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.

Forget cut-offs or no cut-offs. The people who designed this should have gone "Oh, right: COVID!" and just scrapped that portion of the quiz.

Bunch'a idiots...

Voss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Voss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Voss wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Waaaghbert wrote:
What's up with this "if you haven't played in the last two years you not entitled to have an opinion" crowd going wild here?

You like 40k and have played in the last 2 years? cool, enjoy it give your feedback and continue. I tried 8th didn't enjoy it and would love to have the opportunity to say why. My opinion is not suddenly "worthless"

Let's reword the scope of the survey:

"Please provide feedback based on your games of 9th edition, to help shape improvements to the game and the next edition"

'Improvements to the game and next edition' aren't improved by shutting people's previous experience out.
Or even the things they'd like to see.

If you haven't played 9th, you have no real world experience of the current game to provide feedback with, it's really not unreasonable. I understand what you're saying but they likely didn't want to open it up to a horde of needless salty whiners who haven't bought or played anything in a decade.

I do love the way you characterize experience as 'needless salty whiners.' That certainly makes things open for discussion.

About as open as taking feedback on something someone has never experienced eh?

Good gatekeeping. Well done.
You definitely don't want returning or new customers from other systems, or just new customers in general, no sirree.
Next year, I guess the cutoff will be anyone not subbed to the App, right? That good for you?

I'm gatekeeping feedback on the current rules by accepting they want feedback from people who have actually played it, sounds appropriate.

Dudeface wrote:
I'm gatekeeping feedback on the current rules by accepting they want feedback from people who have actually played it, sounds appropriate.

And people have been countering that by saying that the ability to read and understand the game without necessarily having played it still means that they should have a voice.

I mean, by your logic, we can't have an opinion on any new book that comes out until we personally have played a game using that book, even if we have complete understanding of the base rules and can read the new rules and comprehend how they interact.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Forget cut-offs or no cut-offs. The people who designed this should have gone "Oh, right: COVID!" and just scrapped that portion of the quiz.

Bunch'a idiots...

No, no, the danger is over, everyone go back to the GW stores to Forge the Narrative. If you weren't forging the narrative in the last two plague-ridden years clearly you a hater, sir.

Zero reason to cut people off from providing more feedback. If GW isn't interested in hearing feedback from people who haven't played in the last 2 years (I mean, that would be stupid, but let's run with it for a moment), all it had to do was just filter that data out and not pay attention to it. Even if you're going to ignore someone, there's no reason to tell them that to their face.

Sometimes you really get the feeling GW is run by a bunch of utterly clueless middle managers who have never actually interacted with a real person in their lives.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I'm gatekeeping feedback on the current rules by accepting they want feedback from people who have actually played it, sounds appropriate.

And people have been countering that by saying that the ability to read and understand the game without necessarily having played it still means that they should have a voice.

I mean, by your logic, we can't have an opinion on any new book that comes out until we personally have played a game using that book, even if we have complete understanding of the base rules and can read the new rules and comprehend how they interact.

Well no, sometimes if something is so hideously misrepresented in the rules it'll stand out like a sore thumb, but I don't think anyone on the release of the Ork book was expecting the sort of dominance from buggies/planes the way we're seeing it now. That has become more apparent with time and experience most importantly.

Reading the books (if they have bought them and read them which I doubt if they're not intending to play), will grant you a knee-jerk response at best because it can't be quantified.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I'm gatekeeping feedback on the current rules by accepting they want feedback from people who have actually played it, sounds appropriate.

And people have been countering that by saying that the ability to read and understand the game without necessarily having played it still means that they should have a voice.

I mean, by your logic, we can't have an opinion on any new book that comes out until we personally have played a game using that book, even if we have complete understanding of the base rules and can read the new rules and comprehend how they interact.

He's using the "how do you know that dog turd I put on your plate tastes like dog turd? Have you tried it?" defence. Don't engage.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I'm gatekeeping feedback on the current rules by accepting they want feedback from people who have actually played it, sounds appropriate.

And people have been countering that by saying that the ability to read and understand the game without necessarily having played it still means that they should have a voice.

I mean, by your logic, we can't have an opinion on any new book that comes out until we personally have played a game using that book, even if we have complete understanding of the base rules and can read the new rules and comprehend how they interact.

He's using the "how do you know that dog turd I put on your plate tastes like dog turd? Have you tried it?" defence. Don't engage.

How do you know what dog turd tastes like?

Dudeface wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I'm gatekeeping feedback on the current rules by accepting they want feedback from people who have actually played it, sounds appropriate.

And people have been countering that by saying that the ability to read and understand the game without necessarily having played it still means that they should have a voice.

I mean, by your logic, we can't have an opinion on any new book that comes out until we personally have played a game using that book, even if we have complete understanding of the base rules and can read the new rules and comprehend how they interact.

