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.

Consolidation of Space Marines – why not?

First of all before there is any accusation that I am somehow anti marines I will point out that I been collecting them from the days of Rogue Trader and have substantial Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Ultramarines armies as well as bits and pieces of other Chapters.

My view is that GWs resources are massively focussed on Marines (Imperium and Chaos) and this is further compounded by the obsessive focus on several Chapters to the exclusion and determent of all others.
IMO It also ill-serves those few “Chosen” Chapters who have to suffer more and more outlandish models to try and sell something new for them – so for the wolves we have moved from a normal Chapter (in fact the basic chapter in RT) to one with a Viking culture to one which rides wolves, has wolves pulling grav sleighs and equipment has painful naming conventions. Similar things are happening for the Blood Angels and Dark Angels.
Many of the units that are flagged as somehow unique to the various Chapters are simply not. Wolfen- mutated Marines are found in others like the Black Dragons. Terminators are found in a variety of storied forms – notably the Salamanders and Iron Hands, however only the Wolves and Angels are allowed to have special rules for them.

Consolidating most of the codex’s with the few minor differences being incorporated in data slates or expanded Chapter tactics would allow many of these neglected Chapters to field units that are in keeping with the actual stories whilst loosing none of the actual fluff about the Wolves or Angels.

I can;t see any issue with this, what eactly would be lost with the consoldation described above.

From the other Thread

You clearly havent spoken to many Canadians than if you find it strange to be called mate

You keep making this grocery analogy, but it just doesnt work here. GW produces models. The models they produce are those that sell well. New models are developed based on where the greatest potential returns are. Models that dont sell well, never get touched. The reason the Dark Eldar models suck so much, isnt cause GW hates Dark Eldar players, but because there is insufficent demand to warrant them spending money modernizing the line. If there are no returns, you dont invest in that avenue. BA/SW/DA/GK/DW, all came into existence and continue to exist and be supported due to GW seeing the demand, and continuing to gain high sales from the customers who made these demands.

For Dark Angels alone, I can count , 17 different enteries in my codex off the top of my head that all have a unique dark angels model. I couldnt give a damn, if scout bikes performed the same as ravenwing bikes, i would still continue to buy and want new ravenwing bikes, because those are the models I like and want. Scout bikes look stupid in my opinion compared to ravenwing bikes. You are arguing for the exact same thing to happen to space marines as a whole that DID happen to IG, and than saying people are being hyperbolic for not wanting their model lines to be discontinued just like what happened with the old IG regiments. Tell me how easy it is to field a Death Krieg army of IG as a new player, given you cant buy any of their models anymore from GW. Surely its the exact same to just buy Cadian models and use Death Krieg rules eh? You forget that half the reason anyone plays the army they do is because they like the look of that army, and want it to continue to being a thing. How does Dark Angels being a thing hurt anyone else? By that argument Tau hurt Ork players cause its another Xenos army taking away from potential investments into Orks!

PS. I am not angry, I am simply in disbelief that you find it so crazy that people care about their unique models remaining cool and unique in appearance, instead of having to use the models for an army they didnt like, and actively chose to not play in the first place.

You are kind of making my argument - the reason we lost all those differnt non marine variants is I would contend because myopically, GW focussed on Marines, and then doubled down to focuss even further on just a few selected Chapters, again destroying any chance that any of 990+ other Chapters would ever get anything. Rather than grocery perhaps a more wargamming annology - its like just making Imperial Roman Legionaries but then only focussing on the 10th, 12 anf 16th Legions, but then becuase you have made the models of all the vaious legionary types for those Legions, making up flying chariots for them. Dont bother with the auxliaries or the various enemies of Rome, just the couple of Legions that fought the civil wars between wannabe Emperors.

I don't understand the Dark Eldar annology - they had a massive remake - they did loose unique characters but had vast numbers of new models - and apparently that was not only worth the investment but continues to do so.

My main focuss would be to reduce units and codexes - the models are already done - what models are missing for the so called big four chapters?

I think this would make total sense, but GW likes £££££££££££

I think the only thing one could find issue with is a question of "pitch vs reality".

"All your options will still be there - it'll just be consolidated so everyone gets access to the cool stuff" is a pitch that's been heard, implemented, and disappointed people since the earliest days of 40k.

