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 remember when Khorne Berzerkers got posable legs back in the day. THOSE were friggin' amazing when they first came out. At least, where I was. No more "static poses", all about the "dynamicism".

(Probably so we can.. dun dun dun... Forge The Narrative!)

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

So your argument stands on some grooves etched into the plates over a period of what, 30 years? To justify a price rise of how much in real terms?

Like I said, Malibu Stacey has a new hat.

Oh well, you don't like new stuff. What can I say

I for one am excited for new things like the Devastator and Assault marine box. You can't compare tacticals, because they weren't produced in 2014 (and it would be pointless to compare Blood Angels 2014 tacticals, since you place no value on sculpted iconography, which is what the BA kit is all about). If you wanted to, you could compare devastator 2015 versus devastator 2005 (or assault), and the difference is *huge*. I have the bits and can take a photo for you if you really don't believe me.

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

Good god, you should try out for Canada's National Strawman Team.

Whether I like them or not is besides the point, I'm not asking you to play spot the difference. You may prefer the Devastator legs on the new kit, another person may find them overly fussy.

I'm asking you to give just one improvement of a new plastic kit over an old one that benefits me as a consumer without leaning on aesthetics.

Look at flat pack furniture, cars, technology, anything generational can point at something that is improved over the one before.

With GW kits, if it isn't new it's either a transition of material to GW's benefit or what is essentially a riff on product extension strategy.

 Talys wrote:

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

You also probably know this, but I just wanted to highlight it out, but it's unfair to compare the cost of models 15 years ago to as they are now (and I think that that's what you're trying to highlight with your 2% annual increase). Inflation exists.

 Enigwolf wrote:
I remember when Khorne Berzerkers got posable legs back in the day. THOSE were friggin' amazing when they first came out. At least, where I was. No more "static poses", all about the "dynamicism".

(Probably so we can.. dun dun dun... Forge The Narrative!)

Whipper-snapper! Back in my day we had to cut our fingers and use our blood as glue on Berzerkers because that was the only way they could be assembled!

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

So your argument stands on some grooves etched into the plates over a period of what, 30 years? To justify a price rise of how much in real terms?

Like I said, Malibu Stacey has a new hat.

Oh well, you don't like new stuff. What can I say

I for one am excited for new things like the Devastator and Assault marine box. You can't compare tacticals, because they weren't produced in 2014 (and it would be pointless to compare Blood Angels 2014 tacticals, since you place no value on sculpted iconography, which is what the BA kit is all about). If you wanted to, you could compare devastator 2015 versus devastator 2005 (or assault), and the difference is *huge*. I have the bits and can take a photo for you if you really don't believe me.

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

Everyday goods
Price in 1982
Price in 2012
% change

Draught lager, per pint
73p
£3.18
336%

Bread, white loaf, sliced,
37p
£1.24
235%

Apples, per kilo
68p
£1.75
157%

Milk, pasteurised, per pint
20p
46p
130%

Sausages, per kg
£1.59
£4.40
177%

Butter, per 250g
50p
£1.38
176%

Carrots, per kg
35p
86p
146%

Sugar, per kg
44p
98p
123%

Coffee, instant, per 100g
97p
£2.68
176%

Eggs, per dozen
73p
£2.82
286%

Vehicle fuel, ultra low sulphur diesel, per litre
36p
£1.42
294%

It isn't gw being price hiking money grabbers. It's just real life inflation

 JamesY wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 JamesY wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
big name designers are almost all gone.

Have they? Jez, Ali, Steve, Seb, Mark, and Trish are all still there, plus plenty more fantastic sculptors. Apart from the Perrys (who had only worked on lotr for the few years before leaving) they haven't lost anyone whose absence is really noticed.

No? Juan maybe? Plus Aly, Trish and Jes are the only ones I recognise from first names only, and one shouldn't underestimate the loss of the Perrys.

Also "designers" extends beyond "sculptors" so I guess you can throw the likes of Rick and Alessio into the mix too. Plus Mike McVey must have been an undoubted creative

I never said people hadn't left, just that it wasn't the case that hardly any big names were left.

No you said

they haven't lost anyone whose absence is really noticed

So I threw out a few names who I thought were significant enough to have had their absence felt.

But, people moaned about the work Rick and Alessio did just as much as they are now moaning about what Robin and Phil do.

Yep, it's self evident you can't please everyone, but I'd say things are an order of magnitude worse now. Just last night we had higher than average attendance at our club night, yet for the first time in 3 years, not a single 40K game. Anecdotal yes, but it seems increasingly representative.

The Perry's needed to do their own thing, so that is less gw's loss, more historical wargamers gain. As for Mike, yes the way he painted over 25 years ago completely set the standard for the whole industry (perhaps no surprise he has become an avid photographer) but what did gw loose when he left? He'd stopped painting eavy metal, couldn't sculpt well enough for the requirements, and was fed up of making dioramas. Time has shown that he also isn't great at creating rules. Yes they have lost great people, but new talent has replaced them (as you would expect for a 30+ yr old company).

Studio McVey makes some splendid minis, whether it's Mike, Ali or freelancers sculpting it shows that Mike clearly had something to offer, and GW don't have that anymore.

 JamesY wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

So your argument stands on some grooves etched into the plates over a period of what, 30 years? To justify a price rise of how much in real terms?

Like I said, Malibu Stacey has a new hat.

Oh well, you don't like new stuff. What can I say

I for one am excited for new things like the Devastator and Assault marine box. You can't compare tacticals, because they weren't produced in 2014 (and it would be pointless to compare Blood Angels 2014 tacticals, since you place no value on sculpted iconography, which is what the BA kit is all about). If you wanted to, you could compare devastator 2015 versus devastator 2005 (or assault), and the difference is *huge*. I have the bits and can take a photo for you if you really don't believe me.

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

Spoiler:

Everyday goods
Price in 1982
Price in 2012
% change

Draught lager, per pint
73p
£3.18
336%

Bread, white loaf, sliced,
37p
£1.24
235%

Apples, per kilo
68p
£1.75
157%

Milk, pasteurised, per pint
20p
46p
130%

Sausages, per kg
£1.59
£4.40
177%

Butter, per 250g
50p
£1.38
176%

Carrots, per kg
35p
86p
146%

Sugar, per kg
44p
98p
123%

Coffee, instant, per 100g
97p
£2.68
176%

Eggs, per dozen
73p
£2.82
286%

Vehicle fuel, ultra low sulphur diesel, per litre
36p
£1.42
294%

It isn't gw being price hiking money grabbers. It's just real life inflation

Yeah, retail products aren't commodities which is all that your list is comprised of (barring the lager...mmmm lager, there's an argument there for it being a commodity).

CPI inflation puts $35 in 1982 at $86.25 today. This does not factor in differences in the cost of materials or other factors, just inflation. Hint, plastic is still pennies a kilo and mold making technology has actually reduced the price of creating molds.

I'm a little surprised, given the nature and level of the discussion, that anyone felt compelled to explain inflation!

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'm a little surprised, given the nature and level of the discussion, that anyone felt compelled to explain inflation!

Hey now, it's just as relevant as the price of butter 20 years ago!

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

So your argument stands on some grooves etched into the plates over a period of what, 30 years? To justify a price rise of how much in real terms?

Like I said, Malibu Stacey has a new hat.

Oh well, you don't like new stuff. What can I say

I for one am excited for new things like the Devastator and Assault marine box. You can't compare tacticals, because they weren't produced in 2014 (and it would be pointless to compare Blood Angels 2014 tacticals, since you place no value on sculpted iconography, which is what the BA kit is all about). If you wanted to, you could compare devastator 2015 versus devastator 2005 (or assault), and the difference is *huge*. I have the bits and can take a photo for you if you really don't believe me.

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

Good god, you should try out for Canada's National Strawman Team.

Whether I like them or not is besides the point, I'm not asking you to play spot the difference. You may prefer the Devastator legs on the new kit, another person may find them overly fussy.

I'm asking you to give just one improvement of a new plastic kit over an old one that benefits me as a consumer without leaning on aesthetics.

Look at flat pack furniture, cars, technology, anything generational can point at something that is improved over the one before.

With GW kits, if it isn't new it's either a transition of material to GW's benefit or what is essentially a riff on product extension strategy.

Details on the newer models are somewhat crisper, with fewer flaws in the flow of the plastic, causing fewer in mold breaks. (Like those loverly conical breaks in so many of the plastic skeletons for Warhammer....)

That is a production improvement - my favorite version of the Marines are those released for 3rd edition. (But I still love me Beakies.)

The Auld Grump

 agnosto wrote:

CPI inflation puts $35 in 1982 at $86.25 today. This does not factor in differences in the cost of materials or other factors, just inflation. Hint, plastic is still pennies a kilo and mold making technology has actually reduced the price of creating molds.

Inflation also affects your fixed and overhead costs like administrative costs, cost of rent, paying your employees, etc. This trickles down into pricing of the sole products they sell, even if the raw materials (the variable cost) of the product is constant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'm a little surprised, given the nature and level of the discussion, that anyone felt compelled to explain inflation!

