Rumors brought to the community by: Warseer's Dosadi
~These very, very early inklings regarding Codex: IG have been floating about the tubes since this weekend:
Take this with the usual dose of salt guys, but someone I trust told me that the new guard codex may have the following things in it.
Army wide special rule: I think it’s called Platoon Drill or something like that. Basically, units from the same platoon may ignore intervening squads when shooting. So enemy units targeted in this way do not receive the 4+ save. Apparently this only works if the Platoon command squad is alive and within 12” of the rest of the platoon. I’ve been told that this is just one of the abilities guard Platoons may get, but only as long as the chain of command is intact (whatever that means). So loosing your HQ Command Squad may be a really bad thing.
Doctrines are for sure gone (I think we all knew this), but have been replaced by more mutable platoons. Instead of Armoured fist squads you can buy Chimeras for a whole platoon. Or buy the whole platoon grav-chutes to give them deep strike, or drop the heavy weapons from squads and give the platoon Scout. Veteran squads become upgrades to platoons (i.e. they are not elites anymore).
Apparently infantry platoons let you attach certain types of support vehicles to them(kinda like back in second edition). Things like sentinels, hellhounds and demolishers can be attached to platoons. They still take up a FOC spot, but become part of the platoon and so will benefit from the Platoon Drill rule.
The Leman Russ can be bought as a squadron so you can get 3 for a single FOC. They can not be attached to platoons however.
Sniper Squads can now infiltrate, get stealth, range finders and all models in the squad have sniper rifles (and BS 4!).
Like the Land Raider, a new plastic sprue for the Leman Russ has been made that will allow plastic demolishers and a 3rd variant (my money is on the Exterminator).
The Baneblade in NOT in the new codex. It just doesn’t work (i.e. overpowered)in games that are not Apocalypse in size.
However Stormtrooper squads can now take Valkyries as transports. Both will be getting a plastic kit. Valkyries follow the rules for skimmers I’ve been told. Again, they want to keep flyers and super heavies out of “normal games” but give people the ability to use them with all the special rules in Apocalypse and Planet-strike (if the ever get around to that.)
This last one makes me wonder what’s they are doing, but apparently there is a new HQ in the book; Inquisitor and Retinue much like the elites from the current Daemon Hunters/Witch Hunters books.
~Like the man said, take these with a LARGE dose of salt as these are very, very far out, but still it may be an insight to what GW is brewing up, and in any case a good sounding board as to what types of army abilities we may see in 5th Edition. Still, this does tie in with the persistant things we keep hearing about a plastic Valkyrie and Stormtroopers.
95 comments:
I could almost get excited about this.
Sweet. While using IG as allies for my DH I never could use doctrines, but now that doesn't matter - I get to use their new options now. Unless of course GW will come up with some allies hindering rules in the new FAQ. Also, I have some bad feeling about the Inq option.
it has potential, Im curious how the grenadier armies will be handled, I always liked the concept.
This is great news! I may just start that IG army yet.
Sounds like a really nice clean up and refinement of the Guard.
This all sounds great and very exciting. However, a lot of it sounds like wishful thinking in the extreme. One thing that gives it some credibility is its appearance on this website, as posting of rumors here by BigRed is usually a bit more careful than on 40K forums. Note that these rumors have appeared on forums before being posted here on Bell of Lost Souls.
I hope a lot or at least some of this turns out to be true. I have a large Cadian army and there isn't anything in these rumors that wouldn't add even more fun to it.
I might actually pick up and start a guard army if the plastic valks is true, especially if they get to keep the 6 frag missle silliness.
If this is true and as mentioned the allies rules are not hindered then I may consider and allied army. IG, Space Marines and Grey Knights. Not a bad combo. I was considering a deamonhunters army in the future but this might be better.
apart from plastic valkys and stormies: meh. seems my penal legion will use the FW DKoK list, when the new guard come out.
but then again, i might be pleasently surprised and find squad heavy flamers and hardened fighters still in there...
i cant wait
im getting a guard army i think il wait abit longer- i heard a rumour that there was going to be plastic steel legion etc
steel legion rock!
Doctrines are gone... Yup, just like the SM traits, we all loved them, so now they're gone..
REALLY screws the guys doing the Skull taker IG army for the forthcoming Macharian Crusade!
My army will go rather unscathed as I prefer quantity over quality (i.e.: can't afford the doctrines), but I wonder what'll happen to the all grenadier army? I've got a friend with one who's afraid that he'll have NO choice but to go for the Inquisition as a result.
Corey
any word on skills like sharp shooters and more specific upgrades like carapace?
Sounds like cool stuff,
especially the 3-variant
Leman Russ set (I like this
all in one kits, all you need
and lots of bits..)
and the new Valkyrie...
...there are only Mordians missing
for me to start a IG army :P
Same hatred for the fact that Doctrines are also gone.
If teh Platoon Drill about negating enemy cover saves granted by intervening units, then it'll certainly screw things up for those who're using one-man units by a lot, or literally mowing down the enemies with full effect.
This can be good and bad, but as a non-IG player then I'll say this rule is just OPed.
The skulltakers will still happen - its the Flylords of Terra producing them, they didnt let silly things like there not being rules to stop them with the genestealer cult minicodex, why would they start now?
I really don´t like it... Every new codex is simple without various options.
Good for little boys but bad for good playing :(
Sigh, Doctrines we will miss you greatly :o(
The platoon drill thing seems interesting - allowing a guard army to line up like it does in all the fluff without drilling all preceding lines in the back. Not sure what good that'll do attached vehicles, I kinda assumed they'd be able to shoot over infantry anyway. Have to wait and see.
Liking the Leman Russ Squadrons IMMENSELY. Would it be sick and wrong of me to field 9 leman russ in a 2000 point game? :oP
Sniper squads infiltrate. Handy. Sniper squads BS4... well while it makes sense that snipers would be better shots than average guardsmen, what difference does this make? Sniper rifles hit on a 2+ anyway!
Liking the new plastics, plastics are always good. Especially the valkryie. I've been perusing the forge world website a lot lately and the more rumours like this i hear, (even if they turn out to be nothing but rumours) the safer my bank balance for the time being! Now all I need is someone to start a rumour that there'll be a plastic thunderbolt and a plastic Macharius with Vulcan mega bolter soon and my immediate shopping list will be off my mind :oP
For what it's worth, the doctrines I will miss most are;
Sharpshooters - very handy on your heavy weapon squads, and meltagun squads, they're notorious for missing.
Grenadiers - cheap troops choices in small games.
warrior weapons - still haven't got round to trying this, but the idea of a baying mob of guardsmen charging towards the enemy always appealed to me, for a one off comedy game if nothing else.
My cityfight army, with the light infantry and cameoline skills, is now also facing some serious design flaws :oS
I'm wondering if the Inquisitor HQ simply allows Stormtroopers to be taken as troops?
Since buildings have vehicle like rules in 5th ed, I would love to see an AV14 Bunker option for the Command HQ squad. Maybe give it Master Vox and Company Standard effects...
Sniper squads all have sniper rifles and BS4? Your BS doesn't matter if you have all sniper rifles. . .
@ian
Snipers don't hit on 2+ in Vth, they hit using BS.
Inquisitor allowing for stormies as troops would solve the grenadier army list issue
All in all, this looks like an improvement to the guard, with a few provisions.
Seems like the general aim is to make all the guard variants work under a cohesive list; the trick will be making that "flexible" platoon entry flexible enough to represent any basic trooper - be he cadian, feral, grenadier, armoured cavalry, droptroops or whatever.
Whether that flexibility actually emerges has a lot to do with the motivation (or lack thereof) of the writers. Just pray they don't let anyone from the codex:CSM project anywhere near it - mindnumbing simplicity may ensue.
Heck, if they remember to stick in a 'command tank' as an HQ choice this time out, you could even pull a fairly balanced Armoured Company from this list (based around chimaera mounted troops, of course). Unfortunately, I have my doubts; GW seemed to have bought the rumors that an Armoured Company was actually a 'hard' army, mostly perpetuated by people who never played against one and completely misunderstood how that particular glass-cannon worked.
Ah, well, here's hoping for the best.
Oh, and @ ian & warhamster
I actually feel pretty safe about the perpetuation of heavy flamers and chameoline into the next codex.
I doubt they'd be too quick to drop both Catachans and Tanith from the fluff.
Then again they did nix half of the traitor legions in one fell swoop, without even a nod to what tragic fate befell them.
R.I.P. Word Bearers, you will be missed.
Hi guys,
As brassscorpion has mentioned, there is so much lead-time on theese rumors (next year) that I see them in the same light as the leaked 5th edition pdf.
Basicly an insight into concepts that the design studio is tossing about, and hints at rule mechanics and concepts that we may see in 5th.
I won't be surprized as all if many of these don't pan out. From a homebrew designer point of view however, it definately gives me ideas for 5th editon special characters, mini-dexes and the like so I'm not complaining.
I know they probably will, but I still really hope they don't remove the option of feral guard (warrior weapons) and grenadier armies.
i'm liking the sound of this. i never used any doctrines to begin with, so i'm ending up with additional options for me. yeah, it sucks for the all grenadier force, but then again it's going to suck for every varient chapter out there as well in a few months.
If this is mostly the designers ideas, maybe we can do some cool ideas here and someone will pass them along to someone at GW - I mean come on, someone hand the Heresy codex over to GW for proper use.
This is nothing more than a compilation of existing players' ideas with some extrapolation from the new SMs book thrown in. Cross-posting this sort of thing is hardly good journalism or doing the gaming community any sort of favour (INHO)!
well, if you don't like it then you don't have to visit the sight.
strange though that i never heard any complaints about the leaked 5th ed or space marine book though.
Personally i like to get some heads up on this stuff, that way i don't go wasting money on minis i won't be able to use when the new codex comes out. I'm already boned by having too many special and heavy weapons for my space marines.
@anon 1:36 above.Please present proof before accusations.How does the presenting of possible rumors (tagged appropriately as extreme in the least and cited from another forum)damage the gaming community? Some of us don't visit other forums, or do so infrequently at best...if nothing else BOLS is giving us a possible look at the direction the I.G. codex might be heading, I see no foul.
@ Anon @ 2:19 - as far as GW is concerned the extra guns mean you just dont have enough marines, unless your up to a full company level :P
I sure will miss Doctrines.
Hi guys
"How does the presenting of possible rumors (tagged appropriately as extreme in the least and cited from another forum) damage the gaming community?"
Good question.
When presented in the context that bigred and the team at here at BoLS have been using recently, they can get people talking and enthused about the possibilities. They can also get people fired up in a negative fashion (see some of the comments about the 5th ed rumors - "I'm selling my army today" etc.)
In the context of a well-respected, great hobby-focused site like BoLS, the rumors can seem more concrete (see brassscorpion's comment in this very thread). When these rumors don't come true, some folks accuse GW of reneging on its promises. Even though it made no such promise.
This harms the reputation of GW.
The bigger danger to the ongoing success (or survival) of the hobby is when such rumors are taken out of the context of this website.
I've heard of a situation, from a source I trust, where a potential hobbyist wanted to get started with Necrons, but an existing hobbyist told him not to bother because the Necrons were getting a complete revamp in a few months (he'd read it on BoLS). The potential hobbyist was about to leave the store (and possibly the hobby) without supporting his FLGS. This can have a direct impact on sales. Sales are what keep a business in business, both the FLGS and GW.
Fortunately the aforementioned source was able to step in and debunk the false rumors and there's another happy Necron player in the heart of Texas. However, this does illustrate the danger of a lack of context and a lack of responsibility for people's actions.
While rumors and speculation can be fun and can generate thousands of great ideas on how to interact with the hobby, they are the ultimate double-edged sword. Not everyone thinks about the potential consequences of their actions, regardless of the problems it could cause.
I could be wrong, but I think that's what anon 1:36 might a have been concerned about.
Cheers
Dave Taylor
GW US Community Development Manager
so IG snipers are going to have a higher BS than SM snipers? LAME...SMs usually recruit their scouts from the best IG and Stormtroopers.
Cheers
Dave Taylor
GW US Community Development Manager
So what do you really do now that you guys have no forum of your own to start any sort of discussion?
Come to sites like BoLS and suggest what they do hurts the community. The community you abandoned (as far as the internet goes) when you removed your own boards.
Perhaps GW could put their own place for discussion back up instead of coming down on this one.
Besides, they always say to take these rumors with a grain of salt.
@ Dave Taylor:
"When these rumors don't come true, some folks accuse GW of reneging on its promises. Even though it made no such promise.
This harms the reputation of GW."
What would be nice is if GW did some open and honest consultation with its player base, using any of the available mechanisms (White Dwarf, Internet) so that there was greater transparency regarding what you are going to do. There is no need for there to be as much rumoring if the process was open and reciprocal.
GW doesn't renege on promises because GW doesn't make them, or, when it does, the promises are backdoor broken. No price increases, but we're withdrawing the current 20 man box and replacing with a 10 man box that costs more than half as much.
It's tough as customers to keep the faith in this context.
The leader in harming GW's reputation is...GW.
@obo - by the time the IG are better then the SM as you put it they are past the age where the Marines can recruit them
Thank you for the other side of the coin in terms of how rumors and such can affect the hobby. However I have to say I have yet to see any release of anything for a game system that was not subject to rumors and the wide scale emotional responses it generates.
It is a double edged sword I suspose but I expect that sort customer service from my lgs. That they would not try to sell me something when thier is a new edition on the horizon. While on the whole I am quite pleased with GW products I never forget that they are a luxury and GW stills need to prove why should I spend my money on your product rather my other hobbies. If I have ample notice of upcoming releases and details about thier price and contents then I can make a more informed decision rather than. Oh GW is not giving me any news buy Wotc are more than happy to let me know what is happening, oh look reaper have this awesome models in the works.
So if you wish to have more fact and less speculation time to step up into the PR game with the big boys and you will probably get my big dollars.
boy oh boy oh boy
cant wait for PLASTIC valks/STORM TROOPERS!!!
man that sounds crazy
People thyat sell their armies because of rumours need to rethink what they are doing.
As goes for the dudes that dossnt want to buy stuff because the army, MIGHT, get redone in 8+ mounths.
Some dudes at my local dossnt want to buy fantasy cold one knights because the leaked fotos of the new once were so sweet. But what can you do?
Another dude has paused his eldar armie because its rumored that there will be new eldar jetbikes.
It goes for me aswell. I dont want to add new horrors or plaquies to my deamon army before they are made in plastic. And that is only a rumour that ive heard. What can GW realy do about it? Rumores makes us (me for one) psyked about the new stuff, and gives us something to look forward to.
I think that we need to focus some more on the newest stuff so that its simply about the newest rumours.
I for one thinks that BOLS has made VERY little efford into making the new deamon release a blast. What did we hear? nothing but bigred making a 100 deamonnette army and a poll about hows the mightiest mark...pardon me but wtf?
I expected to see a large article on the dex and some stuff about how cool the deamon army is...
Konklussion: More effort into the newest stuff and less into rumours, so we can still be as psyked about the newest additions to the game, and less "but the rumour said that","im going to hate that, im out"
hope that my level of english didnt get in the way of cleancy of the post.
BOLS FTW!
Honestly Dave, if GW would open up more, and actually have a community section, rather than the existing "old boys club" mentality, then they would do themselves a world of PR good.
Lots of people have seen the new 40k rulebook. I walked into three GW stores in the past week, and not one of the redshirts would let me peek at it.
