Snaggas and the future of 40k

[Rik Lightstar]

Edition changes don't necessarily drive sales of NEW models, they drive sales of DIFFERENT models.

 

Each new set of rules, be it Core Rules or Codex will impact which units are good or bad encouraging people to replace units that have become worse with the ones that are now improved.

 

The rules team on the whole, despite what some people seem determined to believe, genuinely enjoy playing the games, they want the rules to continually improve and offer new challenges.

 

Rik

[Halandaar]

 

my topic, my question, my definition. someone wants to use a different way to define the phrase they can discuss their definition in their own topic.

 I mean, that’s not how the board works - as long as we’re discussing the topic, everyone is free to use their own ways to define a definition-less concept to discuss.  That includes whether your personal definition is unnecessarily limited or seems cherry-picked to support your view.  My definition of “getting AoS’d” is what it actually is - the absolute end of a setting and game, the creation of a new game with a new name, and a reimagining of any surviving elements - because that’s what WHFB getting End Times’d/AoS’d actually meant for it.

 

If this is a “Convince me that...” or something along those lines, then no one can, you’ve picked a definition to suit something you already seem convinced of - you haven’t seemed willing to shift off your definition even though people have shown that maybe it isn’t as defining as you think it is.  That’s not interesting for conversation, so people are free to pick other veins of conversation to mine, as long as they are still within the overall topic that was presented.

 

You never have answered the question of how you think your idea that 40K has been AoS’d impacts the future of 40K per your own topic title.

 

Right? This whole topic is set up like a "change my mind" meme where the OP isn't interested in any actual discussion and just wants their own point of view validated, and anything that refutes one of their assertions just gets completely ignored.

[Valkyrion]

7th ed was clearly the money grab edition and I think by and large the player base saw through it.

Formations that required certain units are all well and good, but forcing mandatory units on players, or buy X get X free was pretty shady.

 

The thing I don't like about the GW release cycle is the staggered release of the rules. I do understand that you can't release all the codexes at once, but we often end up in a situation where an army has less than a year before a new edition drops. I don't suppose it could be avoided, realistically, but imagine if, say, Tyranids get their codex last with their fancy Crusade Rules and then 10th drops less than a year later and abandons crusade.

 

I think something like Crusade, which is almost like playing a different game, should have been taken out of the codexes and released Apocalypse style or Kill Team style as a boxed set with rosters and a book containing crusade rules for every faction so that everyone gets their rules at the same time.

They could have made a really nice book like that, with a nice fluff section and artwork and made it a £95 boxed set with a fancy extra 'something' like swanky banners that you put next to your units to identify them as legendary or a set of crusade type objective markers or whatever, and the community would have lapped it up.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Valkyrion

[Burni]

My 'turning into AoS' concern is that we'll end up with loads of cool but small, incomplete ranges. Kharadron Overlords are a great example. It's 1 or 1.5 waves and then done. I'd personally rather have something like the classic 'new wave every few years' as it suits how I collect. I realise not everyone collects like that but a game full of Harlequin sized factions doesn't appeal. I prefer range depth to range breadth. Would I like new factions? Probably but seems like there's plenty they can do with giving the existing ones new and replacement units.

[Halandaar]

My 'turning into AoS' concern is that we'll end up with loads of cool but small, incomplete ranges. Kharadron Overlords are a great example. It's 1 or 1.5 waves and then done. 

 

While I agree with that to some extent, believe it or not Kharadron Overlords actually have almost twice as many kits in their range as Genestealer Cults did when they first launched in 2016.

 

New ranges take time to build and something that needs to be considered is that all the AoS factions are being built essentially from scratch, whereas in 40k for the most part it's much more iterative. You do have a few "appear out of nowhere" big ranges like Death Guard in 40k and Nighthaunt in AoS, but other recent examples like AdMech and Genestealer Cults have been built up to their current size over multiple waves. Same with Lumineth Realmlords, which after this week will have had more kits than all the new Necron ones since 9th, an update that most 40k players consider to be a "massive" range update.

 

I guess my point is that just because some factions haven't been revisited yet (Harlequins, Kharadron, Daughters of Khaine etc), it doesn't necessarily hold that they won't ever be revisited and we'll end up with all these small factions in perpetuity. 

[Xenith]

My 'turning into AoS' concern is that we'll end up with loads of cool but small, incomplete ranges. Kharadron Overlords are a great example. It's 1 or 1.5 waves and then done. 

 

Again, I think AdMech, Thousand Sons, Harlequins and Genestealer cults did it first, 'it' being the small, incomplete 'test' range of models for a new faction, that would then be expanded upon if popular.  GSC and AdMech got additional stuff, while Harlies and Thousand Sons are still on the 6 and 4 new kits they got respectively. 

 

In that way, I guess the release cycles for both games has synergised. Rather than 40k being AoS'd, or AoS getting 40k'd, they both got Games Workshop'd around the time the new CEO took over.  

[Burni]

That's sort of my point. 40k has run on the classic 'waves spread over years' so factions do be added to (Ad Mech GSC). But AOS has (until Lumineth maybe?) been mostly a one wave and done, unless it's one of the really big factions (Stormcasts for example).

 

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like the large waves to continue for 40k. I'd like to start a faction knowing I can likely keep adding to it over the years with new models. Rather than getting to 2000pts and thinking 'next!'.

[Halandaar]

That's sort of my point. 40k has run on the classic 'waves spread over years' so factions do be added to (Ad Mech GSC). But AOS has (until Lumineth maybe?) been mostly a one wave and done, unless it's one of the really big factions (Stormcasts for example).

 

Whereas my point is that every faction in every system is "one wave and done" the first time it has a release, and just because a faction hasn't had another wave since it's first, it doesn't mean that there isn't one in the pipeline. I mean last spring, after an impressively comprehensive plastic overhaul of Sisters of Battle, did any of us think we'd be here a year later talking about a significant second wave coming over the horizon with new unit types? Or when Lumineth got a release comparable to many other new AoS factions, did we expect that range to more than double in size in a year's time?

 

I'm wary of painting 40k as the "multiple waves over multiple years" system vs AoS, the "one-and-done" system, simply because there are examples on both sides of the opposite release pattern (and it's not just Stormcast and Lumineth; all four god-aligned Chaos factions as well as Slaves to Darkness have had more than one wave).

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

I think you may have gotten the way GW works backwards there Penitentone, if we were still using 2nd ed we would have exactly the same number of kits, just a wildly convoluted set of rules to play them with and likely more revisions of the various units rules. Models have always been the prime driver of GW rather than rules.

 

Well i say that but theres no way the game would have gotten so popular and expanded everything appropriately stuck with a 90's rulesset!

But IF that's true (ie. the models driving sales not rules part), then why didn't we stay in 5th, which a lot of folks think was a near perfect set of rules, or at least a pretty good set of rules? If not to drive sales, then why? That would have been a perfect time to update CWE INSTEAD of a new edition. So why did they cop out, blow it all up and start over AGAIN if not to sell models?

 

Regarding the second ed part, I agree those rules were a bit much; I enjoyed it at the time, and armies were smaller then, so it worked well enough... but 3rd was an improvement.

i believe they use new editions to push sales.

It's a perfect opportunity to release all new units (heavy intercessors, BGVs, etc.) as well as well as new sculpts for old kits, and change up rules for units that under performed sales wise in the current/last edition to drive sales of those units.

 

Just my 2¢

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

my topic, my question, my definition. someone wants to use a different way to define the phrase they can discuss their definition in their own topic.

I mean, that’s not how the board works - as long as we’re discussing the topic, everyone is free to use their own ways to define a definition-less concept to discuss. That includes whether your personal definition is unnecessarily limited or seems cherry-picked to support your view. My definition of “getting AoS’d” is what it actually is - the absolute end of a setting and game, the creation of a new game with a new name, and a reimagining of any surviving elements - because that’s what WHFB getting End Times’d/AoS’d actually meant for it.

 

If this is a “Convince me that...” or something along those lines, then no one can, you’ve picked a definition to suit something you already seem convinced of - you haven’t seemed willing to shift off your definition even though people have shown that maybe it isn’t as defining as you think it is. That’s not interesting for conversation, so people are free to pick other veins of conversation to mine, as long as they are still within the overall topic that was presented.

 

You never have answered the question of how you think your idea that 40K has been AoS’d impacts the future of 40K per your own topic title.

 

We already know we’re likely to see more centerpiece style stuff (which certain things like the Baneblade and Knight predated AoS) - we just don’t know what exactly each faction/sub-faction might get, we know GW likes their digital sculpting process and that this continues the history of shared elements between “Fantasy in Space” 40K and “40K in Fantasy” AoS, we know that they aren’t shying away from having a moving metastory, and we know that they seem reluctant to alter the major themes of factions while adding in new elements. Those aren’t revelations to the player base.

 

What are your predictions from all of this - what is the future of 40K? Is that future something you think you will enjoy, or do you no longer enjoy the game because of the changes and just want the old 40K back? Can you enjoy 40K without the GW metastory with friends (what I prefer - I don’t find the game studio story all that compelling) or play in the 9,750 or so years of the Scouring to pre-13th Black Crusade with new toys, but without all the Era Indomitus bits?

i mean it kind of is.

I asked a question, if you or others don't like the parameters of the question you can't answer it.

 

So yes, I asked a question, I get to set the parameters or in this case definition, so a structured and somewhat logical discussion on the topic can be had.

