40K Factions by Popularity, Sales, and how much GW likes them.

[Silvereyes]

I've been into 40K since late 2022. In terms of interaction with other fans of 40K, I've been with my gaming group, posts on various Warhammer Reddit threads, some Youtube videos, the Poorhammer podcast, and very recently, joining this forum. I see a lot of people say things as fact, like "X faction has sold poorly", "X faction is really unpopular and not many people play it", "GW hates/forgets our faction exists" etc.

 

The thing is though, a lot of this is said as a fact, or being common knowledge. I've been doing a small Google search to see if much actual data exists about whether any of these statements are true. GW seems to rarely ever release sales data on specific products, and likewise will rarely comment on a product, beside being very positive in stuff like articles for Warhammer Community and the occasional Warhammer livestream.

 

I wonder how much of this is just people's own assumptions, or if there is any data coming from places like FLGS or from reputated leakers? I wanted to ask people's own opinions, what you think is popular or isn't, what is selling and isn't, and finally, whether you think GW "likes" a faction or not. Obviously, I think Space Marines is a big yes for all these, tons of people play them, they have tons of kits, and GW have made them the poster boys of 40K. But outside Space Marines, how are other factions faring?

 

Any thoughts are appreciated. Or a link to any place that has sources on data like this that I've been dumb enough to miss.

 

Thank you.

[Lexington]

Often it's a compilation of what's at events and such - there's a lot of stats out there for such things, so you can at least get an idea of what's being played. Which, of course, isn't going to render an exact match of sales figures, but it's probably the best data we're going to get. Otherwise, it's just general observations. What you see locally, what you see people talking about on the internet, what you see people playing in YouTube battle reports and things like that. That doesn't add up to much more than vibes, but it's not the worst barometer imaginable.

 

You also occasionally get bits and bobs from people who are or recently have been involved with the company and are privy to The Secret Information, but it's rarely that surprising. Space Marines sell a ton. Genestealer Cults don't. Everything else falls between there, but there's a wide gulf on either side.

[Emperor Ming]

Isnt codex rotation not that random, sales have to influence it

 

Marines being first etc etc

[Silvereyes]

2 hours ago, Lexington said:

You also occasionally get bits and bobs from people who are or recently have been involved with the company and are privy to The Secret Information, but it's rarely that surprising.

 

That's interesting, is that stuff from leaks I take it?

 

2 hours ago, Lexington said:

Space Marines sell a ton. Genestealer Cults don't.

 

See, I'm curious about the GSC, because you're not the first I've seen to claim that they are the worst selling 40K faction. Is it really that bad for them, compared to everybody else? I suppose I find it interesting considering in 10th edition, GW got rid of the Harlequins and the Ynarri factions. Granted, neither had that many units, and they just got folded back into the Eldar. Is the GSC range just too big, or too different, for GW to just fold them in with the Tyrannids as a sub-faction or something? They still got a new model, codex, dice, army box etc. The bare minimum for 10th edition factions, but still. Just very curious about the idea that we know which one is last right now.

 

Sorry if this is me reacting to obvious information.

 

2 hours ago, Lexington said:

Everything else falls between there, but there's a wide gulf on either side.

 

Makes sense. I guess for future reference, I'm trying to think of putting factions in a tier list in terms of the factors I mentioned. Like say, on a scale that goes: S, A, B, C, D, Space Marines would be S, GSC would be D, and I guess most factions would be in B? Maybe something like C for Grey Knights and Drukhari considering how desperate they are for a range refresh? Not sure what A would be, what's popular but not Space Marine popular? Orks? Guard?

 

2 hours ago, Lexington said:

That doesn't add up to much more than vibes, but it's not the worst barometer imaginable.

 

No, that makes total sense. I get some feel of it from my own game group. But I also try to be a bit objective, and I like to try and see what the "big picture" is. Shame GW seems to try to obscure it from the rest of us.

 

1 hour ago, Emperor Ming said:

Isnt codex rotation not that random, sales have to influence it

 

Marines being first etc etc

 

Oh I'm sure that's true. Space Marines come first but they've done a good job of trying to space out other Space Marine sub-codexes and releases before the launch of 11th. Although I'm sure there's also other factors like what models are being made, what ranges to promote, a bunch of other marketing factors at play.

 

I suppose for full disclosure, part of the reason I thought about this is reading a few bits and bobs, including on this forum, the speculation for the 11th edition starter set, and who the faction facing the Space Marines will be. Reading people dismiss factions like Drukhari, even though they would benefit the most from a range refresh, because they aren't popular enough. Just find that interesting.

 

Also, on a very surface level, I'm a Tau player, I'd like to figure out where my faction fits in. Somewhere in the middle? We seem to be doing all right, we get books, we got the Kroot range refresh, Vespid kill team, an anniversary and event models, Farsight getting a new model and to be the title character of an Ark of Omen books. Seems like there is at least some sort of dedicated fanbase for them.

[ursvamp]

in regards to OP:
 

In my experience it’s usually based on people’s personal guesses and assumptions.

sometimes those assumptions and guesses are well founded. Sometimes not.

 

We don’t Really have much to go on, when it comes to this stuff. And it doesn’t help that GW is very unpredictable, in what they release and why ^^’

 

The only pattern I seem to see is that Space Marines, Orks, and Chaos Space Marines, consistently get a lot of new stuff (maybe Aeldari, too. Especially if you count in all the mini sub-factions with harlequins, ynnari, and corsairs, that now share their ’dex!).

While the others are about the same, seen over a stretch of years.

We can assume that is because those factions sell especially well. But who knows, really.

 

-

 

The idea that GW ”dislikes” factions has always sounded off, to me. As if they’re a group of hobbyists sitting at home, deciding which parts of a setting they’d like to engage with in their home game of some RPG.

They’re a company. That sells a product.

it is in their best interest to make their product(s) sell. And they are constantly finding ways for them to do that. Sometimes that is done through a new release of a codex. Sometimes through new rules (like grotmas detachments, for instance). Sometimes it’s done through models. But these things takes time. And sometimes we have to wait for extended periods, and that’s no fun at all :( . (Though it’s way better, nowadays, than it used to be)

 

Look at Leagues of Votann; released about this time last edition. And just now got their second wave of models, filling out a pretty sparse range into something nice and more robust.

if you were a Votann player from launch, that probably felt like a long wait (and you might’ve felt somewhat abandoned during it). But looking at it from a editions-scale perspective, there is a certain pacing to it. Now, wether that pacing is deliberate, accidental, or even the vestige of a currently abandoned philosophy about releases, who knows?

 

tl;dr: my points are that we don’t know why GW do the things they do (And when we don’t know it’s easy to construct relatable ideas, that sound like reasonable answers, in our heads).

And that it’s hard to draw conclusions without, or before, we have the bigger picture. ^^’

[N1SB]

My winningest 40k project is my Tau Tiger Shark squadron for Aeronautica Imperialis, so I'm your Air Caste comrade here, Brother Silvereyes.  And I like how you know, like OBVIOUSLY, Marines are the most popular faction, but you want to have an idea of how much.  We've been looking at GW's financial annual reports here for a decade now, and...

 

8 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

No, that makes total sense. I get some feel of it from my own game group. But I also try to be a bit objective, and I like to try and see what the "big picture" is.

 

And it's not even just by 40k faction, but they don't even break it down by entire product lines like 40k/Age of Sigmar/30k, etc.

 

What we have been able to tell is, you know how everything has 3-year product life cycles, right?  So we can see how much a 40k/AoS/30k launch year grows.  I used to use these to build forecasts but, hey, TL;DR, "big picture" view (because that's about as good as I can get it with limited data), this is a very rough feel that I think is about right:

• Previously, 4 years ago, I used to think:
  • About 30% of GW's sales were Astartes (Loyalist, Heretic, 30k era, etc.)
  • Another 30% was all other 40k stuff (Imperial Guard, all the Xenos, etc.)
  • Then 30% was AoS
  • Then 10% all other stuff (like Lord of the Rings, Blood Bowl, I'll put Necromunda here)
• Now I think things have skewed even more towards Astartes (HH 3.0 not selling great, but still, a fully supported game)
  • Almost 50% of GW's sales are Astartes (even with HH 3.0, new 40k characters, new Drop Pod)
  • About 20%+ all other 40k stuff (like you get a Krieg-like set for like a Black Templar or Saturnine set)
  • About 20%+ AoS
  • Then remaining less than 10% all other stuff

I know it sounds like a lot of Marines, even to me it does, but when you consider every starter set for their most popular line is half Marines, then there's a whole other game dedicated to Loyalist vs. Traitor Marines, and there's so many factions of Marines, and Space Marine II is about Marines.