Because a very consistent argument being used is that GW keeps hiking prices to make more profits so they can show black on their financial statements. Correlation is not causation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 agnosto wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:
I remember when Khorne Berzerkers got posable legs back in the day. THOSE were friggin' amazing when they first came out. At least, where I was. No more "static poses", all about the "dynamicism".

(Probably so we can.. dun dun dun... Forge The Narrative!)

Whipper-snapper! Back in my day we had to cut our fingers and use our blood as glue on Berzerkers because that was the only way they could be assembled!

Remember when buying a Special Weapons Marine or a Terminator was essentially a dice roll? You had to shake the bits around to see what you were getting inside. Sheesh. Now GW gives us all the options on one sprue, the horror! The lack of RNG! Why would they ever take such a step backwards?!

 Enigwolf wrote:

 Talys wrote:

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

You also probably know this, but I just wanted to highlight it out, but it's unfair to compare the cost of models 15 years ago to as they are now (and I think that that's what you're trying to highlight with your 2% annual increase). Inflation exists.

Yeah, I just wanted to reduce things to what a "normal" cost of living wage increase as perceived by an average person "should" be and dumb it down to an easy number. Indeed, as you point out, inflation exists, and as JamesY highlights, some things have gotten a lot more expensive than others. Also, my math isn't that good, and compounding 2% annually in my head is about as fancy as I can do without pulling out a calculator or piece of paper

JamesY's list of inflation of common goods highlights how, just to maintain the same standard of living, GW's labour costs must also increase, even if material costs haven't changed a lot.

There's a whole discussion to be had about the buying power of the average worker not keeping up with inflation and an increasing (and unhealthy) wealth gap -- but there's not a lot that a company like GW can do about that! The solution that some people would like to hear is, "they should share and feel our pain and keep their prices low" -- but that's just unlikely in an company that makes luxury entertainment goods.

 Enigwolf wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

CPI inflation puts $35 in 1982 at $86.25 today. This does not factor in differences in the cost of materials or other factors, just inflation. Hint, plastic is still pennies a kilo and mold making technology has actually reduced the price of creating molds.

Inflation also affects your fixed and overhead costs like administrative costs, cost of rent, paying your employees, etc. This trickles down into pricing of the sole products they sell, even if the raw materials (the variable cost) of the product is constant.

Yep, it certainly does but the offset between the price differentials will depend upon what's more expensive and how much cost savings are derived from the reducing factors. There's not enough data to have a serious conversation about it since we simply don't know how many tonnes of plastic they go through in a year and I'm too lazy to research the exact price differentials in modern tooling vs 1980's. You'd also have to factor in reductions in retail presence, warehouse space, production facilities, etc as the company has retracted in recent years. If I cared enough, I could sit down and figure it all out for you but, meh, I can't be arsed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Enigwolf wrote:


Remember when buying a Special Weapons Marine or a Terminator was essentially a dice roll? You had to shake the bits around to see what you were getting inside. Sheesh. Now GW gives us all the options on one sprue, the horror! The lack of RNG! Why would they ever take such a step backwards?!

It was $35 for a roll on the random chart to determine what model you'd get and no taksie-backsies allowed! Unless of course you were a CSM player, and heaven forbid you played a Slaaneshi force, we don't talk about what you had to do for your models.....it's just not spoken.

Talys wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

 Talys wrote:

Is it worth a price difference of $35 -> $50 over a period of 10 years? Well, sure. If they had just increased 2% every year, they'd be $43 anyhow. So would I pay $7-8 more for a cool redesign after a decade? Bring it on, baby. What am I going to do with $8 anyhow? It's the price of a burger, fries and drink at McDonald's.

You also probably know this, but I just wanted to highlight it out, but it's unfair to compare the cost of models 15 years ago to as they are now (and I think that that's what you're trying to highlight with your 2% annual increase). Inflation exists.

Yeah, I just wanted to reduce things to what a "normal" cost of living wage increase as perceived by an average person "should" be and dumb it down to an easy number. Indeed, as you point out, inflation exists, and as JamesY highlights, some things have gotten a lot more expensive than others. Also, my math isn't that good, and compounding 2% annually in my head is about as fancy as I can do without pulling out a calculator or piece of paper

JamesY's list of inflation of common goods highlights how, just to maintain the same standard of living, GW's labour costs must also increase, even if material costs haven't changed a lot.

There's a whole discussion to be had about the buying power of the average worker not keeping up with inflation and an increasing (and unhealthy) wealth gap -- but there's not a lot that a company like GW can do about that! The solution that some people would like to hear is, "they should share and feel our pain and keep their prices low" -- but that's just unlikely in an company that makes luxury entertainment goods.

That's a whole different ballgame that I like to avoid touching with a stick if I can help it - it's called "politics"

agnosto wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

CPI inflation puts $35 in 1982 at $86.25 today. This does not factor in differences in the cost of materials or other factors, just inflation. Hint, plastic is still pennies a kilo and mold making technology has actually reduced the price of creating molds.

Inflation also affects your fixed and overhead costs like administrative costs, cost of rent, paying your employees, etc. This trickles down into pricing of the sole products they sell, even if the raw materials (the variable cost) of the product is constant.

Yep, it certainly does but the offset between the price differentials will depend upon what's more expensive and how much cost savings are derived from the reducing factors. There's not enough data to have a serious conversation about it since we simply don't know how many tonnes of plastic they go through in a year and I'm too lazy to research the exact price differentials in modern tooling vs 1980's. You'd also have to factor in reductions in retail presence, warehouse space, production facilities, etc as the company has retracted in recent years. If I cared enough, I could sit down and figure it all out for you but, meh, I can't be arsed.

I certainly agree with you. I'm sure the data exists, but frankly, I don't care enough to take the hours just to attribute how much of the price increases are due to inflation increases in X, Y, Z, A, B, C. I think you'll probably agree with me on this, but all I care about is knowing that inflation affects prices in some way shape or form, so I can reasonably justify to myself some (if not all, but most likely just most) of the price hikes that GW has made over the years. Incidentally, I'm in the market for a new car as well, and the prices of an equivalent car now compared to back then is.. well, there's a huge gap.

agnosto wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:


Remember when buying a Special Weapons Marine or a Terminator was essentially a dice roll? You had to shake the bits around to see what you were getting inside. Sheesh. Now GW gives us all the options on one sprue, the horror! The lack of RNG! Why would they ever take such a step backwards?!

It was $35 for a roll on the random chart to determine what model you'd get and no taksie-backsies allowed! Unless of course you were a CSM player, and heaven forbid you played a Slaaneshi force, we don't talk about what you had to do for your models.....it's just not spoken.

My FLGS back then had them hanging from a frame on the wall, so you could pick and choose which bits you wanted. I remember my first metal Chaos Terminator I bought (annoyed that Space Marines had plastic terminators...), I didn't realize that it was RNG, and it came with two left-hand lightning claws. Yep. Great job, GW. Now imagine if all direct orders and web orders these days were indeed RNG rolls still... I used to joke with my friends about how the pleasure one derived from the torture of finally assembling a GW-store-legal Slaaneshi force was so fitting with the theme of that particular Chaos god.

Personally, I think what is keeping games work shop alive is a multiple of things. Games workshop is not just games work shop. Its also, Black library, Forge world, and Citadel. All of which funnel money back into Games workshop as a whole. Now they are starting to generate even more money buy selling off rights to games to other companies to produce. Video games, card games, board games, these also generate money that are from outside the normal revenue stream for GW.

 Glitcha wrote:
Personally, I think what is keeping games work shop alive is a multiple of things. Games workshop is not just games work shop. Its also, Black library, Forge world, and Citadel. All of which funnel money back into Games workshop as a whole. Now they are starting to generate even more money buy selling off rights to games to other companies to produce. Video games, card games, board games, these also generate money that are from outside the normal revenue stream for GW.

Licensing does present a new revenue stream for them, but it's not the sole factor keeping them alive, as their financials last year evidenced I believe.

Yep, FW and BL are included with all revenues from the website, and the total ~20%.

That's certainly not keeping the lights on.

Licensing was a really small amount, IIRC, maybe 5%? If that?

 Azreal13 wrote:
Yep, FW and BL are included with all revenues from the website, and the total ~20%.

That's certainly not keeping the lights on.

Licensing was a really small amount, IIRC, maybe 5%? If that?

Is that 5% of revenue or profit? If it's revenue, it's huge; if it's profit, it's only a wee bit. Because the profit margin on licensing is as close to 100% as you'll ever get, and it's close to risk-free (the only risk being that if someone really botches it, they damage your brand).

One might infer from my words I'm not rightly sure.

The information's public. Go check?

 Azreal13 wrote:
One might infer from my words I'm not rightly sure.

The information's public. Go check?

Too Lazy I'm just kinda posting between doing glazes on some minis (gotta wait til they're totally dry before the next layer).

Fine, but don't expect me to be your PA!

 Azreal13 wrote:
Fine, but don't expect me to be your PA!

PA? Power... Armor?

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Fine, but don't expect me to be your PA!

PA? Power... Armor?

Mk 9 'azreal' pattern? Hazardous if approached wrong!

There is a mounted version too. It's the upgraded 'rider of the gwpocalypse' version. Quite nasty! Comes with the 'preferred enemy:gw' ability along with hit and run. Automatically makes its point each post.

Apologies azreal, nothing personal. I'd like to be named after a suit of armour...

 JamesY wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
big name designers are almost all gone.

Have they? Jez, Ali, Steve, Seb, Mark, and Trish are all still there, plus plenty more fantastic sculptors. Apart from the Perrys (who had only worked on lotr for the few years before leaving) they haven't lost anyone whose absence is really noticed.

The only one from that list I recognise is Jez (Jes Bingham? Bickam?)

I mean the people who drove innovation at the company almost all work somewhere else now. Paul Sawyer (who made WD great), John Stallard (who came up with the 2-sides+rules starter box idea), Rick Priestly (who's WW2 rules are the basis for Warhammer), Allesio Cavatore (who co-wrote almost everything), Dan Abnett (the BL author), Mike McVey (painting studio head?). Then there's plenty of other folk who's roles I don't know but are doing quite well elsewhere like Ronnie Renton.

The Perrys are responsible for more than just the LOTR mini's, as I understand it they were instrumental in getting the LOTR contract in the first place, and they are responsible for most of the decent human sculpts throughout it's history.

Almost everyone that did something great and is remembered by the gaming public now works for the competition, and almost everyone of note driving the competition forward used to work for Games Workshop.

Licencing revenue was £1.4m in 2014, with licencing costs being £372k.

You lazy gits.

Deadnight wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Fine, but don't expect me to be your PA!

PA? Power... Armor?

Mk 9 'azreal' pattern? Hazardous if approached wrong!

There is a mounted version too. It's the upgraded 'rider of the gwpocalypse' version. Quite nasty! Comes with the 'preferred enemy:gw' ability along with hit and run. Automatically makes its point each post.

Apologies azreal, nothing personal. I'd like to be named after a suit of armour...

You forgot "And They Shall Tolerate No bs" USR.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Which had a much nicer ring to it until the swear filter got involved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Thud wrote:
Licencing revenue was £1.4m in 2014, with licencing costs being £372k.

You lazy gits.

So less than 2% of revenue?

Unusual for me to be so optimistic with GW!

Thanks thud

Round it off against the cost of goods, it's gross profit of 1m GBP. IIRC, Gross Profit was around 85m total.

So only slightly less than 1.2% of (gross) profit. It'll pay some salaries, but it won't make or break GW. That's a lot of legal and other costs associated to that wee bit of licensing revenue. Maybe it includes the salary of a person or two who's full time jobs are to manage the licensing program. Like, a director/vp type and an assistant. Or maybe they have in-house counsel.

I don't have the numbers on hand but I thought that despite every mobile dev getting their hands on some part of their IP GWs licencing revenue last year was significantly smaller than back when Dawn of War 2 was popular or when Space Marine came out.

I do enjoy the folks trying to sell "GW is fine, nothing is broken" hand wave stance still in 2015. I guess these are folks that missed the first time they tanked and the very, very lengthy threads filled with equally "accredited" folks who gave in detail analysis of the business profile GW was presenting, including the great 14+ part series from the guy over at PaintingBuddha (who legitimately has credentials to comment on GW running themselves in the ground).

If crazed fans can sustain them, then they truly stumbled upon their market. I would say found, but we all know GW doesn't go looking for a market.

I heard they put out the Space Marine book again just recently. Like, really? Wonder what was changed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jonolikespie wrote:
I don't have the numbers on hand but I thought that despite every mobile dev getting their hands on some part of their IP GWs licencing revenue last year was significantly smaller than back when Dawn of War 2 was popular or when Space Marine came out.

Back when they licensed good games? Mordheim wasn't bad of what I demo'd and Total Warhammer looks slick.

The new Space Marine book is actually awesome. Just like the new eldar book, I don't know anyone who plays the faction and bought the book be disappointed with it.

Much like the Eldar book, a lot of units were tweaked (like dreads getting 4 base attacks, scouts getting bs4ws4, and terminators getting cheaper), SM got their "Decurion" (called a Flavius), and there are a bunch of neat formations.

The fluff section is significantly reorganized, with better looking displays of artwork, and plenty of photos. The book is 200 pages.

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you love 40k and space marines, it's a fantastic release. If you hate GW and just want them to die, it's a desperate money grab. Some people will think a $60 book everyr two years is $30 a year, or less than $3 a month, and why not buy a shiny new book. Other people will think that's crazy, and all rules should be free anyways. And some people sit hitting refresh so the can get their LE book for $165.