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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
They can write all the codexes at once, with a comparable level of power in mind, and then slowly release them like they do now.

I was about to say. You don't need to release them all at once, but do write them all at once.

It would breed a level of cohesion, rather than each Codex building upon the last one, paradigm shifts in design ethos, and so on. Less designing in a vacuum and more deliberate control over the content of each book in the context of itself and every other book.

If we are already going to "what-if" land, nothing really forces them to do whole armies at once, right?

If they had a digital way to distribute their rules, they could just pick a part of their ruleset, for example add crusade rules for everyone, polish all the main battle tanks which are durable as wet paper bags or delete two thirds of the stratagems in existence and only do a big rework of a whole army when it's really necessary.

Not Online!!! wrote:
it would still be unfair , especially for the last released faction.

Why?

Not Online!!! wrote:
It would not solve the issues of the codex cycle at all.

In what way?

Not Online!!! wrote:
It would force them to commit upfront hours and then have writers being obsolete, for quite a while, before the next edition comes out.

How? Those writers could then put their efforts into other types of rules-based products.

Not Online!!! wrote:
it is unlikely, purely from a company standpoint, and even if it would happen there would still be severe missbalance for older codices.

I don't see how, because there wouldn't be "older codices".

Not Online!!! wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
They can write all the codexes at once, with a comparable level of power in mind, and then slowly release them like they do now.

I was about to say. You don't need to release them all at once, but do write them all at once.

It would breed a level of cohesion, rather than each Codex building upon the last one, paradigm shifts in design ethos, and so on. Less designing in a vacuum and more deliberate control over the content of each book in the context of itself and every other book.

it would still be unfair , especially for the last released faction.
It would not solve the issues of the codex cycle at all.

It would force them to commit upfront hours and then have writers being obsolete, for quite a while, before the next edition comes out.

They can't work on supplements? Campaign books? Playtest fixes for the current codex cycle? Test new models for the next codex cycle or aforementioned supplements? Write rules for other games like Warcry, Underworlds, Aeronautica, Titanicus, Warhammer Quest?

There's pleny for GWs rules writers to do, which is probably why they suffer so much under the current design philosophy.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
They can write all the codexes at once, with a comparable level of power in mind, and then slowly release them like they do now.

I was about to say. You don't need to release them all at once, but do write them all at once.

It would breed a level of cohesion, rather than each Codex building upon the last one, paradigm shifts in design ethos, and so on. Less designing in a vacuum and more deliberate control over the content of each book in the context of itself and every other book.

I don't know if the timescales on the kit production currently allows them to write rules for something that won't exist for 3 years or may not even be designed yet. They've always been adamant that the minis get given to the rules team to fit in.

they don't even need to be written at the same time but the problem is GW is utterly incapable of sticking to a system.

Designers would need to sit down and write a solid baseline for the entire edition to be based on and test this baseline thoroughly because its the foundation of the entire edition. Then from said baseline they can write all the codexes as they do now, and if they did a good job it all ends roughly equal and anything that slips through the cracks can get balanced out in updates.

The issue is that this is fundamentally not how GW operates, as we see time and time again.
They throw stuff together and make things up as they go along and that obviously doesn't work.

I think that by now the commercial model is clear. They are doing the same as other similar companies.

New releases need to generate a good profit, it is a big issue when they don't. A good profit is made by good models with good rules. They never had issues with the good models part, but the rules part is not 100% deterministic and play test can only get you so far. If the dex underperforms, it sells much less, so in doubt you aim at it being a bit stronger than the other ones, ready to fix them once you have more data. This means that sometimes you make them weaker than expected and get a balanced dex (TS, sisters, GSC and so on), sometimes you get it just right and it is a strong dex (DA, GK), sometimes you make them stronger than intended and you get meta monsters (Admech, Drukhari and so on).

With this sytem, in any case you don't get underpowered factions which don't sell. As long as you keep going with the nerfs, this works.

The issue obviously is that almost at all times you will have that faction which just came out which can potentially be too strong.

Dudeface wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
They can write all the codexes at once, with a comparable level of power in mind, and then slowly release them like they do now.

I was about to say. You don't need to release them all at once, but do write them all at once.

