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.

 Melissia wrote:
In that case, you're contradicting yourself again.

How?

Show your working.

Because as far as I'm concerned, I've been outlining reasons why GW wouldn't update Sisters and I've been pretty consistent in that.

How has anything I said contradicted itself?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Not doing so well following the quote tree there sport?

That was my point too.

Then wouldn't that argue for supporting Sisters of Battle at least halfway properly, even though their sales on their own might not be too profitable compared to the other stuff?

Especially since GW's been creating new armies like the Mechanicum that never existed in 40k tabletop before?

Show me where I said Sisters shouldn't be updated.

I'll show you plenty of examples where I argued where they may not be, but you won't find one instance where I said they shouldn't or won't be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe you both need to stop getting so excited and read what I'm writing, rather than what you think I'm writing.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Maybe you both need to stop getting so excited and read what I'm writing, rather than what you think I'm writing.

You're writing an argument that says a logical business would invest in the Sisters of Battle line and then coming to the conclusion that it's not likely to happen.

No.

I said a logical business would offer alternatives to its best selling line, Marines in this case, in response to someone saying that GW should only sell Marines.

Sisters certainly qualify as an alternative, but they aren't the only alternative.

I also said that I am skeptical that there's been sufficient demand to justify the investment, historically, but also believe that due to falling production costs that may not, or may soon not, be the case.

This is why, up to this point, Sisters have not been an alternative to Marines that GW has chosen to offer.

I'm not prepared to accept the truism that there's a huge untapped demand for Sisters models at face value, but I'm absolutely happy for them to get updated if GW deem it appropriate. I probably wouldn't buy any, but then, Deathwatch haven't floated my boat either, doesn't mean I'm not happy to see more options nor pleased to see people that are massively excited for these new releases either.

 Pouncey wrote:
A GW designer commented a few years ago about why Squats were, well, squatted, and the reason wasn't that there was a lack of demand, or a lack of sufficient sales, or really anything except the simple fact that none of the GW designers really had an interest in updating Squats for 3rd edition, so since no one was willing to fight for them and a huge amount of the game was shifting, they just got rid of them entirely.

The reason that Sisters made it through that was because there was someone willing to fight for them. Jes Goodwin was a prominent advocate for Sisters of Battle and likely is the reason we even got the 2003 update. He was also the one designing the plastic models.

I've said the very same thing in other threads, Sisters are lacking a champion in the GW employee pool, willing to push for them.

Squats were also abandoned because they couldn't find a way to grim dark them enough, while keeping trikes and egg shaped armor. It also didn't hurt that they wanted to get away from direct parities to the Warhammer Fantasy World. It's part of the reason we don't have Space Skaven or Space Lizards. Dark Eldar are a few S&M notches above and beyond Dark Elves, and it let the Craftworld Eldar not be the fools that unleashed Chaos on the 40K universe.

WTH was I rambling about, again ? Oh yeah... We have have Adeptus Mechanicus, Genstealer Cults, Death Watch, and Squats (Demiurg) are in the cold day in Hell catergory of scraping the bottom of the barrel for ideas. They've pretty much used up all the other existing forces that didn't have a proper codex.

The sad thing is, Sisters are one of the few armies in 40k (alongside Tau and Tyranids) that aren't actually a direct clone of any army in WFB. Priests are similar to Warrior Priests, but they're a general Imperium thing, rather than a Sisters thing.

 Azreal13 wrote:
No.

I said a logical business would offer alternatives to its best selling line, Marines in this case, in response to someone saying that GW should only sell Marines.

Sisters certainly qualify as an alternative, but they aren't the only alternative.

I also said that I am skeptical that there's been sufficient demand to justify the investment, historically, but also believe that due to falling production costs that may not, or may soon not, be the case.

This is why, up to this point, Sisters have not been an alternative to Marines that GW has chosen to offer.

I'm not prepared to accept the truism that there's a huge untapped demand for Sisters models at face value, but I'm absolutely happy for them to get updated if GW deem it appropriate. I probably wouldn't buy any, but then, Deathwatch haven't floated my boat either, doesn't mean I'm not happy to see more options nor pleased to see people that are massively excited for these new releases either.

It's not like GW hasn't gambled making an entirely new product line unlike any of the others on the chance people might like it. Very recently, too. Mechanicus is the example I'm thinking of.

As new factions go, AM was about as safe a gamble as you could want.

Forgeworld had already dipped their toe in the water presumably with positive results and Imperial Knights had been greatly successful by all accounts. It was also a totally unsupported faction that had just as many, if not more, people as Sisters expressing a desire for the product, and it had absolutely no back catalogue at all.

But, as I've already said, I think there's something that's changed which is allowing these more experimental and likely lower volume releases. Whether that's simply a change in attitude of management, the advent of 3D digital sculpting or something more practical in terms of the physical production, I can't say for sure, but it probably bodes well for a Sisters release.

 Azreal13 wrote:
As new factions go, AM was about as safe a gamble as you could want.

Forgeworld had already dipped their toe in the water presumably with positive results and Imperial Knights had been greatly successful by all accounts. It was also a totally unsupported faction that had just as many, if not more, people as Sisters expressing a desire for the product, and it had absolutely no back catalogue at all.

But, as I've already said, I think there's something that's changed which is allowing these more experimental and likely lower volume releases. Whether that's simply a change in attitude of management, the advent of 3D digital sculpting or something more practical in terms of the physical production, I can't say for sure, but it probably bodes well for a Sisters release.

So now you're saying that yes, we are in fact likely to see a Sisters release coming at some point?

 Pouncey wrote:
So now you're saying that yes, we are in fact likely to see a Sisters release coming at some point?

*Sigh*

Az is offering some insights into what *MIGHT* be a factor in seeing SoB released some time. He doesn't speak from a point of authority or with insider knowledge, he's simply extrapolating a possible outcome based on recent changes to GW's operating structure and way of doing business.

From what I've read, he isn't against a SoB update/ reboot. He's simply saying why he believes they have languished for so long. Saying it might be logical for GW to redo them and then saying that they probably won't isn't really contradictory. GW does a lot of illogical stuff and doesn't do some things that would be logical. Of course, we don't have all the information they do so we're looking at an incomplete picture when it comes to their decisions and the things that factor into them.

 Lord Corellia wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
So now you're saying that yes, we are in fact likely to see a Sisters release coming at some point?

*Sigh*

Az is offering some insights into what *MIGHT* be a factor in seeing SoB released some time. He doesn't speak from a point of authority or with insider knowledge, he's simply extrapolating a possible outcome based on recent changes to GW's operating structure and way of doing business.

From what I've read, he isn't against a SoB update/ reboot. He's simply saying why he believes they have languished for so long. Saying it might be logical for GW to redo them and then saying that they probably won't isn't really contradictory. GW does a lot of illogical stuff and doesn't do some things that would be logical. Of course, we don't have all the information they do so we're looking at an incomplete picture when it comes to their decisions and the things that factor into them.

Okie dokie then.

I guess maybe after over a decade without any new models, an increased likelihood of getting new models is something to be optimistic about. I don't think I should be pessimistic about the odds of a Sororitas update increasing just because it's still not likely.

 Melissia wrote:
The sad thing is, Sisters are one of the few armies in 40k (alongside Tau and Tyranids) that aren't actually a direct clone of any army in WFB. Priests are similar to Warrior Priests, but they're a general Imperium thing, rather than a Sisters thing.

Sisters of Sigmar

 Pouncey wrote:
It's not like GW hasn't gambled making an entirely new product line unlike any of the others on the chance people might like it. Very recently, too. Mechanicus is the example I'm thinking of.

It's like calling using an ATM gambling really, that's how sure of a bet it was.


My thinking is the sisters will be saved as I guess you could call it like a safety net, it's an idea they'd know if it'd work or not for some quick cash so they may save it. Or they could be having some issues with where to go with the sisters to fit into what 40k has become in the time they've waited for a update. AM was a safe bet, grimdark and would fit without blinking an eye at some of the larger machines they've given the Imperium lately. Sisters, they have remaking the current kits yes but the question is probably what else to make them stand out more. Cause if a faction, which isnt marines, doesn't really stand out then why would people buy it over whatever marine chapter could already do that job. This is probably the problem they're having with no one really championing the sisters at the moment in the design team. Maybe the sisters of silence stuff will build up enough hype for them to consider just rushing the job in the end, the problem isn't they're old metal models but rather than their range of stuff is just extremely limited.

