Letter to GW about our wishes and requests

I must be having a senior moment...where is the letter?

It is at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XNp5SwzBsbeTpjx4zcOVD3BBI6teZY5PGFwR7uRk50I/edit

I would like to suggest

1. Please replace
"The Haywire Blaster is in a weird spot right now. It went from being the best AT weapon in our arsenal (at the tradeoff of being all but useless against anything else) to a very specific niche (used only against Quantum Shieldings and Harlequin vehicles). "
With "
The Haywire Blaster is in a terrible spot right now. It went from being a good weapon in our arsenal to a very specific niche (used only against Quantum Shieldings and Harlequin vehicles) which is not good enough to make it useable. (see math section) ".

The paragraph as is makes it sound as if HWB is actually useful but niche which is far from the truth. In reality, you will never want to model anyone with it as is, c'mon it is worse than other anti-tank weapons vs even vehicles vs most armies and useless otherwise. I really don't see why this paragraph is so positive. We should be more straightforward.


2. May we sign this letter? As in, signed by,

The Dark City
___________
Mppqmld
Count Adhemar
Dave
Johan
etc.

to make it clear there are many of us asking for this. I'm thinking of giving a limited time period and either a separate service or a thread where those interested can sign.

At the rate they are pumping out codexes the Dark Eldar book might already be finalised.

Is this letter going direct to the customer service email or does someone have a direct link to the designers?

I worry that this would just get filtered out by customer service unless you have someone super earnest who think the designers could really benefit and not just be annoyed by a tome of suggestions. I know some folk have put their blood and tears into this but is there anyone of the opinion that the best thing to do with a letter signed on behalf of an online community and forum is REALLY guarantee as much as possible that it's been read?

Let's just catch their attention with a general appeal to their design principles and that we're looking forward to seeing what they've been creating and that hopefully our underutilized and underpowered Coven units, characters, ETC ETC can see some more play. And we'd love it if they'd give us the opportunity to send them a small document that contains our list of suggestions that we'd love to have fun with as players.

At that stage, hit them with it. Because if they're not interested in replying to even a concise and sharp email then there's just NO way they're going to plow through ten pages without losing interest after forty seconds. It's just better to grab their attention first by establishing some common ground, but I'm not hyper invested in how this letter goes so do what you will with my 2 cents and best of luck either way.

I have the email address for FLG. They are already aware and ready for it.

I will be getting one, if I can, of the rules department in Nottingham. I have been told that is where to send it.

I would also suggest posting it to the FB page of GW. I will change the permissions then so people can only view it

Edit: I'd like to give the Doc to FLG tomorrow, see what feedback they might give, and then post it up on FB on Fri. Thoughts?

Yeah hi!
A little late to the party, i made a Djinn Blade a time ago:

I'd like to have rules for it again, and good ones this time if you don't mind
Otherwise i totally agree with the "Wanted" poster from facebook, we're in dire need of fear inspiring HQs and i even have Vect's Guard Constructs already  

Faitherun wrote:

I have the email address for FLG. They are already aware and ready for it.

I will be getting one, if I can, of the rules department in Nottingham. I have been told that is where to send it.

I would also suggest posting it to the FB page of GW. I will change the permissions then so people can only view it

Edit: I'd like to give the Doc to FLG tomorrow, see what feedback they might give, and then post it up on FB on Fri. Thoughts?

Seems good to me.

From browsing the index I kind of feel like all of the above need mentioned. How about also plastic kits for mandrakes, grits and incubi?? At the very least I really want a plastic incubus kit. So badly.

|Meavar wrote:

Faitherun wrote:

I have the email address for FLG. They are already aware and ready for it.

I will be getting one, if I can, of the rules department in Nottingham. I have been told that is where to send it.

I would also suggest posting it to the FB page of GW. I will change the permissions then so people can only view it

Edit: I'd like to give the Doc to FLG tomorrow, see what feedback they might give, and then post it up on FB on Fri. Thoughts?

Seems good to me.

Yeah, great!

I was thinking about ways to buff the Talos. I thought FLY might be interesting it is hovering after all, and it did have move through cover in older editions. I think at some point in its storied history it was a skimmer hybrid. Anyway fly would allow it to jump over terrain, and screening units making it a bit more interesting. Would make twin liquifiers and splinter cannons interesting as you could fall back and shoot. Thoughts?

Yeah, that would certainly be a boost for the Talos but my main issue is that it just doesn't seem to have a role. It needs to have weaponry that allows it to do a job and do it well. Everything just seems too halfhearted currently.

While I advocate the S.Cannon needs to be reduced in points, I think its a bit much asking for re-rolls on Splinter rifles...in fact asking for this is so unrealistic that it kind of devalues what the letter is trying to achieve and that is to bring some balance to the Dark Eldar. Also the stat bit at the end which I love by the way, shows clearly that the rifle is in a good place (at least in comparison to other weapons).

Rather than Splinter weapons having changes to their rules, I would rather the Shredder was made better. We need a good Shredder.

Also there has been very little mention of special wargear for our Raiders. Is there time to mention that at all? Sails, racks etc have all gone and I would like them back.

I think the letter is fantastic by the way and it comes across very well.

Given the Leman Russ's rules allowing it to double tap with its main gun if it moves at half speed (as recently revealed) while also taking no penalties to shoot heavy weapons while moving, maybe we can hope for a similar double-tap ability on the ravager? Everyone else seems to be getting in-house multiple phases, be it shooting or fighting or both. Given this Splinter Racks allowing double taps would not seem unreasonable.

In regards to the Talos; don't forget we are also requesting a better haywireblaster and heatlance, which could 'fix' te Talos if all goes well. Having said that, I think adding the Fly keyword is very fluffy, while helping the usability of the Talos and doesn't seem OP to me.

Only thing is, should we really be jamming stuff in the letter stil? Methinks it's time to check spelling/formatting and close the letter...

We covered the Talos well : we showed it sucked in CC, and it sucked in range.

We talked about splinter racks. We could add things like Grizzeled trophies, etc. but i think we should settle for what we currently have... i'm sure we can all come up with more things to put but time is playing against us.

I will include the pseudos of all the people that participated in this thread. Others can sign, of course.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XNp5SwzBsbeTpjx4zcOVD3BBI6teZY5PGFwR7uRk50I/edit

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

Also there has been very little mention of special wargear for our Raiders.  Is there time to mention that at all?  Sails, racks etc have all gone and I would like them back.

I didn't realize we had left such a hole - I added a small adjustment to one sentence, the Italicized part here:

Quote :

One last request, that everyone on the forum shares, is the return of our beloved Splinter Racks in some form, among other options for our vehicles.

If ya'll agree, I'll finalize this edit and start changing limited distribution.

Dark Elf Dave wrote:

I think the letter is fantastic by the way and it comes across very well.

Thanks! Had my wife read it last night, and she really liked it. Said it came across very polished and showing we have put a lot of thought into it

Edit:
Added a thread for people to be able and sign the letter
http://www.thedarkcity.net/t16473-signature-for-the-letter-to-games-workshop#199876

Somebody is doing a clean-up of the grammar and vocabulary. While I agree with the suggestions generally, can I just remind whoever it is that the Razorwing is a different unit than the Razorwing Jetfighter, and the "Jetfighter" is not superfluous.

The only thing that I think is missing, which I think was discussed, is that bloodbrides, being the wyche equivalent of trueborn, need the option to take a similarly greater number of special weapons in the unit. I think this should only require one additional sentence in the wyche/bloodbride section.

Commented in the Signature thread, but have made some edits, if you would like me to finalise once completed, send it to me and I will happily do so

@Lord Johan, realised that and amended

I took the freedom of taking the current text and trying to make it a bit more visually appealing. I'm not a designer but I thought this could be a first step.

For those who want to have a look at it: https://ufile.io/c6tmx (sadly TDC doesnt offer direct uploads here)

Also, I would be for a small "conclusion" after each chapter (weapons, HQs, units) to highlight the common problems and also mention other problematic aspects.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I took the freedom of taking the current text and trying to make it a bit more visually appealing. I'm not a designer but I thought this could be a first step.

For those who want to have a look at it: https://ufile.io/c6tmx (sadly TDC doesnt offer direct uploads here)

It's very nice !
I wanted to put the names in 2 columns once everyone has had the occasion to sign.
But i like what you did

Once we're done, we should probably send a pdf.

I have changed the permissions to view only. The number of people who have opened this has exploded since I sent a copy to FLG. As such, if there are any changes ya'll think imperative, please post here

Faitherun wrote:

I have changed the permissions to view only. The number of people who have opened this has exploded since I sent a copy to FLG. As such, if there are any changes ya'll think imperative, please post here

Oh so that's with the incredible numbers of readers lately.

I really like what The Strange Dark One added to the presentation of the letter and i would vote for something like that to be sent to GW and published on social media.

I'm not familiar with FGL. What will happen to our letter there ?

If we get lucky, they may do an article on it. I was really hoping for feedback from them before we publish it.

Also reached out to the splintermind group. The groundswell is starting to build.....

krayd wrote:

The only thing that I think is missing, which I think was discussed, is that bloodbrides, being the wyche equivalent of trueborn, need the option to take a similarly greater number of special weapons in the unit.  I think this should only require one additional sentence in the wyche/bloodbride section.

I second this. This always bothered me a lot.