New Knight Castellan Revealed!

[Marshal Reinhard]

Regardless, I think something can be said of the tone used. The more humble and laid back the tone the more likely someone is going to maintan an open mind as they read it. Making suggestions is all fine, requesting clarification or information even better, and pointing out inconsistencies like with how the armigers were originally advertised to us vs now, i think is very poignant. But be vary of going off on how worthless they are now, or how pointless you think they are or similar

 

Armigers are positively a steal right now points wise, maybe the though process was that they were too cheap, so they compensated by removing CP generation. We don't really know. Let's no assume malice or imply incompetence, well ever, but especially not before we know what they reason on the issue.

 

Oh and more varied letters will surely produce better results too.

 

(And I'm not saying anyone anywhere has been rude or anything, I'm just saying in general this is a case where the more humble, less expectant approach is probably better)

[Stray]

Fully agreed.

[CommodusXIII]

 

I don't think it's about making demands, it's about pointing out an issue in the rules that can affect people to a higher degree of detriment than we believe was thought through, and also pointing out an inconsistency with a statement that they'd recently made.

 

 

Feedback is definitely important.  This, however:

 

 

 

I for one will be encouraging players in my area to delay purchasing any of the new models until this issue is resolved favorably.

 

comes off as demanding and entitled.  Compare to the original version:

 

 

I really want to buy the new armiger models, but right now I'm holding back for these reasons, as the lance rule discourages me from running them.

 

Regardless, I'd encourage people to write their own letters rather than recycling/editing Mushkilla's excellent message.

[chapter master 454]

Spamming the same basic letter and making demands isn't going to be as effective as you think.

 

You would be surprised how powerful speaking up is compared to shouting about something. GW have shown of recent a willingness to listen to feedback as they have shown in beta testing new rules into the game to help address some issues like the smite change (and notice how it wasn't the same rule between its initial reveal and then its official update to the game). Within this, it points to that if given proper feedback GW will listen and consider what they do. They didn't need to implement the big FAQ nor yearly chapter approved into the cycle as those cost money that could of went towards new releases that likely draw in more customers yet there it is, the big FAQ update part of the cycle even brought along with it point changes in an attempt to address some balance issues that were raised in the game.

 

We aren't making demands, we are making requests that if they could consider and think about when releasing the FAQ regarding knights then that is all we ask, for them to consider our opinions and if it doesn't work it would be nice for them to let us know why. Simple Dialogue between the community and company can make a much stronger product: the community can test what the company makes far more extensively than the company can ever dream, conceive or plan for while the company has the designers and staff that can internalise those critiques of the systems and use them to further their understanding of what makes the game great and what didn't work out.

 

We only fix the wrongs when both do the civil thing: the consumer speaking about the problem and the company listening about the problem. They don't need to fold to every request, merely listen and understand what people feel is wrong.

[CommodusXIII]

I didn't say that you shouldn't write to GW.  I said that you should right your own words, rather than sending them edited versions of the same letter.  Also, that there's a way to do it respectfully instead of antagonizing them.  The latter is less likely to be taken seriously.

[Stray]

 

 

I don't think it's about making demands, it's about pointing out an issue in the rules that can affect people to a higher degree of detriment than we believe was thought through, and also pointing out an inconsistency with a statement that they'd recently made.

 

 

Feedback is definitely important.  This, however:

 

 

 

I for one will be encouraging players in my area to delay purchasing any of the new models until this issue is resolved favorably.

 

comes off as demanding and entitled.  Compare to the original version:

 

 

I really want to buy the new armiger models, but right now I'm holding back for these reasons, as the lance rule discourages me from running them.

 

Regardless, I'd encourage people to write their own letters rather than recycling/editing Mushkilla's excellent message.

 

 

I don't disagree, and I personally wouldn't use that wording. I do get your point, but he also has a point, and a right to express it in that way. Stating that he feels strongly enough to boycott something and encourage others to the same, is certainly not a demand.

 

He's stating 'You told me this unit would be useful in this way, it isn't, thus I don't have a use for it right now and cannot justify buying it. I will point this out to others.'

[CommodusXIII]

Again, I didn't say anything about what anyone can or can't do.  He can be as antagonistic as he'd like.  He's just less likely be be listened to than if he approached it constructively and respectfully - threatening a boycott isn't either of those.

