[Jacobite]

Hey guys

When quite a lot of the new codexs have come out I've heard a lot of people voice the opinion that a lot of lists have been nerfed and how its all Jervis Johnson's fault.

I was out of the loop for a while (basically untill I came here) so I missed all that changing of the Guard.

Anybody care to explain why Andy Chambers left, the new promenance Jervis and the new direction of GW.

(Please don't turn this into a discussion of weather certain codex's have been nerfed or not, or how GW is now full of mean goblins only interested in making money etc as we have all heard those arguments before and the majority of us know where we all stand on those topics).

So yea - what happened?

 

[uberschveinen]

All these people are whinging because they jumped on the most powerful lists and, suprise suprise, the lists got powered down. Templars, Craftworld Eldar, and Chaos got the same treatment, and nobody can say they didn't deserve it.

 

[Jacobite]

Re: What are the reasons for the rise of the age of Nerf?

(Please don't turn this into a discussion of weather certain codex's have been nerfed or not, or how GW is now full of mean goblins only interested in making money etc as we have all heard those arguments before and the majority of us know where we all stand on those topics).

 

[uberschveinen]

I can't justify reductions in power if I can't indicate specific cases in which they were entirely valid.

 

[Jacobite]

Ok that was me trying very hard to be polite.

Your post didn't really answer the question that I asked. So rather than turning the thread into a discussion on wether or not the Codex's have been powered down (which I specifcally asked this thread not to be), would you please be able to answer it. If not thats fine but please don't hijack the thread.

Thank you.

 

[Alexander_67]

It is in my opinion most of what uberschveinen said, i think its because people in their droves were complaining non stop about how cheap certain armies were due to the rules that made them. And to my ultimate shame i have complained once or twice about said powerful armies. I think GW have simply responded to all this critisism and been forced to remove rule lists for armies.

It wouldnt be fare to simply remove the rules for one army and leave the rest unchanged as that would simply look as if they were either penalising one group of people or admiting blatantly they had made a mistake in the rules.

So if one had to go they all had to go. And you have the situation we have now. All new armies are vanilla. Bog standard. Cut from exactly the same mould. The only thing that defines them individual is what you give your character and how you paint them. And it is a damn shame

 

[MarzM]

Well there was a lot of rumours about why Andy Chambers left GW. I want to make sure that you are aware that these are just rumours, i have no idea if they are true or not!

The first was that he quit for personal/family reasons. Again i dunno if this is completely true, as there is rarely ever one exact reason.

The second i heard was. Andy Chambers wanted to move 40k into the "end Game" scenario, and the powers that be said no. So he felt that perhaps he should leave.

I'm not sure if either/any of these reasons is the actual one, all i know is that he turned up working for the Starship Troopers Miniature game awful quickly! (apparently he's made it a lot better)

Andy Chambers was/is a big loss to a company like GW (IMO). His knowledge, understanding of the games and people who play it and the vision he might have had for the games future. Jervis is not a bad person, or by any means bad at his job. I (with the exception of the Eldar codex) like the direction 40k has taken. Once ALL of the books are re-done i think it will be a better game. I like the fact that in future people will not win their games at the list design stage. Ok i would have preferred to keep the Legions for example, but these can still be done as long as the person writing the list doesn't jacking off to Lash Princes and Oblits combos!

I think/hope the game will eventually revolve around tactics and balanced/themed lists. You asked if the codex's are being powered down jaco. Well yes, they appear to be. I'm happy about that. Playing Beard fest's almost made me give up the hobby, or start playing FoW, Warmachine or Hordes (which are great game's).

One other reason GW probably went in a new direction is that it was floated! GW has investors, share holder etc. They have to have profit margins and business stuff! lol. The games are not really marketed towards us now. This hobby is about 12 year old boys and their parents credit cards. I'm getting on a bit. I'm not their target audience and i can understand why GW acts the way they do. It still frustrates me, but i accept it. We'll just have to see what happens!


