The fact that we're on this forum indicates at least a bit of preference, of course. But Dust Warfare is increasingly becoming preferable to Warhammer 40K. The short list includes:

Rules that at least have some guidance, rather than the product of a soviet of duelling company fiefdoms each putting in an equal amount of new rules for the sake of appearances.

Errata on said rules, instead of stoney and truculant silence.

Reasonable prices on minis, and particularly on models!

And now, the latest reason: Anyone besides me seen the price of the new 7th edition codecies? $50 USD! For nothing more than the previous codex template, with a hard cover. Personally, I find this intolerable; since I own 11 40K armies, that would be $550 USD to codex myself up over the next 4 years. That's almost as much money as I've spent on all of my Dust material, including the 1st edition Tactics and every supplement for it.

I've seen the price of the csm codex, a faction that i have played for 9 years but i won't buy this codex, i found a pdf version that allowed me to read it before purchasing it, to say it nicely I am not impressed by the book, the rules are sloppy in many places, changes brought forward with no apparent thought as to why and a host of other problems, it is not worth the outrages price GW are asking for it.

Sofar I am far more impressed with warfare, it's easier to play, the rules are simply and all fractions are well balanced.

A friend of mine, who has a lot of experience with 'leadership,' as the Dilbert strip puts it, opined that Games Workshop's performance smacked of no firm hand at the tiller; no-one defining direction and gauging performance. Which leaves each person who can lay claim to any power clamoring for his piece of the pie; a soviet. Thus every member of that soviet has to throw in something to each writing project or risk losing their power, and the stuff thrown in can be mighty sloppy. In addition, such a set-up means that there can be no real edtiting; an editor must have the power to change and/or cut material in order to be effective, and with every piece of writing a power play, the editor can't do his job.

I have no inside information to back this concept, but it would easily explain GW's performance over the last several years, including their most recent performance, and what you found in the new Chaos codex.

Thus, my contention that Warfare is becoming ever more preferable to 40K…

Sorry, but in most areas including mine, Dust has not even made a dent to the GW juggernaut. I wish the opposite were true.

Right now as they are its:

1. Warhammer 40k

2. Warmachine/Hordes

…

40. All others

I love this game, but I'm having a hard time getting it to catch on in my area.

I wish fantasy flight would market this like a miniature game, I'm sure people would take it more seriously.

It does hurt that you can't get a lot of the heroes without buying unwanted stuff.

Yes, and we're back to the fact that FFG is new to the hobby, and still trying to get its act together about its marketing.

This, to me, is just the wrong attitude. I don't look at Dust Warfare as a "preferable" option - just an option. I happen to love the new Chaos Marine Codex, because it is well-balanced, with lots of fun, flavorful, and competitive options. Dust is an amazing game, with excellent rules, but I would never limit myself to just one system. I play Dust Warfare, Warmahordes, 40K and Fantasy - as well as having played a few other games, like Firestorm Armada. Variety is the spice of life and with Dust being such a new kid on the block, its not going to compete easily with the GW giant.

Going on the attack against GW, though, seems counterproductive. Don't point out flaws in a system, especially when that invites fanboy syndrome that might hurt your chances in the long run, too. Instead, sell it for its affordability and creative ruleset - tell people the Heroes are far from mandatory (which is truth!) and that new expansions are coming out with cool new models. Try to bring it out on a day when the bigger games aren't being played, then it won't compete and can generate a following all its own.

At least, that is what I did at my last shop. Generated a lot of buzz by not downing on any games, but talking Dust up and doing ceaseless demo games when people weren't doing anything else.

FFG could also print the *&%*&^% unit cards for us Warfare players!!!!

paradiddlebob said:

Why not just use the fan made cards, they work great and are free.

Dust Warfare is the only game for me. I wouldn't touch 40K for any reason. We have one of the largest GW fanbases in North America right here in Sacramento. Lots of support. More players than you can shake a stick at.

Still…

…the GW business practices, and prices, keep me away.

The last miniatures skirmish game I really got into was Vor: The Maelstrom.

1) Principle of the thing. It seems obvious to me they should exist alongside the game shortly after the game comes out.

2) I'd rather pay to have them printed in color and laminated.

For me, it all comes to fun.

