PDA

View Full Version : why so long on new codexs



Rated_lexxx
24-02-2010, 00:09
I haven't played 40k in a while. I noticed that some armies have new codexs, with eventually all armies getting new codexs.

From what I read the armies with a new codex have a distinct advantage over armies with the old codexs.

Some armies are in dire needs of a new codexs(god help my necrons), but the release dates seem so long away.

Anyone know why the descion to release the codexs like this. It seems unfair to armies without the new codex. The players have no news on when there codex will come out.

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 00:21
Basically, GW likes money.

Armies that are fleshed out, and weren't experimental, sell, while those that were horrible to begin with, or lacked models that people wanted, didn't sell.

So they were put at the back of the line, while GW got rich from selling space marines.

GW also likes pretending its in control of everything, and refuses to tell people what they're working on, except when release is imminent.

Tymell
24-02-2010, 00:29
The ones in real dire need are Dark Eldar, Necrons and the Inquisition. Dark Eldar look like they are on the way, but not until late this year/early next year. Necrons and Inquisition I've heard no word on as being worked on.

Why are they behind? Most likely the money explanation, to keep releasing more marine codexes = quick cash. Though I'm not entirely unbelieving of some less cycnical explanations being part of it too, like them wanting to get some right, or not being entirely certain how to progress with others.

Apart from that, the codexes are generally in quite a good state update-wise.

Rated_lexxx
24-02-2010, 00:36
I know. It angers me that space marine, after space marine codex gets released.

Creeping Dementia
24-02-2010, 00:40
From what I read the armies with a new codex have a distinct advantage over armies with the old codexs.



Thats not always true. Sure some old codexes are just bad (Necrons, Dark Angels), but other old Codexes still have some great stuff in them (Dark Eldar, Witch Hunters) and readily dish out a curb-stomping to newer Dexes (like Marines, Hairy Marines, and other Marines).

Also, fairness has nothing to do with it (and shouldn't), its only fair for a company to act in its own best interest, which fortunately usually results in GW belching forth more plastic for us, its not GW job to cater to an ambiguous sense of entitled fairness.

Besides all that, the updates have been coming pretty fast lately anyway.

Tymell
24-02-2010, 00:42
I know. It angers me that space marine, after space marine codex gets released.

If it's any consolation, you're not alone in that, many others feel the same way. Though sometimes it feels worse than it is.

It's one plus Fantasy has in that respect: there's no one army that gets favoured over others.

Morgrad
24-02-2010, 01:27
Nah, it just takes a long time to write inconsistent rules off the top of your head that needs an FAQ the day it comes out. :p

Actually, I'd like to think that they do some solid play-testing first, but who knows?

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 01:30
They have a habit of disregarding what their testers find.

Inquisitor Engel
24-02-2010, 01:49
Having been both a close-to-the-designer and "Techpriest" level tester, I think I can shine some light here.


They have a habit of disregarding what their testers find.

Depends on the testing level.

If the "Ancient and Honourable Order of Tech Priests" are the only testers working on it, it's very difficult for any one particular point to be raised above the others unless it's something glaringly wrong.

Things like sick combinations that maybe only one or two people discover get lost in the din (when I did it, it was a "reply-all" email and a submissions board that only GW could read.

If you're doing testing as a favour (or as a trial) for a specific tester, then you get a INFINITELY larger say. The final iteration of the current Tau Codex has entire rules that had extreme influence by those under the "Special Thanks" section at the front. (The markerlight rules in particular come from a long, long, five-way discussion including the designer.)

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 01:59
The tau codex was pretty much written by everyone except the person credited for it.

If I were to say that GW has largely been ignoring their testers ever since the 4th edition chaos codex, would you agree or disagree with me?

Pink Horror
24-02-2010, 02:08
A codex release is a big advertisement for buying miniatures. They don't want to waste those advertisements by doing them too often and not having enough new miniatures to sell with them.

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 02:10
Yeah, that makes perfect sense, and totally explains why tyranids didn't get recut warriors with boneswords, why marines had to wait for many of their more popular units, and why there is no plastic box with thunderwolf cavalry for space wolves.

Tokugawa100
24-02-2010, 02:31
It's one plus Fantasy has in that respect: there's no one army that gets favoured over others.

Although its no where near the fanatiscism that Space Marines get I would have to The Empire gets a fairly good amount of treatment.
They are constantly getting new releases and plastic models even in months where it should actually be more about another codex.

If every army was all plastic capable I would be very happy, sadly they are and GW seems to not want to do anything about it.:(

nightgant98c
24-02-2010, 02:36
It seems to me that a stronger all around game would be better, because then they could seel mini's in every army. If the codexes were all current, and had a good balance, then people would buy models from the entire range. They could still splash new stuff from time to time. A single new model, even an if it's only an update(like in plastic) of an old mode, would sell well. Send out a couple every few months, and I'm pretty sure thier sales would be just as good, and more consistent.

MaliGn
24-02-2010, 02:55
Does no-one consider the rason GW updates in the order it does? I can see that since Space Marines are popular that on release of a new edition of the game thier army book is a priority release. Since the rules in it will likely contradict the other marine books they need updating in line, it's the curse of second ed when it was rampant releasing for lots of space marines. Since thenj they all now demand rule updates to match codex generic and con no longer be re-absorbed. Eldar, Chaos, Orks, Tyranids, Imperial Guard are always going to be priorities over the neo-races such as necrons, dark eldar, Inquisition, Tau all of which have to some extent been retconned into the universe. The release policy covers history, modern trends, criticism, mood and sales. It's just business guys.

Pink Horror
24-02-2010, 02:58
Yeah, that makes perfect sense, and totally explains why tyranids didn't get recut warriors with boneswords, why marines had to wait for many of their more popular units, and why there is no plastic box with thunderwolf cavalry for space wolves.

It makes perfect sense. It explains why they don't wait for all of the models to be finished either. Get a batch of minis big enough to sell. Get a book to go along with it. Completeness doesn't matter.

Tenken
24-02-2010, 02:59
At least the 40k codices seem to be up to a higher standard than fantasy. Poor, poor beastmen, I can't even think what they did to deserve THAT. And there's no 40k army that is an iWin button, like daemons in fantasy.

Old vs new codices isn't always a case of new wins. The ork codex is a bit dated, but is still a really strong contender. Even the tau, with some finesse and the right gear on crisis suits, can be really hard. Really I think the only army that can't even compete with the new stuff is necrons. They're in desperate need of a new codex. And the fact they only have 1 troop option I think really takes away alot of potential buyers, I know that I would at least consider necrons, were it not for their horribly stagnant army list.

And tyranids just came out and are considered to be one of the more balanced codices. They have some obvious garbage (pyrovore and harpy), and some obvious must have (doom and zoanthropes), but other than that most things have a use and purpose and nothing is ZOMFGNERF good.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 03:08
Meh. They should have just released variant marine dex's as living codex available as pdf downloads, that way they wouldn't have to bump more deserving armies every cycle. Maybe it just me, but having the smallest faction in the game have more variety than entire intergalactic races just seems off to me.

Lord of Worms
24-02-2010, 03:18
The refrain that gets repeated ad nauseum here is that the games are designed to sell models.Their philosophy is that they like to release rules simultaneously with waves of models as they are finished in order to maximize on hype. Their model for this is skewed because they genuinely expect that people who have a neglected army like Dark Eldar to buy a new codex/boxed army combo whatever the new!improved! super-hyped army is. It is also skewed because they seem to think Well, this army that is languishing without a codex for a decade, the sales for them are poor so we will push them back till next year and release marines instead. The sales are languishing because nobody wants to play with a handicap or have no chance of winning. Winning isn't everything, but it is no fun when it is through no fault of your own that you consistently lose. I know they call this "Whineseer" for this exact reason, but this kind of BS is what pisses people off and make them quit the game. It's so much of a frustrating pain in the ass at times that I'm surprised GW hasn't gone bankrupt yet. If they weren't so obsessed with squeezing their former, current and future customers so much they would probably be more successful.

I don't understand why they keep releasing new Space Marine codices because it breaks their entire release model. Every 1.5 years they release a new SM codex each of which is increasingly more powerful and then gets nerfed by the subsequent non-SM codex. I can't tell you how many Dark Angels and Blood Angels armies I've seen using the Smurfs dex. This is a clear and unequivocal indication that their current model of one army, one codex streamlining policy is a heinous and catastrophic failure. I dont know wether the policy itself doesnt work, or wether theyre implementing it poorly, but whatever their intended goal was , this isnt it. To be fair, the new Space Wolves codex is a better way to play World Eaters then that disgusting abomination of a Chaos Codex.

There is no reason why they couldn't have a Marine codex with updates or mini-dexes like they used to, or periodically release supplements online. They are all Space Marines, they shouldn't be so radically different from each other, with Storm Shields varying in efficacy between useless and borderline broken chapter to chapter. A 12 page PDF that tells you how to take your Codex Space Marines and play them as Space Wolves would be no problem to slap together, and would likely keep a clamp-down on all the power creep we've been seeing. They conceived of this streamlining approach when the internet was still in it's infancy, and people actually relied on White Dwarf. If they published an FAQ in WD, and you missed that issue it could have kept you out of the loop. Nowadays, there IS NO EXCUSE for not being able to go online and download a PDF that updates your army, in a day and age where people know exactly what's in the codex a month before release.

To put it short, they let armies languish because they don't actually expect people to stick around in the hobby through two codexes.

/rant

burad
24-02-2010, 03:18
They'd be smart to have new novels released a couple months before a major kit or codex release. For instance, there was recently released the first novel that specifically was about Sisters. The interest generated by the new fluff should ideally be piqued by the release of a new codex a few months later. With so many codexes about Space Marines, it would be easier to ensure a new novel about a particular chapter was released three months before a new codex or new models representing that chapter. And then everybody wins.
Granted, there are some races that have not been/are not likely to be written about in a novel. But even if they are written about in the novel as the bad guys, that helps. Rynn's World should be interesting to Ork players, for instance.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 04:18
This is a clear and unequivocal indication that their current model of one army, one codex streamlining policy is a heinous and catastrophic failure.

It's a catastrophic failure because the policy isn't applied across the board, namely the exception for Space Marine chapters. IG lost their Codex: Catachan and Eldar lost their Craftworld codex. I would make a case for LotD, Kult of Speed Orks, Feral Orks, Kroot Mercs, and the rest, but in all fairness they only appeared in campaign books or chapter approved supplements, unlike the aforementioned books which were dropped. GW in my opinion really dropped the ball on this. They either should have crammed all the Space Marines into a singular codex, or planned to make variant lists for the rest of races.

Now before I get lambasted as another reething marine hater (although I'll brave it and admit I am obviously strongly biased), I just want to point out that I'm not against the concept or support of said Marines on it's own. I'm just dismayed at the notion that they continously cram Marine-heroine down this hobby's throat and have literally cut 5+ lists which could have added alot more diversity to the game then different shades of power armor can ever hope to achieve.

Darkspear
24-02-2010, 04:21
There is also the problem of having many codexes and army books. The old army book problem is also very acute in fantasy. GW has simply too many armies to revamp through its 3 games systems (don't forget LOTR too).

Tenken
24-02-2010, 04:22
I'm in favor of 1 codex for 1 army. I don't care if the codex is 200 pages long, just don't publish 13 codices for, essentially, the same army. Chaos should be 1 codex. Space marines, 1 codex. Inquisition, 1 codex. Whatever xeno race (or empire) 1 codex. But that's just me.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 04:29
There is also the problem of having many codexes and army books. The old army book problem is also very acute in fantasy. GW has simply too many armies to revamp through its 3 games systems (don't forget LOTR too).

Lotr doesn't have army books, does it? I was under the assumption they got updated rules with each expansion, or am I just giving GW more credit then they deserve?

(Besides, if you have alot of army books to write...hire more writers)

Juggalo
24-02-2010, 04:30
The inconsistencies in codex support also really underscores the cosmic punchline that is GW trying to portray their games as designed for any level of "professional" competitive circuit.

Tenken
24-02-2010, 04:30
Lotr doesn't have army books, does it? I was under the assumption they got updated rules with each expansion, or am I just giving GW more credit then they deserve?

(Besides, if you have alot of army books to write...hire more writers)

I think thats right. It's kind of confusing. There's books that are LIKE army books, but all the rules for the models are in the main books. They're mostly for scenarios or whatever, not clue why they even put the rules for the models in them (pry just to take up room).

sabreu
24-02-2010, 04:34
Well, confusing as it may be, I think LoTR is really a minor distraction and shouldn't really be considered as an offender. The ruleset is easy to expand on, since they don't have 8+ books to rewrite every time they want to add something, ya know? It's a good game and doesn't really detract from any of us 40k or fantasy blokes as many would have you believe.

It's just the two core systems that are the problem. Is it just me or does having like 4 dudes write 20+ codex for both systems seem a bit *****?


edit:

Really? why is any word that starts with a w bleeped out? I'm confused. O.o

Lord of Worms
24-02-2010, 04:36
Their army list release is being dictated by the production schedules of models, which is stupid. Such a staggered rules development leaves armies released at the end of an arc being wildly out of wack with the ones at the beginning.This is just an overblown impression of the effects of hype. I don't care about whatever dumb new Kharn-Riding-a-Giant-Scorpion model they decide to release, I just want to play my army.


There is also the problem of having many codexes and army books. The old army book problem is also very acute in fantasy. GW has simply too many armies to revamp through its 3 games systems (don't forget LOTR too).

Then they should
a) Retain their good games-designers (and get back the ones they lost)
b) Stop hiring idiots *cough*Matt Ward
c) Hire a few more guys
d)????
e) Profit!

ehlijen
24-02-2010, 04:40
It's just the two core systems that are the problem. Is it just me or does having like 4 dudes write 20+ codex for both systems seem a bit *****?


Would you prefer every one of the 20+ books to be written by someone else? There is something to be said about having a core group of well communicating few be in charge of everything.

Not saying either is ideal, but neither is all wrong either.

Fobster
24-02-2010, 04:46
I propose a support group for xenos players to talk out their persecution complex. Actually I guess this thread could be it.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 04:46
To answer your question, I would ideally like a dedicated staff devoted to 40k and a dedicated staff to fantasy. You still get that "core group" that can sync things up well, but you don't have to wait until they get their projects from one system done to move onto the next.

Seriously, the way most jobs work is you got one supervisor in your section, for your section, who knows what it is you do. You generally don't get one guy who supervises everything and is expected to do much unless your job is rather focused to begin with.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 04:47
I propose a support group for xenos players to talk out their persecution complex. Actually I guess this thread could be it.

Funny. :rolleyes:

I actually own a marine army. I'm just a gamer who doesn't like how things are being handled.

Lord of Worms
24-02-2010, 04:48
To answer your question, I would ideally like a dedicated staff devoted to 40k and a dedicated staff to fantasy. You still get that "core group" that can sync things up well, but you don't have to wait until they get their projects from one system done to move onto the next.

Or they could alternate yearly. First year, they release all their 40k material. Next year, while collecting input on 40k they release fantasy. Then they switch.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 04:55
Lord of Worms, I could work with actually. Pipe dream as it may be

Inquisitor Engel
24-02-2010, 04:58
The tau codex was pretty much written by everyone except the person credited for it.

No, Andy did an excellent job of writing it, even taking it down to almost nothing and building it back up when it was clear there was a big balance issue. Unfortunately 5th Edition ruined everything...

He also made the markerlight rules less ... INSANE than the first set we came up with. :evilgrin:


If I were to say that GW has largely been ignoring their testers ever since the 4th edition chaos codex, would you agree or disagree with me?

Agreed.

Corrode
24-02-2010, 10:54
The inconsistencies in codex support also really underscores the cosmic punchline that is GW trying to portray their games as designed for any level of "professional" competitive circuit.

It's a good job they've never done this, then, and ignore tournaments and 'competitive' players as much as possible in favour of fun casual-aimed releases.

Tymell
24-02-2010, 11:08
Although its no where near the fanatiscism that Space Marines get I would have to The Empire gets a fairly good amount of treatment.
They are constantly getting new releases and plastic models even in months where it should actually be more about another codex.

If every army was all plastic capable I would be very happy, sadly they are and GW seems to not want to do anything about it.:(

Oh I don't know. They are releasing more plastic kits with each new incarnation of an army, and some of them are coming pretty close to being all-plastic. I think it's more that The Empire went that way, and then they decided to give them the final push into being the first all-plastic one.

Some might get slightly more attention, some less, but thankfully there's nothing like the imbalance in attention with the space marines.

Eldrad
24-02-2010, 11:19
Perhaps we're all jumping the gun here and thinking of old GW instead of new GW policy. From the rumors and everything else it seems as though there is a big push to up the number of Dex's released each year and get everything done in a 4 year span. So far we have had IG,SM,Nids,BA,SW in true 5th dex's. One could argue Orks and Demons were designed with 5th in mind since they came out so close to 5th release.

Harry himself has said that 4 dex's will be coming out on top of everything from Fantasy. This to me indicates GW is learning that most people follow their army and maybe 1 or 2 others and doesn't just jump ship for each new army simply because it's new. Hence the quicker release schedule.

Rated_lexxx
24-02-2010, 11:28
what makes me suspicious about GW is I don't see a release schedule. They tell you a new codex is coming in a few months, but that's about it.