 

And you can be a Xenos player...but you probably have a bunch of Marine models.  Like I was starting a 10th ed Necrons Crusade army, 1st thing I bought was the last 9th ed Recruit Edition because it was cheaper than even a regular box of Necron Warriors and I got a Royal Warden...and I got 5 Assault Intercessors and Shield Guy.

 

9 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

Shame GW seems to try to obscure it from the rest of us.

 

Share an experience with you, in case it comes up.  So I was the Product Manager for a major group of tech products, which you may well be using to read this very post.  We had many divisions and we all helped each other out, so sometimes I was an unofficial member of our gaming division.  Not quite like GW!  But some overlap.

 

In gaming, it's not unusual to...I wouldn't even say obscure...but to simply not disclose game units sold unless it's a blockbuster.  And it's not necessarily an evil corporation hiding the data, it's actually all involved parties, like retailers such as game shops.  It's for very legitimate reasons.  People would gravitate towards the ALREADY best-selling games, so newer, more innovative games would not get a chance to at least blossom.  Moreover, let's say a game doesn't sell particularly well in your country...but everyone plays online with an international community.  The industry is already too AAA franchise-driven, for every Inquisitor: Martyr there's like 5 Call of Duties/Madden/Final Fantasy/another Skyrim edition.  We actually have these publishers that customise titles for our local region here (example: the Chinese edition of Fallout Shelter has a lot more content), but it's really hard at launch when you just can't compare to, say, the sheer built-in player numbers of Final Fantasy Online or something.

 

(Sega actually accidentally leaked sales data and, oh boy, well, we know the actual units sold for Total War: Warhammer III.)

 

As a Xenos player, I think you can appreciate that, yeah?  Like give all these other 40k factions a chance.  It's closer to that.

 

I'll tell you what bothers me about GW obscuring stuff, they re-classified their Operating Expenses.  They used to break it down into 10 items, like I could see how much they spend on Warhammer Stores vs. FLGSs vs. their GW Studios designers (which is teeny tiny actually).  Now they just have "selling costs" and "administrative expenses".

 

And I SWEAR they redistributed things so it looks like it's split 50/50.  That's like, way TOO tidy.  That's actually more suspicious to me.

 

9 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

 

See, I'm curious about the GSC, because you're not the first I've seen to claim that they are the worst selling 40K faction. Is it really that bad for them, compared to everybody else?

 

Brother Lexington speaks with both knowledge and honesty.  Any number of GW leavers mentioned that in interviews, etc.

 

We actually have had former Warhammer Store employees right here on B&C.  They described things only they would know that explained trends that we saw.  And it wasn't some conspirational, "Hey guess what didn't sell, hmmm? GSC!"  It was more like fellow veterans sharing a beer, "Man, those GSC.  That was a hard push."

 

The products are different, the names are different, the tears are the same.  Like, like knows like?  I've shed those same tears, I know what it feels like.  BUT times change, maybe it's different now.  Haven't heard that sort of thing for a bit.  And I held off long enough, let's get to the real crux of your question:

 

9 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

Makes sense. I guess for future reference, I'm trying to think of putting factions in a tier list in terms of the factors I mentioned. Like say, on a scale that goes: S, A, B, C, D, Space Marines would be S, GSC would be D, and I guess most factions would be in B?

 

I suppose for full disclosure, part of the reason I thought about this is reading a few bits and bobs, including on this forum, the speculation for the 11th edition starter set, and who the faction facing the Space Marines will be.

 

Also, on a very surface level, I'm a Tau player, I'd like to figure out where my faction fits in.

 

Thanks for that candid sharing, I think I see your line of thinking, and now you see mine.  So to go with my breakdown above:

• S Tier: Codex-compliant Loyalist Marines (so broadest usage)
• A Tier: non-Codex-compliant Marines and Heretic Astartes
• Everything Else Tier: everything else, honestly, it's a coin toss

Remember I'm your fellow Tau here, albeit just for 1 game, I'm the Air Caste guy with the Tiger Shark orbital view.  But just looking at the full view here, I can kinda tell it'll be very splitting of hairs to speculate which one of the many Everything Else factions gets attention next edition.  Probably not Necrons or Tyranids again, but...yeah.

 

However, let me put it another way!  You might want to speculate what Loyalist Marines would be released next time around, then consider which Xenos would be an interesting match-up.  Like 10th ed, we got true scale Terminators and Primaris Flamers...so Xenos Tyranids kinda make sense.  Like start with Marines, work backwards to Xenos.

 

Or from an ongoing plot standpoint, I haven't been paying attention to non-30k rumours, but I keep hearing chatter about Armageddon again?  For that reason, maybe Orks?  But instead of starting with the Xenos factions, start with what the Imperial element is, and work backwards to find the matching Xenos?

 

Not so serious, sorry for long post, didn't spend time to write a short one.  But I like your thinking, Brother Silvereyes.

[ThaneOfTas]

On the tangential topic of whoes the xenotls faction in the 11th starter set, Orks is by far the most common rumour.

[Silvereyes]

15 hours ago, ursvamp said:

The idea that GW ”dislikes” factions has always sounded off, to me. As if they’re a group of hobbyists sitting at home, deciding which parts of a setting they’d like to engage with in their home game of some RPG.

 

Oh absolutely, I do agree with that. Most decisions will revolve around sales and the like. But I do wonder if there are some factions GW appears to be biased against, even if there is no real way we could ever prove it.

 

15 hours ago, ursvamp said:

Look at Leagues of Votann

 

To be honest, with Votann, I'd certainly hope a second model wave was all but assured even before the first wave went on release. It's not like Emperor's Children were with EC they can lean on existing Chaos models to support the line. If they just gave Votann a single character model for 10th edition, I'm not sure how that could be interpreted as being other than the product line is a failure.

 

15 hours ago, ursvamp said:

tl;dr: my points are that we don’t know why GW do the things they do (And when we don’t know it’s easy to construct relatable ideas, that sound like reasonable answers, in our heads).

And that it’s hard to draw conclusions without, or before, we have the bigger picture. ^^’

 

Agreed. I suppose it's a personality defect of mine, I tend to overthink things and want to know how everything works, even when there is no reasonable way of having such knowledge. But I would also say that part of this thread is trying to understand the mindstep of fellow Warhammer fans, as a relative newbie, and see people on forums or Reddit etc throw statements out without context.

 

7 hours ago, N1SB said:

Not so serious, sorry for long post

 

No, I really appreciate it. I'm having a proper read of your take on the GW financial report right now, and it is very insightful. Thank you for putting the time into explaining so much.

 

7 hours ago, N1SB said:

My winningest 40k project is my Tau Tiger Shark squadron for Aeronautica Imperialis, so I'm your Air Caste comrade here, Brother Silvereyes.

 

That is cool. I've never played that game but it does look interesting. Kindof wish the aeroplanes in 40K itself wern't so severely hampered.

 

7 hours ago, N1SB said:

 

As a Xenos player, I think you can appreciate that, yeah?  Like give all these other 40k factions a chance.  It's closer to that.

 

That does make a lot of sense. Yes, it's too much for a company to reveal literally everything, including their own failures. Saying that though, I wish they were a little more transparent about certain things. Like the decision to retire a faction and fold it in with something else, such as Harlequins and Deathwatch. If those lines aren't selling, and GW aren't going to continue to support them, I'd wish they were a bit more graceful about making a big change for those invested in those armies. Feel like Chaos Daemons are in a very precarious state right now, and whether they'll still exist as a faction for 11th edition. Not to mention whether GW continues to properly support a faction with a new range, a range refresh, or give you the bare minimum for the edition to tide you over. I know realistically, GW would never come out and say "sorry Chaos Daemons, you don't sell well, we are scrapping your faction and rolling you in with the God Legions because we think it will sell better." But I wish there was a little more transparency, or effort not to rugpull fans who are affected when these things happen.

 

8 hours ago, N1SB said:

I'll tell you what bothers me about GW obscuring stuff, they re-classified their Operating Expenses.  They used to break it down into 10 items, like I could see how much they spend on Warhammer Stores vs. FLGSs vs. their GW Studios designers (which is teeny tiny actually).  Now they just have "selling costs" and "administrative expenses".

 

And I SWEAR they redistributed things so it looks like it's split 50/50.  That's like, way TOO tidy.  That's actually more suspicious to me.

 

Ah, the wonderful world of accounting.

 

8 hours ago, N1SB said:

Brother Lexington speaks with both knowledge and honesty.  Any number of GW leavers mentioned that in interviews, etc.

 

We actually have had former Warhammer Store employees right here on B&C.  They described things only they would know that explained trends that we saw.  And it wasn't some conspirational, "Hey guess what didn't sell, hmmm? GSC!"  It was more like fellow veterans sharing a beer, "Man, those GSC.  That was a hard push."

 

The products are different, the names are different, the tears are the same.  Like, like knows like?  I've shed those same tears, I know what it feels like.  BUT times change, maybe it's different now.  Haven't heard that sort of thing for a bit.  And I held off long enough, let's get to the real crux of your question:

 

Oh, I don't mean to throw anyone's statements into doubt. I'm not writing an essay and need to reference my sources. I just thought it was interesting that GSC in particular were being singled out, rather than say half a dozen factions being group together as being the worst sellers. Those sound very interesting, and when you are in sales, no doubt causes trouble when a product line you're told to push just won't shift. 

 

8 hours ago, N1SB said:

• S Tier: Codex-compliant Loyalist Marines (so broadest usage)
• A Tier: non-Codex-compliant Marines and Heretic Astartes
• Everything Else Tier: everything else, honestly, it's a coin toss

 

Very interesting. Would you also include Grey Knights in your A tier? Heretic Astartes, at least in 40K, I've seen a lot of comments along the lines that GW only cares about loyalist Marines, and that Chaos Space Marines just don't get the same attention. But I imagine they are obviously popular in 30K, Death Guard was in a starter box for 7th (I think?), and World Eaters and Emperor's Children are pretty new on the scene.

 

As for everything else, I suppose in a way it is comforting that all the Xenos factions and basically non-Marines in Imperium and Chaos could be considered to be in one large boat. You can just hope that factions that feel unloved lately get their time to shine in the spotlight relatively soon.

 

8 hours ago, N1SB said:

However, let me put it another way!  You might want to speculate what Loyalist Marines would be released next time around, then consider which Xenos would be an interesting match-up.  Like 10th ed, we got true scale Terminators and Primaris Flamers...so Xenos Tyranids kinda make sense.  Like start with Marines, work backwards to Xenos.

 

Know nothing about Marines, so can't really do your method I'm afraid. I'd like to think T'au as the match-up for 11th could happen, although I doubt they'd choose a faction that was relatively a small played on the galaxy stage and not fit the role as typical bad guys. Tyranids brought Hive Fleet Leviathan with them, not sure what the T'au could do to be a real threat or challenge for the Imperium. But I can fantasise about it, maybe some nice new auxillaries, or perhaps a refresh of the Crisis Suits. I'd love a T'au army box that featured like 5 different weird species working for the T'au, really lean into that aspect.

 

8 hours ago, N1SB said:

But I like your thinking, Brother Silvereyes.

 

Thank you, I really just like to overthink. I currently deliver pizza as a job, and it means my mind does a lot of wandering when I'm driving to and from locations. I wish GW was less FOMO oriented and was a bit more transparent with what is happening. But that is probably not going to happen when they are making a lot of money.

