View Full Version : March White Dwarf Feedback thread (UK WD 351, US 350)

14-02-2009, 08:50
Another White Dwarf Feedback thread for February(US 350, UK 351 etc).

General comments about WD go in the General White Dwarf Feedback Thread (http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23972).

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

Off topic and spam posts will be deleted without notice.


The Warseer Inquisition

15-02-2009, 00:57
Wow, filled to the brim with Apocalypse for all 3 main games and hints of some SG stuff. Best issue in months.

Some highlights:
Double sided poster with the new IG BB variants and the Anatomy of a Stompa on the other.
Cover has a fold out, IG vs. Stompas, artwork battle on outside, models on inside.
The inside back cover ad twice as it is also the first page too.:p
Five of the example BB variants are the same base model with the gun changed out and sometimes the Upper Hull the guns attach to (could just be photoshops too).
War of the Ring quickstart will be on the website soon.
Jervis is replaced by Rick Priestly in Standard Bearer.
The Green Knight is voted as the best Michael Perry model by Dave Andrews.
Lots of articles related to Stompas.

Angelus Mortis
17-02-2009, 00:40
Totally miffed because they said they would have the new datasheets for the 6 tank variants and they only had two, the two we already have in the Apoc books. Deception is not a way to get return customers.

17-02-2009, 08:25
Hmm, sounds like I might actually want a copy of this one...

18-02-2009, 12:46
I gave it a 10 - awesome issue, full of humour, information, good articles, the poster is awesome and already in my study. Best issue in ages and everyone should grab it.

Lord Damocles
18-02-2009, 18:05
People seem to have rated this issue quite highly. Good lord! [drops monacle] What's going on here then?

Poster - Meh. It's a poster. Better than a poke in the eye I suppose, but I've seen better (the Landraider cut away springs to mind).

Editorial - Is this an editorial or an advert for Apocalypse? Is there any difference in White Dwarf nowadays?

New Releases/'News' - STOMPAS! BANEBLADES! There was a grand total of one model which I hadn't seen before on the interwebz. One.

The Apocalypse Continues - A vomit inducingly, 'Buy Stompas/Baneblades noobs!' 'article'. Hmm...:rolleyes:
The pictures of various people's armies are welcome though (even if we have seen most of them before). Also: Necrons! In White Dwarf! :eek:

Stompa Kit Breakdown - Meh. Seen it already.

Super Heavy Tanks - They couldn't think of a way to pimp the BaneSwordDoom Hammer like the Stompa; so they just gave us pictures of them. Nice.
The lack of datasheets for four of the six new variants is rather a let down (well, actually, I don't intend to ever be in a position to field one, so I dont actually care all that much). Still, if I'm to pay for a stupidly expensive magazine, only for it to tell me to go online for content, then what's the point?

New Scenarios - Forgive me if I'm a little slow on the uptake here, but with a standard Apoc setup, whoever gets the first turn will usually be able to capture the superheavy straight away won't they...?
What I wouldn't do for some 'standard' scenarios, which i didn't need 60 worth of tank to use... they're probably saving those up for the 40K battles book thingie though arn't they?

Mighty Champions - Actually quite good as far as new rules go. OK, so you'd need Mighty Empires, but you can make a map out of cardboard right?

War Journal - This is the third 'Comming soon: LoTR Apocalypse!' article in as many months. Why don't they just release it already!? Seriously, this doesn't count as an article.

Stompas - Some waffle about Stompas which isn't as good as it was in the good'ol'days (Wot, no Yella?), then three (more) datasheets. I guess if you have three Stompas (and who doesn't after seeing so many pictures of them?) you might like this. I don't, but at least they seem fairly balanced.

Wisdom of the Ancients (Collecting Lizardmen) - Erm... Er... Right... What's this all about then? Some people say, 'I've decided to collect Lizardmen - they're the Roxorz!'. Then there's the same painting guide we had last month.
Didn't feel like showing their armies so far? Personal fluff? Tactics advice? No? Ok then, fair enough.

Assault of Fort Wrath (Apocalypse Battle Report) - I present exhibit one, your Honour: Proof that Apocalypse battle reports in White Dwarf are not cool:
- There's far too much going on. There simply isn't enough detail to any of the four reports to be able to see what's going on properly.
- The deployment is absurd. The Stompas make combat on turn one. Turn frikkin' one!:mad: It's like Picadilly Circus in the Imperial deployment zone (and if you're meant to be defending fortifications, it's usually best to stay behind them...), while most of the Ork zone is empty.
- Terrain? Never heard of it.
-More old person-like moaning... etc. etc...

Standard Bearer - Jervis is gone! [sounds of much merrymaking in background]
It's not patronising, there's a point to it beyond, 'Buy Apocalypse dammit!', and there's actually some humour (just like in yester-year).
What's that? Jervis is comming back next month? Damn.

Citadel Bitz Box (Head Swaps) - To perform a head swap, just swap the head(s). OK, I *think* I've got that...

Ork Warboss - How to convert and paint said funky Warboss.
Excellent stuff. More please!

Citadell Hall of Fame (Dave Andrews) - It could do without the page of random, barely related other minitures by Michael Perry, but it's OK I guess. Not as good as it was at first though.

Kustomisin' Da Stompa - Comverty stuff is always (well, usually at least) good.

Junk at the back - Is it just me or is this section getting *larger*?

I'd been hearing rave reviews about this months issue of Toiletpaper Monthly, so I was expecting quite a lot. I was disappointed.
Maybe it's just that I've become an old fart, and am unable to get into the spirit of Apocalypse (in the beginning I was fine with it, but I'm becoming increasingly fed up with it being rammed down my throat by GW at every possible opportunity - there is more to 40K than Apoc y'know :rolleyes:); this issue was just Stompas this, and Stompas that, BaneSwordHammers here, DoomBladeSwords there.
OK, so there are noticeably more (good) painting and moddeling articles than there use to be, but there is still no background material, no (good: ie. not fixed and/or silly) battle reports, no special missions useable in normal games, no Chapter Approved-esque rules etc. ect.

By coincidence, along with this month's issue, I got number 218 which I'd got off eBay, in the post this morning. I think I'll be reading that one.

Sadly, it's a mere '3' from me this month.

18-02-2009, 18:17

I gave it an '8'...because:

Poster with cutaway Stompa was amusing and well done...reverse with all the new Baneblade varients was interesting as well...

Painting master class with the Warboss was very useful...

Battle report was immense - great stuff!

Good to see closeup of stompa sprues so you can see how they could be customised and they even had an article about this very subject with a few pointers...

Everyone loves a new Apoc datasheet or 5 so can't go wrong here...

Overall a solid issue for me though I'm already fearing for next months score as I don't play LOTR and it looks like that will be the focus - never mind!


19-02-2009, 01:18
An unbiased 6 as the articles seemed to have more to them.

But if im being biased it be a 2 as im not interested in 40k, just fantasy (and specialist games), though have to say the mighty empire's rules are excellent, some original and useful new rules in WD, i was almost in tears of joy, more please!

19-02-2009, 13:47
6. A bit "meh" on first glance. So far I've flicked through it and read Standard Bearer (which was an immense disappointment - yeah, I know plastic's the best thing since sliced bread, yawn yawn...). Nothing else has grabbed my attention as I'm not exactly gagging for either stompas or large 60-a-time tanks. Bat rep looked to be the usual unintelligible mess.

So, it'll now sit under my bed gathering dust for a couple of weeks 'til I'm bored enough to pick it up again.

I gave it a generous 6 as I don't want to crap all over the magazine just coz I'm rather tired and busy at the moment.


I've now had a good night's sleep and am glad I gave it a 6 and nothing less. Possibly could go up to 7. Purely on the ratio of words to pictures. OK so I'm not a big Ork fan and don't actually like the new Stompa model, but that's just personal aesthetics and not GW's fault. I liked the inclusion of a couple of new scenarios, one a "minigame" to allow a stompa in a non-Apocalypse 40k game. That was cool as my friend is an Ork fan and is likely to get a stompa just for the fun of it, so we could do that one sometime.

I still don't like the layout of the bat rep. Still too confusing.

All in all, I've seen worse.

19-02-2009, 14:08
I gave it a 8.
The whole thing was mostly to do with Orks which i like, the Stomp pictures/conversion pages shown were very nice, battle report was great (i dont usealy read these unless they look good) thing that toped it of was the poster ACE!

20-02-2009, 12:14
A really good edition - already lost the poster to my son though :).

Awesome to see 13 (yes 13) Stompas in the battle report, and the 'Eavy Metal Ork Warboss is superb.

Weak points - Rick Priestley on plastics in Standard Bearer, and yet another self gratification fest over the Green Knight (fantastic model, but this has already been done to death).

An 8 in my book.

Finn Sourscowl
22-02-2009, 15:26
A definate 8. Lots to read and most of it intersting. I agree that there is a certain element of pimpage going on, but I don't really mind this when it is realtively wordy pimpage.

I particularly like the idea of the War Journal and hope they do this with the other systems when there is a big release due. It's kinda like the old style designers notes, but spread over a few issues.

RP was a slight dissapointment since he just seemed to be saying "yay, isn't plastic cool??!" which seemed a bit pointless... what he said he was going to go onto (the evolution of Warhammer) seemed much more interesting!

Poster was welcome too, even though I don't really have anywhere to put it anymore (the missus would object if it went up in the spare bedroom ;)

23-02-2009, 06:47
I give it a 5. Some of the stuff is ok. A lot of it is blatant sales pitches for Stompas. The worst bit for me? GW persisting in their 'Lizardmen are blue' approach.

26-02-2009, 22:13
Good issue quite enjoyed it, some excellent painting and modelling articles and a quite enjoyable batrep (did I really just type that?) Highlight though Rick Priestley's impression of Jeremy Clarkson in this months' Standard Bearer he is now GW's official 'grumpy old man' - kudos to the Rick welcome to my world.


27-02-2009, 19:14
Best WD in forever. (or since the good old days). The whole-page pictures of people's armies were the most inspirational thing in a WF I can remember, and the battle report might as well have been from EPIC.

Lord Inquisitor
27-02-2009, 19:27
Got a "9" from me, pretty much just for the battle report, which was the craziest and most fun that I can remember since the big tank battle way back when. That batrep actually had me chuckling, some terrific moments and zany scenario rules.

27-02-2009, 23:52
I gave it a 6, nice poster, nice Battle Report, but... ONLY three pages of Lord Of The Rings? Come on, War Of The Ring is out next month yet you still have to give Mat Ward an idiotic page limit. Sure the Stompa is new and looks nice but did it have to dominated three quarters of the magazine?

Angelus Mortis
28-02-2009, 00:30
I gave it a 6, nice poster, nice Battle Report, but... ONLY three pages of Lord Of The Rings? Come on, War Of The Ring is out next month yet you still have to give Mat Ward an idiotic page limit. Sure the Stompa is new and looks nice but did it have to dominated three quarters of the magazine?

I agree totally. I was very angry about the LoTR coverage. It was 3 pages too many.

28-02-2009, 00:46
I gave it a 7, pretty good,

I really liked the poster, the tank variant stats were good, the stompa stuff was good too especially the mob of them :cool:, also liked the hint towards a new bloodbowl model :)

Minimal Lotr presence was good, not looking forward to next issue though, what with war of the ring coming out, and the whole mag probably being devoted to it :rolleyes:

03-03-2009, 06:44
Totally miffed because they said they would have the new datasheets for the 6 tank variants and they only had two, the two we already have in the Apoc books. Deception is not a way to get return customers.

mite have already been said but the white dwarf does at least have the main weapon profiles for the other 4. and im sure just like all the tanks they are very similar in armour value and other guns...

Angelus Mortis
03-03-2009, 10:57
mite have already been said but the white dwarf does at least have the main weapon profiles for the other 4. and im sure just like all the tanks they are very similar in armour value and other guns...

