing people to drag out other bs with no validity.



And what about the other possible/probable errors? Can we all agree on each one, and the intended point value, wording, etc.?
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Daedalus81 wrote:
It isn't probably unintended it is certainly unintended. Pretending otherwise is just trolling.

Even if we all agree that 55 points is an error (which I think that everyone does), that doesn't help us solve the problem(s) caused by it.

GW will acknowledge the error. Do you want to acknowledge as many as possible or just one at a time as they are found? A little patience goes a long way.

Acknowledge it like they've acknowledged the broken assault weapon rules?
It's been four years - something being obviously broken isn't at all a guarantee that GW will acknowledge it, let alone fix it.

If you can't find someone to agree to let you use neos at their previous 5 point cost you're better off not playing that person.

Why should we assume that 5 points is correct though?

Should we therefore be assuming that everything which changed since last year should revert?
The cost of Ogryns is certainly unintended (I said it in bold, therefore it's true) so we revert them too right?
Where do we stop with reverting changes?
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







Setting the MFM aside for a moment, is there much in CA2019 itself that looks like it should get a FAQ or errata of some form?

2021-4 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG

My Pile of Potential - updates ongoing...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.

Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...

tneva82 wrote:
You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something... 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 BaconCatBug wrote:
Another example: Space Marine Thunder Hammers went from 21 points for Characters to 40 points for Characters. That's nearly a 100% increase in points. Is this not also an "outlier" and a "typo"? If not, why not?

A 1000% increase is clearly a typo. It's all but irrelevant to that case whether completely unrelated increases that are an entire magnitude smaller are typos or not.

7 Ork facts people always get wrong:
Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other.
A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot.
Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests.
Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why.
Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor.
Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers.
Orks do not have the power of believe. 
   
Made in de
Regular Dakkanaut




The Hammer should cost 210
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 Jidmah wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
Another example: Space Marine Thunder Hammers went from 21 points for Characters to 40 points for Characters. That's nearly a 100% increase in points. Is this not also an "outlier" and a "typo"? If not, why not?

A 1000% increase is clearly a typo. It's all but irrelevant to that case whether completely unrelated increases that are an entire magnitude smaller are typos or not.
I never liked that idiom, "all but something". If it's all but irrelevant then it's actually everything except irrelevant, which means it's actually relevant (and blue, and a salmon, but that's beside the point).

Again, I am not asking for you to state once again that one is a typo and the other isn't. I am asking WHY one is a typo and the other isn't. You claim it's because one is a 1000% increase and the other isn't, so what % won't be considered a typo?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blastaar wrote:
 Nazrak wrote:
Christ, can everyone just stop responding to BCB's ridiculous trolling? All they *ever* do is derail threads with willfully-idiotic, excessive pedantry, and then there's just page after page of arguing with somebody who's repeatedly demonstrated they're not interested in any sort of good faith discussion. It literally ruins this forum and I can't believe the little gak hasn't been banned.


BCB isn't trolling-they have a (quite poorly expressed) point. 55pt neophytes is probably unintended, being a massive increase with no improvement in their rules- -but GW hasn't acknowledged the error, or any other possible typos. Or bothered to explain their decision-making process when writing said rules. All we have to go on are what they print, and "forge the narrative." There is no solid, objective basis other than "I/we think X is wrong, and should be Y." Which leads to disagreement and potential abuse. This is why proper play testing, technical writing and proofreading are so vital.
I am glad someone understands. Also, Nazrak, that was a very mean thing to say I am going to go into my corner and cry while tweeting about it now. :(

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/01/13 10:48:15


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





The issue is, if it has one very telling error. There is always the chance, and in some instances a very good one, other lazy work was done and other errors remain. Doesn't matter how big or small as importance is in the eye of the beholder. As if you use the units, even one or two points can mean an awful lot to the player.

Questioning what they did wouldn't be needed if they were open as to why they did things, point out mistakes in their product that will be corrected with erratas later even if not the fix or merely not make the foul up in the first place.

There has been a lot of back and forth and hyperbole flying all over. That fact remains though not making such mistakes is the easiest fix and doesn't lead to questioning everything they do as you can be sure it's right.
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






AngryAngel80 wrote:
The issue is, if it has one very telling error. There is always the chance, and in some instances a very good one, other lazy work was done and other errors remain. Doesn't matter how big or small as importance is in the eye of the beholder. As if you use the units, even one or two points can mean an awful lot to the player.

