PDA

View Full Version : First founding chapter Codices



shin'keiro
27-01-2011, 02:32
Ive seen alot of discussion in other threads from people wanting to see First founding space marine chapter codices..

Heres what i'd like to see form this idea:
All the chapters from the first founding having their own codex.. with special characters and rules from their successor chapters included in the codex:

Dark Angels
Known Descendants: Angels of Absolution, Angels of Redemption, Angels of Vengeance, Guardians of the Covenant, Consecrators, Disciples of Caliban

White Scars
Known Descendants: Marauders, Rampagers, Destroyers, Storm Lords

Space Wolves
Known Descendants: Wold Brothers also 13th company character

Imperial Fists
Known Descendants: Crimson Fists, Black Templars, Soul Drinkers, Iron Knights, Hammers of Dorn

Iron Hands
Known Descendants: Red Talons, Brazen Claws, Sons of Medusa

Blood Angels
Known Descendants: Angels Encarmine, Angels Sanguine, Angels Vermillion, Blood Drinkers, Exsanguinators, Flesh Eaters, Lamenters

Ultramarines
Known Descendants: Doom Eagles, Novamarines7, White Consuls, Black Consuls, Praetors of Orpheus7, Genesis Chapter, Aurora Chapter, Sons of Guilliman, Silver Skulls, Mortifactors, Howling Griffons

Raven Guard
Known Descendants: Black Guard, Revilers, Raptors

Salamanders

9 Codices and we already have 4 of them

What would other people like to see? ideas?

ForgottenLore
27-01-2011, 02:39
I wouldn't mind seeing such a thing, if the non-marine factions in the game got a similar expansion, so a few books detailing the chaos legions, more for the Eldar, Tau, Orks, maybe Necrons depending on what the new codex does with their fluff.

But to just put out 5 more marine books when already almost half of the existing support for the game is marine based is a bad idea.

Inquisitor Gabriel Ashe
27-01-2011, 02:44
I think it's a bad idea considering how much overlap there is in the current SM codices. I think it would probably work better if they released a Codex: Space Marines with the core stuff and a second Codex: Chapters of the Space Marines that gives the Chapter Tactics and unique SCs and units.

Stuff like "If your running a Blood Angels (or successor) chapter, the following characters, vehicles, and units are available. Also, replace Combat Tactics, etc. with these special rules. The FoC is adjusted as so."

Edit: Space Wolves may be bizarre enough to still get their own codex. Grey Knights as well.

TheMav80
27-01-2011, 02:45
Codex? No. I don't even like having the several we already have.

White Dwarf/Chapter Approved styled variant lists for notable Chapters/Legions/Craftworlds/Klans/Septs/Regiments/etc.? Oh hell yes.

Lord-Caerolion
27-01-2011, 02:52
Let the Chaos Marines get a single Legions book first, and Xenos players get even consideration for specialised books from GW, then we'll see. As it is, we've got too many Marine codexes, half of which aren't even needed. Seriously, Dark Angels get a codex when the only variations they have were made up in the latest codex. Note, I'm talking rules-wise here. Terminators being white and called the Deathwing, bikes/speeders being black and called the Ravenwing don't count.

AlphariusOmegon20
27-01-2011, 03:16
Let the Chaos Marines get a single Legions book first

EXACTLY!!! We've been waiting a lot longer for Legion Codexes than Loyalist Marines have been for Founding ones. Granted, I wouldn't mind a Sallies Codex, but I'd rather have my Alpha Legion be a viable Legion again first.

Thank You, LC, for saying what needed to be said.

brotherhostower
27-01-2011, 03:29
Let the Chaos Marines get a single Legions book first, and Xenos players get even consideration for specialised books from GW, then we'll see. As it is, we've got too many Marine codexes, half of which aren't even needed. Seriously, Dark Angels get a codex when the only variations they have were made up in the latest codex. Note, I'm talking rules-wise here. Terminators being white and called the Deathwing, bikes/speeders being black and called the Ravenwing don't count.

Um, Dark Angels (and Blood Angels) have had their own codex since 2nd edition, and the only thing "new" about the current 4th edition codex is Sammael on a jetbike.

Aside from that, yes, I'd rather see variant lists like we had back in 3rd edition than new Marine Codecies. Would like to see a Harlequin and Exodite codex (and the aforementioned Chaos Legions codex or codecies), Kroot Codex... sadly you won't get much variation from say, Necrons, and Orks are already well covered... I dunno, a gretchin codex? lol In the end, GW can barely get their current armies updated before the next edition of the rules comes out, adding more codex fun just doesnt' work, and I doubt people will get drawn in to 3rd edition "make a fun army with a new list, but in a couple of years the buckets of money you gave us for those models... yeah you won't be able to use those anymore."

shin'keiro
27-01-2011, 03:36
Would like to see a Harlequin and Exodite codex

A Harlequin Codex would be great!.. been waiting for one since we had the experimental one from 3rd ed...

I also like the idea of a seperate Chapter codex, detailing special rules etc

White Dwarf should have some special characters in it aswell perhaps with rules\stats and go back to becoming a hobby magazine instead of a catalogue lol

igotsmeakabob!!
27-01-2011, 04:25
Codex? No. I don't even like having the several we already have.

White Dwarf/Chapter Approved styled variant lists for notable Chapters/Legions/Craftworlds/Klans/Septs/Regiments/etc.? Oh hell yes.

Yeah! I'm in for this... but people would worry that the balance would be all Forgeworld quality :/

Stonerhino
27-01-2011, 04:40
Do you really need a codex for yellow, silver or what ever color marines???

The Orange
27-01-2011, 04:46
Would I like to see it? Yes.
More so then xeno's getting updated more often? No.

Rlyehable
27-01-2011, 05:38
No, I actually think that there should be less. There should be one Codex: Space Marines. It should have a all the generic units. It should then have Traits (I know it is a bad word in some circles) for each of the founding chapters and successors. It should also have traits for crusading chapters (i.e. Black Templar).

My suggestions:

All Marines: ATSKNF

Ultramarines - Chapter Tactics

Black Templar - Crusading Chapter (No scouts, Tactical units may add Neophytes)

Blood Angels - Furious Charge, Rage unless LD test failed. Special Formation - Death Company

Dark Angels - Special Formations (Ravenwing - Bikes in any FOC slot, Deathwing - Terminators in any FOC slot)

Imperial Fists - Stubborn

Iron Hands - Bionics (Reroll failed armor saves of "1"). All units that can must take a transport.

Raven Guard - HQs, Veterans, Tactical Squads, and Assault Squads may take jump packs. All Jump Troops have Hit & Run.

Salimanders - HQs, Veterans, Tactical Squads, Assault Squads, and Devistator units may take 2 special weapons options. Perhaps reintroduce the Init 3 + Thunderhammer discount.

Space Wolves - True Grit and Counter-Attack. Elite Scouts (behind enemy lines).

White Scars - HQs, Veterans, Tactical Squads, and Devistators (attack bikes) may be mounted on bikes. All bike units have Hit & Run.

zantis
27-01-2011, 05:54
I dont see why not. More money for GW without having to spend money on creating a whole new range of models. If the bike army option, the 6 dreds option and the first founding characters were taken out of the vanilla marine codex, then i think it would work like this:
White Scars- Bike army. assault specialized
Iron Hands- dreds. possibly hq dreds too. shooting specialized
Raven Guard- infiltrating assault marines. possibly work like blood angels by making the assault marines troops and giving them a nice deepstrike ability. assault specialized
Salamanders- meltas, flamers, and thunderhammers everywhere. flamers and meltas cheaper than vanilla marine cost. Multimelta razorbacks. terminator portable flamestorm cannon as an alternative to a cyclone launcher or assault cannon. close ranged shooting specialized

Imperial fists are too much like the ultramarines to have their own codex.
of the 4 i listed I think salamanders are most likely. Then iron hands takes second place. The other two are really unlikely.

Dr Zoidberg
27-01-2011, 06:46
I like the idea, and would probably buy one or two for the chapters that interest me. That said, Xenos and Chaos players deserve some love first. We in the Imperium have had it too good for too long; it's time for GW to spread the love.

Shipmonkey
27-01-2011, 07:02
White Dwarf/Chapter Approved styled variant lists for notable Chapters/Legions/Craftworlds/Klans/Septs/Regiments/etc.? Oh hell yes.

It would easier if GW just included bonus stats on there paint pots to allow you to know what abilities each color gives. Sorry, let's leave 3rd in the past.



Iron Hands - Bionics (Reroll failed armor saves of "1").

Just imagine this on TH/SS Terminators. Very balanced.


Space Wolves - True Grit and Counter-Attack. Elite Scouts (behind enemy lines).

True Grit? Which edition do you play?

dragonet111
27-01-2011, 08:18
No.
I don't want a codex for every armies. I wish 6ed codex will be bigger (way bigger) and allow multiple builds (without special characters). I play BA and honestly all that make BA unique can be sum up in 3 pages.
IMO if the Space Marines codex had 3 or 4 pages for every 1st founding, a flexible army list and a huge wargear section to give every chapters some funky tools it would be perfect. With rules for the nine 1st founding we can do almost every space marines armies.

AndrewGPaul
27-01-2011, 08:25
Nah, don't bother. My preferred option would be to have Codex: Space Marines, and have a page of special rules for each Chapter that requires them;

Space Wolves - two special weapons instead of special/heavy weapon in Tactical squads; Devastator squads can only have five men; Assault squads can have fifteen; Terminator, Vanguard and Sternguard squads can be split up to provide squad leaders (like Wolf Guard can now).

Dark Angels - I'm not sure they need any special rules. You could prohibit them from taking Vanguard or Sternguard squads since the Deathwing company only uses Terminator armour, but that depends on whether you think other companies have veterans of their own. Perhaps special force lists for Death Wing and Raven Wing armies.

Blood Angels - Command Squads can get jump packs, and you'll need rules for the Death Company. My preference would be to make Sanguinary Guard an upgrade of Vanguard Veteran squads, rather than inventing new units willy-nilly.

Personally, I'd prefer to keep the differences to just Force Organisation Chart changes, unit options and special characters.

You could then do the same for Chaos Space Marines, Eldar and Orks. Perhaps even Tau, to reflect the difference between normal forces, Farsight Enclave forces and 3rd Expansion forces with upgraded equipment. Likewise, Tyranids could have different options for a Hive Fleet Behemoth force as opposed to a Hive Fleet Kraken or Leviathan army.

bossfearless
27-01-2011, 08:26
The only one that really can't be fielded adequately with existing codices would be the Iron Hands. I guess you could take a bunch of dreads in a BA list and do some conversions, but there just isn't a characterful option for IH anywhere to be found. They, and maybe DA, are the only ones that really need a new dex at the moment.

Sparowl
27-01-2011, 09:58
Yeah.......no.

One Space Marine codex. We really can fit all the marine chapters in one book. We'll just have to junk some of the really terrible fanboy writing. What a shame.

Look, I'd love for Imperial Fists to get more love then they do, but I still think it would be a shame for other armies to go without just so there can be more marines.

We have no Craftworld, Ork Klan, Tau Sept, Chaos (Space Marine Legion, Daemon, etc.), Dark Eldar House, Imperial Guard, or Tyranid Hive Fleet books. Why should Space Marines continue getting everything? It is kinda silly.

dragonet111
27-01-2011, 10:18
We have no Craftworld, Ork Klan, Tau Sept, Chaos (Space Marine Legion, Daemon, etc.), Dark Eldar House, Imperial Guard, or Tyranid Hive Fleet books. Why should Space Marines continue getting everything? It is kinda silly.

Exactly and the worst thing is it's slow down the release and update of all other armies.

The Marshel
27-01-2011, 10:26
i like the idea as a sort of appendix to the marine codex, similar to, but more expanded upon, the old trait system. as separate codices, deff not. we have 5 loyalist marine codices and i fully believe thats 2 too many. while not a supporter of one book to rule them all, i do believe dark angles could easily be portrayed by a well thought out marine book. before they were updated, i thought the same for blood angles. post update it'd be too big of a messy job with all the random junk they were given.

AndrewGPaul
27-01-2011, 10:42
The Dark Angels almost certainly could be represented by Codex: Space Marines as it stands now. The only thing missing would be the special characters.

Godzooky
27-01-2011, 11:00
I can't wait for the day when all 1000 space marine chapters have their own codex. Assuming GW's martketing department doesn't order a retcon to add a further 1000 chapters to the fluff, xeno players can finally look forward to the good times. ;)

Sir_Turalyon
27-01-2011, 11:47
Of the five first founding chapters with no Codex, I think only Iron Hands are non-codex chapter that might really need one, to cover things like Iron Fathers (MotF/Captain hybrid), HQ dreadnaughts, Terminators leading regular squads and bionics everywhere. Not sure it if justifies a new codex, a special character or few special rules SM codex might do that.

White Scars are close to be representable under current codex with Khan or bike-riding Captain; only missing things I can think of is biker veterans, hit and run chapter tactics and power lances (may they rest in peace and not come back).

Salamanders, Raven Guard and Imperial Fists are codex chapters with no unique units; nothing that few bulleting points in codex may not fix.

Born Again
27-01-2011, 14:08
No thanks, we've got plenty of SM books as it is.

Bunnahabhain
27-01-2011, 14:35
One loyalist marine codex. No more, no less.

Better for marines- you can't have a book of how Calgar is the bestest best, if you have memphiston, logan grimnar, etc, etc in there as well. It also gets rid of the arbitrary and pointless restrictions. You can keep 'space wolves don't teleport, as they don't trust them' ( long standing background), but get rid of 'Chapter X have got the only plans for a Dread left shoulder Autocannon mount left, so nobody else can have a dread with that weapons fit' and similar rubbish that stems soley from having multiple codices.

Better for Xenos- Maybe they'll not be left waiting 10 years for updates.

Better for GW- The improved game balance that would result from this, if supported by half way sane rules and pricing, would help retain players, and so promote sales.

White dwarf can have a chapter of the month feature, with some background stuff, sample paint schemes, typical army build, etc, etc, to keep the 'must push marines' thing going, without all needing their own special rules and special characters.

In an ideal world, I'd do the unified marine book with something like traits. They were a good idea, poorly executed. To do them better, follow the doctrines path. You can follow the codex path- no tight restrictions, but no bonuses either, but if you go off it, you automatically get all the restrictions, and you have to use your traits to shape the force. It's the only way I've seen to provide force-wide customisation, that doesn't allow you to easily avoid all the drawbacks.

Named chapter X gets traits A, B and C; that with their paint scheme and background identifies them.
They may or may not get some special character or unique unit- Oddball units like death company, thunderwolves etc become a form of special character- only available to <correct named chapter or successors>

It also follows the standard pattern of GW codex updates, of forcing people to make minor changes to an army if they've built it along traditional mainstream lines, but if they've gone to the furthest extreme of one particular codex ( ie built 3 full units of thunder-wolves, or 100 death company...) you could have alot of useless models.

loveless
27-01-2011, 14:45
Meh. Not necessary.

The current split isn't bad - arguably the worst "fault" of the Vanilla Codex is that the Iron Hands are given so little acknowledgement. The chapters that are different enough to warrant their own FOC are given one - only the Dark Angels really suffer at this point, due in large part to everyone else getting their toys (sans the Ravenwing squads).

Space Wolves have, so long as I remember, had a rather non-Codex set-up. Their book would need to stay.

Black Templar have several limitations and boons compared to a Codex chapter. They could probably use a brush-up, but there are more deserving books currently.

Blood Angels already had several rules and units that separated them from the pack - the newest Codex just ran a bit wild with the idea and added more. At this point, it's safe to let the BA keep their book.

Captain Semper
27-01-2011, 15:28
I voted "No". I always thought the most appealing part of Space Marines was the background... The rules evolved to accenuate the traits as described in the background. Now Space Wolves have a background that definitely calls for different playstyle whereas Blood and Dark Angels have their own codices mostly due to GW historic reasons IMO rather than a need to capture a unique playstyle. I like the idea of choosing your marine army on background grounds rather than special rules. So my point is that Codex: SM should cover all the other first founding chapters (except the ones that historically have their own Codices) as it is now, while GW should expand the background to give people legitimate reasons to choose one chapter over another. This can be (and is) done through other publications such as BL books or articles in WD - I recall the Index Astartes articles that were also published in books a few years ago... Now chapter specific plastics on the other hand would be extermely welcome!

Lord Damocles
27-01-2011, 15:31
One loyalist marine codex. No more, no less.
This.


Moar letters!

SPYDER68
27-01-2011, 15:33
i would rather see chaos legion books.. and other codexes get updated..

more marine codex's ? No thanks....

AlphariusOmegon20
27-01-2011, 15:39
Salamanders, Raven Guard and Imperial Fists are codex chapters with no unique units; nothing that few bulleting points in codex may not fix.

Well...not quite.

The Audio book Fireborn suggests that Sallie Firedrake Termies can mix and match Normal and Assault Termie gear in their squads. That is something that can not be done in the current C:SM format. Other than that, you would be correct.

Sallies used to, however, be able to take TH's on their Chaplains and had a limited number of Assault Squad options. This has since been retconned, IMO, not for the better.

Bonzai
27-01-2011, 15:55
I voted no.

I would much rather have one huge codex with all the chapters listed with their various tweeks and modifications. I think the Chapter Tactics idea was a good one, but they botched it by attaching them to special characters.

They should have a couple page breakdown on each founding legion, with the hint that their special rules apply to their successors as well. All have the basic ATSKNF, Combat Squads, etc.., and be organized by:

Legion Name:
Chapter Tactics:
Special Tactics/Doctrin:
Special Equipement:
Special Characters:

For example, an entry for Salamanders.

Salamanders
Chapter Tactics: The Promethean Way (same as Vulkan's current chapter tactics)
Special Tactics/Doctrin: Tactical squads can chose to substitute their heavy weapon for an additional flamer or melta. This exemplifies that they prefer to be up close and personal and assault, instead of stand back and shoot. In addition Command squads and vanguard veterans may take artificer armor for 10 points per model. Special Librarian power: Fury of the Salamander.
Special Equipement: Hvy flamers are available as a free hvy weapons choice to Tac Squads, CC weapons for captains and chapter masters can be upgraded to Master Craft for additional points.
Special Characters: Vulkan, +?

There you go, a nice fluffy, representational, and doesn't take an entire codex to represent. Figure 4-6 pages would cover it.
Page 1: Describes the chapter.
Page 2: Historical time line of notable battles.
Page 3: Rules, tactics, doctrine.
Page 4+: Special Characters.

Do the same with the other chapters, and you have a nice big book that is probably selling for $50-6o, but covers everything. Odds are it will never happen with the new SW's and BA's being chuck full of wolf this, and blood that. Black Templar's would also be problematic. However it would be what I would like to see in the 6th edition marine dex. Which I would like to see repeated with the Chaos legions and Craftworlds.

GrogDaTyrant
27-01-2011, 16:07
One loyalist marine codex. No more, no less.


I with what Bunnahabhain said.

If there was either 1 Marine codex to rule them all, or WD/PDF articles for EVERY variant army list in every other faction, then I might actually be inclined to buy from GW again.

Mannimarco
27-01-2011, 16:18
Yeah why not. Most of the games played round these parts are "space marine joint training exercises" or intergalactic paintball tournaments anyway so it wouldnt make a whole lot of difference.

Should it happen? No chance in hell

Would GW do it if they thought it would sell more marine kits? Your damn right they would.

Lord-Caerolion
27-01-2011, 22:21
Um, Dark Angels (and Blood Angels) have had their own codex since 2nd edition, and the only thing "new" about the current 4th edition codex is Sammael on a jetbike.

You've missed my point. The fact is, the Dark Angels differ from a standard Chapter is precisely crud-all. They have a renamed First Company (allowed under the Codex) and their Second Company rides bikes. Other than that... there's absolutely nothing else.
Dark Angels get their own codex so they have a unit called "Deathwing Terminators" rather than just "Terminators" and "Ravenwing Bikers/Speeders" instead of just "bikes/speeders". In other words, a complete and utter waste of a codex.

Now, I love the Dark Angels. They're a cool Chapter, with awesome background. But I cannot say with a straight face that they deserve their own codex. Point me to one thing they have that deserves a seperate codex. Their Terminators have no special claim to specialness, their bikes and speeders were used perfectly well in seperate squads in previous editions (and there's no reason why they should be grouped together. What's the point of anti-grav if you just use it as an escort for a bike?), their Chaplains differ in name only, and their standard members are just that, standard. There is no reason whatsoever why the Dark Angels cannot use the standard codex. Just include a special character that allows Terminators to be taken as troops. There's already the ability to do the same with bikes.

If my Legions, which actually have differences between them, aren't deserving of even a page of rules, how does a Chapter that is entirely able to use the standard codex get its own unique book so that it can have some renamed squads?

Xarian
27-01-2011, 22:47
I agree with Bunnahabhain.

I wouldn't mind seeing any codex released be meatier (more content) overall, either - give people more viable options, put a bunch more hero-type ICs in, doctrine-like rules for pretty much every army, etc. It would require more playtesting and fine-tuning, but would also lessen the number of books released, which in turn would speed up the development cycle and make fans happier/more willing to fork over their money.

zantis
27-01-2011, 23:30
We have no Craftworld, Ork Klan, Tau Sept, Chaos (Space Marine Legion, Daemon, etc.), Dark Eldar House, Imperial Guard, or Tyranid Hive Fleet books. Why should Space Marines continue getting everything? It is kinda silly.

because a while back (not sure when. may still be true) I remember space marine related sales were the higher than every fantasy army put together. All of the 40k armies put together might've been more but that's irrelevant. the marines are GW's money makers. as a business, why would they stop creating more books that make them more money? Im not saying the xenos dont deserve more attention. They really do. But since the marines sell the most, GW is going to focus on them.

Pitalla Crimson
27-01-2011, 23:35
Its fine the way it this way, having the special char give the army the flavor and rule trait is more simple.
Besides the only official Imperial fists succesor's are black templars and crimson fists. the others are none canonical. Anyways there are succesor chapters that have more flavour or are just too different from a codex chapter. Example: Black templar/ imperial fists.

Vaktathi
27-01-2011, 23:37
Dear god *NO* please.

We already have 4 extraneous Space Marine codex's, whose playstyle and army lists already are less distinct than between most basic Ork or IG armies within their own codecies.

We really don't need more books that share 80-90% of the same stats, units, wargear and weapons. There isn't even much to make any of these armies all that distinct. They've had to stretch, retcon, re-invent, and yoink from other armies just to half-heartedly justify the ones that already exist.

If there really *must* be another SM book, let it be for the forces of Chaos, but honestly, lets just make 2-3 real good SM books and call it at that, and cut the other 4-5 of them.


Now, if we want WD/Chapter Approved things where every army is getting variant lists and whatnot, fine. But we really just don't most of the SM Codecies we already have, much less any new ones.

AlexHolker
27-01-2011, 23:44
because a while back (not sure when. may still be true) I remember space marine related sales were the higher than every fantasy army put together.
They're also the only army that gets proper plastic support - and then some. This would just be feeding the same hateful cycle that screws over everybody that doesn't play Space Marines.

Lord-Caerolion
27-01-2011, 23:44
The only thing more Loyalist codexes will do is create more Dark Angel style codexes, where everything is exactly the same, but the White Scars get Mongol Bikers, which are standard bikes that have Furious Charge, with everything else in the codex being exactly the same.

ForgottenLore
28-01-2011, 00:10
because a while back (not sure when. may still be true) I remember space marine related sales were the higher than every fantasy army put together.

That's not quite fair, since before 8th ed WFB sales were in the toilet, LotR stuff was outselling the WFB.


Besides the only official Imperial fists succesor's are black templars and crimson fists.

IA10 lists the executioners as IF descendants as well.

sabreu
28-01-2011, 01:48
I believe one standard codex should be available. I also believe variant lists should be the domain of white dwarf (for all factions). The idea being here, 1 standard codex for every faction for official tournemants and competitions, and dozens and dozens of variant lists for fun.

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-01-2011, 02:09
I'd love for there to be 7 separate SM codices (1 for the mostly codex-adherent First Founding chapters: UMs, IHs, & ImpFists, and a separate book for each of the others).

However, two immediate problems come to mind: First, GW already has trouble updating the codices they already have. Second, you could hear from the moon the howls of 'Not another Spess Muhreen boook!!!' from the xenos-only players.

Sparowl
28-01-2011, 02:11
because a while back (not sure when. may still be true) I remember space marine related sales were the higher than every fantasy army put together. All of the 40k armies put together might've been more but that's irrelevant. the marines are GW's money makers. as a business, why would they stop creating more books that make them more money? Im not saying the xenos dont deserve more attention. They really do. But since the marines sell the most, GW is going to focus on them.

That's a catch 22. If you give more attention to one product, it will probably sell better then the other products you don't give attention to.

Oh, look, it is selling better! We should give more attention to our star product!



Seriously though, if they spread the love out, sales would likely even out as well. It is easy to say that marine sales are so high, when you are pretending that the sales of 6 of the 14 armies are one army: "Space Marines". Almost half this game is Space Marine books. Of course the numbers are high.

I bet sales for "Xenos" armies would be pretty high too. That's roughly half the 40k range in one group. If we pretended that was a single number, it would probably look good.

sabreu
28-01-2011, 02:17
Seriously though, if they spread the love out, sales would likely even out as well. It is easy to say that marine sales are so high, when you are pretending that the sales of 6 of the 14 armies are one army: "Space Marines". Almost half this game is Space Marine books. Of course the numbers are high.

Not to mention, of course, how to calculate how many sm vehicles were bought for Inquisition armies (Sisters of Battle, primarily), the basis for looted vehicles (orks), or converted to chaos.

VanirX
28-01-2011, 02:27
Make a codex book as thick as the rule book, and in it have the 1st section dedicated to Space Marine units, and rules in general. Then have sperate sections dedicated to each chapter covering specific rules and units.

Vaktathi
28-01-2011, 03:09
Second, you could hear from the moon the howls of 'Not another Spess Muhreen boook!!!' from the xenos-only players.

There are plenty of people who play some sort of SM army or another Imperial army that don't want to see more SM books, not people who just play Xenos armies. I've got Eldar, Tau, Sisters, enough stuff to make a DH army if I chose to, Tyranids, Imperial Guard, Imperial Guard again, and Chaos Space Marines with enough CSM stuff to make two armies if I really wanted to. Most of that stuff is Imperial, SM's of some sort, or both, and as one of those players I have no desire to see any more SM books.

Besides, how many more times do we need those "walk into game store, see SM vs SM battles on every table" moments? SM's already have 7 books (SM, DA, BA, BT, SW, CSM, and DH which is soon to be Codex:Grey Knights), isn't that enough for portraying what is the smallest (and often noted as highly rigid/dogmatic/uniform...) major fighting force in the Warhammer 40,000 universe already? Is there really a need for more?


That's a catch 22. If you give more attention to one product, it will probably sell better then the other products you don't give attention to.

Oh, look, it is selling better! We should give more attention to our star product!



Seriously though, if they spread the love out, sales would likely even out as well. It is easy to say that marine sales are so high, when you are pretending that the sales of 6 of the 14 armies are one army: "Space Marines". Almost half this game is Space Marine books. Of course the numbers are high.

I bet sales for "Xenos" armies would be pretty high too. That's roughly half the 40k range in one group. If we pretended that was a single number, it would probably look good. +over9000 internets.

Wolf Lord Balrog
28-01-2011, 03:28
There are plenty of people who play some sort of SM army or another Imperial army that don't want to see more SM books, not people who just play Xenos armies.

You skipped my first observation that it wouldn't be possible because of GWs production deficiencies. I know the idea is pie-in-sky, never-gonna-happen type stuff. I was only saying, in a perfect world, that's what I would want.

Sir_Turalyon
28-01-2011, 03:43
@ VanirX: That would be almost ideal, except the arm list section would be eighter:

a) full of redundant repetitions (8 entries for tactical squad with identical points costs, options etc except different chapter tactics sections)

or

b)fragmented and requiring to flip pages (Blood Angels Troops: Tactical Squad (See page X for unit cost and options), Assault Squad (See page Y for unit cost and options), Scout Squad (See page X for unit cost and options).

and

c)Full of unique units, or same units in different slots, making it harder to get hold of what belongs where(Blood Angels can use Fast Rhinos and deep striking Land Raider Variants, but not regular ones, Land Speeders Storm or Mortis Dreadnaughts) .


Seriously though, if they spread the love out, sales would likely even out as well. It is easy to say that marine sales are so high, when you are pretending that the sales of 6 of the 14 armies are one army: "Space Marines". Almost half this game is Space Marine books. Of course the numbers are high.


I'm pretty sure you're mistaking cause and effect. Marines sell well because they are easy to grasp yet original concept. In short, other armies are made for people who know what they want, marines are made for people who don't know yet or don't care, and marine variants are to give these people some of a choice without landing them in starter army ghetto. If marines are the vanilla and Orks or Eldar are complex flavours for people who know their taste, colour-coded mairines are vanilla with whipped cream, or with raisin.

To give the feel of other armies to a new person you must eighter simplify it so far it's no longer original and interesting (these are elves in space, these are basic human grunts in space, these are bugs like Aliens or Zerg), or get into introduction lengthy enough to lose attention of listener (So these eldar guys are an ancient civilisation, which destroyed itself ten tousand years ago because they fell so far into hedonism that they created a new Chaos... oh wait, I must tell you about Warp first ... wait where are you going?). Concept and playstyle behind the Space Marines is not only easy to grasp without going onto detail or making them soung mundane (they are knightly orders of elite, heavily armoured superhuman soldiers made of win. and they own whatever bizzare species this SF setting throws at them). Perfect army for unitiated player to take on all these bizzare complex SF thingies. On the other hand, while simple, the idea is original enough to get people interested - while you may find, say, elves in space in other games. As a side effect of their unique apperance no competitor will undercut GW by making alternative Marine minis - if it looks close enough it's copyright breach - so keepinjg them most popular makes financial sense.

In short again, marines are most popular because they are tailor made to be most popular; they aren't just pushed into spotlight, they are purposefuly bred and raised for it. Like it or not, they belong there.


Back to the topic, what I want is good codices with good rules and backed by good model ranges. If they have good idea for new MEQ army (unlikely as it is) i'd be glad to see it. Problem is not whether Salamanders should have a codex, but whether are they fun to play, and whather new Salamanders-themed codex would make an interesting addition to the game? At the moment GW seems to be developing MEQ armies made for sake of new rules into original forces that bring new qualities to the game (yes, even wolf cavalary), which is only a good thing.

AlexHolker
28-01-2011, 04:30
To give the feel of other armies to a new person you must eighter simplify it so far it's no longer original and interesting (these are elves in space, these are basic human grunts in space, these are bugs like Aliens or Zerg), or get into introduction lengthy enough to lose attention of listener (So these eldar guys are an ancient civilisation, which destroyed itself ten tousand years ago because they fell so far into hedonism that they created a new Chaos... oh wait, I must tell you about Warp first ... wait where are you going?).
"You see those guys over there? They're psykers. They almost destroyed humanity. Thats why we burn them."

Ghost-13
28-01-2011, 04:38
I'm of the opinion that we have to many marine codices as is, if each first founding chapter gets a codex, I'd like to see each of the chaos legions and eldar craftworlds getting one aswell.

sabreu
28-01-2011, 04:39
just think, for every alternate marine codex, we could have gotten a new faction instead. =D

Captain Semper
28-01-2011, 06:53
@ Sir_Turalyon: Although I understand (and agree) with your point that Marines is an easy starting point for the uninitiated in the hobby I do not see them as "vanilla" in the way you describe them i.e. when you develop your own taste you move on to other armies... A lot of veteran players play marines by choice (in your flavors analogy, vanilla is their preferred taste - not just an easy taste to get used to) and with all the choices they get from the C:SM alone can create new challenges for themselves and re-invent their armies frequently.

On your other points a mostly agree. I'll go the extra step and join the people who say a large C:SM covering all 1st founding chapters would do nicely especially if it prompts people to choose a chapter on background reasons rather than overstreched special rules. This can be achieved with a couple of generic rules for each chapter (call them battle tactics or whatever) and a few special characters who tell more about the chapters attitude than pages of fluff. Mind you I always welcome more background (as long as retcon is kept in check).

I hope I've not misread your post...

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2011, 08:29
"You see those guys over there? They're psykers. They almost destroyed humanity. Thats why we burn them."

"What's a psyker" is the obvious next question. :)

Sir_Turalyon
28-01-2011, 09:41
@ Sir_Turalyon: Although I understand (and agree) with your point that Marines is an easy starting point for the uninitiated in the hobby I do not see them as "vanilla" in the way you describe them i.e. when you develop your own taste you move on to other armies... A lot of veteran players play marines by choice (in your flavors analogy, vanilla is their preferred taste - not just an easy taste to get used to) and with all the choices they get from the C:SM alone can create new challenges for themselves and re-invent their armies frequently.



Well, vanilla is my ice cream flavour of choice, even after experiencing other tastes :cool:. I don't see it as basic stage you need to move away from, but universal flavour bound to please majority of people, whenever they know other tastes or not. It's a lowest common denominator. Same applies to Marines.

Personally, I've only moved to marines after 7 years of collecting Guard and Xeno armies, and then only because they are Dark Angels. I wouldn't bother with them if they were sold as green Ultramarines; it's the whipped cream that makes the vanilla really good ;) . The finishing does make a difference, even if from metagame point of view they ae very similiar.


Like I said before, Space Marines are GW's own idea in 40k, rather than implementation of generic idea into the genre. They are also highly codified, meaning they offer plenty of details for advanced gamers, like heraldics, background of individual chapters, marks of bolters and power armour and so on. Most other fractions are presented as numerous, varied or changing, to the point when details of their apperance are irrevelant; Marines are the army for people wanting to dig themselves in game fluff, modeling their force precisely like they want, down to unit markings and equipment patterns; 40k equivalent of historical players that insist on painting the units in actual colour schemes and insisting that models should be accurate down to shape of boots actualy used by that one unit (and converting the boots on standard models when painting unit that was assigned a different shape). It's harder to archieve with other armies; Vostryans are yet another of bazzilion Guard regiments; difference between XV-15 and XV-25 Tau suits is mainly aesthethic, while choice of chapter colours, unit markings and mark of power armour mark says lenths about your army. It's not mater of "love" from GW, but design and potential; Marines are designed to express indiciduality more than other armies.

Supreme_Overlord
28-01-2011, 10:06
Chaos Legion codices.

...

That is all.

EDIT:


I'm of the opinion that we have to many marine codices as is, if each first founding chapter gets a codex, I'd like to see each of the chaos legions and eldar craftworlds getting one aswell.

Fair's fair, I agree.


just think, for every alternate marine codex, we could have gotten a new faction instead. =D

I know right. If they made the Hrud a proper faction, I would collect them in an instant. :p

Bunnahabhain
28-01-2011, 11:41
Well, vanilla is my ice cream flavour of choice, even after experiencing other tastes :cool:. I don't see it as basic stage you need to move away from, but universal flavour bound to please majority of people, whenever they know other tastes or not. It's a lowest common denominator. Same applies to Marines...

Still no reason to have standard vanilla, deluxe vanilla, French vanilla, Madagascan vanilla, vanilla swirl, and vanilla chocolate chip, whilst relegating the others to strawberry, chocolate or mint.

There is no reason why you can't do a single unified marine codex, and make at at least as good as the current set of them.

By removing the duplication between the books, it condenses hugely. You don't have to lose much if, any meaningful content.

With intelligent design, you can easily keep options clear and simple.

For example.
Predator. 13/11/10 85 pts
Autocannon turret as standard
May upgrade turret to X, Y or Z for + A,B C pts
May take sponsons X, Y Z for + A,B. C pts
May take standard vehicle upgrade

Done.

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 11:51
just think, for every alternate marine codex, we could have gotten a new faction instead. =D

Not true.

Given the "standard template" Marines can build upon, doing one or two unique units, some shuffling of rules, and a few SC, Marine Codexes are probably not even a 1/10th of the investment of a Xenos Dex.

Moreover, given that 70% to 80% (personal estimates) of 40K players play Marines, IMO 70% to 80% of all Codexes should be Marine Books.

Right now, the small minority of Xenos players (less than 15% I would recon, if you also substract the IG/Chaos-players) get between them one more Codex (Eldar, DE, Orks, Nids, Tau, Necrons, perhaps Daemons.. which is an odd one) than the 70% to 80% of Marine players who are stuck with even one less book (Space Marines, BA, SW, BT, DA).

IMO the game is thus grossly biased in favour of Xenos-players and future Codex releases need to follow much more strongly the distribution in the player-base. Given that the player-base currently favours Marines over Xenos, and Marine Codexes are alot easier to produce (in both models and rule-conception) I see no reason why GW shouldn't follow suit.

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 11:58
This:


I wouldn't mind seeing such a thing, if the non-marine factions in the game got a similar expansion, so a few books detailing the chaos legions, more for the Eldar, Tau, Orks, maybe Necrons depending on what the new codex does with their fluff.

this:


Do you really need a codex for yellow, silver or what ever color marines???

and this:


Yeah.......no. One Space Marine codex. We really can fit all the marine chapters in one book. We'll just have to junk some of the really terrible fanboy writing.

says everything that comes to my mind when I see such a poll.



Moreover, given that 70% to 80% (personal estimates) of 40K players play Marines, IMO 70% to 80% of all Codexes should be Marine Books.
70% to 80% of all players do play Marines now already although the number of Marine books is NOT 70% to 80% of all books. I do NOT want to imagine how 40k would turn out if 70% to 80% of all books would be Marine books! Probably we could rename Warhammer 40k to Marinehammer 40k.
I think GW really has to get away from all-that-shiny-Marines-fanboy-crap and make it a serious game again with multiple serious and same appreciated factions.

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 12:08
70% to 80% of all players do play Marines now already although the number of Marine books is NOT 70% to 80% of all books. I do NOT want to imagine how 40k would turn out if 70% to 80% of all books would be Marine books! Probably we could rename Warhammer 40k to Marinehammer 40k.
I think GW really has to get away from all-that-shiny-Marines-fanboy-crap and make it a serious game again with multiple serious and same appreciated factions.

I think your dichotomy between "serious factions" and "all-that-shiny-Marines-fanboy-crap" is rather arrogant. Who ever put you in charge of deciding what people ought to spend their money and freetime on?

Maybe someone should visit your house and force you to spend your time and hard-earned money on a "more serious" pursuit than mini-wargaming alltogher? Perhaps GW should just ditch their business and encourage all their customers to spend their time and money on "voluntary" community service in a big societal push to make the world again more "fair" and "equal"? Instead, GW could start setting up re-education camps for those still stubbornly failing to see the benefits of "equal appreciation" and serious behaviour?

Bunnahabhain
28-01-2011, 12:13
Not true.

Given the "standard template" Marines can build upon, doing one or two unique units, some shuffling of rules, and a few SC, Marine Codexes are probably not even a 1/10th of the investment of a Xenos Dex.

Moreover, given that 70% to 80% (personal estimates) of 40K players play Marines, IMO 70% to 80% of all Codexes should be Marine Books.

Right now, the small minority of Xenos players (less than 15% I would recon, if you also substract the IG/Chaos-players) get between them one more Codex (Eldar, DE, Orks, Nids, Tau, Necrons, perhaps Daemons.. which is an odd one) than the 70% to 80% of Marine players who are stuck with even one less book (Space Marines, BA, SW, BT, DA).

IMO the game is thus grossly biased in favour of Xenos-players and future Codex releases need to follow much more strongly the distribution in the player-base. Given that the player-base currently favours Marines over Xenos, and Marine Codexes are alot easier to produce (in both models and rule-conception) I see no reason why GW shouldn't follow suit.


You've used this argument before.....

Do you mean 70-80% of armies sold are marines?
70-80% of players play only marines?
70-80% of players have some marines
The last one might be true, the others are not.

If you count players of a force accurately- say ( invented numbers) 60% have loyalist marines, 11% Chaos marines, 8% daemons, 8% DE, 14% Eldar, 19% Orks, 21% Guard, 11% inqusition, 11% tau, etc Then you end up with well over 100%- the average player has more than one army.


Besides, what does it matter how many books a faction has, relative to its popularity? Were not many BA players annoyed about that PDF update? And SW players left with a 7(IIRC) year old book? It's not just xeno players who get annoyed by the slow codex cycle.

Surely one marine book, done well, would be better than the current hodge-podge?

And by done well, I mean both in of rules balance, possible builds, and background. Would any chapter suffer from the loss from their background of Wolfy Mc BloodBlood tickling an avatar to death?

TimLeeson
28-01-2011, 12:14
I'd rather see ONE single and (if needed huge) Codex Space Marines that includes more stuff for the first founding legions. I dont see why they cant do first-founding plastic kits like the black templars/DA upgrades though as part of a release. Iron Hands could have a sprue full of generic bionics as well as specific IH parts - that way people who want iron hands can buy it for both the bionics/shoulder pads, and the people who just want generic bionics can use those. Salamanders also have massive potential for an upgrade sprue - lots of scaled armour, reptillian-styled flamers ect.

Otherwise, for new codices, I want to see some proper alienyalien books first - where are all the cool non-humanoid aliens ? im sick of bipeds and bugs.

Captain Semper
28-01-2011, 12:22
@ Zweischneid: Interesting view... Of course there is no way to verify the percentages you quote but I'm inclined to beleive that SM players are a majority. But it could be 40% of 40k players for all we know. It could be the largest group but nowhere near the numbers you quote.

And the question really is: Is this a good thing? Do more SM codices add more to SM player gaming expirience? For example does a Blood Angels player really need the option of having an army consisting exclusively of dreadnaughts to feel more Blood Angely? Such rules are there to justify the existance of the codex rather than trying to accurate capture the background and/or give character. People used to play Blood Angels for years without the need of overstreched rules and extermely specialised equipment but just because they liked the background of the tortured noble marines plagued by their Primarch's demise and struggling against vampiric tendencies. Personally I'm a DA player since ever and I do NOT require a codex with some obligatory "hunt the fallen" rule to remind me the reason I originally was attracted to them.

My point is that a) not every piece of background needs to be reflected with rules (thus warranting a codex to put them in) and b) inventing streched rules that have no relevance to the background just to fill a codex does not add to the gaming expirience. They are superfluous and verbose - even if they are "balanced".

the1stpip
28-01-2011, 12:23
One book, similar to Chaos 3.5, with two to four pages per chapter, detailing small changes, would be great, but then other races would like similar treatment.

Gorbad Ironclaw
28-01-2011, 12:29
I'm a firm believer that 90%+ of the marine chapters can very easily be included in a basic marine book, including some of the ones that currently have there own codex (Yes, I'm looking at the Dark Angels and Blood Angels).

One big codex with a couple of pages dedicated to special chapters should be quite sufficient for anything that isn't as wildly divergent as Space Wolves, and the last thing 40k needs is more codexes to represent tiny differences. It's the same reason why I don't want to see Eldar Craftworld books or Ork Klan books etc. It's not needed and just serves to add needless clutter and delays while not adding anything of value to the game.

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 12:30
You've used this argument before.....

Do you mean 70-80% of armies sold are marines?
70-80% of players play only marines?
70-80% of players have some marines
The last one might be true, the others are not.

If you count players of a force accurately- say ( invented numbers) 60% have loyalist marines, 11% Chaos marines, 8% daemons, 8% DE, 14% Eldar, 19% Orks, 21% Guard, 11% inqusition, 11% tau, etc Then you end up with well over 100%- the average player has more than one army.



True.. and many players also have more than one loyalist Marine army, which you forgot to account for. And people also buy multiple codexes. I guess the best estimate would be going roughly by playable armies purchased which could be estimated from sales-figures of GW-minis: i.e. if Marines by and large sell, say, roughly 10x as many figures as Eldar, there should be roughly 10 Marine Codexes for "each" Eldar Codex. An alternative could be sales of actual codex-books themselves, though I feel that might be less representative (just a guess though).

And if differences between the (popular) Marines are perceived to be too small, than GW needs to make those differences more pronounced as to foster more diversity within the big chunk of the player base that plays Marines (or the big chunk of collected armies among players that are Marines). If you reduce the differences among Marine-lists (say by merging them all back into one book), you would force a majority of the 40K players to use less lists/a less diverse list, thus making the game as a whole less diverse and more bland.

And yes, I have used the argument before? Are you saying all arguments against more Marine codexes/in favour of alternative or more Xenos-Books in this threat are otherwise new?

Dark Aly
28-01-2011, 12:40
I have 3 marine armies (ravenwing, deathwing and a standard marine force; yes I know two are DA but they're seperae armies). All marine chapters including the more divergent like the space puppies can and should be included in one book. The current codex is already a decent sized book and I think theres enough pages for the fluff and rules for all the founding chapters in there as it is. Add a few more for the photographs and jobs a good 'un. even it ended up the size of the old compendium/companion books they were superb.

It also has the potential to be the best book GW have ever produced full of cool stories from all chapters (Lion vs. wolf from both sides, badab war etc.)

Just thinking about it makes me wish it existed

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 12:44
@ Zweischneid: Interesting view... Of course there is no way to verify the percentages you quote but I'm inclined to beleive that SM players are a majority. But it could be 40% of 40k players for all we know. It could be the largest group but nowhere near the numbers you quote.

And the question really is: Is this a good thing? Do more SM codices add more to SM player gaming expirience? For example does a Blood Angels player really need the option of having an army consisting exclusively of dreadnaughts to feel more Blood Angely? Such rules are there to justify the existance of the codex rather than trying to accurate capture the background and/or give character. People used to play Blood Angels for years without the need of overstreched rules and extermely specialised equipment but just because they liked the background of the tortured noble marines plagued by their Primarch's demise and struggling against vampiric tendencies. Personally I'm a DA player since ever and I do NOT require a codex with some obligatory "hunt the fallen" rule to remind me the reason I originally was attracted to them.

My point is that a) not every piece of background needs to be reflected with rules (thus warranting a codex to put them in) and b) inventing streched rules that have no relevance to the background just to fill a codex does not add to the gaming expirience. They are superfluous and verbose - even if they are "balanced".

Of course my numbers are just made up. But one could make an estimate from sales.

Still, the game currently is unbalanced IMO. If you have a hypothetical player-base of 100 players, and a game consisting of 10 different armies, than the "ideal" IMO would be to get a distribution of about 10 people playing each book. This is, in my opinion, not the case with 40K where a fairly sizable majority sits on some books (i.e. the Marine books) while other books are "under-utilized" (i.e. many Xenos-books).

The only way to move closer to a more balanced distribution would be to either produce more variety/variants of the books that are popular (i.e. Marines) to break up the "big blocks" of players that sit on the same book or the "merge" the under-utilized books (i.e. the Xenos books) to bring the smaller factions together under one heading.

As merging, say Tau & Eldar or Orks & Tyranids would arguably create even more outrage from people attached to their little piece of background, more Marine-books seems to be the most sensible option. However, merging Marines, while leaving Xenos as they are, would only aggrevate the problem, not mitigate it.

And of course, the above example is a "simplification" that does not account for people holding multiple armies.

Chem-Dog
28-01-2011, 13:00
I have voted YES but that's only because I'd love to see one or two thematically different units for specific Legions (and their subsequent chapters).

I've got a sizable Imperial Fists force (mostly in penitent "plastic grey"...:shifty:)
And I'd honestly have trouble Imagining anyhting the chapter would use that's not already covered in the Codex (with the exception of the Stormraven, obviously, but that will come I am sure).

BUT several of the Legions have enough of a specific culture to warrant exclusive units.
Iron Hands need an HQ level Dread, something as punchy as a Furioso/Ironclad but with some funky new armaments. Characters with a preponderance of Tech Marine gear should be an option too, I'm not just talking about servo arm/harness either.
Salamanders should have the Firedrakes explored a little more, thunderhammers should be a standard upgrade for the Standard PF Terminator (not just for Vulkan "Charlton" He'Stan bonuses) and all characters should have access to a wide array of techical marvels that their fluff says they have, Signums, MC weapons and perhaps the sons of Nocturn should have access to more Melta and flamer weaponry, Heavy Flamers as a standard heavy weapon option for all units (yes, even scouts), Multimeltas for Terminators and, I dunno.....Perhaps some kind of Pistol versions of Flamers and Meltas, crazy as it sounds....:shifty:
White Scars should be a little bit more than Codex: Space Marines-on bikes, they should reflect the whole "Cavalry" feel of the Chapter. Now we don't have to get silly and give them "ThunderHorses" (although I have suggested Marines on horses before and it isn't necessarily a bad idea) but things like options to mount sterngard on bikes (yes, with SG ammo) and a general perk for being consumate riders so that, if set against a SM army of bikers they'll be a touch better.


I know that many people dislike the level of emphasis GW seems to place on SM's and that's fair enough, I wouldn't really want to see 9 codexes just for loyalist SM factions but a return to the Index Astartes could solve these problems with a single extra Optional book. On a similar level we could see a Index Xenos book that allows for players to tailor their Ork army to a specific Klan, or Eldar players to a specific Craftworld.

Back though, to Space Marines, I'd at least like to see a Chapter Master for each of the remaining 9 Loyalist Legion's named successor chapters, as it is we have our, another five wouldn't hurt that much, would it?

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 13:02
I think your dichotomy between "serious factions" and "all-that-shiny-Marines-fanboy-crap" is rather arrogant. Who ever put you in charge of deciding what people ought to spend their money and freetime on?

Maybe someone should visit your house and force you to spend your time and hard-earned money on a "more serious" pursuit than mini-wargaming alltogher? Perhaps GW should just ditch their business and encourage all their customers to spend their time and money on "voluntary" community service in a big societal push to make the world again more "fair" and "equal"? Instead, GW could start setting up re-education camps for those still stubbornly failing to see the benefits of "equal appreciation" and serious behaviour?

You are mis-interpreting my words. I don't know if on purpose or not.
By "serious" I am talking about the support that an existing range receives, the expansions in fluff and miniature range, not how serious a book about a specific army is written. Or do you want to tell me that Chaos Obliterators, Eldar Striking Scorpions MK2 and Eldar Banshees MK3 are serious miniatures? Or maybe the "Chem-pan-sey" or "Mon-Keigh" stuff in the Eldar fluff? Imo this is direct and hilarious mockery to every player of these.
Also I am talking about how rules and points are designed and handed out. By comparing Space Wolves and Blood Angels to Tyranids or Eldar, I really can't get rid of the feeling that there is some serious unbalance and that someone did either do that on purpose to overpower Marines or with not enough love and seriousness when designing Eldar and Tyranids.
Seriousness also includes to give a similar support for each faction instead of boosting one further and further in means of fluff, releases and power inside a Codex. Some factions have to live with the same fluff repeated and copied over from one book to the next while others get freakingly expanded every 6 months.

Captain Semper
28-01-2011, 13:06
@ Zweischneid: OK. I see your argument. However I don't see why every faction should have the same (or even roughly the same) following... As long as they are financially viable for GW I can live with the idea that SM are more popular an army compared to, say, Deamons -or everything else for that matter. If other factions are not financially viable i'll be happy to see them go the Squats way in the belly of a Mawloc :) I think diversity is a good think. Repeating the same basic Codex adding rules just for the sake of it does not really add to the hobby...