He's using the "how do you know that dog turd I put on your plate tastes like dog turd? Have you tried it?" defence. Don't engage.

How do you know what dog turd tastes like?

Smell and taste are the same particles hitting your senses.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I just can't tell anymore if you're being serious or not. Maybe you could better explain if you posted an entire page of math for me to read.

So clever!

It's very important for me to fill out this survey about the flavor of dog turds. Why are they gatekeeping my opinions on dog turds?? I should be able to tell them what breed of dog to collect turds from, even though I won't eat their dog turds.

edit: but I am strongly considering eating their dog turds if they collect them from German Shephards, like they did in the 4th iteration of their turd menu!

Rihgu wrote:
It's very important for me to fill out this survey about the flavor of dog turds. Why are they gatekeeping my opinions on dog turds?? I should be able to tell them what breed of dog to collect turds from, even though I won't eat their dog turds.

Glad we can agree that 40k is currently a dog turd.

remember to tell them opening preorders for something on the 31st of the month does not count as 'releasing' them that month

The 'Make Orktober Real' movement

They really took the wind out of the sails of the “keep politics out of my hobby” crowd by openly denying the existence of Covid and lockdowns, and shutting down anyone who practices social distancing. Can’t wait to see how this plays out.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
They really took the wind out of the sails of the “keep politics out of my hobby” crowd by openly denying the existence of Covid and lockdowns, and shutting down anyone who practices social distancing. Can’t wait to see how this plays out.

I and many others have been practicing social distancing and respecting lockdowns, etc, while still playing Warhammer 40k (over virtual tabletops). While acknowledging that this option isn't available or interesting for everybody, I'm not going to pretend like the only way for anybody to have played 40k in the last 2 years is by being the wrong politic? Not 100% sure what you're implying with the politics comment.

I am needling GW for sticking their foot in something they try so hard to avoid.

It’s a similar own-goal to advertising a survey where their customers can finally feel heard, and then immediately telling most of them to f-off.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
They really took the wind out of the sails of the “keep politics out of my hobby” crowd by openly denying the existence of Covid and lockdowns, and shutting down anyone who practices social distancing. Can’t wait to see how this plays out.

Just redo the survey and pick 1 year or w/e. There isn't anything GW can do about COVID.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I am needling GW for sticking their foot in something they try so hard to avoid.

It’s a similar own-goal to advertising a survey where their customers can finally feel heard, and then immediately telling most of them to f-off.

Is it a customer survey or a player survey? I got the impression that since it was asking about the game, and not about my purchases, that it was a player survey.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:
Because I can read?

If I read a book on chess would I become an expert at chess or would I have to put that knowledge into practice?

You wanna be toxic, go ahead and be toxic.

I have played various GW games since the mid-90s, and still do. Warhammer 40k lately? No.

I still have an opinion on that game, though.

Rihgu wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I am needling GW for sticking their foot in something they try so hard to avoid.

It’s a similar own-goal to advertising a survey where their customers can finally feel heard, and then immediately telling most of them to f-off.

Is it a customer survey or a player survey? I got the impression that since it was asking about the game, and not about my purchases, that it was a player survey.

I got a few customer questions, so there is at least one path that leads to those in there.

TheGoodGerman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:
Because I can read?

If I read a book on chess would I become an expert at chess or would I have to put that knowledge into practice?

You wanna be toxic, go ahead and be toxic.

I have played various GW games since the mid-90s, and still do. Warhammer 40k lately? No.

I still have an opinion on that game, though.

Sure. But if I'm a company, and I'm currently going from "Stocks go up" to "Stocks go down" i want to know about my RECENT customers who are pissed off. I dont want data from you, I want to go back to "Stocks go up".

If I was pissing you off but pleasing enough other people for stocks go up....thats what I want. I want to piss you off and please other people.

But stocks go down! Why stocks go down, customers????

Apple fox wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I am needling GW for sticking their foot in something they try so hard to avoid.

It’s a similar own-goal to advertising a survey where their customers can finally feel heard, and then immediately telling most of them to f-off.

Is it a customer survey or a player survey? I got the impression that since it was asking about the game, and not about my purchases, that it was a player survey.

I got a few customer questions, so there is at least one path that leads to those in there.

Oh, interesting. I don't think any of the questions I got related at all to purchasing product! I wonder what the path to get there was?

 the_scotsman wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:
Because I can read?

If I read a book on chess would I become an expert at chess or would I have to put that knowledge into practice?

You wanna be toxic, go ahead and be toxic.

I have played various GW games since the mid-90s, and still do. Warhammer 40k lately? No.

I still have an opinion on that game, though.

