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.

GW sells what people want. Saying GW sells too many Space Marines is like saying McDonalds sells too many hamburgers. People like Space Marines (40K and 30K). And, they like many varieties of Space Marines. GW also sells a ton of different other armies (Eldar, Orks, Necrons, etc.). With many varieties of each. And, in no way are those armies neglected, inferior, or lower quality. No way.

Now, GW is kind of guilty of neglecting armies, according to the forums. Namely, SoB and CSM. Oddly, the two most like Space Marines. Don't know why, except maybe these are seen as pale imitations. But, it really is hard to claim the 30K CSM armies are neglected. And, if the rumors about Sisters of Silence are true, that complaint goes away.

There is merit in this discussion. But, only as a notion. Not a policy or conspiracy.

Do people like Space Marines or do people like the favouritism Space Marines get?

 Blacksails wrote:
Which I'd support if I could download all the rules for everything for free. Rules only, no fluff, in a PDF or epub file as I see fit.

If not, having a book for every single sub faction of note is incredibly costly to collect for those with a desire to have a flexible army

If you want to have a flexible army; then figure out a way to make your army flexible. Don't just run "counts as" whenever a new book comes out.

If that's not what you're talking about, then fine--but that's the most common thing that I personally see. People complaining about how Marine players just hop from book to book as the power levels shift; because hey it's all power armor right?

or multiple armies,

That's a fair point.

and would be an absolute bitch to keep track of every single snowflake rule scattered though 40+ books.

It would be an absolute bitch to keep track of every single snowflake rule? Have you read most of the Chapter Tactics in the Space Marine book? They're USRs like Shrouded(but only for turn one ) or FNP or Twin-Linked with flame/melta weapons.

Saying the rules would need to be free(not something I'm necessarily opposed to) because of some perception that otherwise it becomes a mess for keeping track of things? That's ridiculous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:
Do people like Space Marines or do people like the favouritism Space Marines get?

Part of one, part of the other, part the simple fact that Space Marines are pretty damn easy to build an army of via the second hand market or cheaply via starter boxes.

First off some Armies do completely get neglected. Orks almost literally exist as punching bags for other Armies -probably space marines.

Literally try to win a game as Orks against a SM army say Battle Company. Dark Eldar and Astra Militarium are jokes as well.

Also do people really genuinely like Space Marines over everything else or is it because of GW's propaganda and favoritism towards them? If they pushed say Skitaari or Dark Eldar as much as Space Marines who is to say they wouldn't be as popular?

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you want to have a flexible army; then figure out a way to make your army flexible. Don't just run "counts as" whenever a new book comes out.

If that's not what you're talking about, then fine--but that's the most common thing that I personally see. People complaining about how Marine players just hop from book to book as the power levels shift; because hey it's all power armor right?

If I have a custom regiment that can fight in style X and style Y based on my collection, but those styles are best represented by two different books (or more, if I have a large enough and versatile army) then I'd need to spring for each book instead of 1 with all those rules.

Which is the same as someone with a custom marine chapter who can easily play as BA, any vanilla chapter, or any other marine book because it literally is all power armour with imperial weapons, minus some exceptions that a skilled modeller could easily add in or magnetize as the need arose.

It would be an absolute bitch to keep track of every single snowflake rule? Have you read most of the Chapter Tactics in the Space Marine book? They're USRs like Shrouded(but only for turn one ) or FNP or Twin-Linked with flame/melta weapons.

Saying the rules would need to be free(not something I'm necessarily opposed to) because of some perception that otherwise it becomes a mess for keeping track of things? That's ridiculous.

Yes, it would be a mess, or at least more of a mess than having all those rules in a single, easy to search and thumb through book.

At least a bunch of free PDFs means I don't have to buy every single book if I ever want to know a rule off hand.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you want to have a flexible army; then figure out a way to make your army flexible. Don't just run "counts as" whenever a new book comes out.

If that's not what you're talking about, then fine--but that's the most common thing that I personally see. People complaining about how Marine players just hop from book to book as the power levels shift; because hey it's all power armor right?

If I have a custom regiment that can fight in style X and style Y based on my collection, but those styles are best represented by two different books (or more, if I have a large enough and versatile army) then I'd need to spring for each book instead of 1 with all those rules.

Then buy those two different books. Nobody told you to write your own fluff about how your regiment is super good at something which would require you to buy two different books.

Which is the same as someone with a custom marine chapter who can easily play as BA, any vanilla chapter, or any other marine book because it literally is all power armour with imperial weapons, minus some exceptions that a skilled modeller could easily add in or magnetize as the need arose.

Which is dumb there too. If you want to play a "custom Marine Chapter that can easily play as BA, any vanilla chapter, or any other marine book"? Great. You have to buy the books. Don't like it? Then commit to an army and play it.

It would be an absolute bitch to keep track of every single snowflake rule? Have you read most of the Chapter Tactics in the Space Marine book? They're USRs like Shrouded(but only for turn one ) or FNP or Twin-Linked with flame/melta weapons.

Saying the rules would need to be free(not something I'm necessarily opposed to) because of some perception that otherwise it becomes a mess for keeping track of things? That's ridiculous.

Yes, it would be a mess, or at least more of a mess than having all those rules in a single, easy to search and thumb through book.

At least a bunch of free PDFs means I don't have to buy every single book if I ever want to know a rule off hand.

You want to know an easy way to avoid having to buy every single book if you ever want to know a rule off hand?

Ask your opponent to see their book/PDF/whatever. Don't ask them to "explain the rule"; ask to see their book/PDF/whatever. They should, barring someone who is cheating or just not bringing their stuff with them and "playing from memory"(which you should never, ever, ever do), be more than willing to accommodate you wanting to educate yourself a bit.

40K is way too Marine centric.

That being said, I love marines and I can't help it. I have quite a few armies of marines.

Although, that might be due to xeno's armies only recently being given some love. I'd start eldar for example if they just updated their aspect warrior line.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Then buy those two different books. Nobody told you to write your own fluff about how your regiment is super good at something which would require you to buy two different books.

And my point is that instead of buying 2 books (or more), I'd only have to buy 1. Simple math. Yes, under your system I could buy the ones I need, but the point I'm making is that its far more cumbersome and more expensive than just having the rules in one place.

Which is dumb there too. If you want to play a "custom Marine Chapter that can easily play as BA, any vanilla chapter, or any other marine book"? Great. You have to buy the books. Don't like it? Then commit to an army and play it.

And again, simple math here, 1 books is less than 2 (or 3 for that matter, or even 4), which is less cumbersome, cheaper, and has all the information in one singular source. This has the added benefit for a company like GW to have all the updates applied at once for all those marine players, so we don't get the merry go round of having 1 marine book updated before the others with better point costs for the exact same units.

You want to know an easy way to avoid having to buy every single book if you ever want to know a rule off hand?

Ask your opponent to see their book/PDF/whatever. Don't ask them to "explain the rule"; ask to see their book/PDF/whatever. They should, barring someone who is cheating or just not bringing their stuff with them and "playing from memory"(which you should never, ever, ever do), be more than willing to accommodate you wanting to educate yourself a bit.

Typically, if I want to know something off hand, it'll be where I don't have an opponent around me with the exact army books I want to look at.

Really, all I'm saying is, take a page from how HH is doing army books. All marines in one (covering quite well every single legion), all Mechanicum in another, all regular humans and other auxiliaries in another. Great. Three books to cover off some two dozen armies/factions.

Having a full book for each marine/craftworld/legion/warband/regiment is massive overkill. Especially if it's only to point out their specific rules and special unit.

At least, at the current price points for books.

I could understand it if they were dataslates for $10 or less, as supplements to a larger, more general codex. Then, sure, you've got more than 1 sourcebook, but at least it didn't actually cost you as much as 2 books.

As it is, crunchwise, the different sub-armies aren't significantly different enough to justify a codex for each, imo.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Then buy those two different books. Nobody told you to write your own fluff about how your regiment is super good at something which would require you to buy two different books.

And my point is that instead of buying 2 books (or more), I'd only have to buy 1. Simple math. Yes, under your system I could buy the ones I need, but the point I'm making is that its far more cumbersome and more expensive than just having the rules in one place.

And the point I'm making is that it is just as cumbersome, if not more, to shove all of the subfactions for an army or anything tied to it into the same book. As it stands, I'm still pissed I have to pay $58 plus a supplement ($33 for Angels of Death or $70+ for Kauyon) for a Raven Guard army's rules when their unique detachment doesn't give me access to a hefty chunk of the book.

Which is dumb there too. If you want to play a "custom Marine Chapter that can easily play as BA, any vanilla chapter, or any other marine book"? Great. You have to buy the books. Don't like it? Then commit to an army and play it.

And again, simple math here, 1 books is less than 2 (or 3 for that matter, or even 4), which is less cumbersome, cheaper, and has all the information in one singular source. This has the added benefit for a company like GW to have all the updates applied at once for all those marine players, so we don't get the merry go round of having 1 marine book updated before the others with better point costs for the exact same units.

Right, we just get the merry go round of the book getting updated and then rotting until it gets updated again.

Your argument of "it's less cumbersome, cheaper, and has all the information in one singular source" is predisposed towards your own preconceptions that it would be done a certain way.

You want to know an easy way to avoid having to buy every single book if you ever want to know a rule off hand?

Ask your opponent to see their book/PDF/whatever. Don't ask them to "explain the rule"; ask to see their book/PDF/whatever. They should, barring someone who is cheating or just not bringing their stuff with them and "playing from memory"(which you should never, ever, ever do), be more than willing to accommodate you wanting to educate yourself a bit.

Typically, if I want to know something off hand, it'll be where I don't have an opponent around me with the exact army books I want to look at.

That's really not my or GW or anyone's problem but your own.

Really, all I'm saying is, take a page from how HH is doing army books. All marines in one (covering quite well every single legion), all Mechanicum in another, all regular humans and other auxiliaries in another. Great. Three books to cover off some two dozen armies/factions.

The impression I get from the FW thread and FW itself's product descriptions is that what you posted is not the case. Especially this little line:

Using this book, you can create army lists for any Space Marine Legion and engage them in the devastating conflicts of The Horus Heresy. This book is intended to be used alongside its companion book - The Horus Heresy Legiones Astartes: Age of Darkness Legions - in which you'll find special rules and wargear for individual Legions, as well as unique units and unit profiles for the mighty Primarchs.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BossJakadakk wrote:
Having a full book for each marine/craftworld/legion/warband/regiment is massive overkill. Especially if it's only to point out their specific rules and special unit.

Personally? The biggest downfall we have right now of the subfactions being shoved into their own book is the lack of special units for them. It's a huge pain in the ass, especially for someone who has actually read more than just the GW fluff about Raven Guard. The continued insistence on jump packs as their "signature unit" is a huge disappointment.

At least, at the current price points for books.

I could understand it if they were dataslates for $10 or less, as supplements to a larger, more general codex. Then, sure, you've got more than 1 sourcebook, but at least it didn't actually cost you as much as 2 books.

IMO, the ideal price point for something like this would be $25 tops. You'd be looking at a book that could be in the realm of 60-70 pages with background.

You could trim it down even further to $10-$15 if the fluff was put into its own book and sold separately; for those who were interested in it. Make it a nice glossy book with lots of art and stuff, rather than a mandatory purchase.

As it is, crunchwise, the different sub-armies aren't significantly different enough to justify a codex for each, imo.

As it stands now? Yeah. You're absolutely right.

But if you look back at some of the flavored lists from yore(the Cadian Shock Troops list and Ulthwe Strike Force from 13th Black Crusade), you could easily actually make subarmies with some crunch to them.

