# GW Phone Line - No More Rules Queries



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

I was told on GWs 800 number, that as of Monday 11/2/08, GW phone help line no longer answers rules questions. :crazy: :angry:

Any rules questions need to be submitted via email. 

Thought you all might like the heads up


----------



## LeeHarvey (Jul 25, 2008)

That's nice of them isn't it. I guess they realized that the guys taking orders don't neccessarily know what they are talking about when the rules are in question.


----------



## Minion_1981 (Dec 20, 2007)

Doesn't really matter anyway, they are wrong most of the time anyway lol, at least in my experiance with them


----------



## Cadian81st (Dec 24, 2006)

Doesn't really matter anyway, the FAQ section of the site is pretty clear that you should dice off for any rules complaints anyway instead of calling GW up. (At least it was, don't care too much for the new one and thus don't use it that often)

Guess they're just making it official now.


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

The rulez trollz sucked are rarely knew much about the game, maybe this is an attempt to tidy thing up. I think they need to hire Gal for rules and FAQs anyways  but I am biased.


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

Fine by me, they were fucking useless anyhow.

Seriously, unless you can get a hold of one of the game designers or their official FAQ monkey, calling or e-mailing GW with anything but the most obvious of rules questions is totally pointless.

All you're getting is one underpaid, ill-informed redshirt's opinion on the matter. Call three times, get three different answers. 

If you're lucky you'll get a guy with some command of the rules, but all he's equipped to help you with is where to find a given rule in the book. If you already know the rule but are calling for some sort of official ruling one way or the other to settle a debate you're wasting your time. None of them can give you any official answer.

No e-mail or phone call to the hotline has ever settled a real, solid rules debate.

So this news wins a big 'Meh' from me.

Though it foes fit with GW's current "Fuck you" attitude in regards to product support.


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

> Though it foes fit with GW's current "Fuck you" attitude in regards to product support


I don't think that is totally true. Give it some time to see how the system works. Like you said if the guy on the phone is useless, than maybe having questions sent by email will allow them to be answered by the proper people. If we start sending emails and we get no response back or no updated FAQ's than we can start complaining.


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

They already said they won't be issuing any more update FAQs
So yeah, basically "Fuck you."


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

Deep breaths Gal, it will be ok... one of these years.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

djinn24 said:


> Deep breaths Gal, it will be ok... one of these years.


GW have been saying "fuck you" for a little longer than that

but then all we say back is "fuck you too", quit and play another system :fuck:


----------



## LordWaffles (Jan 15, 2008)

Galahad said:


> They already said they won't be issuing any more update FAQs
> So yeah, basically "Fuck you."


When was this? This sounds like something that could be interpreted as "Pretty damn important" as a large part of the community relies on those faqs. I don't doubt you, I'm just looking for where it says this in detail.

Also what other wargame would you suggest Stella? I keep hearing warmachine, but from what I've seen it's just the cheesiest of the powergamers sitting in a circle trying to win at any and all costs. Like the worst of warhammer jumped into it.


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

In the Main Rulebook FAQ (embedded PDF) towards the end...



> Q. My Imperial Guard or Black Templar Codex
> says that dedicated transports can only be used
> by the unit they’ve been bought for. Is that
> overruled by the new way dedicated transports
> ...


So, in essence... "Fuck you."

"Your codex has useless shit that makes no sense in the current rules? Well, sorry Jimmy you'll just have to wait til we print a 5th edition codex for your army...unless we don't and just skip you like how Orks and Dark Eldar never got a 4th edition codex...

Oh, the new marine codex has way better rules for items like Storm Shields than the crappy rushed White Dwarf Article we pawned off as a new BA codex? Sorry Timmy, but it looks like Blood Angels just have shit poor Storm Shields. But it's not like you had to pay for the book...oh, what was that Dark Angels players? I can't hear you crying over the sound of me telling you to go fuck yourselves.

Here's a dime, go and call someone who gives a shit...no, wait, you can't. Send a fucking e-mail then."


----------



## Someguy (Nov 19, 2007)

It is kind of insulting.

First, they produce books full of errors, contradictions and rules about as clear and transparent as a plank of wood.

Then they wait a year.

Then, they get some random guy on the internet to write FAQs that don't actually provide answers to the questions people frequently ask, but do start some new arguments.

Then they take the phone off the hook.


----------



## Tigirus (Apr 13, 2008)

I never used the 800 number anyway, I just call the store and the people there are happy to help as long as you promise to buy something next time by. (of course I only go to rouge trades, those fools)


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

To an extent I don't really blame them for not wanting any more rules questions by phone. I can't imagine how many times a day they had stupid little 13 year old kids phoning them up asking, "HOW FARR DOES A SPAEC MARIEN MOOV LOL?"