And while I still enjoy commanding mi Leman Russes in future battlefields, Dust Warfare as a wargame is superior in every aspect to 40K, except in the variety of armies (for now). But then there is GW complete lack of support, except for a few, obscure erratas; the very existence of this OFFICIAL forum probes how well FFG is doing things over GW. Sure, constant price risings, broken game rules and complete unbalanced gameplay doesnt help. But lets get real: I dont think Dust Warfare will replace 40K, at least not in a few years. And I wouldnt like that either, since from competition emerges evolution; on the contrary, when a company becomes monopolic, it ends up pretty much in the disastrous state that GW is nowadays…

As I said before, DW is much more balanced and fun for me thab 40K. And that makes me prefer DW over 40K.

wow don't get me started on games workshop, why people play their games is beyond me. 40k is over priced and you have to have 3 books to play it. if gw made dust,after you bought the rulebook you would also have to buy the faction book as well. plus we would be paying 30 percent more at least for the figures and the armies would not be balancedeither. NOT A GW FAN AT ALL, played 40 k and hated it lol

I admit that I do love the variety and background for 40K; it is incredibly superior to Dust. It had better be, considering that it's been in continuous development since 1987! And the Orks just floor me every time, background-wise. But the Wierd War ii aspect of Dust is also very good, and game-play is just plain superior (it had better be, since Andy Chambers had plenty of opportunity to make his objections to Warhammer into good rules).

I've never played 40k and can't really speak to it other than to repeat what I've heard others say. But at my LGS a number of 40k players have been coming by and watching me play DW and seem interested. The store owner has said that he's gotten requests for Dust items (the LGS doesn't carry Dust in stock but can and will order anything). Time will tell, but I think it probably supports the idea that DW might be better or at least is a viable alternative to 40k.

VelosaRaptor said:

There's also now 3 books you have to buy to play Dust Warfare and the number of books is still growing. The tanks are the same price, imperial guard are £1.80 and Dust comparable infantry are £3 each, so neither of your argumants hold up. When DT first came out under AEG, the game was excellent value - not so true now. PS, I don't play or collect 40K.

Admittedly the soldiers come to $4 USD apiece now, where they used to be about $3, so that argument (same soldier price) is true. But the tanks being the same price? Huh, where are you that that is happening? Honest, here in the USA the big models are $40, the walkers range from $25 to $30. Compare this to GW's prices of $45 to $50 for a model (usually a walker) the size of a Dust walker, and $50 to $60+ for a tank or similarly sized model, and the price differences start adding up real quick. For instance, my SSU force of two command squads, 2 battle squads, a close combat squad, a rifle squad, two KV-47s and Capt. Koshka and Gran'ma adds up to about $210, while a similarly-sized 40K force would cost about $260 (or more). So it's still a better deal. Add an SSU tank ($40) and compare it to the $60 cost of a GW tank and the gap just grows.

This gap widens considerably when you take into account the standard tournament army size. In Dust, it's 300-400 points; my SSU force fits that quite nicely. In 40K it's 1500-2000 points; with Space Marines (one of the cheapest cost armies because of the high unit cost) that's about 30-40 troops and HQ (about 700 points and about $140-150), a couple of elites (150-250 and about $50 points per), and three or so tanks, usually including a Land Raider (600-700 points and $180+), plus some other items to round it out. Sooo, that's a Dust tournament for $250, and a 40K tournament for $430-450, or almost TWO Dust tournament armies!

both my arguments hold up, my point was that if gw developed dust to even start playing you would have to buy 2 books the rules and the faction book, read what i said. to play dust you need one book you can download stat cards and print them, again read what i said and know what you are talking about. 40 k is a crap game and is unbalanced.

VelosaRaptor said:

know what you are talking about before you post major mishap.

know what you are talking about before you post major mishap.

VelosaRaptor said:

I do and the things I posted are 100% accurate. The SSU tanks and IG tanks are both £31 in UK, DT infantry do cost more than GW infantry and there are 3 DW books you need to buy.

Wow. My sympathies, man. That sucks that the Dust heavies are essentially $52 where you are! To be a comparable price to the US, they'd be about 23 pounds… And you say Dust troops cost more than $20 USD per box? Again, that sucks!

But, the 40K tanks you mention cost about $55-60 USD here (Leman Russ, Predator)…

Major Mishap said:

lol, pretty sure GW outraces FFG pretty quick on books you need to buy.