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.

All I know is that he plays a mean game of 40k, and has never been flagged for slow play...

the idea that realism should be the foundation of Space Opera sculpts is pretty much anathema to the whole reason that i collect GW minis...
if that is what i wanted, i would collect historicals...

the thing that attracted me to minis, 30 years ago, was finding the original Chaos Dwarf sculpts, back when they were crazy mutated Dwarfs...
seeing something so bizzare, and completely outside the bounds of reality was what made it cool, to me...

i like that GW overdoes it...
turn it up to 11, please...

that said, i don't think that anything needs to change with the Sisters aesthetic...
it seems like they are already turned up to 11 in the eyes of some people, which is totally understandable...
as a happy medium, the status quo does a great job, in my opinion...

cheers
jah

 AnomanderRake wrote:
instead of reading or addressing any of the specific issues you're going to go back and attack a ridiculous viewpoint I don't think anyone's put forth this entire discussion.

See basically the entire discussion with Pouncey.

But as said, tangential.

Those Grishnak models are great.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
instead of reading or addressing any of the specific issues you're going to go back and attack a ridiculous viewpoint I don't think anyone's put forth this entire discussion.

See basically the entire discussion with Pouncey.

Exactly. Pouncey was absolutely adamant about how Sisters have to look feminine. Top priority. Non-negotiable.

Those LFL uniforms do that in spades.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The funniest part is that people think GW is ever going to make plastic Sisters at all, when all indications are that GW will do anything *but* plastic Sisters. Heck, I think we'll see Slaanesh appear in AoS before we get plastic Sisters.

Agree 100% Probably long after. I wont believe GW has released platic sisters even if I see a box on the shelf. I still field the sisters I bought the day they hit the store oh so long ago every week. I have bought many many more since then. I dont need plastic sisters, if someone gave them to me I wouldnt field them alongside my metal ones, they arent going to match. Thats one of those things I just cant stand.

I dont believe the mold issue story, I dont believe the notion that GW somehow made a million models in metal, wont melt them down, and would rather wait till they sold to run plastic sisters. A dex update is more likely to come out worse than what we currently have, no thanks.

All I need for my Sisters is some tactical cards with a Fleur on the back, three or four formations in a WD or for sale bundled up for $10 for a digital download. Heck, just roll the Apoc formations out as new and official and I would be hugely surprised.

Of course, I dont see that happening either.

(Edit) I want to add that I am NOT bitter or angry about how Sisters and Sisters players are treated by GW. I dont need or want my games of 40k to be easy mode. I dont think Sisters as an army deserve some kind of special treatment to make up for something. I thoroughly enjoy the army and always have, I enjoy a good deal of success with them on the table top. Besides, a Sisters player should have a bit of table top martyr in them anyhow.

I should add I'm cool with either flat foot or high heel sisters.

...All right, then. If change is bad, moderation doesn't exist, I've been conflated with an exaggerated version of Pouncey, and none of it matters because GW's only going to do something stupid anyway I guess I'm not mocking up a prototype.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
...All right, then. If change is bad, moderation doesn't exist, I've been conflated with an exaggerated version of Pouncey, and none of it matters because GW's only going to do something stupid anyway ...

All of that is true, except the bold part - you did that to yourself, not me. I never said you were Pouncey.

Nor did I. None of my arguments have been directed towards you in particular.

(I cannot say I agree with JohnHwangDD otherwise, though. The LFL thing was just an extreme example, and I'd rather not see it in model form.)

OK, that's fair. And yes, the LFL uniform was a bit tongue in cheek, obviously.

GW absolutely could do beautiful plastic Sisters models, assuming they use the existing design. GW does sculpts and poses and kits all very nicely. Where they sometimes lose the plot is when it comes to the new designs (e.g., Wulfen).

 Manchu wrote:
Where they sometimes lose the plot is when it comes to the new designs (e.g., Wulfen).

The Wulfen are Digganobz...

herjan1987 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Where they sometimes lose the plot is when it comes to the new designs (e.g., Wulfen).

The Wulfen are Digganobz...

*snort*

Weaborks!

1) Anyone can claim the demand for SOB is substantial on the internet without any real numbers. Just like I can claim the number of people on the internet who wish to sleep with me is substantial. But just because one can say demand is substantial doesn't make it real. (especially that second one...wow is that claim false)

2) Sisters will likely get made in plastic EVENTUALLY, GW hasn't stopped selling them like brettonians and tomb kings and they haven't squatted em either so obviously there is some long term plan for em. Unfortunately said plan likely involves some other release of a more popular army paying for SOB models to be scuplted and molds made.

3) Back to claim 1, the internet has also insisted there is a vast market and always has been and huge market for GW's specialist games such as bloodbowl and the like, except the sales numbers NEVER reflected that. GW's best selling specialist game was Necromunda, it even had it's own actual little section in GW stores alongside fantasy and 40k for a while.....and then it died out. Point being the internet is an echo chamber, and while you and other like minded folks might sit there saying "OMG this is so popular and in demand why don't they sell more of it" uncounted numbers of other people just don't give a damn but you can't here them because they aren't in your little isolated group.

4) I badly want plastic sisters of battle to be a thing sooooo......Marine players spend more money so Geedub has the cash to make sisters.

Re. points 1 & 3, if we look at TGG and Dreadball, doesn't that basically define the market?

1. TGG2 pulled $800k including not-Sisters, etc. At best, not-Sisters were a $500k market including retail.

3. Dreadball pulled $730k DB1, $575k DBX, and $185k DB2 = $1.5M grand total. Maybe $2.5M if we also count retail.

GW is a $125M company. They didn't lose a minute of sleep over TGG's not-Sisters, although the $2.5M in Dreadball caught their attention, which is why Blood Bowl is coming back.

And note that Raging Heroes didn't launch not-Sisters as it's own KS. They don't have that much faith in Sisters, either...

 Mr Morden wrote:
no like this:

YES PLEASE. And thank you.

Note the bolter isn't oversized, it's the same size as the bolter used by a Space Marine...only in the hands of a lowly human being.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
...All right, then. If change is bad, moderation doesn't exist, I've been conflated with an exaggerated version of Pouncey, and none of it matters because GW's only going to do something stupid anyway I guess I'm not mocking up a prototype.

I'd be interested in seeing your idea, at least...

Orktavius wrote:
1) Anyone can claim the demand for SOB is substantial on the internet without any real numbers. Just like I can claim the number of people on the internet who wish to sleep with me is substantial. But just because one can say demand is substantial doesn't make it real. (especially that second one...wow is that claim false)

2) Sisters will likely get made in plastic EVENTUALLY, GW hasn't stopped selling them like brettonians and tomb kings and they haven't squatted em either so obviously there is some long term plan for em. Unfortunately said plan likely involves some other release of a more popular army paying for SOB models to be scuplted and molds made.

3) Back to claim 1, the internet has also insisted there is a vast market and always has been and huge market for GW's specialist games such as bloodbowl and the like, except the sales numbers NEVER reflected that. GW's best selling specialist game was Necromunda, it even had it's own actual little section in GW stores alongside fantasy and 40k for a while.....and then it died out. Point being the internet is an echo chamber, and while you and other like minded folks might sit there saying "OMG this is so popular and in demand why don't they sell more of it" uncounted numbers of other people just don't give a damn but you can't here them because they aren't in your little isolated group.

4) I badly want plastic sisters of battle to be a thing sooooo......Marine players spend more money so Geedub has the cash to make sisters.

If you'd actually read the posts in this thread you'd realize that I have said just that. "I cannot just claim my bubble is representative of the hobby community as a whole".

What I then identified from the responses is that GW does not use any reliable market research techniques to inform their decision making.

Why is it not reliable? because GW have said they do not do market research and therefore they must make their decisions on what to put resource into developing based on sales figures. Those sales figures are flawed however as we have seen I don't know how many posts saying "I'd buy Sisters if they weren't metal/monopose/expensive/etc."

Then I said what do you do?
Well really it wouldn't take a lot to conduct a large scale survey of a number of different communities to try and establish exactly what level of demand there really is.

I have said that I cannot say that the people I have spoken to face to face represent the community at large but either can you say that they don't.

The question is why can't we collect the data ourselves and then draw our conclusions about demand from the evidence?

Orktavius wrote:
1) Anyone can claim the demand for SOB is substantial on the internet without any real numbers. Just like I can claim the number of people on the internet who wish to sleep with me is substantial. But just because one can say demand is substantial doesn't make it real. (especially that second one...wow is that claim false)

Real numbers: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0

Also, having placed ads on the internet, I can attest that their are a substantial amount people on the internet who wish to sleep with me.

We have no way of knowing Adepta Sororitas sales figures. There is evidently enough for them to avoid being squatted, but not enough for GW to make new models a serious priority.

I also agree with your point of the internet being an echo chamber. Confirmation Bias is a real thing, and we tend to seek out like minded individuals.

That being said, 40K has a seriously competitive fan base. If Adepta Sororitas came out with a Tier 1 level competitive codex, their models would fly off the shelf.

Just imagine an Adepta Soritas codex with a Gladius equivalent formation, granting free transports. Sisters and Immolators would be EVERYWHERE !!

Orktavius wrote:
1) Anyone can claim the demand for SOB is substantial on the internet without any real numbers.

You can't say this and also say Sisters wouldn't be popular with a revamp. Because you don't have numbers to say that, either.

Neither does GW. GW doesn't do market research and doesn't make business decisions off of market research. GW doesn't have any idea what the market looks like.

And GW is the only ones who could even do that with any measure of reliability.

So we do not know.

Melissia wrote: GW doesn't do market research and doesn't make business decisions off of market research. GW doesn't have any idea what the market looks like.

Ashiraya wrote:And GW is the only ones who could even do that with any measure of reliability.

So we do not know.

Precisely. We can only assume whether a release of Sisters would be desirable/undesirable. I personally think all the attention that this thread alone has obtained, combined with the many years of this topic surfacing in many areas, would be grounds to say that a fair number of people do want Sisters to return as a viable army both collection and gaming wise.

Again though, only speculation. GW continues to baffle me by having next to no understanding of their markets; the only survey I've ever done for them while on their site... was about improving their site How about you ask me what I'd be interested in spending money on in the future, eh?

G.A

To be fair, most of this thread is just a couple of people - including me - arguing back and forth. Me, Johnhwang and Manchu together make up about a third of the entire thread. It is not a reliable measure for popularity, especially since the segment of the gaming population hardcore enough to go on gaming forums are not representative either.

If GW can bring back Genestealer Cults, after years and years of not even having a list, not even in a Chapter Approved, then I think that they can re-release Sisters of Battle with plastic figures.

Everything Genestealers got was basically to be the NPC faction in a boxed game where Space Marines (who are gauranteed sellers) fight them, along with some slapped-on 40k datasheets.

That... is not a lot.

I think he's referencing the rumours of the Cult returning as a full army after a teaser Warhammer TV released today .

Still, you have a fair point - this thread hasn't had that many comers, and I'm pretty sure there are more 40k players off forums than ones who are signed on to at least one, so yes we are definitely far from the majority or representative sample.

Regardless, this topic isn't exactly new, both amongst forum goers and people who just go play at a club every so often or who are not part of an online community, hence why it is of my belief that there is a decent amount of people who'd at least be interested in collecting new Sisters

GSC won't really be a "full army" any more than Harlequins are. Or IKTs for that matter. Just more cool models that you can field alongside your primary force, be it Nids or IG.

If we are OK with such treatment for Quins and IKTs and GSC, would it be so bad for Sisters to be the same? Maybe in a CSM vs SoB game where the CSMs are the Elites and the Sisters are the fodder?

Genestealer Cult is going to get a hardback, 7th Edition, Codex. I'm not particularly concerned by the content; the fact is that they're getting a new physical Codex, a new vehicle, a new unit, a new character, and a new flyer, all plastic, plus the Overkill figures released seperately. Assuming the rumours are correct.

That is more than the Sisters have had at any point since 2003.

So I would love to see Sisters being one of the first Codexes released in 8th after the obligatory Spess Muhreens Codex.

I have hopes when I see Harlequins, Genestealer Cult and Deathwatch released as true armies.
The Custodes themselves are rumored to be released (by FW) !
How could GW forget the Sisters ? They are just one of those little armies.