Unpopular opinion thread

[JackStreicher]

3 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

The 3 year release cycle for GW games is another artefact of their stubborn refusal to do digital rules with periodic updates (aside from points twice a year, or not even that if they don't feel like it "they didn't have enough data"). When you get one book an edition and no substantive updates to that book, you can't really stretch things out further or it just gets too painful for people who get the duds - and GW seems incapable of putting out books of uniform quality. In the old days when editions lasted longer that generally just meant that the winners won more and the losers lost more. 

You could have an edition go longer than 3 years if you weren't beholden to a physical book release schedule where each faction gets one book spaced roughly across the course of an edition. The FOMO stuff plays into it too, the release schedule is set up in such a way that there'll always be something new coming out soon to stimulate your wallet interest rather than having a game where the focus is on making the game itself better. 

Think how much better things would be if you weren't tired to the missteps in a battletome for the entire cycle - so like after 6 months instead of just getting price cuts on bad units and increases on good ones, you could actually shake things up by, say, putting a rider on Sentinel lofted shots that you can't reroll hits while using them, or buffing Gitz not by making them cheaper but by actually rewriting their allegiance ability to work better and be a more important part of the army. 

 

100%
 

If GW botches another Battletome you are stuck with a ruin of an army - it‘s imo the worst part of the hobby.

 

Imo SCE might need an instant rewrite. Not due to powerlevel but due to how they slaughtered warscrolls and the ability to do melee

Edited October 26, 2021 by JackStreicher

[Bosskelot]

9 hours ago, RexHavoc said:

GW were so busy trying to get everyone to spend their money recklessly on every new release, they have pushed people away from spending anything at all. 
 

You're starting to see this with a lot of boxed set releases now. One could argue that maybe GW are getting better at producing stuff to meet demand, but when even a Space Marine army box release doesn't manage to sell out in its first week, with LGS's having 10+ of them in stock still, clearly there must have been a shift in consumer behaviour.

It's either that or GW really lost the plot after Indomitus and just assumes any big box release will automatically equal the same level of sales. In my conversations with LGS owners this does actually seem to be the case; GW has a load of new sales reps who have little understanding of the hobby and are basically strong-arming these businesses to accept ludicrous numbers of orders. One local had the GW guy trying to make him take 200 boxes of the new Blood Bowl because "REMEMBER INDOMITUS THOUGH????"

[zilberfrid]

There's a lot more character in just Griff than the entire Indomitus box though, and BB is also a better game.

[Bosskelot]

5 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

There's a lot more character in just Griff than the entire Indomitus box though, and BB is also a better game.

Entirely irrelevant to the actual topic of my post.

[yukishiro1]

It'll be interesting to see GW's next set of sales figures. Anecdotally from youtubers, interest in both 40k and AOS (40k more than AOS, but from a higher place to begin with) is down from its peak during the early months of lockdown. It probably doesn't help that 40k is an absolute hot mess right now. 

 

[Enoby]

49 minutes ago, Bosskelot said:

You're starting to see this with a lot of boxed set releases now. One could argue that maybe GW are getting better at producing stuff to meet demand, but when even a Space Marine army box release doesn't manage to sell out in its first week, with LGS's having 10+ of them in stock still, clearly there must have been a shift in consumer behaviour.

It's either that or GW really lost the plot after Indomitus and just assumes any big box release will automatically equal the same level of sales. In my conversations with LGS owners this does actually seem to be the case; GW has a load of new sales reps who have little understanding of the hobby and are basically strong-arming these businesses to accept ludicrous numbers of orders. One local had the GW guy trying to make him take 200 boxes of the new Blood Bowl because "REMEMBER INDOMITUS THOUGH????"

I have definitely noticed a reduction in sold out new releases, though as you said this could be for a lot of reasons. As mentioned it may be overproduction (whether it's due to 'losing the plot' or perhaps more likely seeing the lost sales of things that sold too quickly), customer spending changes, or just being able to make more with opening up properly after the pandemic.

