PDA

View Full Version : February White Dwarf Feedback thread (UK WD 350, US 349)



Bigbot
28-01-2009, 10:45
I'll give it an 8. I'm stuck in with a dislocated knee and I quite enjoyed reading this cover to cover

Lord Damocles
28-01-2009, 14:15
Time for another rambling look at a White Dwarf eh? Good-o.

Editorial - Latham really doesn't seem to have anything worth saying. My nan would say that he therefore shouldn't say anything at all. She'd be right.
Poor.

New Releases / News - Lizardmen and dead Marines. Nothing much out of the ordinary here. The 'cooming soon' pictures are nothing which hasn't been see (on the internet and in real life) already.
OK.

Rise of the Ancients (Lizardman Designer's Notes) - It's OK, but as usual it takes a 'pimp the new stuff' stance rather than an 'explain changes' stance. I would have liked some more detail and some proper explanations by the writters of the new book rather than a 'lets pretend we were having a nice chat, and took notes' article.
OK.

Stegadon Breakdown - By now we know what we're going to get from a kit breakdown. It does what it says on the tin.
OK.

Collecting a Lizardman Army - I couldn't decide weather this was supposed to be part of the same article as the designer's notes, so I put it on it's own. The jist of it is 'buy plastic box sets. Then buy metal models'. Riiight. I don't get it; it's totally pointless. Poor.

Painting Lizardmen - Hmm... blue scales... red scales... well that was fun. A few pointers on painting something other than blue Saurus Warriors would have been nice. Overall it needs a little more work I think.
OK.

There were some other bits and bobs here trying to sell me Lizardmen, which I don't really feel the need to comment on.

Boot Kamp (Tactica: Orks) - Jeremy Vetock? Who's he then? He looks far to literate to be one of GW's games developers...
The tactics are fairly simple, but that's to be expected. The 'equip all Deff Dreads with extra close combat weapons - they'll be running not shooting' comment had me getting all nostalgic for a moment about the days when tacticas didn't mind telling the reader that some options just weren't worth considering, but the final section chickens out and goes for the 'buy everything so you can try it all!' approach.
There was almost some fluff in here... just nearly.
Again, it's an alright article, but it tries to do too much by looking at the entire army at once in too few pages. Having a player talk about they're favourite units, tactics, wargear setups etc. would have worked better I think.
OK.

Prepare for Battle (LoTR Tournament Report) - It made a change to see a LoTR article which didn't read exactly the same as the last one. I'm not particularly interested in LoTR, but I read it anyway. As a series it might work reasonably well; then again I said that about the last Tale of Four gamers series [involuntary shudder].
Good.

War Journal (War of the Ring) - Apocalyspssssssssse! Yeah, when LoTR was originally released I said that it would end up being Fantasy in the LoTRverse. And I was right!
There doesn't seem to be much to this other than 'buy more models and movement trays'.
Poor.

Cities of Deff - Why is this here? Do Orks need/deserve special scenarios and strategems for Cityfight? Does anyone even still play Cityfight for that matter?
On the subject of scenarios, these two seem to be heavily in the Orks favour. On the subject of strategems, none of them would make me want to use anything other than Power Generator, Ammo Dump, or Medicae Facility.
Plus, I'm sick of Orks. Fair enough it's the Ork second wave (well it was last month at least), but spread the articles about a bit eh?
OK.

Battle Report (Lizardmen vs. Deamons) - Oh look the Lizardmen won. Maybe this prooves that Deamons arn't overpowered? Maybe it proves that the newest army always wins battle reports? Who knows.
I don't know enough about Fantasy to say if the armies are sensible or not so...
Ok.

Standard Bearer - Oh dear. Jervis 'patronising you to death since 1996' Johnson almost had the makings of an interesting and thought provoking article here: players not feeling that they have to be constrained by the army lists (ie. just becasue you can mix Khorne and Slaanesh doesn't mean that you have to, but just because fluff doesn't support it doesn't mean you're forced to), and the psychology of collecting could have been really interesting.
Instead we get some drivel about how great Apocalypse is. Again. :eyebrows:
Poor.

Jungle Terrain - Although there is some 'buy our trees!' in here it's not the focus of the article. This is what the articles should be/used to be like: featuring GW products, but not just screaming 'Buy it now N00Bs!' at you.
Good.

Painting Masterclass (Luke McFarlane) - [picks up jaw from the floor] he can paint quite well can't he [/understatement]. i don't think any amount of description could do justice to the 'yellow marine'. Inspiring stuff.
Good.

Citadel Hall of Fame - Well this series lost it's way quickly. I don't think the half page picture of a Thunderfire Cannon was really necesary in an article about the Grail Reliquae...
Poor.

Painting Faces - How to paint faces. As simple (or as complicated as the case may be) as that.
Good.

Junk at the Back - Hey GW, if you cut this out and put it on the web you could decrease your costs and increase your profit margins!
As usual Poor.

----------------
This month is a noticable improvement on recent months. However White Dwarf is still suffering from an inability to maintain the standard of articles over more than a month at a time.

Overall it's OK, but still not up to the standard of the past (or worth 4.50).
I'll give it a 5.

Osbad
28-01-2009, 15:02
A lot of sense.

I only give it a 4 though. Not atrocious, but not worth the money.

RCgothic
28-01-2009, 15:08
The painting faces article was the only thing I was interested in, and I skimmed it in the shop. Not worth paying 4.50 for.

Mozzamanx
28-01-2009, 15:12
There were a couple of interesting articles, that held my attention for the best part of 45 minutes. However, the rest was pretty cacktacular.

Did anyone else find the Ork 'Tactica' ridiculously stupid in places?
"Lining up your Orks as far into your deployment zone as you can and racing towards the enemy is not only a viable Ork tactic, but often a game-winning one as well."
That's not a tactic, and certainly didn't need writing down.

Angelwing
28-01-2009, 15:36
Cities of Deff - Why is this here? Do Orks need/deserve special scenarios and strategems for Cityfight? Does anyone even still play Cityfight for that matter?



I'd just like to pick up on this point.
Many, many people (myself included) are screaming for WD to include more trial rules, scenarios and support for past release supplements, games and armies. The article you describe is exactly that. I concede that the content might not be relevant to you, but it is just the sort of thing the WD needs.
So, to answer your questions: Its here because readers are asking for it. Orks need it just as much as all the other armies. They have started with orks because they have just released a load of great models with loads of bits for converting cityfight stuff. And yes, I still play cityfight.

OrlyggJafnakol
28-01-2009, 15:50
I'd just like to pick up on this point.
Many, many people (myself included) are screaming for WD to include more trial rules, scenarios and support for past release supplements, games and armies. The article you describe is exactly that. I concede that the content might not be relevant to you, but it is just the sort of thing the WD needs.
So, to answer your questions: Its here because readers are asking for it. Orks need it just as much as all the other armies. They have started with orks because they have just released a load of great models with loads of bits for converting cityfight stuff. And yes, I still play cityfight.

Agree, agree agree... The 'tactical' articles in WD are (for me) the most boring articles. WD is a hobby magazine- therefore I hope to see and read about painting, background, converting, rules ideas, scenery construction, scenarios and other (non-studio) people's miniatures and armies. I want a few GW celebs sprinkled in too for nostalgia. This WD had a fair few of those things in. So I was happy.

Lewis
28-01-2009, 16:32
I think there's been a preponderance of special scenarios battle reports lately. They're good in measure but there does seem to have been apocalypse creep lately whereby everything gets played in a crazy overblown environment that stops you from making a proper analysis of how army a) stacks up against army b).

Hellfury
28-01-2009, 16:57
I'd just like to pick up on this point.
Many, many people (myself included) are screaming for WD to include more trial rules, scenarios and support for past release supplements, games and armies. The article you describe is exactly that. I concede that the content might not be relevant to you, but it is just the sort of thing the WD needs.
So, to answer your questions: Its here because readers are asking for it. Orks need it just as much as all the other armies. They have started with orks because they have just released a load of great models with loads of bits for converting cityfight stuff. And yes, I still play cityfight.

QTF.

While I no longer buy the mag, I do feel it is important to give credit where it is due.

its the lack of such articles that made me decline buying the mag again. Small things like this will help me purchase them again.

(that and doing a reprint of chapter approved once a year like the old days)

sheck2
28-01-2009, 17:18
I liekd it and give/gave it a 9...for the reasons stated above.

However...if I was not a subscriber and had to buy the mag at the store...I would not buy it...definitiely look at it, but not worth the cost.

Patriarch
28-01-2009, 17:21
(that and doing a reprint of chapter approved once a year like the old days)
Chapter Approved was just a collection of WD WH40k articles over the previous year, plus the odd bonus like the Necron army list. Since WD's articles are barely worth reading, let alone reprinting, any Chapter Approved is going to be pretty empty. The BA mini-codex was worth it, but what would you put in there with it?

The Lizardmen pictures were nice, but I didn't need to see all of them over and over again. The stegadon has clearly become the new giant. Every army needs at least 3, just like the one in the batrep.

Maybe Jervis will one day sneak a new Epic army list into his articles - he can pepper it up by pimping kroxigors or vindicators or whatever if he wants to keep management happy, just so that some gamers somewhere will get something slightly useful out of it.

The faces tutorial was good.

Nice of them to give a nod to Talisman and Warhammer Historical. Doubtless some Man-O-War players went a bit misty-eyed. Plus a mention of Space Crusade in the Marine painting article.

The rest of it failed to register on my brain in the 20 minutes it took to read through.

I give this one a 6, which is like a 3 in old money.

Noserenda
28-01-2009, 17:27
The Painting articles were cool, and the Battle Report was more interesting than the recent jokes (Especially Januarys...). Johnson I think was given a brief to write about Apocalypse, but managed to actually get some half interesting stuff in around it :chrome:

Lizards look cool :skull:

Hellfury
28-01-2009, 17:38
Chapter Approved was just a collection of WD WH40k articles over the previous year, plus the odd bonus like the Necron army list. Since WD's articles are barely worth reading, let alone reprinting, any Chapter Approved is going to be pretty empty. The BA mini-codex was worth it, but what would you put in there with it?

Yeah, after being in the hobby for half my life now that I am 35, I am quite aware what Chapter approved is, thanks.

I remarked on C/A because IF (pretty big IF) they started to include actual content, then it would be worth making C/A a yearly periodical again.

t-tauri
28-01-2009, 17:39
Another White Dwarf Feedback thread for February(US 349, UK 350 etc). Moved about to fit a poll in.
General comments about WD go in the General White Dwarf Feedback Thread (http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23972).

Please explain why you've given a particular rating and please resist the temptation to mock other posters for their opinion as action will be taken.


Off topic and spam posts will be deleted without notice.

t-tauri

The Warseer Inquisition

Netherghoul
28-01-2009, 17:49
a 2 alas, all the models can be seen left to right (there are same cool models in it, not rating the models but the mere content as a hobby mag).
would love to see more hobby/paint articles in it. hobby magazine ftw Blanchitsuuuuuu! :P
would be better if they showed the new stuff on their sites and turn the WD back into a hobby magazine like it was used to be, and yeah those rocked:)

come on GW give it a spin ;)

Lord Damocles
28-01-2009, 17:58
I'd just like to pick up on this point.
Many, many people (myself included) are screaming for WD to include more trial rules, scenarios and support for past release supplements, games and armies. The article you describe is exactly that. I concede that the content might not be relevant to you, but it is just the sort of thing the WD needs.
So, to answer your questions: Its here because readers are asking for it. Orks need it just as much as all the other armies. They have started with orks because they have just released a load of great models with loads of bits for converting cityfight stuff. And yes, I still play cityfight.
True, true.
I just thought that it was a bit, 'You want new rules/scenarios do you? Here, take this. Haha, that'll keep them quite for a while'.
The scenarios don't seem balanced (which isn't the be-all and end-all I'll concede, but it wouldn't take that much to make them less one sided), and the strategems don't seem all that useful compared to the big three.

I would have much prefered an article which gave some new (balanced) scenarios which weren't race specific, and maybe one race specific strategem for everyone (Dark Eldar slave pit, Imperial Guard defence bunker, Tyranid brood hive etc etc.) so that everyone could get involved.

What we got would be OK if we could expect follow-up articles giving other races more Cityfight goodies, but I doubt that's going to happen somehow (why use up valuable Apocalypse-pimpage space for Cityfight? :()

The best case scenario would be the return of Chapter Approved...

reds8n
28-01-2009, 18:15
A 7 from me, content wise it really only deserved a 6 perhaps but after years of abuse at the hands of comic companies taking any 0 ending number as something significant and putting out some crappy special edition I appreciated the fact they didn't do this. Would have been a bit too soon after the last GW event/party/celebration anyway.

Editorial-- not really a lot you can say in that space I guess. Nice touch about the number of old models people like though.

New models-- well we've all seen them, but the pics are clear and the text is easy to read-- nice use of white space, no complaints here as such, but no outpourings of joy either.

Lizard preview-- alright, answers a few questions but I'd prefer something a bit more in depth. If you say something like " It was tempting to make the Engine of the Gods work like a giant Aztec super-laser" then please tell us why you didn't. Models all nice though and I do dig the sprue breakdowns they do-- I'd like them online for as many of their range as possible.

Boot kamp-- good. Nothing new in there for me, but I've seen some of the newer ( and younger.. but they all look so young these days :() ork players ooh and aaah at this so fair play. And I did like the different tips from different players, i think there is mileage in the idea of some form of roundtable discussion by different players about a force.

LOTR-- enjoyed this, I think given the forthcoming release of the new game an article about a player beginning and developing is both sensible and useful. I like Mr. Trokes' writing style too.:)And Mr. Byrne's models are lovely too. Too bloody good but that's a whole other rant.

Mr. ward's article is well written and I love seeing WD cover something about a game before it is actually out. For ages I've wanted them to showcase how a game/armybook/supplement is put together over the course of a year/ X issues, and this is a step in the right direction. It's not perfect-- ideally last months, this months and next months article would all be 1 piece, with an equal length trilogy of the same at least. Rather odd I thought was the inclusion of the models just ranked up on plain movement trays on page 50. Meh, I can live with it, it just struck me as odd compared to the finished ones on the pages before. Perhaps even worthy of some form of comment ?

Cities of Deff-- cool. New rules and no argument about legality or tournament suitability. Wicked. Yes Mr. Hoare we would like articles like this one.

Battle report-- looked great, I'm dubious about the fairness of the mission, i would have preferred a normal mission and perhaps the fun scenario included as a bonus ?

Standard Bearer-- great intro to an article... where's the rest of it ? I normally like this a lot-- and Mr. Johnson's style is nice enough--but it reminded me too much of myself trying to pad out and reach a word count back when I had essays to finish.

Hobby essentials-- .... given the demographic and styles of the average WD reader... that describing something as being similar to "adding egg whites to a meringue" is not the best example.

Rest of the magazine nice enough-- although I did do a double take at the inclusion of the Thunderfire. The staff at my local GW store had enough bother putting this together, perhaps no the best example.

Trogdor
01-02-2009, 00:54
I thought it was a better read than of late but it's still a far cry from the glory days of Fat Bloke and Guy Haley.

aenarion67
01-02-2009, 05:03
hmmmmm.. well tody i had a bit of a flick thorugh it, must say t is alot better than last months piece of crap. well i had a pleasant suprise when i discovered that a photo of me was in white dwarf!!!! thats right i'm in white dwarf. well i have to say this years coverage of golden demon oz was about one trillion times better than last years :D, the articles were alright and lotr apocalypse to me is just trying to rebake stale bread and make it less stale and more crunchy.

Lord Dan
01-02-2009, 05:55
I liekd it and give/gave it a 9...for the reasons stated above.

However...if I was not a subscriber and had to buy the mag at the store...I would not buy it...definitiely look at it, but not worth the cost.

So it's not worth the cost, but you gave it a 9?

Captain Marius
01-02-2009, 22:14
I enjoyed this month's WD; it got me excited for Lizardmen (my mate is an avid LM player so I've now got a reasonable idea of what to expect for the next few months' gaming), maintained a bit of momentum for the Orks (I'll be buying a Stompa on release day and I can't wait!) and even perked my interest in LOTR again (one of these days I'll cave in and get a proper force together :)). Kept me entertained for a day or so, worth an 8!

lotrchampion
01-02-2009, 23:48
I must confess, I haven't bought this month's WD. Shock horror. But after having a flick through it several times at WHW and GW Notts, I didn't see anything worth my money. Lizardmen? Yep, nice models, all pretty cool, and I'm going to be doing an army of them, but the content for them was pretty poor compared to old release articles. Orks? Again, GW continues to excel themselves in the quality of models, and the lack of quality of associated articles in WD. And finally, LotR, my preferred system. Nice to hear a little more info about WotR, although for me personally it was a little pointless as I was at the GT seminar and had a good chat with MW about it. The irony of this WD was when one of the staffers tried to sell me it on grounds of having a good tactics/army building army for LotR in it, based on Christian Byrne's GT attendance. I pointed out that since Byrne finished 6th from bottom, I'd keep to my own tactics. :)

Once again, an issue lacking anything resembling support for LotR, but the Fantasy and 40k sections were better than they have been in the last year or so. I'll go back to my paint station, hug a copy of Paul Sawyer's last WD and cry into my paints...

P.S. For anyone with a minor interest, current average vote in the poll is around 6.2 .

Jedi152
02-02-2009, 08:10
I picked this issue up on a whim on Saturday with my FHM, and i have to say i was surprised. Since the Chaos Warrior issue i haven't bothered to buy it but i gave it a chance due to the Lizardman feature.

It's quite a good issue. Lizard feature is good (but could do with more depth), sprue layouts are good (exciting model with good features not just a generic blue tank).

I even thoroughly enjoyed reading the War of the Ring article - and i usually skip right past LOTR - and i'm even a little excited about the expansion.

Standard Bearer is the usual, and i can't believe the cheek of Jervis claiming that Chaos armies have been made more diverse.

I don't have time to do a full article breakdown, so i'll leave it there.

Overall i'm impressed. I spend a good hour reading through last night and that's more than i've spend reading it for years.

RevEv
02-02-2009, 12:46
I am really enjoying this WD - some very good articles and, now that my son has got in to LOTR, all the articles are of interest to me.

What speaks volumes to me, however, is that my wife grabbed WD before I had a look in - she plays Lizzies and Orks so many of the articles are of interest to her.

Osbad
02-02-2009, 12:50
A lot better than last month. More to read and not just pictures. I'm trying to filter my hatred of the whole "Ork" genre but inevitably it has some impact. Even so, I think there was just more to read this month. 6.

OrlyggJafnakol
03-02-2009, 09:10
The painting tips about faces has really improved my painting. That has been a first through WD for many, many years... I enjoyed last months issue and I enjoyed this. I also miss the glory days of Paul Sawyer- but with notification that GW is making a profit, perhaps they may invest in a little more WD coverage. I have no issue with the way WD is currently structured I just want more depth to the articles...

Overall, gave the issue an 8- not bad at all!

TheBigBadWolf
03-02-2009, 14:26
I gave it a 7, overall pretty good, but the corners have been torn off on a few pages in the middle, this has happened a few times to me, the cutter either leave paper that should be cut off or cuts the page :mad:.

I would have taken it back but the gf picked it up for me out of whsmith and never noticed.

Finn Sourscowl
07-02-2009, 20:42
7. Overall, not bad at all. Plenty to read, which is one of my main criteria for a good WD.

Highlight: The faces tutorial. Very useful indeed.

tassiewargamer
08-02-2009, 00:49
I rate it a 7 and a half. Lots of inresting articles for my favourite games lotr and whfb. The face painting article is the best painting article I have seen in the past year. And finally the Aus coverage has come back in with the golden demon and an article on a painter from Melbourne. And even 40k had a thing for cities of death which came out like 3 years ago!!!!!!!

