PDA

View Full Version : Once again new Beast rumors ! [hope you enjoy]



GeneralofChaos
07-05-2009, 18:57
There is a good chance that Rune of the True Beast will work against Monster Character's in the new BoC book. I was told it was one of the hot debate going on between play tester's and the design team. So Beasts could end up being the Kryptonite against Greater Daemons. [it's in the latest play test list]

Looks like the design team is trying to tone down Daemons with this item. My sorce says it's one of the big debates going on about the new book. Also in the new play test list it costs 50 pts. Look for the release of BoC book to be in the 1st quarter of 2010, my insider says Beast Mutations, Centigor fast Cav, Gorgan and Dragon Ogres are still in the play test list. Also Bestigors got cheaper at 10 pts per model and Foe Render went down to 20 pts.

The only Special character he talked about was a Daemon Prince of Khorne. My source said he the only Daemon Prince in the book. On the modeling front he said the Minatours, Gorgon & Dragon Ogres look fantastic! Will post more when I get free time after picking up the kids.

People I will not defend my rumours or the source of my information. You should take rumours with a grain of salt from me or anyone else. If this post get's locked it will not be buy my hands. As I will not respond to anyone comments or questions. [this is my last time trying to post rumours on the Warseer, if this post get's locked? catch me on the Herdstone]

Here some past threads I posted on the DL forum about DoC book, way before they where released [check the dates]. From the same inside source. [he was right on target then]

http://z7.invisionfree.com/wyrmling_x/index.php?showtopic=3431&hl=

http://z7.invisionfree.com/wyrmling_x/index.php?showtopic=3397&st=0

http://z7.invisionfree.com/wyrmling_x/index.php?showtopic=3369&hl=

http://z7.invisionfree.com/wyrmling_x/index.php?showtopic=3360&hl=

That's just a few of them, wanted people to see the early dates and show my source was right on. His information was also great on WoC and the Gateway spell. Send me a private message for those links!




have a nice day.... GoC

anuburos
07-05-2009, 19:00
Be the first to say thanks for the rumors! Beasts smacking down Daemons hugh... interesting. I haven't played beasts cuz the model line is aweful in my opinion, but that may change!

Hopefully no Minotaurs with human feet.

Flamer
07-05-2009, 19:30
Thanks GoC - great job.

I think that RoTB is going to go the MC way. DoC are very very tought army to beat and such item along with the pendant of khaleth would bring more meta to concider when building DoC armys.

Fast cav centigors :D ? That would be awsome - I like the models but if thay did new ones in plastic ( dreams away ... )

Dawei
07-05-2009, 19:36
So there are definitely gonna be new dragon ogres? Amazing news! Since like a lot of ppl I love the fluff and art in the WoC book but can't stand the currrent models.

Any idea what they're gonna look like? I 'm sure pics are out of the question for quite a while but any scraps from the proverbial table of rumourdom are appreciated :D

Tancred II von Quenelles
07-05-2009, 19:47
I t d be good drogres include an upgrade to make chaos ogres from bulls and guts. Again a daemonprience of Khorne in non-daemonic army -they d better return Mordrek, Arbaal and others for WoC.

And tanks for news

CaliforniaGamer
07-05-2009, 19:58
Im unfamiliar with the Rune, can someone breakdown what this would do?

Voodoo Boyz
07-05-2009, 20:01
Basically monsters (but not their riders) may allocate attacks the bearer of the Rune.

I doubt it'll really be all that good for BoC against DoC. I doubt the Flying or M10 Terror Causer is going to get anywhere within 10" of the Character that has the item anyway and will just go for the other stuff.

popisdead
07-05-2009, 20:04
Thanks GoC!!!!

CaliforniaGamer
07-05-2009, 20:29
Basically monsters (but not their riders) may allocate attacks the bearer of the Rune.

I doubt it'll really be all that good for BoC against DoC. I doubt the Flying or M10 Terror Causer is going to get anywhere within 10" of the Character that has the item anyway and will just go for the other stuff.

Did mean to say may NOT allocate attacks vs. the bearer of the rune?
Otherwise Im still not clear on what this might do.

So dude with the new rune charges into cc with Greater Daemon and what happens?

Harwammer
07-05-2009, 20:43
Im unfamiliar with the Rune, can someone breakdown what this would do?

