|
I can think of at least four times in recent memory where new-ish players wanted to expand their starting army with a different faction (usually to fit some book or other that they read and liked) and were discouraged by the rules situation. 3/4 of them never came back to the store (as far as I know, but I was there pretty often) that I saw.
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
There is a barrier for entry caused by charging for the rules, even if people decide they're into it enough to go pirate the rulebooks anyway. Clearly GW thinks that the "losses" to piracy are a price they're willing to pay and don't care, and broadly I would say the hobby as a whole probably attracts people who see "Find torrent of rulebook" as a pretty small obstacle. But also the idea that them switching to free digital rules means you couldn't buy a hard copy of your codex or whatever is a false choice. EDIT: And as somebody who has indulged in this debate a lot (and is on the "free rules would be rad as hell" side) it honestly seems pointless since GW doesn't seem to mind their current model at all. Inspector_666 fucked around with this message at 21:42 on May 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
I have a stupid amount of Eldar and a sizeable amount of Orks, and after figuring out how many rules and books I'd have to buy I decided not to try and come back into 8th edition. I am a very casual player and it's a lot to shell out when I am not going to game twice a week like I used to and don't know when I might have to rebuy books/buy more books. Instead I just play 5th edition at home, because I have all the books for that and my kid is happy with it (they were the impetus to start playing again). I recognize that I'm not really a typical player or even GW's target demographic, so it's fine they decide that it's not worth trying to cater to me. But if I had been able to get the 8th books more cheaply/easily my kid would probably have convinced me to buy a bunch of the new big flyers/walkers/etc that have been added to the game.  It would nice if they could offer just stripped down rules in some fashion and nicer/fuller print and PDF versions. I bought a bunch of codices for that content anyway, and I suspect people would get them over barebone rules even if offered.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:46
|
|
|
Booley posted:Print rules are both profitable and nicer to both read and reference than digital rules. Why get rid of it to appease some whiners when it's going to lose them more in book sales than it'll create in model sales? Because it won't. If someone picks up three troops and two HQ that they wouldn't have otherwise purchased, that's all well over the margin on a codex. Plus, and this is more important, they're now growing the pool of purchases that customer will potentially make. They can still sell physical editions to anyone who cares, but having a loss-leader option replaces blurry Russian scans as the company face for anyone who's less invested.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:52
|
|
|
If you're a very casual player just do the Codex and gently caress around on BattleScribe, literally none of the other books are necessary to play a random-rear end game except a couple rules in Chapter Approved for everyone that you'll learn quickly though osmosis.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:53
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:I have a stupid amount of Eldar and a sizeable amount of Orks, and after figuring out how many rules and books I'd have to buy I decided not to try and come back into 8th edition. I am a very casual player and it's a lot to shell out when I am not going to game twice a week like I used to and don't know when I might have to rebuy books/buy more books. Instead I just play 5th edition at home, because I have all the books for that and my kid is happy with it (they were the impetus to start playing again). Most (maybe all at this point) models come with the datasheets to run them included in the instructions. You can play 8th with that + the free battle primer on GWs site. You'll be missing things like chapter tactics, warlord traits, and stratagems, but for the most part those didn't exist in previous editions either. You won't even be missing many of the special rules, as except for a handful of faction-wide rules they all get printed in full on each datasheet.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:55
|
|
|
moths posted:Because it won't. The burden here is to prove that this will actually happen.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:55
|
|
|
I run a stupidly complex army (in terms of mixed faction detachments and the number of books required) and I have all the odd datasheets, indexes, and faqs printed out and in a binder with me. I have had someone ask me to for copies of rules and my list structure and that was the deciding factor for them to purchase a model. People will pay $40 for models where they won't pay $25 for models and $15 for rules; it's human nature. I think you are dramatically underestimating how many people going from their 1000 point starter army to 1500 or 1500 to 2000 want to splash factions and how frustrating it can be to do so.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 22:09
|
|
|
Strobe posted:The burden here is to prove that this will actually happen. I don't have the data to show either way, but it's easier for a person to buy some Tau than to become a Tau player under the current scheme. And customers, like all living things, gravitate towards the easier path.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 22:50
