GW releases a new edition now pretty much every 3 years. That gives 36 months to release content for an edition.
1 of those months goes to the release itself. So 35 months for the rest of the content. I counted, and I think there are at least 23 factions that need releases in that time. One codex a month means two solid years of releases to get everyone updated. Especially if you take into account the tendency to give .5 codex to certain factions sometimes, basically giving them two release slots in an edition.
So assuming no new factions requiring a codex are introduced (and I can't think of an edition where that didn't happen in some form or another, either a new faction or a subfaction). And assuming the focus is on updating an army every month (which they also rarely manage, often two months or more can go by with no update) you're looking at a best case scenario of playing for 11 months with a complete game. More likely, you'll never actually have a complete game, or it will last a month or two if they get there.
To me, that's really unsatisfying. How do you guys feel about it? My solution would be to delay the new editions. Nothing wrong with an edition that lasts 6-7 years if it means everyone's having a good time. Look at D&D 5e, it's doing gangbusters and it's been going 7 years with no sign of slowing down. Third edition went for 6 years and was a huge success. It's not required that they pump an edition out every 3 years, is it?
It's definitely something that weighs on my mind when I think about getting back into 40K, if I buy in I'll probably get a couple of games in given my busy life and lack of a group before the edition changes and I need to rebuy everything and relearn all the rules.
I’m not a big fan of the release cycle they are on. I’m a slow painter, and get games in sporadically. I own rulebooks I’ve never used, do to edition changes happening faster then I play. If you have a like minded group, you can always play old editions. Makes pick up games harder.
On one side, the rapid release does mean that you no longer have to wait decades, often multiple editions between getting your codex. But it does not stop the issue of codex creep, where playing with a new codex, vs and old one is heavily slanted to the latest and greatest book.
While I love to have a book on the shelf, I think we’d be better off with a living digital ruleset. Where updates would not be tied to print and product cycles and lag times. But I think GW makes too much money pushing paper to ever have this happen. Although the cost of getting the rules has stopped me picking up new models a number of times. So it’s not a 100% loss of revenue.
6 Years between Rogue Trader & 2nd, then > 5 > 6 > 4 > 4 > 2 > 3 > 3
GW needs to keep releasing big boxes to keep their shareholders happy, and new edition boxes sell the best. Hopefully as Specialist Games expands their releases will help extend 40k & AoS.
I dunno, I don't think the two are directly comparable but I doubt Hasbro's shareholders are annoyed at how D&D 5e is doing.
Edit to add: And I'm cool with codex releases being as fast as possible, so that people can play the edition properly with their army. But I think the edition should hang around a bit longer to give people a chance to really play with their toys.
Da Boss wrote: I dunno, I don't think the two are directly comparable but I doubt Hasbro's shareholders are annoyed at how D&D 5e is doing.
Edit to add: And I'm cool with codex releases being as fast as possible, so that people can play the edition properly with their army. But I think the edition should hang around a bit longer to give people a chance to really play with their toys.
I think we have a better chance these days of that happening. It used to be the only time you got new stuff was when your codex dropped. There might have been a second wave, or an odd straggler, but it was mostly a one and done drop.
Now with campaign book series, they can drip feed rules/models and tweak codexs on the fly.
The down side is that if you want to have the full rules for your army, you might need to drag 3-5 books to the table, and might only need a page or two for some of them. And they are $30-$50 a pop. Plus maybe a WD or two.
So GW can continue to flog expensive books that everyone “needs” to have. Or updated codexes that compile them.
I don’t have much of an issue with shelling out for models. I’ve had marines serving the Emperor since the RT era, and continue to do so. But books are a dead investment once the new version come out. I’ve got a LOT of money in dead trees on the shelf. Sometimes I can dust them off for pictures, lore, or historical checks. But mostly just wasted. I was OK with it until 6th. You buy a book, get 4-6 (or more) years out of it, that’s an OK ROI. 6th’s 2 year cycle broke me. I now begrudge every cent I spend on rules, and only buy the minimum I need to play, and no fancy accessories like cards.
The constant cycle of releasing new editions and codexes instead of focusing on and improving one ruleset is the main reason I just play the new Apocalypse and older editions. I prefer a mostly static ruleset, perhaps with an occasional FAQ if truly needed for balance but definitely not at the frequency we have these days.
GW used to say they are a model company first, but their focus has shifted a lot more heavily to rules, codexes/battletomes, cards, supplements, novels, and other non-miniature items over the years. And as long as most of you keep on buying those books/cards that are invalidated months after they are released then GW will keep on producing them.
Da Boss wrote: I dunno, I don't think the two are directly comparable but I doubt Hasbro's shareholders are annoyed at how D&D 5e is doing.
Edit to add: And I'm cool with codex releases being as fast as possible, so that people can play the edition properly with their army. But I think the edition should hang around a bit longer to give people a chance to really play with their toys.
D&D isn't about selling miniatures, Warhammer is.
But yeah an Edition shouldn't last three years, unless its suuuuper flawed and there are loads of complaints and constant major FAQ's. At that point scrap it and make a new one.
I could maybe accept less if X.5 codexes were more of a thing, and there's a reasonably active "oops we screwed up" CA process.
You could argue that 8th->9th could have been covered with a big FAQ. I feel "new edition" was more of a marketing demand given the changes were significant, but comprehensible.
But I don't want to revert to "this faction is up, this faction is down, we'll review things in 4 years, maybe, if you get another crap book that's 8+ years on the shelf." (You could argue I guess certain factions have been in that position for a lot of the last 4 years... but still.)
When GW released 9th instead of 8.1 and PA just had like 8 additional pages per army of fairly half assed rules and reprinted datasheets I knew this was the new standard. People bought the books and continue to do so, so GW will keep up this pace of releases as long as its profitable. So yeah, good luck with that 40k players.
If only there were other options for releasing rules, rather than GW having to spend time and resources printing physical copies of codices.
If only there was an option that would allow new datasheets to be seamlessly inserted into existing rules, so that model releases don't have to be strictly coordinated with printed rules.
But alas, no such option exists anywhere on the planet so we must continue with the printed word. Incidentally, could I tempt anyone to a game aboard the Titanic? I hear it will soon be ready for its maiden voyage.
Feeds into my tinfoil hat theory that GW estimate the lifespan of a customer at 3-5 years
Yes they know there are long term players but they don't tend to buy much beyond the odd thing for existing armies and hobby supplies so arent targetted to any great degree beyond nostalgia of SG releases
3-5 years beats the old rumor that they expected little Timmy to last Christmas and a birthday.
Does beg the question, what to sell old players? We already have all the core units in our army. How many fringe units can they add before the bloat gets out of control? SM codex suggests that GW doesn't think there is a cap. But soaking us for a new rulebook and a codex as often as they can is solid financial planning. Leans hard into the sunk cost fallacy.
Players who aren't brand new to the hobby get sold new armies. Whenever I hit a spell of not buying models when I was a young gobbo, a couple of the staff at my local GW always tried to get me to start a new army. Bearing in mind that at this time I was already playing CSM, AM, Daemons, Seraphon, Slaves to Darkness, Bloodbound, and EC in 30k. It never worked because I was really into reading as much BL stuff as I could and eventually the staff chilled out and started helping with book recommendations instead.
Turnip Jedi wrote: Feeds into my tinfoil hat theory that GW estimate the lifespan of a customer at 3-5 years
Hells bells that's dark
yep that came out a little more fatalistic than intended, but then again if you're not spending then GW most likely consider you deceased
I think they acknowledge that established players help spread the brand, and make it so new players have someone to game with. But most of their sales are probably new players getting up to speed. Older players are just grabbing a box or two a year. The new guys are emptying their wallets to get 2,000 points to the table.
Thinking of my own experience on player lifecycle....
I started playing in 1998, and mostly stopped about 2004 (so 6 years) and I only ever got one army to 2k, then I moved, dropping down to mostly just lore books and odd model until a total stop in 2009 I restarted in mid 2020 and am still dithering over which army to build up, so I now have 2 armies at 500pts and another at 1k. Given the limited ability to play currently, theirs not much pressure to build any of these up to 2k.
Its WAY too fast. I would prefer 5 to 6 years TBH.
By the time I've bought, assembled and painted an army it will have been at least several years, disregarding the 7+ armies i have just lying around that have never been painted.
The game changes before I even have a chance to field the damn army. I'll write a list but then they change the points values or in some cases weapon options for the models i've bought meaning my list becomes illegal every 6 months or so when they release the GHB.
I think the accelerated release cycle has harmed their bottom end, from me at least.
I no longer purchase books or rules because they will be obsolete within a year due to FAQ's/Erratas and points adjustments. It's not worth my money.
I also don't purchase any army until 6 months have passed or the latest GHB comes out so that my army won't be make illegal the minute I buy it. It's happened to me twice now, I'm not falling for it again.
Turnip Jedi wrote: Feeds into my tinfoil hat theory that GW estimate the lifespan of a customer at 3-5 years
Yes they know there are long term players but they don't tend to buy much beyond the odd thing for existing armies and hobby supplies so arent targetted to any great degree beyond nostalgia of SG releases
Hardly a good place that represents a UK or US buyer here, but from the around 20 people that started at the begining of 8th ed. Only 6 made it to 9th, and only 3 still play the game. I have a feeling that there is a large number of people that never cross the one edition break point. Specially if they get burned on their faction, because it is one thing to be required to do extra stuff to make a good army still good, there is very little entice to spend money on an army which will stay bad no matter what you do.
In the end GW will probably just cut content, for an army or two that has just book+HQ model or something like that
Turnip Jedi wrote: Feeds into my tinfoil hat theory that GW estimate the lifespan of a customer at 3-5 years
That makes a lot of sense actually. It's been pretty well known GW's primary source of income is 12-14 years olds getting started and becoming obsessed for a while so if you stick like 5 years onto their age it's about when they'd start dropping out of the hobby due to their parents not buying them so much stuff, using the money for non-GW social stuff, moving out to go to college etc.
Turnip Jedi wrote: Feeds into my tinfoil hat theory that GW estimate the lifespan of a customer at 3-5 years
Yes they know there are long term players but they don't tend to buy much beyond the odd thing for existing armies and hobby supplies so arent targetted to any great degree beyond nostalgia of SG releases
Unfortunately that's probably true for anything and becomes more true as things become more popular. The old players and fanatics are vastly outnumbered by the 3-5 year crowd so that's who they're going to market/sell to. At least that's part of why I think the game has changed so much and why going mainstream is largely a negative. On the bright side it's good for the second hand market.
Also, there's no reason you have to stay up to date with their books unless you are playing in tournaments.
Yeah the timeline gets pretty nuts if you've got 36 months in an edition and 24 months to get every codex updated. It also means that every new edition a player has to wonder if they'll get their new rules in the first year or the 2nd year. Woo.
GW is currently doing really well financially but I don't think this is a good strategy for a long-term business model. It's going to burn people out, I've got several friends who love to play but with jobs and families don't always have time. Every time they buy a BRB or codex and it gets invalidated by a newer one before they play, well that certainly hurts. Those are older consumers though, not young Timmy. But with how fast 7th/8th/9th are going, young Timmy could get burned just the same by the time he assembles and paints an army then a new codex drops 3 months later if he bought late in the cycle.
Another thing I don't see discussed often is the edition number and the negative connotations with it. I can't think of many games that are proud to be on a 7th edition or a 10th edition or 15th edition. As a brand new consumer if I saw Warmachine 18th edition I might want to stay away, "18 editions? That's a lot". At what point does 40k become "ugh 14th edition? Man they still haven't gotten the rules right? Maybe I'll try this X-Wing game instead."
I am truly surprised they don't go all in with digital rules and updates. Well, they probably wanted to get Warhammer+ up and running so they could tie digital rules to a monthly netflix sized subscription.
I feel the same way. I have acquired several armies over the years and I don't plan on picking up a codex unless I know I'll be playing that army in the near future. Last thing I want is a codex that gets invalidated before I can play the army.
As an example I don't think many people were expecting Sisters to get a codex so early in 9th given that the 8th ed codex wasn't that old.
Yeah, the stark contrast between D&D and 40K is what kinda stood out to me. 40K first came out in 1987, D&D came out 13 years earlier in 1974. Despite that, D&D has had half the number of editions of 40K.
If you look at WFB it's actually even worse, and if you include AoS you're looking at 11 editions in ten years less time than D&D had it's 5.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, the stark contrast between D&D and 40K is what kinda stood out to me. 40K first came out in 1987, D&D came out 13 years earlier in 1984. Despite that, D&D has had half the number of editions of 40K.
If you look at WFB it's actually even worse, and if you include AoS you're looking at 11 editions in ten years less time than D&D had it's 5.
Just inherently devalues the rules they produce.
This speaks volumes. Unfortunately they've been done gone down that rabbit hole.
The removed - grow up players want a CCG, the more GW is gonna feth over the rest of the game to deliver.....
I've slowly come to realise that I should just do the modeling and army projects I want to and worry about rules later.
Only sticky issue for me is that i'll be playing tournaments, but probably not that many, and would rather not spend on books i'll not use much. For non-tournaments i'll just use Wahapedia, but still buy the books that appeal to me - for the art and fluff as much as anything. The grand tournament pack is like a tax, and its silly that your every table in a tourney will likely have 2 copies.
Turnip Jedi wrote: Feeds into my tinfoil hat theory that GW estimate the lifespan of a customer at 3-5 years
Yes they know there are long term players but they don't tend to buy much beyond the odd thing for existing armies and hobby supplies so arent targetted to any great degree beyond nostalgia of SG releases
It's called "Leaking bucket principle". You lose all the time customers and have therefore to keep replenishing it with new ones. And yes, GW considers those 3-5 years to be the period in which an average gamer is active.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nevelon wrote: 3-5 years beats the old rumor that they expected little Timmy to last Christmas and a birthday.
Does beg the question, what to sell old players? We already have all the core units in our army. How many fringe units can they add before the bloat gets out of control? SM codex suggests that GW doesn't think there is a cap. But soaking us for a new rulebook and a codex as often as they can is solid financial planning. Leans hard into the sunk cost fallacy.
What does a vet buy? Nostalgia stuff! Such as new Slambo for WHFB, new Sly Marbo, female Catachan and the SOB model from the old WD magazine cover.
My solution would be to delay the new editions. Nothing wrong with an edition that lasts 6-7 years if it means everyone's having a good time. Look at D&D 5e, it's doing gangbusters and it's been going 7 years with no sign of slowing down.
That solves nothing as new supplements break the game and increase hobby upkeep and entry costs the same way new codexes do. DnD is not a balanced game, I want 40k to be, I don't think the DnD model is right for this reason.
I don't want printed matched play rules released outside of one month a year. I don't want any army to be ahead in terms of rules, everyone knows that GK, TS and CSM will be 2W at some point, they're not because GW hasn't released the print rules for it yet, that should never be the case. I don't really care how much errata GW piles on top of an edition before switching over to the next one, 8th practically became a new edition with all Psychic Awakening already, I just wish it all came bundled in one robust release once a year.
Spoiler:
*8th edition comes out June 2017 with the indexes, except FW is not separated into its own things.
*GW releases beta rules for new models as they are released.
*December 1st 2017 CA17 is released containing balanced objective secured, WL traits, relics, points and missions for every army.
*October 2017 Deathwatch collectors guide is released as the team had extra time. This contains fluff, pictures, dioramas, guides for Deathwatch and the complete rules for Kill Team, but no rules for regular matched play.
*December 1st 2018 CA18 is released adding Stratagems for every army and updating CA17 content in line with the new Stratagems. Necron datasheets are poorly written so Necrons get a new mini-index as well.
*January 2018 Imperial Guard collectors guide is released as the team had extra time. This contains missions, fluff, pictures, dioramas, guides for Imperial Guard and map campaigns usable by all players, but no rules for regular matched play. These sorts of releases continue whenever the team has time. Space Marines collectors guide with Crusade, Genestealer Cults with Tactical Deployment, etc, etc.
*December 1st 2019 CA19 is released adding Chapter Tactics for every army and updating CA18 content in line with the new Chapter Tactics. Space Marines, Chaos Space Marines, etc get new mini-indexes that include their new units that were using beta rules from the Warhammer Community website previously.
*December 1st 2020 9th edition and CA20 is released adding Combat Doctrines for every army and updating CA19 content in line with the new Combat Doctrines. Space Marines and a few others get a new mini-index to update old or include new datasheets.
*December 1st 2021 CA21 is released updating CA20 content, it now contains Relics, Warlord Traits, Chapter Tactics, Combat Doctrines and Stratagems for every army as well as tournament missions.
The amount of money the veterans at my club spend on 40k still after playing for over 30years make me wonder how many kids there have to be to equal them in spending. These are grown men with 1 hobby and don't spend much on anything else. You would probably need a bunch of kids for each veteran to keep up in spending. And these guys have been doing this for longer than I have been alive. Each of them should be worth at least the same as 40 kids being burned and churned.
A single veteran is probably worth a handful of kids at a time but will keep on for decades. Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids. Probably harder and harder to get the kids now a days as well when you have phones,iPads and way cooler video games than 20-30 years ago to compete with. Way cheaper as well.
Klickor wrote: The amount of money the veterans at my club spend on 40k still after playing for over 30years make me wonder how many kids there have to be to equal them in spending. These are grown men with 1 hobby and don't spend much on anything else. You would probably need a bunch of kids for each veteran to keep up in spending. And these guys have been doing this for longer than I have been alive. Each of them should be worth at least the same as 40 kids being burned and churned.
A single veteran is probably worth a handful of kids at a time but will keep on for decades. Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids. Probably harder and harder to get the kids now a days as well when you have phones,iPads and way cooler video games than 20-30 years ago to compete with. Way cheaper as well.
Nevelon wrote: 3-5 years beats the old rumor that they expected little Timmy to last Christmas and a birthday.
Does beg the question, what to sell old players? We already have all the core units in our army. How many fringe units can they add before the bloat gets out of control? SM codex suggests that GW doesn't think there is a cap. But soaking us for a new rulebook and a codex as often as they can is solid financial planning. Leans hard into the sunk cost fallacy.
That is why Primaris exist. To answer the question of what you sell a marine player that also has all possible units.
You sell him the same thing again, but now they are new marines.
Nevelon wrote: 3-5 years beats the old rumor that they expected little Timmy to last Christmas and a birthday.
Does beg the question, what to sell old players? We already have all the core units in our army. How many fringe units can they add before the bloat gets out of control? SM codex suggests that GW doesn't think there is a cap. But soaking us for a new rulebook and a codex as often as they can is solid financial planning. Leans hard into the sunk cost fallacy.
That is why Primaris exist. To answer the question of what you sell a marine player that also has all possible units.
You sell him the same thing again, but now they are new marines.
Or re-cut old units and add new options. How many Tac/Dev boxes were sold when they brought back grav guns? Especially since they were broken-hot. But these days, that would just be handing money to the 3rd party people I guess.
I have the limited release TDA captain that harks back to the RT sculpt that I have no need for that says nostalgia sells.
And a second, primaris, battle company I’m working up that says “new things” also sell to vets.
I might have a problem, but it’s my major hobby and source of entertainment. Keeps me off the streets and out of trouble.
Klickor wrote: Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids.
See, the thing is, if you're into GW "ecosystem" for 30 years, GW doesn't have to do jack to keep you in it, sheer inertia and sunk cost will keep you going.
Nevelon wrote: 3-5 years beats the old rumor that they expected little Timmy to last Christmas and a birthday.
Does beg the question, what to sell old players? We already have all the core units in our army. How many fringe units can they add before the bloat gets out of control? SM codex suggests that GW doesn't think there is a cap. But soaking us for a new rulebook and a codex as often as they can is solid financial planning. Leans hard into the sunk cost fallacy.
SM players are clearly treated as a class of whale consumer completely separated from the normal reality of what GW considers a consumer to be.
Klickor wrote: Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids.
See, the thing is, if you're into GW "ecosystem" for 30 years, GW doesn't have to do jack to keep you in it, sheer inertia and sunk cost will keep you going.
Back in the final 5 or so years of the Kirby era GW was royally screwed so we know thats not true. Remember all the stores being cut down to one staff member and a bunch of stores just closed completely? If I remember the financial reports the tabletop game was barely making them money. They needed to sell the license to any app developer who wanted to make a Warhammer version of whatever was popular at the time to squeek into a profitable year. Hence why we have so many garbage Warhammer app games now.
IMOGW are quickly burning through the good faith they won back with 8th and its only a matter of time before they're back to where they were.
Specifically with 7th in mind, i am fine with the release schedule since it ended that horrible edition as fast as it did. If anything I wish 7th had only been 1 year instead of 3. But I do think 4 years is the shortest an edition should go. 8th was a bit weird since they released the indexs right off the bat but even with that in mind I think some factions barely had their codex in hand before it was time to move to 9th. Hell, my orkz got our new campaign book shortly before the new edition dropped.
Currently, if I get to play regularly, GW is essentially adding stuff the the game for me whenever I'm about to get bored with the game. My main criticism is that they take too long to ramp up an edition before we actually get to play the whole thing.
I mean, just browse dakka for half an hour - more half the complaints are about issues that are related to codices, either because a codex cannot keep pace with the updated ones or they still contain major problems from 8th like buff stacking or aura castles.
Essentially, even if there was not virus and politics, they would still have taken almost a year to get all armies into 9th, and now it looks like they are going to take at least a year and half.
By that time we are halfway trough the editions if they keep their timetables for the next edition. The time to actually play the completed 9th edition will be very short for many players.
In the end, one of the biggest problems is still books. If the rules were available digitally, you wouldn't need to jump to a whole new edition to fix central parts to the rules, and you wouldn't need to make a full codex release to tweak a few units. There should not be a need for a new edition or codex by default.
But I agree with Semper, 8th edition ended much too early. I didn't even manage to play each plague company once from WotS before I had the new codex.
So I guess four years seems like a good compromise of the game not getting stale without feeling rushed to get the next new thing all the time.
I would actually prefer a revised edition 9.5 at the 3 year mark and then 2 years more of it.
After 3 years you have a clear idea of the problems with core rules, so a second edition of the BRB doesn't hurt.
The amount of money they make with starter sets and books (both new products to sell when a new edition drops) makes it unlikely they'll change the release cycle anytime soon.
Who wants to bet that in mid 2023 we'll have 10th ed, despite having some codices come out in late 2022?
Still 15 codices to be updated to 9th plus another 6 SM supplements (7 with Black Templars). One a month means late 2022 to complete the cycle.
Now with campaign book series, they can drip feed rules/models and tweak codexs on the fly.
The down side is that if you want to have the full rules for your army, you might need to drag 3-5 books to the table, and might only need a page or two for some of them. And they are $30-$50 a pop. Plus maybe a WD or two.
I think that's the plan for the lack of epub versions of the books and how they want you to rely on their app/Warhammer+. Because when you buy the book and get the code you have access to the information on your app which means you don't have to bring the books with you(except maybe the main codex).
Ultimately I think the issue is that the books appear to be a major source of revenue for GW which means they'll want to churn those things out as quickly as possible.
GW really missed the mark with 9th edition codex schedule. Too many changes were made to the Core rules that affected too many factions in too great a way to justify this trickle of content in this edition. They had a great thing that one time they did indexes, remember that? Imagine if they had done that at the start of 9th. 2W marines across the board, instead of waiting for codexes to come out. What a time to be alive that would have been./s
To prevent this kind of issue, they need to release ALL of the codices at the start of a new edition. THEN they can start the release schedule for the new rules and models. Divide the year up in halves and each half gets a story book like Charadon. Releases would have to be staggered similar to how they are now, just with focus on codexes that havent had new units/sculpts taking priority. Throw in some random limited or gimmicky stuff every 4 months to keep them collecting (like Gaunts Ghosts). Starting in the 4th quarter to boost sales report numbers, something like this:
October - Imperium and Xenos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units Story Book
November - Imperium and Chaos with Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units
December - Xenos and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units,
January - Imperium and Xenos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units,Gimmick
February - Imperium and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units
March - Xenos and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units
April - Imperium and Xenos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units, Story Book
May - Imperium and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units, Gimmick
June - Xenos and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units
July - Imperium and Xenos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units,
August - Imperium and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units
September - Xenos and Chaos Boxset, 2 new units, 2 new sculpts of new units, Gimmick
Repeat for a few years while you work on a new edition. I feel like five years is a good lifecycle for an edition. You could vary if the boxsets are battlefield sized or kill team sized. You could have boxsets that feature two new hq choices and nothing else. Boxsets that come with new technical paints, or new colors. Or themed for new chapters/dynasties etc... The possibilities are endless what you can do with a little creativity with just a two army focus and a little ingenuity.
Da Boss wrote: If the core rules are good, there's no need for any edition change. You could have an edition last for 10 years.
If you need new material, there's tonnes of stuff they could make. Actual decent campaign books, scenario books, alternate game modes, loads of stuff.
100% agree. A good set of core rules without any conceptual flaws does not need any change at all.
Even if you run into the issue of the game getting stale, codices, points and missions are sufficient tools to shake up the game and make it interesting again.
GW could release an Indomitus style box and the combo of new models+massive discount versus the inevitable RRP will see it fly off the shelves. You don't need a new edition for that.
I think GW are realising these "get your army book and models early" boxes are sort of the same thing - but with some debate on how much (if any) of a discount should be included.
I think the problem is partly that GW can never commercially leave things alone. 8th was balanced (?) for... 3 months between the late April FAQ and the SM Codex release in August. 3 months in 3 years isn't the best ratio.
kirotheavenger wrote: When I was younger this pace would have been absolutely fine.
One codex a month? What am I going to do the other three weeks of the month?
But now this pace is lightning quick. "Dark Eldar got their release? When? Oh snap, since when were Sisters getting a codex?"
I don't buy any printed publications now, I played about 3 games with my 8th edition Blood Angels codex, it's just not worth it.
when I first got in the game I buy my first codex for like $26and I think the supplement was $15.Now two books for just the one army is $140, it looks better but I don’t think they are worth that.
It’s also more expensive than D&D books are here, and much more than any of the other game books I buy.
The cost is prohibitive and the rules still to meh for the price the game is pushed at to really be satisfied for myself.
Buying supplements for rules is just not worth it.
Buy a book only if you like the full package. If it is a dex for you faction then you are going to use all of it and it is a good buy, but buying a book for half a dozen pages? Yeah, not doing that.
Nevelon wrote: 3-5 years beats the old rumor that they expected little Timmy to last Christmas and a birthday.
Does beg the question, what to sell old players? We already have all the core units in our army. How many fringe units can they add before the bloat gets out of control? SM codex suggests that GW doesn't think there is a cap. But soaking us for a new rulebook and a codex as often as they can is solid financial planning. Leans hard into the sunk cost fallacy.
That is why Primaris exist. To answer the question of what you sell a marine player that also has all possible units.
You sell him the same thing again, but now they are new marines.
I didn't fall for that trap. I have a single, promo Primaris mini in my cabinet and nothing else will be added from that line to my collection. Nice try though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote: "Warhammer: Your kids will be so poor they won't have money to spend on drugs!"
Da Boss wrote: If the core rules are good, there's no need for any edition change. You could have an edition last for 10 years.
If you need new material, there's tonnes of stuff they could make. Actual decent campaign books, scenario books, alternate game modes, loads of stuff.
100% agree. A good set of core rules without any conceptual flaws does not need any change at all.
Even if you run into the issue of the game getting stale, codices, points and missions are sufficient tools to shake up the game and make it interesting again.
Edition change was never about improving the game. It's a dishonest tax for veteran players who still want to play the game at tournaments or at GW shops.
The last time I played 40K with pure edition rules was during 5th. Nowadays I just play Oldhammer with custom rules. Nearly all of the books that GW cranked out since then were of zero value for me.
Sometimes it feels as if GW was not making a game, or making new stuff. They just create system that create problems to the players, then are slow updating the problems they created themselfs and expect that the way to fixing this is just buying another 2000pts army that works, or buying in to another of their games. Take knights for example. Being shot from behind terrain, while not being able to fire back, is a horrible thing. Should never exist as a rule. Till now GW had at least 2 times when they could even updated it. But it feels as if GW only cared for the faction they already released this edition, and cared zero for all the other factions. And it works both ways. Faction too good with old rules, GW ignores it. Faction horrible with old rules, the same level of attention.
Da Boss wrote: If the core rules are good, there's no need for any edition change. You could have an edition last for 10 years.
If you need new material, there's tonnes of stuff they could make. Actual decent campaign books, scenario books, alternate game modes, loads of stuff.
100% agree. A good set of core rules without any conceptual flaws does not need any change at all.
Even if you run into the issue of the game getting stale, codices, points and missions are sufficient tools to shake up the game and make it interesting again.
Even then edition changes could be performed through Chapter Approved. An edition doesn't have to be locked down into a big release date especially since CA is a yearly thing anyway.
100% agree. A good set of core rules without any conceptual flaws does not need any change at all.
Even if you run into the issue of the game getting stale, codices, points and missions are sufficient tools to shake up the game and make it interesting again.
But it is the easiest way to make people rebuy large chunks or even the whole of their collections. Why wait for each army players to redo their armies till the codex comes out, possibly in a year or two, when you can just say unit x, y and z are bad now, and because they were the core of the army, now go buy units a, b and c who are the new thing now. On top of that we once again switched the power from melta to plasma or plasma to melta.
If someone tried to have a semi valid army for marines in 8th and now in 9th, they have went through at least 3 total revamps of how the army works.
Even for my army, which had no model updates in 8th and 9th, the army went from never take anything in termintor armour, to take 10 paladins, to avoid strikes like the plague.
Da Boss wrote: If the core rules are good, there's no need for any edition change. You could have an edition last for 10 years.
If you need new material, there's tonnes of stuff they could make. Actual decent campaign books, scenario books, alternate game modes, loads of stuff.
100% agree. A good set of core rules without any conceptual flaws does not need any change at all. Even if you run into the issue of the game getting stale, codices, points and missions are sufficient tools to shake up the game and make it interesting again.
Even then edition changes could be performed through Chapter Approved. An edition doesn't have to be locked down into a big release date especially since CA is a yearly thing anyway.
Depends. If you introduce a change that affects many rules and multiple phases, you might as well release a new edition.
An example would be a change like making charge moves part of regular movement - this would affect almost every part of the game and errata'ing it in via CA is not really a good solution.
100% agree. A good set of core rules without any conceptual flaws does not need any change at all. Even if you run into the issue of the game getting stale, codices, points and missions are sufficient tools to shake up the game and make it interesting again.
But it is the easiest way to make people rebuy large chunks or even the whole of their collections. Why wait for each army players to redo their armies till the codex comes out, possibly in a year or two, when you can just say unit x, y and z are bad now, and because they were the core of the army, now go buy units a, b and c who are the new thing now. On top of that we once again switched the power from melta to plasma or plasma to melta.
If someone tried to have a semi valid army for marines in 8th and now in 9th, they have went through at least 3 total revamps of how the army works. Even for my army, which had no model updates in 8th and 9th, the army went from never take anything in termintor armour, to take 10 paladins, to avoid strikes like the plague.
Yeah, no. The only models I bought during 9th were the ones released new or some that I liked.
It's not 7th anymore, where GW intentionally destroys all models even remotely competitive. You only get screwed over if your "collection" is a 2000 point meta-aligned army.
Okey, but most armies don't or didn't have the luxury of something like the Inari rule set to carry some weaker models. If in 8th you build your BAs the wrong way, you were not having much fun playing. 8th is the same, you are not seeing many intercessor heavy lists. Stuff that was popular or obligatory, like primaris tanks or eliminators is not used at all in 9th. And because for a lot of factions the armies are pre build, there isn't much someone can do to adapt. specially if GW decided your army to both bad in 9th and not updated.
What is a GSC or knight player suppose to do in 9th? To a degree it doesn't even matter, if he bought a meta or non meta army in 8th.
Plus it is easy to say that the collection isn't invalidated, when your, as in your yours, but as in someones, army sits at the 50% win rates. Doubt there is many custodes players, sad that they bought all those jetbikes to make cpts.
The real question you need to ask is.. if Games-workshop purposely leaves out improvements in the core of the game and its rules just so it has an excuse to release new editions in the future.
Ultimately we as the community could simply just wait until an edition is complete to move onto it, that way we get a largely balance patched finished product for 3+ years, and after that just move onto the 'new' edition when it is 'finished'. Admittedly none/not enough of us have the sheer will power to enact this, and it will never happen, but its the simple solution when we cant control GWs release schedule, we just decide to take longer to adopt it.
Karol wrote: Okey, but most armies don't or didn't have the luxury of something like the Inari rule set to carry some weaker models. If in 8th you build your BAs the wrong way, you were not having much fun playing. 8th is the same, you are not seeing many intercessor heavy lists. Stuff that was popular or obligatory, like primaris tanks or eliminators is not used at all in 9th. And because for a lot of factions the armies are pre build, there isn't much someone can do to adapt. specially if GW decided your army to both bad in 9th and not updated.
Built the army wrong as in "I skewed hard because I wanted to chase the meta and now spamming the same unit 3 times isn't the top list anymore" will hardly get much sympathy from anyone.
I already told you: If you want to chase the meta, feel the burn with the next balance change.
Intercessors are still good and useful. Sorry not sorry that someones 60 IH Intercessors with Apothecary are not considered top tier anymore.
You have to explain what units would be obligatory and why or what you mean with pre build. Last time I checked I could fill my 2000 points how I want, according to the detachment I picked.
Karol's referring to the fact that they got scammed into buying a large Grey Knights army that's just Paladins and Strike Squads.
Now they suck, and he must devote his life to ensuring Dakka knows it.
Release cycle is definitely too short.
Speed of release increases the revenue but comes at the cost of thoroughness.
Result are sloppy rules and less release of models for new codices.
I'm tired of always chasing the new edition. It's not fun anymore. I play the same armies so GW makes less and less from me and costs have gone down unless I decide to start a new army. I did that for 9th and have not played more than 6 games so far and that's not been amazing. The only reason I end up playing the next edition, time after time, is that everyone I game with has decided to move on. The only nice part about a new edition is new models to buy. And that is very hit or miss with me now. I hate all of the new Ork models that came with the last codex and most of the new Space Marines, the ones in Phobos armour, for example. I'd love to stop playing the next edition and settle on an edition. I honestly can't see why an edition doesn't last at least 5 years. and if GW wants to drop a new big box, why can't the drop a new starter box with the same rules and new models or a made to order starter box so that people could pick which factions they want in their box. If I do buy into 10th and so on I will be buying as little as humanly possible. I'm always tempted to drop out of big battle 40K and start playing Kill team or Necromunda but again getting other people, my long time gaming friends, interested just never seems like it's going to happen so I don't bother spending the money.
I doubt I have even 10 years left in the hobby at this point.
secretForge wrote: Ultimately we as the community could simply just wait until an edition is complete to move onto it, that way we get a largely balance patched finished product for 3+ years, and after that just move onto the 'new' edition when it is 'finished'. Admittedly none/not enough of us have the sheer will power to enact this, and it will never happen, but its the simple solution when we cant control GWs release schedule, we just decide to take longer to adopt it.
Well, I need a new computer, but am waiting to see how the industry responds to the M1 first. And lots of people are using older rules editions - I will continue to use this older model computer too, for different things.
The only real motivation to switch rules and codices is because the originals are terrible. Interestingly, it seems that each edition is made terrible through 'bloat' and 'power-creep' before "fixed", stuff retconned, and a new wave of newness is offered up in response, like the fisherman who gently jerks the lure to attract the fish.
Alongside this jerking is a new focus on narrative, pushing the story forward with Cawl's heresy, new threats from old sources, yada, as if it is the story that demands that prior editions be invalidated as new units emerge to take the spotlight.
Personally, I returned after some time to being actively interested in Warhammer, got interested in buying into 7th, but then saw the free stuff with force orgs and got back into hobby, finally buying myself a nice hardcover "Agents of the Imperium". I was really looking forward to whatever GW was going to do after Shadow War, but 8th was not going in the right direction (for me) and 9th just seemed to double-down, so I have dabbled but...
If I were in the States, in a stable home/place/situation (anywhere, really), then I would likely re-collect older editions first before buying into anything that looks like what GW is doing, now.
My opinions on edition churn are well known, but here it goes again:
TLDR: Three years is too short for an edition, for sure.
Caveats: I play mostly with friends, and I prefer to collect many small armies rather than one big one so that friends who want to try the game without buying in have a way to do so.
Personally, I want a forever edition. And I think the experiments of 8th and 9th offer proof that GW is searching for a way to make that work. It is true that campaign books existed prior to Gathering Storm, but never at the scale we've seen since then. And I think GW is looking for the formula that makes campaign books work so that they don't have to jeopardize everything they've built by hitting a reset button.
Because reset buttons do and will drive players away. If GW thinks the average attention span of a customer is 3-5 years, and editions last 3-5 years, do we not think there's a correlation?
I almost dropped out and stuck with 8th. Crusade is what convinced me to buy into 9th, and I haven't been disappointed- 9th is better than 8th, and I really like Crusade. But now the formula is so close to perfect for me that the only way to go is down. 9th will be my forever edition; changes to Crusade rules from here out affect my armies profoundly, and if a 10th edition is coming, there's no guaranty they'll even bother doing Crusade again. So I'm digging in.
Once all the dexes are out, campaign books could drive the model release cycle from that point forward. I'd do it in quarters; each quarter brings a campaign book, a vs. box and 1-3 releases for the 4-5 factions in the campaign book. At the end of every year, all the campaign book material that is suitable for addition to the dex gets appended to the digital dex (ie. the app), then the cycle starts again.
Essentially, the game will be better if it gets to the place where GW is just maintaining it, rather than having a huge to do list of stuff that needs to be done from the ground up.
Gert wrote: You lot should play 30k, that doesn't get updated for ages. Like seriously not even an FAQ since 2019!
No, I'm not crying you're crying.
instead of playing 30k and being stuck in marine vs marine land I would rather snapshot a point in 40k's timeline together with my gaming buddies and play that for a while.
For a recent example (rather then hark back to 3/5th) I would offer up 8th edition, just before the release of marines 2.0. Arguably the most balanced 40k has been in a while.
Klickor wrote: Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids.
See, the thing is, if you're into GW "ecosystem" for 30 years, GW doesn't have to do jack to keep you in it, sheer inertia and sunk cost will keep you going.
Back in the final 5 or so years of the Kirby era GW was royally screwed so we know thats not true. Remember all the stores being cut down to one staff member and a bunch of stores just closed completely? If I remember the financial reports the tabletop game was barely making them money. They needed to sell the license to any app developer who wanted to make a Warhammer version of whatever was popular at the time to squeek into a profitable year. Hence why we have so many garbage Warhammer app games now.
IMOGW are quickly burning through the good faith they won back with 8th and its only a matter of time before they're back to where they were.
Except that's demonstrably false.
For 2014-2015 which I think was the final year of Kirby, Revenue was 120 million pounds, and royalties were at 1,5 million pounds.
Compare to 2020 half-year report where revenue was at 186 million and royalties were at 8,7 million.
So no, while sales were declining in the last years of Kirby period, they never, at any point had to "firesale" licenses, licenses never made more than a tiny sliver of their profits.
And all it took for GW was to set up facebook and make some self-deprecating jokes for those "disgruntled veterans" to come crawling back.
I'm looking to get back into wargaming after a life induced hiatus. And 8th onwards does look like an okay game, it has elements I don't like but that's been true of every edition. It's certainly an improvement on the editions that caused me to stop playing.
But the value proposition isn't really there for me at the moment. It'll be a big investment in time to learn all the rules and a big chunk of money to buy the rules. I'm not a fan of the shift to 32mm basing as standard for infantry models, and if I play I'll have to rebase my 250 odd Ork infantry to new bases. People say I won't have to, but I see plenty of people with the opposite opinion. The advantage of 40K is the accessible playerbase so if I'm going to play I'm going to want to maximise that advantage by maximising my number of opponents.
So the fast release cycle just adds to this, makes me feel like those investments of time and money are going to be poorly spent. And it just makes me think "Feck it, I'm in my late thirties, I can just start my own group with my various friends playing systems I actually really like using whatever models and bases I want, I don't have to deal with this huge infrastructure around 40K or be annoyed by the direction the game background is going."
It's the value of 40K as a game that is degraded vs. putting effort into doing something that involves fewer compromises on my part. At the moment, 40K is losing out due to that. And the only part of what bugs me about 40K that is likely to change is edition length I think, because I think the bigger scaled minis with bigger bases and new narrative direction are here to stay.
Gert wrote: You lot should play 30k, that doesn't get updated for ages. Like seriously not even an FAQ since 2019!
No, I'm not crying you're crying.
Half of my Gaming group does play 30K. I enjoy it a good bit.
I'd love to play more when we can "get the band back together".
My Imperial Guard project that I have been working on for a year and a half now is backwards compatible to just about every edition and I want to field them for 30K when I can.
Maybe people don't realize or have just turned their nose up at 30K, but it is mostly compatible with 7th edition codex books. And I am sure there are a bunch of those on Ebay.
7th edition Orks vs Legions Astartes is a blast. I completely recommend it. Sadly the problem is finding like minded people to play with and some foc negotiation is needed due to formations and special foc's. I have found it worth the time and energy.
kirotheavenger wrote: If there was a way to get 30k units that didn't involve forking out £60 for five power armoured models, I genuinely would be playing 30k.
Same.
Have started getting the ingredients for a small HH army(Emperor's Children), but the lack of games and that I can't buy from my FLGS what I need makes things annoying.
30k looks nice, but the idea of needing to buy two 350$ boxs to get an army is way above my budget. Still nice models and seems to be a lot more fun then w40k.
GW really missed the mark with 9th edition codex schedule. Too many changes were made to the Core rules that affected too many factions in too great a way to justify this trickle of content in this edition. They had a great thing that one time they did indexes, remember that? Imagine if they had done that at the start of 9th. 2W marines across the board, instead of waiting for codexes to come out. What a time to be alive that would have been./s
I think this is a very good point and GW has burned a lot of people with it. If a new edition features large changes across the board in either stats or wounds it's pretty inexcusable for GW to just say "wait for the codex." It's very silly that loyalists get bumped up to 2W but CSM have to wait over a year. I mean they're all Astartes. They could have easily done a 10 page or less PDF with a points adjustment table and "these units get +1 Wound, these units get +1T" and called it a day. It seems like GW is intentionally not doing a quick update like that in order to get people to buy the Codex. Not a sound business practice in my opinion.
With an inevitable 10th edition I'm concerned they'll pull the same thing.
Sim-Life wrote: When GW released 9th instead of 8.1 and PA just had like 8 additional pages per army of fairly half assed rules and reprinted datasheets I knew this was the new standard. People bought the books and continue to do so, so GW will keep up this pace of releases as long as its profitable. So yeah, good luck with that 40k players.
9th is 8.1. Just like 7th was actually just 6th ( most people called it 6.5 ). We just call them 7th and 9th for expediency. I won't speculate when 10th will show, but I will wager it won't be a sea change like 7th to 8th.
Came back in 8th after leaving in 3rd (game wise, still played other GW games) as didn't like the changes from 2nd. Plus GSC were a thing again.
I have my first 9th ed game Saturday with my guard and I genuinely have no idea what rules are valid for them. 9th is steadily losing me, maybe if I had been playing during lockdown I wouldn't feel the disconnect and could have been slowly boiled int he pan, but currently my interest has dropped off a cliff. I don't know what rules are current and what aren't and the mass of corrections and FAQs for my never used rulebook all seems a bit much.
If it had all had an index update like at the start I would be feeling a lot happier. But even then the push to making new armies both tougher and more deadly isn't one I am much interested in. I would go for a new edition if it toned things down and got back to a more sensible balance, but that won't happen for a long time. Currently I wonder if the game isn't going to sink under the weight of the rules and number of changes.
I play 40k because friends, do, currently the pendulum of why not play a better game is swinging pretty hard away from 40k.
kirotheavenger wrote: If there was a way to get 30k units that didn't involve forking out £60 for five power armoured models, I genuinely would be playing 30k.
Same.
Have started getting the ingredients for a small HH army(Emperor's Children), but the lack of games and that I can't buy from my FLGS what I need makes things annoying.
Good news for both of you is that it looks like a new set of some kind is coming soon with plenty of plastic Mk6 marines, a new Contemptor, some characters, some terminators, and a plastic Spartan.
Da Boss wrote: GW releases a new edition now pretty much every 3 years. That gives 36 months to release content for an edition.
1 of those months goes to the release itself. So 35 months for the rest of the content. I counted, and I think there are at least 23 factions that need releases in that time. One codex a month means two solid years of releases to get everyone updated. Especially if you take into account the tendency to give .5 codex to certain factions sometimes, basically giving them two release slots in an edition.
So assuming no new factions requiring a codex are introduced (and I can't think of an edition where that didn't happen in some form or another, either a new faction or a subfaction). And assuming the focus is on updating an army every month (which they also rarely manage, often two months or more can go by with no update) you're looking at a best case scenario of playing for 11 months with a complete game. More likely, you'll never actually have a complete game, or it will last a month or two if they get there.
.
One faulty assumpion. You are assuming gw is aiming complete edition. Or that every faction will get book during edition. Some will, some get 2, some get 0.
Every faction getting book during edition has been rare. Been done less than handful times 40k/fb/aos combined.
The_Real_Chris wrote: I have my first 9th ed game Saturday with my guard and I genuinely have no idea what rules are valid for them.
Off the top of my head, and depending on what format you're playing and what's in your army, the following:
- 9th ed rulebook
- MFM 2021 for up-to-date points values (if using points) - also comes with the GT Mission Pack, for more mission options
- Codex: Imperial Guard for 8th edition
- Optional - Psychic Awakening: The Greater Good
- Optional - Imperial Armour Compendium (if fielding Forge World units)
- Optional - Imperial Guard Legends (PDF, but still a rules source)
- Optional - Forge World Legends (PDF, but still a rules source)
Da Boss wrote: GW releases a new edition now pretty much every 3 years. That gives 36 months to release content for an edition.
1 of those months goes to the release itself. So 35 months for the rest of the content. I counted, and I think there are at least 23 factions that need releases in that time. One codex a month means two solid years of releases to get everyone updated. Especially if you take into account the tendency to give .5 codex to certain factions sometimes, basically giving them two release slots in an edition.
So assuming no new factions requiring a codex are introduced (and I can't think of an edition where that didn't happen in some form or another, either a new faction or a subfaction). And assuming the focus is on updating an army every month (which they also rarely manage, often two months or more can go by with no update) you're looking at a best case scenario of playing for 11 months with a complete game. More likely, you'll never actually have a complete game, or it will last a month or two if they get there.
.
One faulty assumpion. You are assuming gw is aiming complete edition. Or that every faction will get book during edition. Some will, some get 2, some get 0.
Every faction getting book during edition has been rare. Been done less than handful times 40k/fb/aos combined.
Nah I know that, but I don't really care what GW does I'm focused on what'd be good for us as customers.
This is a reason why I actually enjoy LotR. The game is pretty much finished, well balanced and you got some expansions every now and then with some nice new sculpts. I can paint my Rohan Army without thinking the model I paint now will suck on 3 months. The only thing I have to deal with is FOMO with regards to models vanishing from the store but they communicate that pretty good right now
In the time I have been helping my parents out with their house at the other side of town for the whole of June lots of stuff changed in the 40k meta but nothing in MESBG changed. Happy I play LotR now and not 40k because if it had been the last year I would have been stressed to paint new stuff for upcoming tournaments to keep up with my marines. Latest release in models for my lotr army is about a decade ago and the rules changes like 3 years ago. Feels relaxing and fun like a game should be.
Gert wrote: If you aren't averse to MK6 the next box will be an excellent starting point.
yeah and it is suppose to bne 350$. the content is great, and I am sure it will be gone from the site in seconds. But even if my store somehow managed to have a spare one just for me, 350$ is 17 months of saving up and spending no money . The box looks nice though. Big tank, dread, 10 terminators and 40 marines, plus characters. Very nice set.
One of the reasons I really liked 8th was the release of the indexes, which gave everyone a "you start here" footing.
Too bad they ruined it with the codexes releases, but it's clear the company just wants to shovel the new shiny instead of rules stability.
Rules revisions are way too fast and even exceed D&D's 2E shovelware release schedule; the rules should be more static and well-thought out and the company can make its filthy lucre on "catalog" releases adding new units or refining the look of existing units ... like say, Eldar.
And the damn units should come with full stat cards, not the reductive hieroglyphs of the current kits.
yeah and it is suppose to bne 350$. the content is great, and I am sure it will be gone from the site in seconds. But even if my store somehow managed to have a spare one just for me, 350$ is 17 months of saving up and spending no money . The box looks nice though. Big tank, dread, 10 terminators and 40 marines, plus characters. Very nice set.
Who's saying it's going to be $350? That's Austrialia levels of expensive.
Considering BaC and BoP were about £90/$125, I am very much doubting this new box will be almost 3x as much.
By now it is pretty obvious that GWs planned release cycle + unexpected COVID delays means that a whole bunch of armies will get their codex essentially right before 10th edition to be released. I would imagine 10th edition to be a pretty significant change in 40k as well (because 10 is a significant number). It is a shame because there are lots of things that are great about 9th edition rules. But GWs codex hype train business model severely undermines the game system. As usual they're moving in conflicting directions at the same time, trying to lean into competitive esports marketing while at the same time undermining the rules which found any interest in competitive play.
The release schedule demotivates me from playing. I feel like if I buy a book and try to paint up an army by the time I'm finished we will be in a new edition, my army will be invalidated, and I'll have to spend more money to update it. Or I'll feel bad about the army I chose because it falls behind because of power creep. It makes me feel like why even bother.
I don't own a single 9th edition rulebook except the big core rulebook. I bought a lot of models, expanding my different collections - a lot of necrons, guard, space Marines - but I haven't played 9th yet. I still feel scammed for buying the psychic awakening book for my dark angels, and don't want to buy something that is a waste in 2 years time.
I would also really like to just buy the codes for the app without needing to buy the book. I don't mind looking things up on the phone, even though a big advantage of tabletop gaming is the fact I don't need any digital devices. But I really can't understand the decision to not make the book codes available independent of codexes etc.
Finally, on the topic of this "campaign" book ... I would like a book that is actually about a playable campaign. Do they have more than the 1 mission excuse of an attempted narrative? Some campaign detailing the landing on the planet, advancement along important tactical positions final grand stands would be great, they could have interesting special rules, terrain features, what not. Just some army composition rules don't really make s great campaign book in my mind.
I think they could release a new edition every year, if it came packed up with loads of miniatures in a very value for money way, like indomitus, people would eat it up. The problem is the codex release schedule. If some armies aren’t getting their new codex until the end of one edition the game is always going to be wonky.
They should plan their codexes and the edition rules together so they are re all released at the same time.
Brickfix wrote:I don't own a single 9th edition rulebook except the big core rulebook. I bought a lot of models, expanding my different collections - a lot of necrons, guard, space Marines - but I haven't played 9th yet. I still feel scammed for buying the psychic awakening book for my dark angels, and don't want to buy something that is a waste in 2 years time. I would also really like to just buy the codes for the app without needing to buy the book. I don't mind looking things up on the phone, even though a big advantage of tabletop gaming is the fact I don't need any digital devices. But I really can't understand the decision to not make the book codes available independent of codexes etc. Finally, on the topic of this "campaign" book ... I would like a book that is actually about a playable campaign. Do they have more than the 1 mission excuse of an attempted narrative? Some campaign detailing the landing on the planet, advancement along important tactical positions final grand stands would be great, they could have interesting special rules, terrain features, what not. Just some army composition rules don't really make s great campaign book in my mind.
This is where I am for 9th. I haven't played a a game of 9th yet (covid et al), and only own the core rules because i got the Indomitus box for the miniatures. I expect by the time I'm able to play a game we'll already by on 10th ed.
mrFickle wrote:I think they could release a new edition every year, if it came packed up with loads of miniatures in a very value for money way, like indomitus, people would eat it up. The problem is the codex release schedule. If some armies aren’t getting their new codex until the end of one edition the game is always going to be wonky.
They should plan their codexes and the edition rules together so they are re all released at the same time.
I think the release schedule is all wrong, i know covid has played a part in the schedule, but even without that, I think the approach is all wrong.
I liked that 8th was released with the index book so every faction had a similar starting point, but as 9th was built on 8th rather than a a full refresh like 7th-8th i don't think an index release was necessary. The existing 8th ed codex books are still usable, with errata patches to get them by until the 9th codex release. Where they have gone wrong in my mind, is the campaign books like Charadon being released before the 9th ed codexes have all been released. I think the campaign books are an ok idea, but they should be a way to extend the life of an edition and add rules for new units/factions after the codex cycle has been completed. This would also prevent a faction getting a new codex weeks or a few months before the launch of a new edition.
mrFickle wrote: Yeah 9th being built on 8th didn’t work when they didn’t address glaring imbalances like 2w CSM.
It’s a good idea but there is room for improvement
I wish GW released an Index at the start of 9th. Just give everyone a blanket refresh of points and stats. Then use this recent CA to fix any point imbalances between the index, any new codexes, etc.
Jarms48 wrote: I wish GW released an Index at the start of 9th. Just give everyone a blanket refresh of points and stats. Then use this recent CA to fix any point imbalances between the index, any new codexes, etc.
Points that GW felt needed to be adjusted were done so in the Chapter Approved book that dropped alongside the Indomitus box.
Indexes for 9th would have sucked; they were flavourless compared to dexes without all their sub-faction specific content, WL Traits, relics and strats. They only worked when they did because the previous system had been blown up in its entirety and there was nothing.
It also would have double sucked to have to buy an Index at the beginning of the ed only to replace it months later with a dex or dexes.
GW just shouldn't have gone halfway on the Chaos 2.0 dex, and should have released the 2w fix on the day old-marine loyalists got their bump.
PenitentJake wrote: Indexes for 9th would have sucked; they were flavourless compared to dexes without all their sub-faction specific content, WL Traits, relics and strats. They only worked when they did because the previous system had been blown up in its entirety and there was nothing.
It also would have double sucked to have to buy an Index at the beginning of the ed only to replace it months later with a dex or dexes.
GW just shouldn't have gone halfway on the Chaos 2.0 dex, and should have released the 2w fix on the day old-marine loyalists got their bump.
Or...GW could recognize that it's no longer the '90s and they could distribute rules without selling people a pile of hardback books? Maybe stop raising the barrier to entry to the game by making people buy $100 of paper that'll be invalid in six weeks anyway? Or are they just afraid that if people could see how shoddy their rules are before buying them the sunk-cost fallacy will no longer help them get people into the game? And before you try the "it'd be too complicated to do all the rules for everyone at the same time!" I've been through edition changes for much more complicated games where not only did they do updated rules for everyone all at once, they did so without making any of GW's usual catalogue of amateur-hour editing errors, and in at least one case (Corvus Belli, Infinity N4) they did a thorough job of updating the rules for an army they no longer sell most of the minis for. GWcould restructure their rules releases so players aren't stuck paying money for books that get rendered irrelevant by power creep or by new rules in a very short period. They choose not to.
Jarms48 wrote: I wish GW released an Index at the start of 9th.
You really think that wiping out every single 8th Ed Codex at the start of 9th would be a good idea? Some of those books were months old at the time, and you want to just wash that away?
People seem to have it in their head that that the Indices are a necessary part of the game's evolution, that we always need them when a new edition comes out. I've said this before, but the Indices existed because 8th Edition had a different rules base to 3rd-7th, and thus all previous books were incompatible. They weren't there for balance reasons; they were there so people could play with their armies in the new edition until such time as their Codex were ready.
Indices were a 'get you by' publication - something that, I should point out, were free in both 2nd and 3rd Ed, the last time we got broad all-army Indices of factions - designed as a short-term stop-gap so people could keep playing the new game without having to rely on Codex Release Roulette.
Indices are a step backwards when the game is in a state like it is now.
Jarms48 wrote: I wish GW released an Index at the start of 9th.
You really think that wiping out every single 8th Ed Codex at the start of 9th would be a good idea? Some of those books were months old at the time, and you want to just wash that away?...
It'd be a hard reset instead of the soft "we know your army sucks, just wait months or years until your 9e Codex comes out and then you're allowed to play the game again!" reset, yeah.
Jarms48 wrote: I wish GW released an Index at the start of 9th.
You really think that wiping out every single 8th Ed Codex at the start of 9th would be a good idea? Some of those books were months old at the time, and you want to just wash that away?...
It'd be a hard reset instead of the soft "we know your army sucks, just wait months or years until your 9e Codex comes out and then you're allowed to play the game again!" reset, yeah.
And you would have had the same thing with new Indices...
AnomanderRake wrote: It'd be a hard reset instead of the soft "we know your army sucks, just wait months or years until your 9e Codex comes out and then you're allowed to play the game again!" reset, yeah.
Why does a new edition using the same rule base need a hard reset?
AnomanderRake wrote: It'd be a hard reset instead of the soft "we know your army sucks, just wait months or years until your 9e Codex comes out and then you're allowed to play the game again!" reset, yeah.
Why does a new edition using the same rule base need a hard reset?
It shouldn't. My point is that if GW's writing a new edition that needs new Codexes at all that has the practical effect of invalidating all the Codexes from last edition pretty quickly anyway; the Indexes were one of the last things that gave me any hope for the future of Warhammer, because it indicated that someone at GW might have noticed that the game would benefit from them updating everyone at the same time, instead of making sure the Space Marines are always written to be current with the rules while whoever gets the last Codex gets six months of the edition to have current/functional rules before the whole thing is blown up in their face again.
I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions.
They have a really good ruleset with 9th, and 40k is more popular now than it has ever been. I think even GW would be wary about throwing a new edition out there in 3 or even 4 years and risk loosing a large part of the customer base. It would also be pretty bad with how Covid disrupted things.
We'll see though, GW has made some questionable decisions in the past.
Sasori wrote: I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions...
7th and 8th both had loads of supplement books released six months before the next edition came out. GW doesn't seem to care very much about the useful life of their rules.
Sasori wrote: I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions...
7th and 8th both had loads of supplement books released six months before the next edition came out. GW doesn't seem to care very much about the useful life of their rules.
when that expected lifespan is measured in minutes why would they?
Sasori wrote: I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions...
7th and 8th both had loads of supplement books released six months before the next edition came out. GW doesn't seem to care very much about the useful life of their rules.
There is a bit more nuance involved though with the GT mission pack books though, which is something nearly all players are picking up since it's a requirement in matched play. GW using that in conjunction with army balance tweaks feels significantly more sustainable in keeping the edition going longer.
Sasori wrote: I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions...
7th and 8th both had loads of supplement books released six months before the next edition came out. GW doesn't seem to care very much about the useful life of their rules.
There is a bit more nuance involved though with the GT mission pack books though, which is something nearly all players are picking up since it's a requirement in matched play. GW using that in conjunction with army balance tweaks feels significantly more sustainable in keeping the edition going longer.
Unless its just more books for the money churn, which seems more likely given past behavior. That they feel they need more mission packs to keep the game interesting doesn't sound 'more sustainable' to me, just incidental money they're scooping up on the way to business as usual. If anything, more dollars on keep-current books on top of Chapter Approved seems more likely to burn people out.
Compare it to the Battle Missions book back in 2008. Nice cheap paperback with 30 missions. No fuss, no frills. That's how you do a mission book. Not a bunch of reprinted material and half the mission count.
Sasori wrote: There is a bit more nuance involved though with the GT mission pack books though, which is something nearly all players are picking up since it's a requirement in matched play. GW using that in conjunction with army balance tweaks feels significantly more sustainable in keeping the edition going longer.
Yeah I dunno if I'd ever use the word 'nuance' to describe those books, especially given how much they reprint verbatim.
Sasori wrote: I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions...
7th and 8th both had loads of supplement books released six months before the next edition came out. GW doesn't seem to care very much about the useful life of their rules.
There is a bit more nuance involved though with the GT mission pack books though, which is something nearly all players are picking up since it's a requirement in matched play. GW using that in conjunction with army balance tweaks feels significantly more sustainable in keeping the edition going longer.
...Which is all stuff people were saying about 8th. Increased matched play support, regular release of new missions, regular balance patches, and yet it still only lasted three years (every edition since 3rd has lasted 3-4 years). You may still hope that GW can change or do better. My hope died long ago.
PenitentJake wrote: Indexes for 9th would have sucked; they were flavourless compared to dexes without all their sub-faction specific content, WL Traits, relics and strats. They only worked when they did because the previous system had been blown up in its entirety and there was nothing.
It also would have double sucked to have to buy an Index at the beginning of the ed only to replace it months later with a dex or dexes.
GW just shouldn't have gone halfway on the Chaos 2.0 dex, and should have released the 2w fix on the day old-marine loyalists got their bump.
Or , gw could've done the consumer frinedly thing and released the index lists as ... "free PDF" .... alas.
Sasori wrote: I feel like they have finally nailed with 9th edition and AoS 3rd a way to keep the edition going for longer, while still making a lot more money. With all the Crusade Supplements, GHBs and GT mission packs, it feels like they've finally developed something they pan to sustain for longer than the 3 years of the last editions...
7th and 8th both had loads of supplement books released six months before the next edition came out. GW doesn't seem to care very much about the useful life of their rules.
There is a bit more nuance involved though with the GT mission pack books though, which is something nearly all players are picking up since it's a requirement in matched play. GW using that in conjunction with army balance tweaks feels significantly more sustainable in keeping the edition going longer.
...Which is all stuff people were saying about 8th. Increased matched play support, regular release of new missions, regular balance patches, and yet it still only lasted three years (every edition since 3rd has lasted 3-4 years). You may still hope that GW can change or do better. My hope died long ago.
GW also harped on, on the living Ruleset... yeah mighty fine living, so far that we already got a new BRB and defacto incomaptible 8th edition dexes compared to the updated ones.
I think the question is whether you need indexes or a big universal FAQ.
Because I don't think GW should have gone "Marines all have 2 wounds now" and then "yeah, but CSM probably won't get their 2nd wound until half an edition later". It feels bad because it is bad.
The fact we've got this rolling upgrade in anti-tank power starting with MMs is likewise stupid. GW did after all go through and give everyone's flamers 12" range (or most of them anyway). Its unclear why all dedicated anti-tank weapons couldn't be boosted if that's the intent. We could then worry about how monsters/vehicles can possibly cope - but at least the issues would be clear.
It basically comes back to the fact the players would prefer all the codexes to appear at the same time - or perhaps at a maximum over 6-9 months. Instead we are now 12(?) months into the edition and have 6 books. (With 3 more on the horizon getting us towards Christmas).
There's no point having playtesters tell us this is the most balanced edition eva (etc etc) if all the books will be out for 3 months in late 2022... only for things to then be blown wide apart again when 10th edition or the 2nd 9th edition Marine codex drops in 2023.
Well, frustration sales play a role i rekon. Its easier to frustrate some of the playerbase for them to invest into a secondary or tertiary army and spread more sales regularly that way. Playtesters and big names in a community can increase the sales and make people questions if it is really GW that is the issue and instead blame their chosen faction / Collection.
Nr.1 Spread releases (including rules releases) pad quartal numbers. rules afterall still sell. Assuming 10-15 (depending if printed in China or the UK) £ cost for production and shipping, earning double to tripple that via sales of them and in the case of dexes baseline guaranteeing a certain sales number, is very lucrative.
Nr. 2 Frustration marketing and the clues picked up by the video / mobile gaming industry applies. People expanding their range of armies will also increase and naturalise regular income.
And that is where the "playtesters" (they are not really testers, moreso than defacto promotors but that is a whole other debate based upon early access, free gifts and the need for that to be the first to release a video to make money... baseline youtubes fethed in that regard and not really a good baseline for getting reviews that are unbiased, simply because of how the game is rigged against the creators.)
Would be curious to know what armies people were playing in the Index era that they're so excited to go back to it. I was playing Thousand Sons and if you think they're bad now you must have forgotten when they had access to all of three spells and Aspiring Sorcerers could do nothing but cast their crappy mini-smite. Index was an era of zero options and negative flavor because all that mattered at that point was having datasheets that were compatible with the new wounding rules.
The argument on the indexes is that until people starting to identify the overpowered units - and abuse 8th's fundamental problems (i.e. first turn deepstrike, almost no restrictions on soup and unit spam) - you had a reasonably balanced game. Specifically that less lethal, slower paced game that a lot of people seem to want.
Obviously it didn't last though - and was shallow regardless. But I do think that's the charm.
I always bounce around on this - because I have no time for verisimilitude. But equally I do think the game can devolve too much into chess - i.e. just a sequence of glasshammers trading with each other.
I already feel like 40k is uncomfortable close to a sequence of glass hammers trading places.
The only real depth seems to be which character I keep nearby and which strategem I use to boost my offence/defence.
Tyel wrote: The argument on the indexes is that until people starting to identify the overpowered units - and abuse 8th's fundamental problems (i.e. first turn deepstrike, almost no restrictions on soup and unit spam) - you had a reasonably balanced game. Specifically that less lethal, slower paced game that a lot of people seem to want.
Obviously it didn't last though - and was shallow regardless. But I do think that's the charm.
I always bounce around on this - because I have no time for verisimilitude. But equally I do think the game can devolve too much into chess - i.e. just a sequence of glasshammers trading with each other.
I think people who really loved the index era didn't have an army that only worked in one specific and unfun way, plus the "index vs codex"-gap was the same as the "8th edition vs 9th edition"-gap we have now.
Especially internal balance was quite horrible for many index armies.
Yeah, and also people who actually played with the index only for a few weeks, typically index vs index. I rate my experience with ork index the worst 40k ever played, during that year and a half I even missed 7th edition. Drukhari index was also hot garbage.
I too think it's pathetic that GW can't keep a 40K edition going for more than a few years without a reboot.
I'm a proud battlescribe user who doesn't really want to buy redundant books, only to get rid of them next year. I only buy the BRB when it gets updated, I don't see why I'd want to own any more than that. EPUBs I could buy, but that is pretty much impossible these days since GW stopped selling them, flocking idiots.
I sincerely hope a WH+ subscription could become a serious alternative to (not) buying those books every now and then.
I prefer most Specialist Games over 40K exactly because they don't reboot constantly.
To me, it's not even about the costs so much. My other hobbies are much more expensive It's about not wanting to feel like an idiot.
Blackie wrote: Yeah, and also people who actually played with the index only for a few weeks, typically index vs index. I rate my experience with ork index the worst 40k ever played, during that year and a half I even missed 7th edition. Drukhari index was also hot garbage.
The Tau index was garbage as well. Then the codex came out and it wasn't any better. One broken mechanic (drones) that acted as a crutch for a limping faction, not fun to play with or against. Obviously forcing you to play as a static gunline castle.
Give me my shooty, mobile Tau back!
tauist wrote: I too think it's pathetic that GW can't keep a 40K edition going for more than a few years without a reboot.
I'm a proud battlescribe user who doesn't really want to buy redundant books, only to get rid of them next year. I only buy the BRB when it gets updated, I don't see why I'd want to own any more than that. EPUBs I could buy, but that is pretty much impossible these days since GW stopped selling them, flocking idiots.
I sincerely hope a WH+ subscription could become a serious alternative to (not) buying those books every now and then.
I prefer most Specialist Games over 40K exactly because they don't reboot constantly.
To me, it's not even about the costs so much. My other hobbies are much more expensive It's about not wanting to feel like an idiot.
define 'Can't?
GW keeps editions rolling because that brings in money. It means they can sell you all the books again and again. Ofcourse they could keep an edition alive for a decade and just do small tweaks through CA to make the 'best' 40k edition.
But GW is a business. and edition churn makes more money.
But GW is a business. and edition churn makes more money.
If that was the case, then every RPG would have way more editions than they currently have. DnD has been around since 1974 and it is on its 5th edition. DnD also dwarfs any game made by GW in terms of market. 40K has been around since 1987 and is on it's 9th edition.
But GW is a business. and edition churn makes more money.
If that was the case, then every RPG would have way more editions than they currently have. DnD has been around since 1974 and it is on its 5th edition. DnD also dwarfs any game made by GW in terms of market. 40K has been around since 1987 and is on it's 9th edition.
Well ... TSR eventually got bought out. GW is doing better than they ever have so ... maybe TSR should have done the same RE: Edition churn.
Personally, I'd much rather they get the codexes out, and then work on cool campaign books, etc, and let editions live and breathe a while (I also think this would help them to really figure out what's working/not working and get to a more refined rule set), but it does kind of seem like new editions make money.
Blackie wrote: Yeah, and also people who actually played with the index only for a few weeks, typically index vs index. I rate my experience with ork index the worst 40k ever played, during that year and a half I even missed 7th edition. Drukhari index was also hot garbage.
Orks were obviously unfortunate - but I feel this is just wrong on DE. They were comparatively very strong - leagues ahead of where they'd been in 7th.
Which is partly why when the codex turned up with the usual array of perks they were probably the 2nd best mono-faction in the game after Guard.
I have different experience about that, IMHO they were much stronger in 7th than in 8th index thanks to the coven formations.
The 8th codex came with a massive points discount across the whole line of models, that's one of the main reasons why Drukhari jumped to top tier levels. Everything was extremely overcosted in the index to the point that the army was almost unplayable.
Now all we need to do is wait for the guy who made index 40k the best game ever by banning all the OP stuff, changing half the game, and exclusively playing with like-minded people with very limited collections
To me the rules are not worth the monetary cost but also the time and effort to learn them given how likely I am to be able to play before they are invalidated. But probably I'm not the target demographic, I don't have enough free time and so on.
It seems like most people would prefer a 5 year cycle anyway. I think it'd be more reasonable. I've always thought the codex release schedule was the biggest issue with GW games and it's a shame to see it's still the case.
I never understood what was the motivation (if any justification or hearsay at all was ever provided) to backtrack on the "living edition" they promoted at the beginning of 8th.
The plan was clearly an index full revamp of the Codexes, and then campaign and reprint of the core manual.
Is 9th supposed to be still under this strategy? Do we know why they changed it? Was it about selling Space Marine 2.0?
I think it was just a case of what GW meant by "living edition" wasn't the same thing as what the fans understood by "living edition".
It seems 9th is going the same way, although it seems the campaign books are being released alongside codexes, rather than a sort of phase 2 afterwards.
Cybtroll wrote: I never understood what was the motivation (if any justification or hearsay at all was ever provided) to backtrack on the "living edition" they promoted at the beginning of 8th.
The plan was clearly an index full revamp of the Codexes, and then campaign and reprint of the core manual.
Is 9th supposed to be still under this strategy? Do we know why they changed it? Was it about selling Space Marine 2.0?
The truth is that 8th was flawed.
It was a very good edition under many aspects, but in the end its terrain rules were not up to par with the rest of the game. We also had a weird situation with the gaming community being split between ITC and non-ITC.
9th edition was born to fix those 2 issues. It was needed.
The 8th edition was not in a position to really become a living edition since it was afflicted by those 2 issues.
I know that it will not happen since it makes no commercial sense, but 9th edition can actually become a living edition.
But GW is a business. and edition churn makes more money.
If that was the case, then every RPG would have way more editions than they currently have. DnD has been around since 1974 and it is on its 5th edition. DnD also dwarfs any game made by GW in terms of market. 40K has been around since 1987 and is on it's 9th edition.
Most RP systems are based off freelance work that has very erratic delivery times and production schedules. DnD is also not the sole product of Wizards of the Coast which also makes Magic which does get its share of new editions frequently. The development team of DnD is also just over 20 people a few years back(even less now according to freelancing rumors) so DnD and Warhammer are playing in a very different ballpark. To compare the two is just false comparison.
I more apt comparison would be Star Wars Legion and Warhammer and Star Wars Legion has had a lot of issues in its run with irregular release schedules and availability as well as reorgs as it was moved to AMG because as far as I know AMG/FG really don't do any of the actual physical production inhouse like GW does.
When it comes to comparing the value to me as a consumer of expensive hard back rule books that rely on finding other people with a common understanding to play with, and the time investment to learn the rules to play, I think they're perfectly comparable.
Miniatures are a separate issue to me, any that I buy I can use for any number of systems or just to paint and admire. The value of the miniatures to me is entirely divorced from their GW rules.
But the rules themselves are devalued by GW's approach. That's not to say it doesn't work for them as a company, they seem to be doing very well. That's fine, I'm not particularly interested in that since I'm not a shareholder but rather someone who wants to play Sci Fi and Fantasy wargames.
It was a very good edition under many aspects, but in the end its terrain rules were not up to par with the rest of the game. We also had a weird situation with the gaming community being split between ITC and non-ITC.
9th edition was born to fix those 2 issues. It was needed.
The 8th edition was not in a position to really become a living edition since it was afflicted by those 2 issues.
I know that it will not happen since it makes no commercial sense, but 9th edition can actually become a living edition.
I feel a big FAQ could have sorted out those issues though.
I guess at a certain point you can argue this is too fundamental, you want everyone on the same page rather than debating whether the 2020 Chapter Approved is *really* mandatory.
An update would also had the advantage of keeping the power level more or less appropriate rather than the crazy divide we have now (in my opinion equale to the worst moment of the past... But that's debatable).
I mean, I can get that GW want power creep to push sales. But it's baffling anyway that they didn't even try once to keep the power level more or less equal for just more than a few months.
That said, culturally they're still probably the very same company they were when the mindset of Kirby "market research are a waste of money" was rule (isn't Roundtree someone who was in the upper management already with Kirby?).
In order to have such big mistake goes unchallenged for years, company culture is to blame, and that doesn't shift easily.
Da Boss wrote: I might give that a go. Stripped down relatively "level playing field" 40k on the cheap appeals to me.
Even I have to admit that there is a level of appeal there, so I see where you're coming from.
It's just a shame that GW aren't using Chapter Approved to add to the game as a whole. I remember one CA from 8th Ed that gave a bunch of Codex-less armies Relics, Warlord Traits and some Strats. It wasn't much, but it was something to add to the 'get-you-by' nature of the Indices.
PA was a bit like that, but we still have massive disparities like most Chaos Marines vs almost every other type of Marine. They could have done something about that with the upcoming book, but instead chose to reprint PA/Vigilus rules instead.
Klickor wrote: The amount of money the veterans at my club spend on 40k still after playing for over 30years make me wonder how many kids there have to be to equal them in spending. These are grown men with 1 hobby and don't spend much on anything else. You would probably need a bunch of kids for each veteran to keep up in spending. And these guys have been doing this for longer than I have been alive. Each of them should be worth at least the same as 40 kids being burned and churned.
A single veteran is probably worth a handful of kids at a time but will keep on for decades. Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids. Probably harder and harder to get the kids now a days as well when you have phones,iPads and way cooler video games than 20-30 years ago to compete with. Way cheaper as well.
I think it's much wiser to focus on the kids.
Relying on a cadre of old guard who've been playing for a long time is entirely unsustainable. They will all reach a point where they won't be spending any more money, either because they have all the things, are dead/no longer interested, or don't have the money and time to spend courtesy of having kids and the likes. When that happens, if you don't have new blood, you'll collapse.
Short term vs. long term. In the short term, you can get more by appealing to your long-time supporters, but if you want to do well in the long term, you want to bring in new supporters [at a higher rate].
Any hobby requires new people to last, and GW should absolutely be taking measures to make the hobby easier to get into.
I don't like that this has become mutually exclusive. As one of the old guard I resent that "focus on the kids" has come to mean "tell me to feth off", and "support the veterans" has become "get no new blood and therefore die as a game," the trade-off seems to always end with telling me to feth off.
Tyel wrote: The argument on the indexes is that until people starting to identify the overpowered units - and abuse 8th's fundamental problems (i.e. first turn deepstrike, almost no restrictions on soup and unit spam) - you had a reasonably balanced game. Specifically that less lethal, slower paced game that a lot of people seem to want.
Obviously it didn't last though - and was shallow regardless. But I do think that's the charm.
I always bounce around on this - because I have no time for verisimilitude. But equally I do think the game can devolve too much into chess - i.e. just a sequence of glasshammers trading with each other.
