# Tau FAQ already -at least it was quick



## falcoso (Apr 7, 2012)

So we already have a Tau FAQ, as once again GW haven't proof read their books: http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3130063a_Tau_Empire_v1.0_APRIL13.pdf


----------



## Digg40k (Sep 7, 2008)

I laughed at the footer?


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

At least its only 2 small bits of errata that would only confuse people not using common sense rather then a 12 page 'crap, we screwed up all the rules' FAQ.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

GrizBe said:


> At least its only 2 small bits of errata that would only confuse people not using common sense rather then a 12 page 'crap, we screwed up all the rules' FAQ.


Yes I would have said that 2 things is quite an improvement.


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

GrizBe said:


> At least its only 2 small bits of errata that would only confuse people not using common sense rather then a 12 page 'crap, we screwed up all the rules' FAQ.


just wait... that one will be out at the end of the month


----------



## EmbraCraig (Jan 19, 2009)

It's what appear to be 2 pretty minor issues - I've not got my book to compare, but it looks like the first one is a clarification more than anything. The 2nd presumably actually changes something (if the note wasn't there, presumably any unit could take missile drones). So compared to the DA errata with missing equipment etc etc it seems pretty minor.


----------



## DecrepitDragon (Aug 2, 2011)

EmbraCraig said:


> So compared to the DA errata with missing equipment etc etc it seems pretty minor.


So far . . .

Hope it stays that way.

Knows it probably wont. . .


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

They probably didn't want to put too much into the new FAQ so as to not give away the content of their shiny new book.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

I've read about a mistake regarding Multi-trackers.

Are we to assume that all Suits come with Multi-trackers? As it's listed in the wargear rules but no points are provided at the suit wargear list.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Orochi said:


> I've read about a mistake regarding Multi-trackers.
> 
> Are we to assume that all Suits come with Multi-trackers? As it's listed in the wargear rules but no points are provided at the suit wargear list.


Unless it's listed as your wargear, no.


----------



## Mossy Toes (Jun 8, 2009)

Digg40k said:


> I laughed at the footer?


Heh, so did I. Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## EmbraCraig (Jan 19, 2009)

Orochi said:


> I've read about a mistake regarding Multi-trackers.
> 
> Are we to assume that all Suits come with Multi-trackers? As it's listed in the wargear rules but no points are provided at the suit wargear list.


No need to assume - it's stated explicitly in the page detailing the different armour types.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Derp. Sorry guys. It's just something I read on another forum.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

ntaw said:


> They probably didn't want to put too much into the new FAQ so as to not give away the content of their shiny new book.


That they never printed enough of!


----------



## falcoso (Apr 7, 2012)

Digg40k said:


> I laughed at the footer?


Hah, didn't even notice that


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

First week FAQ's regardless of the reason = *facepalm*

Step your fucking game up GW, this just pathetic, you can say all the "we strive to make our codexs perfect" crap you want but really the speed of which you've released FAQ's for the last two Codex's is just embarrassing. They've been in business how long and they are making these basic mistakes?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Jacobite said:


> First week FAQ's regardless of the reason = *facepalm*
> 
> Step your fucking game up GW, this just pathetic, you can say all the "we strive to make our codexs perfect" crap you want but really the speed of which you've released FAQ's for the last two Codex's is just embarrassing. They've been in business how long and they are making these basic mistakes?


One of the last 2 codexes was Daemons which still has no FAQ.

And shit happens. With this express speed at which their releasing things I expect early books to have more mistakes because they're getting less time being looked over for mistakes. At least GW is owning up and fixing them immediately when they realise the problem (likely when looking at the first run of books) and fixing it on the release. I like them doing that over waiting 6 months to a year to go "Our bad, the book is really supposed to say THIS."


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Zion said:


> One of the last 2 codexes was Daemons which still has no FAQ.
> 
> And shit happens. With this express speed at which their releasing things I expect early books to have more mistakes because they're getting less time being looked over for mistakes. At least GW is owning up and fixing them immediately when they realise the problem (likely when looking at the first run of books) and fixing it on the release. I like them doing that over waiting 6 months to a year to go "Our bad, the book is really supposed to say THIS."


I think what you'll find too is that GW has had the book at the printers MONTHS before the release and errors or omissions are found in between the print run and the release so it's not as it seems that the book is released and then they find errors but rather that errors where found but the corrections couldn't be made in time.

What it comes down to is: Fast - Perfect - Cheap : Pick 2


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Magpie_Oz said:


> I think what you'll find too is that GW has had the book at the printers MONTHS before the release and errors or omissions are found in between the print run and the release so it's not as it seems that the book is released and then they find errors but rather that errors where found but the corrections couldn't be made in time.
> 
> What it comes down to is: Fast - Perfect - Cheap : Pick 2


Exactly. The future runs of the books will be better.