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 13:09
As long as they are financially viable for GW I can live with the idea that SM are more popular an army compared to, say, Deamons -or everything else for that matter..
And I do openly put to debate if not some other factions couldn't be way bigger if they would receive the same amount of backup-support from Black Library, PC-Games, Miniature- and Codex-releases.

You know, in the GDR there had been only 2 types of cars. That doesn't mean people only wanted those... But it's useless trying to get some others of they look totally poorly supported in comparison.

Captain Semper
28-01-2011, 13:15
I think such a debate leads nowhere because who really knows... Just because a faction gets the most support does not mean it will top sales... There is no evidence to support either view...

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 13:18
Yea. But I think the biggest mistake of Marines (and the reason they sell so well) is that they do not have a drawback. Not even the Achilles Land Raider has a weak spot, although his name should indicate it.
All others have a major definition for their drawback. I don't see Marines to have any. And people always like to play what is most powerful, you'll see that in every PC- or RPG-Game too.
Sure, the fluff might be nice in some parts. But actually every part of fluff is cool if you open your mind enough and read it because you are playing that faction.

Captain Semper
28-01-2011, 13:22
On the fluff part I fully, FULLY agree! For the first part of your comment, well this is valid point to debate :)

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 13:23
And I do openly put to debate if not some other factions couldn't be way bigger if they would receive the same amount of backup-support from Black Library, PC-Games, Miniature- and Codex-releases.

You know, in the GDR there had been only 2 types of cars. That doesn't mean people only wanted those... But it's useless trying to get some others of they look totally poorly supported in comparison.

That is abit the chicken-and-egg question. I would argue that the superiour range & support for Space Marines is instead a symptom of GW trying to cater to the much greater player-base among Marines, and to keep at least some diversity in the game, without needing to publish excessive amounts Space Marine Codexes which may lead them down the slippery slope of ever-longer update-cycles.

Think of it the opposite: what if the popularity of Space Marines (incl. Space Wolves, Blood Angels, etc..) would be constant/unchanging, even if they only had one book with only as many options/minis as the current Necrons?

You cannot blame GW for the popularity of Space Marines and I for one am happy they do everything they can to keep the existing Space Marines as varied as possible.

Alternative .. say.. Eldar or Tau lists for example would, I would think, add nothing to the game as it would simply serve luxury-excess of options to the odd-out minority. I'd rather have GW push variety where it makes an impact.

Bunnahabhain
28-01-2011, 13:26
BUT several of the Legions have enough of a specific culture to warrant exclusive units.
Agreed

Iron Hands need an HQ level Dread, something as punchy as a Furioso/Ironclad but with some funky new armaments.
Sounds like a special character to me. Or maybe, given that there is at least one other HQ dread already- Bjorn-, and BA have introduced Librarian dreads, and FW Chaplin ones, a standard HQ dread entry, that can take chaplin, librarian or chapter master pattern upgrades?

Characters with a preponderance of Tech Marine gear should be an option too, I'm not just talking about servo arm/harness either.
So a functioning wargear section then, and not reprinting the same 10 option for every character in 17 places in the book?

Salamanders should have the Firedrakes explored a little more,
'Special character' unit? In my ideal unified codex, oddball units( death company, legion of the damned and thunderwolves being examples ) would become Unique units. 0-1 choice each, limited to <insert name> or sucessors only, where appropriate. Legion of the damned could turn up anywhere, no so for death company.
Possibly with a note for all of them that, "For narrative, non competitive play, you may wish to agree with your opponents to relax the 0-1 limit on these units. These normally rare units may be concentrated for some reason. The resulting force will probably not be balanced, but will be interesting!"

thunderhammers should be a standard upgrade for the Standard PF Terminator (not just for Vulkan "Charlton" He'Stan bonuses) and all characters should have access to a wide array of techical marvels that their fluff says they have, Signums, MC weapons and perhaps the sons of Nocturn should have access to more Melta and flamer weaponry, Heavy Flamers as a standard heavy weapon option for all units (yes, even scouts), Multimeltas for Terminators and, I dunno.....Perhaps some kind of Pistol versions of Flamers and Meltas, crazy as it sounds....:shifty:

Sounds like that's the list of the salamanders chapter tactics. Lay out in one or two clear paragraphs. Repeat with blood angels, Imperial fists, etc, etc.

White Scars should be a little bit more than Codex: Space Marines-on bikes, they should reflect the whole "Cavalry" feel of the Chapter. Now we don't have to get silly and give them "ThunderHorses" (although I have suggested Marines on horses before and it isn't necessarily a bad idea) but things like options to mount sterngard on bikes (yes, with SG ammo) and a general perk for being consumate riders so that, if set against a SM army of bikers they'll be a touch better.

Again, you've just mainly done the chapter tactics list. Complex, wasn't it?

Back though, to Space Marines, I'd at least like to see a Chapter Master for each of the remaining 9 Loyalist Legion's named successor chapters, as it is we have our, another five wouldn't hurt that much, would it? Agreed.

TimLeeson
28-01-2011, 13:30
I have voted YES but that's only because I'd love to see one or two thematically different units for specific Legions (and their subsequent chapters).


COnsidering DA/SW/BA wont get lumped into SM and we are talking about the other 1st founding legions then I think that can be done in C:SM though (IMO), even if they need to increase the page-count. I do agree that all legions should get a few thematically different units however - I include chaos-marines in this. Iron Hands should get HQ Dreads and allow terminators to be taken as leaders for tactical squads ect, Salamanders should get Firedrakes. Perhaps one idea to "open" these sorts of armies up is to include non-character HQ's that are legion-specific and customisable to some degree ? This would probably enable more of the successors too - like black-dragons ect.

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 13:39
That is abit the chicken-and-egg question.
I don't think it is. Power always has attracted people. And there is no army with these pimp-stats, pimp-weapons, pimp point costs, pimp vehicles and so few drawbacks as Space Marines. Tell me a single drawback of Space Marines. I can't think of any, except maybe they lack cheap sucking horde units.

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 13:44
I don't think it is. Power always has attracted people. And there is no army with these pimp-stats, pimp-weapons, pimp point costs, pimp vehicles and so few drawbacks as Space Marines. Tell me a single drawback of Space Marines. I can't think of any, except maybe they lack cheap sucking horde units.

The "arrogance"-debate arises again here I suppose.

You very obviously value other peoples motivation less "valuable/worthwhile" than your own motivations behind your choice of 40K army.

If, to you, people choose Space Marines for the "wrong reason" and Xenos for the "right reason", the outcome of such a debate is pre-determined for you I would assume.

I am sorry, but personally I feel one can only build a "fair" rationale for more or less armies of a certain type if one does not "judge" the reaons why people do or do not collect certain armies. As said, it is their time and money, and "power" is as good a reason for people to pass over their hard-earned cash as "I-write-pulizer-price-winning-eldar-fiction-in-my-spare-time".

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 13:53
I never said they chose it for the "wrong" reason, I only named the reason why most seem to chose it. Please quote me where I say that reason had been wrong. It is logical after all. Wrong only is the way how GW designs and supports some armies ... or others not.
So I would be glad if you could stop interpreting words into my saying which do not exist. As an Eldar player I am quite satisfied with my range, although I still believe it has some major flaws.
But I can think of some armies I'd like to play, but which are totally worthless thinking about. Necrons or Sisters of Battle for example. Now is that a cool thing and does it justify yet-another Space Marine Codex? No, it doesn't. It supports my theory that some armies do not get the serious amount of support they should get to create a balanced (not only in points cost, but in balance between armies in general) game.

Gingerwerewolf
28-01-2011, 14:06
Marines are the poster boys for GW and 40k.

The Fluff side of me would love to see all the Marine first 20 elaborated upon. Including the ones that fell to Chaos.
But the Fluff side of me wants an individual Codex for every Tau Spet. For every Craftworld. For Every Imperial Guard Regiment. For Every Ork Clan (do they even still exist?)
Then how about the Nid invasion. Im willing to bet that all the hive fleets have different genetic code available to them and thus could have different troops.
I want the old Genestealers back, with their Hybrids.
I want Squats back. In whatever form they are now known.
I want more Dark Eldar Fluff. Individual armies for all their Cabals
I want full lists for all the Imperial Agents.

The realistic side of me knows that it would be an impossible dream. Doesnt stop me wanting it though.

and with regaurds to the argument about Space Marines being over done by Games Workshop, well thats just normal for anyone who has created a world / universe.

There are Main Characters and there is the supporting cast.

No matter what anyone says, Space Marines are, and always will be the Stars of the 40k universe, and all other armies are just the Supporting cast.

Of course you are going to sell more of the Space Marine equipment. GW would be foolish to ignore that.

As long as they do give the other Armies love from time to time, then its all good with me.

Zweischneid
28-01-2011, 14:12
I never said they chose it for the "wrong" reason, I only named the reason why most seem to chose it. Please quote me where I say that reason had been wrong. It is logical after all. Wrong only is the way how GW designs and supports some armies ... or others not.
So I would be glad if you could stop interpreting words into my saying which do not exist. As an Eldar player I am quite satisfied with my range, although I still believe it has some major flaws.
But I can think of some armies I'd like to play, but which are totally worthless thinking about. Necrons or Sisters of Battle for example. Now is that a cool thing and does it justify yet-another Space Marine Codex? No, it doesn't. It supports my theory that some armies do not get the serious amount of support they should get to create a balanced (not only in points cost, but in balance between armies in general) game.

Well, your rather derogatory "pimp-this, pimp-that" rant didn't come across as unbiased. If I failed to see the impartiality in your "pimp-argument", I apologize.

But it still is not GW's job to push their customers to a different choice of consumption/purchase.

The Coca Cola Company sells over 500 brands of soft-drink, but only a handful varieties of fruit-juice. Why? Because people like the sugary stuff. If people want another variety of Green-Cherry-Chicken-Coke-Zero, rather than Orange Juice, that is not the Coca Cola Companies fault.

And for GW and Space Marines, I pointed out above that Xenos-players, including Eldar, get vastly more support from GW relative to the number/percentage they make up among GW-customers, compared to Space Marine players where, dividing published material by customers, far less goodies are lavished out to them.

Go over to a random GW-store or 40K-tournament/games-day/whatever, and you'll see 10 Space Wolves players for each Eldar player. What does that tell you? That there should be another 9 Codexes for perhaps White Scars, Space Sharks, SW 13 Company and Ragnars Great Company. Making those books available would increase the diversity of the 40K-armies played as a whole. More Eldar-varients however wouldn't change anything, as there's only one Eldar-player anyways who would be blessed with pointless excess-options, leaving the 10 Space Wolf-players with a dublication-inducing lack of options.

Gingerwerewolf
28-01-2011, 14:23
I don't think it is. Power always has attracted people. And there is no army with these pimp-stats, pimp-weapons, pimp point costs, pimp vehicles and so few drawbacks as Space Marines. Tell me a single drawback of Space Marines. I can't think of any, except maybe they lack cheap sucking horde units.

They are overly expensive money wise and points wise.
Thats not the same as lacking a Cheap Horde unit.

And its not Power, its Heroics. All the fluff about Space Marines makes them out to be the ultimate hero. Everyone wants to be the hero, and the younger you are the more powerful that want is.
Space Marines are the ultimate Selfless Heros. Eldar are a selfish race who are dying out. Who would I rather be?

Space Marines have a broader appeal. Their Rulebooks and Armylists are no more overpowered than any other.

You'll note that I have a Space Marine symbol as my Icon. Yep Im a Space Marine fan. You're quite obviously an Eldar fan and to be fair your army has needed a bit of love for 5th edition. Your army has also been around for as long as the Space Marines, but has plainly not been loved by GW to the same extent.

But look at other systems, Elves are some of the highest chosen player class's in all sorts of games (WoW and WAR for example) Surely Eldar are just Elves in Space, but there is something about them that doesnt work for everyone.

Its supply and demand in the end. If more people bought Eldar models then there would be more stuff for them. If people didnt want Space Marine Stuff they wouldnt produce it.

Its not Games Workshops fault, its OURS for making our own decisions.

loveless
28-01-2011, 14:28
Everyone wants to be the hero, and the younger you are the more powerful that want is.

I, actually, always wanted to play the bad guy - my search for heroics didn't show up til college :p

I think part of the Marine allure is that - like any force in 40K - there is no definite "good" or "evil" in the forces. Yes, on the surface the Marines are good, but dig a bit and analyze the Imperium as a whole and you find a darker story.

Gingerwerewolf
28-01-2011, 14:31
Well, your rather derogatory "pimp-this, pimp-that" rant didn't come across as unbiased. If I failed to see the impartiality in your "pimp-argument", I apologize.

But it still is not GW's job to push their customers to a different choice of consumption/purchase.

The Coca Cola Company sells over 500 brands of soft-drink, but only a handful varieties of fruit-juice. Why? Because people like the sugary stuff. If people want another variety of Green-Cherry-Chicken-Coke-Zero, rather than Orange Juice, that is not the Coca Cola Companies fault.

And for GW and Space Marines, I pointed out above that Xenos-players, including Eldar, get vastly more support from GW relative to the number/percentage they make up among GW-customers, compared to Space Marine players where, dividing published material by customers, far less goodies are lavished out to them.

Go over to a random GW-store or 40K-tournament/games-day/whatever, and you'll see 10 Space Wolves players for each Eldar player. What does that tell you? That there should be another 9 Codexes for perhaps White Scars, Space Sharks, SW 13 Company and Ragnars Great Company. Making those books available would increase the diversity of the 40K-armies played as a whole. More Eldar-varients however wouldn't change anything, as there's only one Eldar-player anyways who would be blessed with pointless excess-options, leaving the 10 Space Wolf-players with a dublication-inducing lack of options.

Agreed but with one caveat: (And I think what Hendarion is trying to say)

If GW had pushed the Eldar as their posterboy would it be the other way around with 10 Eldar players to 1 Marine?

I personally believe that GW wouldnt be as big today if it had.

People like things that they can associate with. They'll choose an army simply upon that. Human Heros are very easy, you see them all the time on TV and in Games.
Alien ones are not.

If you have ever done pen and Paper roleplay, the first character that most if not all people choose for themselves in a new system is who they want / or would like to be in that world. The more interesting characters are usually left until after you have got some experience.

Space Marines are what they are because they are accessable.

Gingerwerewolf
28-01-2011, 14:32
I, actually, always wanted to play the bad guy - my search for heroics didn't show up til college :p

I think part of the Marine allure is that - like any force in 40K - there is no definite "good" or "evil" in the forces. Yes, on the surface the Marines are good, but dig a bit and analyze the Imperium as a whole and you find a darker story.

Id say thats the appeal of the whole of 40k.

Hendarion
28-01-2011, 14:41
But it still is not GW's job to push their customers to a different choice of consumption/purchase.
But it should be in GW's interest to design a game where each army is the same supported.


Go over to a random GW-store or 40K-tournament/games-day/whatever, and you'll see 10 Space Wolves players for each Eldar player. What does that tell you?
That tells me that Space Wolves are currently imba, as the tournament-scene ever since reflects which armies are the most powerful.


That there should be another 9 Codexes for perhaps White Scars, Space Sharks, SW 13 Company and Ragnars Great Company.
No, wrong. If there would be so many White Scars, Space Sharks and whatever armies, THEN it would tell me that there is a desire for these Codices. As long as players prefer to paint their armies grey and red, it tells me that they aren't dreaming for a White Scars Codex, but for an overly powerful one. A fan who'd love his army would play it, no matter if it has a Codex or not. Examples can be found in every player who paints and fields a specific Tau Sept, Ork Clan, DE Cabal or Eldar Craftworld.


They are overly expensive money wise and points wise.
They are overly expensive points wise? Have you ever checked the Space Wolves Codex and compared it to say Tyranids, Orks or Eldar Codex? Obviously you didn't.
Overly expensive money wise? I think Mandrakes, Seraphim or Wraithguard would heavily disagree.


And its not Power, its Heroics.
Heroics would be if they would be normal dudes, doing absolutely heroic things. But actually they are the units with the best overall stats for standard units in the entire game. What is heroic about that? Sounds like you interpret Goliath to be the hero instead of David.


All the fluff about Space Marines makes them out to be the ultimate hero. Everyone wants to be the hero, and the younger you are the more powerful that want is.
Each portion of fluff seen from the point of the main character looks like he is the absolute hero. Not only Space Marines.


Space Marines are the ultimate Selfless Heros. Eldar are a selfish race who are dying out.
Right... Space Marines defend their race and their empire and see every other race as scum that has to be burned, killed, purged. Eldar are just... baaad, baaaaad xenos who actually do the very same thing.


Their Rulebooks and Armylists are no more overpowered than any other.
You really didn't read Space Wolves and Blood Angels Codex.


You'll note that I have a Space Marine symbol as my Icon. Yep Im a Space Marine fan. You're quite obviously an Eldar fan and to be fair your army has needed a bit of love for 5th edition. Your army has also been around for as long as the Space Marines, but has plainly not been loved by GW to the same extent.
Wow. Yea. That is exactly how it feels to play a Xenos-army. And that is what I criticise.


But look at other systems, Elves are some of the highest chosen player class's in all sorts of games (WoW and WAR for example) Surely Eldar are just Elves in Space, but there is something about them that doesnt work for everyone.
Elves in other systems or games are overly powerful and noble. Space Marines have that seat in 40k, although they are mentally not even that, seen from a specific point of view.


Its supply and demand in the end. If more people bought Eldar models then there would be more stuff for them.
If people didnt want Space Marine Stuff they wouldnt produce it.

Its not Games Workshops fault, its OURS for making our own decisions.
Make Space Marines 22 points each, drop their armour save to 4+ and toughness to 3 and watch sales of Space Marines going down. Trust me, that is exactly why I am not collecting Sisters of Battle or Necrons. I do not love their models hard enough (as I do with Eldar-designs) to look over all their problems and still buy them. They are interesting to me, but I'm not going to waste money on an army I like (instead of love) but which can't be played the way it should be playable.

Captain Semper
28-01-2011, 16:03
Does anybody really think that what Blood Angels players collectively thought was: What we really need to flesh out our army is deep striking land raiders? Or we need 3 elite jump pack units on top our ordinary assault marines?

I do not beleive that a single unified Codex would harm either GW sales or the following SMs currently enjoy. If the support for marines was extended to chapter specific plastics for all 1st founding chapters I'd say it would enhance sales and love for this faction considerably more that a Codex filled with rules for the sake of rules... And GW could sell background books detailing insignia and formations for each chapter (and their succesors) to flesh out further the differences between chapters.

A generic super-codex would work fine with just a few special rules for each chapter and leave the rest to imagery...

AlexHolker
28-01-2011, 16:24
And for GW and Space Marines, I pointed out above that Xenos-players, including Eldar, get vastly more support from GW relative to the number/percentage they make up among GW-customers, compared to Space Marine players where, dividing published material by customers, far less goodies are lavished out to them.
You are aware that the relationship of support-to-sales is not linear, right? Getting half the plastic support your army needs to be viable isn't half as good as getting full support.

TimLeeson
28-01-2011, 16:55
If you have ever done pen and Paper roleplay, the first character that most if not all people choose for themselves in a new system is who they want / or would like to be in that world. The more interesting characters are usually left until after you have got some experience.
Space Marines are what they are because they are accessable.

Sad but true, people normally want something accessible and relatable as opposed to something more imaginative and weirder for the reasons you mentioned previously. At least 40k has a wide variety of visual niches for most people - the average fan of weird-horror/lovecraftian stuff has practically nothing bar the occasional model like tzeentch flamers so we have to convert :P

Bunnahabhain
28-01-2011, 16:59
You are aware that the relationship of support-to-sales is not linear, right? Getting half the plastic support your army needs to be viable isn't half as good as getting full support.

See the Inquistion- plastic vehicles, metal troops, and codices buried in a coal measure somewhere. Result- neglected and niche armies.

ForgottenLore
28-01-2011, 18:07
Well, I'm not going to get into the "SM sell more >< are supported more" chicken and egg argument again, but in my ideal, "I'm smokin' the good stuff", world here is what I would like to see.

A line of main codexes. These are the core books necessary for each core army to play the game and would all be updated before a new edition of the rules came out, preferably early in the editions life cycle.

Space Marines (de facto codex ultramarines and successors)
Chaos Space Marines
IG
Forces of the Inquisition (including all 3 ordos)
Craftworld Eldar
Dark Eldar (worth noting that this wouldn't have made the cut before GW did the new book and hit the fluff out of the park.)
Orks
Tau
Necrons
Tyranids

These would be expanded on with a series of codex expansions that would be updated less frequently

SM: Chapters 1
SM: Chapters 2 - these 2 books would each provide some flavor and unique rules for 4 of the original legions and several of their successors. Figure about 20 pages per legion and successors.

Traitor Legions - same thing, but without need for as many successors you can fit all of them in one (probably big) book

Guard Regiments - a 100-150 page guard book should be able to include reasonably balanced doctrine system and still have enough room to provide a bit of flavor and a special character or two for 20-30 different regiments.

Craftworld Eldar - lots of flavor and backgroundwith either an Eldar doctrine system or some minor, easy to implement special rules/ characters for a dozen or so craftworlds, probably not a large book.

Ork Clans - I don't know Orks very well, but as I understand it there are only a limited number of major clans. One book should be able to detail all of them.

Codex Minor Powers (or a return of chapter approved in WD) - a series of books that provide small army lists and some fluff for fringe or niche forces that exist in the universe. Genestealer Cults, all Harlequin armies, Exodite Eldar, Farsight Enclaves, Kroot Mercenaries, possibly Ad Mech Skitiarii. These would not be armies meant to be fielded alone, but rather the books would include official rules on how to use allies in a game and what forces from the book can ally with which of the main armies.

That comes to 16 books not counting the minor powers ones, the same number they are producing now. It also allows all the original legions (minus 2) plus several successor chapters to be developed some and also allows for more expansion of the other armies as well.

If they then, each time they updated one of the 10 main books, allocated a single miniatures slot to producing something for the variant armies of that main faction, a character model, upgrade sprue, sanguinary guard, something like that, then the variant lists would also slowly have miniatures added to them.

In conclusion, I just want to comment on Imperial Armour 9 & 10. These books detailed something like 17 different space marine chapters. Each chapter got 3-4 pages of fluff and a special character or two. That made me MUCH more interested in playing Space Marines than any of the chapter specific codexes have ever done. Being able to get that kind of development for a hundred chapters would probably drive SM sales much more than full books for another 5 chapters would.

Inquisitor Gabriel Ashe
28-01-2011, 20:43
A line of main codexes.

Space Marines (de facto codex ultramarines and successors)
Chaos Space Marines
IG
Forces of the Inquisition (including all 3 ordos)
Craftworld Eldar
Dark Eldar (worth noting that this wouldn't have made the cut before GW did the new book and hit the fluff out of the park.)
Orks
Tau
Necrons
Tyranids

I think a better order would be:

SM
CSM
Dark Eldar
Orcs
IG
Daemons
Eldar
Nids
Inquisition
Tau
Necrons

This way there's distinct chunks. There's a break between Imperium 'dexes, Chaos 'dexes, Eldar 'dexes, other Xenos 'dexes.

ForgottenLore
28-01-2011, 20:47
I wasn't listing a particular order, that would have to vary depending on market forces and the production capabilities and such, I was just listing an ideal line up of primary armies.

Inquisitor Gabriel Ashe
28-01-2011, 20:54
Makes sense. My main aim was to put Necrons last anyway because I don't like them. ;)

TheMav80
28-01-2011, 21:22
If simplicity of backround and plenty of plastic kits with original ideas are what make Space Marines popular then the Tau should be hugely succesful.

An almost entirely plastic range of "good guys" spreading their young upstart empire with the highest tech around. They are unique in design to GW and could be the new poster boys.

It will never get the chance to happen because the codex gets updated slowly and look at the units compared to a SM choices.

Tau:
2 HQs - Suit Commander (which is a 1+) and Ethereal
2 Elites - Crisis Suits and Stealth Suits
2 Troops - Firewarriors (another 1+) and Kroot
4 Fast Attack - Gun Drones, Piranha, Vespid, Pathfinders
4 Heavy Support - Sniper Drones, Broadsides, Hammerhead, SkyRay

Vanilla Marines:
5 HQs - Chapter Master, Captain, Chaplain, Librarian, Master of the Forge
5(7) Elites - Terminators (two types), Techmarines, Sternguard, Dreadnought (2 types), Legion of the Damned
2 Troops - Scouts, Tactical Marines
4(5) Fast Attack - Land Speeders (two types), Bikes (also troops!), Assault Marines, Vanguard Veterans
6 Heavy Support - Land Raider, Devastator Squad, Predator, Vindicator, Whirlwind, Thunderfire

Wow...I can't even imagine how the Space Marines outsell something like the Tau! Even allowing for additions in the 5th addition book the Space Marine options, in ONE book, vastly outstrip the Tau.

ForgottenLore
28-01-2011, 21:32
Mav, you forgot 11 special characters for SM, many of which are fairly good choices vs 3 for Tau, at least one (arguably 2) of which are actually liabilities to take.

Charistoph
28-01-2011, 21:42
A line of main codexes. These are the core books necessary for each core army to play the game and would all be updated before a new edition of the rules came out, preferably early in the editions life cycle.

Space Marines (de facto codex ultramarines and successors)
Chaos Space Marines
IG
Forces of the Inquisition (including all 3 ordos)
Craftworld Eldar
Dark Eldar
Orks
Tau
Necrons
Tyranids

These would be expanded on with a series of codex expansions that would be updated less frequently.


Agreed. I can't even remember which post it was (I think one of the Chaos Marine threads), but I propsed something similar. What was different was the timing of the release of the codicies, and having Forgeworld or a new child company, handle the specialized forces like Farsight's Enclave, World Eaters, and Blood Angel expansions that built on the base codex. The supplements would cost less, but would have a higher volume. Each would have upgrade sprues that were released in their waves and encouraged custom models.

The only argument against it is that was what Space Wolves were up till recently, and with that and the Fantasy Chaos treatment, demonstrated that is what GW wants to avoid now.

Jerrus
28-01-2011, 21:48
Though I would like an Imperial Fist codex, I dont think its neccessary. I would be fine with a book with fluff on popular chapters (doesn't have to be first founding)

sabreu
28-01-2011, 21:53
Not true.

Given the "standard template" Marines can build upon, doing one or two unique units, some shuffling of rules, and a few SC, Marine Codexes are probably not even a 1/10th of the investment of a Xenos Dex.

I would counter argue that the Adeptus Mechanicus could be thrown quickly together with existing units (land raiders, tech priests, rhinos, servitors, etc) with as much minimal effort.

I also believe the investment of a xenos dex compared to the marine dex is still about the same. Every new marine dex has new art in it, new (or rewritten) stories, and new model releases to coincede with it's release. The actual effort in writing either is still the same.

TheMav80
28-01-2011, 21:57
Mav, you forgot 11 special characters for SM, many of which are fairly good choices vs 3 for Tau, at least one (arguably 2) of which are actually liabilities to take.

True, and forgot about Rhino/Razorback and Drop Pod vs Devilfish. Also those Elite Dreads can also be Heavy Support.

When you have a fully fleshed out Codex with actual models for all those entries, it isn't any wonder that the line sells so well.

Granted a lot of these things are 5th edition advances and things like Dark Eldar, Imperial Guard, and Tyrannids probably come up closer. That is sort of the point though. Space Marines never have to worry about it because they will always have a newer book. Where as Xenos races have to wait forever. Sorry, I don't count not having a proper BA or SW update as being the same thing.

AlexHolker
28-01-2011, 22:43
A line of main codexes. These are the core books necessary for each core army to play the game and would all be updated before a new edition of the rules came out, preferably early in the editions life cycle.

Space Marines (de facto codex ultramarines and successors)
Chaos Space Marines
IG
Forces of the Inquisition (including all 3 ordos)
Craftworld Eldar
Dark Eldar (worth noting that this wouldn't have made the cut before GW did the new book and hit the fluff out of the park.)
Orks
Tau
Necrons
Tyranids
I would make one change to that list: shove Deathwatch in with the Space Marines, and maybe GK too. Deathwatch literally uses the same people anyway, and GK are (or were) defined by being Space Marines but moreso. Expand the =][= to support Arbites, Mechanicus Tech-Guard and so on if you like, but it would stop some ass from turning it into a de facto second SM codex, which is the result I'd expect if they put one human faction and two Space Marine factions in the same book.

Sparowl
29-01-2011, 05:25
I'm pretty sure you're mistaking cause and effect. Marines sell well because they are easy to grasp yet original concept.

Suffice it to say I disagree.

I would also like to point out that I will put this forward as an opinion, since I'm not prepared to present empirical evidence and therefore will not say that you've made a mistake in having an opinion, as you seem to think I have done.


That is abit the chicken-and-egg question. I would argue that the superiour range & support for Space Marines is instead a symptom of GW trying to cater to the much greater player-base among Marines, and to keep at least some diversity in the game, without needing to publish excessive amounts Space Marine Codexes which may lead them down the slippery slope of ever-longer update-cycles.

...

Alternative .. say.. Eldar or Tau lists for example would, I would think, add nothing to the game as it would simply serve luxury-excess of options to the odd-out minority. I'd rather have GW push variety where it makes an impact.


Go over to a random GW-store or 40K-tournament/games-day/whatever, and you'll see 10 Space Wolves players for each Eldar player. What does that tell you? That there should be another 9 Codexes for perhaps White Scars, Space Sharks, SW 13 Company and Ragnars Great Company.

Generally I see about one player per book. One Codex: Blood Angels player, one Codex: Space Wolves player, one Codex: Ultramarines player (it isn't a Space Marine book, Matt Ward never intended for it to be the Space Marine book, let's just call it what it is, which is the Ultramarines Codex), and roughly one player for every other book. On days with tournaments, I might see some armies doubled up, but I rarely see a triple of one army without doubles of several others, and no shows of a few.

So, by your logic, if not your numbers which are, in the same manner as mine, anecdotal, we should see a new book for each of the Xenos races as well, being as how it will interest a new player. A Craftworld book would bring in a new eldar player, a Klan book would bring in a new Ork player, etc.

And why not? It follows the same logic as producing new Marine Codex. Ultramarines/Blood Angels works because the models can be used for either, therefore decreasing GW's investment into the model line for the new book. If a Codex: Bad Moons suddenly appeared, GW would have the same minimal investment into the model line. Produce a few extra boxes for Orks, roughly the same number that were produced for BA, and allow the Bad Moons to use the Ork models, and suddenly there's a whole "new" ("new" in the same way another Marine army is "new", as in the same old Marines, but with new specialists or more rules or characters or themes, but still essentially Marines) army for GW to milk.

However, that moves away from the position that I was attempting to support, which is that I believe that Marines could easily, fruitfully, and without any damage be compressed into one codex, if a slightly larger then normal one, and that then we could get on with supporting the rest of the game system. You know, the (obvious hyberbole, for people who don't catch it) one that has been sitting in the corner, crying like a 13 year old red-headed step child who has just been told that they were adopted back when their parents thought they couldn't have kids of their own, but that now that the parents have one on the way, the 13 year old is going to need to move to the basement or the attic so that there is room for the new, actually related child that is on the way to have space of their own to be nurtured and groomed, that same space that the 13 year old has been taking up, and to be honest we never really liked you anyways, since you obviously don't wear power armor, yell about how great the Emperor is, your primarch (who was ripped off from some story that was in no manner original or even rewritten very well) was, or how you have no fear. (end hyberbole)

AlphariusOmegon20
29-01-2011, 05:51
No, wrong. If there would be so many White Scars, Space Sharks and whatever armies, THEN it would tell me that there is a desire for these Codices.

There's one problem with this theory. With the sheer abundance of Sallie armies in the three years C:SM has existed in it's current form, Then why have we not heard of any development of a Codex: Salamanders?

With their popularity since C:SM came out, you'd think GW would have moved to make such a codex by now, based on your theory of Demand = Supply. But they haven't, thus invalidating that theory. Codex: Chaos Marine Legions would have also been produced by now, as well as a decently rewritten Chaos Marine Codex.

Again, those things have not surfaced. Thus your theory must have a flaw in it.

Please cite this flaw, if you can find it.

Dvora
29-01-2011, 05:56
a decently rewritten Chaos Marine Codex.


I wish..I wish..

Lothlanathorian
29-01-2011, 08:50
Ive seen alot of discussion in other threads from people wanting to see First founding space marine chapter codices..

Heres what i'd like to see form this idea:
All the chapters from the first founding having their own codex.. with special characters and rules from their successor chapters included in the codex:

Dark Angels
Known Descendants: Angels of Absolution, Angels of Redemption, Angels of Vengeance, Guardians of the Covenant, Consecrators, Disciples of Caliban

White Scars
Known Descendants: Marauders, Rampagers, Destroyers, Storm Lords

Space Wolves
Known Descendants: Wold Brothers also 13th company character

Imperial Fists
Known Descendants: Crimson Fists, Black Templars, Soul Drinkers, Iron Knights, Hammers of Dorn

Iron Hands
Known Descendants: Red Talons, Brazen Claws, Sons of Medusa

Blood Angels
Known Descendants: Angels Encarmine, Angels Sanguine, Angels Vermillion, Blood Drinkers, Exsanguinators, Flesh Eaters, Lamenters

Ultramarines
Known Descendants: Doom Eagles, Novamarines7, White Consuls, Black Consuls, Praetors of Orpheus7, Genesis Chapter, Aurora Chapter, Sons of Guilliman, Silver Skulls, Mortifactors, Howling Griffons

Raven Guard
Known Descendants: Black Guard, Revilers, Raptors

Salamanders

9 Codices and we already have 4 of them

What would other people like to see? ideas?


I was under the impression that these were Legions and not First Founding Chapters...

Dark Aly
29-01-2011, 09:25
There's one problem with this theory. With the sheer abundance of Sallie armies in the three years C:SM has existed in it's current form, Then why have we not heard of any development of a Codex: Salamanders?

With their popularity since C:SM came out, you'd think GW would have moved to make such a codex by now, based on your theory of Demand = Supply. But they haven't, thus invalidating that theory. Codex: Chaos Marine Legions would have also been produced by now, as well as a decently rewritten Chaos Marine Codex.

Again, those things have not surfaced. Thus your theory must have a flaw in it.

Please cite this flaw, if you can find it.

I think you may have missunderstood his point (or I did). He was arguing that the more powerful an army is = the more popular it is. since the current codex came out with Vulkan and his too good to be true rule sallies have been popluar, and the only reason a sallies codex (or any other) should be made if theres lots of people playing them without a powerful armylist (see all the other less comptetive marines often do you?). I see more homebrew chapters than any in C:SM only space pupies and BA come close, I've never seen an iron hands, white scars, lamenters, ultramarines, imperial fists, crimson fists, howling griffons, red scorpions, etc army on the field at all and so the demand for coexes (codecii, who cares?) for induvidual chapters seems slim in my area

I also don't think he intended this comment to be a view of how GW run their bussiness but a counter argument for the 'marines sell more because they're ace'.

The reason marines are so common is twofold;
1) everyone who plays these games is likely to have a slight superhero/villain fantasy and as genetically enhanced humans marines allow this.
2) GW have supported them above and beyond all other armies and so they have amazing models, nearly all plastic and current up to date rules (except chaos).

Hendarion
29-01-2011, 09:26
There's one problem with this theory. With the sheer abundance of Sallie armies in the three years C:SM has existed in it's current form, Then why have we not heard of any development of a Codex: Salamanders?

With their popularity since C:SM came out, you'd think GW would have moved to make such a codex by now, based on your theory of Demand = Supply. But they haven't, thus invalidating that theory. Codex: Chaos Marine Legions would have also been produced by now, as well as a decently rewritten Chaos Marine Codex.

Again, those things have not surfaced. Thus your theory must have a flaw in it.

Please cite this flaw, if you can find it.

You are trying to insert a statement into my saying which doesn't exist.
I said: "If there would be so many White Scars, Space Sharks and whatever armies, THEN it would tell me that there is a desire for these Codices."
That is NOT equal to: "If there would be desire, then GW would have made a book already". There is desire for AdMech, for Ork-Clans, for Exodiths, for Craftworlds and whatever else. Still they don't have a book!
The one making a flaw here is you, as you are assuming a statement in my saying that does not exist.
My theory: "There is no demand, else people would play Salamanders and White Scars already. They play BA and Wolves instead and even paint their armies like that. A real Salamanders or White Scars fan wouldn't paint his stuff red."
Your interpretation of my saying: "There is demand for Salamanders, so why isn't there a book?"
Both are NOT related to each other at all. In the contrary I don't see any desire for a Codex: White Scars. Neither for Codex: Salamanders. Yea, people started playing Salamanders AFTER there came out some super-duper-rules for them. But a fan who wants a Codex done for his army is playing that army without having a special Codex or would at least have played that army already before a Codex for it has existed (as for example I did with my Craftworld). The others who start a special chapter after a new Codex for those had been released, they only run after it because of some shiny new imba tools and troops.

A Codex should be made because of desire and an already existing hype.
A Codex should NOT be made to create a new hype.

AlphariusOmegon20
29-01-2011, 15:29
You are trying to insert a statement into my saying which doesn't exist.
I said: "If there would be so many White Scars, Space Sharks and whatever armies, THEN it would tell me that there is a desire for these Codices."
That is NOT equal to: "If there would be desire, then GW would have made a book already". There is desire for AdMech, for Ork-Clans, for Exodiths, for Craftworlds and whatever else. Still they don't have a book!
The one making a flaw here is you, as you are assuming a statement in my saying that does not exist.
My theory: "There is no demand, else people would play Salamanders and White Scars already. They play BA and Wolves instead and even paint their armies like that. A real Salamanders or White Scars fan wouldn't paint his stuff red."
Your interpretation of my saying: "There is demand for Salamanders, so why isn't there a book?"
Both are NOT related to each other at all. In the contrary I don't see any desire for a Codex: White Scars. Neither for Codex: Salamanders. Yea, people started playing Salamanders AFTER there came out some super-duper-rules for them. But a fan who wants a Codex done for his army is playing that army without having a special Codex or would at least have played that army already before a Codex for it has existed (as for example I did with my Craftworld). The others who start a special chapter after a new Codex for those had been released, they only run after it because of some shiny new imba tools and troops.

A Codex should be made because of desire and an already existing hype.
A Codex should NOT be made to create a new hype.

Then I misunderstood your post and I apologize for my mistake.

However, it does bring up the issue of why ISN'T there a Codex: Sallies and why GW doesn't listen to the demands of what people want.

Sallies merely needed development to be divergent enough from the Codex to rate their own Codex. This was accomplished in Codex: Armageddon so why the retcon? Instead we got BT as their own codex from that book and the Sallies got left out in the cold, even though they had existed since RT.

IMO, The original Chapters from RT should have had first shot at Codexes over BT. (Calm down people, I play BT as well as Sallies.) However, due to the Popularity of BT from Codex:Armageddon, they got their book. Now it has switched. So should Sallies get their own book now based on that precedence?

It does beg to question.

Charistoph
29-01-2011, 16:42
I was under the impression that these were Legions and not First Founding Chapters...

The First Founding was when the Legions were created. Second Founding is when the Loyalist Legions were split into chapters (Raven Guard and Space Wolves didn't fare too well, though).

Azzy
29-01-2011, 20:18
Ignoring all the "what sells better" and the "xenos vs. space marines" partisanship...

My opinion on the matter is: No. It's not needed and it wouldn't enhance the game. I'm fine with Ultramarines/Codex Chapters, Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves getting separate codices as they have since second edition. Grey Knights also get a pass because there's more to them than just being another chapter (and they had their own list back in Rogue Trader). I'll even grudgingly accept Black Templars (though that codex should never have existed) because that genie's already out of the bottle and there's no getting it back in. Yes, ideally I think that BA, DA and BT should be folded back into Codex: Space Marines, but it's just not going to happen. Ever.

That said we sure as hell don't need any more. Before 3rd edition's insidious Codex Astartes articles there was nothing in the rules that made Imperial Fists (or Black Templars, White Scars, etc) any different than Ultramarines other than special characters. There's definitely no need to change that. If GW does anything, it should just be to add more special characters (either in the next codex update or as WD/web upgrades).

At best, if GW were to add any new SM codices it should just be to slit Chaos Space Marines into two--Chaos Space Marines Legions and Chaos Space Marines Renegades. However, I'd like to avoid that, too.


But the Fluff side of me wants an individual Codex for every Tau Spet. For every Craftworld. For Every Imperial Guard Regiment. For Every Ork Clan (do they even still exist?)

Many of these I don't see as necessary or even desirable. But first, let me tackle my own army: Orks. Let there never be more than one Ork codex ever. I've said this in another thread, but I'll repeat.

* The Kult of Speed mini-dex was unnecessary--the option to run a KoS army should have been in the main dex (as it is now).

* The Feral Ork mini-dex also shouldn't existed--only a handful of those units (Boarboyz, Weirdboyz, Madboyz and maybe Squiggoths) should have existed and they should have been in the main dex (and everything else forgotten).

* The Ork Klan rules were absolute, fermented crap--and it didn't even keep with preexisting rules or fluff. In previous editions, it was quite clear that most Ork armies weren't pure this clan or that clan--they tended to be mixed. Sure, you could run an all-Goff army, but even the separate clan lists in RT allowed a Goff army (for example) to take boyz from other clans (in fact you'd have to if you wanted mekboys, painboyz, etc. and the other units that they unlocked). 2nd edition didn't even bother with separate lists as you could easily theme your army as before using the Ork codex. The current codex keeps that tradition (without much of the "this unit unlocks that unit" weirdness), thankfully, you can pretty much theme your as you wish. My only problems with the current codex is the lack of Boarboys (and Boars as mounts for characters), Weirdboyz/Warpheads are a bit disappointing, the lack of Madboyz (though I can understand to an extent) and a nice little (non-rules) subsection for theming your army around the clans, as freebooterz, etc. Other than that it's pretty golden IMO outside of some fiddly bits.

If GW were to split Orks into several codices it would simply fracture, dilute and ultimately limit Orkz as a whole. I don't want that for my army. An Ork codex needs to be a buffet of Orky goodness where you can take what you like to suit your own tastes and not be held down by some heavy-handed, rigid interpretation of the clans that doesn't even fit with the fluff.

Similar things can be said for some of the other xenos armies as well--there's nothing in the fluff that Tau Septs are radically different from each other (excepting Farsight's) that they warrant different codices. Even Farsight's enclave doesn't really have such a divergent structure that it needs anything more than the special character giving the army some special rules (as it already happens).

Eldar have more Craftworlds than what noted--a codex that allows you to theme your army to an existing Craftworld or your own invention is far better than having a codex for each. Heck, in 2nd edition the Eldar codex also covered Exodite units as well.

And, yes, the same could be done with the existing SM chapters... But like I said, you stand no chance of putting that genie back in the bottle--thinking otherwise is deluded wishlisting at best. The best thing to do at this point is to not exacerbate the situation with more SM codices and to not emulate it with the xenos codices. If GW wants to add another faction, it should be by creating a new one and not splintering one of the existing ones. But better that they should fully support the armies that already exist before trying to expand.

ForgottenLore
29-01-2011, 20:32
Well said Azzy, well said.

I basically agree with you but I like engaging in theoretical discussions even when there is no chance of anything coming of it.

dragonet111
29-01-2011, 20:35
The Fluff side of me would love to see all the Marine first 20 elaborated upon. Including the ones that fell to Chaos.
But the Fluff side of me wants an individual Codex for every Tau Spet. For every Craftworld. For Every Imperial Guard Regiment. For Every Ork Clan (do they even still exist?)

I would like to see PDF army lists for every armies, easy to update and easy to release.
For the Fluff I would like Black Library background books like the Battles for Armageddon, Tactica Imperialis, ....

AndrewGPaul
29-01-2011, 20:52
I was under the impression that these were Legions and not First Founding Chapters...


They're the Chapters created during the First Founding. Yes, at the time the were Legions, but now they're not. "First Founding Chapters" is a perfectly accurate description.

TheMav80
29-01-2011, 21:23
@Azzy

I somewhat agree with you (though I still think Chapter Approved type things would be cool).

At the same time, the idea that there are not enough differences between Septs or Klans or whatever doesn't really matter. The Space Marine chapters became more and more divergent just to justify a new codex. Originally they were not so different. The same could be done for other armies.

Not that I think they should. Just saying.

Charistoph
29-01-2011, 23:42
One could say the same for most of the Marine chapters, too. After all, Blood Angels were listed by Traits in the 4th Ed codex before their White Dwarf/PDF came out.

Vaktathi
29-01-2011, 23:52
One could say the same for most of the Marine chapters, too. After all, Blood Angels were listed by Traits in the 4th Ed codex before their White Dwarf/PDF came out.

I believe you are thinking of the Blood *Ravens*.

Garven Dreis
30-01-2011, 00:03
What I wouldn't mind is an updated Index Astartes. That way we can have all of our Space Marine/Traitor Legion rules with sick background AND limit the 'amount' of Marine codexes, which would definitely make me happy if I could take my Warsmith with a Servo-Arm.

Lothlanathorian
30-01-2011, 01:50
They're the Chapters created during the First Founding. Yes, at the time the were Legions, but now they're not. "First Founding Chapters" is a perfectly accurate description.

Ah, didn't look at it this way. Makes more sense, but, at the same time, all the Chapters they were split into would also be First Founding.

I wouldn't mind seeing all the Chapters who were Legions get a Codex and have it include their successors. At the same time, however, I'd also like variant rules for Tau Septs, Eldar Craftworlds, Kroot Merc forces, Ork Klans, etc. I support variety as it is the spice of life and, as we are all very well aware, the spice must flow.

Charistoph
30-01-2011, 02:43
I believe you are thinking of the Blood *Ravens*.

No, I was thinking of Blood Angels, I just remembered incorrectly that the Angels weren't also on there. With the exception of the Rage, the 4th Edition Traits system easily could have incorporated their style, though.


Ah, didn't look at it this way. Makes more sense, but, at the same time, all the Chapters they were split into would also be First Founding.

When the Legions were split into chapters is the official Second Founding, not the First. The First Founding was overseen by the Emperor. The Second Founding was over seen by Roboute Guilliman and the High Lords of Terra. Subsequent foundings were overseen and implemented by just the High Lords of Terra.

Azzy
30-01-2011, 03:12
I basically agree with you but I like engaging in theoretical discussions even when there is no chance of anything coming of it.

Ah. In that case, carry on... Carry on. ;)


At the same time, the idea that there are not enough differences between Septs or Klans or whatever doesn't really matter. The Space Marine chapters became more and more divergent just to justify a new codex. Originally they were not so different.

Agreed. I've been picking up 2nd ed and RT books when I can find them cheap (I started off in 3rd ed), and I was quite surprised when I saw the Angel of Death codex... no Baal Predators, no "Furioso" Dread (the BA Dread had the same options as standard Codex Marines) and Sanguinary Priests were nothing more than Apothecaries. 3rd ed apparently went way over the top in changing the way many armies included, worked and behaved.

AlexHolker
30-01-2011, 11:11
3rd ed apparently went way over the top in changing the way many armies included, worked and behaved.
The worst thing about 3rd edition Blood Angels, in my opinion, was that it encouraged min-maxing to make as many of your soldiers fall to the Black Rage as you can. It's not supposed to be a good thing, guys.

AndrewGPaul
30-01-2011, 11:20
Agreed. I've been picking up 2nd ed and RT books when I can find them cheap (I started off in 3rd ed), and I was quite surprised when I saw the Angel of Death codex... no Baal Predators, no "Furioso" Dread (the BA Dread had the same options as standard Codex Marines) and Sanguinary Priests were nothing more than Apothecaries. 3rd ed apparently went way over the top in changing the way many armies included, worked and behaved.

The Blood Angels and Dark Angels appear to have got Codex: Angels of Death to themselves instead of sharing with the Ultramarines so they had enough space for the Background, not so they could fill it with silly rules.

"Furioso" was just the name of the studio's Blood Angel dreadnought.

Asensur
30-01-2011, 12:12
I think that currently GW should convert the 16 codexes into 10, by missing all space marine chapters into one, mixing all inquisition factions into one, and mixing all chaos factions into one.

The same applies to WHF, mixing together all 3 chaos codexes, the 2 undead factions, and maybe bretonnia with empire. So they get 10 army books aswell.

Of course, every codex/army book getting its special rules and restrictions for each sub-faction.

SamaNagol
30-01-2011, 12:15
Those books would be prohibitively expensive to print due to needing over 150pages

Lothlanathorian
30-01-2011, 12:36
N
When the Legions were split into chapters is the official Second Founding, not the First. The First Founding was overseen by the Emperor. The Second Founding was over seen by Roboute Guilliman and the High Lords of Terra. Subsequent foundings were overseen and implemented by just the High Lords of Terra.

Was it? I've heard it referred to as both and, well, I just plain couldn't remember and had thought that it was the First when they were split. Old Gamer Memory. It gets us all in the end.

Well, glad to have it cleared up and I'll remember better in the future. Unless I forget.

AndrewGPaul
30-01-2011, 12:38
Apocalypse is 200 pages, and costs thirty quid. Prohibitive? I don't think so.

The problem would be making this change now. If they'd gone down that route from the beginning, I don't think anyone would mind. Doing it now, however, means people would get upset at losing this or that special rule, or feeling that GW "don't care about their army".


Well, glad to have it cleared up and I'll remember better in the future. Unless I forget.

It's OK; some irritating pedant like myself will be sure to leap up and correct you. :)

SamaNagol
30-01-2011, 13:00
30 for a codex is absolutely ludicrous.

AlexHolker
30-01-2011, 13:06
30 for a codex is absolutely ludicrous.
Especially if 2/3rds of it is more Space Marines.

Lothlanathorian
30-01-2011, 15:05
Codex prices as they are right now are absolutely ridiculous. Also, I am not quite sure what the conversion rate is from 30 British Monies to American Monies. Why I do know is that the Eldar Codex is $29 retail and I remember it being closer to $20 when it came out, if even that much.

So, if GW were to make Super Codices, none of us would be able to afford them, so I vote no, because I'd like to be able to buy the book I need to play :D

Inquisitor Gabriel Ashe
30-01-2011, 15:32
Last time I ordered from Forge World, it was roughly 1 GBP = 1.50 USD. It fluctuates quite a bit, though.

AFnord
30-01-2011, 15:53
Full fledges books codexes? No, I would not like to see that, as it would mean that it would be an even longer wait for all other armies, and I would really like to see more orks, guards, eldar, nids, necrons, SOBs, tau & chaos daemons and any other none MEQ army that I might have forgotten on the battlefield. I don't dislike marines, not at all, but variety is the spice of life.

What I would like to see is all basic marines being re-merged into one big "codex marines" book, and then see a steady stream of mini 'dexes for all armies, which focuses on specific factions, but require the core book to work. And unlike the 3rd edition mini-dexes, I would love to see them well balanced this time around (I'm looking at you, Blood angels, space wolves & craftworld eldar, you cheesy buggers).

AndrewGPaul
30-01-2011, 16:00
Especially if 2/3rds of it is more Space Marines.

