Possible evidence that Firstborn could stick around forever.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Snip

 

 

 

That HI topic was mine, and I have a 3D printer I still have yet to print a knock off or proxy of an HI.

Also having a 3D printer I know the other uses, but those other uses aren’t relevant to the topic.

 

I don’t print knock offs or proxies because i and many others understand the threat 3D printing poses to GW, and rather than print the models and sink GW, and end the game we all love…

 

The new beakies and spartan are HH kits. The new codex will continue to feature primaris units, particularly the the new primaris kits that are highly likely to be coming out around that time…

The other uses for the 3d printers are relevent because it increases the likelihood that people can justify them. It's great that you wouldn't hurt GW for ethical reason, but I've played against too many FW knockoffs to think that there isn't a significant portion of the community who would.

 

 

Every company is going to advertise their newest products. Willing to bet the next marine codex has pictures of the beakies, and the Spartan.

Noted and screenshotted

Thats fair, I'll make a deal with you. If they don't have pictures in the new codex I'll call them HH units even though they have 40k rules, that said if they are in there you have to drop the whole HH models aren't 40k models thing.

some will, no doubt, but in my experience the larger portion of the community is against direct knock offs and even largely against proxies of kits that GW currently sells.

 

No one really wants to kill the game, and wide spread stealing of designs even general designs for proxies is how you do that.

[Kallas]

Thats fair, I'll make a deal with you. If they don't have pictures in the new codex I'll call them HH units even though they have 40k rules, that said if they are in there you have to drop the whole HH models aren't 40k models thing.

 

I mean, sure.

Allegedly the Beakies don't have the same options as Tactical Marines or Sternguard, so I don't see how they'll even be considered 40k models without their own Datasheet.

 

It's also funny, even WarCom doesn't list the Horus Heresy reveals in the 40k section, which is odd if they're going to market them to both systems...

 

My best guess: no pictures/Datasheets in the 9th 2.0 Codex, but with Datasheets added to the Imperial Armour Compendium via WarCom PDF/a new release of the IA Compendium.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Also seems GW considers the spartan a heresy kit first and foremost so it seems like you’re just reaching…

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/04/21/heresy-thursday-ride-to-battle-in-spartan-style-aboard-the-new-plastic-assault-tank/

Edited April 30, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Marshal Reinhard]

It was always. if its not in the main codex, its HH kit that can incidentally be used in 40k

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Another thing, reviewing the squat stat lines they’re very similar to 8th Ed FB marines, so there’s that, as another indicator to me.

 

And as for canceling the firstborn range hurting customer confidence I again will cite the squats. An entire faction was discontinued and it doesn’t seem to have hurt the game or company at all. No reason to think canceling a line of kits for a faction that is still being supported will hurt the company or game in any notable way.

[DesuVult]

Another thing, reviewing the squat stat lines they’re very similar to 8th Ed FB marines, so there’s that, as another indicator to me.

 

And as for canceling the firstborn range hurting customer confidence I again will cite the squats. An entire faction was discontinued and it doesn’t seem to have hurt the game or company at all. No reason to think canceling a line of kits for a faction that is still being supported will hurt the company or game in any notable way.

It did, there is reason the term "squatting" is still used in the community to refer to the lose of things. That event is why SoB and dark eldar communities have both at times worried their army may be discontinued. Squats being dropped put an indelible mark in the community conscious.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

Another thing, reviewing the squat stat lines they’re very similar to 8th Ed FB marines, so there’s that, as another indicator to me.

 

And as for canceling the firstborn range hurting customer confidence I again will cite the squats. An entire faction was discontinued and it doesn’t seem to have hurt the game or company at all. No reason to think canceling a line of kits for a faction that is still being supported will hurt the company or game in any notable way.

