warhammer 40k 10th edition Mainline Legends

[Kallas]

4 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

Some of the models in the Legends catalogue are older than Windown XP

Warp Spiders are almost 30 years old; age isn't the issue for model rules and where they go - these are purely arbitrary decisions they make for mostly cynical business decisions: why did a heap of 30k models get dumped into Legends? Age? Their kits are brand spanking new, but Warp Spiders, which are older than quite a few adults, are not Legends even though they are far older?

 

Of course, they're still selling Warp Spiders (even if they are Finecast ) but they're also selling Land Raider Spartans (in a new plastic kit) so the line is entirely arbitrary.

[Evil Eye]

The "GW can't make every model forever" argument is a really poor one for one very important reason: GW no longer selling the model doesn't mean the models that they've already sold don't exist anymore. And unlike a mechanical product like a car, short of some catastrophic event such as a shelf dive, the models won't break down or somehow stop working. There is no reason GW can't keep support for old models in perpetuity beyond wanting to force people to buy new ones. It's bad enough when Hive Tyrants are forbidden from taking devourers or deathspitters despite such loadouts having been legal for decades, showcased in relatively recent studio armies, and still being possible to build with basically no actual conversion work (the Carnifex arms fit into the Hive Tyrant shoulders perfectly, by design I might add, and both kits are very much in production!), but when it's a potentially very expensive Forge World model that took a lot of care and effort to build, having it be put in second-class citizen status or worse, be removed entirely is extremely scummy and honestly pretty anti-consumer.

 

If GW makes a model and advertises it as being useable as a gaming piece, it is their job to make sure that you can use it as such. There is no excuse for yanking support for them.

[lansalt]

While unfair for owners of those models, the problem for GW is that keeping around OOP units in the rules encourages recasts and proxies that go against sales of the current ranges. Specially powerful units, remember what happened with Chaplain Dreadnoughts in 8th.

 

Besides economic calculation, there seems to be also an art direction/product management angle, as sometimes units are phased out despite having kits (like it happened with DG between 7th and 8th, and recently with their Possessed)

 

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, lansalt said:

While unfair for owners of those models, the problem for GW is that keeping around OOP units in the rules encourages recasts and proxies that go against sales of the current ranges. Specially powerful units, remember what happened with Chaplain Dreadnoughts in 8th.

 

Besides economic calculation, there seems to be also an art direction/product management angle, as sometimes units are phased out despite having kits (like it happened with DG between 7th and 8th, and recently with their Possessed)

 

If GW doesn't want to encourage recasts or proxies then they shouldn't leave units without models. "Customers might buy something not made by us" is not my problem, and GW cannot make it my problem.

[Kastor Krieg]

21 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

If GW doesn't want to encourage recasts or proxies then they shouldn't leave units without models. "Customers might buy something not made by us" is not my problem, and GW cannot make it my problem.

It's simply spiteful capitalism - they've literally abandoned the possibility of revenue from OOP models and then turn around and do what they can so that nobody else gets that money either.

[lansalt]

52 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

GW cannot make it my problem.

Ah, but they've been doing it since 40k began. They've always sold models and options that were left without rules years later. From RT era marines with shuriken catapults to Predators without sponsons being illegal in HH 2nd. edition.

 

The real problem in my opinion is the strict adherence to the latest official rules due to the tournament/competitive mindset becoming widespread. Unless people are fortunate to have a flexible group of friends used to house rule stuff, they're out of luck.

[Interrogator Stobz]

1 hour ago, lansalt said:

...

The real problem in my opinion is the strict adherence to the latest official rules due to the tournament/competitive mindset becoming widespread. Unless people are fortunate to have a flexible group of friends used to house rule stuff, they're out of luck.

That's not the cause of the problem, merely where it presents itself. 

GeeDub have just proven with these latest documents that they can produce rules for all their past and present units fairly easily (RT is pre 40k as we know it, so not really applicable).

 

To avoid the issue you raise, GeeDub need to simply state that Legends rules that they bring out every Edition are still tournament legal. 

It's not a balance thing as we've discussed, it's not a capability thing as they just proved that, it's something else.

