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)

bitsandkits 11-02-14 08:48 AM

GW finally getting it right?
 
I was wondering how people feel GW are doing, a few years ago they seem to had got flack for everything they did, but lately it feels as though they have turned a corner or at least done enough to silence the critics or maybe the community got sick of the whining ?

So have they got better?



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

MidnightSun 11-02-14 10:40 AM

317 Attachment(s)
The FAQs updating books to 7th ed, the addition of the Toxicrene and Maleceptor (new models and rules for a Codex; sure, they're not exactly going to win any tournaments, but GW is adding new models to a faction outside of a Codex release and the rules are free because they come in the box. How is that in any way not a brilliant thing?) and a similar concept with Dataslates (sure, it's a microtransaction, but it's also adding Be'lakor and Cypher and Tyrannic War Veterans without having to wait four years for the next iteration of your Codex and it adds more options to the game), a more general acceptance of Forge World through use of it's models in White Dwarf, the re-introduction of army list variety (in 5th, we had FOC-swapping characters and that was great, and then the whole idea lulled in mid-6th/7th edition until Grey Knights, who have a brilliant Detachment that forces you to make real choices as to which FOC you use, let alone what units you put within that).

Yeah, I'm really liking GW at the moment.

mayegelt 11-02-14 12:26 PM

Mixed bag for me. I do like the new models. For the last few years the standard of the models has gone up and up. Partially due to competition and also just natural standard increasing over time.
What I am not a fan of is various forms of 'player tax' that seems to have been brought in. I do understand that GW needs to make money, but buying a codex is ok, but then having to buy the supplement codex to get the most out of the codex you bought is not. Dataslates are a funny one. I dislike them bringing out the Dataslates as stand alone products (such as Cypher or Be'lakor) especially when the Dataslate is an incredibly powerful or must have unit (Normal Helbrutes Vs Dataslate Helbrutes being a good example). Forgeworld stuff can also be a pain, but you get charged a lot for the models in that one as well as the books. What I don't like with them is the continual reprinting of the same rules over several books. So Imperial Armour Apoc had a load of Chaosy stuff in. But IA:13 had all of them, mostly unchanged then added in Renegades and Heretics and a couple of chaos versions of imperial 30k tanks (what imperial players had access to for ages)
HOWEVER they seem to be turning a corner with that type of thing and releasing the new units / models as rules included in your purchase or featuring them in White Dwarf (or both). The only prob I see with that is if it comes in WD only and you are a player who started the army long after the WD rules print, so have no way of getting the additional rules for something that could be incredibly useful. An example of this used to be GamesDay Models, where you could only buy the model on the day and your programme had the rules for him. Ones like Crom the Conqueror were insanely good if I remember right.

I do like the Digital copies of the codexes. This helps a lot with travel and stuff, especially if you are going with CSM with Daemon allies and some Forgeworld tanks or whatever. Adding about 1KG in weight with some books it all mounts up if you aren't driving. Also the feature to search for things from a side menu rather than trying to mark up pages is a bonus.
HOWEVER I do not like the format of the recent codexes. Having the compiled list at the end that had all the models in brief with their pts values and the names of what rules affected them was great. The new one forces you to either use something like Battlescribe or endlessly flick back and forth in the book when planning an army. I much preferred being able to see all the units that classed as X over the space of 2-3 pages. Though I do understand in part why GW did it. Some of the reason I have been told was because of copy write law. In that for publications for gaming and hobbies you are allowed to photocopy (or digitise) X% of a book for personal use (X depending on country). Because of this people used to copy the last 20pages of so what had all the stats and costs of each of the units, and then the reference at the end tended to have most of the special rules and weapons. GW of course didn't like this because people could bring in those 20pages with them without really needing to have bought a copy of the book (but claiming they had).

The one big thing I am hoping for though is that currently they have a fast release system on the codexes (about 1 a month maybe 1 every 2 plus a supplement), and what I don't want to happen is that in 10months time when they have released every 5-6th edition book left to bring up to 7th that they then start again and release 7th editions after only having 7th edition out for just over a year.
The other one what might be interesting and soon, is will old supplement books work with new released codexes. So for instance Black Legion and Crimson Slaughter are designed for the 5th edition CSM book. But will they still work with 7th edition (what I think is due for april->july next year).

iamtheeviltwin 11-03-14 03:36 PM

Personally, I am really enjoying GW right now. They feel much more like the Games Workshop of the late 90s, early 2000s that I enjoyed. Lots of releases, rules and new units being released on a regular basis. Great new models that no one else really rivals. The price point is a bit of a killer, I would like to see them find a way to drop the price on rank and file models a bit and balance that with the higher cost of the center piece models.

I think their digital platforms are still a work in progress, but they are getting there and it seems like they are thinking ahead about future technologies such as 3D printing, and the eventual end of the LoTR IP. So it will be nice to see what the future brings.

The only thing I am really missing is the sort of "wild west" feel of their specialist games line, like Warhammer Quest and Bloodbowl. However, they seem to be trying to scratch that itch through third parties via Digital Products and Fantasy Flight.

Khorne's Fist 11-03-14 07:17 PM

Nobody could ever slate them for the quality of their minis, and on the whole the recent releases such as the DE and End Times stuff are simply stunning. Rules wise, 7th Ed seems to have generally been perceived as an improvement on 6th, and the codexes also seem to been well received.

However, the biggest issue for me, as it has been for years, is the price. The price of two units in 40k will get you a full army in other systems like BA or FoW. I will always love 40k as a game and a universe, but with so many other cheaper, more accessible systems out there, I won't be pumping any serious cash into it again any time soon.

Sethis 11-03-14 08:17 PM

For me the fundamental problems I've had for years still haven't been addressed - mainly rules balance. Considering that it's generally the same people who've been writing rules since what, 3rd or 4th, you'd hope they might be a little better at it by now.

venomlust 11-03-14 08:30 PM

I've been really liking GW the past year, as a fan. When I started the hobby just over a year ago, I was appalled that GW released new editions of the game without updating every codex. Veterans laughed and said, "Oh, you." Well look at 'em now! Shouldn't be much longer until they're all hardback. Supplements and dataslates are a tough pill to swallow but really do provide an avenue for providing new content, and you really don't even have to buy them to use their game rules.



As a consumer, I still only make purchases through third parties and eBay. I don't think that will ever change. There's practically no reason for me to ever pay retail prices.

Vaz 11-03-14 08:32 PM

Nope.

I hate playing with tonka toys and pay to win mechanics, where choosing x-new unit wins you games. I could understand making cool rules to make cool new models sell, but that units such as Heldrakes, Nagash, Stormpotatoes, Wraithknights, Superheavies, Riptides, etc are necessary to win (or at least effectively counter those that opponents have, and essentially codex creep is really annoying.

Continually escalating prices which do not match inflation, and utter ridiculous business positions and choices do not equate to a particularly well enjoyed game. I am yet to pay for a book since 7th edition BRB and it will continue to go that way. I am sick of being penalised by an inability to learn from their own mistakes, and having charges for their legal bills and lost profits from pirating applied to my own purchases.



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

Reaper45 11-03-14 08:32 PM

Well GW is at least backing up their being a model company with extremely useful painting guides and painting videos.

So they're doing better.

Vaz 11-03-14 08:42 PM

Games Workshop deluding themselves into being a modeling company these days is as ludicrous as Nintendo pretending that pokemon games are designed for kids.



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

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

Khorne's Fist 11-04-14 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serpion5 (Post 1945506)
What's with all the bitching about the price?

It's not so much the price, but value for money. I have no problem paying €50 for a box of toy soldiers, but that €50 goes a lot further in other systems. In 40k it might buy me a Stormwolf, which would amount to about 15% of the points cost of an army. That same €50 would get me 2 boxes of Warlord Games excellent plastic US marines for Bolt Action, which could be used to make about 600 or 700 points of a 1000 point army. If GW offered even close to that kind of value I'd probably have one of each army.

Sethis 11-04-14 03:44 PM

Something that I would truly like to see to address those price issues:

We have clip-together models for the base game - Dark Vengeance, Black Reach and so on. They're great quality sculpts and only sacrifice versatility (and even then, you can still do some stuff with them). They're also far cheaper to make than multi-part kits, as evidenced by the price that GW was able to put them out for.

So my idea would be for each battleforce to be clip-together models, for each army. You get two infantry squads, a vehicle/MC and a commander. Obviously new moulds and stuff are the significant cost for GW here, so they'd be rotated in with codex releases rather than all done at once. Clip together Rhino? Fire Warriors? Daemons? Yes please.

I know for a fact that if they were the same quality as DV they'd sell like hot cakes, at the right price point.

MidnightSun 11-04-14 03:51 PM

317 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaz (Post 1945874)
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?

Wait, you're supposed to give money for Inquisition and Assassinorum?

Vaz 11-04-14 04:13 PM

That was the idea anyway. But GW are too stupid to cut out the piracy market, and prefer to rinse actual paying customers of 60 to cover the losses. Not realising that this encourages long term supporters of GW to turn to such.



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

ChaosRedCorsairLord 11-04-14 04:31 PM

Quote:

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

Haha, the condescending veteran response, I wasn't expecting that! :laugh:

Seriously though, in second edition 40k didn't have the level of competition it does nowadays. There's almost nothing GW does anymore that another company doesn't do better, which is sad. For all it's faults I do love 40k.

Quote:

Originally Posted by humakt (Post 1945842)
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.

Fair enough man, I'm glad you're enjoying it. I think having a large collection of models to draw upon would definitely make it a lot more enjoyable. Given how long I've played 40k, my collection of finished projects is pathetically small.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaz (Post 1945874)
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?

I'd wager they just don't care. If not it means they still haven't realised plasma pistols aren't worth 15pts. No one can be that incompetent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khorne's Fist (Post 1945898)
It's not so much the price, but value for money. I have no problem paying €50 for a box of toy soldiers, but that €50 goes a lot further in other systems. In 40k it might buy me a Stormwolf, which would amount to about 15% of the points cost of an army. That same €50 would get me 2 boxes of Warlord Games excellent plastic US marines for Bolt Action, which could be used to make about 600 or 700 points of a 1000 point army. If GW offered even close to that kind of value I'd probably have one of each army.

God forbid you play a horde army. Currently I can field most squads in X-wing, and yet for the cost of all that stuff I still couldn't even afford a 1500pt 40k SM army. If you include the cost of rules and codices I can't even get half way there, Ridiculous!


On a more positive note: I guess the thing I like most about GW is their models and kits. There are better models out there, but in terms of bits and variety the GW kits are great. Also some of their vehicles (especially the FW stuff) are pretty damn awesome. The Leman Russ still remains one of my favourite sci-fi tanks of all time.

MidnightSun 11-04-14 05:10 PM

317 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosRedCorsairLord (Post 1945986)
I'd wager they just don't care. If not it means they still haven't realised plasma pistols aren't worth 15pts. No one can be that incompetent.

I'm expecting that to change fairly soon, maybe with the next Marine book; Plasma Pistols cost 15pts because that's what they've always cost. Land Raiders and Terminators are overpriced as well, they're just left that way because that's how they've been forever (and for the old guard, yes, I know, not literally forever, but the history of 'modern' 40k). That's been broken with a couple of things recently, if I'm remembering rightly - the fiddling with the cost of Tacticals was a step, and the new 'different' Terminators (GKT and Chaos Terminators - things that aren't Storm Bolter/PFist with a Sergeant with Power Sword and the option for an Assault Cannon, Heavy Flamer or Cyclone) being far cheaper are both hopefully signs of things to come.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosRedCorsairLord (Post 1945986)
God forbid you play a horde army. Currently I can field most squads in X-wing, and yet for the cost of all that stuff I still couldn't even afford a 1500pt 40k SM army. If you include the cost of rules and codices I can't even get half way there, Ridiculous!

I know it's highly subjective and I'm not knocking it, but I'll just say that I'd gladly pay for 40k miniatures over X-Wing toys.

Totally agree that horde armies are expensive as balls though - Nids can get kinda an okay deal with the snap-fit Gaunts, but Orks and Guard get shafted (unless you picked up a gorillion Black Reach Boyz, natch).

Reaper45 11-04-14 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaz (Post 1944970)
Games Workshop deluding themselves into being a modeling company these days is as ludicrous as Nintendo pretending that pokemon games are designed for kids.

Funny your should say that, because pokemon games are kids games.

It just so happens that nintendo ensured that they were polished to the point where adults could enjoy playing them.

40k miniatures are models that you put together, paint, and make your own that just so happen to have rules so you can play games with them.

Coming into the hobby to be nothing more than a fucking power gamer whose only interested in playing games and winning kills the hobby for the ones who want to head to a GW store on a friday night and hang out for a few hours painting models and having a good time.

Of course you're just going to ignore everything I wrote and insult me.

Vaz 11-04-14 09:55 PM

My point exactly. The game itself was designed for children initially - mainly to piggyback off the anime, comics and general hype. But recognising that there is an indepth battling and competitive scheme - usually by those who have played back since the halcyon days of red and blue, or maybe gold/silver if you were a late comer. I was on a flight out of Kandahar back to cyprus after 9 months in afghanistan, and I had 100 marines yelling 'go pikachu!' As i took on gary at cerulean town bridge.

Nintendo and gamefreak/games workshop acknowledge/refuse to acknowledge that people battling their pokemon/models that they have spent ages trying to catch them all/model and paint, and so back up that huge investment in time/money and effort/effort by providing fantastic, in depth and complex, but oddly balanced and well documented battle and training system with IV's, EV's, typing Combinations, status conditions/poorly written, poorly supported, badly balanced rules and a non existent competitive scene, while backed up with an excellent support of veteran players/none existant encouragement of veterans.

The ethos is the exact same. The execution is entirely different. Maybe that is down to size, but a company as successful as Nintendo providing high end retail capital expenses, GW can learn the most. It is almost contempt with which veterans are treated.

GW needs to stop hiring fans to write codexes and looking at those who actually play the game at that level. Similar to how DOTA and Call of Duty and other MLG Esports use such 'semiprofessionals' to shape the design and balance of their game.

I don't like being shit on by my own investment, and hence i refuse to support them.



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

Fallen 11-04-14 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MidnightSun (Post 1945994)
I know it's highly subjective and I'm not knocking it, but I'll just say that I'd gladly pay for 40k miniatures over X-Wing toys.

To be fair, there is truth to "You get what you pay for", when we are arguing about the quality of the models, and I think no one here is giving GW a hard time on their models (pricing structure maybe, but that is a separate issue here).

How ever most people who like x-wing are drawn to its rules and game play. It's a tight rule set where there are practically zero rule arguments during games (how often do you see something happen in a GW game where you have to "roll off"?), and is a fast paced game where it takes considerable less time to play than a 40k or fantasy game, and considerably less stuff to bring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper45 (Post 1946058)
40k miniatures are models that you put together, paint, and make your own that just so happen to have rules so you can play games with them.

Coming into the hobby to be nothing more than a fucking power gamer whose only interested in playing games and winning kills the hobby for the ones who want to head to a GW store any night and hang out for a few hours painting models and having a good time.

First off, I live in the US where there are considerably less GW stores, and the ones that do exist have zero place to paint and "hang out", maybe its different in the UK and Europe - but everywhere else a GW is the equivalent to Gamestop. We do not really go to them to "hang out", we do not go to them and paint there, mainly because there is nowhere to paint anything, or limited space that is used for gaming.

So, just because GW - who I think we can all agree is on the top of the table top world - HAPPENS to have rules means that I cannot have expectations for the company regarding said rules? I cannot have expectations on how I view their GAME?