Monsters may not allocate their attacks against a character bearing the rune of the true beast (a talisman magic item). Previously this affected monstrous characters, but then GW FAQed monstrous characters not counting as monsters.

At 30 points it was a bit OTT; a 135 BSB could hold off a 600 point blood thirster indefinately (with M5 and access to steed of shadows this was not hard to do).

HOWEVER, since the chaos split BoC have no real solution to monstrous characters, so maybe it won't be so over the top within the context of a new BoC army.


Main point:

Thanks GoC!

Max_Killfactor
07-05-2009, 20:48
Thanks for the rumors. I'm glad Dragon Ogres are getting new models, those aged pretty terribly.

ZiggyQubert
07-05-2009, 22:01
Gee, thanks GOC, you ****ed up playtesting for a bunch of us when you leaked DOC rumors, now your going to do it again with beasts, which playtesters will get in trouble for this I wonder.

Jono-NI
07-05-2009, 22:10
Urm wasn't this posted before......by yourself :P

I know you added a bit more, but still.

steppingonyou
07-05-2009, 22:39
the new dragon ogres look fantastic, cant wait to kill them in droves. i think the list is turning out great and i only have a few points of contention. of course i cant go into details at all other than to say i like the new models and list.

good rumors GoC



mike

GeneralofChaos
07-05-2009, 22:49
Gee, thanks GOC, you ****ed up playtesting for a bunch of us when you leaked DOC rumors, now your going to do it again with beasts, which playtesters will get in trouble for this I wonder.

I have never once said ANY of my information ever came from a play tester. I have gone out of my way over and over again to say just the opposite. I hope that my WoC rumours in the past and my NEW BoC rumours will clear any person, who been wrongly accused. I feel bad for any innocent play tester that was blamed for giving me any information. [because it's 100% untrue]

But I also believe that a few play tester's rights are not more important. Then the ten's of thousand of people rights. Who enjoy reading rumour's on the internet. To me the scale is not even close, I believe in the freedom of information act. My private message box is filled with thank you notes. Not only on this site but other site's as well.

It does seem odd, that so many people are trying so hard to discredit my rumour information. Yet my information also been called so good, that Games-Workshop has fired play tester's over it? [it's either good or bad and if it's bad why would anyone get fired over it] If it's good, what's so wrong about telling people the truth?



GoC

Nightsword
07-05-2009, 22:54
People I will not defend my rumours or the source of my information. You should take rumours with a grain of salt from me or anyone else. If this post get's locked it will not be buy my hands. As I will not respond to anyone comments or questions

This lasted a long time :D

Don't take that as fueling the flames, I thank you for your efforts. Nice little snippet and a little confirmation for new Minotaurs, Dragon Ogres and a Gorgon. Interesting! :)

chivalrous
07-05-2009, 23:17
But I also believe that a few play tester's rights are not more important. Then the ten's of thousand of people rights. ...
If it's good, what's so wrong about telling people the truth?

The general consensus among the community is that there isn't nearly enough play-testing of the current product.
The more play-testers are implicated in leaks, the more likely it is that GW will reduce even further the amount of play-testing that occurs, that would be a very bad thing for all players, so when you talk about peoples' rights to rumours, you must also weigh that up against the same peoples' rights to a fair and balanced game.

That said, I acknowledge that you don't get your information directly from play-testers and it may be that the primary source for these rumours aren't play-testers, but GW would rather believe that leaks are coming from these testers than the more valuable developers.

Ganymede
07-05-2009, 23:37
Bah. I feel like I was promised steak and was instead served a bone with some chewed meat stuck to it.

CaliforniaGamer
07-05-2009, 23:43
can we get the stats and the abilities of the Gorgon at least?

Dead Man Walking
07-05-2009, 23:58
Thanks for the rumors, I will put them in my hat. You would however do well to grow a thicker coat when it comes to how other people respond to your rumors. Just lay down what you have and let the foollish be disproved when the book comes out. Theres no reason to act the victim, you just play into thier hands, Especially when you do it so loudly. Frankly I don't think its the freedom of information act that motivates you, rather its the potential for adulation and it aggravates you when thats not what you get. :skull:

Nicha11
08-05-2009, 00:03
Hmmm, well we can just wait and see whether anything of this is true.

Given that they are still playtesting and there are around 7-8 months to go, anything we read could be wrong.

Grimstonefire
08-05-2009, 00:12
Is it just me, or does it seem a bit stupid to have a rune that is (supposedly) specifically designed to tone down another army? By that logic they don't even need to bother balancing armies in general, just against one specific foe.

Maybe I'm missing something here, I don't understand.

Quarter 1 2010 right? So that would be february/ march, which means we now have a big gap between fantasy releases in Q4 2009.

Einholt
08-05-2009, 00:29
You mean like the Elf anti-anvil item?

Souppilgrim
08-05-2009, 00:36
You mean like the Elf anti-anvil item?

Yeah, that is just very bad way to go about balancing.

sulla
08-05-2009, 02:07
Is it just me, or does it seem a bit stupid to have a rune that is (supposedly) specifically designed to tone down another army? By that logic they don't even need to bother balancing armies in general, just against one specific foe.

Maybe I'm missing something here, I don't understand.


Well how would you go about balancing a low Ld infantry army with next to no shooting or armour against greater daemons and dragons? Seems like they just added an insurance item vs one part of the Daemon army that was otherwise difficult to deal with. You still have to pass terror and beat the rest of the army, which is no easy thing for beasts.

Plus, some GD builds don't even need to be in combat to win. The Rune does nothing to combat them.

Finally, don't forget this item has been in the list since 6th edition. It's just that GW have FAQ'd it to not work how it says it works in it's description. This is just changing it to work like the current one says...

Scryer in the Darkness
08-05-2009, 03:55
I have never once said ANY of my information ever came from a play tester. I have gone out of my way over and over again to say just the opposite. I hope that my WoC rumours in the past and my NEW BoC rumours will clear any person, who been wrongly accused. I feel bad for any innocent play tester that was blamed for giving me any information. [because it's 100% untrue]
While you may claim that none of your info comes directly from a playtester to you, you reference playtesters and the playtest list twice in your opening post. In fact we rarely get a post from you without you referencing playtesting. So it's implicit in your posts that your information is coming by way of playtesters, just maybe not directly. This has the potential to get playtesters in the poo. Not that I care... it's not your fault the info has been passed to you. If playtesters aren't supposed to leak info, then they shouldn't. The onus is on them. Although you could be more discreet about it I guess.

Urgat
08-05-2009, 09:33
On the modeling front he said the Minatours, Gorgon & Dragon Ogres look fantastic!

Well, I'll wait and see. I've found out that half the time someone told me something was awesome, it turned out I didn't like it at all >>

Kromgrog da Git
08-05-2009, 10:04
I'm convinced GW does not bother about a few rumors that "accidently slipped" from the playtesters... It is publicity after all, and does no harm!
The one thing GW would be mad about, are mock-up versions of ABs go public... 'cause taht does economical harm!

shylat
08-05-2009, 10:19
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh thank you GoC!!!!!

I wait for your rumours everyday... I need them ahahaha

Anyway, good to hear about the new Rune of the Truebeast rule, it will make players to use it often, up to now I think noone uses it... but the cost (50 pts) it's really high

Brother Gabriel
08-05-2009, 10:57
Thank you very much GoC :)

shadow hunter
08-05-2009, 11:36
Thanks for the little snippet.


If playtesters aren't supposed to leak info, then they shouldn't. The onus is on them.

I agree entirely to be honest. If a playtester doesn't want to get fired or into trouble or whatever - then dont tell anyone. If it is ok for them to "spill the beans" then why should someone they tell not also pass the info on?

I used to like Portent/warseer for all the rumours posted - but now I rarely read them as there's just so much rubbish, arguing and off topic here now. And when sommet is posted (even if it is untrue or stretched) there's too much flaming.

Shame.

Dag
08-05-2009, 19:31
dont get mad at someone because you read his post lol, its just funny imo how intensly people take this.
so far i think pt has done a meh job with these last books. So more power to rumors, i like to know about the next big army buff thats goin to mutilate my greenies in a different way.

Gobsmasha
08-05-2009, 21:54
You mean like the Elf anti-anvil item?

Or giving daemons all kinds of flaming attacks to counter a certain regen banner? :)

--
john

dooombot
08-05-2009, 22:27
GoC thank you, I cannot wait for the new Beasts book, and your info is always appreciated. Q1 2010 kinda sucks, I really wanted it this year, but oh well we'll see.

zak
08-05-2009, 23:04
Cheers for the rumours. They are getting rarer so anything is appreciated, especially when it concerns the beasts.

Shimmergloom
08-05-2009, 23:23
Considering playtesting has not stopped the abominations of all the 7th edition books from happening yet, I would not worry about GW stopping playtesting because of leaks.

Cause as it stands, they must be completely ignoring all the data from any playtesting that occurs as it is.

Cats Laughing
08-05-2009, 23:31
What are these 'playtesters' being talked about?
Are they similar to those mythical squats that don't exist?

Seriously though, while I understand that we want more playtesters(or rather more playtesting) to help bring a semblance of balance to the game, I also believe that playtesters that can't stick to the NDA aren't worth the goblin spittle they signed with. If you're going to be unprofessional enough to let slip the secrets you're not supposed to let slip, why should we believe you'd be professional enough to do worthwhile playtesting?

Messiah
09-05-2009, 00:05
Yeah, its pretty silly having an item you must use against a specific army.

Nightsword
09-05-2009, 00:59
I'm going to make an assumption here, but I'm assuming that the ability to work against monstrous characters is an additional bonus, so it works the way it did originally before the Daemon FAQ. Therefore not making it useful against one army or type of character, it'd still work against monsters and mounts. And anyway, Daemons aren't the only ones with monstrous characters, Kholec is one of them as well. He might be rarely seen, but he's still there.

And if we are talking about items that are army specific, I've four words for you. "Helm of the Ratslayer." 25pts for +1 AS and fear in skaven or 15pts in an enchanted shield?

selone
09-05-2009, 02:02
Thanks for the update ;)

aeon flux
09-05-2009, 02:15
mmmm... I would really like it if GW would include harpies in the BoC list. Makes sense, as they're chaotic creatures... I just love the looks of winged female daemons... :D
would inject some appreciated hotness into BoC... no other interest other than cosmetic, though everybody would cheer a unit of fast flanking flyers...

MIGHTYPanhead
10-05-2009, 07:25
Well, I'll wait and see. I've found out that half the time someone told me something was awesome, it turned out I didn't like it at all >>

A staff-mate of mine went up to Warhammer world about a year ago (to present the read to succed program, if I'm remembering right), and got to see the new models being worked on. So chuck in another "new beastmen look amazing" vote into the basket.

So far, he's been right about the dice cubes and stompas, so I'm inclined to believe him :D

Valtiel
10-05-2009, 20:34
mmmm... I would really like it if GW would include harpies in the BoC list. Makes sense, as they're chaotic creatures... I just love the looks of winged female daemons... :D
would inject some appreciated hotness into BoC... no other interest other than cosmetic, though everybody would cheer a unit of fast flanking flyers...

There must be something wrong with you then. Look at all those masculine bodies with hairy legs and all! If you ask me that is the best! And I bet everyone around here supports me! *looks around, and decides to crawl away before I'm lynched*:p

J/k btw. Anyway, General of Chaos, I've been following you and your rumours from since the Daemon book rumours started and I really appreciate you sharing all of these with us. Thanks a lot!:D

Mr. ButtHead
27-05-2009, 21:16
Hey, there's any new if Morghur will continue in the new book?

Aflo
28-05-2009, 10:10
Hmm, I have to say I'm not at all keen on the continuation of this metagame between certain special abilities and supposedly 'rare' magic items... it's just lazy really.

Thanks for the rumours GoC, and I agree, it's entirely on the playtester to keep these things secret.

Urgat
28-05-2009, 10:43
A staff-mate of mine went up to Warhammer world about a year ago (to present the read to succed program, if I'm remembering right), and got to see the new models being worked on. So chuck in another "new beastmen look amazing" vote into the basket.

So far, he's been right about the dice cubes and stompas, so I'm inclined to believe him :D

Still, it's a matter of taste. I don't doubt they're coming, but someone telling me they're going to be amazing will not convince me of anything. For instance, I rather like the current minotaurs bare the feet (I like their savage look, the big heads, etc, they really look like embodiments of fury to me), but most people will say they suck. But when I say I like them, I challenge anyone to prove me I'm wrong (heh).


Hey, there's any new if Morghur will continue in the new book?