[Orange Knight]

But if any unit in Legends is competitive, and it can't be bought because the model is out of production, that is bad for the game as it gives legacy players an advantage.

 

GW would then be encouraging recasting, or 3D printed fakes. Alternatively if all the Legends units are weaker so they never appear in the competitive environment, that is also a bad solution.

 

What they have opted to do is an imperfect middle ground. I still believe that at this point it would be best if GW maintained ready access to legacy rules from prior editions via Warhammer Plus. Approaching this from the angle of "game preservation" instead.

[Marshal Rohr]

You can’t take Legends in a competitive game. 

[Orange Knight]

7 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

You can’t take Legends in a competitive game. 

 

Of course. I was simply responding to this:

 

1 hour ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

To avoid the issue you raise, GeeDub need to simply state that Legends rules that they bring out every Edition are still tournament legal. 

 

[NovemberIX]

 

48 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

But if any unit in Legends is competitive, and it can't be bought because the model is out of production, that is bad for the game as it gives legacy players an advantage.

What units that can't be kitbashed or proxied are there? The corollary to that is, if the rules end up being broken, fix them, it's pretty simple, they showed us they can do it.

 

Relatedly, by your example, someone with a bigger wallet than me puts me at a disadvantage because they can go buy Warlord titan, so should GW not sell those? Maybe I'm the weirdo because I like variety, and building different squads that do different things, so what you call bloat, I call the whole reason I stay in this hobby.

[ThePenitentOne]

Anyone know good 3rd party source for knarloc rider/ greater knarloc now that I have datacards for them?

[Bryan Blaire]

“GW can’t make every model forever” is not simply not true.  GW chooses not to make any particular model by deciding not to cut/recut a mold.  Even if a master of a model is no longer around, GW has already shown that it can and will remodel a unit (even a newer one) into a new styling if it so chooses.

 

So the answer is that GW has chosen not to make a model - it is untrue to state that they can’t, because they have the ability.

 

Similarly, the argument that “GW can’t make rules for every model they’ve produce forever” is also not true, because GW have proven that it has the ability to write rules for models.  GW chooses not to include rules for models as it sees fit.  There is nothing about creating rules for models that is mystically preventing them from doing it - they choose not to do it for their own internal business reasons.

 

The answer to the question of “Why not…?” in these cases is extraordinarily rare that GW literally can’t - the only way that I know that GW couldn’t do something at all is if the technology doesn’t exist or they legally aren’t allowed to do something - practically everything else is their own internal decisions, some of which are comprehensible from outside the company, some of which are questionable from outside the company (but probably seem perfectly reasonable from within).

 

Making the argument that “GW can’t…” if technology or legal reasons aren’t an absolute block is simple apologism, disingenuous, or incomplete understanding of how business works.  The fact is that GW can - they choose not to for various reasons.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Bryan Blaire

[Marshal Rohr]

GW can’t even do runs of existing models to keep up with demand, GW can’t do a lot of things because it’s a company run by people who like games and models and not by people who run businesses well. 
 

I *could* do a triathlon, I have arms and legs. I can’t do a triathlon because it’s difficult. 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Marshal Rohr

[Interrogator Stobz]

6 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

But if any unit in Legends is competitive, and it can't be bought because the model is out of production, that is bad for the game as it gives legacy players an advantage.

 

GW would then be encouraging recasting, or 3D printed fakes. Alternatively if all the Legends units are weaker so they never appear in the competitive environment, that is also a bad solution.

...

They are more than happy to do it the other way around with old units counts as new ones. 

So it's nonsense to think it can't go new units counts as old ones.

Honestly,  there is no defence of the indefensible. 

[Redcomet]

37 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

GW can’t even do runs of existing models to keep up with demand, GW can’t do a lot of things because it’s a company run by people who like games and models and not by people who run businesses well. 
 

I *could* do a triathlon, I have arms and legs. I can’t do a triathlon because it’s difficult. 

Sometimes in order to run your business well, you have to make choices that makes Bill the old customer upset. 
And it is all about return on investment and allocation of time and resources. 
GW has made consistent growth in sales and revenue for years and years now. And that is all that counts in the end, because it is a business.

[Interrogator Stobz]

Only if Bill the old customer doesn't still spend his money on their products. Because then Old Bill is still a current source of revenue.

