PDA

View Full Version : Official April 2010 White Dwarf (USA 363, UK 364 etc) Feedback Thread



Wintermute
22-03-2010, 20:40
Its time for yet another White Dwarf Feedback thread, this time for the April issue (US 363, UK 364 etc).

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

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

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

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

Wintermute
The WarSeer Inquisition

Quetzl
23-03-2010, 00:25
This issue was okay, it was heavily focused on Blood Angels, which I enjoyed reading - but on the most part it was a little sparse. The Old War Stories section was probably the best part.

swifty2
23-03-2010, 00:56
I'd say definitely above average, nowhere near as good as it used to be but definitely a good issue by recent standards, the battle report was a good read, the modelling articles are interesting, I enjoyed the WOTR section just for showcasing a non "studio" army, same goes for the vampire army features. The Sanguinor painting guise is really cool, and it's nice the way it compares some of the Blood Angels characters painted in metallics to their nmm counterparts.

Gunless Ganger
23-03-2010, 15:47
I thought it was overall ok - I gave it a 6.

But that battle report?

So a small assault squad of Blood angles led by... Their ULTIMATE commander/avatar/angel guy squares off against an equally mediocre force of chaos being led by - The Destroyer of WORLDS! ... Seriously? This guy decided to show up for this puny little tussle in the jungle? If I were him I wouldn't even get out of bed for anything less than an Apocolypse game. And the angel dude - doesn't he magically show up to only the most important and dire battles to save the day?

"Ok you're going on a covert scouting mission to asses the enemy strength - SUMMON The Sanguinor!!"

"Dang I can't get the lid off this jar of pickles - SUMMON The Sanguinor!!!"

Bigbot
23-03-2010, 21:58
I loved the battle report, felt it had a very old school approach to it. it was clear, good maps, simple scenario.

Really if the worst we can pick up is 'I don't agree Abaddon should be in a small jungle' then we're reaching

Gunless Ganger
24-03-2010, 14:24
I loved the battle report, felt it had a very old school approach to it. it was clear, good maps, simple scenario.

Oh it was a good read - I did give the mag a 6 after all. But still...


Really if the worst we can pick up is 'I don't agree Abaddon should be in a small jungle' then we're reaching

No not reaching... it's still silly. You have the super god characters killing swaths of troops all by themselves till they finally meet in the center and duke it out. It's like bad old days of 5th edition Fantasy Herohammer. Why even bring all those other troops. It's silly things in battle reports like this that lead to the huge # of kids with special characters in every single army list.

mrtn
24-03-2010, 16:38
I agree with Gunless Ganger about the silly use of characters, and with the 6 vote.

Good to see some player armies, even if one of them was probably bought with GW money.

Drop-Trooper
24-03-2010, 23:13
Gah! where is Lord Domcles (sp? - but you know who i mean) with his always enjoyable take onthe mag?

Lord Damocles
25-03-2010, 12:37
Gah! where is Lord Domcles (sp? - but you know who i mean) with his always enjoyable take onthe mag?
*Bright flash and theatrical puff of smoke*


Before I start my monthly whine review I should confess that I actually looked over this month's issue in the store before my copy landed on my doormat. Whether this has altered my opinion of it or not I don't really know; although it did remove any sense of wondering what was going to be inside as I removed the shrinkwrap.

