Is it impossible to have an intelligent conversation...

[Ivarr]

Okay, so with the constant flow of releases, changes to the meta, and "the sky is falling", is it possible to have reasonable discussion about Games Workshop, 40k, or anything to do with the hobby we all know and love? (without some donkey hijacking the conversation with hate.)

I am really "jonesin' " for just some good conversation about any one of the 5 armies I have started in the past month and a half, but the topics I (and others) have started in the last month and a half have stirred very little response. The discussions about how broken the Eldar book is or how Knights shouldn't be allowed in regular games of 40k generate endless whining and argument. What happened to just enjoying the game...talking tactics...being happy that GW is hitting a home-run as far as release schedule and putting out some really cool models at the same time...

Is anyone else feeling this way? Or, did I just pick the worst time to get back involved?

[daboarder]

you know what might help.


Not starting out posts with a polarising stance and the use of aggressive statements. "whining" and "The sky is falling"


on a serious note however, traffic has dropped considerably. and most of the conversations are the same thing week in week out by the same posters. this is in part due to the significant shrinkage that the GW community has undergone lately.
thats partly GWs fault and partly because GW are not the sole contender in the realm of table top wargaming anymore, not by a long shot

[ShadowcatX]

You know what would also help, if the whiners and GW haters would just not post when they don't have anything good to add to a thread.

[CoffeeGrunt]

To be fair, I've noticed that most WIP threads here on BoLS get a minimal response compared to other forums, unless you're posting Golden Daemon standard stuff or are a scratchbuilding genius.

Probably just a case that most people here have seen a lot of "pretty decent" minis, and so only take time for the exceptional ones. Doesn't make for the best community spirit, IMO. :/

[Kirsten]

To be fair, I've noticed that most WIP threads here on BoLS get a minimal response compared to other forums, unless you're posting Golden Daemon standard stuff or are a scratchbuilding genius.

Probably just a case that most people here have seen a lot of "pretty decent" minis, and so only take time for the exceptional ones. Doesn't make for the best community spirit, IMO. :/

that is one of the reasons I am trying to comment on most of the 40k and fantasy painting threads and be a bit more encouraging, there isn't much going on comments wise.

[Erik Setzer]

You know what would also help, if the whiners and GW haters would just not post when they don't have anything good to add to a thread.

It'd also help if the whiners and GW apologists would just not post when they don't have anything good to add to a thread.

See, this attitude that people must "hate" GW if they say anything negative about it is completely ridiculous, really offensive, and, well... either borderline stupidity or trolling. Pick which you'd rather be labeled as, folks. Neither is a good look.

People have been in my apartment and seen all the GW stuff I have. I still get stuff. I play the games pretty much every weekend. I'm considering getting in some more shelves next week to put more of my painted armies on display while not using them (I'm really digging how my Undead look on the bookcase). have my army books displayed prominently. When I have time to get back into it, I'll be back to regularly updating a site mainly about GW games. I could go on and on... but I think I've made the point.

You can love someone/something and still be able to point out the flaws, or even hate what they're doing. (I do that with everyone and everything. My closest friend is my closest friend in large part because she's willing to be critical of me in return, telling me when and where I'm doing wrong in a reasoned manner.) It is my love for GW games that causes me to be critical about their business practices, and how those practices seem to have put us in a position where we have a new edition released less than two years after the last one, and we've already got conflicting styles of codex (some are main book plus supplement, some are just one book with all the formations in it; some have new FOC detachments, some have detachments of formations; some are underpowered, some are overpowered; and the pricing is kind of all over, with some new codices being cheaper than older supplements that are the same page count). That creates in-game issues, as well as out-of-game issues, and feels like there's not a clear plan in place at GW. And objectively, that's worth criticizing.

It's also perfectly honest to point out things like how their sales are down, which meant their profits are also down even while they dropped spending a good bit, and all that at a time when they're introducing more high-priced items and a new edition of their flagship game. That's not a healthy indicator. They just did a whole line to blow up their original flagship game so they can reboot it (after scrapping a lot of the things it already had that people say they want in a reboot). While that initially excited a lot of people, by the end they were left with a lot of unsold hardcovers and a lot of people stopped using any of the new rules introduced... the shine wore off fast. Their moves with marketing and selling those products were all over the board, once against showing a level of managerial ineptness that is rather appalling, and actually managed to piss off a lot of their own managers. You can be excited for the new fluff and all, and still be disappointed at how some of the rules turned out, or how they managed the whole thing. (Also, releasing about $400 worth of books in less than half a year's time alongside a number of kits priced anywhere from $55 to $116 wasn't really a great move, because wallet fatigue does happen.)

Yes, it *is* impossible to have an intelligent discussion. See, I'm bringing up intelligent points, points that range across the spectrum, and the response is that I "hate" GW because I'm not 100% positive. The response is basically to shut up, not criticize, accept that everything GW does is gold. That is not intelligent conversation. While some people might just be as borderline trolling with their everything-GW-does-is-wrong attitude, people who take an everything-GW-does-is-right attitude are also borderline trolling. Neither adds to an intelligent conversation.

[daboarder]

Its kinda funny.


the two longest, most "in depth" posts in this thread barring the OP are Erik's and Mine (Freely admit mine starts with a good chunk of flippancy) But both of us would be attacked as "whiners" by posters of a certain persuasion.

edit: CG also raises the issue that the Hobby segments of the forum move slow as

[Path Walker]

In depth isn't the same as length. Move on, find a new hobby and bore off.

[ShadowcatX]

It'd also help if the whiners and GW apologists would just not post when they don't have anything good to add to a thread.

See, this attitude that people must "hate" GW if they say anything negative about it is completely ridiculous, really offensive, and, well... either borderline stupidity or trolling. Pick which you'd rather be labeled as, folks. Neither is a good look.

If you acknowledge the good and bad about GW, sure. But when every post about GW is negative and then followed up by insults against the people who are actually happy with the release schedule and the direction GW has taken, well you can see why certain people would get the idea that GW is hated by other individuals.

You can love someone/something and still be able to point out the flaws, or even hate what they're doing.

Sure you can. But when that is all you do, is it still love? I doubt many relationships break up because the other person wasn't critical enough.

we have a new edition released less than two years after the last one,

Fair enough, now explain how that's automatically a bad thing.

we've already got conflicting styles of codex (some are main book plus supplement, some are just one book with all the formations in it;

GW puts out a product, gets a back lash from its customers, listens to them, changes its practices, and then gets back lash because it changed.

some have new FOC detachments, some have detachments of formations;

People are being given options, how horrible.

some are underpowered, some are overpowered;

That's always going to happen no matter what game it is. However, none of them are so over powered as to be the only competitive army.

the pricing is kind of all over, with some new codices being cheaper than older supplements that are the same page count).

And here I would say is a legitimate complaint. Standardized pricing for codexes and supplements would rock.

Yes, it *is* impossible to have an intelligent discussion. See, I'm bringing up intelligent points, points that range across the spectrum, and the response is that I "hate" GW because I'm not 100% positive. The response is basically to shut up, not criticize, accept that everything GW does is gold.

Not 100% positive is one thing, you're not even close to 50% positive with regards to something you claim to love, in the very post you're trying to use to show you're positive about it. Something else that would help would be backing off the exaggerations, or do you have a link where someone has told you "shut up and accept that everything GW does is gold"?

[Erik Setzer]

GW puts out a product, gets a back lash from its customers, listens to them, changes its practices, and then gets back lash because it changed.
...
People are being given options, how horrible.
...
And here I would say is a legitimate complaint.

Ok, see? See this, here? You're mocking concerns, claiming they aren't legitimate, and missing the point.

They didn't change things to answer criticisms. And no one's complaining about options, either. Let me see if I can get around your attitude enough to explain this again.

Codex: Orks came out, had a new detachment style and basic formation. It was followed with a supplement with lots of other formations, another detachment style, some other stuff. This is the "new style." Cool, okay, I can dig it. Space Wolves and Dark Eldar followed in the same suit. Meanwhile, Grey Knights got an update, and the Blood Angels, pretty much the same, only sans a supplement, because, well, there's only so much you can do with them. Mostly these armies were toned down, too. This is the new 7th edition style. Okay. Most of these also saw some stuff in campaign supplements.

Then Necrons show up. Suddenly instead of a new FOC detachment (which they actually got in a supplement, strangely), they get a mega-detachment meant for Epic 28mm sized games. Oh, and if you want to run that, you MUST take a certain combo of units. It actually presents less choice than a standard FOC detachment would. Formations were folded into the book, no supplement. Harlequins come along, do the whole formations in the book thing, but go right back to a normal new FOC detachment. Then Daemonkin, with the Epic 28mm detachment. Then Skitarii with the FOC detachment. Then Eldar with the Epic 28mm detachment. And, of course, with the big ones, you must take X and Y to have Z... so not really as much flexibility. And we're now about to have Knights and then Cult Mechanicus, with the Knights confirmed to have a FOC detachment.

And even within that series of books, the balance is off. You have a Bloodthirster of Insensate Rage in the Daemonkin book priced at 275 points. Then you have a Wraithknight in Craftworld Eldar at 295 points. The Wraithknight is much tougher than the Bloodthirster, pretty much just as fast, has a Str D CCW that strikes at Initiative, has Stomp attacks to deal even more damage to hordes of infantry, same armor and inv. save, and is just so much better. And yet, it's only 20 points more.

We'll just set aside the valid complaint that people with Orks, Space Wolves, and Dark Eldar had to pay $100 for what newer codices are charging $50-$58 for. The style is flip-flopping, and there's not much cohesion to the internal contents. And in some cases, it seems they aren't considering the potential ramifications of some of the rules they're printing, such as being able to Scout a bloody Fortress of Redemption (which you can totally do in the Skitarii codex). Or that you can ally Khorne Daemonkin with CSM, attach characters to CSM units (like Havocs), and get Blood Tithe points for units they destroy (while using psykers to get buffs and maybe even summon in more Daemons, because why not?).

So yeah, it's worth asking if the price of these rapid releases is that they have two (or more) teams working on books that aren't really communicating well with each other, and don't have time to adequately run them through testing (much less having the number of people on hand you'd need to feel safe in covering most of the possibilities with the codex). I'd prefer quality over quantity. The figures might look nice (at least most of them), the art is nice, the fluff isn't bad (when it's not just being copied and pasted)... but the game itself feels like it's starting to suffer.

Oh, and charging me $35 for a Kindle version of a codex that looks like no one bothered to put in serious effort? Not cool. Those things have lines where the font is so big they wrap around, unit profiles and other tables designed as images that don't show up at the proper size and are barely readable, and are overall just ugly looking. The iPad version they like to show off might seem pretty, but the version for Kindles, which is still freaking $35, looks like they didn't even try. Sorry, but if I'm paying $35 for an ebook, it should have some effort and testing put into it.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh really. So you're telling me triple flyrant lists have suddenly gotten bad? That daemons suddenly suck? That centurian stars backed up by fire raptors and sicarians are no longer a thing? When did that happen?

Let's see... Triple Flyrant, IIRC, is something you need a supplement for, and is a specialized style of Tyranid army. Daemons *aren't* particularly great if you're not using the cheeky buggery tricks (which still aren't as potent as they used to be). Not going to say they "suck," but I won't put basic Daemons "up there." And you also give an example of a "death star" backed by units not in the codex and sold by Forge World, so not considered part of a "codex list."

Yeah, death stars can fight other death stars. What an interesting game that is. (That was sarcasm, since I'm sure people didn't catch that, and I think a lot of people actually believe Cheesehammer *is* interesting.)



As to the other "point," I don't play MtG for a reason. And yeah, way to go comparing a card game to a miniatures game. Want to justify GW's moves with stuff EA does in video games?