The heavy hand of GW balancing returns...

[MitGas]

They could learn a lot from Blizz's balancing of StarCraft 2. That's still not perfect but they try hard and there were times when balance fixes were done every few months. With warscrolls and point costs now being a mostly digital thing, this would be a real possibility and could easily fix a lot of things.

It would also help Warhammer become even greater if they had a few guys who are "balance-freaks" and thus elevate the game to new heights. Cause the art in Warhammer deserves the best possible game to accompany it.

[Nos]

1 hour ago, BadDice0809 said:

Their methods are not working

Oh but they so obviously are though.

They might not be prioritising what you want, and doing what you and some others want them to. That dosent matter compared to the enormous numbers of people who are happy with what they're doing and throwing money at them for doing it.

They're a business, their intention is to make money, they are doing that superbly. It's working incredibly well.

It's not a straw man to point out that no-one else does what they do as well as they do, or some sort of excuse or anything, it's just a fact which is of relevance when people suggest GW aren't doing it right. The absence of literally anyone else doing it half as well is simply evidence that its obviously very hard to do, and as the sucsessful experts who *are* doing it, GW obviously know what they're doing a lot more than some think they do, because more and more people are giving them their money and time and interest etc. 

That's not "giving them a pass" or anything. This isnt a question of ethics. Buy what they're selling, or dont if you dont like it . They dont offer any of us anything more than what they offer at point of sale. Theres no social contract at play.

Like by all means feel free to "expect better" or whatever. But that's an emotinal investment you have fabricated within yourself. GW arent a public service or political party or human right. You dont owe them anything, they dont owe you anything, especially not some "show of faith".  They dont advertise a game system which is reliably updated , competitive, balanced, fair, or even good. Not anywhere. Just models which you can use in a game with rules they have devised, if you like. They no more say that the models you buy are mechanically functional within these rules than they tell you to paint them or even stick them together. That's what you buy. As with any product, it's up to the consumer to maintain their expectations in accordance to what they have been bought and how it was advertised. On the basis on which GW markets its products it is *absurd* to thin they owe you anything other than what you buy in the box because they *never* sell it to you as anything more than what you pay for.

They're a business, they exist primarily to make money. They're making it to an astonishing degree just now. The  number of people delighted and excited with GW products  clearly vastly outweighs those who are unhappy with their direction and methods.

That's the plan, the plan is working. 

Edited January 18, 2020 by Nos

[Sleboda]

4 hours ago, Vakarian said:

From what I’ve heard from some other members on this board, it appears to be an issue of listening to the play testers rather than not play testing at all. It seems that when rules do go bad in AoS, it’s because the designers just really wanted that rule to go through for whatever reason. 

QFT.

I can personally attest from my old days as a play tester that we were commonly ignored (which, to be fair, is their right - we were not told we were going to dictate changes, we were asked to  just to report results).

The frustrating part was when one of us would offer a clearer wording of a rule, to close a loophole for example, only to be rebuked by telling us to leave the writing to them. Nobody was looking for special recognition or to denigrate the work of the designer, but some of them really had thin skin.

Anyway, I believe current testers are very solid people with a variety of backgrounds (narrative, hyper-competitive, and so on), who are providing the best feedback they can.

Is that feedback being taken more seriously than it was years ago? Dunno.

[Kirjava13]

 

18 minutes ago, Nos said:

Oh but they so obviously are though.

Don't be facetious, you know he's talking about the realm of rules and balance and not the macro business aspect of it.

[Sleboda]

38 minutes ago, MitGas said:

With warscrolls and point costs now being a mostly digital thing, this would be a real possibility and could easily fix a lot of things.

As a purchaser of physical goods, I have to say I appreciate them not (usually!) making changes to the warscroll cards as a way to adjust balance.

[MitGas]

4 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

As a purchaser of physical goods, I have to say I appreciate them not (usually!) making changes to the warscroll cards as a way to adjust balance.