Questioning what they did wouldn't be needed if they were open as to why they did things, point out mistakes in their product that will be corrected with erratas later even if not the fix or merely not make the foul up in the first place.

There has been a lot of back and forth and hyperbole flying all over. That fact remains though not making such mistakes is the easiest fix and doesn't lead to questioning everything they do as you can be sure it's right.
That's also a very good point. The shear number of mistakes and bizarre non-mistakes have lead us to a point were we genuinely cannot be sure if 55ppm is an error or not. Another example is cross book stratagems, they've given contradictory answers, sometimes saying yes, sometimes saying no, ignoring the RaW of the keyword system and sometimes enforcing it.
   
Made in ch
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 BaconCatBug wrote:
AngryAngel80 wrote:
The issue is, if it has one very telling error. There is always the chance, and in some instances a very good one, other lazy work was done and other errors remain. Doesn't matter how big or small as importance is in the eye of the beholder. As if you use the units, even one or two points can mean an awful lot to the player.

Questioning what they did wouldn't be needed if they were open as to why they did things, point out mistakes in their product that will be corrected with erratas later even if not the fix or merely not make the foul up in the first place.

There has been a lot of back and forth and hyperbole flying all over. That fact remains though not making such mistakes is the easiest fix and doesn't lead to questioning everything they do as you can be sure it's right.
That's also a very good point. The shear number of mistakes and bizarre non-mistakes have lead us to a point were we genuinely cannot be sure if 55ppm is an error or not. Another example is cross book stratagems, they've given contradictory answers, sometimes saying yes, sometimes saying no, ignoring the RaW of the keyword system and sometimes enforcing it.


na the neophytes are just too obvious, a better exemple of this would be the situation between R6H chaos spawn and regular chaos spawn. (both are the same in essence but one pays more)
Or the Cultists.


Truth is, GW is inconsistent with rules. Quite heavily, and has in some cases not even considered interaction of a piece of equipment. Then when they did intervene and afterwards updated a roules source (cue CSM 2.0 dex) forgot that they adapted the stratagem / rules in question and just copy pasted....

To say that GW isn't putting propper effort you could expect in a monetized product is, quite valid.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units."
Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?"
Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?"
GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!"
Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.  
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 BaconCatBug wrote:
Again, I am not asking for you to state once again that one is a typo and the other isn't. I am asking WHY one is a typo and the other isn't.

Because the possibility of an intentional 1000% increase on an unchanged troops unit is so low that it can be considered irrelevant.

You claim it's because one is a 1000% increase and the other isn't, so what % won't be considered a typo?

Somewhere below 1000% and above 0%. To the acolyte discussion, the exact value is irrelevant.

If you disagree, provide proof for the need of such a value.

7 Ork facts people always get wrong:
Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other.
A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot.
Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests.
Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why.
Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor.
Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers.
Orks do not have the power of believe. 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka






Considering they have like 2-3 sites, a facebook, twitter and the same can be said about the designers, why doesn't someone up the design totem pole come up and says guys we done goofed, the little gribblies do not cost 55pts, they cost 5, expect an FAQ/Errata soon?

how long does it take to write such a post?

Even if they would have to go to the very top of design team for it, for the head of all designers, and emails would have to be sent, because it was christmas seson, AND the book was not read after being printed by anyone, how long would the exchange take 3-4 hours, considering people not check their emails every 5 min?

And then some stuff, which GW later errates, gets the change not a day or hours later, but multiple months later, or even longer.


If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





For the same reason they never corrected "Monsterous Smash" in 6th edition. Communication often relies on the context understanding of the receiver for smoothing out mistakes or oversights. Since the context makes it clear what was intended, there's no miscommunication to clear up. There's egg on their faces, and they should correct their mistake, but there's no actual harm beyond embarrasment.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Karol wrote:


Considering they have like 2-3 sites, a facebook, twitter and the same can be said about the designers, why doesn't someone up the design totem pole come up and says guys we done goofed, the little gribblies do not cost 55pts, they cost 5, expect an FAQ/Errata soon?

how long does it take to write such a post?

Even if they would have to go to the very top of design team for it, for the head of all designers, and emails would have to be sent, because it was christmas seson, AND the book was not read after being printed by anyone, how long would the exchange take 3-4 hours, considering people not check their emails every 5 min?

And then some stuff, which GW later errates, gets the change not a day or hours later, but multiple months later, or even longer.



Because that's not how large corporation tend to work. There's a process and they're following it. In this case it's a stupid process because they really should have rushed out a quick fix for the most egregious errors like the 55 point Neophytes and the messed up Deathwatch unit sizes, with an understanding that a more complete errata would be forthcoming later.
   
Made in us
RogueSangre





The Cockatrice Malediction

So I actually have 2 theories as to why the errata is taking so long:

1. There were so many errors that there are actually more corrected pt values in the errata than correct pt values in the original. They can't release it because that many updated pts costs would normally be something that they would charge money for. So they're undergoing the painstaking process of ranking the corrections by order of importance with the understanding that they'll only release the top 20% now, with the remaining corrections to be set aside in a very safe place and included in CA 2020... Sorry! Sorry, couldn't keep it together through that last part. Almost made it with a straight face. Can we do another take?

2. They are extensively playtesting the corrections. After having played 3 whole games every week since it went to the printers, they've concluded that GSC neophytes might be too expensive at 55 pts per model. Currently testing 54 pts per model. More testing may be warranted (as time permits).
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

Slipspace wrote:
Karol wrote:


Considering they have like 2-3 sites, a facebook, twitter and the same can be said about the designers, why doesn't someone up the design totem pole come up and says guys we done goofed, the little gribblies do not cost 55pts, they cost 5, expect an FAQ/Errata soon?

how long does it take to write such a post?

Even if they would have to go to the very top of design team for it, for the head of all designers, and emails would have to be sent, because it was christmas seson, AND the book was not read after being printed by anyone, how long would the exchange take 3-4 hours, considering people not check their emails every 5 min?

And then some stuff, which GW later errates, gets the change not a day or hours later, but multiple months later, or even longer.



Because that's not how large corporation tend to work. There's a process and they're following it. In this case it's a stupid process because they really should have rushed out a quick fix for the most egregious errors like the 55 point Neophytes and the messed up Deathwatch unit sizes, with an understanding that a more complete errata would be forthcoming later.


Indeed. Things take as long as they take and get signed off by all kinds of people. Nerd rage doesn't usually speed up the corporate process.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 JohnnyHell wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
Karol wrote:


Considering they have like 2-3 sites, a facebook, twitter and the same can be said about the designers, why doesn't someone up the design totem pole come up and says guys we done goofed, the little gribblies do not cost 55pts, they cost 5, expect an FAQ/Errata soon?

how long does it take to write such a post?

Even if they would have to go to the very top of design team for it, for the head of all designers, and emails would have to be sent, because it was christmas seson, AND the book was not read after being printed by anyone, how long would the exchange take 3-4 hours, considering people not check their emails every 5 min?

And then some stuff, which GW later errates, gets the change not a day or hours later, but multiple months later, or even longer.



Because that's not how large corporation tend to work. There's a process and they're following it. In this case it's a stupid process because they really should have rushed out a quick fix for the most egregious errors like the 55 point Neophytes and the messed up Deathwatch unit sizes, with an understanding that a more complete errata would be forthcoming later.


Indeed. Things take as long as they take and get signed off by all kinds of people. Nerd rage doesn't usually speed up the corporate process.

Not to mention that it's very obvious to anyone employing even a modicum of common sense that the 55pts for a guard-equivalent infantry model was a mistake, so it's not actually that urgent at all.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran





bananathug wrote:
Yeah, the 55 point GSC is an aberration but there are tons of other assumed mistakes in CA2019 that should have been errata'd day 1 (just like the SW codex...).

Another poster wrote that it's not like GW opens the product the same time it goes to the public. These issues should have been known about before it was shipped and a day 1 errata should have been issued.

If I make a mistake at my job that some how gets to the client I'm working all night (or however long it takes) to get it right. The whole time I'm burning with shame/guilt/embarrassment and Vacation/Christmas/death be damned because it's a mark of professionalism and personal pride to not allow such an easily rectifiable mistake to continue. Something as simple as a typo in a PDF should get fixed right away.