I find it when GW is the equivalent to the New York Yankees, Manchester United, The Ohio State Buckeyes, or whoever is the dominant team/player in the sport(s) you watch, to not have high expectations for the WHOLE of the group, not just one portion of the team. It is also a different level of expectations when people regard those teams than they do the New York Mets, Crystal Palace, Purdue, etc.

I find it rather shocking where lots of people tell me that I am a "a fucking power gamer whose only interested in playing games and winning" (I am grouped into the more asshole spot, but that is life) over the internet because I find the quality of THE GAME to be sub par, and not up to the standards that I have set on the game.

I am sorry, I do not collect vast amounts of orks, guardsmen, nids, CSM, SMs for the "hobby" I collect the vast amounts of GW models, because there IS A GAME with it, otherwise I would probably only own a fraction of what I do. I do not SPEND MONEY on models alone in the quantities that I have just to have them; I am sorry for the fact that I have higher expectations for a company to provide quality rules for a GAME that I play that uses their models, which does not match the quality of the models that I buy. I am sorry for being a CUSTOMER of your company. I am sorry for wanting to get a good deal on my time and effort. I am sorry for WANTING to spend MONEY on products that you have, but lacking usefulness in YOUR GAME that I PLAY. I am sorry for have expectations for you that others do not. I am sorry for being invested with you, I am sorry that the game that I love the most is now the most boring game I that I own.

Vaz 11-04-14 10:17 PM

I love how equating balance results in being labled a power gamer. A power gamer wants exactly the opposite.



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

Reaper45 11-04-14 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallen (Post 1946218)
snip

So tell me, since you can't paint at your local store only game, how many hours do you spend playing the game? And how many hours do you spend painting models?

Quote:

I find it rather shocking where lots of people tell me that I am a "a fucking power gamer whose only interested in playing games and winning" (I am grouped into the more asshole spot, but that is life) over the internet because I find the quality of THE GAME to be sub par, and not up to the standards that I have set on the game.
Maybe the power gamer was uncalled for, but tell me are you really interested in the actual hobby or just playing games?

Right now I own a green tide of orks, small force of guard, 500 points of dark eldar. Random tau, eldar, chaos, space wolves, necrons and a few space marines.
I don't give a shit about starting a tau army.I couldn't care less about having a space marine army. I own the models because they look cool, and I enjoy spending the time building and painting them.

So tell me whose GW more interested in having as a customer. The guy who buys whatever because he likes the look of it or the guy looking to enter a tournament whose only going to get eldar, space marine, tau or dark eldar?

Sethis 11-04-14 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper45 (Post 1946242)
So tell me whose GW more interested in having as a customer. The guy who buys whatever because he likes the look of it or the guy looking to enter a tournament whose only going to get eldar, space marine, tau or dark eldar?

I'll phrase that a little differently:

"So tell me whose [sic] GW more interested in having as a customer. The guy who buys whatever because he likes the look of it or the guy looking to enter a tournament whose [sic] only going to get a full 2000pt army and fully paint/base it (with GW paints, glue and flock) to max his tourney points every time a new "overpowered" codex comes out?"

Dunno about you, but I would have thought the latter guy would be a more attractive customer - given that he's rotating entire armies wholesale on a regular basis rather than just sticking to the Orks he's collected since 1995.

I'll also reply to the power gamer comment with the obligatory "game balance isn't just important for tournament players, it's essential to the enjoyment of casual players as well" response. To draw a parallel, it doesn't matter if you play a shooter casually, or as part of a clan/team for cash rewards - both players want to experience as few bugs as possible in their playthroughs.

Reaper45 11-04-14 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sethis (Post 1946266)
I'll phrase that a little differently:

"So tell me whose [sic] GW more interested in having as a customer. The guy who buys whatever because he likes the look of it or the guy looking to enter a tournament whose [sic] only going to get a full 2000pt army and fully paint/base it (with GW paints, glue and flock) to max his tourney points every time a new "overpowered" codex comes out?"

Dunno about you, but I would have thought the latter guy would be a more attractive customer - given that he's rotating entire armies wholesale on a regular basis rather than just sticking to the Orks he's collected since 1995.

