General White Dwarf Feedback Thread

[The Judge]

Agreed to everything Avian said... plus the painting standards - we need more Matt Hutson, and less Adi Wood. No offence...well perhaps some.

[tzeentchgiant]

I had an idea for an article a while back, I don't know how well it would fit in with GW's grand scheme of things, but I thought it would be cool to have a concept art double-page.

Each time a new army was going to be released (maybe two months before), a pair of pages would be dedicated to the artwork, with little explainations of the ideas, just 20-40 words beside each picture. It's just often there is a lot of images that don't make it to print, or don't feature on the site, it would be nice to hear something about them. It wouldn't have to be regular, once every few months, with all the systems covered, and maybe even the FW concepts too, that would be great.

Anyways, I'm not sure how possible this would be, but I would love to see something to that effect feature in a WD, could be a companion to the Designer's Notes section that comes along with each release.

Thoughts?

TG

[Hlokk]

TG, great idea. They generally do a "how models got from concept to plastic" bit, along with a desighners notes section. if they showed progression from concept art to finished art with new releases, along with the paragraph of words you suggest, that would round the peices out nicely. perhaps they could do something similar with fluff?

[Pertinax]

I've said it before, but more "regionalized" editions. Such as UK and N.Europe. This streamlines the Astronomican part, as reading about GW Poole isn't that interesting for somebody who isn't in the same country.

Same applies for the events. Lots of events in N.Europe, but they are seldom listed.

Clubs too. Now what about a N.Europe Club network?
(Ex-Mod Pertinax)

[Sgt John Keel]

The mini editorials at the begining of each section are quite good too.

True. They were the only good thing about last WD.

I too agree with Avian, and the shop pages are useless, haven't seen Pertinax store on there.

/Adrian

[Chuffy]

Less focus on one army. A couple of months ago there was an excellent Warhammer section of WD, with the Cairns list AND the Moulder list, lots of background and lots of new rules, it was brilliant! It wiped the floor with the shoddy "BUY BT AND PAINT THEM LIKE THIS" articles of 40k and the "Gandalf beating his dead horse while trying to get blood from a stone" LOTR scenarios.

Why can't we see more of this stuff?

And cut down on the Astronomicon...or get rid of it completely.

Also, no offense Mr Rees but the last WD was terrible. I mean....the SitE designer notes....WHAT DESIGNER NOTES!?

[static grass]

Warhammer is about playing with toy soldiers. I want articles that inspire me to do that. This is best exemplified by the recent army lists and extra units articles in white dwarf such as the empire knights article or the imperial high command article or zombie pirate list. I don't even need to own the army they are just great to read, it would be nice that were always official so that the forum kids wouldn't always moan but well...

The painting faces article was also excellent. This is your template for teaching how to's. Usually the Master class articles go like this "I then painted the ultramarine blue... just ten times better than you" which helps no one.

I hated the recent battle report with jervis johnsons dark elves as soon as I saw his army selection I knew he would get shredded. I too hated the battle report where the dwarfs had to leggit over a table I honestly thought they were taking the urine. Cool scenerios are good but balance makes them great.

In spite of some really good articles last year I have stopped buying white dwarf as I feel sick picking it up. I just can not stand the thought of another marine staring out of the page. Maybe marines do generate half of GW sales but really do you ever expect that to change by blasting us with them constantly? Perhaps you’re not bothered.

If I divide WD into three parts 40K, WFB and LotR I think the best section is the LotR section and I don't even play the game. The terrain building, the background, the battle reports I don't understand it is all so much better prepared and more inspiring. These are articles to get people to play the game. Most people on this forum just dismiss them but once you read them you get this feel of narration that makes for a good read.

Okay so WD has been catalogue for years but in the past I think WD generated revenue for GW by getting people to play the game and then open their wallets. I feel WD has turned into a tool purely for generating surges in sales of a particular product, this may have worked for a while but now I think it does more harm than good both to the hobby and to GW.

[Grimtuff]

I too agree with Avian, and the shop pages are useless, haven't seen Pertinax store on there.

Likewise, though i'll only agree with you until next issue or 316 (when they feature Lincoln), as my figs are in that one /bragging mode off.

The editing on that last one was terrible, the text did not match up with the poses the marines were in. Number 3 "firing from the hip", nope try number 5.

[Flame of Udun]

Ditto to Avian and Hlokk! You guys really whammed that nail on its head!

Personally the best Battle Report I've ever read was in issue 164 (cover showing a Nurgle Warrior standing on the deck of a Plague ship, back when Man'O War was still around), Chaos Dwarves vs High Elves but all presented as a narrative of the battle, not "I moved here then he moved there", that was a really great piece of writing. IIRC the elves got their asses royally whupped

[Grimtuff]

Personally the best Battle Report I've ever read was in issue 164 (cover showing a Nurgle Warrior standing on the deck of a Plague ship, back when Man'O War was still around), Chaos Dwarves vs High Elves but all presented as a narrative of the battle, not "I moved here then he moved there", that was a really great piece of writing. IIRC the elves got their asses royally whupped

They've tried doing that before, but either through bad writing styles and/or editing, not a lot of people could determine what the hell was going on.

[EvC]

Yes, I for one do not appreciate battle reports told in that manner. I also don't like how battle reports seem to be becoming a novelty in WD, where they'll only have one if they feel there's a good reason for it, like to show off the new army, or Terminators or whatever. LotR battle reports simply do not count, or if the LotR battle report counts as the issue's main batrep, then please include a secondary one as well, not necessarily a full-size one, but a fun one like a kill-team or the seven heroes-style that we've seen before. And if there happens to be no big release one month, then it's easy to come up with a great battle report using amazing unique armies or great players. How about using the extra WHFB army lists occasionally as well? Speed Freeks, Lost and the Damned etc. etc. have taken part in numerous batreps, but none of the SoC lists have been featured (Hell, we've rarely seen pics of an entire SoC army printed in the mag). As much as I love the WH battle reports, having HE vs DE was just boring, as neither army had taken part in a batrep since their last HE-DE fight. Using Cult of Slaanesh would've been a fun variant on that.

[boogle]

Regarding Bat Reps,they shold really look at the following older Bat Reps on how to do them properly:
Alaitoc Eldar vs Blood Angels Epic Battle report - this has to be the very best battle report ever done in the history of WD, it had tactics, storyline, balanced forces and was played in the true spirit of the GW hobby by 2 of the very best hobbyists GW have ever produced (Jervis and Andy)
Space Wolves vs Eldar 40K - was a well done Bat Rep, once again the forces weren't too harsh
Fires over Gehenna - Imperial vs Orks Epic - Introduced us to Titan Legions and was done very well and surprise surprise, Andy and Jervis involved again
IG/Eldar vs Tyranids - one of my personal favourites, i really got into that one and was praying that the Eldar survived long enough to win, sadly it wasn't to be
The Gathering of Might and following stories (plus the preceding Chaos Dwarfs vs Wood Elf battle report) - this was a very good example of a narrative story that took about 6-8 months to play out in WD, it was very well done in terms of following what was going on (especially in a 10000 point Bat Rep)
Korsk Bat Rep - 1st ever Tank Battle - was something different (don't think they have done one since actually)
1st Necromunda Bat Rep - once again very presented and went through the whole process from building the initialgang, through it's 1st few games to the main Batrep, plus the following with the gangs getting advances etc


although most of those games were played in previous incarnations of the current games, they should to me be the templates for doing good battle reports, apartfrom the IG/UM vs Nids and IG vs Necrons for 40K and Ogres vs Empire and Chaos vs Empire (both the death of Volkmar and Archaons Horde vs Empire ones for WFB i can't remember a decent battle report in a while (and the massive battle reports that have done have been simply poo(r))

[big squig]

LotR battle reports simply do not count, or if the LotR battle report counts as the issue's main batrep, then please include a secondary one as well, not necessarily a full-size one, but a fun one like a kill-team or the seven heroes-style that we've seen before.

I don't see why. LotR batreps are usually the better written ones. What I'd like to see is a batrep for every game. I hate paying for a mag and it only having 1 or 2 thirds of what I want in it.

[EvC]

Well that's a valid opinion, but other people have highlighted why LotR batreps don't really hit the spot for them better than I could...

[Pertinax]

So by not giving LOTR the same share of the magazine as the other two games, we can see LOTR sales sink due to lack of promotion, and profits dwindle. Then everybody can keep pointing at LOTR and blaming it more and more.

My point is that there are three systems that GW produce. Why can't they all receive a fair share of the action.

That said, it would be good to see two bat reps per month. Sometimes without studio staff. Maybe use some of the GT personalities?

[Darkseer]

I'd love to see my GT players with their armies in White Dwarf.

All the battle reports have recently consisted of stuido armies with a smattering of random units, played by studio staff.

It would be so much better to read a battle report featuring 2 armies that have been tournament tailord to kick some **** and see those armies be well played by their owners.

They did it for 1 issue, then stopped. It was a real shame. They also did the 'play 3 times and take the best result' method, which I feel ruined it.
I'd love to read about a complete massacre for once, rather than...well, 'paintball'.

[boogle]

well i'll have to disagree with you there, the last LOTR bat rep was one of the very worsti've ever read, couldn't follow a damn thing that was going on (incidentally my worst Bat Rep was when Sisters of Battle 1st came out and they played 3 bat reps with them, each consisting on 1 page that told you absolutely nothing)

[WanderingRogue]

I'd love to see my GT players with their armies in White Dwarf.

WD is just for selling stuff now - so it will usually be with the as yet unrealeased models for that month.

[Darkseer]

theyve put a stop t that so i have heard. Too much hassle - so now it will be studio armys aor studio member armys from now on. Which is crap in my opinion but thats the line they are towing at the moment

WD is generally crap anyway. This is why I stopped buying it.

A couple of months ago I started attending Central London Wargames Club where I now play 40K regularly.

When I first went there, I encountered 3 regular GT players.
Imagine my horror when my **** was firmly handed to me by good players with very competitive armies. It seriously made me rethink my game, army and the whole hobby.
Seriously though, I was a lamb to the slaughter (and in some ways still am). Nothing in White Dwarf prepares you for people playing the game in the competitive nature in which 40K was designed. I think that it should.

I also think that I should be invited in for a game and show off my Deathwing army in a couple of months where I field 3000pts of Deathwing against 3000pts of Genestealers...but White Dwarf doesn't do fun, characterful, crazy battle reports like that anymore.

[Flame of Udun]

I agree with what others have said about the LoTR battle reports lacking the incisiveness of 40K and WFB, and I agree it can be all to easy to bash a game I've only played 5 times and didn't really get on with, but alot of people seem not to be keen on the LoTR content in White Dwarf and considering that it covers between 1/4 to 1/3 of the mag itself it means I'm paying a £1-£1.33 for info that is poorly constructed and, certainly in my case, material that I'm not interested in. I'd rather see LoTR get it's own separate mag and have WD reduced in price. I also agree that WD really does need to lose or really reduce the Astronomicon, I mean I'm not so obsessed that I need to know where the local stores in greece are. I do like the return of the components feature in the back just for reference purposes as I'm not always able to get online or get to my local GW store.

And one last thing, more specialist games coverage would be nice