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.

 Albertorius wrote:

 PetitionersCity wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Yes, yes, you keep explaining how needing another 120€ worth of books that aren't even out yet to play the base game is a good thing.

No need to exaggerate, please, I haven't said that.

Just a FYI, it usually is not kosher here to go up and post full sets of rules.

Its all from Sprues and Brews' review, which GW seems very happy to endorse since they keep sending them things and this read through of every page is their review MO, now for many years.




It's also not the full set of rules, although maybe I'm pushing the 10% rule of library best practice? But anything to actually help discussion

Personally I'm mostly disappointed with what the box has, and the specifics of the book therein.

It's GW policy, but the fact that the newer books give you the barest minimum for them to be considered "complete" (as in, playable with that the box has, and nothing else) irks me enough to simply not buy anything at all.

Add to that that I already have like 30 orlocks, that the totally not tuskens don't really speak that much to me and that the scenery seems to be the least useful scenery I've seen in a long time, coupled with the price point that GW nowadays think they can get away with and... well, printer goes brrrrr.

It's not like there's no good games already with a similar premise out in the wild, either.

Thank you for explaining all this, Albertorius, I do agree on having too many orlocks (and for anyone thinking to sell them off, their value will be lower now too for any resales) and wishing they had done something a bit different there.

I am really curious to see how well this will sell or not. Maybe it is, like many boxes, a once and done. Maybe a smaller hive war box will come too.

And yes, I do agree with anyone who says a GotU style Da Uvver Book should have been in the box, or at least out alongside it..but since that isn't the case I do like to focus on the other positives in the box. But I understand why you don't see those, and happy to hear them

 Albertorius wrote:
Personally I'm mostly disappointed with what the box has, and the specifics of the book therein.

It's GW policy, but the fact that the newer books give you the barest minimum for them to be considered "complete" (as in, playable with that the box has, and nothing else) irks me enough to simply not buy anything at all.

Add to that that I already have like 30 orlocks, that the totally not tuskens don't really speak that much to me and that the scenery seems to be the least useful scenery I've seen in a long time, coupled with the price point that GW nowadays think they can get away with and... well, printer goes brrrrr.

It's not like there's no good games already with a similar premise out in the wild, either.

The scenery is nice to look at, but seemingly mostly only useful for that set, I was wondering what benefit being in an elevated position really gives one in an environment so little other terrain but it seems like it's because the vehicle stuff is quite strong, so being high up keeps guys from getting run over basically. But ya I agree on everything else, the only reason I never jumped into necromunda is it needs a matched play that keeps getting updated for it to work for one off games, the campaigns just aren't viable for a lot of people who can only get games in once in a while.

There is also a new rule, Battlefield Surface, in which it is generally more dangerous to be on the lower ground than above. This relates to the environment you roll for the battle - whcih can be Near Wastes, Deep Wastes and Wild Wastes. If playing the actual campaign in the book, the roads you challenge for determine which part of the Wastes the battle will be in, but if you don't want to do that, you can roll to determine where you are, or just pick. Either way, you then roll on the appropriate table for those Wastes.

Roads - another new rule - are exempt from the surface rule, however. This is recommended to be a 6-8" wide road from one side of the battlefield to the other.

In addition, you have the Season rules - Season of Fire, Season of Ash and Changing Seasons. These often affect Visability (X), another new rule. They also have other effects - radiation, wind, etc - and Pitch Black comes with a number. Something intriguing is that Visibility limits charges - you cannot charge beyond the visibility (X) distance (unless you have something that helps you see beyond). In my group we'd always let charges occur against something you couldn't see (around corners, for example), but perhaps we've been doing that wrong?

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 pancakeonions wrote:
Here's an unboxing from a guy I follow, Universal Head, with a deep dive into the rules:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr9ABx8rxfY

I appreciate the work they do for the community with the summary sheets and such, but damn that boy is full blown shill.