Upset Bill too much and lose all of Bill's custom. 

Losing customers is not good business. 

The amount of work that would have gone into the Legends datasheets would easily be earned back in goodwill purchases by Old Bill.

Hell mine alone this year paid for half of it. 

[MegaVolt87]

14 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

Alternatively, through Warhammer+, GW could keep digital PDF files of old edition rule and codex books, as well as Imperial Armour, so the old models always have access to the rules written for them at the time. I actually think this will be more elegant, as opposed to the halfway house of poorly written current edition rules.

 

I had a long think about this and discussed it with friends. There is a lot to be unhappy about, but ultimately we decided to come to terms with it and move on. GW should approach this through the lens of game preservation and maintain a repository of old rules and codex books in a readily available digital format.

 

This is the way. If there are a couple bucks to be made in it, GW would be more interested. The subscription should really be the archive of full legacy content and edition updates for OOP units. That would go a long way to make the app more appealing, appease old fans and net GW more monthly subs. I think its smart to paygate this content, GW is then more motivated to make sure it actually works because its not really free then. 

[Petitioner's City]

8 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

You can’t take Legends in a competitive game. 

 

That's not quite true to source. From GW's perspective you can only not take a legends unit in an "official tournament" - any other tournament or competitive setting or competitive game can agree to include legends. 

[irlLordy]

GW's rules handling has also been a bit iffy. For a start FW datasheets should have always been in the main codex, not in a seperate book. FW is just an internal business division of GW, we shouldn't have to buy a seperate book to get rules for them. If they don't want kids picking them up, just make them webstore only (and combine the two webstores!).

 

Regarding legends, I'm sympathetic to the idea that GW don't need to provide rules forever for obsoleted OOP models like say a previous Calgar or Tigurius model. Giving a list of counts as is fine in those cases. No new datasheets or points updates required.

 

I really don't understand the logic of sending models to legends when those models are still actively being sold though. Why should XV9s or gellerpox have 2nd class rules? Never mind the HH legends stuff that just came out in nice plastic. 

[Captain Idaho]

The argument that if someone can't get an out of production unit they're at a disadvantage is inaccurate. It is reliant on the concept that those out of production units are superior to in production units and assumes game balance doesn't matter.

 

If the designers did their job properly, someone taking an Ancient on a bike wouldn't automatically win as a choice vs on foot.

 

And again, I agree with Stobz and others in that it would require a single staff member to update legends to be balanced with the changes. I reckon it wouldn't even be a full time job, considering GW doesn't actually play test anything anyway... 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Captain Idaho

[Doctor Perils]

5 hours ago, Bryan Blaire said:

“GW can’t make every model forever” is not simply not true.  GW chooses not to make any particular model by deciding not to cut/recut a mold.  Even if a master of a model is no longer around, GW has already shown that it can and will remodel a unit (even a newer one) into a new styling if it so chooses.

 

So the answer is that GW has chosen not to make a model - it is untrue to state that they can’t, because they have the ability.

 

Similarly, the argument that “GW can’t make rules for every model they’ve produce forever” is also not true, because GW have proven that it has the ability to write rules for models.  GW chooses not to include rules for models as it sees fit.  There is nothing about creating rules for models that is mystically preventing them from doing it - they choose not to do it for their own internal business reasons.

 

The answer to the question of “Why not…?” in these cases is extraordinarily rare that GW literally can’t - the only way that I know that GW couldn’t do something at all is if the technology doesn’t exist or they legally aren’t allowed to do something - practically everything else is their own internal decisions, some of which are comprehensible from outside the company, some of which are questionable from outside the company (but probably seem perfectly reasonable from within).

 

Making the argument that “GW can’t…” if technology or legal reasons aren’t an absolute block is simple apologism, disingenuous, or incomplete understanding of how business works.  The fact is that GW can - they choose not to for various reasons.

I believe this argument is wilfully obtuse: no one is arguing GW can't technologically or legally produce the older models - it's simply a business reality: if they kept around all the old designs, then logistics resources would not be available for new designs, and customers would migrate to other companies who are producing newer products.

 

3 hours ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

They are more than happy to do it the other way around with old units counts as new ones. 

