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.

It says that marines sell well regardless of their rules, not that they don't sell even better if they have stronger rules.

Let's say I sell ice cream. I'm successful at my job, selling a lot of ice cream. Some weeks I sell more, because there's a school class on a field trip stopping by my store. Regardless of whether any given week happens to be when the school class stops by or not, my ice cream sales outperform my coffee sales. This doesn't mean that the school class has no effect on my ice cream sales, only that they're not necessary for my ice cream sales to be high relative to my coffee sales.

In other words, Marines sell worse without good rules, but the absence of good rules (and the loss of sales that entails) does not change the fact that Marines still sell well, even after such a loss in powerful rules.

You could make an argument about the definition of "well", but that'd be overdoing it.

EDIT: Gah, and now I've gone and answered when I said I wouldnt.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

"According to suppliers" = some unprovable crap I made up to try and make a point that doesn't exist.

Ugh, I thought you listened to podcasts. See Chapter tactics, signals from the front line etc. They sell product. They often talk about the popularity of some models. IFF are sold out and very popular even post nerf, if they are to be believed.

Now calm yourself. Your white knighting of GW is becoming obscene. And you still haven't explained your point

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It says that marines sell well regardless of their rules, not that they don't sell even better if they have stronger rules.

Let's say I sell ice cream. I'm successful at my job, selling a lot of ice cream. Some weeks I sell more, because there's a school class on a field trip stopping by my store. Regardless of whether any given week happens to be when the school class stops by or not, my ice cream sales outperform my coffee sales. This doesn't mean that the school class has no effect on my ice cream sales, only that they're not necessary for my ice cream sales to be high relative to my coffee sales.

In other words, Marines sell worse without good rules, but the absence of good rules (and the loss of sales that entails) does not change the fact that Marines still sell well, even after such a loss in powerful rules.

You could make an argument about the definition of "well", but that'd be overdoing it.

EDIT: Gah, and now I've gone and answered when I said I wouldnt.

This is not in dispute.

It's the assertion that GW deliberately crafts the rules to create sales. And apparently more so for marines, because Ynnari and Castellans were never a thing.

Never assign malice when incompetence will suffice.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It says that marines sell well regardless of their rules, not that they don't sell even better if they have stronger rules.

Let's say I sell ice cream. I'm successful at my job, selling a lot of ice cream. Some weeks I sell more, because there's a school class on a field trip stopping by my store. Regardless of whether any given week happens to be when the school class stops by or not, my ice cream sales outperform my coffee sales. This doesn't mean that the school class has no effect on my ice cream sales, only that they're not necessary for my ice cream sales to be high relative to my coffee sales.

In other words, Marines sell worse without good rules, but the absence of good rules (and the loss of sales that entails) does not change the fact that Marines still sell well, even after such a loss in powerful rules.

You could make an argument about the definition of "well", but that'd be overdoing it.

EDIT: Gah, and now I've gone and answered when I said I wouldnt.

I'm glad you answered to be fair. I don't think Brian's point is as clear cut as you think from his statement. I also think a definition of 'well' would be useful in this context. Better than other factions? More sales than any other faction bar none?

When GW push Marines in the fluff, and release new models for them, and push them on people starting the hobby in their stores or buying the starter kit, I'm not sure its surprising that huge numbers of people have a Marine army.

When Marine rules are good, its not surprising they get dusted off and swamp stores and Tournaments all over the world.

I really feel marketting is what sells here, rather than "I just love power armour! I love it so much!"

If we go back to 2nd Edition I am very confident Orks were the second played faction after Marines. They were in the starter. They had a fair few interesting plastic vehicle kits. They appeared endlessly in say White Dwarf (which I think was a much more influential publication than it is today).

Then whoever was pushing Orks clearly moved on. The releases dried up. Their codexes became rubbish. They ceased being marketted. Just collecting the army is difficult, for instance because most of the HQs were not available to buy. Have a pain boy in the start collecting - thats useful, I guess?

Then GW did an Ork release - but it was just... weird. All the vehicles, most/all of which were overcosted. But again, even if love vehicles, due to the flaws of the detachment system, there isn't an especially obvious way to play them. Or at least not a way to play them that doesn't obviously hamstring you.

There are similar criticisms for DE - the three patrols system was dead on arrival - and having just 1 non-special character HQ per mini-faction is incredibly limiting and boring. To some extent the reduction in the Ynnari character costs may allow for some rubber-banding, but its still an obvious weakness that could be resolved very easily.

But GW don't want to release 3 DE characters and have not done so for half a decade. So sucks to be you I guess.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

"According to suppliers" = some unprovable crap I made up to try and make a point that doesn't exist.

Ugh, I thought you listened to podcasts. See Chapter tactics, signals from the front line etc. They sell product. They often talk about the popularity of some models. IFF are sold out and very popular even post nerf, if they are to be believed.

Now calm yourself. Your white knighting of GW is becoming obscene. And you still haven't explained your point

I'm so exhausted from the intellectually dishonest arguments that can only hide behind "white knight" label as some sort of evidence.

And you know what? Arguing with brick walls does nothing, so you guys can keep crying and I'll go live my life.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

This is not in dispute.

It's the assertion that GW deliberately crafts the rules to create sales. And apparently more so for marines, because Ynnari and Castellans were never a thing.

Never assign malice when incompetence will suffice.

We know this has happened. It has been said by ex GW employees convincingly and repeatedly.

There's a preference for Marines (hence where we are now) likely because they have more new models than other factions combined but there are other models that get the same treatment, you've just named 2 examples in Ynnari (likely unintentional) and Castellans. If you think the Castellan ridiculousness was anything less than intentional and not completely aimed at driving sales you are quite naive in my opinion.

Look at the new Ad Mech HQ, its also stupidly priced.
The new Ad Mech tank, stupidly priced.
The new GSC stuff when that was released.
The Disco Lord.

There are examples in every release of a hot, key new model that is aggressively pointed and priced (in money). They aren't a weird, repeating fluke.

What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

The thing is I don't believe Wraithknights were pointed to be overpowered - they were pointed to fit the rought money/point combination GW likes, so that the average player, building an average army, spends such and such an amount of money.

If the Wraithknight had gone up 100 points, that would have been one less box of scatbikes sold.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

I'd wager than certain factions are exempt from the preferential rule hotness for various reasons. For example I suspect that GW assumed the new Ork buggies would sell regardless of their rules so they are all 'meh' to 'awful' on the competitive scale. E - that said, the most expensive point for point model in the Ork arsenal (Mek Guns) are very, very good. I'm struggling to see the relevance of the first Marine codex at the start of 8th but I'd say Thunderfire Cannons have always been very good this edition.

The argument is not "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" the argument is; "we know that GW have done this exact thing before and if something looks like a duck, smells like a duck, sounds like a duck and we've seen ducks in this pond before it's probably a duck."

I thought the new buggies were at least usable outside the dumb squig one. Huh.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

I'd wager than certain factions are exempt from the preferential rule hotness for various reasons.

Why? Why would GW intentionally make less money? The far easier explanation is that they're just incompetent.

You're ignoring Hanlon's razor in order to squeeze GWs actions into hating xeno factions, and you're doing so in exactly the way I've argued: "It looks like a duck, so it's a duck!". You even said so yourself. What if it turns out to be a mallard?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I thought the new buggies were at least usable outside the dumb squig one. Huh.

They probably are but this is Dakka so if its not top-tier then its trash.

Hmm, I seem to remember this thread being about an eldar book...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I thought the new buggies were at least usable outside the dumb squig one. Huh.

Define "usable"? I use them on a regular basis. My army does not do well against a "competitive" list. They don't feature in any competitive Ork lists at all currently.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

I'd wager than certain factions are exempt from the preferential rule hotness for various reasons.

Why? Why would GW intentionally make less money? The far easier explanation is that they're just incompetent.

Who said anything about making less money? I literally explained your query in the rest of my post, that you purposefully removed from your quotation.

Quick question as a returning player....as I am going to collect Eldar as one of my forces, do I buy the existing Craftworlds Codex or do I get this as its more upto date?

VAYASEN wrote:
Quick question as a returning player....as I am going to collect Eldar as one of my forces, do I buy the existing Craftworlds Codex or do I get this as its more upto date?

You get the codex. This only contains rules for Jain Zar, Banshees, a set of psy powers, custom traits and new Exarch abilities. It doesn't have other units, stratagems and so on.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I thought the new buggies were at least usable outside the dumb squig one. Huh.

Its going offtopic - but I think all of them are at least 20, maybe 30 points overcosted. Which is a lot given they are not that expensive.
The Squig one is just a complete rules screw up. It should have at least 3 times as many shots. Right now its probably worth 50-60 points.

Cross-faction like for likes are often difficult, but you compare say a Ravager at 125 points for any of the Ork Vehicles and its not a contest.

Some of this is a meta issue - I think ITC and ETC can be hard on light vehicles - but really you can look at the output and defensive stats for the points and see the problem.

The codex is all you need to get started, phoenix rises isn't really necessary unless you want to use the updated units or want some extra options.

arent the new traits ofr flyer exarchs obligatory, as they make them much better?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

I'd wager than certain factions are exempt from the preferential rule hotness for various reasons.

Why? Why would GW intentionally make less money? The far easier explanation is that they're just incompetent.

Who said anything about making less money? I literally explained your query in the rest of my post, that you purposefully removed from your quotation.

If having preferential rules increases the sales for Space Marines, would not having preferential rules likewise mean more sales of Orks? Assuming this is the case, by not having preferential treatment for Orks, GW would intentionally be reducing sales of their product. That doesn't make sense.

Your explanation didn't explain why GW would purposely be skipping giving certain factions more powerful rules as a policy, it provided a plausible explanation for why they didn't give the Ork Buggies preferential treatment (which, by the way, disproves the notion that there's always a new hot undercosted model). Still not an explanation for the bunch of other cases where there wasn't any new hotness (SM 1.0, GK, AdMech, CSM and so on).

ahh, but remember they WANT Marines to sell out more then other factions because......

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?

We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.

I'd wager than certain factions are exempt from the preferential rule hotness for various reasons.

Why? Why would GW intentionally make less money? The far easier explanation is that they're just incompetent.

Who said anything about making less money? I literally explained your query in the rest of my post, that you purposefully removed from your quotation.

If having preferential rules increases the sales for Space Marines, would not having preferential rules likewise mean more sales of Orks?

Not necessarily, but likely.

Assuming this is the case, by not having preferential treatment for Orks, GW would intentionally be reducing sales of their product. That doesn't make sense.

No it doesn't. And they didn't. What they did do was release one of the most powerful codexes in Orks then slowly nerfed it and increased the power of other codexes over time. Remember when we could mob up lootas and Meganobz? Fight twice at any point in the round? You realise that the most powerful Mek Gun in the index was the KMK then it oddly switched to the Smasha in our codex. Almost like GW want to encourage people to buy one set of expensive kits then have to buy another set. Weird huh?

The Castellan is the perfect example of a unit clearly pointed around profit. And GW milked it as long as they could.

Most releases have a unit or rules like this. I stated as such in my original post. GW may not want to push a particular faction for one reason or another (stock levels, profit margins, opportunity sales on other products etc) but generally each faction has a 'star' unit and each faction has a time when it is powerful before another faction becomes more so and so on. Marines, since they have more releases more frequently than other factions, generally get a better turnaround on this cycle than say, Necrons. As we can now see in their v2 codex - something unique and a first in 8th.

Arguing both sides of the coin.

Buffs = sales.
Nerfs = sales.

Pointless to argue with specious arguments as GW can literally do nothing without it being linked to a sales conspiracy.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

This is not in dispute.

It's the assertion that GW deliberately crafts the rules to create sales. And apparently more so for marines, because Ynnari and Castellans were never a thing.

Never assign malice when incompetence will suffice.

Of course they craft rules to sell models. That's how their business works. C'mon man, you can't be that naive. They have direct control over what is good (what will sell) and what is bad (what will not sell).

Do you have a favorite televangelist you could recommend we donate to as well?

 dotcomee wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

This is not in dispute.

It's the assertion that GW deliberately crafts the rules to create sales. And apparently more so for marines, because Ynnari and Castellans were never a thing.

Never assign malice when incompetence will suffice.

Of course they craft rules to sell models. That's how their business works. C'mon man, you can't be that naive. They have direct control over what is good (what will sell) and what is bad (what will not sell).

Do you have a favorite televangelist you could recommend we donate to as well?

Design, cut, mold, and produce models all so they dont sell...

What business school did you go to?

I don't believe either, that - bluntly put - GW makes "crap rules" for newly released units to keep the sales of them artificially low. I would wager that apart from the most competitive kind of gamer who would only collect the top 10% performing units of each faction to take them to a tournament, every model's sales figure would benefit from having at least servicable rules.

There is a point to make that GW could keep changing very intenionally which unit for each codex is a top dog in every iteration to keep the meta from stalling. In the video game industry this is an observable process for competitive games like League of Legends or Dota 2.

Karol wrote:
arent the new traits ofr flyer exarchs obligatory, as they make them much better?

They're an option, it's up to each player to decide whether they want to use the options presented.

some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.

Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc

Karol wrote:
some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.

Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc

you mean utterly irrelevant for the casual hobbist and only important at the highest levels of compeition?