|
Post by jisidro on Oct 26, 2017 14:47:16 GMT
I'll admit I got worked up there, I'm just really, really, incredibly sick of the tournament-focused culture's insistence that their way to play is the "right way". "This is WMH, you have to know the other armies. It's BS to say otherwise." No, you don't, no, it isn't. Warmachine/Hordes is not only tournaments, Company of Iron is literally 0% tournaments. Stop insisting that because YOU choose to focus solely on tournament play and that you and others you talk to have decided that the only way to do that is to study every card in the game like you're cramming for a final that that is the One True Way to play Privateer Press' games. It's not, it never has been, and it never will be. You can trot out all the same arguments for it being primarily a tournament game, or tournament players being either the largest population or biggest spenders or whatever, but it's not the only way to play. Company of Iron has specifically been stated by the creators as being a non-competitive game. There is not and never will be an official tournament document for it, officially-run tournaments, or official tournament prize support. It is a light, quick game for playing narrative scenarios over an hour or so. You do not need to know every other army in order to play the game, which means that complaining that it's necessary to spend $20 and get every army is completely disingenuous. If you chose to buy the bundle it is because you want every army, not because anyone is forcing you to do it. Will Pagani the guy known for his impressive narrative play did a few insiders with army ideas/suggestions... Go read his insiders and tell me what you learned fluff-wise.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Oct 26, 2017 14:49:31 GMT
You seem to know about software developement... How come Conflict Chamber or WHAC can be so great for free and warroom costs millions to make and HAS to cost $100 because reasons?
|
|
|
Post by krigsol on Oct 26, 2017 14:52:29 GMT
And you saying I am wrong is just as much of an opinion. Saying I am incorrect because I am not thinking of context...eh not really I know they outsource, I know it costs money, I also know it is not unreasonable to want to have the faction cards available on the COI side of the app after purchasing the faction decks on the regular side. It would not be difficult to have a "bundle" for new players to either purchase the faction deck (which includes the COI cards) or you can just purchase the COI cards by themselves and save some money. I also never said people are not allowed to disagree with me. Just like the complaint that the cost was unannounced, I don't see what this would really solve. CoI cards are already severely discounted compared to the Warmachine cards. The individual decks are only $3. A full 33% discount would only save you $1. It's a solution in search of a problem. This is what makes it sound like you're arguing in bad faith, assuming that they're being greedy, and then looking for something to justify that assumption. Opinions can, contrary to popular belief, be wrong. Particularly when they're based on incorrect or false information, such as "PP is being greedy", when in reality they're just covering overhead costs for the app development. They have even released the cards for free to print or download on demand people who don't want to pay for them. Or saying things like CoI costs $60 to play, when in fact you can play it for $9. Words like greedy, slimy, etc. These aren't conducive to productive discussion. They aren't facts or context. They're loaded and emotional words. They're accusations of intent. You don't need the box set at all to play. The tokens can be replaced with other tokens just like in WarmaHordes. The rules are free to download. The Command cards can be downloaded from DriveThruRPG for $6 or bought from PP for $15. You can download the cards for your faction from War Room for $3. Claiming $60 of costs are necessary to play the game is just false. It is not an opinion, it is factually incorrect. Literally never, even with War Room 2. I use Google Play credits that I get by doing surveys through the Google Rewards app. I don't think I've ever paid more than $1 for a deck (if any $ at all), and I have them all.
|
|
|
Post by krigsol on Oct 26, 2017 15:02:47 GMT
You seem to know about software developement... How come Conflict Chamber or WHAC can be so great for free and warroom costs millions to make and HAS to cost $100 because reasons? Because they are/were entirely text-based apps that were not anywhere near what PP has done with War Room 2? You don't even really need experience in software development for that, just a pair of eyes. Conflict Chamber was an army builder, it wasn't a card replacement for games. WHAC was as buggy as War Room 1 and never updated.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Oct 26, 2017 15:08:09 GMT
I believe people who believe this is fine point at the price and people who find it scummy point at the principle.
I find the PRINCIPLE scummy. Its applying a different purchase model to a digital app, then to a comparable real-life model. In real life, I can continue using my printed cards with COI without having to print them out all over again. But PP arbitrarily slapped on an extra price tag on being able to use them in COI. As it's been pointed out, other companies apps are more reliable and less expensive already. Even ones not as big as GW. Like Infinity.
Never ignore the principle because the price point is low. Because in time thats how they always get the foot in the door. "Oh just ignore micro transactions its only for unimportant stuff" "Oh ignore the guns, just get good" "Oh its only 3$ for a cosmetic lootbox" "Oh its only 3$ for a universal lootbox" Why do I have to pay for this. Its the exact same cards, with the exact same references. No comparable "Print" model. They aren't updated to use a different rulebook. What work am I validating with my purchase?
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Oct 26, 2017 15:09:16 GMT
You seem to know about software developement... How come Conflict Chamber or WHAC can be so great for free and warroom costs millions to make and HAS to cost $100 because reasons? Because they are/were entirely text-based apps that were not anywhere near what PP has done with War Room 2? You don't even really need experience in software development for that, just a pair of eyes. Conflict Chamber was an army builder, it wasn't a card replacement for games. WHAC was as buggy as War Room 1 and never updated.
So you pay $100 for reused images and free rules?
WHAC still is great despite not being updated (The models are) it is just missing themes. You can do battles there, save armies, etc. Never had bug problems with it. Conflict chamber is an army builder, tournament supporter and pdf fixer. It is insanely good and useful. Just ask the WTC commitee how much work it saved them?
|
|
|
Post by krigsol on Oct 26, 2017 15:17:17 GMT
Because they are/were entirely text-based apps that were not anywhere near what PP has done with War Room 2? You don't even really need experience in software development for that, just a pair of eyes. Conflict Chamber was an army builder, it wasn't a card replacement for games. WHAC was as buggy as War Room 1 and never updated.
So you pay $100 for reused images and free rules?
WHAC still is great despite not being updated (The models are) it is just missing themes. You can do battles there, save armies, etc. Never had bug problems with it. Conflict chamber is an army builder, tournament supporter and pdf fixer. It is insanely good and useful. Just ask the WTC commitee how much work it saved them?
I've paid barely anything for War Room. As I told the other poster, I pay for War Room decks gradually using Google Survey credits. I'm not trying to stop you from using WHAC. If you like it, more power to you. No one is stopping you or anyone from using Conflict Chamber instead of War Room either. But objectively, neither of them are the commercial-level app that War Room 2 is. Neither of them completely replace cards, which is what PP intends with War Room.
|
|
|
Post by HubertJFarnsworth on Oct 26, 2017 15:18:08 GMT
I'll admit I got worked up there, I'm just really, really, incredibly sick of the tournament-focused culture's insistence that their way to play is the "right way". "This is WMH, you have to know the other armies. It's BS to say otherwise." No, you don't, no, it isn't. Warmachine/Hordes is not only tournaments, Company of Iron is literally 0% tournaments. Stop insisting that because YOU choose to focus solely on tournament play and that you and others you talk to have decided that the only way to do that is to study every card in the game like you're cramming for a final that that is the One True Way to play Privateer Press' games. It's not, it never has been, and it never will be. You can trot out all the same arguments for it being primarily a tournament game, or tournament players being either the largest population or biggest spenders or whatever, but it's not the only way to play. Company of Iron has specifically been stated by the creators as being a non-competitive game. There is not and never will be an official tournament document for it, officially-run tournaments, or official tournament prize support. It is a light, quick game for playing narrative scenarios over an hour or so. You do not need to know every other army in order to play the game, which means that complaining that it's necessary to spend $20 and get every army is completely disingenuous. If you chose to buy the bundle it is because you want every army, not because anyone is forcing you to do it. Will Pagani the guy known for his impressive narrative play did a few insiders with army ideas/suggestions... Go read his insiders and tell me what you learned fluff-wise.
What does that have to do with anything? So they had the new guy write an Insider about some lists he was playing, that doesn't somehow make it not a narrative game. I'm honestly struggling to understand what your point is.
|
|
|
Post by galrohir on Oct 26, 2017 15:20:44 GMT
Even without the whole card thing, I don't think I'll give CoI a shot. It's not an actual skirmish game as we know them, it's just a slightly different way to play 20-25 point games. It has no campaign rules, no advancement rules, the rulebook doesn't even come with any scenarios (I know there's scenarios in No Quarter Prime, but not even having 2-3 in your rulebook? Seriously?). Basically nothing of what I've come to expect from TT skirmish games (a la Shadow War Armageddon, Frostgrave/Ghost Archipielago, to name a few).
At least the rules are free.
EDIT: My bad, I found the scenarios, that one's on me. The rest of the post stands, however.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Oct 26, 2017 15:24:57 GMT
krigsol --I think they want money. I think they want people to just fork over the money for the sake of convenience and most people are going to make the purchases early on not knowing that most of these updated cards will be free in the near future. --Correction: Opinions are based off of emotional preference and worldview. The take observations and come to a conclusion without evidence that fully concludes the hypothesis. My opinion is just as relevant as your. You do not know for sure if they are actually just trying to cover overhead. Or if they are just trying to make some extra profits. Unless you are a dev or PP employee know one knows for sure (at least right now) But we are not here to discuss the minutia of opinions we are here to discuss war gaming so...agree to disagree? --I did not say you needed the box set. My point was that most people day 1 probably ordered the box or acquired it because pre-orders and hype. So most people (in context of day one purchases) are spending 60+ dollars to get into COI and then need to pay another 10 or so to use war room. My issue is not the entry cost. My issue is, once again, that I have to purchase the faction decks AGAIN even though I have already purchased them. I also am assuming most people own 2 factions meaning in war room you pay $6 for half on an apps functionality. It just seems kind of a hefty price tag to me. We can banter about overhead, production costs, etc. But at the end of the day neither of us know the actual cost of production for the app, and we can really only go off of other apps that do similar things. I think war room is a very useful tool but I think they are asking too much for the product and I will personally not be purchasing the COI side of the app. Mostly because all I really needed war room fro anyway was tracking damage and reducing table clutter. In COI you will have like...4 cards max? So who cares about that. You can track the damage on infantry with a dice and beasts, jacks are easy to track when there is only one of them. So IMO 3-20 dollars for a utility most aps give for free...seems steep. P.S: also not everyone uses google play...or takes the surveys haha. A good chunk of people are IOS based. (though I have to say...I am leaning to looking at other smart phones.)
