# Rant About WD Battlereports



## Lopspoon (Jun 23, 2009)

After reading last months WD, I have become really dissapointed in the monthly battle report. I mean, it was a fight between Orks and Imperial Guard. I mean, I can understand why they take a selection of choices some of which aren't competitive to showcase different units. But seriously, the IG player shot his punisher tank at a bunch of Killa Kans for most of the game... 

The punisher has 20 shots, of which 10 will probably hit, of which 1/6 will glance. Those glancing hits will have a 3- modifier on the damage table because guess what, the punisher is Ap -. This would be understandable if the Killa Kans were the only target, but there was a big ass ork mob that could have been targeted.

Does anyone else share this view?


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

WD batreps are always a joke.
They create lame lists to showcase the armies. The newest codex always wins. They fuck the rules up constantly, and they run a dozen games and composite the results together to come up with a result they like better (in other words, it's fake)

About the only reason to read them is to get a look at new minis and to point and laugh at the fuckups.

PS: Wrestling is fake as well. ;-)


----------



## Viscount Vash (Jan 3, 2007)

Gal has got it spot on.

My personal favourite was when they did the Battles book in second Ed and managed to reprint a classic rules breaker from WD.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Although if he had targeted the orks with the punisher it would have shown how devastating it is against low armor save models (Kinda makes me want to use three against a green tide list). I mean they have had some stupid lists in WD battle reports, but using said lists in a retarded fashion is just idiotic. 

Also the punisher is ap- what the hell I thought it was more or less a double mini gun how can they possible justify it being ap- accept to balance the unit game wise.


----------



## hungryugolino (Sep 12, 2009)

Is it really that hard to run a real game? It's not exactly rocket science... (Unless hunter killer missile upgrades are involved...)


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

They simply wanted to show off the kans, sameway as the basilk decieded to do a crazy shot rather than knocking out some walkers. all the list are based on the newest models and the BRs are designed to showcase those. Its definatly got alot worse lately though 

My Favourite ever WD battle report was when the dark elves were released a couple of eds ago and in their debut battle report were completely massacred by some VCs


----------



## Amra_the_lion (May 26, 2008)

The april report of Blood Angels vs Black legion was a joke. The Blood Angels cleaned house so well that I could almost hear the people who are crying "BA broken!" reach a crescendo


oh and as Luke just noticed this is my 666 post!


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Wow people read those battle report things? i cant honestly see the point, even if the thing wasnt staged whats the point? you dont know the people in question, its not you playing either army, its not your board or scenery, its not your models on the page. The battle report thing kinda reminds of bloggin which is also pointless unless your famous.I care as little about what you had for lunch as much as i care if jervis used his land speeder to out flank some other studio unit.

Personally i would like to see the battle report pages turned over to answering letters or printing FAQ's or additional rules or maybe some reader contributed content.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Galahad said:


> WD batreps are always a joke.
> They create lame lists to showcase the armies. The newest codex always wins. They fuck the rules up constantly, and they run a dozen games and composite the results together to come up with a result they like better (in other words, it's fake)
> 
> About the only reason to read them is to get a look at new minis and to point and laugh at the fuckups.
> ...


And what the hell is wrong with Wrestling?:so_happy: At least Wrestling is entertaining and has serious moments. HBK is retired . Thats the worst thing that has happen to me with my entertainment since the recent C:CSM.

I like the Space Pups recent match when they came out. That Daemon Player had the game, but totally put it into the SWs player favore so they could win.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Once upon a time, they were worth reading.

PS, I believe the only army to lose their 'release' WD battle report is Empire from WFB.


----------



## Lopspoon (Jun 23, 2009)

Come to think about it, the only type of battle report I would like to see would be covering Grand Tournament final matches. These would at least be at bit of an insight into a competitive players mind.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

So Battle Reports aren't exempt from the Hobby Mag ---------> Advertisement pamphlet shift that the rest of the £5 mag is suffering? This is news? :laugh:


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

The only decent Battle Reports are the ones where neither force has anything to prove, no new models or codexes have been released so it's a straight up 'fair' brawl of which my favourite will most likely always be the 2-part Armageddon BR.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Ages ago, there was a 3k match between Ulthwe and Black legion.
Eldred killed Abaddon 

And WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY back, 
there was a Last chancers battle report between Graham Davey (black legion) and someone else with the last chancers, where they had to blow up a missile depot or something. The colonel got raped by a Termi lord with a LC, who got killed by Ox due to Brain being killed and upping his S and T to 6!

Ah, I loved that BR. Can still remember the pictures even though I no longer have that WD.

Nostalgia!


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I like looking back at the old battle reps back when it was hero hammer and trying to recreate some of the battles using the new rules.
Some of the battles can be really challenging, my favourite is a few squads of blood angels holding out against a horde of orks that come on randomly as you never know what will appear from turn to turn it makes it really hard to prioritise targets.
The newer Bat Reps are just adverts for things that aren't selling Vs things that are new and it would be much more readable if they tied it in with the showcase feature that showed non eavymetal armies so you could have 2 really nice looking armies slogging it out without the stupid factor that GW put in.


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

Orochi said:


> Once upon a time, they were worth reading.
> 
> PS, I believe the only army to lose their 'release' WD battle report is Empire from WFB.


When Dwarves came out, some years ago now, they actually admitted in the article that they needed 3 takes for the dwarves to win (and any Dwarf player could tell you why after looking at the army). I sometimes wonder if this was the beginning or just some middle point of the slide towards a "showcase" battle, rather than a real one. At least they were Honest about it then, and probably felt a little bad about it.

As for what it's like recently, the WD about the new beastmen (was it two months ago now?) had a Beastmen vs. Bretonnians/Empire. I thought that could be cool, until I saw the first turn. The bretonnian player, without sense or reason sent his Pegasus knights to fight off a pissy little unit of chaos hounds, "without realising" that this would leave his rather expensive unit perfectly set up for a charge from a unit of Minotaurs. This sort of stupid move could not be excused as anything but trying to show off the new Minotaurs. It's just annoying when you can see something obviously stupid like this, and they think they can call it a real battle report? no.



Galahad said:


> PS: Wrestling is fake as well. ;-)


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

*hugs my white dwarves done by fat bloke*


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

neilbatte said:


> The newer Bat Reps are just adverts for things that aren't selling Vs things that are new


Maybe they should put DE in the battle reports for 2 reasons:

1) They don't sell well and might if they are in there

2) Knowing how the studio does armies they'll lose anyways meaning they won't have to rig bat reports anymore


----------



## hungryugolino (Sep 12, 2009)

Dark Eldar? Yeah, no need for rigging...


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

to be fair to games workshop if people are crazy enough to read a battle report, it would be business suicide to not have the new release army win. It might be a hobby based around a fantasy setting, but in the real world you still need to market products in a positive light, and thats even more true when most of your sales come from the sale of new releases.


----------



## Colonel Wolf (Nov 11, 2009)

Galahad said:


> PS: Wrestling is fake as well. ;-)


I trained {briefly} as a professional wrestler. Yes it is {but they hate admitting it}


----------



## dobbins (Sep 19, 2009)

Lopspoon said:


> After reading last months WD, I have become really dissapointed in the monthly battle report. I mean, it was a fight between Orks and Imperial Guard. I mean, I can understand why they take a selection of choices some of which aren't competitive to showcase different units. But seriously, the IG player shot his punisher tank at a bunch of Killa Kans for most of the game...
> 
> The punisher has 20 shots, of which 10 will probably hit, of which 1/6 will glance. Those glancing hits will have a 3- modifier on the damage table because guess what, the punisher is Ap -. This would be understandable if the Killa Kans were the only target, but there was a big ass ork mob that could have been targeted.
> 
> Does anyone else share this view?


My sentiments exactly.


----------



## the cabbage (Dec 29, 2006)

This months was another beauty,

The chaos player sets up spread along the back with abbadon, retinue and LR in a corner.

Does the BA player refuse this flank and roll him up with his incredibly mobile army?

Does he fcuk, he spreads out as well to give one of the games best killing machines a good crack at him. Dcik!