You would think GW would tell or show that they are actually doing something, but keeps everything super classified ultra top secret. I swear they must think have the arc of the convent somewhere to keep this much under wraps

Eldrad
24-02-2010, 11:33
No they just believe that iif people only have 3 months to get excited then their excitement level peaks for them to actually buy whereas if you know 6-12 months ahead of time you might not buy as much because your enthusiasm for said product has waned. Remember that miniatures are not video games, a picture is pretty much the most GW can generate excitment wise, and rules of course. They don't have the luxury of releasing trailers or "new features" such as headsets etc.

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 13:40
GW has been losing money and customers lately, and decided to finally start making good books that have more than 40% useful units.

Maybe they'll start listening to their testers again soon, so we don't get another codex with anything that even remotely resembles vanguard, pyrovores, servitors, penal legions, or bloodclaws.

Corrode
24-02-2010, 13:48
what makes me suspicious about GW is I don't see a release schedule. They tell you a new codex is coming in a few months, but that's about it.

You would think GW would tell or show that they are actually doing something, but keeps everything super classified ultra top secret. I swear they must think have the arc of the convent somewhere to keep this much under wraps

They have two major issues at hand here:

1) As noted, it's supposed to be a hype-building tactic. Whether this works or not is up for debate.
2) Wargaming nerds very often act like whiny children (even the ones who aren't actually 13 years old). If at a year's remove GW say 'Dark Eldar, definitely for October 2010!' and then six months out they find that they're never going to be able to finish it in time, they'll end up with people whining like you wouldn't believe. Delays happen all the time of course - some video game companies are infamous for pushing back deadlines multiple times - but the GW fanbase is especially bad about taking everything the company says about releases as gospel truth without accepting that sometimes things don't play out as expected. For evidence of this, see the whining that used to result when things which were in playtest codices didn't pan out and ended up being removed from the finished product.


Maybe they'll start listening to their testers again soon, so we don't get another codex with anything that even remotely resembles vanguard, pyrovores, servitors, penal legions, or bloodclaws.

I agree with you on the first three, but Penal Legion and Blood Claws only look bad in comparison to the utterly great things in their own books. Anywhere else a 15pt/model MEQ unit with 4 attacks on the charge, Counter Attack and the possibility of taking two hidden power fists would be amazing. It's only stacked up to Grey Hunters that they look bad. I can deal with units being suboptimal if they're still good; it's units like Flash Gitz and Pyrovores which are clear-as-day completely goddamn useless which are the problem.

Sceleris82
24-02-2010, 13:55
Its easy to build hype, just like pc games.
Blacklibary did it with the books thousand sons and prosbero burns.
Take awsome art, combine it with a person talking about the books new vision, add awsome music.. And you got a awsome youtube click for hype right there.

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 14:02
Or, you know, have employees put up some posters around cities with a dedicated GW store.
Ads in newspapers.

It sure doesn't seem to me that GW even wants people to know they exist.

sabreu
24-02-2010, 14:04
[quote]2) Wargaming nerds very often act like whiny children (even the ones who aren't actually 13 years old). If at a year's remove GW say 'Dark Eldar, definitely for October 2010!' and then six months out they find that they're never going to be able to finish it in time, they'll end up with people whining like you wouldn't believe. Delays happen all the time of course - some video game companies are infamous for pushing back deadlines multiple times - but the GW fanbase is especially bad about taking everything the company says about releases as gospel truth without accepting that sometimes things don't play out as expected. For evidence of this, see the whining that used to result when things which were in playtest codices didn't pan out and ended up being removed from the finished product.

You act like this the truth that applies only to wargamers? Seriously, have you not ever seen movie goers get griped about delays, concert goers gripe about delays and cancelations, auto-hobbyist get peeved at delays, book readers get peeved at delays, etc etc? The only difference here is, alot of the inherent indignation is subsided (from the majority) because a new time is introduced. Or if your concert get's cancelled you usually get your money back.

Flame Boy
24-02-2010, 14:53
Sometimes I think GW would be better off creating a staggered release for their armies when they start a new edition. If they released most of the core books shortly after a new rulebook lands, they could release supplements at a later date that (re)introduced units in batches for each race.

The problem with having a "get you by" codex at the beginning would probably be a headache, but if everytime they released a Planetstrike-style supplement, each army could get a whole bunch of new models that fit that theme with updated rules, that would hopefully scale down codex creep.

It seems Games Workshop are trying to do this already with the staggered-phase releases, but when they are trying to do one full codex at a time as well, it seems to get muddled.

I am just wondering what people think about a method similar to this. Would you be able to grin and bear having a rather more bland army list for the next edition, but know that in 6 months or a year people would have more detailed and complex rules for your assault marines, and not feel guilty because your friends also get to play with new Flayed Ones and Stormboyz rules, and miniatures where needed? Each supplement would become a landmark, rather than being a throwaway scenario book, and it would force the designers to discuss how every race interacts with the other each time something is released.

I can imagine getting the groundwork in place to start working like this would make it unfeasible, and assault heavy armies mght feel a bit neglected when the heavy guns are being rebalanced, but I think it could prevent each race from ending up with poor unit choices, because they would have to appear viable compared to releases from other races at the same time.

Tenken
24-02-2010, 16:48
It's only stacked up to Grey Hunters that they look bad. I can deal with units being suboptimal if they're still good; it's units like Flash Gitz and Pyrovores which are clear-as-day completely goddamn useless which are the problem.

What are you on about? Flash gitz are great! Sure they're a bit pricey, but everything else in the ork codex is, lets face it, super cheap. I don't know about you but having a model with potentially 2 str 6 shots, that can potentially be ap 1 or 2, and that can premeasure and can assault the same turn they shoot, and are more deadly than marines on the assault, doesn't sound bad at all to me. The only problems with flash gitz are 1, they take up one of the coveted heavy support slots, and 2, they can't have a dedicated battle wagon or even trukk transport.

massey
24-02-2010, 17:30
It's actually pretty easy to understand their release policy. There is no official release policy. It's a collection of guidelines, really.