Yeah, them trying to squeeze a few bucks outta people makes the game worse than it should be though - I understand you want your cards to be good for a long time but back with the first Tzeentch battletome so much had to be FAQ'ed the battletome was feeling like looking at Swiss cheese anyways... so yeah, it would just be better to get more fixes and forget about lovely printed and amazingly expensive cardboard cutouts.

[Nos]

30 minutes ago, Kirjava13 said:

 

Don't be facetious, you know he's talking about the realm of rules and balance and not the macro business aspect of it.

I'm not being facetious.

GW choose to invest in what they do, and what they dont choose to invest in- rules and balance- for a reason. It's all related to their express business purpose of making money. The two arent separate.  Investment in one area takes away from investment in another. Look at where GW invests its resources, that will tell you their intent.

You *cannot* separate the business of rules and balance from the macro business because it is part of the business, it costs money and requires resources and investment just like making paints and models does. GW will obviously look at the matter of rules etc their business strategy,  deliberate over how important it is to the company, they're not stupid, but up to now they also repeatedly conclude that it's not a priority for them and invest very little in it, putting the majority of their resources elsewhere, ultimately To grow and make more money. If they thought they could do that through investing more on rules and balance then of course they would do that. 

What is facetious is to suggest GW dont invest in rules and balance because they're stupid, cant be bothered, out of caprice, ignorance, because they dont know how to do it or what they're doing etc or that its somehow unrelated to the business aspect of it all. 

Edited January 18, 2020 by Nos

[BadDice0809]

I forgot to add the "but they are making money" evasion as well. Thanks for reminding me.

And if you think keeping the customers happy/pretending to listen (or at least keeping the appearance) isnt part of making money in 2020, you must be out of your mind.

Why invest in warhammer community (which costs much more than an editor) if they didnt care about keeping their public image up? Why do their customer survey? Why make Sisters of Battle again? Saying they have no obligation to listen, or that because they are making money means things are great is a pathetically weak evasion. 

Their reaction to the ITC ban, as weak as it was, shows they WILL listen. The damage was done in the books already, in the data sheets that GW has, once again, a schizophrenic attitude between randomly fixing (OG Thunderers, Plague Monks...) and refusing to address (every scroll other than Plagues...). But it still forced a reaction. 

While I never said, or implied, GW is stupid, since that's another pathetic, reductive argument, I will say that I think a good portion of the problem is the GW old guard. You got designers in charge who have been running the show (and into the ground, like in 8th WHFB, 6/7th edition 40k...soon 8th edition 40k) for so long I really doubt they are still in touch with what the newer audience wants. If there is an issue, they want a patch. Fast. And free. But even better if its tested before hand, and this stuff doesnt exist. No one likes the game that just crashes and burns day one release, and frankly some of these books do that.

GW, ever so slowly, is coming around to this. But it gets to the point that with consistent questionable choices, you got to start looking at the decision makers here.

[Sleboda]

39 minutes ago, MitGas said:

so yeah, it would just be better to get more fixes and forget about lovely printed and amazingly expensive cardboard cutouts.

There's a good chance I'd get out of the gaming part of this hobby if printed materials went away. I just like the physical experience so much more than the digital one.

[Sleboda]

37 minutes ago, BadDice0809 said:

I will say that I think a good portion of the problem is the GW old guard

Interestingly, I think the issue is more with the new guard. Fire now, fix on the fly. Express things using terms that are not even real but are hip/trendy and used by newer generations. Be seen. Be known. Make a video. Give it to me for free. Give it to me now. Dunno. Kids today.

 

Lol.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Sleboda

[MitGas]

39 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

There's a good chance I'd get out of the gaming part of this hobby if printed materials went away. I just like the physical experience so much more than the digital one.

