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.
Rihgu wrote: As an example, the devs of another wargame I play specifically asked the community "which options aren't you taking, and why?".
GW could easily use this program to ask those kinds of questions rather than just... whatever it is everybody else is suggesting they're going to do?
The biggest issue with mass anonymous community feedback is how to get accurate and reliable data. If GW start reaching out to players about specific faction- or unit-level feedback, that channel is going to be flooded with so much data they'll need to hire a whole department to keep up.
What's more, it'll be mostly bad data. The second any kind of feedback form is available there will be organised attempts via sites like 4chan or Facebook to 'meme' the results by claiming Space Marines or Tau (or whatever faction a group thinks it's funny to dislike) are too strong and need to be nerfed. Some people will just flood the page with gibberish, or terrible players will try to get their favourite units buffed even if those units are already good.
That's why they've kept open feedback to more general topics with pre-set answers like "are there too many rules", rather than "what units should cost less points", and it's why balance feedback is taken from a smaller group of known players.
They are getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing currently. As usual, they didn't do any research or pay attention from their tower. Their annual report shows them basically being carried through 2021 on licensing.
This is a company so asinine they C&D'd free marketing from fan animation. I'm really into film and watch a lot of film analysis and reviews on YouTube and was shocked by how many new folks were introduced by Space marine, so what does GW's do? Pull it from YouTube and hide it behind a paywall. Morons. They cater to existing fans with warhammer+ they haven't gotten any new blood from that wreck.
Your post is quite impressive in how detached from reality it is. You clearly have no idea how to read the report if "getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing" was your take-away from it.
Can you tell me where do I add my credit card details in this paywall?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/31 23:43:33
Rihgu wrote: People are acting like the only outcome is top players are going to whisper "make this strong unit stronger" and completely ignore the possibility that some of these players/TOs may want to be able to bring other models.
"Hey, I'd never consider bringing a Gladiator Lancer, but I do like the model, maybe if..." kind of stuff.
That's because there is a vocal minority of very salty folk in the gaming community.
GW + ITC = most tournaments. You want GW support? You want a GW shop at your tournament and the exclusive GW con/event-exclusive models to be sold at your event? You gotta follow our rules. Not just for gaming, but for modeling and other things.
Brandt explicitly stated that independent tournaments would not be forced into GW only models.
And you actually think GW respects him (I'll add or anyone else for that matter) enough to keep him in on those discussions or give him final say? That's WAY, WAY above his pay grade. I am sure they told him those things, I am also sure GW will change this policy as soon as they can.
They are getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing currently. As usual, they didn't do any research or pay attention from their tower. Their annual report shows them basically being carried through 2021 on licensing.
This is a company so asinine they C&D'd free marketing from fan animation. I'm really into film and watch a lot of film analysis and reviews on YouTube and was shocked by how many new folks were introduced by Space marine, so what does GW's do? Pull it from YouTube and hide it behind a paywall. Morons. They cater to existing fans with warhammer+ they haven't gotten any new blood from that wreck.
Whats the saying HMBCD() likes to coin?
GW never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Sorry, but...their current half year is 191.5M. Last half year is 186.8M. How is an increase in revenue in any way "getting nuked from orbit"? The drop in profit is due to increased costs.
3M for salaries and headcount
5.6M for shipping costs
0.7M for new facilities
2.9M in additional inventory
15.1M in outstanding VAT receipts from Europe
5.6M in foreign exchange differences
Not to mention the challenges getting product out.
Platuan4th wrote: But D&D 5th isn't good. It's a bloated mass carried along by popularity.
Sounds vaguely familiar, where have I heard about a game like this before...
I see some TikTok videos from a couple D&D focused people on these specific character builds that can do crazy things. It sort of confuses me, because back when I was a kid we kind of just used our imagination rather than this established set of rules.
It was an 'old man shakes fist at cloud' moment.
But, really, the core of roleplaying is still there. Now there is just more space for the people more inclined to structure. And that's what D&D rules are supposed to do - aside from providing flavor to stimulate stories. And it's better than the old THAC0 stuff.
So, yes, just like Warhammer some people just don't see the value and continue to shake their fist at the sky while claiming the popularity must be a glitch in the system, because people liking a thing must be wrong if it isn't just as they want it to be.
You say this, but most groups don't get playing 5th without modules or insist on playing like Critical Role.
This just in, people play game the way they enjoy it, more on this shocking development tonight at 11.
Most people who play RPGs casually have such tenuous grasp on the rules already that they're basically playing homebrew as is. The system is irrelevant for anything but setting and what type of dice they use for 90% of gaming groups.
