Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
This is from the Bolter and ChainswordSo I guess we aren't allowed to complain anymore about the balance between forces or the rule issues. Oh well.Quote:
I talked to Jervis a bit on Saturday, after the gaming of the day was over.
I asked what sort of playtesting did they do, what sort of process was involved (I'm a software developer, and there are many many parallels between game development and software development, so I'd think they could benefit a lot from the sorts of process type things that we go through with our QA cycles), and what was their thought about 'extreme' builds.
He told me, unapologetically, that they don't test extreme builds, that they don't care about tournament gamers when they write the rules because we only account for 5% of the gamers out there, and that they had no interest in developing better rules for tournament play. we tournament players should "understand that [we] exist on the far fringes of the hobby", and that we should expect problems related to this. Quoted/Paraphrased.
The emphasis in their testing was, in Jervis's words, about whether they had fun, and was focused on the sorts of armies that you see in W.D. battle reports. He said that he doesn't believe anyone who says one army always wins or can't win, and said that he believes that the 'unbeatable' build actually only wins about 55-60% of its games, and that the army that can't win actually only loses about 40-45% of its games.
And, I brought up how other game companies (WotC, Eurogames, video-fighting games) have managed to achieve systems that work for both casual players and tournament players, and he replied that they're just not interested. That as a game developer, he wants to write games that show you how to play the game the way that they do, and that their failure is a failure to communicate to us how they play, not actually a failure of the rules. He even said that they don't even look at FAQs when they playtest in the studio, because they all 'just know' how it is suposed to be played.
So, yeah, disenheartened to be sure. It's one thing to note that things don't work well. It's another to be told by the lead developer that, not only do they not believe there is a problem, but that even if there was, they wouldn't want to fix it. They want a game that you play in your basement with a beer or two, not a game that works in a competative environment.
I am right 94% of the time, why worry about the other 3%.
That's one guy in the dev team. There're probably some there that try to balance it out, too.
That is if that the report is both accurate and unbiased, though I assume it is.
Assuming this is all true, I would respect GW more for treating their customers like adults who can handle rules disputes. While some people might look at it as a lack of support, I'd have to ask them this: Do you really willingly play against/with folks who need to have the law laid down?
What some seem to forget is that table top games are for building community. Its up to each player to build theirs as a friendly environment where rules queries/disagreements don't become major disasters.
"It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous."
---Ogvai Ogvai Helmshrot, Jarl of Tra, VI Legion Astartes
I agree completely with this. Balancing can RUIN a game! If everything is overbalanced, all of the uniqueness and fun of it ends up dimishing and fading away. Having a general balance rather than a strict one allows for creativity.
If we can't play like adults and actually play for fun not for some crazed desire to win despite the rules and loopholes then maybe this isn't the right hobby to involve yourself in.
I call BS on WotC being competitive and casual friendly. That relies on the cooperation of the players, just like GW's testing. I give them much respect for adhering to the principle that these games are designed as fun between friends, and power gamers need to just soak in the pool of their own crapulence.
Which is exactly what it should be!They want a game that you play in your basement with a beer or two, not a game that works in a competative environment.
A business strategy driven by an ideal. Who'da'thunk'it.
To elaborate on my earlier reply, I think it's absolutely fantastic that someone from GW has said something like this. I agree 100% with everything he says and the fact that he's given the middle finger to all the rules lawyers and power gamers out there made me so happy.
How they play is exactly how the game should be played, A few mates getting together and having a laugh. GW have given us this fantastic system, which we can fully customize to our own tastes, and told us to have fun with it, which is exactly what they're doing! Who cares if you don't play a rule exactly as RAW? That's not the point.
For many power gamers, and I know I'm generalising here but I don't care, WH is all they know. If they aren't good at that then they don't have anything. It's very important that they become the best with their army and they live for RAW and FAQs. Maybe if you find yourself like this then it might be an idea to actually take a break from the hobby, figure out what's important, and then get back into it with a much more relaxed approach.
Basically, what I'm saying is that WH games should end like this...
not like this...
When I first got into 40k, it was as a hobby, not a game. I wanted to build models, but I wasn't about to build and paint a big honkin' battleship or something just to have it sit on the shelf and collect dust and have somebody occasionally see it and say, "Hey, nice battleship!" I wanted models that would still have a use even after they were built.
Don't get me wrong. I love the game, too. I just look at it as a hobby, meaning the building, converting, and painting are just as much fun to me as the gaming aspect.
I find the "power gamers" out there are not just a pain in the neck to play against. I feel sorry for them. They clearly don't get what it's really supposed to be about.