That'd piss me off too.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

LordWaffles said:


> Also what other wargame would you suggest Stella?


thats easy, the best game system in the known world
*Disposable Heroes and Coffin for Seven Brothers*
http://www.ironivangames.com/quartermaster.html

and you don't have to worry about Faq's (or lack of) every couple of weeks, and no worries about power gaming
"muahahahaha I am likes taking sixzors King Tigers!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
"yeah.....but were playing early 1942....in Libya"
"but...that mean no cheese!!!!!!!!!"
"no shit sherlock"


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

FYI - in the UK you can only make rule requests by phone, and they are happy to talk to you


----------



## Daneel2.0 (Jul 24, 2008)

That's just weird. It makes me wonder if there was a call volume problem over here, or if it was a problem with different people answering the phone for the different locations.


----------



## Wraithian (Jul 23, 2008)

I sent these cocks an e mail last week. If I get any sort of response, I'll post my letter and their reply. You know, "If," I get one.


----------



## Vashtek (Nov 2, 2007)

I can see why it was pointless for GW to stop answering questions over the phone.. but no more FAQs? Surely not? When did they say this?


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

Vashtek said:


> I can see why it was pointless for GW to stop answering questions over the phone.. but no more FAQs? Surely not? When did they say this?


Scroll up, I JUST posted the exact quote along with a link to the FAQ and my take on what that means.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

The FAQ's were something GW needs to keep doing, because people are fucking stupid, and some "official" source needs to tell them which direction is up. Not answering questions over the phone, though...fine. Some of us have taken the need away from GW to do that sort of thing. You can go online and ask some knowledgable someone rather than call up some redshirt who is just going to look up the rule in the same book that should be sitting in front of you, and give you their take on it.


----------



## Malagate (Jul 28, 2008)

I think Galahad is perhaps giving off the wrong vibe about the GW quote, the way I read it when he writes is that there'll be no more faqs ever again, but the way I read the GW quote is that they're not going to remake all the old faqs until a new codex for the army comes out.

The only way they could get away with not having any more faqs would be to make every book clearly worded and without errors on their first printing of it, as that's never happened I don't think faqs are going to leave us. It's more of a case of that they don't want to rewrite all the old codex rules again in a faq when they could just save it for a new codex (which will have an faq afterwards as they'll mess up somehow).


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

I'm not saying they won't issue correction FAQs, but what I am saying is they won't issue *updates* anymore, ever.

Dark Angel Storm shields will ALWAYS grant a 4+ inv save and only in assault, until GW gets along to making a new codex for them...which with their track record will be about 3 months before 6ths...or 5 months after it.

As a Blood Angels player, I know we're screwed.
We didn't get a codex update til just a couple months before 5th, and they put it in the damned white dwarf. If they couldn't bring themselves to give us a real codex to begin with, I seriously doubt that we're about to get a new codex anytime in the near future.

I was hoping they would issue a new update FAQ to reflect the new stats from the brand new SM codex
And then GW released the main book FAQ and told em to fuck off.


----------



## Vashtek (Nov 2, 2007)

Malagate said:


> I think Galahad is perhaps giving off the wrong vibe about the GW quote, the way I read it when he writes is that there'll be no more faqs ever again, but the way I read the GW quote is that they're not going to remake all the old faqs until a new codex for the army comes out.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> That was my impression too. Thanks for the clarification from you and Gala.


----------



## Triangulum (Jul 15, 2008)

Keep in mind its a company that is trying to make a profit and according to them is in such financial straights that they had to raise prices ***GASP*** a whole 5 dollars. I can kind of get why they would decide to fire a bunch of people whose main job is pawning off stupid 13 year olds back into their codexes. I also agree that its probably that they will not release new FAQ Erattas until new codexes come out. And why not just field a blood angels / dark angels army with the new rules, with the exception of assault squads and Termis as troops for blood angels and dark angels, I dont see the big deal considering as most players didn't use them half the time anyway.


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

Triangulum said:


> And why not just field a blood angels / dark angels army with the new rules, with the exception of assault squads and Termis as troops for blood angels and dark angels, I dont see the big deal considering as most players didn't use them half the time anyway.


So your solution for GW giving our armies the shaft is basically, stop playing them.

That's fantastic advice.
And hey, you're right, if you take away all the unique special characters, the BA-exclusive units like Death Company and Baal predators, play with only a handfull of assault squads, not as troops, take the special weapons away from the veteran assaults (and move them into the FA slot to compete with jump troops and speeders and bikes) and basically play an entirely different list with an utterly different playstyle, then yeah, they sort of are like regular marines.

And if I squint really hard I could pretend my Orks are Dark Eldar.


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)

Galahad said:


> And if I squint really hard I could pretend my Orks are Dark Eldar.


LOL, awesome quote Gal, fucking awesome.


----------



## Cadian81st (Dec 24, 2006)

Galahad said:


> So your solution for GW giving our armies the shaft is basically, stop playing them.


It's not horrible advice when thought about a bit, just a bit extreme for most of us. I mean, the same suggestion is floated everytime a new codex is penned and the core dynamics of an army, or even the way a new unit works, (falcon anybody?) are changed significantly. How many iron warriors armies did we see on ebay right before the new chaos dex was published? Whenever a rules change happens that significantly affects the way an army is played, for better or for worse, whether we like it or not, one of the most common suggestions I hear floating around is, "sell your [army x] and pick up some [army y], [insert reason glorifying army y here]." It happened when iron warriors got shafted and 1ksons were elevated to the position of extreme dominance they now hold, it happened when orks had their choppa rule taken away and everyone cried foul, and now it's happening because vanilla marines get better gear than chapter marines. In the long run it's stupid to do, because the pendulum always swings back, guided by GW's misguided attempt to "correct and balance", in a now-quite-predictable example of overkill that makes grilling with a large thermonuclear device look conservative.