Sure. But if I'm a company, and I'm currently going from "Stocks go up" to "Stocks go down" i want to know about my RECENT customers who are pissed off. I dont want data from you, I want to go back to "Stocks go up".

If I was pissing you off but pleasing enough other people for stocks go up....thats what I want. I want to piss you off and please other people.

But stocks go down! Why stocks go down, customers????

This is the truth of it really and as much as the game can be greatly improved, I don't think the rules of 40k are really the issue.

I dare say people coming out of furlough/lockdown and having notably less time are the main causes for a dip.

Imagine thinking that good data is generated through statements such as “how often should we fix the broken things that we designed”.

The fact of the matter is that GW got sloppy and cheap in not investing enough resources into game design for its flagship tabletop products.

I don’t know why people who think 9th edition is good are getting upset ITT. You should be celebrating because this survey demonstrates unequivocally that there will be absolutely no fundamental changes to the deep flaws (features) in the core mechanics of warhammer. So rest east and go out and collect all those strategem expansion warzone books and have it at it!!

Rihgu wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I am needling GW for sticking their foot in something they try so hard to avoid.

It’s a similar own-goal to advertising a survey where their customers can finally feel heard, and then immediately telling most of them to f-off.

Is it a customer survey or a player survey? I got the impression that since it was asking about the game, and not about my purchases, that it was a player survey.

I got a few customer questions, so there is at least one path that leads to those in there.

Oh, interesting. I don't think any of the questions I got related at all to purchasing product! I wonder what the path to get there was?

If I was aware before, I would have taken note just for interest sake. I was more focused on the game portion of the survey thinking everyone would get the same questions.

Dudeface wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:
Because I can read?

If I read a book on chess would I become an expert at chess or would I have to put that knowledge into practice?

You wanna be toxic, go ahead and be toxic.

I have played various GW games since the mid-90s, and still do. Warhammer 40k lately? No.

I still have an opinion on that game, though.

Sure. But if I'm a company, and I'm currently going from "Stocks go up" to "Stocks go down" i want to know about my RECENT customers who are pissed off. I dont want data from you, I want to go back to "Stocks go up".

If I was pissing you off but pleasing enough other people for stocks go up....thats what I want. I want to piss you off and please other people.

But stocks go down! Why stocks go down, customers????

This is the truth of it really and as much as the game can be greatly improved, I don't think the rules of 40k are really the issue.

I dare say people coming out of furlough/lockdown and having notably less time are the main causes for a dip.

yeah probably.

But hey, maybe if we get them to make the game a little better because of it itll be a win win.

I do like to think that at least a little bit of the dip was caused by people who built armies during lockdown actually cracking open a rulebook and going

"wait...

....what? Doctrina...whats? What is a "logos." how do I....canticles? OK, this guy gives me a "stratagem" for free so what's a *flips page* Ohhhhh, oh no...."

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
That was entertaining, choose your own adventure style. I died after the third question and the survey just stopped. Didn't know this was a rogue-like.

You got a third question?

Probably not. Upon reflection I think I may have counted "start survey" as a successful answer. Or the goodbye page.

It all happened so fast.

It seems pretty foolish of them to cut off survey feedback if you let them know you haven't played in a long time.

Even if they had no intention of actioning anything suggested by someone that hasn't played in a while, it would be much easier to take their feedback and just filter it out of the results and ignore it when they do their analysis. Not that it's a good idea mind you. Would it really hurt to look at what the people who don't play say and see if it lines up with what the people who DO play say?

I really can't see a reason for it. If someone takes the trouble to open a survey, let them give you some data. Now they've just pissed some people off that at worst, could have given them data they don't plan to do anything with.

Yeah someone obviously realised they didn't want feedback on how the game plays from people who aren't playing, which is understandable, but they could've just filtered it at the analysis stage without losing data

Basically put over the message that I have no interest in professional matchplay and want to see at least one supplement that covers solo-coop play, as they did for Age of Sigmar via WHC and WD. Would also like to see more experimental rules and ideas for open play, instead of just "yeah, sure, just do whatever you want" and call it a mode of play. We can easily deduce that ourselves without even reading the rules.

I did not appreciate the questions about the combined income of our households and our living situation as its none of their business. If they want to be greedy and price players out of their brand without giving a damn then thats their prerogative, but those questions are insult to injury. Refused to answer them.

Also put in a complaint regarding the constant barrage of £100+ boxsets when players just want to buy their new codex and a model to add to their collection. If I'm an Ork player, why would I want a bunch of Space Wolves as well? How am I supposed to get excited over "yeah! you can buy Ghaz separately in a few months time! isn't that great? Got your credit card ready?".

Fed up with the chapter approved and warzone supplements. A codex should be the bible for a faction. Full stop. A new book on the shelf every few years is one thing, but multiple hardbacks for each edition is quite another.