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.

Dudeface wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Argive wrote:
ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more

@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..

Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.

This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..

Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been

It was also really dull and lacked any character imo.

I kind of agree, I just wish "adding character" was not "completely and utterly disregarding any need for balance."

GW didn't try to balance anything that came out with the codexes with options present in the indexes. "reroll 1 die", "Interrupt combat" and "autopass morale" were not taken as the baseline value of CPs that should be used for stratagems, they just dropped a ton of strats willy nilly that had wildly varying power levels.

"6++ FNP" and "+1A on the charge" were not taken as the baseline value for warlord traits, they just gave obviously massively superior warlord traits straight out of the gate like "+1A +1S all the time babyyyyyyy!"

That's always been a thing that frustrated me with GW's rules writing. Sometimes, they just decide "Eh, feth it! We're gonna make this new book a good solid 30% more powerful than the last book, and we'll update everyone else....eventually! Maybe never tbh!"

Every time I play against one of the older codexes that I haven't for a while I'm always just shocked at how blatantly terrible some of the stuff in it is. I had a game against necrons where some little stupid character of mine like a weirdboy got into a slapfight with the rough Necron equivalent a cryptek. And it was like "Ok, cryptek swings. He's got ONE MELEE ATTACK."

and it was just like, oh. Oh, they just never bothered to fix those rules for nearly 4 years. The cryptek is a like 90-point model that just...gets only one melee attack. less than stupid 20 point platoon commanders.

Dudeface wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Argive wrote:
ahh yes the "wait and see" strategem.. You can never win against it. Because as long as time exists you can "wait and see" more

@ OP I applaud you optimisim sir. Despite all the gak Im actualy fairly optimistic. No joke..

Im optimistic that AT SOME POINT in the lifespan of 9th edition the chips will FINALLY fall and we will have some sort "fair and balanced" starting point for MOST (sadly not ALL because GW is GW) armies.

This will be a "calm" like in FFX after Sin dies.. and if youre not aware of what I mean you have lost out bruh.. you have lost out.. SO this calm will only last a max of 6 months before some new broken BS is introduced or some major nerf where everything goes out of whack again and we go back to square one..

Honestly 8e indexes was the healthiest the game had ever been

It was also really dull and lacked any character imo.

Yeah, it might have been more balanced but the lack of any warlord traits or relics (on the back of swathes of wargear being removed wholesale) made for a very dull experience.

To my mind, it's perhaps an indicator that the game has been relying on those things rather too heavily. Not that I object to them (though if I got my way, Stratagems are definitely going in the incinerator), but I think some races could do with more non-relic wargear.

Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.

 vipoid wrote:


Yeah, it might have been more balanced but the lack of any warlord traits or relics (on the back of swathes of wargear being removed wholesale) made for a very dull experience.

To my mind, it's perhaps an indicator that the game has been relying on those things rather too heavily. Not that I object to them (though if I got my way, Stratagems are definitely going in the incinerator), but I think some races could do with more non-relic wargear.

I think its more an indication of why Warhammer is popular. The IP is evocative and people like to make pew pew noises in their head.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:


Yeah, it might have been more balanced but the lack of any warlord traits or relics (on the back of swathes of wargear being removed wholesale) made for a very dull experience.

To my mind, it's perhaps an indicator that the game has been relying on those things rather too heavily. Not that I object to them (though if I got my way, Stratagems are definitely going in the incinerator), but I think some races could do with more non-relic wargear.

I think its more an indication of why Warhammer is popular. The IP is evocative and people like to make pew pew noises in their head.

Only in their heads?

 vipoid wrote:


Only in their heads?

I'll admit to spit shining the car windows as a kid. These days I have to keep my hands on the wheel.

 CommanderWalrus wrote:
so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!

Since we are both new here, of my very limited interraction with this forum, I will offer this:


Dakka is only useful if you follow a few people and love the painting stuff. If you like learning from some of the players and blogs that they post about, its a good site. If you came here with the intent to say, or do anything remotely positive reflecting on good old evil incarnate themselves, GW, then you are in the wrong place.

One of my locals said it best. He stated that your local game store is where people go to enjoy their hobby. Dakka, Reddit and Facebook are where people go to hate it. This forum, by and large, is filled with people who hate the hobby, don't play, or just play troll for the sake of trolling. As I said, a good place to keep up with some of the blog posts and see what a few people think about particular subjects, like developing news, but if you are looking for anything close to a reasonable conversation about 40k, this site will disappoint every time.

Seabass wrote:

 CommanderWalrus wrote:
so I see a lot of people on the forums right now in various states of either distress or excitement about the current state of warhammer. And i think it's really important right now to simply calm down and be patient for a lot of reasons.
We're in a really weird spot right now. We have a lot of rules and information about 9th edition out and about, but I would like to remind everyone that none of the codexes have come out yet. We're in the "index era" of the current edition, and it is really too early to make judgment about most things. I mean, we all remember how bad things were in the 8th edition index era, right? I've seen people talking, sometimes rather heatedly, about how "x faction is going to be underpowered, y option is going to be completely broken" and I would just like to say that while discussion is well and good(not to mention the point of the forums), it's too early in the game to be freaking out right now. We don't know when the next xenos release is going to be, we don't know if said releases are going to be big and awesome and exciting or disappointing, we don't know if Necrons/Marines will be broken one way or the other, we don't know if it's going to be just marines forever and ever with no end in sight (but to be fair that is looking pretty likely at this point). For all we know they could drop an equally big release for, say, Eldar next month. Not likely, but the point is that we should wait and see at this point.
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it, I'm saying we shouldn't despair when we haven't even touched the books yet. I, for one, choose to remain optimistic. It might be blasphemy for me to say this, but GW has proven they can listen to fans, and they have proven they can make sound decisions. Whether or not they do is up in the air, but we shouldn't dismiss it as a possibility.
Sorry about the wall of text. Please be good to each other on here and everywhere else, and remember to follow the forum rules!

Since we are both new here, of my very limited interraction with this forum, I will offer this:


Dakka is only useful if you follow a few people and love the painting stuff. If you like learning from some of the players and blogs that they post about, its a good site. If you came here with the intent to say, or do anything remotely positive reflecting on good old evil incarnate themselves, GW, then you are in the wrong place.

One of my locals said it best. He stated that your local game store is where people go to enjoy their hobby. Dakka, Reddit and Facebook are where people go to hate it. This forum, by and large, is filled with people who hate the hobby, don't play, or just play troll for the sake of trolling. As I said, a good place to keep up with some of the blog posts and see what a few people think about particular subjects, like developing news, but if you are looking for anything close to a reasonable conversation about 40k, this site will disappoint every time.

I disagree. I think Dakka has it's fair share of very reasonable conversation. But reasonable conversations comes with reasonable assessment of the facts coupled with the bandying about of opinions. Do you want a bunch of sunshine and rainbows about GWs history? Well there are a couple people on this forum who will defend GW to their deaths. And while there are also the opposite haters who gunna hate, I think there are more people then both those camps combined who just see the facts and make their opinions known.

Reasonable conversation. If you, or anyone else, has any actual pertinent data to present I would love to see and assess that data. But if you only have handfuls of hopes... well then I have a history of data to present.

Reasonable conversation doesn't come from a echo chamber where everyone is just happy to be there. Reasonable conversation comes from people willing to exchange ideas and debate their merits. I am ready for reasonable conversation whenever you are.

I think you can just look through the comments and see the number of personal attacks, and the lack of data represented and put forth from both sides and reasonably conclude that there is nothing reasonable about the conversation here, for the vast majority of responses.

This forum holds little value other than to engage in small conversations like this while reading other threads from people who are presenting useful material, save the painting, lore and a few other subs.

On the other hand I think this is one of the few forums where you can call a spade a spade rather than just gush about how amazing GW is. Many of the negative comments come from people who expect better than the gak we often get and have no qualms about calling GW out for their often ridiculous design and rules.

Wayniac wrote:
On the other hand I think this is one of the few forums where you can call a spade a spade rather than just gush about how amazing GW is. Many of the negative comments come from people who expect better than the gak we often get and have no qualms about calling GW out for their often ridiculous design and rules.

one of the few?

you're, you're not serious, are you?

For the places I go, beating up on GW, and more appropriately, refusing to see anything they do as good or positive, is a common position. I'm a member of a lot of FB groups, Reddit subs, Here, and Discord channels. So far the discord channels seem to be ok, YMMV. The rest are dumpster fires.

Wanna hate your hobby? discuss it online. Wanna enjoy your hobby? play it.

special exception for a lot of the Youtube personalities. Tabletop Tactics, Tabletop Titans, Winters SEO, Leutin09, Wolf Lord Rho, Baldermort, this list goes on, but those dudes are absolutely top-notch. Even when they have a criticism, it is framed in a reasonable manner. They are often a wonderful example of how you can disagree with something that Beelzebub does, I mean, GW does, and still find enjoyment in the hobby.

