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'd be fine with just Marines & CSM, the rest being replaced by other armies with similar dynamics.

But it won't happen because GW can make one model for Vanilla SM then re-use it for DA, BA, BT, SW or make minor upgrade sprues if they feel like it.

The only point of multiple Codices is for GW to generate bucketloads of cash by being able to release Marines every year or two.

Right, which in turn gives them the capital to work on other armies.

If they follow up on this plan of updating every army to 5th edition before skipping on to 6th, I don't think people will have any right to complain. Among the next three books we have both Necrons and Dark Eldar getting their updates, and unless they make up new Marine armies, there are only two more Imperial SM armies left to update after Grey Knights (Dark Angels and Black Templar).

Terminus wrote:Right, which in turn gives them the capital to work on other armies.

If they follow up on this plan of updating every army to 5th edition before skipping on to 6th, I don't think people will have any right to complain. Among the next three books we have both Necrons and Dark Eldar getting their updates, and unless they make up new Marine armies, there are only two more Imperial SM armies left to update after Grey Knights (Dark Angels and Black Templar).

How much money do they need to fething make a new Necron codex then? 2002 was the publish date for the one out right now. They haven't made enough money or had enough time to sit down and go "Guys....the rules set out for the Necrons are really lame in comparison to the other ones we've already updated....screw it, let's make another chapter specific codex and then use that money so we can have this talk again next year."?

Call me impatient but for some reason (this might seem weird), I don't much enjoy getting gipped out of even armies due to my favored force not having up-to-date rules.

I too like every xeno player get a little annoyed that I have to wait a decade to get updates while 5 new space marines chapters are created and have fully supported releases every month(gross exaggeration)

I also don't understand why armies that are all essentially the exact same except usually 2 units and sometimes a change of FoC require whole new books. I can see that the current SM players may be a little annoyed but their armies would still be viable.

Unfortunately SM is what makes the most cash and money talks.

Terminus wrote:Right, which in turn gives them the capital to work on other armies.

If they follow up on this plan of updating every army to 5th edition before skipping on to 6th, I don't think people will have any right to complain.

Among the next three books we have both Necrons and Dark Eldar getting their updates, and unless they make up new Marine armies, there are only two more Imperial SM armies left to update after Grey Knights (Dark Angels and Black Templar).

See? Someone gets it.

From the rumors, it looks like GW has adequate time, and (more importantly) desire, to update the remaining "obsolete" armies (DE, Necrons, DH & WH) before releasing 6E. From the recent sales, it also looks like GW has enough cash to do so - I wonder where that cash came from...

Due to their messiness, I'd expect DH & WH to get redone before DA or BT. I think GW will only do 2 minor SMs per edition, otherwise, the pipe goes dry for 6E. So, with SWs and BA redone for 5E, GW should be "done" with them for now.
____

Firesolved wrote:How much money do they need to fething make a new Necron codex then? 2002 was the publish date for the one out right now.

Necrons are going to take a *lot* of work because their Codex is really small and limited. A rework will probably re-concept Necrons in general, along with adding probably a half-dozen new units along with several "special character" equivalents. Along with a lot of model design and development, and playtesting. It's a major project with major up-front cash outlays, for an army that, to date, hasn't been a huge seller. "Fixing" Necrons is probably only slightly cheaper than redoing Dark Eldar.

Firesolved wrote:How much money do they need to fething make a new Necron codex then? 2002 was the publish date for the one out right now.

Necrons are going to take a *lot* of work because their Codex is really small and limited. A rework will probably re-concept Necrons in general, along with adding probably a half-dozen new units along with several "special character" equivalents. Along with a lot of model design and development, and playtesting. It's a major project with major up-front cash outlays, for an army that, to date, hasn't been a huge seller. "Fixing" Necrons is probably only slightly cheaper than redoing Dark Eldar.

Firesolved wrote:Still aggravating and I wish to take my hate out on MEQs.

Technically, we Necrons are kinda MEQs. Same basic stats, yah know?

Necroman wrote:

Firesolved wrote:Still aggravating and I wish to take my hate out on MEQs.

Technically, we Necrons are kinda MEQs. Same basic stats, yah know?

Shut up, shut up, shut up!!!

Mad Rabbit wrote:I'm guessing non-vanilla Marine players would throw a fit, and then suddenly understand why losing Legions was a big deal to Chaos Marines.

I am a non-vanilla player, and I already understand. I miss my Emperor's Children legion...

I would go absoulutely ape. To first lose my Codex: Craftworld Eldar, then to lose Chaos Legions, then to lose my Space Wolves?
I would have to go after whoever put forward this idea. With a dull, rusty butter knife.

Rats. Voted wrong. I voted indifferent, but I was meaning to vote "Burn down Games Workshop," as I was already thinking of doing that.

I know exactly what you are talking about, being a Chaos player who got pissed at all the options I lost jumping from the old book to the new one, but doing that to 5 more armies just isn't the answer. I don't have time to fully explain myself, dinner is done, but when I get back I will try to put down a better arguement.

riplikash wrote:The unsaid implication here is that if GW didn't spend time making SM codexes they could make more codexes for other armies. But that's just not the case. GMs output isn't limited by volume like a pipe, but by how much money they have to hire people. GM needs to make money, the more they make the more codexes you will see. The fact that marine codexes are so popular tells you they sell well. They are the cash crop. The more profit they make the more they can experiment with new ideas.

SM codexes are not REPLACING other armies, they are ALLOWING other armies. If they replaced all the SM material with new, less popular material, than new updates would be SLOWER in coming, not faster.

The SM ARE the heart and soul of the game. They catch a lot of flak, but I'd wager well over 95% of hobbyists have had a serious interest in SM at one point or another. They catch a lot of flak because they are so common, but they are so common because they are frikkin awesome.

I think you hit the nail right on the head there.

riplikash wrote:The unsaid implication here is that if GW didn't spend time making SM codexes they could make more codexes for other armies. But that's just not the case. GMs output isn't limited by volume like a pipe, but by how much money they have to hire people. GM needs to make money, the more they make the more codexes you will see. The fact that marine codexes are so popular tells you they sell well. They are the cash crop. The more profit they make the more they can experiment with new ideas.

SM codexes are not REPLACING other armies, they are ALLOWING other armies. If they replaced all the SM material with new, less popular material, than new updates would be SLOWER in coming, not faster.

The SM ARE the heart and soul of the game. They catch a lot of flak, but I'd wager well over 95% of hobbyists have had a serious interest in SM at one point or another. They catch a lot of flak because they are so common, but they are so common because they are frikkin awesome.

You would lose that wager. The SM's provide nothing for other armies other than an opponent to fight. The SM's and almost to the same extent the IG are a cash cow because of multiple armies using the same models.
The profits from this do not go into the Xenos armies but rather towards the disproportionately large SM promo budget and into shareholder back pockets.

GW is a corporation and as such follow a preset model of a set profit margin. It is not enough that a product makes money but has to return a certain percentage for every dollar spent. Now this may sound like common sense untill you realize the the profit margin is skewed by a model line that crosses several armies and that this preset ratio is used to determine if they will invest in expanding non-SM armies. This creates an unrealizable expectation that an army will have to match SM profit ratio on its own woth a single codex. In other words, Before GW will expand an army with a single codex into multiple codices, that army will have to match the profit ratio of the SM's.

Necroman wrote: Technically, we Necrons are kinda MEQs. Same basic stats, yah know?

And that's unfortunate.

I'm seriously hoping that GW takes the chance to move Necrons away from the MEQ stat, just to make them different:

Space Marine = WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A1 Ld8 Sv3+
Necron Warrior = WS3 BS3 S5 T5 W1 I3 A2 Ld10 Sv4++I Fearless, Relentless

Yup, I'm hoping Warriors get bump to S5 T5 with an 4+ Invulnerable standard, along with an extra Attack, changing the numbers away from 4s purely for sake of making them not MEQs.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Necroman wrote: Technically, we Necrons are kinda MEQs. Same basic stats, yah know?

And that's unfortunate.

I'm seriously hoping that GW takes the chance to move Necrons away from the MEQ stat, just to make them different:

Space Marine = WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A1 Ld8 Sv3+
Necron Warrior = WS3 BS3 S5 T5 W1 I3 A2 Ld10 Sv4++I Fearless, Relentless

Yup, I'm hoping Warriors get bump to S5 T5 with an 4+ Invulnerable standard, along with an extra Attack, changing the numbers away from 4s purely for sake of making them not MEQs.

Agreed. If not for rules reasons of simply not being a unique army, then at least for fluff reasons; why the hell should they have close to the same basic stats as Space Marines when the two fight in different ways?

Exactly. Let a new set of Necron rules with a new Necron statline drive a distinctly different playstyle.

Having MEQ isn't the problem. Having every army and its mother be an MEQ army is the problem.

For this reason, I voted unhappy. I still like my MEQ armies; they fit my play-style and I like the CSM/BT fluff, so discontinuing them would be a bad thing imho.

The prevalence of MEQ armies, on the other hand... let's just say if there were different Craftworld codicies and more non-MEQ armies I'd be happy. MEQ mirrors aren't nearly as fun.

Necroman wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Necroman wrote: Technically, we Necrons are kinda MEQs. Same basic stats, yah know?

And that's unfortunate.

I'm seriously hoping that GW takes the chance to move Necrons away from the MEQ stat, just to make them different:

Space Marine = WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A1 Ld8 Sv3+
Necron Warrior = WS3 BS3 S5 T5 W1 I3 A2 Ld10 Sv4++I Fearless, Relentless

Yup, I'm hoping Warriors get bump to S5 T5 with an 4+ Invulnerable standard, along with an extra Attack, changing the numbers away from 4s purely for sake of making them not MEQs.

Agreed. If not for rules reasons of simply not being a unique army, then at least for fluff reasons; why the hell should they have close to the same basic stats as Space Marines when the two fight in different ways?

Uh and how many ponts is that guy going to be?

I love how the OP thinks that getting rid of MEQ codexes would get GW to release other armies.

They Wouldn't, they'd just do 1 codex a year instead.

And to those championing 1 book for everything:
Look at the Chaos Codex. I don't think even GW are dumb enough to make that mistake again.

I would LOVE a Mechanicus codex.

made my own Fandex for them and some official rules would be awsome.

they feature so promanantly in the fluff, but have no models besides Titans.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
I'm seriously hoping that GW takes the chance to move Necrons away from the MEQ stat, just to make them different:

Space Marine = WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A1 Ld8 Sv3+
Necron Warrior = WS3 BS3 S5 T5 W1 I3 A2 Ld10 Sv4++I Fearless, Relentless

Yup, I'm hoping Warriors get bump to S5 T5 with an 4+ Invulnerable standard, along with an extra Attack, changing the numbers away from 4s purely for sake of making them not MEQs.

Uh and how many ponts is that guy going to be?

Well, let's see...

A SM is 15 pts, and the changes were:

-1 to WS & BS (-2)
+1 to S & T (+3)
-1 to I (-1)
+1 A (+2)
+2 Ld & Fearless (+3)
-1 Sv, but Inv (+1)
+ Relentless (+2)

Total 23 pts (+8 net)


That's same as a Plague Marine:

WS4 BS4 S4 T5 W1 I3 A2 Ld10 Fearless FNP

-1 WS & BS (-2)
+1 S (+1)
-1 Sv, but Inv (+1)
+ Relentless (+2)
- FNP (-2)

Same 23 pts (+0 net).

Guys, if you're going to discuss this necron warrior stuff, take it to another thread... like maybe by necron fandex thread, if you really want, then you could 'suggest' it. If it is good enough, might even get in the finished version. Although, tbh John, the above statline is meh. Personally, I don't like it... many a piece of fluff says, "a necron warrior can take about the same amount of punishment as a space marine". Toughness 5 is NOT about the same.


Anyway, I've had my say in this thread already, and I'll probably only read from now on. [/endrant]

T5 with a 3+ and FNP is much better than T4 with a 3+, but T5 with a 4++I is "about the same" as T4 with a 3+. Run the numbers and see for yourself.

JohnHwangDD wrote:T5 with a 3+ and FNP is much better than T4 with a 3+, but T5 with a 4++I is "about the same" as T4 with a 3+. Run the numbers and see for yourself.

But Necrons have FNP.

They don't have to.

Either way, Necrons shouldn't be MEQs.

...