 Kanluwen wrote:

And the point I'm making is that it is just as cumbersome, if not more, to shove all of the subfactions for an army or anything tied to it into the same book. As it stands, I'm still pissed I have to pay $58 plus a supplement ($33 for Angels of Death or $70+ for Kauyon) for a Raven Guard army's rules when their unique detachment doesn't give me access to a hefty chunk of the book.

Or instead, you'd pay $60 to have all those rules, and all the other marine rules if you ever feel like using them. The advantage of one book is that you don't have to constantly re-print all the units and rules that are common among all the factions in every faction book. Unless you're proposing a supplement system where you buy the core book and then the faction book as a supplement.

Right, we just get the merry go round of the book getting updated and then rotting until it gets updated again.

...which is what happens anyways?

Your argument of "it's less cumbersome, cheaper, and has all the information in one singular source" is predisposed towards your own preconceptions that it would be done a certain way.

And yours isn't?

That's really not my or GW or anyone's problem but your own.

What a great counter-point!

Of course its my problem, hence why I'm trying to discuss a method in which it couldn't be a problem.

The impression I get from the FW thread and FW itself's product descriptions is that what you posted is not the case. Especially this little line:

Using this book, you can create army lists for any Space Marine Legion and engage them in the devastating conflicts of The Horus Heresy. This book is intended to be used alongside its companion book - The Horus Heresy Legiones Astartes: Age of Darkness Legions - in which you'll find special rules and wargear for individual Legions, as well as unique units and unit profiles for the mighty Primarchs.

Right, forgot the legions are split in two. Yeah, so all the core rules and units common among all the legions are found in one book, and all the legion specific rules and units/wargear are found in the other. If it makes you feel any better, I'm not overly fond of even that system, but its a world better than having to deal with theoretically 18 books for all the legions. The other books cover the factions entirely though.

*Edit* I realize we're getting off topic here. I'll drop it here.

Well let me put it this way, if you include the guy who showed up two hours late to our Campaign day there were exactly 2 armies out of 8 that were NOT Space Marines/CSM. Btw by some Miracle the Ork player won the day Mostly because the SM players and CSM players took elite/specialist armies, low model count and I spammed Ork boyz inside BWs.

People play what they want, and I have no qualms with that. It just makes it sweeter when that tactical squad goes poof when the earth shaker hits

pm713 wrote:
Do people like Space Marines or do people like the favouritism Space Marines get?

people like space marines. Look go look at the "gateways" to 40k and you'll see space marines at the front and center. everyone who knows 40k knows Space Marines, people who develop a love for the other factions typically do so after already knowing 40k for a bit. so of course people play various flavors of space marine

It's good to have an army that almost everyone plays, since it provides a great jumping in point for new players.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

And the point I'm making is that it is just as cumbersome, if not more, to shove all of the subfactions for an army or anything tied to it into the same book. As it stands, I'm still pissed I have to pay $58 plus a supplement ($33 for Angels of Death or $70+ for Kauyon) for a Raven Guard army's rules when their unique detachment doesn't give me access to a hefty chunk of the book.

Or instead, you'd pay $60 to have all those rules, and all the other marine rules if you ever feel like using them. The advantage of one book is that you don't have to constantly re-print all the units and rules that are common among all the factions in every faction book. Unless you're proposing a supplement system where you buy the core book and then the faction book as a supplement.

What "other Marine rules"? Oh, you mean Chapter Traits--aka "USRs by another name"?

You could literally remove every non-Ultramarines Chapter from Codex: Space Marines and there would be no difference.

Right, we just get the merry go round of the book getting updated and then rotting until it gets updated again.

...which is what happens anyways?

Your argument of "it's less cumbersome, cheaper, and has all the information in one singular source" is predisposed towards your own preconceptions that it would be done a certain way.

And yours isn't?

That's really not my or GW or anyone's problem but your own.

