Re: [GZG] GW

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l"Wh
at would you rather have 10 figures that are moulded lumps of lead,
weapons welded to bodies"

Isn't that a description of Historical Miniatures? The "customizing
ability" only really matters in a WYSIWYG environment

Michael Brown
mwsaber6@msn

From: John Tailby 
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 3:23 AM
To: gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu 
Subject: Re: [GZG] GW

Ryan, I played that same edition of epic. The problem I found was that
some of the points sytems for the units were really out of balance. Too
many of the units used special rules, a fault of several GW games at
that time, such that the units that used the basic rules were in the
minority.

I didn't make the transition to the epic 40,000 edition, I got more into
40k about that time. As I understand it it wasn't compulsary to have the
basis on the strips and the square bases would work just as well.

The new Rhino kit is a substantially better kit than the old one. It is
a lot more detailed and comes with a host of accessories. I remember
when GW figures came 5 in a blister for 2.50 pounds call that 20 years
ago. Inflation would roughly double that price in todays dollars. 

What would you rather have 10 figures that are moulded lumps of lead,
weapons welded to bodies, little ability to pose and convert or 10
multipart plastic kits with plenty of posability, alternate weapon
options and far more detail and 3d aspects. Is it worth more to pay for
better models?

I never liked the Squat models or Dwarfs for WFB either, sort and
bearded isn't anything I identify with, so I wasn't impacted to the same
as you when GW stopped supporting the Squat race. Loyal Squat fans have
never let them forget their decision to cease development for squats and
it's become a sort of an urban legend at every convention presentation
they give for someone to as about squats.

While your tale is a valid cautionary one, it highlights an event that
happened once over 10 years ago. About the same time GW simplified the
game and dropped support for some units like the Imperial robots. So
there's no guarantee that every unit will have special rules forever.
However there's quite often an alternate unit whose rules you can use. 

I think GW made an unpopular change in the nature of the Chaos armies
recently.

As frustrating as some of GWs decisions are from time to time, worse
things have happened to me with other games. I had a 25mm Aztec army and
a 15mm one for WRG 7th edition ancients. When they changed the rules to
DBM the army I had ceased to exist.

I got into Warzone it started out as an intersting game of corporate
war. Then the game imploded models came out with increasingly stupid
rules and increasingly powerful abilites making the existing models
obsolete. Then after released a second edition of the game they went
bankrupt.

I bought several fleet boxes of B5 ships from Mongoose. They are
expensive and contained manufacturing flaws. Now Mongoose has pulled the
game and there are no more models or rules.

So while it is not very nice to have the army you collect be
oblilterated by a new version fo the rules, GW are by no means the only
culprit in this area. It seems to be a risk of gaming.

The same thing happens in shopping. Buy a suit wear if for 18 months and
go back for a second pair of trousers only to find that model isn't
supported and you can't get a replacement pair to match.

Withdrawl of product support isn't just a GW issue it's a feature of all
commercial arrangements. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l