It would breed a level of cohesion, rather than each Codex building upon the last one, paradigm shifts in design ethos, and so on. Less designing in a vacuum and more deliberate control over the content of each book in the context of itself and every other book.

I don't know if the timescales on the kit production currently allows them to write rules for something that won't exist for 3 years or may not even be designed yet. They've always been adamant that the minis get given to the rules team to fit in.

There's no reason that that's how rules and models have to interact though.

'GW can't do anything about [problem] because of [other problem caused by GW]' isn't very convincing as an argument.

Dudeface wrote:
They've always been adamant that the minis get given to the rules team to fit in.

Which is a problem in and of itself.

This isn't an easy fix. This would require them to rethink the way they create the game in toto.

Dudeface wrote:


I don't know if the timescales on the kit production currently allows them to write rules for something that won't exist for 3 years or may not even be designed yet. They've always been adamant that the minis get given to the rules team to fit in.

But pretty much everything already exists from the beginning. Most of the armies don't get many new releases in each edition, some get even none for years. And to add a few more new stuff on top on something that has already been written (note I mean written/designed, not already printed) isn't a big deal.

Take the new tyranids codex. I think there's just one unit that's really new, anything else already existed since the launch of 9th edition. It wouldn't have been hard to write the codex at that moment and then add the lone new monster, and correct a few things here and there considering the state of the game. Same with Aeldari, custodes, tau... and many factions before them.

I don't understand the argument that sides with staggered codex releases. It's obvious to even the newest player that it's intentional design to have the newest codexes be more powerful. With some VERY slight exceptions, there has been a rampant power creep and increase in imbalance with every new codex. Special Faction rules that completely invalidate other factions. Special rules that are targeted to benefiting an imperialist faction over say, a chaos one (SECOND WOUND COUGH COUGH).

I was team incompetance for the first half of this edition, what with the day 1 DLCs and obvious misprints in codexes. But now it's just pissing in my face and calling it Covid-related shipping issues.

The fact that Chaos didn't get their second wound until 3 years into the edition, the fact that DE were until very recently still borked, the fact that Custodes and Harlies were even going to print in their respective fashions, tells me that the rules team is made up not of incompetents, but of vindictive fanbois. And the fact that GW is letting it happen is because, well, look at the numbers. GW is experiencing a surge not seen since well, ever.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't going to last. GW sees the writing on the wall. They are squeezing their cheeto-fingered cash cows hard right now, because groups like one page rules and other home printing groups offer entire 2k armies for under 300$. And the rules are basically free with the STLs.

GW can't compete with that. What they can do is simple economics. Gouge the business for every last bit of capital, and then sell. I will not be surprised if GW gives up the game with 10th, or if there even is a 10th. There is no more profit in this model.

Blackie wrote:

Dudeface wrote:


I don't know if the timescales on the kit production currently allows them to write rules for something that won't exist for 3 years or may not even be designed yet. They've always been adamant that the minis get given to the rules team to fit in.

But pretty much everything already exists from the beginning. Most of the armies don't get many new releases in each edition, some get even none for years. And to add a few more new stuff on top on something that has already been written (note I mean written/designed, not already printed) isn't a big deal.

Take the new tyranids codex. I think there's just one unit that's really new, anything else already existed since the launch of 9th edition. It wouldn't have been hard to write the codex at that moment and then add the lone new monster, and correct a few things here and there considering the state of the game. Same with Aeldari, custodes, tau... and many factions before them.

To take chaos marines as an example, they're being released mid 2022, 2 years after the edition launch, the mini design process for some of these units would be just beginning in 2020. True, lots of factions don't get much, but that's not what the majority of people want or ask for.

How do you let the designer create with freedom or writers create rules for something you can't envision at this point?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:I don't understand the argument that sides with staggered codex releases. It's obvious to even the newest player that it's intentional design to have the newest codexes be more powerful. With some VERY slight exceptions, there has been a rampant power creep and increase in imbalance with every new codex. Special Faction rules that completely invalidate other factions. Special rules that are targeted to benefiting an imperialist faction over say, a chaos one (SECOND WOUND COUGH COUGH).

