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.

Ouze wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Ouze wrote:More pressingly, there are no Nob Biker models - thats kind a rough one, as they are one of the best units in the book by general opinion. Having them available at super-high prices via FW is better then nothing, but not as good as a plastic release, obviously.

Well, they're pretty easy to build: nob bodies from boys spures, arms from nob sprues, etc. Use the remaining nob bodies to build upgrade nobs or foot nob squads.

It's not the most convenient, but it's kind of like saying there is no Missile Launcher Long Fang kit.

It's kind of not, actually. One is possibly the best unit in the book, the other is a single piece of wargear (which is, in fact, represented in the Devastator kit). And, yes, I'm aware you can convert your own, but you could do that for freaking anything; the point is they have no non-resin models. Here's another analogy: lets pretend there are no sternguard available for Space Marines, and a strenous argument was present there don't need to be, since you can just add some extra purity seals to some tactical marines... right?

Actually, yes. The sternguard models don't have the wargear that people would want. I don't know anyone that bought them - they all converted their own.

And there is a biker nob model. So, what's the problem exactly?

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

2.) Same as above. Although I would imagine their sales improving if they had lowered the price to around that of normal toy hobbies rather than as a sort of luxury item.

You're going to have to explain this line to me. I'm also in a "normal toy hobby", namely collecting Transformers, and to complete lines is as, if not MORE, expensive than building a GW army(to be fair, I don't complete lines). For example, the average Hasbro wave is 4 Deluxes(12.99 USD Retail), 2 Voyagers(21.99 USD Retail), 4 Scouts(7.99 USD Retail, IIRC), and 4 Legends(4.99 USD Retail). That's $147.86 a month before tax(and shipping if you pre-order), assuming you can find the whole wave and other fans or scalpers don't beat you to it.

Add in retailer exclusives for various stores(normally K-mart, Walmart, Target, and TRU), Takara exclusives(Importing for a deluxe is around $35 USD, $50 USD for a Voyager, $100-150 USD for Japanese Retailer Exclusives), Botcon exclusives(some demanding $200-300 USD a figure on the secondary, $300+ USD just to get in the con itself if you want the exclusives)and SDCC exclusives, and that builds up fast. Throw in vintage G1 figures(complete headmasters range around $70-100 USD, on the extreme end Fortress Maximus demands $1500 USD complete) and you'll be needing a second mortgage.

Trust me, GW IS priced around that of "normal" toy hobbies. At least most GW OOP and vintage figures don't regularly jump 100-300% their original retail value(see Classics Ramjet, who's running around $85 USD up from his retail of $9.99 USD from 2006 or so). And Hasbro US does "price adjustments" almost as often as GW does.

More blood for the bloodgod?

Platuan4th wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

2.) Same as above. Although I would imagine their sales improving if they had lowered the price to around that of normal toy hobbies rather than as a sort of luxury item.

You're going to have to explain this line to me. I'm also in a "normal toy hobby"

I know, wargaming is not an expensive hobby. It really isn't expensive at all compared to any hobby that I've been involved in.

Even compared to toys I don't see it as expensive.

This costs £10 (compared to a squad of 10 IG or 13 Orks for £12)

I agree with Killkrazy and think he makes a sensible point- the problem isn't nessicarily the volume of space marine releases, it's the slowness of the schedule as a whole. They need to employ more creative people, I feel, and get more releases out. The current schedule is much too slow, and it makes the "marine dominance" worse. It would be much easier to tolerate (or even enjoy) if Xenos players weren't waiting so long with no love.
We need to pull this above petty factionalism as a debate, because the real problem is structural within GW. They have fired or not hired enough creative people to meet their needs.

Honestly, I think we're up to our neck in what we've seen from the 'more creative people'. I'd rather see a slowdown than a speed-up.

Compare the quality of the most recent Xenos codex in terms of fluff, etc to the most recent Imperial one(Blood Angels).

Admittedly: Dark Eldar waited a long time.

But wouldn't you say that book was worth the wait?

Parts of the Blood Angels book (and from what we've seen so far, the entire Grey Knights book as well) should be taken out back behind GW Nottingham, blindfolded and have a round put into them Old Yeller style. The fluff needs work, the rules need work, the book in general was just poorly done.

Kanluwen wrote:

Admittedly: Dark Eldar waited a long time.

But wouldn't you say that book was worth the wait?

Quite frankly, no. Its not like it takes years and years to come up with this stuff, really.

Edit: I should qualify that. It was nice to finally see the DE book, don't get me wrong. I just don't see 12 years worth of quality there to justify the wait.

To be fair: Dark Eldar had supposedly been 'done' for at least a year or two previous. They just waited for a release slot they could use.

But there has to be some kind of balance to strike. Because frankly, the Grey Knights book is looking to be a piece of crap that should be taken back to the drawing
board.

The models themselves could be released with no real issue, but the book needs to be taken back to the printer.

Kanluwen wrote:To be fair: Dark Eldar had supposedly been 'done' for at least a year or two previous. They just waited for a release slot they could use.

But there has to be some kind of balance to strike. Because frankly, the Grey Knights book is looking to be a piece of crap that should be taken back to the drawing
board.

The models themselves could be released with no real issue, but the book needs to be taken back to the printer.

But one could say that for the past few codexes (codices?) really. Similar complaints have been made about BA, SW and Tyranid codexes (either the complaint that they are bland or overpowered). But even accepting the couple of years that the DE codex may have been ready, did it really take 10 years to release?

filbert wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:To be fair: Dark Eldar had supposedly been 'done' for at least a year or two previous. They just waited for a release slot they could use.

But there has to be some kind of balance to strike. Because frankly, the Grey Knights book is looking to be a piece of crap that should be taken back to the drawing
board.

The models themselves could be released with no real issue, but the book needs to be taken back to the printer.

But one could say that for the past few codexes (codices?) really. Similar complaints have been made about BA, SW and Tyranid codexes (either the complaint that they are bland or overpowered). But even accepting the couple of years that the DE codex may have been ready, did it really take 10 years to release?

With Dark Eldar, it's kind of a hectic situation from what I've been able to ascertain. They had the codex ready very early on in that cycle, they had some models that they could release...but then they decided to go back to the drawing board and it was left to stagnate for awhile.

Then Goodwin and Kelly got the project back and lit a fire under it, for us to get the finalized product. Which--quite frankly--I feel is an example of the quality that every book could benefit from.

Bear in mind: when I say "some kind of balance to strike" I'm not necessarily referring to the game balance. With Grey Knights, I'm referring to the absolute bitchslap that they gave the existing fluff and premise of the army courtesy of Matt Ward's ridiculous need to overcompensate the 'differences between X Marines and Y Marines'.

Space Wolves, I felt, was a good showcase of how a Marine Variant can be Marines...but not Marines as we knew them.

Is it just me or have all the 5th edition books been like this? The non-marine stuff has been good to excellent while the SM books seem to be getting worse.

Codex SM replaced the very flexible 4th edition book and the endless SM lists of 3rd with one that encouraged cookie cutter 10 man squads and replaces chapter rules with special characters.

Codex SW has cool ideas and then some unbalanced crap.

Codex BA was just an abomination in fluff and rules.

And now Codex GK looks even worse.

IS it a coincidence that it coincides with a number of key personalities parting company with GW or am I reading too much into this?

filbert wrote:IS it a coincidence that it coincides with a number of key personalities parting company with GW or am I reading too much into this?

I think you're reading too much into it.

While I disagree with Kid Kyoto about Codex: Space Marines proper and Space Wolves(which, aside from the hideous Thunderwolf model, has been pretty nice in all actuality)--he's right about BA and GK.

And what do those two books have in common?

MATT WARD!

Kanluwen wrote:Honestly, I think we're up to our neck in what we've seen from the 'more creative people'. I'd rather see a slowdown than a speed-up.

Compare the quality of the most recent Xenos codex in terms of fluff, etc to the most recent Imperial one(Blood Angels).

Admittedly: Dark Eldar waited a long time.

But wouldn't you say that book was worth the wait?

....

I'm not interested in fluff, so I say it was a waste of 10 years.

Obviously there are people who are interested in fluff. However, as Filbert has pointed out it's not hard to write. It's just a bit of fiction set in a known background, and requires no playtesting.

How many Black Library novels do GW publish a year? I don't know, but there are 45 40K novels and anthologies in print or "coming soon" right now. That ignores all the CS Goto works. Each of those books contains as much fluff as a single codex.

Counting books that are already "in print" is a bit disingenuous if you're asking "how many Black Library novels do GW publish a year?".

Many of the books currently in print have been in print for years.

There are also many books OOP.

My point is that fluff is fiction and it's easy to get hold of. You hire an SF writer, give him a style guide, and off he goes.

There is no justification for holding up a codex for years because of the need for good quality fluff.

But that wasn't what held the Dark Eldar book up and you know that.

It was held up because of the models themselves firstly, then secondly because they didn't necessarily know if it would be well-received.

Kanluwen wrote:But that wasn't what held the Dark Eldar book up and you know that.

It was held up because of the models themselves firstly, then secondly because they didn't necessarily know if it would be well-received.

If those were the reasons, then they are frankly incomprehensible.

Most of the model range already existed. It didn't need or have to be re-done. They could just have easily have released the rules and updated the old models as and when.

As for being well received? Its not like a codex is a massive financial investment like a new plastic mould, for example. If GW are honestly scared to release new material for exisitng armies for fear that it might not sell, then they really are in the wrong business.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Personally, I think the GW bean counters were trying to squat DE on the sly, in much the same way as I think they would rather do other less popular armies like Sisters, for example. The only reason they didn't manage to do so was for a vocal minority in the Studio who champion them.

Kan, I think you misunderstood me. When I said I wanted more creative types, I didn't mean I wanted more Matt Wards. Matt Ward is (from what I gather) a playtester turned games designer. I think they need people like him, but I think writing an entire codex is the wrong job for him. They (seem to) need division of labour and a bit more creative control. Given what other companies manage, I think GW should be capable of getting out a few more books per year. Maybe I'm fooling myself, but the current cycle is really desperately slow and it renders the game stagnant, especially when every second release is WTF Marines.
I'm a fan of the Space Marine codex, just for the record. It has some cringeworthy fluff, but on the whole I think it and the Ork book are about where GW should be trying to land ALL of their books. I think the problem with Blood Angels and Space Wolves is that they are not very interesting really to start with, so the fluff feels forced because the very idea of them getting their own, full fledged codex IS forced. This is of course an old and tired argument, and we've all heard the rebuttals. I feel bad for even bringing it up again.

Kanluwen wrote:But that wasn't what held the Dark Eldar book up and you know that.

It was held up because of the models themselves firstly, then secondly because they didn't necessarily know if it would be well-received.

I'm not sure what your point is.

It doesn't take 12 years to make some models.

What is market research for, if not to know if something will be well received?

Maybe Deldar were held up by publishing so many SM codexes and models.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:But that wasn't what held the Dark Eldar book up and you know that.

It was held up because of the models themselves firstly, then secondly because they didn't necessarily know if it would be well-received.

I'm not sure what your point is.

It doesn't take 12 years to make some models.

I didn't say it did. I said that the main hold-up was because of the models. The second hold-up was because they didn't know if it would be well-received. Which, frankly, is a valid concern.

What is market research for, if not to know if something will be well received?

Because clearly, asking the miniatures wargaming crowd if they want something means that it will be a financial success. Let's go talk to Mongoose Publishing and see how that Starship Troopers game is faring, shall we?

Maybe Deldar were held up by publishing so many SM codexes and models.

There was all of what 5 SM codices? Something like that within the timeframe, with maybe three of them having even a fraction of the 'full model' support that we're currently seeing with Dark Eldar.

It had nothing to do with Space Marines. It had everything, however, to do with them trying to change Dark Eldar from just being "spiky Eldar" to something actually worth having as its own book rather than just an addendum to the Eldar book.

You know, give it the whole "Space Marine" treatment to use a popular terminology.

Da Boss wrote:Kan, I think you misunderstood me. When I said I wanted more creative types, I didn't mean I wanted more Matt Wards. Matt Ward is (from what I gather) a playtester turned games designer. I think they need people like him, but I think writing an entire codex is the wrong job for him. They (seem to) need division of labour and a bit more creative control. Given what other companies manage, I think GW should be capable of getting out a few more books per year. Maybe I'm fooling myself, but the current cycle is really desperately slow and it renders the game stagnant, especially when every second release is WTF Marines.

I might have misunderstood you. But I was just using Matt Ward as an example of the fact that they seem to be delegating more and more work to each author in an attempt to shove more books out of the door.

When it comes to rules? He can do just fine. The Space Marines book is an example of that. But when it comes to fluff accompanying those rules...he does abysmal if he's not supervised closely.

Da Boss wrote:I'm a fan of the Space Marine codex, just for the record. It has some cringeworthy fluff, but on the whole I think it and the Ork book are about where GW should be trying to land ALL of their books. I think the problem with Blood Angels and Space Wolves is that they are not very interesting really to start with, so the fluff feels forced because the very idea of them getting their own, full fledged codex IS forced. This is of course an old and tired argument, and we've all heard the rebuttals. I feel bad for even bringing it up again.

Space Wolves, in terms of fluff, was perfectly acceptable. The only 'iffy' part is Thunderwolf Cavalry--which could certainly be justified in fluff. Just not with Wolfy McWolferton Riding A Wolf With Wolves. Phil Kelly, otherwise does pretty well in sticking with the established fluff and fleshing it out a bit more.

With Blood Angels, in terms of fluff, the problem is that Matt Ward seems to have tried too hard to make it clear that they're superbadarse. Then of course there's the 'Blood' prefix being overused for weapons...

But yeah. Marines/Orks are a good benchmark and they should be trying to balance around those two books rather than trying to top them.

Kanluwen wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:But that wasn't what held the Dark Eldar book up and you know that.

It was held up because of the models themselves firstly, then secondly because they didn't necessarily know if it would be well-received.

I'm not sure what your point is.

It doesn't take 12 years to make some models.

I didn't say it did. I said that the main hold-up was because of the models. The second hold-up was because they didn't know if it would be well-received. Which, frankly, is a valid concern.

What is market research for, if not to know if something will be well received?

Because clearly, asking the miniatures wargaming crowd if they want something means that it will be a financial success. Let's go talk to Mongoose Publishing and see how that Starship Troopers game is faring, shall we?

What failing?

That the people in charge of that particular book(Andy Chambers being chief among them from what I recall--before y'know, he left the company and the project was shelved until Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin could convince them to fully back it) wanted to take an approach that wasn't just "recycle the fluff, add a few new models and units to the book--call it a day"?

Heavens to Betsy, we can't have that!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and by the by: the failing of Starship Troopers wasn't Mongoose exclusively.

The biggest failing, at least that I can express myself since I did attempt to organize demo games etc was that shops and players just weren't interested in stocking it.

Or they were held up by their own unprofitability. Maybe the market research indicated that the resources of a tiny corporation like GW were better spent on more profitable products.

Maybe I'm on my own here, but I really can't afford buying stuff from FW. Living in the states, paying the currency difference PLUS shipping over the pond really adds up and keeps me from snagging things that I'd really like, even if it IS the only release Tau or Eldar are ever going to get.

That said, I don't think that FW should be a viable area to point to when you're defending the release schedule. If my FLGS can't get it in, than chances are I can't buy it! So if GW release 50 Space Marine things and only 20 Non-Space Marine things, than myself and people like me just get screwed over.

What's the take away message from this thread? If you like Marines, you're gold. If you don't like Marines, be prepared to wait 12 years for an update or just find a new game to play.

As was mentioned earlier; if they can balance fantasy, without all the favoritism for one ethos, why not in 40k?

They've got themselves in a vicious cricle where they've pushed marines for so long and so strenuously that they're now a victim of their own success in that most players want marines. Marine vs. Marine is boring so to liven it up they have to do some insane crap like flying FnP bubbles and walking decepticons that can teleport and have 50 guns (hyperbole). Dark Angel players should be getting ready for some true insanity as well as SoB players because by the time they're updated, stores will probably have to buy bigger tables just for the new Ultra-powered Sister Superior unit that's 4' high and has 20 rail-gun power weapons that can all be shot int he same turn and ignore cover...or some such nonsense.