Editorial - 'I like red Marines. There are red Marines'. Great. Hands up who would have prefered to have seen some pictures of the dodgily painted old Blood Angels? After all, we've all got a selection of embarassingly painted models from our pasts (or at least I have...)
Poor

News and New Releases - The 'Countdown to Destruction' boxout was vaguely interesting in that it appeared to confirm the incomming Nightspinner kit (maybe old news to some, but I haven't been keeping abreast of the Spearhead rumours). The Tempest Guard box below is a wasted opportunity I feel - this could have made a nice 'pimp Marines' feature, but instead it's just a half-page box which tells us very little.
The rest is fairly standard Marine selling and bits telling us to go online.
OK

The Host of Angels (Blood Angel Designers' Notes) - I like Blood Angels. I own lots of Blood Angels. I ought to be excited by new Blood Angels. I'm not.
'On a roll of a 1 the squad loses their And They Shall Know No Fear special rule and gains Furious Charge and Fearless. So while you lose some tactical flexibility the effect is not entirely undesireable'. What? You lose the ability to fail morale checks? There's no real downside to the Red Thirst at all then. This is a classic 'say what's new, but fail to explain why'.
There's also the explanation of why Death Company Dreadnoughts are Troops ('the reasons already mentioned') - because they're thrown in to the fight first? That's a stupid reason for being Troops. I find it far more likely that Elites had become full of bloat and they wnated to shift more Dreadnoughts.
Then there's, 'Matt is keen to point out that they are a Codex Chapter'. So keen in fact that they couldn't just use Codex: Space Marines!
/Rant

The notes accompanying the pictures are utterly pointless if you know anything about Marines, and the plug for the Blood Angels Omnibus just offends me.

The sprue breakdown for the Sanguinary Guard is good (and convinced me to pick up a box), but I question why the two sprue breakdowns in this issue are in seperate places.
Poor

Riders of the Riddermark - Tactics for Rohan. *Yawn* We've seen it all before. So. Many. Times.
Poor

Red in Tooth and Claw (Beastman Tactics) - I guess it might be useful to some. Seems rather too simple though (move up front, appear behind, CHARGE!). Also, the 3000pt list seems particularly pointless as Fantasy is played at 2000pts if I'm not mistaken...
OK

Old war Stories - So special rules need to be supplied for a game which isn't driven by rules. Riiight. Run that by me again..?
All I took from this was that they played a[nother] game with some special rules they made up and some stuff happened. Great. But what were the special rules? (most were not actually presented), what actually happened? (the Goblin got squished by a falling Giant, but who won?) etc.
Poor

Move and Fire - 'I like to call this type of army a 'Move and Fire' force / because gunline sounds too static'. Followed by 'deployment is crucial when using a Move and Fire army as once deployed you don't want to move your units unless it's absolutely necessary'.
So it's a bloomin' GUNLINE! Just man up a bit and admit it!
Poor

Angels of Vengeance (Blood Angels vs. Black Legion battle report) - First I should echo the comments above regarding the number of special characters (slightly hypocritically, as I intend to use Seth in my army, by hey...).

Secondly I would like to point out once again that the players/whoever writes up these battle rports is a chump who doesn't know the rules. Observe:
- The victory conditions were changed so the Blood Angels Jump Infantry could claim objectives (in Vanguard it's just Infantry). Balance? Never heard of it! :rolleyes:
- In the first turn the Blood Angel Rhinos pop smoke in the shooting phase. The SHOOTING PHASE?!? :mad:
- Lemartes kills the last Terminator in two successive rounds of combat. Come again? :eyebrows:

Added to that it's another 2000pt game rather than 1500, and the armies are chump-tastic.
Poor

(Off-topic speculation: The Rubric Marine on page 56 to the left of the Aspiring Sorceror. Black Legion colour scheme. Painted for new studio army to coincide with new codex or just old variant?)

Standard Bearer - It's like a drinking game. Down a shot every time Jervis mentions the heraldry of the Empire book!
I fail to see the point of this ('Look at the pictures'? But at least my blood pressure isn't as high as at this point last month...