Totally understandable but I didn't wanna suggest that - just that warscroll cards, despite being a nice thing to have, are IMO actually counter-productive to the game's health. When they release them, they can't really change much or else they'll upset those that bought them. Then again, if they tweaked certain warscrolls and/or adjusted points more frequently many units would get more play and IMO cool minis beat cool warscrolls cards or a battletome with usable warscrolls. 

[Sleboda]

That could be said of the books themselves too, though, right? Same info in the books as on the cards.

Now, I know some folks would be fine ditching the books as well, but not me. It's harder to find what I need on a phone or tablet, harder to read, and makes me more worried about theft or damage. 

[MitGas]

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

That could be said of the books themselves too, though, right? Same info in the books as on the cards.

Now, I know some folks would be fine ditching the books as well, but not me. It's harder to find what I need on a phone or tablet, harder to read, and makes me more worried about theft or damage. 

Well, the books have other things to offer - from backstory to general tactics to painting guides and a miniature showcase... the actual units are usually just a few pages and it's not like ALL of them would need to be changed either. 

[BadDice0809]

1 hour ago, MitGas said:

Totally understandable but I didn't wanna suggest that - just that warscroll cards, despite being a nice thing to have, are IMO actually counter-productive to the game's health. When they release them, they can't really change much or else they'll upset those that bought them. Then again, if they tweaked certain warscrolls and/or adjusted points more frequently many units would get more play and IMO cool minis beat cool warscrolls cards or a battletome with usable warscrolls. 

This times a million.

I hate the cards. It's not fun to have to flip through them, they take up space on the table, and frankly the Azyr app is great.

GW is really handicapping an excellent resource like that app. Why do they make use choose between the hardback book and the digital? Why cant I buy the hardback collectors edition, and get a code that at least unlocks the rules for the 90 dollar book I just bought in the app I already pay for?

Why hasn't GW bought out (or frankly ceased and desisted) AoS reminders, and integrated that into Azyr. And given a 30 day trial pass to Azyr to new hobbyist who get to a certain part of their "Crusade" (or whatever it is called) in store start an army dealy-o.

Why isnt Azyr posting pics I take of my armies units to the AoS GW page, where users can vote on their best painted "unit highlight" once a week.

Why isnt GW data mining the Azyr app like Corvis Belli does with their excellent army builder app for Infinity and use that in rules decisions and points adjustments. 

Them dragging their feet on adjusting warscrolls 'because it invalidates books' reminder me of their old argument with their faction dice. For the longest time, players complained because they put the faction symbol on the one, instead of the six. And for the longest time, GW didnt switch it around because 'well it would be confusing to people who already had the old dice...'. An industry popped up of people making the same dice but just reversing the symbols (also selling for a quarter of the cost, because of course, GW) before they finally bowed and just did it... it's that same sort of drag your feet mentality.

You have the resource right in front of you to make this work. Just do it already. If some Spaniards in a giant garage with an anime wolf on it can do this, I hope a multi billion dollar company can.

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, xking said:

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO YOUR FACE?! 

Ha! @TwiceIfILikeIt and I were goofing around drunk hobbying the other night and she wanted some eyeball close-ups. She took that one and I thought it was cool. 😁

[Sleboda]

25 minutes ago, MitGas said:

Well, the books have other things to offer - from backstory to general tactics to painting guides and a miniature showcase... the actual units are usually just a few pages and it's not like ALL of them would need to be changed either. 

Fer sher, but my point is that the cards and linked content in the books are the same. If you alter the cards, you alter the book.  I think GW wants to avoid, as much as possible, having several versions of one thing out there. This goes back to the revised Dark Eldar codex fiasco. They were burned by that one. 

 

I really pretty much agree with them. Until all options for getting the rules are digital only (something I would not like), they should not publish competing versions of physical rules.

 

You can't expect all players to automatically have the most current version. Your can want that state of the game, but the reality shows that confusion will abound.

 

I think the FAQ process is reasonable. Even if you are not online, you probably have a way to get an update every once in a while from a buddy who is, but making digital access a retirement is a barrier to access.