Yeah the assertion that Dakka is a cesspit of negativity does not line up with my experience and I've been on this site for over 10 years. I'd say the forum probably has a relatively equal distribution of GW critics and defenders and frankly I really dig that, it offers a balanced perspective and I think that's why I've kept coming back for so many years. If you feel the site is too negative, be the change you want to see.

It's not a binary situation. You can be in and a part of the hobby, enjoy parts of it, and hate other parts of it.

Recognizing GW for what it is not mutually exclusive from enjoying building and painting. Recognizing incredible flaws in their game and product doesn't mean you hate miniature war gaming. It's REASONABLE to point out the flaw that is the turn structure. It's reasonable to correctly assess it's impact on the game and GWs refusal to get better. It's reasonable to point out all the faqs and erratas and the sheer volume of documents needed to play a up to date game of 40k.

You don't need to compliment sandwich GW to levy good criticisms.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
Yeah the assertion that Dakka is a cesspit of negativity does not line up with my experience and I've been on this site for over 10 years. I'd say the forum probably has a relatively equal distribution of GW critics and defenders and frankly I really dig that, it offers a balanced perspective and I think that's why I've kept coming back for so many years. If you feel the site is too negative, be the change you want to see.

Being the change you want to see in this world works really well in face to face interactions. On the internet, I do have concerns. I am also not saying the forum is not without merit. I do come back because I follow people who posit both often positive and often negative views of GW and their efforts. However, the vast majority of this is or are just insults and adhominem attacks thrown around or complaining about GW, many times with little merit or information, other than to look at them and say "see, 15 years ago, when they did this, they screwed it up, so they will just screw up again". The same also remains true about some of the white knights (which, I guess includes me at this point) who will not accept fault with GW.

I understand the importance of looking at past behavior to help determine reasonable assessment of future behaviors, but the past can be a trap. I understand the dangers of being optimistic about the future with unrealistic expectations.


The vast majority of interactions in these threads seems locked, quite bitterly i might add, in one or the other. (Myself included. I will freely admit I am more willing to give GW the benefit of the doubt after 8th edition, they have earned back some of my customer good will. recent decisions in their marketing have also done the same.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:
It's not a binary situation. You can be in and a part of the hobby, enjoy parts of it, and hate other parts of it.

Recognizing GW for what it is not mutually exclusive from enjoying building and painting. Recognizing incredible flaws in their game and product doesn't mean you hate miniature war gaming. It's REASONABLE to point out the flaw that is the turn structure. It's reasonable to correctly assess it's impact on the game and GWs refusal to get better. It's reasonable to point out all the faqs and erratas and the sheer volume of documents needed to play a up to date game of 40k.

You don't need to compliment sandwich GW to levy good criticisms.

Your position in that statement is really telling. "GW's refusal to get better" is extremely descriptive of how one could view your stance. No, a "complaint sandwich" is not necessary, however, if all that populated this, and many other threads like it was based on the construct of discussing the game instead of beating down GW (and there very much is a difference) i think the impression, at least from my perspective, would change. As it is, that is not what I see here. Thats not what I have ever seen here. (Though i will freely admit that while I have lurked a long time, I have not been an active participant for very long). Thankfully, my perspective, and my impression of this site, like any other opinion, is just mine. My perspective isn't required or needed. However, when I read the OP, like everyone else here, I wanted to chime in.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.

How so? It's far better than the gak we had at any lifecycle of 8e and 9e (outside of index).

Yeah sure, it was bland. But that was what it was supposed to be, here's the template for *everyone* to start playing 8e right out the gate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seabass wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
On the other hand I think this is one of the few forums where you can call a spade a spade rather than just gush about how amazing GW is. Many of the negative comments come from people who expect better than the gak we often get and have no qualms about calling GW out for their often ridiculous design and rules.

one of the few?

you're, you're not serious, are you?

For the places I go, beating up on GW, and more appropriately, refusing to see anything they do as good or positive, is a common position. I'm a member of a lot of FB groups, Reddit subs, Here, and Discord channels. So far the discord channels seem to be ok, YMMV. The rest are dumpster fires.

Wanna hate your hobby? discuss it online. Wanna enjoy your hobby? play it.

special exception for a lot of the Youtube personalities. Tabletop Tactics, Tabletop Titans, Winters SEO, Leutin09, Wolf Lord Rho, Baldermort, this list goes on, but those dudes are absolutely top-notch. Even when they have a criticism, it is framed in a reasonable manner. They are often a wonderful example of how you can disagree with something that Beelzebub does, I mean, GW does, and still find enjoyment in the hobby.