Now, if I had known one of those guys, I for sure would have looked at it. Old boys club in action.
GW used to have a nice if somewhat dated looking forum. Well patrolled, it was a nice place to go and talk with other people.
Warseer was touted as the place to go after GW closed it down. Warseer is such a negative and cold forum, it's like Grima Wormtongue whispering in the ear of Theoden, poisoning the gamer's minds with hearsay and vitriole. I refuse to look at Warseer anymore, it just makes me angry.
BOLS on the other hand has great hobby material and rumours, and interesting discussion on the blog. I find BOLS has become THE place to look for 40k excitement. I take rumours for what they are, though, and have patience. 13 years in this hobby has taught change is the only constant.
So why doesn't GW get a new forum? How about a release schedule that is relevant?
There are so many things GW could do to reach out to the community, instead of closing down the avenues of discussion to all but the In-Club?
Why not be more inclusive of your customers? Apocalypse and Mega-Fantasy have shown the veterans are still here. Jervis' Standard Bearer caters more to the veteran appeasement than ever (and good on him!), so why not open up MORE?
Thanks.
A.N. Mous
@Dave Taylor
Hi Dave, (and the rest of Games Workshop)
I appreciate your comments, and understand how rumors and speculation can hurt sales and interest in the hobby. However, I really think that BOLS is providing a service here. Personally it keeps me fired up about my favorite hobby to have a place to hear the latest gossip come and discuss possible changes. Most readers know not to take everything at face value, and those few who panic and sell their armies over a few rumors might have sold their collections anyways.
If GW really wants to improve its reputation, then it can commit more to supporting the desires of the existing community. I hope you guys are taking notes as to what people get fired up about, both positive and negative reactions are important. You could even view this blog (sarcastic comments included) as providing a service to GW, many companies pay to get this kind of feedback about their products.
We can tell that the focus has been on producing simpler, easy to understand core rules and codexes. While this goal has a lot of advantages, such as getting new / younger players involved, it has a lot of negative fallout since veteran gamers feel snubbed. And, lets face it, without dedicated gamers lovingly converting and painting entire armies, coming up with new scenarios, telling their friends about the hobby, organizing and attending tournaments, etc., Games Workshop would be seriously hurt and so would the hobby as a whole.
The company often gives the impression that the design teams have their own agenda and ideas about what make games fun and playable, and that most of the wonderful and creative ideas from the community are being ignored. For example, many people are upset about the lack of customization offered by the newer codexes. I mostly play friendly games but since my friends generally want to play by official rules only I have to abide by the letter of the book, so it affects everyone. The current White Dwarf features an article about power gaming, and goes on to list all of the most broken, cheesy, hated tournament lists with a kind of shrug-- like "oh well, we know these beardy armies exist and we don't really care to fix them." Where are the special rules? Where are the scenarios? Where are the articles on customization and themes? They're few and far between, and over time White Dwarf is starting to look like a well produced series of ads instead of a hobby magazine. We want support for our themed armies! To throw in a plug for Lost and the Damned, is it really too much to ask to have mutants, traitors, daemons and Chaos Marines fighting in the same legal force? Would that really break the game to have a Chaos force that matches the backstory of every 40k novel and supplement?
I'm not an expert in business, but customer retention has to be at least as important as attracting new customers. Now as for myself I'm a lifer, but not every player is as dedicated. We all know Games Workshop has the best minatures around, great art, slick design, and customer support, so why do you ignore us when it comes to rules?
I hope that this feedback is helpful to you and not too irritating. My point is not to badmouth an awesome company pointlessly, it is to try to get improvements made in rules support and community relations.
Thank you for your time,
- Ross
@Dave Taylor: Point conceeded, I apologize To Anon and yourself if I have caused offense. That being said, it is the responsibility of the player to discover the truth of such sensationalized rumors (and they are labeled as such here, often more than once)and determine for themselves what action they wish to take, if anything. It is often said here that until the product is in hand, certainties will not be known.I also believe that Game Thug has a very valid point, GW is mostly responsible for its own ills...I only need to cite bitz removal (making it very difficult and costly to have WYSIWYG armies in tourneys) and the obviously fouled-up PR poll on the GW website that disregarded anyone's opinion who was over 24...among a few other colossal foul ups. I will say this, every time I think about selling my armies, GW has managed to pull a rabbit out of its hat that keeps me in "The Hobby" for a little while longer (Apoc for now).Perhaps one day, GW will listen to its fan base (even the older ones, who generally have more disposable income than your average 15-20 yr. old)and maybe even do some out of house extensive play testing.Until that day, I guess we settle for mediocrity.
Having recently finished a marketing report on Gamesworkshop as part of my degree. (Now marked, and passed!) I've spend quite a few hours of my life studying GW's marketing stragies, it's results, the views of it's fan base, and how it goes about it's business.
My conclusion, right or wrong, was that GW has done more than a few things in recent years, growing in frequency as time passes, to hurt, mislead, or trample over, it's fan bases. The company gives of the impression, be it true or not, to a great deal of people, to be a bunch of guys in suits, sitting in a cold office room, writing a business plan.
To the man who just spent £100's on a dogs of war army, a lost and the damned selection, or a veteran armoured company player, that imagine provides a certain lack of comfort when GW absentmindly erase their army from existance.
Bell of Lost souls however, is one of the sources of posative thoughts on GW. A rare internet gathering place (Seriously guys, the correct responce to people bitching about serious issues in the way you handle PR in your internet forum, and the content of white dwarf, is not to close the forums in a vague attempt to stop the fanbase from talking to each other. It sends the seriously wrong signals.) Bell of lost souls takes rumors, (Kinda like if GW talked to the public) presents them in a well formatted, exited way, collects peoples views and thoughts, and attempts to produce a product (a suppliment, new idea, interesting article) based on the way people react, while at the same time, bringing new and exciting thoughts to the hobby convincing people to buy. (Which is something you appear to be somewhat desprate for at the moment, given your recent poor returns.)
I like warhammer as a hobby. I am a avid specalist games collector, own over 16,000 points of warhammer 40k, and am a die hard fantasy player. I even run a Dark Hersey gaming group (And don't even get me started on what a fiasco the relase of that was)
I want to like your hobby. I want to spend my money on you. However, I want to do that safe in the knowledge that you give some care as to my and my fellow collectos thoughts on the hobby.
I don't want to buy a space marine captain, because you've relased a new boxed set. And I sure as hell don't want to walk into another GW store, and have a 5 minuet arguement with the staff about why I should by a brand new baneblade for my craftworld eldar army. (This actually happened).
I'm sure everyone else feels the same.
Please take more care in the future to listen to those who provide you with an existance, and your employee's with a job. And don't critise the men of Bell of lost souls, for doing the fantastic job of helping keep this hobby alive, and adding another layer of enjoyment to it.
Internet rumors will not kill your business. Disregarding the wishes of your customers, and disrepecting them by in some cases diliberately ignoring their voices will.
Yours Faithfully,
Michael Dollin
It sounds like army doctrines have been replaced by platoon doctrines. If true, score one for my predictions! Two points if the combined Leman Russ kit is real.
The presence of the Inquisitor does not bode well for the future of Inquisition armies.
Anyway ........ I'd be disappointed to lose my doctrines, traits too. Thank god I didn't go overboard modeling doctrines and traits, I'd be more angry than bummed. I don't understand why GW would get rid of something so positive and loved as army customization (as lately seen in the Chaos and Ork codexes).
PS to Dave Taylor, your modeling kung fu creativity is the best, and I respect you immensely for the gorgeous armies you have created. Glad you post here!
if GW listened to your community instead of saying it is, i'm pretty sure that White Dwarf wouldn't be the Sears Catalog that it is today.
