PDA

View Full Version : Developer for a Day



Warrior of Chaos
05-10-2012, 19:44
Hey all WoC here with some questions,

1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I would like to work on the Dwarfs book myself. I think stunties have so much going for them and I love the fluff. This would definitely become my "dibs" book if I were ever offered an opportunity to contribute to the game. And should that book be taken by the Bearded One, I wouldn't mind working on WoC (go figure right).

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
I am not overly fond of the Soul Grinder in fantasy.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
I would love to see a Dwarf zepplin.
I would just like to see how some of my fellow hobbyists would change the game we know. ;)

EDIT: added from below.
4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
I would make it so that all "Monsters" are treated as having 1 rank for the purposes of Steadfast. Maybe also a rule that Teclis auto-implodes if placed anywhere on the game table...LOL

So here is the next wave of questions:

5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?
I think that Chaos Chosen with the warshrine combo is probably one of the worst.

6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?
Still not sure on this one myself, but I have seen a bunch other others debating (heavily) on some topics. I suppose the one that came up that I was involved discussing was if the VC lore attribute could heal characters. I personally feel it is clear enough, but I suppose I might make some edit to the effect in errata which spells out that it CAN.


Bonus: 7. Who needs a new job? By this I am asking which developer, painter, modeler, CEO, local hobby store employee of GW do you think should be let go/swapped in favor of new talent? I am not asking for this to turn into a hate-fest, but I would like to see where the angst really lies.
I do not believe that anyone needs to be "fired" per say, but I think that the CEO/board of directors need to be addressed regarding their business practices (cost, how they treat the Aussies for products..etc.)

logan054
05-10-2012, 19:56
Hey all WoC here with some questions,

1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

I would love to work on the WoC book. I love the fluff and would love the chance to really bring out the true flavor of the army.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

I Soul Grinder, it should have been left in 40k, it just doesn't seem right in warhammer, certainly not with the current model.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

Chosen knights for WoC with the option to ride daemonic mounts, I might however get my wish.

tmarichards
05-10-2012, 20:02
"1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?"

Ogres. Move Mournfang to rare, and maybe the Scraplauncher to Special.

Grimstonefire
05-10-2012, 20:08
It would definitely be Chaos Dwarfs if I could create anything, but otherwise Dwarfs as well.

I'd remove the Demigryph knights from Empire. They overcompensate for what should be an imposed weakness.

As chosenish WoC seem to be creeping in through FW/GW, I would have said them as well, but instead I would say that they should bring the Brotherhood of Grimnir and the Doomseekers back as upgrade options for all levels of slayers (+D3 autohits at base strength).

popisdead
05-10-2012, 20:21
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Fix Beastmen (rares, Lore, etc).

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Organ gun. Needs to be more points as it auto-kills 15-20 PPM Elf infantry.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
BEAR CAVALRY! Bestigor/Razorgor Monstrous Cav would be cool Or Ungor Raiders riding Centigors as Fast Cav.

grimkeeper
05-10-2012, 20:30
1) Vampire Counts / Daemons
2) Special Characters / Soul Grinder it looks terriable in Fantasy
3) Chaos Cultists for Empire

grimkeeper
05-10-2012, 20:31
1) Vampire Counts / Daemons
2) Special Characters / Soul Grinder it looks terriable in Fantasy
3) Chaos Cultists for Empire

Urgat
05-10-2012, 20:38
1) OnG obviously, though it only needs finetuning now
2) provision for removing popisdead's bears as soon as the idea would emerge :p
3) yeah, there's many

"Mighty General"
05-10-2012, 21:54
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Dogs of War. I think the rules they and some of the regiments of renown had, if worked in, would make them unique enough so they wouldn't just be an Empire/Bretonnia clone.
2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
I'd second the Soul Grinder.
3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
A skaven tunnelling beast like they had in the Clan Moulder list in WD (maybe an upgrade for the abomination).

The Low King
05-10-2012, 22:31
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I would love to work on the Dwarf or Woodelf book but honestly i think i would mess it up. We all like to think we could make a better balanced book than the developers but the fact that noone can actually agree on what is unbalanced in any book is pretty good evidence to the contrary.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
The ironblaster, i just think it is silly. But balance wise, the Kdaii destroyer.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Rune/Mechanical Golems.

gd09garett
05-10-2012, 22:52
1. Empire. Remove the steam punk silliness and go back to a cosmopolitan nation, just discovering gunpowder, and using guns, faith and steel to stand against the monstrous darkness which threatens it. Orcs and Goblins would be a close second though.
2. The Steam Tank- enough said with steam punk silliness above.
3. Bring back Kislev troops- winged lancers, proper war wagons, etc.

Warrior of Chaos
05-10-2012, 23:00
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Fix Beastmen (rares, Lore, etc).

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Organ gun. Needs to be more points as it auto-kills 15-20 PPM Elf infantry.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
BEAR CAVALRY! Bestigor/Razorgor Monstrous Cav would be cool Or Ungor Raiders riding Centigors as Fast Cav.

Hmm...Bear Cavalry for Beastmen (maybe wood elves)? Are you thinking somesort of mutated creatures? I would have thought regular beasts would flee from the unnatural presence of the true children of chaos. I am glad someone thought to give the Beasties some love though. I think they could use it.

P.S. Leave my organ gun alone or I'll have to put you on the list with Cruddace and Ward (J/K). LOL;)


As a follow on question:

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
I would make it so that all "Monsters" are treated as having 1 rank for the purposes of Steadfast. Maybe also a rule that Teclis auto-implodes if placed anywhere on the game table...LOL:shifty:

The Low King
05-10-2012, 23:21
4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.


Cannons working like a template (so hitting both rider and mount). Mainly because it might make people stop moaning about cannons, but also because skink pinball on stegadons is crazy.

Last Edition
05-10-2012, 23:25
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
As you might see in my signature, I would undoubtedly start working on a Norse Army book.
2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
K'daai Destroyer - what were they thinking?
3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
There are days when I miss my old T5 W4 A3 Mummies on 20mm bases :) I also think the Empire War Wagon is missed by many, even I miss playing against it.
4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
I agree with the Low King, cannons could do with a change but not sure how. But rules don't bother me anymore; overall they are good rules which creates a good fun game.

Sheena Easton
05-10-2012, 23:27
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Wood Elves - I'd make them all wild and dangerous, and better than your faves obviously.


2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
That ridiculous Lion Chariot


3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Wood Elf Spellsinger Ziena Oestun!
I'd also bring back Forest Goblins as mobs and characters along with the Giant and Gigantic Spider mounts for those characters.


4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Steadfast annoys me. I'd adjust it so it is rank bonus (with Monsters counting as having a rank bonus of 2) and have it negated by flank / rear charges.

Warrior of Chaos
06-10-2012, 00:01
Cannons working like a template (so hitting both rider and mount). Mainly because it might make people stop moaning about cannons, but also because skink pinball on stegadons is crazy.

Yes this would rank right up there in the top three for me. I also think I would also allow Ward saves against spells which remove models from play. There are quite a few little things that would make me happy to see fixed.

b0007452
06-10-2012, 00:55
I really like this thread.

1 - Either Araby or a remake of the Zombie Pirate list in White Dwarf during the Lustria campaign. Araby as the fan made one online is similar to one I had in my head and I imagine that you could make some incredibly cool genie/Aladdinesque units. Zombie Pirates as the list in White Dwarf was awsome and I feel an 8th ed. updated version would be sweet :D.

2 - I hate the Razorgor. The model is hideous and Beastmen have such a depth of monsters to choose from I'm sure they could have found something better in its place.

3 - Werewolves of some description. I really think they should be involved somehow with Vampire Counts.

4 - Not too bothered. The rules work both ways and I don't really play enough to be too affected. Overall the game feels good to me so I just wait to see what changes are made next edition.

Jim :D

DaemonReign
06-10-2012, 01:06
1. I would revision the Daemons of Chaos Book for Fantasy, in fact, I already did (or at least moderated such a project).
2. Yeah you know what the SoulGrinder is a pretty damn good candidate for removal (from Fantasy).
3. Again, yes, the Dwarf Zeppelin is still the best 'rumoured' idea existing on Dwarves.
4. I have never quite gotten over how you only need to meet nominal casting values when dispelling RemainsInPlay spells in subsequent magic phases. As far as I'm concerned, if you cast a boosted RiP then your opponant should damn-well have to meet the boosted value when dispelling. Off the top of my head I suppose that's my biggest gripe.

sulla
06-10-2012, 01:29
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
]
2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.Great questions WoC!

1)Armybook; Hordes of chaos; I would redo chaos as an all-in-one book designed to work around the warband concept chaos; leaders and their followers. Buying a beastlord would neccessitate buying his core gor followers but also unlock the rest of his beastly tribe. Chaos lords/exhalted would need warriors but unlock all the other all manner of warriors, chosen, knights and chariots, Doombulls would need minotaur units, daemonic heroes would bring their mark of daemonic warbands etc. So it would not follow the same build as other armies but rather hero + x core gives options of x additional heroes/special/rare from that warband's list.

2)Most disliked unit; Ironblaster. Hands down. Even if you could conceivably fire a cannon that was larger than the beast carrying it without breaking the beast's back, how would you ever reload it and why would it be more accurate than trained human or dwarven engineers.

3)Unrealised unit; summoned daemon prince in the DE book. DE sorceresses are reknowned for their selfishness and belief that they are strongwilled enough to control chaos; I'd like to see them be able to employ bound daemons with all the inherent risks of such an idea.

4)Rule to change; While I think the game would run better with unit caps to make shooting, knights, magic missiles, flank charges and many other things more relevant, the rule I would change first would be the attack allocation rule. I would make it so that only one model per combat phase can allocate attacks at each character(unless the attackers have no other targets to attack). It irks me to no end that some combat characters are just flat out unuseable right now. Sick of seeing just BSB, mages and mounted/solo characters. Infantry heroes should be viable for all armies.

Petey
06-10-2012, 01:59
Hey all WoC here with some questions,

[QUOTE=Warrior of Chaos;6453758]1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
That now defunct rumor of a mercenary book, where your armies could take allied merc units. If that isn't available, then Dark Elves.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Mournfang Cavalry. I would replace them with a unit that was similar but less impact hits and armor.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
High Elf Drake Riders

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
I would make difficult terrain actually difficult to cross. For example, charges flees etc, through woods should reduce your range by d6"

Sh4d0w
06-10-2012, 02:40
1. I would love to work on the woodelves book, bringing back the ability to be competitive while remaining a relatively skirmish based army while delving deeper into the forest spirit side of things.

2. Definitely soul-grinder....and this is coming from a daemon player, I will never, ever use it.

3. Malakai Makaissons Goblin-Hewer...i know it has a model but I want rules dammit!

4. Like with Petey I agree that terrain needs a bigger effect so yeah -6" for charge/flees etc.

Skywave
06-10-2012, 06:55
1) I would definitely like to work on the Tomb Kings book. Adjust a few rules and point cost mainly, to take into account 8th edition, wich the author failed to do. While not a main army in Warhammer, it's still sad to see that it received such a poorly conceived book from an author that didn't really tried to make things work properly.

2) The Ironblaster. There's no reason this thing should be as good as it is.

3) For me it would Ghost infantry for the VC, like in the 4th edition Undead book. Normal 20mm bases infantry, with rank and all, only because I think it looked cool!

4) I would say steadfast not working on Undead. This need to be tweaked somehow so that undead could get some benefit from it instead of getting nothing. Unstable in 8th could have been like daemon instability, wich if I'm not mistaken can get steadfast since it's Ld test of sort? Or else could have at least get crumble reduced by half when steadfast or something similar.

Kayosiv
06-10-2012, 08:24
My friend and I were just talking about that exact thing. We came up with the idea that if an undead unit is steadfast, it crumbles less than the number equal to it's unmodified leadership. We were also discussing that Characters really should have some sort of crumble resistance, especially vampires and tomb kings. Not immunity, but either taking 1 less crumble or just having a "ward save" that can be used against crumble.

Baraqiel
06-10-2012, 08:40
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

Either Wood Elves or a reunified Chaos book.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

Nothing immediately springs to mind. I like the Soulgrinder in fantasy, to me it adds to the time- and space- lessness of Chaos.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

The old Dwarf Juggernaught!

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

Fear, it's now pretty useless.

Boreas_NL
06-10-2012, 13:07
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I am torn between wanting to re-write that utter piece of crap that is the 8th ed. Empire army book (failing that, I would also settle for writing the FAQ) or write up a new book for Mordheim...

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Empire Wizard Wagons (both of them as they are equally eligible for my dislike)... Totally unfindable in the background of WF, ill-conceived, made almost mandatory (because State Troops are overpriced and useless) and butt-ugly...

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Plenty! Anything Imperial: Foot Knights, War Wagons, Dwarfs, Ogres and/or Halflings...

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Charging Knights should be able to strike first! I don't use any Knights in my army, but using Initiative on this one seems a bit stupid...

Blinder
06-10-2012, 13:35
1. Hmm... probably Wood Elves, there's *so* much to play with in the background and they seem one of the best candidates for doing things "differently" (which they really already do... it'd mainly be a matter of updating how the "skirmish filling" fits inside the crunchy wooden shell to be more easily varied in the reality of the current ruleset). I'd probably do my best to meddle with whoever would be doing the Bret book, as I think both armies would do well to play up the politics between them to help set them apart from HE/DE and Empire.

2. I actually can't think of any unit that makes me want it *gone.* Most of the stuff that seems out of place (Soulgrinder) is largely down to the model not fitting in terribly well... but that can be corrected with a new model (IMO it doesn't do well in *either* system). Most of the stuff that's just O_o (Ironblasters, Mournfang, etc.) needs point/section adjustments and maybe some careful rulebook Errata (cannon or monsters). Though, barring some major toning down, Teclis can go die in a fire... it might be time to replace him with a pupil based on the amount of ire he's built up.

3. I'd like to see a lot of stuff that's fallen by the wayside (DoW, Kislev, Araby) start showing up again.

4. "Speed of Asuryn" (spelling adjusted accordingly). Yeah, a lot of the main rules probably need to be tweaked first, but I really don't like broad "here, go ahead and ignore all the downsides" rules... if it just granted ASF it'd be fine, but "our ASF is better than yours" reeks of "we can't figure out how to make this stuff worthwhile without adding in a huge crutch." (I guess that really means I want to change the FAQ more than the rule, though)

DaemonReign
06-10-2012, 14:12
Really cool thread this one. Just a blast browsing through people's Little lists.


My friend and I were just talking about that exact thing. We came up with the idea that if an undead unit is steadfast, it crumbles less than the number equal to it's unmodified leadership. We were also discussing that Characters really should have some sort of crumble resistance, especially vampires and tomb kings. Not immunity, but either taking 1 less crumble or just having a "ward save" that can be used against crumble.

My gaming Group play-tested houseruled versions of Unstable interaction with Steadfast at the beginning of 8th Ed. We tried "Steadfast = No Crumble", and (later on) "Steadfast = 'Halved' Crumble" if I remember correctly. Just for a couple of games. Now; I can tell you that "Steadfast = No Crumble" was quite 'broken' (no surprice I suppose) but even 'halving' crumble on 'steadfast' (deadfast? *tihi*) really Changes stuff more than was/is theorethically obvious - at least that's what we thought we saw so now we play Crumble 'by the book' and VC pretty much hasn't lost a game locally since the new book came out.
It gets complicated but I Think the most interesting thing to do with Unstable would be to restrict it to a 'unit-by-unit' basis:
So your horde of zombies lost the combat by a lot and that's fine, it's just a shame this autopops the single-model lord you've sent in for support in the same combat.
Resolving 'many different' sets of individual combat resolutions would go against the idea of streamlining things though.
Basically, I certainly agree that both steadfast and the BSB leave you wanting for more when it comes to the Crumble-rule.. it's just that it's really a pretty difficult nut to crack when you get down to it..

The bearded one
06-10-2012, 14:25
And should that book be taken by the Bearded One,


Stolen.


1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Dwarfs

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Soulgrinder, and the K'daai who's rules are just absolutely absurd.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
I wouldn't mind a dwarf tunneling machine, perhaps it might have interactions with miners, or might pop up somewhere in the middle of the table and bring miners along with it.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Make IF dispellable by irresistible dispells. IF's don't need to be the be-all to end-all.

yabbadabba
06-10-2012, 14:38
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Tough one. Chaos were my first army but Empire and Dwarves are what rock my boat in gaming terms. I think the challenge would be to make TKs more feared though. So, TKs it is.
2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
I don't think I would want any unit removed, but several need rewriting. Any skirmisher unit for instance.
3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
I'd redesign them a bit, but bring back War Wagons!
4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
I think GW are still following a one size fits all format which no longer works. So I would restructure the whole system to have a beginner/tournament base rule set, with an advanced/veteran addition. That way any rules that are too clunky in a beginner/tournament set, eg. the mega-spells, could be removed and placed in a gaming environment more capable of dealing with them.

Athlan na Dyr
06-10-2012, 15:00
First of all, great idea.


1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

Tough one, as I'm rather happy with my armies current book (vamps). Either Skaven because of the amount of things that annoy me in that book, or (re)combined Chaos.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

Cannons :shifty:
Seriously though, the Ironblaster (for model reasons, not because its a cannon) or Teclis.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

Named bloodline characters for bloodlines other than the von Carsteins.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

Not a rule, but more of a recurring concept is the lack of strong disincentives to go bigger. This applies mostly to unit sizes due to unit based buffs, Steadfast and the Horde rule, but also to elements of the magic phase and so on. Solving a fair few problems just by taking more bodies/ throwing more dice is irksome, and reduces the importance of skirmishers, cavalry, BS based shooting, magic missiles and so on.

someone2040
06-10-2012, 15:02
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I think I'd like to bring Dogs of War back into the game. While in some ways they are similar to Empire, they also have a lot of cool things about the army. Plus all the Regiments of Renown are amazing and cool.
If not, then I'd probably like to work on Lizardmen. I don't think there's actually too much wrong with the current book in the way things are, just some things need to be toned down, while most of the special characters need to be boosted/points decrease.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Well, I'm also not a fan of the Soulgrinder in Fantasy. Daemons may be a race that crosses over the boundaries between 40k and Fantasy, but I don't think that means EVERYTHING has to cross over. I think certainly there is room to have only Fantasy and only 40k units/characters.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Bring back Be'Lakor the Dark Master. Got such an awesome model. It's somewhat amazing he didn't make it into the Daemons of Chaos book considering his list was the basis for it.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Change Steadfast so you cannot use Inspiring Presence. It stops unbreakable cheap unit syndrome unless the player invests in putting some leadership characters into the unit (Which the trade off then is, they are vulnerable to being struck).
Probably everything should count as having minimum 1 rank, but I think the above is a more important fix to implement than this.

Warrior of Chaos
06-10-2012, 17:24
... Halflings...

Sorry the one mention caught my eye. YES it would be cool to have Halflings back in the works. I completely forgot about them until you mentioned them. Don't they still have some models for them on the collectables menus for Empire on GW website?


Stolen.

......4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Make IF dispellable by irresistible dispells. IF's don't need to be the be-all to end-all.

Damn you...:cries::D: as to the answered question, I hadn't even thought about that....I LOVE the idea that irresistible could still be cancelled with irresistible...

DaemonReign
06-10-2012, 17:38
Make IF dispellable by irresistible dispells. IF's don't need to be the be-all to end-all.

They're not the 'be-all to end-all' - you simply trade the risk of being dispelled for Rolling on the miscast-table.
If you're gonna start dispelling with irresistable, then I demand you also roll on the miscast table - or that the miscast for a 'dispelled' spell simply gets cancelled.
Perhaps hitting a bit below the belt, but I can't help pointing out it's a bit ironic seeing this gripe being reported by a dwarf-player. ;)
And don't worry, that last bit was meant in a fraternal tone and I'm certainly aware you play other races too (Slann would definately take a hit if irrestables could be nullified).
Personally I Think the magic phase is quite all right.. It's just RiP and Bound spells that suffer, and it's a shame they didn't build a chart for the 12-dice cap so that things would scale up a bit when you play bigger games (oh well, easy enough to houserule).

NonComPoop
06-10-2012, 20:00
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I would expand on the human armies that have been left out yet should be taking an active part. First would be Araby( based on the Ottoman Turks), second would be the Southlands (based on African warrors) after that I would do a proper redux of Necromunda (wich I would continue to add expansions for new settings/gangs based on the hives other than Hive Primus)

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Gyrocopters. The idea of that advanced a technology is being used in the Warhammer world always kind of broke my suspension of disbelief and came off as stupid.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
I would like to see a regement of Mutant beastmen kind of like chosen in a Chaos warrior army; where the effect of thier "gifts" are randomly generated at the start of the game.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
That'd have to be the speed of Asuryan. In that it really doesn't need to be anything more that ASF. Striking first with two handers and not in initiative order is kinda dumb when the basic rules for the situation are perfectly fine.

Urgat
06-10-2012, 20:16
They're not the 'be-all to end-all' - you simply trade the risk of being dispelled for Rolling on the miscast-table.

Man, if I were to create a post to talk about everything I don't like which has been mentionned above, it'd be quite a long one ;)

Hudson Gameover
06-10-2012, 20:30
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Got to be Norse, I've got a warband and a fleet, why cant I have an army.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
All cannons!

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Warewolves and bears for Norse but they could work in some other armys to.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
The cannon rules need a complete overhaul.

Melkanador
06-10-2012, 20:54
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
All of them so there would be a vague feeling of balance between the books. If possible I would rewrite the RB as well.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Soulgrinder. 40k should stay 40k.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
CD and DoW as armies.[

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Steadfast is cancelled if the steadfast unit is disrupted. Slavebus should be enough reasoning.

Spiney Norman
06-10-2012, 21:11
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Wood Elves, firstly because I love the army and secondly because they are by far the most needy army out there right now. I'd probably play up the forest spirit aspect of the army, add some fast, heavy hitting stuff, ditch the lore of Loren and just make tree singing a standard spell that all Asrai wizards know (ala power of darkness), then give them access to life, beasts, shadows & heavens.


2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
hmmm, tough one, there aren't many units I dislike so much they need to be removed, most things (like the soul grinder) could be fixed with a more appropriate model or more balanced rules. I suppose for pure daftness of concept I would lose the Ogre Kingdoms Ironblaster


3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
hmmm, I'm tempted to stay with the wood elf theme and say Zoats


4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Easiest to answer; I would alter how cannons hit ridden monsters so that the monster only is hit on D6 roll 1-4 and the character only is hit on 5-6.

Sh4d0w
07-10-2012, 02:27
They're not the 'be-all to end-all' - you simply trade the risk of being dispelled for Rolling on the miscast-table.
If you're gonna start dispelling with irresistable, then I demand you also roll on the miscast table - or that the miscast for a 'dispelled' spell simply gets cancelled.
Perhaps hitting a bit below the belt, but I can't help pointing out it's a bit ironic seeing this gripe being reported by a dwarf-player. ;)
And don't worry, that last bit was meant in a fraternal tone and I'm certainly aware you play other races too (Slann would definately take a hit if irrestables could be nullified).
Personally I Think the magic phase is quite all right.. It's just RiP and Bound spells that suffer, and it's a shame they didn't build a chart for the 12-dice cap so that things would scale up a bit when you play bigger games (oh well, easy enough to houserule).

What about the fact that you are wasting all your dispell dice trying to get double 6's??? If the opponent can throw all his dice and get IF on one spell you should be able to counter it...

The bearded one
07-10-2012, 03:35
Perhaps hitting a bit below the belt, but I can't help pointing out it's a bit ironic seeing this gripe being reported by a dwarf-player. ;)

It's funny, but I don't think I've even used my dwarfs on the field for the better part of a year. I just use lizardmen to game, and my slann steals enemy 6's anyway.

DaemonReign
07-10-2012, 03:44
What about the fact that you are wasting all your dispell dice trying to get double 6's??? If the opponent can throw all his dice and get IF on one spell you should be able to counter it...

Frankly, I prefer Irrestiable to be just that - unstoppable.
Though I could see a rules-tweak whereby you would be allowed to dispell with a double-six, but then the miscast would also transfer from the caster to the dispeller.
That would actually be kind of epic;
The dispelling wizard sacrificing himself to absorb the awesome force of the powers let loose by the other side, essentially focusing all that power on himself in order to save his fellow soldiers!

Gurrfang
07-10-2012, 04:52
1: I would not rewrite any one army book, I'd rewrite them ALL. One of my biggest complaints of gw practices is that several rule books are out of date, and the most recent book always seems to dominate for a short period, while faq files keep getting bigger.
2: Can't say I'd remove any unit, they all have a role to fill.
3: I would add black orc cavalry for orcs and goblins. I've always wondered why black orcs wouldn't nab a good bunch of boars in a society that is run by the biggest and best.
4: I would alter the randomized movement rule, allowing a unit charged by a randomly moving unit a charge reaction. Hell pit abominations are simple way to gamey for reasons like this. (my opinion only, yes, I'm a skaven hater! Faced way to many skyre lists.)

Crymson
07-10-2012, 10:31
I'd want to work on a brand new army that has not had an army book before.

I would remove Eternal Guard from the wood elf book. Feel out of place to me.

And I would bring back Halflings into the Empire army book.

Warrior of Chaos
07-10-2012, 18:19
I'd want to work on a brand new army that has not had an army book before...

If I had to choose an Army outside the normal list, I'd probably pick Nippon. I think it would be quite fun.

Gaargod
07-10-2012, 18:25
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Specifically Armybook eh? So no rerwriting the BRB? Fine, in which case... Well actually, a lot of choices. I have lots of ideas for new books, but frankly I'd prefer to rewrite one of the books which needs it badly. Probably Vampires, as their book offends me for the total lack of proper Bloodlines influence and a whole multitude of sins in the actual rules department. Although I'd love to do the WoC book, so many many fun things could be done with it.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Not a unit as such, sorry, but the Hellheart needs to go. Stupid item.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Saurus Cavalry / Heroes riding Baby Carnosaurs (or equivalent new breed). I want my monstrous lizardmen cavalry dammit!

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Steadfast. As I've said from day 1, the actual idea is fine, it was just very badly implemented. It absolutely, positively, should not use the General's LD for unmodified LD tests for a start. But more importantly, it should use Unit Strength (bring it back, it's really not that hard to count!). And you should have to outnumber by a a decent margin - say at least double to get the stubborn bonus. And possibly be cancelled by flank charges, although that one wouldn't be necessary if the other two were implemented.



Of course, I don't know if I would actually want to try to rewrite an entire book if I was dev for a day :p. As badly as some books have been done, I can't imagine I'd do any better if you only gave me 24 hours! If I had no/limited restrictions and a reasonably deadline... Yeah.

TheDungen
07-10-2012, 21:08
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I'd write the HE book, i'd add units so that there were two units from each kingdom, and reintroduce honours one for each kingdom giving the character a loadout similar to a unit from that kingdom and making that unit jump down one step in the type (rare>special or special>core). I'd also add much fluff on the daily lives of the elves and on elven politics, who is allied with whom against whom at court. what bitter rivalities are there which cultural differences are there between the different elven kingdoms. Oh an i'd add a capital on the map for each kingdom, namely Tor Saphyr, Tor Caled, Tor Lathain (Cotique). Id also describe these cities, where are they how are they built and so on. All in all i'd make Ulthuan much more a confederation of kingdoms than it is being described currently. Oh and i'd tone down the dying race fluff. Say that they're in a few thousand years long population decline but still hope to reclaim their lost glory.

Otherwise i could see myself write the DE book and give it a full dark eldar style rehaul. Adding alot of roman ideas and making them more of a civilised warrior people with Machiavellian ideas than treasonous and backstabbing.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Either the soulgrinder (although it could work with a better model) or the tomb king snakes.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
a few see my above comment on high elfs.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
steadfast, removed. any number of ranks can now be added to combat resolution.

Aéquitas
07-10-2012, 22:01
The soulgrinder is fixed for you all. Pricey conversion but this must be the best one I have seen so far, one day I'll have one like it :)

http://imageshack.us/a/img6/5034/soulgrinder2.png

GrandmasterWang
08-10-2012, 05:44
Epic soul grinder. I dont see why the people who want it,removed dont just substitute a prefered model, the rules are fine.

1. Chaos dwarfs or dogs of war
2. Mechanical horse
3. Dogs of war, war wagon, goblin hewer
4. Daemonic instability with steadfast. Makes big blocks too good, id also adjust the building rules. Give tomb kings back their -1 to crumble. We house rule it for my poor Khalazid the eternal with his great weapon & cloak of dunes

Gromdal
08-10-2012, 12:46
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Dwarfs, Bretonnians, Warriors of Chaos. In that order.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Changing the rules of many, but removing none.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Foot knights for bretonnia

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
No character auto killing with spells, war machines etc. Ie massive overhaul to how artillery works from sniping to effective vs mass troops.

Tyrelli
08-10-2012, 13:14
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Chaos Dwarfs ... but I would really like to do "Add on Books" best example would be the Albion campaign where you got a book with new add on rules and Minis .. (fen beast ect) I would Do a Nagash Army Book (forces of nagash) and bring him back in mini form. (With Plastic/finecast you could do something amazing with nagash)

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
The Beastmen Mineators Yuck horrible Minis

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
As I said Nagash .. but also would love to see Slugtounge realised.

Warrior of Chaos
09-10-2012, 11:10
The soulgrinder is fixed for you all. Pricey conversion but this must be the best one I have seen so far, one day I'll have one like it :)

http://imageshack.us/a/img6/5034/soulgrinder2.png

Hmmm...not too shabby. Now if only the kit actually had a similar conversion to drop the mechanical lower-half I might change my opinion on what needs to go.

This thread has been rather enlightening so far. I am rather suprised by the answers in some cases...(I didn't know the Ironblaster was so despised-it is not an issue in my local meta). Even more interesting is the number of people who would re-write Armybooks that have just been updated for 8th! I almost had expected to see a big rush of people wanting to update the much older books, but that is not the case. This is good stuff...

zak
09-10-2012, 14:37
1. Skaven - Really dislike the army book and the rules within. The models ate lovely, but just too abuseable for my liking. The DE book would be a close second followed by Bretts and WE.

2. Not sure why anyone would want to get rid og minotaurs as a unit choice. The models aren't that bad once they are painted in a decent colour scheme. There is no unit I would remove. Several lines of miniatures that need resculpting (Razorgor being a fine example).

3. Would love to see Empire and Brett Foot Knights and Black Orcs riding some sort of beast. A boar will do if they can't think of anything else.

4. Not a great lover of TLOS. Like others have said Steadfast needs rewriting rather than removing.

MLP
09-10-2012, 16:12
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
I would revamp and release Mordhiem! Also make my halfling book official :-D

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
As many have said the Soulgrinder, I agree and would also remove many other silly models I don't feel fit my theme of Warhammer. Gyrocopter, Luminark & other thing, robot horse, mangler squig, others I can't think of now

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Doomseekers.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
ASF I find a litle too much with the rerolls to hit against lower initiative, it serves only to make it overpowred against certain armies. I feel that Steadfast, horde was poorly implemented and a bit too simple for my liking

En Sabbah Nur
09-10-2012, 16:28
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Cathay. I really think there is potential that has never been exploited here. Even if that makes a third human army.
Tomb Kings would be a good second thought.
2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Soulgrinder has definitely nothing to do in Fantasy. Not with that look anyway.
3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Let's see... For now ? Nope. May be Halflings for the Empire.
4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
The Nehekhara Lore for Tomb Kings, which is just useless now, especially the Attribute (WTF only 1D3+1 minis ? Are you ********** kidding me ?). Back to the old one.

AntaresCD
09-10-2012, 16:36
Honestly, if I could be a developer at GW I wouldn't worry about any of those 3 (now 4) things. What I would do is sit down and pour over the BRB and clean it up. I'd start with clearly defining and unifying terms used and their definitions, such as "removing a model" or "round of close combat." I would then make the phases very clear in a systematic flow-of-control style that helps eliminate a lot of the quirks, loopholes, and inconsistencies. I would then go over all edge cases, special rules, etc. and word them clearly to mesh cleanly with said more clearly defined rules. The FAQ would be scrapped and redone in light of this (consistency is key) and should hopefully be much, much shorter. The intention of all this, of course, is to make the rules cleaner and with less gotchas. That in and of itself, tends to sap more enjoyment out of the game (due to arguments, mistakes, etc.) than any particular imbalanced book, or unit, or whatever. If I still had time I would then scrap all the armybook FAQs and redo them to specifically mesh the errors, edition-lag, inconsistent wording, etc. into the new framework, with the same purpose as above. I don't think the rules will ever be perfect, but simple proofreading, editing, consistency, and bothering to have the FAQ readers actually read the rules a few times before answering would do wonders...

Jind_Singh
09-10-2012, 19:28
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

I would want to write a book for the forgotten realms - a single book that has Cathy/Ind/Araby - that would be a great project! It would be similar to the Forgeworld book (actually it WOULD be a Forgeworld book as it's big enough to cover what I'd want to do).

If it was Warhammer I would want to have a hand in writting the Beastmen book and see if I could make it fun and fresh (but it would be quite the challenge!)

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

Not so much any unit but I'd get rid of a lot of the magic items that makes for unkillable characters (Dreadlord with stupid combos anyone?!)

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

Empire War Wagon
Chaos Knights on daemonic mounts like Juggers
Kislev units for the Empire
Halflings for the Empire
Forest Goblin infantry
Dwarf Zeplin
Goat Riding Gnoblars for Ogre Kingdoms!!!

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

Cannons! Plain and simple just silly how accurate they are! I would change it so:

1) It's not a template, it's a cannon ball! I'd randomize who eats the cannon ball on ridden monsters
2) If a cannon ball travels through a forest enroute to the target it's distance is reduced by an artillary die - misfire indicates it's got stuck on a tree!
3) 1st shot of the game the cannon ball gains D3 to the artillary die roll to see how much further it goes - this represents that the 1st shot is loaded well, packed down tight. (But not an extra D3 for the bounce)

TheDungen
09-10-2012, 20:03
Actually on second thought i'd rewrite mordheim, i'd make most old warbands (not only the official and in rulebook ones) balanced somehow and also make a more natrual progression betwen mordheim > empire in flames > warhammer skrimish > small warhammer army as the warbands keep growing making it a more natural entry point for new players who want to get playing asap without having to paint a big army first. This would be inforced by adding a soft cap on the number of minatures ina warband rather than a hard one (each extra member helping the warband less than the previous one but cutting more into the warband upkeep or costing more to recruit). Id also add more random things,and remove a few restrictions, like having minotaur heroes or sellswords joining the warband as a possible advancement roll.

Ealdwulf
09-10-2012, 21:44
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Though I do not play this army I feel like they are a golden opportunity missed. I really love the bestial brutality and pure savagery of the Beastmen. I feel like their army book could have a fair amount more variety and flexibility that really showcase their savage nature.
2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
From a purely visual view I think the current Minotaur models are kind of lack-luster. I wouldn't remove the unit from the game, but I'd like to see some more dynamic models.
3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
I'd like to see the Bretonnians get some kind of movable reliquary much like the crusaders used to wheel into battle. To me it would be a unit that had various powers depending on how you equipped it. I.e there would be one that geared more towards defensive and healing and another that was more offensive. Maybe have a few different pieces in the plastic kit that would make it stand out as one of those. This would be either guarded by Grail Pilgrims or perhaps elite-foot knights.

Petey
11-10-2012, 18:52
Actually on second thought i'd rewrite mordheim, i'd make most old warbands (not only the official and in rulebook ones) balanced somehow and also make a more natrual progression betwen mordheim > empire in flames > warhammer skrimish > small warhammer army as the warbands keep growing making it a more natural entry point for new players who want to get playing asap without having to paint a big army first. This would be inforced by adding a soft cap on the number of minatures ina warband rather than a hard one (each extra member helping the warband less than the previous one but cutting more into the warband upkeep or costing more to recruit). Id also add more random things,and remove a few restrictions, like having minotaur heroes or sellswords joining the warband as a possible advancement roll.

I just did a set of rules for making mordheim warbands with the existing eighth ed armybooks and rules if you re interested, they re a hit w my group.

Phazael
12-10-2012, 00:01
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

I would either write an Araby book or rewrite Beastmen. The first would be fun to do and you could get very creative. The second just needs someone who actually cares about the army to work on it.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

Skavenslaves. Most of the issues people have with the present rules stem from things this unit can abuse the crap out of. No model should cost 2 points, let alone one with commands and effective LD10, especially without a unit size cap.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

Toss up between Daemonic Chariots (the non character ones) and the Shaggoth Lord that used to exist in the Beastmen book.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

I would change Purple Sun to work against the Toughness stat, instead of Initiative. There is already one kill spell that targets STR (Dwellers) and two that Target Initiative, so one should penalize toughness (which would make more sense for death anyhow) to provide more balance. I think I would also make it so that undead could benefit from Steadfast in some manner. Like undead halve their crumble if they also count as steadfast. I think I would also let rear charges of any kind flat out negate steadfast so that if people want to put giant point denial deathstars on the table, they at least have to have support units to protect them and therefor think in the movement phase. Finally, I would bring back half VP for units only (not single models) to tone down some of the deathstar craziness thats been going on.


Mostly, I would rip off Matt Ward's beard and beat Cruddace to death with it. I think that alone would save the future editions from most of their problems.

DaemonReign
12-10-2012, 00:26
Mostly, I would rip off Matt Ward's beard and beat Cruddace to death with it.

Priceless!! :p

Rake
12-10-2012, 09:55
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

Create? Hands down Dogs of War. Re write... oh god... so many... but would probably go for Beastmen. They need the whole forest raider thing brought back...

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

Skavenslaves. Simple really.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

Pretty happy with current selection to be honest. No burning desire to add anything, but since I have to I would probably make it a dwarven zeppelin.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

Remove model from the game. Stupid idea. I want it gone. Replace with D3 wounds ony MR save and end of story.

After this egregious error has been corrected I would focus on the cannon v monster and rider interaction.

Ebon
12-10-2012, 18:50
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

Considered Welves but they don't so much need a new book as they need a new system (skirmishing army just doesn't work in an edition that puts the emphasis on infantry blocks) so probably Beastmen. I love the concept, like most of the models (Razorgore being an exception, I'd like minotaurs to have more fur too) but their current rules are just awful. The whole army needs a big overhaul and a focused direction.
I really would like to see a Dogs of War book too and I'd love to see a Chaos Dwarf book as well.


2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

The Soul Grinder just looks ridiculous and out of place in fantasy. I'm not a big fan of the trend toward every army having enormous centrepiece models either but I'm not nasty enough to say they all need to go.


3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

The Dwarf zeppelin is a really cool idea. I'd also like to see VCs get all the classic movie monsters (except mummies obviously). Give them werewolves, swamp things, Frankensteins and so on. Also, I'd like to see the Empire get halflings back, along with some nominal dwarf presence (maybe limited to a single unit of standard warriors) and the old Kislev units.


4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

The one someone mentioned above: Dispelling RiP spells on their base casting value. You should have to at least equal what was actually rolled to dispell an RiP spell.

Montegue
12-10-2012, 21:30
1) I would re-do the Dwarf army book. I'd like to add a good deal more variety in units, make amends for some of the over the top anti dwarf fluff out there, reclaim a hold or two, and set the Dwarfs on a path of expansion, like a Dwarfish renaissance.

2) I don't know that I would get rid of a unit, but I would change some of them. Most glaringly, I would make the Demonic ward save a base 6.

3) I would want to insert the Doomseekers back into the dwarf list.

4) I would change the rule that has cannon fire hit both rider and mount. This would go a long way to alleviate people's aversion to fielding such units.

DaemonReign
13-10-2012, 03:05
The one someone mentioned above: Dispelling RiP spells on their base casting value. You should have to at least equal what was actually rolled to dispell an RiP spell.

That was me. :) But are you sure you don't mean that you should have to equal the boosted casting value because you wrote rolled which seems a tad extreme if taken litterally. :p

Anyway, this thread has thus far started to present us with some average answers:

1 - Which Army Book would You re-write?
Looks like Beastmen & Wood Elves are mentioned by many.
2 - Which unit to remove?
SoulGrinder appears to be in the lead (followed by Skaven Slaves?).
3 - Which unit to add?
Dwarf Zeppelin mentioned by many..
4 - Rules-change?
A lot of spread, but ping-ponging cannon-balls is mentioned a lot.

The above is just a very loose interpretation of having followed this thread, so I hope I'm not completely off.. :shifty:

Warrior of Chaos
13-10-2012, 03:40
That was me. :) Anyway, this thread has thus far started to present us with some average answers.....The above is just a very loose interpretation of having followed this thread, so I hope I'm not completely off.. :shifty:

You beat me to it. I was looking at the trends as well. I started this thread because I wanted to see the consensus of what should be priority to repair based off of many opinions. :D

So here is the next wave of questions:

5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?
I think that Chaos Chosen with the warshrine combo is probably one of the worst.

6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?
Still not sure on this one myself, but I have seen a bunch other others debating (heavily) on some topics. I suppose the one that came up that I was involved discussing was if the VC lore attribute could heal characters. I personally feel it is clear enough, but I suppose I might make some edit to the effect in errata which spells out that it CAN.


7. Who needs a new job? By this I am asking which developer, painter, modeler, CEO, local hobby store employee of GW do you think should be let go/swapped in favor of new talent? I am not asking for this to turn into a hate-fest, but I would like to see where the angst really lies.
I do not believe that anyone needs to be "fired" per say, but I think that the CEO/board of directors need to be addressed regarding their business practices (cost, how they treat the Aussies for products..etc.)

Here is a quick and dirty rundown of the thread....it is messy, but you can kinda see what people are saying the most. That Soul Grinder is really, really hated...LOL. I read through everything and put some tick marks down in notepad as I went through to see what people were discussing and then cut/pasted everything to the forum. I may have missed the odd end here or there but it is pretty close.

1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
dwarf *****
woc**
ogres*
CD***
beasts****
vc*
DoC**
OnG*
Dogs of War *****
wood elf*******
empire**
norse**
araby***
Hordes of Chaos***
Tomb Kings***
Mordheim*
Skaven**
lizardmen*
Nippon*
HE*
Brets*
Cathay**
Ind*

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
soul grinder *************
demgryph*
organ gun*
special characters*
iron blaster*****
steam tank*
k'daai destroyer**
lion chariot*
razorgor*
mournfang cav*
dwarf juggernaut*
empire wagons**
dwarf tunneling machine*
bloodline VC other than Von C.*
gyrocopters**
cannons*
zoats*
TK Snakes*
empire mechanical horse*
minotaurs*
skaven slaves**

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
zeppelin *****
chosen knights*
doomseekers***
razorgor cav*
empire chaos cultists*
Skaven tunneling beast*
Mechanical Golems*
Kislev troops**
mummies*
Ziena Oestun*
werewolves **
Daemon Prince for DE*
HE drake riders*
Goblin Hewer**
VC Ghost Infantry*
Be'Lakor*
bears*
Return of CD and DoW.*
Black Orc Cav*
war wagon**
Bret Foot Knights**
Nagash*
Halflings ***
Forest Gobbo Inf. **
Knoblars riding goats (nice Jind)* LOL
bret reliquary*

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Monster get rank**
Fix Cannons Shooting *****
steadfast*******
Fix dispelling remains in play (dispel same as it was cast)**
Attack allocation*
fix difficult terrain (more difficult)**
Fear*
Strike first on the charge*
IF dispelled by IF on dispel**
Beginner and Advanced Player rulesets*
Bring back importance of skirmishers and fast cav*
eternal guard*
TLOS*
ASF*
Lore of Nehekhara*
fix Purple Sun*
Fix MR*
Get rid of spells that "remove from play"*

5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?
Chosen/Warshrine combo *

6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?
VC Lore Attribute healing characters *

7. Who needs a new job? By this I am asking which developer, painter, modeler, CEO, local hobby store employee of GW do you think should be let go/swapped in favor of new talent? I am not asking for this to turn into a hate-fest, but I would like to see where the angst really lies.
CEO/Board *

Ebon
13-10-2012, 08:15
That was me. :) But are you sure you don't mean that you should have to equal the boosted casting value because you wrote rolled which seems a tad extreme if taken litterally. :p

Sorry. That is what I meant, yes.


5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?

Since 8th dropped, probably Skaven slaves.


6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?

Drawing a blank on this one.


7. Who needs a new job? By this I am asking which developer, painter, modeler, CEO, local hobby store employee of GW do you think should be let go/swapped in favor of new talent? I am not asking for this to turn into a hate-fest, but I would like to see where the angst really lies.

Ward gets strict instructions to do all future books in the same way he did Necrons (although preferably without removing all the mustery in the process).
I'm sure Jervis is a nice bloke but I can't be the only person sick of his "everything is fantastic" wittering in every issue of WD.
I would double the size of the board and fill the additional spaces with random GW players (and they must be players, not just collectors), swapped for another group of random players every year. That means the players, acting in concert, can deadlock the board. Hopefully, that would lead to less vastly-above-inflation price hikes, less swapping perfectly acceptable materials for completely inferior ones (Finecrap) and a general attempt to get the board to understand the mindset of the players.
Oh, and I want to fire whoever made the call to get rid of anything resembling support for the veteran players.

lbecks
13-10-2012, 08:47
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?

Araby, Cathay, All those parts of the World that haven't been explored.


2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?

Soul Grinder.


3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?

All the units associated with question 1.


4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.

I don't play enough to have an opinion on this.


5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?

Same as question 4.


6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?

Same as question 4.


Bonus: 7. Who needs a new job? By this I am asking which developer, painter, modeler, CEO, local hobby store employee of GW do you think should be let go/swapped in favor of new talent? I am not asking for this to turn into a hate-fest, but I would like to see where the angst really lies.

Papa Kirby and his consultant wife Mama Kirby. Every stockholder that only cares about the dividend. The FC development team and any unskilled casters. Replace them with competent people. Hire more EM painters, convert existing hobby painters to terrain builders. Get rid of some of the accountants and replace them with a marketing team.

Urgat
13-10-2012, 09:18
5. skaven slaves. They single-handedly manage to make people whine about an otherwise fine rule (steadfast).

6. the ogre faq thing where Jervis says it should be this way, but no after all it's that way, I don't remember what it is exactly, but the very way to do if irks me regardless of the issue.

7. the heavy metal painters responsible for the beastmen range. I would say taht lately everything they d is really meh, but on the BM range, they managed to make everybody hate models that are otherwise quite fine.

Snake1311
13-10-2012, 14:35
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
Pretty certain I can produce a solid Dwarf book, since thats the army I've played the most. HE are the army that needs a new book really badly though, their current one is a mess from a gameplay perspective, and according so some HE players I've spoken to, a fluff perspective too.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Not keen on removing choice personally. I'd rather things get reworked when necessary, whether it be rules, model, or both

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Dwarf deathroller. We need swiftstrider here and there, and the most sensible way to get it in is in the form of a chariot.

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
Irresistable force. You should be getting magic off as a reward for managing your resources (dice and spells) well, not just throwing as many dice as you can at the spell u want and hoping for boxcars. How would I change it.....maybe double 6s give you an extra 'free' PD to add to your spell - and obviously soften the miscast table as a result

5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?
Dark elf combat characters on pegasi, with the pendadnt

6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?
There are literally dozens of these. GW FAQ support is terrible.

TheDungen
13-10-2012, 19:21
I just did a set of rules for making mordheim warbands with the existing eighth ed armybooks and rules if you re interested, they re a hit w my group.

I'd live to take a look at it. Please link it.

Warrior of Chaos
14-10-2012, 02:06
Papa Kirby and his consultant wife Mama Kirby. Every stockholder that only cares about the dividend. The FC development team and any unskilled casters. Replace them with competent people. Hire more EM painters, convert existing hobby painters to terrain builders. Get rid of some of the accountants and replace them with a marketing team.

I see you have previously given this much thought. :p


Ward gets strict instructions to do all future books in the same way he did Necrons (although preferably without removing all the mustery in the process).

^ This or...


...rip off Matt Ward's beard and beat Cruddace to death with it. I think that alone would save the future editions from most of their problems.

^ ...this happens. LOL

DaemonReign
14-10-2012, 06:55
5 - Most Abused Unit:
None in the 6 armies I have any real experience of. I would imagine Skaven Slaves, and I would imagine that they're just waay too cheap just like Skellies were too expensive there for a while.

6 - Fubar FAQ:
There are quite a few that could have been done with better precision [in wording] and some that I flat out disagree with. Most of all I can't defend the need for all these Errata/FAQ entries: GW should damn well invest the Resources into their rules-development necessary to eliminate all these bloopers. They should put 3+ co-writers/playtesters on each Army Book and let them hammer things out for 2 years, rather than what they do currently which [I imagine] is basically having one guy working for ~6 months.

7 - Who should go?
I'm gonna have to go with CEO/Board. I Think they should just finetune their over-all business philosophy. Eliminating the need for Errata's would be a part of this. Rules-creation with utter integrity would be Another (no more discounted *new* units, no more off-the-reservation nerfs to *old* units - just 'balanced' stuff through-and-through). Simply a more long-term approach, with less focus on the sales next month and more focus on the system's over-all reputation ten years from now.

yabbadabba
14-10-2012, 10:38
-snip- It seems to me you have missed off any responses that were "no change" or similar. Any reason why?

Urgat
14-10-2012, 11:04
5 - Most Abused Unit:
None in the 6 armies I have any real experience of. I would imagine Skaven Slaves, and I would imagine that they're just waay too cheap just like Skellies were too expensive there for a while.

6 - Fubar FAQ:
There are quite a few that could have been done with better precision [in wording] and some that I flat out disagree with. Most of all I can't defend the need for all these Errata/FAQ entries: GW should damn well invest the Resources into their rules-development necessary to eliminate all these bloopers. They should put 3+ co-writers/playtesters on each Army Book and let them hammer things out for 2 years, rather than what they do currently which [I imagine] is basically having one guy working for ~6 months.

7 - Who should go?
I'm gonna have to go with CEO/Board. I Think they should just finetune their over-all business philosophy. Eliminating the need for Errata's would be a part of this. Rules-creation with utter integrity would be Another (no more discounted *new* units, no more off-the-reservation nerfs to *old* units - just 'balanced' stuff through-and-through). Simply a more long-term approach, with less focus on the sales next month and more focus on the system's over-all reputation ten years from now.


DaemonReign, you seem to assume that they go in with the idea that they want to do FAQs. I think it's more a case of:
"ok, this time guys, I want no blumper!
-sure boss! We're gonna triplecheck every doublecheck!"

One month later...

"hello, you fine today?
-Nah... seen those punks on Warseer?
-What, they did it again?
-Yeah, they've found another loophole. I swear they must be actively looking for them.
-Damn, and here I thought that this time we had it all covered..."

I mean come on, they're humans. As long as there's rules that are absolutes (rules with "always" that turn out as "always excepted when nthat and that and that"), they will contradict each other occasionnally, people will find loopholes, and FAQs will be needed.

DaemonReign
14-10-2012, 11:19
I mean come on, they're humans.

Perfectly possible to Clean the rules up from loopholes and contradictions if you put enough Resources into it. At any rate there's just too much stuff; I'd accept/understand 2-3 things for each Army Book and ~10 for the BRB but pages upon pages of crap [that still leaves questions unresolved or unanswered] is just pathetic.
And it's not a super-human feat either. It basically just takes management and a clearly set ambition.
My impression is that GW probably lacks both, and I imagine it's rather conscious too: No clear tangible profit.

brynolf
15-10-2012, 00:53
1. If you could be a developer at GW, what Armybook would you want to be able to re-write/create?
The only books I actually care about are the ones used in our gaming group. So DoC, Dwarfs and DE are those that are left. Of those, dwarfs are probably in most dire need of a new book. They are a bit too bland for the moment.

2. What single unit do you dislike the most and would have it removed from the game?
Urr... I don't know. The Empire's robot horse is pretty stupid.

3. Is there a unit past, present or unrealized that you would add into the game?
Empire halflings. Or chaos halflings. Halflings for everyone!

4. What single rule irks you the most and how would you change it? Please explain.
I would remove Irresistible force. I think the magic phase would be much more interesting without it in its current form.

5. What single unit, based off of statline, abilities and synergies, point cost (whatever) tends to be abused the most?
From what I've heard, it's skaven slaves. But I have never seen any myself.

6. What FAQ have you or others had, that has not been answered (or answered adequately) that you would choose to answer? What would you say?
The new Empire book's detachment rules is in dire dire need of a FAQ. It's actually rather stunning that Gee-Dub haven't made one yet. Or, as I see it, the problem actually lies in the BRB:s description of Steadfast. So perhaps I should say the BRB.

Bonus: 7. Who needs a new job?
Sculptor Kev White needs a new job. At GW.

Warrior of Chaos
15-10-2012, 08:51
It seems to me you have missed off any responses that were "no change" or similar. Any reason why?

Not in particular, I was just looking at thoughts on changes. I can go back if you'd like and do a quick tally of votes for "stay the course". ;)