Article on Fanboys, Exclusivity, and Sonic the Hedgehog

[Verilance]

On number seven, A lot of people care. Army construction programs remove the human error part of army building. I just got back from Wargames Con where every player I saw had their armies printed out via Army Builder. Adepticon was the same way.

What??

Kids today can no longer do simple math??

What is this world coming too!!!

i blame allowing calculators in schools

I own a lot of the army books even for those whose models I never entend to collect and have built many many lists just for fun.

never once have I thought to myself I need an aid to do so, pen and paper work just fine

[relasine]

How many unit types does each faction in WM have? How different are those unit types to each other? The variety of 40k alone blows away WM, it is a far, far more complex system and takes longer to update. PP can do it faster because they are a tiny operation that doesn't have to arrange the printing of hundreds of thousands of books and kits months in advance of a release to satisfy initial demand. It is also part of their business model, staggered releases to give people time to save money between releases so they spend more. It works for GW, so they will continue. Having said that Harry on Warseer, I think, said we should see a change in the frequency with which they update army books and codices.

On the first point, the four original WM factions have 60 (give or take one or two) currently available releases between warcasters, warjacks, units, unit and weapon attachments, solos, etc. Mercs have about ten more. I'm not going to take the time to count up the Hordes factions, but I'll ball park it at 45. Minions have about the same. Retribution probably has about 30. So in total, we're looking at around 565 separate model/units, by the end of the year it'll be closer to 580.

I'll concede that there are more units to discuss in 40k, but how many of them are really the same model in a different book with a different paint job? What's the difference in the stat line between Tactical, Assault, and Devastator Marines? Is there really a big difference between a Space Wolf Rhino and a Chaos Space Marine Rhino save the cost and one or two pieces of wargear? To get a Guardsmen's stat line, you need only take a Space Marine's and subtract one from most everything. The "variety" that you talk of is pretty spurious when you get down to it and really look at the design space that GW uses. When unit entries consists of the same stat lines with +/- one or two, there isn't much variety there.

And I'm curious, which units in Warmachine are you talking about that "do the same thing"? If you cite specific examples, I might understand what you're getting at better.

Explain to me how 40k is a more complex game, because I'd love to hear it. Its design space is way more restricted. Its dice mechanics are simpler. There's no resource management. Comparatively, there's less dynamism in terms of buffing/debuffing. Units (with a few exceptions, i.e. Long Fangs, PotMS) must all shoot the same target. The vehicle damage chart is outdated and not particularly elegant. There are very few modifiers in the game (vehicle damage chart being one of the only examples). The cover system is too simple for its own good. Wargear is the only part of the game that has any measure of complexity over Warmachine/Hordes, but when you compare that to warcaster/warlock interaction (there are over 100 warcasters/warlocks), the scale tilts back in the other direction.

I'm not implying these are bad things. 40k must be a simpler game due to the higher model count, and as a 40k player I'm okay with that. If 40k's ruleset were just as complex as Warmachine's, 1500-point games would take five hours. Its level of complexity is appropriate, but it is not more complex than Warmachine.

They have some good design podcasts on their website...

Link?

[eldargal]

Here:
[url]http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=9400003[/url]

The combination of varying equipment options, stats,USRs, army specific USRs and unit specific USRs just seemed to give 40k armies a much greater variety in how a unit could be equipped and used than in Warmachine. This is often hailed as one of the advantages, a much 'tighter' ruleset. My impression of Warmachine, and I admit my experience is fairly limited, is that each faction is basically a combination of caster, warjacks and whatnot with a variation of rules to give them some difference. More akin to the differences between SM chapters than say SM, Eldar, Tau and Orks.

[SotonShades]

has anyone else noticed this is becoming the exact argument the original artical was, for want of a better word, criticising? I think that is brilliant hehe.

[SMC]

Why are people still saying that GW raised their prices because of the change to Finecast? GW raises their prices every year around the same time. This has been their practice for at least the last five years. Or are you going to argue that they raised prices on metals last year in anticipation of raising prices for finecast? It had nothing to do with Finecast. Did you all forget they raised prices on plastics and codices at the same time? Either you're ignorantly spreading lies to make your case or willfully spreading lies to make your case. Which is it?

[eldargal]

While true, GW are going to save an awful lot of money on using resin instead of metal, so the price rise just seemed like a kick in the teeth. As I said, it was poorly handled, they would have been better making a big issue of how the switch to a cheaper material would save the customer money. We call it the Finecast price rise because it happened when Finecast was introduced, even though it was not only Finecast that went up in price.

[wittdooley]

has anyone else noticed this is becoming the exact argument the original artical was, for want of a better word, criticising? I think that is brilliant hehe.

Yep, it has, hasn't it?

I wholeheartedly disagree on your assessment about the internet/social media, Relasine. GW is one of the more adept miniature companies at utilizing this, particularly with Twitter updates. Both the GW main twitter feed (@voxcaster) and the Black Library twitter feed (@blacklibrary) update ALL THE TIME. Privateer Does a fair job as well. As for the blog: Really? GW updates their blog at least 3 times a week. I think that's pretty admirable. Privateer updates occasionally, but there's no real consistency to it. That's frustrating to me, though I do love their online terrain contests.

I agree that the initiation of Finecast was poorly handled, but as I've articulated before, the medium is only going to be a boon to the hobby (see Trollforged games "Trollcast") The durable resin material makes models of superior quality with a greater ease for hobbyist conversions. I just got my cockatrice, a "wave 3" model, and it is flawless. And gorgeous.

I think people that bring the GW stores into conversations are conveniently closing their eyes to a pretty major fact: GW HAS ITS OWN STORES. No other hobby line does. GW runs them at a loss to grow the hobby. People complaining about not being allowed to play all their specialist games in the stores also forget that the store has to deal with customer questions about that game's availability if they allow it to be played. It's only slightly different than not being allowed to play a different game system in a GW store. Sometimes I think GW should just stop operationing their stores, but then I think about how much an internet uproar there would be then...

@ Relasine: Don't kid yourself on some warjacks being more or less the same. While I can only speak specifically to the factions I play, all the warjacks are essentially Dreadnoughts with different weapons. Ol Rowdy is an Ironclad with some USRs. The Pyre Troll, Winter Troll, and Slag Troll are all, effectively, the same troll with a different elemental ability. Hell, I'm still waiting for my Electroll I'm not saying it's a bad thing, as I do realize they serve a different purpose in the game, but it's no different than my Rifleman dread serving a different purpose than my furiouso dread.

[relasine]

@ Relasine: Don't kid yourself on some warjacks being more or less the same. While I can only speak specifically to the factions I play, all the warjacks are essentially Dreadnoughts with different weapons. Ol Rowdy is an Ironclad with some USRs. The Pyre Troll, Winter Troll, and Slag Troll are all, effectively, the same troll with a different elemental ability. Hell, I'm still waiting for my Electroll I'm not saying it's a bad thing, as I do realize they serve a different purpose in the game, but it's no different than my Rifleman dread serving a different purpose than my furiouso dread.

Fair enough, there is some play between warjacks, but remember that each faction has at least three "chassis" that they run their 'jacks on, and even comparing one warjack on the same chassis to the next you do see some variation in the statline (Hunter, Grenadier). However, are you going to argue that Dreadnought has more in-game options or mechanical complexity than a warjack? Dreadnoughts do three things: move, fire, and assault, and they limited access to some in-game buffs. Warjacks and warbeasts can do that and trample, slam, throw, headbutt, push, benefit from the game's resource management system, use a more elegant damage tracking system, and interact in very complicated ways with spells and effects.

I'll also concede that GW has gotten markedly better with their internet presence.

People complaining about not being allowed to play all their specialist games in the stores also forget that the store has to deal with customer questions about that game's availability if they allow it to be played. It's only slightly different than not being allowed to play a different game system in a GW store.

That's your argument? That because they'll have to "answer questions about availability"? And how is it slightly different for me to want to Epic at a GW from wanting to Malifaux? GW makes Epic. I believe that you can still special order at one of their brick and mortar stores. Why can't I play it in the store again?

Here:
[url]http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=9400003[/url]

The combination of varying equipment options, stats,USRs, army specific USRs and unit specific USRs just seemed to give 40k armies a much greater variety in how a unit could be equipped and used than in Warmachine. This is often hailed as one of the advantages, a much 'tighter' ruleset. My impression of Warmachine, and I admit my experience is fairly limited, is that each faction is basically a combination of caster, warjacks and whatnot with a variation of rules to give them some difference. More akin to the differences between SM chapters than say SM, Eldar, Tau and Orks.

Thanks for the link. I'll check them out, but I think I listened to them already. Aren't they the ones that released back in 2008 when the 5th Ed. rulebook came out?

If your experience with Warmachine is lacking, why are you making claims about its level of complexity? If that's the case, you probably shouldn't make any claims about it at all. You still haven't addressed any of my specific arguments. All I see is "X+Y+Z=complicated" v. a game that you admittedly have limited experience with.

To address yours, Warmachine has all of things you've listed, save army-specific USRs (which they sort of do have on a limited basis i.e. Tough/Regeneration, Eyeless Sight, access to exclusive things like the Choir of Menoth, etc) and varying equipment options. This may seem like a lower level of complexity, but when you factor in that Privateer uses a more robust design space, a more complicated targeting system (i.e. individual models decide their target), a more complicated dice mechanic, and, chief among them, constant in-game, sweeping interaction with other models on the board (i.e. support solos, warcasters, etc.), you can easily tell which is more complex. Wargear may change a unit's role, but it changes little else about them. Compare Cygnar's non-character ranged units for a moment (Trencher Infantry, Trencher Commandos, Long Gunners, Gun Mages, Rangers). Not only do they all have different roles, but they all have different stat blocks and vastly different special rules. Hell, the nature of their roles is even more complex. 40k roles are mostly relegated to a few specific categories (i.e. forward/rear elements, anti-tank/anti-infantry, anti-elite/anti-horde). Warmachine roles are more involved, not only consisting of the categories above, but with more options. (i.e. forward disrupting, flanking/skirmishing, back-line suppression, mid-line trouble-shooting, front-line buffing).

I'm not entirely sure why you're arguing this point. Like I stated, 40k has to be less complicated due to its model count. It simply has to be for people to be able to finish a 1500-to-2000-point game in less than five hours. The fact that you can't admit that suggests to me that you're either trolling, in denial, or just don't know.

My original point here was that GW's system of updating their armies is antiquated and way too slow. You're seriously going to defend them on that when Necrons haven't seen a codex update in over eight years? Really? With all the resources they have at their disposal, that's complete and utter garbage.

[wittdooley]

Fair enough, there is some play between warjacks, but remember that each faction has at least three "chassis" that they run their 'jacks on, and even comparing one warjack on the same chassis to the next you do see some variation in the statline (Hunter, Grenadier). However, are you going to argue that Dreadnought has more in-game options or mechanical complexity than a warjack? Dreadnoughts do three things: move, fire, and assault, and they limited access to some in-game buffs. Warjacks and warbeasts can do that and trample, slam, throw, headbutt, push, benefit from the game's resource management system, use a more elegant damage tracking system, and interact in very complicated ways with spells and effects.

Never said they had more complexity. The question was simply where were there units in Warmahordes that did essentially the same thing. I offered up a suggestion. I'm curious about the 3 chassis; does Cygnar only have 2 (the lancer and ironclad chassis) while everyone else has more? If so, I feel cheated! To be entirely fair, 40k also involves a more complicated (though I won't argue necessarily better) armour mechanic (different armour at different points of the model, different levels of penetration, etc).

That's your argument? That because they'll have to "answer questions about availability"? And how is it slightly different for me to want to Epic at a GW from wanting to Malifaux? GW makes Epic. I believe that you can still special order at one of their brick and mortar stores. Why can't I play it in the store again?

Not really an argument, but perhaps an explanation. Also consider that not all your GW store employees will have been old enough to play these games and answer questions about them (and, quite frankly, they really shouldn't have to as they aren't products GW fully supports any longer). Again, not an argument or excuse, as I personally think it's silly that they won't "let" you play them, but I think it is a reasonable explanation/justification. I don't have a GW within 6 hours of me, so it isn't an issue for me.

I'm not entirely sure why you're arguing this point. Like I stated, 40k has to be less complicated due to its model count. It simply has to be for people to be able to finish a 1500-to-2000-point game in less than five hours.

We agree here, for the most part. I'd argue that, though it uses miniatures, Warmahordes shares as much in common with M:tG as it does with 40k, mostly due to the synergies required to play and the resource management to which you refer. I don't think this is a bad thing. I think being good at Warmahordes requries a vast amount more knowledge than 40k--you really have to know what your opponents army is cabable of to be successful. For some, that's a good thing, for others, that's a bad thing. For me, it's the primary reason I won't play Warmahordes in "competitive" tournaments. I simply don't have the time to devote to learn other folks armies. I love to play with my buddies, however.

My original point here was that GW's system of updating their armies is antiquated and way too slow. You're seriously going to defend them on that when Necrons haven't seen a codex update in over eight years? Really? With all the resources they have at their disposal, that's complete and utter garbage.

It's driven by the allmighty $$. They use their market research to determine that Marine codecies sell more models. I'd wager that Privateer has done the same upon deciding which factions to include in their 2-p starter. I don't have any of the stats, but I'd guess Cygnar (the good guys) and Cryx (arguably the most competetive) sell the most models. This is just a guess, but I can certainly see that being true. Honestly, if you ignore Phase-Out, the Necrons can still be very competitive.

Anyways, I play both because they are so different.

[Mauglum.]

Hi all.
As there has been mention of complexity and complaication.
And a comparison of 40k 'lots of options' compared to the aparent fewer options of other games.

40k game play is NOT complex.
As a Red shirt once said, 'Assaulty units assult, shooty unit shoot.Assaulty units move alot, shooty units shoot alot.'
(And any units that do both, tend not to be cost effective...)

40k has lots of options in the army lists ,( strategic focus,)because it has fewer options in the actual game.(Tactical focus.)
This also focuses the players on individual models.(Which follows the focus on toy soldiers, GW plc currently emphasises.)
This is done on purpose to appeal to GW plcs prime demoghraphic, who have a thirst for data, but are not great at grasping the over aching tactical view of the game.
(Source.. Rick Priestly.)

This results in a complicated rule set, due to the rules being written exclusivley for each model type.(Despite the game fuctioning at the unit interaction level.)Even though the game play is straight forward.*
(*Compared to other rule sets.)

And as such is quite unique.

Most of the other companies in the table top minature wargames market ,try to achive higher tactical complexity , and lower strategic focus.
As this tends to provide more complex gameplay and less complicated rules.(As the rules are written inclusivley.)

This tends to provides gamers with better value for money , due to the higher re play value .

If you are in the demoghraphic GW plc write 40k rules for , you will enjoy the game.

However, anyone wanting more complex gameplay, and less complicated rules , often fail to see the limitation of the 40k rule set.
Untill they are so heavily invested in it , they feel its too late to change maybe?