I'm going to send a letter to GW and thank them for a great issue and to keep it up.

Hawkwar
08-02-2009, 04:34
Rated as a 4. Australian edition 350

Editorial - Pointless drivel as usual
New Releases - The same as always - Informative no more
News - No more than a preview of next months new releases
Rise of the Ancients - Mildly interesting (Lizardmen are not my thing though)
Painting Lizardmen - Of no interest for me
In store this month - thought new releases had covered that already
Boot Kamp/Cities of Deff - Interesting for adding to games, adds to the Orks and city fight so worth while (even if Orks are getting even more coverage) It was a bit light on for actual content though
Prepare for battle LOTR - Yawn
Echoes of the fall - Oh look the new army wins (I am so surprised) I didnt even bother reading all this
Standard bearer - Started interestingly enough but became an add for Apocalypse. JJ could do so much more with this article. Maybe he should go back and reread his first article and take inspiration from that as to what he should be writing about.
Hobby Essentials - Interesting
Jungle terrain - Interesting
Painting Masters - Good
Citadel Hall of Fame - Good but why is there a thunderfire cannon and a rocket battery in an article discussing the grail reliquae (poor editing)
Painting faces - Good
Golden Demon - Always worth looking at
18 pages of nothingness - meh

Overall a couple of good articles but nothing outstanding

happy_doctor
09-02-2009, 23:30
I'll give it a 5, despite the fact that, being a Lizardman player, I was really interested in this month's release.
The reason behind this is mainly the battle report; I felt that my intelligence was insulted when I read the introduction to the battle report.

(in brief) "we decided to ignore army restrictions, not count points at all and pick whatever we liked without any balance! That will surely show how good the new army is against the nasty daemons..."

I don't mind seeing interesting scenarios and uneven battles, but this was too much:

It was like 6000 points of lizardmen VS 3000 points of Daemons, plus with 15 characters around, the lizards were bound to achieve the objective of closing the portal. I just miss the times when battle reports were honest and didn't care about making the new army appear strong.

Hell, they could have chosen any single battle report from Warseer's relevant subforum and it would have made a far more interesting read!

Thus, a 5 and definitely not worth the money, when internet is free and provides you with excellent painting logs, battle reports, tactics discussions and actual rumours.

Jedi152
10-02-2009, 07:17
Citadel Hall of Fame - Good but why is there a thunderfire cannon and a rocket battery in an article discussing the grail reliquae (poor editing)
I have to admit i thought this too. It just seems like they were trying to fill empty space with a few random pictures.

bomblu
10-02-2009, 12:17
I saw some improvement since january's edit. though i think they need to get back to paul sawyer (fat bloke) cos he made the magazine worth reading...nowadays its just recycled stuff and stupid articles about one army in a whole book...january's one was damn horrible - only orks and some tiny bits :/

If only they stopped to think a bit before they do their articles...and standard bearer's becoming a bit ridiculus now - i might just send him a letter if thats what he wants ;)

Natura
13-02-2009, 04:01
I actually gave this one an 8, mainly because it featured something I haven't seen in ages; new rules to use. As an Ork played the Cities of Deff article was fantastic, and the Ork Tactica article, whilst basic in the extreme, wasn't bad to read. I also have a fondness for Lizardmen so reading about them was fun.

Without the Cities of Deff article however I'd be rating this one much closer to 5.

the1stpip
13-02-2009, 22:48
Yep, I gave it a '5'.

I remember a time when I would spend hours rading it, while these days a cursory glance and you are done.

However, the article by Jeremy Vetock was a nod to former glory, and Nigel Stillman noted that WD is back in the hands of the studio, then maybe w shall see more interesting articles (mike Walker come back, all is forgiven).

I hope this is the start of an up trend.

Keravin
13-02-2009, 23:19
I have to admit i thought this too. It just seems like they were trying to fill empty space with a few random pictures.

They were other examples of models by the same sculptor.

No that would be too obvious :eyebrows: