Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 185 Posts

·
nice boy, daft though !
Joined
·
10,212 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Rattlehead
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
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).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
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.
 

·
Dazed and confused.
Joined
·
8,496 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,190 Posts
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.
 

·
JUGGERNUT
Joined
·
2,558 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,685 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
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)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,459 Posts
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)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,689 Posts
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.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,978 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,868 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,007 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,182 Posts
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).
 

·
Rattlehead
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,830 Posts
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
 
1 - 20 of 185 Posts
Top