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:It feels like I've uncovered a dirty 40k secret recently, and that is no one uses the Long-las from the Cadian Company Command Squad because the sculpt is awful. The moment you add a torsoit refuses to go together perfectly without gaps that would make a Shadowspear Eliminator blush and you gotta stuff a ton of greenstuff into to fix in turn. I'm legit surprised as it is one of my favorite bits from that box. So much so that ended up ordering a bunch of cloaks to scatter through the army just cause I liked the Sniper kit. I bought a few of the command boxes cause it is just such a useful supply of bits for the army. After finding a pair of the old metal blisters for Cadian Snipers, I actually was able to make either a 10 man Ratling team, though I tend not to cause toughness 2 is brutal, or a few Special Weapon Sniper teams. Lately, I've also had some good luck with adding a sniper rifle to my lascannon infantry squads. Its cheaper than my usual plasma, has no range issues, and sometimes scores a mortal wound. I snapped a couple of quick pictures of my snipers in case that helps at all. I never had any issues with adding the torso, though the seam on the back of the cape is always a bit much and never took greenstuff terribly well.  The whole gang The metal ones along with one from Victoria Minis Command squad plastic boysSave for the seam on the back, they went together surprisingly well. If it helps, I'd be happy to take a few more. I really do like my little snipers, even if they usually just get murdered.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
It's the seam I meant in this case. This is how it looked when I posted it and that was after a couple of minutes of scraping and adjusting. And then when I was about to start greenstuffing I snapped it off again on a whim and managed to make the gap a lot less noticeable and still get it lined up with the wrist more or less dead on. Still going to require some filling but not as much as that one. I was just sorta surprised to not see it show up more than once I googled for it. Everything else was either the old metal ones or various kitbashes. Also discovered it never shows up in the the codex model display, while the Catachan one does.  (Which I am totally going to make use of as well somehow.)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
That kit was released 16 years ago, there's lots of stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
Yeah, the long-las has probably been the thing I've let be unused in my bits box because how stiff it looks. Same with the power sword arm, not sure what kind of black magic you'd have to employ to make that look good. It's also made me hate that almost all the IG sword arms are in an awkward angled L shape that just seems to seep dynamic motion out of everything it touches.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:17
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:It's the seam I meant in this case. This is how it looked when I posted it and that was after a couple of minutes of scraping and adjusting. Oh good. Lining up the seam is strange but it seems to be...ok in the end. I could probably stand to get better at greenstuff but pulling some the paint over it helps I think. Still, I had no idea the kit was 17 years old. Good luck with the Catachan ones, they always looked a bit silly to me but I never was a Catachan kind of guy. I dig the colors on your cape btw. Very cool.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:32
|
|
|
The Catachan Infantry models are really bad but the Catachan Command Squad kit is pretty good overall. Helps it's probably half as old as the Catachan Infantry models. Thanks, turns out there weren't that many good guides on how to paint not-urban/snow camo (at least keeping it basic) on the WHTV channel so I improvised a little after how Victoria Lambs camo cloaks are painted. Still not sure about the highlight but hard to fix that now I feel.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:43
|
|
|
Strobe posted:If you're a very casual player just do the Codex and gently caress around on BattleScribe, literally none of the other books are necessary to play a random-rear end game except a couple rules in Chapter Approved for everyone that you'll learn quickly though osmosis. As much as it is weird for me to agree with Strobe, this is a really good point. Outside of competitive play you can just roll with your codex and rulebook, you don't need umpteen different supplements and the two rules that actually matter from Chapter Approved you can write on a sticky note and glue that to your rulebook. Giant Isopod posted:I run a stupidly complex army (in terms of mixed faction detachments and the number of books required) and I have all the odd datasheets, indexes, and faqs printed out and in a binder with me. I mean, you chose to run a stupidly complex army with loads of different factions in it that needed seventy books. Nobody forced you to do this.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 00:11
|
|
|
Endman posted:I mean, you chose to run a stupidly complex army with loads of different factions in it that needed seventy books. Nobody forced you to do this. Yeah, when I play I nearly always just play my army from one codex. I think the ability to have allies as an option is a neat bonus in 8th, but it shouldn't be the first thing someone does when getting into the hobby. Once you have a few armies and want to mash them up do the other thing maybe add a patrol of Custodes to a IG army you start to need more than one book. New players don't just jump into a deep competition style loyal 32 without being told to do so.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 00:30
|
|
|
Endman posted:I mean, you chose to run a stupidly complex army with loads of different factions in it that needed seventy books. Nobody forced you to do this. Of course. I did not mean to imply that my army was the issue. However, because I do do this I end up talking to a lot of new players that want to add this or that to their army and giving advice on how to cram in a detachment-of-this or small-force-of-that. Lord_Hambrose posted:New players don't just jump into a deep competition style loyal 32 without being told to do so. No, but I think you'd be surprised how many new players come in with an army idea that's a mix of forces based on a book they read.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 00:31
|
|
|
I like playing monofaction with a bit of a theme or just a strong visual. That being said I've always wanted to make a super weathered imperial soup where they've just been in the poo poo so long it's mainly guard, some scions standing in for local cops a smattering of marines. All caked in poo poo and weathered to hell. Like not an effective army, but a grab bag to represent that this is what's left.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
