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.

PenitentJake wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
The problem with releasing kits for other factions: not many people buy them right now. New models will not change that.

Something about Space Marines is special. Came to terms with that a long time ago.

If that makes you want to walk away, HABA has a nice line of board games with wooden pieces. You might find them more interesting.

If I remember correctly, the Sisters box sold out as quickly as Indomitus, and I've seen another poster comment on how, locally, Necrons are outselling marines. I'm not saying that marines aren't the best sellers- clearly they are.

What I'm saying is that it's a chicken and egg scenario. Marines sell more models because they have more models to sell, because they have more developed subfactions which also have more models to sell, and because they are part of almost every box set ever made, so everyone already has some laying around somewhere. If any other faction had all of those things going for it, it might compete with Marine sales.

Until another faction makes it to that place, we'll never know whether or not marines. They're just omnipresent.

Exactly. GW themselves said this at one point specifically with regards to Tau. It was shortly after that last major revamp they got (I THINK that was 6th ed, but might have been 5th?). Someone from GW publicly said "Tau weren't selling so we weren't really working on them as much. Had we known the new Tau release would be as popular as it was, we'd have done this a lot sooner."

Picture a scenario where a 17 year old kid is in a store looking to start 40k and he's talking to another player about armies - "Well.... these guys get updated every few weeks at this point, have BY FAR the largest model range, are always updated every edition, and have one of everything. These guys are largely composed of models that are older than you, THIS army had its last major revamp 4 editions ago and has only LOST models since then ... "

I honestly think GW would watch that scenario and say "SEE! The non-marines don't sell!" while completely missing the fact that they have, at this point, basically allowed an unintentional anf figurative soft-squatting of several factions. That's a more extreme term that I should probably use, but that's how a new player will look at it. Necrons were dead for eons until Indomitus and the new dex and now they sell like crazy. All GW has to do is release some models that aren't garbage and people will buy them.

I agree.
I can only suppose that they didn't want it stealing 40k's playerbase?
Plus I'm sure a large number of people playing older rules because they felt those were better wasn't a good look and wouldn't be encouraging to new players.

Maybe they just wanted to keep it as Forgeworld's thing, and Forgeworld has really been struggling, even before Covid they were culling huge chunks of their store.
I imagine 3d printing has given people the power to turn their nose up at Forgeworld's supreme prices for mediocre products.

I don't think Covid has helped any, but my guess is, the 30k issues have far more to do with the passing of Alan Bligh than anything else. He was the heart and soul of that project, and filling his shoes cannot be easy. If it's even possible.

For me, my biggest issue with 9th from a release standpoint, is that I feel like the entire game is in a state of total limbo. Marines going to 2W may be perfectly fine in the long run, but not having all of the other codexes updated or FAQ'd or Index'd makes everything feel half-formed right now. I have a hard time getting interested or invested in something without knowing how it's going to pan out.

I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way, and I think this is a reason many are flocking back to OldHammer. It's stable and is a known entity. I also think once people go back to Old Hammer, the gloves are off and people feel more at liberty to house rule or modify the game to make it "their own". There is a certain level of pressure that comes with keeping up with the latest and greatest, and people are just worn out right now.

 Mezmorki wrote:
For me, my biggest issue with 9th from a release standpoint, is that I feel like the entire game is in a state of total limbo. Marines going to 2W may be perfectly fine in the long run, but not having all of the other codexes updated or FAQ'd or Index'd makes everything feel half-formed right now. I have a hard time getting interested or invested in something without knowing how it's going to pan out.

That's definitely a problem. It isn't even just the two wound thing (for factions that are obviously going to get it when their books finally roll around), but even stuff like the DG FAQ where we have to worry about whether an ability is affecting a models movement or its movement characteristic. That might be clearly written in 9th edition books, but in 8th edition books... not so much.
Same for a lot of the cover rules, to be honest, since that system changed. Mostly it means just the light cover rules, but sometimes not.

There is a general move to cleaner, technical wording (though in pure GW style, sometimes they just miss); but that doesn't exist for the great majority of factions. They're still stuck with language that's essentially 'its sort of like this, so whatever.' And by the time it is all cleared up for every faction in the game, we'll likely be hearing about 10th edition...

I've been saying for ages that 9TH problem is the slow as heck release schedule that just takes out all the fun from legacy 8th armies.
Index are sort of needed, no questions here

The Space Marine spam has driven me, a primarily Space Marine player away from them. Apart from one or two of the ancient kits I’m not touching them at all until the releases slow down. Three codexes so quick just make it unappealing for me, let alone the must have unit spam, I’ll stick to Eldar, the pace of their release suits me better.

KurtAngle2 wrote:
I've been saying for ages that 9TH problem is the slow as heck release schedule that just takes out all the fun from legacy 8th armies.
Index are sort of needed, no questions here

Isn't the norm for GW an update ever 2-3 months and 8th was an oddity, because they reset the whole game, and had new model lines and books ready for the edition for years before. I remember a twich interview with the main concept artists for primaris and he said they have been working on primaris design update since like 5th ed.

I doubt they have a back log big enough to do more, then they are doing now.

Ideally, GW would make a new edition and just release the core rules and all the base codexes at once. I'd gladly have them take twice as long between edition releases to do it all in one release.

They can, of course, then space out the model releases, recognizing that people can use their older models, or proxies. Maybe the new edition launches with new kits ONLY for newly added units where there isn't an already available and suitable kit.

One can dream right?

 Mezmorki wrote:
Ideally, GW would make a new edition and just release the core rules and all the base codexes at once. I'd gladly have them take twice as long between edition releases to do it all in one release.

They can, of course, then space out the model releases, recognizing that people can use their older models, or proxies. Maybe the new edition launches with new kits ONLY for newly added units where there isn't an already available and suitable kit.

One can dream right?

The only problem is that this bumps up against "no model no rules". They can't reasonably produce all the sprues that would be needed for that all at the same time, so they would have to stagger the release schedule, and this would mean that, if all the books are out "today", there will be x number of units w/out models. Leaving them more open to 3rd party model issues than I think they really want to be. But yes, this would be nice were it possible.

Voss wrote:
even stuff like the DG FAQ where we have to worry about whether an ability is affecting a models movement or its movement characteristic.

This sort of minutia is something I really wish didn't exist in the game.
You literally have to put a lawyer hat on to understand and explain the difference between those two situations.
If one player doesn't understand how that interaction works, it's going to take a while to explain that and it almost leaves a bad taste in the first player's mouth.
Anyone ever have to explain to an opponent why their Space Marine wasn't allowed to reroll the 3 to-hit, because it actually hit without the minus they had? Every single person normally wouldn't conceive of that interaction, thought it was stupid, and felt cheated.

I feel like no model no rules wouldn't be an issue if players felt they were only a few years from seeing decent support and most of their line was reasonably modern. This is even assuming it was at all a quantifiable hit to the 800 pound gorilla of the industry.

It is entirely a "problem" of their own making no matter what way you look at it.

It smacks of corporate think and pure greed as I doubt most players would turn to third party over conversion/counts as from within the GW line. The power of their insular "The Hobby" approach is very strong.

Just going to add my £0.02, based on what the OP has said, take it or leave it.

Firstly, the world has been in the midst of a crippling pandemic this past 12 months. The situation here in the UK has not gone well compared to the Far East and Oceania (that's as far as I'll describe it) and it has impacted on GW. They shut down completely for a period.

So if they've been slow in releasing things for 9th that's probably why. I'm not defending GW, just stating something factual.


Secondly, as long as I have rules for stuff and things generally work I'm happy. I have 20 year old models (some even dating back further). 90% of the 40k models I have were bought pre-2005. I believe my regular gaming buddy is of the same opinion. It doesn't matter to us if we're using old models, new models, proxies or whatever (we've been known to use paper squares back in the day), so lack of model releases or one faction getting more than the other doesn't really matter.

There are several factions that haven't been properly fleshed out, ever, dating all the way back to 3rd edition, probably even Rogue Trader. The marine-spam recently is nothing new.

And apparently 8th edition codices are still valid, until superseded by 9th edition codices. So no big deal there either.

Myself and my gaming buddy therefore employ a couple of techniques that seem to be becoming antiquated - making do with what we have and "house rules".


Thirdly, I think many people who are "losing interest" are in part too focused on the competitive aspect. There's too much emphasis on the tournament scene as it is already and it sucks the fun out of the games imho. I went away from the GW hobby for a period (for various "life" reasons) and came back in recent years and it's all "meta this, meta that" all over the internet. It seems that competition has overridden the fun of sitting down with like minded people, chewing the fat, and playing a game.

That's not to say I don't lose interest from time to time myself, but that's more to do with the lack of gaming clubs in the immediate area of the UK that I live in that I can access (I don't drive), and the cost of the hobby (including the tri-yearly rules refresh that GW seem to have adopted). But not really because of GW's immediate release schedule or priority.

I've just gotten tired of GW.

Left the game in 2nd, came back at the tail end of 5th. Played mostly in 6th, was a bit put off by 7th.

8th rolled around and I got interested again, but ended up getting in very few games. Covid outright killed the chance the chance to play with others.

No interest in 9th, and now my armies (all 12, except the Eldar) are finally fully painted. Gone back to RPGs. Even if I started using the minis again for a wargame, it'd be for my homebrew rules or 8th edition.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The release schedule isn't really doing it, but the mechanics are for me.

Nothing feels really effective or satisfying to use, particularly against Marines and marine-like armies where everything just kind of sponges off units and a heavy artillery gun kills like half a guy.

I played a game of 5th edition the other day, and it was astonishing how much better it felt. Bringing the right firepower onto the right target was rewarded with immediate and substantial effect in a way it just isn't now, where a mid-strength, AP-2, D2/3 many shot statline is universally the most effective option and tank guns feel anemic.

And despite the vastly greater ability to actually have an effect with weapons our armies didn't disintegrate nearly as fast. Even though my AP3 blast templates basically erased a squad with each hit and my vanquisher squadron was punching holes in his tanks, the fact that most units had to chose to move or fire at full effect, and fire or charge, made the game both a lot less lethal and a feel a lot more maneuver focused [My friend might disagree, since I immobilized or blew up both his Rhinos and his Land Raider in the opening salvo of my guns]


If I can get my friends to do so, I might be angling towards a reversion to 5th ed. Even if it has it's own problems [wound allocation *coughcough*], it still feels better than 9th.

5th Wasn't perfect, but I agree with a bit of homebrewing to make all the factions in-line with each other it could have been the golden age of 40k imo.

I already started my own re-boot of 5th ed. if you want to check out here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/794253.page
I've already finished CSM. All I'm doing is updating the codex's and adding in the newest models.

Back on topic, I can't say I'm feeling fatigue right now more awaiting in anticipation on the future release of the Night Lords supplement. I'm hoping for decent rules and, more importantly, a much, much better trait.

The releases for AOS and the other games in the AOS do appear to be more balanced. My other impression is that the fantasy sculpts are more interesting and varied. Some of the new 40K sculpts are brilliant but they are largely more power armour which can only be so varied. The fantasy setting of AOS seems to spark the imagination in the designers more than for 40K.

Mind you I was looking at the FW website and the approach they’ve taken to chaos marines blows GW out the water especially when looking at chaos demons and CSM demon engines.

By all rights eldar should have the most fantastic sculpts of 40K. I really think if GW invested more in these armies people would buy the minis

Tycho wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
The problem with releasing kits for other factions: not many people buy them right now. New models will not change that.

Something about Space Marines is special. Came to terms with that a long time ago.

If that makes you want to walk away, HABA has a nice line of board games with wooden pieces. You might find them more interesting.

If I remember correctly, the Sisters box sold out as quickly as Indomitus, and I've seen another poster comment on how, locally, Necrons are outselling marines. I'm not saying that marines aren't the best sellers- clearly they are.

What I'm saying is that it's a chicken and egg scenario. Marines sell more models because they have more models to sell, because they have more developed subfactions which also have more models to sell, and because they are part of almost every box set ever made, so everyone already has some laying around somewhere. If any other faction had all of those things going for it, it might compete with Marine sales.

Until another faction makes it to that place, we'll never know whether or not marines. They're just omnipresent.

Exactly. GW themselves said this at one point specifically with regards to Tau. It was shortly after that last major revamp they got (I THINK that was 6th ed, but might have been 5th?). Someone from GW publicly said "Tau weren't selling so we weren't really working on them as much. Had we known the new Tau release would be as popular as it was, we'd have done this a lot sooner."

Picture a scenario where a 17 year old kid is in a store looking to start 40k and he's talking to another player about armies - "Well.... these guys get updated every few weeks at this point, have BY FAR the largest model range, are always updated every edition, and have one of everything. These guys are largely composed of models that are older than you, THIS army had its last major revamp 4 editions ago and has only LOST models since then ... "

I honestly think GW would watch that scenario and say "SEE! The non-marines don't sell!" while completely missing the fact that they have, at this point, basically allowed an unintentional anf figurative soft-squatting of several factions. That's a more extreme term that I should probably use, but that's how a new player will look at it. Necrons were dead for eons until Indomitus and the new dex and now they sell like crazy. All GW has to do is release some models that aren't garbage and people will buy them..

Companies with market caps as large as GWs tend not to get caught by surprise when it comes to pricing, demand, features, etc.

Take that comment however you want it, but were they leaving money on the table by not releasing as many models for other factions? Probably not.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Companies with market caps as large as GWs tend not to get caught by surprise when it comes to pricing, demand, features, etc.

Take that comment however you want it, but were they leaving money on the table by not releasing as many models for other factions? Probably not.

GW is a company that famously did no research into what their users wanted for quite some time. They've been blindsided by demand before, as has been brought up in this very thread. Regardless of trends, we simply cannot grant GW the level of competence/foresight required to know something the playerbase did not w/r/t model demand.

What would Dakka be without its Two-Minutes Hate for Space Marines? Can such a thing be defined?

I would love to know what goes through the minds of the decision makers involved in all of this. I guess as long as they sell it's working; if you don't like marines then you aren't part of the main target anymore. You just exist in the peripheral, buying old stuff and waiting.

 Irkjoe wrote:
I would love to know what goes through the minds of the decision makers involved in all of this. I guess as long as they sell it's working; if you don't like marines then you aren't part of the main target anymore. You just exist in the peripheral, buying old stuff and waiting.

I think it's probably just that Space Marines are popular. Supply and demand. Sounds simple but there it is.

 waefre_1 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Companies with market caps as large as GWs tend not to get caught by surprise when it comes to pricing, demand, features, etc.

Take that comment however you want it, but were they leaving money on the table by not releasing as many models for other factions? Probably not.

GW is a company that famously did no research into what their users wanted for quite some time. They've been blindsided by demand before, as has been brought up in this very thread. Regardless of trends, we simply cannot grant GW the level of competence/foresight required to know something the playerbase did not w/r/t model demand.

Exactly. Companies with proper forecasting, market research and predictive models are STILL at times, caught off guard by real world results, and GW has almost none of those things. They're still essentially running certain aspects of the business like it's a hobby side-gig operating out of Rick P's garage. That's part of their charm, but also a big part of why they run into issues. They've only recently begun to look outside themselves and acknowledge the world "outside of Nottingham". Let's not forget this is the same company who, in the era of the internet and social media, decided to shut down all such outlets for a surprisingly long time. I don't think they're nearly as back wards as some think, but let's also not pretend like this is Apple being surprised by the latest iPhone results ....

They can and do (frequently) get caught off guard.

Tycho wrote:

 waefre_1 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Companies with market caps as large as GWs tend not to get caught by surprise when it comes to pricing, demand, features, etc.

Take that comment however you want it, but were they leaving money on the table by not releasing as many models for other factions? Probably not.

GW is a company that famously did no research into what their users wanted for quite some time. They've been blindsided by demand before, as has been brought up in this very thread. Regardless of trends, we simply cannot grant GW the level of competence/foresight required to know something the playerbase did not w/r/t model demand.

Exactly. Companies with proper forecasting, market research and predictive models are STILL at times, caught off guard by real world results, and GW has almost none of those things. They're still essentially running certain aspects of the business like it's a hobby side-gig operating out of Rick P's garage. That's part of their charm, but also a big part of why they run into issues. They've only recently begun to look outside themselves and acknowledge the world "outside of Nottingham". Let's not forget this is the same company who, in the era of the internet and social media, decided to shut down all such outlets for a surprisingly long time. I don't think they're nearly as back wards as some think, but let's also not pretend like this is Apple being surprised by the latest iPhone results ....

They can and do (frequently) get caught off guard.

Dunno if it's safe to assume GW does no market research or that they haven't historically.

https://ycharts.com/companies/GMWKF/market_cap

The company's market cap is $4.6 Billion, that's about 2/3rds of Mattel. Pretty much doubled during lockdowns, even though they had their production / storefronts closed for months. They have profitable revenue streams in retail, digital and distribution, not many companies are successful in those 3 areas simultaneously.