-A new edition will be released every 4-6 years. This allows them to correct problems with the old rules, change up the way the game plays, and yes, force you to buy a new book.
-When a new edition gets released, the most popular armies will normally be updated first. This means Space Marines. Marines make up the majority of GW's sales, and they'd be dumb to not update them.
-Other currently popular armies will follow, order dependant upon several factors. How long has it been since their last update? Are people still buying them in large numbers? Is there someone on the staff with a cool idea on how to do the army?
-More niche armies will follow. These armies will be worked in when there's an opening, but they are not a priority.
-Part of this decision will be current sales versus expected sales. GW has a rough idea of how many Eldar players (and Ork players, and Nid players, etc) are out there. They know how much stuff is being purchased. They know what kind of sales bump they normally get from an army release. If sales of Eldar models are still at an acceptable level, there is not a pressing need to update them.
-Part of this decision is based upon guaranteeing a certain amount of revenue every year. You can't release 3 high risk books in a given year because they might all bomb, and then you're out of business. So there's a strong amount of risk-management involved.

I'm gonna toss out some numbers. These come from nowhere other than my own observations at local stores and a guess. The numbers might be way off, but I don't think so. These aren't percentages, just my prediction on how well armies sell relative to one another, and thus the level of importance that will be assigned to each codex. Even if the specific numbers I list are incorrect, you can bet GW knows the correct numbers, and plans their releases accordingly.

Space Marines (all types) -- 100
Imperial Guard -- 40
Orks -- 40
Chaos -- 30
Tyranids -- 25
Eldar -- 20
Tau -- 15
Demons -- 10**
Inquisition -- 10
Necrons -- 10
Dark Eldar -- 1

So for every Dark Eldar army sold, I'd bet GW sells 100 Space Marine armies, 40 Ork armies, and 20 Eldar armies. For every Tau army sold, GW sells 2 Chaos armies.

My guess would be that Space Marine sales are probably divided about 40 Ultramarines/20 Space Wolves/15 Dark Angels/15 Blood Angels/10 Black Templars. Those kits, however, are interchangeable, so they get more bang for their buck. I may not be giving enough credit to Ultramarines with that breakdown.

Demons would have their numbers skewed by the fact that people buy them for Fantasy. I'd say they probably rank in there with Necrons for people who buy them to use specifically in 40K. Fantasy doesn't sell nearly as well as 40K though, so I'm not sure how much of an overall bump they get (would probably put them on par with Tau at that point). That's probably why GW is in no rush to put out the plastic demon prince. Why use up a good chunk of production space on a plastic kit for an army that doesn't sell well?

Ultimately, this seems to fit with who they give release priority to. A release like Black Templars, which doesn't cost much to produce but probably will give them sales comparable to a codex for Tau, will get pushed back behind Orks, IG, and Tyranids. But they're an easy update, and all on their own a marine variant sell comparably to the lower-tier popularity armies. I mean, you release like 2 plastic SW kits and two or three metal models and you've got an army range selling comparably to Eldar? So that's why they do marine variants. They take little effort and give good return. Could they do that with variants of other armies? Unknown.

Dark Eldar are a special case. They don't sell at all now, and have never sold well. They require a massive investment to get them up to par with any other army. When released, they will sell much better. But how much better? Probably the upper limit would be for them to sell the same as Eldar. That's the best case scenario. They'd probably sell the same as Necrons or Tau. But that requires you to redo the entire model range to get to that point. For the same amount of investment, you could probably do all 4 marine variants, or update 2 stand-alone armies like Orks and Chaos. And that is why Dark Eldar lag behind. Yes, they can become a profitable line, but is it worth the investment right now? It hasn't been.

TheDarkDuke
24-02-2010, 17:48
I haven't played 40k in a while. I noticed that some armies have new codexs, with eventually all armies getting new codexs.

From what I read the armies with a new codex have a distinct advantage over armies with the old codexs.

Some armies are in dire needs of a new codexs(god help my necrons), but the release dates seem so long away.

Anyone know why the descion to release the codexs like this. It seems unfair to armies without the new codex. The players have no news on when there codex will come out.

Well i wouldn't say all old codex are in dire need of rule updates, as Dark Eldar and Witch Hunters are well imo better under the new rules. Daemon Hunters have always been below the rest. Tau got beat up a bit, and well Necron got sent back to the stone age.

So it really depends on what GW deems more worthy of being done first. Most of us understand a lot of the decisions to release certain codex, but when it comes to some of the lesser selling armies mentioned already above. It comes down to sales potential + new models work + new rules work = Whose up next. Its not a surprise to get SW and BA out of the way, as sales potential is high with new armies or adding to old armies to simply want some of the new bits for my completely different marine army. So when GW decide who gets a new dex first for example DE vs Necron. What percentages to they put on sales potential compared to the amount of work or cost to get there. So really IMO we will see what GW deems most in a race between what gets released first DH, Necron or DE. Eg:

If DH get released first, they are certainly imo are ranking sale potential the absolute most important factor in a release, as they are an alternate of power armour.

If Necron get released first they certainly imo are ranking low new model costs in development a more important factor in a release, as model wise there isn't anything wrong with the current range, only rules that don't function properly anymore. So a lot of work will be placed on the rules over models.

If DE get released first well this one will shock me lol. We all know they have a ton or work to be done on models, so we are looking at the most cost out of all three of these armies. While DE rules can be very competitive no doubt huge overhaul will be done. With really an unknown sale potential, this is a very dark horse for GW. Would giving them big overhaul and updates like Dark Elf result in the same sales figures or are Dark Eldar just not as wanted? This will be the release that happens when it happens due to everything slowly getting put together piece by piece. Maybe the best option, maybe not... time will tell.