And please for the love of all that is good and holy please have no one start a price bitching spree. We do NOT need more of those on the internet. Learn to budget and quit bitching that your luxury isn't priced like food from Taco Bell.


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

Zion said:


> Exactly. The future runs of the books will be better.
> 
> And please for the love of all that is good and holy please have no one start a price bitching spree. We do NOT need more of those on the internet. Learn to budget and quit bitching that your luxury isn't priced like food from Taco Bell.


Right well in the interests of politeness I won't make a couple of comments I was going to.

I will however say this: As a collector not a gamer, when GW produces one of these new hardback codex's that IMHO is actually worth the price tag I will buy one, until then no. FW books I think are worth the price tag in comparison. 

I'm not bitching about price necessarily I'm saying they are not worth what they are.


----------



## DecrepitDragon (Aug 2, 2011)

Zion said:


> Learn to budget and quit bitching that your luxury isn't priced like food from Taco Bell.


Whoa there mate! Just a bit harsh, dont you think? I could budget till the end of the century, and I'd still think this hobby is expensive.

I understand your frustration, but not all of us that don't enjoy the price hikes are "bitching" unnecessarily.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Jacobite said:


> Right well in the interests of politeness I won't make a couple of comments I was going to.
> 
> I will however say this: As a collector not a gamer, when GW produces one of these new hardback codex's that IMHO is actually worth the price tag I will buy one, until then no. FW books I think are worth the price tag in comparison.
> 
> I'm not bitching about price necessarily I'm saying they are not worth what they are.


So your personal opinion doesn't match what GW decides their price is. Congrats. Welcome to buying pretty much everything ever. 

Look I'm not trying to be rude, but we have far too many threads devolve into "let's bitch about things I don't agree with because I don't understand why they're done this way in a hobby that I play which is a complete luxury and not at all a requirement as a basic part of life to live" threads instead of staying on topic.

You don't agree with GW's products being up to par to their price point. Fine. I can agree that it is your opinion that the book GW knocked out while knocking out several others is inferior to the one FW did by itself or in correlation to perhaps one other book (assuming they've been working on the Drop Site Massacre Pt1 book at the same time as IA12 that is). That's cool. 

But the thing is that not every thread needs to be a complaint logged mess about how much someone hates something GW did/didn't do/should do/shouldn't do/will do/ or won't do. Okay, so you're annoyed that the books are perfect the very first time. Fine. Let's leave it there before this becomes another off-topic mess that has nothing to do with the actual topic itself.



DecrepitDragon said:


> Whoa there mate! Just a bit harsh, dont you think? I could budget till the end of the century, and I'd still think this hobby is expensive.
> 
> I understand your frustration, but not all of us that don't enjoy the price hikes are "bitching" unnecessarily.


How many threads do you slog through that turn into bitch threads about something that GW does? I personally see anywhere from 20-50 a _day_ (no, not all of them are -here- as I go hunting for rumours -elsewhere- to bring -here- but that doesn't mean I don't have to wade through it to find the pearls in the muck). It's almost always turns into an off-topic mess that drags the whole thread down and can even turn into arguments.

End of the day GW's inflation rate pretty much matches that of oil. We're paying for a luxury item made of plastic which is made from oil. When you read the actual investor's reports you see that GW doesn't make dick as a net profit that they pay as dividends right now (really if you haven't, go read at least the most recent one. You'd be amazed how much goes into say, production, in a 6 month period). At the end of the day GW is producing a product that is honestly pretty well priced considering what we could be paying for things especially considering the scale of what they do.

At the end of the day GW isn't coming into your house and holding you at gunpoint to buy more Marines, Tau, Eldar, Daemons or what-have-you. If you can't afford something right now, don't buy it. If you can't afford GW's stuff new, buy used. For the love of all that is holy there are ways to make this hobby more affordable.

And if you can't get enough pleasure in a game of plastic men going pew pew at each other to compensate whatever you end up spending to such a degree that you feel the need to bitch about it at every possible chance, get a new hobby because obviously this one doesn't meet your personal "enjoyment >/= cost" equation.

I'm not saying this hobby can't be expensive, I'm saying that the people who spend all their time complaining about how much it costs are either from Downunder (Hi Australia and New Zealand) or need to learn to manage their money better. And that second group has no pitty from me.

BACK on topic, the footer was funny but I'm glad GW is getting better at producing this books at a fast pace. No Day-1 FAQ needed for Daemons, and only two small things for Tau. As long as it's this good or better we're on the right track. If we get another Dark Angels goof-up then I think someone might need to give them a Gibs Smack.