I was team incompetance for the first half of this edition, what with the day 1 DLCs and obvious misprints in codexes. But now it's just pissing in my face and calling it Covid-related shipping issues.

The fact that Chaos didn't get their second wound until 3 years into the edition, the fact that DE were until very recently still borked, the fact that Custodes and Harlies were even going to print in their respective fashions, tells me that the rules team is made up not of incompetents, but of vindictive fanbois. And the fact that GW is letting it happen is because, well, look at the numbers. GW is experiencing a surge not seen since well, ever.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't going to last. GW sees the writing on the wall. They are squeezing their cheeto-fingered cash cows hard right now, because groups like one page rules and other home printing groups offer entire 2k armies for under 300$. And the rules are basically free with the STLs.

GW can't compete with that. What they can do is simple economics. Gouge the business for every last bit of capital, and then sell. I will not be surprised if GW gives up the game with 10th, or if there even is a 10th. There is no more profit in this model.

You need to stop being involved with the hobby, it doesn't seem to be good for you at this time. You have a good mix of overreaction, exaggeration and hyperbole going on here.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
[...]
GW is experiencing a surge not seen since well, ever.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't going to last. GW sees the writing on the wall. They are squeezing their cheeto-fingered cash cows hard right now, because groups like one page rules and other home printing groups offer entire 2k armies for under 300$. And the rules are basically free with the STLs.

GW can't compete with that. What they can do is simple economics. Gouge the business for every last bit of capital, and then sell. I will not be surprised if GW gives up the game with 10th, or if there even is a 10th. There is no more profit in this model.

No more profit?
They are crushing numbers year after year even during a pandemic and even without having managed to ramp up production of plastic kits.
Now that their second manufacturing plant comes online, they won't have entire product lines "out of stock" every time a new book comes out.

If you're so confident about their imminent doomfall, download a trading app and buy some put options to short the stock. You'd make some money out of it.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
tells me that the rules team is made up not of incompetents, but of vindictive fanbois. And the fact that GW is letting it happen is because, well, look at the numbers. GW is experiencing a surge not seen since well, ever.

Yeah no lol.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

Don't get me wrong, this isn't going to last. GW sees the writing on the wall. They are squeezing their cheeto-fingered cash cows hard right now, because groups like one page rules and other home printing groups offer entire 2k armies for under 300$. And the rules are basically free with the STLs.

GW can't compete with that. What they can do is simple economics. Gouge the business for every last bit of capital, and then sell. I will not be surprised if GW gives up the game with 10th, or if there even is a 10th. There is no more profit in this model.

As someone with a 3d printer and multiple fully printed armies, its not a threat to GW no matter what people say. It's still very time consuming and inaccessible for most, a resin printer requires fiddling with the settings (don't underestimate the computer illiteracy that many people have), it also requires a properly ventilated area and quite some space for the cleaning station too, before moving in my house, there was no way i could get myself one in my old apartment.

and even if you get all this, printing an entire army is basically working your printer nonstop for a few days, it takes a lot of time, especially if you introduce any vehicles in there

We're still many years away from having "plug and play" resin printers which *could* theoretically start scaring GW


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:


You need to stop being involved with the hobby, it doesn't seem to be good for you at this time. You have a good mix of overreaction, exaggeration and hyperbole going on here.

This.

As much as i hate telling people that this isnt the hobby for them. In Fezzik's case it's true. I've never seen a positive post from them, only doomposting and claiming the end of GW is coming and that the designers will come and kill your dog for some reason. It's truly unhealthy.

Dudeface wrote:


To take chaos marines as an example, they're being released mid 2022, 2 years after the edition launch, the mini design process for some of these units would be just beginning in 2020. True, lots of factions don't get much, but that's not what the majority of people want or ask for.

How do you let the designer create with freedom or writers create rules for something you can't envision at this point?

You're overestimating the desire people have for new releases. I don't think the vast majority of people even wants new releases, I actually believe it's a tiny fraction of the playerbase that wants something new on a regular basis. Most people want to stick with a collection for a long period, without being forced to replace their old stuff with new ones which is what typically happens when new stuff is released. They're left behind or even get their collections invalidated. That's definitely what the vast majority DOESN'T want. Others want to collect multiple armies, maybe even from different games.

The GW roster is already huge, there's no need of new stuff. Start another army instead! Or even another game. That's what I've done and I'm still doing: I have tons of SW and orks, I didn't need to buy anything that was released in 8th or 9th and frankly I didn't even want to get new pricey models that are basically a slightly alternative version of already existing units, like the whole snagga line and even the whole primaris line. I bought Necromunda and fantasy models instead, loads of them.

And lots of new releases are just already existing units that get a new sculpts, so those new releases have nothing to do with "freedom" for the writers.

 Ordana wrote:
they don't even need to be written at the same time but the problem is GW is utterly incapable of sticking to a system.

Designers would need to sit down and write a solid baseline for the entire edition to be based on and test this baseline thoroughly because its the foundation of the entire edition. Then from said baseline they can write all the codexes as they do now, and if they did a good job it all ends roughly equal and anything that slips through the cracks can get balanced out in updates.

The issue is that this is fundamentally not how GW operates, as we see time and time again.
They throw stuff together and make things up as they go along and that obviously doesn't work.

It's essentially because they have to hit a release year.

They literally started conceiving 9th about 6 to 12 months ( or somewhere near - can't recall precisely what they said ) after 8th was released. For them to write and release all the 8th edition books while ALSO writing ninth while ALSO writing Psychic Awakening is just a recipe for disaster. There are not enough people to make a smooth transition for that in 3 years time.

With Horus this year and AoS last year then 40K will be next year. That gives them 18 months with a mostly clear slate regarding codexes, but they're going to fill that space likely with marine supplement redos and warzone stuff.

Well, since PA was a disaster anyway (as are the new warzones), the solution is obvious...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
it would still be unfair , especially for the last released faction.

Why?

Because you'd still get the codex that is and was on par with the other new ones, just at the end of it, meaning that for those factions, depending upon gw rulesteam being not capable of packing their nonsense in to be a hellscape to play in until your codex gets released.

Not Online!!! wrote:
It would not solve the issues of the codex cycle at all.

In what way?

see above

Not Online!!! wrote:
It would force them to commit upfront hours and then have writers being obsolete, for quite a while, before the next edition comes out.

How? Those writers could then put their efforts into other types of rules-based products.

Could , but codices are far more likely to actually sell, compared to other rules products.

Not Online!!! wrote:
it is unlikely, purely from a company standpoint, and even if it would happen there would still be severe missbalance for older codices.

I don't see how, because there wouldn't be "older codices".

Yes, until your codex get's updated in the cycle it will not matter that the new codex is tested against the new codices, because you still will be playing the old codices against the new ones until then. It would out of a playerperspective change very little, untill all codices are released, then we may very well look at a superior product indeed for probably 1-3 months before rulessupplements get vommited out and or a new edition comes starting the wheel of nonsense again.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
They literally started conceiving 9th about 6 to 12 months ( or somewhere near - can't recall precisely what they said ) after 8th was released. For them to write and release all the 8th edition books while ALSO writing ninth while ALSO writing Psychic Awakening is just a recipe for disaster. There are not enough people to make a smooth transition for that in 3 years time.

Yeah, again:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
'GW can't do anything about [problem] because of [other problem caused by GW]' isn't very convincing as an argument.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Because you'd still get the codex that is and was on par with the other new ones, just at the end of it, meaning that for those factions, depending upon gw rulesteam being not capable of packing their nonsense in to be a hellscape to play in until your codex gets released.

...

Yes, until your codex get's updated in the cycle it will not matter that the new codex is tested against the new codices, because you still will be playing the old codices against the new ones until then. It would out of a playerperspective change very little, untill all codices are released, then we may very well look at a superior product indeed for probably 1-3 months before rulessupplements get vommited out and or a new edition comes starting the wheel of nonsense again.

And this is different to now, how, exactly?

The end result would be worth the 'downtime' (so to speak) from such an endeavour.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Could , but codices are far more likely to actually sell, compared to other rules products.