GW + ITC = most tournaments. You want GW support? You want a GW shop at your tournament and the exclusive GW con/event-exclusive models to be sold at your event? You gotta follow our rules. Not just for gaming, but for modeling and other things.
Brandt explicitly stated that independent tournaments would not be forced into GW only models.
And you actually think GW respects him (I'll add or anyone else for that matter) enough to keep him in on those discussions or give him final say? That's WAY, WAY above his pay grade. I am sure they told him those things, I am also sure GW will change this policy as soon as they can.
They are getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing currently. As usual, they didn't do any research or pay attention from their tower. Their annual report shows them basically being carried through 2021 on licensing.
This is a company so asinine they C&D'd free marketing from fan animation. I'm really into film and watch a lot of film analysis and reviews on YouTube and was shocked by how many new folks were introduced by Space marine, so what does GW's do? Pull it from YouTube and hide it behind a paywall. Morons. They cater to existing fans with warhammer+ they haven't gotten any new blood from that wreck.
Whats the saying HMBCD() likes to coin?
GW never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
It's actually not way above. I report into the C suite and this sorta thing is my call with re events.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/01 01:02:00
And correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like GW bought out ITC. If GW does something like trying to get them to ban non-GW models, they can always just... stop partnering with GW? This isn't rocket science.
They are getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing currently.
No. No they really aren't. Making these sorts of outlandish claims demonstrates a lack of credibility to speak seriously on the subject matter. The idea is so far detached from reality it makes me question whether or not you and I even exist on the same material plane of reality.
GW + ITC = most tournaments. You want GW support? You want a GW shop at your tournament and the exclusive GW con/event-exclusive models to be sold at your event? You gotta follow our rules. Not just for gaming, but for modeling and other things.
Brandt explicitly stated that independent tournaments would not be forced into GW only models.
And you actually think GW respects him (I'll add or anyone else for that matter) enough to keep him in on those discussions or give him final say? That's WAY, WAY above his pay grade. I am sure they told him those things, I am also sure GW will change this policy as soon as they can.
They are getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing currently. As usual, they didn't do any research or pay attention from their tower. Their annual report shows them basically being carried through 2021 on licensing.
This is a company so asinine they C&D'd free marketing from fan animation. I'm really into film and watch a lot of film analysis and reviews on YouTube and was shocked by how many new folks were introduced by Space marine, so what does GW's do? Pull it from YouTube and hide it behind a paywall. Morons. They cater to existing fans with warhammer+ they haven't gotten any new blood from that wreck.
Whats the saying HMBCD() likes to coin?
GW never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
It's actually not way above. I report into the C suite and this sorta thing is my call with re events.
I am getting such great Schadenfreude out of seeing you torpedo these posts lol.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
Laughing Man wrote: And correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like GW bought out ITC. If GW does something like trying to get them to ban non-GW models, they can always just... stop partnering with GW? This isn't rocket science.
It all depends on how the contract(I would hope there is one as much as I despise ITC) is worded.
hotsauceman1 wrote: But also, why do casual players care if the tournament side is getting love?
Casual players, showing you dont care about units performance and just play fluffy lists(Whatever that means lol) shouldnt care because you will just play what you want whether is broken busted or UP or OP.
Saw this gem and felt it needed addressing. A knight castellan, 3 blood angels captains and a guard CP battery is not fluffy. That's a list that was designed solely around abusing game mechanics.
That level of douchery has been dialled back, but I cant imagine many competitive players are sitting down going "you know what, hive fleet jormungandr sounds cool, they attack using rapid moving serpent forms and burrow attacks, I'll build an army that focuses on that". Instead they'll be abusing min-max hive guard armies and the new MC spam.
I'd love to get some form of confirmation from Mike since he's around, or anyone at GW in honesty that they are going to use these feedback groups to bring up the bottom X% just as much as they are going to reign in the top Y%.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rihgu wrote: People are acting like the only outcome is top players are going to whisper "make this strong unit stronger" and completely ignore the possibility that some of these players/TOs may want to be able to bring other models.
"Hey, I'd never consider bringing a Gladiator Lancer, but I do like the model, maybe if..." kind of stuff.
It depends how it's handled, of the feedback requested is "how do we stop drukhari having the top WR" the answer isn't going to be "make gladiators lancers good"
You're misunderstanding that first poster's point.
He's not saying, 'competitive players play fluffy' he's saying 'why do casual players care what competitive players do?' as well as 'why does it matter if a unit is too strong to a casual player that's only using it for its fluff in friendly games?'
