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.

Definitely no point in investing in an army unless you can be certain that your future grandkids will be able to use it to win the LVO.

Icegoat wrote:
The replies here are more ic one day last year all old chaos space marines and chaos space marine terminator became obsolete over a weekend. How dumb are people grey knights are doomed

That made the models old. It didn't do anything for the CSM or CSM Terminator datasheet. It didn't make them better or worse on the table.

Its all about timing. Yes, GW shows little likelyhood they will produce new mini-marines. Therefore if they ever release more GK stuff, on the balance of history, you would expect it to be Primaris. But you don't know for certain, and you don't know when, if ever, they will do this.

In terms of competitive play, I'm not sure what you can draw from it. Primaris on release were largely crap, because they were overcosted in a generally overcosted roster. Marine armies were generally about going as cheap/efficient on firepower as possible under Guilliman's reroll everything buff. There were some things like Ravenguard throwing Aggressors forward and going "haha, if you can't clear this you're in trouble" - but the overwhelming majority of armies just went and killed them.

But yes, they got bolter discipline and +1 attack, and the new SM codex, and then more buffs in the chapter codexes, and yet more buffs from Faith and Fury and now Primaris stuff is clearly the way to go. Will it remain the way to go? Who can say when the wheel of Chapter Approved turns in about 9.5 months time?

Grey Knights were trash more or less from the get go. The recent buffs in Ritual of the Damned have however made them very playable - with the current units.
But who can say if 9th is just around the corner? If GK 2.0 is going to nerf them back into irrelevency? Rule changes are far more likely to be a problem if you are "competitive" than eventual Primarisification.
Maybe they will bring out Strike-Primaris, who are essentially Strike Squads but better, so your Strike Squads are worse now. That would be a bit sad. But then... how many strike marines were you buying? Say 30? Assuming standard discounts its £90. Not something you want to lose perhaps - but if you are competitive player, its not much in terms of travelling to events.

Grey40k wrote:

The point is that replacement of old SMs is not business as usual, it is far faster than usual range expansions. The fear is that instead of having an OK functioning army, it would result in a faster than usual outclassed army with no hope to regain the spotlight. That'd be because I doubt they plan on rotating old marines to the top of the pack, which happens with other units / subfactions / factions that are supported. After all, the 2 plastic kits that consitute the core of GK are in the direct line of fire of the primaris advance.

Are they? If one thing should be clear, it's that the GK are not an actual Space Marine faction. There have been exactly zero Grey Knights Primaris units so far. If your thesis is GK's current units are going to be obsoleted, fine, but there's been no movement that direction at all. I think you're more likely to simply see absolutely no new kits than for the current kits to be rendered obsolete in a relevant time scale. They're in the second tier, or worse, of support with most of everyone else where nobody knows what the heck will ever happen. This is almost completely besides the rules aspect, which, as stated above, took quite a while to actually develop to where it is now.

GK may, in fact, forever remain non-primaris for precisely this reason. To make a more fully-formed Grey Knights army GW has lots of room to add new, bespoke, stuff. Like a GK-specific flyer or tank or whatever without most stepping on models that are already there.

Tyel wrote:
Grey Knights were trash more or less from the get go. The recent buffs in Ritual of the Damned have however made them very playable - with the current units.
But who can say if 9th is just around the corner? If GK 2.0 is going to nerf them back into irrelevency? Rule changes are far more likely to be a problem if you are "competitive" than eventual Primarisification.
Maybe they will bring out Strike-Primaris, who are essentially Strike Squads but better, so your Strike Squads are worse now. That would be a bit sad. But then... how many strike marines were you buying? Say 30? Assuming standard discounts its £90. Not something you want to lose perhaps - but if you are competitive player, its not much in terms of travelling to events.

Fair comments.

I guess the killer combo would be, in my case, if they made them mind about terminators and killed them the same way they are killing power armor marines. Why? It is not the 50x5 euros alone, plus 40-50 miniatures (that alone is much more money in time than the boxes). It is that combined with the feeling that they killed the core of the army. Because honestly, GK are heavily defined by that small core of unique units. I fully expect that there will be primaris better than strike squads before GK even get a new round of updates.

rbstr wrote:
Are they? If one thing should be clear, it's that the GK are not an actual Space Marine faction..

Yep, they aren't. And since they cannot be easily ported into primaris, apparently, GW is so far leaving them behind. In an era of all or mostly all primaris, who wants to be stuck with the old marines?

In any case, I do appreciate all the comments and the info I gathered in the discussion. As I said, I hope it is helpful for the next old player coming back.

I've made my mind. I hope you guys don't mind if I stick around and pester you with questions, I have a lot to catch up on.

 harlokin wrote:
Definitely no point in investing in an army unless you can be certain that your future grandkids will be able to use it to win the LVO.

Yes, rightly so. It's important to look at time frames as it gives the discussion some weight to it. Nothing we buy is promised from cradle to the grave. That said, how long is everyone going to be into the game ? Nothing lasts forever so worrying about what ifs that could be decades off is silly and all factions should be concerned as if the flagship faction would suffer this, everyone will be facing that replacement scheme at some point.

Don't you guys look at this from the wrong perspective, if most people play for 1-2 years, and gathering the money, waiting for the stuff to be shiped and maybe even painting the stuff takes time, then it doesn't matter if the real phase out is in 100 years, when the soft phase out aka weaker rules, no new models, no focus in the lore is already there. And this isn't even GK specific.

There were people who started WFB, only for GW to remove their armies from the game. So it is not like GW did not do stuff like that in the past. And not everyone played the game 20 years ago either, so arguments that at least they were good in 4th edition don't hold up much either. Heck some people, like me for example, didn't play in 7th ed, and all the arguments that about the game being over all better now then in 7th ed, don't help me much.


Also on a personal note, it would probably be better to have a quick phase out, then a slow 10-20 years drip of CA updates and codex, indexs etc that don't make the game very fun, but do force you to buy new books every 6-12 months. at least from a buyer perspective. For GW it is probably awesome. Some copy paste stuff done at full price, as if it was new stuff, is like printing money. Or people buying 40$ books to get 3 pages of rules.

I mean you're preaching to the choir Karol. I have sad they shouldn't phase out peoples things, period. I've fought the fight against primaris replacing old marines. I think its awful as a practice and forced rebuying of armies sucks.

I very much didn't like what they did to fantasy players with AoS, I never will like it. Unless these people can use their models in the new fantasy old world stuff they still suck for that. Anyone who went big with tomb kings on their reboot should be pissed off big time, and that was almost me. Though I decided to sell what tomb kings I had and I'm glad I did before I knew they were going to turn to dust as it were.

GW will never be clear about these things though. They want to clear up old stock, then say its all worthless. GW are only transparent in their lack of transparency. The only truth they give you is that they are full of bullgak. They invented things like legends, just so they could phase out things and still say they are keeping them alive. It's all so much gak because of their PR arm and spin of the truth.

As Mark Twain said, it's always best to get your facts straight then you can decide how you'll twist them. I bet you any amount of money right now, that when they do phase out model lines, they'll not say they are phasing them out at all because they are being kept alive in legends and poof! look now they never squat anything again ? They never lied. Bold new GW.

Edit: That said how quick the process is however does indicate how much of a good or bad investment it is. If they stick with the game for only a few years max, all this probably won't bother anyone if it happens in like a yearly fashion then it may be time people really weigh what buys they make as full on army replacements in time and money are way too big to do every year for most players.

I think it all comes down to how and if you can buy another army. If someone comes in buys what he wants, commissions a painter, gets the army after 4-6 weeks, and plays it and then it gets phased out, but he can just buy another army it aint a problem, or a small one.

Real problem start when you buy stuff and can't switch to another army. Or you really bought, converted and painted the army the way you like it spending 600hours+ on the whole thing and now you can no longer use it. Then people reactions are different.

I have a friendw hose army is 2 dark imperiums and 3 dreads. He was Iron Hand before Iron Hands were good. Now he is the worse of the worse WAAC players by what people say around here, but if his army gets nerfed in 6 months, it ain't going to be a huge tragedy. On the other hand I have seen a guy, who no longer plays anymore, with a 1000pts BA army, although army is a bad word to describe his models. When the changes came and his army became illegal to play, he just quit.

Yeah that is what I mean. If you can afford to just burn and churn whole armies nothing of this means anything to you.

I still don't think thats most players who piece their forces together and paint them on their own want that level of model attrition. Then it's a lot of time and money spent into each force and that isn't easy to for most to just pump out all the time.

Sorry to hear about both of those guys. I'd tell the IH player to just keep playing and tell people to grow up. From the models he has it doesn't sound that crazy. For the BA player that is pretty sad to hear for him. Wish he didn't quit but I can see where he would if the game just left him in the dust, leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

Grey40k wrote:

Essentially, given the limited leisure time I have I think it would be foolish of my to choose an army with a short lifespan. I don't think I am alone in that limitation, and hence why I think that telling people to just not worry about the future is a tad irritating. It is as if the implication of your comment were that those who care about longevity are in the wrong. You might not mean it that way, but I have found people who outright stated it.

Ok, talk yourself out of playing the army that you're attracted to.

As someone who is currently looking at his good old grey knights army, this thread hits me right in the feels, especially cause I hate primaris.

Karol wrote:
Don't you guys look at this from the wrong perspective, if most people play for 1-2 years, and gathering the money, waiting for the stuff to be shiped and maybe even painting the stuff takes time, then it doesn't matter if the real phase out is in 100 years, when the soft phase out aka weaker rules, no new models, no focus in the lore is already there. And this isn't even GK specific.

There were people who started WFB, only for GW to remove their armies from the game. So it is not like GW did not do stuff like that in the past. And not everyone played the game 20 years ago either, so arguments that at least they were good in 4th edition don't hold up much either. Heck some people, like me for example, didn't play in 7th ed, and all the arguments that about the game being over all better now then in 7th ed, don't help me much.


Also on a personal note, it would probably be better to have a quick phase out, then a slow 10-20 years drip of CA updates and codex, indexs etc that don't make the game very fun, but do force you to buy new books every 6-12 months. at least from a buyer perspective. For GW it is probably awesome. Some copy paste stuff done at full price, as if it was new stuff, is like printing money. Or people buying 40$ books to get 3 pages of rules.

This really resonates with me.

Soft phasing out, as you call it, is already killing it for me. Plus the uncertainty over how that will play out really discourages me from getting myself into it.

As I have said many times, the primaries roll out is not business as usual, so it cannot be compared to the normal flow of factions up and down the meta. I suspect that the reason why they don’t phase out miniatures faster right now is because letting armies languish in game while selling their sculpts is pretty darn profitable.

Also, I want to point out that in many cases this is truly a textbook example of planned obsolescence. This is very clear here because the miniatures are only made obsolete because GW chooses to do it, as in many cases the sculpts are not necessarily better. And even if they were, some people might prefer the old school look or heavily altered them so the look pretty cool despite awkward poses and what not.

If you take a look at the rate of hard replacement of miniatures in wh40k, you will notice that it’s gone up by a lot. Of course game rules pushed people to certain models over others, but models tended to rotate in being meta and rarely disappeared. Specially for marines; I still have that statue like marines that I think just got their b9lter clipped on. Those were both legal and playable marines, as far as I know, for a very long time.

Telling players who truly invest in their armies to jump in and just buy whatever is, I think, bad advice. At least if they care about fielding those models effectively in the mid or near future.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Yeah that is what I mean. If you can afford to just burn and churn whole armies nothing of this means anything to you.

I still don't think thats most players who piece their forces together and paint them on their own want that level of model attrition. Then it's a lot of time and money spent into each force and that isn't easy to for most to just pump out all the time.

Sorry to hear about both of those guys. I'd tell the IH player to just keep playing and tell people to grow up. From the models he has it doesn't sound that crazy. For the BA player that is pretty sad to hear for him. Wish he didn't quit but I can see where he would if the game just left him in the dust, leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

Yep!

The additional problem is that it harms the publisher s reputation. I don’t think there is any doubt in everyone s mind that GW miniatures are overpriced because of their market power. But, for many years, they were also selling you something other companies didn’t: longevity. Longevity as in the miniature and game would be supported for more than most people play. On top of being a game system so widespread that you can play it mostly anywhere. It was continually supported via new fluff, playable, widespread, and had decent resell value.

Nowadays, I don’t think that’s the case; Look at what happened to warhammer fantasy. Not only they changed the rules, but they went out of their way to squat large fractions of the range for many armies. Sure, the allowed a transition period, but that proud dwarf warrior that had lasted decades is now no longer supported in game. Was that necessary to bring new life to fantasy? Clearly not, they could have just changed the rules and added models. A limited version of this is happening in wh40k with primaris. Everything I read about their roll out indicates that it is a hard replacement of old marines.

Think of what this means more broadly. GW is no longer offering the same product (longevity wise). This means we as consumers need to re-evaluate how we value it and how we plan our purchases. For me this means that I won’t buy GKs and will think very carefully about any non primaris purchase I make for marines. I simply do no trust that they will stand by their old models the way they did in the past.

I have to say, for all their issues (GW overpricing painting materials and so on isn’t new), it pains me to see them ditching that core value of longevity. Think about it, how many companies stand by their product for over 20 freaking years.

Grey40k wrote:
For me this means that I won’t buy GKs

Sorry your return to the hobby was so short, and that this thread was of so little utility. I'm sure that in 20 years you'll know for certain whether it would have been a waste to invest in Grey Knights.

 harlokin wrote:

Grey40k wrote:
For me this means that I won’t buy GKs

Sorry your return to the hobby was so short, and that this thread was of so little utility. I'm sure that in 20 years you'll know for certain whether it would have been a waste to invest in Grey Knights.

On the contrary, I learnt a lot.

It just means one has to be more careful with the sculpts you buy. Just adjusting to modern GW and their new business practices.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Yeah that is what I mean. If you can afford to just burn and churn whole armies nothing of this means anything to you.

I still don't think thats most players who piece their forces together and paint them on their own want that level of model attrition. Then it's a lot of time and money spent into each force and that isn't easy to for most to just pump out all the time.

Sorry to hear about both of those guys. I'd tell the IH player to just keep playing and tell people to grow up. From the models he has it doesn't sound that crazy. For the BA player that is pretty sad to hear for him. Wish he didn't quit but I can see where he would if the game just left him in the dust, leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

To a degree it is funny, although me and funny don't work that well, I think. He was a bit like me, couldn't afford a full blown 900$ army, so got 3 dreads for cheap, and some ETB primaris and 2 dark empires. So you can imagine his list 50 intercessors, hellblasters, flying dude no one runs etc Picked to IH, because he is a tech stuff. Even made bases for them with parts of our old schools motherboards. Was getting wacked by all armies left and right. And then new codex came out and over night he became that guy who picked IH for pure power. And fun part comes from the fact it is the people that beat him with their knights and eldar armies over year or so.

It just means one has to be more careful with the sculpts you buy. Just adjusting to modern GW and their new business practices.

I am not sure if this is new though. I know prior editions from memes and stories at the store, but to me it seems like GW was always doing stuff like that. One guy told me that orcs and dark eldar did not have a book for like 8 years, and if that is true, then the stuff they do now isn't that much different. Because waiting for 8 years hoping that your book comes out next year, and it never does is like being soft phase out too. I wonder how many people that started with orcs or dark eldar stayed to see their new books.

Karol wrote:

It just means one has to be more careful with the sculpts you buy. Just adjusting to modern GW and their new business practices.

I am not sure if this is new though. I know prior editions from memes and stories at the store, but to me it seems like GW was always doing stuff like that. One guy told me that orcs and dark eldar did not have a book for like 8 years, and if that is true, then the stuff they do now isn't that much different. Because waiting for 8 years hoping that your book comes out next year, and it never does is like being soft phase out too. I wonder how many people that started with orcs or dark eldar stayed to see their new books.

I'd say it is new.

While the roll out of new armies has been uneven (codexes that you refer to), miniatures lasted forever. Have a look at Ragnar from the space wolves, or Azrael from the DA. Those miniatures were the official sculpts for how long? I have a force of DA and until very recently all my miniatures were fully supported (and it's been 20+ years).They still valid are but I expect them to get primared soon.

