Gamesworkshop's Evolving Release Strategy

[yukishiro1]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here about what copyright law covers. To try to dispel it (and to be very clear, this post is not advocating piracy in any way - the whole point is to explain what it is so people can avoid it): 

It absolutely IS NOT piracy to read a summary of the rules on 1d4 chan or anywhere else. Copyright applies to creative works, not to information. You cannot copyright rules themselves, because rules are information, and information is not copyrightable. 

To give a concrete example: GW has a copyright on the particular chart that comes at the end of a battletome that lists the points values for the units. 1d4 chan can't just take a photo of that chart and upload it (nor can it reproduce the same chart with the same formatting in word or paint and post that - the point is that you are copying the creative expression, not how you copy it). But it is absolutely, perfectly legal for you or 1d4 chan or anyone else to summarize the information in that chart on your own site. 

Obviously the topic is somewhat more complex in its nuances, but the takeaway the average person needs to know is this:

1. You cannot copy a battletome itself and post it somewhere, because you are reproducing GW's creative works without authorization. Viewing someone else's copy that has been posted somewhere in violation of copyright is not technically copyright infringement, but it is benefitting from someone else's infringement. Downloading someone else's copy is creating a copy yourself, and therefore direct infringement. 

2. You are absolutely free to extract any and all information in a battletome and post it in a different format yourself, and you are absolutely free to read someone else's summary of that information as well. 

Edited January 26, 2021 by yukishiro1

[stratigo]

4 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:

I have no particular knowledge of copywrite law, or how it might relate to gaming products. However I can explain how copying and quoting works in academic and journalistic contexts. 

Making a direct copy, such as photographing or photocopying a page is illegal (that's why pages with character sheets and army rosters usually have a specific disclaimer saying that they can be copied). Sometimes you can get away with copying a small section, such as one article in a journal (if I remember correctly).

However you are quite within your rights to read a book at the library and make notes. Rules information in a warhammer book is simple enough that you could make notes on everything you need to play the game, and type it up in your own words. In other words making a cheat sheet for yourself or your friends to use. Finding a library that has the latest battletome would be the challenge. Some games clubs and universities perhaps?  I guess if you live in London the British Library might?

However, once you've made your cheat sheets, actually publishing that (online or otherwise) for other people to refer to is going to be where things get dodgy. In theory... if you were writing up a "transformative" work that discussed and provided commentary to the rules, then I think you would be within your rights to quote or paraphrase specific sections, so long as you cite the original work, and attribute it correctly. This is what most of the lore wikis do, although I feel that a lot of them go a bit too far, and often have very long quotations which aren't properly attributed or identified as such.

When I write a scientific paper, I can quote sections or reproduce a figure from another paper in order to make my point. However the rules for doing that may not be completely transferable to making a website of quick reference warhammer rules. I'm sure I've read that game mechanics themselves can't be copywrited, only the presentation of those rules, but I'd think the games company wouldn't want anyone publishing their rules verbatim.

 

making a copy of a book you own isn't actually illegal. Making a copy and then giving that copy to someone else is. Making a copy of a book you don't own is obviously also illegal.

[Ggom]

So... The way to force GW to change their current book model is to write summaries of the 2 pages of rules and share them?

Sounds like a good plan, for those of us who disliked the current model. 

[ian0delond]

If sharing the information may affect the market of the book you are not allowed to share it. 

 

Saying rules are just "information" so it's ok it's false. Even road maps are protected against plagiarism.

Edited January 27, 2021 by ian0delond

[Ggom]

1 minute ago, ian0delond said:

If sharing the information may affect the market of the book you are not allowed to share it. 

I think it would be useful for those of us sharing these types of statements to clarify the extent of their knowledge, as @yukishiro1 did.

For instance, is this a statement coming from someone who is educated in the matter or has related working experience, is this the opinion of a layperson, etc.

Otherwise it's hard for those of us without professional insight into the matter to form an opinion in this area of much myth and rumor.

[ian0delond]

because  @yukishiro1 gave any source?

[yukishiro1]

1 hour ago, ian0delond said:

If sharing the information may affect the market of the book you are not allowed to share it. 

 

Saying rules are just "information" so it's ok it's false. Even road maps are protected against plagiarism.

Copyright laws vary by jurisdiction and I am not an expert in the subject internationally, so I do not want to outright claim you are wrong here as to whatever jurisdiction you call home, but in general the impact on the market value is one factor (typically of four) in evaluating fair use, which is something you only get to where there has been actual copying of a copyrighted work. In other words, it's a defense to what would otherwise be infringement. In none of these jurisdictions would it be accurate to say that "If sharing the information may affect the market of the book you are not allowed to share it." 

One clarification I should make is that it might have been better to use the word "idea" than "information" in drawing the dichotomy between what is copyrightable and what is not. In this context, the distinction is pretty obvious, but information is certainly copyrightable if it's expressive rather than functional in nature. The point is that someone's particular expression is what is copyrightable, not the functional information laying behind that expression. 

I deliberately didn't get into fair use because it's impossible to really generalize about. But you don't need to worry about that if you aren't copying without authorization in the first place, and summarizing rules is not copying. The only place this becomes  a gray area where fair use potentially comes into play is if you are reproducing word-for-word the exact wording of a complicated rule.

Copyright in major jurisdictions protects expression, not ideas, processes, procedures, mechanics, or the like. The points value of a unit, or hitting on 4+s, etc etc  are not expression, and therefore not protected by copyright in any major jurisdiction that I am aware of.  For an example of this in practice, you can read this case about a company that copied the rules for its CCG from another CCG; the judge threw out the lawsuit, making clear that rules are not subject to copyright. 

https://casetext.com/case/davinci-editrice-srl-v-ziko-games-llc-3

I don't think it makes sense to get into this topic more deeply here. My intent was simply to calm some nerves and lay out the basic framework so people can have a better idea of what they should or should not watch out for. If you want to tell people I am wrong you are free to do so, and each person will have to decide for themselves whose information is accurate. 

To the person who asked, I am an attorney, but not a copyright attorney. Nothing I wrote here should be construed as actual legal advice, and you certainly shouldn't take my word for it simply because of my qualifications; it doesn't matter what someone's title is, what matters is the accuracy of what they write. 

Edited January 27, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Austin]

1 hour ago, yukishiro1 said:

Copyright laws vary by jurisdiction and I am not an expert in the subject internationally, so I do not want to outright claim you are wrong here as to whatever jurisdiction you call home, but in general the impact on the market value is one factor (typically of four) in evaluating fair use, which is something you only get to where there has been actual copying of a copyrighted work. In other words, it's a defense to what would otherwise be infringement. In none of these jurisdictions would it be accurate to say that "If sharing the information may affect the market of the book you are not allowed to share it." 

One clarification I should make is that it might have been better to use the word "idea" than "information" in drawing the dichotomy between what is copyrightable and what is not. In this context, the distinction is pretty obvious, but information is certainly copyrightable if it's expressive rather than functional in nature. The point is that someone's particular expression is what is copyrightable, not the functional information laying behind that expression. 

I deliberately didn't get into fair use because it's impossible to really generalize about. But you don't need to worry about that if you aren't copying without authorization in the first place, and summarizing rules is not copying. The only place this becomes  a gray area where fair use potentially comes into play is if you are reproducing word-for-word the exact wording of a complicated rule.

Copyright in major jurisdictions protects expression, not ideas, processes, procedures, mechanics, or the like. The points value of a unit, or hitting on 4+s, etc etc  are not expression, and therefore not protected by copyright in any major jurisdiction that I am aware of.  For an example of this in practice, you can read this case about a company that copied the rules for its CCG from another CCG; the judge threw out the lawsuit, making clear that rules are not subject to copyright. 

https://casetext.com/case/davinci-editrice-srl-v-ziko-games-llc-3

I don't think it makes sense to get into this topic more deeply here. My intent was simply to calm some nerves and lay out the basic framework so people can have a better idea of what they should or should not watch out for. If you want to tell people I am wrong you are free to do so, and each person will have to decide for themselves whose information is accurate. 

To the person who asked, I am an attorney, but not a copyright attorney. Nothing I wrote here should be construed as actual legal advice, and you certainly shouldn't take my word for it simply because of my qualifications; it doesn't matter what someone's title is, what matters is the accuracy of what they write. 

I’m not going to lie when you added that part at the end, I felt it in my spirit. 

[Greybeard86]

Who says they do not make money out of the books sales alone? I am quite convinced they do.

That said, one must understand GW s business as a “total” business. Not only from the industrial / production point of view, but also because it spans across media in a remarkably integrated manner.

They hype their own products via magazines, novels, and also rule books. We cannot judge the performance of any of these supporting elements on their own, but as part of a hype machine to sell models.

They release books so fast and stagger their product releases on purpose to maintain a high hype state and keep people buying. It is a planned / designed business plan and it is working well for them.

Lots of people are satisfied with it and frankly it is no different than what phone / computer / clothing companies do. Hype is perfect because it taps into the irrational / impulsive part of the buyer.

Now, insofar no one is getting in too deep and hurting themselves with those impulsive purchases, I guess we have collectively decided that this is ok. Personally, I find it annoying and try to keep a cool head when making those purchases.

[EccentricCircle]

This raises the question; How many people actually enjoy the hype?

From reading the forums, it seems as though its quite popular, everyone always wants to know what's coming next. They get excited about new releases etc. That all makes sense.

However I've read comments to the effect that it was a shame that lumineth took so long to come out, because it meant that GW had to dial back the Hype train and not market them as aggressively. As someone who has always found the "buy it now! buy it now!" style advertising annoying, that surprised me, since surely if you have all the information, then its a good thing that the company stopped yelling at you to buy stuff, and let you decide whether you liked them on your own.   I tend to agree with the other posters who've said that its quite manipulative, and stresses Fear of Missing Out and "this is the new, best thing ever, get it quick while its still the new best thing ever". Still I can well believe I'm in the minority there.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

5 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:

This raises the question; How many people actually enjoy the hype?

Personally, I somewhat enjoy the hype cycle. It's fun to speculate about what is coming, try to gather clues and make predictions. I think what is happening with Cursed City right now is super fun, for example, with everyone connecting info from different places, talking about their hopes for the game and what it could mean for AoS and the Mortal Realms. I don't find the slow release of new information in this case manipulative at all. It gets people excited in the same way solving a puzzle in a game or uncovering a mystery in a book does.

What I don't enjoy is being treated like a ressource to be managed. The Lumineth and Daughters Battletome situation is a pretty good example of that. On the face of it: Sure, new book and new models, that's cool. That's something to get excited about. But then you start to notice how GW caused the problem that the new Daughters BT is going to solve (the Daughters rules had become fragmented over their original tome, BR: Morathi and Shadow and Pain), and how the release timing of the new Lumineth release in relation to their original release seems to be set up to exploit the sunk cost of Lumineth players to sell more units/books.

That kind of stuff sucks, because for me it means I can't just buy GW products and trust them not to heck me over for buying in early. This will definitely be on my mind when I get interested in a new army they are hyping in the future: Will being an early adopter be worse for me than just waiting for another year to see what will happen to this army? Will my trust/loyalty as a customer be rewarded or punished? I don't like the recent developments, because it makes it harder to just stay positive about the game I enjoy. I want to be able to get excited and buy stuff that I like for my hobby. But it feels like the "smart" thing to do is to adopt a cynical attitude and not give GW any more trust, loyalty or indeed money than absolutely necessary.

[Beastmaster]

I enjoy following the developments from a bit of a distance. I read here and only rarely go to any of GWs websites or watch videos. Guess I’m more interested in the marketing strategy than in the marketing itself. When it comes to buying, I always take my time and never buy anything day one anyway.

[JackStreicher]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Will my trust/loyalty as a customer be rewarded or punished? I don't like the recent developments, because it makes it harder to just stay positive about the game I enjoy. I want to be able to get excited and buy stuff that I like for my hobby. But it feels like the "smart" thing to do is to adopt a cynical attitude and not give GW any more trust, loyalty or indeed money than absolutely necessary.

Welcome to the club. I don‘t know for how long you‘ve been in the hobby. Yet once you‘ve been part of the community for long enough you cannot not realize the poo GW keeps pulling off (to put it hyperbolic). You think things might get better but they don‘t, at least not really.

Example based on myself:

I started the hobby very young with WHF. I loved it. Yet the former release schedule and frakking up of army books you‘ve waited for years to arrive really starts to grind you down. On top of that you get the constant „price adjustments“, grinding ever onwards. The whole community around you has already become cynical - they play the game, even like it, though they‘re painfully aware of the shoddy ruleswriting. Then WHF blows up.

I took a break from Warhammer until DoK arrived. I thought the game was cool, relaxed and looked good, so I ditched my old WHF grudge and startet very positive up until a year ago? At some point I felt the grinding again, the price adjustments, quite honestly anti-social behavior (imo) during a pandemic (price increase while people suffer, lose their jobs and competitors lower prices). And ever since the grinding has become worse and worse, the sound clearer and clearer. It‘s painfully obvious what kind of corpo GW is, it‘s not a friendly one. Now the EA DLC*bs has begun. It also doesn‘t help that a lot of the vocal community is in full denial of that simple fact and that this community behaves more like worshippers than customers - which means it will just be getting worse. 
 

 

* meaning that the whole Produktlinie/Game  is finished, yet they release the skeleton part of the army to force you to buy more content for the full experience, while demanding way too much money for the base game/product and the DLC.
 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2021 by JackStreicher

[yukishiro1]

6 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:

Who says they do not make money out of the books sales alone? I am quite convinced they do.

That said, one must understand GW s business as a “total” business. Not only from the industrial / production point of view, but also because it spans across media in a remarkably integrated manner.

They hype their own products via magazines, novels, and also rule books. We cannot judge the performance of any of these supporting elements on their own, but as part of a hype machine to sell models.

Charging money for new rules doesn't raise the hype around them vs just releasing them for free. That's the point of a free rules model - it gets people going out to buy more models by not locking their rules behind a paywall. 

I'm sure GW doesn't actually lose money on their books, but the margin is definitely way lower than it is on their plastic - it has to be, unless they have some magic way of printing glossy color books that nobody else in the world knows about, that sort of printing is exceedingly expensive. Even if GW makes some nominal amount off a $50 battletome, they make far more off selling you $50 of plastic instead. So it'd make business sense if they could give away the rules for free online and shift people from spending that $50 on the tome to spending $50 on more plastic instead. 

[Overread]

GW tried that and sales lowered - its called AoS launch day

You forget the Battletome is NOT just about rules. What it is about is being a single catch-all product for gamers from the brand new never played all the way to the seasoned player who has been playing for 30 years. They are for professional gamers through to those who simply like lore or casually collect and paint. That's why they have lore, paint, photos, artwork, rules all in one single book.

The idea is that even if the GW store manager (or 3rd party) can't get you to buy a model on the day, they can put a Battletome in your hand which you take home and read. You've far far far more chance of coming back and getting models than if they say "Here's a website go home and have a look." Plus that means they are going online and whilst GW has a good online marketing system, there's all the competition there too. 

 

 

The Battletome/codex might make less money per book in profit than models do; however the net potential of snaring a player and keeping them loyal gamers for years to GW is vastly greater.

 

Note that Privateer Press tried the whole "follow the pros" desire with printed and online rules and it helped contribute to their market collapsing in on itself. To the point where they stopped printing lore books and have had to scale back. Now other things didn't help, but that was one of the things that started the slide. Niche products create niche markets. 

 

AS for fragmented unit releases resulting in out of date battletomes, that's going to happen. GW used to print rules in books for concept models that didn't exist, however the 3rd party market started making models to fill that niche. In addition it meant that there were some models, some options that unless you converted or bought 3rd party (only at 3rd party stores/clubs) you couldn't use. Which wasn't friendly toward people new to the game and to modelling. So GW now focuses on protecting their sales, but also meaning that the game is more fair to new customers by only printing rules for models they've released (or which are going to be released for certain within the very near future). 
As gamers we also want new models so drip-feeding the odd model here and there is a positive for us in getting new things; long (5 year!) gaps without new models can lead to gamers being unsatisfied with their army. 

GW also does give AoS players free warscrolls online, so those newly added models are already there online as a digital resource. 

[Greybeard86]

2 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

Charging money for new rules doesn't raise the hype around them vs just releasing them for free. That's the point of a free rules model - it gets people going out to buy more models by not locking their rules behind a paywall. 

I'm sure GW doesn't actually lose money on their books, but the margin is definitely way lower than it is on their plastic - it has to be, unless they have some magic way of printing glossy color books that nobody else in the world knows about, that sort of printing is exceedingly expensive. Even if GW makes some nominal amount off a $50 battletome, they make far more off selling you $50 of plastic instead. So it'd make business sense if they could give away the rules for free online and shift people from spending that $50 on the tome to spending $50 on more plastic instead. 

What you says makes sense if people were on some sort of "limited budget" and bought one or the other. I bet that, in many cases, people buy the book and then some extra plastic.  The book is a way to hype you more and sell, and it seems to work well because GW keeps doing it, now at an increasing pace with multiple books for similar armies. We pay for the publicity, fellows, ain't that great?

The constant re-release of books does not need to market to the same people that would only buy every now and then. This is for those who want the latest rules, aren't willing to get them elsewhere (i.e. internet), and then, of course, it also limits the second hand market for new players.

1 hour ago, Overread said:

GW tried that and sales lowered - its called AoS launch day

You forget the Battletome is NOT just about rules. What it is about is being a single catch-all product for gamers from the brand new never played all the way to the seasoned player who has been playing for 30 years. They are for professional gamers through to those who simply like lore or casually collect and paint. That's why they have lore, paint, photos, artwork, rules all in one single book.

I agree. Battletomes are giant printed ads, but you pay for them. It is a wicked genious move. It is like a giant catalogue that keeps coming out with "new cool stuff" and we even pay for more than its cost.

 

[Overread]

I remember buying (and probably still have someone) at least one if not two of the old GW annual catalogues! They were nothing but models produced by the company start to finish, showing off each and every part too. This was back when GW produced a lot in metals and these catalogues showed of all the model ranges at the time. The idea was back then you could order specific parts of models from GW, so with the catalogue not only did you see the entire product range, but you could also part order.

This was also before the internet really took off in a big way and also before the shift into plastics and finecast and then into almost pure plastics that GW is today.

[JackStreicher]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

GW tried that and sales lowered - its called AoS launch day

Like that was the reason 🧐

maybe people were a little upset that WHF died, or that there were no points. But I am sure it was the free rules 🤨

#ThisIsBlasphemy

 

On the Battletome part: Tbh it‘s trash paper. Nice Art and Stories, yet compared to WHF Armybooks, the resell value of a Battletome drops to 0 once it‘s replaced by a new one. And let‘s not talk about the quality of rules, Print errors, lazy point mistakes and all of the good stuff  - totally worth its money, if it was Monopoly money that is.

Withput hyperbole: The BTs lose value way too fast.

Edited January 28, 2021 by JackStreicher

[Greybeard86]

21 minutes ago, Overread said:

I remember buying (and probably still have someone) at least one if not two of the old GW annual catalogues! They were nothing but models produced by the company start to finish, showing off each and every part too. This was back when GW produced a lot in metals and these catalogues showed of all the model ranges at the time. The idea was back then you could order specific parts of models from GW, so with the catalogue not only did you see the entire product range, but you could also part order.

This was also before the internet really took off in a big way and also before the shift into plastics and finecast and then into almost pure plastics that GW is today.

I read dozens of times a dwarf batrep in an old white dwarf I was gifted at a GW store.

Hype is the ultimate seller, but with great power...

I still think it is a crabby move to release so many rule books and constantly cycle the meta like this, but I guess we all find that spot in the hobby that brings us joy and it doesn't need to be the same for all of us.

Personally, the balancing approach and rule release schedules put me off and in my second year after coming back to the hobby I have yet to buy a rule book. And this comes from someone who was scouting for the old Dogs of War army book for a time.

[JackStreicher]

Just now, Greybeard86 said:

I read dozens of times a dwarf batrep in an old white dwarf I was gifted at a GW store.

Hype is the ultimate seller, but with great power...

I still think it is a crabby move to release so many rule books and constantly cycle the meta like this, but I guess we all find that spot in the hobby that brings us joy and it doesn't need to be the same for all of us.

Personally, the balancing approach and rule release schedules put me off and in my second year after coming back to the hobby I have yet to buy a rule book. And this comes from someone who was scouting for the old Dogs of War army book for a time.

Per faction: I‘d love ONE solid Battletome every 2-3 years and then more units + warscrolls and conversion kits across 2-3 years 

[Overread]

2 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Per faction: I‘d love ONE solid Battletome every 2-3 years and then more units + warscrolls and conversion kits across 2-3 years 

That is the normal lifespan of many Battletomes/Codex in general. AoS is just a bit abnormal right now - there are many factions which are undersized and when they get a big update it means a new tome. Most Slaanesh players were fully expecting another several years before seeing any big release of models and if they were lucky getting one or two models between the big releases. The sudden glut of models this February is fantastic for most Slaanesh players because its something we did not expect to see for years. Yes it means a new Tome, but at the same time it means several years of getting to use those models instead of waiting and hoping. 

[JackStreicher]

2 minutes ago, Overread said:

That is the normal lifespan of many Battletomes/Codex in general. AoS is just a bit abnormal right now - there are many factions which are undersized and when they get a big update it means a new tome. Most Slaanesh players were fully expecting another several years before seeing any big release of models and if they were lucky getting one or two models between the big releases. The sudden glut of models this February is fantastic for most Slaanesh players because its something we did not expect to see for years. Yes it means a new Tome, but at the same time it means several years of getting to use those models instead of waiting and hoping. 

I don‘t mind the Slaanesh update, it‘s okayish. The Lumineth however... smells like EA-DLC-Scheme to me.

[stratigo]

On 1/28/2021 at 8:42 AM, EccentricCircle said:

This raises the question; How many people actually enjoy the hype?

From reading the forums, it seems as though its quite popular, everyone always wants to know what's coming next. They get excited about new releases etc. That all makes sense.

However I've read comments to the effect that it was a shame that lumineth took so long to come out, because it meant that GW had to dial back the Hype train and not market them as aggressively. As someone who has always found the "buy it now! buy it now!" style advertising annoying, that surprised me, since surely if you have all the information, then its a good thing that the company stopped yelling at you to buy stuff, and let you decide whether you liked them on your own.   I tend to agree with the other posters who've said that its quite manipulative, and stresses Fear of Missing Out and "this is the new, best thing ever, get it quick while its still the new best thing ever". Still I can well believe I'm in the minority there.

I enjoy the hype. I don't enjoy them obfuscating their plans to prevent people from making informed purchasing decisions 

[Joseph Mackay]

On 1/19/2021 at 8:07 PM, Bosskelot said:

Don't hold out much hope for new Fyreslayers either. It was the biggest bomb of a model line GW have ever made.

And who’s fault was that? Theirs by overpricing them compared to everything released before, and releasing only 2 units that look too similar to each other while also making them a horde army. They fixed the prices on future armies (until Bonereapers) but they refuse to lower prices* on existing products

except in the case of the Magmadroth where they put it in a Start Collecting box that was cheaper than the Magmadroth on its own.

 

in regards to this new ‘release strategy’ I’m nervous. Slaanesh getting a new battletome so soon (unless it’s a ‘designed for aos3’ situation) rubs me the wrong way because of the whole ‘cash grab’ feeling and invalidating a battletome so soon after release.
Lumineth getting new stuff so soon after their main release, while the likes of Fyreslayers, Flesh-Eater Courts, Ironjawz, Daughters Of Khaine etc NEED more models/units, and armies like Skaven and Seraphon need massive updates to replace the really old models is upsetting.

I disliked the whole release strategy of aos2 so far as well. The fact most armies only got Endless Spells and/or Faction Terrain felt extremely lazy. In my opinion, a lot of the endless spells should have been units instead (Corpsemare Stampede, Molten Infernoth, the Sylvaneth worm thing and the upcoming dock blood snake etc). Some armies didn’t even get either (Cities Of Sigmar, Orruck Warclans). My thoughts? GW were more focused on rushing out books so everyone was on an ‘even playing field’ (and yes, in my opinion I feel some of the battletomes were rushed) at the expense of releasing models

Edited February 5, 2021 by Joseph Mackay

[Joseph Mackay]

On 1/26/2021 at 11:25 AM, zilberfrid said:

I don't consider GW very good at writing rulesets, and additions like the Ossiarch and Lumineth mess with strong points of the rulesets.

GW is good at making models and, through presence, have a lot of players.

This. I think their Specialist Games like Bloodbowl etc are great, but their main games? Almost every other game company writes better rules and/or more balanced. GW being a publicly traded company put too much priority into selling stuff than making a good game. If every other game company had the same sort of presence gw do (their own dedicated stores etc) then I don’t think gw would survive honestly