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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Bob Lorgar wrote:
Damn, I could only WISH my World Eaters models were that young.

World Eaters are a Chapter within Codex Chaos, and Codex Chaos has had tons of releases in recent years, all of which are usable in World Eater armies. Khorne Berzerkers are a specific model kit that hasn't been updated. That's not the same as an army literally receiving no new models for more than half a decade.

And how Long did it take gw to Overall Update Chaos marine? it was not far behind.

But eldar getting Love is a great thing.

Dudeface wrote:
Be fair, zerkers are the oldest core infantry in production, but they're also likely to get replaced in the next year or so according to rumours.

I am being fair. They're an ancient model kit in an army that has received multiple updates. It's not the same as an army that's not received new model kits in almost a decade.

You're right about them likely being replaced: If Guardians are getting redone, then doing 'Zerkers seems obvious to me.

That'll leave, what... Catachans as the oldest plastic infantry kit? Not oldest plastic kit - Falcon may have that edge at this point. It came out before the Vyper/Attack Bike, right?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Be fair, zerkers are the oldest core infantry in production, but they're also likely to get replaced in the next year or so according to rumours.

I am being fair. They're an ancient model kit in an army that has received multiple updates. It's not the same as an army that's not received new model kits in almost a decade.

You're right about them likely being replaced: If Guardians are getting redone, then doing 'Zerkers seems obvious to me.

That'll leave, what... Catachans as the oldest plastic infantry kit? Not oldest plastic kit - Falcon may have that edge at this point. It came out before the Vyper/Attack Bike, right?

Well, to be fair, Berzerkers ain't WE either. The only actual WE model currently produced by GW (instead of FW) is Kharn IIRC.

Falcon and Vyper came out very near one another, I think, but yeah, by now both are really old. Eldar grav vehicles could certainly use recut sprues with some additional options, but the core design holds up very well. If anything, and now that the storm guardians get the old style Wave Serpent sail, it could be cool to get that again on the Wave Serpents ^^ instead of the lines of dongles.

I wonder how these will look next to the old models.. Will they be so far upscaled as to make mixing old and new guardians a no-go?

Overall, I like the new proportions, slightly chunkier and less skinny than the old ones, but the heads look a tad too big for my sensibilities. If I'll ever end up with Aeldari models, Imma use the helmeted heads for most of em.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Be fair, zerkers are the oldest core infantry in production, but they're also likely to get replaced in the next year or so according to rumours.

I am being fair. They're an ancient model kit in an army that has received multiple updates. It's not the same as an army that's not received new model kits in almost a decade.

You're right about them likely being replaced: If Guardians are getting redone, then doing 'Zerkers seems obvious to me.


That'll leave, what... Catachans as the oldest plastic infantry kit? Not oldest plastic kit - Falcon may have that edge at this point. It came out before the Vyper/Attack Bike, right?

The Vyper came out in Spring 1997 and the falcon in early 1998. They first showed off the falcon at games day 1997. I was there and it blew my mind at the time. Both those kits look pretty good even now.

Chikout wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Be fair, zerkers are the oldest core infantry in production, but they're also likely to get replaced in the next year or so according to rumours.

I am being fair. They're an ancient model kit in an army that has received multiple updates. It's not the same as an army that's not received new model kits in almost a decade.

You're right about them likely being replaced: If Guardians are getting redone, then doing 'Zerkers seems obvious to me.


That'll leave, what... Catachans as the oldest plastic infantry kit? Not oldest plastic kit - Falcon may have that edge at this point. It came out before the Vyper/Attack Bike, right?

The Vyper came out in Spring 1997 and the falcon in early 1998. They first showed off the falcon at games day 1997. I was there and it blew my mind at the time. Both those kits look pretty good even now.

Falcon was November 97. Which luckily means that this year it becomes eligible for the discount on vehicle insurance that applies to over-25's!

Assuming the new Guardians are on 28mm bases, and both the weapon platforms are on a 40mm, we can compare the crew models to give a rough estimate of how the old and new Guardians will scale with each other.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That'll leave, what... Catachans as the oldest plastic infantry kit? Not oldest plastic kit - Falcon may have that edge at this point. It came out before the Vyper/Attack Bike, right?

The Falcon orginally came with a 2nd edition data card! That's how old it is:

I think the Vyper May predate the Falcon?

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:I think the Vyper May predate the Falcon?

Chikout wrote:The Vyper came out in Spring 1997 and the falcon in early 1998. They first showed off the falcon at games day 1997. I was there and it blew my mind at the time. Both those kits look pretty good even now.

Yes

I'd say the Shining Spears plastic Jetbikes pre-date them!

 JNAProductions wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Tell you what, let's play a game - you list new units (actually new units, not re-sculpts) that Dark Eldar have received in the last 10 years and I'll list units that have been removed from their codex in the same period.

Let's see who runs out first.

I am well aware of what options their various HQs have lost over the years, but to say that GW has no interest in supporting DE when they are widely seen as having the most powerful (or one of the most powerful) Codices in the entire game right now is melodramatic.

Yes, they technically didn't even get a "Codex + 1 Model" release in 9th, as Lilith came out way before their book did, meaning they've had zero model support this edition, but they also received one of the best top-to-bottom miniature line refreshes that GW has ever done compared to the absolute drek they had in 3rd. Is it bad that their main HQ is basically hugging himself and has no options? Yes. Is it stupid that they still haven't done Grotesques in an Ogryn-style plastic 3 pack? Of course. Should they do a "Beastmaster" box that has the guy on the board, and a bunch of critters, all in plastic? Absolutely.

But to say that they have no interest in supporting them? Tyranids haven't received a new model in over 7 years. I would never suggest that GW has abandoned them.

Power=/=care.

I can make Tau, with their current rules, so completely and utterly OP that they'd have a damn-near 100% win rate against any other Dex, and I can do it in this post.

Set all models' points costs to 1.
Set any other points cost to 0.

Dark Eldar weren't and aren't powerful because they have interesting, well-thought-out rules that synergize well in powerful ways. They're powerful because they're good at what this edition wants, and are generally on the cheap side.

Exactly this.

Dark Eldar are strong but they're not fun.

They weren't made better by GW taking the time to make them really play like their lore but instead by "big numbers, low points".

If you want a contrast, I'd suggest looking at the 9th edition SoB codex and all the effort put into artefacts, acts of faith, master abilities etc. Now look at the DE codex and the effort put into Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V. Can't be arsed thinking of any more DE artefacts? Don't worry - just put a big picture in the middle to pad out the page. I'm sure no one will ever notice. With SoB you can make a Canoness a melee character, a ranged character, a tanky character, a support character, or some combination of all of those. With Dark Eldar, on the other hand, you can use your selection of warlord traits, artefacts and Master abilities to make a melee character or another melee character.

Whatever happens with Eldar, I at least know that the HQ section will contain more than "melee HQ" and "melee HQ who sucks at his job".

/rant


Anyway, more on topic, does anyone remember if Guardian rifles are meant to be getting a boost to their range?

Rumour is ap-1 and 18” range.

However, not at all sure those rumours are reliable.

 zedmeister wrote:
I'd say the Shining Spears plastic Jetbikes pre-date them!

Shining Spears had no models back then at all, even though they did have an entry in the 2nd edition Codex. That did not come til later (3rd edition) and then their Jetbikes were basically the Guardian Jetbikes, with slight changes.

The Vyper came first, followed by the Falcon. Then the Fire Prism as conversion kit, but it got 2nd edition rules too, barely, as it was the tail end of 2nd edition.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Rumour is ap-1 and 18” range.

However, not at all sure those rumours are reliable.

That would certainly make for a substantial improvement if true.

 vipoid wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Rumour is ap-1 and 18” range.

However, not at all sure those rumours are reliable.

That would certainly make for a substantial improvement if true.

