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.

 BroodSpawn wrote:
But at what point do you then remove these legacy items? At some point someone is going to have to do that and someone is going to be unhappy about it. You have a choice: do it now or do it next year/2 years/*insert appropriate date*.

In any case you're still going to annoy someone and this is probably a decision that was made when 8th was being playtested. I think it's the right call going forward, but you still have the options for the legacy gear even if it's not taking up 3-10 pages of extra space that means nothing for anyone other than veteran players.

In the Epic Armageddon book they did exactly this. There's a section for all the old "legacy" stuff and it has a "counts as" counterpart. If things are going to be removed then they're either going to have to go this route or just accept that they're invalidating models and people will be pissed. I mean, it's the elephant in the room and nobody wants to admit that it's an option.. but at some point it's where they're probably going to go. The only other option would be to roll those legacy kits into FW and have FW provide the rules. That way they can wash their hands of it and provide more chaff for FW to produce. I do recall when IG had to buy IA to field Leman Russ variants.. this isn't really that different of a situation.

Put it in legacy one codex, remove it outright in the next. It gives a period where players know those options are on their way out so they can adapt. Yeah people will still be upset but GW could drop a bar of gold on the doorstep of every 40k player and people would complain it wasn't pre-minted currency. It doesn't mean that an incremental approach is meaningless.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Put it in legacy one codex, remove it outright in the next. It gives a period where players know those options are on their way out so they can adapt. Yeah people will still be upset but GW could drop a bar of gold on the doorstep of every 40k player and people would complain it wasn't pre-minted currency. It doesn't mean that an incremental approach is meaningless.

But this is exactly what they've done, Legacy in the Index, removed in the Codex with the explanation of why.

 BroodSpawn wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Put it in legacy one codex, remove it outright in the next. It gives a period where players know those options are on their way out so they can adapt. Yeah people will still be upset but GW could drop a bar of gold on the doorstep of every 40k player and people would complain it wasn't pre-minted currency. It doesn't mean that an incremental approach is meaningless.

But this is exactly what they've done, Legacy in the Index, removed in the Codex with the explanation of why.

agreed. thats exactly whats happened. the legacy options are there, we know, however, they are on their way out

 warboss wrote:

MaxT wrote:

Not in scale with RTB01 Marines they don't.

2nd edition grill face marines didn't get a different statline/incompatible rules nor get described as clearly superior in the fluff. Your comparison is apples to bowling balls..

They also happened 20 years ago. I suspect that most of the people who were upset about the scale change have managed to move on with their lives by now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Put it in legacy one codex, remove it outright in the next. It gives a period where players know those options are on their way out so they can adapt. Yeah people will still be upset but GW could drop a bar of gold on the doorstep of every 40k player and people would complain it wasn't pre-minted currency. It doesn't mean that an incremental approach is meaningless.

It's really easy to dismiss complaints you disagree with as 'Well, yeah, but people will complain about anything...' but people feeling forced into buying multiple books has been a fairly standard complaint for as long as it's been happening (so at least since 3rd edition).

Many of the complaints about having rules in multiple books could have been avoided if the indexes had simply been provided with the core rules, as they were in 2nd and 3rd edition.

 insaniak wrote:

 warboss wrote:

MaxT wrote:

Not in scale with RTB01 Marines they don't.

2nd edition grill face marines didn't get a different statline/incompatible rules nor get described as clearly superior in the fluff. Your comparison is apples to bowling balls..

They also happened 20 years ago. I suspect that most of the people who were upset about the scale change have managed to move on with their lives by now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Put it in legacy one codex, remove it outright in the next. It gives a period where players know those options are on their way out so they can adapt. Yeah people will still be upset but GW could drop a bar of gold on the doorstep of every 40k player and people would complain it wasn't pre-minted currency. It doesn't mean that an incremental approach is meaningless.

It's really easy to dismiss complaints you disagree with as 'Well, yeah, but people will complain about anything...' but people feeling forced into buying multiple books has been a fairly standard complaint for as long as it's been happening (so at least since 3rd edition).

Many of the complaints about having rules in multiple books could have been avoided if the indexes had simply been provided with the core rules, as they were in 2nd and 3rd edition.

I disagree with you on many things it would seem, but you are absolutely right that the datasheets for units should have been provided free of charge (as they are done in AOS). They are being included in the model boxes, but put them on the website! Still produce the Indexes, but with the rules free they are a convenience rather than a necessity.

 Desubot wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It would be one extra page that for many would eliminate the need to carry a whole book around.

An extra page is a cost. a cost that adds up when printing quite a lot of books.

First, there's no such thing as an extra page in printing: there's an extra four pages. Second, they could remove or consolidate a page from the gallery. A show of hands for who wants one more page of minis gallery you can find online, with some nice formatting, over one more page of content?

I'd rather have more gallery pages than rules for something that's now out of date and only there to please legacy players with old kits.

Id rather have both.

 insaniak wrote:

 warboss wrote:

MaxT wrote:

Not in scale with RTB01 Marines they don't.

2nd edition grill face marines didn't get a different statline/incompatible rules nor get described as clearly superior in the fluff. Your comparison is apples to bowling balls..

They also happened 20 years ago. I suspect that most of the people who were upset about the scale change have managed to move on with their lives by now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Put it in legacy one codex, remove it outright in the next. It gives a period where players know those options are on their way out so they can adapt. Yeah people will still be upset but GW could drop a bar of gold on the doorstep of every 40k player and people would complain it wasn't pre-minted currency. It doesn't mean that an incremental approach is meaningless.

It's really easy to dismiss complaints you disagree with as 'Well, yeah, but people will complain about anything...' but people feeling forced into buying multiple books has been a fairly standard complaint for as long as it's been happening (so at least since 3rd edition).

Many of the complaints about having rules in multiple books could have been avoided if the indexes had simply been provided with the core rules, as they were in 2nd and 3rd edition.

It is a legitimate complaint, that's why I'm saying they should have included legacy options in the codex so that players did not need the index for upgrades on still-current units. The counter argument was to the effect of 'well people would still complain if they did that' to which I responded.

I'd be amazed if a significant amount of the space marine player base had twin linked heavy bolters actually modelled on a dreadnaught. If more than 0.001% of the player base of space marines had that modelled, I'd say keep it (And I'd also be amazed they had it).

If weapon options like that are produced by forgeworld though, then forgeworld can produce the rules for it. GW don't need too.

And that's just one example of the more niche options that could be rid of, or accommodated for in another way. Yeah, losing librarians on bikes from the codex might suck a bit, and probably should have been kept, but a LOT of options have been long overdue an exclusion.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
...but a LOT of options have been long overdue an exclusion.

Or long overdue a model, depending on your point of view...

Dropping those options was certainly one way to 'fix' the problem of some options not being represented in the model range. It's not automatically the best way to deal with it, though, and was always going to be annoying for those who were already using those options.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I'd be amazed if a significant amount of the space marine player base had twin linked heavy bolters actually modelled on a dreadnaught. If more than 0.001% of the player base of space marines had that modelled, I'd say keep it (And I'd also be amazed they had it).

If weapon options like that are produced by forgeworld though, then forgeworld can produce the rules for it. GW don't need too.

And that's just one example of the more niche options that could be rid of, or accommodated for in another way. Yeah, losing librarians on bikes from the codex might suck a bit, and probably should have been kept, but a LOT of options have been long overdue an exclusion.

I immediately sourced some twin heavy bolters off ebay when the index came out because they're a discontinued part but -really good- for making a dreadnought nice and cheap whilst still covering an all-dreadnought army's main weakness of needing to take a lot of volume of fire options to be TAC.

The quad autocannon venerable is one of the best dreadnought options period, though admittedly it's only 16 points to upgrade it to a Contemptor frame from there, giving you a degrading statline but an invulnerable and an extra pair of wounds. Kind of a tossup which frame is better there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
...but a LOT of options have been long overdue an exclusion.

Or long overdue a model, depending on your point of view...

Dropping those options was certainly one way to 'fix' the problem of some options not being represented in the model range. It's not automatically the best way to deal with it, though, and was always going to be annoying for those who were already using those options.

I would argue that it isn't a problem for a model to have a non-included option, so long as the unit itself has a model.

Sure, studios for Chapterhouse can make a tyranid drop pod if such a unit has no model, but an upgrade kit isn't really the same kind of problem for the IP. People make upgrade kit guns regardless of whether the model already has one, and just label it as "compatible with".

If you put a legacy section in the codex, you put all the legacy stuff in there, not just the options. Else, i would still need the index. Unfortunately, this has 2 drawbacks:

1) A lot of additional pages.
2) New players finding that stuff in the codex and going "Mommy, mommy i want that!". It is not a nice incentive for new players knowing that some of the stuff that old players have, is no longer accessible.(For many players coming from other games, making your own models equals inaccessible).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Forgeworld is already enough of a problem, reserving some cool models only for the "elite" of players who can afford the extra price.

Index only 40k

Spoletta wrote:

Forgeworld is already enough of a problem, reserving some cool models only for the "elite" of players who can afford the extra price.

If you can afford most of what GW puts out these days you can afford FW, I hate to burst your bubble, but much of the game is for your fictional 'Elite'

Spoletta wrote:
If you put a legacy section in the codex, you put all the legacy stuff in there, not just the options. Else, i would still need the index. Unfortunately, this has 2 drawbacks:

1) A lot of additional pages.
2) New players finding that stuff in the codex and going "Mommy, mommy i want that!". It is not a nice incentive for new players knowing that some of the stuff that old players have, is no longer accessible.(For many players coming from other games, making your own models equals inaccessible).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Forgeworld is already enough of a problem, reserving some cool models only for the "elite" of players who can afford the extra price.

If you haven't noticed.. with the current GW prices and the exchange rate, FW is cheaper for a lot of options.. at least for Americans.. and only marginally higher than 3rd party companies like Anvil or Mad Robot. Sure things like Titans are crazy expensive but GW proper is charging $35+ for characters.. while FW has characters like Raven Guard Shadow Captain Korvydae for £18.. (edit - Shrike from GW is $19.25 for a closer equivalency ). There's also Kharne who is $35 compared to Terminator Lord Zhufor at £22. GW Terminators $50 FW Tartaros Pattern Terminator Armour is £39, a GW Land Raider is $74.25 while FW Land Raiders start at £57. GW Predator $57.75 FW Predator £55. GW Rhinos are $37 each while you can get a bundle of 3 FW ones for £100. Dreadnought prices are comparable.. depending on whether or not you're intending to magnetize and buy all the weapons.. I could go on with this but I hope my point is made. The ONLY thing that offsets these similar (and even cheaper) prices is that typically for the FW kits, you'll want some special FW rules. I'm not 100% caught up on whether any of those are provided in the downloads but they do also have their Indices.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

Forgeworld is already enough of a problem, reserving some cool models only for the "elite" of players who can afford the extra price.

If you can afford most of what GW puts out these days you can afford FW, I hate to burst your bubble, but much of the game is for your fictional 'Elite'

+1.

FW's prices haven't been increasing at the rate GW proper's are, so things are far closer than they once were.

BroodSpawn wrote:
But at what point do you then remove these legacy items? At some point someone is going to have to do that and someone is going to be unhappy about it. You have a choice: do it now or do it next year/2 years/*insert appropriate date*.

In any case you're still going to annoy someone and this is probably a decision that was made when 8th was being playtested. I think it's the right call going forward, but you still have the options for the legacy gear even if it's not taking up 3-10 pages of extra space that means nothing for anyone other than veteran players.

You missed out an option: don't remove the items at all, because a HUEG company like GW trying to gut one of the best parts of the hobby to spite a few guys flogging bitz on ebay and a couple of random 3rd party miniature makers who have literally tens of customers each is hideously, stupendously, monumentally petty. You missed a second option too actually: instead of cutting options from the factions that still have them, they should be adding options back for the factions that have lost them in recent updates.

Even if I think it's a pointless move(GW are perfectly capable of competing on quality and even, if they want to, price), I can at least understand the logic behind their choice to no longer produce fully worked up art, fluff, and rules for a unit before they also have a model to sell, but stripping units of options and only giving new units mono-loadouts based strictly on what's in that specific box in an attempt to discourage conversions is just...bad. Like, objectively, it's a negative move, there is no positive outcome from it for us as customers and hobbyists, and I can't even see where the rationale is for it helping GW - where's the angle there? In the short term people aren't going to start forking out 20+ quid multiple times for a box because it contains one bit they want for a conversion, and in the long term if you take away any reason to do conversions nobody would need to buy additional boxes anyway - all you'll have done is reduced sales by however many bitz retailers buy and by however many potential future conversion-based projects never get started. Hell half of my purchases over the years have been to support conversion-based projects, I don't even want to think about how much money that was in total spent on GW product, and all because there were enough options and flexibility in the rules and the background to allow for them.

And I don't buy that it's simplification/streamlining to make the product more attractive to younger buyers either, because I don't believe kids these days are any less creative or ambitious than they were ten, twenty, thirty years ago and all of us who've been in the hobby a while managed just fine.

Like I say; I just can't find the angle on this that makes it make sense.

Preorders are up on the New Zealand site.

 Ghaz wrote:
Preorders are up on the New Zealand site.

Is it weird that the most exciting aspect of this post for me was that some of that would make nice bits for Epic?

Oh baby much better with helm every day.

not 100% on the gene seed.

August WD preorder says the Index Astartes articles series is indeed back

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NZ/White-Dwarf-August-2017-ENG

There are more (small) pages of the first three Codex books

Description

Is that salvation on the horizon for the Imperium? Why, yes – in the shape of a new issue of White Dwarf. And not only that, but with it a raft of new Primaris Space Marines. We’ve got your in-depth guide in Designers’ Notes, and – wait for it – the return of Index Astartes! After that, six of ’Eavy Metal’s finest tackle the new Space Marines in our stunning ’Eavy Metal Space Marine Challenge. But it’s not all Space Marines. The first of a new generation of codexes arrive with us this month, and we take a look at what’s in store in Damned Tomes & Ancient Pages. Elsewhere, Tactica Imperialis takes a look at stratagems, Pete Foley talks tournaments in the General’s Almanack before putting his money where his mouth is in this month’s battle report, Illuminations enters the Mortal Realms and much, much more.

 Desubot wrote:
Oh baby much better with helm every day.

not 100% on the gene seed.

I might change the marine for a Tyranid and claim he's inspecting some xenos gunk.

Matched play points

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/Downloads/K3ns3JDOGE2asjf/Primaris-week-4/IORF435R4_ENG_Primaris_Marines_Release_04_July_29th.pdf

The apotechary is really cool. He also comes with an extra head, an extra pistol and an extra servoarm, which you can use to convert a regular primaris marine into another apotechary. I'm definitely getting this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Warhams-77 wrote:
Matched play points

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/Downloads/K3ns3JDOGE2asjf/Primaris-week-4/IORF435R4_ENG_Primaris_Marines_Release_04_July_29th.pdf

So intercessors sergeants of some chapters can take a chainsword, while some can take a powersword and the Deathwatch can take either. FFS, this is just bloody annoying. Just let us choose, it is not like there is an overabundance of variety in primaris units!

Yeah, the Apothecary is pretty cool.

Helm option on the Apothecary is very welcome. Shame about the scenic base and geenseed hand though.

The base could easily be left off and the hand swapped for a pistol hand.

I like the geneseed hand. It is quite gruesome.