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.

When, exactly, did that happen? Pretty much everyone has said that the quality of the sculpts has improved. What thread are you reading?



Who's trolling, guy? You're the one telling me 'crawl back under my rock.' I'm talking about the actual models, about the advantages and disadvantages. You're just repeating your points and then doing a cut rate flame attack when you can't challenge the substance of my points.

You say the plastic Scouts aren't poseable. I prove you wrong. You ignore it, and resort to cute little insults. Who's the troll?

I've gotten fairly tired of seeing you passing off your opinions and preferences as realities and facts that we all have to agree with. Most people prefer plastic. Most people prefer the new sculpts. Feel free to disagree, but please stop being so ridiculously self-absorbed that you can't even recognize that you're in the minority. GW exists to serve its consumer base, not to pander to one arrogant, self-appointed expert on all things art, sculpted and painted.

If you had a thought in your head worth hearing, you'd probably be able to carry on a discussion without accusing people who disagree of "trolling."

Maybe it's time you considered the fact that your personality is so incredibly grating that by being yourself, you're actually trolling.



I'd hope they're pipelining their work, though. Like, it's not the same exact people on every Codex. You'd think they could be working on one while the previous is in printing, etc. etc.

I'm sure there's a lot of delays. For example, you have to know the basics of the rules in order to sculpt models (i.e. you can't sculpt the Autarchs until you know what weapons Autarchs will have), then you have to have the models sculpted and painted so they can be photoed and put in the book. You can plan somewhat to overlap some of this, but it's hard. So, yeah, I can see why they might have a fairly long cycle for a given codex...

But so what? Have more than one going at a time... Keep the production line full.

Posted By Phryxis on 01/10/2007 6:33 PM
Who's trolling, guy?

 

Uhm, you are?

 

 

 

rabble rabble rabble!

As to Chaos, The Lost and the Damned was the Quintessential Codex. If GW could actually come out with a hefty volume with as much material as it had, and its counterpart Slaves to Darkness, We would be all the more better for it. Orks need to be reevaluated even more then the Space Marines do, and as to the so called " Balance issue", Every time these so called  " Uber" codexes come out, there has been a lack of quality control and product testing that goes with it.

Maybe someone could ask Jervis if he could open up the Battle Bunker, stores, and White Dwarf for some real use, to use as a numbers crunching and games research tools and facilities. Start by showcasing a couple of the companies so called gems and play the hell out of them. Lets run the armies ragged while we compare notes, battle reports, and statistical analysis to come up with a free flowing game to actually have some imput into the Codex production. The product is dying on the vine with the changes for change sake. I can appreciate that Lord of the Rings was a pretty good game, I played it a few times myself, and can even say that the other two flagship games could stand with some of the kind of attention to detail that this game received. I sure the heck don't appreciate though the semi hiatus from some of the companies money makers, such as Blood Bowl, Space Hulk, Necromunda, and the Harlequins, but when push came to shove, these were some hard chargers as far as great playing products. Of course there were a few holes in them, but they were also alot more fun to play fast and loose with alot of variation. Alot more then " Make a Space Marine codex just for three or four variations of the same model,and then lets give them someone to beat on now...". The poor things should know by now that being able to have the options is the key to the sale, not to just put all your eggs in the Space Marine basket.

I'm not going to get involved with you two's squabble, but you both are right about the points on the subject of the game. There have bottom line, been hits and misses, but the overall quality of the sculpts has improved from the days of the Happy Orks, the 10oz dred, and the army of assault cannons, but it has dropped back two steps in terms of keeping the product flexable enough to let the Player use thier imagination and evolve thier own, and be able to play a varied army that can be changed out for playabilites sake and has degraded to the point of the same old same old. I blame the standardization of armies for alot of this mess, but then again, the happy medium has never been found when its a choice between over the top, and outlandishly cheesable armies. Who can forget the armies of Eldar, Space Wolves, Tyranids or Necrons that opened the door to the nerffest that the codexes have become?

I for one recommend that GW just come back with a three ring binder type format. Then our codexes could be evolved as the rules do. I don't really care for the evolution of things that have yet to really convince me that they really needed to be, but at least we all could have a fighting chance to be able to keep a continuous army on the table with out alot of essentially throwing away units, time, and effort on products that are essentially cast off as soon as someone in the development feels that they are owed something just because thier name is in the codex. Not to mention they could save money on sucky book binding as the pages fall out after a couple of good readings.

The real issue is the bottom line though, and the bottom line with GW is that they have a great product, but thier marketing and support blows.  The Codexes and the armies in general would do alot better off the company put together a stock list for the new armies and opened the door to them at Tournaments, at the stores, in the mags, etc. so the general public could get alittle more then the standard White Dwarf " Play them, they ROck!!!, they are the best thing since sliced bread...."

The funniest thing about GW is the fact that they could easily turn thier substandard buisness practices around if they just applied themselves and stopped acting like everyone owes them something.

Great points all on an interesting thread!

I think someobdy deleted my post.

I thought 'Games Potluck' was a good tear.

Shucks

Ah, the Tau Vespids for another. How could I forget those? Then there are the tree-trunk legs planted wide, arms waving in the air like they don't care screaming bald headed chaplains. Or (most) of the upcoming new libraians in the same awful poses. Or the equally blocky upcoming Dark Angels. Spase Marinez!!! Hurr! I think you've been humiliated enough, so I'll stop now. Enjoy!

Thank you kindly for my first ever Dakka sig.

Phyrixis, Nyarlathotep, time out. You've both made valid points, and you've both resorted to personal insults. No more in this thread, and please try to keep it more civil in future threads.

-The Mgmt.

Wait, what?!?! So a series of personal attacks and insults (to which I retorted after nothing was done) count as valid points? No offense intended Mannahnin, but I don't see how not one but three rambling troll posts are "valid points". It's one thing to have a difference of opinion on the quality of GW's various product (which I most definitely have) and entirely another to troll and derail a thread over it.

For example Yak likes the quality of the figures and the rules (in general) while I see a loss of quality in both (also only in general), yet, despite this, we both respect each other's opinion (look at Yak's response to my earlier opinion) and are able to articulate them without resorting to hurling insults and/or putting words into my mouth or going off on some meandering derail that has nothing to do with the original topic.

You both have valid (both subjective and objective) points about the figures. You both hurled insults. There's not a lot of moral high ground here.

But gosh darn it, what tiny little space there is I'm taking and holding like the Fourth Vensuvian Corps on Zagnutia Prime!

As far as I can tell he strongly disagreed with you on page 9, without throwing any insults (though the poop comment was a bit strong, and came close to the line), and you called him a troll for it. Looks like you hurling the first insult, actually.

No more posting from either of you on this thread please. If you want to discuss the issue with me, PM me.

Posted By Ghaz on 01/07/2007 2:06 PM

Posted By Sgt_Scruffy on 01/07/2007 2:01 PM
whoa whoa whoa... Codex Apocalypse?

Rumored to be used for games in the 3,000+ points range and to see the release of the long rumored plastic Baneblade.

Now your talking!

Also, Codex Apocalypse was the rumored name for the Sisters of Battle / Ecclesearchy codex back in the days of "rumors of an anime themed army in a couple of years." 

I also find it interesting that the Space Marines are getting another "redux" next year, according to the OP, as are Necrons.  As an avowed Necron hater, that is the worst news.

Posted By Hellfury on 01/07/2007 4:01 PM
GW admitted that the sisters of battle codex was the most playtested codex they ever produced.

It was later said that they playtested that list 30 times.

I am sure that GW will never make the mistake again on publishing how many times a codex is playtested because of that.

Is that some kinda joke!?  The Codex Witch Hunters was a bitter and near complete disappointment.  With high hopes for some knock-out units, all we got were a few stat tweaks and silly, stupid, useless units.  The only army that got screwed more was Imperial Guard.  So now tht it is worth it to take an LR Exterminator, it is dropped from the list?  Thanks for nothing, GW.  I guess your plan is to suckify all armies except Space Marines so the only armies will be the freaks in tin cans. 

Oh, and the Sisters got their Acts of Faith.  The only thing decent in the whole damn book.

Posted By keezus on 01/08/2007 7:12 AM
Codex Marines Redux Rumours: - REMEMBER, YOU READ IT HERE FIRST!

Drop pods have been adjusted to reflect the fact that they give up half victory points when they land. This has been fixed. The new profile is 0 points, AV13 all the way around but does not include weapons however.

In order to "encourage" players to take more regular tactical marines and in larger squads, the following changes will be made to the Bolter entry: Space Marines are the mostly highly trained soldiers in the Imperium and the Bolter is their weapon of the Emperor's holy retribution. To represent their supreme skill at arms, the Marine bolter profile will be changed to the following:

Marine Bolter: Range 24" Rapidfire, S4 AP5, Rending, Counts as a 2nd HTH weapon. True Grit now counts the Bolter as 24" Assault 2 instead.

Assault Cannons have been reduced in price by 5 points across the codex. Multi-meltas and Plasma-Cannons have been raised in price by 15 points in order to balance this change.

Space Marine Librarians are masters of the mystic arts. As such, Librarians gain this additional ability:

Emperor's Prescience: Before the first turn, all Marine units may fire once at an enemy unit within LOS following all normal shooting rules, regardless of whether Night Fight is in effect for this mission.

Space Marine Masters are consumate strategists. As such, reserve rolls gain +1 and may be rerolled. In addition, D6 units may be repositioned up to 6" from their positions after inital deployment. Units may NOT be moved outside thier deployment zones.

We feel that these changes will do much to add to the flavour of the Emperor's Finest and make the army much more fun to play against. - GW Dev Team

(This was a joke)

That's what you think...

Very true.

I recently opened a box of "Wild riders of saim hann" boxed set of 5 eldar jetbikes. I never opened them because jetbikes, quite frankly, sucked until now.

Much to my suprise, the plastic was so much smoother and better detailed with considerably less flash to clean. The plastic is also considerably more durable. My brand new (12 yr old, never seen the light of day until now) jetbikes right next to the shining spears recently purchased, fresh and unprimed, has such a huge difference in quality, its hard to describe.

Now this can be chalked off to old molds I realize, but the fact remains that quality control has gone down alot.

Nowadays, they just chuck stuff in a box and sell it, only fixing it when someone complains.

If employees that work for a company have that attitude, they get fired. Why should GW feel they can escape this?

The new tech wont save them if they cant make a frame without lots of cracks in the models with subpar plastic (that costs more because of oil prices *snicker* ).

but I hugely digrees from the thread (Codex releases) So I will say that GW needs to make their codex's out of better plastic to stay on topic.

  The only army that got screwed more was Imperial Guard.  So now tht it is worth it to take an LR Exterminator, it is dropped from the list?  Thanks for nothing, GW.  I guess your plan is to suckify all armies except Space Marines so the only armies will be the freaks in tin cans. 

Forgeworld my man Forgeworld.

Forget Codex's its all about Imperial Armour.

Posted By Grot 6 on 01/10/2007 10:39 PM
Not to mention they could save money on sucky book binding as the pages fall out after a couple of good reamings.

I fixed your typo.

This whole SM redux thing is obviously a ploy to sell a bunch of tac squad boxes by making people upgrade all their tac squads from 6 to 10 (the rumor is only full size squads can take heavy weapons).  I guess GW is really feeling the heat and need some quick cash.

If that's the case then I doubt there will be a trait that allows variable squad sizes.  In fact maybe they'll follow the eldar codex and do away with the trait system completely.

If not, I have an idea for a new trait - "Break Like The Wind".  It allows you to add an extra marine to any full size tac squad (so now your marines go to 11).  Sweet.

About Plastics....

When I started my very first army about 6 years ago(Eldar) I don't ever remember having to spend more than a few minutes checking for flash and mold lines. Frankly, I almost never saw any. When I ordered a Tyranid box after the V4 release, I thought I had been ripped off because the plastic components seemed like cheap, poorly casted counterfeits.(Checked with another recent purchaser, same appearance) When I had finally purchased a V4 Carnifex, I had spent at least an hour removing flash and mould lines, with a dremel, and only on the few parts I was using for a gunfex. I was afraid to see it put together, the amount of shaving and carving I had to do.

And that is all I have to say about plastics.

I love having my complaints validated by other's similar experiences!


As to the subject at hand, what baffles me is GW can return to it's phased release schedule instead of doing these massive releases that see some people's armies ignored for years (Orks anybody?). They can still have splash releases and put out more product specific for said army whenever it's codex/army book is released, but also keep other peoples interest up by putting out stuff for other armies. Like CoD did, but year round.

There is also no reason other than greed that both SPASE MaRHINEZZ!!! Hurr! (spikes or no spikes) need five codices apiece either. Both could have a single super doubleplus huge generic main book with all the bells, whistles and fluffy goodness that would allow players to build and run generic versions of any loyalist or chaos SM army. Then, for the loyalists they could put out dexes like the 2nd ed "Angels of Death" (BA + DA in same dex) while for Chaos they could revisit the RT era "Slaves to Darkness" and "Lost and the Damned" books (just focused on the 40k aspect).

Unfortunately, the powers that be seem completely opposed to any changes and want to instead force feed the same boring crap that hasn't been working for the last several years. I can't wait for Kirby to get his just rewards (pink slip ahoy!).

I actually prefer the concept of plastics to metal.  In theory a good kit should give one tons of options with the advantage that plastics are easier to work with (IMHO).  That being said, GW's concept of plastics is circa that which was available in the mid-60s and 70s.  For a true understanding as to what can be done with plastics, one needs to take a look at the stuff currently being done by Dragon/DML (1/35 scale minis for historical models).

AJC

     It isn't that I don't like plastics, but damn, this new material they are using is a headache.  The only cleaning I ever had to do was when I cut my Guardians off of the sprue to clean up where they separated.  I simply have noticed a progression from quality material to an annoying problem. 

  As for releases, well, I am not happy with it.  Waiting YEARS for something new to come out for your force can be excruciating, especially when power armor gets something new every couple of months it seems.  I don't expect GW to adopt the Privateer Press model(which usual satisfies everyone at once, and makes more sense in the context of keeping factions balanced, albiet they only have to support 4 factions per game).  I don't know how to make it better, but to quote the horse from Ren and Stimpy,

"No sir, I don't like it!"

") Posted By Abadabadoobaddon on 01/12/2007 5:15 AM

Posted By Grot 6 on 01/10/2007 10:39 PM
Not to mention they could save money on sucky book binding as the pages fall out after a couple of good reamings.

I fixed your typo.

LOL

Posted By SisterJoey on 01/11/2007 10:37 PM

Is that some kinda joke!?  The Codex Witch Hunters was a bitter and near complete disappointment.  With high hopes for some knock-out units, all we got were a few stat tweaks and silly, stupid, useless units.  The only army that got screwed more was Imperial Guard.  So now tht it is worth it to take an LR Exterminator, it is dropped from the list?  Thanks for nothing, GW.  I guess your plan is to suckify all armies except Space Marines so the only armies will be the freaks in tin cans. 

Oh, and the Sisters got their Acts of Faith.  The only thing decent in the whole damn book.

On the subject of armies 'needing' a Codex rewrite, my opinion is fairly firm that it's a case of a number of 'armies' that have been launched that are actually incomplete as concepts.

Now, this is based on the Third Edition rationale which was (someone tell me if I'm paraphrasing that rulebook's designer notes wrong, I haven't checked lately) to get away from all that overwrought 2nd Edition silliness, the masses of different weapon types, special rules, modifiers and the like. What the Studio wanted to do was produce a game where we rolled buckets of dice, resolved combats and firing quickly and got on & enjoyed ourselves.

The rulebook contained army lists for all the major factions which were spartan but effective. Stripping out modifiers and pots of different weapon types helped us. You had a rules set that stood on the simple stat line and a small range of USR's that gave some level of modification to the troop types.

Obviously we all missed our 'toys' we had got used to in the previous editions and waited eagerly for each codex to flesh out the army and return it to some of it's former glory. But wait! What happened to streamlining, buckets of dice and the like?

Examples:
Dark Eldar Wyches in the Rulebook - all identically armed, Succubus can take limited wargear, up to 2 troopers can take shredders.
Dark Eldar in their first codex: Up to 5 different weapon types in the squad, wherein you could have 5 different attack types going on in a close combat, at different initiative steps.

Hardly streamlined.

Now it's fair to say we might think 'I'm a big boy/girl/space alien and I can handle a bit of complexity in my gaming', but here's the other problem. When one army gets toys, other armies want to have toys. We all know about Codex creep.

But on top of that, getting back to my original point (in a rather long winded fashion), is that there is, therefore, a culture of game design led by the product. "What can we make that's cool, because cool sells?" And as someone rightly points out, new models = new rules.

Now you've left the streamlined simplicity pretty much in your rear view mirror. Rather than having a simple stat line, a few USR's and units that are generally using the same weapon/attack type throughout the squad, it's a mess. New special rules are being added with every release, and the conflicts between them have spawned hordes of FAQ's (mostly unanswered) and heated YMDC debates.

What's even worse is that, by having a design led by products, there are 'armies' which simply aren't a complete concept (y'see, I was getting to it). It's not hard to see that someone said "Ooh, Undead in Space, we should so do them!" - concept miniature comes out, GW is put to work on army-fying a limited concept. Answer to this knotty problem? Special rules!

Sisters of Battle - "Wow, these Jes sculpts are mint, we should so do an army!" Result? GW Design tries to army-fy another limited concept. What shall we do, of course, let's invent another wedge of special rules!

The 'uniqueness' of these kinds of armies, with their character and flair seemingly lent to them by their unusual rules is entirely at odds with the whole idea of what GW wanted to do in 3rd Ed.

Marines and CSM's are a different kind of problem - they are a solid army which got a big boost in 3rd ed, but then they had to diversify the army to 'keep it fresh'. None of this classic rock-scissors-paper stuff for GW, there have to be more and different kinds of troop and special characters, because product leads the design. Of course, we are willing consumers, because we all love 'cool' new mini's particularly for our army, or that army that has always 'intrigued' us.

I'm probably being iconoclastic and anachronistic in my views and I readily agree what I've said here is not necesssarily 'right' or the only 'truth', but I want to play a game where the armies make sense, the game mechanic flows, and it's about applying the correct combination of firepower, assault tactics and mobility to win (or enjoyably lose) games, rather than positioning everything to hope that my melta gun rolls a 6 on it's penetration roll, or my Daemon Prince rolls a 3 on the minor powers list to get Siren.

I'd just rather play a table top wargame than a metagame.

[Faints]

I agree about the plastics quality. I recently stripped my old Falcon and bought a new v4 Wave Serpent. Same molds, etc. but the plastic was much cheaper on the new one! Also, does anyone remember when GW first started doing plastic casting in force and they claimed it would reduce casting costs and consequently prices? And now a 5-man plastic Termie squad costs $50! Lol.

And the 5-Chaos Codex news is NOT good, if it follows the quality of recent codices. CoD was the biggest ripoff I've ever purchased - it was simply a reprint of the (very good) Cityfight, but with 1/3 of the pages. I have a feeling we'll see the current Chaos dex divided into 5 parts and released @ $20 each for 1/5 the content and fluff.

Posted By ancientsociety on 01/12/2007 11:27 AM
Also, does anyone remember when GW first started doing plastic casting in force and they claimed it would reduce casting costs and consequently prices? And now a 5-man plastic Termie squad costs $50! Lol.

Maybe $50 is a price reduction?  From the $500 they would have charged.

Posted By Gundammecha on 01/12/2007 4:01 AM

  The only army that got screwed more was Imperial Guard.  So now tht it is worth it to take an LR Exterminator, it is dropped from the list?  Thanks for nothing, GW.  I guess your plan is to suckify all armies except Space Marines so the only armies will be the freaks in tin cans. 

Forgeworld my man Forgeworld.

Forget Codex's its all about Imperial Armour.

  Money, my man, money.

As in I ain't got none...

And my wife won't even let me spend that.

Sisters of Battle - "Wow, these Jes sculpts are mint, we should so do an army!" Result? GW Design tries to army-fy another limited concept. What shall we do, of course, let's invent another wedge of special rules!