Any black templars players feeling like their current ruleset is as unique and interesting as their 3rd ed codex?

no?

how about Catachan players - since your 3rd edition codex, each edition has maintained all the unique stuff you had since you had your own book, right?

Harlequin players? Definitely way more convenient before we had to deal with our own book, I'll bet everyone is wishing we were still back in the Eldar/Dark Eldar codex, right?

So in the theoretical world where the sales pitch is exactly the reality of what you describe - great, all for it, bundle 'em up and lets have a Harry Potter book sized space marine codex with infinite customization!

the_scotsman wrote:
I think the only thing one could find issue with is a question of "pitch vs reality".

"All your options will still be there - it'll just be consolidated so everyone gets access to the cool stuff" is a pitch that's been heard, implemented, and disappointed people since the earliest days of 40k.

Any black templars players feeling like their current ruleset is as unique and interesting as their 3rd ed codex?

no?

how about Catachan players - since your 3rd edition codex, each edition has maintained all the unique stuff you had since you had your own book, right?

Harlequin players? Definitely way more convenient before we had to deal with our own book, I'll bet everyone is wishing we were still back in the Eldar/Dark Eldar codex, right?

So in the theoretical world where the sales pitch is exactly the reality of what you describe - great, all for it, bundle 'em up and lets have a Harry Potter book sized space marine codex with infinite customization!

I can sort of see that - but when you actually look at the special units - they really are not particuarly special - they have a rule or two, or just slighty different weapons loadout.
I would prefer the unit entries in a Marine dex to be more like the Death Watch entries - loads of options and possible special rules.

Then you could do the same with the neglected Guard codex and all the others.
Why is there no carapce armour option, why no close combat weapon equiped squads etc etc etc - these take up very little space and do enhance the fluff.

I’d be for consolidating the marine chapters into one book, and do some culling of superfluous units to include more detail unique to the various chapters.

I really wonder about some of the units - do we really need to have a separate entry for Thunderwolves instead of using bike stats with alternate models? And do centurions need to exist at all instead of just fixing Terminators?

 Stormonu wrote:
I’d be for consolidating the marine chapters into one book, and do some culling of superfluous units to include more detail unique to the various chapters.

I really wonder about some of the units - do we really need to have a separate entry for Thunderwolves instead of using bike stats with alternate models? And do centurions need to exist at all instead of just fixing Terminators?

I hate Centurions models - so cool. I don't like Thunderwovles but a "Marine Cavalry unit" is fine if its needed.

It depends on the implementation. The problem is that when GW does something like this they do it by cutting off options.

What you want for Marines/CSM is a rulebook that works like the 30k Legion list or the 3e CSM Codex/4e SM Codex where you have one core army list, and then nine or ten appendixes at the end that give you a page describing what's different if you play this specific Legion. Or even something like the 7e "supplements" where you have your Codex and then you get a pamphlet that describes what's different about your specific Chapter/Legion/etc.

The problem with giving everyone their own Codex is that GW has chosen to cut options off of one Codex to make another feel more unique. Space Marines used to be able to field melee Tactical squads and squads with two special weapons instead of special/heavy, but those got cut off to make Grey Hunters feel more unique.

The problem with GW actually doing this is that for it to work you need to a) cut down on the number of different profiles, which they don't like to do, and b) break kit-datasheet equivalence, which runs counter to their 8e design philosophy where the name of the kit must be the name of the datasheet and the only options available to the datasheet must be options you can build in the kit.

You are kind of making my argument - the reason we lost all those differnt non marine variants is I would contend because myopically, GW focussed on Marines, and then doubled down to focuss even further on just a few selected Chapters, again destroying any chance that any of 990+ other Chapters would ever get anything. Rather than grocery perhaps a more wargamming annology - its like just making Imperial Roman Legionaries but then only focussing on the 10th, 12 anf 16th Legions, but then becuase you have made the models of all the vaious legionary types for those Legions, making up flying chariots for them. Dont bother with the auxliaries or the various enemies of Rome, just the couple of Legions that fought the civil wars between wannabe Emperors.

I don't understand the Dark Eldar annology - they had a massive remake - they did loose unique characters but had vast numbers of new models - and apparently that was not only worth the investment but continues to do so.