Jervis should be using this space to talk about 'real issues'. For example: people don't think Pyrovores are worth anything. Jervis should argue for them, telling people to think outside the box a little, or not to play agaist Marines every single game. Or people think FAQs take too long to be released. Jervis should attempt to explain this and say how the situation will be improved in the future. Etc. ect...
Poor

'Eavy Metal Masterclass (The Sanguinor) - Non-metal metal. Not a fan myself, but I know a decent painting guide when I see one.
Good

Modelling Workshop (Statues) - 'Erm, paint it'. Great. Slightly pointless.
OK

Modelling Workshop: Blood Angels - Sprue breakdown is good (but why here and not with the Sanguinary Guard breakdown?), the rest of this article is lacklustre at best. They're just Marines. OK, so they're Blood Angel Marines mixed with other Marines... Marines then. In different poses. Like the ones in all the other pictures of Blood Angels in this issue...
Poor

Battlefield Challenges: (Fantasy) Duel of Champions - I don't know all that much about Fantasy rules, but isn't the most likely result of two characters, both with Killing Blow, charging each other, that whoever strikes first will kill their opponant in the first round of combat? Perhaps somebody who knows more could enlighten me.
No rating yet, pending enlightenment

War of the Ring Army Workshop (Rohan) - What a surprise. They look just like every other bunch of Rohan models I've ever seen. Dull.
Poor

Army Showcase (Vampire Counts) - Interesting painting style. This would be much improved by having more, larger pictures to the models/units/army. For example, the Zombies appear to have non-standard heads (I'm guessing Gouls) but the picture's so small I can barely see.
OK

Gumf at Back - usually I moan. This month I'll just make an observation. I know the manager of the new Kettering store (pg.109, top right). Yay!
Also the manager of Stratford-Upon-Avon is invisible?
Poor


Not a good issue for me this month by any stretch. Not sure what to vote it; there was very little 'good' content, and relatively little 'OK' content, but then it wasn't the worst issue ever either. Maybe a 3.

mrtn
25-03-2010, 13:24
Battlefield Challenges: (Fantasy) Duel of Champions - I don't know all that much about Fantasy rules, but isn't the most likely result of two characters, both with Killing Blow, charging each other, that whoever strikes first will kill their opponant in the first round of combat? Perhaps somebody who knows more could enlighten me.
No rating yet, pending enlightenment
I'm not sure what he means when both counts as charging, since this never happens in the real game. Both get to strike simultaneously?
I do however know that the picture they used (Doombull vs high elf on horse) gave me a nasty tactic to use. Doombulls and other large US3 characters are immune to Killing Blow. Would I mind getting a free Killing Blow ability, and the chance to kill off an enemy character, while probably survive myself since I've got 4 or 5 wounds? Yes, I would, thank you very much. :angel:

Rick_1138
25-03-2010, 14:24
Firstly, a 'Hi Everybody' as this is my first login in over 10 months!

Anyway, I agree with a lot lord D has said, it was not a bad issue, I am biased as my passion in the hobby is painting, and the seraphim guide was exceptional, the Davy metal masterclass of the last year or so is a brilliant part and my main reason for sub.

I do feel the magazine is getting better eith the current editor now he is comfy, better hobby articles, okay battle reports and a bit less 'catalogue'.

Lotr stuff is getting stale, it could be replaced with either a comic or short story each month, just a thought.

Lord Damocles
25-03-2010, 15:44
I'm not sure what he means when both counts as charging, since this never happens in the real game. Both get to strike simultaneously?
In my distinctly un-Fantasy-aligned mind I assumed since both characters are striking first, they'd stike at the same time, and that they'd both get any Furious Charge-esque abilities which only work for the first round of combat.


I guess if the enemy has a big beasty wich can't be inta-killed, that's when you send in a Joe Nobody character to get squished into a paste.

S_A_T_S
26-03-2010, 20:43
BLOOD ANGELS! Loved the HM-Masterclass, and the scenario article. If only they could get rid of the LotR stuff. Who the hell reads that crap? They need to rebalance and get more fantasy articles in there though. Too 40k at the moment.

EDIT: I don't see the problem with the Jump Troops claiming objectives. I admit I don't have the Battle Missions book, but in the WD box-out, it says "not JUST troops, but all infantry, so I assumed Troops + Infantry could claim objectives. I was a little surprised when the Guard captured the last point, but I have no problems with the assault squads capping points, as they're Troops and also Jump INFANTRY.

Lewis
27-03-2010, 18:12
As someone at my club pointed out to me the Beastman tactics described required you to roll double six and also double four plus when rolling to bring on ambushers. As much as I hate to say it this is classic tactics for children writing: sure you might be able to get this to happen, it'd be very cool, but is it probable? Is it a sound idea? A tactica on how to cope when this stupid random rule doesn't work would be far more useful.

I haven't actually managed to finish the Jervis article, so dull was the content. Last month's should be the model: where he talks about a commonly asked question like "will there be new armies?". My question would be "Why did what happened with the Blood Bowl rules comittee happen Jervis?" I wouldn't care if gave a party line answer so long as he gave an answers.

As it stands Jervis' Standard Bearer articles read like an old colonel discussing his favourite pipe tobaccos whilst the Highland clearances are carried out in the background.

Red Marines are red.

darius-god-of-biscuits
27-03-2010, 18:53
4 - not the worst.

Is it me or it head on the front page character really poor? Paint a helmet if you can't paint faces!

Lewis
27-03-2010, 19:17
I thought exactly that. Is it the same guy that did the IG one? he can't do hands either.

BattleofLund
27-03-2010, 20:27
Red Marines are red.

At least Blood Marines won't get grotesque Bats to ride about on. Err... or will they? I honestly haven't read the Codex.

I gave the WD a three. Seen Marines before, even Red/Blood Marines, and am not too excited. Even Marines With Wings fail to rouse my interest.

Batrep: didn't like. One side rushes the other, who tries to stand and fire. Rushers win. Interesting tactics? No.

TheBigBadWolf
28-03-2010, 19:24
Gave it a 5, the heavy metal master class was good and the battle report was ok, disapointed that the Chapter Approved stuff is on the web instead of the mag, livery and background of the BA and successors.

ORKY ARD BOYZ
29-03-2010, 11:00
Move and Fire - 'I like to call this type of army a 'Move and Fire' force / because gunline sounds too static'. Followed by 'deployment is crucial when using a Move and Fire army as once deployed you don't want to move your units unless it's absolutely necessary'.


This made me laugh. The entire reason I read this section is because of your reviews.

AndrewGPaul
29-03-2010, 18:52
Red in Tooth and Claw (Beastman Tactics) - I guess it might be useful to some. Seems rather too simple though (move up front, appear behind, CHARGE!). Also, the 3000pt list seems particularly pointless as Fantasy is played at 2000pts if I'm not mistaken...
OK

Angels of Vengeance (Blood Angels vs. Black Legion battle report)...

Added to that it's another 2000pt game rather than 1500, and the armies are chump-tastic.
Poor

So, all Battle Reports and/or sample armies should be 2,000 points of Fantasy or 1,500 points of 40K?

Presumably, the battle report was 2,000 points because there was more than 1,500 points of cool new stuff to showcase. The other comments about the quality of the scenario aside, that seems reasonable to me.

Osbad
30-03-2010, 10:10
Saw it in the Newsagents this morning. Yet another lost sale. 3.

Lord Damocles
30-03-2010, 10:48
So, all Battle Reports and/or sample armies should be 2,000 points of Fantasy or 1,500 points of 40K?
Not all, no. But *some* would certainly be an improvement.

*grabs nearest pile of White Dwarves*

From 348 to current issue, there have been 17 40K battle reports by my count. Of those, 1 has been 1500 points (to be fair 6 were Apoc, so 1 out of 11). In the same time there have been 12 other army lists presented for 40K. Of these, 1 has been 1500pts (3 were for 1000pt doubles tournament).
None at all have been 1850pts which I'm led to believe is the standard in Americaland.

Again over the same period, there have been 7 Fantasy battle reports, none of which have been the standard 2000pts. There have been 10 other Fantasy army lists, of which 7 have been 2000pts (rather better).



I get that battle reports are used to push product, but (at least in my humble opinion) they would do this better if they used armies which represented the type of army that you could concievably take to a pick up game), as well as being better balanced and easier to report on accurately.
Of course, it could be argued that I'm missing the point and that more points is 'more fun', but I really don't see that...


(P.S. Sorry if this is too General White Dwarf Feedback Mister Big Scary Robot, Sir)

warpoet
04-04-2010, 21:41
The Tempest Guard box below is a wasted opportunity I feel - this could have made a nice 'pimp Marines' feature, but instead it's just a half-page box which tells us very little.
The rest is fairly standard Marine selling and bits telling us to go online.


Did anyone else think the original concept art for the Tempest Guard looked like a winged pointy acorn?

War Angel
09-04-2010, 19:18
Likes: Cover is good. Fierce Blood Angel guy shooting. Who are the guys in robes?

Photos of Blood Angels vs. things are great. Showing off what a force looks like.

Models look good and wouldn't mind getting some of these myself. Eventhough I don't have a
Blood Angels army. Just Dante from the Heroes of the Adeptus Astartes box. Which may
make me have a command squad for him.

New models shown. The Space Marine statue would make a great piece of scenery.
The characters look fun. The Sanguinor looks like something I'd want for fun.

Page art makes me want to scan them and put them on my wall.

Dislikes: We don't see more like the guys in red robes in games.

More Rohan stuff.

DeviantApostle
17-04-2010, 12:37
I had to give it a 4 for the battle report, despite liking the rest of it.

Turning to page 55, you have a nicely balanced Blood Angels force despite the presence of Sanguinor. No Deep Striking Land Raiders, no assault terminators, no Blood Talon Dreads... the only way this fails is in that it doesn't really showcase some of the problem children of the Codex, which I can forgive since the army is nicely balanced and formulated.

Nothing can go wrong, my heart is calm and still as I turn the page and... BY THE FOUR LORDS OF CHAOS WHAT IS THIS MESS?!?

Let's set aside that I can't find 'Bolt of Tzeench' in my Codex and that Abaddon looks like the most dangerous miget in 40K (that model REALY needs an update). Way to go putting the big A in a unit that negates him being Fearless. Bolt of Change? All those points on a short range lascannon that might not go off? Really? A DP without wings? No Obliterators? No Rhinos? What the heck is this guy smoking?

And it gets worse. I won't go on but I really, really, hope there's not some noob CSM player taking notes from the Batrep. Really not surprising he got stomped into the ground.

Darthvegeta800
19-04-2010, 00:48
I had to give it a 4 for the battle report, despite liking the rest of it.

Turning to page 55, you have a nicely balanced Blood Angels force despite the presence of Sanguinor. No Deep Striking Land Raiders, no assault terminators, no Blood Talon Dreads... the only way this fails is in that it doesn't really showcase some of the problem children of the Codex, which I can forgive since the army is nicely balanced and formulated.

Nothing can go wrong, my heart is calm and still as I turn the page and... BY THE FOUR LORDS OF CHAOS WHAT IS THIS MESS?!?

Let's set aside that I can't find 'Bolt of Tzeench' in my Codex and that Abaddon looks like the most dangerous miget in 40K (that model REALY needs an update). Way to go putting the big A in a unit that negates him being Fearless. Bolt of Change? All those points on a short range lascannon that might not go off? Really? A DP without wings? No Obliterators? No Rhinos? What the heck is this guy smoking?

And it gets worse. I won't go on but I really, really, hope there's not some noob CSM player taking notes from the Batrep. Really not surprising he got stomped into the ground.