It did, there is reason the term "squatting" is still used in the community to refer to the lose of things. That event is why SoB and dark eldar communities have both at times worried their army may be discontinued. Squats being dropped put an indelible mark in the community conscious.

lol people being worried their faction was going away didn’t hurt the game or the company though. People being worried is only people being worried. Despite GW deleting an entire faction in the infancy of the game, it grew into the largest and most popular wargame in the world. Yeah it hurt them sooo badly.

[WrathOfTheLion]

I don't quite agree with either of you wholly. I wholeheartedly agree that the Horus Heresy kits are designed for that game system first and foremost, and that any use in 40k is incidental with the current published datasheets.

 

However, I don't agree that removing what was the most popular faction is equivalent to removing a faction in the infancy of the game. The latter of course had minimal impact, the former has significant impact. Dismissing those that don't want this to happen of course is also wrong. As fellow hobbyists, we should never want to see someone's army removed or otherwise deleted from the game. We'll deal with what happens if GW makes that decision, but we shouldn't wish it to happen, that's bizarre.

Edited May 1, 2022 by WrathOfTheLion

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I don't quite agree with either of you wholly. I wholeheartedly agree that the Horus Heresy kits are designed for that game system first and foremost, and that any use in 40k is incidental with the current published datasheets.

 

However, I don't agree that removing what was the most popular faction is equivalent to removing a faction in the infancy of the game. The latter of course had minimal impact, the former has significant impact. Dismissing those that don't want this to happen of course is also wrong. As fellow hobbyists, we should never want to see someone's army removed or otherwise deleted from the game. We'll deal with what happens if GW makes that decision, but we shouldn't wish it to happen, that's bizarre.

I don’t want it to happen or wish it to happen. It just seems so glaringly obvious where GW is going with this, that disdain for primaris is the only explanation for people to not see it coming.

[DesuVult]

disdain for primaris is the only explanation for people to not see it coming.

That is an odd stance to take.

[WrathOfTheLion]

How is that the only explanation? I have multiple Primaris forces, so that's clearly not it.

 

Your logic makes sense only if you follow the current linear trend, of which linear trends have a tendency of changing. My logic is as follows - GW has recently been doing massive moves on nostalgia/revival of older art, see Sisters of Battle, Beakies for Horus Heresy, Squats themselves, etc., all of which are looking to be fairly popular moves. They'd be remiss to not do something eventually with their classic Space Marine lineup for that same reason.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

How is that the only explanation? I have multiple Primaris forces, so that's clearly not it.

 

Your logic makes sense only if you follow the current linear trend, of which linear trends have a tendency of changing. My logic is as follows - GW has recently been doing massive moves on nostalgia/revival of older art, see Sisters of Battle, Beakies for Horus Heresy, Squats themselves, etc., all of which are looking to be fairly popular moves. They'd be remiss to not do something eventually with their classic Space Marine lineup for that same reason.

they can easily just revamp those classic sculpts into HH or into new primaris sculpts.

Even that classic BT design from the artwork was written to be allowed as a primaris marine, why wouldn’t they just make it firstborn only if that was their plan?

[WrathOfTheLion]

Because they're not done with the Primaris range. What I would do, were I entrepreneurial, is continue with that new range, make your money there, give them time to sell their old stuff, get rid of it etc. Give it some time to be considered 'the past' to a lot of folks. Then come in a few years later with new versions of the old things to hit the nostalgia there. They won't just expand the Primaris datasheets ad infinitum, it'll have diminishing returns over time.

 

Doesn't mean they'll do it in the short term, might not even be advisable to do so while following through on the new range and while a lot of those kits aren't exactly that old (tactical squad, devastators, assault squad, etc.). But something like five, ten years from now that may be different.

Edited May 1, 2022 by WrathOfTheLion

[Marshal Reinhard]

Is it even correct to think of Primaris and classic marines as seperate factions?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Is it even correct to think of Primaris and classic marines as seperate factions?

nope.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Is it even correct to think of Primaris and classic marines as seperate factions?

no one is talking about them as separate factions.

