Knight Titans

[Primarch]

The difference between buying minis for display and for gaming is one of quantity. Most painters aren't going yo buy 40 of the same model, they will buy 1. Rules DO drive sales as they convince players that they need lots of identical looking minis.

[The Other Dave]

Note that I said rules were secondary, not completely unimportant. GW's rules tend to be just "good enough" to sell boatloads of models, but they are not, by any stretch, as good as they could be - as in, balanced, clear, well-written, etc. etc.

(Personally, I agree that better rules would be better for the hobby, but "miniatures as the core business model" is pretty well-documented as corporate GW's outlook.)

[me_in_japan]

Whether it's a 50/50 split or a 99/1 split, as a business that non-painty proportion of customers is one that I'm interested in, since they're unrelated to the painty crowd. I don't follow how listening to tourney gamers would have resulted in no Knights. I've never seen a tourney player say "I wish XXX didn't exist", just "I wish XXX had decent rules, if it did, I would buy one". The painty crowd is unaffected by the rules, as they're buying based in a different set of criteria.

[Primarch]

I would guess that the painty crowd will want the new Knights as they do look rather spiffy.

[AndrewGPaul]

Whether it's a 50/50 split or a 99/1 split, as a business that non-painty proportion of customers is one that I'm interested in, since they're unrelated to the painty crowd. I don't follow how listening to tourney gamers would have resulted in no Knights. I've never seen a tourney player say "I wish XXX didn't exist", just "I wish XXX had decent rules, if it did, I would buy one". The painty crowd is unaffected by the rules, as they're buying based in a different set of criteria.

I've heard a lot of moaning that all these new add-on codexes and dataslates, as well as Escalation, are "upsetting the meta" and "making it impossible to plan for tournaments" or "I can't make an 'all-comers' list for pick-up games". In those cases, the preference is clear - they don't want any of that stuff. I'm also seeing threads asking if there are too many armies. The implication there is that if there are, then GW shouldn't be adding new stuff like this.

Thankfully, it seems clear that the designers are ignoring them - or at least, leaving them to enforce their own restrictions - and making more cool shiny things.

[Miguelsan]

Apparently the rumour mill grinds slowly but grinds!
I stand corrected and announce that according to our spies a Codex for the Knights will be available for preorder on saturday. Will it be full with units and flashbacks to epic? That we will see.

M.

PS: Many Bothan Spies were lost to get you this information.

[Auxryn]

GW should by no means make themselves a slave to the tournament crowd, but no matter how tiny a sliver of total players they are they can still be useful. The tournament-oriented groups can plumb the tactical depths of the game much more quickly and comprehensively than any in-house playtesting, which game designers should be making use of to make the game better.
They should be asking: What rules are unclear? What needs to be addressed in a FAQ? What units are going unused, and why?
Every codex has forgotten units that no one likes. What would they have to do to make you buy Flayed Ones? That is what they should be finding out.

Likewise, it would probably help the game if they made the Grimoire of True names grant a flat 3+ invulnerable, made a rule stating that Riptides can't be joined by ICs, made the 'Through Boldness, Victory' a once-per-game ability, and did something about Seer Councils and Beast Packs. It would probably upset some people who had to change their armies, but it would likely make for more interesting games all round.

There will always be stupid moves from any company, and there will always be nerd rage from any fanbase, but better rules and a more interesting game should help everyone.

P.S. Hooray for Bothans! Also, why would anyone ever employ a Bothan?

[Primarch]

As a casual gamer (ie I don't attend big tournaments nor do I run copy/paste spam lists of the latest flavour), I also find the dataslate add-ons and escalation rules a bit much, mainly because of the 'buy to win' effect they have. It's not something people here are too concerned about facing as most of us are of the same mindset, which is something I am happy about really. I think that the new add ons can be good if you run a narrative game or want a challenge, but in general terms, it's not for me.
But anyway, like it or not, the rules are what they are and I don't blame GW for not listening to the various naysayers and doom mongers out there. At the same time, being aware of what all your customers are saying and what they want is never bad for a business.

I probably won't be buying a Knight as they are expensive and I will probably never get it painted anyway. It's a lovely piece of kit, but that money could be better spent elsewhere.

[Primarch]

P.S. Hooray for Bothans! Also, why would anyone ever employ a Bothan?

Because they will send wave after wave of their men to gather even the smallest speck of information regardless of the cost in lives. Also, you never need to pay them retirement or severance pay.