I think there's also a decent chance that some products are just not as popular as others. The 40k Orks limited edition codex didn't sell out very quickly (can't remember about the box), which may well just be that people aren't interested in Orks much in 40k (could be a very loud but small fanbase). Same as the Lumineth box having to be recalled last year (and their LE book not selling out particularly quickly), it didn't represent a wider change, just that some products don't do as well as others.

I do think there's much less good will towards Games Workshop recently, and at least in the online community there's a feeling of the sun setting on this golden renaissance of GW and things going backwards. I'm not sure how much of an impact that has on sales though. 

That said it feels like we're (as in the AoS community) suffering a bit of burnout where there's too much released and not enough at the same. Loads of stuff is coming out that can be used in AoS, but not much for the main game and it's left 3rd feeling a bit like a damp squib to many. 

On the topic of burnout, I do find it helps to only collect one army that you really like and just acknowledge the others.

[zilberfrid]

8 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I have definitely noticed a reduction in sold out new releases, though as you said this could be for a lot of reasons. As mentioned it may be overproduction (whether it's due to 'losing the plot' or perhaps more likely seeing the lost sales of things that sold too quickly), customer spending changes, or just being able to make more with opening up properly after the pandemic.

I think there's also a decent chance that some products are just not as popular as others. The 40k Orks limited edition codex didn't sell out very quickly (can't remember about the box), which may well just be that people aren't interested in Orks much in 40k (could be a very loud but small fanbase). Same as the Lumineth box having to be recalled last year (and their LE book not selling out particularly quickly), it didn't represent a wider change, just that some products don't do as well as others.

I do think there's much less good will towards Games Workshop recently, and at least in the online community there's a feeling of the sun setting on this golden renaissance of GW and things going backwards. I'm not sure how much of an impact that has on sales though. 

That said it feels like we're (as in the AoS community) suffering a bit of burnout where there's too much released and not enough at the same. Loads of stuff is coming out that can be used in AoS, but not much for the main game and it's left 3rd feeling a bit like a damp squib to many. 

On the topic of burnout, I do find it helps to only collect one army that you really like and just acknowledge the others.

Note that the orc boxes are restricted in a way that you can't outfit units with all the same weapons anymore.

[SunStorm]

1 hour ago, yukishiro1 said:

It'll be interesting to see GW's next set of sales figures. Anecdotally from youtubers, interest in both 40k and AOS (40k more than AOS, but from a higher place to begin with) is down from its peak during the early months of lockdown. It probably doesn't help that 40k is an absolute hot mess right now. 

 

Wouldn't this be somewhat expected? If the hobby had a huge uptick in interest/demand due to people being stuck at home (and some cases, having spare disposible income) wouldn't it also make sense that once cinemas, theatres, nightclubs, concerts, sports events, etc all open up that the demand might drop off? 

Would need a comparision with other hobbies/games that saw an increase in demand during lock down to really see if it's due to 40k being to blame. 

 

 

[zilberfrid]

2 hours ago, Bosskelot said:

Entirely irrelevant to the actual topic of my post.

That's why I didn't quote you, it was just an opinion that came to mind at that time.

[JackStreicher]

3 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

It'll be interesting to see GW's next set of sales figures. Anecdotally from youtubers, interest in both 40k and AOS (40k more than AOS, but from a higher place to begin with) is down from its peak during the early months of lockdown. It probably doesn't help that 40k is an absolute hot mess right now. 

 

I can confirm this.
Sadly it appears that the New Battleomes aren't just better they are absurd - while many game mechanics have been implemented that counter any kind of counter play or that invalidate entire factions.

I've got this information from my brothers who play competetively only - they're beyond fed-up. Quote "This isn't the best 40K Edition ever it's close to the worst and it already feels like the Edition needs a hard-reset like 7th needed at its end"

To arc back to AoS - It seems like AoS is more and more 40k-ified and you can also see this trend in the current battletomes, however AoS is still better off (currently)

[Beliman]

Unpopular Kharadron Opinion but I think that's really popular overall:

• More ranged restrictions for everyone (cut ranged dmg if needed!! Yarrr).
• More charge buffs overall: I want to charge after leaving my skyvessel, as a true pirate!!

Maybe unpopular:

• Lord Magnate of Barak Mhornar should be called Long Drong, or better, it should be the same Long Drong because [reasons]! I know, I know... Slayers are not KOs business, but what about pirates? And everyone knows that we have better beer than your Magmalt Ale!!

Spoiler

 

5 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

To arc back to AoS - It seems like AoS is more and more 40k-ified and you can also see this trend in the current battletomes, however AoS is still better off (currently)

Not sure about that, I mean... we only have 2 battletomes and they doesn't feel like Slaan-71%winrate-nesh. At least that's my perspective.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Beliman

[JackStreicher]

37 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Unpopular Kharadron Opinion but I think that's really popular overall:

• More ranged restrictions for everyone (cut ranged dmg if needed!! Yarrr).
• More charge buffs overall: I want to charge after leaving my skyvessel, as a true pirate!!

Maybe unpopular:

• Lord Magnate of Barak Mhornar should be called Long Drong, or better, it should be the same Long Drong because [reasons]! I know, I know... Slayers are not KOs business, but what about pirates? And everyone knows that we have better beer than your Magmalt Ale!!

  Reveal hidden contents

Not sure about that, I mean... we only have 2 battletomes and they doesn't feel like Slaan-71%winrate-nesh. At least that's my perspective.

It's not about the win-rate. It's about bland rule designs with extreme powerspikes (Stormcast dragons, Cruleboyz shooting, Orruk Alpha-Strikes etc.)

[EccentricCircle]

13 hours ago, Orbei said:

Consider that D&D was created in the 70s and is only on 5th edition. 5th edition itself was released in 2014 and is still ongoing. Meanwhile, 40k is in it's 9th edition and AoS, which was only created in 2015, is in it's third edition. 

The game changes way too fast. New models and rules for them is great! But a battletome should last a decade and be supported during that time with tweeks if necessary to keep it up to date. Core rulesets should have longer than a 4 year lifespan. Between the short lifespan of editions and terrible power creep with new releases the landscape of the game changes rapidly. Probably great fun for tournament players but less so for people who get in a handful of games a year.

I absolutely agree with you that the short edition cycle for GW wargames is a major problem. I would like my books to be good for at least five years ideally.

That said D&D is perhaps not the best comparison, as its not really a comparable game.

I also feel the need to point out that while we're all merrily playing "fifth edition" Dungeons and Dragons, it is neither the fifth edition of the game, nor have there been five editions of the game.

5e is the fifth "full" edition of Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, however there have been between 2 and 4 "half editions" depending on how you count. 3.5 was the most famous, but 2e also had a revised edition, 4e had D&D Essentials, and many consider Unearthed Arcana to be "AD&D 1.5" in retrospect. That's on top of the Original edition of D&D (which wasn't the same thing as 1st edition AD&D). OD&D was updated as Basic/Expert D&D which went through approximately five iterations. So... while its true that even the shortest lived of those editions has been slightly longer running than a GW book cycle (and many of them overlapped) we are actually up to around the 14th version of D&D (and that's not counting spin offs and retroclones!)

[Noserenda]

9 hours ago, Orbei said:

Yeah, it's awful if GW lets it be awful. If they just update the rules for all factions periodically via FAQs or, preferably, fully digital rules offerings, it wouldn't be awful. It would be great!

I would love this! Unfortunately we get a system reset far more frequently than every decade.

 

We have never had an AoS system reset, (though arguably AoS is a Warhammer system reset) and 40k has only had 2 so no, they arent frequent A system reset means toss out all your old books its new rules time, most edition changes are tweaks and revisions 

So really, as Eccentric circle points out, D&D is even well ahead by your own admission

Digital rules are great and something GW should be supporting rather than trying to stop, but wargamers are still very tied into physical books and as mentioned getting stuck with a clunker sucks even with faqs and such, some design is so bad it cant be fixed with a points tweak.

[Bosskelot]

7 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

I can confirm this.
Sadly it appears that the New Battleomes aren't just better they are absurd - while many game mechanics have been implemented that counter any kind of counter play or that invalidate entire factions.