JBP posted:I like playing monofaction with a bit of a theme or just a strong visual. I think it would be cool to do an army where there is an Inquisitor and some stormtroopers who are shiny and new and then have a detachment of regular guardsmen and battle damaged space marines. Have the back story being there's been an awful war going on for ages and the inquisitor has swooped in and requisitioned those veterans to do some sort of special mission. Have the juxtaposition between the battle worn and damaged guard and marines and the pristine inquisitorial forces, but tie it all together somehow. Maybe inquisitorial campaign markings on the armour made to look newly added onto grimey and worn out armour and clothes.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 03:29
|
|
|
Tie it all together with the basing.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 03:48
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Tie it all together with the basing. Yeah but you could also make some little cloth insignias and make them look hammered onto the right pads if you wanted to go nuts.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 07:12
|
|
|
JBP posted:Yeah but you could also make some little cloth insignias and make them look hammered onto the right pads if you wanted to go nuts. Yeah, I think having more than just the base to signify they are all part of the same force would be good, primarily because space marines and possibly inquisitorial storm troopers won't be wearing camo like the guardsmen, so it doesn't really matter what base they are on. Whereas if you do a mixture of battered and wounded guard regiments you can paint them all in a similar camo pattern which helps visually demonstrate they are the same fighting force.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 12:02
|
|
|
You can also decorate bases with discarded elements of the other allies. A matching marine helmet on a guardsmen's base, or bolter shells under the scions for example.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 12:16
|
|
|
ro5s posted:And a pair of plague marine squads: These plague marines are really nice! I like how crisp the basecoats are - often these models feel blurry to me, and it's cool to be able to differentiate all the elaborate details without feeling sensory overload.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:29
|
|
|
"Just steal it!" isn't exactly a good counter argument to rules being too expensive. A lot of the arguments in this thread seem to be from differing viewpoints based off of socioeconomic status.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:34
|
|
|
If you can afford to play Warhammer with actual models you can afford the rules. If you can't afford to do that the cost of a Codex isn't what's stopping you.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
I really want to see 40k pick up on Sigmar's lead in regards to unit stat sheets and rules. Sigmar has a totally usable army building mobile and web app (but much simpler army building rules), and all stat sheets for units are free. The individual army rulebooks get you fluff, hero gear (Sigmar's relics are called artefacts), spells, and the army's special abilities. The free stat sheets also means you're not put in a position like Ad Mech players were put last year, with a couple stat sheets that were only available in physical form, if you accidentally tossed out your Skorpius's assembly instructions you were out of luck, especially because Battlescribe had their stats wrong for a while. For newer players or players looking to expand their armies, you can easily look up what units do and how they work before you commit to buying them. You can also poke around the army builder to get an idea of army role and what you can ally in or what units you can use in different factions beforehand, too. If you end up more seriously playing the game, you still end up giving Games Workshop as much money on army rulebooks and supplement rulebooks as you do in 40k, but you don't need to commit to them as early as you do in 40k. It's far from perfect, but it seems friendlier to get started than 40k. They make it a hassle to look up battlefield role if you don't have the rulebook, for example. It's not listed on the individual unit's stat sheet because it's in a separate part of the rulebook because role change change based on who's leading your army, but you can use the free web app and trial and error your way to find out if there's a way to get a unit to count in a particular slot by swapping who your army's general is.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:09
|
|
|
Arven posted:"Just steal it!" isn't exactly a good counter argument to rules being too expensive. I mean this is an expensive hobby, there's just no way around it. Its like saying "man, you polo players are really snobby about being able to afford your own horse". The models are expensive, the rules are expensive, the paints are expensive. If you don't have a lot of money, then the hobby isn't for you, and that's a shame but I can't personally solve wealth inequality in the world. If you love the setting but have little money, then the 40K RPGs are infinitely better because you pay for the rulebook once and can play over and over.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
imo it's absolutely fine to pirate the hell out of 40K's rulebooks and in fact it's both cool and good.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
Chainclaw posted:I really want to see 40k pick up on Sigmar's lead in regards to unit stat sheets and rules. Sigmar has a totally usable army building mobile and web app (but much simpler army building rules), and all stat sheets for units are free. The individual army rulebooks get you fluff, hero gear (Sigmar's relics are called artefacts), spells, and the army's special abilities. Yeah this is the actual model I would like to see them adopt. It works really well in AoS and there's literally no reason not to do it for 40k.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