My main focuss would be to reduce units and codexes - the models are already done - what models are missing for the so called big four chapters?

No, im not really. GW focuses on what sells well. If Xenos sales pick up and marine sales stay constant, they are not going to start cutting down on marines to make xenos, they will simply invest in xenos more. You act like its a zero sum game, when it isnt. If sales and demand are equal, investment would be equal accross the board. When they are not, investment becomes proportional to potential returns. Marines doing well doesnt mean Xenos does bad. Besides when it comes to the other chapters of space marines, I'd argue we should want them to get the same treatment that DA/BA/SW/GK/DW get. The more the merrier.

And frankly you are making my argument for me. You want to reduce the units. If you reduce the units, why keep making distinct models, for units that no longer exist? I sure can buy so many Valhallan IG after all. GW has already shown clearly that they will stop producing distinct versions of models, when you can just have one style that is used by all.

the_scotsman wrote:
I think the only thing one could find issue with is a question of "pitch vs reality".

"All your options will still be there - it'll just be consolidated so everyone gets access to the cool stuff" is a pitch that's been heard, implemented, and disappointed people since the earliest days of 40k.

Any black templars players feeling like their current ruleset is as unique and interesting as their 3rd ed codex?

no?

how about Catachan players - since your 3rd edition codex, each edition has maintained all the unique stuff you had since you had your own book, right?

Harlequin players? Definitely way more convenient before we had to deal with our own book, I'll bet everyone is wishing we were still back in the Eldar/Dark Eldar codex, right?

So in the theoretical world where the sales pitch is exactly the reality of what you describe - great, all for it, bundle 'em up and lets have a Harry Potter book sized space marine codex with infinite customization!

Agreed on this entirely. "Just fold them into one book, it's easy!" has invariably been followed by "feth your army" in practice.

By all means, make more Codices for the Adeptus Administratum, or Khornate Orks or whatever, but stop messing with people's armies to make it happen.

I agree really. Most of the snowflake chapter stuff can be done with a few extra lines on datasheets and some keywords to enable snowflake loadouts or abilities. For the REALLY unique units just put them in the codex as is but make them chapter exclusive.

The positive side of this of that you enable some of the more traditional codex compliant chapters (salamanders, iron hands, white scars, etc) to easily have some special flavor added without having a whole extra codex added.

The only downside is less of the snowflake specific codex fluff and add course the space marine codex would be bigger.

A lot of the chapter unique stuff shouldn't be. Why are the BA the only ones who give their tacticals heavy flamers, their honour guard jump packs or put their librarians in dreadnoughts? I want the marine codex to be a toolbox with a lot of options and everyone can freely pick and choose what they think suits their chapter.

They're already quasi doing this with primaris marines.

This is gentrification of marines. We haven't seen faction specific Primaris and i doubt we will.

When primaris rules are actually good (some day) and core SM armies old-marine rules are complete and utter trash, this will be the scenario you're talking about.

We're already half-way there. Unless you're Deathwatch everything sucks. So when primaris gets good, we'll be exactly where i said we'll be.

72Canadian72 wrote:

You are kind of making my argument - the reason we lost all those differnt non marine variants is I would contend because myopically, GW focussed on Marines, and then doubled down to focuss even further on just a few selected Chapters, again destroying any chance that any of 990+ other Chapters would ever get anything. Rather than grocery perhaps a more wargamming annology - its like just making Imperial Roman Legionaries but then only focussing on the 10th, 12 anf 16th Legions, but then becuase you have made the models of all the vaious legionary types for those Legions, making up flying chariots for them. Dont bother with the auxliaries or the various enemies of Rome, just the couple of Legions that fought the civil wars between wannabe Emperors.

I don't understand the Dark Eldar annology - they had a massive remake - they did loose unique characters but had vast numbers of new models - and apparently that was not only worth the investment but continues to do so.

My main focuss would be to reduce units and codexes - the models are already done - what models are missing for the so called big four chapters?

No, im not really. GW focuses on what sells well. If Xenos sales pick up and marine sales stay constant, they are not going to start cutting down on marines to make xenos, they will simply invest in xenos more. You act like its a zero sum game, when it isnt. If sales and demand are equal, investment would be equal accross the board. When they are not, investment becomes proportional to potential returns. Marines doing well doesnt mean Xenos does bad. Besides when it comes to the other chapters of space marines, I'd argue we should want them to get the same treatment that DA/BA/SW/GK/DW get. The more the merrier.

And frankly you are making my argument for me. You want to reduce the units. If you reduce the units, why keep making distinct models, for units that no longer exist? I sure can buy so many Valhallan IG after all. GW has already shown clearly that they will stop producing distinct versions of models, when you can just have one style that is used by all.

Not really -we still had to have special Primaris models for only a few Chapters - again neglecting all others. There is not an infinite amount of time and resources to split up - if you choose to focuss on marines (as they did in the past) then you won't be doing something else. The other problem your not considering is that because they had such a limited amount of units to make - they had to keep inventing more and more outlandish one for just those chapters - the moment they did something for someone else there is a clamour from the fans of that chapter - where is out version - not even just can we use - where is our special unique version of the same unit.

In addiiton the Marine range - as described in the codex was finished - what has not been made in plastic?

- they could have looked at things like Thralls, stealth Snipers (liek the cool new Primaris ones) etc but they were stuck with having to make stuff for those Chapters. and still are. We are now seeing a more varied range - Genestealer Cults and Ad Mech are shining examples of this but they do have to squeeze between marine dexes and releases.

 Marmatag wrote:
They're already quasi doing this with primaris marines.

This is gentrification of marines.

Sorry, couldn't resist. I have a mental image of a bunch of primaris hipsters opening up a bunch of breweries and coffee shops and pricing out all the regular marines with the rising rent in all the fortress monasteries.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I think the only thing one could find issue with is a question of "pitch vs reality".

"All your options will still be there - it'll just be consolidated so everyone gets access to the cool stuff" is a pitch that's been heard, implemented, and disappointed people since the earliest days of 40k.

Any black templars players feeling like their current ruleset is as unique and interesting as their 3rd ed codex?

no?

how about Catachan players - since your 3rd edition codex, each edition has maintained all the unique stuff you had since you had your own book, right?

Harlequin players? Definitely way more convenient before we had to deal with our own book, I'll bet everyone is wishing we were still back in the Eldar/Dark Eldar codex, right?

So in the theoretical world where the sales pitch is exactly the reality of what you describe - great, all for it, bundle 'em up and lets have a Harry Potter book sized space marine codex with infinite customization!

Agreed on this entirely. "Just fold them into one book, it's easy!" has invariably been followed by "feth your army" in practice.

By all means, make more Codices for the Adeptus Administratum, or Khornate Orks or whatever, but stop messing with people's armies to make it happen.

It sounds like I'm going to have to actually write a consolidated book to get my point across. Can't do so right now because I'm not at my desk, will start a Proposed Rules thread later.

The truly unique stuff wouldn't add much to the basic SM codex to fold most of the variant loyalists in, maybe a couple dozen pages to an already expensive hardback triple digit page count book. It could be done without sacrificing much meaningful in terms of flavor (at least not anymoreso than already happens with editions changes and codex updates and the like).

From a game/player perspective, consolidation could be done relatively easily if desired.

The bigger issue is that GW appears to use these variant SM books to keep interest in their primary product line up with some level of consistency, and I suspect is a key part of their business model and forecasting.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I think the only thing one could find issue with is a question of "pitch vs reality".

"All your options will still be there - it'll just be consolidated so everyone gets access to the cool stuff" is a pitch that's been heard, implemented, and disappointed people since the earliest days of 40k.

Any black templars players feeling like their current ruleset is as unique and interesting as their 3rd ed codex?

no?

how about Catachan players - since your 3rd edition codex, each edition has maintained all the unique stuff you had since you had your own book, right?

Harlequin players? Definitely way more convenient before we had to deal with our own book, I'll bet everyone is wishing we were still back in the Eldar/Dark Eldar codex, right?

So in the theoretical world where the sales pitch is exactly the reality of what you describe - great, all for it, bundle 'em up and lets have a Harry Potter book sized space marine codex with infinite customization!

Agreed on this entirely. "Just fold them into one book, it's easy!" has invariably been followed by "feth your army" in practice.

By all means, make more Codices for the Adeptus Administratum, or Khornate Orks or whatever, but stop messing with people's armies to make it happen.

it does not have to be and it should not be.

As others are saying almost every different "unique" unit can be represented by a few more lines on a dataslate or Chapter tactics. A tiny few unique units could remain Chapter specific.

Lets look at tac Marines - what the total rules and options that the equivalents in the SW, DA and BA Codexs - how much space would it take up?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I think the only thing one could find issue with is a question of "pitch vs reality".

"All your options will still be there - it'll just be consolidated so everyone gets access to the cool stuff" is a pitch that's been heard, implemented, and disappointed people since the earliest days of 40k.

Any black templars players feeling like their current ruleset is as unique and interesting as their 3rd ed codex?

no?

how about Catachan players - since your 3rd edition codex, each edition has maintained all the unique stuff you had since you had your own book, right?

Harlequin players? Definitely way more convenient before we had to deal with our own book, I'll bet everyone is wishing we were still back in the Eldar/Dark Eldar codex, right?

So in the theoretical world where the sales pitch is exactly the reality of what you describe - great, all for it, bundle 'em up and lets have a Harry Potter book sized space marine codex with infinite customization!

Agreed on this entirely. "Just fold them into one book, it's easy!" has invariably been followed by "feth your army" in practice.

By all means, make more Codices for the Adeptus Administratum, or Khornate Orks or whatever, but stop messing with people's armies to make it happen.

It isn't feth your army at all. What it does is make it easier to balance Marines.

Think about all these "unique entries" that don't have any equivalents for the Vanilla Codex, Blood Angels, and Dark Angel. Then think about those entries and why no other Chapter, even a successor, has access to them. Hell, did Dark Angels honestly need "different" fliers that nobody uses anyway? Does it not seen odd that Blood Angels do not have TFC whatsoever, and not even ONE successor managed to snag a partnership with a Forge World that makes them? Or how about those Ultramarines successors that use Jump focused units (like the Doom Eagles and Fire Hawks) that don't have at least Jump Command Squads? There's also an inconsistency with Strategems, like the Angels not having access to the Chapter Master stratagem despite these codices having to represent successors.

What needs to happen is consolidation of units and upgrades everyone should have access to (Centurions, Stormtalons, TFC, Plasma Cannons on Terminators, etc), and make sure everything generic is somewhat internally balanced. Then we can add 3-4 unique unit entries, and THEN we can price Special Characters as necessary. Bam, done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
A lot of the chapter unique stuff shouldn't be. Why are the BA the only ones who give their tacticals heavy flamers, their honour guard jump packs or put their librarians in dreadnoughts? I want the marine codex to be a toolbox with a lot of options and everyone can freely pick and choose what they think suits their chapter.

Not even GKs get an HQ Librarian on that level.

I'm all for a big Inquisition codex with the militant arms for each -hunter. It isn't like either the Deathwatch or Grey Knights codices are particularly large, so it wouldn't be particularly hard to get them and Sisters into the same codex with Inquisition.

Not really -we still had to have special Primaris models for only a few Chapters - again neglecting all others. There is not an infinite amount of time and resources to split up - if you choose to focuss on marines (as they did in the past) then you won't be doing something else. The other problem your not considering is that because they had such a limited amount of units to make - they had to keep inventing more and more outlandish one for just those chapters - the moment they did something for someone else there is a clamour from the fans of that chapter - where is out version - not even just can we use - where is our special unique version of the same unit.

In addiiton the Marine range - as described in the codex was finished - what has not been made in plastic?

- they could have looked at things like Thralls, stealth Snipers (liek the cool new Primaris ones) etc but they were stuck with having to make stuff for those Chapters. and still are. We are now seeing a more varied range - Genestealer Cults and Ad Mech are shining examples of this but they do have to squeeze between marine dexes and releases.

Honest question friend, what special Primaris models are you referring to? As far as Ive heard, everyone can currently take all the primaris models. The only exception being GK, who have been pretty much getting the shaft all of 8th ed. As far as I've seen, no chapter unique primaris models exist or have even been hinted at.

Maybe I am too new of a player though because I have not seen what you are claiming that everyone is demanding a unique model that only they can use. Every Primaris release I've seen has had people asking, can I use this in my army, not where are my DA specific primaris units. Using the new shadowspear box as an example, every week on their FB page ive seen fans asking GW if you they can use the models, not can we get chapter specific models only.

Resources are allocated based on potential ROI. As I said, equal demand and sales, will result in equal investment. Disproportional demand will result in disproportional investment rates. Its why some armies dont see anything new every edition, while some will continue to get new things all the time. Its not a feth you to the players of the less popular armies, its simply cold economics.

Ya GSC and Ad Mech have got a lot of shiny new toys. Has that hurt marine players at all in any way? No. So why argue for axing marine players unique models. How does that help Nids get new stuff? It doesnt. Nids get new stuff while nids remain popular and high selling. You want a xenos race expanded? Buy it and make your voice heard. The amount GW can invest or will be willing to invest in an army is directly tied to how well that army sells. They are a business and want to make money.

72Canadian72 wrote:

Not really -we still had to have special Primaris models for only a few Chapters - again neglecting all others. There is not an infinite amount of time and resources to split up - if you choose to focuss on marines (as they did in the past) then you won't be doing something else. The other problem your not considering is that because they had such a limited amount of units to make - they had to keep inventing more and more outlandish one for just those chapters - the moment they did something for someone else there is a clamour from the fans of that chapter - where is out version - not even just can we use - where is our special unique version of the same unit.

In addiiton the Marine range - as described in the codex was finished - what has not been made in plastic?

- they could have looked at things like Thralls, stealth Snipers (liek the cool new Primaris ones) etc but they were stuck with having to make stuff for those Chapters. and still are. We are now seeing a more varied range - Genestealer Cults and Ad Mech are shining examples of this but they do have to squeeze between marine dexes and releases.

Honest question friend, what special Primaris models are you referring to? As far as Ive heard, everyone can currently take all the primaris models. The only exception being GK, who have been pretty much getting the shaft all of 8th ed. As far as I've seen, no chapter unique primaris models exist or have even been hinted at.

Maybe I am too new of a player though because I have not seen what you are claiming that everyone is demanding a unique model that only they can use. Every Primaris release I've seen has had people asking, can I use this in my army, not where are my DA specific primaris units. Using the new shadowspear box as an example, every week on their FB page ive seen fans asking GW if you they can use the models, not can we get chapter specific models only.

Resources are allocated based on potential ROI. As I said, equal demand and sales, will result in equal investment. Disproportional demand will result in disproportional investment rates. Its why some armies dont see anything new every edition, while some will continue to get new things all the time. Its not a feth you to the players of the less popular armies, its simply cold economics.

Ya GSC and Ad Mech have got a lot of shiny new toys. Has that hurt marine players at all in any way? No. So why argue for axing marine players unique models. How does that help Nids get new stuff? It doesnt. Nids get new stuff while nids remain popular and high selling. You want a xenos race expanded? Buy it and make your voice heard. The amount GW can invest or will be willing to invest in an army is directly tied to how well that army sells. They are a business and want to make money.

Plenty of Marine players complaing every time a non marine model comes out - or one thats not from their sub faction.

I meant the special boxed sets that came out and took up the shelf space with the same Primaris but branded for the few select Marine Chapters?

I do buy the other armies, I also buy the odd Marine if I like them but I am runing out of space - what happens when you get old. You cant sell stuff if you are making other stuff instead. Its that simple.

So the big question - if the "unique" unit entries were folded into a Marine codex but retained all elments - that would not be good enough?

There were angels and wolf specific lieutenants as well as Calgar.

Simple answer. More books = more sales. There's a reason small tiny sub-factions suddenly became "armies" (Grey Knights, Harlequins, etc.). Codices, cards, dice, etc. That's more or less free money for GW.

 Elbows wrote:
Simple answer. More books = more sales. There's a reason small tiny sub-factions suddenly became "armies" (Grey Knights, Harlequins, etc.). Codices, cards, dice, etc. That's more or less free money for GW.

Fair point but what is you opinion on the general concept and suggested details.

Plenty of Marine players complaing every time a non marine model comes out - or one thats not from their sub faction.

I meant the special boxed sets that came out and took up the shelf space with the same Primaris but branded for the few select Marine Chapters?

I do buy the other armies, I also buy the odd Marine if I like them but I am runing out of space - what happens when you get old. You cant sell stuff if you are making other stuff instead. Its that simple.

So the big question - if the "unique" unit entries were folded into a Marine codex but retained all elments - that would not be good enough?

Thats not an issue unique to marine players though. Thats no different than a Tau player complaining when an Ork model gets released.

Are you referring to Tooth and Claw that came out for GSC and SW at the end of 2018? If I recall, all the SW models were just normal primaris, with a SW upgrade frame included. My BA friend had no problem integrating them into his army after he bought it. (He also play GSC hence the appeal).

Ya that argument works, but only if you are unwilling to expand. GW is a business, they arent going to artifically limit themselves by only producing x amount of kits/models a year because they dont want to expand their production lines. If there is a ROI available, they will happily continue to expand, because doing so will continue to grow the game, the player base, and thus their revenues. If demand is insufficient to warrant expansion though, its not GW ignoring those players, its GW waiting until its actually profitable to address.

The answer to the big question is, those unique MODELS would disappear. As has happened in the past with other factions. Most players couldnt give a damn about sharing the weapon loadouts/rules etc. They just want the cool and fun army they were marketed to remain the cool and fun army they were buying into. If scout bikes got plasma talons and corvus hammers, I still wouldnt buy them, as thats not why I and many others buy things like the ravenwing black knights. In a perfect world what you are saying would be great, but the reality is we have seen GW consolidate rules etc, and than just stop making the unique models. once the models are gone, your army has been all but in name squatted. Just ask non cadian IG players.

 Elbows wrote:
Simple answer. More books = more sales. There's a reason small tiny sub-factions suddenly became "armies" (Grey Knights, Harlequins, etc.). Codices, cards, dice, etc. That's more or less free money for GW.

Yes, like CSM today. Thousand Sons and Death Guard have now own codexes.

GW puts out codices because the support is there and thus the profits are there. they aren't shoveling marines at us for no reason. they're doing it because marines SELL. chaos is a good example as well, the 1k sons where always one of the more popular traitor legions. and well I don'thave exact figures the number of nurgle stuff I've seen over the years leads me to conclude death guard is right up there too.

as someone said, GW likes their money, and marine codices sell. if GW folded in all the marine factions into one "super codex" it'd not magicly give more attention to Xenos it would just see more spece marine releases over all.

Because that's like consolidating the AdMech and Astra Copywritum into one book because they are both Human. Different Armies, Different Codexes. Simple really.

Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Space Wolves all deviate from the Codex Astartes in some form or another, which is what Codex: Space Marines is meant to represent. If anything, Salamanders and Iron Hands should get their own books too but GW seem to hate those chapters (especially Iron Hands) with a passion usually reserved for Hanzo mains.

By your logic we should just lump all the Eldar into one codex along with Orks because they are all Xenos created by the Old Ones.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Because that's like consolidating the AdMech and Astra Copywritum into one book because they are both Human. Different Armies, Different Codexes. Simple really.

Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Space Wolves all deviate from the Codex Astartes in some form or another, which is what Codex: Space Marines is meant to represent. If anything, Salamanders and Iron Hands should get their own books too but GW seem to hate those chapters (especially Iron Hands) with a passion usually reserved for Overwatch players.

By your logic we should just lump all the Eldar into one codex along with Orks because they are all Xenos created by the Old Ones.

Not really. Marines play a lot more similarly to each other than Nids and Eldar, or Guard and Ad Mech.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Not really. Marines play a lot more similarly to each other than Nids and Eldar, or Guard and Ad Mech.

So lets consolidate Tau and Astra Copywritum then, they are both shooty armies with weak melee.

We already have silliness like Black Templar exclusive units in the SM codex, there is no need to expand that 300fold.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Not really. Marines play a lot more similarly to each other than Nids and Eldar, or Guard and Ad Mech.

So lets consolidate Tau and Astra Copywritum then, they are both shooty armies with weak melee.

Let's consolidate genestealer cults into Tyranids, surely all GSC need is a single unit to repsetent the presence of cultists right? I mean CSMs manage that way just fine!