You don't know that, and you especially don't know that in a world where all the Codices have been written in conjunction with one another. In such an environment dedicated narrative and, yes, even tournament releases could thrive, because they'd be completely free of the escalation and creep of the Codex cycle. They could be written knowing exactly what every army has right from the start.

Or, to put it another way, a rising tide raises all ships.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

Don't get me wrong, this isn't going to last. GW sees the writing on the wall. They are squeezing their cheeto-fingered cash cows hard right now, because groups like one page rules and other home printing groups offer entire 2k armies for under 300$. And the rules are basically free with the STLs.

GW can't compete with that. What they can do is simple economics. Gouge the business for every last bit of capital, and then sell. I will not be surprised if GW gives up the game with 10th, or if there even is a 10th. There is no more profit in this model.

Did you lick/chew on your lead minis as a child?

ccs wrote:
Did you lick/chew on your lead minis as a child?

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/half-of-americans-exposed-to-harmful-levels-of-lead-as-children#:~:text=About%20half%20of%20U.S.%20adults,than%20two%20points%20on%20average.

That metric may not be as unusual as you'd expect. It explains a lot of things, not the least of which is the general discourse on these boards.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

ccs wrote:
Did you lick/chew on your lead minis as a child?

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/half-of-americans-exposed-to-harmful-levels-of-lead-as-children#:~:text=About%20half%20of%20U.S.%20adults,than%20two%20points%20on%20average.

That metric may not be as unusual as you'd expect. It explains a lot of things, not the least of which is the general discourse on these boards.

Yes, I'm well aware of the dangers of lead.

 Sim-Life wrote:


They can't work on supplements? Campaign books? Playtest fixes for the current codex cycle? Test new models for the next codex cycle or aforementioned supplements? Write rules for other games like Warcry, Underworlds, Aeronautica, Titanicus, Warhammer Quest?

There's pleny for GWs rules writers to do, which is probably why they suffer so much under the current design philosophy.

Well they can of course. Problem with how GW writes rules is, that if they put out all basic rules for all armies at the same time, for the entire edition, you would on one hand have stuff like eldar, tyranids or tau and on the other hand stuff like necron or imperial fist. Lets assumes the community goes really slow this time and it takes 4-6 weeks to solve the over all meta game. The number of people who are willingly going to start necron or imperial fists, is going to be extremly low. Their entire flag ship faction, which is marines, would not have the early edition grace period of being the only updated one, nor would it have the false feeling that it is all good. Anyone who sees marines rules and the good armies rules, or even rules of armies like BT or GK and other marines would know that something ain't right there.

The fact that writers would have time to write the extra books, wouldn't help much either. Campaign etc rule sets mostly help already good and establish armies. In 9th only crusher stamped was an extra rule set that helped a weaker army.

Karol wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:


They can't work on supplements? Campaign books? Playtest fixes for the current codex cycle? Test new models for the next codex cycle or aforementioned supplements? Write rules for other games like Warcry, Underworlds, Aeronautica, Titanicus, Warhammer Quest?

There's pleny for GWs rules writers to do, which is probably why they suffer so much under the current design philosophy.

Well they can of course. Problem with how GW writes rules is, that if they put out all basic rules for all armies at the same time, for the entire edition, you would on one hand have stuff like eldar, tyranids or tau and on the other hand stuff like necron or imperial fist. Lets assumes the community goes really slow this time and it takes 4-6 weeks to solve the over all meta game. The number of people who are willingly going to start necron or imperial fists, is going to be extremly low. Their entire flag ship faction, which is marines, would not have the early edition grace period of being the only updated one, nor would it have the false feeling that it is all good. Anyone who sees marines rules and the good armies rules, or even rules of armies like BT or GK and other marines would know that something ain't right there.

The fact that writers would have time to write the extra books, wouldn't help much either. Campaign etc rule sets mostly help already good and establish armies. In 9th only crusher stamped was an extra rule set that helped a weaker army.

Or, crazy idea-they could playtest and iterate the Codecs, so that they're reasonably well-balanced, and could give errata and points adjustments for free if a combo or interaction that was unforeseen ends up being too powerful.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah, again:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
'GW can't do anything about [problem] because of [other problem caused by GW]' isn't very convincing as an argument.