Funny. Ive been following the guy since 2009 and Peter is anything but a shill. In fact, the reason why he isnt a prolificly successful content creator is because he wont shill.

Not trying to invalidate your remark, as your opinion is your own. Im just pointing out after much experience with the guy, youd likely agree too.

Speaking of shills...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PetitionersCity wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Yes, yes, you keep explaining how needing another 120€ worth of books that aren't even out yet to play the base game is a good thing.

No need to exaggerate, please, I haven't said that.

Maybe not explicitely, but definitely implicitely. We get it. Youre ride or die and your rationalization is the only correct interpretation. ..

...And sump city is now dead to me as legit a resource.

.

I'd shill to if GW gave me a 300$$ box every quarter to "review" lolol.

Chopstick wrote:
I'd shill to if GW gave me a 300$$ box every quarter to "review" lolol.

They even spell out what you can’t say. Pretty sweet gig.

 Wiz Warrior wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 pancakeonions wrote:
Here's an unboxing from a guy I follow, Universal Head, with a deep dive into the rules:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr9ABx8rxfY

I appreciate the work they do for the community with the summary sheets and such, but damn that boy is full blown shill.

Funny. Ive been following the guy since 2009 and Peter is anything but a shill. In fact, the reason why he isnt a prolificly successful content creator is because he wont shill.

Not trying to invalidate your remark, as your opinion is your own. Im just pointing out after much experience with the guy, youd likely agree too.

Anybody getting pre-release/review copies of anything from GW is, at best, compromised in terms of being able to impartially review a product.

"Shills"? Good good, as a community, have you guys ever wondered if you are actually a bunch of bullies? "Sorry if you disagree with us, you are a shill/brainless/the problem and we'll gang up on you - our way or the highway". That is actually bullying, you know. Like you have created a community where saying something you
guys disagree with just leads to name calling and actual genuine internet toxicity.

When did Dakka become more negative than the Sump on yaktribe (which actually doesn't engage in that kind of language and is a constructive place to complain about current necromunda and GW, one which is pretty levelheaded) and head towards a 4chan conversation?

Ah well, guys, you've achieved the aims of your bullying - no dissent. bye! And you will pat yourselves on the back, say "mission achieved" and not realise - or fully realise, perhaps - what utter bullies you are acting like. Such an awful, poisonous attitude a number of you have, utterly unwelcoming.

If we get told who is being paid to tell us nice things about products, that helps us decide what to buy. There are laws being brought in to force that, such as telling people when a prodicty is given for free, or a review itt otherwise paid-for. But, the terms used for this kind of information, and the people creating the reviews, could be better.

 privateer4hire wrote:
They even spell out what you can’t say. Pretty sweet gig.

What sort of things are restricted?

 PetitionersCity wrote:
"Shills"? Good good, as a community, have you guys ever wondered if you are actually a bunch of bullies? "Sorry if you disagree with us, you are a shill/brainless/the problem and we'll gang up on you - our way or the highway". That is actually bullying, you know. Like you have created a community where saying something you
guys disagree with just leads to name calling and actual genuine internet toxicity.

When did Dakka become more negative than the Sump on yaktribe (which actually doesn't engage in that kind of language and is a constructive place to complain about current necromunda and GW, one which is pretty levelheaded) and head towards a 4chan conversation?

Ah well, guys, you've achieved the aims of your bullying - no dissent. bye! And you will pat yourselves on the back, say "mission achieved" and not realise - or fully realise, perhaps - what utter bullies you are acting like. Such an awful, poisonous attitude a number of you have, utterly unwelcoming.

I don't see anything wrong with calling someone who got paid to favourably review a product a shill. That's just the truth.

Are they paid? Or are they given a review copy?

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Anybody getting pre-release/review copies of anything from GW is, at best, compromised in terms of being able to impartially review a product.

Cow manure!

As someone who was once paid to review movies, which I saw for free before the release date, I can honestly tell you the price I paid to see the movie had no effect on my reviews. The people giving these things out for free need the reviewers more than the other way around. The value of any review isn’t numbers or thumbs up but details both good and bad. I did say some nice things about some bad movies and frequently bad things about good ones. GW doesn’t buy reviews like corporations buy politicians, but only because they can’t.

Well if you go "angry review" on their products it's very likely that they won't give you another 200-300$ product to review next time, I don't remember any movie ticket cost 100$. they cost around 2USD to 10 USD here.

The cost of me going to cinema to watch every blockbuster movies in a year is less than a single infantry box from GW.

The Ash Wastes box model don't come with Necromunda / Zone Mortalis bases, do they?

 Chairman Aeon wrote:


Cow manure!

As someone who was once paid to review movies, which I saw for free before the release date, I can honestly tell you the price I paid to see the movie had no effect on my reviews. The people giving these things out for free need the reviewers more than the other way around. The value of any review isn’t numbers or thumbs up but details both good and bad. I did say some nice things about some bad movies and frequently bad things about good ones. GW doesn’t buy reviews like corporations buy politicians, but only because they can’t.

There's a difference between a professional reviewer paid by an independent party (a newspaper, magazine, website) and an amateur doing it for free products.

Are there any independent review outlets left? Dragon magazine is long gone, I guess there's Wargames Illustrated, maybe some fan-supported sites. But yeah, I don't assign much credibility to someone working for free product. I'd give more credit to people who bought a game with their own money, invested time and can provide candid feedback.

There are maybe half a dozen magazines in the UK I'd say would qualify as "an independent party", though I'd need a trip to WH Smiths to get the names right

I don't mind reviews-for-free-product, unless the reviewer fails to disclose that this is the case.

There is a difference between people paid to provide positive reviews and people sent free copies to review.

I've seen plenty of criticism from reviews on free product.

You are welcome to not believe them and they should (and hopefully do) tell you that they've had free product - but some of the stuff in this thread is ridiculous.

 Chairman Aeon wrote:
As someone who was once paid to review movies, which I saw for free before the release date, I can honestly tell you the price I paid to see the movie had no effect on my reviews. The people giving these things out for free need the reviewers more than the other way around. The value of any review isn’t numbers or thumbs up but details both good and bad. I did say some nice things about some bad movies and frequently bad things about good ones. GW doesn’t buy reviews like corporations buy politicians, but only because they can’t.

Difference is, your NDA with the movie company to get access to the pre-release did not mention "not talking bad about the company/product and no corporations with competitors for 3 years after watching the movie"
and I don't think you even had an NDA with the company that made the movie in the first place (or need to avoided saying that you have seen the movie for free on pre-release)

yes GW needs the reviews, but a lot of people now make their living by reviewing GW boxes, and they need GW to get a copy of the box (gambling on pre-order if you might get a copy or not is not really an option, specially not if you need the review being live on release day)

This is one thing the company was spot on, get the influencers who make their living from social media into needing the products more than GW needs the review
for everyone who won't do it under certain conditions there will be 2 new ones who find it a good way to start their channel

Yeah I don't buy the "People who receive stuff from GW are always positive/shill!" argument.

GW sent WintersSEO just about every 40k book they make, and he has done videos basically saying "These books are gak. Don't buy them.".

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:


... But yeah, I don't assign much credibility to someone working for free product. I'd give more credit to people who bought a game with their own money, invested time and can provide candid feedback.

Well i know of a one person who built 'communities' and spent a lot of time and money writing or recording reviews in the hope of getting onto the free product list. Didnt trust their opinion at all when they paid for stuff or got it free. That was shilling, but its pretty obvious.

Like everything, independent or 'free review copy' you have to judge that review and person on their merits. Personally I see what else they have reviewed and how I agree with those past comments. You also need to take your opinions about details and compare against the reviewers thoughts.