I'll also reply to the power gamer comment with the obligatory "game balance isn't just important for tournament players, it's essential to the enjoyment of casual players as well" response. To draw a parallel, it doesn't matter if you play a shooter casually, or as part of a clan/team for cash rewards - both players want to experience as few bugs as possible in their playthroughs.

If GW cared about tournaments we'd have balance and an incentive for people to play something other than eldar tau or space marines.

Tawa 11-04-14 11:37 PM

Quote:

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

I'll see your 2Ed, and raise you a Rogue Trader.... :good:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosRedCorsairLord (Post 1945986)
Haha, the condescending veteran response, I wasn't expecting that! :laugh:

See above. :laugh:

humakt 11-05-14 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tawa (Post 1946306)
I'll see your 2Ed, and raise you a Rogue Trader.... :good:

I've got a 1st edition of WHF in the loft, but then I'm an old fart as well.

I think there is too much emphasis on game balance. GW are not encouraging tournaments because that's not the game style they like.

I understand why people want balance but its not happened in the last 20 years so I don't see it changing anytime soon.

Tawa 11-05-14 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by humakt (Post 1946362)
I've got a 1st edition of WHF in the loft, but then I'm an old fart as well.

Ace :good: I've also still got my copies of Ere We Go! and Freebooterz somewhere :)

Sethis 11-05-14 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper45 (Post 1946290)
If GW cared about tournaments we'd have balance and an incentive for people to play something other than eldar tau or space marines.

They don't care about tournaments. Which results in poor game balance. Which disappoints players. Which leads to lost revenue. Especially since games like Warmahordes and X-Wing with very tight rulesets have been gaining traction for years now. Which is why it's so insane that they don't seem to care. It just doesn't make financial sense.

If they actually just went to the biggest 5 tournament events in the world, took aside the top 5 finishers for each one, said "We'll pay 20 for you to list the top 10 problems you have with game balance in this edition so we can address them next time" then they'd get enough feedback from people who know what they're talking about to fuel the design team for months.

However they seem to be so... scared... of their own customers opinions that they don't bother, and so disinterested in community engagement that they've given up any attempt to cater to or run events for the broad demographics (Painters, Gamers, Fluff fans). Although at least Painters have Golden Demon and Fluff fans have BL Open Days.

Ultimately, I think the only way they're ever going to achieve anything approaching balance is to completely reinvent the game from the core mechanics up, similar to the 2nd/3rd Ed transition. Maybe move to a 2D6 or D10 system. Either that, or realise that "because it's always been like that" is NOT A VALID REASON TO EVER DO ANYTHING AT ALL, EVER.

Quote:

Originally Posted by humakt (Post 1946362)
I think there is too much emphasis on game balance. GW are not encouraging tournaments because that's not the game style they like.

Why are people always linking game balance to tournaments? They have nothing to do with each other. Balance is equally as important to casual gamers as tourney goers. Reducing the number of rules arguments and fundamentally broken units is in the best interests of everyone, whether that's 10yr old Timmy playing with his mates on the floor or someone at a top table competition with 500 attendees.

SilverTabby 11-05-14 12:58 AM

I remember what happened when they let Jervis, a hardcore tournament winner at the time, write the Skaven army book. Result? A book that everyone took, because you could be sick with it. And so everyone complained, even the tourney players.

You want books written so tourney players approve? Then *every* book must be written like that, and virtually none of the writers play that way, and you alienate 80% of the actual player base.

I really like the current writing mentality, that the game is *fun* first, competitive second. It's a game, and is what you make of it. My nids suck in CC, yet still I fling them at it because I have fun doing so. Each to their own.

Oh, and from reading the books and knowing the writers, 3rd Ed 40k was the first edition with younger players specifically in mind...

Sethis 11-05-14 01:10 AM

I'm not saying let them write the codex, just take their opinions on board. I don't think I'm alone in expressing the opinion that Jervis can go suck a mercury filled dildo dry either.

Einherjar667 11-05-14 01:50 AM

I am greatly enjoying the End Times phase of WFB, epic times for the fantasy crowd.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:32 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