Jump to content

stratigo

Members
  • Posts

    1,086
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by stratigo

  1. KO is not as good as it used to be and a lot of the top KO players are busy in testing mode to try and find the new thing A lot of seraphon players likely haven't adapted into the new seraphon meta and away from skink spam But you're looking too much at winrate and not the twip.
  2. He's trying to avoid a CnD to preserve the channel. Removing all the content would defeat the purpose and he may as well forge forward until GW tells youtube to burn it all down. He's defending what he's already created by promising to not make any more. GW could still go at him, and youtube would comply. I think they'd lose in court because it is parody and GW would have to prove harm, but TTS didn't compete with any products GW made, until WH+. That's actually the crux of what people are missing is that GW before WH+ didn't have a legal argument about a product they produce being harmed by animations, because they didn't create animations or other television. Now they do (well soon), so they can make this argument. I have little hope for WH plus because of how much a trashfire their 40k app is and what I know of the internal chaos revolving around that mess. I hope Brandt can figure it out, but GW is trying to cut paying for quality here and rely on, uh, "passion". Again. Not sure that will fly with programmers. GW might have to buck up and offer real money to get a real product and not a trashfire I suspect they are offering the animators they brought on board peanuts and relying on their passion for the hobby too. Because that is just... what GW seems to do. They're like most entertainment companies in this.
  3. I think people are overvaluing gotrek again just like they did when he first appeared. He is a 4 inch moving ****** kicker. But 4 inches with limited tricks to increase that isn't enough. He also is super vulnerable to mass damage one shooting which is still quite popular.
  4. Did you just not pay attention to the whole discussion of utilitarianism. I mean, I get most people don't really think about ethical frameworks to approach actions and go with their inbuilt gut socialized into them by their community. But, like, strive to rise above it mate. If you want to argue on my level you have to do one of two things. 1. Try and convince me that Utilitarianism is a bad ethical system and an alternative is a better one 2/ Try and convince me that on a balance, GW is producing more happiness, pleasure, good, than suffering, sadness, or harm. The first is nearly impossible, you'd have to probably have a degree in philosophy to even approach the argument. I have put a lot of thought in ethical frameworks. The second is far more possible, though if you don't think utilitarianism is a proper ethical framework, then it probably becomes fruitless to try in argue in a framework you don't believe. Most people kind of reflectively fall back onto some level of egoistic utilitarianism, where they seek the most good for themselves and their immediate community, albeit often they are very very wrong what is good even for their community. I am using a easily recognizable ethical framework here. This isn't hard. Corporations are evil is not the axiom of utilitarianism. Corporations causing more suffering then benefits is just my perception of the facts for an entity like GW. If you have facts supporting you, by all means, counter them. Heck I'd love to hear that most GW employees are in fact paid much better then Hewitt and several others I am aware of. I'd love to know that the animators now working for GW will be looking at paychecks in excess of what they could make independently, with the passion and creativity they brought to the IP. Also, I attacked you because you are using a far right source that does things like, and I quote from its website, say "Biden Nominee’s Eco-Terrorism Problem Isn’t Going Away". It is an utterly unreliable source and your use of it indicates either ignorance of it and unwillingness to do about 5 minutes worth of googling (seriously, just follow the sources back. It's easy and you should always do it), or a belief they are a valid source and an attempt to stealth in what would likely be an extremely unpopular ideology here. This is the egg on your face mate, don't use these kinds of sources. Make sure the sources you are using are reliable before you use them. People probably wouldn't get it if I started using the words pleasure and pain seriously in discussions of ethics (which is what utilitarianism defines itself on). And might think it has something to do with sex even, which would be funny, but it doesn't.
  5. You could always kill a monster hero before if the opponent misplayed, or you outmaneuvered them. Only a handful of armies could accomplish that kill without any, well, skill involved. Now these heroes are unpunishable, you can be as reckless and play utterly poorly and it doesn't matter, most armies just can't kill your hero monster. Except for a slightly smaller group of mindless point and click armies that are unaffected. What cranking the defensiveness of heroes to the moon does is reward being bad at the game in the same way giving a shooting army teleports and mortal wound shooting does.