But the point is, thats not what was told. We were lead to believe, as you can see from several posts on here, that all the tank variants would be in the issue. They were not. Thats dirty.

03-03-2009, 20:50
I didn't care much for the poster (being over the age of 13 and all), although on first read I was impressed with the issue.

Then, having sat down and re-read it, it just got a bit too much "Apocalypse means you need to buy as much as possible!!!!1!!"

I'm pleased that rules and (semi-)decent hobby articles seem to be creeping back in, the only complete failure in the mag was the Lizardman article.

03-03-2009, 21:11
The mag seems to be getting better. I'm 18 and the poster (even though is almost uselsess for me as i collect fantasy) is always something to look foward to. The articles (even though the lizardmen is an almost exact carbon copy from last month) contain some originality. Again, it's getting better but it's far from being a Quality Hobby Suppliment. LotR seems to be lacking in content ecently but i think i'll be eating my words once WarOfTheRing's out... :p

Though i gave it a 6...room for improvement :)

04-03-2009, 09:19
a solid 7 from me, more reading than there was a wee while ago. A step in the right direction. Not really into Apocalypse, but neverthe less I enjoyed the battle report, sounds like a lot of silly fun was had by all! As a Lord of the Rings player I am really looking forward to next month

04-03-2009, 23:25
If there's nothing truely more substantial in it than watered down articles and advertisements, then it's a 1 for me. And this one got a 1, because its quality still sucks. I get useless spam-magazines in the mail better than this.

It's kinda sad to see WD declining so sharply, even when it's already so bad. consider that in October 2007 (still not a very good article) it was about a whole new gameset, but this article was eseentially just 10 colorful pictures that said GET YOUR STOMPA AND SHADOWSWORD NOW GET IT NOW TRY THIS VARIANT GET IT NOW GET IT NOW GET IT NOW and so on and so on, plus a few terrible articles that were written by noobz who have nothing to add.

I get more news and articles from Warseer than I get from White Dwarf, and Warseer is free.

05-03-2009, 04:49
Ork Warboss Masterclass is pretty awesome. The photos are really capturing what is being painted where a lot better than most tutorials. BUT the colours are really washed out. This doesn't affect their educational value but the colours do not match the actual paint colours properly. Example is the Warboss' skin and armour look very washed out in the tutorial photos but more vibrant in the first photo of the article (where he's pictured with his Nobz).

05-03-2009, 08:21
The positives:

- Converting stompa article fairly interesting, although not really up to standards of earlier articles in terms of scope/variety

- warboss article interesting

- Apocalypse battle report was entertaining, although it needed at least twice as many pages, and I agree with the earlier sentiment about idiotic deployment. How the hell did the stompas get into combat on turn one?


- the shadowsword article repeated the poster. We didn't get the promised datasheets (even though it would have ment a mere two extra pages, apparently best spent on adverts) and there were no conversion/customisation tips (probably saved for next issue so they can drag it all out).

- the apocalypse article was just a two page sales pitch.

- the whole magazine remains vastly overpriced compared to almost all of the other magazines on the stand, and despite this is both filled with 'official' advertisements and uses up an unhealthy amount of the spare space from that for 'unofficial' buy x and y articles. Furthermore it remains quite thin. At least half, if not two thirds, or the magazine is sales pitch, with a couple of genuine hobby articles thrown in. Not enough, GW, not enough.

07-03-2009, 18:32
3. The battle report was hard to follow and non-sensical.
The article on painting the war boss was good.
I liked the pics of some real gamers army's, but they were small..
And I'm getting REAL tired of the lack of good content.

static grass
07-03-2009, 19:00
I give it a seven. The main hightlights are the warboss painting article and the Apoc report which are both superb. The painting article was great because of the detail the Apoc report was great because the details where missing. Its Apocalypse you don't need to see all the crew shaken and failed armour saves. Just stick to the broad stokes.

It was very nice to see some of the staff armies although please GW dont show the Howling Griffons ever again less their quatered now basically checked red and yellow scheme will make me vomit.

Assembling the Stompa is a must for all you ork players and was nice to see. The standard bearer was a bit lame both in tone and content. Rick is no Pratchett* and I have heard the "You guys have so many different units you dont know your born/ One day you too will get the big kits (we wont - see previous)" line before. Tell me something I dont know.

The lizardmen and ME articles are okay. Nice to see some support for ME for now.

LotR is going Apoc. Anyone still playing this?

09-03-2009, 21:22
a solid 8, really good white dwarf, loads of apoc datasheets, a very big battle repost, some very nice hobby articles and much less BUY THIS! being printed all over the magazine, aswell as a rather good double sided poster.

one of the best white dwarves from the recent lot.

09-03-2009, 21:31
5 from me - the lowest I've given in a while.

I'm just not a huge Apoc fan, and found the Batrep confusing to say the least, THe new Stompa does look cool though, although not after the umpteenth page...

THe WFB stuff that there was, was decent enough, and read quite well, and Rick's SB article was entertaining - nice to have a bit of humour back in WD.

Decent Eavy metal paint guide, although the Ask Eavy Metal bit was pointless in the extreme...

09-03-2009, 22:41
I gave it a 3, it's the first WD ive bought in about 6 years.(just started back) I thought its was crap(even the battle rep was plainly told) i much prefer the WD from before i quit. What happend to the short stories?

09-03-2009, 22:52
I gave it a 3, it's the first WD ive bought in about 6 years.(just started back) I thought its was crap(even the battle rep was plainly told) i much prefer the WD from before i quit. What happend to the short stories?

for a while now (not sure how long) white dwarf has just been crammed full of aricles being relevant only to whatever GW was selling that month, along with items related to that product, it's become more of a monthly catalogue than a hobby magazine, along with a battle report if a new armybook/ codex has been released where the new army almost if not always wins.

however March's white dwarf has been much better. Less advertising and more hobby, not an apoc fan but it's quite nice to read teh datasheets.... and it's not every month you geta poster :p

But i, and i i can safely say everyone on this forum, prefered the older WD where their where short stories, converison ideas, army showcases.. and dare i mention ..Specialist games.

11-03-2009, 18:48
gave it a 5, ok but not great.......a little transparent with the "hey heres a stompa, its new! you should buy 10 of them"

27-03-2009, 09:33
havent bought WD since it went up to 4.50 but decided to pick this one up.

Not bad at all, some nice non-codex minis (gamers armies, gasp!), some nice useable rules and scenarios and a fair bit of text.

For once its the following day and I havent finished reading it. A solid 6/10 from me, heading in the right direction. I have sent of the direct debit form so I can get them at 3 an issue - a price I think is fair.

30-03-2009, 09:04
Good issue for Warhammer 40K but I love Warhammer fantasy. So I give it 6

30-03-2009, 12:15
I personally hated it.

Again, like all wd's these days, its focussed too much on advertising products than adding some depth to the hobby.

what i did like:

apoc data sheets (always welcome)
staff members apoc armies (i particularly liked the blood ravens as i remembered them from the medusa campaign :P)
mighty empires campaign rules (possibly the best fantasy article i have seen in a long time, i've been having a lot of fun with these rules)
ork warboss conversion/masterclass (conversions are alwas welcome)

what i didnt like;

sompa article

shadowsword article
(see stompa article, replace "stompa" with "shadowsword"

lizardmen article
(this is the lizardmen these are their models they are blue
:eek::eek: wow thank you white dwarf)

the back section
i reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaly dont are where the stores are all over the world
and its getting bigger

30-03-2009, 13:16
Rated it an 8. The Armageddon battle rep was a good read and, seeing as I play Lizardmen, the insight from developers was nice. I especcially liked the painting tactic one of the developers (andy maybe) had using grey asa basecoat and washes to get a nice look. I've started using the tactic and my test model came out great and things are moving so much FASTER. Check out my Sig plog to check it out!