PDA

View Full Version : Official September 2012 White Dwarf (USA 392, UK 393 etc) Feedback Thread



Wintermute
24-08-2012, 11:40
Its time for yet another White Dwarf Feedback thread, this time for the September 2012 issue (US 392, UK 393 etc).

If any of you wish to make more general comments about WD, please will you make them in the General White Dwarf Feedback Thread (http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23972).

I would like to make a couple of other requests. If you post the score you have given to the current WD on the thread, would you please explain why especially if you have voted 1 or 10. I think this is useful (and interesting) for other WarSeer members reading the thread, it also provides useful feedback for others who read the thread which may include GW Staffers.

The other request is related to the previous one. Do not criticise people for posting their score and views about WD, I believe we are all entitled to voice our opinions without the the fear of them being criticised.

As always, all off-topic posts and spam will be deleted without notice.

Wintermute
The WarSeer Inquisition

Avatar_exADV
25-08-2012, 06:15
106 pages, not counting the covers or the usual useless pages at the back.

22 pages of that are ads - not articles-which-are-almost-ads, but actual ads.
-53- of what's left are covering the new box set. Good - you will get several good views of the new models, including some alternate paint schemes, and they're nice models. There's also a series of their new cut-down battle reports with the new models, made up for by having six of them (!)

Everything else is "let's look at the pretty models". Some double-page shots of Warhammer Fantasy armies, some shots of various Space Marines, a few pages looking at a Space Wolves army. No hobby content. No painting guides, even half-ass "here are four colors" guides.

Okay, I get that they're excited about the new box set. Are you interested in the new box set? Then you could do a lot worse than picking this up. If you aren't interested in it, there's really no reason to get it...

Tarax
25-08-2012, 08:24
I only bought it to get a good look at the new box and decide if it was worth it to buy it. Even if I don't, it's still something I want to look at in the future. (Call me crazy.)

As to the rest. Well, I haven't read it beyond 'What's in the box', which was underwhelming. But looking forward to the Battle Reports.

JJ's Standard Bearer promises to be the same driffle as normal, but this time he will review the last couple of years of driffle, so be warned.

But there are also some Armies form (non-)staff to look at. Which seem rather nice.

No score yet, but will probably be 4 or 5.

Inquisitor Shego
25-08-2012, 17:01
Some beautiful paint schemes, but ultimate, 50+ pages telling me nothing the Advanced Orders section of the WD Online Store didn't already say. Rip off

Lord Damocles
25-08-2012, 22:14
Hooo boy...


- Double page spread of Dark Vengeance - <- dark colour, in case we forget what sort of vengeance the Dark Angels want on the worshipers of the Dark Gods, in the grim darkness of the far future. Dark.

Editorial - Dark Vengeance. Also hobby content. Meh
Poor

News/New Releases - Ooh, there's a full page 'introduction' (?) to the new releases. Double page of Dark Vengeance. Double page of Dark Venegance Dark Angels. Double page of Dark Vengeance Evil Marines. Dark Vengeance carry case (seriously?). Sternguard (I sure am glad they included the pictures of Marines twice on this page. I just don't think that one lot of Sternguard would have satisfied me).
Double page of Finecast (40K), double page of Finecast (Fantasy), double page of Finecast (LoTR) AND THEY STILL DIDN'T ACTUALLY LIST WHICH MODELS ARE NOW OUT IN FINECAST! AAAAARGH! :mad:
The Black Library Weekender advert doesn't say what the four exclusive products actually are/contain. Sign me up for some of that unspecified product, GW!
Poor

Dark Vengeance - vastly too many pictures of the new models. We've already seen them all several times in this issue, so there's really no need to see them all again so many times so soon.
The wordy bits are rather pointless. We know what the boxset contains because we just waded through six pages of adverts for it, and we'll soon know what the scenarios are like.
Is it worth me saying designers' notes, concept art, greens, etc.? No? All right then *sigh* Why not compare to the previous boxsets?
Poor

- Dark Vengeance -based store advert, and random picture of Dark Angel -

The Hellfire Stone (Dark Vengeance background) - Hmm, riddle me this: 'We wanted them [Chaos Marines] to look like they had dwelt in the Eye of Terror for the last ten millenia' (pg.24); 'the Crimson Slaughter were declared renegade in M41' (pg.33). Forging a narrative and all...
The double page background spreads are OK (I like how the Chaplain isn't mentioned). The 'Eavy Metal pages are an embarrasing re-hash of pictures I'm already sick of seeing in this issue. The excerpt from the novella doesn't exactly inspire me to buy it.
You could have got vastly more (better quality) background into the space taken up mostly by more pictures of Dark Vengeance models.
If the Hellfire Stone needs Marine blood, why don't the Crimson Slaughter just sacrifice one of their own?
Poor

The Battle for Bane's Landing (Dark vengeance battle reports) - The multiple mini-battle reports are a decent idea, but so much (so very much...) space is taken up by pictures that the bulk of the action is glossed over. There are no maps.
OK

- Double page spread for 40K stuff -

Scenery Showcase: Bane's Landing - Really, GW? Really? Just pictures of plastic scenery kits. No attempt at conversion, or anything.
Poor

Painting Showcase: Dark Vengeance - Oh joy, more Dark Vengeance. The different colour schemes are an alright idea, but I'm not sure so many pictures of whole units (as opposed to single models) are necessary. More schemes on single models would provide a better introduction to different Chaos Legions/Warbands. This could have been expanded to be a brief intro to the background of various Chaos Marine factions for new players.
OK

- Double page spread of Dark Vengeance Related models -

Modelling Workshop: Xenos! OK, no, it's more Space Marines. I lied. Just trying to make myself believe that everything that isn't a Marine hasn't been totally ignored by White Dwarf.
Wanna see pictures of plastic Marines? Knock yourself out. Personally, anything not in Power Armour (Carapace doesn't count!) would have appealed more; or even unpainted models to better show the different parts/greenstuff etc.
Poor

- Double page spread of Marine boxsets -

Armies on Parade (Space Wolves) - Dammit! Space Wolves army showcase again. Give it a rest already. I mean, they're alright and all, but more Marines? More Space Wolves?
This is the 'extended Armies on Parade feature' mentioned in the Editorial - extended by showing some more small pictures of models mostly seen on the previous page, and some particularly dull (in all senses) Realm of Battle sections. this is how long these features should be, but the large pictures of individual cool models should go in the space(s) taken up by nothing particularly interesting here.
Poor

Citadel Hall of Fame (Slann Mage Priest) - This again? Bit wierd. Why the pictures of Skinks? Why no pictures of greens, part-scultped model, concept art, previous model(s)? Like it's predecesors, this is pretty vacuous.
Poor

Golden Demon Daemons Gallery - Erm, OK... I... Odd double page content; only four models. Is this a covert advert of Games Day/Golden Demon?
???

Standard Bearer - Standard Bearer about Standard Bearer? This is meta as hell.
If I'd sent jervis a letter reviewing all the Standard Bearers he'd written, I'm guessing it wouldn't have been an entertaining read.
Poor
I want Blanche.

- Double page of Forgeworld with text acting to disguise it as content -

Warhammer Ancient Rivals - (Vampire Counts and Bretonnian showcases) - Suck it up Fantasy players, if it ain't Dark vengeance or a Marine, it's lucky to get page space at all.
The armies are great (Gui le Gross!) and deserve far more space. Some more in the way of explanation of the armies would also be good - why do the knights have a dragon tagging along? How do the armies relate to the title?
Good

- Double page adverts for paint and stuff -

News/Hobbit advert/Schools League/Gamesday advert/stuff at the back - Blerg.
Poor
The Schools League bit could have been far better.

Had enough Dark Vengeance yet? No? Well have the back cover too.

--------------------------

Dark.

I'm sad now (okay, I was sad before, but now I'm more sad) :(


I love Dark Vengeance as much as the next guy, but oh my; that was a lot of Dark Vengeance.
It might not have been so bad if 90% of the content wasn't just pictures of the models over and over and over again. The vast quantity of pictures of Dark Vengeance models even cut down (I assume) the space available to features which could actually have been really good (what little Fantasy content there was).


One would assume that this issue will be puched to new players alongside Dark Vengeance; and as such should be serving as an introduction to GW's games. I would have thought that there would be painting guides for the models in the boxset, brief introductions to different 40K races/factions, something to get people aware of/interested in Fantasy/LoTR, a really nice battle report etc..

Also, whatever happened to the conclusion to that Marines vs. Necrons campaign from a while ago?

I don't want to vote this issue a '1', but what is there to give it a higher rating? The Fantasy article which should have had far more space dedicated to it?

stahly
26-08-2012, 12:22
It's getting worse and worse every issue, they should seriously increase the staff capacity for WD and get a new editor. Back in 2008 and 2009 when Mark Latham was editor, people complained too, but now those issues seem to be 2nd golden age of WD by comparison to the lukewarm effort we now get every month.

ac4155
26-08-2012, 12:33
I'd say it is better than the past two, but still terrible compared to other recent issues. I agree that they need to increase staff of WD. It appears that at the moment it feels like its one guy taking photos then quickly writing a paragraph to go with them.

Though I also wonder that if people dislike WD so much and the way it's gone/going, why do you still buy it?

Wintermute
26-08-2012, 13:26
It's getting worse and worse every issue, they should seriously increase the staff capacity for WD and get a new editor.

It doesn't matter who the editor is they will still be carrying out the brief given to them by their superiors at GW. The same goes for the staffing level. As far as GW are concerned WD meets the requirements they set for it.

Therefore lets keep the discussion focused on reviewing the current issue and not general comments about WD.

Wintermute

Commissar Merces
26-08-2012, 16:54
Gave it a 3 and only for the fantasy stuff

Bigbot
27-08-2012, 00:48
I enjoyed last months, gave me loads to read and the Iappreciated rules on demons.

This month...we have a whole new direction for chaos and we're just doing a magazine of pretty pictures...shocking, even my wife went through the magazine and said what a rip off it is this month

Tarax
27-08-2012, 10:12
Not necessarily a rip off, more a rip out. Last night I was browsing and decided to remove all the adverts and stuff at the back, which I normally do. This time I went a little further and also removed SB and some inner adverts. Looking at what was left, I counted the pages removed. It came to almost half. And still I could remove some more without causing damage to any article worth reading.

I have to ammend my previous score, and will give it a 3. (Still haven't read the missions, so it can be rounded up or down.)

Seeing Darnok's thread on a rehash of WD in the future, I sincerely hope so.

tiger g
28-08-2012, 12:13
Read in 45 minutes. Gave it a 2

anselminus
28-08-2012, 18:42
if only GW make a chapter aprouved or a full description of crimson sabre or crimson slaughter with old battle and more caracteristiques p41 to 61 of battle report who probably will be similar to the guide in the starter box.

they are beautifull armies insides alpha legion, vampire count and bretonnian, but too advert pages, GW When will understand you that we already know your range and that we make fun of it of its ad.

I am disappointed I found that recently Wd became again interessant but there since 2 3 numbers we dip back...

MiyamatoMusashi
31-08-2012, 11:05
I liked the sequence of battle reports, those alone did a really good job of making the contents of the box sound exciting, almost enough to make me want to buy it; though the later battles could have done with maps, as it was hard to see what was going on without them.

There was no other content in this issue.

No painting, no modelling, no conversions, no design notes, no Warhammer, no Lord of the Rings, no 40K other than Dark Vengeance. Nothing.

2/10. Avoided 1/10 because the battle reports were quite interesting.

Black-Tooth
01-09-2012, 16:19
I've never seen so little content in a magazine before. I was 20 odd pages through before I even got to a written article, which happened to be only half a page of text. Sadly the pictures are of the same models over and over again. Very poor. Worse than the 'Giant Issue' in my opinion.

Bob Arctor
02-09-2012, 00:53
As with a lot of recent issues, its hard to decide what to score it. I thought on its own the Dark Vengeance coverage was worth about an 8, telling you almost everything you need to know and playing out the whole campaign was quite good. Some of the reports even seemed quite word-heavy compared to others they have published in the last year or so. There was also some nice Warhammer armies, and lots of Marines from various staff members (although it would have been good to see how they used the new upgrade pack - obviously they weren't made available to staff in time).

The downside, as has often been the case recently, was that coverage for anything beyond this month's focus was completely lacking. For this reason, I ended up giving it a (slightly generous) 4. Better than some issues this year, but still not great.

I have been a subscriber since 1995 and have had (badly written) reminder letters to renew these last 2 months. I have decided I won't be bothering.

Sparowl
02-09-2012, 02:15
Well, let's see.

Dark Vengeance takes up 3/4 of the magazine. The majority of which is pictures of the new models. Mostly the same pictures. Conversions? Different color schemes? Far less important then showing us those same pictures. GW must've paid a lot for those pictures.

Fantasy gets a battle report. I would've liked some more information about the armies, the players.....I wanted more, and I'm not a big fan of fantasy.

The master class/golden daemon should've had more space. But, it wasn't about dark vengeance. Therefore it shall not get any space.

Overall I would give it a 2/10. Only because the hints of things I wanted to see. But sadly it's all about Dark Vengeance. Which wasn't interesting enough for an entire magazine.

Damien 1427
02-09-2012, 18:19
This is pretty bad stuff. I actually liked the last few issues for the most part, if only because they offered us precious, precious content in the form of new rules. This is abysmal. Sure, I liked some of the conversions of Marines and pictures of the new boxed set not painted in the "stock" colours, but I can get all that, and more, on the internet for free. And usually with a break down of parts and techniques if I want to loot the idea for myself.

I don't know how to give it a mark, but this is perhaps by far and away the worst issue we've had for a while. Why not, instead of just showing us yet more pictures of the new models, not add a few new scenarios using the contents of the new box? Like a Space Hulk-esque game where the Dark Angels are hunted by the Helbrute? Or a "hordes mode" style mission where the Tactical Squad have to hold out against waves of enemies? Or something.

thenamelessdead
02-09-2012, 18:49
Not sure if this counts as a review because I only flicked through this issue in a shop. But the amount of pictures I saw of the new box contents was lamentable. Surely there must be some will within GW to produce something better than this?

Lord Damocles
02-09-2012, 18:56
I notice that the painting guide(s) for Dark Vengeance, which are conspicuous by their absence from White Dwarf, were however released as paid content on iPad... :eyebrows:

Sir_Glonojad
02-09-2012, 19:54
There are two reasons that I gave the issue a "2" instead of a "1": an interesting Bretonnian army with metal bowmen and a possibility to have a look at incredibly nicely done models from the 6th edition 40k box. Unfortunately, the latter took more than a half of the issue AND there's not even a painting guide (not to mention an article attempting to recycle Dark Angel models for another chapter). Even the Finecast information on Bretonnians was not complete - if not for Warseer I wouldn't have known that there are more then 3 sets incoming. It seems that this issue failed even as an advert/catalogue...

I guess this was the last time that I got WD blindly. Obviously this rules any subscriptions out.

Promethius
03-09-2012, 18:09
I gave it 2.

I enjoyed the bretonnian and undead armies although I would like to have seen more pics of them and closer up, along with some background - how did the collections come about, that kind of thing. Unfortunately this wasn't there. Ironically for a mag that consists almost entirely of adverts, good pictures of other people's conversions and painted figs are what are most likely to inspire me into buying new things.

The dark vengeance coverage was 'meh'. I have been looking online for ideas of what legion to paint the chaos marines as - why the hell is this not in the mag? A page with some of the figs painted up in one each of the nine legions and some others like red corsairs would not have been a big ask. Where is the painting guide for beginners? Where are the conversion articles? Where are the terrain articles for your first games? I have also been removing dark angels iconography so I can use the marines in my imperial fist collection - this could have been the basis of a more advanced article for people who want to add to their own armies. In general I thought the dark vengeance coverage was pretty lacklustre.

All in all I felt that where terrain articles, modelling articles and other content should have been there were just adverts to try to get you to buy scenary etc.

checkmorale
03-09-2012, 19:14
I notice that the painting guide(s) for Dark Vengeance, which are conspicuous by their absence from White Dwarf, were however released as paid content on iPad... :eyebrows:

This. I paid ten bucks for this magazine, and didn't even get any kind of painting guide! :mad: I think I will vote with my wallet and I will not be collecting the next one.

~Check

Damien 1427
03-09-2012, 21:51
All in all I felt that where terrain articles

I get the feeling why we won't see "proper" terrain articles again is because of the very, very large range of "official" GW terrain. It'd be madness to tell people how to make their own when you have stock to shift. That does, however, make very dull articles.

Host Tar
03-09-2012, 22:13
Gave it a 3, there've been worse and the models for DV are very nice - not that that has much to do with the WD team. Still makes me cry though

Promethius
03-09-2012, 23:05
I get the feeling why we won't see "proper" terrain articles again is because of the very, very large range of "official" GW terrain. It'd be madness to tell people how to make their own when you have stock to shift. That does, however, make very dull articles.

You're right, of course, but still... I remember spending ages trying to reproduce the landing pad they had in the issues around 196 and being inspired to get building. The plastics are nice but even articles about basing them and embelishments would be nice. An alternative to just having a couple of pages with pictures of the terrain pieces and price points would be to have an article with a very cool gaming board that incorporates those sets. I remember a massive necromunda tower board in wd back in the day. What frustrated me with this issue of wd was that the thought process seemed to be 'let's try to sell these things by putting pictures of them in the mag' rather than trying to increase the appeal by showing the real unlocked potential of some of the kits and encouraging modelling.

Lord Damocles
04-09-2012, 10:29
I get the feeling why we won't see "proper" terrain articles again is because of the very, very large range of "official" GW terrain. It'd be madness to tell people how to make their own when you have stock to shift. That does, however, make very dull articles.
The irony being, White Dwarf quite frequently features scatchbuilt terrain which has no substitute in their terrain range, which would make for great terrain building articles - Dark Eldar webway portal, Necron vane/pylon things, floating lightning islands etc.

A series of articles adding race-specific terrain to some of the Xenos armies in 40K would make for some good background, cool conversions, new rules, and could inspire people to buy more models for whichever faction is featured.

Marked_by_chaos
06-09-2012, 21:07
I get the feeling why we won't see "proper" terrain articles again is because of the very, very large range of "official" GW terrain. It'd be madness to tell people how to make their own when you have stock to shift. That does, however, make very dull articles.

Sadly the evidence of the last few years of WD proves you right. You don't even see the use of polystyrene to base gw scenery often, if at all. Instead there are a collection of pieces carved into modular or gaming hill etc.

Even more sadly this approach is spreading. Assuming that they are not ommitted entirely in favour of IBook products I suspect we will also now never see a painting article that involves blending or techniques not covered in the how to paint citadel miniatures guide i.e. base, wash, layer, layer, maybe glaze.

lbecks
08-09-2012, 06:29
Good overall variety (fluff, hobby, pictures), but poor effort on some parts. Just a lot of pictures which started to become redundant. Not enough words. I wanted more designer interviews. The models are stunning but they only have a paraphrase from Jes Goodwin. An EM Masterclass article would have been great in this issue covering green armor and cloth, bone armor and cloth, and armor to flesh transitions.

Crube
08-09-2012, 07:04
Not impressed to be honest

I appreciate it's the DV release, but that seems half hearted and lacking in any real content. The WFB token articles are also lacking...

2 for me... Seriously thinking about cancelling the subscription as soon as this quarters Direct Debit runs out

justsumguy
11-09-2012, 17:34
Best thing in it are Dave Andrews Ultramarines. Show the whole army next time!

Sheena Easton
11-09-2012, 19:28
that was a lot of Dark Vengeance.
It might not have been so bad if 90% of the content wasn't just pictures of the models over and over and over again. The vast quantity of pictures of Dark Vengeance models even cut down (I assume) the space available to features which could actually have been really good (what little Fantasy content there was).


One would assume that this issue will be puched to new players alongside Dark Vengeance; and as such should be serving as an introduction to GW's games. I would have thought that there would be painting guides for the models in the boxset, brief introductions to different 40K races/factions, something to get people aware of/interested in Fantasy/LoTR, a really nice battle report etc..

This is why I gave it a 2

duffybear1988
12-09-2012, 21:38
It got a 2 from me. Even though it was packed with pictures of Dark vengeance, they still managed to miss out all the angles I would have liked to have seen.

All in all it was pants.

I used to love reading the battle reports back in the late 90s and early 00s, but now I don't even bother with them as they just seem so fake.

Finnigan2004
13-09-2012, 01:39
It was pure junk. As a subscriber, I'm still mad about shipping times-- it only just arrived today. That said, I was not missing anything. I've never given it a "1" before, but this time it deserved it. The only content that I spent any time on was the Golden Daemon stuff (always the best part) and the army on parade. I've tried a few battle reports, but they're not worth the time. Standard Bearer is o.k. sometimes, but it does not look worth it this week. I skimmed it and will probably read it later. On the bright side, maybe it can't go up until it hits rock bottom. We're there.