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.

 bullyboy wrote:
Nobody is taking ass cents (in a general statement of course, people will always play outliers occasionally) if they aren't playing RG or WS. The points value is then fairly meaningless, especially if they are going to be handcuffed to another overpriced unit for a means of delivery.

I don't know what WS do to make them better (I just don't know WS period), but I do play Raven Guard (but own zero Cents). The problem is the keyword, they should not be classed as Infantry...problem solved (at least for Ravenguard).

I agree. Vehical keyword would probably fix them. As the WL traits and strats they are abusing in WS/RG are infantry only.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Nobody is taking ass cents (in a general statement of course, people will always play outliers occasionally) if they aren't playing RG or WS. The points value is then fairly meaningless, especially if they are going to be handcuffed to another overpriced unit for a means of delivery.

I don't know what WS do to make them better (I just don't know WS period), but I do play Raven Guard (but own zero Cents). The problem is the keyword, they should not be classed as Infantry...problem solved (at least for Ravenguard).

I agree. Vehical keyword would probably fix them. As the WL traits and strats they are abusing in WS/RG are infantry only.

Could classify them as MC’s as well, would solve the problem and might be more accurate than counting them as a vehicle.

Custodes terminators also can deep strike for free, move a full 6, and have a 4++ built in.

Meanwhile the Assault Cents are better at shooting.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Centurions, IH Colors, and Leviathans are the literal poster children for "That Guy" at the FLGS. The one that has to be ultra competitive no matter what.

38" threat range with no move penalty. One single 155 point Moirax kills 104 points of Centurions. If your meta is Centurions bust them out. If you're facing Levis then 3 of them can likely bring one down (or at least cripple for something else to finish it off) without needing to start in the threat range of Storm Cannons.

If using transhuman on them and they are in cover you barely kill one of them. If they have any other defensive buff as well you kill even less, especially if they have any form of fnp. Fnp almost halves the expected kills. Those damn centurions are hard to kill and using something with only 24" range to hry to hard counter something feels risky.

Klickor wrote:

If using transhuman on them and they are in cover you barely kill one of them. If they have any other defensive buff as well you kill even less, especially if they have any form of fnp. Fnp almost halves the expected kills. Those damn centurions are hard to kill and using something with only 24" range to hry to hard counter something feels risky.

Transhuman is 2CP. They'll handicap themselves especially if I have 2 or more of these going after different units. 24" is easy to manage with 14" move and if they Cents can't clear screens and move 24" in a single turn i'm back pedaling without concern. IH rarely have Cents so FNP hasn't been a huge issue for me.

Klickor wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Centurions, IH Colors, and Leviathans are the literal poster children for "That Guy" at the FLGS. The one that has to be ultra competitive no matter what.

38" threat range with no move penalty. One single 155 point Moirax kills 104 points of Centurions. If your meta is Centurions bust them out. If you're facing Levis then 3 of them can likely bring one down (or at least cripple for something else to finish it off) without needing to start in the threat range of Storm Cannons.

If using transhuman on them and they are in cover you barely kill one of them. If they have any other defensive buff as well you kill even less, especially if they have any form of fnp. Fnp almost halves the expected kills. Those damn centurions are hard to kill and using something with only 24" range to hry to hard counter something feels risky.

You must really struggle killing custodes then. They even have invune saves and a -1 to hit on them at all times lol.

Not really. I kill them in melee with thunderhammers but I have had bad luck sometimes and they make a bunch of 3++ saves in a row.

Im mostly saying that the Moirax isnt that good at killing Centurions. Having to be within 24" of the new marines and not be incredibly sturdy or killy in melee sounds like a rather bad counter. What is it good against if there are no centurions or they hold them back or deploy them after killing the Moirax?

They lose to devastator centurions from IF since their Heavy bolters outrange the Moirax with 4"

Klickor wrote:
Not really. I kill them in melee with thunderhammers but I have had bad luck sometimes and they make a bunch of 3++ saves in a row.

Im mostly saying that the Moirax isnt that good at killing Centurions. Having to be within 24" of the new marines and not be incredibly sturdy or killy in melee sounds like a rather bad counter. What is it good against if there are no centurions or they hold them back or deploy them after killing the Moirax?

They lose to devastator centurions from IF since their Heavy bolters outrange the Moirax with 4"

Speed bumps keep cents getting too far in. I haven't had the pleasure of facing IF Dev Cents, but it isn't like they can move fast enough to defeat any LOS terrain (provided there is some). You otherwise have me there, but it would still probably be my preferred tool.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Shareholders like money.

GW learnt long ago that people will buy the models with the best rules, regardless of aesthetics and price.

GW does all it can to make as much money as possible.

Ass Cents are the perfect example of this and are criminally undercosted.

Is your awfully photoshopped picture supposed to be some kind of witty retort?

I can't wait for the few years when GW realise they have too many Reivers, Squigbuggies etc on their shelves and make them OP. Your naivety would be endearing if you weren't so aggressive with it.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Shareholders like money.

GW learnt long ago that people will buy the models with the best rules, regardless of aesthetics and price.

GW does all it can to make as much money as possible.

Ass Cents are the perfect example of this and are criminally undercosted.

Is your awfully photoshopped picture supposed to be some kind of witty retort?

I can't wait for the few years when GW realise they have too many Reivers, Squigbuggies etc on their shelves and make them OP. Your naivety would be endearing if you weren't so aggressive with it.

Regarding the picture, I don't think anyone is buying the mek shop to use in the game.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Shareholders like money.

GW learnt long ago that people will buy the models with the best rules, regardless of aesthetics and price.

GW does all it can to make as much money as possible.

Ass Cents are the perfect example of this and are criminally undercosted.

Is your awfully photoshopped picture supposed to be some kind of witty retort?

I can't wait for the few years when GW realise they have too many Reivers, Squigbuggies etc on their shelves and make them OP. Your naivety would be endearing if you weren't so aggressive with it.

It pretty clearly demonstrates how silly your narrative is. How about that Smasha Gun nerf? Which ploy is GW using there? Did they want to sell fewer Smasha Guns, but not THAT many fewer? I see they didn't bump the points on any other Mek Gunz. DIABOLICAL!

I just can't keep up with the absolute genius of it all.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It pretty clearly demonstrates how silly your narrative is. How about that Smasha Gun nerf? Which ploy is GW using there? Did they want to sell fewer Smasha Guns, but not THAT many fewer? I see they didn't bump the points on any other Mek Gunz. DIABOLICAL!

I just can't keep up with the absolute genius of it all.

You consider a 2pt increase on a MASSIVELY OVER-PERFORMING WEAPON a "nerf" worth mentioning? Lol, that just shows how desperate your argument has become. GW are quite happy to sell as many overpriced Mek Gunz to people who will buy them, it's as simple as that. And trust me when I say the moment the Smasha Gun is nerfed considerably another Mek Gun will become the top dog and players will still need the buy the kit in order to play competitively. Why do I know this? Because the kit is expensive and relatively new. It's funny that models packaged in boxed sets aren't dropped in points, despite their utter lack of use in competitive games such as these. Isn't it odd that probably the most cash to points efficient model in the game, that many players have access to is also one of the worst performing? I wonder why that is? Definitely nothing to do with money, no way.

Same with the way they are trying to force WYSIWYG down every tournaments' throat - definitely not because they want players to spend their money on 'OP weapon option x' then have to buy more kits and change it to 'OP weapon option y' when they change its stats. "But every model comes with all of the weapon options!" I hear you cry. Do they?

I can't believe you actually doubt this, particularly as one of their staff members has gone on record literally stating it happens. Wake up.

Breaking news: GW is a company that tries to make money!

WAKE UP SHEEPLE

Ushtarador wrote:
Breaking news: GW is a company that tries to make money!

WAKE UP SHEEPLE

No man, they're all about creating a balanced and fair game for everyone, that is all. They're almost a charity. They never show any interest in using the game rules, special offers, limited edition sets, or any other basic, large scale production techniques to manipulate demand to suit their stock. Nope. No way. That's why their financial performance has been so bad lately and why their shareholders are so annoyed.

If GW is so competent why dont they make most units equal and then have a few outliers so everything sells? Sure, mek gunz sell well due to their rules but the rules for terminators havent moved a tactical dreadnought suit in almost a decade. Now some units sell well and some dont. If GW really did all their balancing around selling models they would make sure none were total crap.

They benefit from the meta changing and people buying new stuff but you can have that and still sell Baal Predators, melee dreads as long as those models arent total crap. Only having a few OP models and the rest crap limits what people need and want to buy.

You would do it like they do in WoW and other games like that and do small changes that slightly shifts what is the best all the time. That way you will have people get everything over time. Like every unit for their 40k army since none of them are unplayable or every class for wow since top class changes in each major patch/raid.

And they probably wouldnt have made a resin kit the best unit in the game if they knew what they were doing. They would have made the whirlwind and not TFC the best artillery piece if individual kit sales was the only reason they buffed or nerfed units.

 _SeeD_ wrote:
You know the stats. Why are CAS only 52 points per model? A comparable unit is Custodes Aquilon Terminators, who have the same Strength, Toughness, and Wounds, but with worse shooting and melee, with a cost of around 80~? These guys seem like an auto include because they are so good. Sorry for the complainy sounding post.

Because something has to make up for how unbelievably ugly and lame they are.

 Grimskul wrote:

ccs wrote:
To sell more kits.

In a nutshell, this. I'm pretty sure CA is more or less a way to make people buy more models since everyone gets price cuts, its only egregiously competitive units that get the slap occasionally, and usually because they've made enough money from their kits already.

GW used the highly scientific process of measuring the thickness of the dust on the centurion boxes before they dropped the codex. Sorry bro. 8th edition is the edition you asked for.

Hellebore wrote:
Because they are so ugly.

No matter how good they are the models are the worst invention GW has created for marines.

I'd only field them if they were ambot conversions or redone entirely - my personal opinion is that they should have been 'light dreds' as a chapter undoubtedly has more severely injured warriors than dreadnought chassis' to put them in.

Put dreadnaught sarcophagus in the middle and it suddenly makes far more sense.

I keep hoping I will wake up from the nightmare and these abominations will have never existed along with Santa Logan, Crisis Suits, Storm Surges and Wolves on Wolves,

Oh goal posts how I missed thee.

You consider a 2pt increase on a MASSIVELY OVER-PERFORMING WEAPON a "nerf" worth mentioning? Lol, that just shows how desperate your argument has become. GW are quite happy to sell as many overpriced Mek Gunz to people who will buy them, it's as simple as that.

Previously GW "nerfed the KMK", because "everyone owned those" and they "wanted to sell Smasha Guns". So, now its "GW are quite happy to sell as many overpriced Mek Gunz".

But let's compare their points efficiency as a nerf to the Smasha is an indirect buff to the KMK.



Oh gee look at that. They're not wildly different are they? But the Smasha is still considered better for other reasons : people don't like D6 shots, 48" is easier to deploy, and the cheaper bodies are less of an investment when filling all the slots.

Do you know what would happen in Mek Gunz when to 3 max per army? They might take KMKs, because they'd offer the most damage for the slots available. 18 KMKs obviously do way more damage than 18 Smashas, but no one will invest that kind of points into "easily" killed units.

But you think GW has THOSE considerations on lock down? This is what their master plan hinges on?

And trust me when I say the moment the Smasha Gun is nerfed considerably another Mek Gun will become the top dog and players will still need the buy the kit in order to play competitively. Why do I know this? Because the kit is expensive and relatively new.

And why didn't they do that now, exactly? They didn't get enough sales of Smasha Guns? Are you just going to invent whatever logic with no data you want to make a point?

Relatively new? Five years is relatively new?

It's funny that models packaged in boxed sets aren't dropped in points, despite their utter lack of use in competitive games such as these.

Oh god. You know what you'd say if those models in the boxed sets had point drops? You'd say, "oh, GW only did point drops for models in box sets to push those".

But, LOL, get this. All the models in this Start Collecting dropped in points:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Start-Collecting-Chaos-Space-Marines-2019

So you'll point at that and say, "SEE! They're trying to push those models!" and proceed to ignore the other boxes that were mixed on point drops.

Isn't it odd that probably the most cash to points efficient model in the game, that many players have access to is also one of the worst performing? I wonder why that is? Definitely nothing to do with money, no way.

So, because you think this fantastical "cash to points" measure is skewed for the Stompa that GW actively seeks to keep it off the table - and you think this is reasonable logic. Do you even LISTEN to yourself? Oh, but GW dropped its points so they must be TRICKING us to keep us off their trail on "cash to points". Those sly dogs. We're too woke for them!

Also, exactly what does the kit price have to do with current ownership of the model. If GW won't benefit from them purchasing another Stompa since they already own a Stompa then what exactly is the purpose of dropping the points of models that other people also own? Do you legitimately think the Stompa kit is as well made as the Castellan kit?

If GW is truly concerned about this then why don't they just raise the price of the Stompa to $150? Or drop the points to an absurdly low level so that people are enticed to buy even two or three of them!

definitely not because they want players to spend their money on 'OP weapon option x' then have to buy more kits and change it to 'OP weapon option y' when they change its stats. "But every model comes with all of the weapon options!" I hear you cry. Do [url=https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Imperial-Knights-Knight-Valiant-2018]they?

Just like the internet told us how amazing the Chaincannons were and that they'd just wreck face at their current point cost. Didn't pan out did it? But, oh no! If GW drops points then it will be suddenly usable and we'll all be cutting ourselves for our foolishness! It has nothing to do with the fact that they're 24" weapons that are hard to deliver en mass.

But I guess GW can't ever change them, because then it would be for the sales and not because they're not broadly usable like the internet wants them to be.

Same with the way they are trying to force WYSIWYG down every tournaments' throat

To what official GW statement are you referring?

I can't believe you actually doubt this, particularly as one of their staff members has gone on record literally stating it happens. Wake up.

Yea, he literally didn't say that, but you people live in this ridiculous warped fantasy and use any piece of information to make up your narrative.

Just bull gak artistry through and through.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Oh goal posts how I missed thee.
SNIP
Just bull gak artistry through and through.

I really don't have the time or inclination to respond to this essay of idiocy.

It's not on topic either. The topic, in case you've missed it, isn't "let's argue about whether GW use rules to push the sales of certain models" it's; "Can someone explain Centurion Assault Squads to me?" I offered my explanation. If you want to discuss my explanation in detail, I suggest you make another thread or PM me, rather than take this one off topic. I find it interesting and telling that you haven't actually answered the OPs question, or responded to them, you've simply dived in with your lance of whiteknightdom and poked fun at my response. Bizarre.

Perhaps rather than worrying about what I'm writing, you should give your own opinion on the topic at hand.

However I will state that if you believe that GW, as manufacturers/suppliers (I work for a manufacturer by the way) DON'T manipulate demand to suit their stock and that they don't use every tool at their disposal, including the written rules of a unit (especially when an ex employee has stated such) you are either incredibly naive or you have very little experience of the private sector.

I think the reason Centurion Assault Squads exist is because there is a moon unicorn secretly controlling Games Workshop that is forcing them to create weird units. Anyone that disagrees with my explanation is off topic.


On a more serious note, as people have already said, they're good when you have a way around their poor mobility and really bad otherwise. They're the typical example of a brick unit.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Oh goal posts how I missed thee.
SNIP
Just bull gak artistry through and through.

I really don't have the time or inclination to respond to this essay of idiocy.

It's not on topic either. The topic, in case you've missed it, isn't "let's argue about whether GW use rules to push the sales of certain models" it's; "Can someone explain Centurion Assault Squads to me?" I offered my explanation. If you want to discuss my explanation in detail, I suggest you make another thread or PM me, rather than take this one off topic. I find it interesting and telling that you haven't actually answered the OPs question, or responded to them, you've simply dived in with your lance of whiteknightdom and poked fun at my response. Bizarre.

Perhaps rather than worrying about what I'm writing, you should give your own opinion on the topic at hand.

However I will state that if you believe that GW, as manufacturers/suppliers (I work for a manufacturer by the way) DON'T manipulate demand to suit their stock and that they don't use every tool at their disposal, including the written rules of a unit (especially when an ex employee has stated such) you are either incredibly naive or you have very little experience of the private sector.

It's entirely on topic, because I'm explaining why your fly by night logic explanation isn't correct.

One side of the argument has consistently applied logic, doesn't shift goal posts, doesn't use cherries as evidence of totality, and doesn't rely on conspiracy theories. And it isn't your side.

I don't need to provide a direct post, because someone already said what I would. I'm just here to knock down bs.

Plenty of businesses manipulate demand. Why would GW be manipulating for Centurions over literally anything else? Because you'll likely assert - without evidence - that "Centurion boxes were collecting dust". A premise based on made up information - what does one call that? Why would Aggressors, a new mold, not be preferable to them? Aggressors even went up a wound and gained an attack. 6 Aggressors to 4 Cents.

Oh, wait. Aggressors are 2.1 points per dollar where Centurions are 2 points per dollar. GW clearly favored Centurions there.

I'm really glad you have deep insights into manufacturing businesses that only want to sell part of their inventory instead of moving all of it more evenly, which makes planning for production and the costly warehousing space a much easier task. Especially when said business is constantly pushing new product consuming all the time for new production and suddenly needing to produce a mold that isn't in the current line-up is a distraction to efficiency.

But, yea, some secret sales agenda is a way easier explanation than they just screwed up.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Oh goal posts how I missed thee.
SNIP
Just bull gak artistry through and through.

I really don't have the time or inclination to respond to this essay of idiocy.

It's not on topic either. The topic, in case you've missed it, isn't "let's argue about whether GW use rules to push the sales of certain models" it's; "Can someone explain Centurion Assault Squads to me?" I offered my explanation. If you want to discuss my explanation in detail, I suggest you make another thread or PM me, rather than take this one off topic. I find it interesting and telling that you haven't actually answered the OPs question, or responded to them, you've simply dived in with your lance of whiteknightdom and poked fun at my response. Bizarre.

Perhaps rather than worrying about what I'm writing, you should give your own opinion on the topic at hand.

However I will state that if you believe that GW, as manufacturers/suppliers (I work for a manufacturer by the way) DON'T manipulate demand to suit their stock and that they don't use every tool at their disposal, including the written rules of a unit (especially when an ex employee has stated such) you are either incredibly naive or you have very little experience of the private sector.

It's entirely on topic, because I'm explaining why your fly by night logic explanation isn't correct.

One side of the argument has consistently applied logic, doesn't shift goal posts, doesn't use cherries as evidence of totality, and doesn't rely on conspiracy theories. And it isn't your side.

I don't need to provide a direct post, because someone already said what I would. I'm just here to knock down bs.

Plenty of businesses manipulate demand. Why would GW be manipulating for Centurions over literally anything else? Because you'll likely assert - without evidence - that "Centurion boxes were collecting dust". A premise based on made up information - what does one call that? Why would Aggressors, a new mold, not be preferable to them? Aggressors even went up a wound and gained an attack. 6 Aggressors to 4 Cents.

Oh, wait. Aggressors are 2.1 points per dollar where Centurions are 2 points per dollar. GW clearly favored Centurions there.

I'm really glad you have deep insights into manufacturing businesses that only want to sell part of their inventory instead of moving all of it more evenly, which makes planning for production and the costly warehousing space a much easier task. Especially when said business is constantly pushing new product consuming all the time for new production and suddenly needing to produce a mold that isn't in the current line-up is a distraction to efficiency.

But, yea, some secret sales agenda is a way easier explanation than they just screwed up.

So the mods are OK to let this continue? Okies then.

Your arguments above only show how little you understand of the manufacturing process and supply and demand. You are proving your own ignorance.

Do you actually think that a manufacturer can produce every product in their inventory at the same time? Lol. Particularly when this particular manufacturer has a TON of inventory across a what, 30 year time using different base materials AND limited output because limited moulds? You have no idea. The only thing you've stated that is correct is that they hold tons of stock, not just on their own warehouse but across their stores and 3rd party resellers.

Let me give you a basic example so you might wrap your head around my simple, logical and (according to ex GW employees) correct statement. Two new products released at the same time - unit a and b. Now what happens when 'unit b' has worse rules than 'unit a'? People buy unit a more than unit b right? So what happens to the stock of unit b compared to unit a? It stays on the shelf, not selling as much. So after a year or two of unit a outselling unit b and unit b having vastly more units in the warehouses and across stores (taking up valuable storage space that could be used for other products or not at all), what do GW do? Do they do nothing? No, that would be stupid. They incentivise people (manipulate demand) to buy unit b to shift stock. That incentive might be through monetary price cuts (lol - has this ever happened?), it might be through making the unit part of a boxed set that offers slightly more monetary value (warbikers as part of the Speed Freaks set, for example) or perhaps they tweak the rules of unit b (or unit a, if they fulfil similar roles) to ensure it starts selling. If any of this seems illogical or nonsensical please go into detail as to why because I don't think I could make it any more simple.

Could the above be used to explain why Ass Cents are now very points efficient? Yes, I think so. Does it seem particularly likely when we have multiple GW employees literally stating on record that GW senior staff have manipulated demand through the rules of at least some units to drive sales? Yes, i think so.

But of course it could just be that they have no idea what they're doing and it's a pure coincidence that some units are made blatantly OP when they haven't sold for a while, when they are newly released, or when they offer reduced price to point efficiency. What a strange, peculiar coincidence that is. How odd.

E - sp

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Could the above be used to explain why Ass Cents are now very points efficient? Yes, I think so. Does it seem particularly likely when we have multiple GW employees literally stating on record that GW senior staff have manipulated demand through the rules of at least some units to drive sales? Yes, i think so.

Citations required - specifically for "multiple GW employees" and "some units" - I've seen reference to one ex-employee talking about the Wraithknight, but that's it.

 Dysartes wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Could the above be used to explain why Ass Cents are now very points efficient? Yes, I think so. Does it seem particularly likely when we have multiple GW employees literally stating on record that GW senior staff have manipulated demand through the rules of at least some units to drive sales? Yes, i think so.

Citations required - specifically for "multiple GW employees" and "some units" - I've seen reference to one ex-employee talking about the Wraithknight, but that's it.

There was another employee referencing multiple units in fantasy that had exactly the same treatment. I don't need to cite anything though. Is one employee giving a clear cut example not enough for you? How many employees do you need to tell you the obvious?

 Dysartes wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Could the above be used to explain why Ass Cents are now very points efficient? Yes, I think so. Does it seem particularly likely when we have multiple GW employees literally stating on record that GW senior staff have manipulated demand through the rules of at least some units to drive sales? Yes, i think so.

Citations required - specifically for "multiple GW employees" and "some units" - I've seen reference to one ex-employee talking about the Wraithknight, but that's it.

No citation required. Its bloody obvious that SM get tons of new rules to drive up their sales.

Assault Centurions by themselves arent really shifting many boxes. Its more RG and WS that does it.

So the question is. Did they make Master of Ambush warlord trait for RG and the deepstrike/outflank stratagems to sell centurions? I dont buy that that is the main reason those exists, to sell assault centurions.

Buffing stats on centurions/gravis and lowering cost so they sell at all and not being completely useless I can see and is a good decision. But to make the above mentioned rules just to make aggressors and assault centurions broken just to shift more of those Im not as sure of.

They try to balance the game from time to time to make more options viable so people buy them and they change the core rules also just to shake up the game to sell more books and make other units and armies the top dogs. But from what I can see its more coincidence in most cases on what is actually good. They dont really know what the exact results of their changes will bring and its enough for them as long as the best space marine list isnt the same through the years. If GW were as competent as they and some in here believe they are we would probably see even more diversity in good units and the changes to units wouldnt be as sudden.

Most be much easier for GW if they could predict the sales better all the time and didnt have huge jumps up and down and sometimes running out of stock for some options while others rot on a shelf for years.

If the difference between Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, Vanguard Veterans and Assault marines are quite small at any one point I would start with buying the one that is the best for me, be it rules or look, and when that unit is finished and I habe played with it for a while I wouldnt need a huge incentive to buy another Jump unit, maybe just a shift in the meta or a small point correctiong and I would buy it. I dont need huge shifts or buffs for me to want to buy it, all it really does is change the order I buy and paint them. If all 4 units are well balanced then I will buy them all over time anyway. But if they never make assault marines good and just change which of DC, VV or SG that is broken they have lost me from ever buying the regular marines, which is actually a more expensive box than the others for some weird reason.

Most 40k gamers I know will buy and paint mostly the same amount each year and sure they fill in their blanks in their army from the top units at the time but they also stop themselves going to the actual bottom crap units. Its not like they are done with their army as soon as they reach 2000pts. I dont know anyone that has ever stopped growing their model count unless they quit the hobby completely. You dont need OP rules to sell models, you only need non crap rules.

Hellebore wrote:
Because they are so ugly.

No matter how good they are the models are the worst invention GW has created for marines.

I'd only field them if they were ambot conversions or redone entirely - my personal opinion is that they should have been 'light dreds' as a chapter undoubtedly has more severely injured warriors than dreadnought chassis' to put them in.

Put dreadnaught sarcophagus in the middle and it suddenly makes far more sense.

Exactly! Sure they can be good, but then you have to field a Marine in a fat suit.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


So the mods are OK to let this continue? Okies then.

Your arguments above only show how little you understand of the manufacturing process and supply and demand. You are proving your own ignorance.

Do you actually think that a manufacturer can produce every product in their inventory at the same time? Lol. Particularly when this particular manufacturer has a TON of inventory across a what, 30 year time using different base materials AND limited output because limited moulds? You have no idea. The only thing you've stated that is correct is that they hold tons of stock, not just on their own warehouse but across their stores and 3rd party resellers.

Let me give you a basic example so you might wrap your head around my simple, logical and (according to ex GW employees) correct statement. Two new products released at the same time - unit a and b. Now what happens when 'unit b' has worse rules than 'unit a'? People buy unit a more than unit b right? So what happens to the stock of unit b compared to unit a? It stays on the shelf, not selling as much. So after a year or two of unit a outselling unit b and unit b having vastly more units in the warehouses and across stores (taking up valuable storage space that could be used for other products or not at all), what do GW do? Do they do nothing? No, that would be stupid. They incentivise people (manipulate demand) to buy unit b to shift stock. That incentive might be through monetary price cuts (lol - has this ever happened?), it might be through making the unit part of a boxed set that offers slightly more monetary value (warbikers as part of the Speed Freaks set, for example) or perhaps they tweak the rules of unit b (or unit a, if they fulfil similar roles) to ensure it starts selling. If any of this seems illogical or nonsensical please go into detail as to why because I don't think I could make it any more simple.

Could the above be used to explain why Ass Cents are now very points efficient? Yes, I think so. Does it seem particularly likely when we have multiple GW employees literally stating on record that GW senior staff have manipulated demand through the rules of at least some units to drive sales? Yes, i think so.

But of course it could just be that they have no idea what they're doing and it's a pure coincidence that some units are made blatantly OP when they haven't sold for a while, when they are newly released, or when they offer reduced price to point efficiency. What a strange, peculiar coincidence that is. How odd.

E - sp

Sure.

Your logic asserts that GW MUST NOT have sold the kits well - without evidence.

You assume, falsely, that competitive players are the only people buying models.

You forget that Devastator Cents were difficult to instagib and decent units in 7th and that the Assault kit was the same kit so claims that they'd just have a bunch laying around - 6 years later - gets even more ridiculous.

You ignore that GW had the opportunity to shift these models far sooner, but from 7th edition they were 55 points each - with weapons . In the Index they were 95 points (OMG! The cash to points on those! Why...that's almost as bad as the stompa!). In the first Codex they dropped to 75 points. At neither of these points were they cheaper than 7th edition. Relief did not come in CA17. It did not come in CA18. Sure seems like they were really energized to push those models, but at the time they're pushing a mountain of new kits - ALL with good rules - THAT is when they suddenly want to force out Centurions? You think GW has a lack of product people are willing to buy that they needed to push that one?

You even ignore the secondary market. On eBay there are 46 squads of used Centurions that sold in the past 3 months and 58 new. Is it really a great plan for GW to push models that have almost 50% of the sales in the secondary market? (And we can't even see the other secondary markets)

You know what's not on the secondary market? New kits.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Sure.

Your logic asserts that GW MUST NOT have sold the kits well - without evidence.

Have they ever been out of stock? This doesn't take a genius - we've already asserted that competitive units sell better than others.

You assume, falsely, that competitive players are the only people buying models.

I assume nothing. I'm not a competitive player as such but I still buy more models that perform well for my faction than those that don't. Regardless - do you not concede that it is pretty fething likely, like indisputably so, that the more competitive a unit is the more it sells? Do you need a source on this? Because I actually have one and I know you'll know it too - Reece from FLG has stated this multiple times. If you watch signals (I believe you do) I know you'll have heard him state this.

You forget that Devastator Cents were difficult to instagib and decent units in 7th and that the Assault kit was the same kit so claims that they'd just have a bunch laying around - 6 years later - gets even more ridiculous.

I have already explained this but let's do it again because obviously you're struggling. Let's say I buy Devestator Cents 7 years ago because they are decent. I build them as such. I GLUE them. I paint them. Now, 7 years later Ass Cents are decent. What do I need to do? That's right! You (hopefully) guessed it! Buy more kits.

Do you know GWs stock levels of Cent boxes? You know how many they made and shifted in 7th? No? Is this pot calling kettle black? Yes.

You ignore that GW had the opportunity to shift these models far sooner, but from 7th edition they were 55 points each - with weapons . In the Index they were 95 points (OMG! The cash to points on those! Why...that's almost as bad as the stompa!). In the first Codex they dropped to 75 points. At neither of these points were they cheaper than 7th edition. Relief did not come in CA17. It did not come in CA18. Sure seems like they were really energized to push those models, but at the time they're pushing a mountain of new kits - ALL with good rules - THAT is when they suddenly want to force out Centurions? You think GW has a lack of product people are willing to buy that they needed to push that one?

You seem to misunderstand that my argument doesn't hinge on Ass Cents particularly. This thread concerns Ass Cents so that's why the discussion is around this particular unit. GW push models all of the time. ModelS. Not model. As to why they are pushing Ass Cents now? Ask GW.

You even ignore the secondary market. On eBay there are 46 squads of used Centurions that sold in the past 3 months and 58 new. Is it really a great plan for GW to push models that have almost 50% of the sales in the secondary market? (And we can't even see the other secondary markets)

EBay is not the market. Don't confuse the two. I don't ignore the secondary market at all. Of course it factors into which models GW prefers to push. This is exactly why we see new models typically the most obvious example of this demand manipulation. 'But muh Squigbuggy' is a stupid and poorly conceived counter argument. My argument is not that GW make EVERY new unit OP. They definitely do some of them though, its blindingly obvious AND we have employees providing proof.

You know what's not on the secondary market? New kits.

Which is EXACTLY why they are typically OP. Honestly I don't know why you're so defensive on this. Like why are you so against the idea that GW do what any business in their position would do to drive sales?

E - sp