Sadly i was talking (writing actually) to Grovel3 :P

I don't see you being able to bring a better account to the table. Maybe you should let them be, after all they live there and you (probably) don't.

And if you do then I'm an ass and apologize :D

Yea I often get the same feeling. There's always that underlying diss in most Warmahordes propaganda. There is no need to prove PP is better than GW, just play the damn game and have fun. 40k is certainly a lot of fun too.

LOL I just laughed my ass off loud when I read the title. That's EXACTLY what I think about Warmahordes. Thumbs up!

Oh well this is just what I was thinking.

So I live in South America and there is no actual development, heck, not even a damn hobby centre anywhere in the whole subcontinent. But I still have to pay premium for 'Free' Customer Service "around the world". Funny that, I have yet to see a single red shirt here.

So the first world struggles with the results of 25 years of savage, unchecked liberalism and globalization, and we not only had to pay dearly in LIVES (starvation, poverty, lack of healthcare etc.) while they turned their backs on us, we ALSO have to bear the burden of GW's losses.

Good rules, a nicer company and such don't cut it for me: Warmahordes are played at the skirmish level. I don't give a rat's ass about a stupid bar brawl, it's armies that I want to command. One game system can't replace another, because of the scale of battles (and therefore, the general structure of the rules). I can't stand people everywhere dropping GW for Privateer Press like both are equivalent: it's not, and nothing will change in GW general policy if you switch systems.

Please, do finish the 'Back to Basics' series :)

Everything else is cool. We really appreciate your collective efforts :D

Cheers.

I believe we should approach this issue from a different perspective. First of all, context.

Warhammer 40k (and all other wargames for that matter) is not an abstract entity, but rather a game created and supported by a company in the UK, which has experienced massive growth throughout the 2000s and has just become rather standarized. If you look closely, fluff is playing an ever minor part in codex design these days. Codex authors are taking more liberties when introducing new units, characters, and bits of fluff, yet we must not forget that when designing new codices, fluff is still king. So no hope that Assault marines will be any good in the near future, as fluff does not like abrupt changes.

We must also take into account that for the past 3 years, the western world has been passing through one of the worst crisis in the history of capitalism, but more importantly the UK had been hit relatively hard. Those who hail from there, or who buy stuff from UK webstores may have noticed a flux in not only GW's but in general pricing, with the UK lifting and reapplying VAT charges. We've also had quite a few price hikes these last years. Bear with me, I'm almost done with this part.

Summarizing, Warhammer 40k is constrained by the economy, so if people don't buy minis, game's over for Games Workshop (lol redundancy). It is only logical that they go for the most popular ranges when the time for and update comes. Imo Dark Eldar were a high stake.

It would seem, also, that GW has invested a lot in new designing equipment and is anxious to show every other company and player that they can do a hell of a job now with their new kits - a tendency that started with the Apoc-size kits (Baneblade, Stompa), the Stormraven and such being the latest examples of this (not to mention the new SW and BA boxes). Again, the strongest choice would be to give these new toys to popular armies. The advantages of this, in my opinion, are threefold: First, it is safer to say that the new kits would be bought a lot. Second, it ensures almost everyone will have a look at these kits (even if they do not own them) and say 'wow!' - that's a show-off of skill. And third, these new kits can increase the popularity of said armies, bolstering the playerbase even more.

I'm done with context, honest! next up, why I think there's no balance problem in 5th Ed.

Codices have two kinds of 'rules' which I will call 'hard' and 'soft'. The main difference between them is, you can do mathhammer with 'hard rules', but with 'soft rules', you cannot. 'Hard rules' are statlines and wargear options , and points cost. 'Soft rules' are USRs, unit special rules, FOC location, and overall codex context.

As I see it the problem with the later codices is everyone focusing on the 'hard rules' and completely ignoring the 'soft' part. Before GH, a lot of people thought CSM were the sh!t because they had CCWs. Yeah, how about the rest of your codex is shameful. Now, many claim that SM have been superceded by the SW for all the well known reasons. Yet the same error keeps showing up. What about combat tactics? are all C:SM list portable to C:SW and to which degree? What about giving up an Elites slots to start with? Are we spending more or less for unit equivalents and the same or similar wargear?

Lots of people miss this point. If it's not numbers, it doesn't matter. Obviously they are wrong.

Looking better now :D good rant btw, backed with tons of facts.