It would be basically GW silently tacitly admitting they messed up in 3rd edition when they reduced the range to 12". The boosting of Avenger catapults to 18" was already an admission, yet GW remained stubborn and kept Guardians with useless 12" catapults. If GW makes all catapults 18", then they will have caved.

I think its important to keep some perspective in mind regarding model rereleases - if you have a plastic kit for a unit, (and you aren't playing loyalist space marines) you should expect to live with your kit for at least 10-20 years before it gets updated again. You are not going to get a resculpt of that kit every 5-10 years because its "old" and you want resculpts for your armies because everyone else got new minis too. The only reason tactical marines got redone as often as they do is likely due to the fact that because they are such a high volume kit (if rumors are to be believed) GW has had to replace the molds for them several times over the years as a result of the molds wearing through, at which point it only makes sense that they would do a design update in the process.

Sucks, but thats how the cookie crumbles, molds are a high cost capital asset and are extremely time consuming to cut and tool and get into service. GW isn't going to redo a kit after 10 years if it still has another 20+ years of useful life left in it.

chaos0xomega wrote:
The only reason tactical marines got redone as often as they do is likely due to the fact that because they are such a high volume kit (if rumors are to be believed) GW has had to replace the molds for them several times over the years as a result of the molds wearing through, at which point it only makes sense that they would do a design update in the process.

More like they know people will buy them and they'll replace their older ones with the new, so they expect a better turnaround.

Iracundus wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
I'd say the Shining Spears plastic Jetbikes pre-date them!

Shining Spears had no models back then at all, even though they did have an entry in the 2nd edition Codex. That did not come til later (3rd edition) and then their Jetbikes were basically the Guardian Jetbikes, with slight changes.

The Vyper came first, followed by the Falcon. Then the Fire Prism as conversion kit, but it got 2nd edition rules too, barely, as it was the tail end of 2nd edition.

He didn't say shining spears. Just their jetbikes The plastic parts are the same.

Did the guardian jetbikes come before or after vyper?

Riders came later but whatabout the plastic bike itself.

tneva82 wrote:


Did the guardian jetbikes come before or after vyper?

Riders came later but whatabout the plastic bike itself.

1994

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/123mjQsYY-8UvsYJLV-ZkazjbsWrLCvVbuhvKKVPchlw/htmlview#

The Guardian Jetbikes came out long before. The Shining Spear Jetbikes differ in having a keypad (instead of Guardian Jetbike handlebars) and a rear flagpole that differs from the Guardian one.

 zedmeister wrote:
The Falcon orginally came with a 2nd edition data card! That's how old it is:

Oh I know. I was around when it came out. I have the issue of WD.

Just wasn't sure if it was older than the Vyper or the other way around. I remember the scenario they invented for that month's Battle Report, where they showed off the new Vypers and Attack Bikes.

 Albertorius wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
The only reason tactical marines got redone as often as they do is likely due to the fact that because they are such a high volume kit (if rumors are to be believed) GW has had to replace the molds for them several times over the years as a result of the molds wearing through, at which point it only makes sense that they would do a design update in the process.

More like they know people will buy them and they'll replace their older ones with the new, so they expect a better turnaround.

Unlikely. Production tooling is considered a capital asset (I believe the UK refers to it as a "fixed asset"), theres all sorts of tax implications involved with them and their depreciation/disposal, etc. There are back-end financial considerations/a bigger picture that have to be accounted for here beyond simple sales revenue/profit.

Glad to see Guardians getting a new kit with some well done sculpts and nice faces. I'm happy with my current set of Guardians but I am very interested in what they do with plastic Aspects.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
The Falcon orginally came with a 2nd edition data card! That's how old it is:

Oh I know. I was around when it came out. I have the issue of WD.

Just wasn't sure if it was older than the Vyper or the other way around. I remember the scenario they invented for that month's Battle Report, where they showed off the new Vypers and Attack Bikes.

Vyper was WD207, Falcon WD216, Prism WD219, 3rd ed WD226. My first return to the game after a three year break was because I saw then fresh Falcon box on a storefront.

I once showed a printout of the Prism to a GW store employee well before the model came out. He swore it was just a conversion.

Iracundus wrote:
The Guardian Jetbikes came out long before. The Shining Spear Jetbikes differ in having a keypad (instead of Guardian Jetbike handlebars) and a rear flagpole that differs from the Guardian one.

The Shining Spears box is just the old plastic jet bike with a selection of metal (now resin?) parts - torso/head, legs, lance arm, arm with control panel (instead of the handlebars as you note) and the aerial thing instead of the flag pole.

But you get the whole plastic jet bike sprue.

The new Guardians look really nice. They'd look better in yellow, of course. I might just have to buy a box to fix GW's mistake...

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
The only reason tactical marines got redone as often as they do is likely due to the fact that because they are such a high volume kit (if rumors are to be believed) GW has had to replace the molds for them several times over the years as a result of the molds wearing through, at which point it only makes sense that they would do a design update in the process.

More like they know people will buy them and they'll replace their older ones with the new, so they expect a better turnaround.

Unlikely. Production tooling is considered a capital asset (I believe the UK refers to it as a "fixed asset"), theres all sorts of tax implications involved with them and their depreciation/disposal, etc. There are back-end financial considerations/a bigger picture that have to be accounted for here beyond simple sales revenue/profit.

Yeah that's correct, although it depends on the original cost of the tool. Generally fixed assets need to have a minimum value before depreciation is used; £5000 is a common figure for this. So a 'cheap' aluminium mold for an event character like a store anniversary model might not require registration as an asset as the cost will be well under GW's threshold, but a set of steel molds for something like a Falcon could be a £10,000 asset, written off gradually over 5 or 10 years.

This is a big factor in the pricing for models. For example, we've seen equivalent kits (same number/size sprues) for space marines & xenos factions where the marine box was £5 cheaper. That's because even though the molds may cost GW almost the same, someone has carried out sales forecasting* for the lifetime of their use and determined that the xenos kit will sell far fewer and therefore need a higher price per unit to make the same profit as the marine kit.

*aka educated guessing

 xttz wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
The only reason tactical marines got redone as often as they do is likely due to the fact that because they are such a high volume kit (if rumors are to be believed) GW has had to replace the molds for them several times over the years as a result of the molds wearing through, at which point it only makes sense that they would do a design update in the process.

More like they know people will buy them and they'll replace their older ones with the new, so they expect a better turnaround.

Unlikely. Production tooling is considered a capital asset (I believe the UK refers to it as a "fixed asset"), theres all sorts of tax implications involved with them and their depreciation/disposal, etc. There are back-end financial considerations/a bigger picture that have to be accounted for here beyond simple sales revenue/profit.

Yeah that's correct, although it depends on the original cost of the tool. Generally fixed assets need to have a minimum value before depreciation is used; £5000 is a common figure for this. So a 'cheap' aluminium mold for an event character like a store anniversary model might not require registration as an asset as the cost will be well under GW's threshold, but a set of steel molds for something like a Falcon could be a £10,000 asset, written off gradually over 5 or 10 years.

This is a big factor in the pricing for models. For example, we've seen equivalent kits (same number/size sprues) for space marines & xenos factions where the marine box was £5 cheaper. That's because even though the molds may cost GW almost the same, someone has carried out sales forecasting* for the lifetime of their use and determined that the xenos kit will sell far fewer and therefore need a higher price per unit to make the same profit as the marine kit.

*aka educated guessing

Maybe, just maybe putting like 90% of marketing effort to promote SM rainbow has something to do with how long does it take for a mould to make an acceptable return? And there is no reason of this sort to explain why GW has never updated Warp Spiders after their debut in '94 or why an anniversary SM models take precedence over a remake of Phoenix Lords or a mainstay character models like Warlocks. Those would make the same return in comparable time, just because of how short run anniversary models are designed for.

Fortunately GW seems to realise, that they overfocused on SM, so they do major overhauls of Xenos and non-SM imperial factions lately and reintroduce RT/2nd concepts.