I've got this information from my brothers who play competetively only - they're beyond fed-up. Quote "This isn't the best 40K Edition ever it's close to the worst and it already feels like the Edition needs a hard-reset like 7th needed at its end"

To arc back to AoS - It seems like AoS is more and more 40k-ified and you can also see this trend in the current battletomes, however AoS is still better off (currently)

Eh, not really.

Admech are arguably the only strong faction right now that need severe re-writes. The other issues can be curtailed through points changes and even Admech themselves can be brute-forced back into reasonability by that method too (although it's not really ideal.)

The issue with 40k right now is the glacial pace of Codex releases while GW is also releasing endless supplements and crusade books to go along with things. Not only that but their actual regular balance patches are not so regular anymore which compounds all of the issues even further. Don't get me wrong; 40k at the highest competitive level is really, really unhealthy with certain Admech and one Ork build that you literally just concede to if you lose the roll-off for first turn. Other matches and games are much more reasonable though.

Again though, the issue is that they're releasing campaign and codex supplements for armies that don't have a Codex yet or haven't been FAQ'd to bring them up to date a little. CSM are still sitting there on 1 wound a year after loyalist Marines got their 2nd wound and a year after the loyalist chapters got Index FAQ's even though they had their supplements coming out in like, a matter of weeks. It's really bad optics on GW's part.

 

11 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

It'll be interesting to see GW's next set of sales figures. Anecdotally from youtubers, interest in both 40k and AOS (40k more than AOS, but from a higher place to begin with) is down from its peak during the early months of lockdown. It probably doesn't help that 40k is an absolute hot mess right now. 

 

I've sort of heard this too, but not directly from any youtubers themselves. Could you point to the ones who have mentioned it? I'd be interested in it.

[yukishiro1]

I don't have a written source. I remember Tabletop Titans mentioned it offhand in a stream a few weeks ago - which surprised me, they're generally very business savvy (not meant as a criticism) and it didn't seem like a great idea to tell people on air that they weren't getting the views they used to. It stuck in my mind precisely because it wasn't like them. I think it was Brian who said it, but I have no idea what video it was in. 

WintersSEO also went into it at greater length in a recent video - I think it's the one titled "what's going on?" but don't quote me on that.

Edited October 26, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Orbei]

3 hours ago, EccentricCircle said:

I also feel the need to point out that while we're all merrily playing "fifth edition" Dungeons and Dragons, it is neither the fifth edition of the game, nor have there been five editions of the game.

I considered someone would mention all of those when I wrote the post, but I don't think it detracts from the point. All of those mini editions were still the same core ruleset with updates. If we count such things as a change in edition we could just as easily count the addition of endless spells to AoS or new generals handbooks as new editions. 5th edition D&D is still 5th edition, which has been around longer than AoS as a whole. 

Different games but I like that design philosophy much more. AoS changes way too fast and lacks a cohesive design principle because of it. This is the unpopular opinion thread though so... 

[EccentricCircle]

1 minute ago, Orbei said:

I considered someone would mention all of those when I wrote the post, but I don't think it detracts from the point. All of those mini editions were still the same core ruleset with updates. If we count such things as a change in edition we could just as easily count the addition of endless spells to AoS or new generals handbooks as new editions. 5th edition D&D is still 5th edition, which has been around longer than AoS as a whole. 

Different games but I like that design philosophy much more. AoS changes way too fast and lacks a cohesive design principle because of it. This is the unpopular opinion thread though so... 

Oh I absolutely agree with you. D&D books also add a lot more to the fabric of the game than iterative wargame updates, which are often essentially the same book with a few numbers changed in the name of balance (which will never actually work).

I'm just a pedantic D&D collector who can't pass up the chance to tell people on the internet how many editions of D&D there have been!

[Beliman]

7 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

It's not about the win-rate. It's about bland rule designs with extreme powerspikes (Stormcast dragons, Cruleboyz shooting, Orruk Alpha-Strikes etc.)

Ummm, maybe I'm wrong, but the problem you are talking about is the "meta"builds used in competitive environments, also known as Cookie Cutter Lists.