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 17:48
Their biggest sellers are marines, orks, and tau, in that order.
Dark eldar sell about as well as the metal armies - demonhunters, witchhunters, etc.

TheDarkDuke
24-02-2010, 18:01
Their biggest sellers are marines, orks, and tau, in that order.
Dark eldar sell about as well as the metal armies - demonhunters, witchhunters, etc.

Source please? As I don't believe this for a second. Tau out sell Imperial Guard and Chaos Space Marines? Dark Eldar not carried in store sell equal to armies carried in store?

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it certainly isn't a swan its a duck.

WinglessVT2
24-02-2010, 18:06
I can't give you the source, because I don't have access to where they kept most of the numbers at one point anymore. We're talking about 2008, pretty much, and judging from what I see, it hasn't changed much - except that guard has gone from something few players want, to an army that now sells stuff.

Gray knights and witchhunters aren't carried in stores anymore, either. Just like dark eldar, you'll find their stuff from GW direct, and old boxes in some stores.

Chaos has had problems shipping stuff, because their book doesn't appeal to a lot of players.

Colonial Rifle
24-02-2010, 18:32
It's actually pretty easy to understand their release policy. There is no official release policy. It's a collection of guidelines, really.

So for every Dark Eldar army sold, I'd bet GW sells 100 Space Marine armies, 40 Ork armies, and 20 Eldar armies. For every Tau army sold, GW sells 2 Chaos armies.

Ultimately, this seems to fit with who they give release priority to. A release like Black Templars, which doesn't cost much to produce but probably will give them sales comparable to a codex for Tau, will get pushed back behind Orks, IG, and Tyranids. But they're an easy update, and all on their own a marine variant sell comparably to the lower-tier popularity armies. I mean, you release like 2 plastic SW kits and two or three metal models and you've got an army range selling comparably to Eldar? So that's why they do marine variants. They take little effort and give good return. Could they do that with variants of other armies? Unknown.

Dark Eldar are a special case. They don't sell at all now, and have never sold well. They require a massive investment to get them up to par with any other army. When released, they will sell much better. But how much better? Probably the upper limit would be for them to sell the same as Eldar. That's the best case scenario. They'd probably sell the same as Necrons or Tau. But that requires you to redo the entire model range to get to that point. For the same amount of investment, you could probably do all 4 marine variants, or update 2 stand-alone armies like Orks and Chaos. And that is why Dark Eldar lag behind. Yes, they can become a profitable line, but is it worth the investment right now? It hasn't been.

Massey, I agree with your outline and numbers on how the lines sell, but they are subject to fluctuation between editions. Remember, before the latest Ork codex, Ork sales were pretty poor and we used to have posts here (mainly from new players) screaming "OMG ORKZ SUX!" and wondering if they should be fazed out. One shiny new codex and some great sculpts later and orks are back to being a high-tier 40k army. The converse could be said for the mess of Codex: CSM. Bad, boring list = chaos suffers a steep decline in popularity.

So I don't see the "risk" with releasing DE at all. Make a good, strong book with redesigned model line and people will buy it. Worked for Orks, Space Wolves and Chaos 3.5. It will work again - not rocket science.

starlight
24-02-2010, 18:43
On Topic or not at all... Several Posts Deleted for being Off Topic/Spam or responses. Do not respond to these Posts.


starlight

sabreu
24-02-2010, 18:46
Massey, while I don't agree with you all the time, I think you did a great write up in explaining this. Still sucks how their mentality is, imo. Can't sell something as well if you don't update it, so it's a viscious cycle.

Corrode
24-02-2010, 18:56
What are you on about? Flash gitz are great! Sure they're a bit pricey, but everything else in the ork codex is, lets face it, super cheap. I don't know about you but having a model with potentially 2 str 6 shots, that can potentially be ap 1 or 2, and that can premeasure and can assault the same turn they shoot, and are more deadly than marines on the assault, doesn't sound bad at all to me. The only problems with flash gitz are 1, they take up one of the coveted heavy support slots, and 2, they can't have a dedicated battle wagon or even trukk transport.

I mathed it out here:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3890671&postcount=30

Essentially Flash Gitz at full upgrades are less effective than 2 scoring mobs of Shoota Boyz which put 50 more bodies and a lot more attacks on the board. As you can see from the post, if they go a little cheaper and don't take the Painboy then they have a reasonable chance to do as much damage to themselves as the enemy when shooting at a unit that's less than half their cost.

massey
24-02-2010, 20:21
Massey, I agree with your outline and numbers on how the lines sell, but they are subject to fluctuation between editions. Remember, before the latest Ork codex, Ork sales were pretty poor and we used to have posts here (mainly from new players) screaming "OMG ORKZ SUX!" and wondering if they should be fazed out. One shiny new codex and some great sculpts later and orks are back to being a high-tier 40k army. The converse could be said for the mess of Codex: CSM. Bad, boring list = chaos suffers a steep decline in popularity.

So I don't see the "risk" with releasing DE at all. Make a good, strong book with redesigned model line and people will buy it. Worked for Orks, Space Wolves and Chaos 3.5. It will work again - not rocket science.

Thanks. I agree that a good update (and the orks had an excellent one) can really change the fortunes of an army. I think orks have always been relatively popular, and the time before the new ork book was probably more of an aberration than the norm. You basically saw orks go from their lowest point to their highest point very quickly. It also helps to be included in the new starter box.

I don't think Dark Eldar are a "risk" in that they'll be a total failure. But GW doesn't really know what to expect, and there's a large investment needed. Space Wolves were relatively easy to do. Same with Blood Angels. Those armies don't need much, and GW will have a good idea of how well they'll sell. Dark Eldar? Unknown. They don't sell well at all right now, but that's to be expected. They also require a really big investment. They're basically starting from scratch on them.

I know people talk about all the Dark Eldar players who will rush out and buy a new army, but how many people is that? Their existing player base is so small as to be almost negligible. That makes it hard to calculate numbers. When you're determining which army to release for 4th quarter 2010, and you need to know you're gonna be able to keep the lights on, which army do you release, Dark Eldar, who have a big question mark? Or a new Chaos book, where you know you've got guaranteed sales?

I think they'll release DE eventually. Probably soon at this point. Even if it's not hugely popular on its own, it reassures the customer base and improves the health of the game as a whole. But I don't think it's a sure-fire gold mine.


Massey, while I don't agree with you all the time, I think you did a great write up in explaining this. Still sucks how their mentality is, imo. Can't sell something as well if you don't update it, so it's a viscious cycle.

I don't even always agree with me. :D Comes from working in a field where everyone is extremely opinionated. :) I do wish they'd update things more frequently. I came to 40K through Battletech, which had a very nice, tight set of rules. Just played it again this weekend for the first time in probably 5 years, and remembered how great the game was. GW doesn't have a rules set that works that well. It made me realize how much GW is a model-driven business.

Tenken
24-02-2010, 20:48
I mathed it out here:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3890671&postcount=30

Essentially Flash Gitz at full upgrades are less effective than 2 scoring mobs of Shoota Boyz which put 50 more bodies and a lot more attacks on the board. As you can see from the post, if they go a little cheaper and don't take the Painboy then they have a reasonable chance to do as much damage to themselves as the enemy when shooting at a unit that's less than half their cost.

First off, why in gods name would you buy the blasta upgrade? Second you're looking at the gitz in a vacuum. Put them in a battlewagon, hell even a trukk and they can be pretty threatening as they can put their shots where they need to be.

Plus gitz can pick their fights. Playing against guard? Take some pot shots on your way to melee, but get stuck in. Playing against space marines? Keep your distance and shoot! They're a highly versatile unit, and versatility is something people seem to often overlook when math hammering.

Corrode
24-02-2010, 20:57
First off, why in gods name would you buy the blasta upgrade? Second you're looking at the gitz in a vacuum. Put them in a battlewagon, hell even a trukk and they can be pretty threatening as they can put their shots where they need to be.

Plus gitz can pick their fights. Playing against guard? Take some pot shots on your way to melee, but get stuck in. Playing against space marines? Keep your distance and shoot! They're a highly versatile unit, and versatility is something people seem to often overlook when math hammering.

Naked Gitz are even worse than regular ones, being slightly cheaper but much less effective (essentially being Shoota Boyz in a ten-man squad). There's a balance to be struck between all upgrades and none, but the discussion of the time wasn't differentiating and I found it easiest to simply load out the Gitz with the maximum upgrades (which would seem to indicate their best performance). As much as taking a Battlewagon or Trukk sounds like a good idea, Shoota Boyz can do it too (ok, they can't take a dedicated Wagon, but they can use the HS slot you save by not taking Flash Gitz) whilst being scoring and much, much cheaper. There's no gain in versatility offered by Gitz over Shootas.

Nothing you've just said about Gitz 'picking their fights' is any different to Shootas. Shootas are substantially cheaper, and an equal points value of Shootas is just as good at every role the Gitz can perform, and in many ways better. They simply don't compare at all well, and for an investment of anywhere between 300-500~ points I want better than that. I'm certainly not dismissing versatility as being worthwhile, but the Gitz are less versatile and less effective than equivalent points of another similar unit, which makes them pretty awful.

carl
24-02-2010, 22:29
Regarding the whole SM debate:

Personolly i've allways felt SM sell well for one reason:

They get pushed like crazy. SM codex's take up a significant fraction of the total books, the models take up an even greater % of average shelf space, and every adverty not advertising the latest release is SPESS MARINESSS.

Given how hard they're pushed and how much more GW spends on pushing them, do they really justify the claim of being this amazingly popular, amazingly well selling army. Or is it just a case of: They sell the most because they're the most pushed.

Occulto
24-02-2010, 23:14
Or is it just a case of: They sell the most because they're the most pushed.

No. They sell the most because

They're small model count - so cheap.

They're easy to paint to a decent tabletop standard (spray, ink, detail, maybe use some decals).

They're ridiculously easy to build and convert (they're almost the Lego of 40K)

Their rules are easy to remember.

Other armies share some of the same aspects but not all - ie Orks are easy to build and convert, but painting a hundred boyz can tax the patience of even a veteran.

Pink Horror
24-02-2010, 23:36
Occulto, are you claiming that being the mascot of 40k, and having many more army lists, and the most fluff, has nothing to do with it? Are you claiming that seriously?

Lord of Worms
24-02-2010, 23:54
As I implied earlier, I don't consider SM to have "more books" because nowadays if you use the Dark Angels or Black Templar list you're an idiot, plain and simple. I would sooner say that marines are the most "updated" codex. The cycle of marine/non-marine releases simply means that at no point is a marine player stuck with an unusable codex, even World Eaters can rejoice in the Wolves dex, it plays much better than the Chaos one.

Pink Horror
24-02-2010, 23:57
As I implied earlier, I don't consider SM to have "more books" because nowadays if you use the Dark Angels or Black Templar list you're an idiot, plain and simple.

Why? Is it idiotic to want a challenge? To desire to be different?

Lord of Worms
25-02-2010, 00:09
Aside from a pure Deathwing army, you can put together any convincing Dark Angels army you want using the marine Codex. A few irrelevant wargear choices are not enough to justify using what was essentially a poorly designed list from the beginning, that is now totally out of date. So yes, handicapping yourself unnecessarily is quite foolish. Granted, Black Templars would be more challenging to pull off, but I could probably think of a few examples of how itcould be done if I was more familiar with the list.

WinglessVT2
25-02-2010, 00:14
The regular marine codex is much better for representing dark angels.
It has their old exclusive weapon, now renamed 'relic blade,' better terminators that cost less, better bikes that can be troops, better dreadnoughts, more dreadnoughts, better land raiders...