 

If there is one thing, I think I've learned to appreciate that in the grand scheme of things, T'au are doing very well in recent times. Farsight got a new model and got to be the title character of the penultimate Arks of Omen book, the Kroot got a big refresh, we got a gorgeous Ethereal as an anniversary model, and the T'au even got to help launch the new edition of Kill Team with the Vespid Stingwings. GW took a risk on T'au auxillaries, and I'm glad for it. I just now have to wait to see if GW continues the auxillaries, or if this resurgence is short lived. But with the state some other factions are in, and I have nitpicks about the T'au codex, I think we're in a good place. I'd just be grateful to get a better designed codex for 11th edition.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

Well, opinions are worth nothing. You want facts and you will get them from former GW employees who really knew what was selling and what wasn´t. Prime example was the 40K Space Marine Tactical squad. According to those former employees that box outsold the entire range of WHFB products. Let that sink in. 

[Silvereyes]

5 minutes ago, ThaneOfTas said:

On the tangential topic of whoes the xenotls faction in the 11th starter set, Orks is by far the most common rumour.

 

Makes sense, they're a fun antagonist to the Space Marines and can have some weird and wonderful kits. Wonder what the odds for all factions fighting the Space Marines in 11th would be? What other factions are realistic possibilities? I know any other Imperium faction and Chaos Knights are out. Necrons and Tyranids are probably too soon from 9th and 10th edition starters to come back. Could Chaos make a big return perhaps?

[Dark Shepherd]

Auspex Tactics on the YouTubes has done a couple of vids on top 50 selling kits as reported by FLGS (that sponsor him)

[Silvereyes]

2 minutes ago, Deus_Ex_Machina said:

Well, opinions are worth nothing. You want facts and you will get them from former GW employees who really knew what was selling and what wasn´t. Prime example was the 40K Space Marine Tactical squad. According to those former employees that box outsold the entire range of WHFB products. Let that sink in. 

 

Oh absolutely, any former GW employees own accounts are great to hear, it adds a lot of context in terms of what was happening with GW at the time of their employment. The end of Fantasy and the turbulent start of The Age of Sigmar sounds like a real wild time.

[ThaneOfTas]

4 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

odds for all factions fighting the Space Marines in 11th would be? What other factions are realistic possibilities?

Drukhari are the only other xenos that are in with a shot, however they're arguably less marketable, these boxes are often little timmys first foray into the hobby, and Timmy's mum and dad might not be quite so keen on the BDSM looking space elves when compared to cartoonish space bugs, terminators, or the marines. Orks are way less likely to cause issues on that front I think.

 

Tau have also been a long time since a major mainline release, however they're a bit too "order" coded I think. While 40k lacks the grand alliance system from AoS, it's not at all difficult to see where the different armies would all into the same divisions, and a starter set with two 'order' factions is very unlikely I think, same reason that it won't be Craftworlders.

 

Chaos is a possibility, I don't think that it's likely as the rumours of Orks are coming from Valrak and he's right far more often than he's wrong, but if it were to be chaos, I could see Vashtors servants getting fleshed out, giving us a Dark Mechanicum faction. I don't see them going with any of the other cult legions, and black legion/generic has less that need updating, so I'm not sure what new kits would go in it.

[Pacific81]

On 8/9/2025 at 6:00 AM, ursvamp said:

 

The idea that GW ”dislikes” factions has always sounded off, to me. As if they’re a group of hobbyists sitting at home, deciding which parts of a setting they’d like to engage with in their home game of some RPG.

They’re a company. That sells a product.

it is in their best interest to make their product(s) sell. And they are constantly finding ways for them to do that. 

 

 

Think this is generally true but I did hear that a Squat re-launch (or Votann) didn't happen for many years because there was someone similar very senior who strongly disliked them and the 'dwarf in space' concept. Only after he left did they start sneaking back into the game universe, first in Necromunda as a special character, and then eventually as a faction.

Basically the same as there being no motorcycles on Top Gear for many years because of Jeremy Clarkson (for anyone familiar with that show).

 

Genestealers were also apparently 'saved' by Andy Chambers - there was a decision that there were going to not be kept as there were too many factions, Chambers managed to get them rolled into the Tyranid range and as part of that army.

 

So there are sometimes judgements made about specific factions fitting or not, and individual management who are influential enough to dictate what is or isn't released.

