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 see this claim made a lot, what does everyone else think? I keep seeing stories that GW is making factions OP on initial Codex releases and then nerfing the products into the ground like right after. Do you think they do this and would you consider this a dishonest campaign?

Also if you vote yes please comment.

Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

Possibly.

The problem is it's very hard to tell because they're so awful at writing rules that they could be trying to make something powerful and still completely mess it up.

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

'Never atribute to malice, that which can be sufficently explained by stupidity.'

GW have only recently begun to try and really understand how their game plays out 'in the wild.' The whole 'conspiring to sell new models' ignores the large number of models that manage to be truly unplayable on release as well as some of the oldest kits having some of the best rules at times.

New units are not necessarily always good.

I'm more in the boat of "rule are too good by accident" rather than malice.

I also wonder if books would appear less broken if they all came out in batches or at once, and didn't get nerfed one by one before the next one came out.

Unnerf all the armies, and I wonder how the game would sit.

It does seem like books are play tested in groups of 3 or 4, and the power level between them seems to be similar. But they never come out at the same time.

Lammia wrote:

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

'Never atribute to malice, that which can be sufficently explained by stupidity.'

GW have only recently begun to try and really understand how their game plays out 'in the wild.' The whole 'conspiring to sell new models' ignores the large number of models that manage to be truly unplayable on release as well as some of the oldest kits having some of the best rules at times.

Sorry but if it Talks like a Duck, Walks like a Duck and Quacks like a Duck - it's probably a Duck.

I could see this happening once or twice with a small business but for a multimillion dollar company to keep making the same mistakes over and over which just happen to, by coincidence, sell more product eventually we have to call a Spade a Spade.

Trust me when I say the used car salesman didn't sell you that lemon out of naive innocence.

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

Because it isn't advertising, let alone false. GW is terribly hit and miss with new releases. Primaris hit the ground with a splat, and it took GW multiple iterations to get them passable, and they still aren't great. Some are absolute, utter pants (Reavers) and always have been. On the AoS side, Kruleboys (one of the newest factions) are absolutely at the bottom of their own power listing (per the latest metawatch). A lot of the new chaos marine/cultist stuff was a mess on release, not 'powerful to drive sales.'

They've had to re-write rules (Iron Hands supplement was a stellar example, as was the weird can't shoot strat for Salamanders(?)) because they literally didn't understand how people would read and use what the rules they wrote (that was actually in the initial FAQ)

As Lammia said, there's just too many bad releases to really believe 'overpowered' is intentional. They're just flailingly wildly.

Voss wrote:

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

Because it isn't advertising, let alone false. GW is terribly hit and miss with new releases. Primaris hit the ground with a splat, and it took GW multiple iterations to get them passable, and they still aren't great. Some are absolute, utter pants (Reavers) and always have been. On the AoS side, Kruleboys (one of the newest factions) are absolutely at the bottom of their own power listing (per the latest metawatch). A lot of the new chaos marine/cultist stuff was a mess on release, not 'powerful to drive sales.'

They've had to re-write rules (Iron Hands supplement was a stellar example, as was the weird can't shoot strat for Salamanders(?)) because they literally didn't understand how people would read and use what the rules they wrote (that was actually in the initial FAQ)

As Lammia said, there's just too many bad releases to really believe 'overpowered' is intentional. They're just flailingly wildly.

And just by coincidence these overpowered releases just happen to sell more products and increase profits?

Poor, naive, innocent GW sounds like the victim here. How could us horrible people dare to consider GW's motives to be anything less then pure?

To think anyone would ever lie or cheat out of greed or to make lots of money...why that's just uncharitable good sir!

Asenion wrote:

Voss wrote:

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

Because it isn't advertising, let alone false. GW is terribly hit and miss with new releases. Primaris hit the ground with a splat, and it took GW multiple iterations to get them passable, and they still aren't great. Some are absolute, utter pants (Reavers) and always have been. On the AoS side, Kruleboys (one of the newest factions) are absolutely at the bottom of their own power listing (per the latest metawatch). A lot of the new chaos marine/cultist stuff was a mess on release, not 'powerful to drive sales.'

They've had to re-write rules (Iron Hands supplement was a stellar example, as was the weird can't shoot strat for Salamanders(?)) because they literally didn't understand how people would read and use what the rules they wrote (that was actually in the initial FAQ)

As Lammia said, there's just too many bad releases to really believe 'overpowered' is intentional. They're just flailingly wildly.

And just by coincidence these overpowered releases just happen to sell more products and increase profits?

Poor, naive, innocent GW sounds like the victim here. How could us horrible people dare to consider GW's motives to be anything less then pure?

To think anyone would ever lie or cheat out of greed or to make lots of money...why that's just uncharitable good sir!

Meta chases exist, it's true. But GW sales aren't defined by them. They are a tiny fraction of subgroup of GWs market. I can tell you now that GW were thrilled by their Primaris sales and the fact that most Sisters players went out and bought the new Exocist and Castigator on release also shows rules don't drive new model sales.

Eh, I'm in the no crew. A combination of some new kits being pretty crappy like pretty much every kit in Phobos armour, which they just keep releasing kits and variants of, and indeed some of the powerful stuff is fairly if not more powerful. Like, Harlies were a terror for a good period of time this edition, not a single new model. Model making isn't quite like selling groceries, where you can make some tweaks to cost or such push it's sales. That's what battle forces and bundles are for! Shovel out those poor sellers under the guise of a themed force.

Honestly it feels like GW just having poor balancing vs a very overeager design team. Get a new kit, make new rules that attempt at being fun and fluffy. Whoops they interact with something horribly. Better tone it back a little later on. Tack on the art teams tendancy to just, stack on additional guns to a new kit and it's gonna get muddy.

Guns = Cool.

Moar Gunz = Moar Kool!

cody.d. wrote:
Eh, I'm in the now crew. A combination of some new kits being pretty crappy like pretty much every kit in Phobos armour, which they just keep releasing kits and variants of, and indeed some of the powerful stuff is fairly if not more powerful. Like, Harlies were a terror for a good period of time this edition, not a single new model. Model making isn't quite like selling groceries, where you can make some tweaks to cost or such push it's sales. That's what battle forces and bundles are for! Shovel out those poor sellers under the guise of a themed force.

Honestly it feels like GW just having poor balancing vs a very overeager design team. Get a new kit, make new rules that attempt at being fun and fluffy. Whoops they interact with something horribly. Better tone it back a little later on. Tack on the art teams tendancy to just, stack on additional guns to a new kit and it's gonna get muddy.

I don't know. I see Big Foot riding the Lochness Monster with a UFO in the background with the words:

"Still more believable then Epstein killing himself."

And even Epstein killing himself sounds more believable then these claims that GW purposely overpowering and then nerfing new codexes is coincidence.

I mean why are all the Forge-World models so lackluster?

Why can't we play games in store? Why is GW squeezing out small game stores with huge price mark-ups on their products?

At one point they even tried to make a rule saying you can't bring armies to tournaments unless they are painted with GW's official paint. The company has a reputation for being a little ruthless and greedy.

As the saying goes " The Sun never sets on the Warhammer Empire - cause God would never Trust GW in the Dark."

Voss wrote:

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

Because it isn't advertising, let alone false. GW is terribly hit and miss with new releases. Primaris hit the ground with a splat, and it took GW multiple iterations to get them passable, and they still aren't great. Some are absolute, utter pants (Reavers) and always have been. On the AoS side, Kruleboys (one of the newest factions) are absolutely at the bottom of their own power listing (per the latest metawatch). A lot of the new chaos marine/cultist stuff was a mess on release, not 'powerful to drive sales.'

They've had to re-write rules (Iron Hands supplement was a stellar example, as was the weird can't shoot strat for Salamanders(?)) because they literally didn't understand how people would read and use what the rules they wrote (that was actually in the initial FAQ)

You believe everything you read on line??

Asenion wrote:

cody.d. wrote:
Eh, I'm in the now crew. A combination of some new kits being pretty crappy like pretty much every kit in Phobos armour, which they just keep releasing kits and variants of, and indeed some of the powerful stuff is fairly if not more powerful. Like, Harlies were a terror for a good period of time this edition, not a single new model. Model making isn't quite like selling groceries, where you can make some tweaks to cost or such push it's sales. That's what battle forces and bundles are for! Shovel out those poor sellers under the guise of a themed force.

Honestly it feels like GW just having poor balancing vs a very overeager design team. Get a new kit, make new rules that attempt at being fun and fluffy. Whoops they interact with something horribly. Better tone it back a little later on. Tack on the art teams tendancy to just, stack on additional guns to a new kit and it's gonna get muddy.

I don't know. I see Big Foot riding the Lochness Monster with a UFO in the background with the words:

"Still more believable then Epstein killing himself."

And even Epstein killing himself sounds more believable then these claims that GW purposely overpowering and then nerfing new codexes is coincidence.

I mean why are all the Forge-World models so lackluster?

Why can't we play games in store? Why is GW squeezing out small game stores with huge price mark-ups on their products?

At one point they even tried to make a rule saying you can't bring armies to tournaments unless they are painted with GW's official paint. The company has a reputation for being a little ruthless and greedy.

As the saying goes " The Sun never sets on the Warhammer Empire - cause God would never Trust GW in the Dark."

I think that's more GW being protective over their IP, too protective, like.... destructively protective, than being outright malicious.

Indeed, why do they make the very expensive FW models so meh, sometimes. In other cases they've been known to be so broken that they get banned in major events. I remember the time when Chaplain dreads were super powerful, but it was only because of janky rules interactions. It's a character, it's a dread. Done, broken powerful model

GW is not consistent in almost anything they do. If you were to try and map out their behavior on any sort of graph, you'd probably go mad. We are programmed to see patterns, but if you see a saint in your grilled cheese that may not mean there is intent behind it.

Perhaps someone could take every new release, each new codex and see if there is any correlation between new kit and power level. It's possible, but i'm certain most releases come with a lotta stuff you don't bother with outside of a collection.

I'm not saying GW does not have a tonne of failings, I just don't think new codexes are intentionally made op to boost sales.

They are, they just aren't always great at doing it. I would bet you everything in my wallet that they thought Intercessors, at the beginning of 8th, were incredibly bullying at 20 points per model.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
They are, they just aren't always great at doing it. I would bet you everything in my wallet that they thought Intercessors, at the beginning of 8th, were incredibly bullying at 20 points per model.

Why is the most 'pushed' kit right now, 5 years old?

Asenion wrote:

Lammia wrote:

Asenion wrote:

ccs wrote:
Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Entire armies/Codex? Not usually. Happens though at times. Specific units, often the new hotness? Hell yes. Gotta sell those models....


I've been watching them do this for all 29 years & some odd months I've been playing this game.
The new twist to it in recent years is the blatant bait & switch that comes shortly after release nowdays.

How is this not false advertising?

'Never atribute to malice, that which can be sufficently explained by stupidity.'

GW have only recently begun to try and really understand how their game plays out 'in the wild.' The whole 'conspiring to sell new models' ignores the large number of models that manage to be truly unplayable on release as well as some of the oldest kits having some of the best rules at times.

Sorry but if it Talks like a Duck, Walks like a Duck and Quacks like a Duck - it's probably a Duck.

I could see this happening once or twice with a small business but for a multimillion dollar company to keep making the same mistakes over and over which just happen to, by coincidence, sell more product eventually we have to call a Spade a Spade.

Trust me when I say the used car salesman didn't sell you that lemon out of naive innocence.

Funny thing about the Duck Fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

GWs ability to constantly fail to sell a new model due to underpowered rules while overpowering rules for models people already have is all the proof you need to know that GW isn't doing it on purpose.

cody.d. wrote:

I'm not saying GW does not have a tonne of failings, I just don't think new codexes are intentionally made op to boost sales.

So you're ignoring the arrival of the Votaan & the articles on GWs own site deliberately hyping the Judgement token rules and spotlighting the magrails?
Not to mention pts values that were definitely intended to get a fair chunk of this release into your typical 2k matched lists.
You think that was all some sort of accident or something?

ccs wrote:

cody.d. wrote:

I'm not saying GW does not have a tonne of failings, I just don't think new codexes are intentionally made op to boost sales.

So you're ignoring the arrival of the Votaan & the articles on GWs own site deliberately hyping the Judgement token rules and spotlighting the magrails?
Not to mention pts values that were definitely intended to get a fair chunk of this release into your typical 2k matched lists.
You think that was all some sort of accident or something?

LoV were always going to sell, if anything their broken rules put people off. GW rules team aren't marketing; if they were, they'd be getting paid a hell of a lot more than they are right now.

Can some one explain why there are so many mediocre to poor books released if this is the case then?

 alextroy wrote:
GWs ability to constantly fail to sell a new model due to underpowered rules while overpowering rules for models people already have is all the proof you need to know that GW isn't doing it on purpose.

Or they're just bad at it. They're pretty conclusively bad at rules.

Generally I think they write like a pack of over-excited 12 year olds going "wouldn't it be cool if..."

I also think their in-house testing is super non-competitive, and they just don't see blatantly overpowered stuff like liquifiers plus dark technomancer in the DE codex because, despite creating the combo with the "wouldn't it be cool if" mentality, they then only take one in a list instead of cramming in as many as will fit in a 2000 point army.

That said, there have definitely been examples where it has been admitted that things have been overpowered or under-costed to drive sales, eg the eldar wraithknight on it's initial release...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Possibly.

The problem is it's very hard to tell because they're so awful at writing rules that they could be trying to make something powerful and still completely mess it up.

This, just look at the Sister codex. The new hotness was the Castigator Tank and the Paragon Warsuits. Both were absolute trash. The Paragon only got good after getting a point drop and AoC, while the Castigator is still terrible.

Next codex for the Squats will nerf them into the nerf, you just watch

Dudeface wrote:
Can some one explain why there are so many mediocre to poor books released if this is the case then?

What book hasn't made mark in top tournaments upon release? GSC and...?

tneva82 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Can some one explain why there are so many mediocre to poor books released if this is the case then?

What book hasn't made mark in top tournaments upon release? GSC and...?

Necrons, Thousand Sons, Death Guard (maybe), CSM, both Knights, Daemons, Templars...

Jarms48 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Possibly.

The problem is it's very hard to tell because they're so awful at writing rules that they could be trying to make something powerful and still completely mess it up.

This, just look at the Sister codex. The new hotness was the Castigator Tank and the Paragon Warsuits. Both were absolute trash. The Paragon only got good after getting a point drop and AoC, while the Castigator is still terrible.

Lol
It’s possible it’s a yes.
The rules just suck so much that no one could ever be concluded from the outside

Based on the evidence, there are two options. Either GW purposely overpowers new models on release, but just sucks at it. Or GW is trying to release balanced books and sucks at that as well. So either way, most of what we see is the result of incompetence. It doesn't really matter what the underlying cause is and it makes sense to then just go for the simplest option.

One thing I've always wondered about though is why they would supposedly want to sell more of the new stuff. That already has large drivers to sell whereas their old stuff might need more help. Everyone knows units that have been languishing for editions on end.

Personally, I think that GW just doesn't see balance as all that important and I broadly agree there. At least, as far as sales are concerned. Most of their kits sell based on how they look and their coolness factor. Sure, people would rather not get the wettest of blankets, but even then they'll gladly buy units and armies that aren't that great.

Generally though, overpowered units tend to stand out more than weaker ones. They're the ones doing the most after all. New stuff also stands out more because, well, we haven't seen it before. So if something new is overpowered it really stands out and people are ready again to trot out the idea that the new stuff is purposely made overpowered.

I feel the same way about the poll title, in that it does t match the thread title. I think this is a terrible case of false advertising amd the OP SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES!!1!111!111eleven