I mean, that's the price you pay to jump on the competitive bandwagon , the arms race between friends that ends with a perfectly optimized builds that always follows your local meta. I'm not saying that's wrong, a lot of peope likes to find "meta-breaker" combos or just clash their perfect lists, but that's exactly what we always had: 1-dropZilfin lists, Changehosts lists,  Anvils of pew-pew-pewhammer lists, triple-keeper matrioska, etc...

I imagine that Dragons Rampage or Stormcasts Pew-Pew-Eternals are going to be good candidates to join the "meta" lists.

Even if I was one of them in 1.0, (60 arkanauts, 20 thunderes and 32 balloon boyz...), it wasn't for me. But I understand why some people loves (and follows) the competitive scene and I really respect their dedication.

 

[Neverchosen]

I think that people's obsession with lore prevents them from enjoying many aspects of the hobby. I already mentioned the adherence to colour schemes but I think this also effects list building and modelling. I know this because it even impacts myself I have mentioned that despite not liking Space Marines I am interested in making a hybrid Space Marine/Chaos Space Marine army but I am already annoyed by the comments of heresy and other tired jokes. Similarly, I am trying to incorporate a way of conveying the immortal aspect of Stormcast into my scheme when in reality I just want to paint some classical knights with some ancient styled helmets.  

I will take this a step further and state this is actually where I think the fun in developing the lore for your army stands. In finding places in which you can juxtapose or deconstruct the established canon of your army. Make your Idoneth a band trying to atone for stealing souls even if it cost them their lives, have your Dwarves have no love of gold and give generously from their craft putting a target on their back from profiteers and merchants, maybe your Flesh Eater Courts do not see them selves as the gentry but rather peasants locked in a perpetual moral revolution unwittingly taking the phrase eat the rich a little too literally, create an army of Orruks or Beasts of Chaos who wish only for peace and quite but are pursued for being monsters or mutants, or make a free guild army that are unwittingly agents of chaos.

Edited October 27, 2021 by Neverchosen

[JackStreicher]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Ummm, maybe I'm wrong, but the problem you are talking about is the "meta"builds used in competitive environments, also known as Cookie Cutter Lists.

I am not talking about that. Armies that get way too easy access to save stacking (+3 or 4 constantly) while dishing out way too many Mortal  Wounds.

One encounters them in a lot of casual lists as well since the access to those abilities is just too easy (Gnarlroot Treelord Ancient‘s Aura, the Hive Swarm, Mystic shield etc. Etc.)

The fact that save stacking is easy with three general abilities while there is no counter in the form of rend abilities. 
 

Shooting: It used to be an issue and it has become worse (unleash hell, even more MW shooting was added to the game)
 

Mortal Wounds in general: Their access is very unevenly distributed across armies. Spells that can annihalate entire tough Models or units

The feel bad games and moments stack up quickly.

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by JackStreicher

[EccentricCircle]

39 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

I think that people's obsession with lore prevents them from enjoying many aspects of the hobby. I already mentioned the adherence to colour schemes but I think this also effects list building and modelling. I know this because it even impacts myself I have mentioned that despite not liking Space Marines I am interested in making a hybrid Space Marine/Chaos Space Marine army but I am already annoyed by the comments of heresy and other tired jokes. Similarly I am trying to incorporate a way of conveying the immortal aspect of Stormcast into my scheme when in reality I just want to paint some classical knights with some ancient styled helmets.  

I will take this a step further and state this is actually where I think the fun in developing the lore for your army stands. In finding places in which you can juxtapose or deconstruct the established canon of your army. Make your Idoneth a band trying to atone for stealing souls even if it cost them their lives, have your Dwarves have no love of gold and give generously from their craft putting a target on their back from profiteers and merchants, maybe your Flesh Eater Courts do not see them selves as the gentry but rather peasants locked in a perpetual moral revolution unwittingly taking the phrase eat the rich a little too literally, create an army of Orruks or Beasts of Chaos who wish only for peace and quite but are pursued for being mutants, or make a free guild army that are unwittingly agents of chaos.

I love all of those ideas, but the Revolutionary Ghouls is the best!

[RexHavoc]

1 hour ago, Neverchosen said:

I think that people's obsession with lore prevents them from enjoying many aspects of the hobby. I already mentioned the adherence to colour schemes but I think this also effects list building and modelling. I know this because it even impacts myself I have mentioned that despite not liking Space Marines I am interested in making a hybrid Space Marine/Chaos Space Marine army but I am already annoyed by the comments of heresy and other tired jokes. Similarly, I am trying to incorporate a way of conveying the immortal aspect of Stormcast into my scheme when in reality I just want to paint some classical knights with some ancient styled helmets.  

I will take this a step further and state this is actually where I think the fun in developing the lore for your army stands. In finding places in which you can juxtapose or deconstruct the established canon of your army. Make your Idoneth a band trying to atone for stealing souls even if it cost them their lives, have your Dwarves have no love of gold and give generously from their craft putting a target on their back from profiteers and merchants, maybe your Flesh Eater Courts do not see them selves as the gentry but rather peasants locked in a perpetual moral revolution unwittingly taking the phrase eat the rich a little too literally, create an army of Orruks or Beasts of Chaos who wish only for peace and quite but are pursued for being mutants, or make a free guild army that are unwittingly agents of chaos.

I've always been lore/narrative over anything else. I love making up new lore for myself (I never expect people to like it, but I don't need them too) But I was once told I was ruining 40k as I was playing Skaven as a chaos force, for Epic 40k, when epic hadn't been been sold by GW for almost 10 years. I was surprised I was doing so much damage to the entire hobby, but hey! Here we are! 😁 *

Same guff from folk when I posted my slaanesh-cast, mostly because they are on squares (because we still play WFB & like oathmark) but also because people were so caught up with it being against 'lore'. (I never even tried to claim they were stormcast, fallen or otherwise. I just like the armour for them over the usual spikey & skull stuff of chaos)

My chaosdin overlords have mostly been left alone, but then they are mostly just dwarves with big shoulder pads, as I never got too far into the painting (Painting the Ironclad destroyed my soul- far too many buttons and dials and readouts which had I know there were so many before starting to paint them, I'd have left them alone in the first place!)

I gave up posting my timeline for my AoS campaign as there were complaints- some people thought it was too WFB and shouldn't be in AoS, and some people thought it was too AoS to be incorporating so much from WFB.


* I did have the last laugh. A couple of my space skaven models were featured as part of another article in a very popular warhammer fan magazine. I take great pride in my accomplishment, I single handedly ruined the entire 40k hobby. 



 

[Gitzdee]

I miss shooting with templates. 

[zilberfrid]

2 hours ago, RexHavoc said:

I've always been lore/narrative over anything else. I love making up new lore for myself (I never expect people to like it, but I don't need them too) But I was once told I was ruining 40k as I was playing Skaven as a chaos force, for Epic 40k, when epic hadn't been been sold by GW for almost 10 years. I was surprised I was doing so much damage to the entire hobby, but hey! Here we are! 😁 *

Same guff from folk when I posted my slaanesh-cast, mostly because they are on squares (because we still play WFB & like oathmark) but also because people were so caught up with it being against 'lore'. (I never even tried to claim they were stormcast, fallen or otherwise. I just like the armour for them over the usual spikey & skull stuff of chaos)

My chaosdin overlords have mostly been left alone, but then they are mostly just dwarves with big shoulder pads, as I never got too far into the painting (Painting the Ironclad destroyed my soul- far too many buttons and dials and readouts which had I know there were so many before starting to paint them, I'd have left them alone in the first place!)

I gave up posting my timeline for my AoS campaign as there were complaints- some people thought it was too WFB and shouldn't be in AoS, and some people thought it was too AoS to be incorporating so much from WFB.


* I did have the last laugh. A couple of my space skaven models were featured as part of another article in a very popular warhammer fan magazine. I take great pride in my accomplishment, I single handedly ruined the entire 40k hobby. 
 

I get all of that, except painting a myriad of buttons and dials.