PDA

View Full Version : Would you play 40K if it had no Space Marines?



barrangas
16-07-2010, 03:42
This poll is just to see if you think you would have still gotten into 40k if it never had Space Marines. Obviously GW would never get rid of their cash cow, but what if they never thought of it or used a completely different idea like genespliced mutants or robots? I think the setting itself could have supported itself with obvious changes (Chaos would probably be regular humans like in WHF) but would it still interest you?

Crap, there was supposed to be a poll. Unfortunately I got to wordy on one slot and it didn't let me fix it :mad:

OoieGooie
16-07-2010, 03:47
I would have. For me it was playing 40k and buying my first box set of rules and mini's. The marines and orks where in the box and unfortunately the marines looked way cooler at the time. So, for many (like myself), my guess is this is what started people on marines.

Thankfully I found Eldar. Oh sweet, shiny Eldar.

Unfortunately I have all these space wolves from when I started. I guess I can use them for dead bodies?

Penitent Engine
16-07-2010, 03:51
I would vote if there was a poll :shifty:
And yes, I would. If Chaos was still around I would be to!


Unfortunately I have all these space wolves from when I started. I guess I can use them for dead bodies?
Alternatively, sell them on ebay to power gamers...

barrangas
16-07-2010, 03:53
I would vote if there was a poll :shifty:

There was supposed to be one... :cries:.

barrangas
16-07-2010, 03:58
Success!!!

OoieGooie
16-07-2010, 03:58
There was supposed to be one... :cries:.

You might be able to do it still. Can you edit your post?

EDIT: ah there it is

The Inevitable One
16-07-2010, 04:02
You know you can create another poll after you have posted the thread right? Just look for thread tools in the top right corner of your post and then at the bottom of the thread tools there should be a thing that says "create poll". If you already tried to do that well then I am out of ideas.

Grand Master Raziel
16-07-2010, 06:22
There's a slight chance I might have gotten into 40K on the strength of the Imperial Guard, but probably not. When I got into 40K, I wanted to play a human protagonist army that was suitably futuristic. IG didn't fit the bill, but Space Marines did. They're still my favorite army, some 6 years later. I think it safe to say, if it weren't for Space Marines, I wouldn't be playing 40K today.

Getifa Ubazza
16-07-2010, 06:36
I do feel that the game needs an Elite type of human army, so marines are important, but there role could be filled just as well with a storm trooper or IG veteran style army.

WigglesNY
16-07-2010, 06:51
My first army was Tau? I quit, now I play Blood Angels :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Asurman
16-07-2010, 06:51
No offense intended, but this post will have very little in the way of honesty.. much more likely to become a cesspool.

I don't even play Marines, and even I grow tired of all of the Marine hatred -- the exact kind this thread is going to attract.

"No way man, I'd of played 40K regardless! Even though the real defining aspect of 40K is Marines! Wooo, one Marine codex to rule them all!" /jersey shore fist-bump fellow xeno players

Billy
16-07-2010, 06:53
Without Space Marines there would be no Imperium. Without the boys in blue (and every other colour of the rainbow) humanity would be crushed into non-existence.

So unless you want a universe JUST crawling with xenos and no human element the game needs SM's.

Space Marines do get overdone by GW, so i can see why people load them up with the hate sauce. But there is just something cool about a geneticly altered killing machine capable of punching a man's head clean off.

If you don't want any space marines make your own game and call it xenohammer 40k "in the far future there is only xenos, because humanity is too weak without the Space Marines to defend itself"

Billy
16-07-2010, 06:57
And yes, I would. If Chaos was still around I would be to!

News flash, Chaos marines are still space marines...

druchii
16-07-2010, 07:04
This poll is just to see if you think you would have still gotten into 40k if it never had Space Marines. Obviously GW would never get rid of their cash cow, but what if they never thought of it or used a completely different idea like genespliced mutants or robots? I think the setting itself could have supported itself with obvious changes (Chaos would probably be regular humans like in WHF) but would it still interest you?

Crap, there was supposed to be a poll. Unfortunately I got to wordy on one slot and it didn't let me fix it :mad:

I don't think the game would be nearly as popular. Really, what else sets 40k apart, totally, from different sci-fi games? Everyone's got the nasty aliens, the sexy aliens, the robots, the shooty aliens, but 40k made it COOL to be a good guy. Games that can do that (almost ALL games, look at Warcraft, they made being "good" guys(the alliance) COOL because they looked neat, and were actually the BAD guys!), make the good guys appealing, usually do well.

It's easy to make badguys appealing, so creating compelling antagonists (because even if you play Dark Eldar, or Chaos Demons, one of those "holy crap" moments is when they face off against a Space Marine). And lets face, space marines are just *******' sick. Huge machine gun that shoots rockets? Check. Awesome armor? Check. Ancient weapons juiced up by energy fields? Check. GIANT HANDS?! Check. Giant robots? check. Tanks? Check. Hammering metal studs into your face for every decade of service? Check.

See? They have like every check mark of COOL!!1one! checked off.

d

thebaz
16-07-2010, 07:21
fluff whise they are the most important thing to the entire storyline of the 40k universe Good verse Evil. I think if the Horus Heresy would have never happened then it would have been equally boring but I don't think over half the gamers out there would have started playing if there had been SM. I started with Tau but quickly changed to Dark Angels and have collected nearly 6000 pts worth. I also started an Iron Warriors army back when they were amazing not because they could take 4 Heavy Support but because I liked their fluff.
Storyline is very important for me when I choose an army thats why I think Space Marines are a very good choice because there are a lot of Chapters to choose from with very rich history. Especially the first founding!

Dead7
16-07-2010, 08:00
It's easy to make badguys appealing, so creating compelling antagonists (because even if you play Dark Eldar, or Chaos Demons, one of those "holy crap" moments is when they face off against a Space Marine). And lets face, space marines are just *******' sick. Huge machine gun that shoots rockets? Check. Awesome armor? Check. Ancient weapons juiced up by energy fields? Check. GIANT HANDS?! Check. Giant robots? check. Tanks? Check. Hammering metal studs into your face for every decade of service? Check.

See? They have like every check mark of COOL!!1one! checked off.

d

thats the problem with them imo, they are too "cool". the 90% of the background for 40k can be summed up in one sentence; "space marines are better than you". i really wouldnt mind if they were not so over done in both rules and fluff, but having every other codex as a different color of the same army is really annoying, ive even been seriously looking at other other gaming systems becaus im so tired of it. i agree though that having a compelling protagonist is really nice, its just that focusing 50% of your development and 90% of the fluff on one army is obviously going to **** some people off. i went to a gaming store that wants to start doing 40k today to play a game with a friend to try to build hype, we met some nice people but there was literaly no one who wanted to play a non space marine army. how is that any fun?

Hunger
16-07-2010, 08:12
I went for Not Sure. When I got into 40K it was from a move from Fantasy, in about 92. The units that drew me were the SM Devastators and the BA Furioso Dreadnought, back when Furioso was a warriors name. I likes the look of the guns, and the I thought the dread was the coolest miniature out there. However, I always loved Tyranids too, and if the Devastators didn't exist I'm pretty sure I would have started Tyranids instead, based on the Genestealers and 2nd ed Hormagaunts.

Radium
16-07-2010, 08:48
Yes. I really don't care that much for space marines. Although I do like the new BA codex...

DarkReaver
16-07-2010, 08:54
I didn't care for Space Marines. Sure I do play Chaos Space Marines but if they weren't around either I more than likely would of used Orks.

Bloodknight
16-07-2010, 08:56
Probably yes.

While I own a 10K CSM army, I've never owned or wanted any loyal Space Marines and if the CSM didn't exist, I'd probably have gone for Orks.

Well, and I love the Guard so much that I don't need other defenders of the Imperium anyway.

magath
16-07-2010, 09:00
Honestly, No, I wouldn't.

Marines are awesome, I love them and the whole concept, their kind of the definining thing about 40k for me.

Frankly, if it weren't for marines, I'd sod off and play a better sci fi game.

Penitent Engine
16-07-2010, 09:07
News flash, Chaos marines are still space marines...

Special report, I play Daemons :cool:

Marines are ok, but I think the game would still be great without them.

IcedAnimals
16-07-2010, 09:09
I play Necrons, Sisters, and Daemons. None of which are marine armies, but without marines the game wouldn't be 40k. Sure they could just be "stormtroopers" in a guard army. However without them it would simply be too much missing from the game including a fluff point.

When it comes down to it, there are other games out there that offer a similar experience but with no marines. And I am not playing those games.

Corax
16-07-2010, 09:10
I think that I would still be interested in 40k if there were no SMs in 40k, but I also think that the background would, by necessity, be significantly different to what it is now. Originally, the Tyranids where what attracted me to 40k, so I still would have gotten dragged in, I suspect.

Obviously, you would not have the whole Horus Heresy thing as the central hook for the whole thing so you would need something else for the whole thing to revolve around. What that would be, I'm not sure...

However, I also think that IG would be different to what they are now (as they would be the human poster boys), and would be a good deal less incompetent than they are; perhaps a Guardsman would be more like a Stormtrooper, and a Stormtrooper (slightly) more like a SM. They would probably bear a closer similarity to the Mobile Infantry from Starship Troopers, I suspect.

Giganthrax
16-07-2010, 09:20
I love space marines and feel they are iconic to the 40k universe.

That being said, I'm not sure if I'd play 40k without them. I'm a fan of elite armies, and without marines what elite armies would we have left? Necrons? Nidzilla? Deffwing? Screw those, I want a real elite army.

So, unless we had some other elite army alternative, I don't think I'd be much interested in 40k simply because the playstyle of the armies wouldn't mesh with my own playstyle.

Wishing
16-07-2010, 09:22
thats the problem with them imo, they are too "cool". the 90% of the background for 40k can be summed up in one sentence; "space marines are better than you".

That's kinda my starting point for this debate as well. If Marines hadn't been specifically designed (fluff-wise) to be better than everyone else, 40k would be a different and presumably more interesting game. However, would it have taken off, or even been written in the first place without them? I personally think that GW wouldn't have had an interest in publishing a sci-fi game featuring their fantasy races if they hadn't had the Marines as a new, shiny USP. It would have been cool if they had though - I would love it if 40k was more like WHFB in terms of no one single faction being "the popular one".

Radium
16-07-2010, 09:31
That being said, I'm not sure if I'd play 40k without them. I'm a fan of elite armies, and without marines what elite armies would we have left? Necrons? Nidzilla? Deffwing? Screw those, I want a real elite army.

What about Eldar :rolleyes:?

thebaz
16-07-2010, 09:32
Yes But the entire storyline revolves around the space marine and it has always been that way. I love playing as other races but if there were not Space Marines we would have no Warhammer 40k as we know it

Zurubbu
16-07-2010, 09:39
The only good marine is a dead marine, and the only thing better than a dead marine is a dyin' marine who tell yer where to find 'is mates.

I dont like space marines. Actually i'd like the whole humanity die, but i guess the imperium point of view is too important to lose.

Sir_Turalyon
16-07-2010, 09:50
Depends what 40k would look like. Marines are so central to the concept of 40k it would be hard to imagine what the seting would be without Imperium as we know it. Removing marines would require removing Chaos and Sisters (otherwise designers would give Sisters tanks, more gear and developed them as fully-fledged MEQ army to fill the niche). Would the game about vast Imperium of Man whose main fighting force is Imperial Guard, using superiority of numbers to keep in check more deadly aliens, really interesting? Perhaps, as strange reversal of convention that side with more worse trained troops is supposed to be bad guys.

The game would be vastly different, with central part of toughness and armour save spectrum relatively unused. Despite their claim of being elite army, marines are the middle ground army. Without them, saves better than 3+ would be reserved for elite troops like Meganobz, Incubi and Fire Dragons, and considered as rare and powerful as power armour is in fluff ... unless you play Necrons. Orks would be absurdly tough monsters they are supposed to be. Tyranids would be full of insanely tough monsters and Necrons would be complete monsters with high toughness and armour. With armies more extreme, it would be more difficult to make a take on all comers lists; due to prevalance of low save / low toughness armies such lists would probably work poorly against Necrons and Tyranids. Game would be even more paper-rock-scissors like, with more autowin situations.

x2wyckedx
16-07-2010, 09:50
Space Marine fluff is what got me into 40k. If there was no space marines I probably would not have gotten interested. I dont play space marines but I still love how fanatical they are.

Captain_Trips01
16-07-2010, 09:53
Yes, but SM are still one of the defining icons of Warhammer. I started with Tau and recently started a small Space Wolves force, but I would still play the game without them. But I would rather have them then not, of course.

bigcheese76
16-07-2010, 09:55
Space Marines are one of the factors that make 40k unique from other tabletop games and they really have been made the flagship army for 40k by GW. For this reason, I like having the marines and would feel like something was missing were they taken away.

Badger[Fr]
16-07-2010, 09:58
Even if Space Marines aren't my main army, I honestly don't know. As much as I enjoy the baroque feel of the old, first Edition Imperial Guard, the pseudo-historical regiments of the 2nd and 3rd Edition do not appeal to me in the slightest, contrary to the average psychopathic Space Marine.

Weren't it for DoW's awesome portrayal of the Imperial Guard (they're even more fanatical than Space Marines), I would have probably chosen the Astartes.

Giganthrax
16-07-2010, 10:00
What about Eldar :rolleyes:?
Lol, space elves with crappy models and a standard "we elves are smarter, faster, and more beautiful then everyone else" elf fluff? No thanks.

b4z
16-07-2010, 10:23
I think without Space Marines, Warhammer 40,000 would be a much better game... because it would bring more creativity and diversity and balance.

That's the one thing Warhammer Fantasy has over Warhammer 40,000... a greater selection of individualised Armies, which breeds creativity and diversity and balance.

Every 75%+ of Warhammer 40,000 games i've seen played involves Space Marines.

To me it matters not if they are Blue, Red, Green, Yellow etc. [or their names are changed and their foc is slightly different, eg. DA/BA/SW]

It is simply boring. There is no doubt about it.

Corax
16-07-2010, 10:24
The game would be vastly different, with central part of toughness and armour save spectrum relatively unused. Despite their claim of being elite army, marines are the middle ground army. Without them, saves better than 3+ would be reserved for elite troops like Meganobz, Incubi and Fire Dragons, and considered as rare and powerful as power armour is in fluff ... unless you play Necrons. Orks would be absurdly tough monsters they are supposed to be. Tyranids would be full of insanely tough monsters and Necrons would be complete monsters with high toughness and armour. With armies more extreme, it would be more difficult to make a take on all comers lists; due to prevalance of low save / low toughness armies such lists would probably work poorly against Necrons and Tyranids. Game would be even more paper-rock-scissors like, with more autowin situations.

I agree. I think that the absence of the MEQs would actually do wonders for the overall balance of the system as a whole, as it would push the focus away from high S, AP:1-2 weapons to multi-shot weapons and templates and would negate the constant need for power weapons. The presence of power armour, specifically the advantages it gives over all others, actually distorts all other aspects of the game. I believe 40k would be a better (from a balance POV) game than it is now.

Hellebore
16-07-2010, 10:25
That's kinda my starting point for this debate as well. If Marines hadn't been specifically designed (fluff-wise) to be better than everyone else, 40k would be a different and presumably more interesting game. However, would it have taken off, or even been written in the first place without them? I personally think that GW wouldn't have had an interest in publishing a sci-fi game featuring their fantasy races if they hadn't had the Marines as a new, shiny USP. It would have been cool if they had though - I would love it if 40k was more like WHFB in terms of no one single faction being "the popular one".

Space marines were just part of the imperial army back in the 80s.

People are looking at the history of 40k with modern eyes.

Back when they made 40k space marines were NOT the best at everything. In fact they were some of the worst scum in the galaxy, psycho indoctrinated into fighting for the emperor. Back then space marines WERE storm troopers, working for the imperial army slaughtering children because they had mutant eyes.

Space marines being the best at everything only showed up in the 90s and was only codified in 2nd ed.

The game was immensely successful WITHOUT marines being teh bestest. Only when it became successful did they start pushing that angle.

My perspective is that marines SHOULD have been the Elites of the Imperial Guard. Had they been the elites instead of elites that were randomly made their own force then the imbalance we see wouldn't have been an issue.

The space wolves would have been a different regiment of space marine.

What difference would there have been? Imperial guard would have fought the great crusade. the 20 legions would have been the first 20 guard regiments, the Primarchs the Lord Generals in charge of them.

There would have been human heroes, there would have been mighty warriors. There just wouldn't have been so much self indulgent fanfic about space marines.

I can quite easily imagine a 40k without space marines. It would be virtually identical. The space marines fill a niche created for them to fill, if they weren't there the 'niche' of 'guy what uppercuts an avatar' wouldn't exist to be filled in the first place.

At every battle marines fought there would be guard instead. Heroic guard sergeants leading the defences.Marneus Calgar Guard Colonel leading his command squad into combat.

Hellebore

Malice313
16-07-2010, 10:39
There was no way I would have gotten into 4+k without Space Marines as the RTB01 box set was the only affordable (read: plastic) box set available.

Actually it was 1 of 2 box sets available, the other being Thrugg Bullnecks Ork Raiders and they were lead so you only got 17 Orks instead of 30 Marines.

I have not voted because the options don't seem to cover this.


...Space marines being the best at everything only showed up in the 90s and was only codified in 2nd ed...

I can see your point, and that is when the Power Armour save changed to 3+, but I think the change was a little more gradual than that and began with the original Epic scale box: Space Marine.

Before 2nd ed (around the time of the Battle Manual from memory) there was also an article about the bio engineering of Space Marines (that appears in the Compendium or "Red Book") which is when SM's got an increase to T4.

This along with the article describing the progression of the Mk's of Power armour is where I think the supremacy of SM's began. Well ahead of 2nd ed.

mughi3
16-07-2010, 10:47
If the game was still fun to play, had a good player base, nice model...then yes i would still play it without SMs. 40K is only one of many mini's games i play.

Hellebore
16-07-2010, 11:03
2nd ed came out in 1993. The supremecy of the space marines started showing up in WD in the early 90s before this, but then 2nd ed in some ways rewrote 40k and it was then that the emphasis on space marines really become apparent.

Hellebore

Sai-Lauren
16-07-2010, 11:51
Without Space Marines there would be no Imperium. Without the boys in blue (and every other colour of the rainbow) humanity would be crushed into non-existence.

So unless you want a universe JUST crawling with xenos and no human element the game needs SM's.

Space Marines do get overdone by GW, so i can see why people load them up with the hate sauce. But there is just something cool about a geneticly altered killing machine capable of punching a man's head clean off.

If you don't want any space marines make your own game and call it xenohammer 40k "in the far future there is only xenos, because humanity is too weak without the Space Marines to defend itself"

In fluff, no, not necessarily - alien threats can still be terrifying, requiring the best that humanity has to offer in order to defeat it. It's just that the best that humanity has to offer is an Elite Imperial Guardsman, not a Marine.

No one army is essential to the game - 40k started without Chaos, so does it really need that in the universe, or can the bad guys just be aliens and heretics?

In RT there were no Dark Eldar (closest was probably the Eldar pirates), Tau or Necrons, warp creatures were genuinely rare and scary, they brought in the Sororitas from a single piece of background nearly two editions later, and have lost the Jokaero, Zoats, Squats and Beastmen.



Obviously, you would not have the whole Horus Heresy thing as the central hook for the whole thing so you would need something else for the whole thing to revolve around. What that would be, I'm not sure...

RT never had the Horus Heresy. That came in later.



Yes But the entire storyline revolves around the space marine and it has always been that way.

Again, not in RT. 40k started off as the Imperium of Humanity standing against the enemies without and within. Marines were only in the fluff as a part of that, not todays view with the dead and dying guardsmen in the background airbrushed out.

And most of the posts have been effectively "If Marines were taken away" - that's not what the OP asked. It's if they'd never existed in the first place - if 40k was just a Sci-Fi WFB, possibly with competing human empires as well as the alien races.

If 40k had come into existance without Marines, guess what - people would still have bought it as another GW produced wargaming system, alongside WFB. At that time, GW had their own shops and sold through independants, and they were an international company with a well known name. (GW's just a teensy bit bigger now than they were then. ;))

Would it have sold as well as it has done? Probably not, but probably not appreciably so - those people who had been "brought in by marines" would probably have been brought in by another army, and there may well have been some who'd been brought in because there was no one army that got hyped over all the others.

And maybe if the designers hadn't been spending time on developing Marines, they'd have been able to work on other projects, which would have supported GW better and made it even more successful (RPGs, board and card games, they even designed some of the challenges for The Crystal Maze tv series, which could have gone on into other things).

GW could potentially have become an even bigger company than it is.



Space marines were just part of the imperial army back in the 80s.

People are looking at the history of 40k with modern eyes.

Back when they made 40k space marines were NOT the best at everything. In fact they were some of the worst scum in the galaxy, psycho indoctrinated into fighting for the emperor. Back then space marines WERE storm troopers, working for the imperial army slaughtering children because they had mutant eyes.

Space marines being the best at everything only showed up in the 90s and was only codified in 2nd ed.

The game was immensely successful WITHOUT marines being teh bestest. Only when it became successful did they start pushing that angle.

My perspective is that marines SHOULD have been the Elites of the Imperial Guard. Had they been the elites instead of elites that were randomly made their own force then the imbalance we see wouldn't have been an issue.

The space wolves would have been a different regiment of space marine.

What difference would there have been? Imperial guard would have fought the great crusade. the 20 legions would have been the first 20 guard regiments, the Primarchs the Lord Generals in charge of them.

There would have been human heroes, there would have been mighty warriors. There just wouldn't have been so much self indulgent fanfic about space marines.

I can quite easily imagine a 40k without space marines. It would be virtually identical. The space marines fill a niche created for them to fill, if they weren't there the 'niche' of 'guy what uppercuts an avatar' wouldn't exist to be filled in the first place.

At every battle marines fought there would be guard instead. Heroic guard sergeants leading the defences.Marneus Calgar Guard Colonel leading his command squad into combat.

Hellebore

That.

Malice313
16-07-2010, 12:51
2nd ed came out in 1993. The supremecy of the space marines started showing up in WD in the early 90s before this, but then 2nd ed in some ways rewrote 40k and it was then that the emphasis on space marines really become apparent.

Hellebore

I'm not doubting that was when it was really cut and dried. I was just trying to make the point that it was a gradual increase that culminated in 2nd ed.

I think that in terms of back ground in general 2nd ed started to properly define 4+k, which in some cases did involve rewriting, but in many others it was filling in massive blanks.


...RT never had the Horus Heresy. That came in later...

Pages 240-245 of Slaves to Darkness where the first place the Horus Heresy appeared which was printed 5 years before 2nd ed.

Corax
16-07-2010, 12:57
My perspective is that marines SHOULD have been the Elites of the Imperial Guard. Had they been the elites instead of elites that were randomly made their own force then the imbalance we see wouldn't have been an issue.

Wow. Someone who feels the same way about where Marines should fit in 40k to what I do. I thought I was the only one out on that limb...

barrangas
16-07-2010, 13:55
There was no way I would have gotten into 4+k without Space Marines as the RTB01 box set was the only affordable (read: plastic) box set available.

Actually it was 1 of 2 box sets available, the other being Thrugg Bullnecks Ork Raiders and they were lead so you only got 17 Orks instead of 30 Marines.

I have not voted because the options don't seem to cover this.

The question isn't about the price of the models, it's about what attracted you to 40k. Specifically if Marines were key to your enjoyment of the setting. I would have to assume that you were drawn in by something other then the price. What would have happened if the Orks, Eldar, and IG were the same price for the same model count?

I'm targetting the SM on this poll because they are the most popular army in 40k and it's interesting to see if people would have played if they were never present.

I for one started with the Tau, as they interested me the most. I was familiar with the game since 2nd Ed. and the Eldar did occassionally tempt me but the Tau are what actually drew me in. So Marine aren't what got me started. That said I did pick up CSM 3.0 because the Tau had very few options. I didn't take regular SM because I didn't want to be fighting the same army as mine all the time. Still Tau are my favorite so I went with SM not being the reason I started 40k.

Sai-Lauren
16-07-2010, 14:04
Pages 240-245 of Slaves to Darkness where the first place the Horus Heresy appeared which was printed 5 years before 2nd ed.
Exactly - Slaves to Darkness was RT era, but was printed after and retconned the original background of the Imperium in the Rogue Trader rule book. ;)

electricblooz
16-07-2010, 14:14
The question isn't about the price of the models, it's about what attracted you to 40k. Specifically if Marines were key to your enjoyment of the setting.

You're combining two concepts there that don't necessarily need to be combined.

Space marines are what drew me to 40k because of the RTBO1 box (followed very shortly by the original Harlequin box). However, I never played those Marines, I was in my early 20's when I bought them and bought them just cause it looked like fun to paint them (I was into Battletech at the time).

The first army I ever <played> and the army I enjoy most is my IG (followed closely by my =I= and Eldar armies). I have a full Vanilla Marine army somewhere, but they are hardly the key to my enjoyment.

In this sense, I suspect your premise is faulty. I'm willing to bet that you are going to argue that the SM are not pivotal to the success of 40k (based on your poll results) and, thus, GW should place more emphasis on the xenos armies. However, the faulty dichotomy you create in your response scale precludes this conclusion because it forces respondents to either agree that the SM are integral to both entry and enjoyment or to disagree with both. I would argue that it is possible to have gained entry through the SM while having never had them be integral to enjoyment.

BTW - before you argue that I'm wrong about the bias in your response scale, I have a doctorate in public opinion and manage the survey operations for a $3 billion organization. In other words, I know about which I speak....

PC Veteran
16-07-2010, 14:24
I voted not sure.

I got into 40k Because of (epic) The box came with Space Marines and Eldar. That got me to buy the first Spacehulk. Which lead me to play my first 40k game with my terminators as part of a big game the store had going on. This was back in 2nd edition when terminator rulled. That got me started, and I bought an army. If the marines never existed I might have gone the fantasy route. Although Once the new Cadian models came out for 40k that may have got me interested.

don_mondo
16-07-2010, 14:34
I'm a yes, but none of the yes answers fit me. Yes, I'd play without Marines even tho I have Marine armies. Cause I also have IG, Nids, Orks, Genestealer Cult, etc etc.......

the1stpip
16-07-2010, 15:28
I voted Nor Sure, as it is the nearest to 'I would continue as normal'.

I like Marines, I have two Marine armies and a third on the way, but I also have Guard, Orks and D Eldar, so it wouldnt bother me either way.

Marines are THE iconic image of 40k, I'm sure it wouldnt be the same game without them though.

Godzooky
16-07-2010, 15:33
They do give the 40K universe something iconic that sets it apart from most generic sci-fi, IMHO

If marines went a lot of the grimdark vibe would go with them, but I'm sure another faction would rise up and become the new favourite target for all the whiners, given time. People like to whine.

barrangas
16-07-2010, 16:02
You're combining two concepts there that don't necessarily need to be combined.

Space marines are what drew me to 40k because of the RTBO1 box (followed very shortly by the original Harlequin box). However, I never played those Marines, I was in my early 20's when I bought them and bought them just cause it looked like fun to paint them (I was into Battletech at the time).

The first army I ever <played> and the army I enjoy most is my IG (followed closely by my =I= and Eldar armies). I have a full Vanilla Marine army somewhere, but they are hardly the key to my enjoyment.

In this sense, I suspect your premise is faulty. I'm willing to bet that you are going to argue that the SM are not pivotal to the success of 40k (based on your poll results) and, thus, GW should place more emphasis on the xenos armies. However, the faulty dichotomy you create in your response scale precludes this conclusion because it forces respondents to either agree that the SM are integral to both entry and enjoyment or to disagree with both. I would argue that it is possible to have gained entry through the SM while having never had them be integral to enjoyment.

BTW - before you argue that I'm wrong about the bias in your response scale, I have a doctorate in public opinion and manage the survey operations for a $3 billion organization. In other words, I know about which I speak....

Wow, I'm glad to see that you are comfident in your abilities :D.

Honestly my curiosity stems from the fact that Marines are the most widely played army. I play Chaos Space Marines which is, at it's core, a Space Marine Army. They aren't what got me playing 40k but I still like them a lot.

If I have any alterior motives, its because I'm working on armies for play during the Dark Age of Technology, so gauging interest in whether people would be interested in a time before SM is something of interest to me.

My expected range for the poll was that option 2 and 6 would be the highest followed by option 3 and 5. So far option 1 is about what I expected. I'm sort of surprised that option 3 is beating 2 ATM. The real surprise was option 7 as it was one of the two extreme options I put in there. I'm tempted to exampand my sample to similar forums to see how they stack up. Of course that would be to see if this forum just had a lot of SM haters. I'd expect it to level out more. That's way more work then I wanted to do though.

Now I would argue that 40k had the ability to stand alone with out space marines at the start if you tried to argue that it couldn't. If they tried to remove them now though I think 40k would collapse. Like it or not SM are the keystone for 40k so that alone, IMO, is worth asking the question.

Now my response to Malice 313 was based on the fact that having an economic answer to the poll wouldn't really fit. For example, you state that you bought the box set because you thought they'd be fun to paint. You could have done that and gone back to Battletech but something got you to stay. Was it the SM fluff that got you in and you later found your love of IG? Was it that you got the models, decided to look into the system, and the IG drew you in? SM models interested me but the setting never did until the Tau came out, so I give credit to the Tau for gettig me involved in 40k.

You can believe I'm lying if you want and, by the sound of your post, you probably will. It doesn't affect me much. No matter what qualifications you claim it doesn't make your reasons for posting here any better or worse then mine.

Grand Master Raziel
16-07-2010, 16:09
thats the problem with them imo, they are too "cool". the 90% of the background for 40k can be summed up in one sentence; "space marines are better than you".

Pretty much every army's fluff portrays them as being better than everybody else at what they do. The only notable exception is Codex: Imperial Guard, where the PBI are portrayed as PBI - but they're still portrayed as tops in the massed armor department. You don't want to read the Space Marine fluff, don't buy any SM dexes. Problem solved.




I agree. I think that the absence of the MEQs would actually do wonders for the overall balance of the system as a whole, as it would push the focus away from high S, AP:1-2 weapons to multi-shot weapons and templates and would negate the constant need for power weapons. The presence of power armour, specifically the advantages it gives over all others, actually distorts all other aspects of the game. I believe 40k would be a better (from a balance POV) game than it is now.

You completely missed Sir_Turalyon's point. He was arguing that 40K would be less balanced without Space Marines, not more so.


Space marines were just part of the imperial army back in the 80s.

People are looking at the history of 40k with modern eyes.

So, you're arguing the game should be like it was back in the RT era? In that case, there should be no Tau, no Necrons, and no Dark Eldar, because all of those armies came after the RT era. I don't think players of those armies would agree with you.

Perhaps more to the point, Warhammer 40K has a decades-long history, but only in the very beginning of that are Space Marines a subset of the Imperial Guard. I'd argue the game evolved away from that to having Space Marines be their own army and central to the fluff, and then it took off. It's hard to say for sure, but one could argue that the central role of Space Marines and the Horus Heresy in the fluff is what sets the 40K universe apart from any other generic Sci Fi setting. Without the HH and all the fallout from it, what would 40K's setting be? Humans in space fighting aliens in the future. Gee, that hasn't been done before. :rolleyes:



The game was immensely successful WITHOUT marines being teh bestest. Only when it became successful did they start pushing that angle.