Dark angels have always just been a prototype codex.

Occulto
25-02-2010, 00:15
Occulto, are you claiming that being the mascot of 40k, and having many more army lists, and the most fluff, has nothing to do with it? Are you claiming that seriously?

Sure.

I'm saying that SM got all that attention because they're the best sellers (due the reasons above), not the other way round.

No amount of lists would change the fact that a horde army costs waaaaay more than SM.

No amount of fluff would change the fact that a SM army can be painted in a weekend to tabletop standard with basic techniques, while a horde takes much longer.

Lord of Worms
25-02-2010, 00:22
Orks are pretty cheap for anybody with a credit card and an ebay account. Last I checked AoBR orks went for about 30 cents a Boy.

Occulto
25-02-2010, 00:33
Orks are pretty cheap for anybody with a credit card and an ebay account. Last I checked AoBR orks went for about 30 cents a Boy.

Boyz are now. Then you start throwing in things like Vehicles etc and it adds up.

And 30 cents a Boy doesn't change the fact that SM are the easiest army to get looking good on the table, in the shortest amount of time.

You can't get away with spraying Orks green, slapping on an ink wash and some decals. :p

sabreu
25-02-2010, 00:37
Sure.

I'm saying that SM got all that attention because they're the best sellers (due the reasons above), not the other way round.

No amount of lists would change the fact that a horde army costs waaaaay more than SM.

No amount of fluff would change the fact that a SM army can be painted in a weekend to tabletop standard with basic techniques, while a horde takes much longer.

Wait...so by that logic Necrons should be number 1! They have the easiest models to assemble and paint, the smallest model count, and essentially half as many special rules than marines have.

No, I call bunk on that assertion. Gameplay is definitely pushing the sales.

Occulto
25-02-2010, 00:56
Wait...so by that logic Necrons should be number 1! They have the easiest models to assemble and paint, the smallest model count, and essentially half as many special rules than marines have.

No, I call bunk on that assertion. Gameplay is definitely pushing the sales.

SM do have a few years head start on Necrons. :p

Plus Necrons don't offer the same ease of conversion. (There's a distinct lack of bitz/options anyway). If I want to convert a bunch of Tac Marines into Devastators, it'll be much easier than converting a bunch of Necrons into Immortals.

Which is why I originally said: "Other armies share some of the same aspects but not all."

sabreu
25-02-2010, 01:23
SM do have a few years head start on Necrons. :p

Plus Necrons don't offer the same ease of conversion. (There's a distinct lack of bitz/options anyway). If I want to convert a bunch of Tac Marines into Devastators, it'll be much easier than converting a bunch of Necrons into Immortals.

Which is why I originally said: "Other armies share some of the same aspects but not all."

Of course they do! :p

But making tac marines into devastators isn't a conversion. It's a kitbash, only possible because they have seperate kits for that, spare bits, and formerly blisters. That's because their fully supported. Just trying to make a point. ;)

massey
25-02-2010, 01:53
Regarding the whole SM debate:

Personolly i've allways felt SM sell well for one reason:

They get pushed like crazy. SM codex's take up a significant fraction of the total books, the models take up an even greater % of average shelf space, and every adverty not advertising the latest release is SPESS MARINESSS.

Given how hard they're pushed and how much more GW spends on pushing them, do they really justify the claim of being this amazingly popular, amazingly well selling army. Or is it just a case of: They sell the most because they're the most pushed.

Irrelevant. It just doesn't matter why. It is the way it is. You might as well ask why the quarterback is so popular. Is he popular because he's banging the head cheerleader, or is he banging the head cheerleader because he's popular? In the end, it doesn't matter. Fact is, the trend started somewhere. Marines started selling better than other armies, and so GW started producing more marines.

I've always seen these sorts of comments as a "that's not fair" rant. Life isn't fair. Coffee is for closers. First place is a Cadillac Eldorado. Second place is a set of steak knives. Third place is you're fired. ;)

Occulto
25-02-2010, 01:56
Of course they do! :p

But making tac marines into devastators isn't a conversion. It's a kitbash, only possible because they have seperate kits for that, spare bits, and formerly blisters. That's because their fully supported. Just trying to make a point. ;)

Ok, kitbash then. :p

I see your point, but I argue it's not just because they're fully supported. It's because every SM model is built around the same standardised parts, so transferring between kits much easier. It's more due to the design of power armour (ie simple geometric shapes) than the number of kits out there.

Orks are very similar. A friend of mine used to amaze me with the number of different Ork units he made using pretty much just the one kit. Slugga boyz, Shoota boyz, Skarboyz, 'Ard boyz, Flash Gitz - all from the basic Boyz box.

sabreu
25-02-2010, 02:01
Orks are very similar. A friend of mine used to amaze me with the number of different Ork units he made using pretty much just the one kit. Slugga boyz, Shoota boyz, Skarboyz, 'Ard boyz, Flash Gitz - all from the basic Boyz box.

Hehe. The running joke in my neck of the woods (er, post-apocalyptic seeming NJ...) was that if you played space marines, you were a gamer, and if you played Orks, you were a modeller by default. God I loved it when all we needed was just that one box. No two armies ever looked alike! :p

Occulto
25-02-2010, 02:10
Hehe. The running joke in my neck of the woods (er, post-apocalyptic seeming NJ...) was that if you played space marines, you were a gamer, and if you played Orks, you were a modeller by default. God I loved it when all we needed was just that one box. No two armies ever looked alike! :p

Oh this guy started Orks just when GW had their "We're getting rid of Gorka Morka" sale. :D

Every day for two weeks he'd come home with some more boxes of stuff. I think he went into debt with every friend he had, just to take advantage of the ridiculous prices.

Rated_lexxx
25-02-2010, 12:13
so it's going to come to all games are going to be SM vs. SM boy that seems fun :P