[DesuVult]

Lensoven why do you think everyone who disagrees with you has disdain for primaris?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Lensoven why do you think everyone who disagrees with you has disdain for primaris?

because theres literally no logical explanation for keeping the FB around long term.

 

The majority of pre8th players already have a full firstborn army. GW’s purpose is to sell models, not a the game. Therefore forcing people to buy all new models achieves their objective in a way keeping FB around does not, combined with the general animosity towards primaris the FB fanbois show, it makes sense that most people who are arguing for FB to stick around long term despite the evidence.

[DesuVult]

 

Lensoven why do you think everyone who disagrees with you has disdain for primaris?

because theres literally no logical explanation for keeping the FB around long term.

 

The majority of pre8th players already have a full firstborn army. GW’s purpose is to sell models, not a the game. Therefore forcing people to buy all new models achieves their objective in a way keeping FB around does not, combined with the general animosity towards primaris the FB fanbois show, it makes sense that most people who are arguing for FB to stick around long term despite the evidence.

I don't feel that really tracks. It seems to me at least that your are projecting something you feel.

 

Your theory also has the issue of new HH models like the contemptor and resized firstborn. GW would have to release those with the intent to pull them from 40k after first providing them as an option in 40k.

 

It seems you are very invested in this and view disagreement as a more personal thing than it is. Myself, other firstborn players in this thread, and most firstborn players I know do not hold primaris in disdain, we have primaris models ourselves. You can even look back on my posts , such as where I comment that I expect assault marines to have their options rolled into assault intercessors and note that as a good thing.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

Lensoven why do you think everyone who disagrees with you has disdain for primaris?

because theres literally no logical explanation for keeping the FB around long term.

 

The majority of pre8th players already have a full firstborn army. GW’s purpose is to sell models, not a the game. Therefore forcing people to buy all new models achieves their objective in a way keeping FB around does not, combined with the general animosity towards primaris the FB fanbois show, it makes sense that most people who are arguing for FB to stick around long term despite the evidence.

I don't feel that really tracks. It seems to me at least that your are projecting something you feel.

 

Your theory also has the issue of new HH models like the contemptor and resized firstborn. GW would have to release those with the intent to pull them from 40k after first providing them as an option in 40k.

 

It seems you are very invested in this and view disagreement as a more personal thing than it is. Myself, other firstborn players in this thread, and most firstborn players I know do not hold primaris in disdain, we have primaris models ourselves. You can even look back on my posts , such as where I comment that I expect assault marines to have their options rolled into assault intercessors and note that as a good thing.

I never said everyone who uses FB disdains primaris. I too use firstborn marines, however there is a large group of fans who have a hatred for primaris because of the introduction of them. The introduction did suck but the modes are great.

 

HH kits are just that. HH, GW will double dip for a while, but in a decade you’re not going to find FB marines in the codex. That’s all I am saying. I’m not saying the FB are going away tomorrow or in 10th. It just seems delusional to look at how things have been going and to think FB will be around for the remainder of the time the game is actively supported.

 

If GW was interested in FB kits we’d see fFB units in the large multi unit pictures in the codex. We’d see them front and center of other promotional materials, but we really don’t.

 

In fact off the top of my head the only FB unit I can think of in a multi unit shot is a DC SR in the BA supplement.

Edited May 1, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[phandaal]

It seems you are very invested in this and view disagreement as a more personal thing than it is. Myself, other firstborn players in this thread, and most firstborn players I know do not hold primaris in disdain, we have primaris models ourselves. You can even look back on my posts , such as where I comment that I expect assault marines to have their options rolled into assault intercessors and note that as a good thing.

This.

 

My first models after coming back to 40k in 8th were Primaris. My thousands of points of fully painted Greenwing are Primaris. Regularly play games with this army. That is not something done by someone that has disdain for Primaris.

 

Primaris are not real people - they are just miniatures. Most of the sculpts are pretty neat.

 

But deleting decades worth of investment from dedicated customers is a mistake, plain and simple. GW needs a better way forward than that.

[Djangomatic82]

 

Lensoven why do you think everyone who disagrees with you has disdain for primaris?

because theres literally no logical explanation for keeping the FB around long term.

 

The majority of pre8th players already have a full firstborn army. GW’s purpose is to sell models, not a the game. Therefore forcing people to buy all new models achieves their objective in a way keeping FB around does not, combined with the general animosity towards primaris the FB fanbois show, it makes sense that most people who are arguing for FB to stick around long term despite the evidence.

 

I'm pretty sure your underlying assumption that the only way to shift a large quantity of models is to create a First Born/Primaris forced obsolescence, is wrong.

There have already been range refreshes of the first born line at least twice to my recollection and that seems to be what you are misidentifying and misattributing to the Primaris line creation.

If the necessity of having a whole set of rules that exclude over 50% of an existing model line was the the driving force behind people purchasing new models, everyone that had them would have never moved on from the RT01 pewter models.

But we know that having forced obsolescence through Primaris only rules is unnecessary to get people to buy new models en mass. If GW had simply introduced Primaris as Truescale, or waited until the new HH models were ready to be released, we still would have purchased the models, regardless of if we already had old versions of them in our collections.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

 

Lensoven why do you think everyone who disagrees with you has disdain for primaris?

because theres literally no logical explanation for keeping the FB around long term.

 

The majority of pre8th players already have a full firstborn army. GW’s purpose is to sell models, not a the game. Therefore forcing people to buy all new models achieves their objective in a way keeping FB around does not, combined with the general animosity towards primaris the FB fanbois show, it makes sense that most people who are arguing for FB to stick around long term despite the evidence.

I'm pretty sure your underlying assumption that the only way to shift a large quantity of models is to create a First Born/Primaris forced obsolescence, is wrong.

There have already been range refreshes of the first born line at least twice to my recollection and that seems to be what you are misidentifying and misattributing to the Primaris line creation.

If the necessity of having a whole set of rules that exclude over 50% of an existing model line was the the driving force behind people purchasing new models, everyone that had them would have never moved on from the RT01 pewter models.

But we know that having forced obsolescence through Primaris only rules is unnecessary to get people to buy new models en mass. If GW had simply introduced Primaris as Truescale, or waited until the new HH models were ready to be released, we still would have purchased the models, regardless of if we already had old versions of them in our collections.

unnecessary or mean doesn’t mean it’s not the plan.

[DesuVult]

A big problem with retiring firstborn I keep coming back to is the business side and that this decision would have to have already been made and explained to business side people multiple times. On that I just struggle to see it work well. I can practically hear some of the questions asked. Like what the customer overlap is and what the expected customer loss is.

 

If firstborn are dropped from 40k they would still be on the webstore for 30k. They are still being produced, still taking up shelf space in stores and in storage, master molds are still being produced and maintained, SKU are still being maintained. Grey Knights will be resized eventually and someone will ask why the CAD files cannot be reused. The rhino will still be produced and sold in 40k for CSM and SoBs just excluded from LSM.

 

There will be 40k players who exist in an area who like the 30k marine aesthetic like beakies but there isn't a 30k community in the area so their 30k purchases will limited. Someone will spot that demographic and want to target it because hooking that individual means potentially hooking contacts of that individual.

 

Savings look pretty minimal, some firstborn kits in 40k are removed like vanguard veterans, thunderwolf cavalry, and centurions and you save some page space by removing firstborn options from the codex but while those savings would add up the question would be posed about the offset from customer loss.

 

Any time a business does anything it will lose some customers, there may be a net gain but some are lost. People will want to know expected net customer gain or lose compared to expected savings and long term revenue and profit changes. Cutting firstborn mostly seems to be savings from needing fewer pages in the codex and models produced but with HH coming to plastic it doesn't seem like there will actually be a huge net change in firstborn kits. GW has also not been taking measures to reduce codex size and has even bragged about codex size recently. GW seems to like larger books when they can be sold for a premium, limited edition books produced at GW's scale, price point, and sale speed are something many companies would salivate over.

