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.

Right now with the releases we've seen, the new DA/BA releases are better by FAR than their Primaris Counter parts.

Sanguinary Guard are the best unit hands down in the entire BA codex, like it's not even close.
Deathwing Terminators are better by a large margin than Bladeguard Vets
And most of the Old Tanks/vehicles/units are better for the cost than the newer variants. TF Cannons, Jetpack units, Assault troops, Razorbacks vs Primaris Transports, Centurions vs Aggressors, Dreadnaughts are a bit of a toss up depending on the chapter, but still.

Why is GW creating rule sets that basically make it's new hotness weaker out of the gate? The store I shop at has literally been told to pull it's older models off the shelves, so why even bother making them stronger if you can't buy them?

Is this a bait and switch? Make Deathwing terminators hot now, and when Covid is over, toss them in legends?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:Why is GW creating rule sets that basically make it's new hotness weaker out of the gate?

Perhaps the whole "GW make their new units super powerful to encourage sales" isn't as common a marketing tactics as some people say, and they're just haphazard in how they write rules.

The problem with GW is of course, they are not a charity nor do their executives play any game besides monopoly. If you even get a hint that something is being phased out, it probably is, stop collecting it and buy a nice atlantic wargames army instead.

Someone will come in here and say it's to get rid of stock before they phase out old Marines. Maybe even the same person that argues DG is overpowered to sell a new army...

Personally I'm okay with iconic units being a staple of the army instead of the most recent model.
Not saying iconic units should be overpowered, just that they should be a good choice.

That we have two threads on the same day within hours of each other, going into complete opposite directions, speaks volumes.

If you want to see something, you can come up with a reason behind it.

Whoever was in charge for the rules of the codices and supplements so far managed - by intent or coincidence - that most of the units are between playable and good. With army iconic units more often bordering towards good.

Let's hope future releases will be similar to that.

Terminators and Bikes won't be send off to Legends imho, until we
A) have proper replacements for all of them
B) they don't sell anymore

Whoever was in charge for the rules of the codices and supplements

It’s really good when the lead designers’ names are right in the front of the codexes

It is understandable that units that are unique can be better then generic ones. If DA bladeguard got access to inner circle and deathwing rule they would be comperable to DW termintors. Same if BA bladeguard got access to jump packs.

DA Bladeguard got the Inner Circle and Deathwing rule.

Isn't it possible, that just maybe, the writers are trying to make good flavorful rules for everything? And that in a fluffy Blood Angels army Sanguinary Guard should be really good, and Terminators should be really good in a Dark Angels army? Maybe they're just trying to make armies look and act like they should in the fluff? And not executing some "Master Plan" to sell more primaris?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:Why is GW creating rule sets that basically make it's new hotness weaker out of the gate?

Perhaps the whole "GW make their new units super powerful to encourage sales" isn't as common a marketing tactics as some people say, and they're just haphazard in how they write rules.

This, been saying it for years.

I believe they're TRYING to make fun rules people will be excited about. I've met some of the rules team, and I very much get the impression they care about the game. I also think balance simply isn't as high a priority for them as it is for a lot of people here. Instead there's more of an emphasis on the emotional reaction to the rules.

There is no conspiracy. There's just some nerds trying to come up with stuff they think people will find fun to put in the next book.

a_typical_hero wrote:
DA Bladeguard got the Inner Circle and Deathwing rule.

But they aren't running around with the wounded only on +4rule all the time.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't it possible, that just maybe, the writers are trying to make good flavorful rules for everything? And that in a fluffy Blood Angels army Sanguinary Guard should be really good, and Terminators should be really good in a Dark Angels army? Maybe they're just trying to make armies look and act like they should in the fluff? And not executing some "Master Plan" to sell more primaris?

Ding ding ding.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't it possible, that just maybe, the writers are trying to make good flavorful rules for everything? And that in a fluffy Blood Angels army Sanguinary Guard should be really good, and Terminators should be really good in a Dark Angels army? Maybe they're just trying to make armies look and act like they should in the fluff? And not executing some "Master Plan" to sell more primaris?

I've been watching GW rules for a very long time, and my general impression is that they are absolutely trying to make good flavourful rules for everything. The problem they have is that they don't consider the larger environment of the game when writing rules, skimp on the playtesting/QA, don't talk to other teams writing different books, and ignore what little playtesting data they get because the playtesters tell them things like "this thing you thought was really cool is going to break the game in half". They're not malicious, just incompetent.

Karol wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
DA Bladeguard got the Inner Circle and Deathwing rule.

But they aren't running around with the wounded only on +4rule all the time.

Ummmm, according to the goonhammer review they do.

 Grimskul wrote:

Karol wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
DA Bladeguard got the Inner Circle and Deathwing rule.