Most balance changes should have a near zero impact on the casual/narrative community because winning shouldn't really matter to them so long as they have fun playing. A super OP combo should make precisely 0 waves (because it should be mutually agreed upon not to use it) and super OP individual units (which, lets be honest, there aren't a huge amount of units that are game warping in a vacuum anymore. Almost every top tier strategy relies on multiple layers of rules to make anything really over the top. Take those away and even things like double Volkite Contemptors are just 'good'.) should be naturally weeded out down to maybe 1 per list just via social pressure.
If anything, the casual community should be laser focused on improving bad units because that might actually have a positive impact on the feel of that army on the table. Nerfing OP stuff shouldn't really make any difference. SPECIFICALLY for casual and narrative play.
It matters to casual players because this never just stops with "what stat/cost changes should GW make". You only need to look at all the changes various 3rd party event organizers have implemented over the years. Everything from standardized terrain placement rules, entirely different scoring systems, and even rule changes/interpretations to fix one thing but have knock on effects elsewhere.
And we keep seeing GW listen to that small population of tourny players just because they shout the loudest, in the most visible places. But their outsized influence reshapes the entire game with halfbaked, short-term band-aids to fix what is as much a player problem as it is a rules writing problem.
A perfect example of this is the rule of 3. Technically it's an optional rule specifically recommended for tournament games, but good luck finding any store where people don't consider it a mandatory rule in all games. Why? Because tournament players both in person and online have insisted it makes the game fairer or more balanced, and therefore is necessary to have fun. Should there be some limit in place to stop people from building ridiculous army's of one unit spammed countless times? Maybe. Did the Ro3 achieve that in a positive way? Well considering tourney players just moved on to playing some new broken combination but most people can't field IG Veteran Companies at their local anymore. No, no it didn't. But tourney players were satisfied if not happy.
And that's all in addition to the way tourney players already warp the game by controlling most of the forum, and sometimes even shop, discourse. They tout how "serious" they are about the game and use that as a false legitimacy to "advise" newer players on what to buy/not buy and how to play for "maximum fun" (always tourney rules/meta) while shouting down anyone else as giving bad advice that'll ruin your games. So now you have casual players walking into their local with a skewed image of anything not tourney-orthodox as being bad, unfair, or unfun.
Which is exactly where we are. If tourney players think a faction is OP, groups of casual players will avoid opponents with those armies even if their list isn't the broken. If you ask to play Narrative/Crusade scenarios, large swaths of players will decline and act like you tried to peddle a snake oil collection because "those scenarios are 'unbalanced'". Want to bring a not overpowered list that breaks a tournament rule like Ro3, "no that obviously gaks all over the contract of fairness".
Like I don't know if it's worth even wasting the breath at this point because we have to keep doing the same song and dance over and over...
GW + ITC = most tournaments. You want GW support? You want a GW shop at your tournament and the exclusive GW con/event-exclusive models to be sold at your event? You gotta follow our rules. Not just for gaming, but for modeling and other things.
Brandt explicitly stated that independent tournaments would not be forced into GW only models.
The great part about this is that GW doesn't have to force independent tournaments to fit any particular mold.
There will simply be a difference. There will be ITC/GW tournaments, and there will be those that aren't. The tournaments that GW supports will be supported. It's a subtle thing, but very much a power play however you look at it.
If you need real-world examples for this in action, just check out the business strats of your local internet provider. You either have it or you don't, and what are you going to use as competition? The service that doesn't exist? They didn't 'force' them to do anything, they just out-competed them until they had a monopoly on a city/region.
To be clear, as Mike is here in the topic, I'm not calling anyone a liar. I'm just making a speculation on which way this partnership is going to go, long-term.
ITC bonus points for those using armies with 100% GW models without conversions, nothing more is needed to get people doing it
Daedalus81 wrote: Sorry, but...their current half year is 191.5M. Last half year is 186.8M. How is an increase in revenue in any way "getting nuked from orbit"? The drop in profit is due to increased costs.
I would not call it nuked from orbit, nor that 3D printing is the cause, but they increased the income from license to 20M, take that away and not only the profit droped but the revenue as well
it just tells us that GW being lucky during the first wave of lockdowns was just that luck of being in the right place at the right time and not some good strategy neither could the management build on that to keep it up
I guess it is more simple, people got into the hobby with GW because they had time, money and GW had everything in stock (were others already had problems, because they make models in house and not in China), and GW got record sales, but GW kept doing what they always did, and people left again after seeing what is needed to maintain the hobby or get playing the game at home (as for a lot of people playing in public because of restrictions was not an option last year) and as soon as the first hype drops, GW does offer nothing to stay unless you are already involved with the background and get hyped by the next faction released, or if you are not liking Marines
They are getting nuked from orbit by 3D printing currently.