Would be weird if he was removed, he's like THE beastman character now, and the arch-enemy of the wood elves. Removing him would make no sense, even though I don't put it past GW to actually do just that. His rules (the spawn thing) needs to be toned down, though.

Lord Khabal
28-05-2009, 13:10
I agree. Taste is a very personal thing. I hate the empire and dwarfen model line (urgh!) and there are lots of people who love them... Though it is improving...

Mireadur
28-05-2009, 15:37
Looks like the design team is trying to tone down Daemons with this item.

This is the most stupid and pathetic thing ive faced in a long time, not by GeneralofChaos but from GW itself. (Ok maybe the goldswords move was even stupidier :()

Mr.chair
28-05-2009, 17:17
Was it stupidier? :p Just kidding.

Don't get so upset. GWs method of "balancing" the game has always been tied up with some armies just having the upper hand over others. In a game as unbalanced as warhammer there's nothing to cry about over a single item. Save your tears for playing Tomb Kings ;)

exsulis
28-05-2009, 17:48
Still, it's a matter of taste. I don't doubt they're coming, but someone telling me they're going to be amazing will not convince me of anything. For instance, I rather like the current minotaurs bare the feet (I like their savage look, the big heads, etc, they really look like embodiments of fury to me), but most people will say they suck. But when I say I like them, I challenge anyone to prove me I'm wrong (heh).


Umm, the Current GW minotaurs are just plain *****. The heads are too oversized, and distorted. The bodies are puny, and what is up with humie feet? I demand cloven hoofs!! The models just look bleh. They don't look cool, or ferocious instead they just look like partially mutated Humies in a pathetic kind of way. Its the main reason I never started a Beastmen army.

back on topic, I'd heard a similiar rumor about Beasts balancing, or being a hammer against Daemons. Go fig.

Lord Dan
28-05-2009, 18:48
I guess now GW now has no choice but to execute their current playtesters and start over. Shame.

Kerill
28-05-2009, 18:54
Cheers GOC

Condottiere
28-05-2009, 19:01
Do GW execute their playtesters? Of course, NDAs would prevent them from telling us.

sulla
28-05-2009, 22:06
This is the most stupid and pathetic thing ive faced in a long time, not by GeneralofChaos but from GW itself. (Ok maybe the goldswords move was even stupidier :()

You do realise that it's on a single character, right? And that a herald of khorne on a jugger or chariot can beat any beast character in combat, right? So it's hardly likely to make beasts autowin over daemons. You have to actually get the character into combat with the GD, and alone, so no other chaos character can accept the challenge. Try that with the current beasts army... go on. Try to get that character into combat with the GD.

Lord Dan
29-05-2009, 06:41
Do GW execute their playtesters?

Have you ever met a playtester?

Condottiere
29-05-2009, 07:04
I guess it's like people who claimed to have been in the Special Forces - they aren't allowed to talk about it.

MarcoPollo
29-05-2009, 17:04
It does seem odd, that so many people are trying so hard to discredit my rumour information. Yet my information also been called so good, that Games-Workshop has fired play tester's over it? [it's either good or bad and if it's bad why would anyone get fired over it] If it's good, what's so wrong about telling people the truth?

GoC

Persecution complexes aside, I am happy to have a little glimpse into what could very well be. I find GoC to have some of the most reliable rumors. I just wish that GW would be a little more forgiving to its clients when they butcher a complete line of their work and give us something reasonably sound to work with in the mean time. A faq or a white dwarf addendum would go along way in this customers satisfaction.

Lord Dan
29-05-2009, 17:06
I find GoC to have some of the most reliable rumors.

It's not an issue of the rumors being reliable. It's an issue of him posting the rumors all over forums when whoever confided the information in him probably didn't intend for him to.

DarkTerror
29-05-2009, 17:14
It's not an issue of the rumors being reliable. It's an issue of him posting the rumors all over forums when whoever confided the information in him probably didn't intend for him to.

That's not our issue to decide. Either ignore the rumor or enjoy.

Lord Dan
29-05-2009, 17:27
That's not our issue to decide. Either ignore the rumor or enjoy.

I think it's very much our issue to decide, I just think it's an issue some people would rather ignore. No, we can't control whether or not playtesters leak information. What we can control is our response when people repeat that information on these forums.

So are there any other options? Because I'm not going to ignore the rumor, and I'm actually kind of angry.

MarcoPollo
29-05-2009, 17:48
I think it's very much our issue to decide, I just think it's an issue some people would rather ignore. No, we can't control whether or not playtesters leak information. What we can control is our response when people repeat that information on these forums.


I choose to ignore this issue as it is not important to me. I appreciate the rumors from GoC.

If people are getting in trouble for "leaking" information, that is their problem.

Mireadur
29-05-2009, 18:02
You do realise that it's on a single character, right? And that a herald of khorne on a jugger or chariot can beat any beast character in combat, right? So it's hardly likely to make beasts autowin over daemons. You have to actually get the character into combat with the GD, and alone, so no other chaos character can accept the challenge. Try that with the current beasts army... go on. Try to get that character into combat with the GD.

Im not debating about auto-wins or not, get me shot if im that simple minded, im just stating its totally retarded to create an item to counter something specific from a specific army because they couldnt balance it in the beginning.

Do you realize how simple and silly this strategic game becomes when all your games get reduced to what combo(s) you and your opponent will be using that day? (which to make it worse tend to be always the same).

Lord Dan
29-05-2009, 18:10
I choose to ignore this issue as it is not important to me.

The reason it should be important to you is twofold. First, the reason GW has been cutting back on the number of playtesters (such as gaming groups and the like, who used to be invited to playtest) is due to leaks. The most recently done army books have had very little playtesting done for this reason, and this is apparent in their "breakability". The second reason is related, and it is the inevitable degradation of the rules that would follow even further cuts in outside playtesting. If the rules you play by aren't important to you, then the game probably isn't all that important to you, and if that were the case...well, why would you care about BoC rumors?

MarcoPollo
29-05-2009, 18:26
Leaks also help promote the upcoming book. It helps keep people interested in their product while it is being put together. And often "leaks" are done deliberately for this purpose. It is the same thing when you go to a car show. The company is "leaking" information about its upcoming designs.

Perhaps the reason why GW is not play testing their stuff more (if indeed this is the actual objective case) is that they are short on money and lack the spending priorities for this. I'm sure that GW has not been performing as well lately.

Sure rules are important. GW would do well to consider many different areas of rule genesis other than play testers. Communities like this one and others present good points that often go, at best undervalued, and at worst, with contempt.

I am no business expert, but I feel that GW doesn't pay enough attention to its core communities. To GW, give us some rumors (ideas) and listen to the communities reply.

Condottiere
29-05-2009, 18:38
Companies that can't or won't communicate with their customers eventually suffer backlashes; total control of information is impossible and measures to do so usually backfire.

Tabletop miniatures aren't electronic games where there's enough selection that if you are dissatisfied with one product, you can drop it and move on to the next. However, that doesn't mean that GW customers won't spend their money on other leisure activities, in preference to buying GW products.

Dungeon_Lawyer
29-05-2009, 19:19
The reason it should be important to you is twofold. First, the reason GW has been cutting back on the number of playtesters (such as gaming groups and the like, who used to be invited to playtest) is due to leaks. The most recently done army books have had very little playtesting done for this reason, and this is apparent in their "breakability". The second reason is related, and it is the inevitable degradation of the rules that would follow even further cuts in outside playtesting. If the rules you play by aren't important to you, then the game probably isn't all that important to you, and if that were the case...well, why would you care about BoC rumors?
Leaks....
Since they cant stop it.....
The problem is not those who leak the information, the problem is with GW's response. They cut back on playtesters and stop outsourcing playtesting to the greater community, fact, -and as a result we get broken armybooks and the quality of the game goes down.

GW should be embracing its ethusiastic customer base that wants to know all the latest rumours, not providing them with an inferior product in order to protect secrecy-- If rumours or artwork get leaked, so what , go with it -allow the community the opportunity to shape the game. Cause I would bet hard cash that a completely leaked but community playtested BoC armybook would play a lot better than the "in-house" one where gonna get.

Charistoph
29-05-2009, 23:30
GW should be embracing its ethusiastic customer base that wants to know all the latest rumours, not providing them with an inferior product in order to protect secrecy-- If rumours or artwork get leaked, so what , go with it -allow the community the opportunity to shape the game. Cause I would bet hard cash that a completely leaked but community playtested BoC armybook would play a lot better than the "in-house" one where gonna get.

IDK, they could use a little over powering...

mrtn
30-05-2009, 10:10
Last time they let the community influence the beastmen was in the preview list for the 6th ed armybook. "Oh, the Shaggoth is too cheesy, you must nerf it!" was the result.

Jabroni the Wise
30-05-2009, 12:05
If rumours or artwork get leaked, so what , go with it -allow the community the opportunity to shape the game. Cause I would bet hard cash that a completely leaked but community playtested BoC armybook would play a lot better than the "in-house" one where gonna get.

The entire Warhammer-playing community is stolid. Some more than others, but I would not want anyone outside of Games Workshop touching this game at all, unless they actually have a hand in it already. Just reading what everyone says on the various forums alone, its a shock that some people can play the game, much less devise rules for it.


Companies that can't or won't communicate with their customers eventually suffer backlashes; total control of information is impossible and measures to do so usually backfire.


On the grounds that their clientele are extremely obtuse and have no idea of what's good for them, I'd say that's solid reasoning to not communicate.

Games Workshop doesn't need to tell anyone a thing. The community doesn't need to leak any rumors to build hype, because most of the people in the community are going to drink up everyone else's spit of 'oh well i heard from a very reliable source (ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP)' or 'well me and my friends talked to old jim whos the manager at the place we play at'.

What publicity or rumors does Games Workshop need to send out if their fans are arguing and hyping about it every day? The community is an unheard-of biblical self-sustaining beast that somehow survives on what one end produces for the other, and unless a miracle of Nature razes every single one in the community, then it'll keep on thriving on its own hype and rumors even as it lays catatonic in its own Mountain Dew soaked deathbed.


And if that was too much to read, then I'll just say this. Games Workshop has everything under control and the community is still pretty dumb and should keep their dirty hands off the game.


But I also believe that a few play tester's rights are not more important. Then the ten's of thousand of people rights. Who enjoy reading rumour's on the internet. To me the scale is not even close, I believe in the freedom of information act.


Also, this is probably the dumbest statement I've ever heard.

steppingonyou
30-05-2009, 15:59
on this subject:

i had the deamon book in my hands for all of 4 weeks before it went to print. all of my feed back was listened to and weighed.

as for balance... who cares? its a game. you play it. 20 clanrats are NOT equal to 20 spearmen. there is no balance at all.

the beast book IS a counter to deamons. enjoy it. it will also play well against VC. and orcs and goblins. even chaos dwarves.

if you can all wait till it comes out, play a few games with them. avoid the semantics and over thinking of wording. enjoy the mass flank attacks and monster minotaur lords killing your finely crafted bret army.

lol
if anything, something is getting turned to stone

Condottiere
30-05-2009, 16:02
On the basis of the above, I'd guess that we can look forward to more monsters with special rules.

Herod
30-05-2009, 16:13
And if that was too much to read, then I'll just say this. Games Workshop has everything under control and the community is still pretty dumb and should keep their dirty hands off the game.

LOL

I think I'll steal you own quote and apply it to your post.


...this is probably the dumbest statement I've ever heard.

H

Jabroni the Wise
30-05-2009, 16:26
LOL

I think I'll steal you own quote and apply it to your post.

H

I'll freely admit any day that Games Workshop is smarter than the collective mouth-breathers of the Warseer community. It's not saying much, but its true.

Harwammer
31-05-2009, 00:01
IDK, they could use a little over powering...
I think it is unfair of you to suggest that because BoC have been underpowered in the past they deserve to be a little bit overpowered in the future. Its not like HoC daemons or 6th ed DE got boosted to top tier in 7th ed.


Last time they let the community influence the beastmen was in the preview list for the 6th ed armybook. "Oh, the Shaggoth is too cheesy, you must nerf it!" was the result.

This is exatly what I was going to say too. Even in WoC the shaggoth sucks because they tried to 'rebalance' shaggy, i.e. give some/take some, instead of completely revamping it to something 'useful'.

Out of curiosity, point for point, is there a worse monster than BoC shaggy in the game? Likewise, point for point, is there a worse monstrous character than the BoC shaggy champion in the game?

sulla
31-05-2009, 22:40
Im not debating about auto-wins or not, get me shot if im that simple minded, im just stating its totally retarded to create an item to counter something specific from a specific army because they couldnt balance it in the beginning.