It's less an argument and more recognizing the reality of over worked designers.

Karol wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:


They can't work on supplements? Campaign books? Playtest fixes for the current codex cycle? Test new models for the next codex cycle or aforementioned supplements? Write rules for other games like Warcry, Underworlds, Aeronautica, Titanicus, Warhammer Quest?

There's pleny for GWs rules writers to do, which is probably why they suffer so much under the current design philosophy.

Well they can of course. Problem with how GW writes rules is, that if they put out all basic rules for all armies at the same time, for the entire edition, you would on one hand have stuff like eldar, tyranids or tau and on the other hand stuff like necron or imperial fist. Lets assumes the community goes really slow this time and it takes 4-6 weeks to solve the over all meta game. The number of people who are willingly going to start necron or imperial fists, is going to be extremly low. Their entire flag ship faction, which is marines, would not have the early edition grace period of being the only updated one, nor would it have the false feeling that it is all good. Anyone who sees marines rules and the good armies rules, or even rules of armies like BT or GK and other marines would know that something ain't right there.

The fact that writers would have time to write the extra books, wouldn't help much either. Campaign etc rule sets mostly help already good and establish armies. In 9th only crusher stamped was an extra rule set that helped a weaker army.

SimLife litterally answered the imaginary problem you pointed out : use the "downtime" to playtest fixes for the current codex cycle

 JNAProductions wrote:
Or, crazy idea-they could playtest and iterate the Codecs, so that they're reasonably well-balanced, and could give errata and points adjustments for free if a combo or interaction that was unforeseen ends up being too powerful.

And who would those playtesters suppose to be? Can't be random dudes, because GW ain't at the level where design people can hang around all days at stores to find people they think ar representative of how the game is played all around the world. It could be friends or in house testing, but this gives the results GW gets since the begining of time itself or at least since GW started to sell rules for models. They can hire known tournament players, which is good, because those guys do have credentials that they know at least something about the game. But they come with a problem too. If you take 10 top footballers from europe and make them write rules for not just football leagues, but football itself for everyone, you will get a system which is extremly skewed in favour tournament way of playing and not much anyone else. On top of that is faction bias and company bias for specific factions. Core marines can not have a new edition without at least a few sets. After you update lets say necrons, you may not give them any new models next edition or you give them a character. Some factions clearly have more care and thought put in to both writing their rules, and fitting them in to a 2000pts army. Others on the other hand feel as if someone was given a codex to write as a punishment. Which often means a lot of copy paste and armies in this edtion need to have X, Y and Z system, and that is it. And this is just the rules part, there is also the , for GW more important, sales part. They clearly undercut armies, to nerf them later on , just so people who want to get an army now or updated it comparing to prior builds, spend more money.

GW to do something you say would have to kick out the entire design team, create a playtest team from only God knows who and it would have to not come in to conflict with the sales departament actions. Possible for a company working from a dudes garage, where a "team" means 1-2 dudes. Not really possible in a company the size of GW, with established people who wrote and designed stuff for a few decades for the company.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


SimLife litterally answered the imaginary problem you pointed out : use the "downtime" to playtest fixes for the current codex cycle

They don't know how to pick the playtesters. In house playtesters give them the results w40k has seen since for ever. But lets assume it works, somehow. Now imagine someone like me wants to start to play GK under such a system. They get to see all the rules for all the factions day 1, there is no years of waiting that "maybe" GW will fix my codex. You get a book, you see in what state it is and it it looks unfun, you will not start to play it. If money ain't a problem and you want to start something else, which is fun, GW doesn't lose money. Buf it the person only wants to play this one army, they will just not play GW games at all probably.

External balance is difficult, but there’s no excuse beyond profit making/incompetence for the state of internal balance we see.

Spoletta wrote:
I think that by now the commercial model is clear. They are doing the same as other similar companies.

New releases need to generate a good profit, it is a big issue when they don't. A good profit is made by good models with good rules. They never had issues with the good models part, but the rules part is not 100% deterministic and play test can only get you so far. If the dex underperforms, it sells much less, so in doubt you aim at it being a bit stronger than the other ones, ready to fix them once you have more data. This means that sometimes you make them weaker than expected and get a balanced dex (TS, sisters, GSC and so on), sometimes you get it just right and it is a strong dex (DA, GK), sometimes you make them stronger than intended and you get meta monsters (Admech, Drukhari and so on).