Er, it'd be all Space Marines. As I understood it, Asensur's suggestion was that there'd be Codex: Space Marines covering all the Chapters, Codex: Chaos Space Marines covering all the traitor legions, Codex: Inquisition covering the three Ordos (and presumably the Deathwatch, Grey Knights and Sisters of Battle) and then all the existing other books. The only really expensive book would be Codex: Space Marines due to having to include the background and gallery sections from five existing books.

30 for a 200-page book? That's not bad. Better value than the Forces of Warmachine books from Privateer Press, at any rate. :)

However, I think we may be concentrating too much on the details. I only used Apocalypse as an example that making a book with more than 150 pages (actually, more than 144, given the way the things are printed) isn't "prohibitively expensive". At least, not from my point of view. You could probably cut down the page count be reducing the amount of fluff on each Chapter - no need to include the complete background sections from all the existing codexes. :)

AlexHolker
30-01-2011, 16:10
Er, it'd be all Space Marines.
Not if you're a Sisters player, who would then be stuck in a book with two Space Marine factions.

AndrewGPaul
30-01-2011, 16:19
Actually what, half a dozen unit entries? The suggestion to do a Codex: Inquisition makes sense if the armies were to stay as they are now - Inquisitorial armies using Grey Knights or Sisters as the muscle. If they're going to be proper Sisters of Battle or Grey Knights armies, with possible Inquisition support, then I agree, separate books makes more sense.

Perhaps a Codex: Imperial Agents would be more useful - hive off things like Inquisitors, Adeptus Arbites, Assassins and possibly Deathwatch into one little book, and let them act as allies to any other Imperial army. In fact, while we're at it, stick the Legion of the Damned in there, too.

Yes, I understand GW are trying to get away from the Allies concept, but if we're talking about shaking up the "Codex for everyone!" paradigm, that's not really relevant any more. :)

Actually, I'll spell out what I'd like to see:

One big Codex: Space Marines, with differences between Chapters limited to tweaks to the Force Org chart, differing unit upgrades, a Chapter Tactics rule, a special unit where necessary (only the Death Company and Black Templar mixed tactical squads spring to mind, so far) and special characters.

Codex: Imperial Guard. Expanded details on the different regiments. It's only to be expected that Catachan and Cadian regiments would be the main focus (with possibly lesser focus on Elysian, Krieg and Tallarn regiments), but something similar to the Space Marine chapters above would be nice - a special character and perhaps a special Order for each regiment. You could even cover renegade forces in here - or at least give ideas on the sort of units that would be more common.

Codex: Sisters of Battle. Pretty much as it was in 2nd edition and as it's expected to be in 5th; Battle sisters with possibly a smattering of other Ecclesiarchy units.

Codex: Grey Knights. I'm in two minds over this. In one way, they could be integrated into Codex: Space Marines, in another I can see how they could deserve a book to themselves, especially if they've got more Inquisitorial units (in which case, call the book Codex: Ordo Malleus). If it includes things like Inquisitorial Storm Troopers, consider how to preserve 'version control' between this book and Codex: Imperial Guard.

Codex: Imperial Agents. Basically, everything else. Possibly this could be a series of website articles, depending on what ends up in the other Imperial books.

Codex: Orks. Include background on the six clans and Freebooterz, to the same level as Codex: Space Marines.

Codex: Eldar. Again, cover the different Craftworlds. I'd be open to arguments that you could combine the Craftworld and Dark Eldar into one book (and chuck in the Harlequins, while we're at it), but I can see the other point of view.

Codex: Dark Eldar. The same "version control" argument applies here, except with Harlequins compared to the Craftworld list.

Codex: Tau. There's probably scope for including tweaks to the army lists for things like the Farsight Enclave, and of course Kroot mercenaries.

Codex: Tyranids.

Codex: Chaos Space Marines. Basically, see the comments above for Codex: Space Marines, except with more spikes and tentacles.

Codex: Chaos Daemons. Include options for allying with Chaos Marines.

Now, this is all off the top of my head, with no great thought to it, and it's what I'd like to see. Not necessarily what will work. :)

My ... dream, if you'd like is to convince players that an army can be distinctive because of the background, the way it's painted and the way you choose to play it on the table, not just because of the latest and greatest special rule.

I'd also like to see more stuff on the website - army list variants - for instance a web article on using Codex: Imperial Guard and Codex: Tyranids to make a Genestealer Cult army.

Vaktathi
30-01-2011, 17:59
Codex prices as they are right now are absolutely ridiculous. Also, I am not quite sure what the conversion rate is from 30 British Monies to American Monies. Why I do know is that the Eldar Codex is $29 retail and I remember it being closer to $20 when it came out, if even that much.

So, if GW were to make Super Codices, none of us would be able to afford them, so I vote no, because I'd like to be able to buy the book I need to play :D

It wouldn't be worse than other games. Flames of War has some army list books that are $50 (though you get like two dozen army lists for like 5 nations), and RPG books often go for $35-50 each.

Though that said, such books are typically hardcover also :p

Inquisitor Gabriel Ashe
30-01-2011, 18:04
Uh, most of us would be able to afford them.

AlexHolker
30-01-2011, 19:18
My ... dream, if you'd like is to convince players that an army can be distinctive because of the background...
The background or lack thereof is the main reason I am opposed to a combined =][= codex. Neither of the previous Sisters codices has covered much other than a general overview of the Age of Apostasy and a brief background of a handful of special characters. Shove them in with the Space Marines, and that's unlikely to get any better.

AndrewGPaul
30-01-2011, 23:52
Halfway through my post I think I convinced myself of that argument. :)

Nazguire
31-01-2011, 05:23
I don't think it is. Power always has attracted people. And there is no army with these pimp-stats, pimp-weapons, pimp point costs, pimp vehicles and so few drawbacks as Space Marines. Tell me a single drawback of Space Marines. I can't think of any, except maybe they lack cheap sucking horde units.

In 3rd edition it used to be 'Jack of All Trades, Master of None'. Not so much any more.

And I think that they still are that, unless you specialise your list. Which leaves you weak in many other areas.

Space Wolves/Blood Angels are a different story however.

I can't think of any unit in the entire codex that's AMAZINGLY GOOD at one thing. I'm taking points cost into consideration too.

Gingerwerewolf
31-01-2011, 13:06
Make Space Marines 22 points each, drop their armour save to 4+ and toughness to 3 and watch sales of Space Marines going down. Trust me, that is exactly why I am not collecting Sisters of Battle or Necrons. I do not love their models hard enough (as I do with Eldar-designs) to look over all their problems and still buy them. They are interesting to me, but I'm not going to waste money on an army I like (instead of love) but which can't be played the way it should be playable.

And they would still sell more Space Marines than Eldar or any other race. Because they are the Posterchild.

All the quotes you took from my Post, you pointed out flaws and asked me if Id read the BA and SW codex. Yep I have and do not consider them overpowered because they cost more points.

Just because Ive dont it recently, I managed to get a 100 point difference in a 1500 point army that was designed in Blood Angels in comparison to the identicle Codex Space Marine Army. BA are more expensive.

Having a basic codex with Chapter addon mini codecies was done back in 3rd edition and it was the worst thing they have ever done. Everything was bland. I hope and pray they dont go back to that again

Gingerwerewolf
31-01-2011, 13:09
The Blood Angels and Dark Angels appear to have got Codex: Angels of Death to themselves instead of sharing with the Ultramarines so they had enough space for the Background, not so they could fill it with silly rules.

"Furioso" was just the name of the studio's Blood Angel dreadnought.

Yep all of that is spot on.

I also remember collecting a Blood Angels force because my mate Stuart collected the Dark Angels. It was a brilliant codex and was the first that brought in the idea of a Flawed but nible chapter.

Hendarion
31-01-2011, 13:19
All the quotes you took from my Post, you pointed out flaws and asked me if Id read the BA and SW codex. Yep I have and do not consider them overpowered because they cost more points.
The two sentence contradict each other. Wolves cost less (15pts) than a normal Marine (16pts) and yet they can do more.

Godzooky
31-01-2011, 13:22
The two sentence contradict each other. Wolves cost less (15pts) than a normal Marine (16pts) and yet they can do more.

Hendarion: the Scrappy Doo of Warseer.

Don't start it, because he'll finish it. :p

Wishing
31-01-2011, 13:52
Haven't read the whole thread, but I think the main flaw in the "Marines should get a single book, not several books" argument is GW's need to keep a well-paced release schedule. Gamers want one complete marine book that contains everything you need to play marines because it would make their gaming experience better. GW does not want this, because if they did this, then they would sell lots of copies of that one book, but then wouldn't have any more marine books to produce until they revise that book or make a new edition of the game.

Like it or not, GW are devoted to the business practice that marines sell better than their other armies and thus are a cash cow that needs regular milking. If you milk all of the milk out of the cow in one go, you will have a dry period afterwards during which there will be no new milk. As people get excited about new milk, a lack of such will make people grow bored and start drifting off to other game systems that have new and different flavours of fresh new milk. So the people that really wanted lots of the old milk in one go are happy, but milk sales overall drop and GW goes out of business.

Godzooky
31-01-2011, 13:56
Haven't read the whole thread, but I think the main flaw in the "Marines should get a single book, not several books" argument is GW's need to keep a well-paced release schedule. Gamers want one complete marine book that contains everything you need to play marines because it would make their gaming experience better. GW does not want this, because if they did this, then they would sell lots of copies of that one book, but then wouldn't have any more marine books to produce until they revise that book or make a new edition of the game.

Like it or not, GW are devoted to the business practice that marines sell better than their other armies and thus are a cash cow that needs regular milking. If you milk all of the milk out of the cow in one go, you will have a dry period afterwards during which there will be no new milk. As people get excited about new milk, a lack of such will make people grow bored and start drifting off to other game systems that have new and different flavours of fresh new milk. So the people that really wanted lots of the old milk in one go are happy, but milk sales overall drop and GW goes out of business.

An extremely elegant explanation, but stop saying milk!!! :D

Captain Semper
31-01-2011, 13:59
My ... dream, if you'd like is to convince players that an army can be distinctive because of the background, the way it's painted and the way you choose to play it on the table, not just because of the latest and greatest special rule.

I'd also like to see more stuff on the website - army list variants - for instance a web article on using Codex: Imperial Guard and Codex: Tyranids to make a Genestealer Cult army.

Fully agree. Less is more... If only subtle changes existed between the rules of the verious chapters it would push people to choose a chapter based on background/modelling rather than rules. And as long as GW would produce chapter-specific stuff the interest for SM will remain high.

Bunnahabhain
31-01-2011, 14:05
Haven't read the whole thread, but I think the main flaw in the "Marines should get a single book, not several books" argument is GW's need to keep a well-paced release schedule

Do they?

Surely they need to keep a reasonable sales volume up, and how they achieve that is neither here not there. GW exist to sell models, and the rules are a way to do it.

A decent marine book covering all the chapters can be done. White dwarf has a chapter of the month feature, with background, paint schemes, conversions, maybe a battle report. You release occasional add on kits for them- i.e. a bionics/Iron hands upgrade sprue...

You do something like that, and you can keep up the promotion of marines without the endless codices. If the book is any good, then surely the iconic imagery of them, extensive plastic model support, endless black library books and inclusion in the starter set will be enough to keep them selling.

AndrewGPaul
31-01-2011, 14:11
In addition, White Dwarf could do something like Battlefront's sourcebook release pattern, on a smaller scale. Pick an army - Marines or otherwise - then do a special army list based on a specific event. Say the Crimson Fists at some point during the Rynn's World campaign, Iyanden Eldar during the defense of their craftworld, the Sisters of Battle at Sanctuary 101, that sort of thing. Provide a tweaked army list concentrating on the forces present (some restrictions to the FOC, a minor special character, a special rule to compensate for the force restrictions, that sort of thing. That way, you can push Space Marines and blue paint, or Eldar and yellow paint, or Sisters of Battle and black paint for a month. If the special lists are designed so that an army built using them is still legal under the main Codex, there's no problem, IMO.

Wishing
31-01-2011, 14:15
You do something like that, and you can keep up the promotion of marines without the endless codices. If the book is any good, then surely the iconic imagery of them, extensive plastic model support, endless black library books and inclusion in the starter set will be enough to keep them selling.

I'm sure they would keep selling, but not as well as they sell when there are regular new books with new rules and models to get people excited about the "next big thing", along with the other factors you mention. Keep in mind that the goal of GW isn't to make players happy - it is to make them hungry to buy more.

Wishing
31-01-2011, 14:20
In addition, White Dwarf could do something like Battlefront's sourcebook release pattern, on a smaller scale. Pick an army - Marines or otherwise - then do a special army list based on a specific event. Say the Crimson Fists at some point during the Rynn's World campaign, Iyanden Eldar during the defense of their craftworld, the Sisters of Battle at Sanctuary 101, that sort of thing. Provide a tweaked army list concentrating on the forces present (some restrictions to the FOC, a minor special character, a special rule to compensate for the force restrictions, that sort of thing. That way, you can push Space Marines and blue paint, or Eldar and yellow paint, or Sisters of Battle and black paint for a month. If the special lists are designed so that an army built using them is still legal under the main Codex, there's no problem, IMO.

Like PP's campaigns and campaign specific model rules? I agree that this is a good way of keeping things fresh and generating some excitement. However, nothing beats actual army book releases with new overpowered models for generating sales, which comes with an illusion that "this is essential and the last thing you ever need to buy!". Until the next big thing, of course.

omegoku
31-01-2011, 14:23
Less Codex means each one should get updated more often, at least in theory
I think
Codex : Tyranids
Codex : Tau Empire
Codex : Orks
Codex : Eldar
Codex : Dark Eldar
Codex : Sisters of Battle
Codex : Grey Knights
Codex : Imperial Guard
Codex : Space Marines
Codex : Chaos

would be enough.
BA, SW, BT etc could be rolled back in using a combo of unique characters, unique units and a more robust traits/divergence system. Make sure that every advantage is linked to an actual disadvantage.

Something like
Generic Captain
Can be given one trait for X points
A second for X+Y points
Lots of funky and fun equipment from power swords, to digi lasers to servo harness

Unique Captain for each Chapter of Renown
Ultramarines, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Iron Hands, Black Templar, etc
Each can use a trait from above.

Now A Blood Angel player has the choice, use the BA named captain or the Generic Captain who can be equipped and given traits to become a BA.

traits are selected for army wide use and all units in a FoC must take the same one.

Example: Blood Angels would have
Red Thirst : Every unit within 18" of a combat must pass a Ld test at the start of the movement phase. If they fail they gain the Rage and Furious Charge USRs.
Assault Specialists : Assault Marines are troops
Overcharged Engines : Any rhino chassis tank in the unit must take overcharged engines for X points, overcharged engines make the vehicle fast but they take +1 on vehicle damage chart
Unique Units : Mephiston, Dante, Tycho, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard

AndrewGPaul
31-01-2011, 14:39
Personally, I feel that example list of Blood Angels rules is far too long. I'd like:

Unique unit: Death Company - WS5 BS3, Fearless instead of And They Shall Know No Fear, existing equipment options.

Special Characters - the existing characters, possibly also Sergeant or Captain Lorenzo.

Rules: Assault Specialists, as above. Possibly also something allowing them to choose to go first, or re-roll or gain a bonus to the roll.

The rest? Nah. There wasn't much in the Blood Angels' background to justify the Red Thirst rules, other than what was written to explain it retrospectively.

Perhaps Overcharged Engines could be optional, but I don't think they need to be mandatory.Certainly not for Whirlwinds and Vindicators.

Sanguinary Guard are basically Vanguard Veterans with a fancy Power Weapon. Count them as armed with boltgun, bolt pistol and Master-Crafted power weapon and be done with it.

Bear in mind, with the above, that I don't think every last detail of the backghround needs to be explained with rules. Some cool-looking models are enough to make the Blood Angels distinct from Ultramarines, IMO.

Captain Semper
31-01-2011, 14:52
The benefit of having one SM Super codex is that the creative power of GW will be diverted to a) more frequent updates to all codices and b) the introduction of new races - the latter is by far the most exciting part as it will serve the expansion of the Universe. Furthermore when they get around to update the super codex, all SM players will be serviced instead of having several gears. Currently DA seem to be left behind but BA and SW also waited for ever to get their updates. In the mean time they had to look with envy to Codex chapters or adopt the generic SM Codex as their list became obsolete...

Bonzai
31-01-2011, 15:15
Haven't read the whole thread, but I think the main flaw in the "Marines should get a single book, not several books" argument is GW's need to keep a well-paced release schedule. Gamers want one complete marine book that contains everything you need to play marines because it would make their gaming experience better. GW does not want this, because if they did this, then they would sell lots of copies of that one book, but then wouldn't have any more marine books to produce until they revise that book or make a new edition of the game.

Like it or not, GW are devoted to the business practice that marines sell better than their other armies and thus are a cash cow that needs regular milking. If you milk all of the milk out of the cow in one go, you will have a dry period afterwards during which there will be no new milk. As people get excited about new milk, a lack of such will make people grow bored and start drifting off to other game systems that have new and different flavours of fresh new milk. So the people that really wanted lots of the old milk in one go are happy, but milk sales overall drop and GW goes out of business.

I would say that there are enough armies and potential products out there, that they wouldn't have to worry about running out of release material. The other races, second, third wave releases, expansions, campaigns, etc.. Hopefully they DE taught them that Xeno's can sell too.