The fact that GW hasn't fixed it yet and is so far outside of their schedule hopefully points to the fact that something else is going on and GW knows that CA2019 was a mistake and they have lots of things to fix.

Typos and copy/paste errors should take minutes/hours to fix not days/weeks. "Oh, we put the wrong space wolf fast attack page in (I hope they did). John, put out a community post and Frank you put up the right PDF." How the hell does that take a month?

I haven't bought any GW product since the SM 2.0 + supplements debacle and hopefully others are too. I doubt GW misses my 100ish bucks a month but a couple hundred of us could impact the bottom line enough that GW would take these mistakes (and rule balance in general) more seriously. GWs cavalier attitude towards the rules/balance of their game will only be addressed when we start voting with their wallet.

The vitriol leveled at the "white knights" on dakka is because those of us fed-up with being taken advantage of by GW understand that as long as we are the vocal minority nothing with change.

I am a huge fan of this game. It is one of the few hobbies I crave time out of my busy schedule to enjoy and wish that GW cared as much about it as they care about coming up with new ways to get our money. As others have said, as long as people keep buying then GW has little to no reason to change.

I came back to 8th because of the promises of the new GW. Better marketing, better communication and "the most play tested edition yet" lured me back in from almost a decade away from the game. It's frustrating that the problems the game has now seem so easy to fix and yet GW won't put forth anything but the minimum effort to fix them.


If everyone would just stop buying CA the problem would work itself out.
   
Made in us
Waaagh! Warbiker





Pancakey wrote:

If everyone would just stop buying CA the problem would work itself out.


This. Read it again folks; This. "But I NEED Chapter Approved in order to play the game!" No, you don't. There are other means to get the updated points, and by continuing to purchase these shoddy books full of errors the message you send to GW is "Sure, I will purchase whatever crap you put in front of me. Take my money!" Make them earn your money by ensuring they spend a little time proofreading their books.


edit: Look, I really like this game, or at least the potential of what the game could be if GW were to spend more of an effort writing consistent rules for all factions with an attempt to balance each unit's effectiveness with its point cost. Instead, their focus is on selling the newest hot models above all else. While this strategy increases their revenue in the short term, a better set of rules and greater attention to all factions would help them so much more in the long term by bringing in more players (and consumers $$$) for all factions, with more veteran players sticking around for the improved game experience.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/01/13 18:12:52


 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 Jidmah wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
Again, I am not asking for you to state once again that one is a typo and the other isn't. I am asking WHY one is a typo and the other isn't.

Because the possibility of an intentional 1000% increase on an unchanged troops unit is so low that it can be considered irrelevant.

You claim it's because one is a 1000% increase and the other isn't, so what % won't be considered a typo?

Somewhere below 1000% and above 0%. To the acolyte discussion, the exact value is irrelevant.

If you disagree, provide proof for the need of such a value.
By your logic the thunder hammer increase or razorwing flock increase should be ignored. So I ask you to again, what % increase do you consider to be ignore worthy. You seem so sure that the acolytes increase can be ignored you must have an answer for me. All I ask is for a single number.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
Again, I am not asking for you to state once again that one is a typo and the other isn't. I am asking WHY one is a typo and the other isn't.

Because the possibility of an intentional 1000% increase on an unchanged troops unit is so low that it can be considered irrelevant.

You claim it's because one is a 1000% increase and the other isn't, so what % won't be considered a typo?

Somewhere below 1000% and above 0%. To the acolyte discussion, the exact value is irrelevant.

If you disagree, provide proof for the need of such a value.
By your logic the thunder hammer increase or razorwing flock increase should be ignored. So I ask you to again, what % increase do you consider to be ignore worthy. You seem so sure that the acolytes increase can be ignored you must have an answer for me. All I ask is for a single number.


Oh good. A strawman. Seriously dude...

Also asking a question to which there is no answer. The answer is “use your nous”, and is covered in many posts above. Stop being absolutist and ridiculous.

One day you won’t be disingenuous and will contribute positively to a thread. Until then... threads will continue to circle the drain like this one. Roll on the thread lock.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






How is it a strawman? He is asserting that a points increase is too large, in his opinion, to be valid. I counter with examples that, in my opinion, are also invalid by the same argument.

Why are my examples invalid and his valid?
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: