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.

That's fact, quite frankly.

Dark Angels had Jervis Johnson and Andy Hoare working(with the rest of the studio having feedback and insights also, as per norm) on what was to be the 'first of the character driven books'.

In that regard, it was successful. But unlike the Space Marines/Blood Angels Codex from Ward and Kelly's Space Wolves, they were(at least according to Hoare+Thorpe) slightly restricted in how they could do the book in terms of wargear, characters, etc. They couldn't add any units to 'flesh out' aspects of the army that were lacking, and they basically had to use the layout of the old Codex: Space Wolves to work from(which is why we had stupidity such as Elite Scouts...that really weren't).

gmaleron wrote:ONe thing that i have recently come across in our game store that me and a few friends touched on was not the difference between types of marine armies but in paricular one item that is available to them. Storm Shields, probably one of the more ridiculous things to come across and i can say i have played alot of armies that have particulary every guy with one of these things.

What we discussed (in detail) was the fact that is it fair to have the option for a 3+ 3+ or even a 2+ 3+ save? In my own opinion i feel that the lowest ANY invunerable save should be is 4+ . I know the argument of "How Expensive" these things are is supposed to counter it, but when this expensive item is attatched to nearly every, if not all model in your army then even then chances are your going to win. I think the Storm Shields should be moved to a 4+ and cheapen the points cost on it making it much more fair and balanced item. Cant wait to get the flak on this one

The hyperbole is strong with this one...

VoidAngel wrote:What puzzles me is, with the half-assedness of the books...what keeps them from catching them all up roughly at once? No one would complain if a new codex a month came out one a new edition went into effect. Xenos wouldn't be far behind anything else, and everyone would be happy. So...what's the hold up?

Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.

Kanluwen wrote:

As for Dark Angels having their own codex...
Yeah. Clearly there's no reason for a Founding Legion that has traditionally had its own book, distinct from the standard C: SM.

And clearly the blandness of it has nothing whatsoever to do with the halfassed job they did on the book.

The DA book is as distinct now from C:SM than as it *ever* has been in the past, and still shares **ALL** of its non-SC units and all of its non-SC weapons and wargear with C:SM, same as it has since 1996 when Angels of Death came out. When you share that much with another army book, you probably don't need your own codex.

They also didn't really half-ass anything, when the book came out, it was a big metagame change, with lavishly equipped troops relative to others at the time (*free* bolt pistols and grenades? how awesome was that in 2007?), and fleshed out the characters more than they had before. It's not like Dark Angels were really any more differentiated or unique relative to C:SM before their current book.

Just because they didn't make them wildly different from C:SM as a playable army (which they *never* have been) covering all the minutae of every fluff tidbit ever mentioned about them no matter how apocryphal, trivial, or from something not in the current timeline doesn't mean they half-assed the book or that they even need their own book. The problems that DA's have as a competitive army was the wargear bloat and cost decreases that came eighteen months later in Codex: Space Marines 5E, and that other books also replicated their simple FoC swap mechanic, but was not a result of the book being bad at the time of its release, and its certainly not any less bland than the Dark Angels previous two army lists. The fact that they didn't create a slew of new things out of thin air that never were mentioned or existed before, or significantly exaggerated minute aspects from previous incarnations, as they did with Blood Angels, doesn't meant it was half assed. It sticks doggedly to the two previous incarnations of the Dark Angels and the Dark Angels previously established fluff.

But the fact of the matter is that DA's *have never* been all that distinct from C:SM. Ever. In 2E all they really had different was Characters. After that, it was simply FoC swaps. Just because they are a first founding legion and have had their own army book in the past doesn't mean that it's actually *needed* to accurately portray them. Their big thing is that they sometimes field their first and second company equivalents in en-masse more than other chapters. This doesn't mean other chapters don't do this, it doesn't mean that these formations are *only* or even *mostly* fielded in that manner or that they are fielded on their own without any supporting elements from other companies (something that the DA codecies have plainly pointed out), it just means the do it more than other chapters. That's not really something that needs its own book, especially for a chapter that, as its own books have said, is rather codex-adherent in organization and battle strategy otherwise.

People harp on DA now for some good reasons, primarily not being very competitive relative to newer marine books. But as a representation of the Dark Angels? It does everything it needs to do, and the means to do that can and have been done in other books. The current book does a very good job of portraying the Dark Angels as well as they ever have been. It's chief problem is not that it does a bad job of representing Dark Angels, but that all that is required to achieve this is relatively simple swap mechanics and a couple characters. In that light, given that other books contain the exact same mechanics and they are easily ported, what *real* need have Dark Angels of their own book to accurately portray their forces that could be done if rolled into another book? None. Unless one wants them to get the BA treatment and have their previous fluff exaggerated to bad internet fanfic levels and have tons of random, rather extreme stuff just pulled out of thin air that was never even hinted at before, or simply insist that they need their own book just because they have always had one, no matter how pointless it really is.

I think I can probably guess the response to this from multiple angles. I will apparently "have no idea what I'm talking about", or "ignorant" or be "deluded" and simply be "wrong" on everything, or just "irrationally hate dark angels and/or space marines", etc. Despite the fact that I have the Angels of Death book, and the 3E and 4E C: DA books in front of me.

They put out a Dark Angles book to...(get this) sell books! Oh, and a few new very expensive special characters, and some repackaged existing models in an Army box. That's why.

I liked the codex when it came out, for the record, though I've yet to try playing them.

The reason I got into 40k was because of the Gaunt's Ghosts omnibus(es). 9 books total and I think a few short stories. They center around the stories of the imperial guard. I found it riveting and exciting, and it seemed that since the books were focusing on regular joes that everything was a lot more intense.

Gamewise I believe everything is indeed measured against MEQs. This isn't a bad thing, but it creates a standard that other armies need to address. I don't find them too horribly bad to have as a focal point. It creates a bit of organization and concensus on what the best of each army is.

Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.

But really, do you think us as the players would want 1 a month, i wouldn't. Once one comes out, I purchase it, read it, and become acquainted. I don't have a Dark Eldar army, nor do I have an intention of getting one, but I do have the 5th edition codex in case they get used against me. In that respect, I need time to look though as see what they could do from a players point of view, to make tactics and strategies for them, and see how my army would need to deal with them. Also, it takes alot of time to balance that stuff out, they have to test it against other sets and see if it will work properly. So yes, I agree, they could pump out one a month, but I think they would lack quality and balance, plus it would just be too fast. I would much prefer them to release the codices simultaneously and then work on the next edition, rather than one at a time.

Kanluwen wrote:Your last statement is completely wrong and tells me you're here to whine about the Dark Angels having their own book.

If you want a "mostly Terminator" army, you've got a better option available to you than the Deathwing in the form of the Space Wolves Codex and its "Loganwing".

As for Dark Angels having their own codex...
Yeah. Clearly there's no reason for a Founding Legion that has traditionally had its own book, distinct from the standard C: SM.

And clearly the blandness of it has nothing whatsoever to do with the halfassed job they did on the book.

I am not here 'whining' about the Dark Angels having their own book. I am stating my opinion that they have no need of their own book. The only unique trait that separates Dark Angels from Vanilla Marines are FOC swaps, and they don't justify a whole separate book. As I said before, just throw two new characters into C:SM, and voila, Dark Angels. Just because they historically have had their own book is not sufficient justification for continuation when it is just not necessary and diverting GW resources away from other codices.

As for the Loganwing: You are correct in this regard; however, I actually prefer the Deathwing because of the cheaper HQ and Deathwing Assault rules. The Dark Angels FAQ/Update definitely helps as well. While the Loganwing has better support, I play pure or nearly-pure Deathwing anyway. My opinions regarding the Dark Angels book are not based off a personal distaste, but rather because the Dark Angels codex is IMO unnecessary.

streamdragon wrote: The hyperbole is strong with this one...

Not intending to exaggerate , i just happen to play a total of x3 terminator armies at my store and each army is literally festooned with these things, not to mention a thunderwolf cavalry army running around with them, i should have worded it a bit better to say a GOOD PORTION of armies units can take them, in my case though they are everywhere

gmaleron wrote:

streamdragon wrote: The hyperbole is strong with this one...

Not intending to exaggerate , i just happen to play a total of x3 terminator armies at my store and each army is literally festooned with these things, not to mention a thunderwolf cavalry army running around with them, i should have worded it a bit better to say a GOOD PORTION of armies units can take them, in my case though they are everywhere

I just love that you said "festooned". Carry on.

Such an underused word. I declare today 'festooned' day on DakkaDakka.

Aegis1650 wrote:
But really, do you think us as the players would want 1 a month, i wouldn't.

I'm pretty sure those people who have to wait 10 years for a codex update would like one a month.

Seriously, GW's model of updating their game makes no sense, and no one else does it like they do. When I first got into 40k I was like, what? They released an edition of the game without releasing rules for each army in the game before moving onto a new edition? It just doesn't make sense, and it doesn't seem like it should take so long to release each codex. IMO, balancing the armies and such and writing rules for each codex should be happening while you're writing the new ruleset, so each army is inherently tied to it. How can you playtest a new edition using army rules from the previous edition? I don't get it.

Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if GW weren't so tight-lipped. I see them as the biggest company in this sector of gaming, so it's hard to believe they can't produce a quality codex a month (or so). Wizards of the Coast produces multiple quality, thick books every month, and I'm sure they're smaller than GW.

" How can you playtest a new edition using army rules from the previous edition? I don't get it. "

Simple. You can't.

They try to say they tailor the new game to leave the old codices valid, but that's rarely true.

As to wanting a new codex a month until they were all out - you're right, I wouldn't actually want that. It was a compromise suggestion. What I'd rather have is ALL the codices out at once with the new edition of the game! But, for various good and valid business reasons, that would never happen. Not without vastly reducing the size and cost of the books. I like the new-style books, I really do - but they ought to be able to churn them out faster. Game balance is mostly an art that consists of experience, depth of knowledge, and good scripts. It's not impossible (and shouldn't even be difficult) for company the size of GW to adequately test new rules on at *least* a quarterly basis. Use structured and trusted "crowdsources" - and you can easily do it twice as fast.

VoidAngel wrote:What I'd rather have is ALL the codices out at once with the new edition of the game! But, for various good and valid business reasons, that would never happen.

Yup yup. I do agree that one a month is not at all unreasonable. For those of us who play armies like the Sisters that haven't had a new Codex (a real Codex, not some tie-in to promote the Inquisitor game) for a decade, each f'ing MEQ chapter book is like a roundhouse kick to the face. Then, for those of us who play Inquisition, roll Xeno, or at the very least, play CSM, we're basically enabling all of the MEQ by providing them just enough enemies per FLG to avoid total Marine saturation. It's a vicious cycle.

They could easily boost model and book sales - and improve the game(!) by putting out books more often. How? How could this miracle be achieved? Through what sorcery, you ask?

"Sir, we've got these nifty Shining Spears...nice models, $30 a box - but they don't sell at all."
"Smithers, don't bring me problems - bring me reasons!"
"Well Sir, um, we did some market analysis...and...er..."
"Well, spit it out Smithers!"
"Ah, no Sir, never! I mean...uh... well, it's the Eldar rules Sir. These units suck, and not in the good way."
"Ah. Thank you Smithers. This is what I want you to do. Get to work on Codex: Eldar. Make Shining Spears the new "uuuubar" unit, as the kids say."
"Brilliant Sir! That will immediately pump up sales for these things!"
"Yessssss. Oh, and Smithers - raise the price to $45 a box."

So, in effect - investments in models you've already cast and produced can always be recovered by rules tweaks. Two extremely nice side effects are a) increased book sales, and b) a game that becomes more and more optimized (both for sales and game play) over time - provided you leave the basic rules alone, and don't get crazy with the rules tweaks.

I know, it makes too much sense.

The problem is codex releases are tied to model range releases for business reasons.

They could very well have a codex done in a month and just need playtest tweaking. But GW like the huge influx of money that comes from a codex being released with the new hot gak on the shelves.

They are a business afterall. Releasing a model range without a codex will get sales, as will a codex without a model range. Releasing both, and hyping the army up, gets a lot more sales.

It's funny, they keep saying they're a model company first, game company second. They're both - not many people would buy their models without a game. As such, not many people would buy their game if they didn't have a model range to carry it.

Loki--

I had a feeling it might be something like that. Unfortunately, this means the game suffers a lot in comparison to its competitors. I think if 40k as a game system and release model doesn't change, it's going to continue having a diminished market share.

-Loki- wrote:... not many people would buy their models without a game. As such, not many people would buy their game if they didn't have a model range to carry it.

" not many people would buy their models without a game."

Reaper

"not many people would buy their game if they didn't have a model range to carry it"

40K

Wave serpents for the first, what, 15 years? Tervigons, Terranofexes, there's...many more examples.

They'd make more money from happier, more loyal players. That means codices on a decent schedule, edition updates far enough apart, and rules that work and keep things fun. It means stewardship of the game, not just cranking pieces of it out haphazardly and hoping they sell well enough to keep you profitable.

Yes, they will continue to lose market share - because other companies are doing a better job, and anyone with $40,000 can buy a 3D printer set-up and start a miniatures company.

VoidAngel wrote:

Yes, they will continue to lose market share - because other companies are doing a better job, and anyone with $40,000 can buy a 3D printer set-up and start a miniatures company.

To this last point: It will be really interesting to see what happens with 40k and GW in general in the next 5-10 years as 3D printing becomes mainstream.

Not gonna lie, as soon as there's decent competition for the type of game play 40k offers I'm off this sinking boat so fast greased lightning will be like 'wow that was fast'. I've been abused by GW's marketing decisions as a Xeno player for far too long to enjoy anything outside of the game itself and the people I play with. It's already squashed my desire to buy an entire Dark Eldar army because I don't want even more money to go to waste when I leave.

@Hans - the technology is coming along in leaps and bounds. These things were $100K apiece 5 years ago. $40K 2 years ago. $5-10K (for some models) now. That's getting into "serious hobbyist" money. The resolution isn't where in needs to be for GW-level 28mm minis, and I'm not sure about the durability of current materials (but it seems like it would stand up, at least some formulations, anyway). In 10 years? Yeah, the technology will more than be there, and it will be so cheap that GW might as well just sell the CAD drawings to players to print themselves (right!).