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

Yeah I have found them to be ridiculously poor of late.

My major problem is they've replaced all the writing for just shitty pictures that show hardly anything. My favourite battle report was one between the tau and sisters of battle. It was two gorgeous looking armies going for it, no silly decisions, no stupid rules and the tau got beat on points but it was still worth the read.

Nowadays I only by white dwarf if I'm stuck on a coach home and my ipods died. It tends to last me about an hour and a half cover to cover. Sad times for the extortionate price.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Galahad said:


> WD batreps are always a joke.
> They create lame lists to showcase the armies. The newest codex always wins. They fuck the rules up constantly, and they run a dozen games and composite the results together to come up with a result they like better (in other words, it's fake)
> 
> About the only reason to read them is to get a look at new minis and to point and laugh at the fuckups.
> ...


YEW TOOK MAH JOB!!!


----------



## tonisanoob (Mar 18, 2010)

colonel shaffer, actually killed that termie lord, not the other way about


----------



## DestroyerHive (Dec 22, 2009)

It's true, that and the fact that SM always win, as to make people want to buy different units. Take the new [Tyranid Codex announcement White Dwarf] for example. The 'Nid list was 20 points short to begin with, enough for the Bio Plasma thing on the Carnifex, and the SM list was using the broken Vulkan He'Stan, giving twin linked flamers/melta guns to everyone.

Even though it was a new 'Nid announcement, SM somehow managed to win...uke:


----------



## hungryugolino (Sep 12, 2009)

At least they didn't use Ultras.


----------



## Kettu (Nov 20, 2007)

deathbringer said:


> My favourite battle report was one between the tau and sisters of battle. It was two gorgeous looking armies going for it, no silly decisions, no stupid rules and the tau got beat on points but it was still worth the read.


When did this one happen? I wasn't aware Sisters had a single battle report since 3rd ed when the Witchhunters codex came out.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I`ve never seen any inquisitor units since the deathwatch in a battle report, and that was back with the tyranids 4th ed release. But you`re right, they are getting worse. I think it`s pretty obvious that they`re staged.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Stella Cadente said:


> *hugs my white dwarves done by fat bloke*


Those really were the days... man I miss that chubby guy.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

tonisanoob said:


> colonel shaffer, actually killed that termie lord, not the other way about


Double checked, and yes...you're right.

Yeh, Fat bloke was good, as was chambers.


----------



## Abomination (Jul 6, 2008)

I personally really enjoy the battle reports. I don't care if they 'fixed' or 'fake'. I find them to be a jolly good read. I particularly enjoyed the Blood Angels vs Chaos Space Marines in this months WD. I still think the whole magazine is pretty good to be honest and can't quite get my head around all the hate it gets. I do think it is about 50p - £1 to expensive though.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Abomination said:


> to be honest and can't quite get my head around all the hate it gets.


read a white dwarf from the time of the fat bloke and you will very soon understand, that was back in the days when the magazine was written for the gamer by gamers, now its written for idiots with fat wallets by idiots who want fat wallets.


----------



## murdock129 (Apr 3, 2008)

Battle Reports these days are horribly bad

I mean old ones, like the one I'm reading now (in White Dawrf 201 with Tuomas Pirinen playing Chaos Dwarfs and Gavin Thorpe playing Dwarfs, no prizes for guessing who lost) are a lot of fun

Gav Thorpe was especially great in those old editions, but now they've got so fake, boring and showcase-ish, their not interesting anymore


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

As a chaos player I wanted to scream at this months WD I mean who sticks a unit of sons straight in from of rabid blood angels while carrying assualt me signs. 

Fat bloke WD were the best I loved when they had articles written BY gamers and collecters FOR gamers and collectors. They included background fluff, rule discussions, detailed painting masterclasses nigh on every month, rather than the current just use drybrushing and washes. WD is turning into an expensive piece of buy this propaganda.

At least fat bloke is doing well for himself running his own model company.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

I think the best Fat Bloke battle report was the 4-way Carnage match the WD had to get out of work at Christmas, full of treachery and blood...best comedy battle ever!