[JackStreicher]

10 hours ago, BadDice0809 said:

To a point some else else made about "Well the Iron Hands FAQ didnt fix it" at least it was quickly MADE. The community said "Hell No" and what do you know, the company felt obligated to at least make an ATTEMPT. 

I get so tried of the "Name someone else who does it" arguements. Even if NO ONE had balance or close to balance, why would it be wrong for customers to ask for it?

For that matter, name another miniatures company worth over 1 Billion. Guess what  I think it's natural to ask more from a company with those sort of resources to put in more effort. GW is not some start up model company living Kickstarter to Kickstarter or whatever.  A company that large gets LESS of a pass, not more.

As to general balance concerns, I understand it can get hard. But I really think apologist overplay it. New armies are not NEARLY as complex in unit choice or options as in WHFB, or even older editions of 40k. Brand new factions, for example Bonereapers, dont have very many kit choices, for stop. Their equipment is fixed. 8 units, 4 heros, and 2 special characters. 5 subfactions. 6 Battalions. Thats it.

And yet, the internal balance is almost laughably pathetic. If you are not running Pertifex, you are basically telling your opponent you are playing, deliberately, at a handicap. Mortek Guard are almost always mathematically the right choice. The cool "one in three" special weapon for the stalkers is always mathematically the wrong choice. I could go on, but its discussed elsewhere. 

Let's look at KO and Tzeentch, two books you would expect were worked on around the same time (given they planned a combined box for them). KO have a tiny amount of units, Tzeentch only more so because it pulls in legacy StD and Daemons. One book, KO, is so concerned about some imagined Alpha strike it neuters the ability of guys to shoot out of boats, from the Thunderers not getting a +1 to hit (gamebreaking right) on their limited special weapons to shorting the range of Arcanaut pistols (because it's those 4/4/-/1 shots we must worry about...) while in the next book over, for 480 points, in a one drop Battalion, I can get 36 3/3/-1/d3 shots on target, no problem. And that's one unit. That's battleline. The balance is again laughable. These were books worked on at the same time right? By the same small team? 

Or the huge shifts in game mechanics. One drop Battalions are taken from some (Sylvaneth), or just nonexistent (CoS) while given to others (StD, KO, Tzeentch). Some people GET to play in the activation wars (Slaanesh, FEC, Fyreslayers) while others don't (Ogres, OBR, etc).  Summoning is nonexistent (CoS, fyreslayers, KO, OBR, Nighthaunt, Ogres, DoK) to almost nonexistent/tightly controlled(warclans, Sylvaneth, Nurgle) to ok (Gloomspite, Khorne) to very strong (FEC, new Slaanesh, maybe Tzeentch) just broken (old Slaanesh). CP starving armies (Sylvaneth, Orruks, Nighthaunt, Stormcast) to CP neutral (IDK, Beasts?, Skaven?) to CP spamming (CoS, Gloomspite) to random attempt to CP spam but not really we cant make this work make something up(OBR).

And this is mostly in the last year, from the company that puts on a face of being more committed to balance and community input. They say they arent the "just a models company" (which their actions over the Wraithknight release shows they knew exactly how to release broken rules to spike sales) anymore. Then they should put their money where their mouth is. Letting Hagg Nar, Slaanesh, FEC run wild for as long as they did isnt doing that. Building false choice armies like OBR isnt doing that. Letting rules like the StD Nurgle CA get to print isn't doing that. Going out of their way to put clause after stipulation after shackle on the biggest shooting army in one book while letting Tzeentch do it, but better and cheaper, isnt doing that.

I won't pretend to have an answer to this. But its bull**** to hide from the problem under "well no one else is that great either" or "hey now they try really hard." Their methods are not working. Maybe instead of sending review copies to (well meaning) drones reciting the book, they should send early access to these guys who immediately find ways to break their books- BEFORE they go to print. Or invest in an editor, or someone, to establish some consistency. Whatever the case, it is  entirely reasonable to ask for a show of faith on their part to try to correct their course.

100% this. Nothing to add.

[Nos]

9 hours ago, BadDice0809 said:

I forgot to add the "but they are making money" evasion as well. Thanks for reminding me.

And if you think keeping the customers happy/pretending to listen (or at least keeping the appearance) isnt part of making money in 2020, you must be out of your mind.

Why invest in warhammer community (which costs much more than an editor) if they didnt care about keeping their public image up? Why do their customer survey? Why make Sisters of Battle again? Saying they have no obligation to listen, or that because they are making money means things are great is a pathetically weak evasion. 

Their reaction to the ITC ban, as weak as it was, shows they WILL listen. The damage was done in the books already, in the data sheets that GW has, once again, a schizophrenic attitude between randomly fixing (OG Thunderers, Plague Monks...) and refusing to address (every scroll other than Plagues...). But it still forced a reaction. 

While I never said, or implied, GW is stupid, since that's another pathetic, reductive argument, I will say that I think a good portion of the problem is the GW old guard. You got designers in charge who have been running the show (and into the ground, like in 8th WHFB, 6/7th edition 40k...soon 8th edition 40k) for so long I really doubt they are still in touch with what the newer audience wants. If there is an issue, they want a patch. Fast. And free. But even better if its tested before hand, and this stuff doesnt exist. No one likes the game that just crashes and burns day one release, and frankly some of these books do that.

GW, ever so slowly, is coming around to this. But it gets to the point that with consistent questionable choices, you got to start looking at the decision makers here.

*IT IS NOT AN EVASION. GW DO NOT EXIST TO PROVIDE YOU AND ME A  GAMING  SERVICE NOR IS THAT A PRIORITY. THEY EXIST TO MAKE MONEY AND THEY EXIST BECAUSE THEY MAKE MONEY*

First paragraph of their Business model on their website: 

"We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world, to engage and inspire our customers, and to sell our products globally at a profit. We Intend to do this forever. Our decisions are focussed on long term sucsess  not short term goals".

It dosent even mention games, let alone tate them as a priority, let alone balanced ones. 

I think GW know to a colossal degree far far far more than you or I will ever know about making money in 2020.

What are the costs of investing in warhammer community do you think, in real terms ?  Some bandwidth costs , a few staff, to monitor it. Their Social media presence is actually tiny for a company if their size, suggesting again a very considered attitude towards wher they invest their resources. The answer as to why they have it is to create hype and sell products.

Show me where I *once* said they dont care about keeping their public image up? You need to engage with my arguments dude, not make stuff up.

Why make Sisters of Battle? I mean, to make money from the demand from them, obviously. It's been a years long investment, they wont have just done it through whimsy or nostalgia , It will have been researched and costed extensively and they will have concluded it was  worthwhile investment. 

Why do the customer survey? To work out what people want from them so they can market and sell it, or change their marketing to highlight those things more. You know, like *all* customer surveys.

(That paragraph a totally torpedoes your argument about how big a deal rules etc are completely. Your saying that GW is committed to listening to its customers and makes changes according to that. Cant be that many people focussing on rules in that case because by your own admission GW are doing nothing on that front).

I haven't once said they have no obligation to listen. Quote me where I said that. Dont make stuff up.

What I actually said was that GW are overwhelmingly sucsessful because they do listen to what the community want. Its just that what the community want is more toys. Most people dont care about rules and balance in comparison and GW dosent think,on the basis of data which is far more accurate, reliable and representative of its customer base than you or I have, that this needs to change.  It knows what it's doing far better than you or I do. And your expectations of them have no basis in what their stated purpose and intent in black and white is.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Nos

[JackStreicher]

37 minutes ago, Nos said:

*IT IS NOT AN EVASION. GW DO NOT EXIST TO PROVIDE YOU AND ME A  GAMING  SERVICE. THEY EXIST TO MAKE MONEY*

I think GW know to a colossal degree far far far more than you or I will ever know about making money in 2020.

