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.

Ah, the grand GWspiracy, never not entertaining when it comes up!

 techsoldaten wrote:
- New models come with highly improved datasheets, getting players to buy more models.

....Except when they don't. New models come out with datasheets that are worse than existing options all the time.1 in about 4 new datasheets comes out that is actually competitive. Don't believe me? What's the new Primaris wave?

-Judicar
-Eradicators
-Bladeguard

^very competitive

-Assault Intercessors
-Outriders
-ATV
-Captain with storm shield and relic blade
-Bladeguard ancient
-Heavy Intercessors
-Stationary missile fortification

^decent, but generally worse than existing options by most accounts. Most competitive players ain't seeing a reason to take chainsword intercessors over assault bolter intercessors, or outriders over marine bikers, or atvs over multimelta attack bikes/eradicators

-3 different kinds of primaris-speeder
-3 different kints of gladiator
-volkite gun lieutenant guy
-primaris techmarine
-stationary gun turret

^generally pretty bad

 techsoldaten wrote:
New books come with special rules, getting players to buy more books.

This is the actual business strategy. GW's business models with respect to the rules right now is the same strategy being employed by every "freemium" video game model: Manufactured Discontent in marketing language. If you subtly make sure a customer is having a worse time just before you give them a product to buy that alleviates that bad time, the customer will be much more enthusiastic about purchasing that product. Have you noticed that "codexes that nerf the faction that is currently powerful, or do not significantly rework and change a faction" are not really a thing since the early-8th codexes? Gw's strategy tends to be to buff something ELSE to be the spider that swallows the fly, and that's intentional. Buffs make the people who get them happy.

There's a reason it would have been horrible for Space Wolves players to play even 1 month of their special unique units being W1 and normal marines being W2, but Chaos Space Marines players GW is A-OK with making play hilariously blatantly imbalanced matchups.

 techsoldaten wrote:
- New editions come with altered mechanics, getting players to buy more armies.

Yep, or different types of units more favored by the edition's strategy. We've been through the "for every box of infantry you buy, you must buy a transport to go with them" edition, the "we want you to buy multiples of the same kit together to get a formation bonus" edition, the "no actually wait, no transports, hordes of infantry on the battlefield please" edition, and now the, I guess "throw out your non-marines, buy primaris pleasepleasepleaseweinvestedsomuchintothem" edition.

What is not part of GW's business practices: making older, iconic units useful in the current meta. They only become useful again by coincidence and it's why we rarely see

 techsoldaten wrote:
Dire Avengers in Eldar armies,

1 for 1 so far, though oddly, a strange example to pick given that Dire Avengers are THE NEWEST eldar troop choice :^) is GW trying to get people to buy Storm Guardians or something?

 techsoldaten wrote:
Meganobs in Ork armies,

You do see those all the time in competitive ork lists. Also, FWIW, MANZ are the second-newest wave of ork stuff behind the new buggies.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Chaos Space Marines in CSM armies, etc.

Weird because Chaos Space Marines are a brand new kit.

I don't think GW's rules designers are competent professional or organised enough to do much more than throw gak at the wall and see what sticks.

Seems to be good enough as long as the models and background are cool enough.

The whinge as far as I can see is that for the last 3 of 4 years there has been a major Marine release.

In part I can agree - they wanted Primaris to fully replace Marines (and may have then got cold feet, who knows), so wanted everything out reasonably quickly. I'm also not overly convinced they'd have gone *much faster* than this - because as said, pockets are only so big, GW want people to buy a little often.

But the point is they are new - a big collection of models for people to sink their teeth into. Which unsurprisingly has occurred, and its now wall to wall marines even more than usual.

The problem is *this is exactly why* Xenos - and to a degree Chaos factions - feel ignored. I don't think Dark Eldar need an entire new line of models. Kabalites, Wyches etc hold up very well. But it would be nice to have something *new* - and I mean properly new, not "this was finecast, now it isn't". Because yes, I've got some finecast incubi, so unless you make them so overpowered I should be running 20-30 in every list I can imagine, I don't need more. But at the same time, its hard to see who is going to start a DE army on the back of Incubi and one special character, so who is this release for?

I think DE are going to get Hesperax early in 2021 and then that will be it for another edition. And their codex/supplement/future chapter approved rules might be good, might be bad through those years - but from a collection perspective, its kind of tedious.

In the same way if you think Tyranids are a "complete" army, and there's no room for new units, I just feel that's a lack of imagination. Yes you might be treading on another unit's toes - but again, if the models *look cool* - and are not complete trash rules wise - I don't think that's a problem.

It becomes a problem for stores to stock and so on. The Xenos range that most badly needs to be looked at is definitely Eldar, and after that next in line is probably Imperial Guard. Everyone else has pretty nice models and lots of plastic kits.

Every range cannot be like Primaris, it would overwhelm the retailers. That is what happened to Warmachine and Hordes.

I think this is an issue mostly for veteran players who are also "faction loyalists", only playing one or two factions. Then you feel that things get stale and want a shake up. But I think that might be a smaller group by far than people who collect multiple factions, new players, and people who play space marines as their main faction.

Judging everything just on "is it or plastic or not" is a bad idea though.

Unless those 22 year old Berzerker models are fine. I mean they are plastic, right? Or how's about the 21 year old Eldar Guardians which are brought up as the main sticking point for people not wanting to play Craftworlds, more than Finecast Aspect Warriors? Tyranid Gaunts are a laughably bad kit now too and the Cadians looked out of date the moment they came out in 2003.

Range refreshes are not just about pleasing the already existing collectors of the army, but ensuring there can continue to be new blood that will invest in it too. Necrons would not be seeing nearly the same amount of popularity right now if they were still on those terrible old sculpts for Warriors, despite the previous Warrior kits being newer than like all of the other kits I just mentioned aside from Cadians.

Making sure the core troops of the army are up to date is the most important thing for the health of a model range because it's what people are going to be buying and painting the most of. If they're having to wrestle with shoddy old sculpts which are starting to get worn out and are visibly lower quality than newer stuff of course they're not going to buy into the army on a large scale. And if half of those models are finecast too? No chance.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Judging everything just on "is it or plastic or not" is a bad idea though.

Unless those 22 year old Berzerker models are fine. I mean they are plastic, right? Or how's about the 21 year old Eldar Guardians which are brought up as the main sticking point for people not wanting to play Craftworlds, more than Finecast Aspect Warriors? Tyranid Gaunts are a laughably bad kit now too and the Cadians looked out of date the moment they came out in 2003.

Range refreshes are not just about pleasing the already existing collectors of the army, but ensuring there can continue to be new blood that will invest in it too. Necrons would not be seeing nearly the same amount of popularity right now if they were still on those terrible old sculpts for Warriors, despite the previous Warrior kits being newer than like all of the other kits I just mentioned aside from Cadians.

Making sure the core troops of the army are up to date is the most important thing for the health of a model range because it's what people are going to be buying and painting the most of. If they're having to wrestle with shoddy old sculpts which are starting to get worn out and are visibly lower quality than newer stuff of course they're not going to buy into the army on a large scale. And if half of those models are finecast too? No chance.

I still get PTSD about snapped hormagaunt feet and split-crack eldar asses, even over a decade since I last built some.

I will say that new = expensive in comparison, guardians and gaunts if resculpted will cost more per head than they do now and the 2nd hand market will shrink for current-versions obviously. Same for ork boyz and guardsmen, I see people clamouring for new guard or ork infantry and I already consider them too expensive to get into.

Dudeface wrote:

I will say that new = expensive in comparison, guardians and gaunts if resculpted will cost more per head than they do now and the 2nd hand market will shrink for current-versions obviously. Same for ork boyz and guardsmen, I see people clamouring for new guard or ork infantry and I already consider them too expensive to get into.

This is definitely true, I wonder if people realise that costs of these kits would probably increase about 50% per head if they got a new release.
I'm seriously considering starting Imperial Guard - but even current costs have all but stopped me after I planned out even a small 1000pt list. As much as newer and sexier models would be great, the new costs would completely torpedo my plans.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
New models are a crapshoot on if they are good or not. That's a common fallacy that gets tossed around despite countless examples of all the times models came out and weren't good.

New books always try to tweak and refine the armies to keep the game fresh and interesting, which of course helps people buy more stuff, but that's the same for any game system.

I feel you've gone a bit too cynical and only see malice where there isn't any.

You talk about malice, I talk about business models.

GW's business model demands they keep people continuously buying models, books and supplies. I'm pretty sure that's self-evident, but you're welcome to argue.

That's a nice story about keeping the game interesting, but it's not necessary for people's enjoyment of the game nor is it true of all gaming systems. Chess and Go have been around for centuries unchanged and people still enjoy playing both very much. The sentiment I hear expressed by 40k players the most is a desire for a game that's well balanced with each faction's units costed properly relative to one another. A bonus would be if a list could survive a new edition unchanged.

There's a reason that never happens.

Try not to think about this as good or bad, but simply the business model under which the company operates. By changing the relative value of factions / units every six months, people are constantly adjusting for the meta (which often involves purchasing new models.) There's always a different gauge for what's efficient coming, meaning there's always a consumer demand for product.

You don't have to be cynical to realize that's what's happening. It's not necessarily bad, I find it entertaining and the constant churn is the reason I've stayed around so long. The rules for Wraithlords had me laughing for a long time.

We're at a point where the rules for Primaris Marine armies are so good GW was able to increase demand for those models. It started about 1.5 years ago and continues to this day. This is the oversaturation, I was seeing it myself before Covid hit. Primaris had already been around for years but people were not starting armies at the same rate because, despite the quality of the models, the rules weren't there to make them as good as what they are.

GW knows they can shift demand to another faction with the release of the next Codex by introducing some new rules and setting points at a certain level. They're just refining the business model now to extract as much capital from consumers as possible on their ascent to being a "big" company.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

I will say that new = expensive in comparison, guardians and gaunts if resculpted will cost more per head than they do now and the 2nd hand market will shrink for current-versions obviously. Same for ork boyz and guardsmen, I see people clamouring for new guard or ork infantry and I already consider them too expensive to get into.

This is definitely true, I wonder if people realise that costs of these kits would probably increase about 50% per head if they got a new release.
I'm seriously considering starting Imperial Guard - but even current costs have all but stopped me after I planned out even a small 1000pt list. As much as newer and sexier models would be great, the new costs would completely torpedo my plans.

This is also why I think that representing hordes by recycling units back onto the board is a good idea, because 'horde' armies otherwise cost so much more than the PA armies. If they had the same number of units, but one side could recycle units, you'd get that horde feeling pretty well.

I agree with the point made earlier that respawning units doesn't really feel like a horde as much as just having lots of models.
It also sells fewer models, which is exactly the opposite of what GW is trying to push.
They went kinda crazy at the end of 7th, giving you units completely free, spawning other units during the game, or even units turning into other units mid-game. So to properly play a 2000pt game you might need to bring 2500pts+ to the table.
Fortunately they abandoned that because it was extremely toxic to play against.

But I doubt respawning hordes will be a thing.

 Jidmah wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Where did anything say DttFE was going away?

Mortarion's datasheet doesn't have it, so unless it's rolled into the DG-specific army trait, I assume it is gone.

Huh, fair point. Yeah it might be going away then.

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:Adding Ridgerunners and a Jackal Alpha are going to change how Tyranid army plays far more than adding some Penitent Engines to a space marine army.

This really just reflects how the Marine codex is already so extensive and so bloated that they have a unit for every role and every niche except cheap horde infantry. And this was the case even before the Primaris launch. Guard change significantly when you add Penitent Engines to the mix.

This argument is, fundamentally, that because the Tyranid range has so many gaps compared to Space Marines, then any additions that can ally with Tyranids should count as support for the Tyranid range. I don't buy it- it's barely a step removed from telling Guard players they should be happy because now Sisters are back.

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:I don't think any 40k faction would be equal or exceed space marines even if they were given more promotion and resources as marines. Any faction would certainly be doing better much than they are. Necrons and Sisters of Battle being a pretty strong case for that recently. But they don't have the Je ne sais quoi that space marines do. That's not me as a fan of space marines, that's me being honest with myself. I would rather space marines and Primaris especially be niche so I can be THEE Primaris player at my FLGS.

(...)

But what I want isn't what I think would work best. Same goes for space marines. They are always going to be a popular idea. There's a reason why large amount of non-GW media feature them. The idea of a space marine was well imprinted in my mind well before I ever heard of 40k. If anything, 40k space marines are less space marine than anything else I would call a space marine. They are space knights really. Which is close enough.

I disagree with the hypothesis that dudebro space knights are such a popular and enduring concept that they would automatically be the most popular faction regardless of support, and as you noted (bolded for emphasis) what 40K calls a 'space marine' doesn't really line up with the pop culture concept of a 'space marine'.

I think you can make a case for something like Tempestus Scions tapping into the popularity of Call of Duty, or a more sci-fi Guard regiment like Elysians that actually does match the cultural roots of Aliens' Marines (see also: Halo's UNSC, Starship Troopers' Mobile Infantry). Maybe if Scions were more than two kits, or Guard had models newer than 2003, they might actually be more popular.

GW's marketing and writing constantly fluffs up Marines as the coolest thing to ever exist (even when reading about unrelated factions), puts them on all the branding, and includes them in all the starter sets- I think that has a lot more to do with their popularity than any inherent appeal to space knights. Just look at how Custodes are nowhere near as popular as Marines despite basically being the same concept taken to the next level.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
New models are a crapshoot on if they are good or not. That's a common fallacy that gets tossed around despite countless examples of all the times models came out and weren't good.

New books always try to tweak and refine the armies to keep the game fresh and interesting, which of course helps people buy more stuff, but that's the same for any game system.

I feel you've gone a bit too cynical and only see malice where there isn't any.

You talk about malice, I talk about business models.

GW's business model demands they keep people continuously buying models, books and supplies. I'm pretty sure that's self-evident, but you're welcome to argue.

That's a nice story about keeping the game interesting, but it's not necessary for people's enjoyment of the game nor is it true of all gaming systems. Chess and Go have been around for centuries unchanged and people still enjoy playing both very much. The sentiment I hear expressed by 40k players the most is a desire for a game that's well balanced with each faction's units costed properly relative to one another. A bonus would be if a list could survive a new edition unchanged.

There's a reason that never happens.

Try not to think about this as good or bad, but simply the business model under which the company operates. By changing the relative value of factions / units every six months, people are constantly adjusting for the meta (which often involves purchasing new models.) There's always a different gauge for what's efficient coming, meaning there's always a consumer demand for product.

You don't have to be cynical to realize that's what's happening. It's not necessarily bad, I find it entertaining and the constant churn is the reason I've stayed around so long. The rules for Wraithlords had me laughing for a long time.

We're at a point where the rules for Primaris Marine armies are so good GW was able to increase demand for those models. It started about 1.5 years ago and continues to this day. This is the oversaturation, I was seeing it myself before Covid hit. Primaris had already been around for years but people were not starting armies at the same rate because, despite the quality of the models, the rules weren't there to make them as good as what they are.

GW knows they can shift demand to another faction with the release of the next Codex by introducing some new rules and setting points at a certain level. They're just refining the business model now to extract as much capital from consumers as possible on their ascent to being a "big" company.

The reason I saw that post as ascribing malice was the long debunked "all new stuff is better than old stuff" claim, paired with saying that they want you to buy stuff is proof of them being mustache twirling.

And you don't have to constantly adjust for metas outside of competetive, but then you're already buying into the highest amount of churn to compete in a meta arms race.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I agree with the point made earlier that respawning units doesn't really feel like a horde as much as just having lots of models.
It also sells fewer models, which is exactly the opposite of what GW is trying to push.
They went kinda crazy at the end of 7th, giving you units completely free, spawning other units during the game, or even units turning into other units mid-game. So to properly play a 2000pt game you might need to bring 2500pts+ to the table.
Fortunately they abandoned that because it was extremely toxic to play against.

But I doubt respawning hordes will be a thing.

I didn't find it toxic. Not like Riptide spam. But I bet they sold off a lot of outstanding Rhinos, Razorbacks, and other assorted inventory gumming up their warehouse (and not gelling with their new production schedule). I know I finished building my Battle Company for that reason, because GW seemed to be rewarding me loyally building a Battle Company. I'd bet that one of the reasons we see so many more SM than Orks, Tyranids, or AM is because they're much cheaper to collect and field in a game. If a unit of Termagants is 120pts for thirty and a unit of SM is 120pts for five, the Tyranid player needs to buy 3x as many boxes. Where a Tyranid player only has to buy one box for a Troops unit, like a SM player, I think you'd see lots more Tyranid armies.

Primaris tech marine is not bad. It is actually competitive. It has a great gun and CC weapon plus on demand +1 to hit for a vehicle.

 catbarf wrote:

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:Adding Ridgerunners and a Jackal Alpha are going to change how Tyranid army plays far more than adding some Penitent Engines to a space marine army.

This really just reflects how the Marine codex is already so extensive and so bloated that they have a unit for every role and every niche except cheap horde infantry. And this was the case even before the Primaris launch. Guard change significantly when you add Penitent Engines to the mix.

This argument is, fundamentally, that because the Tyranid range has so many gaps compared to Space Marines, then any additions that can ally with Tyranids should count as support for the Tyranid range. I don't buy it- it's barely a step removed from telling Guard players they should be happy because now Sisters are back.

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:I don't think any 40k faction would be equal or exceed space marines even if they were given more promotion and resources as marines. Any faction would certainly be doing better much than they are. Necrons and Sisters of Battle being a pretty strong case for that recently. But they don't have the Je ne sais quoi that space marines do. That's not me as a fan of space marines, that's me being honest with myself. I would rather space marines and Primaris especially be niche so I can be THEE Primaris player at my FLGS.

(...)

But what I want isn't what I think would work best. Same goes for space marines. They are always going to be a popular idea. There's a reason why large amount of non-GW media feature them. The idea of a space marine was well imprinted in my mind well before I ever heard of 40k. If anything, 40k space marines are less space marine than anything else I would call a space marine. They are space knights really. Which is close enough.

I disagree with the hypothesis that dudebro space knights are such a popular and enduring concept that they would automatically be the most popular faction regardless of support, and as you noted (bolded for emphasis) what 40K calls a 'space marine' doesn't really line up with the pop culture concept of a 'space marine'.

I think you can make a case for something like Tempestus Scions tapping into the popularity of Call of Duty, or a more sci-fi Guard regiment like Elysians that actually does match the cultural roots of Aliens' Marines (see also: Halo's UNSC, Starship Troopers' Mobile Infantry). Maybe if Scions were more than two kits, or Guard had models newer than 2003, they might actually be more popular.

GW's marketing and writing constantly fluffs up Marines as the coolest thing to ever exist (even when reading about unrelated factions), puts them on all the branding, and includes them in all the starter sets- I think that has a lot more to do with their popularity than any inherent appeal to space knights. Just look at how Custodes are nowhere near as popular as Marines despite basically being the same concept taken to the next level.

Scions have literally one kit, a flyer, and the ugliest vehicle design conceived by the mind of man, and are both uncompetitive and boring as feth to play as and against, and so many of the Counterstrike Call of Duty Dudebros I know who are into 40k are building massive armies of them, or want to.

it's obviously an appeal that exists that is filled somewhat by space marines, but GW could 100% replicate that appeal without the trappings of space-marineyness. Heck, they DID with the phobos line and its cringetastic CoD skull masks and seven-foot-long sneakyboi combat knives.

GW just needs to make atheist marines who wield katanas and wear trenchcoats and they'll have perfectly cornered the market. You'd think this is a joke but the sheer number of 'homebrew chapters that secretly don't believe in the emperor' stories I heard before GW made the horus heresy and allowed for marines who didn't believe in him religiously and just perfectly remembered the history from 10,000 years ago...

GW don't care which grey plastic they sell.

This idea that they want to shift space marines for half a year, then move into CWE, then back into Space Marines, then lets have 6 weeks where GSC are top dogs, oh no Abberants are selling too quickly, lets nerf into the ground doesn't make sense from any sort of business angle.

They want a game that people enjoy playing - which I think means a game which feels vaguely balanced. The more people playing means the more people talking about the game and buying models. (I think this was challenged under Kirby - but it was a bit like the idea people buy cars just to look nice outside the house. Some people sure, most people though won't buy if the car is awful to drive.)

The problem with balance however is that they want - and in fact, need - to add new stuff. And any game where you add new stuff tends to undermine balance, because predicting how meta's evolve is incredibly difficult. The whinge is that GW often get internal and external balance way out of whack, which, a mathhammerer declares, they should be able to avoid with some relatively simple excel spreadsheets.

Tyel wrote:

They want a game that people enjoy playing

They don't though, they care even less about this than they do which grey plastic they sell. All they care about is how much money they make, which is pretty closely correlated to how much plastic they sell.
The more people play one faction, the better for them. Because they can produce one Space Marine kit and sell to 50% of the playerbase, or one Eldar kit and sell to 10% of the playerbase, that's not even a hard equation for which presents a better return on investment for GW.
That's what creates this cycle, Space Marines are the most popular > GW gives them the most attention > Space Marines draw more players and get even more attention > GW gives them more attention > Repeat

 techsoldaten wrote:

- New models come with highly improved datasheets, getting players to buy more models.

This particular argument is false, just look at the hammerfall bunker, gladiator, firestrike or hounds of morkai. These could all be old datasheets.

Agreed with the rest

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
...having your main range be as outdated is a serious no no.

More of a no-no than selling poor-quality resin casts of fifteen-year-old metal minis as core elements of any of your ranges?

Every company experimented with ways to replace metal. GWs failed hard as did most other attempts (PVC) and they gave up on it.

I agree regarding the garbage homebrew Chapter stories I always see. Always unknown founding, always believe in saving humanity but say feth the Imperium, somehow having more plot armor than Space Wolves against the Inquisition, always not following the Codex...it's kinda pathetic. Sorry your garbage homebrew Chapter doesn't get as much done as the Ultramarines, stay mad.

In 2019 I had a lot of hope when the SM codex came out, and the supplements. It could have been a great template for re-doing all the codexes the same way. All factions could have gotten a huge main codex, along with some supplements for different sub-factions. I was pretty excited.

Unfortunately, after the Space Marines got this great codex and supplements that had some absolutely amazing rules, what did the rest of us get? We got PA.

What a joke of a series of books in comparison to what the Space Marines got. Not only that, but the Space Marines also got good stuff in the PA books too.

Apparently, the money I spend on Tyranids is not as valuable as the money you spend on Space Marines. Maybe GW doesn't understand the message they are sending to the customers who don't want to play Imperium armies. I somehow doubt that, though. I think they are just lazy as a company and have gotten away with these tactics for so long, they don't need to do it any other way.

It's sad how badly GW treats their non-Imperium customers. Maybe at some point, if enough of us stop supporting and playing the game, people will realize the problems, but I'm not holding my breath.

Ignoring diversity in your game system certainly won't breed it on the table.

Well it seems, that GW is thinking that if you are hardcore enough to buy tyranid or eldar models that are almost twice my age, then you would have bought them anyway. What ever the models were new or old. And if they can sell you old models with fewer work and investment, they do just that. So your money is worth less.

With marines they can't do that, because they are both their flagship product, so GW wants them to sell, but at the same time because they sell a secondary market is created that clogs new GW sells, so if they were not constantly updating the marine model line, which is easiest to do by changing rules, soon the marine sells would start droping, because players would focus their buying on 50% off second hand armies/models.

Karol wrote:
Well it seems, that GW is thinking that if you are hardcore enough to buy tyranid or eldar models that are almost twice my age, then you would have bought them anyway. What ever the models were new or old. And if they can sell you old models with fewer work and investment, they do just that. So your money is worth less.

With marines they can't do that, because they are both their flagship product, so GW wants them to sell, but at the same time because they sell a secondary market is created that clogs new GW sells, so if they were not constantly updating the marine model line, which is easiest to do by changing rules, soon the marine sells would start droping, because players would focus their buying on 50% off second hand armies/models.

Then you realise that finecast takes a lot more work than plastic injection moulding and your theory doesnt hold. It takes GW MORE energy to produce these outdated models that people keep asking for.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
[
Then you realise that finecast takes a lot more work than plastic injection moulding and your theory doesnt hold. It takes GW MORE energy to produce these outdated models that people keep asking for.

That assumes they keep producing them. Print runs on unpopular stuff often result in a ton of extras sitting in a warehouse. No reason to resculpt it while you've got stock on hand to sell that no one wants.

Comparatively, resin has cheaper setup costs but higher production costs. Plastic had higher set up costs but cheaper production costs.

That's why resin is typically used for low sales volume stuff, like 3rd party bits or characters.
I think the fact that characters are now plastic is a big reason why they're so expensive now, they're typically lower sales volume of people only buy 1 captain Vs three troop squads, so they need to recoup the set up cost over fewer sales.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Then you realise that finecast takes a lot more work than plastic injection moulding and your theory doesnt hold. It takes GW MORE energy to produce these outdated models that people keep asking for.

They produce them in low numbers, so the cost isn't that high as kiro set. At the same time, as it was said before. Plastic eldar boxs cost more then similar marine ones. For aged models. So no I don't agree with you.

Yeah, Karol is actually right here. I suspect that one of the main reasons for the "legally distinct" nature of Primaris Marines is precisely so GW doesn't have to compete with a secondary market.

Ok I just have to say, someone listed heavy intercessors as decent, how can they be anything quite yet they aren't even released yet ?

You can math hammer things all you like but I think the heavy Ints will be very good when they actually get put out and outriders are for all intents seem better than bike units to me, or maybe on par, with bike units able to specialize with weapons while outriders are overall good for infantry clearing and rapid deployment around the board.

However aside from that I'd agree, GW is just so bad with rules they are hit and miss for making new units amazing good so I don't think they do that on purpose, or they try and are really bad at it. Take your pick.

People have already kitbashed and converted Heavy Intercessors.