With this sytem, in any case you don't get underpowered factions which don't sell. As long as you keep going with the nerfs, this works.

The issue obviously is that almost at all times you will have that faction which just came out which can potentially be too strong.

I appreciate that you didn't just go with the lazy and easily disprovable 'GW does OP 'cause Money!' route.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I don't understand the argument that sides with staggered codex releases.

I don't think anyone LIKES the staggered codex releases- I think all of us would prefer that they all drop at the same time. The issue is that some of us are thinking about the economics of the company instead thinking only about the player experience, and we know that going to a "release it all one day one" model would probably damage the company's bottom line, which could have negative consequences for the game in the long term.

It's the difference between "liking" staggered releases and "understanding" why they might be necessary.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

I was team incompetance for the first half of this edition, what with the day 1 DLCs and obvious misprints in codexes. But now it's just pissing in my face and calling it Covid-related shipping issues.

There are many crises affecting the global supply chain- it isn't all Covid. But they are legit issues- we do see it in other industries.

I'm ambivalent about the DLC label on Campaign books. I'll acknowledge that it's a complex and nuanced argument that can go on for pages and pages, and then leave it at that. (Actually, I won't- because I'm going to reference someone else's comment about campaign books before the end of this post, but we'll get there soon enough)

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

The fact that Chaos didn't get their second wound until 3 years into the edition,

I agree totally- I think this is probably the single most egregious error of the edition, simply because it would have been so damn easy to fix. May not agree with some of the stuff in the rest of the post, but we are definitely on the same page here.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

GW is experiencing a surge not seen since well, ever.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't going to last. GW sees the writing on the wall. They are squeezing their cheeto-fingered cash cows hard right now, because groups like one page rules and other home printing groups offer entire 2k armies for under 300$. And the rules are basically free with the STLs.

GW can't compete with that. What they can do is simple economics. Gouge the business for every last bit of capital, and then sell. I will not be surprised if GW gives up the game with 10th, or if there even is a 10th. There is no more profit in this model.

People have been predicting the death of GW or 40k for most of 40k's 35 year lifespan. I won't say it's impossible- by all accounts, they did come close in 6th and 7th, and I've also gone on record saying I don't think I will stick around for 10th. In my case, it's because I actually really like 9th, and I think 10th, though it might be better for all of you, it will probably be worse for me.

3D printing will take a chunk of the player base, it's true. But it's still farther away than enthusiasts may think, and it only replaces the modelling aspect of GW's suite of offerings- and yes, I acknowledge that it's the biggest chunk of the GW pie, but it isn't the only chunk.

Personally, I believe one of the keys to GW's current level of success is the diversity of play styles. It can be hard for people to relate to this because many of us only engage with our own slice of the game. I know that the vast majority of Dakka posters are 2k Matched players, but I'm less convinced that this group represents the largest portion of GW's customer base. And again, I acknowledge that it's possible- but I think it's very difficult to prove.

Voss wrote:
Well, since PA was a disaster anyway (as are the new warzones), the solution is obvious...

I wasn't a huge fan of PA either, but I quite like the new campaign books. Keep in mind, that this is from my own particular set of preferences- stand-alone pick-up games aren't terribly interesting or exciting for me. My interest in this game (any game really) is escalation campaign style.

I also think that campaign books are an important part of sustaining a persistent edition, which is my ultimate hope for future of the game. I'm not saying that it's ever going to happen- I'd just like it to happen, and I think campaign books would be almost essential in order to make it happen.

Don't get me wrong, I do think the campaign books can be improved, for sure- merging the two hard-backs and mission packs into a single volume would be a huge improvement- heck, even just combine Mission Pack 1 with hardback 1, and mission pack 2 with hardback 2 so that we end up with 2 instead of 4.

GW or w40k will "die" when my generation is 30+, the old timers of today are gone, and suddenly GW finds out that there is too few w40k players to support the sales even if a starting army costs 4k$.