  6. I mean, the only things that can be evil are like, three of the biggest mass murders in human history? Not very much raises to the level of the holocaust or the GLF mate. If that's the metric for evil, then there's not much that is evil huh? I don't think you understand utilitarianism though. It's a difficult philosophy to follow and people often use it to justify evil under the idea that it will be good eventually, if you ignore the externalities. But that's the thing, utilitarianism is abou thte externalities, not just intended effects. Intentions don't matter, results do, all the results. An individual's happiness can outbalance a group provided the satisfaction outways a collective suffering or sadness (this is dramatically difficult to measure). But there's also no such thing as an atomized individual. Every action taken will ripple through a community. A happy individual will make their loved ones happy as well. But also, the group DOES usually outweigh an individual, because satisfying one individual and one individual only usually comes at the cost of a group, and, like, you tell me why that is Moral? Utilitarianism is about doing good and minimizing harm. And companies are about maximizing profit and ignoring everything else. It's why people are literally dying in fires on the west cost. No hyperbole, corporations have literally killed people in a fire. People are burning to death because of the results of global warming right now. And this is because of the profit motive. People dying in a fire makes more money then changing oil infrastructure for oil companies. So they lobby for more people dying in a fire. GW's evil is of course less, but, well, they have the same motivation and press a smaller suffering onto their employees (and fans) economically. And this is evil.
  7. they didn't though. Only certain armies could frontload all that damage, and several of them can STILL do that. It kicked, like, KO down. But the snek lists and tzeentch don't care.
  8. Okay, I keep seeing this as a defense. Do people not know how youtube works? Alfabusa has to take a proactive step because if GW DO CnD him, the entire channel gets torched and everything is gone. The whole channel. Taking a proactive stance is the only chance he has to the rest of the channel unless you people think he can afford a years long legal battle with a billion dollar corporation. GW knows what a chilling effect is. These comparisons always fall apart because a company is not one man making art in their garage. Kantian ethics is a bad system to base your ethics around and is just used to justify making things worse for the have nots and protecting the haves. Hmmm, Sarouan trying to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the tools to petition for change using a website created by a non profit created by a sleazy corporate frontman? The irony. Do some digging and you'll find that your website is created by dudes funded by the tabacco industry to petition for deregulation in America's food industry. The whole group exists to advocate for deregulation of business. EG, it's right wing corporatists BS, so not a huge shock it would be your source. I welcome anyone to look up Richard Berman, the man behind CORE (which is behind the so called activism facts.com) So, two things. First, Alfabusa isn't in the UK Second, the patreon system can be used as a vendor, but often isn't. He's making money, but not selling. Not sure if this would be a meaningful distinction GW is evil in the same way most corporations are incentivized to do evil. Evil as defined in a utilitarian sense of doing more harm then good. What GW does to its employees is evil. But it's a common evil we as a society look away from because we are so used to it. But that doesn't make it not evil
  9. The problem iz that the balance is such a mess that unleash hell is the only thing buoying shooting against the spate of three plus save hero monsters that are rocking the edition. Any melee unit with less then a three plus save is almost not viable now. This is very true. But it is also super discouraging to build and paint and army and do nothing but lose. New players will just stop. It's only us whales that will stick with it the year or three before our stuff is good again, or invest in another army entirely.
  10. Maybe they all play idk and think everyone is waiting for the asf tide to kick in
  11. Everyone remembers the crimes of communism. No one attributes the crimes of capitalism to it. there's several famines in India on the feet of the HEIC and the Raj for example.
  12. It seems to me you are mostly arguing with your own conscience. This is, again, a forum about GW. There are companies I think should be absolutely destroyed, their assets siezed, and their infrastructure demolished (Mostly oil companies), but GW isn't one of them, and like, how far do you think a thread would go if I started talking about how awful, say, BP is? You are mostly qualifying any criticism to, far as I can tell, feel better about participating in the system. But, also, you don't have a choice to participate or not in any realistic measure, so this tension is all internal here.
  13. XD. I think you have decided what I post says different things then what I actually say because there's no connection. I indeed said people shouldn't feel the need to stop buying from GW (eg try to destroy it). But I guess you missed that. Also, it is GW that makes those decisions, because the people who make those decisions are the ones that decide what GW does and does not do. No designer has much or any say in the way the company is run.
  14. This is a forum about GW games and going "Well everyone does it" Starts to sound like a defense of bad practices of GW by trying to dismiss them. No, GW commits to bad labor practices. That such bad practices are industry or even society wide doesn't excuse every individual company of those practices. It gets to a point where you can't talk about literally any company's abuses because "they all do this". People better grasp real concrete identifiable events. Statistics make people's eyes gloss over. Each story is important because people identify with other people and not a faceless mass.
  15. Everyone should be paid more then that. And there is more then enough money in the system to do that too.
  16. I mean, society hasn't realized teaching children is a job actually worth paying much for, so I have little hope for creative work.
  17. I'm going to assume you struggle because of how bad it is and not because you think Hewitt came out to just lie (in a way that's easily disproven if GW cares even a little bit) He actually mentioned he made less then store managers (since he did that job too and was paid less to be a writer) I mean.... far as we know. I dread literally any entertainment company coming out with a "Yeah we drive female employees to suicide" story these days. I can only hope wargaming industry isn't the same level of cesspit video game companies are. But the compensation thing here is a big ol' echo of the same nonsense that goes on in video game companies. Makes you worry bout the animators they brought into the fold huh?
  18. I debated strongly on making this thread cause, like, it'll obviously go bad as these sorts of threads have a tendency to so shortly after a tangentially related "GW business practices" got closed. But I also can't in good conscious let people consume in ignorance or easily feign ignorance of business issues in the product we all enjoy. Especially considering some of the gross ignorance some people have used in defense of GW's business practices. James Hewitt reveals how much GW paid him. And it ain't much at all. Further he reveals a culture (one incredibly common in all industries) of discouragement in discussing your salary and seeking better compensation for the work you do. This is the reality of working as a creative in GW. The people who make the games we play are paid wages that barely scate past the poverty line. James Hewitt made, roughly 27 thousand dollars (according to a quick google of the modern exchange between pound and dollar) a year to write hit after hit. When I say GW creatives should be better compensated and have more say, this is why. And this sort of stuff isn't hard too find out if you are active in any of the same places. Next time you are at a con (hopefully in the not to distant future this will be possible) drinking with GW creative staff at the bar, ask em how much they made. The numbers will shock you. If they aren't too scared to tell you. This isn't an enjoinder to stop buying or playing GW games. There's no entertainment to consume that doesn't have these sorts of problems and expecting people to suffer without entertainment to do absolutely negligible damage to companies that all do this sadly doesn't really help. But don't consume in ignorance that the money you pay goes into the pockets of the people who make the games you love. It largely does not. Do not make the argument that supporting GW is supporting the designers. It largely is not. I am sick and tired of people apologizing on behalf of GW with the argument that we have to support the people working there. GW doesn't support the people working there.
  19. Combo dwarves already have 3 distinct behemoths Warclans didn't get a new one either when it was combined. It depends on if the combo comes with a full release of other dwarves or not I suppose.
