Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums

Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums (https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/)
-   General 40k (https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/14-general-40k/)
-   -   GW finally getting it right? (https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/general-40k/171698-gw-finally-getting-right.html)

Drohar 11-03-14 09:17 PM

Tough people (me including) complain about the price, I'd rather buy expensive and cool than cheap and ugly. 40k world is my biggest reason to collect GW and they are getting it right. It is not easy satisfying everyones needs or wishes, but generally they are doing a good job. (Please don't take it into consideration that I collect Nids and just got two new models :D)

Einherjar667 11-03-14 09:22 PM

I think they are doing an excellent job. I have only been disappointed a few times, and so slightly that I can't even remember what about. Most of the rabble on the internet, the complaining, is borderline disillusioned ramblings (yeah I spent some time on WarSeer)

Fallen 11-04-14 06:22 AM

I'm disappointed with the Product that I receive for a $60 codex, to the point that I will no longer buy a new codex. I fail to see enough "stuff" for me to justify the price point for the codexs (as much as like the good eternal balance within). When I compare the codexs with other like items from other ranges (Bolt Action armies being an example).

I am disappointed with the lack of actual forewarning/hype/build up on new products. As much as I like having new things being released often; I'm sorry, but I can not budget my hobby expenses into "rumors" for the $45 and up items (aka all of GW), I have to plan for the release and save up to the amount, otherwise I wait a month or two until I can buy it.

I am rather disappointed with the route of game play that GW went with for general games, and lots of the finesse changes from 6th to 7th, that was a rather "tight" expectations for pickup games with some cool styles of play if one wished to do a special type of game with someone.

----

Most of all I feel saddened by GW's lack of being a "game" company with their pathetic excuses for their, IMO, lackluster rules and lack of multiple variants of of game play being of rough equality between them. For instance a pure Close combat army, vs a pure shooty army; MC heavy tyranids vs swarm tyranids; Mono god builds in either Chaos force vs multi god builds...

Over all I feel that GW has been doing better, but "better" is not enough for me to spend any of my money on them with any actual consistency.

Serpion5 11-04-14 07:07 AM

What's with all the bitching about the price? All it is in this hobby is a matter of patience.

I want two maleceptors and two toxicrenes in my collection to give me good list options. Naturally I'm not going to by all of them at once. One kit per week. Maybe one kit per fortnight even. That gives me plenty of time to build and even paint the previous one.

You treat it like a long term hobby, which it is, and there's no problem. If I can manage this on Australian prices I'm pretty sure anyone else can too. :P


Personally I think GW are doing a great job lately. Even though they've shifted their focus to their models before their game, I feel that the current ruleset is one of the most balanced versions of the game to date. Add to which gw are now willing to add new units outside releases and it's easy to rectify weaker codexes with a new unit here and there, tyranids being the prime example.

Jace of Ultramar 11-04-14 12:22 PM

Honestly, I think GW has been doing ok. Since I first came in to this hobby, a year before 5th ended, I've had pleasant experiences all around. I've questioned their method on why they do certain things the way they do, but, people on here and a friend who is a former shop owner have helped me put things in perspective.
Overall, I like everything that has been released in this year since the introduction of WD weekly #1 on up to the current End Times for Fantasy.

ChaosRedCorsairLord 11-04-14 01:13 PM

The models themselves have never been my problem, they're all almost without exception excellent. They've just failed to meaningfully address game balance.

I think it's just so many people have jumped ship that there are less people to complain.

SilverTabby 11-04-14 01:47 PM

Having been playing 40k since 2nd Ed, you youngsters know *nothing* of game balance issues :wink:

humakt 11-04-14 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilverTabby (Post 1945834)
Having been playing 40k since 2nd Ed, you youngsters know *nothing* of game balance issues :wink:

This I have to whole heartedly agree with.

I am finding in hard to keep up with the break neck release speed GW are maintaining. But I love this. It means when I play somebody I don't know everything they have in their army. I am kept guessing which is all part of the enjoyment. I now want to take different lists to see what happens in certain circumstances or against different armies. I want to tray a data slate here or formation there. Woohoo for variety.

Another thing about 7th I have found I really like are the Maelstrom of war missions. I do think you need to be prepared to play them, as you need a mobile army to have a chance of getting a steady build up of VP's but its definitely fun to play.

Perhaps I just have a very relaxed gaming circle who are not out to win a game in 3 turns. For me GW are doing a great job with only a few very small rule niggles that I would change but nothing drastic (haywire springs to mind as way too powerful).

MidnightSun 11-04-14 02:51 PM

317 Attachment(s)
I'll just add, because this just struck me; yes, the Grey Knights codex has less in it that the old one. But frankly, there's not a single unit in there that I would call dead weight. Draigo is perhaps below average, but honestly that's only really because Draigo is very expensive and doesn't fill your HQ slot (which is full of expensive dudes) rather than any problem with his unit entry. Dreadnoughts, equally, but since Dreadnoughts are kind of poor in every Codex, I don't really begrudge the GK book for that. Purgators compete for slot space, but there are worse units in the game than a couple of Incinerators jumping out of a Razorback or shooting out of a Rhino top hatch. I'm probably not going to bring Halberds, but Warding Staves, Swords, Falchions and Hammers are all useful. I doubt I'll use Psilencers, but Incinerators, Psycannons and all the Heavy versions of the weapons are viable.

Yeah, the GK codex is smaller, yes, Psybolt disappeared, yes, you need to download a small .pdf or keep your old Grey Knight book handy if you want to use the Inquisition. But I think, overall, the new GK book is better, certainly with regard to internal balance. Add in Officio Assassinorum, and Inquisition, and it's far better than the old book.

I think it might be something that affects players who've been playing for a long time, and in a fairly relaxed gaming environment - you become less concerned with external balance and more concerned about a Codex' internal balance.

Vaz 11-04-14 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilverTabby (Post 1945834)
Having been playing 40k since 2nd Ed, you youngsters know *nothing* of game balance issues :wink:

With what's assumed the majority of the writers having played the game that long as well, it comes across that those who are writing those rules know nothing of game balance either.
@MidnightSun - in regards to Grey Knights - does it not bother you that you now have to pay for not only a new codex, but 2 other smaller books to use the same rules?



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:52 AM.

Powered by the Emperor of Man.


vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.0 Beta 4 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome