StarTrotter wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
One of the most brilliant design decisions GW ever made was the Space Marine shoulder pad. Slap a different emblem on that pad, and suddenly it's a visually different model from all the others. What is the equivalent of that for the other armies?

Huh? That's no different to painting any model from any other army differently to set it apart.

no it's not.... the actual model looks different rather than just the paint.

Really? A model with an upside down omega symbol on the shoulder pad looks much the same to me as a model with a skull on the shoulder pad. I would say Tyranids with a different paint scheme can look as much if not more unique than Space Marines with a shoulder pad swap.

Things like Space Wolves look different because they have a lot of other adornments on them... though even they look much the same, a dude in armour who is very protective of his shins and shoulders.

I think it's a stretch to say "the actual model looks different".

of course the models look different. Look at space wolves who have models that ride wolves, or blood angels who have models (sangunary guard) who have cool wings on their jump packsor dark angels who have a jetbikeand some cool landspeeders.

also i can personalise my space marines how I want with different shoulder pads representing different codexs, different helmets, different markings on the guns eg space wolves, different markings on the back packs.

The actual models look different.

Honestly the models don't look THAT different. BT have a few unique models, DA a few, BA a couple, SW is the closest to being removed enough but then again they are riding fething wolves xD. They aren't all that radiantly different from one another in the end. For the most part, keep in mind that SM are this: Ravenguard, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Ultramarines, White Scars, BT, BA, DA, SW, etc. For the most part, the marines look the same. A few patches here and there and some minor iconography but everything, in the end is still samey. SW drop pods don't really look much different than Ultramarine drop pods, Salamander land raiders don't look much different than a SW land raider. Yes, they all have their differences and the armies listed above have some extra ways to make themself more personable, but I would never claim they are necessarily the most customizable as much of their variations are the stroke of your paint brush or sticking on some stickers (or cobbling together BT, BA, SM, and etc bits to make something to call your own ). Really though, orks, guardsman, and CSM probably win out on what armies can claim the most diversity.

CSM is SM bits + Chaos bits, tanks can be clean and neat, ramshackled, pirates, renegades, tyrant lords, daemonic entities. The models can look like their armor is from several different marks and they can have claws growing out anywhere. Cultists also are there so every standard guardsman and more can be shoved right on in. Want extra diversity for your CSM army? Grab some Bretonian bits and Warriors of Chaos, you don't even need to look online to add extras.

IG, do I need to explain this one? Want to make an army of mutant beastmen? Go at it. Make a band of pirates? Have fun. A rebelling PDF force, yay! Guardsman are far more diverse in terms of troop choices being capable of drawing from practically any game with human sized models (sense most of them have humans in them ). The tanks offer not as much diversity (arguably SM win out here just because of the capability of adding murals onto vehicles being rather fluffy) but IG have more vehicles and can still make some custom models for it. Maybe you don't want to surf online for them though and want only GW models because you play there, well have no fear! Cultists? Okay guardsman. Slicing tau and making your own Gue'vesa guardsman? Have a blast! Go on over to the fantasy side, grab beastmen, bretonnians, and the Empire models and start building to your dream's content. Heck, make a skaven army and make them an odd mutant race! Oh and ogres can be great options to make your Ogryns look cooler.

Finally you have orks, yes the ork troopers will look much the same, then again Iron Hands and Ravenguard look much the same and it might simply be because SM has 6 different codices or something it probably is , but even then you can kit out some crazy awesome ramshackle guns and ccw as well as armor. The terrain? Oh only Chaos has as many choices.... orks can grab pretty much anything and try to orkify it. And vehicles? Claim all the vehicles ALL THE VEHICLES! So orks have their units, the orks from fantasy, and finally can nab every single vehicle (though probably not fluffy to have a daemon vehicle. CSM yes daemon daemon no) from both 40k and fantasy and make it a chariot pushed by squigs if you so desire!


Anyways, as somebody above mentioned, I think the reason why SM has become so big really is two things. One, what's striking? To many, SM is rather surprising (you wouldn't believe how many people seem to think the Master Chief is an original idea with SPARTANS . Haven't even read Starship Trooper or watched it I suppose) and serves that natural tendency. They are, so to speak, the good guys of 40k. Along with that, they aren't hard to play. Perhaps difficult to master (currently), but they are a relatively forgiving army. Your mistakes aren't really punished as much. Being out of cover, for a beginner, isn't as you are doomed. Your guys have 3+ saves and, whilst not so great when you get more experienced and play more challenging games, will be tanking many shots. They are elite, the few, the proud that fight 1 to 4 in some cases. Not too many models to build, not too many models to paint, not that difficult to paint either. There's very little flesh... simply put, they are easy to paint, easy to build, forgiving, and the "good guys" of the setting whilst also rather elite.

Then there is the other part, they sell well so they get advertise more thus continuing a cycle of them being bigger. They are GW's poster boys and thus always will get preferential treatment. They will have a giant statue of them in the shop, many if not most of the pictures adorning the walls will have a SM of some sort, the books will be loaded with SM, they also get the greatest treatment in terms of codices with the most special rules to really make lists different, as represented by chapter tactics, every starter box has SM, SM have 5 or 6 codices and cover up a large portion of the wall space, they'll hand away free SM models to beginners, and are apparently advertised to beginners to play.

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

obviously they are the best sellers and I challenge you to disprove that statement.....

Portent on Warseer posted a link to a reddit chat with an ex-GW sales rep (he posted this and this for verification) which included some interesting titbits of information:
It's true that space marines make up roughly 12% of sales, and all of the other races make up roughly 2% each, but that's lumping Ultramarines, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc. all in one big bunch.

40k and Fantasy actually split right down the middle in terms of actual sales. Popularity, as you say, may tend towards 40k in your area, but overall, both are really equally popular, according to the actual sales figures.

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

obviously they are the best sellers and I challenge you to disprove that statement.....

You: "I am making a statement of fact!"

Me: "Can you prove this statement of fact?"

You: "I cannot provide documentation, so you must prove me wrong!"

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

obviously they are the best sellers and I challenge you to disprove that statement.....

You: "I am making a statement of fact!"

Me: "Can you prove this statement of fact?"

You: "I cannot provide documentation, so you must prove me wrong!"

I don't need to prove my statements with facts unless you are disagreeing with my statement. If you are disagreeing with my statement that means you think SM are not the best sellers for GW. If you think SM are not the best sellers can you prove that statement that you are making?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

obviously they are the best sellers and I challenge you to disprove that statement.....

You: "I am making a statement of fact!"

Me: "Can you prove this statement of fact?"

You: "I cannot provide documentation, so you must prove me wrong!"

I don't need to prove my statements with facts unless you are disagreeing with my statement. If you are disagreeing with my statement that means you think SM are not the best sellers for GW. If you think SM are not the best sellers can you prove that statement that you are making?

You're making the statement. The onus is on you to prove it.

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

obviously they are the best sellers and I challenge you to disprove that statement.....

You: "I am making a statement of fact!"

Me: "Can you prove this statement of fact?"

You: "I cannot provide documentation, so you must prove me wrong!"

I don't need to prove my statements with facts unless you are disagreeing with my statement. If you are disagreeing with my statement that means you think SM are not the best sellers for GW. If you think SM are not the best sellers can you prove that statement that you are making?

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

nobody wrote:

champagne_socialist wrote:

 Imperator_Class wrote:
You're kidding me, right? At my GW the rough percentage of armies i see are 80% Tau and Eldar, 10% SM and the last 10% is taken up by chaos, nids, necrons and orcs.

so we should judge all gw sales around the world on your local gw store? perhaps look at the fact SM re their best selling army to see they are the most popular.

Considering you opened the thread with your own anecdotes it's generally a good idea to consider others

Does the statement regarding "Marines are the best sellers" have any recent documentation to confirm that it's still the case?

obviously they are the best sellers and I challenge you to disprove that statement.....

You: "I am making a statement of fact!"

Me: "Can you prove this statement of fact?"

You: "I cannot provide documentation, so you must prove me wrong!"

I don't need to prove my statements with facts unless you are disagreeing with my statement. If you are disagreeing with my statement that means you think SM are not the best sellers for GW. If you think SM are not the best sellers can you prove that statement that you are making?

"I don't need to back up my statements, but if you disagree you need to back up yours"

Your statement was that it was obvious, but when I asked for confirmation *I* need proof that your "obvious" statement isn't true?

Of course but I only need to prove it if you disagree with the statement I made, I don't need to prove a statement that you agree with. Therefore if you disagree that means you are saying SM are not the best sellers and thus you are making a statement of yourself. So why don't you prove the statement you are making which is SM are not the best sellers?

 Psienesis wrote:

Of course but I only need to prove it if you disagree with the statement I made, I don't need to prove a statement that you agree with. Therefore if you disagree that means you are saying SM are not the best sellers and thus you are making a statement of yourself. So why don't you prove the statement you are making which is SM are not the best sellers?

Fifty people agreeing that the world is flat does not make the world flat. Just because people agree with your statement does not make it true, so, as with Wikipedia, if you are going to claim something, and someone posts "Citation Needed", then you need to cite your sources.

 Psienesis wrote:
How many individual armies of SM are there as a product line?

Let's count the individual product lines: Vanilla, BA, BT (with the Upgrade Pack), Chaos, DA, GK, and SW.

That's 7 armies. If we assume that these armies sell in equal amounts, and we take the previously-posted sales numbers, we learn that each individual army of Space Marines accounts for 1.7% of GW's 40K sales. That puts them below the average of the Xenos races, actually, and only become the majority of sales if you lump all 7 of these armies into 1 category.

This is "creative math" used to prove a point (that SM are the best-selling faction) and provides them an advantage that no other faction in the game has (that is, the ability to build 2000 different armies out of 7 books). However, if we want to compare an individual group, like Vanilla Space Marines, we see that they are (mathematically) on par with the Xenos factions, noted as all being 2% of sales volume, and all sell more or less equally, at the time the data was published.

Now... prove me wrong.

demyztikx wrote:


As for the bickering:
If someone asserts a positive ("SM are the best sellers") The burden of proof is on him. That is UNLESS the other person states ("That's not true") THEN the burden of proof is shifted to a negative claim and the burden of proof is on the second person to prove it's not true.
And having 50 believers in anything means nothing as to facts. It's like adding "FACT:" to the start of things.
"FACT: The Police hit their peak in 1981." Despite people believing this and that I said it was a fact, it is indeed false as Every Breath You Take didn't come out until 1983.

champagne_socialist wrote:

but you just proved me right by highlighting that SPACE MARINES is the best sellng army. Doesn't matter if it is SW or BA or BT they are all SM. Thank you for proving me right