Regardless of the reasons for the marine love, it makes the game boring when 90% of the players in a community are some form of Marine. Gee, you've got Red Marines and I've got Silver Marines and they look nearly exactly the same from 5 feet away....except for the color of their armor, but I guess that's important somehow.

/rant

filbert wrote:They could just have easily have released the rules and updated the old models as and when.

This would have resulted in DE models that were substantially worse. Part of the reason the DE are such an excellent release is because they didn't just re-sculpt here and there; they sat down and re-thought the entire line. That means stylistically they fit together because the artists now understand what being Dark Eldar in the 40K background means, as opposed to in 3rd edition when the only thing the studio really seems to have understood about them is their gameplay. It also means that they can mechanically fit together and design all of their arms/heads/weapons/etc to fit across the line. And with excellent background and excellent models, it was only a natural next step for GW to give them interesting gameplay mechanics. Taking the time to approach the line as a whole has made the DE better than the sum of their parts, and they are now one of the best success stories GW has had recently (even if I don't like the beasts or beastmaster).

I'm actually kinda with Kan here. Rushing to re-design half of their product line every 5 years is resulting in reduced quality for GW, and it's over-emphasizing SM because SM are the easiest kits to re-make as Jes has already built power armour templates to make sculpting space marines much easier. It means SM are the low-hanging fruit they have to re-release to keep the easy money coming in to stay afloat long enough to get to the more complex (model-wise) armies.

I would much rather see GW slow down and give their IP the time it deserves, rather than rush the Blood Angel Garbage Scow and the Grey Knight Voltron out the door because someone in accounting thinks all of us need something new to buy. I mean, surely all of the design work that goes into a lackluster release is still expensive, right? Why not slow down and make sure that the release is something we'll actually want to spend money on? I would happily wait 7 years for a model redesign if I knew my armies would get the DE treatment, as opposed to say the Beastman treatment.

If the risk to slowing down is that GW doesn't have enough new product coming out to sustain themselves financially or that the players need more things to keep the game interesting, why not make up for a slower army-schedule by more frequent variant rules releases and more scenery/conversion/Armageddon kits. Heck, they could even let their newly-hired talent cut their teeth on smaller games like Space Hulk or BFG/Epic/Mordheim/etc. Bringing back those sorts of games would introduce a lot more game play variety, would keep regular releases coming out, and give GW a hook to catch the "casual" miniature player market again. The great thing about those games is if someone screws up the game design, just stop supporting it and put the existing units in the bargain bin (perhaps direct-only from the GW website, and used as promotional giveaways to make players think they're getting something a little extra for their money). There's no need to support each game long-term, so there's a lot less risk to those sorts of games than there is to the GW core lines.

Platuan4th wrote:snip

Holy gak, lol, thanks for reminding me. I just remembered I bought a Transformers toy years ago (the classics line Rodimus) and I checked eBay to see how much it would sell new in the package, and I saw listings between $66-89.

I bought that thing at random just because, and stuck it in my closet and forget about it I guess. I should have bought the whole set apparently, lol.

Kanluwen wrote:What failing?

That the people in charge of that particular book(Andy Chambers being chief among them from what I recall--before y'know, he left the company and the project was shelved until Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin could convince them to fully back it) wanted to take an approach that wasn't just "recycle the fluff, add a few new models and units to the book--call it a day"?

Heavens to Betsy, we can't have that!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and by the by: the failing of Starship Troopers wasn't Mongoose exclusively.

The biggest failing, at least that I can express myself since I did attempt to organize demo games etc was that shops and players just weren't interested in stocking it.

12 years to get a book out?

I'm a bit surprised you don't see that as a problem.

Of course I see it as a problem. But considering that it was one of a very few instances where that's been the case--it's an exception, not the rule.

To use it as an example of some kind of necessary reshuffling of GW's priorities is disingenuous.