PDA

View Full Version : A (polite) email to GW



Rated_lexxx
16-01-2012, 23:36
I have spent weeks trying to find blaster for my trueborn. They seem pretty rare especially the warrior ones.

I finally wrote a email to GW just saying how disappointed I am that these weapons are not available through GW and the fact GW tournies and our local tournies are WYSIWYG

It was a polite letter, but I know at the end of the day it won't do much. Just one of those things I have to.


It's like voting. Even if I don't like either of the candidates I still have to vote

Anyone else email/write them on this?

Aun'aart'al
16-01-2012, 23:53
a number of years ago I tried to establish a dialogue with their legal department and work with them to avoid violating their intellectual property rights while working on my codex. The "conversation" was over a period of 6 agonizing months and only 4 e-mails.

Suffice to say I don't recommend it.

Rated_lexxx
17-01-2012, 00:07
OMG I am sorry I didn't mean to put this in News and Rumors I thought I was still in general. Can I have a mod please move it

Alkemy
17-01-2012, 04:22
I politely wrote to them about a mistake in White Dwarf and am still yet to hear anything back... not that it matters, I was just being picky...

Inquisitor Engel
17-01-2012, 04:33
WYSIWYG at GW doesn't necessarily mean you have to EXACTLY a blaster, just that it be clear that the model is armed with something different and you explain what it is before the game, as well as that representation being consistent across the army.

The Death of Reason
17-01-2012, 05:19
Yeah, its not like the little plastic bugger will shoot anything anyway.

Either you accept that you are too poor to buy extra sets just for single parts to be a proper WYSIWYG-nazi. Or you come to terms with that a melta from one factory just might look like a plasma gun from another.

Otherwise there is always all the bits services out there :)

Daigar
17-01-2012, 08:12
The amount of wargear missing from GW kits is astounding. Take for example the Space Marine Dreadnought/Venerable Dreadnought (as they can both take the same options):
Right arm:
-multi-melta (basic) (not included)
-TL Heavy Flamer (not included)
-TL Heavy Bolter (not included)
-TL Autocannon (not included)
-Plasma Cannon (included only in Venerable Dreadnought kit)
-Assault Cannon
-TL Lascannon
Left arm:
-Close Combat Weapon (basic)
-Twin Linked Autocannon (not included)
-Missile Launcher (included only in regular Dreadnought kit)

Out of 10 different arms a single dreadnought kit has only 4, no amount of magnetizing can help here.

Righthandedtwin
17-01-2012, 09:43
Interestingly all the missing components from the dread are available via forgeworld /play_twilight_zone_theme

jimbo1701
17-01-2012, 10:06
Except the twin heavy flamer, not that anyone uses them.

Latro_
17-01-2012, 10:07
In the past i'v emailed Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin, both replied.

Noobie2k7
17-01-2012, 10:13
The amount of wargear missing from GW kits is astounding. Take for example the Space Marine Dreadnought/Venerable Dreadnought (as they can both take the same options):
Right arm:
-multi-melta (basic) (not included)
-TL Heavy Flamer (not included)
-TL Heavy Bolter (not included)
-TL Autocannon (not included)
-Plasma Cannon (included only in Venerable Dreadnought kit)
-Assault Cannon
-TL Lascannon
Left arm:
-Close Combat Weapon (basic)
-Twin Linked Autocannon (not included)
-Missile Launcher (included only in regular Dreadnought kit)

Out of 10 different arms a single dreadnought kit has only 4, no amount of magnetizing can help here. Wow, that's just stupid.

Harwammer
17-01-2012, 10:41
Regarding 'missing wargear' from model kits, has GW ever even pretended to have a policy of including every wargear option in every box set? I don't think so. In fact often they state some options in rulebooks are only there for those that 1) have older (other-wise out-dated) models, 2) want to convert alternative weapon options, 3) exist in fluff but not models, or 4) to leave wiggle room to design new models with these options.

I don't perceive these as 'missing pieces', rather a lack of these options in the rule books would be 'missing options'. I'd rather have a rule with no model than a model with no rule.

hazmiter
17-01-2012, 10:50
Lol, gw have a fair bit of missing kit bits, I went and made the twin link heavy flamer and heavy bolter myself from scratch. Had to sacrifice a lascannon and assault cannon just to have those.
But i still have 2 twin las and assault left...

Bit sites are the better option, forgeworld are a last choice reguarding bits.

I'm in favour of building up your own customized blasters as it is dark eldar., or finding 3rd party bits, there are a few companies out there.

Erazmus_M_Wattle
17-01-2012, 11:52
In the past i'v emailed Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin, both replied.

What was their replies if you don't mind me asking?

Garvey
17-01-2012, 13:19
You can get a very good looking blaster by cutting the barrell off of the shredder and glueing the barrell of the blast pistol in its place. There is a link to a fourm called "The Dark City" dedicated to all things Dark Eldar. In the project logs, I'm sure you could find pictures and more detailed instructions if needed.

Graeme
17-01-2012, 13:29
You can get a very good looking blaster by cutting the barrell off of the shredder and glueing the barrell of the blast pistol in its place.

Likewise the underslung blaster from reaver jetbikes can be scavenged and stuck to a shredder stock.

Hrw-Amen
17-01-2012, 14:10
Even if GW do not supply all the options there is usually a way to convert something with minimal effort as long as you have a good bits box, which you should have if you have been collecting for a while.

As with regards to writing to them, I have to say that every time I'e written to them I've had a reply back within a couple of weeks. Usually about model designs and ideas and so on, nothing spectacular.

scarletsquig
17-01-2012, 15:46
I've always gotten a reply from GW, sometimes a very helpful one, too.

Sami
17-01-2012, 16:42
To the OP: GW included lots of useless Shredders and Blast Pistols in their kits for you to convert your own Blasters ;)

Garvey
17-01-2012, 16:50
Likewise the underslung blaster from reaver jetbikes can be scavenged and stuck to a shredder stock.


Good call, Graeme! I didn't even think about the Reaver kits. The new Dark Eldar kits are actually some of the most complete available, with regards to upgrade options.

Spider-pope
20-01-2012, 13:40
What was their replies if you don't mind me asking?

"Stop hiding in the bushes outside my house or i will call the police."

Inquisitor Engel
21-01-2012, 17:28
Many of the options included in the Codexes are to accomodate older models.

snake-eyez
23-01-2012, 11:09
Regarding 'missing wargear' from model kits, has GW ever even pretended to have a policy of including every wargear option in every box set? I don't think so. In fact often they state some options in rulebooks are only there for those that 1) have older (other-wise out-dated) models, 2) want to convert alternative weapon options, 3) exist in fluff but not models, or 4) to leave wiggle room to design new models with these options.

I don't perceive these as 'missing pieces', rather a lack of these options in the rule books would be 'missing options'. I'd rather have a rule with no model than a model with no rule.

Thats a good way to look at it. GW multi-part plastic kits are increasing in options with nearly every update (from my experience anyway), giving more and more options with their plastic models (look at marine tactical squad, it now gives the melta, plasma gun, powerweapon etc, none of which were in 3rd ed plastic box). If these many weapons options weren't available in the codex, I'm sure no one would complain about all of them not being in the box set.

That said, I don't see anything wrong with emailing GW about not having a model listed in the codex which you would buy if released. The business develops new models and kits based on expected demand, so politely informing them of your "demand" for a model would at least let them know a little about what customers want to see released.