PDA

View Full Version : How am I wrong to be angry at GW



heliodorus04
16-08-2006, 21:13
Why am I wrong to be incensed at GWís incompetence?

I have three issues here: Time, clarity, and thoroughness.

GW takes too long to post a FAQ (or a Codex, or a rulebook), they write things that at best are ďfairly clear,Ē and without doubt, are negligently inadequate with regard to thoroughness.

I could deal with one of these three in any given publication, but all three, every time? Itís MADNESS and I canít understand why so many gamers (especially myself) put up with this. Thereís no excusing this consistent, demonstrable callousness to professional standards of writing/editing, and most especially, playtesting.

Iíve watched the threads about the new FAQ, and Iíve been patient and waited on my to form my own opinions. For the record, Iím a Tau player, and donít think we got hosed, really. Nids did, though.

Iím upset because it took them this long Ö to produce THAT? No way. Tell me this is an April Foolís joke, because I just canít believe anyone who considers themselves a professional game designer, technical writer, or editor, would put that out with any modicum of self-satisfaction. The only circumstance I could see that passing as understandable and acceptable is if the circumstances were dire Ė perhaps the week before a Grand Tournament, they need to make a quick, best guess type of ruling on some loopholes that were being exploited.

But itís taken them 4 months from the latest codex to come up with the stuff on the Tau and Tyranids. I just canít accept this.

For me, I have already refused to buy any more models except for Tau, to round out new elements in my army. I may very well be e-baying this army in the future just so I donít have to deal with this (yeah, I hear ya Ė go already!).

What Iíd like to see is some professional standard for design, playtesting, and publishing new material. Itís like theyíre in a private gaming club, and they all know what the rules mean, so they donít feel any reason to clarify their rules for the rest of us, and we can just go scratch and muddle through. I find it disrespectful to the players at worst, and at best, indicative of terrible standards and no pride in their work.

I donít want to be nice. I want to tell them that theyíve lost me as a customer, and I want millions of others to do the same, because that would get their attention.

ReDavide
16-08-2006, 21:20
Why am I wrong to be incensed at GW’s incompetence?You're not.

But just sitting there wallowing in rage is a waste of your time. Yes, you have a right to be angry. Decide how you'll respond to it. Responding by leaving in favor of another wargame company is fine. Responding by writing a professional letter to GW and then moving on with your life and making the best of the new rules with as much dignity as you can muster, is fine. But sitting their being self-satisfiedly outraged is pathetic. (I'm not saying you're doing this, just saying that it's a possible response I expect many people have, and a rather pathetic one at that.)

McMullet
16-08-2006, 22:00
Indeed. GW do a lot of displeasing things. Some of them make good business sense. Some of them are tolerable. This last set of FAQs is the proverbial straw that broke the Tyranid Warrior's back.

I don't like to be a "whiny" gamer, and I often find myself sticking up for GW to offer an alternative viewpoint to the constant slagging that they get on the internet. But this is indefensible. They'll be hearing from me.

Wraithbored
16-08-2006, 22:05
I also don't think you or anyone else is wrong of being angry or just miffed at GW.(then again one could bring up that annoying phrase "noone's forcing you to play")

I don't like whineing aswell but in all seriousness this last set of FAQ's doesn't even make bussiness sense, in the example of nids of which i own a decently sized army is that it's going to harm sales of all midweight nids.


Tau pathfinders will be a rare sight indeed as well.

Can anybody shed some retail sense into this because allas I don't see it.

Kamin_Majere
16-08-2006, 22:07
Lots of big words... if you send that to GW it will only confuse them.

Your not wrong for feeling this way. Theres nothing in the GW ruleset that could not be explained away in a good FAQ/errata. But they simply refuse to do it. They took some spanish FAQ that a regional manager more than likely made up and stuck it up as offical. It was bullocks. If wizards of the coast can do a comprehensive rule book with a game as convoluted as Magic then GW can easily do one for 40K. And the point that dont come up with playtesting should be FAQ'ed and errata'd more quickly that has happened in the current incarnation of the company

Overlord Krycis
16-08-2006, 22:10
Normally I'm completely unflapable when it comes to GW screwing up...but this time it really is inexcusable.
I've already wrote an email detailing my displeasure at the grossly inadequete "FAQs".
But I agree with ReDavide...just deal with it in an appropriate manner and get on with gaming.
That is, after all, why we put up with all the errors/problems/massively idiotic situations that GW find themselves doing frquently.

ReDavide
16-08-2006, 22:16
I don't like whineing aswell but in all seriousness this last set of FAQ's doesn't even make bussiness sense, in the example of nids of which i own a decently sized army is that it's going to harm sales of all midweight nids.

Careful. If GW let business sense dominate FAQ decisions, we'd be hearing even more shrieking from the fan base than we are now.

"Q: I play against Space Marines an awful lot, and always seem to lose. What can I do?
A: Perhaps you'd like to build an army of the Imperium's Finest!"

Baneboss
16-08-2006, 22:39
...I just can’t believe anyone who considers themselves a professional game designer, technical writer, or editor, would put that out with any modicum of self-satisfaction...

In regards of time and playtesting.

I am a Dowpro beta team member and you have no idea how long it took us to release a stable version. I joined team half year ago and in our recent version we still have little minor tweaks to do. It was a long way to go.

We used mostly original vanillia DoW statistics and tweaked them accordingly to punish any imbalance found in original. There was however a devil hidden. Every time something was purged another thing had to be tweaked.

Now imagine we had more or less 4 stable races to base from and "only" entire new race to add (IG) along with new units to every race. Seems pretty easy? NO! We also aimed to increase playability, tactics and all that was taken with release of WA. Now think that GW has to deal with a dozen races where everything must be tested because such codex will be in use for another 5-7 years. FAQs can only fix minor bugs.

While not supporting GW in their turtle slowness I understand them. Sometimes its hard to produce balanced product.

McMullet
16-08-2006, 22:46
It is the sheer poorness of the FAQ that disappoints me. The fact is, I'd prefer to have received no FAQ to the one we have now, even though an FAQ was needed for a lot things.

Dooks Dizzo
16-08-2006, 22:46
But just sitting there wallowing in rage is a waste of your time.

Wallowing in rage is never a waste of time.

Wallowing in despair might be, but not good old fashioned anger.

Kamin_Majere
16-08-2006, 22:46
@baneboss' comments

yes but that doesnt excuse the fact that a blind monkey could have typed that FAQ up in the MONTHS it took to release. GW has just gotten to where it does a **** poor job on things like this. I know time has to be spent on making the money machine work, but some support is not too much to ask. Even if GW just contracted the work out to a group of gamers that would do it for free or for a subscription to white dwarf. I know a hundred people that would be willing to help GW out on this.

Scour the Internet and find things that people ask about and put their heads together and come up with offical GW recognized answers for it all.

cav da man
16-08-2006, 22:47
i suggest take what you can from the FAQ's and then agree on you're own rules when you're playing in your group or store.

Wraithbored
16-08-2006, 23:04
Careful. If GW let business sense dominate FAQ decisions, we'd be hearing even more shrieking from the fan base than we are now.

"Q: I play against Space Marines an awful lot, and always seem to lose. What can I do?
A: Perhaps you'd like to build an army of the Imperium's Finest!"

URGH :eek: Right-o you sir are completely correct!

IncrediSteve
16-08-2006, 23:04
I have to disagree.