For Ash wastes the most detailed review ive watched was by the guy from Sump City radio. He went into great detail, sumarising the mechanics of the new ways to play etc.
I really liked the review and his summary was it is a great box. Personally tho i dont think he really reviewed the box, but its the rules he reviewed and i think everything he said about those will be correct. If you want to play it now then yeah the box is great, it has the rules, dice, tokens, etc. that you will need and wont be available separate for some time.

Is the total box good value? yes if you want both gangs anyway and more terrain. But really thats not the tough ask, you are buying into a game system that will require you to buy the gang book, the new vehicle book when it comes out, probably more different vehicles or extra gangers. Basically its £180 (£135 3rd party) plus another £100 if you want to keep playing that game as it expands. The alternative is buying rules, dice and aftermarket tokens when they eventually come out, but that will be at least £50 if not more.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah I don't buy the "People who receive stuff from GW are always positive/shill!" argument.

no, but most of those who never mention that they got a free copy or a pre-release review copy

This has been around since at least 2014:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/26/vloggers-must-tell-fans-paid-adverts-asa-rules

Video bloggers are breaking the law if they fail to tell their legions of fans they are being paid to promote products, according to a landmark ruling from the UK advertising watchdog.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) told vloggers it “pays to be honest” after banning a campaign for Oreo biscuits featuring a host of YouTube stars that did not clearly label the videos as having been paid for.

I have no idea whetehr this is still as it stands, but reviews must state whetehr the product was send for free.

I'll be sopping up all that second hand marked down content for the game.

Price was a big turn off, but bang for the buck was the major issue I had.

You get ANOTHER rulebook to add to the other four or five, with even less consistency.

Some riders and the new gang, which is half a gang.


If there's anything to ask, lets ask that they at least proofread it this time. I mean $300.00? you should be expected to proofread.


Give me a free game, I'll shill all day till the cows come home. GW? Heck yeah!!! Greatest games on the planet! These games raise the dead, cure the sick, heal the wounded, feeds the poor!
Buy them, you can't live without them...

 PetitionersCity wrote:
In my group we'd always let charges occur against something you couldn't see (around corners, for example), but perhaps we've been doing that wrong?

Pretty sure you can normally charge things you can’t see. I assume Visibility (X) is also accounting for assorted side effects like wind disabling your other senses beyond that range too, so you basically don’t know they’re actually there. Tabletop fog of war, basically.

 Chairman Aeon wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Anybody getting pre-release/review copies of anything from GW is, at best, compromised in terms of being able to impartially review a product.

Cow manure!

As someone who was once paid to review movies, which I saw for free before the release date, I can honestly tell you the price I paid to see the movie had no effect on my reviews. The people giving these things out for free need the reviewers more than the other way around. The value of any review isn’t numbers or thumbs up but details both good and bad. I did say some nice things about some bad movies and frequently bad things about good ones. GW doesn’t buy reviews like corporations buy politicians, but only because they can’t.

There is a body of evidence that givng people free stuff positively influences them in the favour of the giver, even when the recipient is aware of the bias and tries to minimise it. This is why drugs "repping" is increasingly heavily regulated in the UK,to minimise the effects on prescribing habits and ensure prescriptions are based on evidence and cost-effectiveness rather than the all-inclusive trip to Tenerife the rep sent you on (this used to happen).

Absolutely the same thing will happen with boxset reviewers, so it is technically true they will be "compromised". However, the effect is much less important, will be quite small, and it is unlikely to turn someone into an overt shill. The pressure is still there though.

At least youtubers have to declare that they have received something - I donlt know if the same is true of film critics.

Especially as the only truly negative thing about GWs offerings is the price. The models look amazing (allowing for ranges of personal preference) and there are loads of ways to play with the toys. They are just eye wateringly expensive now as GW plumbs the depths of what the market can support.

If you no longer have to experience that particular pain, everything else will seem even more rosy by comparison.