I think people who really loved the index era didn't have an army that only worked in one specific and unfun way, plus the "index vs codex"-gap was the same as the "8th edition vs 9th edition"-gap we have now.
Especially internal balance was quite horrible for many index armies.
Nah, I'd play my current-codex GSC against a thousand drukhari/admech armies before I'd willingly play Index GSC vs 8th Codex again, that was MISERABLE.
especially during the madness of the 'infinite regenerating-cp guard army' era index vs codex was pure garbage.
People who liked the index era played Space Marines and are really remembering the post-SM 1.0 codex era, that's my theory.
I don't like that this has become mutually exclusive. As one of the old guard I resent that "focus on the kids" has come to mean "tell me to feth off", and "support the veterans" has become "get no new blood and therefore die as a game," the trade-off seems to always end with telling me to feth off.
If GW cared about veterans we'd have resculpted Aspect Warriors, resculpted Cadians etc. But veterans all own these already and they won't buy them as much as new players, so there's not as much profit in it as sculpting a new units that the vets also have to buy.
I don't like that this has become mutually exclusive. As one of the old guard I resent that "focus on the kids" has come to mean "tell me to feth off", and "support the veterans" has become "get no new blood and therefore die as a game," the trade-off seems to always end with telling me to feth off.
If GW cared about veterans we'd have resculpted Aspect Warriors, resculpted Cadians etc. But veterans all own these already and they won't buy them as much as new players, so there's not as much profit in it as sculpting a new units that the vets also have to buy.
I don't think this is true. I think GW thinks it's true, yeah, but that's why they always seem to overproduce things like Stormcast and Primaris Marines, and underproduce things like Sisters and the new Vampire release that sell out immediately because veterans are going to jump headfirst into fancier sculpts for stuff they already have and like in addition to all the new people who pop up and think that looked cool. New players are easier to appeal to than old players. New players will buy resculpts because they're new and shiny, old players will buy resculpts because they liked the model already and now they get a fancier plastic version with newer and better rules. Sure, you'll always get holdouts who growl and say "gr, my metal Aspect Warriors that are now wildly out of scale with the rest of the game hanging off their lovingly-converted 25mm bases are fine, I'm not going to buy into the blatant cash grab!", but you weren't going to get them anyway. Also by resculpting WHFB stuff for Sigmar they capture people who played Total War (and don't appreciate being told all their cool stuff is OOP metal with terrible rules or doesn't exist anymore) and all the people who kept their WHFB armies to play 9th Age/KoW/oldhammer, neither of whom give a flying feth about fish-elves or Stormcast.
TL;DR: I don't think you lose new people by making cool new sculpts for old models, but you definitely lose old people by never updating old models.
But GW is a business. and edition churn makes more money.
If that was the case, then every RPG would have way more editions than they currently have. DnD has been around since 1974 and it is on its 5th edition. DnD also dwarfs any game made by GW in terms of market. 40K has been around since 1987 and is on it's 9th edition.
D&D is a pretty poor counter example, given that you could use the sheer weight of supplements JUST for 3.5 to bury a man alive.
Klickor wrote: The amount of money the veterans at my club spend on 40k still after playing for over 30years make me wonder how many kids there have to be to equal them in spending. These are grown men with 1 hobby and don't spend much on anything else. You would probably need a bunch of kids for each veteran to keep up in spending. And these guys have been doing this for longer than I have been alive. Each of them should be worth at least the same as 40 kids being burned and churned.
A single veteran is probably worth a handful of kids at a time but will keep on for decades. Probably a bad idea to not cater to them enough and focus too much on the kids. Probably harder and harder to get the kids now a days as well when you have phones,iPads and way cooler video games than 20-30 years ago to compete with. Way cheaper as well.
I think it's much wiser to focus on the kids.
Relying on a cadre of old guard who've been playing for a long time is entirely unsustainable. They will all reach a point where they won't be spending any more money, either because they have all the things, are dead/no longer interested, or don't have the money and time to spend courtesy of having kids and the likes. When that happens, if you don't have new blood, you'll collapse.
Short term vs. long term. In the short term, you can get more by appealing to your long-time supporters, but if you want to do well in the long term, you want to bring in new supporters [at a higher rate].
Any hobby requires new people to last, and GW should absolutely be taking measures to make the hobby easier to get into.
They did take measures to make the hobby easier to get into by making kill teams and other skirmish scale games. Rules however are a vehicle to move models, as is the game as a whole. I really don’t understand what they are doing there and I absolutely refuse to invest my money in that, but somebody has to be because they keep doing it.
Seeing orkz get new kit and overhauls of old ones, and xenos get some sort of model release is nice though. Not to mention that as a chaos space marine player I was happy with my model line being overhauled as well. Rules could conceivably be fixed in local communities but wargaming communities are not anything at all like table top role playing communities. You could houserule anything you felt like as a ttrpg group and getting 5-8 people you play with every day to agree or at least be willing to try it. It is significantly easier than trying to with ten to twenty people you cycle through randomly for pickup games.
I don't like that this has become mutually exclusive. As one of the old guard I resent that "focus on the kids" has come to mean "tell me to feth off", and "support the veterans" has become "get no new blood and therefore die as a game," the trade-off seems to always end with telling me to feth off.
If GW cared about veterans we'd have resculpted Aspect Warriors, resculpted Cadians etc. But veterans all own these already and they won't buy them as much as new players, so there's not as much profit in it as sculpting a new units that the vets also have to buy.
I don't think this is true. I think GW thinks it's true, yeah, but that's why they always seem to overproduce things like Stormcast and Primaris Marines, and underproduce things like Sisters and the new Vampire release that sell out immediately because veterans are going to jump headfirst into fancier sculpts for stuff they already have and like in addition to all the new people who pop up and think that looked cool. New players are easier to appeal to than old players. New players will buy resculpts because they're new and shiny, old players will buy resculpts because they liked the model already and now they get a fancier plastic version with newer and better rules. Sure, you'll always get holdouts who growl and say "gr, my metal Aspect Warriors that are now wildly out of scale with the rest of the game hanging off their lovingly-converted 25mm bases are fine, I'm not going to buy into the blatant cash grab!", but you weren't going to get them anyway. Also by resculpting WHFB stuff for Sigmar they capture people who played Total War (and don't appreciate being told all their cool stuff is OOP metal with terrible rules or doesn't exist anymore) and all the people who kept their WHFB armies to play 9th Age/KoW/oldhammer, neither of whom give a flying feth about fish-elves or Stormcast.
TL;DR: I don't think you lose new people by making cool new sculpts for old models, but you definitely lose old people by never updating old models.
Just speaking for myself but I haven't replaced any of my old metal Sisters with the new plastic ones, nor have I seen an increase in people selling them. If this were the case I would have expected a lot of people clearing out their old collections. Either that or they don't care about scale differences.
But GW is a business. and edition churn makes more money.
If that was the case, then every RPG would have way more editions than they currently have. DnD has been around since 1974 and it is on its 5th edition. DnD also dwarfs any game made by GW in terms of market. 40K has been around since 1987 and is on it's 9th edition.
D&D is a pretty poor counter example, given that you could use the sheer weight of supplements JUST for 3.5 to bury a man alive.
Nah, I disagree with that. Supplements are fine, it's changing the core rules that's the problem.
Well if that's your concern then you should consider that every numbered edition of D&D has been completely incompatible with the one before it; 4e was so incompatible with 3e that a lot of people got very mad, so mad that Paizo rose up to out-compete D&D for a time. 8e->9e doesn't even count as an edition change by d20 standards.
People is much more open to supplement material for RPG because those aren't competitive in nature.
If you lack some books or expansions but you are not interested in those clases, subclases, races, etc... whatever. But if your army has competitive rules in a supplement, not many people is confortable with the idea of missing out on that stuff.
Galas wrote: People is much more open to supplement material for RPG because those aren't competitive in nature.
If you lack some books or expansions but you are not interested in those clases, subclases, races, etc... whatever. But if your army has competitive rules in a supplement, not many people is confortable with the idea of missing out on that stuff.
Yeah, there's definitely a bigger element of FOMO that makes them feel mandatory, especially if they're key to a central competitive build.
I'd consider myself an old(ish) person and I'm far more interested in new stuff than getting new sculpts for models I already own.
Its like if you want to buy Fire Dragons, go buy some Fire Dragons. Sure finecast sucks, but the models are fine. The idea that a new plastic kit is going to somehow set the unit alight (assuming a 1:1 replacement) is lost on me.
Its like if GW finally *FINALLY* found the time to do some new DE stuff. And they went "yeah, plastic Court of the Archon and Plastic Beasts". Cue dramatic music.
But If I wanted to run those models, I've already sorted it out - and its very hard to see how those models would encourage someone to start a new DE army. (See similar thoughts on Incubi, who are at least now good enough that everyone probably wants to own a couple of squads and maybe didn't buy multiple finecast kits.) I'd much rather have something completely new and interesting that I can add to my army.
Then you have the issue of things like Necron flayed ones which I think are cool minis that have always been a cool concept (see Maynarkh etc) but have been priced such that the idea of running a flayer-heavy force is just financially ludicrous.
Galas wrote: People is much more open to supplement material for RPG because those aren't competitive in nature.
If you lack some books or expansions but you are not interested in those clases, subclases, races, etc... whatever. But if your army has competitive rules in a supplement, not many people is confortable with the idea of missing out on that stuff.
I am personally of the opinion that campaign books should be narrative only, especially in the light of GW being unable to balance them or playtest in any way.
Arachnofiend wrote: Well if that's your concern then you should consider that every numbered edition of D&D has been completely incompatible with the one before it; 4e was so incompatible with 3e that a lot of people got very mad, so mad that Paizo rose up to out-compete D&D for a time. 8e->9e doesn't even count as an edition change by d20 standards.
Not quite. I can use the 1st Ed books I inherited (and adventure modules) with the 2nd ed books I bought just fine. 8th -> 9th 40k is a lot like 3.0 -> 3.5 in D&D which despite the numbering was still an edition change, and had quite a bit of gnashing of teeth to go with it.
Tyel wrote: I'd consider myself an old(ish) person and I'm far more interested in new stuff than getting new sculpts for models I already own.
Its like if you want to buy Fire Dragons, go buy some Fire Dragons. Sure finecast sucks, but the models are fine. The idea that a new plastic kit is going to somehow set the unit alight (assuming a 1:1 replacement) is lost on me.
Hard disagree on this. I like my fire dragons but I would gladly replace them with plastic rather than ever work with fine cast again. The only Aspects I don't plan on replacing are my Striking Scorpions since I prefer the look of the older style.
I've known a great many people who liked Eldar after seeing them in games like Dawn of War but would never in any way consider starting an army considering how old and poorly made the line is. Perceived value matters a lot to a customer and the Eldar line looks like a clearance item about to be discontinued. Making plastic models of a factions most iconic units will sell and it will sell well. Sisters are living proof of that after year and years of nay-sayers saying GW would never make plastic sisters because they won't get enough sales and they won't turn a profit on them.
