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.

???

I don't really need to take a marketing class to tell me that many people like space marines due to FLUFF and GAME-PLAY rather than they being the only product that GW constantly shoves down the consumer's throat.

You act as if the only reason Space Marines sell is because they are the only product that GW constantly shoves out it's doors.

Yes, there are a total of 5 Space Marine Codexes, including the Blood Angels WD 'dex.

The reason Space Marines sell is because they are Space Marines! They are a popular product!

They're a cool army, with cool background, cool looks, etc.

And "localized opinions?" What kind of BS is that?

I really don't want to argue this further, as this question is asked so many times that I've given up on explaining it.

I like the codex system

My second daughter is called Aurora

When I looked through the chapters and saw Aurora, the chapter's love of Mech and un-Imperium like comfort with 'good' xenos (Eldar Tau etc) they were a natural fit for me.

Why not build up the flexibility of other armies

Make different craftworld armies have different characteristics - ie more howling banshees / striking scorpions in one then more dark reapers / fire warriers etc in another, a 'near dead' craftworld that uses lots of wraithguard / armour etc etc

Lots of understanding in this forum about business realities, think expansion not consolidation.

One of the ways my work place polls communities like this is surveys such as Zoomerang - perhaps we could get GW to run those sorts of customer research (we would need to register from our registration with GW, so sample is from GW players) and that way these sorts of frustration could be taken as easily digested, quantitatively tested input bu Gav Thorpe / Jarvis J, who can then bring about the changes everyone feels so strongly about.

GW wants to make us happy, thats their business, getting feedback like this in a digestible way and implementing in as a prioritisation ladder is the logistic challenge they need to crack to make that work.

Make different craftworld armies have different characteristics - ie more howling banshees / striking scorpions in one then more dark reapers / fire warriers etc in another, a 'near dead' craftworld that uses lots of wraithguard / armour etc etc

This made me smile.

Craftworld with lots of Howling Banshees and striking scorpions = Biel-tan, the Swordwind

Craftworld that's near dead with lots of wraithguard = Ilyanden.

You sohuld work as a GW fluff writer.

Cryonicleech wrote:???

I don't really need to take a marketing class to tell me that many people like space marines due to FLUFF and GAME-PLAY rather than they being the only product that GW constantly shoves down the consumer's throat.

You act as if the only reason Space Marines sell is because they are the only product that GW constantly shoves out it's doors.

Yes, there are a total of 5 Space Marine Codexes, including the Blood Angels WD 'dex.

The reason Space Marines sell is because they are Space Marines! They are a popular product!

They're a cool army, with cool background, cool looks, etc.

And "localized opinions?" What kind of BS is that?

I really don't want to argue this further, as this question is asked so many times that I've given up on explaining it.

Because your the end all authority If a store doesn't show or carry a product it will not sell there guy.. plain and simple. If I have a ton of cool looking sm stuff but I don't carry Tau, CD etc it prob won't sell. Localized opinions seemed pretty easy to get but sociology and economics in hs covered that there guy. I'm not saying don't put out cool material for sm, I'm saying share the wealth and don't ignore a fan base. My opinion is not too much sm but too much in a row when others are due for an update. Necron players and god bless the DE players that are out there are due for some new stuff . Its not like they would loose money if they kicked out a new codex fo these guys. Hell they go buy more and draw in some new people.

Model count model count model count.

If there was another army that had even less models required, was competitive and looked cool it would sell well too.

Shaman wrote:Model count model count model count.

If there was another army that had even less models required, was competitive and looked cool it would sell well too.

COUGH... space wolves

Exactly why I will probably be collecting them.

Shaman wrote:Model count model count model count.

If there was another army that had even less models required, was competitive and looked cool it would sell well too.

Thats a very good observation.

It's hard to argue against having a bunch of codices for anyone, SM or not. Variety's a good thing, and in a perfect world everybody's favorite variant would have their own cool rules.

In the world we've got...well, let me put it this way. Aren't there armies that are suffering for attention? Don't Necrons need a new Codex? Wouldn't it be nice if Tyranids had a few more viable options? If GW is going to mess with Dark Eldar at all, don't they need some attention? Doesn't the Inquisition need a little love?

And speaking just for myself, it'd be nice if I saw a few less people playing 3+ armor, 4 stat, big shoulder pad, rhino riding, jump pack and termy having armies-just for variety's sake. Like I said, variety is a good thing.

And assuming GW isn't going to hire a bunch of people to make all of these spiffy new codexes and attract new players to all of these armies, the only place for them to get the resources to do those projects is from somewhere else. And the obvious place to get those resources, if GW was actually going to do that, would be from codices devoted to variants of SM.

Of course, this isn't going to happen. SM drive sales, and they're popular, and blahblahblah. Good to be a Space Marine player, I guess.

That's so far been the most compelling argument for removing variant marines.

What makes you think that GW can't continue to have more Codices with a slower update schedule?

To a player with an existing army built against a current Codex, what exactly about more frequent updates is good?

Do you *like* having your stuff nerfed and jerked around?

Do you *like* having to buy more stuff just to stay the same?

I think there is room for at least 2 or 3 more major Codices (e.g. Eldar), slowing the main Codex timeline to a 6 year cycle, with another 4 to 6 secondary Codices (e.g. Space Wolves) slowing their timeline to roughly 10-year cycle.

That would be awesome if I could rebuild my Blood Angels and leave them alone for a decade. Then, revamp my Eldar as Biel Tan and have them not change for a decade as well.

No updates = pure WIN for the player.

The the answer to this question is "Yes" and "No", simultaneously.


Yes.

Yes, there' are too many Space Marines in this game.

Ultramarines/Codex Marines
Blood Angels
Bland Angels
Black Templars
Space Wolves
'Spiky' Loyalists
Girl Space Marines
Grey Space Marines

It's heaps. It's a total saturation when they could be doing so many more interesting things, or at least consolidating a bunch of them into larger more detailed Codices (such as Chaos 3.5 was).

But...

No.

GW are a business. They have to sell things. You cannot ignore both how successful and therefore how necessary Marines are to GW as a business. If selling more Marines means we get to keep everything else, then they're a necessary evil.

And I say this as an Ultramarine, Black Templar and Chaos Marine player.

Link to a relevant thread which will surprise many people.

It really does seem since 3rd edition, 40K has become the original Space Marine game minus the Titans. Marines, marine variants and Chaos seem to be the primary opponents with the other races making the rare appearance. I don't recall marines being nearly as dominant on terms of players in 1st or 2nd edition.

Why do GW push Space marines so much? I can think of a few reasons:
[1] Space marines sell a lot
[2] Forgeworld allows continued marine bling options which have proven quite successful
[3] It is easier/cheaper to add bling or a different top knot to an existing model than to create a new model from scratch
[4] GW staff play marines more often

Why do Space marines sell so well?
[1] Nearly all the background revolves around them. GW's emphasis on the human PoV in their stories mean non-human armies are always treated as one dimensional villains
[2] Most battle reports in the GW house organ have at least one of the players playing a marine army
[3] A player can buy nearly the entire army in plastic. Most other armies have basic units that are in metal, and most of the characters/HQs are only available in metal. This is very attractive to the modeling aspect of the game
[4] They will always be the first Codex in a new edition. With a 4-5 year lifespan for an edition, GW is either unwilling, or unable to release a codex for every faction. The release of Codex: Daemons only makes this worse. If you want to be sure your Codex is going to be available in the current edition, you're going to pick space marines
[5] Marines or chaos marines tend to win a lot of painting competitions. Seriously, if GW promotes painting and modeling as integral parts of the hobby, how about showcasing more than GD winners which are nearly always human or chaos guys?
[6] Nearly all the marketing pieces have space marines on it. And they never seem to be being beaten.

What would I like to see GW do?
[1] Release Codex: Space Marines at the beginning of the edition and Codex: Space Marines everything else mid-edition. This would mean units unique to a chapter are detailed in the second book. This eliminates redundancy and complaints about basic equipment discrepancies such as Cyclone missile launchers, combat shields etc. From GW's perspective they can continue to put out marine stuff throughout the edition's lifespan rather than relying on the splash release business model. From a collector/modeller's perspective players can either buy the base models and then convert or wait until a dedicated special unit is released. For example, Tyranid hunters or sternguard aren't much different model wise from a tactical squad in terms of models. Players would know they can wait 2 - 2.5 years to make their cool 'fluff' units or play with their current Codex. They can make their own custom conversions with background that isn't rules reliant. IMO, people often want a rules benefit for their custom/unique units (see the old purity seals discussion).
[2] Use USRs more. Make more of these and put them in the main rulebook. Then distinguish the differences between chapters/legions by the USRs for units. I think GW started to go this route, but it needs to fully embrace it.
[3] quit releasing editions until all factions have an army book. If they want to make a new edition then speed up Codex release. Unlike many people, I think marines, chaos marines and to a lesser extent necrons, don't require nearly as much play testing as other factions because the differences are very minor. A tactical marine isn't going to be much different across x numbers of marine chapters. Vehicle upgrades shouldn't cost different amounts if it is on an identical vehicle.
[4] Release models for different factions more often. When/if you receive a Codex in the current edition shouldn't be the only time you get new models. GW has improved this somewhat over the past 2 years or so, but marines continue to benefit the most from new model releases
[5] drop some armies or consolidate them. Frankly, I don't think we need two different =I= lists. I'm not even sure I want to see them in the 40k setting as they seem more 'warband' or skirmish level than the typical 40K game. However, since they have Codexes now, just combine them down to 1 army. Drop the Dark Eldar or combine them with regular Eldar. I played DE throughout 3rd edition and frankly, the lack of background and attention they have received from GW (have they ever won a battle report? Have they had more than 3?) makes me think everybody would just be better with them gone or reimagined to extreme Eldar outcasts. I'm not sure who was clamoring for a new Daemons codex. many of the CSM players seem to not care for it. I'm guessing GW thought it would be easier to maintain a new list if it had a WFB analog. Who knows? It is just one more Codex between me and the next rev of my codex.

I've been playing since 1989. I've had multiple armies I've sold. I now have three armies (Tau, Eldar, and CSM) but am starting marines. Why am I starting marines? So I am assured I can play with a current codex in every edition and get new models before the next edition comes out.

Yes - and at the same time no...

Two problems are in near-constant discussion amongst GW players.

1: The lack of love for xenos because GW spends too much time pushing SM.
2: The bland nature of some variant SM codices.

This leads to some people wanting more time spent developing SM to the 'n'th degree (the logical conclusion to which would be 20 codices - one for each loyalist legion and their successors, one for crusading chapters, one for each traitor legion and one for renegades).

At the same time other people would like to see one SM book, one CSM book and that's it, thus freeing up development for more regular updates of orks/eldar/nids etc.

The problem with these approaches is that neither of them are helpful or practical. GW needs to sell SM in large quantities. They are iconic, an ideal starter army, all plastic, low model count, etc. As has been pointed out, they are ideal as a money-making vehicle which can support the rest of the range.

Focussing on SM (particularly loyalist), however, has led to neglect of other armies, a lack of continuity in rules/wargear and the debasement of a lot of the 'fluff' that got many of us into this hobby in the first place.

Therefore, I propose the following:

Core Codices:
Space Marines - Ultramarines and their succesors
Imperial Guard - Cadians and generic guardsmen
Chaos Space Marines - Black Legion and Renegades (including common lesser daemons)
Eldar - Ulthwe and minor Craftworlds
Orks - Goffs and lesser clans
Tau
Necrons
Tyranids

'Advanced' Codices:
Astartes - Variant lists and special characters for the 8 other loyalist legions and their successors (including Black Templars and other crusaders)
Imperium - Variant lists and characters for other famous IG regiments, Inquisitors, Grey Knights, Sisters, Deathwatch.
Lost and the Damned - Variant lists and characters for the 8 other traitor legions, pure Daemon armies and Renegade IG (old LatD list)
Ancients - Variant lists and charcaters for the craftworlds, exodites and Dark Eldar
Klans - Varaiant lists and characters for other Ork Klans, Kult of Speed and Freebooterz.

This method ensures that every army and variant is guaranteed a list, with 'core' stuff coming out first so people can run legal 'counts as' armies until the advanced books provide specific options.

as the Meerkat says - 'Simples!!'

The real question is: How do you get a market dominating corporation to stop rinsing it's most popular product?

Off the top of my head I got cry, pray and terrorism.

Stop buying them.

The thing is, teen newbs will keep on buying them and they represent a big chunk of the market.

Of course, but we would need numbers. I wonder if there are more people disatisfied with the amount of Marine players, to the point they would actually do something about it, than there are people who are into marines to the extent they don't care. My guess is probably not.

I personally would like to see a more cohesive release strategy from GW with regards their codex releases.

As has been mentioned above, it is great for a player to be able to build up an army and be rules legal for 5-6 years until the new codex comes out, but then you get something like the last IG codex which seemed to come in almost as the ink was drying on the previous one.

Then there are armies which are still languishing with codexes which were written for rule books which were painted on the walls of caves.

I would love for them to sit down and say "Ok, we are going to release codexes in this order, then we are going to wait a year so that everyone is able to use them with the current rules, then we are going to update the rulebook and restart the cycle" (and then publish this cycle so that everyone can know what is going on and plan accordingly).

I would also love them to combine several of the codexes together. As has been said previously, I think a single generic "Space Marine" codex would be fantastic supported by a second "I am a different coloured Space Marine" codex, with all the "special" chapters, characters, fluff etc.

I would like to see all the SoB/Daemon Hunters/etc stuck into a single codex to go along with the IG codex, in a simmilar way to the Generic SM/different SM codex.

Although you may miss out on some rulebook sales, I would imagine that you may well make up for it in model sales.

I don't really want to shell out £15 on a rulebook for a slightly different chapter of space maries, even if I do like the models, so I will not buy the book or the models. I will stick with the models I have and the book I have.

However, if my book had the rules for several different armies of SM, I might think about starting a couple of smaller SM armies to go along side my main army, because SM chapter X can field Y unit, which chapter Z cannot, but it looks really cool and I want to have one and play with it, but don't really want to shell out on top of the models for a rule book I will hardly use.

A larger combined arms book gives more scope for model purchases in my view.

The problem with the Codex system for me, is that they always seem to want to go one better than the last one. This means by the time they get to the end of the cycle, the last Codex bears no relation to the first one in terms of layout, content or rules.

This wouldn't be so much of an issue if their Codex release pattern was quicker, but due to the nature of what's involved (i.e. miniature design and production), it takes years to complete each cycle.

I'm 33 and have watched the release cycles for both 40K and Warhammer army books with bemusement. I think some degree of consistency was managed for 2nd Edition (but nostalgia may be clouding my judgement), but after that, it went out of the window.

Ironically, what they really need for writing the Codexes, is a Codex! It will be laid out thus. It will contain x amount of special characters, x amount of troop choices, x amount of special rules etc. And they should stick to this pattern for at least a few years.

captain.gordino wrote:Link to a relevant thread which will surprise many people.

Win.

OT,
More and newer codecies are fine as long as the do not ruin the older ones.

The idea that that a new codex for an existing army changes the entire playstyle/theme/rules-set/list of models needed is simply bad.
Not bad marketing necessarily, but it rarely is good from a simply consumer POV.

See: Windows OS, and the err. . . love flowing from gamers (or businesses) when an OS is no longer supported or usable for popular software.

The more releases the better and unfortunately for non-SM players; SM's are GW's flagship, poster-child, and cash cow all rolled into a suit of plastic power armor. There's a new SM-centric video game coming out as well which will only further cement their important role in GW's success.

The various SM chapters are pretty unique as well from Space Vikings to Space Vampires you've got a lot of themes covered.

Lets just all be glad that Eldar aren't GW's number one army.

Marines are cool, and nearly every veteran player has a marine army. Having a bunch of marine books means that at least one will have the play style you want, and that means you can play one army for a long, long time.

If you are going to have this discussion then lets consider how the process on mini production has changed over the years.
Back in the dark ages of 1st edition warhammer (and a much wider range of other games/games companies/mini makers) it was all batch produced metal models from fairly simple silicon moulds you could set up in your shed.
Now GW is the biggest beast left in the jungle and they are making mass production stuff in plastic. You cannot do this at home. More, it requires a SIGNIFICANT investment to make the moulds for injection moulding and run the process, therefore you MUST sell SIGNIFICANT numbers of minis. If GW were not now a big multi-national (I remember them having one shop in hammersmith) it would ONLY make space marines and the enemy race (orks?)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe we should try to "fix" it by going back to the roots of the hobby and make our own "greens" , moulding them at home and casting them in our sheds?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Come to that, why not write your own codex

If that is true (and I'm not doubting it is to an extent) how do companies like Perry Brothers make Napoleonic and USCW plastics and stay profitable? How about Mantic Miniatures or Warlord Games? It can't all be just plastic model process.

This is something I hinted at when I talked about adding a topknot to an existing marine model. In fact, the Space Wof sprues are just the logical extent of what was done with CSMs back in 4th.

i would like if all races had this kind of variation like SM have.

General Mayhem wrote:If you are going to have this discussion then lets consider how the process on mini production has changed over the years.
Back in the dark ages of 1st edition warhammer (and a much wider range of other games/games companies/mini makers) it was all batch produced metal models from fairly simple silicon moulds you could set up in your shed.
Now GW is the biggest beast left in the jungle and they are making mass production stuff in plastic. You cannot do this at home. More, it requires a SIGNIFICANT investment to make the moulds for injection moulding and run the process, therefore you MUST sell SIGNIFICANT numbers of minis. If GW were not now a big multi-national (I remember them having one shop in hammersmith) it would ONLY make space marines and the enemy race (orks?)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe we should try to "fix" it by going back to the roots of the hobby and make our own "greens" , moulding them at home and casting them in our sheds?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Come to that, why not write your own codex

Lots of people and companies still do that, though they don't make 40K stuff.

The only hold GW have on things is when people want 40K

There's any number of SF rulesets and figures ranges on the market.

A bit like Bill Gates and Windows versus any other OS, success breeds success, we all want a lot of compatability more than we want anything else?
The point of the GW system is we all have it and know it. Even if we occasionally moan about it, it remains that which we have in common.

*Sig Speaks*

GW wants to make money. check
GW makes money. check
GW does nothing for it's own veteran gamers. check

GW is just doing what it thinks will make the most money. I play the game because it's popular and add my anonymous comments here. That's all.

I would just like for the FIRST time in 40k history: have a plan for 5th edition.

Actually, let's get all the armies we're going to create and actually get them all DONE with SUPPORT.

Besides RT, I can't think of an edition where we had all the armies with all the rules where we could objectively look at it as a whole (or meta as the term likes to be slung around) and understand the "GAME".

So keep buying whatever your expendable income will allow and keep posting on forums like this one. It does keep the game moving along.

I think GW has a flawed business model. It's currently working, but I see sustainability problems.

Their current business model:

1) Get customer to pick desired army
2) Buy all available models for said army.
3) Let army become stale by not releasing new material for said army for years.
4) Have customer get bored and start second most liked army and repeat cycle.

This process is only broken when something drastic happens, such as a new edition, a new codex or getting bored with the game and quits.

Personally, I don't like a company relying on me getting bored with my favorite army so I need to buy other random junk to keep them in business. I'd rather have something along the lines of a more continuous releases. Example: once a year each race will get some new toy to play with as an addition to the army. The stats for said units come in a book most players will want to buy to keep money coming.

Something else I'd like to see happen, *Gasp* advancing the fluff lines. Yes, I know this is 40K so going into 41K fluff might seem a bit strange, but I think that would give GW the leeway needed to change stats based on what happens next rather than just changing history completely.

The other thing I'd really like to see happen is a decent set of rules created which don't have the flaws of the normal 40K systems. Seeing as this is probably impossible with the codex system (and I can't see GW leaving that) at least provide a forum to have developers make rules corrections so a ruling doesn't need to be based on people debating fine print on an internet forum.

Oh, and yes I have been giving my money to a company that does this. Privateer Press seems to have learned from the problems that the Codex release system causes and gone a different route to keep their games fresh.