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.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

angryboy2k wrote:

Why not? Do sprue recuts occur at regular intervals? Is there a time limit in which GW should recut all sprues or not bother ever doing it again? Also, the ork boyz were recut in 2007, so there's no real pattern to the timing anyway. We could just as well talk about the logic in when GW decide to upgrade codexes.

In short, the timing is completely irrelevant. The question is whether or not GW are willing to retool perfectly usable models and put them onto new sprues. They obviously are - and in a number of cases did nothing to update the models except add a few upgrades. It's entirely within the realms of possibility for GW to release new bike sprues with just updated riders. Maybe they'll put them in a three pack to improve their production efficiency or something.

It's also entirely within the realms of possibility for GW to lower prices, go back to metals or give a free handy with every purchase of a Battleforce or larger. Is any of that likely, based on their previous actions? No. People really need to stop latching onto unfounded rumours and wishlisting. Look at what GW has been doing the past few years, and accept that they will probably continue like that in the near future. And stop dredging up contrary examples from half a decade and two editions ago, because they are half a decade and two editions old.

So how often do you think injection molding tooling should be updated? What's an appropriate timeframe to you? I don't see how things being done 6 to 9 years ago invalidates the idea of updating the sprues. At the time they were updated, the Space Marine sprues were "only" seven years old - that means they're overdue for an upgrade, no?

I'm not actually saying I believe the rumors. I'm simply saying it's happened before, and the conclusion you've drawn (i.e. that it was so long ago we can't use it as a basis for comparison) makes no sense - because the age of the sprues NOW is more or less the age they were the first time they were overhauled. From the information available, EITHER possibility is valid.

So...

Are we in speculation and wish list mode? Is there any actual news?

 MWHistorian wrote:
I just hope they don't mess up the Master of the Forge. I rather like having 5 dreadnaughts in my army with a conversion beamer. Just don't mess that up and I'll be happy.

Don't worry GW probably won't. They'll just make it so its not viable to take anymore, oh wait dreadnoughts also use the vehicle rules...

 Breotan wrote:
They'd have to re-sculpt it anyway because of all the GK iconography on it.

The GK iconography on the Stormraven is all optional. It's also a Blood Angels vehicle remember.

 Brother SRM wrote:

 Breotan wrote:
They'd have to re-sculpt it anyway because of all the GK iconography on it.

The GK iconography on the Stormraven is all optional. It's also a Blood Angels vehicle remember.

I believe that comment was in reference to the DreadKnight (i.e. - "baby-carrier" in this post).

angryboy2k wrote:
So how often do you think injection molding tooling should be updated? What's an appropriate timeframe to you? I don't see how things being done 6 to 9 years ago invalidates the idea of updating the sprues. At the time they were updated, the Space Marine sprues were "only" seven years old - that means they're overdue for an upgrade, no?

I'm not actually saying I believe the rumors. I'm simply saying it's happened before, and the conclusion you've drawn (i.e. that it was so long ago we can't use it as a basis for comparison) makes no sense - because the age of the sprues NOW is more or less the age they were the first time they were overhauled. From the information available, EITHER possibility is valid.

You're missing the point completely. The age of any particular sprue has nothing to do with anything here. For whatever reason, GW is currently not in the business of replacing existing plastic kits. End of story. Probably because they figure they will make more sales if they make something entirely new, or replace unpopular Finecast kits, than if they just update models that everyone already owns, anyway. But that's just the most common assumption.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Puscifer wrote:
There will be supplements for the more famous chapters: Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and White Scars were the ones mentioned. White Scars are the first out the gate.

Thus we enter the age when GW saw fit to release full-price hardback "companion" books that are nothing but fluff and a few rules changes.

Isn't that every Privateer Press book ever released after the core army books?

DeathGod wrote:
Isn't that every Privateer Press book ever released after the core army books?

PP books are glorified yearly release catalogs, yes. But you don't have to buy those to actually play a faction.

Not exactly. There are rules expansions as well in every Mk2 book.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

angryboy2k wrote:
So how often do you think injection molding tooling should be updated? What's an appropriate timeframe to you? I don't see how things being done 6 to 9 years ago invalidates the idea of updating the sprues. At the time they were updated, the Space Marine sprues were "only" seven years old - that means they're overdue for an upgrade, no?

I'm not actually saying I believe the rumors. I'm simply saying it's happened before, and the conclusion you've drawn (i.e. that it was so long ago we can't use it as a basis for comparison) makes no sense - because the age of the sprues NOW is more or less the age they were the first time they were overhauled. From the information available, EITHER possibility is valid.

You're missing the point completely. The age of any particular sprue has nothing to do with anything here. For whatever reason, GW is currently not in the business of replacing existing plastic kits. End of story. Probably because they figure they will make more sales if they make something entirely new, or replace unpopular Finecast kits, than if they just update models that everyone already owns, anyway. But that's just the most common assumption.

You're the one who brought up the age of the examples I gave, as though to say that GW doesn't do that sort of thing anymore. I tried to tell you that you can't draw any conclusion from that and that all we can say is that GW has replaced perfectly good sprues (with near identical models) in the past (most likely because they figured the retooled version would save money long term). If I didn't explain that clearly, I'm sorry, but I think if you'll go back through my posts that I did.

