# So, are we happy bunnys yet?



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Benjamin Franklin once wrote

_"'In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes."_

well he died before GW created Warhammer and 40k and i like to think his quote would have been more like 
"'In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death,taxes and GW players complaining about something GW havent released.":grin:

no in all seriousness i would like to say on reflection GW have really pulled some impressive stuff out of the bag lately and there seems little sign of it letting up, now i know there are some glaringly massive exceptions to the rule but on the whole GW have really done well in recent times with cutting out codex model gaps, transfering stuff to plastic and releasing addional codex books and companion books and are working very quickly to refresh those armies in need, now i realize that yesterday isnt fast enough for some of you but dont we have to say A job well done so far please keep it up? is ther esomething they have released that has made you a very happy bunny recently and apart from sisters and squats what else is on your list of wants?


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

I really want 

A)Night Lords Supplement - nothing major, maybe some different usr's, artefacts and a character or two. I just want to feel like a different army to normal csm (even slightly would be fine)
B)Biel-Tan Supplement - something that gives me a reason to play my aspect warriors again. They were what got me into 40k.

Other than that I'm really pleased with GW. 6th is the most fun 40k has been for me.


----------



## Matcap (Aug 23, 2012)

Knights, Knights, Knights, Knights, Knights, Knights, Knights.

Also the deathwing and ravenwing command squads are ace.

Enjoying the new special effects paints as well.

GW has a very pleased customer in me :grin:


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Not wanting to sound like a fan boy I have been very impressed with the amount of stuff GW have been pumping out as of late. With the exception of SoB players I think everybody can be happy. 

Some really good looking codexes and supplements, and a lot of lovely looking models. I'm not 100% certain about LoW in the main game, but as I generally play in a more friendly atmosphere I don't see this ever being an issue. If I go to a tournament that allows these options I will know what to expect.

The new Kill Team rules are a lot of fun to play, and the advent of data slates means it is very hard to keep up with all the armies that are out there. Such variety is very welcome. But I'm sure somebody must be unhappy right?


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

I'm loving the environment right now. It seems others are as well because both 40k and Fantasy play seem to have exploded in my area recently.

I am looking forward to the coming updates to Wood Elves and Brettonians that appear to be in the works for fantasy.

As for wants...

Still want my Harlequin supplement/codex


----------



## Jolnir (Feb 11, 2014)

Considering the negativity I witnessed on forums after the Nid Dex release, I'd say GW has done an excellent job satisfying the majority with the Dwarf and Knight releases recently.


----------



## The Irish Commissar (Jan 31, 2012)

Im really looking forward to a saim hann supplement with maybe an hq special character option. Apart from that i have to say im impressed with GW. A thumbs up from me :good:


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

The Irish Commissar said:


> Im really looking forward to a saim hann supplement with maybe an hq special character option. Apart from that i have to say im impressed with GW.


Seriously? Saim-Hann is only the easiest and most competitive build you can make in the basic Codex.

A *lot* of people are wanting supplements for their favourite army when their favourite army _doesn't need a supplement_. Pretty much all the Eldar Craftworlds don't need a supplement. I can't think of a Space Marine Chapter that needs a supplement. Farsight Enclaves did, which they got, but I can't think of any other supplement you might add. Chaos Space Marines don't need any supplements.

I really like how much versatility GW is putting into their Codex releases. You want to run a themed army? You can. Pretty much all the 6th edition books lend themselves to each of their 'primary factions' (First Founding Chapters, Chaos Legions, Craftworlds, Septs, whatever); you want Iron Warriors? You can bring Warpsmiths and more Daemon Engines than ever before, and maybe even a Chaos Knight pending on their allies matrix. You want Word Bearers? You can ally in with Daemons and run 20-man squads of Chaos Space Marines with relevant Marks and Icons. You want White Scars? Bring an all-bike/all-mounted army with Chapter Tactics to help you out. You want Iyanden? Bring a Spiritseer, and Wraithguard and Wraithlords and Wraithknights. Even some of the less well-known stuff - the Red Hunters and Exorcists can bring Inquisitors without having to bring Grey Knights, Yme-Loc can bring a whole load of Wave Serpents and be viable with them, Flawless Host can bring big squads of high-initiative Chaos Marines with Feel No Pain and combat weapons.

Whatever you want the story of your army to be, you can pretty much make it with the 6th edition releases so far.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

I was happy that they brought back Cypher. Although buying a data slate to use him does make the model a bit pricy.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

Well, this Saturday I'm getting one of two of my wants, Legion of the Damned Codex. 
I would love to see a Crimson Fists supplement.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I'd like the Orks to get some love as the army is a little left behind but then I'd also like the Imperial guard book to not change too drastically as I can't be arsed to order the heads and other stuff I'd need if it get's a major rework let alone try and remember the paint recipies.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

Slightly bummed over the fact that I can't use Knights as they are now, but they were a hell of a release and are quite the badass mini.

The money I won't be spending on Knights that I don't need can now go toward Helbrutes and whatever other CSM releases that I don't need await us in the near future. I'm happy with what I've got, but new toys are always fun!


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Not denying GW has been pumping out lots of stuff.

It's just that it's not the stuff I was looking forward to, and the parts I can use (Adepta Sororitas and Inquisition) were ludicrously overpriced copypasta jokes.

So, no, I'm not a happy bunny. As for the rest of the game, I can live with having to deal with AV 15 and Strength D weapons at 1500 points, but what I feel are the biggest problems of this edition have never been addressed by any of the supplements, new releases or whatnot. Dare I say they have been made worse at times.


----------



## Varakir (Sep 2, 2009)

Whilst the prices on the digi-dexes & data slates are still rather high, i think they've done a lot of good. It's nice that they can just churn these out and give us options that would otherwise be shoehorned into another codex (i.e inquisition).

All the recent releases seem to support the fact that they've realised a lot of players want to play interesting and individual armies, but still want rules to back them up. God knows how all these releases are affecting the competitive scene, but for those of us who just play the odd match it's great to have so much to choose from.

Not so great on the wallet though. My theoretical shopping list is getting pretty silly now.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> Seriously? Saim-Hann is only the easiest and most competitive build you can make in the basic Codex.
> 
> A *lot* of people are wanting supplements for their favourite army when their favourite army _doesn't need a supplement_. Pretty much all the Eldar Craftworlds don't need a supplement. Farsight Enclaves did, which they got, but I can't think of any other supplement you might add. Chaos Space Marines don't need any supplements.


That's your opinion and you're welcome to it 
Supplements aren't needed, they add flavour.
In order to play Night Lords - all the chaos codex allows to do to try for a fluffy/themed list is to nerf yourself. The hallmark of Night Lords in 6th so far is that they *don't* take any of the options in the dex - no marks, no banners etc.
A supplement that gave some recognition to the fact thay they are every bit as unique as the Black Legion - who have their own supplement would be nice.
A Saim Hann supplement would also be nice - they're every bit as 'unique' as the Iyanden supplement.
I take it you've never tried to play a full Eldar aspect army? Biel-tan was my army from 2nd ed - aspect warriors were what got me into the game. Some of us would really like to play the eldar codex *and be able to win the odd game* without resorting to serpent spam, seer councils or wraiths. Something to make scorpions or banshees viable in game at all would be even better. 
They are both supplements which were as necessary as the Iyanden supplement or the Black legion supplement. So yeah, we don't need them - But I'd like to see them added as flavour


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Ah, so we reach the actual problem.

You can quite easily run all-Aspect Warriors - they're in every slot. Will it be a good army? Fuck no!

People don't want supplements because they want flavour and theme, they want supplements to make their shitty pet army into the new Tau. Well sadly, that's not how the game works, and it never will. Some armies are better than others, and some units are better than others.

You can bring a perfectly viable Night Lords army with the Chaos Codex and make it as bad or good as you wish. Noght Lords have dudes with Marks and Daemon Princes and Sorcerors just like any other warband. See Uzas, Cyrion, The Exalted, Ruven, Krieg Acerbus. Yeah, some Night Lords like Sahaal refuse to worship Chaos, but even then they use it as a tool if it will improve their abilities. Others, like Acerbus, freely frolick with Chaos.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> Ah, so we reach the actual problem.
> 
> You can quite easily run all-Aspect Warriors - they're in every slot. Will it be a good army? Fuck no!
> 
> ...


It's not about making a new army into the next tau :laugh: 
It'd be nice if striking scorpions weren't a trap. It'd be nice to have a way of using Banshees. It'd be nice if there was a single actual slot in the codex where aspect warriors were a good choice.

But, if they made a biel-tan supplement, I would buy it and use it. If they made a Night Lord supplement I would use it.
*Even if the rules were worse* - why? 

*Because those are MY armies. They are the one's I've chosen and will stick with.* 

I would love to see a biel-tan supplement as I really want to know what GW will do with them - how would they try to sell them? What would they do to entice people to play them? 
I used to have rules to be able to play them how I wanted - The Craftworld Codex and Chaos 3.5. And before you claim 'ooh chaos cheez player want 3.5 back - waah, big deal' The Night Lords got the stealth USR. Thats pretty much it. But it made them a little different than playing other csm's and that made me happy.

At the moment, I'm using the Black Legion codex to represent my night lords as I made all my Night Lords Chosen - the BL supplement means I can run my chosen as troops without taking Abaddon. I really enjoy paying on average 80-100 pts of my 2k list on VOTLW against tyranids/Eldar/Tau etc. But I'm playing the BL dex as it means I can field what I want to use. Is it good? not really, the BL supplement makes chaos worse (I know, I should just be taking 3 heldrakes every game...yawn)... But I still use it as it's nearer the army I want to fight with.
Biel-Tan is rumoured to be getting a supplement so I'm waiting in hope for GW.

