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.

 Nevelon wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
My only issue with Combat Patrols is there needs to be a small printed out book available for GW/FLGS to use.

I've seen eyes bleeding over attempts at trying to read rules on a phone.

They should be available online to download PDFs.

If you're meaning the rules for the Combat Patrols themselves, I thought they were? There's a section on the Downloads page on WarCom with 46 of them there, at the very least.

A lot of the old Start Collecting sets could do a legal army in that they'd have an option there which could be build as a command/leader model.

However they were also clearly designed as bulk-out sets. That is they'd often have models you'd want several of in the same army. So the idea is you'd buy several and bulk out a solid core of your army and then expand from there.


Today its a bit different because you don't really need that in the same way for a lot of 40K and AoS armies. There are a LOT more units in general to most armies (esp in 40) and fewer "this one kit builds 10-20 different variations).
So there's less value in a single bulk-out kit that you buy over and over again as opposed to getting a different specialist model.



Start Collecting have thus changed into the new form where they are more a one-and-done approach to armies. Where often the saving is mostly the leader model that you might really only need the one of anyway. Alongside Combat Patrol and Spearhead making them into mini-game boxes to further enhance the chance of getting new people in and getting people to start new armies

And honestly it works

 Dysartes wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
My only issue with Combat Patrols is there needs to be a small printed out book available for GW/FLGS to use.

I've seen eyes bleeding over attempts at trying to read rules on a phone.

They should be available online to download PDFs.

If you're meaning the rules for the Combat Patrols themselves, I thought they were? There's a section on the Downloads page on WarCom with 46 of them there, at the very least.

Yep. And none of the kids who play combat patrol at the shop appear to own printers.

Slipspace wrote:
Current rumour is 2 strats per detachment point. So the 1-cost ones only have 2 strats.

They said on one of the videos that a detachment they were on about had no strats but let you take extra upgrades instead.

 Overread wrote:
Start Collecting have thus changed into the new form where they are more a one-and-done approach to armies. Where often the saving is mostly the leader model that you might really only need the one of anyway. Alongside Combat Patrol and Spearhead making them into mini-game boxes to further enhance the chance of getting new people in and getting people to start new armies

And honestly it works

More cynically, I have a feeling GW loves putting niche characters and EPIC HEROes in the combat patrol boxes to discourage buying duplicates, precisely to avoid giving away too much value "for free".

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Start Collecting have thus changed into the new form where they are more a one-and-done approach to armies. Where often the saving is mostly the leader model that you might really only need the one of anyway. Alongside Combat Patrol and Spearhead making them into mini-game boxes to further enhance the chance of getting new people in and getting people to start new armies

And honestly it works

More cynically, I have a feeling GW loves putting niche characters and EPIC HEROes in the combat patrol boxes to discourage buying duplicates, precisely to avoid giving away too much value "for free".

I think its far more a way to justify their production runs. The problem with characters has always been that they don't sell as many copies as units but still have the same up front costs to produce the mold. By slipping them in box sets effectively for free, they can boost the perceived value of the boxes while also moving more copies of the sprue to meet the minimum volume needed to show they weren't produced at a loss. That's the reason they initially tried so many things like Finecast to produce characters before deciding they had to find ways to make HIPS viable.

Honestly I think the HIPS just came along with the evolution of the method and GW getting into aluminium moulds - it's also why we see more hero-churn. Things like the soulblight wightking on steed would once have lasted for 10-20years instead lasting for only a handful.

It's much easier for GW to justify a new sculpt replacement if the mould is going to give out much faster and need replacing.

Indeed you can see creative staff pushing for it - if the mould is going to die why now push the latest shiny new version of a model.

To say that start collecting boxes were a worse starter product because they did not make an useable army is just lying.

They did fine. GW back in the day just did not give you specific rules to play those boxes agaisnt each other.

Combat Patrols, today, are basically old start collecting boxes with + 1 kit throwed in (normally a character) for double the price. The savings are much worse. And we talking about 2017-2018 Start Collecting, not 2005 boxes.