[Stray]

Again, I didn't say anything about what anyone can or can't do.  He can be as antagonistic as he'd like.  He's just less likely be be listened to than if he approached it constructively and respectfully - threatening a boycott isn't either of those.

 

Well, no-one is saying you did buddy

 

And I don't think he's advocating a boycott really. He simply says he'd advise people local to him to delay purchase until there's a resolution. Semantics, but I don't think GW are as thin skinned as maybe you think (certainly not from some of the responses I've had from them, honestly, they could learn a thing or two about constructive tone tbh: 'Serves you right for turning your back on the Emperor' is still my favourite constructive response to a polite query).

[Mushkilla]

I agree.

 

In my experience it's better to be polite and nice about things. It's also better if people change up the message a bit, it just makes it more personal. In, my original message I added a PS telling them about the awesome job I think they have been doing with 8th.

 

I understand people are upset but threats don't get you anywhere in these sort of situations. At the end of the day GW the ones with the power to change this.

[CommodusXIII]

I don't think GW will take offense - like you said, they're probably used to it by now.  It's just good practice for providing negative feedback to a company on a product:

• Original messages/letters/reviews are more likely to be paid attention to.  Form letters/copies/edits/etc. are less likely to be fully read, because they stop being a communication and instead become a category.  A statistic.  It you open your inbox and see three emails, each of the same length and same format and same opening paragraph, you're less likely to read all of them through to the end.  Instead, they get filed.  No one at GW will point to that letter and say, "Hey, this guy makes a really good point!"  
• No offense, but boycott was your word.  I really enjoyed the original message because it demonstrated why sales might be hurt - bad rules makes the model less viable, which makes them less desirable, which leads to lower sales.  "We're not going to buy this" gets the point across, but without provoking thought.  "We're not going to buy this unless you fix this" is a pointed demand and, while yes it gets the point across and yes, anyone is within their rights to say it, it's less compelling.

Generally speaking:  If the goal is to show volume of discontent, than that's probably fine.  If the goal is to actually engage with the company - to speak to them instead of at them - then it's less effective.

 

And yeah, GW could probably work on their replies.  At least that showed that a human being read your email, but it's not much more helpful or encouraging beyond that.  Sounds like it was an attempt at humor that fell a little flat.

 

EDIT:  Also, Mushkilla's email gives me the sense of "I want these models to be successful. Here are some recommendations for how you can sell more."  Now that is compelling.

[Stray]

Yes, you're right. Boycott was a poor word. It's why I said: 'And I don't think he's advocating a boycott really.' - That wasn't me saying you said that

 

You make all really good points. But come on, need we even have the conversation? Let's not derail things any further, but keep in mind we're all grown ups. We all are very well aware of tone, we know that asking nicely is better than 'omgwhygw111!!!' We've likely all written letters before too . 'Tis no biggy really right?

 

He really wasn't very rude or antagonistic in my opinion. That's all I'm saying. I wouldn't have phrased anything that way myself, but perhaps there is something to be said for letting a business know that reason X makes you uncomfortable spending your money with them right now. (I do think we probably don't need to point out publicly that we feel he was rude or somehow wrong when he was trying to contribute, or if we must, maybe we all need to work on tone in doing so. Implying that someone is being 'demanding' or 'entitled' does make things a bit combative quickly right? And honestly Comm, I know you meant no harm here buddy   )

 

If you agree with the whole CP issue, raise your voice is all. You're big boys and girls, you decide how you want to communicate that. The important thing is that you communicate it if it's something you care about. If you don't, then don't.

[Stray]

 

 

And yeah, GW could probably work on their replies.  At least that showed that a human being read your email, but it's not much more helpful or encouraging beyond that.  Sounds like it was an attempt at humor that fell a little flat.

 

 

Gawd, yeah. I kinda wish it were an email. This was from one of the presenters when I asked a question during a live stream! :D

 

In full disclosure (because it does seem - and is really - something of a minor thing), I have some mental health issues part of which causes me a great deal of social anxiety... so silly as it seems, it was somewhat mortifying at the time as it was quite public! Of course the presenter was just trying to be funny and had no idea that it was reasonably hard to even ask the question :)

[helterskelter]

Can we email them about maybe releasing the only other model they need to that's actually got synergy with other models in your army. I mean realistically they've released 1 model, reboxed another twice and have 3 weapon sprues. The last one is a rebox with 2 new sprues (opening carapace/throne/canis rex stuff/weapons). Is it really pushing it to get the "command" model :p yes this is a big bear and I will flog this horse until it's a bloodied pulp