Sure, but we don't have 20+ minutes of podcast to talk about our positions on things. There, one has the time to be far more nuanced. If one was to write word for word what they say, it'd be blown off as a wall of text and never read.

I am one of those horrid dreadknights, a herald of ruin, a despoiler of fun and an Abaddon of marines. And yet I'm happy to point out that the models are good in one thread, and in another I'd blow steam at GW for releasing yet again more of the same thing. If you go into threads that are like "marines bad" expect to see the topic around "marines bad", same thing with "model looks sick".

How so? It's far better than the gak we had at any lifecycle of 8e and 9e (outside of index).

Yeah sure, it was bland. But that was what it was supposed to be, here's the template for *everyone* to start playing 8e right out the gate.

The codex made my dudes worse, specialy if compared to other codex faction, so if we assume that GW writes their books the way they want, without someone forcing them to write the rules in specific ways, then durning the Index times my dudes were too good. So that is already one imbalanc found.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Anyone saying the Index era was healthy and balanced might as well just be called a liar because it literally could not be further from the truth.

At the time though no one knew any better, as there had not yet been enough waiting for any real seeing to begin.

Well, I feel like being in a vacuum until the codices for my armies (such as GK) arrive somewhere in the future.
I guess CSM will feel the same.
Releasing indices at the start of the 8th ed was a much better solution for players to get into the new edition.

Releasing Indices at the start of 8th was an imperative given that there were no other valid rules for all those armies (7th Ed wasn't compatible with 8th). 8th Codices are still compatible with 9th.

I don't see what the big deal is. This is the 5th time we've been through this situation. Why is everyone acting like it's so unique.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Releasing Indices at the start of 8th was an imperative given that there were no other valid rules for all those armies (7th Ed wasn't compatible with 8th). 8th Codices are still compatible with 9th.

I don't see what the big deal is. This is the 5th time we've been through this situation. Why is everyone acting like it's so unique.

We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Releasing Indices at the start of 8th was an imperative given that there were no other valid rules for all those armies (7th Ed wasn't compatible with 8th). 8th Codices are still compatible with 9th.

I don't see what the big deal is. This is the 5th time we've been through this situation. Why is everyone acting like it's so unique.

We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.

that seems like a bit of a rosetinted view.

Yeah no kidding.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah no kidding.

i mean,i think that partially the reason why people are so upset with GW atm, is that GW managed over the life cycle of 8th managed to get pretty close to a decently enough balanced game, then throwing it all out with marines 2.0.

Then gw managed to piss off even those that don't really care about balance, by releasing more or less nothing without more marines.

Meanwhile GW also thinks that removing 2 armies, whilest perfectly ignoring those with finecrap, or drinking age units, in favour of seemingly more marines is probably just the nail for alot of people.

That's not to say 9th doesn't improve, atleast baseline, in regards to terrain, but has still maintained the wierd view rules and made at the same time a rather comical mess out of it.

I'm fully aware that the current balance issues aren't anything particularly special, and we've had single-army dominance before the way we have Space Marine dominance now, but in the past rulebook changes have shaken up the game and significantly altered the balance of the backwards-compatible rulebooks. Think Hull Points in 6e presenting an immediate nerf to the Rhino parking lots of late 5e, or the Jink nerf presented immediately in the rulebook in 7e. Prior rulebooks have disrupted the game and left people scrambling to figure out what's going to be good next across the board even with fully backwards-compatible Codexes by changing core rules, the 8e-9e change is a maintenance release that hasn't really impacted balance much. With few exceptions things that were dominant late 8e are still dominant now.

I think it stems from the removal of USRs; because every rule is on the datasheet now it's much harder to fiddle with the balance of the game from the rulebook and we actually have to wait for the army books to show up for anything to happen.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.

- 3rd: Chaos Space Marines
- 4th: Eldar
- 5th: Grey Knights
- 6th/7th: Didn't play enough, though I remember Skyhammer Assault formations or free Rhinos / Razorbacks being the rage

Those I mentioned were just the most powerful books (in my opinion) for that edition. Doesn't mean that it was more fun to play against Starcannon spam in 3rd or Lash Chaos in 4th or Leafblower in 5th.
Every edition has its problematic units. If anything, getting an unbalanced book at the end of an edition is preferable to having it at the beginning or inbetween.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I'm fully aware that the current balance issues aren't anything particularly special, and we've had single-army dominance before the way we have Space Marine dominance now, but in the past rulebook changes have shaken up the game and significantly altered the balance of the backwards-compatible rulebooks. Think Hull Points in 6e presenting an immediate nerf to the Rhino parking lots of late 5e, or the Jink nerf presented immediately in the rulebook in 7e. Prior rulebooks have disrupted the game and left people scrambling to figure out what's going to be good next across the board even with fully backwards-compatible Codexes by changing core rules, the 8e-9e change is a maintenance release that hasn't really impacted balance much. With few exceptions things that were dominant late 8e are still dominant now.

