Is it impossible to have an intelligent conversation...

[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"?

[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.

[Ivarr]

I agree with everything said here, and I have no problem with people who have something negative to say as long as they say it in a productive way. That is not the case about 90% of the time lately. I am not a blind supporter of GW, however, I am hugely enjoying the releases lately. I am not excited to face some of the new Eldar, but I am reserving judgement (at least publicly) until I face a few armies based on the new codex. I was really hoping for a NEW knight model, not just an added sprue, but overall, I love tomorrows release. And again, reserving judgement publicly until I get some games in. I am not ambushing people with over the top assumptions about the implications of any release. I am offended, and let down, by the number of people who are.

Part of the problem (so I do understand your final paragraph) is that people assume that because I am not on here trash talking constantly, I must be a "everything-GW-does-is-right" person, which btw is not necessarily a bad thing, and jump on anything positive I post. I really wish that sometimes people who have a bunch of negative to say would start their own threads and include a warning in the title rather than hijacking what could be a reasonable discussion.

To get back to where this thread started, I have bought DA, Generic SM (battle company of each), 3 knights (as of tomorrow), CSM (over 2k points) and the starts of SW, Skitari and AS. in the last couple of months...posted question, proposed lists and the starts of general discussions about some of them, but the communities here and in other places barely respond. Most responses are how to cut and paste a "net list" into what I have, or what "Deathstar" I should include if I wanna complete. Any knight list I suggest, or just wanna chat about is either hit with "they aren't gonna be allowed in tournaments anyway" or "hope ya have a tolerant group of friends" rather than any real discussion.

And for conversations sake, when did it become OK to even consider banning an entire army (Knights)? I don't like Eldar or GK or Black Templars...never have...and in many of the editions, these armies have been very hard to beat (tournament or not)...but no one serious ever said...we should just pretend the army doesn't exist...remove it from tournament play. Not once.

Any how, that last bit is just my personal thoughts/questions.

[ShadowcatX]

Well, to answer the "just enjoying the game" part... It's become hard. I have a lot of armies that were built to be fluffy but still reasonably competitive over the years, but in the current set of books, they get ROFL-stomped by so much stuff. You put an army on the table with combined arms, designed to be capable of fighting different things, and then watch it get rolled over. And you see that happen again and again, and the only way to really combat it is to once again drop hundreds of dollars and spend a few weeks assembling and painting, so you have the latest strong units. It gets kind of tiring.

Which is the way of the gaming industry. In MtG you're not even allowed to use cards that are 2+ years old in the most common format unless they've been reprinted. Roleplaying books have power creep, and new editions.

Gaming systems that say "buy this one thing and you'll be done buying forever" aren't gaming systems, they're board games.

Last week was the only truly competitive game I'd had in a while. I allied my Khorne Daemonkin with a guy playing Eldar against two Necron players. 2x2, 1500 per player (so 3000 per side). Notice something about that, though? It's all the newest armies, except Skitarii. (The Eldar player also had some Harlequin characters, so throw them in, as well.) The armies were pretty evenly matched, but I just knew that pretty much anything pre-2015 thrown at either side would have a very bad time unless played by a really good player.

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?

[Alaric]

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?

You get kudos for trying bud. I think mebbe a site that doesn't have the same atmosphere as this one might be more up yer alley. Try the Independent Characters forum mebbe? I see lots of good in depth convos on it. Its not remotely as funny as this one tho, if yer into that sorta thing Ive been on the web a loooong time and Ive noticed that alot of forums are just cliques ala high school. There is no shortage of forums for this hobby, keep looking around and Im sure you will find a good one. Good luck!

[Erik Setzer]

Ill be honest....I wouldnt....but thats more because I play Nurgle and Slaanesh.....and EWWWW!

Well, I mean, if you played Khorne.

Heck, every large model I have is "christened," too. Not so much on purpose. I tend to get out a fresh X-Acto blade when starting on a new project, to make sure everything's clean. And then I just act like someone who doesn't know what safety is (I do, I just don't actively think about it while modeling), and inevitably slice myself. Sliced four fingers *and* stabbed a file into my thumb while working on the Knight. At one point, I was bleeding so much parts of the model were sticking to my hand. I just primed and painted right over it. And that Knight became a terror.

(My lawyer says I should note that I'm not advocating that anyone purposely injure him/herself in order to gain a competitive advantage in a game.)

[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?

[Alaric]

(My lawyer says I should note that I'm not advocating that anyone purposely injure him/herself in order to gain a competitive advantage in a game.)

If you can afford a lawyer you should be able to afford this game :P

[Wolfshade]

I personally observe that its all kicked off as I started posting less..

[Mr Mystery]

I personally observe that its all kicked off as I started posting less..

That's because you're some kinda dream boat