Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Can we split the business cycle discussion out from the HH discussion?

 Ahtman wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
It needs to make money to justify releases, this cycle is both a cause and result of that happening. They know their target audience well enough I'd wager.

Perhaps you think "company wants to make money" was a secret only you figured out but pretty sure everyone here knows that and as such is taken into account when having this conversation. The discussion isn't "is this specific release ok" but "is it indicative a change in the approach toward HH and are they trying to make it more like 40k". If they are indeed trying to make it a game with shorter edition cycle and with consistently buying new army books they will probably lose some people. There are other business models that can make money without a new edition every three years.

Well, I sort of assumed everyone here was smart enough to have worked out that evidently they've changed behaviour and yes its to bring the release model closer to their breadwinners. But please, continue to discuss that.

I'm sure you'll also eventually realise that as the big fish in the small pond they sent the standard to a large degree. This method, despite upsetting a minority, keeps making the numbers go up. It does this more than the other business models do for their competitors.

I'm done. Too many hypocritical people out to be angry at something in here.

 Albertorius wrote:
I.... I'm simply an old curmudgeon that doesn't want to have to learn a new ruleset again every 3 years to play the same game, you know?

My take is similar. HH is more of a “historical” game that has events rather than tournaments. I personally don’t need the same level of turnover for HH as we get for 40K. I would be perfectly happy with an annual mission book or deck, but I feel a 5 year cycle makes much more sense than a 3 year cycle for HH. Just my opinion, obviously.

As I love playing with the HH community at Adepticon, I’ll be buying the new rules to learn. But I’m not happy about it as the only time I really play is Adepticon.

All of that said, these models are bitchin and I will get that Fellblade for my 3k Sons of Horus list.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
Plastic Glaive top left

Spoiler:

To speak nothing of the Sabre?

Unfortunately that is not a plastic Glaive or Fellblade. They have the old style square doors. The new plastic one has the round "Demios" style doors.

Whoops, I replied to this before I saw other peoples replies.
Sorry for the extra post.

 Ahtman wrote:

Vorian wrote:
If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?

You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.

'

It is the company's problem when they don't know their audience. HH, while having some overlap, is not the same audience as 40k or AoS. HH enthusiasts are more akin to historical wargamers and that crowd isn't constantly playing games or publishing revised rule sets. It isn't a tournament game dominated by the meta and trying to make it that kind of game, if only appearing to do so, will burn good will and lose customers.

This is exactly the point. The people playing 30k are not the same type of people playing 40k. Most are older, and want / need stability in a hobby they only get to do part time because they are adults with busy lives. But GW doesn't know their customer base and thinks everyone is little Timmy getting their mum to buy everything for them.

How long was heresy the same game under forgeworld and the black books. I seem to remember playing the same game for about a decade.

And this isn't about making more money for the company, those new plastic kits will sell by the bucket load regardless of the rules changing or not. After all GW is a miniatures company, not a game design company, that was drilled into you while working there.

It is about making more money. The logic is that a rules change forces players to change their armies and buy more models, that's the core reason, that GW believes it can get more money out of HH players just like it does from 40k ones.

Time will tell if they are correct or not.

Dudeface wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Better yet - buy the books once you're in a position to play.

Problem: You need the rules in order to know how to build the army you want. It isn't that easy.

Only as a point of precision. If you know you want a mechanised force or a dread based force etc. You can make a start then getthe rules, you night not have an exact 3k army or whatever but it should be enough to start with or build off.

It's the same with 40k, buy some models you like, paint them, buy rules, finish the force off.

Cool. You make that "dread based force" that you mentioned, then discover that it's totally OP and toxic, and no one wants to play with you. Too bad you didn't consult the rules first, right? Keep trying.

Wait, are you saying its the players fault for building a force they thought looked cool without seeking peer approval? I thought GW was the big evil here and that 2nd edition was so good people wanted said dread forced for 6+ years.

Sort the hypocrisy out. People should be able to rock up with whatever they think looks cool and the game able to handle it - that's on GW and not the player for not "consulting the rules first".

Conversely it's not taken nostradamus to work out a new edition was a possibility for at least a year now. You might not want it or like it, but it was hardly dropped by surprise. The churn, whilst hardly fantastic, is a symptom of success in GWs eyes. I'd swear some of you want the game to do badly so they stop releasing for it.

A little bit of column A, a little bit of column B. Gw should write the rules in a way that any force is equally strong. But they don't. So it’s on the player to figure things out. Edition changes with mass changes to stats and other rules make that more difficult. Thus, why many of us would prefer a 2.5 edition over the rules rehash, with the expense of new books, we seem to be getting.

TLDR: We didn't want a new edition. We wanted an iteration of the current one.

Dudeface wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
It needs to make money to justify releases, this cycle is both a cause and result of that happening. They know their target audience well enough I'd wager.

Perhaps you think "company wants to make money" was a secret only you figured out but pretty sure everyone here knows that and as such is taken into account when having this conversation. The discussion isn't "is this specific release ok" but "is it indicative a change in the approach toward HH and are they trying to make it more like 40k". If they are indeed trying to make it a game with shorter edition cycle and with consistently buying new army books they will probably lose some people. There are other business models that can make money without a new edition every three years.

Well, I sort of assumed everyone here was smart enough to have worked out that evidently they've changed behaviour and yes its to bring the release model closer to their breadwinners. But please, continue to discuss that.

I'm sure you'll also eventually realise that as the big fish in the small pond they sent the standard to a large degree. This method, despite upsetting a minority, keeps making the numbers go up. It does this more than the other business models do for their competitors.

I'm done. Too many hypocritical people out to be angry at something in here.

"No you're the stupid ones!" and taking your ball and going home is certainly one way to get your point across. You can pretend that HH isn't a slightly different crowd than 40k but as you can see by this thread, and others just like it around the internet with similar concerns, it isn't some isolated point of friction. Even Arbiter Ian made a video about this launch and brought up this problem. I don't think this current change is going to drive to many away but if they come out with a 4th edition in three years requiring new army books you'll see a much larger exodus of people just sticking to the edition they like and buying models. You see it a bit in 40k, but with the HH being a somewhat different crowd it will happen on a much bigger scale. I don't think the model side is in any danger but the rule books could see a significant decline, not to mention morale.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

I also suspect that there's something else.
The knowledge that what this really means is that 30k players are going to get churned.
Perhaps some really did believe that they would escape the fate of every other GW game which isn't just canned. Most though - I believe - always knew, deep down, but tried to deny the knowledge. There's no running from the truth now though.
New rules every three years; your rules library frequently invalidated; units getting abandoned to Legends; New Thing™ is best thing; entirely mutable background. It's all coming.
Get ready, Old World players!

I know this post appeared a couple of pages back, but I think this nails my reaction. And not just mine - when I posted the earlier rumours about the new edition and new models (most of which were correct), there was a lot of pushback from people who simply refused to accept it was happening.

The prospect of buying multiple new hardback books, and shoving the old ones into my pile of discarded 40k codexes, does not fill me with any joy. There’s something wrong when getting new rulebooks etc is nothing but an expensive chore. It’s very wasteful too. It’s a business model that only really works because GW has worked out that a large number of players only stay with the hobby for a limited period, and it’s more profitable to generate excitement and sales for newer players by constantly re-launching their games, rather than it is to keep established players happy. It’s basically the iPhone business model applied to wargaming.

 Snord wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

I also suspect that there's something else.
The knowledge that what this really means is that 30k players are going to get churned.
Perhaps some really did believe that they would escape the fate of every other GW game which isn't just canned. Most though - I believe - always knew, deep down, but tried to deny the knowledge. There's no running from the truth now though.
New rules every three years; your rules library frequently invalidated; units getting abandoned to Legends; New Thing™ is best thing; entirely mutable background. It's all coming.
Get ready, Old World players!

I know this post appeared a couple of pages back, but I think this nails my reaction. And not just mine - when I posted the earlier rumours about the new edition and new models (most of which were correct), there was a lot of pushback from people who simply refused to accept it was happening.

The prospect of buying multiple new hardback books, and shoving the old ones into my pile of discarded 40k codexes, does not fill me with any joy. There’s something wrong when getting new rulebooks etc is nothing but an expensive chore. It’s very wasteful too. It’s a business model that only really works because GW has worked out that a large number of players only stay with the hobby for a limited period, and it’s more profitable to generate excitement and sales for newer players by constantly re-launching their games, rather than it is to keep established players happy. It’s basically the iPhone business model applied to wargaming.

It's also the same model used by the Comics industry. For years, both Marvel and DC have hit the cosmic reset button on their storyline and character arcs every few years to reset the setting so new readers can have a smooth introduction to the universe.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
It's also the same model used by the Comics industry. For years, both Marvel and DC have hit the cosmic reset button on their storyline and character arcs every few years to reset the setting so new readers can have a smooth introduction to the universe.

Stories are forever, though. You can still read your back issues, and don't need to coordinate agreeing on a baseline with another person to enjoy them. Playing a wargame requires consensus,.

I'm curious whether this works out for GW. I feel the new HH Edition has a similar approach like the new Middle earth Edition, though the latter had an outside force with the new movie apparently calling for a new edition. But the changes made and the wording from GW about it are similar.
Additional leadership profiles, all old books not really useable anymore, but still they say: This will still be the game you know and love.
A difference being that the ME releases appeared extremely slowly, but we'll see the pace of everything they teased for HH in the coming months.