----------



## WarWolf88 (Apr 1, 2010)

I think there has been maybe two or three battle reports that I have actually read in a long time, as now days I just look who won and what were the points and the mini of the match.

Ah, what I wouldn't give for the WD staff to make one more battle report like the on in the first WD I ever bought (can't remember the number anymore). I remember it was a 3rd Ed Ork Speed Freaks against Imperial Guard (Drop Troops). Both sides also had aircraft (a Vandetta and a Valkyrie against a Fighta Bomba', I think). The objective was to snatch a stranded IG officer from the desert and bring him home. The Orks won, but it certainly was an epic battle with all you could hope for from a game, with both sides it giving it their all. Ah, the memories...

*looks at the "new" battle reports and starts to reach for a flamer...*


----------



## FatBoyFat (Feb 23, 2009)

I still wish they did the Journals, they were cool, loads of great stuff in them, custom rules, house rules, how to make leviathans, halfling mordhiem band, lots of intresting little bits, but ah well.. I still like the white dwarf mag, it is a good read, and I've got nearly every copy going back to erm.. really long ago  90 something, 94 maybe, or 93, a few gaps, but most of them.

But I do generally speed read the battle reports now, unless its a tale of four gamers or something similar one.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Baron Spikey said:


> I think the best Fat Bloke battle report was the 4-way Carnage match the WD had to get out of work at Christmas, full of treachery and blood...best comedy battle ever!


That one was the best. I remember it fondly because it was my first issue of White Dwarf ever. :good:


----------



## The Sullen One (Nov 9, 2008)

Sometimes I wonder about battle reports, and while I don't think they're fixed, I can't help but feel the results are skewed somewhat. After all they have practice games, why?

First, why is it that a guy like Christian Byrne, who wrote the tactica on Chaos Marine tourney armies can make such a mistake as to given a CSM squad a Lascannon and then confuse them by adding in the icon of Khorne? Okay we know it makes them greater on the attack, but you've given them a lascannon, are they really meant for Close Combat?

And what the hell was going on with the Thousand Sons? They should never be put in a situation where combat is guranteed, as even a baby chimp could tell you they'll die. Hell I've lost them against Sisters of Battle (it was a charge or be charged situation in case your wondering).

Then again you only have to look at Phil Kelly to see that not everyone buggers up they're army selection. Here is a guy who really goes all out to make his army deadly, such as giving powerklaws to his warboss and nobz.

That said they're still good reads.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

Phil? Phil? Good grief. The man loaded his Eldar list with starcannons, ffs.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

ive noticed that WB battle reports have drastically gone downhill since around WB 300 (US) - which is prolly when fat bloke "retired". ive also bought the new WD for the BA releases, the battle report was a joke. in general i find that WDs are overpriced (by about $5) & extremely boring.


----------



## Garven Dreis (Oct 26, 2009)

Agreed, I was absolutely angry with the March battle report... honestly, the IG army should've totally wiped out the Orks, but i suppose you don't go out and say "Well, we have this model, but here it is getting vaporized by a horde of squishies.


----------



## Amra_the_lion (May 26, 2008)

also note in this artical on the gw website they mistakenly say that a blood angels tactical squad may have an infernus pistol.

I want to ask those fools if they even looked at the book while writing these articles. You are the alpha and the omega of this hobby GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER GW!


----------



## Tbirch (Mar 13, 2010)

I used to like reading them last year still when I started reading WD, but the more I've learned and read myself now, the worse they seem to get. I mean.. I had those "I wouldnt do it like that" moments before, but the BA one from last mag was kind of over the top.

Plus I dont like non-fluffy chaos armies.. Little bit of everything is not a coherent and working army.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

I gave up on WD's a while back and now just go in and read the open copy in store and then go on GW site as the main parts (for me the releases) are online before it comes out so I don't bother wasting my $12 on it. I agree that WD battle reports were only really last decent in 3rd edition and my opinion on why - you had *consolidation into CC *after winning a combat - which in turn meant no assholing around as the new army can get wiped in 2 seconds but now without it you just throw any unit in and then win and get them shot to give the balance back meaning no strategy needed


----------