Biel-Tan, Saim Hann, Ulthwe, Alaitoc, The Iron Warriors, The Night Lords, the Word Bearers and the Alpha Legion are every bit as deserving as Iyanden, the Black Legion, the sentinels of terra, the farsight enclaves, the legion of the damned and clan raukaan as far as supplements go.



MidnightSun said:


> You can quite easily run all-Aspect Warriors - they're in every slot. Will it be a good army? Fuck no!


No shit, really? There are so many people who only want to play this game to lose as much as possible.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Firstly, I'm not saying that Iron Warriors or Ulthwe are less deserving than Imperial Fists or Black Legion - I disagree with those supplements too.

Secondly, I'm not really sure what you're saying - you want a supplement with arbitrary differences just to make the army different? I don't follow - an Iron Warriors list from the basic codex is totally different from a Word Bearers list is entirely different to a Death Guard army.

Generally, I dislike supplements giving rules to the army that are already otherwise given by Special Characters - if there was a Deathwing supplement that made Deathwing Troops, it would completely invalidate Belial, and a Crimson Fist supplement that made Sternguard Scoring would hugely devalue Pedro Kantor.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> arbitrary differences just to make the army different


Thats what the supplements are.



MidnightSun said:


> I don't follow - an Iron Warriors list from the basic codex is totally different from a Word Bearers list is entirely different to a Death Guard army.


Fair enough.
Ideally, I'd like to see more variation. Death guard are do-able in the chaos dex. Word Bearers can take cultists and ally in demons, Iron warriors can take allied guard for the extra heavy support, the alpha's could maybe take Huron and Cultists.
How do you make playing Night Lords seem different to Red Corsairs other than the paint scheme? If they had a supplement giving them their own warlord traits and artefacts I'd be satisfied. 


MidnightSun said:


> I'm not saying that Iron Warriors or Ulthwe are less deserving than Imperial Fists or Black Legion - I disagree with those supplements too.


I like the supplements, I'd like to see more of them. The BL supplement hasn't invalidated Abaddon for me - I still take him if I want to. But as I'm running my NL as chosen, the BL supplement has enabled me to take my night lords without abaddon. It's not taken anything away, now I have more choices.
If I want to run chosen as troops in a 2k game, it doesn't make a lot of sense for Abaddon to be there every single time. He might want a to book time off to go on holiday/move house/redecorate/put up skulls for the seasonal holiday etc:grin:


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

Gret79 said:


> He might want a to book time off to go on holiday/move house/redecorate/put up skulls for the seasonal holiday etc:grin:


The image of Abaddon lay on a beach sipping cocktails or putting up xmas decorations is fucking hilarious! :laugh:


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Gret79 said:


> Thats what the supplements are.


I know, doesn't mean I can't dislike them for it :laugh:



Gret79 said:


> How do you make playing Night Lords seem different to Red Corsairs other than the paint scheme? If they had a supplement giving them their own warlord traits and artefacts I'd be satisfied.


Well, I guess you just don't take Possessed or take more Raptors or whatever. You can't really generalise - there are a huge number of different views and factions within the Night Lords and within the Corsairs, and some of them are bound to be alike. There's a limited number of ways to wage war, after all.



Gret79 said:


> I like the supplements, I'd like to see more of them. The BL supplement hasn't invalidated Abaddon for me - I still take him if I want to. But as I'm running my NL as chosen, the BL supplement has enabled me to take my night lords without abaddon. It's not taken anything away, now I have more choices.
> If I want to run chosen as troops in a 2k game, it doesn't make a lot of sense for Abaddon to be there every single time. He might want a to book time off to go on holiday/move house/redecorate/put up skulls for the seasonal holiday etc:grin:


This has been a common complaint with Special Characters, but I really do think it makes them less special to take all the 'special' rules from them and give it as an army-wide rule in a supplement. Yeah, you can take Abaddon, but there's less incentive. Abaddon is a combat dude who gives transferable fearless, punches pretty well, and makes Chosen into Troops. Before, you took him because you wanted one or more of those attributes. Now? Well, a 65pt Chaos Lord from Black Legion is a dude who gives transferable fearless and makes Chosen into Troops. Is Abaddon worth what, 210pts of punches? Not really, no - you have to be pretty fucking good at punches to be worth 210pts and have no other benefits.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

MidnightSun said:


> Ah, so we reach the actual problem.
> 
> People don't want supplements because they want flavour and theme, they want supplements to make their shitty pet army into the new Tau. Well sadly, that's not how the game works, and it never will. Some armies are better than others, and some units are better than others.


Fair enough on the point of some armies being weaker/stronger than others. Definitely not the case with wanting a supplement because I want my Khronies to be the new Tau.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

venomlust said:


> Fair enough on the point of some armies being weaker/stronger than others. Definitely not the case with wanting a supplement because I want my Khronies to be the new Tau.


So... what's the problem?

If you want a Khorne army, bring a Juggerlord, Berzerkers, and dudes with the Mark of Khorne. Bam, you have a Khorne army. And guess what? It's different to Typhus, three units of Plague Marines in Rhinos, three squads of Plague Zombies, and Obliterators. And you know the weird thing? That's not the same as Fabius, 20 Enhanced Marines, 5-man Noise Marine units and 15 Spawn. Well fuck me sideways, I just made three themed lists from the basic book.

Not aimed at you, venomlust, more a depiction of my view on the situation.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> This has been a common complaint with Special Characters, but I really do think it makes them less special to take all the 'special' rules from them and give it as an army-wide rule in a supplement. Yeah, you can take Abaddon, but there's less incentive. Abaddon is a combat dude who gives transferable fearless, punches pretty well, and makes Chosen into Troops. Before, you took him because you wanted one or more of those attributes. Now? Well, a 65pt Chaos Lord from Black Legion is a dude who gives transferable fearless and makes Chosen into Troops. Is Abaddon worth what, 210pts of punches? Not really, no - you have to be pretty fucking good at punches to be worth 210pts and have no other benefits.


Abaddon gets Init 6 in termie armour,4w and eternal warrior, with the 3rd best punches in the game (behind Swarmy and a DP) and his warlord trait of preferred enemy vs space marines (which is gold against SM's) if you keep your army in a 2 foot patch of board. If you take the BL supplement you lose the black mace, the burning brand and you have to spend a tax on VOTLW as well so it's not quite invalidating him. If you take a generic lord (as I've been doing) I normally give him artefacts too, so they could be offset by taking Abaddon and doing the army in the vanilla dex.
If you want to do BL chosen spam, it doesn't save much on the Abby tax. You don't see much more on the table.
It's just the difference between strawberry and raspberry. 
Not to mention, the supplement costs £30...


----------



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

How about less cunty bickering and more on topic gw love.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

MidnightSun said:


> So... what's the problem?
> 
> If you want a Khorne army, bring a Juggerlord, Berzerkers, and dudes with the Mark of Khorne. Bam, you have a Khorne army. And guess what? It's different to Typhus, three units of Plague Marines in Rhinos, three squads of Plague Zombies, and Obliterators. And you know the weird thing? That's not the same as Fabius, 20 Enhanced Marines, 5-man Noise Marine units and 15 Spawn. Well fuck me sideways, I just made three themed lists from the basic book.
> 
> Not aimed at you, venomlust, more a depiction of my view on the situation.


No worries. Yeah, those are themed lists, alright. I just want more Khorne stuff. Yes, I can always convert things and then have them count-as, but that isn't quite the same as having more goodies and rules to set your army apart. 

I want an army with 2 Juggernaut Lords. I also love the idea of allies, but don't really want to stray from CSM/Daemons... maybe traitor guard some day. Black Legion has allowed me to take a second Juggerlord with good (but pricey) artifacts, so ultimately I can do what I like in a semi-inferior (but at least possible) way. But Black Legion isn't the same as a Khorne-themed thing, which is _really_ what I want.

Berzerkers on Juggernauts if I'm dreaming, warlord traits, and some solid artifacts with prices that reflect their utility. Some cheaper but weaker artifacts would be nice, too. Not ALL 30+ point sinks. And also, none of them are allowed to be worthless (dreaming again). How about a new Independent Character with a unique combination of rules? Nothing overpowered, just something interesting or unexpected. Maybe something like Chapter Tactics for each CSM traitor legion/supplement, too. Not unreasonable.

Are any of these things necessary? No. Can I get by just fine without them? Sure. But GW is constantly releasing new and awesome stuff. It's fun when it gets to be your particular army or favorite getting a new release. These days, it also seems more and more likely that it will actually happen in a reasonable time frame.

Now, would I complain if alluva sudden Berzerkers were the new cheese, the _queso nuevo_, if you will? Naw. I'd rub it in my friends' faces and revel in their tears. Now _Zoidberg_ is the cheesy one!


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

venomlust said:


> Now _Zoidberg_ is the cheesy one!


Whats Karandras got to do with anything? :grin:


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

Gret79 said:


> Whats Karandras got to do with anything? :grin:


Haha, I had to look him up. Never knew he had that claw.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Has it occurred to anyone that if you want Berzerkers on Juggernaughts or Plague Marines on Palanquins or units of Aspiring Sorcerors on Discs, _you can do that_? GW has always said "make your own rules". In 6th edition, that message hasn't changed but is being pushed harder (well, they might have added "because we sure as hell can't" to the end). Sure, if you want to go to a tournament they won't let you, but not that many people go to tournaments. Any half-reasonable group of friends should let you run these things, because hey, it's cool, and this is a game of toy soldiers. It's not like you wish something was added to Team Fortress 2 or Space Marine - you don't have to have technical know-how to script something into the game. 40k is very permissive in that you can just splice two statlines together, make some pretty models and plonk them on the table.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

MidnightSun said:


> Has it occurred to anyone that if you want Berzerkers on Juggernaughts or Plague Marines on Palanquins or units of Aspiring Sorcerors on Discs, _you can do that_? GW has always said "make your own rules". In 6th edition, that message hasn't changed but is being pushed harder (well, they might have added "because we sure as hell can't" to the end). Sure, if you want to go to a tournament they won't let you, but not that many people go to tournaments. Any half-reasonable group of friends should let you run these things, because hey, it's cool, and this is a game of toy soldiers. It's not like you wish something was added to Team Fortress 2 or Space Marine - you don't have to have technical know-how to script something into the game. 40k is very permissive in that you can just splice two statlines together, make some pretty models and plonk them on the table.


Sure, it has occurred to us. Haven't done it yet, though. It's definitely the best solution possible short of GW actually releasing a quality sculpt with real rules.

The problem is that I don't see my local players being cool with homebrew anything. I could be wrong, because I've never broached the subject, but I can already hear their reactions in my head. They already complain about units that are blatantly not overpowered (never once complaining about my 2 Heldrakes, oddly enough). I wouldn't call this "real" complaining so much as being butthurt about their favorite hero/unit/whatever getting killed by my x/y/z. I've won maybe 20% of the total games I've played, so it's sort of funny when they whine. Anyway...

One could choose to insult them or point out how lame their reactions are, I suppose, but they can't argue with something "official" that they can see for themselves in a book. Now that our group has migrated away from the GW store to a local gaming club/store, I may have a better shot at getting some homebrew stuff being acceptable.

*edit*

Here, I gave it a shot. http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1595201#post1595201


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

scscofield said:


> How about less cunty bickering and more on topic gw love.


Just saw the Damned bundle set, which I like and will probably order just to get the models I don't have! 

On a separate note, I may buy a box of Vampire Counts skeletons to kit bash and use for Damned with my Marines that are still on sprue.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

Just remembered - I want a dreadclaw and those myrmidon destructors too. Fw are also on a bit of a roll


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

I'm surprised FW hasn't done a LotD yet... that would be awesome sauce :shok:


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I really like the Eldar codex. It's got multiple viable units and strategies that the majority of players will never really use because it requires a fundamentally huge pool of models and the builds are a lot less auto-win than "Serpents and Jetbikes and Wraithknights" which is all that a lot of people see when they read the codex.

So yeah, after 4th and 5th, I'm damn happy with my book. I just wish we could get rid of all the characters and models that are now over 20 years old. Specifically, Jetbikes, the Avatar, Phoenix Lords and Eldrad. The redo of Lilith Hesperax and creation of Illic Nightspear shows us what kind of kickass model GW can put together when they try. There is no excuse for the flat bodied, tiny little things that represent the most powerful warriors of our race.

But the codex makes me very happy indeed. :good:


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> Has it occurred to anyone that if you want Berzerkers on Juggernaughts or Plague Marines on Palanquins or units of Aspiring Sorcerors on Discs, _you can do that_? GW has always said "make your own rules". In 6th edition, that message hasn't changed but is being pushed harder (well, they might have added "because we sure as hell can't" to the end). Sure, if you want to go to a tournament they won't let you, but not that many people go to tournaments. Any half-reasonable group of friends should let you run these things, because hey, it's cool, and this is a game of toy soldiers...


This. 

Once you start seeing the game this way and altering your approach to it, you enjoy it so much more: 
What I mean by that is that I think some people (myself included in the past) want GW to spoon feed them supplements to make up for the lack of balance (especially compared to other systems) and make their favourite army better...Well, that aint happening, because it just isn't the kind of game that focuses on balance, it's much more about the background, creating storylines (or narratives) and being creative with scenarios, homebrewing etc. GW have made this abundantly clear. It's a beer and pretzels game, embrace it as such and have a good time. 
Fact is, 40k does what it is meant to do incredibly well. Hats off to GW for that. If you want a game that focuses on the gaming side with rigorously play tested and balanced rules and units, you are better off with something like Infinity or Mali. But the trade off there is that the fluff is pretty piss poor compared to 40k. There are no real 'themed' armies and very little diversity in terms of themed lists and what you can do in terms of conversions and modelling...40k in comparison has a crazy amount of diversity now with the break neck speed of supplement and codex releases, and that is rather awesome in it's own way. And it allows greater creativity in terms of painting and modelling IMO.

And honestly, who even plays this game competitively anymore? It's got to be quite a small minority...


----------



## Ryu_Niimura (May 1, 2013)

Straken's_Fist said:


> This.
> 
> Once you start seeing the game this way and altering your approach to it, you enjoy it so much more:
> What I mean by that is that I think some people (myself included in the past) want GW to spoon feed them supplements to make up for the lack of balance (especially compared to other systems) and make their favourite army better...Well, that aint happening, because it just isn't the kind of game that focuses on balance, it's much more about the background, creating storylines (or narratives) and being creative with scenarios, homebrewing etc. GW have made this abundantly clear. It's a beer and pretzels game, embrace it as such and have a good time.
> ...


I reckon it is but that small minority often happens to be the most vocal one. People will bitch and moan untill the end of time, that's how it has always been.

I have just started to rediscover the hobby part of Warhammer and am slowly but surely beginning to take a liking to painting/converting my models and looking at them with pride. I'd love to play a game with the models that I'm so proud of every now and then but because the people at my local GW are a bunch of assholes and because I like to play lists that are anything but competative I rarely get the chance to do so while actually enjoying myself. But that still doesn't get me down as I continue to search for new and awesome models to add to my collection and think up background stories for my armies and GW has provided more than I could ask for in that regard.


----------



## Igni Ferroque (Dec 7, 2010)

GW has been very consistent in one department and have actually been rather odd in another...

Consistently they still hate Nids and really enjoy kicking them in the teeth. 

Oddly, they really have upped their money making game and are releasing some cool stuff that looks worth-while buying. I am really impressed with how fast this stuff is being produced and marketed. I'll still ebay the majority of it as its still over-priced and outside my sanity bracket. 

What I wish for?
Revamp of some of the rules and community play-testing of new stuff. Let the players have a say in how to make the garbage units worth-while and tone down the imba units. 

I wish they'd bring back drop pods and doom... but i'll find a magic lamp before this happens!


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Igni Ferroque said:


> What I wish for?
> Revamp of some of the rules and community play-testing of new stuff. Let the players have a say in how to make the garbage units worth-while and tone down the imba units.
> 
> I wish they'd bring back drop pods and doom... but i'll find a magic lamp before this happens!


But this stuff _can all happen_; how many times do GW have to say that the rules are just a base to be expanded or modified before the message gets through to the community? If you want to use Mycetic Spores and the Doom of Malan'tai, then any decent gaming group should let you - after all, it lets them use whatever cool stuff they want that was dropped from their books or that they're disappointed with.


----------



## Igni Ferroque (Dec 7, 2010)

MidnightSun said:


> But this stuff _can all happen_; how many times do GW have to say that the rules are just a base to be expanded or modified before the message gets through to the community? If you want to use Mycetic Spores and the Doom of Malan'tai, then any decent gaming group should let you - after all, it lets them use whatever cool stuff they want that was dropped from their books or that they're disappointed with.


I play the game competitively as well as for the fun of it. I can homebrew all I like but official tournaments wont allow me to bring my own rules to the scene and use them.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

That's not really Games Workshop's fault. They do not endorse or support tournaments, and have made it pretty clear that 40k is not supposed to be suitable for competitive play. Don't blame a hammer manufacturer that their hammers don't work as screwdrivers.


----------



## Igni Ferroque (Dec 7, 2010)

Well thats a shame, because they have a very solid system for a competitive environment. I'll chalk that one as another reason why I am not happy with Games Workshop, but I ain't going to overly whine about it in general. 

Its a shame the Hammer manufacturer makes glass hammers though


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Igni Ferroque said:


> Its a shame the Hammer manufacturer makes glass hammers though


Err, no. 40k is really good for creating a narrative, fun environment if you bring a fluffy, weird, or silly army, or even a 'decent' army and play it with friends for a couple of laughs and a day's entertainment. It serves it's purpose admirably.


----------



## Old Man78 (Nov 3, 2011)

In general, I am quite happy, I would however like to see terminator command squads for vanilla marines, and a few other little quibbles but whatever g.w are doing not to my liking the new knights have me not caring!


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

>40k playerbase
>happy
Pick one.


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

Igni Ferroque said:


> Well thats a shame, because they have a very solid system for a competitive environment.


How is it a solid system for a competitive environment? It isn't in any way shape or form a game set up for competitive play. If you want to try and play it that way then fine. But it is clearly not designed for this purpose and I don't know how much clearer GW can make this, so am at a loss as to why people complain about GW because they haven't balanced the game for competitive play. It's not designed for that and this is why if you want to play it competitively you will find that you only have a small selection of units and lists to choose from, lists that rarely make any sense from a fluff perspective or follow a theme. This is because it's unbalanced. It is unbalanced because GW have made a game that doesn't care about balance or a tournament scene. They admit this throughout the 6th edition rulebook and constantly suggest players should expand on their rules and scenarios with their own ideas and forge a narrative. 

People need to start realising this, and I think then they'd be a whole lot happier if they did and altered their approach to 40k. If you have a club where no one will let you homebrew, or is full of douchebags, find another one, or start one yourself (been toying with this idea myself recently), or just focus on home gaming...If you REALLY want something geared towards balance and competitive gaming pick one of the myriad other system out there: It's the golden age of wargaming and sadly very few people seem to realise it! 
GW aren't the big bad wolf the internet makes them out to be. Sure, they are also not perfect. But hey, nor are their rival companies...


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

Zion said:


> >40k playerbase
> >happy
> Pick one.


I'm pretty happy with it. But I agree, too many people play 40K and it is impossible to keep them all happy. Seems a good portion of them just want to be miserable.


----------



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

I have found that to be more a internet thing than reality.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

I am quite quite happy. Loving the new kits that are coming out, as well as loving the games overall.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

One half of me wants to stab gw... And the other wants to hug them...
Stab because of the hilariously unbalanced rules, I know they don't care, but I'm really big on balance in everything, because if everything is ~equal! you Arnt shooting yourself in the foot for playing fluffy! which makes fluffy more fun IMO because you get somewhere with it! and tournaments are both down to skill and have more than 2 armies in them... Eg, I think riptides are really cool, but I feel like a dick using one, my bros the same with heldrakes, I like assault marines, but if I deep strike them, I end up with a bigger 'dead pile' and a tear in my eye...
And other things, like the order of codex realise IMO could be redone, and supplements are pointless IMO, I think they should be more than just giving army wide speacial rules, unique units would be cool and other such things
*white dwarf*
But it's great the amount of shit coming out, even if the codex quality dips abit for it IMO, and the new kits look great! they just need to keep going and 'modernise' everything
And other stuff I like...
The good pile looks tiny compared to the hate pile  it's easier to be hateful I find... Their equal in my heart, promise


----------



## Iraqiel (May 21, 2008)

My 2c...

Yes. 

I agree with everyone above who advocates having fun whilst playing this game.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Straken's_Fist said:


> so am at a loss as to why people complain about GW because they haven't balanced the game for competitive play.


I don't complain about balance because it's not balanced for tournament play.

I complain about balance because it isn't balanced for casual play either.

Let's take an example of a Dark Mechanicus versus Space Wolf list.

The Dark Mechanicus player takes two Warpsmiths, a few score Cultists converted up as thralls, three Heldrakes, and three Forge/Maulerfiends. Fluffy? Yes. Competitive? Not really.

The Space Wolf player runs a grab bag of SW units. He's got some Blood Claws, some Grey Hunters, a tooled out Lord on Thunderwolf, some Scouts, some Long Fangs. Fluffy? Yes. Competitive? Nope.

Unless something awfully strange happens, assuming both players are of equal skill, the Space Wolf player is statistically likely to never win a game. Because he has absolutely no answer to flyers, which zoom around toasting his units to death on 2+ while being functionally immune to retaliation.

Both players are fluffy, both are trying to forge a narrative, neither is tournament calibre, yet the games they play are terribly unbalanced by the presence of units that most armies simply have no actual answer to without resorting to using those same units themselves, or allying them in, which compromises fluff and narrative.

And this is what GW doesn't seem to understand. Balanced and well written rules that are clear cut and unambiguous doesn't just benefit the tournament scene. It benefits casual gamers just as much, if not more so - it leads to less rules disputes, closer games through having a narrower power gap, and therefore more fun. It means players can spend less time leafing through rulebooks, and more time focusing on forging a narrative and enjoying the game.

However this isn't a complaints thread, and I won't turn it into one. I just wanted to point out that competitive players aren't the only people who care about balance.


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

I've always been happy with all aspects of the hobby. I love most of the minis, their paints are great, most people I've come across that play are decent people, and despite whinging about some ridiculous fluff pieces on the whole I enjoy the rules. Yeah, happy with everything except the price. The price is why GW haven't got a penny off me in almost two years. If they fixed that I would be ecstatic. 

I was only comparing the new dwarf releases with the Avatars of War equivalents last Thursday. With AoW you get twice the amount of minis for the same price, and IMO they are much better minis, especially the slayer box. GW being the giant they are surely they can compete price wise with one of the much smaller pretenders. It's GWs pricing policy that allows these companies to thrive.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

Sethis said:


> I don't complain about balance because it's not balanced for tournament play.
> 
> I complain about balance because it isn't balanced for casual play either.
> 
> ...


^ This. Just brilliant.

It's not just that though, it's this whole attitude that you can either 'forge narratives' OR play competitive games, but never both. I hate the argument that; 40k is a 'beer and pretzels' game and so doesn't need to be balanced. It's all just for fun, so shut up and go forge a narrative. It's such a cop out, and reeks of lazy game design. As a consumer, I expect quality game design for such exorbitant costs.

A good, well designed, game system can be both competitive and 'fluffy'. The two are not (and IMO shouldn't be) mutually exclusive.


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> ^ This. Just brilliant.
> 
> It's not just that though, it's this whole attitude that you can either 'forge narratives' OR play competitive games, but never both. I hate the argument that; 40k is a 'beer and pretzels' game and so doesn't need to be balanced. It's all just for fun, so shut up and go forge a narrative. It's such a cop out, and reeks of lazy game design. As a consumer, I expect quality game design for such exorbitant costs.
> 
> A good, well designed, game system can be both competitive and 'fluffy'. The two are not (and IMO shouldn't be) mutually exclusive.


But why do you expect that, when they have made it clear they aren't bothered about playtesting, even for casual games? Why did you get into 40k knowing this? As numerous people have pointed out, it's a bit like going into a Burger King and expecting Vegan food... 

It may seem like a cop out, but equally from another point of view, it would seem like you want to be spoon fed rules by GW...Like people who want a supplement for their favourite factions simply to make them a stronger force. And if winning means that much to you , why not just use a counts as force? 

And Sethis, if you are about to play a casual game where one army is obviously weaker, as per your example, why not adjust the scenario accordingly to re-balance the game? There are well over 100 scenarios now GW have released if you cannot be bothered to deisgn your own (which again GW encourage you to do throughout the BRB).

On the contrary I think it's hard to make a game that has fluff depth while remaining balanced even for casual play...
I know I keep bringing up Malifaux and Infinity (simply because i'm sticking to what I know), but the fluff is nowhere near as developed as 40k. Malifaux has fluff in the rulebooks, and some fan fiction in their monthly online magazine, but it's absolutely nothing compared to 40k...Infinity is even less well developed than Malifaux... 
Yes, it is true both systems are balanced even for casual play. However, they are completely different games based around small skirmises, and your factions never really go above 7 or 8 models (with some exceptions). It is much easier to balance a game with a low model count, for fairly obvious reasons.

I am not a GW apologist, but I do think it is very difficult to balance a game such as 40k with the high model count, variation in rules and units...Couple that with the fluff depth and you are always going to make someone unhappy with new rules...
I guess they could of course stop releasing so much and cut down on the factions, but imagine the nerd rage that would ensue if they did that? 
Maybe one solution would be to open up beta testing like Wyrdgames have done with Mali? If they cannot or will not playtest the units themselves then why not let the community?


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Straken's_Fist said:


> But why do you expect that, when they have made it clear they aren't bothered about playtesting, even for casual games? Why did you get into 40k knowing this?


Who says that we knew about it? How many people actually started this hobby with a comprehensive review of every available codex and expansion, along with a thorough understanding of the rules and how badly balanced they are? Speaking for myself, I got into the hobby when I saw a catalogue back in the 90s and have been collecting ever since. It wasn't until after about 8 years collecting that I even considered looking at building "competitive" lists.

Fundamentally, if someone markets a game that has two sides fighting against each other, you expect the person marketing it to make sure that both sides can win. That's pretty damn obvious, and should go entirely without saying. Otherwise no-one at all would ever pick up the game. Can you imagine trying to market a game openly and your tagline was "Play any army you like out of a dozen, but only three of them have any chance of beating all-comers"? Do you think anyone walking into a GW store for the first time is told that by the staff? Isn't there some responsibility for the people making a wargame to ensure that people playing their game can have a basically even fight most of the time using the rules as written?



Straken's_Fist said:


> And Sethis, if you are about to play a casual game where one army is obviously weaker, as per your example, why not adjust the scenario accordingly to re-balance the game? There are well over 100 scenarios now GW have released if you cannot be bothered to deisgn your own (which again GW encourage you to do throughout the BRB).


Why should it be my job to correct GW's incredibly obvious fuckups - I told anyone who would listen in the hours after getting the 6th Ed rulebook that Flyers and Allies would break the game - how could an entire company not see it? Why is the onus on me to "suck it up and deal with it" instead of the onus being on GW to improve their rules writing?



Straken's_Fist said:


> On the contrary I think it's hard to make a game that has fluff depth while remaining balanced even for casual play...


What does fluff have to do with rules balance? Nothing at all. You could directly transpose the GW fluff into the Warmahordes rules system and instantly have better rules with the same fluff depth. You could even simplify the Warmahordes system significantly in order to accomodate larger model counts.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

I don't think anybody doubts that it's hard to totally balance 40k, but they could at least make it look like their making an effort, use th FAQs for more than rubbing it in...
A blind man could see the riptide and a heldrake, and a 4yr old could fix them... So why don't they?
Because their too lazy, they don't make money of off FAQs, so why bother?


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

Straken's_Fist said:


> I am not a GW apologist, but I do think it is very difficult to balance a game such as 40k with the high model count, variation in rules and units...Couple that with the fluff depth and you are always going to make someone unhappy with new rules...
> I guess they could of course stop releasing so much and cut down on the factions, but imagine the nerd rage that would ensue if they did that?
> Maybe one solution would be to open up beta testing like Wyrdgames have done with Mali? If they cannot or will not playtest the units themselves then why not let the community?


Bitch as I may from time to time about "balance," I could not agree more with you here, Fisty.

I have compared 40k to WoW in the past, because I see very similar points of view on both sides of a similar situation regarding multiple factions, classes, and game balance issues. It's not a perfect analogy, sure, but from my experience it makes perfect sense.

I've heard/read it said that if you want a game where both sides are balanced and it's purely based on skill, play chess (or checkers, whatever).

This next point is definitely debatable, but unless every army has the same units, perhaps with different "skins" on them, we're not on a perfectly level playing field. I don't know anything about game design, but it seems like the more options you have, the farther the nebulous concept of balance slips away from you. Is balance an army vs. army concept? Unit type vs. unit type? Is the whole thing rock/paper/scissors of a sort? Is everyone supposed to be equivalent in power to everyone else?

At the same time, players definitely love customizing their avatar/army. Different factions, classes, "builds" for each of those classes, and so on appeal to the individualistic nature or simply fall in line with a role or something that the player prefers. You try to make them different and interesting so that the players feel like there's a difference in their play experience based on making different choices.

In any complex set of rules, there will be loopholes. In theory, it could be possible to devise a system without loopholes and presupposes every possible way the rules can be interpreted and exploited, but that sounds like a lot of time and money spent on an aspect of the business that isn't as important as getting the game out there and selling things. They want to be financially successful so they can eat and stuff.

There are also the "most efficient" ways of doing things, so to speak. Players, as humans, aren't stupid (give me some leeway here, please :laugh. Separate from doing something in a particular way because that's the way we want to do it, we try to find the most efficient way possible to accomplish a task. That can definitely apply to games as well, can't it? It's not a better or worse way of playing than purely for fluff/story/whatever reasons, just different. We have a tendency to disagree with or look down upon perspectives different from our own (read this thread, for example), but nothing makes any point of view inherently better or worse, wrong or right, irrespective of how fervent someone is about it.

We hold this ideal of fairness in all things, which is good in spirit and worth pursuing, but often is not reflected in reality. We get mad when it isn't there, and get pissed at those who can make things better, but choose not to. Things will never be exactly the way we want them to be. Such is life. It is clear, as has been repeated about 100 times in this thread, that GW doesn't really care all that much about balance. They make money, and a badass fictional universe with toys representing the various factions makes them that money. I don't think they're lazy or evil, they just have different priorities than the players do (surprise?).

A fair bit of ambiguity, but I think this spiel relates to the topic at hand. I'm definitely just trying to relax about all the nonsense and enjoy the game with my friends. They were surprisingly cool with homebrewing stuff, so we'll see how or if that works out.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

I see balance this way: Blizzard has enough difficulty balancing zerg, terran an protoss, an wc3 was never balanced cause there were 4 factions. In 40k, theres like 500


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

Straken's_Fist said:


> But why do you expect that, when they have made it clear they aren't bothered about playtesting, even for casual games? Why did you get into 40k knowing this? As numerous people have pointed out, it's a bit like going into a Burger King and expecting Vegan food...


No it's not. It's nothing like that. I have a better simile:

It's exactly like buying an expensive board game from a company and expecting balanced, polished rules. 

The rules are a product GW sells for money (lots of money). They don't get to use the "we don't really care that much" excuse without copping flak for it. 

Challenge and Fun aren't mutually exclusive. I doubt anyone would argue that if the Riptide was more appropriately point costed the game would be less fun (unless you're a really big fan of the Riptide model, which I wouldn't fault you for :wink. The game would be better, whether you're a casual player, tournament player, or somewhere in between.



Straken's_Fist said:


> It may seem like a cop out,


I doesn't seem like a cop out; it *is* a cop out. Why even make a game if you're not gonna try to balance it and make it fair? Why include point values not designed to be competitive to some degree? Just let people take whatever they want. Why even make rules? Just let people make their own dice rolling or pew-pew noises.

It's the definition of a cop out. GW just can't be fucked polishing the product they sell us.



Straken's_Fist said:


> but equally from another point of view, it would seem like you want to be spoon fed rules by GW...Like people who want a supplement for their favourite factions simply to make them a stronger force. And if winning means that much to you , why not just use a counts as force?


Before I start, I'm just gonna point out that I said and insinuated none of this. It's all just words you've put in my mouth, but I'll roll with it.

I don't want to be spoon fed anything, except cadbury cream eggs. I just want the rules GW sells to us to be better quality. 

I don't care about winning very much at all. Some of the best games I've ever played (40k, X-wing, GoT, BFG, BSG, MTG, etc...), have been game's I've lost. I care about the challenge, not the outcome. That's just the cherry on top. 

In an ideal 40k, count-as forces should only be needed for units/armies that are not represented in the rules.

All I would like, is for GW to spend the time to balance and polish the rules they sell to us, for money. Is it unreasonable to ask a company to refine a shoddy product?



Straken's_Fist said:


> I am not a GW apologist, but I do think it is very difficult to balance a game such as 40k with the high model count, variation in rules and units...Couple that with the fluff depth and you are always going to make someone unhappy with new rules...


I'll agree with that. It's not possible to perfectly balance 40k (or any boardgame for that matter), but that doesn't mean GW shouldn't be trying to get the game as close to perfect as they can.



Straken's_Fist said:


> Maybe one solution would be to open up beta testing like Wyrdgames have done with Mali? If they cannot or will not playtest the units themselves then why not let the community?


I don't know who play-tests the GW rules, but more data/opinions is never a bad thing.


EDIT: Ah Shit-biscuits. Curse you Sethis you ninja! *Fist Shake*


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> EDIT: Ah Shit-biscuits. Curse you Sethis you ninja! *Fist Shake*


By an hour and 25 minutes???? :laugh::grin:


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

Sethis said:


> By an hour and 25 minutes???? :laugh::grin:


I type very, very slowly. It takes me like 10 minutes to get through the login screen. :laugh:


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

I decided that I'd be productive today at college, so I drew up a sigil for Warhammer 40,000 players. If it's daubed on a wall using the hot, angry tears of neckbeards, it focuses the dark energies into a portal through which the unholy trinity of Matt Ward, Gav Thorpe and Alessio Cavatore can enter into this reality.









Can't get the picture to stay upright, so click it and then click the popup if you're having trouble reading it.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

MidnightSun said:


> I decided that I'd be productive today at college, so I drew up a sigil for Warhammer 40,000 players. If it's daubed on a wall using the hot, angry tears of neckbeards, it focuses the dark energies into a portal through which the unholy trinity of Matt Ward, Gav Thorpe and Alessio Cavatore can enter into this reality.
> 
> View attachment 959947697
> 
> ...


That's actually hilarious.:biggrin:


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

It's missing the people whining, about people whining, infinity-loop.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

Thinking about it, it's also missing escalation and D-weapons :grin:

Hopefully, GW will stop releasing lovely new things we all want so we can stop getting distracted from the serious business of complaining about GW.

6th - My favourite Edition.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Listing all the complaints of Warhammer players would take more pentagrams than a Slayer concert.


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

People complain when it's cool to complain, and praise when it's cool to praise. The internet is a poor indication of what people actually feel, especially on forums where "avatars" are a personality of their own - it's even easier to hide behind the anonymity and become something you're not in the real world.


----------



## Jolnir (Feb 11, 2014)

It's easy to complain, and people post negative remarks all the time on the internet. When something is awesome, however, people tend to be less vocal about it. People don't rave about good experiences they have, because good experiences are the expectation. Negative experiences are unexpected and end up getting more attention.


----------



## Silens (Dec 26, 2010)

The game is incredibly shite and the models are too expensive to justify so we'll keep buying them just to keep an eye on how shite the game is.


----------



## Samules (Oct 13, 2010)

My experience with GW has been positive overall. That probably has more to do with the community than GW but whatever. I will now shut my cake hole before complaints begin to spew out.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

It's give and take, before it was just 'give every 3 years or so'.

The transfer to the majority of models being in plastic is divine, possible nitpicking at the fact they are not re-sculpting a handful of models that really need an update (Abaddon, Mephiston, etc).

The rules are more streamlined, games are smoother and now actually make a little sense - hark back to the days where everyone's main thought was to table the opponent. 

However, I feel they are damaging the 'soul' of what I remember being 'Warhammer' (all inclusive, 40k, Fantasy, etc), despite improving it's 'physical appearance'.
I feel they are slowly but surely reducing, regurgitating and just generally lowering the caliber of the canon - I feel current authors are making even the sci-fi/fantasy unbelievable and just plain dull. There has been a significant drop in the quality and individuality of the writing of codices in particular - once upon a time, opening a brand new codex was like opening an armies Pandora's box, opening it's identity. Now, I feel that all the codices follow a predictable schematic iced with simplistic and quite frankly boring fluff.