It might. The cheat code here is that the new rulebook is included for free with those sweet new models you probably want, so you're only spending money for real on your (one?) faction Liber.

The equation is considerably more sour for non Marine players.

Staying with 2.0 is... possible? Saturnines have profiles in the fan edition, but obviously their loadout won't match as GW invented all brand new guns for them, and the fan edition is a bit bad overall.

Dunno on the non-Marine player thing.

I’ll be getting two sets of Saturnine, and will probably give the second rulebook to someone. And I’m sure there’ll be cheap copies doing to rounds for much the same reason.

I'm not sure if I want two. You can bet your pajamas there will be a melee Dreadnought coming later and maybe a second Terminator loadout too.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Dunno on the non-Marine player thing.

I’ll be getting two sets of Saturnine, and will probably give the second rulebook to someone. And I’m sure there’ll be cheap copies doing to rounds for much the same reason.

As a person who will not be buying the starter box, I will be hunting down people who did to make a donation to their cause (for their extra copy.)

Cant say I like the Saturnine terminators. Perhaps they will look nice in real life.

Funny they share the basic design with primaris agressors. Feels like they tried to make Agressors the equivalent of terminators for primaris, and now they tie the design to the heresy era (in a weird topsy turvy re-design prequel way)

It isn't all doom and gloom. I think there are a lot of things to be looking forward to with this release. The models, obliviously, but I am optimistic the rules are an improvement and having the majority of the lists available to go at launch is good. Well, if you are a Dark Mechanicum or militia player it is a little less rosy, but still overall a positive.

I wasn't all that keen on the Saturnine initially but seeing just how massive they are somewhat softened me on them. They chonky.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
It might. The cheat code here is that the new rulebook is included for free with those sweet new models you probably want, so you're only spending money for real on your (one?) faction Liber.

The equation is considerably more sour for non Marine players.

Staying with 2.0 is... possible? Saturnines have profiles in the fan edition, but obviously their loadout won't match as GW invented all brand new guns for them, and the fan edition is a bit bad overall.

It isn't "free". It's included in the price of the boxset. If you don't want the boxset? You pay.

No Saturday pre-orders or Sunday preview this week?
Just Heresy stuff?

Sunday pre-orders just went up.

Bumper crop of Old World, AoS and Middle Earth.

There was always the discusion how a marine would fit in terminator armour because the placing of the head. What do they do with the spacemarine wearing saturnine armour stretching there legs and arms or better the whole marine. there is to little marine for that suits of armour.

 Ahtman wrote:

Vorian wrote:
If you've played 5 games in 3 years, that's more your issue isn't it?

You can't expect a company to calibrate their release schedules for players that play fewer than a game per 6 months.

'

It is the company's problem when they don't know their audience. HH, while having some overlap, is not the same audience as 40k or AoS. HH enthusiasts are more akin to historical wargamers and that crowd isn't constantly playing games or publishing revised rule sets. It isn't a tournament game dominated by the meta and trying to make it that kind of game, if only appearing to do so, will burn good will and lose customers.

except they are 100% trying to shake that historical tag and trying to turn it into another tentpole game
This isnt necromunda, this game is now going to be the big 3, Aos, 40k, 30k
They want to shake the proffesional casual audience and ring in more tournament players to drive up engagement and sells

Sunday Preview article only mentions some 'delectable' lore posts for Heresy, so probably no rules articles this week

Random thought.

Wonder if we might see Legion Specific upgrades for the Saturnine Dreadnought?

Well, there were no new legion bitz released for any of the 3 plastic dreadnoughts during the 3 years of 2nd edition.

HH walks a fine line because on the one hand legion specific can work; on the other hand it can also end up with loads of parts for basically the same model in the same army choking up the production run and leaving other armies out with nothing.

It also relies heavily on tapping that "marine mine" of popularity.

I feel like if they wanted to do it in plastic and have legio-specifc parts the smart thing would have been to make a generic core model and then have a bunch of parts in the box like shields/emblems to stick on for legions or to be designed around as part of legio specific kits- ergo one core sprue and then a legio specific spru with both parts creating the final model.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Well, there were no new legion bitz released for any of the 3 plastic dreadnoughts during the 3 years of 2nd edition.

Technically they released a legion specific resin torso for the contemptor for each legion (they were modofied versions of the legion specific resin contemptors).

Also theres a few legion leviathans - blood angeks, dark angels, white scars, and night lords

Shopping list for Marine players

Once again GW are selling 30K as "40K but only with Marines."