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.

Same here, gonna print it asap so I don't have to rely on my Nook for it.

Troike wrote:Before this digital codex, the SoB rules were not obtainable from GW. There was no official way to get their rules.

They released the WD "Codex". OOP but official. I own it. According to the author, this digital thing is basically a revised edition of said Codex.
Several years ago, Blood Angels also got a WD Codex in 2 WDs. A few months later this became a free pdf-download, that you were allowed to print for personal use. No problem back then, but taboo today, because it doesn't cost money.

pretre wrote:

 Troike wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Still waiting for a full Codex release, you know, with new miniatures, and not just taking half the units away.

What, would you prefer they have nothing, until their real update?

He's talking about a full Codex: Witchhunters release.FALSE

No, I am not.

Actually, I am talking about a full Codex: Ecclesiarchy. Background: The work on a full Codex Sororitas was started shortly after the work for Codex Grey Knights began. Back then, it was rumoured that Grey Knights get all the Inquisition and Sororitas get new ecclesiarchy units like priests, redemptionists plus new stuff. That's why Harry and others expected a full Sororitas Codex when only a WD stop-gap was released. Something must have gone wrong, maybe the production delays with the plastics or designs rejected. The stop-gap served one main purpose, to take away the Inquisition units from Sororitas and give them to Grey Knights only (they didn't want 6th edition Grey Knights to ally with 3rd edition Inquisition). And so that they can pretend in advertising that Sororitas had an update after 2004.

 Kroothawk wrote:
They released the WD "Codex". OOP but official. I own it. According to the author, this digital thing is basically a revised edition of said Codex.
Several years ago, Blood Angels also got a WD Codex in 2 WDs. A few months later this became a free pdf-download, that you were allowed to print for personal use. No problem back then, but taboo today, because it doesn't cost money.

The difference is that the BA WD free-pdf was a scan of the actual pages from WD. The BA free PDF wasn't even revised. This is a wholly updated document with additional content. New content and additional work costs money. I accept that. (Here's a nice reminder. It is even in German for you... )

 Kroothawk wrote:
Actually, I am talking about a full Codex: Ecclesiarchy... snip

Rumored. That's a lot of assumptions based off of rumors. Show me a company source talking about Codex: Ecclesiarchy. As far as I know, GW has only ever talked about SOB, Witchhunters and, now, AS. Sometimes the 'mongers get it wrong.

 Kroothawk wrote:
They released the WD "Codex". OOP but official.

It being OOP was exactly my point. There was no way to obtain their rules from GW.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Several years ago, Blood Angels also got a WD Codex in 2 WDs. A few months later this became a free pdf-download, that you were allowed to print for personal use. No problem back then, but taboo today, because it doesn't cost money.

But they actually put time and effort into updating and adding to this, it isn't a straight reprint like the BA pdf was. Therefore, it costs money.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Something must have gone wrong, maybe the production delays with the plastics or designs rejected.

I think I recall Harry or Hastings, one of those, noting that GW wasn't happy with the designs. Obviously they still couldn't get past those modelling problems, at the time.

 Kroothawk wrote:
The stop-gap served one main purpose, to take away the Inquisition units from Sororitas and give them to Grey Knights only

Good. The Grey Knights can keep them. I and many other SoB fans much prefer our codex to be Inquisition free, just like they began.

 Kroothawk wrote:
And so that they can pretend in advertising that Sororitas had an update after 2004.

The WD codex was an update. Not necessarily the best of updates, but it was an update. Sorry, there's no getting away from it.

 pretre wrote:
Rumored. That's a lot of assumptions based off of rumors. Show me a company source talking about Codex: Ecclesiarchy. As far as I know, GW has only ever talked about SOB, Witchhunters and, now, AS. Sometimes the 'mongers get it wrong.

The world of rumours can be scary and unreadable to some, but it is the world I live in.

Oh, and the BA pdf wasn't updated, because it was released so soon after the physical release. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so.

BTW Space Wolves also had no German Codex for years, so GW released the rules as a free pdf. Japan has no printed Codices at all, only free pdf's in Japanese.

In the end we have to wait for the Digital Codex release to see, if the author is right about it being basically the old WD Codex with minor tweaks or as advertising says a full new Codex.

 Kroothawk wrote:
In the end we have to wait for the Digital Codex release to see, if the author is right about it being basically the old WD Codex with minor tweaks or as advertising says a full new Codex.

I don't think anyone's disputing that it's the old WD codex with some changes to its rules. What's disputed is when you compare it to a simple errata. Not only do we have added content like Apoc Formations, Relics and Alter of War missions, but new fluff and artwork. Far, far more than one would get from a reprint or an errata.

Also I don't think that the advertising ever called it a full new codex, just talked about what's been added to it.

Troike has it. Full new codex? No. More than a WD cut and paste? Definitely.

 pretre wrote:
Troike has it. Full new codex? No. More than a WD cut and paste? Definitely.

Exactly.

It's not much, but it's something, and furthermore something that isn't insubstantial.

 Melissia wrote:

xruslanx wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Yeah... call me picky but I want my Adepta Sororitas to be "professional soldiers of god" (as they are in 40k), not "supermodels playing (and badly, at that) at being soldiers during a photo shoot" (as in Raging Heroes).

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that pin-ups sell better than "professional soldiers of god".

What evidence do you have of this?

Because I haven't SEEN any miniature sets that offer women as professional soldiers without making them pin-ups.

It's an untapped market. Just because no sculptor has tried yet doesn't mean that it isn't possible.

Tits sell just about anything. I don't need "evidence" to prove that a scantily glad woman sells products.

I wonder if the digital codex is a way for GW to start updating the sisters without doing a full release. Perhaps if they've solved the "plastics problem" then maybe they'll do one kit at a time for an indefinite period and thus update the range more slowly. If they truly feel that the sisters are as unpopular as they do, then it would be less risky than fully committing to a release that might flop. Instead, you'll get a new plastic kit every couple months while the front page can continue to show off whatever other 40K/Fantasy army they've re-released that month.
The optimist in me says that a plastic battle sister squad could show up in a few month, the pessimist says that this new codex is all you get.

 greyknight12 wrote:

The optimist in me says that a plastic battle sister squad could show up in a few month, the pessimist says that this new codex is all you get.

The kid in me is suicidal over how miserable the future is!

 greyknight12 wrote:
The optimist in me says that a plastic battle sister squad could show up in a few month, the pessimist says that this new codex is all you get.

I doubt it. Plastic Sisters will probably come all at once, alongside a proper codex release. Usual GW tactic, drop it all at once to blitzkrieg everyone's wallets.

And don't worry, I'm sure that when the Sisters get their real update, GW will give them their due amount of fanfare. Even for this, they've made a lot of noise. Head over to the GW site, notice who's all over the first page? Also, the Digital Editions Facebook page has been very proactive in promoting the SoB.

ClockworkZion wrote:How can GW have a marketing "strategy" when they have no Marketing Department?

Because some other dept is formulating it? Which may turn out more or less good.

Melissia wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Keep in mind that Raging Heroes has plans for a full sisters army.

As well as issues with cost, delivery time and not quite fitting the aesthetics of the setting. Not saying that I don't look forward to seeing what they have to put out, but their current kickstarter is not inspiring. The fact that their minis tend to be monopose as well doesn't help.

And a lot of the style of places like Raging Heroes is far too sexualized, even compared to Sisters, and I don't want that in my miniatures.

And much too healthy looking and full of life for 40K humans.

CoteazRox wrote:
And much too healthy looking and full of life for 40K humans.

If it isn't pallid, bald/grey-haired and with at least one monocle it just isn't 40k!

pretre wrote:I think points increases are unlikely.

10 sisters squads with a veteran are already 5 point more expensive.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

pretre wrote:I think points increases are unlikely.

10 sisters squads with a veteran are already 5 point more expensive.

But if you take a Simulcrum you're 5 points cheaper than you were before!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

pretre wrote:I think points increases are unlikely.

10 sisters squads with a veteran are already 5 point more expensive.

But if you take a Simulcrum you're 5 points cheaper than you were before!

The point cost justification will be on how the faith system works now and scales. This also depends if the Heavy Flamer will be reduced in points back to 10 pts like it is in the SM codex. If this happens we will be able to purchase a Simulcrum for a squad for free, and maintain the same cost of a squad with heavy flamer, melta gun, vet, combi weapon.

 Kreedos wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

pretre wrote:I think points increases are unlikely.

10 sisters squads with a veteran are already 5 point more expensive.

But if you take a Simulcrum you're 5 points cheaper than you were before!

The point cost justification will be on how the faith system works now and scales. This also depends if the Heavy Flamer will be reduced in points back to 10 pts like it is in the SM codex. If this happens we will be able to purchase a Simulcrum for a squad for free, and maintain the same cost of a squad with heavy flamer, melta gun, vet, combi weapon.

Oh I agree, but I just wanted to point out that it's not -all- more expensive.

At least as far as we know.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

pretre wrote:I think points increases are unlikely.

10 sisters squads with a veteran are already 5 point more expensive.

But the squad as a whole can be cheaper. I think that's a wash, personally.

 Troike wrote:
I doubt it. Plastic Sisters will probably come all at once, alongside a proper codex release. Usual GW tactic, drop it all at once to blitzkrieg everyone's wallets.

Indeed. Even though it will probably take two or more years to actually get around to it, they'll hopefully go all out when they finally do.

xruslanx wrote:
Tits sell just about anything. I don't need "evidence" to prove that a scantily glad woman sells products.

Ah, so you admit you have no evidence to support your assertion that non-pinup models don't sell because they don't shove tits in everyone's face (instead of the real reason, which is quite simply they're not selling because no one is fething making them)... which is just as good as admitting you are wrong.

Oooh, Mel drops the People's elbow from the top ropes!

 Melissia wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
Tits sell just about anything. I don't need "evidence" to prove that a scantily glad woman sells products.

Ah, so you admit you have no evidence to support your assertion that non-pinup models don't sell because they don't shove tits in everyone's face (instead of the real reason, which is quite simply they're not selling because no one is fething making them)... which is just as good as admitting you are wrong.

Not to support xruslanx (who is... oi), but I wouldn't necessarily dismiss the contention that the more commercially viable female models that those that are conventionally pretty.

As an aside, Vic from Victoria Miniatures is indeed attempting what I think most would characterize as "non-pinup models', see here.

With regards to the sexy or non-sexy debate, virtually the only statement of any real weight I have seen on the subject is the statement by Bryan Stiltz from Reaper miniatures;

But we have done some tests. Conversions on the same figure, and released under different part numbers and names have shown that an immodest figure will outsell a more modest version of the same exact figure. A topless version will sell a LOT more, and full nudity will sell even more.

Now, obviously this is the results of one company, and testing a very different market (individual figures rather then product lines), but this is, to the best of my knowledge, the only such testing ever publicly reported.

That's not to say that there is no market out there, or that the preferences that exist for single models (presumably bought for painting/display/RPGs) are applicable to building an army. But there is an opportunity coming in the next year as there are going to be 5 fairly large entries into the market of aesthetically distinct female miniatures; Raging Heroes has 3 different lines of female miniatures coming out ranging from tank tops and bare midriffs to head-to-toe uniforms. In addition we can (hopefully) expect relatively soon Dreamforge Games to release their Black Widow female anti-tank troopers in their Eisenkern line and the entry from Victoria miniatures.

A year from now if those lines reach the market we will have some real, new data in this area, since they represent five fairly good points on the continuum of titillation, from near-pinup to virtually de-sexualized.

If you want to see a example of "TNA sells", look at the female modles that came out at the start of the Warzone Kickstarter to the ones that came out towords the end.

http://warzonegame.com/product/6/angelika-drachen.html
http://warzonegame.com/product/15/valerie-duval.html

It's a product of the male dominated market of wargameing, and a issue I wish more people were aware of. You would be surprised how many people started comeing out of the wood work dureing that kick starter trying to defend blatant pandering to the fans of the pin-up look.

One of the funny things that came out of that was a few people trying to say that the people on DakkaDakka just hate the female body, and that none of us want boobies in our wargames. (Some sort of straw-man argument trying to say we were the ones being sexist...)


Personally I've never met any of these people who buy the pin-up minis in real life. I like to think once people paint them up, they go into shoe boxes that they put under their beds in shame.

 Melissia wrote:
Ah, so you admit you have no evidence to support your assertion that non-pinup models don't sell because they don't shove tits in everyone's face (instead of the real reason, which is quite simply they're not selling because no one is fething making them)... which is just as good as admitting you are wrong.

I guess every single marketing exec is wrong and you are right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lockark wrote:

One of the funny things that came out of that was a few people trying to say that the people on DakkaDakka just hate the female body, and that none of us want boobies in our wargames. (Some sort of straw-man argument trying to say we were the ones being sexist...)

Liking T 'n' A doesn't make you a sexist, it makes you a man.

 Lockark wrote:

Personally I've never met any of these people who buy the pin-up minis in real life. I like to think once people paint them up, they go into shoe boxes that they put under their beds in shame.

I use mine in lots of different games and have hundreds - fully on display - even used my Foundry Nymphs as Elf archers back when I used to play WFB. why shouldn't I?

I might be considered shallow but not sure why I have pander or even justify to other people about what I spend my money on and how I use them..................people like different things - thats life .

Alot of people like sexy girl models in their wargames -some don't - either is valid...........

heading back to the Sisters - I think alots going to depend on the pts change (if there is one) to St Celestine and if its alot - what alternatives do we get - we don't appear to be getting a jump pack for the Cannoness - maybe we might get a Palatine with one but I doubt it. Also what happens to the Command Squad and the Celestian Squad. I am hoping to field a Cannoness in my next game just to see what I can do.

We currently have a large improvement in flexibility of our Battle Sister squads and if the Dominon /Serphaim Squads/Exorcists/Immolators stay as is - then we are in a good place.

IMO In an ideal world we would get (assuming its only a somewhat updated WD codex and no new models)

Scaled Faith Powers - otherwise I am happy with them as is.
Shield of Faith - as is
St Celestine - same
Command Squad - not sure what but it needs something - more shiny weapons and larger squad perhaps plus bonuses as Celestian
Celestian Sqaud - +1 WS, +1I, option to take Blessed blades (Relic blades) or similar
Seraphim - as is
Dominon - as is
Exorcist - as is but with Skyfire/Interceptor missiles option / variant
Immolator - as is
Rhino - as is
Repressor - FW stats actually in the Codex rather than just the photo

 Kroothawk wrote:
Japan has no printed Codices at all, only free pdf's in Japanese.

Alas, this hasn't been true for a while. We get proper (hideously overpriced) translations now.

xruslanx wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Ah, so you admit you have no evidence to support your assertion that non-pinup models don't sell because they don't shove tits in everyone's face (instead of the real reason, which is quite simply they're not selling because no one is fething making them)... which is just as good as admitting you are wrong.

I guess every single marketing exec is wrong and you are right.

Marketing executives are not prescient. Disney, Warner Bros. and Universal each lost a hundred million dollars on a big flop this year. And these weren't art pieces, they were products which were only made because it was believed that they would make money. Just because a marketing executive fails to predict something does not make it untrue.

 Lockark wrote:

One of the funny things that came out of that was a few people trying to say that the people on DakkaDakka just hate the female body, and that none of us want boobies in our wargames. (Some sort of straw-man argument trying to say we were the ones being sexist...)

Liking T 'n' A doesn't make you a sexist, it makes you a man.

I like T'n'A, but I don't want just T'n'A. Raging Heroes could have covered all the bases, with Jailbirds for people who want something like the Eschers and Kurganovas for people wanting a serious army wearing proper armour, and Iron Empire somewhere in between.

xruslanx wrote:

 Lockark wrote:

One of the funny things that came out of that was a few people trying to say that the people on DakkaDakka just hate the female body, and that none of us want boobies in our wargames. (Some sort of straw-man argument trying to say we were the ones being sexist...)

Liking T 'n' A doesn't make you a sexist, it makes you a man.

No, that's not correct, this forum and many other places on the internet are crawling with brats who've only just discovered the vinegar strokes and are very far from being men, these young pups are the likeliest to 'go wild' over tiny tits being bared on tiny metal representations of women. As a man, I'm far more concerned with 'Is it a good sculpt' and 'will I feel like a basement neckbeard virgin if I put these on the table in front of other actual men?', as I have a wife, porn and the girls at the office for T&A.

xruslanx wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lockark wrote:

One of the funny things that came out of that was a few people trying to say that the people on DakkaDakka just hate the female body, and that none of us want boobies in our wargames. (Some sort of straw-man argument trying to say we were the ones being sexist...)

Liking T 'n' A doesn't make you a sexist, it makes you a man.

Shoving it in (no pun intended) for the sake of having it in a wargame, especially when it makes no sense whatsoever (as opposed to stuff like Slaanesh), arguably is though. It's the MMORPG chainmail bikini scenario all over again; it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If you can't have a female model in your line without having to resort to tittilation I'd say it's entirely justifiable to call it sexism.

Put it this way: If you're selling it as a pinup model, sure, go ahead. The entire point of a pinup model is that it's sexy (whether or not that is good or not is a debate I'm not touching with a 10 parsec pole). If you're selling it as a wargaming model then I'd question why you're trying to sell a pinup model as a wargaming model, and further question why you have to sexualize a model that by all rights ought to have nothing with sex to do at all (again, exceptions such as Slaanesh apply).

The day I need my toy soldiers as T'n'A over say... one of any of the several thousand college girls a few miles from my apartment, who out of that number I'm sure a few hundred would be willing to have a drink with me at the pub, will be a very sad, pathetic day indeed. More so if my manhood hinges on said toy soldiers instead of literally everything else that makes me the bad ass skull crusher I am.

I do find it kinda hilarious how there's a certain demographic that comes out when female minis with clothes on that try to rant about that being wrong like they're wounded or their fun is reduced in some way by someone else's toy soldiers having some well made armor instead of being some modeling glue and a well made pin away from a wardrobe malfunction all the time.