My imagination always flies back to late 80s/early 90s red-bladed power swords, red boltguns, Epic scale Eldar Titans, grimy skaven clashing with overly-silver dwarves, 40k Hero-hammer, 5 unit only Fantasy Khorne Daemon armies, the army-breaking Leman Russ Demolisher, garish Eldar Aspect colour schemes, the Joker-style grin on the face of the first Hive Tyrant, DOOMRIDER, Ahriman's lascannon spell, the original Rhinos and Predators, Necromunda and other specialist games, 'Fat Bloke' + Space Mcquirck + Andy Chambers + Pete Haines + etc.... the list is almost endless.

For me, the 'magic' of GW has gone. So, no - I'm not happy.


----------



## Nacho libre (Feb 23, 2013)

For once I have nothing to gripe about. I feel calm, happy almost. These feelings scare me.


----------



## DarkDisciple_Nahum (Oct 6, 2013)

Orochi said:


> DOOMRIDER,


I had forgotten about Doomrider! Ahhh I think I still have a terrible convesion for him somewhere... I miss Doomrider...


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

Orochi said:


> My imagination always flies back to late 80s/early 90s red-bladed power swords, red boltguns, Epic scale Eldar Titans, grimy skaven clashing with overly-silver dwarves, 40k Hero-hammer, 5 unit only Fantasy Khorne Daemon armies, the army-breaking Leman Russ Demolisher, garish Eldar Aspect colour schemes, the Joker-style grin on the face of the first Hive Tyrant, DOOMRIDER, Ahriman's lascannon spell, the original Rhinos and Predators, Necromunda and other specialist games, 'Fat Bloke' + Space Mcquirck + Andy Chambers + Pete Haines + etc.... the list is almost endless.
> 
> For me, the 'magic' of GW has gone. So, no - I'm not happy.


Can you say exactly what it is about these features that makes today's GW comparatively inadequate? Or what exactly today's aspects of the hobby don't match up to the older ones?

I'm not at all saying your opinion is ill-founded, but I'm just interested to know. Humans are naturally adverse to change, we remember the past as being better because it was known and understood, unlike an ever-changing present. I can't help but feel that by listing "old" things you're indulging in nostalgia, not impartially comparing GW "then" and GW "now".


----------



## Moonschwine (Jun 13, 2011)

Although I like what is being put out, and the WD change has actually got me going in store more, I'm still displeased that game balance is not being addressed. 

I feel like GW is trying to shock and awe us with all the pretty little things that come out without addressing the core issue. Take Codex: Legion of the Damned. The thing is outright insulting, yet they go and release Knights which look incredible and overall people agree that they are priced right for what they do compared to things like Riptides. It baffles me how WD is still not being used as a weekly game-tweaking tool.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Farseer - the first part of my post explains that.
moon - there used to be one, called 'Journal', off of the top of my head. And then something called 'Chapter Approved' which was both in WDs and had a compilation book every so often. I think this was running during 2nd and 3rd Ed.


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

Orochi said:


> Farseer - the first part of my post explains that.
> moon - there used to be one, called 'Journal', off of the top of my head. And then something called 'Chapter Approved' which was both in WDs and had a compilation book every so often. I think this was running during 2nd and 3rd Ed.


I miss Chapter Approved


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

I still have at least 2 of the books. 
Really should have a hobby clearout, what with all the supplements and codex's for my two armies (eldar and chaos) I'm running out of storage space for my 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th ed codex's...


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

*Is a sister of battle player and thus does not count*


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Necrosis said:


> *Is a sister of battle player and thus does not count*


Which is why I'm waiting for Imperial Guard's new codex to arrive. I've got enough sisters as it is, and allies are the only thing preventing me from shelving them once and for all, but I need to know if expanding on IG is going to be worthwhile or yet another punch in the dick, like with Sisters and Inquisition.

If that too fails, it might be a good moment to start Chaos myself, since the deals actually save money (!!!). Yes, I'll still get punched in the junk, but at least I'll be playing with models that came out after 1994.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

Honestly I play tau and my arse feels a bit on the roomy side...
I think the riptide is a badass model and I really want to use it... However it's not fun to use, for anyone involved and people give me rather dirty looks as I bring out even one of them


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

errrrgh.

Time warp me back to when 3rd Ed. came out.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Mokuren said:


> Which is why I'm waiting for Imperial Guard's new codex to arrive. I've got enough sisters as it is, and allies are the only thing preventing me from shelving them once and for all, but I need to know if expanding on IG is going to be worthwhile or yet another punch in the dick, like with Sisters and Inquisition.
> 
> If that too fails, it might be a good moment to start Chaos myself, since the deals actually save money (!!!). Yes, I'll still get punched in the junk, but at least I'll be playing with models that came out after 1994.


To be honest I haven't played 40k for a long time (for several months). Though I am thinking of going back to 4th edition.


----------



## Jace of Ultramar (Aug 2, 2011)

kiro the avenger! said:


> Honestly I play tau and my arse feels a bit on the roomy side...
> I think the riptide is a badass model and I really want to use it... However it's not fun to use, for anyone involved and people give me rather dirty looks as I bring out even one of them


Seriously? Those people suck. Come to San Antonio and my gaming group will let you run whatever the hell you want, as long as your points total the proper amount and you're not exceeding the FoC slots.


----------



## Battman (Nov 2, 2012)

I'm quite looking forward to the ork codex whenever that finally comes out, as well as some schemes around space marines and space wolves.

Very tempted with the awesomeness of knights though.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

kiro the avenger! said:


> Honestly I play tau and my arse feels a bit on the roomy side...
> I think the riptide is a badass model and I really want to use it... However it's not fun to use, for anyone involved and people give me rather dirty looks as I bring out even one of them


Even better because Riptides, just as a unit, are not particularly good.

If my opponent brought out two Riptides, I'd probably sigh in relief. If he followed them up with 30 Pathfinders, THEN I'd be sad.


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

Orochi said:


> Farseer - the first part of my post explains that.


You say GW is damaging the "soul", but my contention was that this isn't particularly concrete, which is why I asked why these features you mention (quoted below) were comparatively better. 



> My imagination always flies back to late 80s/early 90s red-bladed power swords, red boltguns, Epic scale Eldar Titans, grimy skaven clashing with overly-silver dwarves, 40k Hero-hammer, 5 unit only Fantasy Khorne Daemon armies, the army-breaking Leman Russ Demolisher, garish Eldar Aspect colour schemes, the Joker-style grin on the face of the first Hive Tyrant, DOOMRIDER, Ahriman's lascannon spell, the original Rhinos and Predators, Necromunda and other specialist games, 'Fat Bloke' + Space Mcquirck + Andy Chambers + Pete Haines + etc.... the list is almost endless.


Apologies if this wasn't made clear in my first post. Listing older features, then simply saying the "soul" is gone from today's game, is not a concrete comparison, which is why I was keen for you to outline what it is exactly (apart from this abstract "soul" business) that's wrong with GW today. I'll refer you back to my first post:



> Humans are naturally adverse to change, we remember the past as being better because it was known and understood, unlike an ever-changing present. I can't help but feel that by listing "old" things you're indulging in nostalgia, not impartially comparing GW "then" and GW "now".


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Farseer Darvaleth said:


> You say GW is damaging the "soul", but my contention was that this isn't particularly concrete, which is why I asked why these features you mention (quoted below) were comparatively better.
> 
> 
> 
> Apologies if this wasn't made clear in my first post. Listing older features, then simply saying the "soul" is gone from today's game, is not a concrete comparison, which is why I was keen for you to outline what it is exactly (apart from this abstract "soul" business) that's wrong with GW today. I'll refer you back to my first post:


Sorry, Farseer - my initial response was a little belligerent.

You say it's more of a nostalgic element to my feelings, and yes - upon more thought, I reckon that is the case.

As much as I enjoy the progress the likes of 'Eavy Metal has made, I do feel that they have lost something in their bid to increase the realism of the appearance of models, etc.

I'm going to be really vague and cite a cartoon I used to watch when I was about 3 - Animals of Farthing Wood. It has a charm about it (even now) that is lost in more modern CGI cartoons. Which, although visually more up to date and modern, just lack that 'thing', something I cannot word.

I feel GW has done the same, somewhere in the mid-00's, they lost that part of themselves. And I honestly cannot word what it is. So I will settle with your suggestion that it is my nostalgia. 

sorry again for the short answer before, dude!


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

Orochi said:


> Sorry, Farseer - my initial response was a little belligerent.
> 
> You say it's more of a nostalgic element to my feelings, and yes - upon more thought, I reckon that is the case.
> 
> ...


Don't worry, as I recall you had another member to answer as well so I understand the brevity! 

Thank you for your response, and I'm glad you can admit it's nostalgia. I'm not saying that's a bad thing at all - I'm certainly not able to look at things purely objectively (hence preferring puppet Yoda to CGI ball of plasma Yoda!). 

My issue is with people who say, purely objectively (and they make a point of professing their impartiality) that GW has got substantially worse, with all elements of nostalgia and that "thing" (and I do understand what you mean by that) set aside. They try and dress opinion as fact. After all, at the end of the day everybody has their own preference, and if they feel GW has lost something then nobody can (or should) tell them otherwise. The reason I pressed for a concrete answer is because I have yet to find a purely objective, impartial "worsening" of GW. People confuse this with personal preference too often from what I've seen (which admittedly is limited). 

But then I suppose a subject so broad as the highly diverse output of a company in an exciting, innovative industry is hardly ever going to have an objective answer either way, so perhaps my question was foolish!