I think it stems from the removal of USRs; because every rule is on the datasheet now it's much harder to fiddle with the balance of the game from the rulebook and we actually have to wait for the army books to show up for anything to happen.

Looking at the regular tournament posts on Goonhammer and from personal experience, I have to disagree. The new edition did shake things up for enough lists to be viable against Marines in a competitive setting.

a_typical_hero wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
We're all sick of getting endlessly steamrolled by Space Marines and were hoping for a reset. The five previous resets never came at a time when the game was so wildly out of whack in favour of one book.

- 3rd: Chaos Space Marines
- 4th: Eldar
- 5th: Grey Knights
- 6th/7th: Didn't play enough, though I remember Skyhammer Assault formations or free Rhinos / Razorbacks being the rage

Those I mentioned were just the most powerful books (in my opinion) for that edition. Doesn't mean that it was more fun to play against Starcannon spam in 3rd or Lash Chaos in 4th or Leafblower in 5th.
Every edition has its problematic units. If anything, getting an unbalanced book at the end of an edition is preferable to having it at the beginning or inbetween...

Again. Yes. Single-army dominance is a problem. Prior editions were able to nerf the single dominant army in the core rules. I can't speak to 3e->4e but 5e, 6e, and 7e all rewrote the vehicle rules in significant ways that neutered some of the most powerful builds the single dominant army had (loss of the skimmer save in 5e, loss of charge-from-stationary-Rhino and addition of hull points in 6e, rewritten Jink in 7e...). 9e couldn't do that.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Meanwhile GW also thinks that removing 2 armies, whilest perfectly ignoring those with finecrap, or drinking age units, in favour of seemingly more marines is probably just the nail for alot of people.

Removing two armies? I presume you mean R&H and... Corsairs... or Elysians? ( )

Yeah, I don't think GW ever even thought of those two as armies, as in, to (mis)quote M. Bison:

"The day GW removed R&H from 40k was the most important day in your life. For GW, it was Tuesday."

GW removing (or, more likely, just either forgetting or not even considering) a FW army shouldn't be a surprise sadly, especially when the minis aren't even for sale. The only reason Krieg are in the new book is 'cause FW still sell them.

I think we all need to accept that when that Compendium drops there's going to be a longer list of what we've lost compared to what we've gained. Just wait and, and you'll see ( ).

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Meanwhile GW also thinks that removing 2 armies, whilest perfectly ignoring those with finecrap, or drinking age units, in favour of seemingly more marines is probably just the nail for alot of people.

Removing two armies? I presume you mean R&H and... Corsairs... or Elysians? ( )

Yeah, I don't think GW ever even thought of those two as armies, as in, to (mis)quote M. Bison:

"The day GW removed R&H from 40k was the most important day in your life. For GW, it was Tuesday."

GW removing (or, more likely, just either forgetting or not even considering) a FW army shouldn't be a surprise sadly, especially when the minis aren't even for sale. The only reason Krieg are in the new book is 'cause FW still sell them.

I think we all need to accept that when that Compendium drops there's going to be a longer list of what we've lost compared to what we've gained. Just wait and, and you'll see ( ).

Doesn't change the fact, that the community will regard it , in general, as negligence of anything but the cashcow, whilest the cahscow get's milked to death.
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.
And for the others, the finecrap units left and those units which just needed and deserved a more pressing update getting ignored time and time again, has an impact on their sales figures.

Not Online!!! wrote:
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.

Will it?

If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
in the long term, their "tuesday" decision will hurt them.

Will it?

If they go and release Heretic Militarum (or whatever dumb name they decide on for Traitor Guard) tomorrow with a full plastic range, modelled on the examples we saw in BSF, with Beastmen included as a unit type, and all sorts of other things (tainted Commissars, Ogryn, etc.), will anyone really care that the FW list for R&H is defunct?

No , but ,that is only one half of the coin, the more pressing matter is for those factions that are Stuck in the desinvestment cycle Like dark eldar or craftworlders. These won't sell really anymore.