MarzM :mrgreen:

 

[Jeridian]

The rumour I heard/figured out about Chambers quitting was that with the start of 4th Ed he wanted to completely revolutionise the game system, get rid of U go I go, etc, etc.

The bean counters said No. Too risky, stick with a tried system and milk it til it collapses.

So Andy moved to the company that did the Starship Troopers game which coincidentally forgoes the U go I go system, whilst having a lot of hallmarks of the 40k system...

 

[Kujo]

GW has investors, share holder etc. They have to have profit margins and business stuff! lol.

How could they not be making huge profits when they can sell 15 cents worth of plastic for 15 dollars?????

 

[Jeridian]

I really don't want to comment on the Nerf Age anymore (I've whined across several forums).

On the one hand I like that Iron Warriors are gone, that Blood Angels don't get 250pts of free stuff, that Ulthwe doesn't have a 60xman Seer Village, etc, etc.

But on the other hand I don't like how the only difference between armies will be what colour you paint them. And having the hard choice between taking a Tactical Squad kitted like A, or a Tactical Squad kitted like A...


I wouldn't mind seeing the Assault Cannon fixed, such a no brainer- the DA/BA solution is GW standard sideways, half-assed but it's tolerable.
And the Holo Fields- of, 'You can't kill me, I win.'

 

[The Wraithlord]

I believe that this is what he is referring to Uber:

Anybody care to explain why Andy Chambers left, the new promenance Jervis and the new direction of GW.

Jac, I don't fully know myself but I seem to recall that Andy was fired, then Pete Haines (not that I might that one) and the Jervis was put in charge of the overall direction for 40K in the forseeable future. Jervis stated ideal is to level the playing field with all the codices, making them all roughly at the same power level and having all units in each codex be as viable as the next. Once the codices are somewhat standardized, then they will concentrate on more add-ons such as Cities of Death and Apocalypse.

The whole idea of it being 'his fault' stems from his White Dwarf articles that often make reference to his young son and that people feel that whatever is being done with 40K right now is not for veteran players but is instead all focused on making it as easy as possible for said child to play. Which is a load of hogwash. GW is a business and I am fairly certain they realize that appealing to the younger market will only gain them more revenue (which many feel is the single most evil thing they can do, gasp, a company making money.....). I simply look at it as a smart move as it just means more players for me to crush in the future

 

[hephesto]

Good question, if they are indeed levelling all armies and codexes there is bound to be some powering down of armies and units. And in many cases this is a good thing as there were quite a few broken, overpowered things out there. For example as an Iron Warrior player I'm the first to admit that that list was indeed very open to abuse and there were many, many others.

As such I'm hoping that the current line of powering down codexes doesn't take things to far and forces people to chuck half their excisintg armies in the bin (poor alpha legion player ). Good example here is the chaos codex, read it cover to cover, and I like it a lott, especially the very nice, fluff sections and stories (the wolf of Fenris and Kharn stories are so damn cool). And I can fully understand why certain things were cut/changed, but I do have the feeling that a lott of long-time chaos player will have the feeling that the only thing that differentiates 1 chaos army from the next will be the colourscheme and how abusive a unit choice a player will make. In fact there's an army pic in the codex that demonstrates this very well - a red corsair force with allies from the cleaced. Fancy names and very cool colourscheme, but they're all the same chaos marines.

The strange thing is if this is indeed there planned course, then why are the putting such extreme effort into apocalypse. Doubt it will help to make things simpler or more balanced....although funfactor should go up x-fold. Ah well, the only thing I can truly say is that the next 2 should show us just how far gw is taking this. I'm pretty sure the daemon codex will make chaos very special again, orks should be fine (I hope) with some old units coming back and if the rumors are true necrons should be getting an tau-styled update. And while a lott of people are afraid they'll loose their "we'll be back roll", I really doubt it as the apocalypse phalanx still uses it and makes it even better.