As for that "thing", could it be explained by the dehumanisation of GW? As it has grown it has thrown off its humbler past, and the face of individuals is more subsumed by the corporate whole. Now it has to really push sales rather than tactical articles or modelling tutorials, or just columns to chat about the hobby, in White Dwarf. It feels less like something we're all involved in with GW, and more like something GW is selling us. The business has grown larger and larger - the difference between a school play where you know the lead role, and seeing something at the West End where even the stage-hands could outstrip everyone in that school play you fondly remember. Or the difference between a live performance and a CD, where live the audience is part of the experience, the performers give something extra, something different for that particular audience, and everybody knows how hard the music is and how much pressure is on the lead soloist not just to play it correctly, but beautifully - whereas the CD is probably the result of a hundred retakes, each little embellishment well-planned out in advance, and no human face for the listener to latch on to. Maybe these examples are over the top, or even irrelevant, but that's how I personally feel GW has lost that "thing" that many people either skirt around or directly cite but fail to describe - it became too successful.

And, in part, surely that's our fault? The reason they don't create all this content aimed at the player-base is because we make our own: you need only google "Space Marine tactics" to see what I mean. Indeed, the "hobby" side is over saturated by our own content as the industry grew - GW can't afford to spend valuable resources, especially in today's economic climate, on something that is made for free by the players already. Their name is big enough that they can't produce those more "human" columns - they can't afford you to know the main actor (to borrow from my earlier analogy). All that's left for them to do is exactly what we cannot - the production of models, and assorted supporting merchandise, to let us play the games. That's where their money goes, and that's where their money comes from. Because they were so popular with us, the playerbase, they had to change to support this wider audience - staying the same would've led to a drop in demand after it is continually not met, and expanding with the same character would've been unsustainable. We commercialised GW because we liked it too much.

(Just a mad theory!)


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

Mokuren said:


> Not denying GW has been pumping out lots of stuff.
> 
> It's just that it's not the stuff I was looking forward to, and the parts I can use (Adepta Sororitas and Inquisition) were ludicrously overpriced copypasta jokes.
> 
> So, no, I'm not a happy bunny. As for the rest of the game, I can live with having to deal with AV 15 and Strength D weapons at 1500 points, but what I feel are the biggest problems of this edition have never been addressed by any of the supplements, new releases or whatnot. Dare I say they have been made worse at times.


I have been away from the game for a few months. AV 15?


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

shaantitus said:


> I have been away from the game for a few months. AV 15?


One of the fortification options in Stronghold Assault has AV 15 and a rule that gives a -1 to rolls on the building damage table. It's the macro-cannon Aquila strongpoint. Costs a bit more than two land raiders but has a 72" large blast strength D weapon that fires twice, or it can use an apocalyptic mega-blast with 180" range instead, though it loses strength D.

It's also a multi-part building, so it's actually two AV 15 pieces.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Orochi said:


> errrrgh.
> 
> Time warp me back to when 3rd Ed. came out.


You mean back during the "Herohammer" days?


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Zion said:


> You mean back during the "Herohammer" days?


What do you mean you 'won't play me' if I run an Exalted Lord on a Juggernaut with an Axe of Khorne, Plasma Pistol and Chaos armour... leading a squad of 20 WS5 & Str5 Khorne berzerkers?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Orochi said:


> What do you mean you 'won't play me' if I run an Exalted Lord on a Juggernaut with an Axe of Khorne, Plasma Pistol and Chaos armour... leading a squad of 20 WS5 & Str5 Khorne berzerkers?


Yeah, that'd be pretty much a game over for my Sisters during 3rd. I'd play, but I don't think I could bring anything that could actually beat that.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Zion said:


> Yeah, that'd be pretty much a game over for my Sisters during 3rd. I'd play, but I don't think I could bring anything that could actually beat that.


Go back to 2nd. Ed, when Genestealers not only had WS & Ini 6, 3 attacks and Infiltrate, but came with power weapons by default.

14pts each.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Orochi said:


> Go back to 2nd. Ed, when Genestealers not only had WS & Ini 6, 3 attacks and Infiltrate, but came with power weapons by default.
> 
> 14pts each.


The same second edition that allowed you to pretty much mix and match almost anything into an army, and had rules for not only the Mechanicus but Astropaths? Oh, and there was that whole rule that could kill entire armies who weren't wearing helmets/breather masks through dice rolls before the game started.

Yeah, it was silly edition that doesn't compare to later editions very well.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Zion said:


> Oh, and there was that whole rule that could kill entire armies who weren't wearing helmets/breather masks through dice rolls before the game started.


Virus Outbreak. The first real FAQ by GW, if I remember rightly - at the GT after that card was released, players were told to rip up the card, and a public apology was put in White Dwarf. Oh for the days when Games Workshop would put in White Dwarf "It's a fair cop, we made a mistake"...



Orochi said:


> Go back to 2nd. Ed, when Genestealers not only had WS & Ini 6, 3 attacks and Infiltrate, but came with power weapons by default.
> 
> 14pts each.


Carnifexes at T9 with 10 wounds and a 3+ save, and when you killed them they rolled a 4+ for every wound they had to regain those wounds and stand back up again. Rules debates as to whether a bad attitude was an additional close combat weapon as it was listed under wargear. Oh 2nd edition.




Zion said:


> The same second edition that allowed you to pretty much mix and match almost anything into an army, and had rules for not only the Mechanicus but Astropaths?
> 
> 
> Yeah, it was silly edition that doesn't compare to later editions very well.


Space Marine Primary Detachment
Imperial Guard Allied Detachment
Inquisitorial Detachment
Legion of the Damned Detachment
Cypher Dataslate
Imperial Knight Detachment

Whaddya mean, 'doesn't compare to later editions very well'? :laugh:


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

There were a lot less restrictions back then on how you mixed things around, but yes they did bring some of that back.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Yeah, Armouries are back as wargear (which is a step backwards in my opinion), but they didn't go so stupidly unrestricted as Wargear Cards, so no more Inquisitors in Terminator Armour on Bikes with Vortex Grenades disguised as Gretchin.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

MidnightSun said:


> Yeah, Armouries are back as wargear (which is a step backwards in my opinion), but they didn't go so stupidly unrestricted as Wargear Cards, so no more Inquisitors in Terminator Armour on Bikes with Vortex Grenades disguised as Gretchin.


I think the backlash from trying to make the game into a more competitive game has finally started swinging us back towards the 2nd edition mentality of the game.

Unfortunately we have a heavily entrenched competitive base in the game anymore who don't like this design mentality even though it's older than most of their armies.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Zion said:


> I think the backlash from trying to make the game into a more competitive game has finally started swinging us back towards the 2nd edition mentality of the game.
> 
> Unfortunately we have a heavily entrenched competitive base in the game anymore who don't like this design mentality even though it's older than most of their armies.


I'd say you're very right on the first point, but I'd go further and say that GW are trying to really emphasize that 40k is _not a competitive game_ with 6th edition.

I'd amend your second point to _'Unfortunately we have a heavily entrenched competitive base in the game anymore who don't like this game'_ :victory:


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

MidnightSun said:


> I'd say you're very right on the first point, but I'd go further and say that GW are trying to really emphasize that 40k is _not a competitive game_ with 6th edition.


Which I'm fine with as 3rd was a poor attempt to make it competitive and the game suffered for it more in the long run than anything. I'm happy to see it getting more casual again.



MidnightSun said:


> I'd amend your second point to _'Unfortunately we have a heavily entrenched competitive base in the game anymore who don't like this game'_ :victory:


Also fair.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

I agree; hell, just look at my signature. When people learn to play nice, their 40k experience will improve immeasurably. As it stands, people abuse the rules (literally, they do not use them for their intended purpose) and then complain that's it's not balanced. It's like complaining that the apples you bought don't taste like oranges.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

MidnightSun said:


> I agree; hell, just look at my signature. When people learn to play nice, their 40k experience will improve immeasurably. As it stands, people abuse the rules (literally, they do not use them for their intended purpose) and then complain that's it's not balanced. It's like complaining that the apples you bought don't taste like oranges.


Agreed. Even a perfectly balanced game can be broken. For as much as MtG gets lauded for game design, even it can't escape players breaking the game and "netdecking" the good combos.

I have a lot more fun when the game is casual in nature over being competitive. It doesn't mean I don't try to win or play my best, but I don't worry about running Quaddrake army either.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Zion said:


> Agreed. Even a perfectly balanced game can be broken. For as much as MtG gets lauded for game design, even it can't escape players breaking the game and "netdecking" the good combos.


Ho boy, MTG. The game design is admirable in that the special rules are keyworded, which is great (except Regeneration, which is ok now but only after innumerable FAQs and tournament rulings). The cards themselves? They're not balanced at all. There are no incredible standouts (a few rare exceptions - Jace the Mind Sculptor, or whichever one has four abilities that includes 0 - Mill 10, Thragtusk, maybe Birthing Pod depending on your beliefs), but that's only because cards are only compared within the top, I dunno, 25% of the cardbase. There are loads and loads of cards and barely ever of them see use - essentially every Dimir release in Gatecrash were kinda terrible, and that's just scratching the surface.

But that's all pretty tangential to your point k:



Zion said:


> I have a lot more fun when the game is casual in nature over being competitive. It doesn't mean I don't try to win or play my best, but I don't worry about running Quaddrake army either.


