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.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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!"

Nothing to argue when it comes to personal preference. Let's see who has that moment in a few years

Let's be honest. If you buy a wargaming miniature, then I hope for all that is good and pure in the world that you will enjoy
* Putting that model together
* Painting that model
* Looking at that model on your shelf
because that's what a person can guarantee that they'll be able to do with that model after buying it. You can't count on anything else.

If your plan is "Buy a single army, use it for five years", that plan will be an absolute failure in any wargaming environment. Because no static, unchanging list is going to be effective across all of the scenarios that will be written for tournaments, etc. for five years. If the game company doesn't release new scenarios, eventually the people running tournaments will "just to shake things up, and keep things interesting".

Likewise, if you design a list to do well today, over time the (relative) effectiveness of that will change because:
* Other armies will get things that you have a hard time dealing with, if you don't make adjustments.
* Other armies will get things that make you easier to deal with, if you don't make adjustments.
whether those things are point changes, new models, new rules, or whatever.

I collect Chaos, so I don't have to give so much as a nod to making my collection look "cohesive", or worry whether my models belong to the same design/scale era. If being cohesive like that is an issue for you, that's going to complicate things.

A collection of models that you can make effective lists out of over five years is likely to be 1.5 x to 2 x as whatever you'd put into a single army. And because you can't predict the future, you can't know which options to buy, build and assemble in advance.

If the game survives long enough, the game company will redo its old sculpts. Because techniques, materials, and styles will have moved on and they want to keep selling models to people.

And that's pretty much how wargaming (whether you're playing Games Workshop games or playing someone else's games) has worked for the last twenty five years.

 solkan wrote:

If your plan is "Buy a single army, use it for five years", that plan will be an absolute failure in any wargaming environment. Because no static, unchanging list is going to be effective across all of the scenarios that will be written for tournaments, etc. for five years. If the game company doesn't release new scenarios, eventually the people running tournaments will "just to shake things up, and keep things interesting".

No one said that. You could say buy some more dakka squads, or more strike squads, or more paladins and then vary their relative presence in your list based on the meta. Can't really do that if power armor / terminator marines get hard or soft nuked, can you?

If the game survives long enough, the game company will redo its old sculpts. Because techniques, materials, and styles will have moved on and they want to keep selling models to people.

And that's pretty much how wargaming (whether you're playing Games Workshop games or playing someone else's games) has worked for the last twenty five years.

They might redo their sculpts, that does not mean the old ones will be discontinued. There have been several iterations of old marines, but I could get by with the first edition "clip on" models just fine if I that was my choice. Same for dwarf warriors, and many other miniatures.
However, now dwarf warriors have been squatted, and old marines are being phased out (if you care about performance, that is). What we are seeing now is most definately not business as usual, and quite obviously not how GW conducted their business prior to 2015.

I am not against new sculpts or new miniature models representing expanded options. I do dislike the company not supporting their range for as long as they did. I am a semi rational consumer, I adjust my buying accordingly.

Grey40k wrote:
They might redo their sculpts, that does not mean the old ones will be discontinued.

Pardon? I'm not exactly seeing where I can get my hands on a 5th edition era Tactical Squad box.

Sure, there's the newest version of one, but the old sculpts are very much discontinued. You can absolutely use old models, but that's not the same as discontinued.

Similarly, if, somehow, ALL old marines got removed, no datasheets, nothing, I'm sure you'd be more than able to use them as the nearest Primaris stand in. But again, as Grey Knights are so unique, I don't think for a second that they'll be removed. The way I look at Grey Knights, I compare them closer to Custodes than to the nearest Space Marine.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Pardon? I'm not exactly seeing where I can get my hands on a 5th edition era Tactical Squad box..

Sure, there's the newest version of one, but the old sculpts are very much discontinued. You can absolutely use old models, but that's not the same as discontinued.

With regards to the rules supporting them, apologies if that wasn't clear. The whole point of the thread is not whether you can get your hands on old boxes of miniatures, but rather how effectively you can field them in a game.

Similarly, if, somehow, ALL old marines got removed, no datasheets, nothing, I'm sure you'd be more than able to use them as the nearest Primaris stand in.

You think? I am not sure. Specially if you are playing in tournaments (from local to GT) or more generally with people outside friendly smaller groups.

An unsupported miniature (not just an old model) is a gamble that not all are willing to take.

Grey40k wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Pardon? I'm not exactly seeing where I can get my hands on a 5th edition era Tactical Squad box..

Sure, there's the newest version of one, but the old sculpts are very much discontinued. You can absolutely use old models, but that's not the same as discontinued.

With regards to the rules supporting them, apologies if that wasn't clear. The whole point of the thread is not whether you can get your hands on old boxes of miniatures, but rather how effectively you can field them in a game.

Ah, my mistake for the confusion. It sounded like you were talking about the actual sculpts being discontinued, which is an inevitable.

Similarly, if, somehow, ALL old marines got removed, no datasheets, nothing, I'm sure you'd be more than able to use them as the nearest Primaris stand in.

You think? I am not sure. Specially if you are playing in tournaments (from local to GT) or more generally with people outside friendly smaller groups.

An unsupported miniature (not just an old model) is a gamble that not all are willing to take.

In some cases, models that are directly comparable might still not be 100% reliable to field though.
Old metal Terminators, for example, are quite a bit smaller than the current breed. Older Tyranids too, are quite different in size and aesthetic.

I'm usually happy to rely on the goodwill of strangers though, and I've not really been let down in that regard.

To the OP, play your army. If you want to use the same army composition that you had in 3rd-4th feel free to use 2 10 model Strike Squads in Land Raider Crusaders with a Brother Captain of two buffing the squads for H2H. You can still use the same models in the same way. You may need to break up the 2 Strike squads into 4 5 man squads to qualify for a battalion, but you can still use the same models.

You want to use Storm Ravens or Dreadknights going forward? Feel free, but don't be surprised when their rules change.

You want to use banners but don't want them on your models? Is there another way to signify which model has them? Did you pick out the model with the detailed purity scrolls and tell your opponent that it is the one with the 'furled' banner?

Let me tell you my own story. In 7th, I decided to liquidate my 40k collection and decided to play an army that would age well. Then there was the Horus Heresy, which I couldn't play in, and then 8th dropped an I lost several rules that I felt made my force feel unique. Did I liquidate my tau? No, I shelved the units that were negatively affected in trust that I could use them again in the future.

You can do the same.

 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.

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.

but let me guess GK are not your only army, and you can afford to buy a new good army if you could afford it? Because if yes, then this is an advice of the then just go see a private doctor in another country for treatment.

Pre PA4 GK were horrible, and even worse if it goes for models I owned. Now I am not sure how people see this, when they are very rich, but to me nothing should be bad or unfun to play with, and specially not the whole faction. And saying that an army can be still fun, because you can paint it. Assumes two things. First that you like to paint and second that you think a well painted car that can't drive is good.

This is why I don't get the whole something was good or bad in the past, or in the future. I care about now. What do I care if some edition in the past GK were uber, that doesn't help me. Also GK being good in X years in the past, also doesn't matter much to me. Specially as the past shows that GW is not very attentive or focused on fixing them, and other armies have a history of years being bad. Heck if suddenly GK become uber in 5 years, but my store closes in 3 years time. I won't be able to even use the army to have fun.

Karol wrote:
but let me guess GK are not your only army, and you can afford to buy a new good army if you could afford it?

I have many armies, but I don't play them in preference of how well I win with them, and I couldn't just drop cash for another without saving, or selling. For what it's worth, I am unemployed, with no income beyond savings, unless I get accepted for a government loan.

Because if yes, then this is an advice of the then just go see a private doctor in another country for treatment.

A doctor is needed for genuine medical reasons and emergencies. Not toy soldiers.

Again, in many threads you've made your personal situation clear, that you cannot/will not sell off the army you are unhappy with, unable to get another army, unable to play against people who would be more forgiving, but won't take a step back from the hobby. Personally, I know I'd be out of that hobby area like a shot, but I digress.

My point was that how well an army does isn't always the only metric by which someone can enjoy an army.

And saying that an army can be still fun, because you can paint it. Assumes two things. First that you like to paint and second that you think a well painted car that can't drive is good.

Well, yeah. If you only get enjoyment out of playing, that's fine. I'm just drawing awareness to other parts of the hobby that are equally valid, and less likely to be made obsolete by future events.

@ OP What's your army build lead time?
As in how long do you think realistically it will take you to build an army?

Paladins are currently strong. The new PA rulea have made GK decent, a lot more decent than they have been for the whole of the edition. But how long will this last ?
Likewise what will any army be like by the time you finish your army? Im a slow army builder and painter and since I started back up in 40k the army I was planning on building looks nothing like im playing now lol.

Consider this one iron clad rule: Any top meta build/faction is only one FAQ from being on the bottom.

Do you like grey knight? Will you enjoy painting and building grey knights? Collect grey knights. This should be your only concern.
If you want to chase the meta dragon for competition sake and play the newest baddest hotnes.. be prepared to sell and buy whole armies on the regular as rules can change rapidly.

It's only been a couple years since GK got new plastics in their current style with Voldus.

That's newer than 90% of GW's current range.

Grey40k wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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!"

Nothing to argue when it comes to personal preference. Let's see who has that moment in a few years

Ok.
But 1st;

Define "a few years". Be specific. "By the end of ____." or "In the __ Edition Codex." are acceptable answers.

Also please list the units that you expect to see removed. As in, not for sale by GW & not listed in the Codex. Forge World stuff is not part of this discussion. Again, be specific.

Yeah, in all fairness, "a few years" has already passed since Primaris introduction. They were definitely out in 2017 at least.

Hence my comment on "I know I said they'd be going any day now, so I'm not going to get any!", when that's still years someone could have picked up miniMarines.

Grey40k wrote:


As you say, it is about the definition of obsolete.

For me, obsolete is when they are clearly inferior from a gameplay perspective. This is, at the moment, a hot debate here when it comes to intercessors vs tactical marines. However, I have been reading more on it and it seems that a consensus is emerging: old marines are toast, and it is a matter of how long before they nuke them completely.

There are players that will be fine being able to field them at that lower standard for a while. That's not my case, and I think it isn't the case for some others either. This kind of discussion is, I feel, helpful for people returning to the game (or starting now fresh!) so that they can make a decision with full information.

Of course, that doesn't mean that I expect that the game will remain static until 2030, that's just an exaggeration you added yourself

Seeing that your definition of obsolescence is 'are not competitive', there is no metric of how long something will remain competitive, OP, broken etc or even optimal with a codex.

My advice would be to collect marines, paint them as a custom chapter and swap chapter rules. Generally though, chasing competitive longevity is a fools errand, but I wish you luck.

ccs wrote:

Grey40k wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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!"

Nothing to argue when it comes to personal preference. Let's see who has that moment in a few years

Ok.
But 1st;

Define "a few years". Be specific. "By the end of ____." or "In the __ Edition Codex." are acceptable answers.

Also please list the units that you expect to see removed. As in, not for sale by GW & not listed in the Codex. Forge World stuff is not part of this discussion. Again, be specific.

well most of the people I started with, quit the game already. Two are playing tournaments, and one guy has an army, but no longer plays. Two people that started a year later, and out of those one quit, and sold his BA army, and the other started with an IH primaris army and it over night turned in to a tournament winning army. Including me this is 4 people still with an army, 5 counting the guy who doesn't play anymore. In the mean time 13 people started and left. And all of them, stoped playing because either their army stoped working or because they couldn't afford the constant updates.
I don't know about others, but in my area this seems to mean that, an army should get fixed within a year. If not people just quit, and if it gets updated later, they never get to expiriance it, because they are no longer playing or own any models to play.

 =Angel= wrote:

Seeing that your definition of obsolescence is 'are not competitive', there is no metric of how long something will remain competitive, OP, broken etc or even optimal with a codex.

Yeah, by that rationale, Khorne Berserkers were 'obsolete' for 6th / 7th edition at least. Could have easily been a candidate for removal, given the models are 20+ years old too. Since the 8th edition codex though they're one of the best (if not *the* best) melee units in the game.

ccs wrote:

Grey40k wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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!"

Nothing to argue when it comes to personal preference. Let's see who has that moment in a few years

Ok.
But 1st;

Define "a few years". Be specific. "By the end of ____." or "In the __ Edition Codex." are acceptable answers.

Also please list the units that you expect to see removed. As in, not for sale by GW & not listed in the Codex. Forge World stuff is not part of this discussion. Again, be specific.

I expect power armor marines to be phased out the first from 40k. This means no more new kits (or anecdotally few), and gradually becoming worse than primaris equivalents. As for in how many years, worse case scenario a couple more years, best case 3-5 (for the transition to complete).

I also expect terminators to be replaced in the lore by some elite primaris version. Gravis comes to mind, but I expect them to release something that replaces more directly terminators. For that, I imagine worse case scenario 1-2 years, best case 3-5.

Your turn!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 =Angel= wrote:

Grey40k wrote:


As you say, it is about the definition of obsolete.

For me, obsolete is when they are clearly inferior from a gameplay perspective. This is, at the moment, a hot debate here when it comes to intercessors vs tactical marines. However, I have been reading more on it and it seems that a consensus is emerging: old marines are toast, and it is a matter of how long before they nuke them completely.

There are players that will be fine being able to field them at that lower standard for a while. That's not my case, and I think it isn't the case for some others either. This kind of discussion is, I feel, helpful for people returning to the game (or starting now fresh!) so that they can make a decision with full information.

Of course, that doesn't mean that I expect that the game will remain static until 2030, that's just an exaggeration you added yourself

Seeing that your definition of obsolescence is 'are not competitive', there is no metric of how long something will remain competitive, OP, broken etc or even optimal with a codex.

My advice would be to collect marines, paint them as a custom chapter and swap chapter rules. Generally though, chasing competitive longevity is a fools errand, but I wish you luck.

Not being meta top 5 is not the same as clearly inferior, as in a dominated option. But if you prefer to give me the meta chaser label, go ahead.

Grey40k wrote:

ccs wrote:

Grey40k wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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!"

Nothing to argue when it comes to personal preference. Let's see who has that moment in a few years

Ok.
But 1st;

Define "a few years". Be specific. "By the end of ____." or "In the __ Edition Codex." are acceptable answers.

Also please list the units that you expect to see removed. As in, not for sale by GW & not listed in the Codex. Forge World stuff is not part of this discussion. Again, be specific.

I expect power armor marines to be phased out the first from 40k. This means no more new kits (or anecdotally few), and gradually becoming worse than primaris equivalents. As for in how many years, worse case scenario a couple more years, best case 3-5 (for the transition to complete).

I also expect terminators to be replaced in the lore by some elite primaris version. Gravis comes to mind, but I expect them to release something that replaces more directly terminators. For that, I imagine worse case scenario 1-2 years, best case 3-5.

Your turn!

I doubt that I'll be experiencing your predicted sad-face moment. Though if you really want a date, then no sooner than Jan.1st 2030.

But I asked you a simple question & all you gave me was a wishy washy worst/best case ranges covering 1-5 years..... Clearly you didn't understand the request.
So try again.
Name the 1st year that you think I won't be able to make a generic, loyalist, non-primaris, codex SM force, bought new from GW.

Again, complaining about no new kits would only be an issue if the current kits are flawed. However, I don't see the current SM mini marine kits ageing badly over the next decade or so, so why should they be updated?

Update the kits that NEED it, not just to fulfil some kind of "this is old" quota. So a decently old kit, like Terminators, are still pretty damn fine, even now, and so realistically don't need any kind of recut for a while, whereas Cadians, Eldar, and so on, could really do with new updates, not simply because they're old, but because they're not really pulling their weight.

And, as I've said earlier, units being bad in game isn't a reflection of if they're going to be scrapped. Khorne Berzerkers, despite being a rather hideously proportioned kit and nearly ancient, were terrible in game for the better part of a decade. Now, they're back in fashion - and they're a mini-marine unit too!

ccs wrote:

Though if you really want a date, then no sooner than Jan.1st 2030.

I doubt it, since it is 2020 and we are already seeing intercessors being the unit of choice in most lists(over tac marines); we'll see!

But I asked you a simple question & all you gave me was a wishy washy worst/best case ranges covering 1-5 years..... Clearly you didn't understand the request.
.

More like you do not understand how predictions work. If you did, you'd realize that you should discount the opinion of anyone who gives you a set date / value and that's it.

I think that the noise to signal ratio is getting worse in the thread, so I am done with it.

Thanks everyone for your opinions and tips!