Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

  1. #1
    Librarian
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Findlay,OH
    Posts
    360

    Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

    I bet some people are wondering why no new units are being made for the armies from 7th ed and before. I'll be honest, I'm a little surprised that GW hasn't done any new units for some of these armies that, I think, need some (outside of the PSM and DG units, they're the only exceptions). I was actually hoping for stuff like a Dominatrix for Nids, an uber Greater Daemon for the CSM codex, a new squad for GK,, a new aspect warrior class for CW, and so on and so forth. It would have been nice to have something to say that new stuff are helping move the storyline forward. However, when you actually think about it, there's a possible explanation for it.

    When the indexes came out, it was a nice way to jump right into 8th ed without waiting for ALL the codices from 7th to be updated (it was all there in bare bone form). Now, I'll will take a wild guess on this (and I'm sure others will agree because they thought the same thing as well): GW wanted to see how well the new system was going to be taken. When WFB was becoming less and less popular, the game needed to be changed (argue all you want, but it needed the changes badly). AoS was created as a result, and was the starter for the new system in 40k. AoS was able to maintain much of the older units, but it created a whole new armies, units, rules, etc. However, knowing that, all that was going to happen because in some ways it was a new game, still set in the Fantasy setting. With 40k, it wasn't failing as bad as WFB to create a brand new game. All it needed was some rule updates. In which case, GW used the AoS system and was able to create a more enjoyable and easier experience for newer and older players.

    Even though things did become easier to get into, some veteran players were not entirely sold on the changes. So I think what we're seeing here is (for the lack of a better phrase) a trial run. We still get codices with all the updated and complete rules, sub armies for most codices (except the more specialized ones but that can change), and the induction of the PSM units for all (except GK and DW, for now) SM armies. DG was the only brand new codex with new units to reflect how they play and that's about it (it'll go the same for TS, WE, and EC eventually). So with SM armies and DG the only ones getting new stuff, what about the rest of the armies? Well, thank goodness for sub army rules to at least keep it fresh. As far as new units, I don't seeing anything new (except for maybe a primarch here and there) until after ALL the codices have been updated. So basically the current ones are glorified versions of the indexes, but still nothing new on the unit front (outside of what was mentioned).

    It stinks, but at least the rate in which the codices are coming out should help speed up the process, and Chapter Approved is keeping things updated, so some good news there. Also, the SM armies getting specialized LRs at least give them decent enough LoWs (not quite like a Baneblade or a Stompa, but good enough for what they do). On the surface, I think, everything is moving just fine. Not perfect, but it's at least it's very doable. Until then, we'll probably have to wait until new codices come out after all the current armies get are taken out of the indexes and put into what we're seeing now.

  2. #2

    Re: Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

    There's an upper limit to how many units GW can support, though.

    I look back on the unit types circa 1999 and I'm not seeing a lot of gaps there. Every tactical function is fulfilled.

    Does GW really need to keep generating new models for us to buy? (And no, that isn't a rhetorical question.)
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  3. #3
    Chapter Master Lost Egg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wandering in the wilderness...
    Posts
    2,154

    Re: Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

    I don't think they need to produce new units rather it would be better if they updated the older kits and made sure to include all the options available to the unit, in the kit.

    I am surprised with the number of new units etc GW has put out with each codex over the last few editions, ignoring updating the older kits and yet going after Chapterhouse and suchlike which filled the gaps they left.

  4. #4

    Re: Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

    GW has always had gaps in their product line. It's fun looking back where they have entries on the army list and no photo, sometimes not even concept art!

    "You'll get to see it when we figure it out!"
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  5. #5
    Inquisitor Lord Damocles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    8,567

    Re: Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

    Releasing new Codexes without new models is a low effort money spinner for GW.

    They didn't even use new cover art besides Codex: Space Marines - something which hasn't happened since 3rd ed. Codex: Assassins, which was a freebie in White Dwarf!

  6. #6

    Re: Why aren't we seeing new units for existing 40k armies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Damocles View Post
    Releasing new Codexes without new models is a low effort money spinner for GW.
    Oh come on, we're talking about a company that - when it finds mistakes in its rules - forces you to buy the corrections.

    The Standard Model of game design is to come up with the best system you can, and then expand it as needed, selling supplements and scenario packs as the years pass. Periodically you notice things don't work, or that something needs to be fixed, so you come out with a 'revised and updated' rulebook.

    This builds continuity and grows the gaming population while incrementally improving the product.

    GW has historically acted like they are doing this, but in fact they use the books and re-launches as 'found money' whenever their profits start to soften.

    This is why I'm not entirely convinced there won't be a new WHFB system. They could simply repackage AOS stuff and make a quick buck re-selling to all the old players.

    On the other hand, I've long advocated them doing a "40k Advanced" system that was an update of 2nd ed and they never did. In fact the company was downright hostile about the system, even to the point of mocking people who still liked it on forums.

    So who knows.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •