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.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:


Sarcasm aside, yeah, if Harlequins were actually top tier you would see a MUCH bigger swing for them. Compare current tournament results to 8th edition meta lists.

Oof, I understand disputing them being the best army in the game (they are, they have comparable or better play rates to the very best Space Marine chapters while being harder to paint, harder to play, as well as being a much more niche faction in eighth, while also having as many or more top four wins than any other faction), but I couldn't imagine being so deluded as to suggest they aren't even top tier.

Keep on coping my friend.

My mistake, I meant they aren't the best and used tier instead, assuming that I wouldn't have to get into semantic arguments when the intent behind the post is blatantly obvious. But hey my mistake, let me clarify. Harlequins are TOP TIER, but they aren't the best faction in the game and by a long shot. In fact, if you take away games Vs. The favored Space Marine chapters, Harlequins win/loss rate drops dramatically...its almost like they are built to kill SM and factions with low model count, high durability. Wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that their basic troops choice has a fething melta pistol and a CC weapon that has -3AP.

For Instance, Harlequins Vs. Cult Mechanicus. 10 Wins 13 Losses (43.75% win rate). Dark Eldar: 3 wins 5 losses (37.50% win rate). Demons 4 wins 6 losses (40% win rate) Orkz 6 wins 5 Losses. (54.55% win rate) I mean, still not bad, but not OP by any stretch of the imagination. But how well do they do against the current favorite SM chapters and other high durability factions? Smurfs 14 Wins 3 losses (80.56% win rate) Salamanders 15 wins 4 losses (78.95% win rate) Iron Hands 7 wins 3 losses (70% win rate). Sisters of Battle 9 Wins 3 losses (73.08% win rate) Imperial Knights 10 wins 1 loss (90.91% win rate).

So are Orkz, Dark Eldar, Demons and Mechanicus just more OP than Smurfs, Salamanders, Iron Hands, SoB, Imperial knights or is it the fact that Harlequins are just currently the paper to the SM and other factions Rock.

Hecaton wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I think it's more like a dollar with Astartes than a Dime with another faction.

And if other factions got the marketing, production, and rulea favoritism that Astartes got...?

Then you lot would bitch endlessly about them as well for some reason or other.

ccs wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I think it's more like a dollar with Astartes than a Dime with another faction.

And if other factions got the marketing, production, and rulea favoritism that Astartes got...?

Then you lot would bitch endlessly about them as well for some reason or other.

If everyone got similar levels of marketing, production, and rules favoritism we'd whine about one army getting more marketing, production, and rules favoritism than everyone else?

 AnomanderRake wrote:

ccs wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I think it's more like a dollar with Astartes than a Dime with another faction.

And if other factions got the marketing, production, and rulea favoritism that Astartes got...?

Then you lot would bitch endlessly about them as well for some reason or other.

If everyone got similar levels of marketing, production, and rules favoritism we'd whine about one army getting more marketing, production, and rules favoritism than everyone else?

I mean Stormcast were getting complaints when they got some updates when they haven't had much attention for a long period of time, so I wouldn't be surprised if there would be complaints as soon as people believed Space Marines might be getting something.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

ccs wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I think it's more like a dollar with Astartes than a Dime with another faction.

And if other factions got the marketing, production, and rulea favoritism that Astartes got...?

Then you lot would bitch endlessly about them as well for some reason or other.

If everyone got similar levels of marketing, production, and rules favoritism we'd whine about one army getting more marketing, production, and rules favoritism than everyone else?

I think I covered that with "for some reason or other". If everything was equal you'd still find something....

ccs wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I think it's more like a dollar with Astartes than a Dime with another faction.

And if other factions got the marketing, production, and rulea favoritism that Astartes got...?

Then you lot would bitch endlessly about them as well for some reason or other.

You're not following me. I'm talking about the financial outcomes.

And no, you'll find that the more balanced things are, the less people complain. Humans have a sense of fairness.

Of course people will complain about something, but getting that over saturation and favoritism dealt with would still be a good thing.

Saying " don't change this annoying direction because people will find something else to complain about ! " Is about the oddest reason I've heard so far not to do it. With that logic no one should ever change anything bad or try and fix something because something else will just need to be fixed later why even bother ?

Well for me, I'd love for them to change that saturation and spread the love just to see what else is complained about then. Change can be good, even for complaints.

If GW spread out their marketing they'd have to release a variety of factions. That costs more than just recycling the same design of power armour.
And no single release would earn a massive amount, as it would only sell to a few people (there's what, over a dozen factions now?). Space Marines being the majority allows them to focus their efforts and releases on the majority of players. It's more efficient in terms of resources.

I hope you're not mistaking my explanation of this reason to be defending GW. It's a short sighted approach for the game, and ultimately only really benefits GW themselves.
SM players are getting tired of having to constantly open their wallets, and non-SM players are getting tired of not getting anything.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
If GW spread out their marketing they'd have to release a variety of factions. That costs more than just recycling the same design of power armour.
And no single release would earn a massive amount, as it would only sell to a few people (there's what, over a dozen factions now?). Space Marines being the majority allows them to focus their efforts and releases on the majority of players. It's more efficient in terms of resources.

I hope you're not mistaking my explanation of this reason to be defending GW. It's a short sighted approach for the game, and ultimately only really benefits GW themselves.
SM players are getting tired of having to constantly open their wallets, and non-SM players are getting tired of not getting anything.

My point is that GW might be in a metastable position.

ccs wrote:
...I think I covered that with "for some reason or other". If everything was equal you'd still find something....

So you want to listen to the same complaints over and over again instead of new complaints?

Hecaton wrote:

ccs wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I think it's more like a dollar with Astartes than a Dime with another faction.

And if other factions got the marketing, production, and rulea favoritism that Astartes got...?

Then you lot would bitch endlessly about them as well for some reason or other.

You're not following me. I'm talking about the financial outcomes.

And no, you'll find that the more balanced things are, the less people complain. Humans have a sense of fairness.

Oh, GW? They'd make $.
Our fellow Dakkanaughts/40k players? They'll bitch about some aspect of it

? Can you know that?
I find the inherent quietening of dakkas complaints more likely outcome then the supposed further bitching because dakka.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

ccs wrote:
...I think I covered that with "for some reason or other". If everything was equal you'd still find something....

So you want to listen to the same complaints over and over again instead of new complaints?

the complains are always the same. Either it is my dudes don't have or other dudes have something. The only difference is how good with words specific posters are and that is more or less it.

It is interesting to read other people get angry though.

Not Online!!! wrote:
? Can you know that?
I find the inherent quietening of dakkas complaints more likely outcome then the supposed further bitching because dakka.

Yes. As surely as I know that GW will raise prices.

ccs wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
? Can you know that?
I find the inherent quietening of dakkas complaints more likely outcome then the supposed further bitching because dakka.

Yes. As surely as I know that GW will raise prices.

I am not doubting that dakka would find something to do so, but i most certainly would assume that we would've less general demand for a result then.

ccs wrote:

Oh, GW? They'd make $.
Our fellow Dakkanaughts/40k players? They'll bitch about some aspect of it

Nope! People have a sense of fairness. The fairer the game is, the less non-sociopaths will complain about it.

My point, also, is that GW's financial model might be more lucrative with an "ensemble cast" of factions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:


the complains are always the same. Either it is my dudes don't have or other dudes have something. The only difference is how good with words specific posters are and that is more or less it.

It is interesting to read other people get angry though.

Karol, you're wrong. Plenty of people will acknowledge that their own faction has stuff that's too powerful. You're essentially saying that nobody has good arguments because you aren't competent enough to understand them, with your "how good with words" thing people are saying.

Like I mentioned, non-sociopaths have a sense of fairness and will complain about an unfair game. Sociopaths understand fairness too, but only *care* when the fairness isn't in their favor - this seems to be the viewpoint you're promoting. You come off like an absolutely cutthroat, unsportsmanlike player.

Lack of models Ill say as well has pushed me further and further into getting third party figures in order to get what I want.

People will complain if the armies aren't in at least some level of rules parity. However, they wouldn't complain of marine over saturation if it wasn't the case with model releases.

As was stated, marine players are tired of being milked, and some other factions would love to get some new kits, even if they are over expensive at this point.

While yes GW will inevitably leave plenty to complain about, they are hardly a company without fault. This matter they could correct and leave at least one less thing to complain of. For everyone involved, it should be a win win as even most marine players, myself included, would love for the other people to get hammered with some models for awhile and actually be hyped up to play their factions for a bit.

I also disagree that dakka will rant no matter what. Some individuals will, for sure, but most of dakka won't. For example, during the golden times of 8th after the castellan nerf and before SM 2.0 there was surprisingly little negativity around here, and at the very least not every other thread was eventually talking about the same two things.
If a faction doing well enough and is not regularly stepping on other people's toes, you rarely read about them in general threads at all.

So, if the game is in good state and codices get equal, decent treatment from GW, will dakka turn into a pool of positivity and be showing GW in praise? Doubtful, after all some people's fourth pillar of the hobby is complaining about how GW sucks.
We won't have every other thread derailing into a discussion on space marines though, and we won't have people (rightfully) complaining how their army doesn't work as intended/at all regularly.

"Equal". It wasn't even equal in a way just more balanced in regards to releases...
There were still some issues at that point in time but nothing that couldn't have been solved. Especially in regards to mainline GW factions...

Yeah, I was talking about a fictional scenario

I think they really hit home with how much support orks got over the course of 8th. We got our codex with a slew of awesome buggies to go along with it, then came vigilus with some decent rules and da red gobbo and a year later Saga of the Beast and Thrakka were released. And that's ignoring all the failed attempts of adding "open play only" datasheets to the game, because for some reason GW is afraid of assigning point values to ork datasheets.
Essentially they manage to released exactly as much stuff as I was willing to buy

If they tone down the flood of marines a bit to just give them twice as much as to everyone else and alternate between major/minor releases for the other factions every other year while regularly updating their rules, many, many people would be a lot happier than they are now.

I sure as hell would've been, considering that i' could've lived with a slow transtion of my R&H into GW rules teams hands if there were actually something to go by (and propper communication), but somewhere a overhead must've decided that selling separete additional books and Sm releases with high proift margines because Printing in china is dirt cheap, and forcing marine players to buy 2 separate books to play their favourite chapter takes precedent.

To be fair, if they slapped all the supplements into a single book, it would be larger than the BRB and not cost a lot less than the two books do now - and that is already assuming large parts of the supplements are redundant and can be removed when you join them.

A combined supplement book would only be bigger than the BRB because they decided to stretch each individual supplement so thin, trying to justify its existence.

We really don't need an entire lore page about the Imperial Fists 7th Company, nor does each subfaction require 20 stratagems and their own psychic discipline. If they were all in one book (or heaven forbid, the smaller Marine subfactions are treated like every other subfaction in the game) you'd see a lot more restraint. 1 Stratagem, 1 Relic, 1 WLT and maybe 1 Psychic Power. That's all they need and deserve.

Given the choice people would definitely prefer buying a second book over losing all that content related to their army.

Just go ask R&H players how much they enjoy their rules finally being free.

 Bosskelot wrote:
A combined supplement book would only be bigger than the BRB because they decided to stretch each individual supplement so thin, trying to justify its existence.

We really don't need an entire lore page about the Imperial Fists 7th Company, nor does each subfaction require 20 stratagems and their own psychic discipline. If they were all in one book (or heaven forbid, the smaller Marine subfactions are treated like every other subfaction in the game) you'd see a lot more restraint. 1 Stratagem, 1 Relic, 1 WLT and maybe 1 Psychic Power. That's all they need and deserve.

Need? Probably.

Deserve? Not according to GW.

The entire primaris line wasn't needed or deserved, and yet GW launched it and it sold quite well.

40k is mostly about SM and with the sheer amount of SM relaeses it makes sense that their chapters don't count as standard subfactions, and they are much more developed instead. Of course it's not "fair" but it's how GW designed the 40k universe.

Hecaton 794465 11011672 wrote:
]

Karol, you're wrong. Plenty of people will acknowledge that their own faction has stuff that's too powerful. You're essentially saying that nobody has good arguments because you aren't competent enough to understand them, with your "how good with words" thing people are saying.

Like I mentioned, non-sociopaths have a sense of fairness and will complain about an unfair game. Sociopaths understand fairness too, but only *care* when the fairness isn't in their favor - this seems to be the viewpoint you're promoting. You come off like an absolutely cutthroat, unsportsmanlike player.

Maybe people that can play multiple armies or people that stay and play their armies anyway, and this ends just talk.

I don't really care if someone says their faction is too powerful or not enough powerful. I care about stuff that happens in the real world. like an people getting bullied for playing the 2.0 IH by eldar or tau players, after almost 3 years playing bad IH all 8th.

ah and as "fariness" goes it is not a sociopath or non sociopath thing it is a cultural thing. Just ask someone from outside your culture, what their local views on what is considered fair and you would be suprised.

We have a so called kali, character in a book not indian godess, law. Unfair and bad thing is when someone takes Kalis cows. Good and fair is when Kali takes someones cows. To give you an example. And I ain't promoting anything, I am just saying how w40k looks like outside of places like UK or US. And oddly enough considering how posted lists look like and how armies being sold on ebay and the like look like, the as you called it "sociopath" way of playing seems not exclusive to my area of the world.


And one more thing. I go to sports school, I don't think you know what sportsman like means, because for majority of people actualy doing sports, it is much closer to not get caught, while doing everything possible to win etc And this includes people doing sports in US and UK.

40K being about Marines is ok. It's the reality of what sells.

But the supplement approach is just dumb and clumsy.

It'd be much better if they'd spin off the various Marine chapters like Blood Angels, White Scars, etc.. into individual Codexes. Sure, you have to reprint a few pages for Intercessors, etc.. in each, but a) customers don't have to buy two books, b) the armies can be balanced far better without a "generic" set of strats, WL traits, etc.. to consider that might be useless to one chapter and broken in another, and you could even adjust point values to reflect the relative strength of units in various chapters. Also, you wouldn't have to stuff all the Marines into a 12-month release window and could sprinkle them more regularly across the entire lifespan of an edition along with the other armies.

They spectacularly failed with that approach in 8th.

I agree with Sunny Side Up, SM chapters would be much better if they were functioning standalone armies. Not like they were in 8th or previous edition though with tons of shared stuff. Give them 40ish datasheets and that's it.

I mean SW could not have a single primaris model for example, bikes of all kinds only for DA or Whitescars, no dreads for Whitescars or Imperial Fists, no flyers for Iron Hands etc...

Make chapters real standalone armies with 70ish% of unique stuff and just a few identical model shared between the chapters. Each chapter with its own subfactions and for example Space Wolves sagas could have been the equivalent of orks clans, necrons dynasties, etc...

Instead of a single SM codex and 7-8 supplements I'd definitely prefer 7-8 codexes, with the removal of the vanilla book. A few minor chapters would go but amen.

I understand that this way new SM releases would have less market as only a fraction of SM players could play them, but overall the game would be much healtier and I think that if that really was the case people would buy more stuff anyway as a result.