I certainly don't know nor would I venture to guess whether GW will do it again in the future - I just wouldn't rule it out.

angryboy2k wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

angryboy2k wrote:
So how often do you think injection molding tooling should be updated? What's an appropriate timeframe to you? I don't see how things being done 6 to 9 years ago invalidates the idea of updating the sprues. At the time they were updated, the Space Marine sprues were "only" seven years old - that means they're overdue for an upgrade, no?

I'm not actually saying I believe the rumors. I'm simply saying it's happened before, and the conclusion you've drawn (i.e. that it was so long ago we can't use it as a basis for comparison) makes no sense - because the age of the sprues NOW is more or less the age they were the first time they were overhauled. From the information available, EITHER possibility is valid.

You're missing the point completely. The age of any particular sprue has nothing to do with anything here. For whatever reason, GW is currently not in the business of replacing existing plastic kits. End of story. Probably because they figure they will make more sales if they make something entirely new, or replace unpopular Finecast kits, than if they just update models that everyone already owns, anyway. But that's just the most common assumption.

You're the one who brought up the age of the examples I gave, as though to say that GW doesn't do that sort of thing anymore. I tried to tell you that you can't draw any conclusion from that and that all we can say is that GW has replaced perfectly good sprues (with near identical models) in the past (most likely because they figured the retooled version would save money long term). If I didn't explain that clearly, I'm sorry, but I think if you'll go back through my posts that I did.

I certainly don't know nor would I venture to guess whether GW will do it again in the future - I just wouldn't rule it out.

I for one agree with lord_blackfang. The writing's been on the wall a long time and if you can't see it you're blind. GW is replacing less and less existing kits, no matter how old they are, both in Warhammer Fantasy and in 40K. What they do is keep the old junk because there's still someone out there buying them and just add new unforeseen units with new kits to the game. Most of those kits aren't traditional 'boring' rank and file stuff either but instead exciting mega sized models, monstrous cavalry and other exotic stuff with high sales potential. I don't have a hard time believing that business wise this makes a lot more sense than replacing old stuff with prettier models 'just because'.

I'm sure they'll do it eventually. But odds are low that it will be soon.

Of course predicting based on past behavior isn't 100% accurate - a year ago I'd have (and did!) laughed at anyone who claimed that we would have 5 new Codexes published within the first year of 6th edition's life span.

@ Therion
There's not enough data to make a trend. I'm thrilled you think I'm blind.

angryboy2k wrote:
There's not enough data to make a trend. I'm thrilled you think I'm blind.

The data I use is from a span of half a decade or slightly longer. Maybe you need to look closer, but if you're indeed blind I'm not sure what good it'll do you.

And if you'd picked the five years from 1997 to 2002 you'd have come to the same conclusion you just have. Well done!

angryboy2k wrote:
And if you'd picked the five years from 1997 to 2002 you'd have come to the same conclusion you just have. Well done!

Even if I just took the last 3 army books and the related releases it would be enough data to make a trend. The fact I'm looking as far back as 2008 is just being thorough. GW is not in the business of replacing old models with prettier ones. GW is in the business of selling miniatures.

Can we please have this discussion without the tempers rising?

lord_blackfang wrote:

DeathGod wrote:
Isn't that every Privateer Press book ever released after the core army books?

PP books are glorified yearly release catalogs, yes. But you don't have to buy those to actually play a faction.

You won't have to buy Iyanden to play them either. You can still play an Iyanden themed army, painted like Iyanden, without the supplement. Also, PP books are required to play a lot of the casters, Gargantuans and Colossals, and units not found in the core book.

I've never actually seen someone playing factions in that game who don't own the extra books for fluff, special rules, and a few pictures. Just saying...

Therion wrote:

angryboy2k wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

angryboy2k wrote:
So how often do you think injection molding tooling should be updated? What's an appropriate timeframe to you? I don't see how things being done 6 to 9 years ago invalidates the idea of updating the sprues. At the time they were updated, the Space Marine sprues were "only" seven years old - that means they're overdue for an upgrade, no?

I'm not actually saying I believe the rumors. I'm simply saying it's happened before, and the conclusion you've drawn (i.e. that it was so long ago we can't use it as a basis for comparison) makes no sense - because the age of the sprues NOW is more or less the age they were the first time they were overhauled. From the information available, EITHER possibility is valid.

You're missing the point completely. The age of any particular sprue has nothing to do with anything here. For whatever reason, GW is currently not in the business of replacing existing plastic kits. End of story. Probably because they figure they will make more sales if they make something entirely new, or replace unpopular Finecast kits, than if they just update models that everyone already owns, anyway. But that's just the most common assumption.

You're the one who brought up the age of the examples I gave, as though to say that GW doesn't do that sort of thing anymore. I tried to tell you that you can't draw any conclusion from that and that all we can say is that GW has replaced perfectly good sprues (with near identical models) in the past (most likely because they figured the retooled version would save money long term). If I didn't explain that clearly, I'm sorry, but I think if you'll go back through my posts that I did.

I certainly don't know nor would I venture to guess whether GW will do it again in the future - I just wouldn't rule it out.

I for one agree with lord_blackfang. The writing's been on the wall a long time and if you can't see it you're blind. GW is replacing less and less existing kits, no matter how old they are, both in Warhammer Fantasy and in 40K. What they do is keep the old junk because there's still someone out there buying them and just add new unforeseen units with new kits to the game. Most of those kits aren't traditional 'boring' rank and file stuff either but instead exciting mega sized models, monstrous cavalry and other exotic stuff with high sales potential. I don't have a hard time believing that business wise this makes a lot more sense than replacing old stuff with prettier models 'just because'.

Amen. Most people say, "good thing I already own 32 of [insert model]" when a new version of an old model comes out. Those don't sell as well as brand spanking new kits. That said, I have it on pretty good authority that old models will be updated in the future, but the focus right now is updated books and a few new kits for each army.

 Krinsath wrote:

 Brother SRM wrote:

 Breotan wrote:
They'd have to re-sculpt it anyway because of all the GK iconography on it.

The GK iconography on the Stormraven is all optional. It's also a Blood Angels vehicle remember.

I believe that comment was in reference to the DreadKnight (i.e. - "baby-carrier" in this post).

Exactly.

Personally I don't use GK or BA but will happily field my Storm Raven in whichever Marine variant army I desire. If my opponent doesn't like that, he can find another person to play against.

 Breotan wrote:
Exactly.

Personally I don't use GK or BA but will happily field my Storm Raven in whichever Marine variant army I desire. If my opponent doesn't like that, he can find another person to play against.

Irrelevant, the only iconography is optional. It's a flat kit at its core just as Rhinos or any tank are.

@Therion, don't call it data unless you have it plotted as such. And 5 years is too small a frame of reference to mean much, sorry. Also, you're precluding change.

Anyhow, this is a silly thread now, we should really close it down or keep at discussions of the actual rumors instead of this "omg, look at my e-peen, I am magically more knowledgeable than you even though I have absolutely no proof or credentials!"

 brassangel wrote:
Amen. Most people say, "good thing I already own 32 of [insert model]" when a new version of an old model comes out.

You forgot to quote the second half: "... otherwise I would have to buy 32 new jetbikes/Crisis Suits ...", giving the quote a different meaning

 brassangel wrote:


PP books are required to play a lot of the casters, Gargantuans and Colossals, and units not found in the core book.

I thought the rules to any given WarmaHordes model were on the card that comes with the model?

Nurd6 wrote:

 brassangel wrote:


PP books are required to play a lot of the casters, Gargantuans and Colossals, and units not found in the core book.

I thought the rules to any given WarmaHordes model were on the card that comes with the model?

They are, some of the books like the colossals, the core rules for the colossals are in that book and not listed on every card. That doesn't 100% mean you need to buy the book though, as PP does have their app that has a reference section with all the core rules, or you just memorize them, or just borrow your friends book etc.

 troa wrote:

 Breotan wrote:
Exactly.

Personally I don't use GK or BA but will happily field my Storm Raven in whichever Marine variant army I desire. If my opponent doesn't like that, he can find another person to play against.

Irrelevant, the only iconography is optional. It's a flat kit at its core just as Rhinos or any tank are.

Okay. Since you're the second person who missed this, I'll spell it out for people. The iconography in question is the stuff on the DREADKNIGHT. That's what is being talked about when I used the term iconography. If you hadn't removed that bit from the quote chain, it'd be pretty obvious.

 Crimson wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
What, like 3rd edition and its Ultramarines, etc codexes that required another book to use?

Yes. At $50 US each. You want a White Scars army? Get ready to drop $100.

Iyanden supplement was not the same price as the codex. It may still be too expensive, but at least get your facts straight. I've seen codex price supplement repeated so many times that it seems that most people actually believe that this is the case.

Facts are confirmed. In Canada, the physical normal copy of Iyanden Supplement is the same price as Codex Eldar at $59.50CAD. GW will never let us down!

Yikes. We got hit hard with that one. 140 for a wraithknight, 120 for the codexes...

Edited by AgeOfEgos

I honestly am more disappointed if this is true on the fact that, I bought the digital version of the C:SM and when 6th came out, it received a free update with hull points. So now i have to purchase a brand new book entirely and I haven't even gotten my full use out of this one. Damn, my iPad is going to be sore.

Edit 1: the cost of the Iyanden was only $40 on digital, and I had it a week ago. Maybe if everyone purchases a digital application device, we can force the industry to save us money by saving them money on not having to buy ink or paper. And get the product sooner.

Not sure how everyone going out and buying an ipad just for GW books is saving us money...

Spaz431 wrote:
I honestly am more disappointed if this is true on the fact that, I bought the digital version of the C:SM and when 6th came out, it received a free update with hull points. So now i have to purchase a brand new book entirely and I haven't even gotten my full use out of this one. Damn, my iPad is going to be sore.

You do realise how old the current SM codex is, don't you?