Article on Fanboys, Exclusivity, and Sonic the Hedgehog

[wittdooley]

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

And this quote invalidates anything you say. It is a wholly biased statement using it's own circular logic to support itself.

Also, to talk about strategy in list building is absurd. In a game like Warmahordes, you MUST build a synergistic list to even have a chance to win. Even then, the Paper-Rock-Scissors nature of the game can severely cripple your chances to win, which is why PP allows for two lists in tournaments. It's an admission that some lists will have a vastly greater chance to beat other lists.

Lastly, reading your responses makes my brain hurt, there's so much wrong with them.

[juliusb]

Although I have no desire to play PP games, I appreciate their success because they'll keep GW on their toes. The big deal-breaker for me is time, I don't have time to learn new rules and fluff (important to me) but most of all, I don't want to struggle finding games. 40K's popularity is it's biggest draw for me, I can easily find a game.

As for the hate, it's pure immaturity. Anyone who is passionate about a hobby company to the point of hate really needs to reassess their life and priorities. Talking about it on the internet is fun but if you're actually emotionally involved; sad.

[wittdooley]

Although I have no desire to play PP games, I appreciate their success because they'll keep GW on their toes. The big deal-breaker for me is time, I don't have time to learn new rules and fluff (important to me) but most of all, I don't want to struggle finding games. 40K's popularity is it's biggest draw for me, I can easily find a game.

I can totally appreciate that. Quite frankly, I do more painting and modelling than actual playing, for the very same reasons. That's also why I do one of two "get-away" events a year (GenCon & Adepticon, usually) in order to make sure I have some good, quality, gaming time.

[eldargal]

My experience with Warmachine is limited, not non-existent. The impression I got was, as Wittdooley put it, that much of it was rock-papers-scissors style of combat, where you have to get the right amount of rocks, paper and scissors in your list to have a shot at winning. Unlike 40k where there is no such dynamic, or at least not to the same extent.

But you are still missing the point, it is not the ruleset that is complex, it is the dynamic of twenty nine different armies accross two systems which all need balancing against each other (andd the development team can only do so much) as well as production capacity (how many kits they can produce in a year), market strategies and market saturation (don't release too much too quickly or people run out of money) etc which makes it a far more complex effort to update something. They can't just throw something together over a weekend and stick it on the website. I really don't think people understand the logistics differences between a country that sells one hundred and twenty million pounds worth of kits a year in hundreds of stores and thousands of indepednent stores and a company that sells a few million pounds worth of kits in however many independent stores.

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.


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?


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.

[relasine]

My experience with Warmachine is limited, not non-existent. The impression I got was, as Wittdooley put it, that much of it was rock-papers-scissors style of combat, where you have to get the right amount of rocks, paper and scissors in your list to have a shot at winning. Unlike 40k where there is no such dynamic, or at least not to the same extent.

But you are still missing the point, it is not the ruleset that is complex, it is the dynamic of twenty nine different armies accross two systems which all need balancing against each other (andd the development team can only do so much) as well as production capacity (how many kits they can produce in a year), market strategies and market saturation (don't release too much too quickly or people run out of money) etc which makes it a far more complex effort to update something. They can't just throw something together over a weekend and stick it on the website. I really don't think people understand the logistics differences between a country that sells one hundred and twenty million pounds worth of kits a year in hundreds of stores and thousands of indepednent stores and a company that sells a few million pounds worth of kits in however many independent stores.

I'm baffled. You're still defending GW's reluctance to update some of their armies for over a decade. You can make excuses for that from now until eternity, but it will always be absurd.

[eldargal]

I'm not defending it, I'm saying there is a reason for it. There is a difference.

[SMC]

No matter what you say or how much time you spend explaining how reality actually works you will not alter his opinion. He is...wait for it...a fanboy.

[relasine]

I'm not defending it, I'm saying there is a reason for it. There is a difference.

That by definition is defending it.

No matter what you say or how much time you spend explaining how reality actually works you will not alter his opinion. He is...wait for it...a fanboy.

Obvious troll is obvious.

My appreciation for the way that PP does things has nothing to do with the matter being discussed here. I play 40k, too. I have [URL="http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?t=1464"]painted[/URL] and [URL="http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?t=16202"]owned[/URL] enormous [URL="http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a316/relasine/DSC00663.jpg"]amounts[/URL] of [URL="http://s14.photobucket.com/albums/a316/relasine/Orks/"]Citadel[/URL] miniatures. I want GW to do better, and with all the resources at their disposal. I expect it of them. Why the hell don't you?

[eldargal]

Only if you are halfwitted dolt who lacks any kind of subtlety of thought.

GW had a reason to increase costs when switching to a new, cheaper material, that doesn't make it good nor right.
GW have a reason to stop cheaper imports of their products to countries in which they have a higher profit margin, that doesn't make it good nor right.
GW have reasons (logistical, commercial and developmental) to take a long time to update some older and less popular codices, that doesn't make it good nor right.

I do not like that GW takes so long to update some books, but I understand why it is so.

I do not consider myself a fangirl because I am more than willing to criticise GW when it is warranted, and it is warranted quite often. But it does annoy me when people hold up a tiny company like PP and say 'well if they can do it fast why can't GW?' with no thought as to what it would entail.

[Mauglum.]

Hi wittdooly.
Can you please expian what EXACTLY you dis agree with?

The more complex the gameplay, the more re-play value a game has.(Fact).
Game play in wargames is comprised of stratragic, and tactical factors.(Fact.)

Definitions.
Tactical factors are ALL the options players have in game.(Actions- interactions available and the variation in the squencing of these actions.)

Strategic factors are the all the options players take BEFORE the game starts.(Army building , unit load out and deployment .etc)

If a game uses the most apropriate game mechanics then the maximum tactical interation can be arrived at with the minimum of written rules.(Fact.)
Strategic conciderations usualy are more text heavy ,as each option has to be defined , rather than tactical game play which is derived 'organicaly' from the basic basic game mechanics and resolution methods.

In my last post I compared 40k to the rest of the table top wargames companies in general.
All rule sets use strategic and tactical elements.

PP games may be nearest to 40k in reguards to being strategicaly heavy.
But PP write thier rules sets specificaly for compatative play, and are quite honest about the limitations of thier game systems.

And thier rule sets are no where near as compicated as the current 40k rule sets.(Yet the game complexity is comparable.)

I try to be objective , and use interviews with game developers,and comparison to other products , when writing posts.

So I would be very appeciative if you could clarify what is 'so wrong it makes you brain hurt'?