What are the costs of investing in warhammer community do you think, in real terms ? Oh the answer is to create hype and sell products, by the way. 

Show me where I *once* said they dont care about keeping their public image up? You need to engage with my arguments dude, not make stuff up.

Why make Sisters of Battle? I mean, to make money from the demand from them, obviously. It's been a years long investment, they wont have just done it through whimsy or nostalgia , It will have been researched and costed extensively and they will have concluded it was  worthwhile investment. 

Why do the customer survey? To work out what people want from them so they can market and sell it, or change their marketing to highlight those things more. You know, like *all* customer surveys.

(That paragraph a totally torpedoes your argument about how big a deal rules etc are completely. Your saying that GW is committed to listening to its customers and makes changes according to that. Cant be that many people focussing on rules in that case because by your own admission GW are doing nothing on that front).

I haven't once said they have no obligation to listen. Quote me where I said that. Dont make stuff up.

What I actually said was that GW are overwhelmingly sucsessful because they do listen to what the community want. Its just that what the community want is more toys. Most people dont care about rules and balance in comparison and GW dosent think,on the basis of data which is far more accurate, reliable and representative of its customer base than you or I have, that this needs to change.  It knows what it's doing far better than you or I do.

You forget that GW is not just one person but many.

if designers don‘t listen to plattester then that likely has nothing to do with GW wanting to make money.

there‘re so many instances rules have to go through, optimising and streamlining them so no FAQ is needed actually saves them money. Meaning a good balance also saves them money due to less time being spent on creating FAQs to put rules back in line.

good balance also keeps long time customers buying their products (I didn‘t extend my DoK collection for two years since I couldn‘t play them due to being too strong and my opponents not having any fun at all) that‘s about 300€ I didn’t spent and instead bought them a year later on eBay. 
as Memory serves I am not the only one reacting like that to having an overpowered faction.

 

edit: If I realize that my army is grossly underpowered I‘d sell what I have on eBay which again reduces GWs sales. They‘re hurting themself in the long term while losing customers who get tired of their practices.

Edited January 18, 2020 by JackStreicher

[Nos]

1 hour ago, JackStreicher said:

You forget that GW is not just one person but many.

if designers don‘t listen to plattester then that likely has nothing to do with GW wanting to make money.

there‘re so many instances rules have to go through, optimising and streamlining them so no FAQ is needed actually saves them money. Meaning a good balance also saves them money due to less time being spent on creating FAQs to put rules back in line.

good balance also keeps long time customers buying their products (I didn‘t extend my DoK collection for two years since I couldn‘t play them due to being too strong and my opponents not having any fun at all) that‘s about 300€ I didn’t spent and instead bought them a year later on eBay. 
as Memory serves I am not the only one reacting like that to having an overpowered faction.

 

edit: If I realize that my army is grossly underpowered I‘d sell what I have on eBay which again reduces GWs sales. They‘re hurting themself in the long term while losing customers who get tired of their practices.

I'm  not disputing that that is your or anyone else's experience. I personally buy very little from GW, I trade, beg, sell borrow etc. Nor am I an apologist for hyper capitalist practices or mass consumerism. Quite the opposite, I loathe it.

But whatever your or my feelings on the matter, the fact is that the issues you identify as being of real importance to GW's contonued sucsess, just, arent to the degree you think they are. Not remotely.

Prophesying some sort of reckoning if GW dont prioritise balancing their games  better etc, the customers they will lose and so on-its been happening for years. GW have made more money in that time. They have gotten stronger, not weaker. 

Its totally understandable to want AOS to be more balanced and a better game. No qualms with that at all. But its delusional to insist, against an avalanche of evidence to the contrary, that it's somehow actually detrimental and dangerous for GW not to do so. Its utter nonsense. Knowing the anecdotal  evidence of yourself, or ten people, or even a hundred people who didnt give GW  money in some instances because of your opinion on the nature of their product and practices? It means nothing in comparison to the literal millions of people worldwide who do and who approve of their product and practices. 

GW will not focus on balance to the degree that a small minority want until it becomes appreciably profitable for them to do so, because by their own stated ambition, they exist to make toys and make money, worldwide, forever. Again- they dont even *mention* making games in their Company mission.

Toys and money, worldwide, forever. That's what they're in it for and given how much money they're making, its obviously a philosophy the overwelming majority agree with. They're not going to mess with that if the demand isn't there relative to the profits it will bring. 

The revolution isnt coming. Manage your expectations to the reality of the situation, not what you want or think needs to happen, on the basis of evidence which is basically non existent in comparison to the evidence GW have that actually what they're doing is really very popular and profitable. 

Edited January 18, 2020 by Nos

[NJohansson]

I have been in this hobby for almost 30 years now and we still have the same arguments over and over. 

 

FWIW - the balance between army books has been improved greatly, GW actually do respond/make balancing attempts each and every year (there was a time when you had to just wait a couple of years for a new book) and the overall customer/community care/support has been greatly increased the last couple of years. 

 

Saying all that - internal balancing (unit on unit) is still bad but one ought to play chess if you really strive for absolute balance. The STD book has some viable units/builds and some abysmal - the same goes for the majority of army books. If you play casual you have loads of variety - if you want tournament level you need to focus on the obviously good parts.

[Sleboda]

2 hours ago, NJohansson said:

If you play casual you have loads of variety - if you want tournament level you need to focus on the obviously good parts.

I think a lot of folks need to remember this. Take Bonereapers for instance. Going to a tournament? Yeah, you'll likely go with Petrifex. Looking to create a theme, play a narrative game, or just try something different? Try the others. The Battletomes are not billed as "the ultimate guide to winning tournaments with Army X." They include lots of stuff that inspire players to do more than min/max on the path to Crushville (though that's in there as well if that's your thing!).

[Dead Scribe]

The thing that gets kicked back a lot is that some groups only run optimal lists, so casual players have to hope for other casual players lol.  

[Nos]

14 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

I think a lot of folks need to remember this. Take Bonereapers for instance. Going to a tournament? Yeah, you'll likely go with Petrifex. Looking to create a theme, play a narrative game, or just try something different? Try the others. The Battletomes are not billed as "the ultimate guide to winning tournaments with Army X." They include lots of stuff that inspire players to do more than min/max on the path to Crushville (though that's in there as well if that's your thing!).

The other side of it as well is that unless you've built your army expressly with a narrative behind it and only want to play them in that vein (which, great, if that's your thing, have fun!); why limit yourself? I play every Stormhost and Glade with my Stormcast and Sylvaneth and enjoy the options and possibilities on offer, or the challenges they impose, or the focus they provide. I have my favourites of course and there are some which are flat our garbage competitively, but the fact is they are options which provide a variety on the gaming table without me having to buy more models. 

These days you can totally buy one army and play it as six if you want. It's an excellent new trend.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Nos

[JPjr]

Yeah when, for example, with Ossiarch Bonereapers people say why would anyone even consider running anything other than Petrifex I feel like saying yeah but counterpoint why would you choose to run anything other than the lads who are essentially skeletons that are burning on the inside and have a habit of exploding when you kill them launching literal bone shrapnel into unwitting people’s stupid soft fleshy faces.

🤟💀🤘

or you know the ones made from bloody dinosaur bones or whatever they are or lets not forget the NULL MYRIAD, as lets face it with a name like that you know Arkhan’s mob are rolling up with some sweet merch, get me a t-shirt with that on NOW...

 

EDIT: great I’ve just realised I now need to buy a Gothizar Harvester and use a load of green stuff to give him a cowboy hat and long coat so he looks like he’s escaped from The Fields of the Nephilim...

Edited January 18, 2020 by JPjr