Do you realize how simple and silly this strategic game becomes when all your games get reduced to what combo(s) you and your opponent will be using that day? (which to make it worse tend to be always the same).
Are greater daemons unbalanced? The empire players probably don't think so. Or Dwarf players. Or DE players. Or anyone with decent shooting. Or anyone with very manouverable, fast, hard hitting combat units. But armies with low ld, who are also slow with poor armour? They just might have no real answers to GD's. And since they are the only armies that need specific solutions, look for armies like beasts or tomb kings to get specific anti GD (and hydra and treeman) items to give those specific armies tools to defeat things that other armies don't have.

Condottiere
01-06-2009, 07:00
Since BoC will be getting a new line-up, they may be unearthing some counter-parts to those Daemons, that they dug up from the deepest darkest parts of the forest.

MarcoPollo
01-06-2009, 22:39
I'll freely admit any day that Games Workshop is smarter than the collective mouth-breathers of the Warhammer community. It's not saying much, but its true.


Well Jabroni, I think it is arrogant of anyone who is unwilling to listen. If a teacher/prof doesn't listen to the needs of his class, then that class stays stale. If a salesman doesn't listen to his client then the client goes to someone who does.

Having fresh eyes on a subject often helps.

The listening doesn't have to be an active thing either. They could just peruse the forums and listen to what is said. There is certainly no harm in it.

Death Korp
02-06-2009, 14:40
'The listening doesn't have to be an active thing either. They could just peruse the forums and listen to what is said. There is certainly no harm in it.'

The only problem with that though is that there are too many forums with too many people with too many different opinions. If there was one forum, like the PP forums, then they could have more control of things. but remember, they are a smaller community, the GW community is massive. Just imagine the size of the forum. So many users with so many conflicting opinions on their products.

The only forum I have seen GW support in any way is the Ammobunker. They had 3 tables at last years Games Day UK (check the GW webpage on GD 2008) to represent the internet community. The reason they chose the AB was because they didn't whine like most forums (e.g this one), but because they were a strong community and was painting/modelling based.

I think other forums can learn from the sucess of the Ammobunker.

DK

The Red Scourge
02-06-2009, 18:15
Out of curiosity, point for point, is there a worse monster than BoC shaggy in the game? Likewise, point for point, is there a worse monstrous character than the BoC shaggy champion in the game?

Yup WoC shaggy. He's gotten upgraded to 7th, so there no hope for that guy. At least BoC shaggy's got hope :)

Is T6 too much to ask for, or just a 100 pt reduction, so you'll only feel envy instead feeling abused when looking at a hydra? :cries:

Harwammer
02-06-2009, 18:42
Yup WoC shaggy. He's gotten upgraded to 7th, so there no hope for that guy. At least BoC shaggy's got hope :)

Is T6 too much to ask for, or just a 100 pt reduction, so you'll only feel envy instead feeling abused when looking at a hydra? :cries:

I don't know about WoC shaggoths, chaos players were asking for a str increase and a points decrease on the shaggoth and they got it. Sure, weapons got more expensive as 'balance', but they are still better than the BoC one.

You are right that Phil Kelly undershot the mark for rebalancing WoC shaggys; compare them to hydras, steam tanks, even giants and try not to cry!

Lets hope BoC get to retain their gorgeous shaggoth model, but lets also hope they don't get a copy and paste for rules from either of the current chaos books. I find it hard to think the BoC shaggoth will be much cheaper or better than the WoC one because then the shaggoths won't be 'balanced' with each other.

Shimmergloom
02-06-2009, 19:42
The reason it should be important to you is twofold. First, the reason GW has been cutting back on the number of playtesters (such as gaming groups and the like, who used to be invited to playtest) is due to leaks.

What's hilarious here is that Sunday while I was playing warhammer about 6 or so people were playing warmachine. I hadn't played warmachine in about a year and a half, so I asked how out of date I was.

He mentioned how the new '2nd edition' of warmachine was being tested out now. How you could just download the pdf of it before the final version comes out in a few months.

What a novel concept.

Don't worry about leaks, but let the people test it out a bit. See what's broken, give feedback.

sephiroth87
02-06-2009, 19:42
Daemon princes from daemons and mortals aren't balanced with each other. I don't see why the shaggoths should be in beasts and mortals.

If they screwed up with the first one, don't be afraid to fix it!