Guess I'm a noob CSM player since I give a rat's ass about minmaxing. I'm the kind of guy who'd field an army without rhino's or a Daemon Prince with an odd fluffy loadout.
THIS is what I frequently like about WD. GW promotes games that are meant to be fun not competitive minmaxed nonsense.

Von Blacke
19-04-2010, 17:26
Gave it a four.

To be honest, is it really necessary to overload a single magazine with one topic? Yes, new Marines, keep us posted for a few months. Not "OMG BLOOD ANGELS READ NOW" It gets on my nerves, I know there's something new, I know you want to sell it, but do we need an overload of one thing? I think not.

Please go back to the days of equal coverage, if this was a weekly publication, fine, but it's not, and sometimes I like to read about a bit of everything.

You can tell me to stop living in the past as much as you want, but I miss content, not catalogue.

Sureshot05
21-04-2010, 22:44
So a late review - more for those who might be still sitting on the fence and also in case the editorial staff are reading as well as general interest.


Editorial - Standard - like said above, a missed opportunity to show an old and a new painted marine by the editor to give hope to new hobbiests and to make it interesting to old alike.

News and New Releases - Fine, except I feel here is where the sprue breakdown should be. That way I can see what parts are of interest to us non BA players.

The Host of Angels (Blood Angel Designers' Notes) - Poor. I think this could have benefited from being done like an interview. Make the first half the sale and the second (maybe in boxed out sections) some revealing Q&A. Why troop dreds, in terms of balance and compared to other chapters?

Riders of the Riddermark - Tactics for Rohan. De ja vu. The problem with tactics for LotR is that they rarely describe some sneaky combo's which can be really interesting if played right.

Red in Tooth and Claw (Beastman Tactics) - Actually quite good. but the sample minotaur list was completely out of place and screamed buy minotaurs.

Old war Stories - Interesting, but the scenario should have been here.

Move and Fire - interesting for rookies, but the real show was the army lists. Maybe more focus on these would have made a better article.

Angels of Vengeance (Blood Angels vs. Black Legion battle report) - Loved it,
but spoiled by bias victory conditions. Felt like an older battle report and with a little more detail and no bias could well have been the greatest for over a year.

Standard Bearer - Fine, but I think Jervis could do with talking about some of the more fundamental or interesting challenges and issues. For example, a detailed description of the design process for an army book would be great.

'Eavy Metal Masterclass (The Sanguinor) - Great. Detailed and very useful.

Modelling Workshop (Statues) - Poor, just "look at me"

Modelling Workshop: Okay, found some of the conversions a little lack luster but nice article

Battlefield Challenges: (Fantasy) Duel of Champions - A bit unbalanced against monstrous creatures, but interesting in principle if you talk to your opponent (which I assume you do if you are arranging to trial the scenario)


War of the Ring Army Workshop (Rohan) - nice, but needed more closeups.

Army Showcase (Vampire Counts) - nice, but needed more closeups.


Gumf at Back - standard rubbish.

7.

Mojaco
22-04-2010, 22:53
Sorry, I voted 4 but I thought this was for UK365 :)
364 was okay, nothing fancy. A 7 at best. 365 sucked though, but that's for another topic.

EldarWonderland
23-04-2010, 15:02
Gave it a 3.

Totally Bored with Blood Angels - everywhere I look it's a sea of Red.
LotR - nice looking models.
OnG - ok

A Page dedicated to pictures of a sprue? You're having a laugh.

grissom2006
24-04-2010, 10:27
Got to admit first WD that i've bought in a while thats actually had me sit down and read through a good number of the articles. My normal thing would be to pick it up and flick through it and place it on my collection pile these days.

This time however i found myself reading through most of the articles which is a first in many months. Found the BA articles to be the usual over glorified sales pitch but it did show a little restraint. Loved the none metallic painting article so going to have to make a copy that until i master the art of it and do it off the top of my head.

Just spotted a screw up in this issue the boxed 40K sets has the SM Commander but the picture of the box is for the SM Dreadnought page93.