 

I keep trying to do some idea of the business calculus and I just don't see it. I feel anyone particularly conservative running the numbers would be hard opposed to it over the risk of customer lose and long term sales concerns.

 

Then there is also the range rotation system they have created. Not only does it have most of the benefits of retiring the model but allows them to bring the model out periodically to spark FOMO within their community. Even in more GW averse communities you see people hate on MTO range rotation models only to get the ones they want the most. It would give them on last sale opportunity for models shifted to the new HH scale.

 

We have seen one plastic mkII HH body as crew for the spartan. It can be expected to see mk II as a full release at some point down the line. Due to the similarities to mkIII GW can shift mkIII to range rotation if they are not selling sufficiently and then later down the line use the mkII CAD files to make mkIII in the new HH scale as a cheap filler for a new release.

 

Maintaining many of the kits and even keeping them on the webstore to sell in other games but just not selling them to LSM players feels like such a weird business decision I cannot get my head around.

Edited May 1, 2022 by DesuVult

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

A big problem with retiring firstborn I keep coming back to is the business side and that this decision would have to have already been made and explained to business side people multiple times. On that I just struggle to see it work well. I can practically hear some of the questions asked. Like what the customer overlap is and what the expected customer loss is.

 

If firstborn are dropped from 40k they would still be on the webstore for 30k. They are still being produced, still taking up shelf space in stores and in storage, master molds are still being produced and maintained, SKU are still being maintained. Grey Knights will be resized eventually and someone will ask why the CAD files cannot be reused. The rhino will still be produced and sold in 40k for CSM and SoBs just excluded from LSM.

 

There will be 40k players who exist in an area who like the 30k marine aesthetic like beakies but there isn't a 30k community in the area so their 30k purchases will limited. Someone will spot that demographic and want to target it because hooking that individual means potentially hooking contacts of that individual.

 

Savings look pretty minimal, some firstborn kits in 40k are removed like vanguard veterans, thunderwolf cavalry, and centurions and you save some page space by removing firstborn options from the codex but while those savings would add up the question would be posed about the offset from customer loss.

 

Any time a business does anything it will lose some customers, there may be a net gain but some are lost. People will want to know expected net customer gain or lose compared to expected savings and long term revenue and profit changes. Cutting firstborn mostly seems to be savings from needing fewer pages in the codex and models produced but with HH coming to plastic it doesn't seem like there will actually be a huge net change in firstborn kits. GW has also not been taking measures to reduce codex size and has even bragged about codex size recently. GW seems to like larger books when they can be sold for a premium, limited edition books produced at GW's scale, price point, and sale speed are something many companies would salivate over.

 

I keep trying to do some idea of the business calculus and I just don't see it. I feel anyone particularly conservative running the numbers would be hard opposed to it over the risk of customer lose and long term sales concerns.

 

Then there is also the range rotation system they have created. Not only does it have most of the benefits of retiring the model but allows them to bring the model out periodically to spark FOMO within their community. Even in more GW averse communities you see people hate on MTO range rotation models only to get the ones they want the most. It would give them on last sale opportunity for models shifted to the new HH scale.

 

We have seen one plastic mkII HH body as crew for the spartan. It can be expected to see mk II as a full release at some point down the line. Due to the similarities to mkIII GW can shift mkIII to range rotation if they are not selling sufficiently and then later down the line use the mkII CAD files to make mkIII in the new HH scale as a cheap filler for a new release.

 

Maintaining many of the kits and even keeping them on the webstore to sell in other games but just not selling them to LSM players feels like such a weird business decision I cannot get my head around.

GW has shown pretty clearly that they don’t actually give a :cuss about its players.

Sure there will be some lost players but most of those will likely just go to 30k, amounting in very little actual loss of players