Even the good combat patrol boxes like Genestealer Cultists or Dark Eldar are replaced by much worse ones with less discounts (Dont make me talk about AoS spearhead boxes with useless warcry warbands or underworld warbands throwed in the mix)

 Overread wrote:
Honestly I think the HIPS just came along with the evolution of the method and GW getting into aluminium moulds - it's also why we see more hero-churn. Things like the soulblight wightking on steed would once have lasted for 10-20years instead lasting for only a handful.

It's much easier for GW to justify a new sculpt replacement if the mould is going to give out much faster and need replacing.

Indeed you can see creative staff pushing for it - if the mould is going to die why now push the latest shiny new version of a model.

HIPS is just the name of the plastic GW use. It's the same plastic they've always used, in steel moulds or (if they're using them) aluminium. There's no innovation there that would affect what GW is choosing to make and why. There seems to be a tendency for people who aren't familiar with certain manufacturing processes to fabulate theories about how these processes are dictating creative or commercial decisions (it comes up a lot of with printing, which is an industry I work in). It seems hardly ever to be the case. The change over time is that GW has acquired the capacity to make pretty much its whole range in plastic, where previously that capacity was more limited. If the lifetime of moulds were a significant factor in the frequency of GW's releases, we'd see kits occasionally suddenly vanish when a mould became unuseable. It takes 2 to 3 years to design and manufacture a new kit, so it isn't possibly to plan the replacement to coincide reliably with the end of another mould's lifetime. I'm sceptical GW are using aluminium moulds for anything other than designated limited editions and oddities like the small sprues they use for miniature of the month and so on. GW has upped the frequency of new releases so that it has more new releases to sell. I don't think there's some weird 'science bit' to be done using changing technology to explain it.

Combat patrols actually have a similar level of discount to Start Collecting boxes.

The difference is that the base price of new models has risen a noticeable amount in the last decade, and combat patrols favour new kits. Start Collecting were predominantly things from 2000-2012.

For example, the ageing Ork Nobz & Lootas boxes are currently £27 and were under the £20 mark when Start Collecting boxes existed*. However when we see these refreshed they will inevitably become £40+ kits overnight. This will absolutely be reflected in future Ork combat patrols.

*I checked and at one point I paid £15 for Lootas from a FLGS

It's a fair point on price increases.
I think my issue is that a lot of the discount often seems to just be a "free" character. While I might grit my teeth through 5 infantry now being £37.50 rrp, I'm really struggling with infantry characters being nearly £30.

I guess if I checked you could say the same of the start collecting boxes too though.

Greenfield wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Honestly I think the HIPS just came along with the evolution of the method and GW getting into aluminium moulds - it's also why we see more hero-churn. Things like the soulblight wightking on steed would once have lasted for 10-20years instead lasting for only a handful.

It's much easier for GW to justify a new sculpt replacement if the mould is going to give out much faster and need replacing.

Indeed you can see creative staff pushing for it - if the mould is going to die why now push the latest shiny new version of a model.

HIPS is just the name of the plastic GW use. It's the same plastic they've always used, in steel moulds or (if they're using them) aluminium. There's no innovation there that would affect what GW is choosing to make and why. There seems to be a tendency for people who aren't familiar with certain manufacturing processes to fabulate theories about how these processes are dictating creative or commercial decisions (it comes up a lot of with printing, which is an industry I work in). It seems hardly ever to be the case. The change over time is that GW has acquired the capacity to make pretty much its whole range in plastic, where previously that capacity was more limited. If the lifetime of moulds were a significant factor in the frequency of GW's releases, we'd see kits occasionally suddenly vanish when a mould became unuseable. It takes 2 to 3 years to design and manufacture a new kit, so it isn't possibly to plan the replacement to coincide reliably with the end of another mould's lifetime. I'm sceptical GW are using aluminium moulds for anything other than designated limited editions and oddities like the small sprues they use for miniature of the month and so on. GW has upped the frequency of new releases so that it has more new releases to sell. I don't think there's some weird 'science bit' to be done using changing technology to explain it.

On the cost? Bringing the tool making in-house presumably lowered costs, as you’re not paying for someone else’s profit margin.

And in terms of affordability? Likely just experience. If we look right back to Drastik Plastik, we can trace GW getting more into it. Presumably, those early kits sold well enough to cover the initial design costs. And as time went on and more stuff moved to plastic? GW saw the same return, to the point the decision was made to put everything in plastic, confident the investment would be returned handsomely.

There must surely also be a break even point between coughing up for a steel HIPS mould, and having to periodically replace rubber moulds for spin cast metal?

Anyways, here’s a video from the lovely Jordan Sorcery in conversation with John Thornthwaite, Citadel’s early plastic innovation chap.

Also remember now GW is big enough even your niche Xenos Black Library Celebration character is probably selling more than the Space Marine Chapter Master or infantry squad was a decade ago.

If the minimum volume to make a plastic mould viable over resin is, say, 100,000 units GW is hitting that a lot more reliably on a lot more niche units now it's so big.

This also translates into further competitive advantage as a lot of people have a strong preference for working with plastic, and GW has the size to offer entire ranges in plastic.

Part of the reason I think characters cost so much is I think customers are more comfortable stretching their wallet for a character. "£30 for one Captain?! Well I only need the one, and he will be the centrepiece of my army, so go on then...". Vs if a squad you needed multiple of to just kinda lurk into the background? Yeah you can't push the price so hard on that one.
I bet their profit margin is very comfortable on characters "getting value from the mould" isn't so much a factor anymore.

If it was so prohibitively expensive to cut moulds for plastic models that GW are forced to put characters into Combat Patrol boxes to justify the investment, they wouldn't be making moulds for models which are given away for free in store for a single month.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
If it was so prohibitively expensive to cut moulds for plastic models that GW are forced to put characters into Combat Patrol boxes to justify the investment, they wouldn't be making moulds for models which are given away for free in store for a single month.

Assuming that those monthly models don't use another expense account with cheaper mounds and single print runs with no reprints- keep in stock characters likely use better mounds and have to fit in production runs- it may be less about cost and more about machine time- do a bigger run at once to fill a bunch of combat patrol or battalion boxes plus singles instead of multiple smaller runs.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
If it was so prohibitively expensive to cut moulds for plastic models that GW are forced to put characters into Combat Patrol boxes to justify the investment, they wouldn't be making moulds for models which are given away for free in store for a single month.

By using cheaper moulds (well, just exchangeable inserts/cavities - not a full new tool) that don't last long. They have all the data and measurements from the original mould where the single parts of the models are in, so it's not that expensive. That's not something you do for a kit that should stay in the range for some years.

These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

Any thoughts on Heavy allowing you to move up to 3" and still get the +1 to hit? Not sure its that material, but potentially allows for some shuffling around a roof.

Tyel wrote:
These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

Any thoughts on Heavy allowing you to move up to 3" and still get the +1 to hit? Not sure its that material, but potentially allows for some shuffling around a roof.

Some of the terrain footprints are 2.5", so it might let a Guard Heavy Weapons team hide behind a wall then pop out and shoot while keeping the Heavy bonus. Also useful for minor shuffling around for LoS purposes.

Tyel wrote:
These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

Any thoughts on Heavy allowing you to move up to 3" and still get the +1 to hit? Not sure its that material, but potentially allows for some shuffling around a roof.

I think it would have been worth it when heavy meant you could not move and fire. But now? When you can move and fire normally without it? Not a fan. +1 to hit is pretty big. Having some firm restrictions on it does not bother me. This strikes me as having your cake and getting to eat it.

IMHO etc…

Tyel wrote:
These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

They're actually weirdly detailed, just regarding things we don't have any structure to properly put into context. Like the rules version of the Rumor Engine posts.

As far as Heavy is concerned, I think its largely a good thing. The game thankfully requires mobility to such a degree that sacrificing it is a pretty huge loss. It will also largely just offset cover now, so not as impactful as it would have been before.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/3279970825525880

If you have a burning question about the new edition of Warhammer 40,000, drop an email to QandA@40k.warhammer.com before 5pm BST 12th May and Eddie and Adam will answer them in a special Q&A this time next week.

'Live' Q&A 15th May - 7pm BST

 Nevelon wrote:

Tyel wrote:
These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

Any thoughts on Heavy allowing you to move up to 3" and still get the +1 to hit? Not sure its that material, but potentially allows for some shuffling around a roof.

I think it would have been worth it when heavy meant you could not move and fire. But now? When you can move and fire normally without it? Not a fan. +1 to hit is pretty big. Having some firm restrictions on it does not bother me. This strikes me as having your cake and getting to eat it.

IMHO etc…

3" is plenty of space to deny a charge with, imo.

 RaptorusRex wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

Tyel wrote:
These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

Any thoughts on Heavy allowing you to move up to 3" and still get the +1 to hit? Not sure its that material, but potentially allows for some shuffling around a roof.

I think it would have been worth it when heavy meant you could not move and fire. But now? When you can move and fire normally without it? Not a fan. +1 to hit is pretty big. Having some firm restrictions on it does not bother me. This strikes me as having your cake and getting to eat it.

IMHO etc…

3" is plenty of space to deny a charge with, imo.

Oh I’m not saying that 3” isn’t nothing. There are a TON of things that can be done with it. I just feel that +1 to hit is a valuable enough buff that you should need to keep your feet firmly planted to get it. You want to move and fire? Great. You still can, up to your full move. Just at your normal BS.

GW, obviously, disagrees.

 LunarSol wrote:

Tyel wrote:
These faction guides aren't exactly flush with info.

They're actually weirdly detailed, just regarding things we don't have any structure to properly put into context. Like the rules version of the Rumor Engine posts.

As far as Heavy is concerned, I think its largely a good thing. The game thankfully requires mobility to such a degree that sacrificing it is a pretty huge loss. It will also largely just offset cover now, so not as impactful as it would have been before.

It’s also something we’ve seen in Heresy. Rather than a penalty for moving, remaining stationary provides a boost. So instance an extra shot, extra pip of strength etc.

Makes for a more mobile, shifting game.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

It’s also something we’ve seen in Heresy. Rather than a penalty for moving, remaining stationary provides a boost. So instance an extra shot, extra pip of strength etc.

Makes for a more mobile, shifting game.

Penalties and buffs are effectively the same thing. Every buff could instead be a penalty to a better base stat. The WoW resting experience thing being the most famous example of this.

The reason you see this shift is to put rules responsibility on the player owning the models. If the special rules on my models penalize me, I benefit when I forget them. If the special rules provide me a benefit, then failing to use them is a detriment. It helps ensure that my opponent doesn't feel a need to police me and makes for less contentious games.

Six of one, half dozen of the other. All depends how you look at it.

If I’m going for a more nimble infantry army? I know I can now do that with Heavy Weapons, and they’ll do what their stat line says they’ll do (dice gods allowing of course). And should I find them an advantageous position? They can plant their feets and overperform,

Certainly I feel like I’m weighing a lesser risk when choosing to shift it or stand ground,

It also affects different armies in different ways. Orky Heavy Weapons have a significantly greater benefit from staying put compared to Space Marine Heavy Weapons.

Just going on the base rules as we’ve seen so far of course.

 LunarSol wrote:
The reason you see this shift is to put rules responsibility on the player owning the models. If the special rules on my models penalize me, I benefit when I forget them. If the special rules provide me a benefit, then failing to use them is a detriment. It helps ensure that my opponent doesn't feel a need to police me and makes for less contentious games.

This is a great point and one I hadn't considered. I like new Heavy (in 30k, not played with the new 40k version yet) more now.

We've gone from no shooting if you move, to only hitting on 6s if you move, to getting a +1 if you don't move, to now getting a +1 if you move half speed or less.

If they don't want players to have to actually decide between movement or shooting, just drop the freaking mechanic already.

The new video mentions PSYCHIC now ignores hit modifiers (and potentially also/instead BS modifiers, since they specifically call out cover).

 catbarf wrote:
We've gone from no shooting if you move, to only hitting on 6s if you move, to getting a +1 if you don't move, to now getting a +1 if you move half speed or less.

If they don't want players to have to actually decide between movement or shooting, just drop the freaking mechanic already.

Or people can suck it up and go back to the start, do not pass go, do not get 200 pts. Make positioning and range matter again.