"GW is not concerning themselves with game balance"

[N.I.B.]

-GW is not concerning themselves with game balance or competitive play in any respect.

If it wasn't clear for everyone after the Tyranid codex, it is now. More miserable hear-say here: natfka.blogspot.se/2014/01/an-interesting-conversation-with-gw-rep.html

-Mentioned how the Tau and Eldar books were mistakes in that they elevated expectations for the remaining 6th ed books. Said not to expect all (any) books to be quite on that level going forward. Mentioned how it's probably nice for "us" that the books were so strong. [brought up after i mentioned the tyranid book, escalation, dataslates.]

wat?

[Davor]

I guess I am ok with this. I understand GW is a subpar rules company that don't know how to write or edit their own material. All GW can do is copy ideas from other companies/movies/tv/books and nothing they do is original. They can make good miniatures, but for story and fluff, they can't do anything.

They did start to make a good story/fluff, but after 25 years, I don't think GW knows how to grow. They are stale, and boring, and not very Original. Once I accepted this, GW can't really disappoint me too much anymore. They can surprise me, maybe one day, but that hasn't happened in a long time. I have accepted what GW is. A mediocre story company with good expensive miniatures.

[biomassbob]

From that article supposedly coming from a GW employee "Supplements aren't designed with game balance in mind. They are designed with fun / cool in mind." I would disagree with this in that they are designed with making money, whether they are fun/cool or not. If GW can get players to buy a continuous increasing in cost dex and then get them to buy another and another ruleset for this or that character/additional rules they will get lots more money (unless this puts enough people off).

When I started in 4th edition and saw many of the wonky rules and the way GW approached things it seemed that they didn't care much about balance and/or just weren't good at it (or were unwilling to spend the time at it). When issues were raised about this or that problem the "Well you should have see X before. GW are getting better with their rules." Ah, was not to be.

For me, GW does continue to disappoint. The game has so much potential - it just needs a company that cares about making a good game/product. I have always hoped that GW collapses with the risk/hope that a good game company buys the IP or the risk that 40K is no more (although the community could do a much superior job in writing dexes - the problem would be acceptance since there would be a wide variety of opinions on what to do.

[Inquisitor Stingray]

Figured someone was going to post this eventually. The entire conversation paints a rather depressing, if unsurprising, picture of Games Workshop as a company. Still, it's very anecdotal and I'm not sure how a rep would know what rules the design team remember and don't remember writing. The pricing based on coolness is kind of funny as well.

It may be that people have been misled to expect Tau and Eldar to be the new powerlevel standard in terms of succeeding codices, but even so I don't think that explains the negative reception of Tyranids. Save for CSM codex, every other 6th edition codex seems to have been given much more attention and care than our recent book. I don't mean to refuel that debate, it's just that GW's acknowledement of the situation, does not remedy it in any way.

[monkeychuka]

Seems legit If they ever decided to focus on the competitive element and involve the community in balancing the game then people would come back in droves IMHO. 40k has the best background lore, the largest player base and the highest quality/variety of models. It just seems odd to neglect this facet of the game. Unless the 'grey beards' and tournament players form a small but vocal minority which don't actually affect sales all that much. In which case, carry on pitching to new, younger players.

[hornywingythingy]

Jan 26, 2014 20:53:24 GMT Inquisitor Stingray said:

Save for CSM codex, every other 6th edition codex seems to have been given much more attention and care than our recent book. I don't mean to refuel that debate, it's just that GW's acknowledement of the situation, does not remedy it in any way.

I'd say dark angels got a fairly lackluster rehash too tbh.....

[gigasnail]

painful reading.

[eskimo]

Oh man that's funny stuff. The comments too. Are people really that easily pleased/ naive?

I've been playing 6 to 9 months of tabletop gaming. And for me it's all about the fun/ casualness. But yet this new Codex is just meh. The previous dex was majorly unbalanced but way more fun.

Haruspex. Looks cool, sounds cool. Sits around all game. You roll one freakin dice for his massive tougne.

Harpies that can walk but can't walk.

Scything Talons that do NOTHING.

Instinct behavior that has 9 options of doing the same thing.

The writers not remembering what they suposedly wrote is just evidence of their dim-witedness.

Need i go on? And i'm a freakin noob for #/^$#^^# sake.

[yoritomo]

Yeah, that sounds about right.

GW has never really cared about game balance. It looked like they might be heading that direction back in early 4th edition when Andy Chambers was writing the rules, but that all ended when he left.

The folks who run GW still believe that GW is a beer and pretzel type of game. I don't think that's ever going to change.

[coredump]

I don't mind the concept, but I think balance and clean rules are most needed by *casual* gamers. Tourneys will have FAQ or comp or tweaks to fix problems. But if I go down to my FLGS I am stuck with what ever (please do not swear) GW puts out. Maybe I roll someone, maybe someone rolls me, maybe it is a balanced and fun game.
Or maybe we spend way too much time figuring out the 'grey' areas in the rules.

Yes, you can 4+ the rules issues, but the problem is when army lists are written with one understanding, and you may get completely boned otherwise.

Better rules, better balance... is needed for Casual gamers... not tourney gamers.

[mobugs]

Jan 27, 2014 1:25:35 GMT coredump said:

And don't you think there is a much greater majority of casual vs tourney players?

[t⊗theark]

I like playing for fun and story telling, playing a flashy game with cinimatic imagination fuel than I'm not too bothered by this.

I have fun a tournaments too, I have fun competing in a game and if the mechanics for that aren't their than Nurgle is my patron as I despair.

[jackedup]

I pointed this out before, on another thread. The CEO has based the strategy on the quality of their miniatures first, and the IP of the Warhammer universe. This is the entire reason that FFG is given the license to produce Warhammer games; GW acknowledges that rules are not their strong suit. Business wise, their decision does make sense -

Fact is, a large number of players are not tournament players, as mobugs points out. They get together maybe once a month for a quick bash, and aren't even likely to notice whether an army's broken. But THAT BEING SAID...

There is no reason for GW to take things to illogical extremes. They now have an extreme "casual vs. serious" view, and insist that one must exclude the other. The fact is, it's quite possible to do both. It's just not possible for GW's current team of designers to pull it off. If they would shrink their egos a bit, and let *some other company* (maybe FFG) write the rules, they could continue to sell their game and please both sides of the spectrum.

[coredump]

Jan 27, 2014 1:45:54 GMT mobugs said:

Jan 27, 2014 1:25:35 GMT coredump said:

And don't you think there is a much greater majority of casual vs tourney players?

Of course, but that isn't my point.

My point is that whenever people complain about balance and shoddy rules; it is assumed to be a 'tourney player' issue. My assertion is that balance is more important for the casual player... rules writing is more important for the casual player. When GW dismisses their poor quality by saying they aren't concerned about tourneys and tourney players... they are greatly missing the point. They are screwing over their *casual* players.

[WestRider]

I've actually found it much harder to play 40K casually in 6th than since 2nd Ed. There are just way too many ways to end up with lopsided games, often without even trying.

Clear, balanced Rules are in everyone's best interest. That's what keeps it an actual game, where our decisions in the game matter.