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.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
There wouldn't be any new models at all for the launch of these right? Right?

Answered in the Warhammer Community post:

Is every army getting new models too?
Some of them. Certain armies will get new miniatures alongside their new codex, and others won’t. Don’t worry though, our miniatures designers are working hard and we’ll get to all of you eventually – we’re well aware you all want new models for your chosen army.

I don't want new models, GW. Every time you add new models to my army you butcher the fluff just that little bit more as you don't seem to be able to look past "giant shooty-stompy robots!" as the theme of my army.

As a Space Wolf player I couldn't agree more - some of the recent years fluff and models have been horrifyingly bad.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Imateria wrote:
Enough with the fething space marines GW, in the last 2 years we've had all of 2 major none Power Armour releases (Tau and GSC), by October that number goes down to 1.

*checks over my 7th Ed In Memoriam*

Codex: Harlies - 2015
Codex: Skitarii - 2015
Codex: Adeptus Mechanicus - 2015
Codex: Genestealer Cults - 2016
Codex Imperial Agents - 2016 (it has Sisters, but still)

I'd forgotten about Imperial Agents (which also had Deathwatch and Grey Knights as well), but I think most people wanted to forget about that hack job anyway.

I meant 2 years specifically as 24 months, so that discounts pretty much everything before Codex Dark Angels, and I did that because I know there was a lot of non Space Marine releases in the first half of 15. Thats still more than 2 years ago though.

I can certainly empathise with people having limited hobby budgets, mine is as well. But in this case I cannot really fathom the complaints. We knew this would happen. GW said that there would be codices, and with new marine models being previewed, it was pretty damn obvious that the marine codex would be among the first to be published and it would happen soon. Everybody knew this (at least everybody frequenting these forums) when they bought their Imperium 1 Index, so it is really silly to cry about it now.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

I don't want new models, GW. Every time you add new models to my army you butcher the fluff just that little bit more as you don't seem to be able to look past "giant shooty-stompy robots!" as the theme of my army.

New models doesn't have to mean new units though. Nearly every faction has got at least a couple of resin character models or squads that could do with porting over to plastic.

And at least one faction has almost no plastic to speak of. Though I'm fairly certain we're not going to be one of the ten released this year.

OgreChubbs wrote:
Except the price raises weekly if not more often.

...no it doesn't.

 Melissia wrote:
And at least one faction has almost no plastic to speak of. Though I'm fairly certain we're not going to be one of the ten released this year.

Look on the bright side: SOB got an "update" with the new edition right?
A swanky new St. Celestine as well.
So what do you think is the hold-up?
Armed and armored nuns in space a bit of a politically correct hot potato or just too critical to the fluff where they cannot "Squat" them?
I look at it as a missed opportunity for a faction to show that some loophole of not being allowed to "control men under arms" will show a force with a ton of character and potentially cooler looking than anything out there.
At the very least, it has been so long, they can do a redesign of pretty much everything.
When they do get around to it I hope it is not something as silly as the chains on weapons shtick that my BTSM's got.

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them. The "new GW" isn't really much different than the old one in that regard. Whether or not a faction gets new rules or new models is, just like before, dependent on whether or not some big-name employee at GW is enough of a fan to bother pushing for it. What is updated isn't decided out of what needs updating, but out of fanboyism.

 Melissia wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them. The "new GW" isn't really much different than the old one in that regard.

In a meeting at GW:

"Well it's time to update Sisters. We have St Celestine, featured them alongside main armies in Imperium 2, gave them their own article during the buildup, and people are clamoring for them. The rules are pretty good so we just need models. Let's get started."
"Nah, I don't like them."
"What?"
"Nah, they're not really my 'thing', you know?"
-"Me neither."
-"Yeah I just don't like them."
"But it's your job. I'm your boss! Work on the models!"
"Nah, I don't like them enough."

This is actually how companies are run.

Whilst I'm exactly not holding my breath for plastic sisters, I think they're now way more likely than ever before. They already have the CAD files for their armour from making Celestine and her pals, so most of the work is already done.

I hope you realize I wasn't joking

In the past there was an ongoing problem with a race that had an old codex vs one with new and the increased chaos that the change in editions played. It will be interesting to see the issues with some races having a codex vs no codex (index only). We are discussing a house rule where both opponents must have access to a codex for their army for either to use one.

Requizen wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them. The "new GW" isn't really much different than the old one in that regard.

In a meeting at GW:

"Well it's time to update Sisters. We have St Celestine, featured them alongside main armies in Imperium 2, gave them their own article during the buildup, and people are clamoring for them. The rules are pretty good so we just need models. Let's get started."
"Nah, I don't like them."
"What?"
"Nah, they're not really my 'thing', you know?"
-"Me neither."
-"Yeah I just don't like them."
"But it's your job. I'm your boss! Work on the models!"
"Nah, I don't like them enough."

This is actually how companies are run.

That's a depressingly accurate depiction of product meetings. Except with less flowery language.

ERJAK wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them. The "new GW" isn't really much different than the old one in that regard.

In a meeting at GW:

"Well it's time to update Sisters. We have St Celestine, featured them alongside main armies in Imperium 2, gave them their own article during the buildup, and people are clamoring for them. The rules are pretty good so we just need models. Let's get started."
"Nah, I don't like them."
"What?"
"Nah, they're not really my 'thing', you know?"
-"Me neither."
-"Yeah I just don't like them."
"But it's your job. I'm your boss! Work on the models!"
"Nah, I don't like them enough."

This is actually how companies are run.

That's a depressingly accurate depiction of product meetings. Except with less flowery language.

It's basically what happened to the Squats, too. Nobody cared or was interested enough to work on them, so they got, well, squatted.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I shouldn't be surprised but I am. GW told us that this edition would start with a great deal of emphasis on the conflict between the Imperium and Chaos. So that's what we're getting and somehow people are surprised what we were told over a month ago was true.

Surprised is the wrong word; I would say that "dismayed" and "aggravated" would be better. It's nice to focus on the Imperium vs Chaos war, but they are releasing 10 books before Christmas; I don't think it would be too much to ask that 2 or 3 of those are not Power Armor books. "Focus on" doesn't necessarily mean the exclusion of everything else.

 Melissia wrote:
I hope you realize I wasn't joking

I think he was pointing out the absurdity of your position. yes to a degree if a employee with some influance likes something he might push for it, but it's also a bean counting thing. I suspect the meetings for GW go more along these lines.

CEO> alright folks, it's time to talk releases for the next year.
Beancounter> Alright, our leading army is space Marines it's clearly the most popular, in quarter 2, we're expecting things to be weakish, let's have some space marines for that.
Developer> well ok, since we wanna do some space marines anyway, we could redo a few of the old kits, the Scout Marine kit is a few years old and looking a bit long in the tooth.
Developer 2> I dunno, we could do Death Watch instead. I bet they'd be popular, we could selll a new codex for them, and some economic data from our lisencing agreement with FFG suggests there is a lot of intrest in deathwatch
Bean Counter> I think Dev 2's idea might make some more sense that way so we'll go with it.
CEO> alright the other releases, I was thinking maybe Tau, Eldar and Sisters of Battle
Beancounter> Tau and Eldar are selling pretty well. the eldar have a wide deep range and that appeals to people, and market research shows people like the Tau's battlesuits, given the sucess of the Imperial Knight perhaps a giant Tau suit? Sisters of Battle I don't think would be a good use of resources, the current sisters suggests they sell quite poorly.
Dev 1> part of that could be affordability, the price of a squad of sisters is a lot.
Bean Counter> we have several units with a similer price as sisters of battle that see considerably greater sales. no I think people are just unintreasted.


And yes I know the units with a similer price that see greater sales are 1: avaliable outside of web order. 2: are plastic and posable

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


It's basically what happened to the Squats, too. Nobody cared or was interested enough to work on them, so they got, well, squatted.

Contrary to popular belief here this is not how most businesses work and squats were dropped, because the concept was terrible and they couldn't do it justice carrying it forward.

After reading interviews with the big guys that have leave GW, I think you are giving the desing studio of GW too much credit and profesionalism, BrianDavion.

They have always been afterall a bunch of nerds And the ones that weren't nerds, the marketing and economical department, where Tom Kirby acolytes, so... not much better.
I assume they do it now under Roundtree but they didn't had data and marketing research before

 Melissia wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them. The "new GW" isn't really much different than the old one in that regard. Whether or not a faction gets new rules or new models is, just like before, dependent on whether or not some big-name employee at GW is enough of a fan to bother pushing for it. What is updated isn't decided out of what needs updating, but out of fanboyism.

I know you said you aren't joking after posting this, but come on! GW management are only fans of money, that drives their decisions more than any other factor.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them. The "new GW" isn't really much different than the old one in that regard.

In a meeting at GW:

"Well it's time to update Sisters. We have St Celestine, featured them alongside main armies in Imperium 2, gave them their own article during the buildup, and people are clamoring for them. The rules are pretty good so we just need models. Let's get started."
"Nah, I don't like them."
"What?"
"Nah, they're not really my 'thing', you know?"
-"Me neither."
-"Yeah I just don't like them."
"But it's your job. I'm your boss! Work on the models!"
"Nah, I don't like them enough."

This is actually how companies are run.

That's a depressingly accurate depiction of product meetings. Except with less flowery language.

It's basically what happened to the Squats, too. Nobody cared or was interested enough to work on them, so they got, well, squatted.

That is an over simplification isn't it?

Wasn't it more a matter of Squats not having their own role on the game table that wasn't already filled by other factions (Space Marines and Guard specifically)?

There is a huge difference between "I don't like that, so I won't bother wasting time on it" and "this thing is redundant and doesn't really fit in our product line so it isn't worth devoting resources to fix it".

Anyway, the idea GW makes its product decisions based on the tastes of its management alone is ridiculous to me. Could the higher ups' taste influence things? Sure. But unless someone could provide minutes of a meeting or some other tangible proof that product releases are determined purely by the enthusiasm of GW management well, I am going to just take that claim as nothing more than disappointed fans trying to find an outlet to direct their frustrations over a faction they feel isn't getting enough support.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:


That is an over simplification isn't it?

Extremely.

Wasn't it more a matter of Squats not having their own role on the game table that wasn't already filled by other factions (Space Marines and Guard specifically)?

There is a huge difference between "I don't like that, so I won't bother wasting time on it" and "this thing is redundant and doesn't really fit in our product line so it isn't worth devoting resources to fix it".

Anyway, the idea GW makes its product decisions based on the tastes of its management alone is ridiculous to me. Could the higher ups' taste influence things? Sure. But unless someone could provide minutes of a meeting or some other tangible proof that product releases are determined purely by the enthusiasm of GW management well, I am going to just take that claim as nothing more than disappointed fans trying to find an outlet to direct their frustrations over a faction they feel isn't getting enough support.

We don't let reality get in the way of making whatever argument we want here!

 Melissia wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
So what do you think is the hold-up?

Same reason as before. There's no one in the company that likes them enough to bother working on them.

Funny. There was this video with the guy who created the SoB and the sculptor of Inquisitor Greyfax, where Steve Bundle actually says he made her thinking of SoB power armour. We can also point to Celestine and the twins as laying the CG bedrock to done Sisters in plastic.

And for niche stuff, see Harlequins and Genestealer Cults. And this is why Sisters players expect Zoats and Slann before a proper Sisters release. There is no reason why GW doesn't do Sisters at this point--ZERO.

i!

The kicker is - They've already done the hard part of the Sisters. They now have the base 3D models that encompasses 95% of the line.

Cannoness, Celestine and her two Seraphim make up the core of any Sister model. They have universal mount points already, which makes me think that this is their original intent. They've already proven they can produce the sprue accurately in plastic. So there really isn't much - if anything - from a production standpoint stopping it. It just needs the green light.

 ncshooter426 wrote:
The kicker is - They've already done the hard part of the Sisters. They now have the base 3D models that encompasses 95% of the line.

Cannoness, Celestine and her two Seraphim make up the core of any Sister model. They have universal mount points already, which makes me think that this is their original intent. They've already proven they can produce the sprue accurately in plastic. So there really isn't much - if anything - from a production standpoint stopping it. It just needs the green light.

One of my hopes is that, by not releasing the codex in this year, that they are taking the time to really figure out where they want to take sisters as a faction, and then add/create kits as necessary to fulfill this.

 Crimson wrote:
I can certainly empathise with people having limited hobby budgets, mine is as well. But in this case I cannot really fathom the complaints. We knew this would happen. GW said that there would be codices, and with new marine models being previewed, it was pretty damn obvious that the marine codex would be among the first to be published and it would happen soon. Everybody knew this (at least everybody frequenting these forums) when they bought their Imperium 1 Index, so it is really silly to cry about it now.

I'm not annoyed at Codices being released. I was hopeful they would release books with more depth and detail.


I'm utterly dismayed that they aren't putting stuff in the Codex that was in the Index. They've already said if you want rules for things like the Imperial Space Marine, Land Raider Ultra, or Legion of the Damned, you'll need to keep your Index. Those won't be in the Space Marine Codex.

Bloody hell. If you buy a new hardback Codex for Space Marines, then discover you need to buy another book to use some of your Space Marines--and that book is otherwise made obsolete by the book you just bought--I think you'd be rightfully annoyed.

I still think expensive hardcover Codices are a barrier to entry, and a deterrent to both new players and players starting a new faction, but having expanded rulebooks that don't cover things in the truncated rulebook, while making that book obsolete, is such a bad idea.

Ok, just cut through the whole thread.....wow. I, for one, am happy that they will be doing full codices to flesh out the armies, but I'm glad that I held off on purchasing the index books as I would have been extremely aggravated at the waste of money. I am in full agreement that they should have all been free downloads while waiting for the codex releases. I can't believe that there are people that don't understand, whether you can or can't afford something, being aggravated at dropping money (forget the amount) on something that is essentially useless within a year. I know that you don't have to use the codices, however, since they are putting new units and updated rules, etc in them, it really does gimp things. Sure you can try to only use the indexes and only play against people that are willing to do that, but that will really limit your opponent base. You would have to have a closed gaming group, and your group would need to feel the same way. For those that play at a shop, this is not going to be a realistic view of things.

Da Butcha wrote:
I still think expensive hardcover Codices are a barrier to entry, and a deterrent to both new players and players starting a new faction, but having expanded rulebooks that don't cover things in the truncated rulebook, while making that book obsolete, is such a bad idea.

The first part of this is so true! If one didn't know it would be easy to assume that GW was a book company and not a model company because they keep serving up big expensive books to play their game. Problem is no one want to shell out $100 for books for a game they aren't sure they want to play. And we won't even talk about new units/models being added to an army. Also, every start collecting box from now on should include the 12 page rules and a double-sided data slate on the models in the box.

The second point might be what we saw in AoS happening already. And what I mean is that if it isn't in the new book(s) then it probably isn't going to be in the game in the future. The Indexes cover all the models available and the Codexes cover all the models that will be available.

 Galas wrote:
After reading interviews with the big guys that have leave GW, I think you are giving the desing studio of GW too much credit and profesionalism, BrianDavion.

They have always been afterall a bunch of nerds And the ones that weren't nerds, the marketing and economical department, where Tom Kirby acolytes, so... not much better.
I assume they do it now under Roundtree but they didn't had data and marketing research before

well.. keep in mind, I was going for a VEEEERY subtle "the bean counter just looks at the numbers, draws incorrect conclusions, and doesn't do any actual market research" vibe

such as the fact that SOBs sell less then say, terminators, and "clearly it's because no one is intreasted in SOBs!"

As much as I love SoB speculation (I would seriously think about liquidating some assets to start an army if they were in plastic), I feel like we're getting dangerously close to Rule #2 warning (and I've already gotten one of those today). Anyone want to start up a thread in general to continue it?

Codexes will only contain units they intend to keep in stock for a while / foreseeable future. Including the Imperial Space Marine in the Index avoided pissing people off, but keeping on publishing rules for unavailable models just creates a potential Chapterhouse 2.0 situation, whereby 3rd parties have gaps they can fill. GW feel it's better to only sell rules for what you can find on their shelves... and it's not a crazy strategy, really. We've already seen it in AOS Skirmish recently, where inclusions were based not even on what they still make, but just what is a plastic box set in store. Expect that template to be followed for Codexes.

P.S. I'll gladly take someone's 'useless' Index Imperium 1 or Index Chaos off them when they upgrade, you know, to save them throwing it away.