So it's nonsense to think it can't go new units counts as old ones.

Honestly,  there is no defence of the indefensible. 

Again, they want to sell you and little timmy the new design to recoup on the investment - producing rules that fit the new models makes more sense than telling timmy that he should just use the rules previous kit that he could buy for a third of the price from second hand.

Yeah it sucks, I'd much rather be able to field a jump pack lord and stuff like that, but from GW's PoV it's completely understandable

[Kallas]

58 minutes ago, Doctor Perils said:

if they kept around all the old designs, then logistics resources would not be available for new designs

Leviathan shows that they are willing to pause anything they want to to put out the things they want to. They didn't have to put so much on hold to pump out a bajillion copies of Leviathan, but they did; they can choose to do that with whatever the hell they want. The logisitics can be focused however they choose.

 

Also, if these designs are already made, then it's literally just a case of pumping a few out every now and then in relative down times as demand comes in - they can even put additional notices on these kinds of models, like they do for Online Only models: "These models are Legends and have a low priority for manufacturing. As such, there may be delays when ordering these models of up to X weeks."

 

1 hour ago, Doctor Perils said:

Again, they want to sell you and little timmy the new design to recoup on the investment

See, this argument gets brought out a lot, and I don't understand why people miss the obvious flip side: if they want return on investment, surely the products that have already paid for themselves are worth more, because every unit shifted has a greater amount of profit (because less is being deducted to pay for the investment). If anything, new products are a less beneficial business resource, because they require more time to spin up into full profit.

 

And I expect that most people would assume that they are not above making a units' rules good to shift product off of the shelves; so doing so with a product that has already returned on its original investment would be easily worthwhile selling more of - especially with things like new detachments, they can easily go, "oh, this kind of unit is Battleline in this detachment, so you can take 6 of them!" Sure, most people would see that for the business decision it clearly would be - doesn't mean it wouldn't work.

[Captain Idaho]

The resources to keep updated rules for older and out of production models is nothing in this digital world and we shouldn't confuse the logistics of miniatures creation, shelf space and maintenance with it.

 

 

[Blurf]

1 hour ago, Kallas said:

Leviathan shows that they are willing to pause anything they want to to put out the things they want to. They didn't have to put so much on hold to pump out a bajillion copies of Leviathan, but they did; they can choose to do that with whatever the hell they want. The logisitics can be focused however they choose.

 

Also, if these designs are already made, then it's literally just a case of pumping a few out every now and then in relative down times as demand comes in - they can even put additional notices on these kinds of models, like they do for Online Only models: "These models are Legends and have a low priority for manufacturing. As such, there may be delays when ordering these models of up to X weeks."

 

See, this argument gets brought out a lot, and I don't understand why people miss the obvious flip side: if they want return on investment, surely the products that have already paid for themselves are worth more, because every unit shifted has a greater amount of profit (because less is being deducted to pay for the investment). If anything, new products are a less beneficial business resource, because they require more time to spin up into full profit.

 

And I expect that most people would assume that they are not above making a units' rules good to shift product off of the shelves; so doing so with a product that has already returned on its original investment would be easily worthwhile selling more of - especially with things like new detachments, they can easily go, "oh, this kind of unit is Battleline in this detachment, so you can take 6 of them!" Sure, most people would see that for the business decision it clearly would be - doesn't mean it wouldn't work.

That doesn't make any sense for 2 reasons. 1 fixed costs are irrelevant in determining profitability. Once the molds are made, you only care about marginal rates. How many kits something has sold over it's lifetime doesn't mean anything TODAY. If one kit is making you 3$ per kit at a volume of 10 kits per day and a another kit is only making 2$ per kit at a volume of 5 kits per day, those are the only numbers that matter. Everything else is sunk cost to be amortized across all product lines. It doesn't matter if the product cost a Billion dollars to set up, if it's only making 1$ per day, and you have the opportunity to scrap it to make 2$ per day doing something else, you scrap it right away.

 

2. New products generate massively more revenue than old ones. The VAST majority of the total sales of most model kits happens during the first month after release. I've heard as much as 90% for specialist units (although that's hearsay)

Edited July 24, 2023 by Blurf