3D hurts GW, but on a different level, first they profit from all people who 3D print to play 40k, as this keeps the game popular and gets new people in (who buy the GW stuff), and advertise it as a game worth investing the time and afford to make your own models
and those who want the GW plastics, for those it does not matter if 3D prtinting, 3rd party plastic, 3rd party resin or other are better/cheaper
3D printing affects only those that already used alternatives, looked at the 2nd hand market etc. as those for whom playing the game is more important than getting GW models, which is not the target group for their models in the first place
with all the people making models for 40k/AoS, the help to make the games more popular than GW ever would
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/02/01 07:19:11
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
kodos wrote: ITC bonus points for those using armies with 100% GW models without conversions, nothing more is needed to get people doing it
Daedalus81 wrote: Sorry, but...their current half year is 191.5M. Last half year is 186.8M. How is an increase in revenue in any way "getting nuked from orbit"? The drop in profit is due to increased costs.
I would not call it nuked from orbit, nor that 3D printing is the cause, but they increased the income from license to 20M, take that away and not only the profit droped but the revenue as well
it just tells us that GW being lucky during the first wave of lockdowns was just that luck of being in the right place at the right time and not some good strategy neither could the management build on that to keep it up
I guess it is more simple, people got into the hobby with GW because they had time, money and GW had everything in stock (were others already had problems, because they make models in house and not in China), and GW got record sales, but GW kept doing what they always did, and people left again after seeing what is needed to maintain the hobby or get playing the game at home (as for a lot of people playing in public because of restrictions was not an option last year) and as soon as the first hype drops, GW does offer nothing to stay unless you are already involved with the background and get hyped by the next faction released, or if you are not liking Marines
That's not quite how the income statement works.
Revenue does not reflect licensing. Licensing goes directly to profit. GW earned less profit on more sales dollars - they didn't suddenly start selling stuff with lower margins. There was a hit to their costs. This is something that has been mentioned as to why it isn't a simple slam dunk for GW to lower prices, which would make it so they sell more for less margin. Then when you factor in challenges like Brexit, Covid, currency exchanges, etc the business gets harder to operate and expansion ( e.g. facilities / specialist games ) gets more difficult.
The pandemic gave GW record profits, because the sales largely happened online where their highest profit margin exists.
People didn't buy into an expensive hobby and then suddenly wake up and realize it isn't what they wanted. Lots of people had extra hobby money, which they spent. That period is over now and we're back to "normal".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/01 15:35:13
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Latest season champion literally attended minimum number of events, Kan. The people that have the skill to regularly end up in this group aren't the ones buffing their qualifier points by averages.
Not saying they should be determining balance, but just attending lots of events doesn't indicate wins.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/01 16:30:43
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Yup, and those people have a much better idea of how to balance the game than people playing models because they look cool. The guy who just won LVO for the second time is a teacher's aid at FSU and doing his masters...
Edit- forgot I'm talking to the guy who thinks power level is the ultimate balancing system for 40k. Carry on, obviously nothing I say at this point is going to change your mind
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/01 16:54:57
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Yup, and those people have a much better idea of how to balance the game than people playing models because they look cool. The guy who just won LVO for the second time is a teacher's aid at FSU and doing his masters...
Edit- forgot I'm talking to the guy who thinks power level is the ultimate balancing system for 40k. Carry on, obviously nothing I say at this point is going to change your mind
The guy who just won the LVO is on record as not wanting to partake in playtesting etc. Due to lack of pay and conflict of interest. So not the best example.
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Yup, and those people have a much better idea of how to balance the game than people playing models because they look cool. ...
No they don't.
Just because someone is good at identifying methods of rules abuse does NOT make them good at knowing how to correct them.
It's foolish to assume that because someone wins a tournament or several tournaments that they have an innate ability to troubleshoot and correct complex rules systems. Just because someone is an all-star football player doesn't mean that they're able to coach the team.
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Yup, and those people have a much better idea of how to balance the game than people playing models because they look cool. The guy who just won LVO for the second time is a teacher's aid at FSU and doing his masters...
Aide*...and frigging lol at you for thinking his "grasp of balance" is somehow tied to his knowledge of the game rather than the list he wrote.