You can't deny that using any other company's miniatures is a drastic and blazing step down in quality. More like a headfirst [I]dive into a chasm down in quality. The closest you can come is a few that do resin casts, but those have nowhere near the modularity or thoroughness [there's that word again] and are nearly the same price, if not more expensive in some cases.

I think it's all a matter of perspective really. To me, GW rules are written in a pleasant, friendly tone, implying and often times outright saying "this is the core of how this should work, but if kinks show up, use common sense and fairness to sort it out, and above all, HAVE FUN". Heck, it even says that as a rule, the very first ******* rule in the whole book.

When both players abide by this, there are no problems. When both players goal is to have fun, there is no loser. And what's the big deal in being a loser anyway? Some people just can't seem to grasp the concept that someone has to lose [unless it's a draw of course]. Hmm, win or lose, that's a 50/50 shot, that means you've got just as much a chance of doing either. Getting upset/overly happy over whichever one happens to is ridiculous.

What is it with you people and always having to win? I don't just mean this in 40k, it applies to absolutely everything. So many people act like it's the end of the world if they lose anything, and get angry and upset over it. It's just not worth it, and is entirely immature and irrational. Sports, tabletop games, video games, tic-tac-toe, all of it's just for fun! Winning doesn't matter if you miss the point.

I know you're going to respond with "But IncrediSteve, tournaments yada-yada-cry-gripe-whine-complain, shake-fist-threaten". And what is it with Tournaments? Tournaments seem to be the epitome of this win-or-die mentality. Tournaments are taken overly serious to the extreme; shameless powergaming tactics are expected, every imaginable loophole is exploited, and I can't remember hearing anyone ever mention having fun in these serious style tournaments. Only moans of how much of a jack*** so and so armored company guy was, "8 STARCANNONS?!?!", so and so marked me for bad sportsmanship just because I won, etc. etc. and the whole thing sounds [and indeed for many is] simply miserable.

Games Workshop games are not meant for tournaments in my opinion. Just as the name implies, they are meant to be played in a game shop, or in a den; just an excuse to put some use to your model collection and have some fun with fellow hobbyists, cheering at miraculous acts of heroism, laughing at disastrous displays of misfortune, and generally having a good time. This is the way GW rules are written, and this is the way I hope they stay written.

These win/tournament obsessed people have been whining incessantly for a few years now that GW should write cold, official, hammer of the judge-style rules like many other game systems have. Then GW makes a few, and they all start yelling and complaining? To me, these FAQs are GW's way of saying "Fine!! THERE, you happy now?!" and giving people a taste of what it would actually be like if GW gave them what they're asking for.

And all this over the Tyranid Warrior and Zoanthrope being instakilled by S9 and 10 weapons? That doesn't make them useless at all. They're still mid-sized, cost effective [bearing in mind that the gribblies they oversee are very cheap] shock troops. And a normal army isn't composed of nothing but S9 and 10 weapons! If an opponent is focusing his lascannons on your Warriors, they're not focusing on that big multihundred point Carnifex of doom thats going to rip the snot of their lines once it gets there. Of course they'll die easily if you're only using them in groups of 3 scattered about your entire army. They should be used in broods of 6-9; anything that's min-maxed is going to be cannon fodder and a priority target. A Tyranid army should have a Hive Tyrant at it's center, two mid-sized broods of Warriors on the flanks, and zoanthropes bringing up the rear. The Warriors are a key ingredient of your army, not the whole point of it. Don't look at a unit as it sits, look at an army and what it is composed of. The best games are always with well planned strategic armies, not fire and forget powerhouses built for the sake of bragging rights.

I could go on, but I'll stop now since it's already quite long.

t-tauri
16-08-2006, 23:57
It is the sheer poorness of the FAQ that disappoints me. The fact is, I'd prefer to have received no FAQ to the one we have now, even though an FAQ was needed for a lot things.
So true.

I'm sorry Steve but it's reached the point where even the hardened GW fanboys of Warseer have had enough. The sheer arrogance of releasing that FAQ is a knee to the happy sacs (or other vulnerable area for lady gamers) of GW players everywhere. As McMullet says a simple read through of the rules area here or any other GW forum would have produced a more cogent set of questions and a set of responses more in keeping with the way the game has been played.

Can we say "PR disaster?"

Aegius
17-08-2006, 00:11
I have to disagree.

You can't deny that using any other company's miniatures is a drastic and blazing step down in quality. More like a headfirst [I]dive into a chasm down in quality. The closest you can come is a few that do resin casts, but those have nowhere near the modularity or thoroughness [there's that word again] and are nearly the same price, if not more expensive in some cases.

I think it's all a matter of perspective really. To me, GW rules are written in a pleasant, friendly tone, implying and often times outright saying "this is the core of how this should work, but if kinks show up, use common sense and fairness to sort it out, and above all, HAVE FUN". Heck, it even says that as a rule, the very first ******* rule in the whole book.

When both players abide by this, there are no problems. When both players goal is to have fun, there is no loser. And what's the big deal in being a loser anyway? Some people just can't seem to grasp the concept that someone has to lose [unless it's a draw of course]. Hmm, win or lose, that's a 50/50 shot, that means you've got just as much a chance of doing either. Getting upset/overly happy over whichever one happens to is ridiculous.

What is it with you people and always having to win? I don't just mean this in 40k, it applies to absolutely everything. So many people act like it's the end of the world if they lose anything, and get angry and upset over it. It's just not worth it, and is entirely immature and irrational. Sports, tabletop games, video games, tic-tac-toe, all of it's just for fun! Winning doesn't matter if you miss the point.

I know you're going to respond with "But IncrediSteve, tournaments yada-yada-cry-gripe-whine-complain, shake-fist-threaten". And what is it with Tournaments? Tournaments seem to be the epitome of this win-or-die mentality. Tournaments are taken overly serious to the extreme; shameless powergaming tactics are expected, every imaginable loophole is exploited, and I can't remember hearing anyone ever mention having fun in these serious style tournaments. Only moans of how much of a jack*** so and so armored company guy was, "8 STARCANNONS?!?!", so and so marked me for bad sportsmanship just because I won, etc. etc. and the whole thing sounds [and indeed for many is] simply miserable.

Games Workshop games are not meant for tournaments in my opinion. Just as the name implies, they are meant to be played in a game shop, or in a den; just an excuse to put some use to your model collection and have some fun with fellow hobbyists, cheering at miraculous acts of heroism, laughing at disastrous displays of misfortune, and generally having a good time. This is the way GW rules are written, and this is the way I hope they stay written.

These win/tournament obsessed people have been whining incessantly for a few years now that GW should write cold, official, hammer of the judge-style rules like many other game systems have. Then GW makes a few, and they all start yelling and complaining? To me, these FAQs are GW's way of saying "Fine!! THERE, you happy now?!" and giving people a taste of what it would actually be like if GW gave them what they're asking for.

And all this over the Tyranid Warrior and Zoanthrope being instakilled by S9 and 10 weapons? That doesn't make them useless at all. They're still mid-sized, cost effective [bearing in mind that the gribblies they oversee are very cheap] shock troops. And a normal army isn't composed of nothing but S9 and 10 weapons! If an opponent is focusing his lascannons on your Warriors, they're not focusing on that big multihundred point Carnifex of doom thats going to rip the snot of their lines once it gets there. Of course they'll die easily if you're only using them in groups of 3 scattered about your entire army. They should be used in broods of 6-9; anything that's min-maxed is going to be cannon fodder and a priority target. A Tyranid army should have a Hive Tyrant at it's center, two mid-sized broods of Warriors on the flanks, and zoanthropes bringing up the rear. The Warriors are a key ingredient of your army, not the whole point of it. Don't look at a unit as it sits, look at an army and what it is composed of. The best games are always with well planned strategic armies, not fire and forget powerhouses built for the sake of bragging rights.

I could go on, but I'll stop now since it's already quite long.




I couldn't agree more. thanks for this post. I only wish that I could put together an argument as intelligent as this.

cailus
17-08-2006, 02:09
You can't deny that using any other company's miniatures is a drastic and blazing step down in quality. More like a headfirst dive into a chasm down in quality. The closest you can come is a few that do resin casts, but those have nowhere near the modularity or thoroughness [there's that word again] and are nearly the same price, if not more expensive in some cases..

Quality my bum. My experience with GW metal models is that for the most part they have some sort of problem be it poor sculpting, over fragile etc - e.g. XV-88's, XV-15, Killer Kans, Flamers of Tzeentch, Big Mek (re: the piping from arm to backpack), Daemonettes etc

Plastics are generally better.



I think it's all a matter of perspective really. To me, GW rules are written in a pleasant, friendly tone, implying and often times outright saying "this is the core of how this should work, but if kinks show up, use common sense and fairness to sort it out, and above all, HAVE FUN". Heck, it even says that as a rule, the very first ******* rule in the whole book.

When both players abide by this, there are no problems. When both players goal is to have fun, there is no loser. And what's the big deal in being a loser anyway? Some people just can't seem to grasp the concept that someone has to lose [unless it's a draw of course]. Hmm, win or lose, that's a 50/50 shot, that means you've got just as much a chance of doing either. Getting upset/overly happy over whichever one happens to is ridiculous.

What is it with you people and always having to win? I don't just mean this in 40k, it applies to absolutely everything. So many people act like it's the end of the world if they lose anything, and get angry and upset over it. It's just not worth it, and is entirely immature and irrational. Sports, tabletop games, video games, tic-tac-toe, all of it's just for fun! Winning doesn't matter if you miss the point.

Yet people in stores and gaming clubs also play to win at any cost. I always tell the story of my 1st gaming club where 85% of the players cheated. Winning is all that matters to a lot of people in this day and age.


I know you're going to respond with "But IncrediSteve, tournaments yada-yada-cry-gripe-whine-complain, shake-fist-threaten". And what is it with Tournaments? Tournaments seem to be the epitome of this win-or-die mentality. Tournaments are taken overly serious to the extreme; shameless powergaming tactics are expected, every imaginable loophole is exploited, and I can't remember hearing anyone ever mention having fun in these serious style tournaments. Only moans of how much of a jack*** so and so armored company guy was, "8 STARCANNONS?!?!", so and so marked me for bad sportsmanship just because I won, etc. etc. and the whole thing sounds [and indeed for many is] simply miserable.

Power gaming is prevalent everwhere as is rule lawyering and other unfun things. As I said, our society prefers winners so we all want to win.



Games Workshop games are not meant for tournaments in my opinion. Just as the name implies, they are meant to be played in a game shop, or in a den; just an excuse to put some use to your model collection and have some fun with fellow hobbyists, cheering at miraculous acts of heroism, laughing at disastrous displays of misfortune, and generally having a good time. This is the way GW rules are written, and this is the way I hope they stay written.

I think they are written to sell little toy soldiers. The rules get dumbed down as time goes on so that more people buy the soldiers.

If it wasn't for the stupid game I would never have brought or painted any models. Many other people are in this same boat.




These win/tournament obsessed people have been whining incessantly for a few years now that GW should write cold, official, hammer of the judge-style rules like many other game systems have. Then GW makes a few, and they all start yelling and complaining? To me, these FAQs are GW's way of saying "Fine!! THERE, you happy now?!" and giving people a taste of what it would actually be like if GW gave them what they're asking for.

If this is what they do, then this is really stupid business practice. I've never heard of a company punishing its customers.

You give GW too much credit. They make mistakes.

The FAQs are more a lack of analysis or planning. Look at the Pathfinder Scout ruling - surely there is no sanity in giving a part of a unit the Scout USR and not giving the same rule to the other part which you have to take.

It means that Pathfinders cannot be deployed initially under Escalation even though the Scout rule allows them that. The Devilfish transport doesn't get the Scout rule but the Pathfinders do. So what is the point of the compulsory Devilfish?

asmodai_dark86
17-08-2006, 03:43
When is the gaming community going to admit that we are, to put it simply, the slaves to GW?

Yes I'm sad to see the company is becoming a fading glory compared to what some of us veterans remember it 15, 10, hell even 5 years ago.

At the end of the day ask yourself these questions
Does wargaming make you happy?
Do you really need something official to run your life?
Would another two price rises put you off?

If the answer to any of those is yes then get out now and save your cash. Theres other wargames, perhaps even cheaper wargames. But at the end of the day nothing feels finer then painting up a marine, whacking a bolter in his hand, and laughing as he mows down your opponents men.

A few years back I used to run a club. Now this wasnt at a wealthy school so codexes were slim pickings (I managed to get my hands on each one in turn due to my position - I'd be fair). A few times we were short of rule books. In fact we had non. So then it became hilariously fun as the people who need the rules under there pillow got laughed out of the building, and all manner of insanity broke out.
Player 1 'Hey can I ram his rhino with my land speeder'
Me 'Pfft yeh!'
Player 2 'But.. its not in the rules!'
Me 'Yeh but it'll be cool.. whack the blast template on that rhino and everything under it suffers a wound on a 4+'

Thats wargaming. Not pi$$ing about with FAQ's, but having a laugh and fun. Remember those days? Fun.

IncrediSteve
17-08-2006, 05:51
If it wasn't for the stupid game I would never have brought or painted any models. Many other people are in this same boat.



If the models don't matter to you, then another hobby system, perhaps Flames of War, would probobly be better for you. The Flames of War rulebook is free, and the rules are blatantly designed after 40k with the proper tweakings to make it fit World War II, so it wouldn't be too much of an adjustment. I haven't read over the rules extensively, so I can't tell you how the pricings compare, all I know is that it's about $60 for a mechanized grenadier platoon with 3 halftracks and accompanying squads of grenadiers, pewter, about the same scale as Epic.

cailus
17-08-2006, 08:20
If the models don't matter to you, then another hobby system.

Just out of curiosity do you work for GW? No offense but you seem to be following the company line of "if you don't like it, then you're in the wrong hobby."

grickherder
17-08-2006, 08:35
You can't deny that using any other company's miniatures is a drastic and blazing step down in quality.

You bet I can. One has to have their heads pretty much stuck... in the sand in order to have missed what's been released by other miniature companies over the last 5 years. Reaper, Rackham, Hasslefree, Heresy, Black Scorpion and on and on and on. It takes a bit of digging, by I'd highly recommend checking out www.theminiaturespage.com and find out what you've been missing out on.

Some pictures:
http://www.blackscorpionminiatures.com/images/USM/USM_USM14_1.jpg
Black Scorpion Marines
-
http://www.blackscorpionminiatures.com/images/TOMB/TOMB_TOMB4_1.jpg
Black Scorpion Tombstone series Cowboys
-
http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/gallery/26200458e4fad9b4eb599676054f5a5f.jpg
Hasslefree Grymn (space dwarves)
Many more here:
http://www.hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/gallery.php?gallery_id=25
-
http://www.heresyminiatures.com/images/hm011_1.jpg
Heresy Tunnel dweller
-

continued...

grickherder
17-08-2006, 08:37
http://www.heresyminiatures.com/images/lurkers1.jpg
Heresy Lurkers
-

And Let's not forget Corvus Belli's Infinity series:
http://www.infinitythegame.com/eng/galeria.asp

But if your criteria for quality is solely limited to "must be multipiece cartoony plastics" then yeah, GW's all you've got.


More like a headfirst dive into a chasm down in quality.

LOL! The ones I showed you were just off the top of my head with a tiny bit of digging. Tip of the iceberg, so to speak.

Seriously, check out http://www.theminiaturespage.com and find out about a much larger and better world.

I'd also highly suggest checking out Colonel Marble's Sci-Fi and Fantasy minaitures review on Youtube.com:

http://youtube.com/profile?user=ColMarbles

Grick

Archaon
17-08-2006, 09:29
Games Workshop games are not meant for tournaments in my opinion. Just as the name implies, they are meant to be played in a game shop, or in a den; just an excuse to put some use to your model collection and have some fun with fellow hobbyists, cheering at miraculous acts of heroism, laughing at disastrous displays of misfortune, and generally having a good time. This is the way GW rules are written, and this is the way I hope they stay written.

Numerous GW officials have repeatedly stated that the rules are not designed for tournament play but rather for friendly games but i believe this is just a convenient excuse.

I'm not a big tournament players.. i go to maybe 5-6 tournaments a year and only one of those is outside of my region. I go there because it is also well organized and civil.. many powergaming aspirations are halted in their tracks.

Now i play with my friends at our places and these are all great guys.. they are my friends but when we play both want to win. Simple as that.. the focus is not winning but to have fun and an interesting game but at the end we also want to win.
Now the problem is that even with my friends and friendly games we've come up with situations which gave us a headache because the rules weren#t clear and either side had their own interpretation so sometimes we got into a rather heated argument - just because the rules are inconsistent and not that tightly written.

Imagine the games between people who don't know each other that well when doing a pickup game in a store or even on tournaments where there are no restrictions (GW Tournaments for example).

The problem is, as someone already wrote, that within GW all the designers and playtesters know the intent of the rules and are playing accordingly.. everybody outside doesn't and they are the customers.
GW has a very hard time admitting mistakes and FAQs are just that.. admittance of a mistake and the correction of that.

Every good PC game i know had several patches released.. most of them due to technical problems but also to tweak gaming imbalances. Blizzard for example is quite well known for their balance tweaks.. sometimes several years after the game stopped selling in big quantities because they believe there's till work to be done after they see how players are using their products. If there's an imbalance found they correct it rather fast (for a gaming company) so the rest of the players won't suffer.

Now GW just won't do that because in their arrogance they believe their games to be perfect (or at least good enough) and they don't need tweaking while everybody who played the game for at least 6 months can tell you that there are areas which need cleaning up or a rewording of a rule.

This is just sloppy games design and ruleswriting and it would give them one hell of a boost if between editions they would issue a grand FAQ on maybe a yearly basis to fix problems players are reporting all around the world.
But that would mean investing some serious money to monitor, develop and write the FAQ.. maybe even hire an extra guy or two just for that but it think it would be well worth it.
What fun is it to buy their armies and then having problems in many games because of their sloppy rules?

idinos
17-08-2006, 09:31
Just out of curiosity do you work for GW? No offense but you seem to be following the company line of "if you don't like it, then you're in the wrong hobby."

Ahhh, the refuge of the unimaginative, accusing the other person of working for the company. It is good to see that freedom of thought and a nice debate only apply when people are condemning GW. Otherwise they must be employees or something!

Also, the company line makes perfect sense. You get into a hobby because you like it. If you don't, you are indeed in the wrong hobby and you should stop participating in it. Personally, I don't like basketball, so I don't play it. With your logic, I should be on the courts every Friday night and complain about the size of the hoops, the weight of the ball, and moan on how the introduction of zonal defence has destroyed the game.

I did not like a couple of the new rulings either. It is not the end of the world, nor do I sit in my armchair, fuming at GW because they made some changes to the game. Plus, you need to understand that GW isn't out there to "get" you. They introduced some clarifications, some people are happy about them, some aren't. Could they have done a more thorough job? Of course. Would it have made those people who are moaning now happy? Probably not, especially as a lot seem to be suffering from a persecution syndrome, with GW trying to destroy their enjoyment of the game because it hates them personally.

Bombot
17-08-2006, 10:13
When someone says such Comical Ali-style propaganda points like using any other company’s miniatures is a “headfirst dive into a chasm down in quality”, it’s hardly surprising if they get accused of working for the company.

I agree with IncrediSteve’s point that wargames make crap tournament games, but he oversold the GW miniatures.

yerpo
17-08-2006, 10:42
What is it with you people and always having to win? I don't just mean this in 40k, it applies to absolutely everything. So many people act like it's the end of the world if they lose anything, and get angry and upset over it. It's just not worth it, and is entirely immature and irrational. Sports, tabletop games, video games, tic-tac-toe, all of it's just for fun! Winning doesn't matter if you miss the point.

Sorry, but you're over-generalising the gaming population. Enjoying this game to me (and, dare I say, to the majority of people who care about it) means being able to compare players' tactical abilities (plus looking at well painted minis while doing it). The last time I checked this was a tabletop game of tactics and strategy. The ruleset should be no more than a tool for doing it and not, I repeat, not the purpose of playing. Now, tell me, how the ******* am I supposed to use that tool if it's so incompetently designed?!

Please stop making excuses for GW's poor decisions until you can give me an answer to that question.

Promethius
17-08-2006, 10:55
In reply to the original post, I have to agree that editing in GW publications is abysmal. Spelling and gramatical errors abound. Words are used out of context in a sentance (no doubt as a result of spell-check errors) and are not picked up on (for example, there might be changed to their). In any given Black Library publication, I will tend to come across at least three obvious mistakes (and that's on a good day). Personally, I would be embaressed to have my name down as the editor for any of those novels. That GW can print a novel or a codex with such obvious mistakes is a sign that either they really don't care about quality, or that they are simply incompetant. I'm not sure which option I prefer.

As far as the FAQs are concerned, I find it hard to feel the same passion that a lot of other gamers are displaying. Personally, I don't max out on str. 9 weapons, so it wouldn't affect me, but I certainly agree that "immune to instant kill" should be "immune to instant kill", not some kind of compromise. I suppose the real problem that people have is that this has been introduced without explaination, quite late after the codex release, and feels like a very low priority for GW (I suspect that some people still believe that GW is in the business of supporting their wargames, rather than simply selling models). As for the tournament aspect, there has always been a divide between tournament gamers and 'fun' gamers, but I think ultimately that clearly written rules benefit everyone.

Sorry if that post sounds a little pesimistic.

hairyman
17-08-2006, 11:39
Games Workshop games are not meant for tournaments in my opinion. Just as the name implies, they are meant to be played in a game shop, or in a den; just an excuse to put some use to your model collection and have some fun with fellow hobbyists, cheering at miraculous acts of heroism, laughing at disastrous displays of misfortune, and generally having a good time. This is the way GW rules are written, and this is the way I hope they stay written.

These win/tournament obsessed people have been whining incessantly for a few years now that GW should write cold, official, hammer of the judge-style rules like many other game systems have. Then GW makes a few, and they all start yelling and complaining? To me, these FAQs are GW's way of saying "Fine!! THERE, you happy now?!" and giving people a taste of what it would actually be like if GW gave them what they're asking for.



Spot on. I'd much prefer GW rulebooks to read like the rules for "oi, dats my leg" than have them read like a carefully compiled legal document. There's no rules problem or quirky situation that can't be resolved by either a swift dice roll, or by making up your own house rules.... either way the application of common sense should see you right.

Gaebriel
17-08-2006, 12:12
Whatever the intend of GW's rules, I would like it better if a product I bought was less error-ridden. And if I got the impression that the entity I bought from wanted to clear these errors up asap (customer service comes to mind). And as M:TG shows, a game thoroughly designed on mathematical priciples can be quite tight - it's no accident that many successfull game-designers are mathematicians...

Sandals
17-08-2006, 12:14
on the subject of proof reading, i don't think many of the high ups in GW bother. this may be a gross exaggeration, but i doubt any of them have university degrees in english. basing this on my store manager, he started to work for the company at 16 and has never done anything else. his spelling ang grammer is awful and to make this worse he doesn't care!

when i worked there, i was constantly proof reading posters that were to be put up and finding mistakes. when i pointed them out the response i always got was, "oh that doesn't matter no-one's going to notice."

WTF!!!!

I noticed for a start!

now whenever i go in (which is quite regularly as i am still good friends with the staff) i can look around and see literally dozens of mistakes on posters that are supposed to be advertising events to thier customers (read kids). i mean, the poster advertising the new warhammer release says it is out on Saturday 8th September, and if you look on your calanders i would now like to know which edition he's advertising!

I think the problem is the attitude rather than anything specificly aimed at the figures or rules.

Jedi152
17-08-2006, 12:20
I had to point out a big laminated sign to staff at Warhammer World (where people will be coming from all over the country to admire the home of the hobby) that mentioned the "Emporer".

Madness.

Bombot
17-08-2006, 12:20
now whenever i go in (which is quite regularly as i am still good friends with the staff) i can look around and see literally dozens of mistakes on posters that are supposed to be advertising events to thier customers (read kids). i mean, the poster advertising the new warhammer release says it is out on Saturday 8th September, and if you look on your calanders i would now like to know which edition he's advertising!

Do you mean 'their' perhaps? ;)

Sorry, donít normally do this but couldnít resist this time!

McMullet
17-08-2006, 12:22
Spot on. I'd much prefer GW rulebooks to read like the rules for "oi, dats my leg" than have them read like a carefully compiled legal document. There's no rules problem or quirky situation that can't be resolved by either a swift dice roll, or by making up your own house rules.... either way the application of common sense should see you right.
I'd rather use common sense or a dice roll than the new FAQs, that's for sure.

Normally, I'd be agreeing with hairyman or IncrediSteve, but there is a limit. GW needs to produce something for us to work with. If we take this argument about common sense, playing for fun, etc., to its conclusion, then why do we need any rules? Why not just put minis on the table and have a role-play battle, rather than faffing about measuring stuff and rolling dice?

That could be fun, actually. However, on other occasions, I might want to play a game, a strategy game, that needs some rules. It needs rules that are reasonably clear, and as I stated in the letter I'm writing to GW about this, if they supply rules for a strategy game that are unclear, they have supplied a defective product. A defective product should be repaired or refunded.

The purpose of FAQs is to make life easier for gamers. Rather than having to stop playing for a big argument every time there is a some confusion, or a rule doesn't cover the situation, or is worded badly, we just look at the GW errata docs, resolve the question and move on. Thus, we have fun playing the game, rather than arguing about stuff. The new FAQs represent, in many cases, the decision that would be reached by just the kind of "play-to-win" opponent that everyone hates to play against.

I don't expect perfect rules. I just like to play games, not discuss their rules at every turn. As far as the current FAQ goes, it is, as I have said before, worse than no FAQ. I've gotten nowhere with my nids, but if I was I would've been happy to work the rules out with my opponent before every game. "I think spore mines should explode if they deepstrike onto an enemy, that makes sense doesn't it?" "sure" "I don't mind taking IB test for my Carnifex, but it can't fall back if it fails as it's fearless. Make sense to you?" etc...

Now, however, instead of working out the way the rules work with common sense, I have to contend with someone who's read these new FAQs - some of which make rulings (like the nit-picky synapse instant death thing) that, if someone had said them to me before a game, would've prompted me to apologise and not play them. That's my problem. Not that the FAQs aren't good enough, but that they actually make the game worse, more nitpicky.

hairyman
17-08-2006, 12:55
Fair points there Mr Mullet, but....


That's my problem. Not that the FAQs aren't good enough, but that they actually make the game worse, more nitpicky.

I think that's what IncrediSteve was trying to point out... that the FAQs are nitpicky, arsey, pedantic and crap precisely because people clamour for cast iron certainty and cold, watertight logic in GW rules nowadays. Tournaments and "serious" playing of toy soldiers mean the letter rather than the flavour of the rules become predominant, as people (in their own odd little heads) turn a fun pastime into a pseudo-Olympian pursuit. The FAQ's in all their nitpicking glory - which do, I agree, make the game worse - are a sad reflection of that. As you said:


The new FAQs represent, in many cases, the decision that would be reached by just the kind of "play-to-win" opponent that everyone hates to play against.


The course of the game, in this respect anyway, has been as much steered by gamers as by GW. It's the gamers who want the tournaments and endless army composition forums and tactics boards and all the rest; and this trend towards wanting a professional, analytical and precise set of rules to go with their oh-so serious hobby, rather than the back of an envelope style rules of "the good old days", inevitably changes the game, and the surrounding FAQ's and rules decisions, to reflect the new playing enviroment. An enviroment, in the main, that's been initially created by gamers and not by the designers.

Grimshawl
17-08-2006, 14:21
If your implying that the gamers are at fault for this travesty of a FAQ I have to ask just how do you come up with that?

GW wrote this drivil, GW put it up instead of something better thought out.

McMullet
17-08-2006, 14:28
I think that's what IncrediSteve was trying to point out... that the FAQs are nitpicky, arsey, pedantic and crap precisely because people clamour for cast iron certainty and cold, watertight logic in GW rules nowadays. Tournaments and "serious" playing of toy soldiers mean the letter rather than the flavour of the rules become predominant, as people (in their own odd little heads) turn a fun pastime into a pseudo-Olympian pursuit. The FAQ's in all their nitpicking glory - which do, I agree, make the game worse - are a sad reflection of that.

It doesn't have to be like that, however. Asking for clarification, as I say, just makes playing people easier. If something comes up in a game and it's been dealt with in an FAQ, whether it's a friendly game or a tournament (not that the two are mutually exclusive, coughcarnagecough), it makes life easier. No, I don't want rules consisting of a series of 8000 bullet points of convoluted e-prime. However, if there's a point in the rules that often causes confusion, there's no harm in asking GW to give an "official" interpretation of it. It just makes life a bit simpler, and it doesn't stop you being creative when you fancy a laugh or somethuing really weird happens. ;)

To suggest that GW have produced nitpicky FAQs to punish us for wanting them, or because they think that's what we want, is not onlyu unfair to those of us who believe that GW should produce a useable product, it's also wrong. If we look at the Tyranid FAQ, we have three distinct types of interpretation:


Synapse/ID immunity. Against the intent of the rules (this is fairly certain, I think, though I will add a "seemingly") and using the wording of the rule incorrectly. "Instant death by a weapon double toughness" is used a lot to describe the general rule "Instant death caused by a weapon of double or more toughness", for example in Codex: Necrons. I won't go on about this, it's been done to death already. Basically, this is the "nitpicker's assessment".
Spore mines Deep Striking onto enemies. The obvious intent of DSing these guys is to get them to land on the opposition, however, by the lettor of the rules, if they successfully do this they are destroyed. They are destroyed, not they explode. However, the FAQ response is the common sense, "Jeez, they're supposed to explode! Come on... :rolleyes:"
IB/fearless. A new, made up rule. It seems a bit odd, but it's OK I guess. I can live with it, but it's completely different to the above two rulings.Therein lies my problem. If, from now on, all GW FAQs are nipicking ruleslawyer's FAQs, fine, I can ignore them. I can use my common sense, it;s no big deal. But within the same document, we have three different approaches: Look at the rule wording without any common sense, use common sense and ignore wording, make up new rule to cover the situation. The last one there is OK I guess, and may be necessary sometimes, though they could think it through better than they did in this case. However, the first two are two completely opposed ways of approaching the issue. Hence, my assessment of this set of FAQs as being very poor quality.


The course of the game, in this respect anyway, has been as much steered by gamers as by GW. It's the gamers who want the tournaments and endless army composition forums and tactics boards and all the rest; and this trend towards wanting a professional, analytical and precise set of rules to go with their oh-so serious hobby, rather than the back of an envelope style rules of "the good old days", inevitably changes the game, and the surrounding FAQ's and rules decisions, to reflect the new playing enviroment. An enviroment, in the main, that's been initially created by gamers and not by the designers.

Having a more competitive environment, as long as it remains friendly, does not preclude people using common sense. It's a matter of keeping the competition one between strategy, and not rules-lawyering. I think you're right that this is a product of people taking the game too seriously - As long as people believe that winning a game of 40K makes their willy bigger they will keep trying to win at all costs, even that of the game being fun. However, I don't think that this attitude is so prevalent that it will make GW do this. Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm just fortunate that most games I participate in or watch are played in a good spirit, but I think most people who want FAQs just want them to make their games more hassle-free.

hairyman
17-08-2006, 14:41
Fairy snuff... some good points there, sir.

IncrediSteve
17-08-2006, 16:28
Now, tell me, how the ******* am I supposed to use that tool if it's so incompetently designed?!


Well, a good first step is to calm down. It's hard to use any tool when you're steaming and frothing at the mouth. Next, if you buy a tool and find it has defects, you either need to fix that tool [not as hard as you'd like to think] or buy from a different tool company in the future.


Over-exageration occurs in equal amounts of both sides of any argument as it's a classic and simple way of stating your opinion, and making things appear extreme can be more persuasive. Everyone screaming their heads off is definately doing the same thing.


@Grickherder: As for the quality of miniautres, I feel that you only proved my point. To me, those models look like crap [except the first one with modern combat desert troops, they were pretty nifty] and just don't inspire me the way GW stuff does. Sure, my use of such extreme words like "undeniable" to describe GW miniatures is pretty one sided, but that's the way I feel. I've seen and considered other miniature ranges, but to they just don't compare. Perhaps I should start all of my posts with the disclaimer "WARNING: This passage contains opinions of an individual which may or may not be the most accurate or representative of the overall population and should not be considered legally binding or truth-declaring in any way. By reading the message below you accept the terms and conditions of not taking it for the proclaimed word of god and keeping things in perspective." Actually, I'll make that my Sig.


I only defend GW because the popular thing to do here seems to be bashing them with wantan abandon, and these poor FAQs [note that never once did I defend the actual FAQs as being good] shouldn't be taken to the extremes everyone has been. GWs resources are stretched pretty darn thin, especially now that they've bought all those machines they've been bragging about, and the rumours of a flopped Star Wars miniature game. These FAQs aren't the toilsome labors of the entire company, they were just put up by one random web guy who noticed "hey, we don't have any FAQs, I ought to do something about that." Once anyone of actual importance finds out about this hooplah, I'm sure we'll get real ones, or revert back to the FAQless "figure it out yourself" playing field we had before.

McMullet
17-08-2006, 16:44
I only defend GW because the popular thing to do here seems to be bashing them with wantan abandon, and these poor FAQs [note that never once did I defend the actual FAQs as being good] shouldn't be taken to the extremes everyone has been.

As I've said before I often find myself sticking up for GW if only to avoid the unbroken strings of "I hate GW!" "Yeah, me too! They suck!" backslapping you get in threads that start with a complaint. Likewise, a few poorly written FAQs, even very bad ones like these, aren't the end of the world. Hopefully people I play will use some common dog and ignore them, and if not there's no reason I can't still have fun.

However, I still feel moved to complain in this case. Hopefully I can complain without saying, "OMG GW suxx0rz!!!!!!1", and indeed, if I (or anyone else) starts that sort of pointless whining they might as well save their breath, as it will achieve nowt whatsoever. I suppose I am "angry" with GW, but not to the extent that I lose my composure.

Good on you for offering an alternative viewpoint though, it wouldn't be much of a discussion without one. :)


These FAQs aren't the toilsome labors of the entire company, they were just put up by one random web guy who noticed "hey, we don't have any FAQs, I ought to do something about that." Once anyone of actual importance finds out about this hooplah, I'm sure we'll get real ones, or revert back to the FAQless "figure it out yourself" playing field we had before.

You may be right about the origin of the FAQ. The highly variable style of the answers suggests to me that they're compiled from answers given by (various of) the "roolboyz" rather than from a member of the development team. I hope you're right about them changing, but I'll be letting them know my views to be on the safe side.

yerpo
17-08-2006, 17:07
Well, a good first step is to calm down. It's hard to use any tool when you're steaming and frothing at the mouth. Next, if you buy a tool and find it has defects, you either need to fix that tool [not as hard as you'd like to think] or buy from a different tool company in the future.

You're right about exaggeration, it probably applies to my tone as well as your over-generalisation. The point is, that this isn't as much an issue about the GW's latest mistake as it's about the GW's attitude to people who play their game and buy their products. It really isn't that difficult to invent house rules or ignore the most nonsensical ones, but that approach is limited to your usual opponents. As poorly writen those FAQs are, they represent the official ruleset and it's really not my job to persuade people about what I think would have more sense. So when I say I'm angry at GW, I'm merely expressing my concern about the game I love and wouldn't readily change it to another for a lot of reasons, mixed with the realisation that I cannot make them do a better job designing it. This is why I'm not wrong being 'angry' at GW.

Sandals
17-08-2006, 18:24
Do you mean 'their' perhaps? ;)

Sorry, donít normally do this but couldnít resist this time!

Damn!!! I was sooo careful...:D

Zzarchov
17-08-2006, 18:49
now, to be fair here, everyone is screaming how this makes "no business sense" but it does.

These issues may not seem unablanced to you, but I've seen them abused and it made me nearly want to quit with all these unbeatable cheese-tactics.


1.) Pathfinders are still fine, all that you lose is 6 inches of movement from their first turn starting location and the ability to have a devilfish start with the "skimmer moving fast rule" (which with the tau upgrades is quite powerful)

2.) Landspeeders are still fine, now a cheap HB landspeeder can't just deepstrike behind all your tanks with nothing you can do about it. They have to use tactics.

3.) Nids, ya warriors got screwed abit, they are still usuable but not as powerful as before, but you can still get major usage out of them, the simple fact that they are synapse creatures whom you can give jetpacks/wings too means they have a use, not in a direct combat but as an emergency force to keep synapse. And its not so annoying to have the unstobaly ravenors and underpriced Zoanthropes shrugging off way too much firepower.

Carnifexes and other fearless creatures have ALWAYS needed to take "out of synapse" tests. Fearless makes you immune to morale and pinning, not leadership. Target priority tests also need taking. This is why rippers have two rules, being fearless AND immune to being out of synapse.

And you got a major boost, a winged tyrant who can leap forward and deliver 12 twinlinked s5 shots!


So whats the business sense? It cuts interest in the game when cheese tactics abound. Lower model sales all around. GW loves making new flashy "OMG IM THA PWNZOR!" units (even when it revamps the game to get rid of this buildup) to sell some new models, then hates it when it poisons the entire market that its unbalanced (oh look, we sold 50% more landspeeders..and uh oh...our tank sales are down 80%..)

cailus
18-08-2006, 00:41
1.) Pathfinders are still fine, all that you lose is 6 inches of movement from their first turn starting location and the ability to have a devilfish start with the "skimmer moving fast rule" (which with the tau upgrades is quite powerful)


Do you realise that this ruling is not a rules clarification but that it only confuses the matter even further?

Now that the Devilfish does not have the Scout USR, can you deploy the unit on the table under the Escalation rules, as the Pathfinders should be able to do this under the Scout USR. However if the Devilfish does not have USR it cannot be deployed under Escalation.

Furthermore that 6 inch extra movement loss is huge. It could literally mean the difference between being in cover and out of it. It also means to use the scout rule means that the unit no longer operates as an integrated unit.

The problem is that the Devilfish has to be acquired. There would be no problem if the Devilfish is optional. But it is compulsory. And it makes a mockery of the Universal Special Rules, which should be universal.

(However Marine scout bikers get to move 12 inches regardless.)

You have also in the past made claims about the Nids as well in a previous post by claiming they were cheap without taking into account the points of compulsory bioweapons.

My point is that you should be more acquainted with the rules and requirements before making bold statements.

IMO the FAQ's are poorly conceived drivel made up by a company whose attitude to its customers is pathetic and insulting.

grickherder
18-08-2006, 02:22
made up by a company whose attitude to its customers is pathetic and insulting.

But what are you going to to about it? Write emails? Post on message boards?

Or perhaps is it actually time to look for another miniatures game? There are a ton of alternatives out there without all this "**** on the customers" faq nonsense.

Zzarchov
18-08-2006, 03:27
Actually I play nids, Im quite familiar with the rules. I quoted the price before because thats the price sans upgrades (even if intentional) because even the most minimal upgrade bringing it up under 5pts per model is pretty amazing, and there are other configurations, so a generalist points quote is pretty hard as it won't apply to many (every runs different)

As for escalation, ever think thats intentional? In an escalation match your not planning for a major engagement so you can't already be zooming a devilfish out for a battle you didn't know was coming.

speaking of knowing the rules before making bold statements..

You know that bikes are not a seperate unit from the bikers right? The Devilfish is a seperate unit and it would be retarded to give it scout.

If it had scout, the game would start with the pathfinders going one way (without the transport) and the Devilfish going completely another way, usually run as a light tank. This is what happened before the FAQ in my area.

grickherder
18-08-2006, 04:27
you can't already be zooming a devilfish out for a battle you didn't know was coming.

Devilfish + pathfinders = RECON UNIT

They'd be the FIRST ones present in such engagement.

cailus
18-08-2006, 04:46
Actually I play nids, Im quite familiar with the rules. I quoted the price before because thats the price sans upgrades (even if intentional) because even the most minimal upgrade bringing it up under 5pts per model is pretty amazing, and there are other configurations, so a generalist points quote is pretty hard as it won't apply to many (every runs different).

The generalist perspective is false because it does not take into account compulsory upgrades. There is no way in hell you can field the basic model because it's against the rules.

It's different if they are optional as they do not have to be acquired.

So the minimal points base for a Warrior should be the cost of the cheapest upgrade.



As for escalation, ever think thats intentional? In an escalation match your not planning for a major engagement so you can't already be zooming a devilfish out for a battle you didn't know was coming.

Realism is never a yardstick in 40K for anything. Otherwise running at people with a sword would not be more effective than mowing down someone with a heavy machine gun.


speaking of knowing the rules before making bold statements..

You know that bikes are not a seperate unit from the bikers right?

The bikes comment was bitching about preferrential marine treatment


The Devilfish is a seperate unit and it would be retarded to give it scout..

As you have commented on realism, I shall do the same.

Giving the Devilfish the scout rule is not retarded because it represents the aerial insertion of a special ops unit in advance of the main force.

From a realistic perspective, what your suggesting is that a Special Forces helicopter deploys it's troops with the main force and that the special forces then walk to their objective.


If it had scout, the game would start with the pathfinders going one way (without the transport) and the Devilfish going completely another way, usually run as a light tank. This is what happened before the FAQ in my area.

In terms of rules intent, this appears to be a wrong application of the unit's abilities. As I said, judging by the unit's role and equipment they are the equivalent to a modern day special ops unit in that they are forward deployed and then provide recon, target designation and disruption capabilities.

Besides rules intention rarely has anything to do with realism. The most common role for a Space Marine Tactical Squad is las/plas fire support. Yet the rules and fluff clearly specify that this is the most flexible of all marine units and are used in a multi-role manner.

Zzarchov
18-08-2006, 20:36
If realism doesn't matter, and the rules intent is not being used as desired..

then is this not all around a good thing?

Exterminatus
18-08-2006, 23:07
I havent posted here in a while, but here goes:

If you dont like the game and are REALLY fed up with all the negative changes, just quit. I myself used to spend all my hard earned cash at GW, but eventually it became to expensive for me to bear. Whats more, the atttitude you were describing manifested more and more in my area. Warhammer became some sort of Olympichammer, where the second place is the first loser.

Remember the good old days where every rulebook started with THIS IS JUST A GUIDELINE FOR THE RULES or something similar? It meant that the rules should be taken as guidelines how to play your games, and if something comes up, just roll a dice or discuss it with your opponent. We all started this hobby because it is (was) fun, but somehow we lost sight of that. Time to bring back the fun and ignore GW with their FAQ's. GW can go FAQ itself :D

Cactusman
18-08-2006, 23:52
I dunno, I'm new to this Warseer thing and I like it but there seems to be a lot of unhappy people out there. GW seems to have changed a lot over the years. In the old days they were a properly scruffy company. Nowadays they have taken on the all new glossy 21st century make-money-above-all-other-concerns. But they have to. If they didn't there would be no GW and no WH40K. Maybe they do cut corners, maybe they do skimp here and there. But they don't on the models, they don't on the paints and the background to WH40K is and continues to be a work of genius in my opinion. I still love playing their games even though I know they make an obscene amount of money out of me. It's a hobby. It's fun. Look at the good, not the bad... for your own enjoyment's sake if nothing else. If it's really getting you down, give up gaming for a bit. You'll soon be back.

McMullet
19-08-2006, 00:00
I don't really understand the "If you don't like these 4 one-page PDFs then you must stop playing 40K" argument.

I still like playing GW games, and this spoils playing; not that much, but quite a bit for 4 A4 sheets. I don't see the problem with drawing attention to this fact, and attempting to do something about it. Certainly, being excessively negative and whining is a waste of time.

grickherder
19-08-2006, 00:46
I don't really understand the "If you don't like these 4 one-page PDFs then you must stop playing 40K" argument.

My position is that it's a good idea to consider whether or not there might be a better way to do the wargaming hobby than constantly put up with stuff like the faqs, codex creep, new editions invalidating armies (though this hasn't happened in a while) constant price hikes, a cult of personality and secrecy around the designers, a terrible lack of technical editing, increasingly cartoony miniatures with decreasing casting quality (plastic scouts anyone?).

Maybe there's a better way to go about my hobby time. How about you?

Ravenous
19-08-2006, 01:50
http://uk.games-workshop.com/events/diary/default.aspx?event=26

You guys might want to see the new UK GT tourny rules, Nids arent allowed in. As well look at the Tourny FAQs those are tens times worse then what we recieved thus far.

A thread for this is already open http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46042

Sandals
19-08-2006, 03:17
AFAIK from speaking to mail order, nids are allowed it was just left out by mistake. as are black templars which were also left out.

in the pack i have it also has the third ed thing about rippers being genofixed, but that is apparently staying so you cant upgrade your unit at all. WTF? That's a bit like saying you have to field marines with nothing but bolters!

Ravenous
19-08-2006, 03:28
Thats silly. Must be another mistake, GW seems to be doing that alot these days.

and here is something else from the GW website in the Nid section on how to build and play your nids.

Shaun Clough
With the advent of the new Codex: Tyranids and the removal of Mutation rules (and thereby Hive Nodes), something had to change to take up the slack, as the lowly Gaunt would have difficultly doing anything with a Leadership of 5. This change occurred with the Synapse Creature rule instead of the Gaunt itself. Synapse Creature models (and those in their Synapse range) are immune to Instant Death.

http://uk.games-workshop.com/tyranids/hivemind-armies/3/

Jes Bickham
Things have changed, though, with the advent of a shiny new Codex: Tyranids and some truly astonishing miniatures. Synapse is a big deal now Ė mutants are gone, so you can't rely on Hive Nodes any more. Still, there are replacement benefits, most notably that Synapse Creatures, and those under their influence, are now immune to Instant Death. It makes Warriors and mid-range armies (such as those tricky-to-use Raveners) super-viable options now.

http://uk.games-workshop.com/tyranids/hivemind-armies/5/

So, anyone else feel like they have been lied to for the past year?

McMullet
19-08-2006, 13:17
My position is that it's a good idea to consider whether or not there might be a better way to do the wargaming hobby than constantly put up with stuff like the faqs, codex creep, new editions invalidating armies (though this hasn't happened in a while) constant price hikes, a cult of personality and secrecy around the designers, a terrible lack of technical editing, increasingly cartoony miniatures with decreasing casting quality (plastic scouts anyone?).

Maybe there's a better way to go about my hobby time. How about you?
Heh, when you put it like that... :p

I guess this is the first thing that's really bothered me, that's all. The rest of those things I find tolerable. I'll see how it goes with the FAQs.

Any hobby you do is going to cost money, and in spite of some problems I think I get pretty good value playing GW games.

Sandals
19-08-2006, 14:17
Any hobby you do is going to cost money, and in spite of some problems I think I get pretty good value playing GW games.

only until you decide to buy anything new...:p

cailus
21-08-2006, 03:56
I don't really understand the "If you don't like these 4 one-page PDFs then you must stop playing 40K" argument.

I still like playing GW games, and this spoils playing; not that much, but quite a bit for 4 A4 sheets. I don't see the problem with drawing attention to this fact, and attempting to do something about it. Certainly, being excessively negative and whining is a waste of time.

Criticism is bad!

Look at how well the Stalinist Soviet Union did without criticism. They not only industrialised but they also beat the Germans! And look what happens when Gorbachev allows criticism - the entire thing collapsed.

So we must support Comrade Kirby and the glorious Games Workshop. Anyone who opposes their vision of brotherhood and unity is a counter-revolutionary Trotskyite!

VetSgtNamaan
21-08-2006, 19:09
So I am guessing there is a big hate fest going on. SOmehow the song lyric from 'Dogma' by KMFDM seems appropriate 'We are addicted to the things we hate.'

I for one am not to sure what exactly it is about the Faqs that has caused so much uproar as a long time DnD player I have certainly seen my share of crap publications. ANd I am sure there will be plenty of opportunites they will screw up in the future. The way I see it you can either do something about it (.ie email, phone direct services or complain to a GW store or independent retailer about the impact this will have on your buying practices.), do nothing and well post on forums about it. or perhaps start to look for another game or other options to get your next gw hit.

I have a good relationship with my Independent gaming store and I have often come to him regarding GW practices or failure to implement practices that will affect my buy stuff in his store. (It has a little more weight than you think since I spend an obscene amount of money in his store every year. Not just on GW though. ) In canada there are only 3 agents that stores deal with, I am sure the number is larger but if alot of these stores start to complain to GW agents about how thier current actions are jeopardizing sales I am sure something will be done. 20-30 people on a forum complaining is not going to do anything quite honestly. You need a significant percentage of thier buying base to cause anything to happen regardless of who slow or stubborn they might be. They are after all a business out to make money.

If they continue to ignore thier customer base well TSR did the same during second edition and rather than listen to thier customers continued to put out products they thought were cool. 2 editions later I have ran into gamers who say TSR who? It is a cutthroat business so time will tell whether or not GW will shape up or continue the way it has. there are many ways to get GW figs without actually buying them new. I have gotten alot of IG and Marine stuff for dirt cheap used from local players,plus ebay is another way to get stuff plus with being able to attach paypal to any account credit card or just a bank account it is pretty easy for most people to use it.

Plus if you are like me and do not like to play conflicts or local tournies who cares what rules you use as long as both are okay with it.




As for the quality of other models well I certainly love what reaper is doing, and I have bought a couple hundred of thier models they are amazing for mordheim and dnd dynamic poses and often very cheap. I am sure there are other aspiring companies try to carve out thier niche as well.

IJW
22-08-2006, 12:00
In case no one in the thread has noticed, the Tyranid FAQ is already being changed so that the mid-weight models ARE immune to ID, not just double-strength weapons...

Three Headed Monkey
24-08-2006, 12:04
That was pretty strange. I started reading this post after the above mentioned change to FAQs and was wondering "hold on, what are you complaining about, it doesnt say that at all???"

I guess it makes sense. The FAQs now state that Tyranid creatures in synapse range (including of themselves) are immune to instant death.

When were the FAQ's edited? The site says 15th of August but that can't be right as this thread started later.

It seems that GW does listen to its customer base after all.

Avian
24-08-2006, 12:13
The page I'm looking at says updated 23. august...

McMullet
24-08-2006, 12:17
There are a few threads in the 40K forums, but I think it was changed a few days ago.