|
|
|
Post by slaughtersun on Oct 26, 2017 15:27:05 GMT
WHAC and Conflict Chamber are done by their authors of their own volition and in their "spare time". Saying it costs "nothing" is a disfavour and wrong...if they choose to offer their time (and time is money) and skills to the "community" its their choice, much like is everyone's choice to select which tools to use but saying it has no costs is just plain illusion.
|
|
|
Post by regabond on Oct 26, 2017 15:39:11 GMT
Many models changed a little bit, so you're paying a reduced price for those cards and those changes. Again this is just for war room's use. Everything is having a physical and/or pdf release as well.
I dislike war room a lot, but it's better(ish) than lugging all my cards around. I think all of their prices could have been lower, but they weren't and these prices are inline with their previous pricings.
Also it's hard for me to call someone greedy if they're releasing most of the game for free as well...
|
|
|
Post by krigsol on Oct 26, 2017 15:41:54 GMT
krigsol --I think they want money. I think they want people to just fork over the money for the sake of convenience and most people are going to make the purchases early on not knowing that most of these updated cards will be free in the near future. --Correction: Opinions are based off of emotional preference and worldview. The take observations and come to a conclusion without evidence that fully concludes the hypothesis. My opinion is just as relevant as your. You do not know for sure if they are actually just trying to cover overhead. Or if they are just trying to make some extra profits. Unless you are a dev or PP employee know one knows for sure (at least right now) But we are not here to discuss the minutia of opinions we are here to discuss war gaming so...agree to disagree? The only actual information we have (their word) is that War Room does not make them money. You can imagine that Pagani is actually a lizard person if you want. But it's still something that's not true based on real information. I'm not going to "agree" to be fine with things like that. In my opinion, that type of toxicity is one of the biggest downsides of the WMH community. They're real people, and they make a point to engage with the community. The health of the community is part of wargaming. That's no different than the normal game, though. And it's for the same reason: War Room has extended overhead costs that they have to cover. $3/faction is not a hefty price tag in Warmachine. It is the lowest cost of anything in the game. Paint costs $1 more than any CoI faction. No, we can't. Different things have different costs. Different companies have different margins and costs they can eat. Things exist within contexts. So don't pay it. That's the point: the cost is not necessary to pay, because the product is optional. But it still costs money to create, so it has to have a cost to cover its production. How much you want or need a product isn't the only factor in setting its cost.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Oct 26, 2017 15:46:58 GMT
Will Pagani the guy known for his impressive narrative play did a few insiders with army ideas/suggestions... Go read his insiders and tell me what you learned fluff-wise.
What does that have to do with anything? So they had the new guy write an Insider about some lists he was playing, that doesn't somehow make it not a narrative game. I'm honestly struggling to understand what your point is. WM/H grew up to be a tournament game.
God knows why they keep trying to develope narratives and my experience is that for most players that is 100% irrelevant when stacked against the rules. I followed the CoI stuff that came out and it never sounded like a narrative game apart from WM/H. Smaller armies, different scenarios but both the rulebook and advanced rulebook follow on the footsteps of Big Brother. There is no reference to tournaments just there isn't one in Primal/Prime. It's all on SR.
If the company presents the game as non-narrative when it is unveiling the game and generating hype... then it's not a narrative game.
|
|
|
Post by HubertJFarnsworth on Oct 26, 2017 15:58:37 GMT
What does that have to do with anything? So they had the new guy write an Insider about some lists he was playing, that doesn't somehow make it not a narrative game. I'm honestly struggling to understand what your point is. I followed the CoI stuff that came out and it never sounded like a narrative game apart from WM/H.
If the company presents the game as non-narrative when it is unveiling the game and generating hype... then it's not a narrative game.
Except for right here in the very first YouTube video about it where they talk how it comes with "very narrative" scenarios, won't have tournaments, and is a casual game? They use the word casual like six times in the next 30 seconds on this video: youtu.be/0RNbdi7okEs?t=1m20sSo, again, not a tournament game. And the reason they keep developing it is because they like, players like it, and hopefully people will buy it. Just because you and your group of friends don't like it doesn't mean there isn't an audience.
|
|