[siegfriedfr]

On 8/9/2025 at 7:00 AM, ursvamp said:

The idea that GW ”dislikes” factions has always sounded off, to me. As if they’re a group of hobbyists sitting at home, deciding which parts of a setting they’d like to engage with in their home game of some RPG.

 

 

Obivously GW "the company" has no preference, except for what sells the most with low effort (ie space marines).

 

But when you read trough the codices being released, you can clearly sense the author (which is now anonymous following past death threats to Matt ward and Robin Cruddace) doesn't want so-and-so faction to actually perform well in combat.

 

Case in point, the 10th Tyranid codex sucked balls and resorted to gimmicks to win battles trough scoring shenaningans rather than might. And we know from a warcom article that Cruddace was the one who wrote the codex. As long as this guy is at GW, tyranids gameplay will suck, plain and simple. So there are individual preference in-house that go trough, just not company preferences.

[Robbienw]

Not 40k but 30k, but I’ve always thought going by the model lines that the 30k guys have never been keen on Space Wolves and Ultramarines 

[Silvereyes]

17 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

Drukhari are the only other xenos that are in with a shot, however they're arguably less marketable, these boxes are often little timmys first foray into the hobby, and Timmy's mum and dad might not be quite so keen on the BDSM looking space elves when compared to cartoonish space bugs, terminators, or the marines. Orks are way less likely to cause issues on that front I think.

 

Makes sense. Is it rumoured or speculated Drukhari may get a range refresh before 11th anyway? Hopefully they get something, seems like they are the range that are in the most urgent need of a range refresh.

17 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

Tau have also been a long time since a major mainline release, however they're a bit too "order" coded I think. While 40k lacks the grand alliance system from AoS, it's not at all difficult to see where the different armies would all into the same divisions, and a starter set with two 'order' factions is very unlikely I think, same reason that it won't be Craftworlders.

 

Sadly, I agree. Considering how much of Leviathan's marketing was about the Tyranids being this big bad for the Space Marines to face, I struggle to see how you would utilise something like Tau or Eldar.

 

17 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

...but if it were to be chaos, I could see Vashtors servants getting fleshed out, giving us a Dark Mechanicum faction.

 

Would be pretty cool if they did use the starter set to launch a new faction right out of the gate. I guess the question is if that would be perhaps too risky?

 

17 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

I don't see them going with any of the other cult legions, and black legion/generic has less that need updating, so I'm not sure what new kits would go in it.

 

Curious why you think the cult legions are out? OK, Emperor's Children is probably unlikely due to them just getting their first wave, and the whole Slaanesh thing. But Death Guard, Thousand Sons, World Eaters? I dunno, they seem somewhat workable?

 

12 hours ago, Pacific81 said:

Think this is generally true but I did hear that a Squat re-launch (or Votann) didn't happen for many years because there was someone similar very senior who strongly disliked them and the 'dwarf in space' concept. Only after he left did they start sneaking back into the game universe, first in Necromunda as a special character, and then eventually as a faction.

Basically the same as there being no motorcycles on Top Gear for many years because of Jeremy Clarkson (for anyone familiar with that show).

 

Genestealers were also apparently 'saved' by Andy Chambers - there was a decision that there were going to not be kept as there were too many factions, Chambers managed to get them rolled into the Tyranid range and as part of that army.

 

So there are sometimes judgements made about specific factions fitting or not, and individual management who are influential enough to dictate what is or isn't released.

 

Yeah, I don't want to "accuse" GW of making biased decisions. I do imagine most are made on sales data, marketing, other factors that we don't know about. At the same time though, it isn't exactly uncommon for a person high up the chain who can either block or clear something by themselves. Sometimes it can be a little shocking how petty high up executives in companies can be. But for the purposes of this thread, I don't want to make any wild accusations, even if I am annoyed by certain aspects of GW's behaviour.

 

9 hours ago, siegfriedfr said:

But when you read trough the codices being released, you can clearly sense the author (which is now anonymous following past death threats to Matt ward and Robin Cruddace) doesn't want so-and-so faction to actually perform well in combat.