Nope, if anything GW is running out of ideas (how many brand-new-but-totally-always-there-just-off-screen new Space Marine units can they shoehorn in?!) so they may have to fall back on some older ideas to keep revenue coming in. Hell, this is already happening with Genestealer Cults and Deathwatch.

 n0t_u wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The sad thing is, Sisters are one of the few armies in 40k (alongside Tau and Tyranids) that aren't actually a direct clone of any army in WFB. Priests are similar to Warrior Priests, but they're a general Imperium thing, rather than a Sisters thing.

Sisters of Sigmar

In all fairness, I don't recall Sister's of Sigmar until Mordheim came out, and I'm pretty sure Sisters of Battle predates Mordheim.

Were Sisters of Sigmar in early Warhammer Fantasy Battle ?

Sisters of Sigmar are more a part of the WFB universe (but not actually a part of WB) that were based on Sisters, actually. Heh. Derivative, but in the other direction than most of 40k's factions.

 Melissia wrote:
Sisters of Sigmar are more a part of the WFB universe (but not actually a part of WB) that were based on Sisters, actually. Heh. Derivative, but in the other direction than most of 40k's factions.

That's what I thought. Sisters of Battle came first.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
Pretty much this. Nobody asked for "anime" stuff in 40k. In fact, a lot of neckbeards HATED the Tau at one time. And not just because they are an "optimistic" race in a setting full of GRIMDARK and MEHTAL.

Now, they are one of the popular armies.

Popular in the sense that Tau are invariably the number one pick to be banned / deleted / removed / Squatted in every single Dakka poll I've seen in the past few years...

I think that has more to do with powergaming douchelords, munchkins, and cheese mongers being drawn to the Tau than anything else, rather than the theme of their faction.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
Pretty much this. Nobody asked for "anime" stuff in 40k. In fact, a lot of neckbeards HATED the Tau at one time. And not just because they are an "optimistic" race in a setting full of GRIMDARK and MEHTAL.

Now, they are one of the popular armies.

Popular in the sense that Tau are invariably the number one pick to be banned / deleted / removed / Squatted in every single Dakka poll I've seen in the past few years...

I think that has more to do with powergaming douchelords, munchkins, and cheese mongers being drawn to the Tau than anything else, rather than the theme of their faction.

No, it's been pretty consistent for years, even when Tau weren't ridiculously overpowered.

I remember many, MANY complaints about their anime aesthetic back in 2003.

And I also recall a counter-point that Space Marines have a fairly anime-type aesthetic too given their ridiculously large weapons and fething ridiculously-sized shoulder armor.

 Pouncey wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
Pretty much this. Nobody asked for "anime" stuff in 40k. In fact, a lot of neckbeards HATED the Tau at one time. And not just because they are an "optimistic" race in a setting full of GRIMDARK and MEHTAL.

Now, they are one of the popular armies.

Popular in the sense that Tau are invariably the number one pick to be banned / deleted / removed / Squatted in every single Dakka poll I've seen in the past few years...

I think that has more to do with powergaming douchelords, munchkins, and cheese mongers being drawn to the Tau than anything else, rather than the theme of their faction.

No, it's been pretty consistent for years, even when Tau weren't ridiculously overpowered.

I remember many, MANY complaints about their anime aesthetic back in 2003.

And I also recall a counter-point that Space Marines have a fairly anime-type aesthetic too given their ridiculously large weapons and fething ridiculously-sized shoulder armor.

It makes sense that the Space Marines share an anime aesthetic with the Tau. After all, the whole power armor gimmick and "real robot" genre has a common origin: Heinlein's Starship Troopers. And that's in addition to the outrageous dimensions of their gear that you mention.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
It makes sense that the Space Marines share an anime aesthetic with the Tau. After all, the whole power armor gimmick and "real robot" genre has a common origin: Heinlein's Starship Troopers. And that's in addition to the outrageous dimensions of their gear that you mention.

Starship Troopers is anime?

Melissia wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
10 Sisters = £49.70 on GW site right now

I don't see 5 plastic Sisters for £30 being beyond the realm of possibility.

They'll almost certainly build two unit types, but I don't see it being ridiculously unlikely.

They'll build at least four unit types more likely than not. Battle Sisters, Celestians, Dominions, and Retributors all use the exact same miniatures. Only Seraphim, Repentia, and HQ units use different minis at the moment. And I doubt this will much change-- at most, they might release slightly more expensive Celestian models... but if they can't even produce plastic Battle Sisters, they won't do that.

A box of 5 Sisters of battle with two flamers, two meltas, two storm bolters, a heavy bolter, heavy flamer and multi-melta, plus a few weapons for the Sister Superior - say a power maul, power sword and an eviscerator/chainsword for £30? I'd buy it.

Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Evidently it can.

Then the only reasonable explanation is that they're just plain not willing to properly support Sisters of Battle.

Not that they can't do it. But that they won't do it.

I think this is probably the answer - I have heard from various GW staffers, ex-staffers, and seen enough rumours to be fairly confident that there are figures ready to be cast and produced, and that they have been for at least six years, but that the final step - actually writing a codex and producing the figures - just hasn't been taken.

privateer4hire wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
<cough>Genstealer Cult<cough>

No where near as popular as Sisters, has full plastic model range, and even at $150 a box for Deathwatch, still cheaper than sisters are currently.

I would definitely buy a Sanctuary 101 board game release ala Deathwatch Overkill if GW released plastic SoBs that way.

Oh now that's a brilliant idea. A Canoness, a squad of Seraphim, a couple of squads of Sisters, and a load of Necrons. I'd buy that!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
Pretty much this. Nobody asked for "anime" stuff in 40k. In fact, a lot of neckbeards HATED the Tau at one time. And not just because they are an "optimistic" race in a setting full of GRIMDARK and MEHTAL.

Now, they are one of the popular armies.

Popular in the sense that Tau are invariably the number one pick to be banned / deleted / removed / Squatted in every single Dakka poll I've seen in the past few years...

That does not make them impopular, just controversial.

 Pouncey wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
It makes sense that the Space Marines share an anime aesthetic with the Tau. After all, the whole power armor gimmick and "real robot" genre has a common origin: Heinlein's Starship Troopers. And that's in addition to the outrageous dimensions of their gear that you mention.

Starship Troopers is anime?

Starship Troopers is a CGI-animated feature, yes. Go watch it.
____

 Ashiraya wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
Pretty much this. Nobody asked for "anime" stuff in 40k. In fact, a lot of neckbeards HATED the Tau at one time. And not just because they are an "optimistic" race in a setting full of GRIMDARK and MEHTAL.

Now, they are one of the popular armies.

Popular in the sense that Tau are invariably the number one pick to be banned / deleted / removed / Squatted in every single Dakka poll I've seen in the past few years...

That does not make them impopular, just controversial.

I'm pretty sure Tau being the top pick to be kicked out of the game is the very definition of unpopular.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
It makes sense that the Space Marines share an anime aesthetic with the Tau. After all, the whole power armor gimmick and "real robot" genre has a common origin: Heinlein's Starship Troopers. And that's in addition to the outrageous dimensions of their gear that you mention.

Starship Troopers is anime?

Starship Troopers is a CGI-animated feature, yes. Go watch it.

I don't think that a single-season North American only CGI animation (if we're talking about Roughnecks: The Starship Troopers Chronicles) that aired between 1999 and 2000 would have had much influence on the design of the Space Marines or the Tau. Starship Troopers the novel is part of a tradition of powered armour mil-SF that includes things like The Forever War and Armor; even E.E. 'Doc' Smith's Lensman series from the 1920s and 30s had powered armour suits.

I think it's fairly clear that Astartes powered armour draws from the general SF tradition of powered armour and adds in medieval full plate and aesthetics from bits of Judge Dredd. There isn't really an anime aesthetic for the Astartes. There certainly is with Tau, however!

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
It makes sense that the Space Marines share an anime aesthetic with the Tau. After all, the whole power armor gimmick and "real robot" genre has a common origin: Heinlein's Starship Troopers. And that's in addition to the outrageous dimensions of their gear that you mention.

Starship Troopers is anime?

Starship Troopers is a CGI-animated feature, yes. Go watch it.

I don't think that a single-season North American only CGI animation (if we're talking about Roughnecks: The Starship Troopers Chronicles) that aired between 1999 and 2000 would have had much influence on the design of the Space Marines or the Tau.

No, I'm thinking of the more recent CGI-animated movie, Starship Troopers: Invasion.

The Space Marine visual aesthetic was laid down in the late 1980s, so it predates any of the SST movies or other visuals.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
It makes sense that the Space Marines share an anime aesthetic with the Tau. After all, the whole power armor gimmick and "real robot" genre has a common origin: Heinlein's Starship Troopers. And that's in addition to the outrageous dimensions of their gear that you mention.

Starship Troopers is anime?

Starship Troopers is a CGI-animated feature, yes. Go watch it.

I don't think that a single-season North American only CGI animation (if we're talking about Roughnecks: The Starship Troopers Chronicles) that aired between 1999 and 2000 would have had much influence on the design of the Space Marines or the Tau.

No, I'm thinking of the more recent CGI-animated movie, Starship Troopers: Invasion.

The Space Marine visual aesthetic was laid down in the late 1980s, so it predates any of the SST movies or other visuals.

...Starship Troopers was a book long before it was ever anything else.

It may surprise you that it isn't news to many of us.

John probably pre dates the first publication.

 Azreal13 wrote:
It may surprise you that it isn't news to many of us.

John probably pre dates the first publication.

Then why does John seem to be saying that 40k Space Marines predate Starship Troopers and basing it solely on the movies and TV shows?

Does the description of power armor in the book not actually contain any references to what it looks like that influenced the concepts of power armor for everything that followed?

 Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
It may surprise you that it isn't news to many of us.

John probably pre dates the first publication.

Then why does John seem to be saying that 40k Space Marines predate Starship Troopers and basing it solely on the movies and TV shows?

Does the description of power armor in the book not actually contain any references to what it looks like that influenced the concepts of power armor for everything that followed?

No idea why he would. A better comparison from the movie would be Cadians vs Starship Troopers, not Space Marines. I never read the book, so I can't say how accurate the description of the Troopers or the Bugs actually is.

For those that don't know since it isn't common knowledge, Starship Troopers is a military science fiction novel by American writer Robert A. Heinlein, published hardcover in December 1959.

Further, founded in 1975 at 15 Bolingbroke Road, London by John Peake, Ian Livingstone, and Steve Jackson (not to be confused with U.S. game designer Steve Jackson), Games Workshop was originally a manufacturer of wooden boards for games such as backgammon, mancala, Nine Men's Morris, and Go. It later became an importer of the U.S. role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons and then a publisher of wargames and role-playing games in its own right, expanding from a bedroom mail-order company in the process.

So, obviously, Games Workshop stole the idea for Cadians from Robert A Heinlein and probably owe him some money or something. At least a pint or a back rub, one would think.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
It may surprise you that it isn't news to many of us.

John probably pre dates the first publication.

Then why does John seem to be saying that 40k Space Marines predate Starship Troopers and basing it solely on the movies and TV shows?

Does the description of power armor in the book not actually contain any references to what it looks like that influenced the concepts of power armor for everything that followed?

Well, err, novels don't include pictures?

What he's saying is that the movies cannot have influenced the Marine aesthetic, as the Marines predate the movies by a decade or so. It is very possible, probable, that ST the book has had more than a passing influence.

It's really puzzling how you've not grasped what he was saying.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
It may surprise you that it isn't news to many of us.

John probably pre dates the first publication.

Then why does John seem to be saying that 40k Space Marines predate Starship Troopers and basing it solely on the movies and TV shows?

Does the description of power armor in the book not actually contain any references to what it looks like that influenced the concepts of power armor for everything that followed?

That would be because the Starship Troopers descriptions of the things in the books are merely words, not pictures of actual or virtual 3-dimensional objects that GW could have used to create their Space Marine design aesthetic.

The iconic GW Space Marine is the Womble-headed mk. VI "beakie", and is a very specific look and design, which has since been refined into the 2E mk. VIII and further refined via the 3E multi-pose plastics that define and codify the very specific proportions and details of what a Space Marine is. At this point in time, there is very little question as to what a GW Space Marine will look like, and GW going backward with the BAC and other 30k stuff only further cements the range of variability that means "GW Space Marine".

The words in the book are largely worthless, because they are too broad and too easily reinterpreted for or against any particular design. GW's objective models trump the subjective words.