  20. Three posts are pretty much asking the same thing, so I'll just answer them with this one. GW is not a person. It's not a collection of individuals. It's not even the shareholders really. It's a legal entity that exists to own things. It doesn't make things, it owns things other people make, on behalf of its investors, but most of the investors don't have a strong connection to even the day to day operations of the company, much less make things for it. When someone says GW makes something, they are doing a shorthand of "A team of someone's in GW has made something and GW pays them some amount of compensation for owning their work". I feel like this is basic economics here. This component doesn't even have a moral judgement attached, it's a strict statement of fact. GW the company exists to hold the IP and tools of production for a labor force. The labor force produces things using the owned IP and tools. That's capitalism. That's just capitalism. I don't get how this is confusing people. Capitalist realism indeed, you struggle to see into even the basic workings of the system. Now, I DO, obviously, have a moral judgement. And that judgement is that GW using its power of ownership extracts more wealth then I think is moral from the people working for it, and can (and has done so) use that concentration of wealth as a tool to stifle and manipulate small creators out of markets. Both strictly legally and not so strictly legally. And, this being a thread about GW IP rules, the imbalance between a corporation of the size of GW (who is obviously far from the biggest corporation in the world) and an individual or even small group is vast, and the law does NOT adequately bridge it, or even really try that hard to in terms of IP rights. GW has MORE protection under the law then any animator on youtube, and this sucks. This is bad. And they all have to hope that GW simply doesn't exercise its power to destroy them, which is can do at will, and can do so largely regardless of the law, a law that already exists to benefit wealthier entities in the first place. It is a bad world where one's livelihood, or even just hobbies, exist on the whim of a powerful impersonal entity right? If you want me to get into what I think GW should do in regards to labor, I can, but that wasn't the point of this thread. GW manages a small measure of vertical integration in that they own the process from design to production. That's not super uncommon in wargaming, though GW of course has a dominating edge over most companies that produce both IP and models. And it's not really... material? A lot of companies vertically integrate to own the IP and means of production through various steps. But, again, IP thread, so focus of the IP part of it. Also, you're right, GW does employ, though I was using the term mostly to mean both. They also still hire on this distinction (eg, hire for a long term position, verse hire for a set task for those not knowing what it is). GW does participate readily in the gig economy. They should be paid more and have some controlling stake in what they create and what they use to create it actually. But, dude, this isn't the labor rights thread. It's the IP thread. +++ MOD EDIT +++ Please don't insult other members
  21. I doubt dwarves are going to get a behemoth. Maybe a mecha suit for grombrindel to ride, but I doubt it
  22. I mean, large corporations steal the IP of individual creators all the time :D. I do think Europe (and by extension, the UK) does a better job than America are protecting smaller creators from predatory companies. GW's run afoul of this in the pat actually. I mean the story is actually usually "The person that actually makes things of creative value has that thing they made bought out by the boring money guy, often for far less then it is actually worth, because the boring money guy knows how to manipulate money and has few morals, and the creative simply doesn't" But, you know, I wish GW would use all that hiring power they got to hire people who actually know how to make an app. Cause like, it's a comedy of errors in there from what I hear from people who know someone working on it. GW the business doesn't make anything. It hires people that makes things for it, who do NOT see a equal return for the things that they make proportional to what the people who own, but have no involvement in, GW make. Thus it is not actual fairness to equate GW, the corporation that holds IP, to a creator who creates an IP themselves and thus owns it. The actual reality is that GW has more protections afforded to it de facto, and even de jure, then an individual creator. The law does not protect them equally, it protects GW more then any individual. I would not be nearly as critical if we had equal IP protection in fact as well as in law, but that's not the world we live in. The world we live in is that a corporation, by dint of its resource advantage and ability to pressure politicians, has more rights then any individual creator. This is just the facts, and like, yes we can accept this is true, but it kind of stands to be commented upon quite harshly because, pardon my french, it's ******. GW commits to a lot of hilariously anti consumer things mate. Like, a lot a lot. And again, the law treat an entity like GW with far more even handedness in actual reality then you indie animator. Honestly I am waited on baited breathe to see if they try to shut down alfabusa, because he has the clearest source of non review based fair use I have ever seen via parody. But I can guarantee to you if GW goes at him, he's done, no matter what the law protects. I mean maybe I am vastly overestimating the amount of knowledge people have, but I feel like y'all know that larger, wealthier entities are better protected under the law then smaller, poorer entities. You don't seriously think the law is actually equal right? In practice or in writing. I mean, I did post the link to capitalist realism, but I didn't think people fell this hard into it to think that the system is truly strictly fair to literally everyone because this is so blatantly not the case.
  23. Luckily a lot of AoS is dictated by either teleports or mega speed. Like, warclans will literally be right in the foxes' face no matter how much they run
×
×
  • Create New...