From a purely practical standpoint, you can just use BattleScribe, make it pretty through ButtScribe if you like, and consult Goonhammer or 1d4chan or something for the details of things that BattleScribe doesn't have. Even for tournaments. I've been to a LOT of tournaments, and while every single one has said "you must bring the book with the rules you're using" or something similar, do you know what none have them have ever done? Checked. I've lugged all the books for all my armies to every tournament I've played in and not once has anyone asked to see if I have the right books. The only times the books have even left the bag I carry them in is when I pulled it out to remind myself of the details of some strat that I rarely use but might be useful in this one odd situation I've gotten myself in. And you know what? Playing with the online resources is better. If I whip out my Iron Hands mini-codex and play with the rule written down there, I'm playing wrong. March of the Ancients can be used as many times as I like. The Ironstone is way better. Ferros gives my whole army 5++ in 6" instead of just infantry. To play correctly, I need to download the real rules from GW. What good is the dead tree product to me if the rules are wrong, and no one, even at tournaments, even cares if I bring it?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
jng2058 posted:From a purely practical standpoint, you can just use BattleScribe, make it pretty through ButtScribe if you like, and consult Goonhammer or 1d4chan or something for the details of things that BattleScribe doesn't have. Even for tournaments. I've been to a LOT of tournaments, and while every single one has said "you must bring the book with the rules you're using" or something similar, do you know what none have them have ever done? Checked. I've lugged all the books for all my armies to every tournament I've played in and not once has anyone asked to see if I have the right books. The only times the books have even left the bag I carry them in is when I pulled it out to remind myself of the details of some strat that I rarely use but might be useful in this one odd situation I've gotten myself in. The problem with that is Battlescribe isn't official and isn't guaranteed to be accurate. I've had people challenge my battlescribe sheets in casual games (specifically the Skorpius Dunerider, and in my favor), luckily I had the actual paper data sheet for it to verify that the battlescribe info wasn't correct. Battlescribe also isn't updated for sometimes up to weeks after a FAQ or a new rulebook release. My biggest issue with Battlescribe doesn't effect most people, though. Under the hood, the data is just really poorly organized and not consistent per army, so it's a big hassle to try and write your own software that consumes battlescribe data to do other things.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Strobe posted:If you can afford to play Warhammer with actual models you can afford the rules. If you can't afford to do that the cost of a Codex isn't what's stopping you. Stopping? No. Dissuading? Absolutely. Again, it's not really an issue because anyone can pirate the rules and order models from China. But GW is definitely leaving money on the table by sticking with that same codex model for six editions. But regardless, it's my BIG REVEAL guess that they'll move on from traditional codexes. It meets the "every player will care" criteria, brings them into line with some competitors, and the executives have certainly noticed digital products still selling while physical offices are closed.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
Battlescribe is great for point calculations, not so much on rules. Even then I still double check the points.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Chainclaw posted:The problem with that is Battlescribe isn't official and isn't guaranteed to be accurate. I've had people challenge my battlescribe sheets in casual games (specifically the Skorpius Dunerider, and in my favor), luckily I had the actual paper data sheet for it to verify that the battlescribe info wasn't correct. While this is a fair point, it's a fairly rare one in my experience. From a practical standpoint, once again, I could do as my brother does for his Dark Eldar and painstakingly scribble out and write in every new rule, points change, and strat modification into his codex. But you know what? gently caress that. Not least of which because while he's only got the one army and two books to mess with, I play Imperium, and would have to do that for Marines (4+ books), Guard (3 books), Knights (will be 2 books soon), and I've just started some AdMech (2 books soon), plus White Dwarf poo poo to use my Inquisitors and Assassins, with another Psychic Awakening for them soon too. While it is certainly thematic to pretend to be an Administratum scribe just to play this game, I have neither the time nor inclination to spend hours adjusting my dead tree books to keep them correct when I've got access to quick online resources that will do it for me. I'll take my chances with BattleScribe+Goonhammer/1d4chan. If GW wants to get off their asses and make an official app that collates the rules and spits them out in a usable fashion, then I'll use that. But until then I'll use what is available, even at the risk of some errors. jng2058 fucked around with this message at 17:22 on May 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
One of my GW orders got lost in the mail thanks to FedEx, and GW has very slow support and I don't know what my options are.  Guess i'm not really looking for help, just want to vent. Thankfully it was a small order with just some new paints.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
reading this conversation and realizing that I have several viable 40k armies, some that I started after 8e came out, that I just haven't bothered to buy the codex for, meanwhile my AoS collection is mostly made up of wfb legacy models but I've actually bought all of the battletomes.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/21/heads-up-price-adjustment-new-releases/ Rejoice, for GW has resumed normal operations and preorders are due for May 30th. But apparently also a price hike but they messed up the URL so no idea what's getting raised.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/21/heads-up-price-adjustment-new-releases/ I think the correct URL is https://www.games-workshop.com/featured.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 20:08
|
|