If 100 people are using 100 different definitions no discussion worthwhile can be had on any topic.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

New editions will always be a thing, and they absolutely should be.

 

A ground-up rules refresh is exciting and creates a buzz in the hobby every few years.

I respect your opinion of course- 17k + posts! I just hit 1 K.

 

But if we were still playing second ed, every faction would have 100+ kits, not just Marines.

 

I won't deny it generates hype. Nor will I deny that some editions are better than others. I liked 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 8th and 9th. Ninth is my fave so far- it's the only edition where all factions have had distinct rules for their subfactions + Crusade rules. I very much suspect this will be my last edition; it was only Crusade that made me buy into 9th; I would have been content to play 8th for a decade at least.

 

Despite the few benefits that new editions have, as a design philosophy, they are almost single handedly responsible for the existence of "Have" and "Have not" armies. If GW fixes that this edition, maybe I'll get behind 10th. After all, once every army is in a good place, it would be much cheaper to keep up. But if they reset before they fix CWE and Guard, I'm done. Fixing the model range for these two factions is the most important job the edition needs to do- there are other things that need to be fixed too, but this is the bare minimum for the edition.

 

Crusade is another thing; if it dies with 9th, so does my support for the company. IMHO, it's the best thing that's ever happened to 40k, and I refuse to go back. I suppose if GW does equalize their support this ed, and they do drop a 10th, I probably could find a way to scaffold 9th's Crusade onto 10th's rule set... But they'd have to get a lot right in order for me to do it.

 

Personally, while new editions have caused hype in the past, I don't think they're necessary. If Indomitus, + Marine dex and Supplements + Cron dex + Marine range refresh + Cron range refresh had all dropped without a new edition, I think they probably would have sold just as well. And that's kind of what I'm advocating for... When it would normally be time for a new edition, just pick the two armies most in need of a codex update- reprint their dexes, refresh their ranges, put'em in a vs box, replace all the starters with models from those ranges as well and come up with a suitable story event, hopefully linked with a flashy Warhammer studio movie or the launch of a tv series.

 

No edition hype necessary.

new codexes being released would be the marker of new editions if they left the core rules the same...and yes you're right, if they released these new codexes and models with out a new BRB of core rules they likely would have sold just as well but the new codexes with new rules is what push model sales.

If all the rules stagnated thus no new editions the model line by necessity stagnates as well. Without new rules few people will buy new models that can't be played.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

That's sort of my point. 40k has run on the classic 'waves spread over years' so factions do be added to (Ad Mech GSC). But AOS has (until Lumineth maybe?) been mostly a one wave and done, unless it's one of the really big factions (Stormcasts for example).

 

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like the large waves to continue for 40k. I'd like to start a faction knowing I can likely keep adding to it over the years with new models. Rather than getting to 2000pts and thinking 'next!'.

How are you guys defining a wave?

 

I'd say that marines have gotten multiple small waves this edition alone.

[Burni]

 

That's sort of my point. 40k has run on the classic 'waves spread over years' so factions do be added to (Ad Mech GSC). But AOS has (until Lumineth maybe?) been mostly a one wave and done, unless it's one of the really big factions (Stormcasts for example).

 

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like the large waves to continue for 40k. I'd like to start a faction knowing I can likely keep adding to it over the years with new models. Rather than getting to 2000pts and thinking 'next!'.

How are you guys defining a wave?

 

I'd say that marines have gotten multiple small waves this edition alone.

To me, something like Ad Mech or GSC and I feel like it used to be the most common format: new codex brings new kits. Although that’s probably selective memory as, as Halandaar points out, both systems get a mix of that or codex only or codex and a HQ release styles.

 

I dunno. It just seems like AOS is littered with small abandoned small factions (flesh eater courts for example) and I’d be annoyed if I started an army of an exciting new 40K faction only to discover it will only ever be made of the same 4 kits which have limited poses. But I realise others like lots of small projects, so there’s no perfect solution here.

[Closet Skeleton]

 

 

Those are advanced space crusade/1e warriors, 2nd ed warriors were metal but only came near the end of the edition cycle so the space crusade ones were used for most of that period.

 

Not according to the 1996 catalogue that got me into the hobby.

 

 

That doesn't contradict anything I said. The 1996 catalogue doesn't say 'edition' on any of its entries. The Carnifex in there is also a late first ed model.

 

The 2nd ed warriors first appear in the 1997 catalogue but the older ones are still in there.

[Halandaar]

How are you guys defining a wave?

 

I'd say that marines have gotten multiple small waves this edition alone.

I consider all the SM releases since 9th to be part of a single wave. All the units were new to the same book at the same time, even if the physical release of the kits was spread over a longer period because logistics.

[Rik Lightstar]

The big difference for a lot of the AoS factions is that they're a re-imagining of existing concepts and models, a lot of the kits are the old WFB ones with one or two added in.

 

They're still building the setting and to take Daughters of Khaine as an example they added a few kits to the existing Witch Elf sub faction and (Snake Girls, Harpy Girls and Morathi) the first time round to create a distinct faction of their own. They've just had an update with new Endless Spells and a new Hero. It's much the same for Flesh Eaters, Troggoths and Gobbos.

 

The completely new ranges like the Idoneth and Lumineth have had some absolutely amazing kits and in some cases have more options than the "legacy factions".

 

I think the future of faction updates for both settings though will be a single miniature release (maybe 2) alongside the Codex/Army Book, with an interim X.5 release alongside a campaign book or similar.

 

New factions or major overhauls will get the treatment we've seen on Lumineth, Stormcast, Primaris and Sisters of Battle where the release is spread over 12-36 months in 2-4 waves.

 

Rik

[Bryan Blaire]

I asked a question, if you or others don't like the parameters of the question you can't answer it.

So yes, I asked a question, I get to set the parameters or in this case definition, so a structured and somewhat logical discussion on the topic can be had.

If 100 people are using 100 different definitions no discussion worthwhile can be had on any topic.

If you go through the first page or so of this discussion, it doesn’t appear that you ever actually asked a question about the topic you were posing - so no one can answer something that doesn’t exist, not even you.  In fact, here’s the only questions I could find by you on the first page: “dark Eldar went what? 15+ years with the exact same models and units?”  Your next questions on page 2 went on to be “How does a blood Angels player or imperial fist player come up with an easy counter? Bring back Rogal Dorn? Ok works for IF, but what about BA? Rewrite 30 year old lore so sanguinius can come back as well?” And “how is that solution easy for factions or subfactions who have dead primarchs?”  So your own questions didn’t actually stay on topic.

 

You made some statements, tried to make up a definition, and your definition has been refuted and evidence provided against it being an actual definition.  That has also been logically discussed.  That you don’t like that your definition can be shot down by people and doesn’t actually define the concept can also be logically discussed.  The only part of your “definition” that wasn’t happening before AoS was the “sweeping” lore changes - people have already shown how widespread range refreshes did occur (heck, Dark Eldar didn’t even exist before you started playing the game in 3rd - I know I never had them in 2nd), so two whole factions were introduced long before AoS was even dreamed of - so model ranges are really not defining.  Lore changes were happening in all 40K editions, but I will grant you that they weren’t as large as what happened during the 13th Black Crusade.  That particular is also too narrow and lacks perspective about what the holistic occurrence of actually changing from WHFB to AoS really was.

 

Discussion is worthwhile if it’s had, whether it satisfies you is not the concern of the board...

 

There’s been plenty of evidence presented on why your definition isn’t actually defining for others and people don’t agree.  If you don’t want to discuss it, you’re free not to respond.    Once we’ve hit the circular discussion stage, though, the Mods are likely to just shut this down.  You’re convinced by your definition, others hold that some parts are correct, and others disagree with your definition and are unconvinced by your postulation that it’s a definition at all.

[jaxom]

 

I dunno. It just seems like AOS is littered with small abandoned small factions (flesh eater courts for example) and I’d be annoyed if I started an army of an exciting new 40K faction only to discover it will only ever be made of the same 4 kits which have limited poses. But I realise others like lots of small projects, so there’s no perfect solution here.

 

I think this leads into the question: can a faction be 'complete'? In my opinion, the Flesheater Courts are one of the most well-developed factions in terms of lore, play-style, and miniature range. The Harlequins feel that way to me as well; they're not an army, but a large troupe, I don't feel they need battle tanks or Wraith-units. Whereas the Mechanicus range really felt incomplete until the recent Skorpius tanks; I find the fliers (vehicle and infantry) and cavalry to be icing on the cake.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

That's sort of my point. 40k has run on the classic 'waves spread over years' so factions do be added to (Ad Mech GSC). But AOS has (until Lumineth maybe?) been mostly a one wave and done, unless it's one of the really big factions (Stormcasts for example).

 

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like the large waves to continue for 40k. I'd like to start a faction knowing I can likely keep adding to it over the years with new models. Rather than getting to 2000pts and thinking 'next!'.

How are you guys defining a wave?

 

I'd say that marines have gotten multiple small waves this edition alone.

To me, something like Ad Mech or GSC and I feel like it used to be the most common format: new codex brings new kits. Although that’s probably selective memory as, as Halandaar points out, both systems get a mix of that or codex only or codex and a HQ release styles.

 

I dunno. It just seems like AOS is littered with small abandoned small factions (flesh eater courts for example) and I’d be annoyed if I started an army of an exciting new 40K faction only to discover it will only ever be made of the same 4 kits which have limited poses. But I realise others like lots of small projects, so there’s no perfect solution here.

those armies released during my hiatus, so I need a bit more than that to know what you mean