This. Also; do you like the Heldrake model so much that you'd want to build, paint and own four of them? Because I don't know anyone who does. The internet loves to say how Taudar ruin everything, but the amount of gamers outside of the uber-competitive spend-hundreds-on-just-going-to-tournaments-so-they-need-the-prize-money-for-basic-living-costs group don't actually _play_ Tau or Eldar, and aren't going to shell out the silly amount of money you need for a full 2000pts competitive army.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

GW has picked up the keyworded special rules thing from MtG it seems though as 6th is full of them, and the number of army specific stuff has gone down quite a bit (and many of those just list the USRs that the rule gives).


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Yeah, kinda.

Damnit, GW, I want Conjurations and models with Missile Lock. You've brought out CSM and Daemons, the two most likely candidates for Conjurations; Legion of the Damned, who could have been shoe-horned in as a Conjuration for Codex: Space Marines; who's going to get a conjuration? Imperial Guard?

And you gave *one* unit Missile Lock, then promptly deleted it with an FAQ because it didn't *have* any Missiles.

God damnit.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Just ran across this, some decent stuff about improving the mindset so _everyone_ can have a good time: http://theimperialpatrol.blogspot.co.nz/2014/03/3-ways-to-enhancing-your-gaming.html


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

Zion said:


> The same second edition that allowed you to pretty much mix and match almost anything into an army, and had rules for not only the Mechanicus but Astropaths?


Ah yes...The good ol' days. Gretchin cannon fodder with Genestealers, Chaos Space Marines/Daemons and a couple of Leman Russ battle tanks for good measure.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

I agree with the plenty of cover your post mentions, but having cover increases the strain on your wallet, slows the game as your always craning over your models, going to hospital with an eye poked out by a toy soldier, and debating the 50% obscured 
But it means more strategy in games, and makes it more realistic, if you want you could do a thing where every time a ordnance large blast hits, remove any terrain under the blast and put a crater their, this changes the game as it plays out and means it can be strategic where you out your blasts, saying you can put the blast any where as well will help, you could slow down enemies through choke points, or give your own men some cover where their wasn't any...
But I'm quite happy with 6th as it is, I learnt long ago not to go to tournaments (the hard way) and wish I could have an even friendlier group than I have (local gw with a bunch of lying scumbag noobs)
I mean I table them with a pretty shitty list... I've lost once to a plasma spam chaos player but that was from god AWEFUL dice... 10 hammer nators charge a chosen squad, 0 kills and 5 loses sounds fair? What about if I add a priest? But it was fun... Rolling the dice, praying for 2s and standing gob smacked at the 1s...
I still think the game could use tweaks though... Game balance never hurt, and yes gw doesn't give a shit, but it helps everyone, balance means freindlies are freindlier as no one leaves with a bitter taste in their mouth because their new BA army just couldn't cope against a heldrake... Balance means I could bring whatever fluffy list I like, and not be shooting myself in the foot for it... I means tournaments play by skill, not luck of who you get out against..
Over all it's a good edition, minor changes but when is that not the case?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Balance isn't bad, and it's clear that (despite some rough spots were designers get too caught up in trying to make rules to the same level as the models) GW has overall gotten better at it.

That's why everyone complains that everything (save the over-designed stuff that you can tell were someone's pet project) sucks.


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

Mokuren said:


> One of the fortification options in Stronghold Assault has AV 15 and a rule that gives a -1 to rolls on the building damage table. It's the macro-cannon Aquila strongpoint. Costs a bit more than two land raiders but has a 72" large blast strength D weapon that fires twice, or it can use an apocalyptic mega-blast with 180" range instead, though it loses strength D.
> 
> It's also a multi-part building, so it's actually two AV 15 pieces.


Thankyou sir, It appears I am a little behind the times.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

I do have memories of 3rd. Ed cover generation basically ending up with both sides using the cover to create cover for their gunlines and/or a 'tunnel' for a crazy charge. 

8 tactical squads on a hill, anyone?

Does anyone remember 'Melta-missiles' and 'wrist-mounted grenade launchers'?


----------



## BlastU (Apr 3, 2014)

I just recently got into Warhammer 40k a couple of months ago with the purchase of the Dark Vengeance Set. Been looking at all the videos, been buying the books and have increased both armies gradually. I'm probably at the addictive, can't believe I didn't know about this game before phase 
I really enjoy the site and seeing all the content and like the idea that in a way its not getting old but rather rejuvenating or whatever. It's nice to see a hobby that is still producing new stuff as of late. I'm already liking the looks of Necrons but I'm wondering if I should wait for the new codex to come out. Oh ya, Im a Happy Bunny...but She Bunny isn't thrilled


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

BlastU said:


> but She Bunny isn't thrilled


They rarely are :laugh:


----------



## incinerator950 (Mar 23, 2014)

I'll be impressed when GW does an actual reduced sale that makes me want to buy something from them instead of Ebay.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

incinerator950 said:


> I'll be impressed when GW does an actual reduced sale that makes me want to buy something from them instead of Ebay.


And then people get mad they paid full price or that the discounts weren't "low enough". There is no winning for GW.


----------



## incinerator950 (Mar 23, 2014)

Zion said:


> And then people get mad they paid full price or that the discounts weren't "low enough". There is no winning for GW.


Their loss.


----------



## Nacho libre (Feb 23, 2013)

incinerator950 said:


> Their loss.


Remember though mate gw is still an international company that needs to make money.


----------



## incinerator950 (Mar 23, 2014)

Nacho libre said:


> Remember though mate gw is still an international company that needs to make money.


And living in a recession, I need to save money. Hence why I build slowly and only buy at cost through other people.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

incinerator950 said:


> Their loss.


I'm going to go with a Wargames reference: "A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."

There is *nothing* GW can do to make everyone happy. I'm not saying there aren't things that they could do, but when it comes to pricing I really don't think we're being screwed nearly as much as we think. Even if it doesn't cost much to make things (and that's counting what GW spends on) there is a lot that gets eaten up by taxes, operating expenses (stores, battle bunkers, ect) and everything else. In the very end would you like to know how much GW actually kept of all the money they made in 2013?

In 2013 they had 134,597,000 GBP in Revenue (that's the money we gave them), but when is all said and done all that was left as profit was 16,318,000 GBP. That's their actual Retained Earnings that they actually can claim as a Net Profit when all is said and done. That's 12.12% of the money they took in. 

You know what those retained earnings go? That's where those dividends come from, it goes back into the company so they don't have to borrow money to buy or repair equipment and generally keep a large safety net so if they screw up again and have another issue like they did in 2007 they don't have to go borrow money again (they actually float enough cash that they are able to all their debts TODAY if they all come due RIGHT NOW). It also helps pay for stuff like Games Day and new products like those Imperial Knights (GW doesn't record R&D costs separately and the money has to come from somewhere)

So no, GW isn't a bunch of money grubbing assholes and no they really can't afford to lower prices by much (what's 12 pence off a Landraider really going to get you? Part of a candy bar?), at least as they are now. If GW cuts prices they'll need to basically can their largest cash sink: their stores and sales branches. No more GW stores, Battle Bunkers, ect. Just their webstore and FLGSes. I don't think that'd make people who only have GW stores near them happy.


----------



## Jolnir (Feb 11, 2014)

It's a business with a premium product. Pay to play. No one cries to Ferrari because they aren't affordable enough.

If the new prices don't appeal to your wallet, then continue to buy used.


----------



## Nacho libre (Feb 23, 2013)

Its an expensive hobby, but you chose to start it.


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

It's a bit like complaining about the price of cocaine..."Oh, 50 quid a gram is expensive, you are ripping me off!" Then don't take it? Get drunk instead or something...Or start scuba diving. 
And besides, you do that to a coke dealer you will probably get your head kicked in. At least with GW we can by a new product off ebay or through 1/3 off websites. You get a 1/3 off with coke or methamphetamines it means you are likely going to be buying from the 17 year old kid who lives in the sewer and it will be cut with laundry detergent and the crushed up bones of the neighbours dead cat...So yeah, GW could be a lot worse.


----------



## incinerator950 (Mar 23, 2014)

Straken's_Fist said:


> It's a bit like complaining about the price of cocaine..."Oh, 50 quid a gram is expensive, you are ripping me off!" Then don't take it? Get drunk instead or something...Or start scuba diving.
> And besides, you do that to a coke dealer you will probably get your head kicked in. At least with GW we can by a new product off ebay or through 1/3 off websites. You get a 1/3 off with coke or methamphetamines it means you are likely going to be buying from the 17 year old kid who lives in the sewer and it will be cut with laundry detergent and the crushed up bones of the neighbours dead cat...So yeah, GW could be a lot worse.


You negotiate with coke dealers at gunpoint. 

Anyway, its a matter of opinion, like paying for an AK variant. Paying for one without a lot of upgrades past $1k is a huge ripoff, as opposed to pieces of plastic molded off an assembly line. 

As it stands on topic before the money crew derails the topic, universal rules balance (lack of with each ascending edition) is what gripes me. The lack of coherency within writers can also be attributed, but that is also a separate problem with BL too.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

incinerator950 said:


> As it stands on topic before the money crew derails the topic, universal rules balance (lack of with each ascending edition) is what gripes me. The lack of coherency within writers can also be attributed, but that is also a separate problem with BL too.


Balance is one of the few complaints aimed at GW I can get behind. I have my theories on why it's happened too (namely their meta in-house is different than our meta).


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Yes-ish

For nigh on fucking ages; I have wished that GW could/would find a way to speed up codex/armybook releases, 
with or without loads of new models,
If they can get relatively everything reasonably updated (one armybook and codex in particular) and keep everything ok-ish (books updated every two to three years) then i'll be even happier then the easter bunny


----------