White Dwarf no longer contains any meaningful content for 40k hobbyists, with the exception of very detailed pictures and prices of upcoming releases.
i dont know if this opinion is held by anyone else but ill just state what i see
Gamesworkshop is now run by buisnessmen not real hobbyests and they seem to be just leaching money out of in not trying to make the game better (which in truth would probably get them more money)
iunderstand the need for gamesworkshop to be a buisness and make money but please can you not sabatoge your own thing by making it into a buisness
i dont know if you will agree just my opionion
@ Dave Taylor
Your comments about rumors being a double edged sword are well worded.
However, rumors can be addressed in a few ways. Rumors can be challenged, ignored, or purpetuated. Where does GW stand?
Are you challenging the rumors of this site or purpetuating them?
Your example of customers acting on a rumor (believing and then dispelling) is an example of what happens when rumors are not addressed by the source in which the rumor is about, as well as, what you wrote about the gain and loss of sales.
"Sales are what keep a business in business, both the FLGS and GW."
Can you have sales without customers? The answer is a resounding "no"! GW seems to have two sets of customers to serve: newbies and veterans. I imagine their are more.(I fall into a third category called "product slaves", but that is for another day.)
When one out of the groups feels slighted (like witch hunters and daemon hunters) they will get disillusioned rather quickly. There are other reasons that groups of your customers get disillusioned. What is GW doing to listen to your groups of customers to drive sales? It seems that you are trying to over control the risk of a loss of profit by addressing sales instead of customers.
I know that stockholders interests come first, however if their interest in this hobby is only sales and money then perhaps you should find new stockholders who are receptive to a balance of customer desires to drive sales and make money.
My personal comment is that if anybody in the company does't play the game then why are they in the company?
What is comunity development doing to promote the hobby? Perhaps you could tell people what you are doing. Not specifics, but tell people in a timely manner... we are going to let squats go from our lineup and explain. Yep... you are going to get some negative feedback but you can't win them all no matter how hard you try. Just like Dark Angels vs Tyranids.
GW seems to have no venue for customer feedback except perhaps "The Standard Bearer" each month and that feels oriented towards... the sale of the month.
BoLS is a venue to discuss idea's and rumors. If you guys (GW) are reading... why not dispell damaging rumors with the truth?
In saying all this, without any meaningfull address about the "rumor", from the source in which the rumor is about, you will always run the uncontrolled risk of losing something if the rumor is ture or not.
just my thoughts,
later,
Tim Weston
@anon 8:41pm
"opionion"
I love these. They are full of tasty layers, and can be made into opinion soup.
Sigh.
Perhaps America should stop wasting money on education. No child left behind? That's right. They are now ALL at the start line.
POTATOE.
Hi guys
I'm sorry if my original post left some of you feeling like I was slamming BoLS. That was not my intention.
It was also not my intention to make it seem like I was slamming BoLS for posting rumors and/or speculating.
I guess my point was more of a "hey, let's understand that the things we do have consequences, and that context doesn't always carry.
There was a post asking about the dispelling or confirmation of rumors. I can't do that because I find out the truth much closer to the release date than these rumors are doing the rounds. I won't see a final copy of the IG stuff until about a month or two before it's released. Certainly no help to me now.
Do we (GW) need to do a better job of message management? Sure we do. The caveat to this is we need to improve our internal communication first. When you're talking about teams across nine countries and dozens of languages it can take a bit of time.
Chatting on blogs and forums like BoLS, Dakka, coolminiornot etc. are the places we (the GW US Community Development Team) can go to answer questions, attempt to provide information (if we have it), and also see how the US community is interacting with each other (even though there are many folks from around the world frequenting the places I mentioned). We aim to help people understand intent and correct misconceptions amongst the community we're charged with developing, the US hobby community. Some of that will bleed over to other countries, sure.
It's a start and we've got a ways to go.
Thank you all for your feedback and I'm sorry if my original post derailed an interesting goob about possibilities for the IG (my favorite 40K army BTW).
Cheers
Dave
GW has beome an iteratively updated rules system akin to an MMO.
A community manager, patch notes, changes in the pipeline...
...these are all things we are beginning to expect from GW.
I am painting models a year in advance of a viable codex release, the more information I have the more I can invest in GW miniatures.
The less sure I am, the more likely I'll go play computer games for a fraction of the price.
Its a high investment purchase, buyers need reassurance and care.
Well, I have seen some of Dave's IG in WD Oz, and some of his fine Inquisitor scale conversions (which are still up there for me as being some of the best stuff I have seen anyone do in that scale).
But for the IG comments, it seems like it is going to make the IG a much more varied army.
You can upgrade one platoon to be a veteran group, with grav chutes, destined to be dropped behind the lines to cause utter havoc, (especially as they are scoring until all are dead) but another platoon having a different skill set meaning you can show combined forces (different homeworlds) or even using the platoon upgrades to have a mechanised infantry platoon (in chimeras) supported by your sneaky grav chuting vets who can land and disrupt the enemy heavy weapons.
I can see this as a much better combined force of arms than the last one.
The leman russ unit of three tanks for one slot is going to add some more flexibility in the list, (or so I think) but the kit having standard, demolisher and exterminator (fingers crossed) will mean much greater variance in the tanks you face.
But then, we need to see how the new edition works before we knock down any of the rumoured changes.
And I for one am not sad to see the last of the ratling snipers if it is to be a squad of normal humans with sniper rifles like the scouts...
I like the idea of adding the Inquisitor to the IG book. That way you have a one stop shop for the Inquisitor. OR you can use the Inquisitor codexes instead.
@dave
dave, we at least have to thank you for taking some time to answer some of our concerns and honestly just being someone we can talk to.
Unfortunately, as you seem to be the only GW rep around here some of us must vent our frustrations....
@All: We've said it in many, many articles, but don't let rumors change your buying and modeling habits. Holding off on a unit you really want to build or not shopping because a plastic version "might" come out in the future, is ridiculous.
Buy models, pain them and play with them.
@gaDe:
"I for one thinks that BOLS has made VERY little efford into making the new deamon release a blast. What did we hear? nothing but bigred making a 100 deamonnette army and a poll about hows the mightiest mark...pardon me but wtf?"
I think you are confusing us with some sort of professional journal or GW marketing site. We're a couple of guys that play 40k, just like you.
We tend to write about things that we play and the armies we collect. At this point we are gearing up for the Macharian Crusade campaign, which hasn't left us a lot of time to play with the Chaos Daemons codex. That's our fault.
But GW also released the Chaos Daemons codex really close to their update to the main rulebook. That's a tough spot on the release schedule -- kind of like opening for the Rolling Stones. That's GW's fault.
(Heck, I stopped writing tactica articles months ago because 5E is going to invalidate most of them).
If we knew what was coming (..cough.. advance copies... cough.. free models.. email for our mailing address.. cough..), we'd have more time to prepare articles and events centered around those releases.
As always, if there's something you'd like us to write about -- drop us an email.
Mkerr's tactics on Sisters of Battle pretty much got me back into 40K.
I've blown several thousand dollars since then...
A few bones thrown BoLS' way could get GW a fantastic return on marketing investment.
@mkerr
It whould still be awesome to hear some of the veterans first improssions of the dex.
If you all just took 10 min to tell what your firstimpressions were, it could give the "less veterans" some second opinions about the dex.
@ Dave Taylor
Thanks for the reply...
... I will report for my flogging shortly... Anybody seen that chair I threw?
later,
Tim Weston
Another nail in the coffin of customisation and creativity...
@ Dave Taylor:
I live in Zurich, Switzerland, and in our community everyone (well, let's say 99%) reads BoLS. People with a higher education know English and in our modern world there's no way to get information faster than from English websites. As Switzerland has no official GW store, the WWW gets even more important.
Therefore I can absolutely confirm what you said about what you do in the US is also spilling over into other countries. And a big thank you for bigred and mkerr because you created an exciting global community. =)
One of the main problems with Internet rumors and leaks is that it takes people away from the stores. I remember when I didn't have internet access, I would regularly drop into my local store to find out all the juicy rumors about new editions, rules and models. While I was in there I might pick up a paint or a blisterpack. Now i just look on the net, I rarely get to my store these days unless there is something I particularly want to see or buy.
I actually had a decent chat to a GW employee about GW's sometimes over the top secrecy and he made a pretty good point. One of the main reasons GW doesn't look to far into the future is because it takes away from the models that are coming out at the moment or in the next month.
And this makes sense! For the people who buy models/squads/armies when a new 'dex or range is released, you want to be excited about what you've just bought! and not losing interest in your brand new army because there's a new one 4 months away. Last thing GW wants is for there new range to be 'old news' before it's even released.
He also said that he finds out about future releases from the same place I do! the BoLS.
As far as a rumor forum goes, BoLS is absolutely brilliant.
And to Dave Taylor, good to see that GW are making there presence known amongst the community.
One last comment, all this talk of profit margins, men in suits and share prices should be left for elswhere. Every big business in the world runs off these things but it is still gamers who make the rulebooks. If there is something that people don't like then don't buy it.
Back to the topic at hand!
I really hope that the valkyrie kit comes with weapons options and the possibility to be a vulture!
I'd buy heaps! Although i guess it'd still be an easy conversion.
These platoon drills rumors sound great! I'm in the army and almost all field work is done at at least Platoon level.
I would Imagine the current trend of special characters allowing armies to take certain units will be present for the IG too.
Maves
Hi again Dave,
Thanks for the response.
I know that it was not the original intent of the post to talk about GW's reputation and responsiveness to customers, but it seems like for right or wrong the cat is out of the bag. Maybe it's not your place to get involved in disputes of this nature, but it seems like a lot of the points people made were not addressed at all.
You said:
"We aim to help people understand intent and correct misconceptions amongst the community we're charged with developing, the US hobby community."
Well, here is your chance. Are our perceptions mistaken? Do we have the wrong idea of how much Games Workshop cares about customer satisfaction and input? I'm not asking you to confirm or deny specific rumors, but if you could read through some of the posts addressed to you a second time and respond, it would be appreciated.
-Ross
I see why GW don't get involved on forums! The spanish inquisition they'd recieve would drive most men insane.
@ Gade -
Ask and you shall receive. Chaos Daemons will be a very randomly performing army that will win some games as a veritable shut-out and get trounced viciously in others. Their non-psychic powers are an unbalancing, and, as such, will be a source of great frustration, both for their players and opponents.
With the changes to deployment and reserving (particularly the flanking abilities of infiltrators and scouts), they will not have near the advantage in 5th edition that they would have in a 4th edition standard mission, but I expect them to make a great deal of trouble for most army commanders.
I have not had the opportunity to play with them enough to determine an optimal actual builds and/or deployment strategies. I can say I'd hold Soulgrinders back if I'm going second and deploy them if going first, but otherwise, I have no planning advice with weight behind it for now.
"Well, here is your chance. Are our perceptions mistaken? Do we have the wrong idea of how much Games Workshop cares about customer satisfaction and input? I'm not asking you to confirm or deny specific rumors, but if you could read through some of the posts addressed to you a second time and respond, it would be appreciated."
Its like MMO's video games company if you compare SONY Online with Blizzard. Thing still is how Blizz' can make money (alot) and care on Vets/Community around? GW should follow the Blizz way instead the way SONY took to fail.
Hi guys
At the risk of being deleted by bigred by fouling up a thread I've already unintentionally derailed, I'll take the opportunity to answer some of the points raised in other posts.
The primary thing to remember for the remainder of my post is about spheres of influence. The typical GW staff member has a certain sphere (or spheres) of influence". For example I can affect the dates of the US Games Days and GTs, but not the Games Days or GTs of other countries. I am aware to a greater or lesser degree of the US release schedule for the next few months, but I don't have influence over the dates or prices. A Games Developer has influence over the content of a Codex they are working on, but not the number of power klaws on a sprue, or the sales technique employed by GW staffers.
This is, in my opinion, the chief reason you don't see a lot of us posting online.
Questions can start out in our sphere of influence and rapidly move out of it, and once again the staff member is stuck with out an answer (or at least the answer the poster want's to hear).
As I said, that's just my opinion.
Having said that, I'll try to respond to some of the posters' questions in this thread, particularly those in my sphere of influence.
@ matt mcelvogue
"community you abandoned (as far as the internet goes) when you removed your own boards"
- we did not have a good exit strategy. No doubt our customers felt/feel abandoned. We did not handle this as well as we could have. Part of the mission for the Community Development Team is to determine how to improve lines of communication and bring hobbyists together.
@ ota
"every new codex is simple. Good for little boys but bad for good playing"
- I have not found this to be the case. In the club I belong to the response has been more of "good for everyone". However, writing Codexes is not in my sphere of influence.
@ gamethug
"open and honest consultation with its player base...greater transparency"
- part of the GW US Community Development Team's mission is to do this, for our spheres of influence. Perhaps we can determine the best way for this to occur going forward.
We've started something with our own blog and GW event specific forums (gwuscommunity.com).
"tough to keep the faith in this context"
- faith is an important cornerstone of passion. I hope that over the coming years we can do some good things that will help reinforce your faith.
@ vetsgtnamaan
"they would not try to sell me something that was on the horizon"
- correct information is key here and the decision must be yours. In my example in my first post, the information was not correct but presented as the truth.
"GW not giving me any news"
- I think we are, but it may seem like old news due to months of rumors and speculation.
"time to step up to the PR game"
- I absolutely agree and we'll be working on a plan to bring the PR realm into our sphere of influence.
@ gade
"I don't want to add new horrors or plaguies to my army before they are made in plastic"
- this reinforces one of my points in my first post. Rather than enjoy countless hours hobbying with existing models, some folks will hold out for something that is rumor and/or speculation.
@ a. n. mous
"community section rather than "old boys club"...none of the redshirts would let me peek."
- the behavior of our Hobby Center staff is not in our sphere of influence. I would suggest, however, that if you're in Detroit those guys aren't showing anyone until this weekend.
"GW get a forum...release schedule that is relevant"
- We are trialing event specific forums now (mentioned earlier in this thread) and we'll see how things go from there. As far the release schedule, I'm not sure what you mean by you comment.
@ @ chaosgerbil 5:48pm
"whole post"
- I feel that most of the points raised in your post can be covered by the "spheres of responsibility" concept. GW staff have their specific sphere (or spheres), but the customer typically doesn't see these spheres. We all appear to be GW and should therefore no the correct answer to every question. More often than not, if any answer is outside of our sphere of influence, we'll still try to answer the question because we want to help. Sometimes these answers are wrong. Hopefully some experiments with event-specific forums will help us determine better ways to open the communication lines.
@ anonymous 5:59
"PR poll...no info from over 24s"
- I'm not aware of this poll. Was it done on the US website prior to 2002?
"out of house extensive playtesting"
- this is done, much more than anyone thinks.
@ admiral halsey
"bunch of suits in a room"
- the funny part about this is that if anyone wears a suit to our office they get no end of ribbing about it, unless they have just come from a funeral.
"absent-mindedly erased their army from existence"
- I can assure you that decisions like those that affected the Dogs of War and Lost and the Damned were not taken lightly at all. I was not involved in the decisions (not my sphere of influence), but I happen to have both of those armies (my DoW since their army book release in 5th ed). I view repurposing those models as something wargamers have to do from time to time.
"close forums"
- our forums, like many others, became places where the signal to noise ratio was out of whack. As I mentioned earlier, we just didn't have a good exit strategy. We're looking to improve that over the coming years.
"Please take more care to listen"
- We do listen. The trouble we find, in my experience, that for every ten people who want one thing, there are ten more who want the exact opposite. A tough line to walk.
"internet rumors will not kill your business"
- True. I do think, however, that the irresponsible use of internet rumors can cause damage to that business. Note: BoLS do a great job of their disclaimers, and more importantly their exciting hobby material.
@ wombats
"I am painting models a year in advance of a viable codex release, the more information I have the more I can invest in GW miniatures"
- the more information people tend to want is called "the details" which will be found in the future Codex. By all means prepare, but the idea really should be to work with what you have now, not what you'll have in 12+ months time.
@ maves
"spanish inquistion"
- it's not that bad really, I got to type all this from a fairly comfy chair ; )
So there you have it, about 30 minutes of typing that, I hope, answers most of the points made throughout this thread.
Thanks for the invite to do so Ross. It was a great exercise.
There are things we've done before that we did poorly. There are things we've done well. We'll continue to make mistakes (we're only human) but we hope that the good, helpful things we do will greatly outweigh the mistakes.
So, as well as coming to BoLS for your cool hobby/occasional rumor fix, perhaps you'd like to drop by gwuscommunity.com
Cheers
Dave Taylor
GW US Community Development Manager
Dave, by taking the time to respond more thoroughly I expect you have "scored some points" for you and GW. I think many gamer's frustrations are heightened by what they see as being ignored by a company that they spend many hours and dollars to support. The more responses you are able to give should translate into people feeling listened to and supported.
So, thanks.
I know that you are not the editor of White Dwarf, a rules designer, and a miniatures producer all rolled into one; but you are the only contact we have so I think that's why you got bombarded with complaints and questions. I know it's not easy when you have people shouting for GW to do opposite things, although there are ways to get a more representative opinion of what the community as a whole wants.
It is good news that GW is planning to upgrade or revamp its community relations and support. I know I won't get my way with the codexes issues and I'll just have to live with that, but since 40k is such a cool and engaging hobby I'll stick around.
BOLS, sorry for the thread hijacking, but it seemed like some important issues were floating around that needed to be addressed. Now that my Lost & The Damned is stuck as a guard army, I am very interested in the next IG codex... but you guys know that if you take 9 Leman Russes you will have to model beards on them, right?
Cheers!
I'm thinking I'll model my nine out of gorgonzola ; )
Cheers
Dave
Hi Dave,
www.gwuscommunity.com has been added to our linklist.
Now back to our regularly scheduled conversations...WHAT 9 RUSSES!!! :)
I see... nine executioners on the horizen... or was it a mirage?
later,
Tim Weston
I'm thinking that the Leman Russ squad would be a 0-1 choice for the army.
@DaveTaylor: You officially have permission to hijack any thread at any time.
Seeing a comment from you on our humble blog is often the highlight of our day.
If you'd like an open thread from time to time, just let us know! I think it would do wonders in healing perceived wounds from your extremely loyal fanbase.
In any case, thanks for the comments!
"- we did not have a good exit strategy. No doubt our customers felt/feel abandoned. We did not handle this as well as we could have. Part of the mission for the Community Development Team is to determine how to improve lines of communication and bring hobbyists together."
Excellent, I'd love to see an "official" forum (be it a forum we can use or not) that gives me and the community a place to hear from you guys. BEFORE it is heard about everywhere else on the internet ;)
well the big picture, seems that the guard codex will be okay, and will hurt alot on grenadier armies but thats GW after all. the IG codex rumor seems to me that it will be the most fluffy codex around, 40k without the fluff is nothing more than plastic soldiers.
GW really lost focus of theirs games, never seen that much vets going back to the oldies such as classic battletech and the such here in montreal.
even the young ones that started back in 4th ed still wonders what is the joke of the 5th ed as previous rule set was a unfinished product.
new chaos codex is a refit of the 1996 codex, the orky one lacks alot of fresh new stuff but again it's only a roll back in the end.
blood angel codex, better not talk bout that one.
back to the IG codex rumor, inquisitorial HQ choice.. really bad thing, should just have to make priests useful plus how many like those commissars mini so much to have them as commander and i could go on like this for ever.
we see soon enough when it come out, it may be a decent book, but for sure it will be far from ground breaking.. for how many years players want some fast attack choices like some humvees or getting back the IG land speedeer
GW just don't care
It's kind of a hive mind.
When a customer base gets so starved for communication, they'll jump on anyone from the company, regardless of position.
Another example would be an MMO I used to play. The forum moderator would post new patch notes and news, and people would hound her endlessly with questions and complaints in the hopes that she had the ear of the absent developers. Even though her only job was to handle forum goers and post thing that came in her inbox
dave taylor that post here , okay he can defend GW, but does it change the fact that 40k is loosing is place little by little.. profits are going down and down..releasing minis to sell is one thing but without a decent rule set to sell along is and other, many minis will be sold and finish as shelf sitters again. the craze of new ( without being new )will be short lived as the daemon army will ( soul grinder, what a joke... half a old daemon prince kit plus half a defiler )....
since Dave sphere of influence is not codex writing...so it way not his fault he we get a dumb down rule set.. i haven't bought a single mini in 2years now, i own 3k of black legion, basically a marine army with spikes..so since rogue trader . i haven't got hurt at all with the changes so far
but i still feel sorry for all fellow wargamers who got the squat treatment.. in the end i really hope the IG codex won't be like the chaos one
One bright spot for everyone complaining about Chimera heavy armies getting hosed by S4 Defensive weapons- I've heard that while that's true, the movement/shooting chart has been tweaked so that all vehicles can now move up to 12" and fire one weapon, not just Fast vehicles- Fast now just means a flat out speed boost at top speed, no improvement on the weapons chart. So you could razz those Chimeras into position, drop off troops and still fire off your Heavy Bolter/Flamer. Apparently.
My personal bit of unfounded speculation is that perhaps the 'inquisitorial retinue' is a slight misinterpretation on the OP's part. I have a suspicion it might actually be based the High Command unit originally published in Chapter Approved in WD308, which was structured very like an inquisitor's retinue with an officer and orderlie (henchmen). This was a great unit, and would make a lot of sense in a Guard codex.
To my mind the biggest rules botches all seem to come from the way the game is updated - the so-called 'pendulum' of rules changes spawned by the every-few-years-a-new-edit release cycle.
To justify forking out the $20 for a new book, the writers no doubt feel the update needs some hooks, and so apply hosts of sweeping changes to list composition, army operation and new units, when in most cases a handful of point tweaks may have been sufficient to achieve 'balance'.
Maybe - and this is just brainstorming - GW should supplant the whole codex publishing process with a regularly updated rules website; tweak/add units and lists on an item by item basis and allow tourney organizers to pick and choose what will be legal at events. Break-out lists into 'tournament-tested', 'semi-legal/apoc' and 'archived' but keep them all published. Post ideas for converting out-of-print minis. Justify the profit lost on books with a subscription or the increase in miniature sales that could come from a less rigid / more uniform release schedule. Reaffirm community goodwill by perpetually fine tuning the game based on consumer and critical input.
The transition would be a little sticky, but I'm sure it could be worked out. Would take a few weeks of big-cup-of-coffee thinking though, and I'm definitely not getting paid for that.
Change is inevitable in the Warhammer hobby and if you're particularly pleased with a rules set or Codex then the next version will likely seem disappointing. On the other hand, if you're displeased with a current Codex or rules set then the next revision of it will likely make you quite happy. Having been in the hobby since Rogue Trader I can tell you that this is a constant cycle and I've experienced both feelings many times. Not every product will please every customer every time, it's just not possible.
It seems that the pure gamers, those who are only interested in the game of 40K itself rather than the models, are most likely to feel crushed or betrayed when disappointed by rules changes. Those who are more interested in the hobby and who use the rules as a means for bringing their model collections to life are still disappointed at times by revisions, but less likely to want to drop out of the hobby as we have made huge commitments to modeling and painting that go far beyond the mere cost of the product.
I'm lucky enough to live near a GW Battle Bunker that's also a company HQ. One thing I've found associating with GW staff members who hold a wide variety of different jobs is that most of these people have a high level of committment to the hobby and the customers. They love the hobby as much as the non-employee customers and on a personal level are just as subject to being pleased or disappointed by a product as any other customer. On the other hand, when any of us works for any organization, whether that company makes toys or sells insurance, it's important to publicly support the company that furnishes you with a salary even when you are occasionally disappointed in something they have done or something that they sell. Everyone should keep this in mind the next time they solicit a response from someone at GW or any other company. They are not going to say "yeah, that sucks" like you may have just done in your rant and they should not be criticized for taking a more measured approach in their response.
Years ago I went from playing historic simulation games (e.g., Avalon Hill, SPI, etc.) to fantasy roleplay games and then to Games Workshop. Warhammer has always filled the void left for me when I stopped roleplaying. I've never seen it as a substitute for the "serious" wargames I played years ago. Warhammer is a fantasy game and for me it's about the miniature 3D world you create when you have two painted armies and some cool scenery on the game table and the stories that evolve from that. It's about the heroic successes and failures and the fun little stories that happen during a game. It's about the fun of seeing models you've built, customized and painted to satisfy your own imagination come to life and sharing that experience with a similarly minded friend.
If every disappointment in the rules revisions makes you want to drop out of the hobby, you're free to do that and you're free to express your disappointment. But it's no reason for irrational attacks and rants on the company or its employees. While most forums receive new angry rants on a daily basis, I'm not used to seeing that on BOLS, but a few of the comments here and on other recent threads have been little more than angry rants. I hope that the trend doesn't take off here as I've already fled from other online forums to BOLS to escape "crazy" behavior, rants, personal attacks and other unpleasantness. As BOLS grows in popularity, it now seems it is also subject to an increase in bad behavior. I hope this isn't an indication of a sudden influx of wonky and disgruntled gamers who wish to spoil what may be the best forum on the Internet.
When I'm disappointed in some of the changes with a new Codex or rule book, I mention the disappointment and specific reasons why in a constructive way to "the right people" so that it will hopefully be taken into consideration the next time changes are made. I also take the time to tell the appropriate people at GW when I think that the company has done something exceptionally well so that the trend will hopefully continue.
If you're unhappy with the hobby or GW, it will do nothing to improve either by simply tearing them apart. If you wish to express dissatisfaction then politely explain why with specific reasons. If you want to make a difference, provide the feedback in a constructive way to GW. Write to the studio or customer service, etc. and save the ranting for the loony bin because the vitriol is not much fun for other hobbyists or useful to GW in the quest to improve their products.
It's now just 10 days to Games Day Baltimore. Can't wait but, must...survive... till then...
nosuchmethod- I personally love having a nice hardcopy of a book in my hands. I hate using printouts of PDFs (LEGAL PDFs- i.e. lists of GW's websites), having a nice, good copy feels so much better. It's something you just can't download.
@Dave Taylor:"I am not aware of this poll. Was it done on the website prior to 2002?"
Actually it was done last year I believe, just ask the lads on The Miniatures Page about it...wear a fire retardant suit if you go down that road as it fracked off quite a few people.As to sphere's of influence...and yours in particular...you are absolutely correct,and venting on you was no way to behave, I sincerely apologize.
@ brassscorpion
amen, at least in principle
I agree that there is little point in complaining if the point doesn't come hand-in-hand with a solution (or at least some productive insight)
BUT
The fact that the game takes precedence to the hobby is a problem cited by many (veterans especially) and I think this attitude is directly disseminated and promoted by GW.
Placing the emphasis on officialdom, the tournament scene and the sanctity of exclusive GW (IP and product) is a company policy over there.
So if you find yourself asking questions like:
Why is my favorite list/unit being dropped? Why are there more forums about nidzilla than about how to paint a carnifex? Why is some Black Shirt telling me I can't play with my cardboard tank or Reaper mini in the GW Store? For that matter, why don't they SELL Reaper minis and templates for cardboard tanks at the GW store? Why has most of the hobby content been culled from direct services, White Dwarf and the web?
etc etc etc
You can stop wondering; It's policy, and its coming down from the top. And it's not, as some will tell you, "good business/making money/just behaving like any publicly-traded company". It's bad business to put short term profit before long term market health (unless it's really a sink-or-swim fiscal quarter). Some GW policy-maker just faked his/her way through macroeconomics. That and missed the bit where being a monopoly is only a good thing in a necessities market.
My breath (mostly) exhausted, I have to say this forum has gotten horribly off track. Apologies all around, especially to the BoLS guys. You make this hobby look good!
As always,
NoSuchMethod
at embarqmail.com
@ James
I absolutely agree with you about how nice hardcopies are, esp. for reference.
But there's no reason they couldn't do both. Maybe release all the lists in their most up-to-date form in a quarterly softback while also posting them all online? And if your list changed a lot that quarter, pick it up, otherwise don't bother.
Something along the lines of warhammer annual meets ravening hordes. Plus, thats more revenue to justify the perceived "loss" of not 'forcing' players to buy the codices.
I'm excited about the new codex, even though it will just distract me from the things that distracted me from my Guard...
>> "Why has most of the hobby content been culled from direct services, White Dwarf and the web?"
There does seem to be some good hobby material that has not been migrated to the new website. Even the hobby article I had published by GW on their website was not integrated onto the new site when the US site content was merged onto the global web. The article helped a lot of people with a complicated build too and sold a pair of expensive GW kits every time someone wanted to do it. I know because I've seen a lot of conversions based on my design and there's even a German forum that has duplicated part of that hobby material from the now defunct US site. There does seem to be more than a bit of highly useful hobby material that's not been re-published on the new site.
Still, although it's sad to lose so much useful hobby content, it's no surprise that some of the hobby material that was present before has now been eliminated, at least for the moment. Getting the new website up and running with its new functionality and global focus was a huge task I'm sure and there are still plenty of bugs to iron out.
For one thing, although much faster than its first week, the new GW global site is still painfully slow to respond when navigating from page to page. Hopefully when problems like that are fixed then they'll work on restoring all of the wonderful hobby content that's not showing at present.
WOW!! It is just super to 1) Get to hear about a great army release and 2) actually hear from a GM employee. I live in Alaska and its great to hear candid discussion outside of a marketing blitz. Back to the matter at hand... Now I have yet another reason to buy guardsmen! Before they where just tyranid prey, and genestealer cultists, but I think I may just build a cults themed IG army. I was thinking of a purple Valkyrie. "The Purple Baron"
@ brassscorpion
Try checking out the UK Games Workshop site. They seem to have inexplicably resisted the global changeover, and most of the good articles are still extant there.
Archive em while you can though, I doubt it will last.
@ BigRed, MKerr et al:
Thanks for all the hard work - all much appreciated!
@ Dave Taylor:
Thanks so much for your authoritative, articulate and ultimately human comments - I even went to the extent of trying to explain to my long-suffering wife what a difference it made to the discussion and, indeed, my 'faith' in GW (as raised and addressed above).
Good luck with gwuscommunity.com too - although I've noted some of the links don't work if (like me) you click on the UK link on the location chooser: maybe this could be flagged up on the homepage?
Cheers, Matey - much appreciated!
@ Brassscorpion:
Article? What article? It sounds fun...and cheers for your measured comments, too.
- Drax
First off, it's always great to see ANY sort of communication between the company and it's fa base, so thanks Dave. Taking the time to talk with us means alot.
About the new platoon based changes- the idea of specializing a platoon for a certain role, as well attaching tanks and such to units is great. it allows for a flexibility that I think is essential for any fighting force, regardless of it being on the PC or console, a table top, or in the real world. Attaching tanks to infantry is something that I would LOVE to do, so this change (if it's true) would be great. That said, it seems a little too flexible for a army as ponderous and ridgid as the Imperial Guard, but whatever.
About waiting to buy minis because of rumours- I am guilty of this, but hear me out. to finish off my IG army, I need to buy a Cadian battle force. after reading this post, I'm going to wait and get it after the new codex is released for 2 reasons
1. My army would be fighting any batles that would require the CBF until about the time the codex came out, so if I can get an executioner and (maybe, just maybe) some cadians in great coats by waiting a bit, what's the harm?
2. If I don't buy the CBF now, I can get the new 5th Ed when it's released.
So there are some reasons for me to wait...
Does anyone know when the IG Codex is coming out?
march next year... I think, thats what they said anyway. the space marines have had 2 codex's before our last one that stuid as.
Man, this site saves my wallet all the time! I was about to buy a few Valkyries from Forge World, but I guess I'd wait for the Citadel ones. I hope there are new ratlings too. And Mordians.
5th Edition IG Codex: Call for a More Restrictive, More Balanced Theme
Greetings. I have two objectives for this post. One is to continue the ongoing discussion about the coming Imperial Guard codex, and what Imperial Guard players would like to see in it. My other objective – just wishful thinking, really – is that one of the games designers responsible for the 5th edition IG codex might read it and consider some of the ideas expressed.
Like many (most?) IG players, I enjoy themed armies. I’m not a military historian, but I’ve always had a sort of grim fascination with World War I and pre-Great War imagery and militaria, including the US Civil War. The entire 40K Universe and game system has always been reflective of these bloody, half-mechanized periods of warfare. Perfect! The deeply immersive backstory is why 40K is the only war game I play.
My own IG army, the 1st Satiran Conscript Fusiliers, is an ‘homage’ to the Japanese army of 1905 – the Russo-Japanese War. Think waves of men charging across a cratered moonscape of rock, caps, bayonets, and banners proud, being mowed down by entrenched machine guns and blasted apart by enormous cannon.
Over the years I’ve collected hundreds of metal Mordians, and spent countless hours crafting the miniatures to fit my chosen theme. Every lasgunner has white “fusilier straps” across his chest (cut from strips of medical tape), and long sword bayonets made from plasticard. My officers are all about epaulets, shiny brass buttons and gold brocade. In game, I favor mobile 10-man squads equipped only with vox casters and special weapons. I like to see my heavy weapons grouped together in the HQ, laying down concentrated fire to cover the advance. My collection has grown quite large, including 20 converted Mordian Rough Riders.
I love every unit in the IG codex, and wish that I could include at least 1 of everything in every 750 – 1500 point army list. Unrealistic, yes, I know.
As dedicated as I am to my theme, I know it could never appeal to everyone. I love the more “high-tech” looking IG armies too, like the Forge World drop troops, and the ubiquitous Cadians, who are the archetypal image of the Guard, updated from those fantastic pencil illustrations of days gone by (Epic Scale, Rogue Trader, 1st Edition plastic guard box).
Given the codex we currently have, I can understand why people have posted so many different, varied army lists. Some are looking to find the “killiest,” most competitive list against all comers. Others are trying to define a theme, such as “trench warfare.” Others are struggling to strike a balance between their favorite theme and a 50/50 chance to win – leading to some pretty strange doctrine combos that don’t fit the fluff or the look of the miniatures available in one’s collection. Some swear by the grenade launcher, while others never take them. There seem to be as many lists as there are guard players, and no two are exactly alike, or even relatively close.
I fit into this last category. One thing I’ve noticed in the games that I’ve played, is that it takes a lot of tweaking and customization to gear up my army against my opponent of the day. As JWOLF so wisely said on Bell of Lost Souls, “The guard do everything worse than their opponents!” This leads, by necessity, to a lot of redundancy built into the list. If I’m fighting Orks, one squad with a flamer isn’t going to cut it. I need at least 3. But then, those 30 men (an entire platoon!) suffer against armored units like killa kans. The agonizing struggle to find balance vs. theme ensues.
IMHO, no list that I’ve seen (or created myself) is so balanced that it could fight equally well against Chaos Space Marines today and Tyranids tomorrow. I think that’s why the Guard place so poorly in tournament play (or so I’ve heard by word-of-mouth). I haven’t followed the results very closely, so can anyone tell me about a grand-prize winning IG army at a GW grand tournament?
So – with genuine respect for all those who are angry and disappointed that doctrines, chapter traits, and specialized army lists are being phased out of the game system – I disagree. As much as I dearly love your army’s cool theme (and my own), I think it’s time for a much tighter codex and a more restrictive, “universal Imperial Guard” theme.
5th Edition isn’t out yet, but I’ve played a tutorial game at my local shop, my IG vs. a friend’s Orks. I may create a second post with more details about this if there seems to be any interest. Based on this one very limited experience, it seems clear that we need an IG army list that can fight on the move, shoot or batter through tough enemy assault units, and have a 50/50 chance to finish the game standing bloody and triumphant upon an objective deep inside enemy territory.
Given the number of doctrines currently available, I don’t see how ANY game design team could figure out how all those different options could come together and make every theme equally competitive. I would like to see some flexibility and choice in the list – absolutely! But I would gladly, gladly, gladly trade in my beloved theme for a solid list with fewer options and a much more balanced chance against all the other races. I would still find ways to express my creativity and my personal theme – by model selection, conversions, painting, etc. – even if the new list said that every 10-man squad MUST take a heavy and special weapon, every command unit must be mounted in a “command chimera” with improved comms, what-have-you. So long as I knew that these units gave me a fighting chance at those distant objectives, and I had a few choices to swap out for variety and arbitrator scenarios, I’d be happier with the IG than I ever have been.
As a bizarre case-in-point, look at the IG army in the Dawn of War video game. You can’t (as far as I know) choose to play anyone except the Cadians. Shabby, barbaric uniforms and cowardly helmets aside (go Mordians), they totally epitomize the spirit of the IG. Vast swarms of lasgun infantry, a few of them toting grenade launchers and plasma guns. Entrenched heavy weapons behind sandbags. Enormous tanks firing wild, explosive ordnance, and Earthshaker cannons that rattle the very sky when they fire in batteries. To this add all of the wonderful Imperial flair: Commissars, Psykers, and Preachers shrieking dogma. Top it all off with incredibly cool, individualistic commanders. I think there’s been 3 different ones so far, including the burly “Ursarkar Creed” guy with a combi-storm bolter/lightning claw. Taken as a whole: Awesome.
If I could completely replicate the spirit of this type of IG army using my Mordians in a standard 1000-2000 point game, I would do it in a heartbeat. For any game designers out there – please do whatever it takes to give us this spirit. If 3 point or 4 point guardsmen gives us the points left over to have at least 1 commissar, priest, and psyker in any size force, then that’s what we need. If to this we need to add two platoons with a set number of 20-man squads, and it gives us the numbers necessary to fight into the enemy deployment zone and wrest the objective away from the defenders (be they Tyranids or Chaos Marines) then that’s what we need. If the list needs to be carefully restricted to prevent wild abuse through min-maxing or whatever, then I’m totally fine with that.
I love to express creativity and try different ideas with my army list as much as anyone else, but right now I think there are just too many options. I’m willing to embrace a more restrictive, “corporate” Guard list in exchange for greater balance and game-winning playability, even if that means (on paper) every Guard army will be pretty much the same as every other Guard army. If the new Chaos, Ork, and Daemon codices are any indication, there will always be at least a handful of flavorful options, and IMHO choosing different models, paint schemes, and simply naming your Heroic Senior Officer go a long way toward personal individualization.
Long post, I know. Comments and critique welcome – as are your thoughts and counter opinions.
Some nice stuff. I'm looking forward to see how much of it makes it into the published work.
Post a Comment