 

Case in point, the 10th Tyranid codex sucked balls and resorted to gimmicks to win battles trough scoring shenaningans rather than might. And we know from a warcom article that Cruddace was the one who wrote the codex. As long as this guy is at GW, tyranids gameplay will suck, plain and simple. So there are individual preference in-house that go trough, just not company preferences.

 

Eh, I'm not sure how much I agree with that, unless there is someone openly admitting to it. Seems weird unprofessional, assuming they are assigned a specific codex by GW. I don't play Tyranids, but you don't think it has more to do with the fact it was the first faction to get a codex in 10th edition, back when the game was unbalanced, and they were working out kinks? Not to mention them wanting battleshock to be a big game changing mechanic, when in reality, it wasn't. 

 

I mean, I dislike the T'au codex overall, and T'au, all through 10th edition, have constantly struggled with being underpowered. But I don't think that is a deliberate attempt by the codex writer to sabotage the faction, I think that has to do with balance issues, an overly obtuse army rule (which thankfully got a lot better in the last update), and, I suspect, an attempt to avoid T'au be overpowered like they have been in the past, since a gun-heavy army can be very powerful.

[ThaneOfTas]

2 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

Makes sense. Is it rumoured or speculated Drukhari may get a range refresh before 11th anyway? Hopefully they get something, seems like they are the range that are in the most urgent need of a range refresh.

Gut feel based on the lack of any rumours yet makes me think that the Drukhari will be waiting for 11th before they get their refresh, so sometime in the next 3-4 years, but I wouldn't expect them in the year or so before 11th.

 

2 hours ago, Silvereyes said:

Curious why you think the cult legions are out? OK, Emperor's Children is probably unlikely due to them just getting their first wave, and the whole Slaanesh thing. But Death Guard, Thousand Sons, World Eaters? I dunno, they seem somewhat workable?

Well, Death Guard have already had their launch box back in 8th, and it was the box that launched them as an independent faction. Every other factions has already had its launch, meaning that all of their staple units (i.e. the things most likely to go into a launch box) have been released. Thousand Sons, World Eaters and Emperor's children could all use another wave, but a launch box tends to refresh the core of a range, while they may branch out a bit more for marines, for the opposition factions they've been fairly consistent in having the box launch with their core iconic units.

[ZeroWolf]

With regards to the DE, only rumour from Valraks sources is a multipart Archon. Not to say there can't be more, but that's it for the moment

[Dark Shepherd]

New Boyz kit in launch would partly explain why we got such a janky stop gap Boyz kit recently :)

 

 

[Teetengee]

9 hours ago, ZeroWolf said:

With regards to the DE, only rumour from Valraks sources is a multipart Archon. Not to say there can't be more, but that's it for the moment

and a multipart is rarely part of a starter box for some time

[Frogian]

3 hours ago, Dark Shepherd said:

New Boyz kit in launch would partly explain why we got such a janky stop gap Boyz kit recently :)

 

 

 

its all very confusing, because what makes the most sense is the stop gap kit is the kit for the starter set. i don't think there has been any other ETB kit outside the new editions sets (inc shadowspear), other than right at the beginning of 8th? like it would seem odd if they made another new ETB kit for the boyz, and then released a multipart one soon after.

[Karhedron]

My understanding from past conversations is that GW devs "bid" to work on particular projects, they don't get assigned. That means that the people who work on particular codices do so because they like that faction so they would certainly not be setting out to produce a sub-standard codex. However they may have certain ideas about how they would like the faction to play that may not or may not work too well in practice.

 

One particular rumour I have heard is that Harlequins were intended to get a second wave but due to poor sales, this never happened. The end result is that they got folded back into Craftworld Eldar rather than becoming a fully fledged faction.

Edited Monday at 11:06 AM by Karhedron

[ThaneOfTas]

12 hours ago, ZeroWolf said:

With regards to the DE, only rumour from Valraks sources is a multipart Archon.

There's also the Lady Malys that leaked a while back

[ZeroWolf]

37 minutes ago, ThaneOfTas said:

There's also the Lady Malys that leaked a while back

To be fair, irc, even that one took Valrak by surprise.