If you read their annual report, it talks about investments in robotics, automation, global supply chains, etc. Each of those areas is capital intensive and requires a fair amount of technical insight into business processes to pull off. Nobody spends on that kind of infrastructure in a vacuum.

GW appears to be all about merchandizing these days. Roundtree brought back boxed games, expanded the factions available for 40k, partnered with card companies, licensed IP for dozens of video games, and increased bottom line profitability by +200% over where Kirby left it.

Businesses like this don't happen by accident. If there was money to be made with additional Xenos releases, I'm pretty sure they would have been prioritized.

Help me understand - where does the idea come from that a public company with a PE Ratio of $36+ and a Board of Directors headed by an ex-PWC guy does no research? A few statements from game designers?

Multiple of John Kirby's preambles explicitly said so. The great survey which lead to plastic sisters was pretty much the first time they had done anything that remotely looked like market research in a decade.

I also think it's incredibly reductive to say that the reason they don't do lots of non-Marine releases for 40k is because they wouldn't sell as well. Like, if that was their entire outlook they would literally release nothing else but Marines. AOS, Specialist Games, LOTR... all gone, because they don't sell as much as Marines do.

But clearly that isn't the case. Can you honestly say that this guy would sell better than a new Vect model, or even a new generic Drukhari HQ? Drukhari players massively dwarf Hedonite ones because they're more established and 40k is like 10x the size of AOS in players. Or do you think that these fething things would outsell any 40k release outside of like, Harlequins?

Fact of the matter is, in a lot of cases, what models get done or re-done comes down a lot to internal studio enthusiasm. If there's little interest in continued support for Drukhari internally, not much will get done for them on a model front. GSC got pushed hard internally and even got a 2nd wave despite not setting the world alight with strong sales numbers (I think they did well, but nothing incredible) and Admech have gotten a ton of support not only because they sold well, but because they're something "new" and people within the studio are enthusiastic for them.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Help me understand - where does the idea come from that a public company with a PE Ratio of $36+ and a Board of Directors headed by an ex-PWC guy does no research? A few statements from game designers?

Well, to put it politely, from people who have no idea what they're talking about. The internets full of them.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Help me understand - where does the idea come from that a public company with a PE Ratio of $36+ and a Board of Directors headed by an ex-PWC guy does no research? A few statements from game designers?

"no market research" comes from Kirby and is no longer a point

and your other points are more important
boxed games, card games, Mobile and PC games, GW Managment has realised that their IP is the main selling point not the models or the rules
hence they changed to make the most out of it

the other point why GW makes more money now is that they changed their additute to the community


by now GW should have realised why non-Marines do not sell (not that they do no research, but geting the rght conclusions out of the data available is another thing) and this is for the main point that people don't want 1 or 2 new models but regular updates and full new ranges. No one is going to buy 20 year old models to start an army just because that 1 new support/hero model looks awesome
while Marines are at a point were most people have a lot and just buy the one new model and don't need to start from scratch
and this is were Primaris come in and why we saw so many Marine releases in a short time, to get people started over with Primaris not only 1-2 new units are needed but a full range including vehicles

even GW had not the capacity to do this on one go and other factions are too large by now as well to get this done with one release
it is not that Eldar won't sell enough if they get a total revamp, it is that a revamp would take several release slots and a longer time

and by this point, 40k (and all the sub-games) is GW's Chas Cow and the are trying to get maximum profit by minimum investment
(a reason why the App is what it is, or low afford rules etc happen)

hence only one major revamp of non-Marines per Edition as the this can be done with the Core Box opponent that need to be done anyway and the 3-4 year Edition cycle is also the time GW needs to re-do and produce a new faction

PS: they have tried to do the same thing with Stormcast in AoS as with Marines and it did not work
for those reasons as the new game more people needed to start from scratch and if all factions have the same starting point and not enough models to have a full range ready, they all sell similar bad
and here they changed to mini-factions instead of doing big ones and have it done with 1-2 release slots and all of them sell well

How long do Craftworld Eldar have to wait for their model range update?
Its getting absurd at this point.

So many of their models are ancient and desparetly need updating.

And yet GW continue to pump out damn Space Marines. I'm utterly fed up.

Rob Lee wrote:
Just going to add my £0.02, based on what the OP has said, take it or leave it.

Firstly, the world has been in the midst of a crippling pandemic this past 12 months. The situation here in the UK has not gone well compared to the Far East and Oceania (that's as far as I'll describe it) and it has impacted on GW. They shut down completely for a period.

So if they've been slow in releasing things for 9th that's probably why. I'm not defending GW, just stating something factual.


Secondly, as long as I have rules for stuff and things generally work I'm happy. I have 20 year old models (some even dating back further). 90% of the 40k models I have were bought pre-2005. I believe my regular gaming buddy is of the same opinion. It doesn't matter to us if we're using old models, new models, proxies or whatever (we've been known to use paper squares back in the day), so lack of model releases or one faction getting more than the other doesn't really matter.

There are several factions that haven't been properly fleshed out, ever, dating all the way back to 3rd edition, probably even Rogue Trader. The marine-spam recently is nothing new.

And apparently 8th edition codices are still valid, until superseded by 9th edition codices. So no big deal there either.

Myself and my gaming buddy therefore employ a couple of techniques that seem to be becoming antiquated - making do with what we have and "house rules".


Thirdly, I think many people who are "losing interest" are in part too focused on the competitive aspect. There's too much emphasis on the tournament scene as it is already and it sucks the fun out of the games imho. I went away from the GW hobby for a period (for various "life" reasons) and came back in recent years and it's all "meta this, meta that" all over the internet. It seems that competition has overridden the fun of sitting down with like minded people, chewing the fat, and playing a game.

That's not to say I don't lose interest from time to time myself, but that's more to do with the lack of gaming clubs in the immediate area of the UK that I live in that I can access (I don't drive), and the cost of the hobby (including the tri-yearly rules refresh that GW seem to have adopted). But not really because of GW's immediate release schedule or priority.

I agree with you, let me say that. I'll add however for some players avoiding the tournament mentality isn't as easy as it sounds. If you play with those who only play the bleeding edge, it sort of pushes you to be worried of power over all else and that player could very well want to avoid that but if its play but super competitive or not play at all, they'll usually pick to do it with the competitive edge. Which this release schedule tends to punish players for as the haves just slap around the have nots and tournament minded folks won't tend to house rule things so everyone is on a good footing,

I wish it was just as easy as avoid the tournament mentality for everyone. Getting that, it's no wonder GW burns some players out.

Jidmah wrote:Multiple of John Kirby's preambles explicitly said so. The great survey which lead to plastic sisters was pretty much the first time they had done anything that remotely looked like market research in a decade.

Kirby GW and Roundtree GW are 2 different companies.

Bosskelot wrote:I also think it's incredibly reductive to say that the reason they don't do lots of non-Marine releases for 40k is because they wouldn't sell as well. Like, if that was their entire outlook they would literally release nothing else but Marines. AOS, Specialist Games, LOTR... all gone, because they don't sell as much as Marines do.

I'd say it's evident GW wants to capitalize and become a global something-other-than-just-a-tabletop-game-company, otherwise they would not be dealing with Disney.

Models are commodities. Some of the kits have been around for 20 years and continue to generate revenue. I'm certain if they came out with a new box of Pathfinders, there is a certain segment of who that would purchase them and the new box would be profitable.

The question is not whether Xenos models like Tau would sell, or even why there never seems to be a limit to the number of Space Marines models GW is willing to release.

The question is why would GW invest the time and resources in producing standalone games. These games are released and mostly gone within a year (sometimes less.) It's an approach that contrasts with the 40k game pretty starkly, in that there's a limit to how long they are willing to make money off the games. Why do they do stop producing many of the standalone games after a certain point, and what does it tell us about the reason for not revamping the Tau / Eldar / Ork lines?

No company makes money by taking attention off their cash cow. If they release a standalone game, it has to compliment the main game (i.e. Necromunda, Kill Team, Adeptus Titanicus) or it has to be an experiment (Blackstone Fortress.) But every dollar spent is one that's not going towards 40k, and the market will only grow so fast. Let's say Blackstone Fortress was a massive success and people starting playing that to the exclusion of 40k, how would that work for GW? It would be a disaster, there's no way to continuously release new models to expand that game.

The same principle is at work when it comes to Xenos armies, and we have to be clear what is meant by the word 'sell.' As a company, GW seeks to find people who are going to buy models. They are a little more responsive to the player base these days, but there is a concept of attrition. The hobby is expensive, life catches up with people and they leave the game. GW would not exist without a steady flow of new players. They need those players to spend a few thousand on the game, and they need a segment of them to spend a lot more over the course of years on multiple armies.

Do first time players identify more with Tau or Space Marines? Tau are kind of cool looking, I appreciate them but I know a lot of people who don't and never will. Power armor, there's something sexy about it, as well as the mysticism and the gothic feel. Seeing both side by side on a tabletop, do you think most people favor Tau or Space Marines? The answer to that question is important because it affects that decision whether or not to buy into the game.

I'd bet you could measure the number of first time players who convert to paying customers based on seeing a Tau army, and it's smaller than the number of Space Marine players. Just as with the standalone games, if GW gave Tau incredible rules, a new line of amazing models, fantastic coverage in White Dwarf, stand-up signs and posters to every hobby shop to promote the Tau - it would be a disaster. They would sell a lot of models while attracting fewer players to the game, which catches up to them in the long run. Even a small difference in converting new players would have a big impact on profits 5 - 10 years down the road.

So selling is complex. It's not just about updating a line with new models, it's about selling the game to people in a way where they're willing to part with a significant amount of money. That's what capitalizing means and it's why CSM rules always suck.

I call it the Juan Diaz rule. You can't make the models for a subfaction so cool they detract from the first time buying experience. If a teenager can't ask his mom for the money to buy something because it's traditional Slaanesh, GW loses a lot of money over time.

Bosskelot wrote:But clearly that isn't the case. Can you honestly say that this guy would sell better than a new Vect model, or even a new generic Drukhari HQ? Drukhari players massively dwarf Hedonite ones because they're more established and 40k is like 10x the size of AOS in players. Or do you think that these fething things would outsell any 40k release outside of like, Harlequins?

Yes, if one is around longer. GW has all sorts of reasons for discontinuing certain models other than the cast broke.

kodos wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Help me understand - where does the idea come from that a public company with a PE Ratio of $36+ and a Board of Directors headed by an ex-PWC guy does no research? A few statements from game designers?

"no market research" comes from Kirby and is no longer a point

and your other points are more important
boxed games, card games, Mobile and PC games, GW Managment has realised that their IP is the main selling point not the models or the rules
hence they changed to make the most out of it

the other point why GW makes more money now is that they changed their additute to the community

Do you really think the attitude to the community is what caused the company to grow 1600% since 2017?

I've not reviewed any internal sales figures, but it does seem like some other factors may have played a big role. GW grew other lines of business successfully outside straight 40k, grown their publishing arm to include more books and young adult novels, expanded their retail footprint (and contracted it), set up operations in North America to make their supply chain more efficient, capitalized on their IP for video games through a pretty robust release of titles, etc.

I recognize that there's a big difference in how players are treated by the company, but I'd be curious to learn how much of a role 40k sales played in growth compared to all these other revenue generators. I suspect it's important, but not the most important factor in growth.

 dan2026 wrote:
How long do Craftworld Eldar have to wait for their model range update?
Its getting absurd at this point.

So many of their models are ancient and desparetly need updating.

And yet GW continue to pump out damn Space Marines. I'm utterly fed up.

Could be worse, you could've played corsairs and be legended now (well what's left of it anyways)...


But i think it shows through with how the insta updates for all loyalist supplements was done and that the general changes of that weren't even generally applied to all other SM /CSM factions despite being a 5 minute change tops...

 techsoldaten wrote:

Jidmah wrote:Multiple of John Kirby's preambles explicitly said so. The great survey which lead to plastic sisters was pretty much the first time they had done anything that remotely looked like market research in a decade.

Kirby GW and Roundtree GW are 2 different companies.

The first big community survey was 2017, only slightly more than 3 years ago. People claim that the development of mode releases takes roughly 2-3 years (which matches with the time it took them to make sisters).
Only based on those two facts alone, it's fairly safe to assume that many of the decisions that led to the primaris revamp of space marines was NOT based on market research.
An that is before even considering the myriad of sources uniformly telling us that the primaries project definitely started in the kirby era, up to claims that they started all the way back during 5th. The sources disagree why what happened exactly, but not one puts the primaris project in Rountree's responsibility.

Kirby GW and Roundtree GW also are *not* two different companies. Rountree has to live with Kirby's legacy and all projects he started.
You also don't change a whole company by changing the CEO, especially not within a few years.

Thus, the flood of marines during the last years neither originated from market research nor Rountree's genius.