Why?
He picked a Skitarii Veteran Cohort...which immediately this limits your listbuilding to the "Skitarii" keyworded units in the AdMech book, with the exception of 1 of each Techpriest type.
Edit- forgot I'm talking to the guy who thinks power level is the ultimate balancing system for 40k. Carry on, obviously nothing I say at this point is going to change your mind
Never once have I said that "power level is the ultimate balancing system for 40k". I have said it's better than points for playing in anything short of tournaments, because it allows for flexibility that points don't. It allows for both players involved to scale or descale their army as necessary.
But you wouldn't care about that, since you seem to just be of the mind that "nubs need to git gud".
Tyel wrote: 5000 players influencing how the game works has to be compared with... what? Half a dozen or so people deciding how the game works?
Half a dozen people that only play fluffhammer and wonder why nobody took certain models because "look how cool they are!".
As opposed to half a dozen people that only play tourneyhammer and are only highly placed because of attending ungodly numbers of events(seriously, when do these people actually work? what do they do for a living?) and wonder why nobody took certain models because "why would you ever waste points"?
Yup, and those people have a much better idea of how to balance the game than people playing models because they look cool. ...
No they don't.
Just because someone is good at identifying methods of rules abuse does NOT make them good at knowing how to correct them.
It's foolish to assume that because someone wins a tournament or several tournaments that they have an innate ability to troubleshoot and correct complex rules systems. Just because someone is an all-star football player doesn't mean that they're able to coach the team.
If you had to choose who would write the rules for the NFL next year, and it was between a group of former Super Bowl winners and a group of people who chose their team based on their favorite animal or color, which would you pick?
Good grief there's some posturing going on in this thread. It's utterly gross but utterly hilarious at the same time.
Maybe some folks need to step away from their keyboards.
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"
EviscerationPlague wrote: Well if tourney players are saying a faction is broken, that's a problem with GW and not the players refusing to play said faction.
That's a completely nonsensical take. Sure GW should be addressing a something if it's found to be overturned. But it wasn't GW that ran around the community shouting about how Space Marines were universally broken because of one build involving Iron Hands with lots of vehicles was tearing up tournaments or that Eldar were universally bullgak because of Wraithknight+Scatbikes or Warp Spider Spam.
It was a very specific, salty subset of the community that either brought those lists into their clubs or incessantly whined about them until new and uninformed casual players started erroneously judging historic players of those factions as FotM or turning their noses up at games of mixed Aspect lists and all comer Marine lists just as examples.
And this happens pretty consistently with every tourney cycle.
I didn't really hear the complaints about SM or Eldar being universally broken. The complaints I heard were "man those WKs and jetbikes are really broken".
EviscerationPlague wrote: Well if tourney players are saying a faction is broken, that's a problem with GW and not the players refusing to play said faction.
That's a completely nonsensical take. Sure GW should be addressing a something if it's found to be overturned. But it wasn't GW that ran around the community shouting about how Space Marines were universally broken because of one build involving Iron Hands with lots of vehicles was tearing up tournaments or that Eldar were universally bullgak because of Wraithknight+Scatbikes or Warp Spider Spam.
It was a very specific, salty subset of the community that either brought those lists into their clubs or incessantly whined about them until new and uninformed casual players started erroneously judging historic players of those factions as FotM or turning their noses up at games of mixed Aspect lists and all comer Marine lists just as examples.
And this happens pretty consistently with every tourney cycle.
Thank you for writing this out, I wish more people would read this and take it on-board.
Dudeface wrote: The guy who just won the LVO is on record as not wanting to partake in playtesting etc. Due to lack of pay and conflict of interest. So not the best example.
Well, a good example of something, at least! It's a principled stance to take and all credit to him for that.
Dudeface wrote: The guy who just won the LVO is on record as not wanting to partake in playtesting etc. Due to lack of pay and conflict of interest. So not the best example.
Well, a good example of something, at least! It's a principled stance to take and all credit to him for that.
It does feel like a "the people who should run for office are people with too much sense to run for office" kind of a situation. If GW is serious about playtesting it needs to just open its wallet and pay people to do it in a professional way, not use it as a carrot to keep influencers and top players on side.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/01 22:56:38
Dudeface wrote: The guy who just won the LVO is on record as not wanting to partake in playtesting etc. Due to lack of pay and conflict of interest. So not the best example.
Sucks, because he's the best man for the job. I'd like it if he just gave his opinion on things occasionally at least. Class act in being concerned about conflict of interest, too.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/02 02:36:25
) likes to coin?