----------



## Rabbit_Hole (Nov 14, 2008)

I think its more of a stop playing them and buy new armies things just like he said. They are profit driven. Think about the price increased over the last couple of years... Space Marines are pieces of plastic that cost a penny to produce that the basic units havent changed in 5 years. But the prices of basic squads have increased by almost a third.


----------



## Triangulum (Jul 15, 2008)

Just for the record, my original suggestion was not so much that you give up your armies, it was that if you want to take advantage of the new rules/prices, just pick an army based around the same theme using the troops you already have, call death company, vanguard veterans if you want after all they have fairly similar rules and playing styles. I am just saying its an option to keep BA and DA armies in play and not force people to buy new armies. Plus they are probably just trying to screw with us like they have been screwing with a bunch of the codexes, promising updates and new stuff in a vague attempt to make sure they don't take a loss on the unit types. For example DE have not had a new dex in who knows how long but persistent rumors have somehow kept them alive. I think it is a similar state of affairs with chapter marines. In the mean time, I am just saying you do have an out.


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

By playing a different army with a different FOC setup, different design and combat philosophy and none of our special units. Yeah, I think I got it the first time. ;-)

SM may be similar to BA, but unless you're vastly under-exploiting the current BA codex setup, you're not going to be able to bounce from one to the other without massively changing your list and your playstyle.


----------



## Mr.Hill (Nov 12, 2008)

Galahad said:


> SM may be similar to BA, but unless you're vastly under-exploiting the current BA codex setup, you're not going to be able to bounce from one to the other without massively changing your list and your playstyle.


I agree with you. A SM is not a SM across the board. BA and DA and Black Temp are all special in the way we use them. We COULD just use the codex, but then we are not playing BA or DA ect. We chose an army, and now they are punishing us for not converting. :angry:


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Mr.Hill said:


> We COULD just use the codex, but then we are not playing BA or DA ect


actually you would be, fluff makes up an army, not the codex you choose, no matter the codex your still blood angels, dark angels, space wolves, or black templars, the only limit is a players imagina.............oh


----------



## Mr.Hill (Nov 12, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> actually you would be, fluff makes up an army, not the codex you choose, no matter the codex your still blood angels, dark angels, space wolves, or black templars, the only limit is a players imagina.............oh



See my problem! lol

I can use the codex SM but i chose my army because i liked the story behind the overpriced lil plastic thingys i put on the table. 
Ill wait the few years till they update my codex.

Till then ill use my up-to-date Daemon Hunters!! ... shit.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Mr.Hill said:


> I can use the codex SM but i chose my army because i liked the story behind the overpriced lil plastic thingys i put on the table


and like I said, that story behind your army would be exactly the same.
the only things that are worth worrying about is BA's who have take 6 ass squads, and BT players with BP and CCW, thats it.


Mr.Hill said:


> Till then ill use my up-to-date Daemon Hunters!! ... shit.


saying "up to date" and "daemonhunters" really does make you feel bad don't it


----------



## Mr.Hill (Nov 12, 2008)

yes, it does 
Maybe one day?


----------



## Cadian81st (Dec 24, 2006)

At least the codex is still pretty right? :mrgreen:


----------



## slaaneshy (Feb 20, 2008)

SM players - just paint em black and turn to CHAOS!!! Your Emperor has forsaken you....


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

While I've always been the advocate of using lists imaginatively (I did make a BA list using the chaos codex once, though it was a 2nd ed inspired list), it takes more than imagination to transfigure one army into another.

Fluff is reflected in the army's codex, in both the fluff section and the rules and list section. Fluff dictates that certain armies have certain units and abilities, and fluff dictates a certain playstyle. An infantry-based BA list with minimal fast attack and no death company certainly would not be keeping with their fluff, now would it?

Certain chapters were given their own codices and unique army lists for a reason, because their _fluff_ calls for a different design and combat philosophy that cannot be ideally replicated with stock SM setup.

Imagination is a wonderful thing, but you can't imagine IG as Dark eldar because they;re set up for different roles and battle philosophies. You can't tell "The exact same story" behind yoru army when your army is completely different. Would the story of the American Revolution have been the exact same if instead of muskets and minutemen the colonials had used tanks and napalm?

Same with regular SM vs BA.
Modern BA are all about speed, assault strength, and mobile firepower.

No amount of imagination on my part can convert a codex geared around static, infantry-based combat into a swift, light and lethal BA battle company.
I could use it to make up a nostalgic 2nd ed inspired list, sure...but 2nd ed Ba are a totally different beast than the current army.

Bottom line is, if you want to play BA, you really need to use the BA codex...and GW has decided to fuck it over for no real reason.

Hell, I feel worse for the DA players, they actually paid for the privilege of having their army become obsolete within a year of its release


----------