----------



## Mossy Toes (Jun 8, 2009)

Agree with Zion wholeheartedly, and as an addendum, I just want to take a step back and look at the 6e codexes as a whole from the standpoint of a gamer, not a collector (my two special edition codexes notwithstanding--I am weak, I know).

While I may have griped about CSM at first, I've come to appreciate what a solid codex it really is. Midlevel with a few power-units, but still quite customizable compared to how much griping has gone on about it.

Dark Angels got a balanced release that, nonetheless, has really shone a light on them and put them in the best position they've been in as an army for years--possibly the best-realized Dark Angels codex yet.

Daemons underwent a massive paradigm shift--but a perfectly acceptable one at that, bringing their playstyle more in line with the background (fragile hordes with random, unpredictable abilities rather than a small, elite cadre). They are one of the few armies that could go through with (and benefit measurably from) such a playstyle change with relative ease, given their nebulous and re-definable nature. All in all? I think Daemons are doing great, especially given their strengths as or with allies.

Tau... well, it's too soon for the dust to have settled yet, but unless some insane combos come out of this, it looks like Tau got a very nice, strong codex that has gone a good ways towards redressing an imbalance in the meta (few counters to flyers)... but probably isn't game-breakingly powerful. They've gotten the dust knocked off them and have been brought up to 6e.

That so many quality, balanced codexes have been released by GW in short succession is a breathtaking accomplishment by GW. I am certainly willing to forgive a handful of easily FAQ'd errors and/or omissions per first-run codexes if it means we're going to continue to get such solid, engaging updates to the armies of 40k at such a rapid rate.

Yes, Jacobite, you're getting the short end of the stick with GW giving the gamers what they want at a rapid pace. Sorry.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Just like to point out that people who bitch about prices are no more likely to be from Oz or NZ than anywhere else.

Sure we pay a higher number but in terms of our market it fits into about the same slot as anywhere else.

By and large people who bitch about GW and their prices are not people who can't budget but simply those who can't bring themselves to post anything positive.

Very refreshing to see that overview their Mossey, I am sure that as time goes by the initial hate ragers will come to agree with your assessment.

Case in point? When was the last time anyone saw a bitchfest about the new paints ? Now they have been about for a bit ppl realise how good they are.


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

Well guess thats me then on both accounts, cheers for pointing that out Mags. I'll keep my trap shut in future.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Jacobite said:


> Well guess thats me then on both accounts, cheers for pointing that out Mags. I'll keep my trap shut in future.


Why? You're not bitching, as you said you don't see the value in a Codex. That's not a bitch that's a rational statement.

I don't buy GW paint brushes for the same reasons.


----------



## falcoso (Apr 7, 2012)

While I understand people's annoyance, many of the early errata's are just clarifications of rules which 9/10 people would have read the correct way anyway (apart from DA, that was just dreadful). However it must be a bitch for people who payed double for a limited edition 'dex


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

I'd agree if I paid for the limited edition, I'd expect an updated codex at some point, for free. That's not likely to happen.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Things with errors in them are always worth more, stamps for example.

So if anything the Limited Ed's are worth even more.

"How does that rule work?" 
"Well it used to work like this but that was in the limited edition"
"Really? oh Wow, I'd love to get one of those to see"
"Well as it happens ........."

Profit !


----------



## DecrepitDragon (Aug 2, 2011)

Zion said:


> How many threads do you slog through that turn into bitch threads about something that GW does?


Just quickly, I do agree with this sentiment. Devolved threads are a nightmare to read. My point was that cost vs value is always going to be a personal opinion, and snapping out a blanket judgement was "a bit harsh". My own personal opinion of the prices aside, I can still empathise with people who struggle to afford something they enjoy. But yes, you're correct of course, that we don't always want to read walls of bitchfesting.

On a more topical note, I bought the DA dex, and errors aside, it was actually fantastic quality. At least none of the pages have fell out yet, and I dont think they will. Mossy Toes covered the main points well I feel.


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Im sure the *** will be filled with obvious questions in no time at all. I am impressed with the speed they are putting these out, instead of us having to wait years for the FAQs, as has been the case previously. May GW do listen to internet grumblings?

The quality of the recent books is really very good. Im not too keen on the price but if I compare it to some of the IT manuals I have its pretty cheap. Full colour books with good lay outs and the actual rules seem very balanced from what I can see (no idea about the Tau codex as I have yet to get mine.)


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

No one is sure about the TAU Codex yet. Most are still shaking out the kinks, designing armies and testing them, and not receiving product.


----------