What a great counter-point!

Considering the bit I replied to was about how you only ever need to refer to a book when you're not playing a game? Yeah, it is.

If you want to refer to a book outside of a game; buy the book.

Of course its my problem, hence why I'm trying to discuss a method in which it couldn't be a problem.

Putting it bluntly, your problem is you want EVERYTHING in as few of places as possible. You're approaching it from that angle.

Me, personally? I don't want that. That is, in my opinion, what leads to bare plastic armies and "custom fluff" that puts C.S. Goto's trash to shame--why would anyone devote any time to actually working on their painting or taking the time to come up with a background for their army which is reasonable and doesn't make them Gotoisms if they're playing an army that has no real investment for them ruleswise?

Why bother with any of that when doing nothing lets you codex hop to the Next Great Thing?

I want a system that lets people pick the army they want to play and not have to get extraneous crap shoveled in there. There's a huge reason why I'm against the Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus being rolled into one book, and it comes down to the simple fact that they don't need to be one army or one book.

The impression I get from the FW thread and FW itself's product descriptions is that what you posted is not the case. Especially this little line:

Using this book, you can create army lists for any Space Marine Legion and engage them in the devastating conflicts of The Horus Heresy. This book is intended to be used alongside its companion book - The Horus Heresy Legiones Astartes: Age of Darkness Legions - in which you'll find special rules and wargear for individual Legions, as well as unique units and unit profiles for the mighty Primarchs.

Right, forgot the legions are split in two. Yeah, so all the core rules and units common among all the legions are found in one book, and all the legion specific rules and units/wargear are found in the other. If it makes you feel any better, I'm not overly fond of even that system, but its a world better than having to deal with theoretically 18 books for all the legions. The other books cover the factions entirely though.

Is it really though? One of the biggest complaints about FW's rules--and even the $58 codices like Eldar and Marines--is the size of the books and the "cumbersomeness" of carrying them.

Whilst yes, there is a large quantity of sm players, that's what I started with. They are the core of this universe, because gw thinks that we 'umies want bigger 'umies to be the protagonists of the game. I do feel that they are trying to emphasize other armies with the start collecting bundles, though.

BrianDavion wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Do people like Space Marines or do people like the favouritism Space Marines get?

people like space marines. Look go look at the "gateways" to 40k and you'll see space marines at the front and center. everyone who knows 40k knows Space Marines, people who develop a love for the other factions typically do so after already knowing 40k for a bit. so of course people play various flavors of space marine

Or all the gateway armies are one army and other armies have bad models involved so nobody likes them to look at.

Me, personally? I don't want that. That is, in my opinion, what leads to bare plastic armies and "custom fluff" that puts C.S. Goto's trash to shame--why would anyone devote any time to actually working on their painting or taking the time to come up with a background for their army which is reasonable and doesn't make them Gotoisms if they're playing an army that has no real investment for them ruleswise?

Good god, this is the worst bit of nerd snobbery (combined with some pretty spectacular white knightery) I've read in a long time.

Heaven forbid people should want to use their imaginations to develop concepts you don't like. Here's the thing, not everybody's as full on intense about their Warhammer as you Kan, perhaps you need to take a breath?

But to combine that disdain with the idea that overpriced rules are somehow a good thing?



You were already on thin ice when the whole crux of your argument is that someone being annoyed that they have to purchase multiple books to realise the creative vision they have for their army is wrong because, well, people should have to pay a lot for their rules so they stay the course, apparently, but this has elevated things significantly. Bravo.

One of the reasons there's so many SM around is the fact that Sm is generally the starting army of most players. Every time someone asks 'I want to join the hobby, which army should I buy first?', most answers are Space Marines.

Around here we have 2 marines, of 6 players

 Azreal13 wrote:

Me, personally? I don't want that. That is, in my opinion, what leads to bare plastic armies and "custom fluff" that puts C.S. Goto's trash to shame--why would anyone devote any time to actually working on their painting or taking the time to come up with a background for their army which is reasonable and doesn't make them Gotoisms if they're playing an army that has no real investment for them ruleswise?