[Stray]

Can we email them about maybe releasing the only other model they need to that's actually got synergy with other models in your army. I mean realistically they've released 1 model, reboxed another twice and have 3 weapon sprues. The last one is a rebox with 2 new sprues (opening carapace/throne/canis rex stuff/weapons). Is it really pushing it to get the "command" model yes this is a big bear and I will flog this horse until it's a bloodied pulp

 

Buy an Atropos (cause they're great). When it arrives, totally don't take a picture of the components with the las-cutter missing from the photo. Then, don't email that picture that you didn't take to FW with the batch number and order number, and they totally won't cast you a replacement (not spare) Las-cutter, which you then absolutely could not use to kit bash a Preceptor convincingly.

 

Because that would be naughty

 

In all seriousness though, getting hold of Atrapos parts on Ebay could be your best bet for now. Could be a while if they're waiting on AoS to die down before releasing the kit :/

 

(Edit: I'm not actually advocating doing the above btw folks. Just aiming for humour and pointing out how amazing FW's customer service really is. Having needed a genuine replacement arm recently, they were great.)

[jeffersonian000]

I personally don’t think GW is doing a good job with 8th. Specifically, I think 8th is a dumpster fire because GW is doing such a bad job of it. And yes, I think they know it. The recent Big FAQ is obviously a reaction to the negative feedback they have been receiving since the launch of this edition. And yes, I am aware that the Big FAQ was released after it was too late to fix the new IK codex while it was being printed, which is why the major issue of our discontent is the inconsistency of GW’s attempt to fix the CP disparity. That’s on them. They can still fix it.

 

But what they need to fix is their internal communications issue, as after 3 decades of business their left hand still has no clue what their right hand is up to. And again, that’s on them.

 

I truly do believe that if we want change, we as a customer base need to vote with our wallets. If you don’t like rules for a model, don’t give GW your money, give them feedback as to why you won’t be spending your money on them. They can fix it, if they care to.

 

SJ

[brother_b]

Maybe 1 armiger shouldn't be enought to fill out a slot, but surely a full compliment of 3 (2?) would be doable? That way you can elect to have lots of mini knights or mini knights and full sized for your army.

[LucidNinja]

Hmm so faeit have some photos of the codex up. The strat for giving a extra relic also makes the knight a character. Means 1cp would be enough if that's all you wanted.

Also aux LoW detachment don't get the household tradition benefits but all knights are from a house/are free blades, so even if not in a lance you get house strats and relics...

[fedratsailor]

aux detachements will most likely consist of freeblades.

[LucidNinja]

aux detachements will most likely consist of freeblades.

Not if you want a shooty knight. Or a particular house relic or warlord trait.

 

House krast Castellan with cawls wrath and krast WL trait of reroll 1's. That's what I think is the best was to take a Castellan ally.

[Gaz1858]

So Aux Detachment does get to follow questor imperialos or questor mechanicus.

 

As to whether it gets a household or not will need to be FAQd as it does say only apply to Super Heavy Detachments according to the dex. But then it also says they must come from a household so....

[Lysere]

 

aux detachements will most likely consist of freeblades.

Not if you want a shooty knight. Or a particular house relic or warlord trait.

 

House krast Castellan with cawls wrath and krast WL trait of reroll 1's. That's what I think is the best was to take a Castellan ally.

 

 

Best way to take a knight when the household trait doesn't do anything for the build. House Terryn battle cannon on a Crusader? Doesn't lose anything being in an Aux Detachment, same with a Raven Castellan. Freeblades will probably be better used to fill normal SHD to add some variety to the list and they don't break the household traits of the other knights.

[Gaz1858]

So Aux Detachment does get to follow questor imperialos or questor mechanicus.

 

As to whether it gets a household or not will need to be FAQd as it does say only apply to Super Heavy Detachments according to the dex. But then it also says they must come from a household so....

Rereading it never mind. Yes Aux Det does get a household

[Aegir_Einarsson]

So aux shd have household rules or not, because i’m a bit confused...

[LucidNinja]

Has a household added to its keywords but doesn't get the special rules.

[PiñaColada]

This all seems very confusing. It's a shame GW didn't put up a preview article that explained allt these scenarios, even if that's not something they normally do. It's weird that no one seems (at least to me) to have a full grasp of what should be relatively simple detachment rules yet