Wishing
31-01-2011, 23:09
I would say that there are enough armies and potential products out there, that they wouldn't have to worry about running out of release material. The other races, second, third wave releases, expansions, campaigns, etc.. Hopefully they DE taught them that Xeno's can sell too.

My guess is that since GW have the actual sales figures in hand and they choose to have half the codex releases be marines, there is a reason for it. My guess as to what that reason is is that if we took umegoku's release schedule above, it would look like this:

Codex : Tyranids - OK sales
Codex : Tau Empire - OK sales
Codex : Orks - OK sales
Codex : Eldar - OK sales
Codex : Dark Eldar - OK sales
Codex : Sisters of Battle - OK sales
Codex : Grey Knights - Nice sales!
Codex : Imperial Guard - OK sales
Codex : Space Marines - Great sales! Kaching!
Codex : Chaos - OK sales
*New Edition, start over*

Hence why GW would rather have a release schedule that looks like this:

Codex : Tyranids - OK sales
Codex : Blood Angels - Kaching!
Codex : Tau Empire - OK sales
Codex : Black Templars - Kaching!
Codex : Orks - OK sales
Codex : Space Wolves - Kaching!
Codex : Eldar - OK sales
*etc.*

Which they currently do. The main reason that every codex release isn't marines is, I think, that it would alienate too many players who have other armies, so they keep the non-marine sellers around mainly to keep the older player base from revolting too badly, which would cost them more money than they would make by switching entirely to all-marine releases.

So it's not that they would run out of material if they reduced marines to one book... there is always more material. The question is what material sells.

Vaktathi
31-01-2011, 23:26
This is assuming each variant marine list is more popular than non-marine factions. I don't think the case could be made that there are as many Dark Angels or Space Wolves players (even with the recent bandwagoning) as there are Ork or Eldar or Imperial Guard players. I don't doubt that there are more aggregate SM players than anything else, but it's also hard to see each variant being so much more popular than every non-SM faction. With that in mind, it sorta undercuts that whole theory (hence no bigger "ka-ching" with each variant book than most other releases), especially as there's a tendency for SM armies to cannibalize sales from each other.

Wishing
31-01-2011, 23:37
This is assuming each variant marine list is more popular than non-marine factions. I don't think the case could be made that there are as many Dark Angels or Space Wolves players (even with the recent bandwagoning) as there are Ork or Eldar or Imperial Guard players. I don't doubt that there are more aggregate SM players than anything else, but it's also hard to see each variant being so much more popular than every non-SM faction. With that in mind, it sorta undercuts that whole theory (hence no bigger "ka-ching" with each variant book than most other releases), especially as there's a tendency for SM armies to cannibalize sales from each other.

It is absolutely assuming that. I'm basing the tables above on the fact that if there was in fact no more ka-ching on marine chapter codexes than on any other army codexes, then they would release more other army codexes and less marine codexes. I can't see any other reason for them to have a release schedule like they do than marine-anything codexes being top sellers compared to any other type of codex.

Vaktathi
31-01-2011, 23:45
There's many non-financial related reasons for why they do what they do ("they've always had a codex so we'll keep making one", variation, developer pet projects, sacred cows, create hype for other lines, etc), not all of them necessarily the greatest from a business perspective or done strictly for financial reasons, and GW is not by any means the embodiment of business excellence, though better than often given credit for admittedly.

I can tell you having worked in large organizations with varied product releases that quite often releases are not done in accordance with revenue generation.


I'd be highly surprised if the 2009 IG release was any less of a revenue generator than the 2009 SW or 2010 BA releases.

AlexHolker
01-02-2011, 00:13
My guess is that since GW have the actual sales figures in hand...
This is my biggest complaint about GW: they do this despite not having relevant sales figures. They have never even produced some things, so they sure as hell don't have the sales figures to show they'd be less profitable than yet another Space Marine Dreadnought.

ForgottenLore
01-02-2011, 03:52
It is absolutely assuming that. I'm basing the tables above on the fact that if there was in fact no more ka-ching on marine chapter codexes than on any other army codexes, then they would release more other army codexes and less marine codexes. I can't see any other reason for them to have a release schedule like they do than marine-anything codexes being top sellers compared to any other type of codex.

So your reasoning is that they produce more marine codexes becasue they sell better and I know the sell better because they are producing more of them?

Wishing
01-02-2011, 09:18
So your reasoning is that they produce more marine codexes becasue they sell better and I know the sell better because they are producing more of them?

Sort of, yeah, except that I'm guessing rather than stating. All we know is that they produce more marine codexes than other types of codexes. We don't know why, but they've been doing it for some years now. My guess is that the reason they are doing so is that it is more profitable for them than producing more non-marine codexes instead.


This is my biggest complaint about GW: they do this despite not having relevant sales figures. They have never even produced some things, so they sure as hell don't have the sales figures to show they'd be less profitable than yet another Space Marine Dreadnought.

Obviously they can't know how well things they haven't produced yet would sell. However, they can look at the history and general trends of how much money they make overall during different periods of codex releases. If they've made 20% more revenue during marine chapter codex months than in guard, eldar, ork etc. codex months, then they can base some conclusions on that.


There's many non-financial related reasons for why they do what they do ("they've always had a codex so we'll keep making one", variation, developer pet projects, sacred cows, create hype for other lines, etc), not all of them necessarily the greatest from a business perspective or done strictly for financial reasons, and GW is not by any means the embodiment of business excellence, though better than often given credit for admittedly.

I can tell you having worked in large organizations with varied product releases that quite often releases are not done in accordance with revenue generation.

I'd be highly surprised if the 2009 IG release was any less of a revenue generator than the 2009 SW or 2010 BA releases.

Interesting, I'd like to hear more on your thoughts about non-finance based reasons for marine saturation. I guess I assume that the abundance on marine codexes are based strictly on revenue because I can't see any other realistic reasons myself, "GW are idiots" doesn't quite cut it for me. I'm sure that when the first marine chapter codex (space wolves, right?) was made, it was because of developer love alone, but I can't see that they would move on to put so much emphasis on a practice that is so damaging to the variety and integrity of the gaming scene if it wasn't a big financial success.

Also it's worth keeping in mind that as previously pointed out, it isn't just about sales, but also about investment. The new Dark Eldar might be selling well, but it also cost GW a lot more money to get them out there than it would have to make a Salamander codex instead, which would only have required an upgrade sprue and a selection of characters.

Poseidal
01-02-2011, 10:03
Overall, while Marines sell the most I think what they are seeing is diminishing returns for what they add.

More anecdotally, I've never actually played against (or even seen anyone) play a variant Marine Chapter locally, with the exception of a single Dark Angels player eight years ago.

Vaktathi
01-02-2011, 20:43
Interesting, I'd like to hear more on your thoughts about non-finance based reasons for marine saturation. I guess I assume that the abundance on marine codexes are based strictly on revenue because I can't see any other realistic reasons myself, "GW are idiots" doesn't quite cut it for me. I'm sure that when the first marine chapter codex (space wolves, right?) was made, it was because of developer love alone, but I can't see that they would move on to put so much emphasis on a practice that is so damaging to the variety and integrity of the gaming scene if it wasn't a big financial success. Well, in all honesty, organizations quite often do things just because someone wants to, not necessarily because there is a market demand for it or a financial need. Sometimes it's just because someone in upper management wants something just because they want it. I worked on a project where a senior VP wanted a huge number of documents dating back to the 1970's digitized (most of which nobody had looked at in 20 or even 30+ years and would never look at again), but could provide no real good business reasoning for it other than "he wanted it", there was nothing showing that the investment would net any realizeable return, but it was enough that the VP wanted it, so it got done at huge expense. It's never really done anything, but continues to be funded and maintained. I can't think of an organization that hasn't done something like this.

I imagine the early marine codex variants were done to build enthusiasm and sales, but it's also just as likely they were simply pet projects, especially as the Ultramarines weren't quite the universal "standard" they are now when Codex: Space Wolves (the first stand alone 40k Codex) was released. However it's entirely possible that their continuation as distinct codecies is completely out of tradition or inertia, rather than any direct financial feedback, or just an effort to keep continuous marketing buzz for SM's in general around (which has its own pluses and minuses). Once done, it's hard to undo, or want to undo even if financial incentive exists unfortunately.

No company is immune to these things, and a company that's inherently based around a hobby and pet projects, and the emotional investment in an army, is probably more susceptible than others.



Also it's worth keeping in mind that as previously pointed out, it isn't just about sales, but also about investment. The new Dark Eldar might be selling well, but it also cost GW a lot more money to get them out there than it would have to make a Salamander codex instead, which would only have required an upgrade sprue and a selection of characters.I agree that's an aspect, but in the case of say a Salamanders dex, you are essentially dumping six digits of financies into a couple plastic sprues and plus more for books and development, and it's very possible the result is simply cannibalized sales from C:SM, which I think may be very true of other current SM armies. For a legal army, it's probably not even necessary to buy any of the new Sallies specific models, or even any new models at all, just a book and maybe some paints to redo ones existing SM models. With DE, people are having to buy huge numbers new models that aren't just being carried over from an existing army.



Unfortunately none of us have access to GW's detailed sales figures, all I can go off of is my impressions and experiences and make judgements based off of that, so all of this is pure conjecture. Perhaps my gaming experiences aren't indicative of the greater metagame and there are in fact more Dark Angel players than Eldar, or Space Wolves than Orks, and that there are more Blood Angels players than WHFB players, but from what I can tell, I don't have any reason to think of these things as being true.

EDIT: whoa that ended up being way longer than I thought :p

Wishing
01-02-2011, 21:49
Great to read your viewpoint though! You may be right that GW are just doing it this way just because just because they want to, even if it isn't a proven financial winner, it just seems odd to me that they would create such an imbalance of army types in 40k, when they seem to have great balance in games like BFG and epic, if it's not because it represents a much needed boost in revenue.

GrogDaTyrant
01-02-2011, 23:54
On the topic of a company 'doing things because it wants to', I can assure you that such a thing also happens with state-run projects and civil engineering companies. And that's something I see first-hand. Complete redesign, demolition, and reconstruction of a major arterial or intersection, simply because 'we can, and have the money to do so'. The same is also true with private projects... unfortunately. Much along the same example as Vaktathi pointed out, I've seen time and money wasted on completely unnecessary things simply because the owner, project manager, or client 'wants it'.

Therefore I have to agree with Vaktathi about much of the marine-spam being due to pet-project or 'personal desire'. While I don't doubt that loyalist marines as a whole are the highest gross sellers, I think much of that is simply due to their constant place in starter-sets, and the company pushing them so hard on newcomers (or even veterans, for that matter). New sub-variant releases may not cost as much as a full faction face-lift (i.e. the Dark Eldar or Ork treatment), but the majority of people who get excited about the new marine releases tend to be pre-existing marine players that buy the codex and maybe a box set (or 2). Or at least in my region that's what it seems like.

Sparowl
02-02-2011, 04:51
New sub-variant releases may not cost as much as a full faction face-lift (i.e. the Dark Eldar or Ork treatment)...

I think we can easily point at that as a financial reason for the variant lists among Marines.

However, that same reasoning could be justified to produce variant lists for Bad Moons or Goffs, Craftworlds, etc.

The old Craftworld codex didn't require any new models, as I recall (I might be wrong on that one, its been awhile).

A new Ork-variant codex wouldn't require any new models. They could put some out, which would be neat. A bling box for Bad Moon Nobs, or a new vehicle for Deff Skulls.

Once again, I put forward the point that there is just as much reason to make variant books for the other armies as there is for the variant books of SMs. If we're interested in a diverse game, player base and model range, then at this point there is more reasons to put out another non-SM book then there is to put out another SM book.

Wishing
02-02-2011, 10:49
Definitely agree with sparowl, saying that marine variant lists require less investment than a whole new army release may be true, but that is just an argument for variant lists, not marine variants specifically. An ork bad moon codex would require just as little investment as a salamanders codex.

So why GW choose to continuously publish marine variant codexes instead of either full faction releases or variant codexes for other factions can probably be said to be to do with two possible reasons:

1. Because they want to, ie. designer bias, personal desire, or other non-business related reasons.
2. Because experience has shown them that this is the best way to maximise their revenue.

The reality is probably a mix of the two, but I will continue to think that number 2 is most likely the more important reason. They are a publicly traded company after all, and have shareholders to answer to, which I think makes it less likely that they put personal bias above revenue.

Poseidal
02-02-2011, 10:58
Well, with some figures we could find out.

Does anyone have any idea of the proportion of what players played what in time periods?

1987-1991
1991-1998
1998-2004
2004-Present

(anything, like GT turnout when it was there, sales or things like that, everything which can give some sort of picture).

Wishing
02-02-2011, 11:22
I honestly doubt that player numbers equals sales numbers though. I suspect that a large percentage of sales go to 12 year old kids that buy them to play around with with their friends, and who never go to clubs or tournaments. That's what I was like when I was 12 anyway.

Poseidal
02-02-2011, 11:27
Well, even sales as well.

Back at my school time, there were more around the same number of players for most (I think Orks might have been the most popular, but there weren't that many and I don't quite recall as it was a while ago), and Necromunda was quite popular, and Epic was still played (or at least talked about)

But I'm wondering if the sales proportion was different back then to now.

AlphariusOmegon20
02-02-2011, 16:40
More anecdotally, I've never actually played against (or even seen anyone) play a variant Marine Chapter locally, with the exception of a single Dark Angels player eight years ago.

See, at my Bunker, I see the opposite. I rarely see Ultramarines other than the Demo table. I rarely see BA as it is.

I see a LOT of DA, SW, Sallies, (Yes, I'm sorry to inform Mr. Ward, but Sallies ARE divergent from the Blue Book codex. They are better represented equipment wise using the BA codex, though you have no access to Vulkan.) BT's, and DIY whatnot.

Dunklezahn
03-02-2011, 11:30
Sallies, (Yes, I'm sorry to inform Mr. Ward, but Sallies ARE divergent from the Blue Book codex. They are better represented equipment wise using the BA codex, though you have no access to Vulkan.) BT's, and DIY whatnot.

So your saying a fast moving assault biased army with rage and feel no pain rules is a better representation for an army whose defining feature used to be a lower initative? Because it has Baal preds with flamers?

Maybe i'm a cynic but I'm inclined to believe you were told that by a power chaser who just converted his Vulcan list to counts as Blood Angels...
Which brings me nicely on to my main rant :D

Power determines an armies popularity, it always has, and a significant portion of your market are playing to win, look at the preponderance of cookie cutter "I win button" style lists online to see, and they want the shiniest toys and the most powerful army. Imperial armies dominate the player base, because they're more popular? Have the best fluff? Or is it because IG, SW and BA are domnating the tourney scene?

I forget the wise poster who pointed this out in another thread but back in the days of 2nd Ed a race had risen that curb stomped the Imperium. 2nd Ed Eldar dominated the competive scene and easily held that top spot. As a result loads of Eldar armies appeared (Anecdotal but it was certainly my experience) Next edition and the Eldar began the beating that has taken them to the army we know today. So why not push the Eldar? Marines aren't pushed because they are most popular they were pushed because they are the chosen poster boys of GW, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.

As such while I would love nothing more for all the marine variants to be rolled into one superbook and the update cycle sped up it wont happen. It wont happen for the same reason that the rules and codecies to come will be run to make sure the Imperium stays top of the pile. Power sells, and GW have chosen their flagship races. By all means play Xenos but we will never see the likes of 2nd ed again when a Xenos can stand tall over the Imperium, GW learned that lesson already. Frequent Imperial updates mean anything that might slip through and put someone ahead of Imperials in power can easily be headed off by Codex: Cheesesmasher Chapter which they can then roll into the new marine dex when it's turn rolls round again.

And yes I am a Xenos player, no I don't think Xenos races are unplayable but I defy anyone to look at recent tourney results and attendance and tell me the most powerful current armies aren't all Imperial.

TheMav80
04-02-2011, 01:50
Except for the fact that cookie cutter I win button lists do not exist...

Dunklezahn
04-02-2011, 09:11
Except for the fact that cookie cutter I win button lists do not exist...

No of course they don't, thats why the vast majority of competitive lists for given any army look almost identical...
It's not like any particular weapon *cough* melta or unit *cough* cheap transport gets spammed at all and everyone's competitive lists are unique snowflakes with really varied units.

So definatly not cookie cutter then...

There are power builds and they are far superior point for point over other builds and some of those gaps it opens up are wide enough that you'd better be a hell of a lot better player than your oppenent or your wasting your time, which at actual top table level is highly unlikely.

That doesn't sound like an I win button at all...

but thats off topic, down with Imperial dominance, down with needing half a dozen varieties of the same army with 2-3 extra units and special rules to keep them top dogs.

AlphariusOmegon20
04-02-2011, 15:31
So your saying a fast moving assault biased army with rage and feel no pain rules is a better representation for an army whose defining feature used to be a lower initative? Because it has Baal preds with flamers?



No, I'm saying that the equipment load out (Flamestorm Pred, minus the overcharged engines, etc....) fits the Sallie way of fighting better than it does the BA's way.

BA are all about the CC assault. How the Flamestorm Pred enhances this preference is beyond me. The Sallies are all about short range firpower,. The Flamestorm Pred fits quite well into this niche.