I very much prefer the range expansions in 5-6-7th editions (I wasn't around) https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Miniatures_(Space_Marines) than the primaris replacement strategy.

I don't think it is a matter of opinion, I think it is objectively true that since they killed WHFB they have taken a more aggresive stance towards miniature obsolescence. That is, not only rule based obsolescene but rather full obsolescence, to the point of retiring models.

PS - I remember using gorka morka models to round up my ork force...

Having owned thousands of dollars in many, many fantasy armies, Grey Knights, Space Marines and Ynnari, be careful of what you invest in.

Always beware of what you are buying from GW.

I have been burned many times in the last few years. They are constantly changing rules, points, and legality of certain armies and models.

My suggestion would be to never purchase any models until at least the next chapter approved drops. That way you can actually build a legal army, at least until the next chapter approved changes it again. My entire Ynnari army that I bought and painted at the beginning of 8th is completely illegal now. Obviously fantasy was destroyed so there goes like 8 of my armies and my favourite game.

I absolutely hate Primaris, but thats the future of Marines.

I will never purchase another non-primaris marine again because I know they will become obsolete soon, and honestly, unless you really love the models, everyone else should do the same.

I love Grey Knights, but I won't be buying anything from them until they get the Primaris treatment. And even then, only if they look good. Not the gakky "tacticool" marine look that they gave the new primaris models. They need to look like knights in space, like real marines should look.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

I have been burned many times in the last few years. They are constantly changing rules, points, and legality of certain armies and models.

My suggestion would be to never purchase any models until at least the next chapter approved drops. That way you can actually build a legal army, at least until the next chapter approved changes it again.

Well, since the most recent CA just landed in Nov/Dec of 2019, NOW would seem to be the window to build an army.
Unless you're advocating waiting another 9.5 - 10 months for CA.2020 to arrive.

I mean, at some point you have to stop waiting & get on with having fun.

ccs wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

I have been burned many times in the last few years. They are constantly changing rules, points, and legality of certain armies and models.

My suggestion would be to never purchase any models until at least the next chapter approved drops. That way you can actually build a legal army, at least until the next chapter approved changes it again.

Well, since the most recent CA just landed in Nov/Dec of 2019, NOW would seem to be the window to build an army.
Unless you're advocating waiting another 9.5 - 10 months for CA.2020 to arrive.

I mean, at some point you have to stop waiting & get on with having fun.

Maybe for some people it takes quite a bit of investment to put together and army, and they do not want to see it go up in flames in a year. That’s likely the time it will take me to put together an army for 8th edition.

There is more than the here and now to the hobby, it has always been a gourmet meal not fast food; or it use to be when I was in it.

True. but CCS is right. After CA or after the CA FAQ is the best time to start a main stream army, specially if it gets new models. Those armies tend to not be hurt by the spring FAQ, and if the army is good rules and points wise, the autum FAQ won't nerf it to much either. So more or less there is time to play till the next CA. And then if it is good it does get nerfed, often.

I am not very much in favour of such a system, but the system is there. Hard to build an army without thinking about it.

Karol wrote:
True. but CCS is right. After CA or after the CA FAQ is the best time to start a main stream army, specially if it gets new models. Those armies tend to not be hurt by the spring FAQ, and if the army is good rules and points wise, the autum FAQ won't nerf it to much either. So more or less there is time to play till the next CA. And then if it is good it does get nerfed, often.

I am not very much in favour of such a system, but the system is there. Hard to build an army without thinking about it.

That’s precisely my point though, that one has to keep in mind the system before buying.

This goes deeper than the CA or supplements like PA, specially when it comes to primaries. From where I stand, any non primaris SM marine you buy must be understood as a risky investment. If you still want it, go ahead. But fully understanding the dynamics of it.

As for other purchases, nothing is full proofed against whacky rule changes, but the more mainstream or newer, the more likely to stay supported for longer. It pains me that we are no longer buying from the GW that kept the dwarf warrior alive for over 25 years, but it is what it is.

Any model is a risky investment though.

The old Chaos Space Marine troops? Now they've been replaced with a largely new aesthetic and upsized. They're not the same as the old ones. So if in 7th, should people not have been buying new Chaos Marine kits?

No model is guaranteed to last forever, it'll almost certainly be replaced or updated at some point. What matters is if you can enjoy it enough before it does get updated, be that in games, aesthetic, art, or whatever.

I went out and added a few extra old marine units to my Space Marines long after Primaris came out, because I knew I'd still enjoy and find value in them, even if GW came out sooner and made them irrelevant (something people have been saying for years now, and it's still not happened). I don't know, I just don't get the idea of "these models NEED to be able to last for 20+ years", but that's just me.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I just don't get the idea of "these models NEED to be able to last for 20+ years", but that's just me.

Well, they are just more valuable that way. In other words, if a miniature can last 20 years then it is more bang for your buck as a consumer.

That's not to say that you won't buy anything else, or that having newer sculpts is bad. As long as they are optional and the old one still has table value, then it is just expanding your options as a consumer and not just making the old ones obsolete.

For us old players, seeing GW squat entire miniature ranges (WHFB) and phase out others (old marines, the poster army!) is shocking. It certainly means that one has to be more careful buying miniatures; regardless of whether you will play 1 year or 10, you are buying a different product than you were some years ago.

Now, if you are fine with more "disposable" or "live in the moment" armies, then the shorter lifespan probably won't matter to you. That's fine by me, but I am surprised that you find my position difficult to understand.

Grey40k wrote:
That's fine by me, but I am surprised that you find my position difficult to understand.

It's not I don't see it, but rather I see it as an inevitable armies get updated. New models come out, resculpts, fresh cut sprues, etc. But very rarely, if ever, has there been a case where entire armies just cease to exist without any alternative form of use.

Tomb Kings and Bretonnians, I guess? Squats have been gone for probably longer than they were ever around. I just don't see classic Marines going (and by that, I mean the models will always have a use). My philosophy would be to get what you want now, if you like it, instead of worrying about what may or may not be. But, I'm not you, or in your situation, so I can't expect my philosophy to apply to you.

Okey, but if you buy an army. It is bad for a long time, and then to play it you more or less have to buy a new army. Then I doubt your going to be happy. Same thing if you buy an army, GW doesn't update it and then phases the army out. To a degree both situations are the same, because the only fix is buying more models. And not everyone can buy a new army every 2 years.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I see it as an inevitable armies get updated. New models come out, resculpts, fresh cut sprues, etc. But very rarely, if ever, has there been a case where entire armies just cease to exist without any alternative form of use..

Well, whfb is a very sad example of it. Not only armies, but very many units have disappeared within armies.

Squats have been gone for probably longer than they were ever around.

Yes, and no. There have been squats in the past, but it is undeniable that the pace has increased in recent years. Just pick every miniature ever released for whfb and wh40 and look at their obsolescence rate.
https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Portal:Miniatures

It is a different business and I think some of you guys don't see it as much because you have present bias.

Of course, you have to understand that you are talking to someone who hadn't touched GW products in the last +20 years, and I have been reading and dipping my toes in the past 2-3 months.

My philosophy would be to get what you want now, if you like it, instead of worrying about what may or may not be. But, I'm not you, or in your situation, so I can't expect my philosophy to apply to you.

Fair enough! My point is not that everyone should be as cautious as me. Rather, that one should get the best possible information on the expected duration of the product. Afterwards, do as you wish with it.

Whether old marines will get outclassed and shelves in 1 year with 9th or in 10 is unclear. The answer will also depend on the type of player; clearly old marines are already a dying breed in competitive tables. People playing mostly friendly games in smaller circles will likely get value for much longer, and might just get old marines to count as primaris. That's not the case for those taking those armies to play with strangers more often, specially when WYSIWYG comes more into play. For them, old marines have a different value altogether. Then, some tournament players 3d print their miniatures, slap 3 colors on them and call it a day. For those players, obsolescence is not as much of an issue either.

We could go on describing approaches to buying a miniature, but I don't see the point. There are many types of players and we are not here to do market research for GW




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:
And not everyone can buy a new army every 2 years.

Or you can, but you don't want to; you feel that you are feeding into a bad business practice.

Since I do want to come back, I will avoid decisions that would end up giving me that feeling.

I definitly can't buy a new army 2 years, not even every 4 years.
If I could I could restart buying an army, I would either not buy one at all or buy a primaris marine army, although for that I would need a lot more money.

Karol wrote:Okey, but if you buy an army. It is bad for a long time, and then to play it you more or less have to buy a new army. Then I doubt your going to be happy. Same thing if you buy an army, GW doesn't update it and then phases the army out. To a degree both situations are the same, because the only fix is buying more models. And not everyone can buy a new army every 2 years.

An army being bad is only an issue if your enjoyment is tied to their success, and playing against people who make no effort to accommodate for it.

Since we're talking Grey Knights here, I'll talk about my small army of them. Sure, they might not have the best W/D/L ratio, but I am very happy with them.
Again, both armies and models can swing in how competitive they are - so as much as people are saying "old Marines are dying competitively", in a future edition, they might be the new hotness again, for whatever reason. As GW have proven time and time again, just because something is new or old doesn't mean it gets made stronger/weaker accordingly. When Hunters/Stalkers were released, I don't remember them being OP. Assault Centurions were hardly ever taken, because they were so slow, and no stratagems to get them closer.

If GK aren't great now, they might be later. No-one can promise anything, but just because something isn't good now doesn't mean it can't be later.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
An army being bad is only an issue if your enjoyment is tied to their success, and playing against people who make no effort to accommodate for it.

At the same time, how good of a time will you have if people have to accommodate you to play a decent game?

That ties to tournaments in the past having crafted their own set of rules, since GW had not done a good job balancing (this was old whfb).

That same tradition allowed them to come up with 9th age and keep the game going a bit longer, unsupported by GW.

so as much as people are saying "old Marines are dying competitively", in a future edition, they might be the new hotness again, for whatever reason.

Do you seriously think that oldmarines are long for this world?

As GW have proven time and time again, just because something is new or old doesn't mean it gets made stronger/weaker accordingly. When Hunters/Stalkers were released, I don't remember them being OP. Assault Centurions were hardly ever taken, because they were so slow, and no stratagems to get them closer.

Supported units might shine again, the whole point of the thread was to ascertain whether old marines will be supported (which has huge implications for GK, since they are all old marines).

If GK aren't great now, they might be later. No-one can promise anything, but just because something isn't good now doesn't mean it can't be later.

I guess that's true. At the same time, it seems very unlikely; at list in the form of power armor old marines. We cannot know things for certain, but we can certainly try to make educated guesses.

Grey40k wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
An army being bad is only an issue if your enjoyment is tied to their success, and playing against people who make no effort to accommodate for it.

At the same time, how good of a time will you have if people have to accommodate you to play a decent game?

A pretty good one, actually? Because, as you said, it was a decent game - but then, I'm not a comp player. My enjoyment doesn't necessarily come from in-game success.

so as much as people are saying "old Marines are dying competitively", in a future edition, they might be the new hotness again, for whatever reason.

Do you seriously think that oldmarines are long for this world?

Honestly, I think they're going to be around for a good time yet. I don't see them being gone in ten years, barring GW going under in that time.
But, that's my optimism speaking.

As GW have proven time and time again, just because something is new or old doesn't mean it gets made stronger/weaker accordingly. When Hunters/Stalkers were released, I don't remember them being OP. Assault Centurions were hardly ever taken, because they were so slow, and no stratagems to get them closer.

Supported units might shine again, the whole point of the thread was to ascertain whether old marines will be supported (which has huge implications for GK, since they are all old marines).

Well, we don't know, do we?

We have no word from GW, and simply relying on "old marines aren't meta" doesn't really tell us anything, knowing how GW likes to shift their meta. We can't rely on "they've not had an updated kit" because there's several armies that have far older models, and no-one's saying they're going to be scrapped.

Basically, there isn't really an obvious answer, and we're all pretty blindly guessing. All I can suggest is to enjoy things while they're around. Maybe it'll stay, maybe it won't, but I'd personally like to enjoy things now and maybe get burned later, than be years down the line saying "I know I've been saying for years not to pick up any non-Primaris models, and they've still been around, but GW are going to scrap them any day now!"