In fact the only thing I'm truly disappointed in so far is the annoying new codex layout, thanksfully I have a decent memory but otherwise I'd be turning pages until my fingers would go dumb. Still this is just a personal thing :wink:

 

[Viscount Vash]

Wraiths about covered it with his answer.

I don't agree with the 'Hogwash' bit though it is being dumbed down, but as Wraith said its to make it marketable to younger players and to move us Vets the newer add ons which are more complicated.(Edit: There was a time when due to lead content the lower age limit for the hobby was 14 yrs.)
This policy (whilst I/you may not like it.) spans from Battle for Macragge to Cities of Death and Apocalypse and is designed to create generations of players all buying different versions of the game. Then get the younger players to purchase the next one up the chain as they mature.
It make sense, how many times have you seen younger brothers get frustrated in a shop because they could not play?

Andy Chambers had his own ideas about the direction of 40k which while probably good from a narritive point of view were not so hot from a business standpoint.
(A memory stirs of rumours...... the collapse of the Imperium...... enclaves of loyalist holding out in isolated pockets of resistance....etc.)


Ubers forgotten Dark and Blood Angels.... :lol:

Edit: sorry Heph your reply was not there when I started typing (slowly). The quicker you wear your codex out the more copies you will have to buy.

 

[Red Orc]

I have a feeling Apocalypse is supposed to make all the older gamers think, hang on, it's OK to field all the units that have been 'nerfed', now I've got an extra 1000(+) points to play with and no force-org charts to worry about... Jervis does care about us after all (and why not? He's older than me (pretty old) and has been at GW since about 1985, several years before Andy Chambers joined).

It's (Apocalypse) not really aimed at the younger market, granted, but they don't want all us oldsters to bog off. Just shut up, I suspect.

As to the min age being 14, not so sure about that. I remember when they started putting warnings on citadel miniatures, I *think* it was 1984, and I think they were 'not recommended for children under 12'; but there was also a big price rise around that time to do with international bismuth and antimony trading, leading to GW trying new (lower lead content) alloys and also moving into plastics with the FF plastic figures and slottabases. So I'd dispute that 14 was ever a lower end - I didn't start playing Warhammer till I was fourteen and 40k at 18 or 19, but only because that's how old I was when Rick Priestly wrote them. I started collecting and gaming with lead miniatures when I was 10.

 

[Jacobite]

Sweet cheers guys. That clears it up well.

I know what you mean about Andy Chambers, his ideas for the 40k universe would have been very interesting imho, not sure how they would sell though, many people may have taken it as meaning that the 40k line of mini's were being discontinued.

Is Space Mcquirk and Fat Bloke still working there?

 

[Viscount Vash]

I cannot find any early packaging for 40k in my Dungeon at the moment, the only reference to 14yrs I could find was on Space Marine. "Complexity: 14yrs to adult"
so you may be right Red Orc. You will be the first to know if I can find it though :wink: .

Not sure about those two Jacs I think Fat Bloke was one of those shunted sideways into the journal bunker, but don't qoute me on it.

 

[The Wraithlord]

Dunno about Space but I am fairly certain that Fat Bloke is gone too.

 

[Jacobite]

Hmm thats a pity - I always thought Space's stuff was cool. Good writer imho. Strange he hasn't done any novels.

And Fat Blokes seris of WD articles on his chaos legion in the early 2000's was great.

Thats a bit of a loss I think.

 

[Alexander_67]

It's (Apocalypse) not really aimed at the younger market, granted, but they don't want all us oldsters to bog off. Just shut up, I suspect.

Sounds about right, but being a game vet gives the right to complain about the state of affairs now. Its just they way of things.

 

[Stella Cadente]

I don't get all this "nerf age" BS, I don't feel like anythings been nerfed, DA got better, BA got better (apart from a few poorly written things), Chaos got much better, and all of them were apparently nerfed, so I just don't get it