I am not buying this one as the Sisters of Battle were a a legitimate army in 2nd edition. (in as much as they received their own codex right before the demise of 2nd.)  While they were struggling to "complete" their concept, 3 armies came along and pushed the Sisters back.  Dark Eldar were released with the switch to 3rd.  Necrons, the "Undead-in-space" were just an article in White Dwarf, for God's sake, and a crappy, over the top one to boot.  (If you think they suck now, in second they were repulsive.)  Add in the Tau, and you get three armies that appear out of thin air before an established one even is hinted at.

The 'uniqueness' of these kinds of armies, with their character and flair seemingly lent to them by their unusual rules is entirely at odds with the whole idea of what GW wanted to do in 3rd Ed.

Respectfully disagree.  Under that logic, there would be nothing special about different Eldar Aspect Warriors, Tyranid creatures, or virtually any other specialist unit.  Each of those have their "uniqueness" based in special rules.  Special Rules are a way of life in this, or any other miniature game.  If it weren't for special rules, all armies would be all Tactical Marines, all the time.  But even they have special rules...And They Shall Know No Fear.  So all Guardsmen...except that they can call in and use the leadership of their boss.  So all Eldar Guardians...except they have move-and-shoot heavies...

And if you think simplifying a system is a good thing, ask old Epic players their opinion of Epic 40K.  (Not Epic Armageddon)  Hint:  it ain't good.

I appreciate the reply. My comments re. Sisters and Necrons *were* aimed at their inception, dating back to 2nd edition. They were limited concepts from the get go and both 2nd Ed releases were flawed. I don't want to be dismissive of the people who love those armies, I question GW's ability to make them work as a fully conceptualised force. But they are product led, so they did what they could - I just don't think what they've done works.

I hear you on special rules - I don't think I've stated my case as eloquently as I should. Which is criminal seeing how long that post was! I think you are equating unit wargear, eg. Aspect warrior kit like Scorps' mandiblasters, to special rules like Holy Vows and so on. It's not quite the same but i think you could probably make an effective counter argument here!

I agree that some additional rules would be inevitable, but it's a malaise. Weak army concepts propped up by less than sterling add-on rules remains my opinion. I don't think my opinion is unquestionably the right one, I know that it's purely subjective.

As for your ATSKNF example - it's in the original rules as a USR, I have no issue with that. It's the continual addition of special rule after special rule....

I don't agree that without special rules, you would be doomed to an eternity of SM's for all time (yeah, because we're not facing that now, are we?) - Orks are a perfectly characterful army with their statline, troop types, some suitably orky wargear & weapons, without having to weight them down with ridiculous reams of additional rules or special abilities. Who wants to go back to the "Orky Weapons that Blow Up" metagame?

And I played Epic 40k (not E:A) - never had a problem with it.

I went to the 40k GT 2nd heat and Jervis Johnson gave a seminar. He touched on a couple of points that have cropped up here.
GW think the Chaos codex is understandable for veteran gamers that can read it in the context of previous editions of the game, have read lots of background material and Black Library novels, and need the complexity to use their vast collection of 15 year old models. However, they believe it is very difficult for brand new gamers to use. There are far too many rules spread across too many factions and sublists. Although Jervis didn't confirm multiple codexes, it seems a logical conclusion to draw.

All future codexes are going to be in the same format as the Eldar codex. GW want to move away from traits, doctrines and sublists. They want everything rolled into a core list which a player 'can use to build a 1500 point army with confidence.' Jervis indicated that other codexes were designed around a different function; they had to appeal to campaign play, multiple games versus specific armies, random tournament play, themed armies, mega games, etc. Now they just focus on one thing - tournament play - and the rest will be picked up by supplements like Cities of Death, codex Apocalypse, codex Darkside, etc. This could be an explanation for the Space Marine redux. If the Eldar codex is the first of a new breed, then the SM codex has to follow soon after because it is THE core codex for 40k.

All future codexes will be self contained. The Black Templars codex demonstrates this in that you don't need the SM codex to use it. Current codexes that aren't self contained will be revisited sooner rather than later. That could affect the release schedule of future codexes.