@Hans and Sum - What GW does have, is the richest game background in the known universe, and the best miniatures. They can save themselves, but their leadership needs to revamp itself, how they do business , and take a fresh look at what they think their core principles should be. Profit first, sure, absolutely. But customer satisfaction should be viewed as the prerequisite for that - not a vaguely hoped for side-effect.

They could take a lesson from Apple at it's best. People love them and are fanatical about whatever latest over-priced ding dong they put out - because Apple thinks first about what will blow people's minds and send them off into new paroxysms of user-phoria. You can get that with a really great codex. You can get that with really well-designed model kits (put a gundam kit together sometime). You can get that with a game that is just a blast to play every time.
All the pieces are there...they just seem to willfully refuse to put them together.

VoidAngel wrote:... anyone with $40,000 can buy a 3D printer set-up and start a miniatures company.

I'm thinking of building a Reprap, for a couple of hundred pounds (I hope).
It might not yet be up to printing figures, but vehicles and scenery is not beyond the bounds of what one can do:
http://www.reprap.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6258
Tau buildings, anyone.

Yep, absolutely. Anyone with some willingness to build it themselves has a bewildering number of sub-multi-thousand-dollar(pound) options.

I know diddly about the tech involved, but theoretically, combined with the really good 3d scanning technology, couldn't you just take a rhino sprue, copy it, and print it? or is that a little ahead of where this tech is at?

It's a bit advanced of "serious hobbyist" level tech, not at all advanced of industrial tech. For $100K - you could do that easy. Maybe even half that, at a slower pace.

Legalities aside, this is what will happen in the next 7 or so years. GW will be selling real STCs, or just getting pirated into oblivion.

-Loki- wrote:The problem is codex releases are tied to model range releases for business reasons.

They could very well have a codex done in a month and just need playtest tweaking. But GW like the huge influx of money that comes from a codex being released with the new hot gak on the shelves..

Still waiting on next wave of nids.

Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.

And 12months later, when they're all released, there's no more new rules for three years?

Or would you rather have a new codex and be changing your army every year?

cyrax777 wrote: Still waiting on next wave of nids.

And new FAQ to make them feel even more unwanted?

thebaroness wrote:

VoidAngel wrote:What I'd rather have is ALL the codices out at once with the new edition of the game! But, for various good and valid business reasons, that would never happen.

Yup yup. I do agree that one a month is not at all unreasonable. For those of us who play armies like the Sisters that haven't had a new Codex (a real Codex, not some tie-in to promote the Inquisitor game) for a decade, each f'ing MEQ chapter book is like a roundhouse kick to the face. Then, for those of us who play Inquisition, roll Xeno, or at the very least, play CSM, we're basically enabling all of the MEQ by providing them just enough enemies per FLG to avoid total Marine saturation. It's a vicious cycle.

Whereas it would be great if GW was faster to update really badly outdated books, all books being renewed every year would be far more disastrous. It was that gak which drove me out from MtG, entire metagame changed every 4 months. No thanks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vaktathi wrote:
People harp on DA now for some good reasons, primarily not being very competitive relative to newer marine books. But as a representation of the Dark Angels? It does everything it needs to do, and the means to do that can and have been done in other books. The current book does a very good job of portraying the Dark Angels as well as they ever have been. It's chief problem is not that it does a bad job of representing Dark Angels, but that all that is required to achieve this is relatively simple swap mechanics and a couple characters. In that light, given that other books contain the exact same mechanics and they are easily ported, what *real* need have Dark Angels of their own book to accurately portray their forces that could be done if rolled into another book? None. Unless one wants them to get the BA treatment and have their previous fluff exaggerated to bad internet fanfic levels and have tons of random, rather extreme stuff just pulled out of thin air that was never even hinted at before, or simply insist that they need their own book just because they have always had one, no matter how pointless it really is.

When the next book rolls out, I think I am going to equip Belial with Twin Dark Claws, and build myself an Angelic Dreadnought...

Scott-S6 wrote:

Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.

And 12months later, when they're all released, there's no more new rules for three years?

Or would you rather have a new codex and be changing your army every year?

No that's when GW decides to join the modern age and learns how this crazy thing called, umm, what is it, internet? Yeah that thing, that's when GW learns how all that whacky stuff works and updates each army's codex for the little stuff with mini-releases and rules tweaks. Ya know to fix blatantly broken and ridiculously outdated problems in each one. The technology exists. It can be done. It's got to be mustache-twirling evil or sheer incompetence that lets armies sit around with no fixes to the things they need for longer than some of the people playing the hobby HAVE BEEN ALIVE.