Good god, this is the worst bit of nerd snobbery (combined with some pretty spectacular white knightery) I've read in a long time.

Is it nerd snobbery? Sure.
White knightery? Yeah, compared to the bilious trash you usually post certainly.

Heaven forbid people should want to use their imaginations to develop concepts you don't like. Here's the thing, not everybody's as full on intense about their Warhammer as you Kan, perhaps you need to take a breath?

Sorry, where did I say that people shouldn't use their imaginations to develop concepts? That's a GOOD thing.

What isn't a good thing is people who attempt to justify their bare plastic with grandiose schemes of amazing paint jobs later on and talking about how their army is just like <insert reference here> but better at <insert random thing here>, and because of that they use either <insert overpowered book here> or <insert most recent overpowered book here>. Or when those same people come up with the most ridiculously Mary Sue fiction for their Space Marines imaginable where it's blatantly obvious from the beginning that the goal is to make a super generic army that can utilize any book with power armored units.

If someone wants to come up with a background for their army? More power to them. But it isn't something they need to be talking about while we play, nor is it something that they should be overly defensive about when they get called out on for their choices of army templates.

But to combine that disdain with the idea that overpriced rules are somehow a good thing?

Yeah...I didn't ever say that "overpriced rules are somehow a good thing". Read what I posted and reply to that or don't reply at all.

You were already on thin ice when the whole crux of your argument is that someone being annoyed that they have to purchase multiple books to realise the creative vision they have for their army is wrong because, well, people should have to pay a lot for their rules so they stay the course, apparently, but this has elevated things significantly. Bravo.

Did you even read what I replied to? Because Blacksails wasn't talking about "needing to purchase multiple books to realize creative vision", but rather about it being "inconvenient" to purchase multiple books because hey sometimes you want to have reference material.

Which, by the by, is absolutely a valid concern but if you feel the urge to reference something consistently enough that you feel you need the book...maybe buy the book?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Me, personally? I don't want that. That is, in my opinion, what leads to bare plastic armies and "custom fluff" that puts C.S. Goto's trash to shame--why would anyone devote any time to actually working on their painting or taking the time to come up with a background for their army which is reasonable and doesn't make them Gotoisms if they're playing an army that has no real investment for them ruleswise?

Good god, this is the worst bit of nerd snobbery (combined with some pretty spectacular white knightery) I've read in a long time.

Is it nerd snobbery? Sure.
White knightery? Yeah, compared to the bilious trash you usually post certainly.

Straight in with a Rule 1 at the start. Well done old chap.

Remind me again, which one of us places higher in the annual "who's posts got the most exalts" list?

Heaven forbid people should want to use their imaginations to develop concepts you don't like. Here's the thing, not everybody's as full on intense about their Warhammer as you Kan, perhaps you need to take a breath?

Sorry, where did I say that people shouldn't use their imaginations to develop concepts? That's a GOOD thing.

What isn't a good thing is people who attempt to justify their bare plastic with grandiose schemes of amazing paint jobs later on and talking about how their army is just like <insert reference here> but better at <insert random thing here>, and because of that they use either <insert overpowered book here> or <insert most recent overpowered book here>. Or when those same people come up with the most ridiculously Mary Sue fiction for their Space Marines imaginable where it's blatantly obvious from the beginning that the goal is to make a super generic army that can utilize any book with power armored units.

If someone wants to come up with a background for their army? More power to them. But it isn't something they need to be talking about while we play, nor is it something that they should be overly defensive about when they get called out on for their choices of army templates.

So it's a good thing as long as you approve of their concept and their reasons for doing it. Gotcha.

But to combine that disdain with the idea that overpriced rules are somehow a good thing?

Yeah...I didn't ever say that "overpriced rules are somehow a good thing". Read what I posted and reply to that or don't reply at all.

I did.

You said that an investment in rules would encourage people to put time and effort into painting and background and it would discourage "Goto" background and grey plastic. If that's the case, then surely, by your own logic, a greater investment would inspire greater devotion? Therefore, you ,just think expensive rules are a positive thing.

You were already on thin ice when the whole crux of your argument is that someone being annoyed that they have to purchase multiple books to realise the creative vision they have for their army is wrong because, well, people should have to pay a lot for their rules so they stay the course, apparently, but this has elevated things significantly. Bravo.

Did you even read what I replied to? Because Blacksails wasn't talking about "needing to purchase multiple books to realize creative vision", but rather about it being "inconvenient" to purchase multiple books because hey sometimes you want to have reference material.

Which, by the by, is absolutely a valid concern but if you feel the urge to reference something consistently enough that you feel you need the book...maybe buy the book?

No he wasn't. He was talking about the need to buy multiple books to best represent differing play styles of the same collection, in relation to a point made about how every single chapter etc could have its own sub codex.

Basically, he lemented the fragmentation of the books (actual or theoretical) resulting in the need for multiple purchases, you then jumped down his throat with a response which was broadly "just buy the books and STFU, nobody forced you to be creative and enthusiastic."

Maybe time to start reading other people's posts and spend less time telling them to read yours?

At our local shop we seem to have a fair mix of armies. There are a couple Nid players, a couple CSMs, a guy who runs Guard, a Necron fanatic, and at least one Eldar and one Tau. As for Loyalist Marines: I know of a couple Space Wolves, a Blood Angel, a Dark Angel or two (myself being one of them), and one plain Space Marine player. I'd have to estimate the ratio of Marines to Xeno/Chaos is about 50/50.

As for the number of Marine Codices, I feel like each chapter has enough unique strengths, weaknesses, and quirks to justify each one having its own codex. Take the Dark Angels' proclivity toward Plasma along with the Ravenwing-Deathwing Deep Strike synergies that come from the new Adeptus Astartes Formations.

Overall, I'd have to say I'm pretty pleased...

Often times when a 40k player who owns a Space Marine army decides to try something different with a new army he starts another "different" SM army. (Say Dark Angels player decides to start a Grey Knights Army [Completely different!]) You almost never to never see rarer armies like Skitaari, Harlequins, Dark Eldar... etc

Doesn't necessarily seem to hold true for my area. I know a player who started out Blood Angels who eventually sold his army and went full Necrons. The when he wanted a 2ndary army he opted for Orks. Another player runs Nids and Tau. I personally just started collecting Tau as a second army to my Dark Angels.

The amount of marines is sort of a feedback loop;

People know 40k because the marines are so iconic, so the majority of them enter the game buying some kind of space marine.

Sales of Space Marines become popular with new players, making GW think that Marines are what draws players in and increases marine exposure to the general public

Rinse and repeat.

I've known people that actually know individual chapter names of space marines, but didn't know that Imperial Guard or Eldar existed in the game (they thought the Tau was the high-tech magic race because they looked like the protoss).

Posters, Chill Thyselves.

That's a general thread warning for rudeness and otherwise antisocial behavior.

I think the issue is that other factions and sub-factions deserve greater representation. There are so few Space Marines relative to anything else in the fiction, however distinctive, flexible, or awesome as they maybe there are far more interesting and varied subfaction even within the Imperium without considering other races. Even if you distill all the other Imperial sub-factions to the most elite elements they still out number Space Marines and afford a much greater level of distinctiveness.

DorianGray wrote:
First off some Armies do completely get neglected. Orks almost literally exist as punching bags for other Armies -probably space marines.

Literally try to win a game as Orks against a SM army say Battle Company. Dark Eldar and Astra Militarium are jokes as well.

Also do people really genuinely like Space Marines over everything else or is it because of GW's propaganda and favoritism towards them? If they pushed say Skitaari or Dark Eldar as much as Space Marines who is to say they wouldn't be as popular?

Orks are not neglected. They have everything from troops to fliers to super-heavies. Under-powered? Probably. But, not neglected.

People really genuinely like Space Marines. Over everything else. Even people who don't like them, secretly like them. GW REALLY likes them. Their own fully developed, fully supported Intellectual Property that makes tons of money. Still very cool after 30 years. Still fun to build and paint. Try to imagine 40K without Space Marines. Right, you can't. So, give up trying before you hurt yourself. Forget I even suggested it! Now, try imagining 40K without Dark Eldar. In fact, try to imagine the last time you even saw a Dark Eldar army. Try to imagine explaining how to even spell "Skitaari." I know, right! It can't be done.

If GW can make a whole other game called 30K that is just Space Marines, it ain't because they forced customers to like Space Marines.

I think the "neglect" most non-marine armies get isn't a case of individual units or availability of unit types but a case of no-one thinking about how they fit together. Just adding one more thing and another and another to an army doesn't fix the army, make it cohesively representative, or fun.

The fandom of Space Marines is strong but there is a certain amount of chicken and egg and self fulfilling prophecies where by the strong support they get is a major component for why they're popular. In the past when other factions had as much or more support those factions were more proportionately represented by the player base.

i voted for "just the right amount"...
i have always been a fan of Marines, first and foremost, since Rogue Trader was a new release...
i bought Orks, Eldar, Guard, and 'Nids when they were all in their first incarnations, but none of them captured my imagination, or made me want to paint, as much as Marines...

nowadays, i buy the occasional Ork, 'Nids, maybe an Eldar or Dark Eldar model, some Guard, but rarely paint one...
i buy loads of Tau and Mechanicum, and enjoy painting them, but not nearly as much as Marines...

the variety of cool background and art for Marines means that i could just paint Marines for the rest of my life, and still not cover all of the ideas that are floating around in my head...
i could probably say the same for a lot of the other factions, if they inspired me as much as Marines, but they don't...

the armor is a constant challenge to paint better, and the different ways that they can be approached is pretty much limitless...
bolters, chainswords, jump packs, assault cannons, heavy flamers, combi-weapons, and more, all inspire me way more than shuriken catapults or fleshborers...

Tau and Ad-Mech are an easy second, with Orks third, and the rest a distant fourth as far as getting my attention...

in the Second Edition days of 'Ere We Go and Freebooterz there was some great art and fluff, but it still couldn't get me as fired up as Adeptus Titanicus and Space Marine, or the original Space Wolves Codex did...

i can honestly say that i love pretty much everything about the 40K universe, but Marines have always been my favorite...
30 years on, and the models are better than ever, so i could not be happier

cheers
jah

 Gobbla wrote:

DorianGray wrote:
First off some Armies do completely get neglected. Orks almost literally exist as punching bags for other Armies -probably space marines.

Literally try to win a game as Orks against a SM army say Battle Company. Dark Eldar and Astra Militarium are jokes as well.

Also do people really genuinely like Space Marines over everything else or is it because of GW's propaganda and favoritism towards them? If they pushed say Skitaari or Dark Eldar as much as Space Marines who is to say they wouldn't be as popular?

Orks are not neglected. They have everything from troops to fliers to super-heavies. Under-powered? Probably. But, not neglected.

People really genuinely like Space Marines. Over everything else. Even people who don't like them, secretly like them. GW REALLY likes them. Their own fully developed, fully supported Intellectual Property that makes tons of money. Still very cool after 30 years. Still fun to build and paint. Try to imagine 40K without Space Marines. Right, you can't. So, give up trying before you hurt yourself. Forget I even suggested it! Now, try imagining 40K without Dark Eldar. In fact, try to imagine the last time you even saw a Dark Eldar army. Try to imagine explaining how to even spell "Skitaari." I know, right! It can't be done.

If GW can make a whole other game called 30K that is just Space Marines, it ain't because they forced customers to like Space Marines.

The gorkanought and morkanought are not super heavies.