But they aren't running around with the wounded only on +4rule all the time.

Ummmm, according to the goonhammer review they do.

I think the difference is Terminators get OBsec and the better weapon profiles, plus a free deep strike.

I mean, it's not even close how BG are worse than Terminators. I mean, we haven't seen the actual codex yet so....

Forgive me if that wasn't your point and I misconstrued your post.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't it possible, that just maybe, the writers are trying to make good flavorful rules for everything? And that in a fluffy Blood Angels army Sanguinary Guard should be really good, and Terminators should be really good in a Dark Angels army? Maybe they're just trying to make armies look and act like they should in the fluff? And not executing some "Master Plan" to sell more primaris?

This. Very much this.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't it possible, that just maybe, the writers are trying to make good flavorful rules for everything? And that in a fluffy Blood Angels army Sanguinary Guard should be really good, and Terminators should be really good in a Dark Angels army? Maybe they're just trying to make armies look and act like they should in the fluff? And not executing some "Master Plan" to sell more primaris?

Not really, seeing as in the OP we only named a couple of units.

Basically they've figured out marine players Arnt going to rush out and replace existing armies with primaris ones.

So older units got 2W and primaris are now niche units offering specific uses instead of trying to push older units out of the way.

pelicaniforce wrote:

Whoever was in charge for the rules of the codices and supplements

It’s really good when the lead designers’ names are right in the front of the codexes

Ah yes. Mr (or Miss) 'the Warhammer Studio.' Well known designer, that one.

They stopped listing names years ago, because Ward and Cruddace in particular were getting death threats from the more insanely rabid members of the customer base.

hobojebus wrote:
Basically they've figured out marine players Arnt going to rush out and replace existing armies with primaris ones.

So older units got 2W and primaris are now niche units offering specific uses instead of trying to push older units out of the way.

Sometimes people don't stop to read what they're writing...

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Right now with the releases we've seen, the new DA/BA releases are better by FAR than their Primaris Counter parts.
...
Is this a bait and switch? Make Deathwing terminators hot now, and when Covid is over, toss them in legends?

Welcome to the show.

Ideally, for my own tastes, rules could be simplified to recognize terminator equivalents once the I-marines become marines and land raider equivalents once flying tanks become tanks again.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:


Is this a bait and switch? Make Deathwing terminators hot now, and when Covid is over, toss them in legends?

When skew lists become competitive it's always bait and switch. I would NEVER recommend to chase the flavour of the month, let alone investing in skew lists (yes, terminators and bikes based army are skew). A DA army without firstborn marines can definitely be (very) competitive.

Pendulum swings, even quite often, and very old SM kits are not going to be a thing forever, maybe they will even be squatted at some point.

More than likely, any playtesting is going on with the newer, primaris units and oldmarine units are just being dragged along, without real concern whether their rules actually make them stronger (or weaker).

Not that I believe much of any playtesting is going on at all, anyways.

We'll, you are a Dark Angel player there are chances that you already possess enought dust-gathering model for a full Terminators or Bike army...

So more that investing money it's more of an opportunity to free some space in the shelf of shame

 Blackie wrote:
When skew lists become competitive it's always bait and switch. I would NEVER recommend to chase the flavour of the month, let alone investing in skew lists (yes, terminators and bikes based army are skew). A DA army without firstborn marines can definitely be (very) competitive.

Pendulum swings, even quite often, and very old SM kits are not going to be a thing forever, maybe they will even be squatted at some point.

Agreed, buying into skew is setting yourself up for disappointment, as many veterans should have experienced by now.

Personally I keep it to "maximum 2 kits of it" for my army, if I want to field a specific unit.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Isn't it possible, that just maybe, the writers are trying to make good flavorful rules for everything? And that in a fluffy Blood Angels army Sanguinary Guard should be really good, and Terminators should be really good in a Dark Angels army? Maybe they're just trying to make armies look and act like they should in the fluff? And not executing some "Master Plan" to sell more primaris?

I'm going with this. And to be honest I'm quite happy for the older units to shine for a while before their probable retirement.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Right now with the releases we've seen, the new DA/BA releases are better by FAR than their Primaris Counter parts.

Sanguinary Guard are the best unit hands down in the entire BA codex, like it's not even close.
Deathwing Terminators are better by a large margin than Bladeguard Vets
And most of the Old Tanks/vehicles/units are better for the cost than the newer variants. TF Cannons, Jetpack units, Assault troops, Razorbacks vs Primaris Transports, Centurions vs Aggressors, Dreadnaughts are a bit of a toss up depending on the chapter, but still.

Why is GW creating rule sets that basically make it's new hotness weaker out of the gate? The store I shop at has literally been told to pull it's older models off the shelves, so why even bother making them stronger if you can't buy them?

Is this a bait and switch? Make Deathwing terminators hot now, and when Covid is over, toss them in legends?

What you're feeling right now is cognitive dissonance. The reality in front of you is conflicting with the belief that GW always makes new things overpowered to drive profits.

Explore for the moment the idea that GW may have multiple market segments that they are courting. Remember the old Magic the Gathering article with Spike Johnny and Timmy?

Let's call our three customers Michaelangelo, Crusty and Timmy.

Timmy is a younger player who maybe doesn't currently play 40k but he wants to get in. He's a kid whose parents buy him most of the stuff he owns, in the kind of wealth class where 60-100$ lego sets and 60$ video games aren't unusual gifts, most of the things he buys with his own money are 20-30$, and every once in a while he might get a really nice present like a 250$-350$ game system.

Timmy's the kind of kid who'd probably get discouraged if he went down to the game club and someone told him his miniatures were glued together wrong, and he'd built something accidentally that was either super inefficient or worse, illegal in the game, so GW tends to make sure Timmy-focused kits don't really have a 'wrong' way to put them together. When GW puts together a Timmy release, they make sure to have one "big gift" box set, a couple "Parents can buy this" 50-60$ sets and "timmy can afford this himself" 20-30$ sets.

Michaelangelo is a collector for whom building and painting the kits as beautiful dioramas is the primary concern. He buys games workshop models because they are the most intricate plastic fantasy miniatures on the market, and playing the game to him is secondary. he doesn't care if the kits he has are sub-optimal in terms of the rules, and when he plays the game he's most interested in the little details on the model having rules to go along with them. Michaelangelo kits can be a little less practical for playing the game with, tend to get saddled with slightly less optimised rules out of the gate, and generally have little in the way of customization - but they do look incredible.

Crusty has been playing the game for ages, and is interested in making his dudes his dudes, and is an adult with his own disposable income. Crusty is highly invested in things being the way he remembers them, and if something new has to be added, would vastly prefer it be some kind of nostalgic reference to something that existed in RT or 2nd edition when the game was way zanier than some totally new concept. Crusty's armies tend to be more expensive to build, and often take longer to paint, but GW tends to make sure that in the optimized configuration Crusty's squads are able to at least hold their own.

This market segmentation is how you can have GW producing a kit like the Adeptus Titanicus Titans (Crusty oriented, with extremely articulated joints, alternative armor plates, prepackaged with transfers despite that being no longer the norm for new kits, and weapons designed to be easily magnetizable and swappable) then right after that the Ork buggy release (Michaelangelo oriented, monopose with intricate, individualized diorama like appearances, suboptimal rules with lots of little details based on details present on the model kit) and then right after that Primaris Wave 2, with modern Call of Duty style aesthetics, a big box for 250$ with everything you need to get into the hobby, a pair of 60$ kits in the Incursor and Invictor with highly optimized but simple to understand rules at just the right price point for Timmy to ask mom and dad to get him, and the cheaper kits like the ones that allow you to buy just one set of sprues for the primaris troop units for 2/3 of the price that Timmy can afford for himself.

 Stux wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:Why is GW creating rule sets that basically make it's new hotness weaker out of the gate?

Perhaps the whole "GW make their new units super powerful to encourage sales" isn't as common a marketing tactics as some people say, and they're just haphazard in how they write rules.

This, been saying it for years.

I believe they're TRYING to make fun rules people will be excited about. I've met some of the rules team, and I very much get the impression they care about the game. I also think balance simply isn't as high a priority for them as it is for a lot of people here. Instead there's more of an emphasis on the emotional reaction to the rules.

There is no conspiracy. There's just some nerds trying to come up with stuff they think people will find fun to put in the next book.

These same nerds have also created a regimental doctrine that is only usable once a turn essentially and costs a CP to use.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Right now with the releases we've seen, the new DA/BA releases are better by FAR than their Primaris Counter parts.

Sanguinary Guard are the best unit hands down in the entire BA codex, like it's not even close.
Deathwing Terminators are better by a large margin than Bladeguard Vets
And most of the Old Tanks/vehicles/units are better for the cost than the newer variants. TF Cannons, Jetpack units, Assault troops, Razorbacks vs Primaris Transports, Centurions vs Aggressors, Dreadnaughts are a bit of a toss up depending on the chapter, but still.

Why is GW creating rule sets that basically make it's new hotness weaker out of the gate? The store I shop at has literally been told to pull it's older models off the shelves, so why even bother making them stronger if you can't buy them?

Is this a bait and switch? Make Deathwing terminators hot now, and when Covid is over, toss them in legends?

It's just because they're not very good at writing balanced rules, not because there's some sinister plan to eliminate old marines from the lineup.