Yes, it was so immensely successful, I never heard of it. I didn't hear about the game until 3rd edition, when I started seeing it in the gaming stores I bought my MtG cards at. So, I think one could quite rightly argue that the huge success came only after 2nd edition came around.




And maybe if the designers hadn't been spending time on developing Marines, they'd have been able to work on other projects, which would have supported GW better and made it even more successful (RPGs, board and card games, they even designed some of the challenges for The Crystal Maze tv series, which could have gone on into other things).

GW could potentially have become an even bigger company than it is.

There's a company that does exactly what you're referring to: Wizards of the Coast. I'd argue that they never really became significantly larger than GW. They certainly never supported their own retail outlets.

de Selby
16-07-2010, 16:10
The thread title and the poll question are two different things: I would carry on collecting 40k stuff if there were no marines, because there are plent of great non-marine armies and the setting could be re-jigged without them.

But I never would have got into the game in the first place if I hadn't seen space marines in a friend's WD when I was 10.

barrangas
16-07-2010, 16:11
I voted Nor Sure, as it is the nearest to 'I would continue as normal'.

I like Marines, I have two Marine armies and a third on the way, but I also have Guard, Orks and D Eldar, so it wouldnt bother me either way.

Marines are THE iconic image of 40k, I'm sure it wouldnt be the same game without them though.

Yeah I forgot the "It wouldn't affect me" in the rush to get the poll out the second time :(. Unfortunately Warseer crashed right after I put it up so I couldn't enter it in last night and by this morning it was up to 3 pages. That is ,assuming there is a way to edit the poll. Sorry!

precinctomega
16-07-2010, 16:18
A space marine - one of the first ever released - was the second Citadel miniature I every bought and was what drew me to White Dwarf and, then, to Warhammer 40,000:Rogue Trader. I can still remember those very early illustrations, marines being reconditioned violent offenders, the many tactical markings (including field police!) and the image of beakie marines with one of Logan's World's lowlife up against a wall, arresting him.

They were iconic from the very start. And then, when RTB-01 was released, that pretty much hooked me for life. When "Space Marine" (the Epic scale game that followed Adeptus Titanicus) was released, locking into place the grand tale of the Horus Heresy as introduced the previous year in Slaves to Darkness, the place of the Adeptus Astartes was sealed into the 40kverse.

I wouldn't have it any other way.

R.

massey
16-07-2010, 16:28
Would you still play Kryomek if it had no space marines? What's that? You've never heard of Kryomek? Ah, I see.

Space Marines are what separates 40K from every other painted miniatures game. Why do you see retail outlets that specialize in carrying GW stuff, but not any that carry VOR: The Maelstrom? Or Void? Or Steve Jackson's OGRE? Space Marines, that's why.

If it weren't for Space Marines, Warseer would just be some guy's personal website that was still hosted by Geocities. It has 436 hits since April 23, 1997. It would have a message talking about the brand new 3rd edition that was supposed to come out in 1998. Then you go and check Wikipedia and find out that the 3rd edition was never published.

So no, I wouldn't play 40K if not for marines. I don't think any of us would, beyond that tiny handful of people who sit around playing Car Wars.

thebaz
16-07-2010, 17:22
A space marine - one of the first ever released - was the second Citadel miniature I every bought and was what drew me to White Dwarf and, then, to Warhammer 40,000:Rogue Trader. I can still remember those very early illustrations, marines being reconditioned violent offenders, the many tactical markings (including field police!) and the image of beakie marines with one of Logan's World's lowlife up against a wall, arresting him.

They were iconic from the very start. And then, when RTB-01 was released, that pretty much hooked me for life. When "Space Marine" (the Epic scale game that followed Adeptus Titanicus) was released, locking into place the grand tale of the Horus Heresy as introduced the previous year in Slaves to Darkness, the place of the Adeptus Astartes was sealed into the 40kverse.

I wouldn't have it any other way.

R.


I agree. Though for the sake of the poor Space Marines don't let Matt Ward near them anymore.

But for what the Horus Heresy Novels have done have been amazing for the game. Sales for Space Marines have gone up even more and it has revealed never known fluff on some mysterious chapters or events

electricblooz
16-07-2010, 17:41
Yeah I forgot the "It wouldn't affect me" in the rush to get the poll out the second time :(. Unfortunately Warseer crashed right after I put it up so I couldn't enter it in last night and by this morning it was up to 3 pages. That is ,assuming there is a way to edit the poll. Sorry!

Including "it wouldn't affect me" would have improved your scale markedly as it would have given the respondents a "step-out" point.

I would still argue, however, that the poll is hard to answer b/c it doesn't give respondents who were drawn in by marines but don't really care about them somewhere to go. For instance, if marine were removed today I really wouldn't care. Had the RTBO1 box never existed, would I have ever even noticed GW? Who knows? I definitely would not have been attracted to the IG of that day so I probably would have walked right on by. Given these facts, how would you suggest I answer your poll?

BTW - here's an interesting factiod - I bought the RTBO1 box and Harlie box and painted those; however, I never played and actual game of 40k until 3rd edition. I had the RT rule book, etc. but nobody in my army really played 40k. I did play a couple of games of Space Hulk and had several Necromunda gangs, plus an Undead army (WFB v4 v5?). But I did not really start playing 40K until moving up to around the Balti area.

Scribe of Khorne
16-07-2010, 17:46
No, because without SM, there is no story.

DeadlySquirrel
16-07-2010, 17:55
every war game needs religious zealots in super awsome armour...

barrangas
16-07-2010, 18:43
Including "it wouldn't affect me" would have improved your scale markedly as it would have given the respondents a "step-out" point.

I would still argue, however, that the poll is hard to answer b/c it doesn't give respondents who were drawn in by marines but don't really care about them somewhere to go. For instance, if marine were removed today I really wouldn't care. Had the RTBO1 box never existed, would I have ever even noticed GW? Who knows? I definitely would not have been attracted to the IG of that day so I probably would have walked right on by. Given these facts, how would you suggest I answer your poll?

BTW - here's an interesting factiod - I bought the RTBO1 box and Harlie box and painted those; however, I never played and actual game of 40k until 3rd edition. I had the RT rule book, etc. but nobody in my army really played 40k. I did play a couple of games of Space Hulk and had several Necromunda gangs, plus an Undead army (WFB v4 v5?). But I did not really start playing 40K until moving up to around the Balti area.

I tried to post this as a poll to start with but because one of my answers was to long it rejected it and didn't allow me to fix the poll before it was posted. You'll note that the first few posts support this (there were a couple of posts before I got out of the error page already). I was rushing to find a way to add this and I forgot that one in my hurry. I have already apologized.

There are many things that would make this poll better. For instance it could have multiple questions on specific topics and have seperate polls for what Edition a person began to play. Then I could open it up to other forums and get a broader sampling. As this forums really wouldn't allow for the first, I don't want to register on other forums, and this is mostly to satisfy my curiousity I really don't care that much. At least the answers were more varied then:

MARINES RUWLZ!!!
Marines r teh suxzor!
I love bacon!

I'm thinking bacon would win. As for how you could answer, I'd say it would be based on when you became interested in playing rather then when you started playing and what you know interests you. Do you think Marines in RT would have gotten you to play back in RT if people in your area played or was it the WWI/II style IG of later editions that got you seriously looking for people to play? If your not sure you could have put that. I'm sorry that I forgot the "It wouldn't have effected me", because I had intended that to be an answer. You could also have just ignored it like I do when I run across one I'm not interested in or think is bad.

electricblooz
16-07-2010, 19:40
I love bacon!


bacon should always win :-)

Dead7
16-07-2010, 20:00
i think without sm the imp guard would be a lot more like eldar, but tougher and slower. but now that i think about it i would be happier if marines were in the game but not the whole point of the game as they are now. i just dont understand why the whole game has to focus on one army, fantasy isnt like that is it?

Scribe of Khorne
16-07-2010, 20:11
i think without sm the imp guard would be a lot more like eldar, but tougher and slower. but now that i think about it i would be happier if marines were in the game but not the whole point of the game as they are now. i just dont understand why the whole game has to focus on one army, fantasy isnt like that is it?

Because they are, imo of course, the focus of the current settings story arc.

Book 1 - Emperor and SM go out and conquer the galaxy. Yes IG are in there, yes there are naval battles, but its the SM forces that are the poster boy of the Crusade.

Book 2 - Horus Heresy

Book 3 (Current) - The glorious Imperium of Mankind, struggles to survive and hold what it gained, then lost from the first 2 'books'.

40K is the story of Imperium seen largely through the eyes and actions of the spacemarines for the last 10k years.

Again, imo.

Vaktathi
16-07-2010, 20:41
While I think SM's are integral to the 40k universe at this point, 40k wouldn't be 40k without them, *personally*, I'd have preferred to see them as essentially the equivalent of WFHB "Rare" units for the various Imperial factions, with entire Space Marine armies being apocalyptic battle things, with CSM's being the 40k equivalent of Warriors of Chaos, options for lots of mundane human troops and monstrous warriors of the dark gods.

That said, they are what they are, and they aren't going anywhere and they certainly have their place. However, we really, really don't need the sheer number of SM armies that are out there. Daemonhunters with rules for GK's, a Chaos book with Lost and the Damned and CSM's, and a single loyalist Space Marine book would do wonders for the game as a whole. The existence of a book for Ultramarines and derivatives, Dark Angles, Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Black Templars is oversaturates the game, cannibalizes sales, and we get armies that have really very little distinction from one another then leading to humongous random special rules and derivatives of identical equipment and the like just to justify having different books for armies that, in all honesty, really didn't need them in the first place. As it is, playing against the supposedly near mythically rare and powerful Space Marines two out of every 3 games really takes away any special feeling to them. When it's the SM's that outnumber the Imperial Guard in terms of representation in the player base several times over, something is wrong. Their ubiquitousness breeds many negative metagame issues (e.g. people building armies around AP2 spam) and really negatively impacts how they should really play and feel.

However, you couldn't ever really remove Space Marines from 40k, they are just too iconic.

Corax
17-07-2010, 03:23
Because they are, imo of course, the focus of the current settings story arc.

That's the way it worked out, but that does not mean that that is the way it had to work out. GW chose to go that way because they obviously believed they could make the most money that way (lets not lose sight of the fact that money is the whole point of the exercise), but it does not mean that it is the only way they could have gone. The whole Horus Heresy as the central narrative of 40k thing is not set in stone; the setting could still work perfectly well either without it, or with something else in its place.

Malice313
17-07-2010, 11:08
The question isn't about the price of the models, it's about what attracted you to 40k.

I guess I worded my point badly. Space Marines were one of two core options and so had to be a a factor in attraction to the game simply by default.


Exactly - Slaves to Darkness was RT era, but was printed after and retconned the original background of the Imperium in the Rogue Trader rule book. ;)

It didn't retcon the background. They just filled in a massive blank.

There was never any mention of what put the Emperor on the Golden throne, other than a great series of battles. The Emperor is said to be immortal but one day he made the golden throne himself and sat down for no apparent reason to have his life sustained. Going by the same ambiguity that is endemic in RT the great series of battles is a prefect description of the Horus Heresy.

All the back ground information in RT is as limited and vague, so virtually everything has been "retcon"-ed to make them a little more 2 dimesional than "There might have been some guys that could have come from a place and maybe they did stuff, but records are fuzzy."

Its kind of like saying Tau were "retcon"-ed for 3rd ed because they are not in the core rule book of the period.

Corax
17-07-2010, 11:30
Actually, Malice313, according to our pals over at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity), an addition that has not been previously alluded to can be classed as a type of retcon. The addition of the Tau to the 40k setting would therefore constitute a retcon, as would the introduction of the Horus Heresy.

mrun0riginal
17-07-2010, 11:56
I started on khorne berserkers, so if there were CSM, then yeah. To be fair, i guess if there were no SM or CSM, i'd pick eldar or something.

massey
17-07-2010, 12:49
Actually, Malice313, according to our pals over at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity), an addition that has not been previously alluded to can be classed as a type of retcon. The addition of the Tau to the 40k setting would therefore constitute a retcon, as would the introduction of the Horus Heresy.

Retcon usually refers to a change in previously established background, not an expansion into a previously untouched topic. Otherwise every new episode of a TV show would be retcon, every single time.

"Wow, I can't believe how much retcon was in that episode. They never mentioned any of those things before."
"Dude, this was episode 2."

And Wikipedia can say whatever it wants, but the concept of retcon loses any meaning if it is expanded to include any additional information that is added at any time.

Malice313
17-07-2010, 12:58
Actually, Malice313, according to our pals over at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity), an addition that has not been previously alluded to can be classed as a type of retcon. The addition of the Tau to the 40k setting would therefore constitute a retcon, as would the introduction of the Horus Heresy.

Fair enough, but really RT alludes to pretty much bugger all.

It many not be the case though. The series of battles that place the Emperor on the Golden Throne many have alluded to the Horus Heresy... or the war of 1812 in North America... or Europe the same year. Perhaps it was the CWA's Upper Kikatinalong rapper M.C. battle competition?

Though in all these cases there would actually be combatants and battle fields in the wars so it would be retcon-ing too.:confused:

SharpSilver
17-07-2010, 13:04
No Space Marines = No Horus = No Horus Heresy = No 'real' Chaos threat.

Would be pretty bland.

Hellebore
17-07-2010, 13:42
Because only space marines can become daemon princes infused with the power of the chaos gods?

Archaon was an ordinary human in WFB and is now the most powerful warrior walking the planet.

You don't have to be a primarch to be uber, no matter what people think.

Hellebore

Malice313
17-07-2010, 13:56
Because only space marines can become daemon princes infused with the power of the chaos gods?

So that's why there are no Daemon Princes in WFB... hang on:confused:

JackCrow
17-07-2010, 13:58
Voted not sure, because things inside the universe of 40k would be radically different.
I'd repopulate it with Sisters of Battle instead of SM, and that would also be SOOOO MUCH fun.
The IG would then get their fair share of glory.

As for no Chaos threat, well you have Xeno scum, and Necrons, so no lack in enemies there.
Eventually if not CSM, something else would emerge from the warp, and then it would replace them quite nicely, though not cool enough probably.

As much as I like SM, Sisters are well you know "sisters". :)

Scribe of Khorne
17-07-2010, 17:13
That's the way it worked out, but that does not mean that that is the way it had to work out. GW chose to go that way because they obviously believed they could make the most money that way (lets not lose sight of the fact that money is the whole point of the exercise), but it does not mean that it is the only way they could have gone. The whole Horus Heresy as the central narrative of 40k thing is not set in stone; the setting could still work perfectly well either without it, or with something else in its place.

Yeah, but at that point it wouldnt be 40K. The question then would be "Would you play a Space based Fantasy Wargame"

As spacemarines and the HH have become the main arc of the background, if you removed spacemarines you essentially would not be playing 40k anymore.

TheDireAvenger
17-07-2010, 18:14
I agree, the Imperium would do just fine with with the imperial guard.

Space Marines wouldn't be so bad if everyone and their mom played them. >_< GW needs to focus more on Xenos!

Dead7
17-07-2010, 21:26
you dont need marines to have chaos, hell they could even play pretty much the same as they do now. just look at fantasy, chaos are really buff heavily armored warrriors. they just got the armor themselves and got buffed by the gods.

Xyrex
17-07-2010, 21:32
Marines for the win. I wouldn't play 40k if marines weren't in it.

Apasas
17-07-2010, 21:50
I was going to vote yes. But I can't help feeling that Space Marines are essential to the sould of the WH40K Universe.

Without them, the game may be better or worse, but it would certainly be different.

So I voted no.

TheMav80
17-07-2010, 22:17
I guess I just don't see how Space Marines are at all iconic as they are now.

But then I'm not as attracted to the gothic fantasy in space thing. I would be perfectly happy with just some scifi. Which is why I play Tau. :p

But you may as well ask "Do you have to have Elves and Dwarves in a fantasy setting to be succesful?" As much as I disagree, it seems the answer is yes.

barrangas
17-07-2010, 22:59
Space Marines wouldn't be so bad if everyone and their mom played them. >_< GW needs to focus more on Xenos!

This is perhaps the main reason I never started a loyalist SM army. Around my area we normally call SM vs SM matches shirts vs skins.

I'd love more Xenos, but then again I'm the type of person who wants more options. You want a new alien, sounds good to me. You think it's time for AdMech to get an army, so do I. I'd love to get the chapter approved lists back for things like Kroot Mercs, White Scars lists, and such. How would I keep up with production of already existing armies? Easy, I'd cut back on WHF and LotR :evilgrin:. Sorry to all you WHF and LotR players, I tried to like them.


But you may as well ask "Do you have to have Elves and Dwarves in a fantasy setting to be succesful?" As much as I disagree, it seems the answer is yes.

I would argue no, there are plenty of good fantasy that lacks elves or dwarves. I for one hate the whole drooling over elves that happens a lot when they do exist in a fantasy world. I'm not alone in this either.

Gazak Blacktoof
17-07-2010, 23:17
No, because without SM, there is no story.

There are several interesting aspects of 40K that don't revolve around the heresy. It would also be possible to have the heresy without marines, though it would be less poignant without the attempted patricide aspect.

Valtiel
17-07-2010, 23:25
I started out with Tyranids, then Chaos Daemons now. I really don't miss them as an army because I find their armies to look dull with almost every unit looking alike, performing slightly alike etc. I think GW could really broaden the universe more if they toned down on the Marines and created other armies. But well, that's just my opinion.

Mini77
17-07-2010, 23:29
If there were no space marines, people would just find something else to hate.

Green-is-best
17-07-2010, 23:58
Space Marines ARE 40k. There's really just no way around that. They have always been both face of the game (who was on the cover of Rogue Trader? Not Imperial Guard) and its heart and soul since the beginning. This question is like asking if Star Wars would be as popular without Jedi. Of course it wouldn't.

Noserenda
18-07-2010, 00:02
Space Marines ARE 40k. There's really just no way around that. They have always been both face of the game (who was on the cover of Rogue Trader? Not Imperial Guard) and its heart and soul since the beginning. This question is like asking if Star Wars would be as popular without Jedi. Of course it wouldn't.

This is true :D

Vaktathi
18-07-2010, 00:05
Space Marines ARE 40k. There's really just no way around that. They have always been both face of the game (who was on the cover of Rogue Trader? Not Imperial Guard) and its heart and soul since the beginning. This question is like asking if Star Wars would be as popular without Jedi. Of course it wouldn't.
SM's back then weren't what they are now. It'd be like if the current cover had IG stormtroopers. That's basically what they were.

Scribe of Khorne
18-07-2010, 00:13
There are several interesting aspects of 40K that don't revolve around the heresy. It would also be possible to have the heresy without marines, though it would be less poignant without the attempted patricide aspect.

I will admit, I am a Marine (World Eater) fan, and as such they are the way I explore the games background, my eyes into the universe if you will.

Yes, there are many interesting aspects of the story not central to marines, the Eldar fall, the formation of the Chaos Gods...well for me thats about it...but im sure others like other parts of the background.

However, for me, its always been about marines, and specifically World Eaters, and all the recent filling out of the story through the HH books, has done nothing if not reinforce the concept that 40K is the story of the Emperor, his Sons, and the marines they lead to rule the galaxy, and then cripple it.

Green-is-best
18-07-2010, 00:34
SM's back then weren't what they are now. It'd be like if the current cover had IG stormtroopers. That's basically what they were.

I disagree. Look back at the Rogue Trader book. The majority of the art work is Marine based. The counters to play your first game are for Orks v Marines. The models detailed in the book are Space Marines. The first release after the Rogue Trader book, Book of the Astronomican, deals primarily with Space Marines vs. Orks. First boxed kit? RTB01. The Imperial Guard box, RTB07, didn't come out until 1989 after Harlequins. HARLEQUINS! First formal Army List? Space Marines. First major metal release? Space Marines. I could go on like this all day. They have always been 40k's primary protagonists and have been marketed as such since the beginning.

Vaktathi
18-07-2010, 01:11
I disagree. Look back at the Rogue Trader book. The majority of the art work is Marine based. The counters to play your first game are for Orks v Marines. The models detailed in the book are Space Marines. The first release after the Rogue Trader book, Book of the Astronomican, deals primarily with Space Marines vs. Orks. First boxed kit? RTB01. The Imperial Guard box, RTB07, didn't come out until 1989 after Harlequins. HARLEQUINS! First formal Army List? Space Marines. First major metal release? Space Marines. I could go on like this all day. They have always been 40k's primary protagonists and have been marketed as such since the beginning.

Right, they were still Space Marines, but they weren't the Space Marines we know today. T3, 4+ saves (that were 5+ against lasguns), nothing like ATSKNF, etc. In terms of gameplay and fluff, the closest thing in the game now are Imperial Guard Stormtroopers.

There was no mythical religious status about them, no Horus Heresy until later, all the great background about SM's that we have now comes from the mid 90's and later really. The SM's we know of and think of now are not the SM's of Rogue Trader. They don't even look the same, the armor is different, and the "beakie" armor is now a rare subtype that still looks somewhat different than it did in RT, where the beakie armor was the standard SM archetype armor.

Green-is-best
18-07-2010, 01:48
Right, they were still Space Marines, but they weren't the Space Marines we know today....snip

Sure they were. The seeds of the Warrior-Monk angle were in Rogue Trader. The Fang is described as the Space Wolves Fortress Monastery. Chaplains and the whole Imperial Cult business was in by 1988, as was the Horus Heresy. The Space Marine chapter as autonomous military force was also in by the middle of 1988. Hell, I think the phrase Angels of Death was used to describe them in the Rogue Trader rulebook. By 1991 T4 was in, as were Mark 7, Purity Seals, and the beginnings of ATSKNF as spelled out in the Space Marines' unique shaken rules.

The Rogue Trader book came out in 1987 and by 1988 an archetype that is instantly recognizable as a "modern" Space Marine was in place. They were a little rougher around the edges, but even that was starting to be ironed out before 2nd edition was released.

lanrak
18-07-2010, 10:33
Hi all.
I think the point is Space Marines were originaly human elite army,that were just as hard to play as any other.
Becuse they were a SMALL elite force, and each loss was felt keenly.

GW then made the shift in 2nd ed to make them the poster boys of 40k.They wrote more fluff and promoted them more than any other army ,due to ease of writing,and producing new chapter specific models-minatures.

I belive that if 40k was as even handed with army support.
Eg 1 codex that covers ALL factions.

The game play and game ballance would be a lot better.

Useing an ELITE force as the benchmark to compare other armies to is not the best way to achive a ballanced game is it?

TTFN

metal bawks
18-07-2010, 10:53
40k would still work without marines - even the Heresy doesn't explicitly need Marines to work (e.g. powerful psykers could take their place, for example).

That said, it were the Space Marines that got me into 40k. Though the Orks (especially the zany RT-era ones) might have done it if there were no SM.

Putty
18-07-2010, 11:28
This poll is just to see if you think you would have still gotten into 40k if it never had Space Marines. Obviously GW would never get rid of their cash cow, but what if they never thought of it or used a completely different idea like genespliced mutants or robots? I think the setting itself could have supported itself with obvious changes (Chaos would probably be regular humans like in WHF) but would it still interest you?

Crap, there was supposed to be a poll. Unfortunately I got to wordy on one slot and it didn't let me fix it :mad:

hmmm i don't know... the reason why i play 40k is to kill space marines...

Corax
18-07-2010, 11:35
hmmm i don't know... the reason why i play 40k is to kill space marines...

Then you need Space Marines as much as anyone. If there were no Marines, you wouldn't be able to kill them and there would an empty place in your soul where "killing Space Marines" would otherwise live. :D

Krovin-Rezh
18-07-2010, 11:56
I started playing in 1998 with the starter set. I chose the DE because they were more unique, and ended up scorning the Space Marines that came with it.

Of course, I now play both DE and BT armies of roughly equal size, but back then, I wanted nothing to do with anything in power armor. So no, I would not have passed on WH40K if there had been Dark Eldar on the big box instead of Black Templar. And I'm sure I would have been twice or thrice more enthralled by the game at that time if it had been Imperial Guard vs. Dark Eldar. It probably would made for much better battles instead of: "Hey, let's massacre the DE again..."

the anti santa
18-07-2010, 13:14
I remember back in the 1st edition days that Marines were still the most popular army but nowhere nearly as much as in later editions.
However aside from Eldar and Orks all the other armies were largely ignored. Guard and nids had very little support, chaos got a bit though back then tended to be closer to human renegades with chaos armour and a few evil marines. The squats and a few other random aliens were badly served too.

I don't think 40K would be anywhere near as big as it is now without marines, i'm pretty sure Fantasy would still be bigger without them. Let's face it the guard are quite dull and too close to modern armies. Many people love that (though i can't see the appeal of making a sci-fi army like modern day soldiers when there are plenty of games that do that already) but most of us prefer all the cool silly big guns, aliens, psychics and tanks.

Lordmonkey
18-07-2010, 14:30
Space Marines are the central players in the 40k universe. Without them it would not be 40k anymore.

GW could still have a Sci-fi system without them, it just wouldn't be anything like the existing one in terms of the fictional universe.

Wrath
19-07-2010, 06:33
Then you need Space Marines as much as anyone. If there were no Marines, you wouldn't be able to kill them and there would an empty place in your soul where "killing Space Marines" would otherwise live. :D

nah, we would just go pop Necrons if we ever got the itch. XD

Soratris
19-07-2010, 07:28
Space Marines didn't really ever interest me, I got in for the Imperial Guard. They were just normal human beings that are forced to fight the various horrors of the universe. I know a lot of people play guard for the tanks and army size, but I played for their sheer humanity.

I mean a Imperial Guard hero is more astounding that an Space Marine one...because they get by on courage and luck via sheer ignorance in the face of impossibly larger and better equipped enemies. ( point: not super soldiers )

Hellebore
19-07-2010, 07:40
Space Marines are the central players in the 40k universe. Without them it would not be 40k anymore.

GW could still have a Sci-fi system without them, it just wouldn't be anything like the existing one in terms of the fictional universe.

Something repeatedly proven to be untrue. Space marines are simply a tiny TINY part of the Imperium and thus a miniscule part of the setting itself. They've only been in existence for the last 10,000 years. They only fulfill a purpose because one was written for them to fulfill.

The entirety of 40k could be exactly the same as it is now, except that marines are elite guard regiments and primarchs were the emperor's finest warrior generals leading his great crusade.

The net change? It only removes geneseed from the equation. Power armour, boltguns, dreadnoughts would remain the same.

40k would look amazingly similar to its current incarnation if you removed the 'space marine' in Imperium.

Hellebore

Wishing
19-07-2010, 11:26
I don't think 40K would be anywhere near as big as it is now without marines, i'm pretty sure Fantasy would still be bigger without them. Let's face it the guard are quite dull and too close to modern armies. Many people love that (though i can't see the appeal of making a sci-fi army like modern day soldiers when there are plenty of games that do that already) but most of us prefer all the cool silly big guns, aliens, psychics and tanks.

Agreed, Guard bore the socks off me as well. Personally I wish the Imperial military was based on mechanicus Skitarii warriors as IG equivalents, with elite Skitarii with power armour (as an elite section of the admech, not their own army) being marine equivalents. More sci-fi horror and less "hey, that guy looks just like my dad" models. But unfortunately being able to identify with and look up to a protagonist is a necessity for a lot of people, hence the popularity of human supersoldiers and "just like an ordinary guy" armies.

metal bawks
19-07-2010, 12:06
Hi all.
I think the point is Space Marines were originaly human elite army,that were just as hard to play as any other.
Becuse they were a SMALL elite force, and each loss was felt keenly.

GW then made the shift in 2nd ed to make them the poster boys of 40k.They wrote more fluff and promoted them more than any other army ,due to ease of writing,and producing new chapter specific models-minatures.

They were the poster boys in the first edition, too.

They're on the rulebook's cover.
They're the protagonists of the introductory scenario.
They have the most background of all playable races in the rulebook.
They were the protagonists of the first official campaign (Wolftime).
They appeared in the first two WD battle reports.
They got the first plastic models.
They got +1 T and special morale rules in one of the compendium books.
They're the protagonists of Space Hulk, Space Crusade and most other spin-off games.
etc. etc.

Godzooky
19-07-2010, 13:06
The net change? It only removes geneseed from the equation. Power armour, boltguns, dreadnoughts would remain the same.

40k would look amazingly similar to its current incarnation if you removed the 'space marine' in Imperium.

Hellebore

I respectfully disagree, Hellebore.

If you're advocating removing space marines from the equation, you can't cherry pick what aspects of them can stay. In my humble opinion, if you are getting rid of superhumans and their geneseeds from the story, you also have to remove the power armour, weaponry and wargear that is so intrinsically linked to their imagery. If they go, they go wholesale, and they would leave a tangible archetypal niche.

Normal mooks in power armour just doesn't cut it for me. I know in Fallout, etc they do this, but it's nowhere near as iconic. And I know SoB are essentially this, too, but they ain't the equal of mehreens by a long shot.

Tymell
19-07-2010, 13:10
No option for my vote, which is just a plain "Yes."

Space marines do interest me, I wouldn't "love it", and I wouldn't play other games more. I wouldn't wish them removed, but I'd still play.

And I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you too, Hellebore. Space marines -are- a big part of 40K, both the background material and the overall feel. Removing them would change it in a big way, though I also disagree that it would suddenly lose everything that makes it special. There's a lot besides marines too.

Hellebore
19-07-2010, 15:12
I respectfully disagree, Hellebore.

If you're advocating removing space marines from the equation, you can't cherry pick what aspects of them can stay. In my humble opinion, if you are getting rid of superhumans and their geneseeds from the story, you also have to remove the power armour, weaponry and wargear that is so intrinsically linked to their imagery. If they go, they go wholesale, and they would leave a tangible archetypal niche.

Normal mooks in power armour just doesn't cut it for me. I know in Fallout, etc they do this, but it's nowhere near as iconic. And I know SoB are essentially this, too, but they ain't the equal of mehreens by a long shot.

You mean like how inquisitors, sisters of battle and the adeptus mechanicus use ALL the equipment space marines use?

If space marines didn't exist then the 'only marines can use land raiders' edict would never have been issued, thus allowing the guard to use them like they did during the Crusade.

No, the fact is that the only difference is the lack of geneseed. Nothing else marines have would disappear if they did. Every vehicle they use is an STC design found by the AdMech and granted to the marines. The only things you could argue wouldn't exist are things like the redeemer and crusader, units that are unsanctioned modifications. Even the Razorback was decreed to be a derivative design by the AdMech.

EDIT: Anyone claiming that removing marines would change the setting dramatically are going to have to prove how. Nothing the marines are described as doing is impossible for anyone else to do - the Horus Heresy is a heresy, that it was a genetically modified primarch doesn't change that. The fact is that everything marines have done in the last 10,000 years could have been done by heroic humans, powerful psykers, or a bazillion imperial guard. Or just a veteran unit of sisters of battle/whatever power armoured unit would exist because the admech can produce a lot but it all goes to marines.

The difference might be in the numbers, or the fact that Guard General Sanguinius didn't have wings and couldn't fly (but did have an anti grav jet pack) but the truth is that the marines are just one other cog of the Imperial fighting machine. If they weren't there to do it, then there would be something else.

Remember we aren't talking about starting NOW and then going back in time and deleting them, we are talking about GW never having made them in the first place. If they wanted a Heresy, if they wanted power armour and dreadnoughts, then MARINES are not a prerequisite for those to exist. GW aren't going to then have the Imperium die because hive fleet Behemoth wasn't stopped by Ultramarines. They would have written about how the Macragge sector defeated Behemoth with its mighty guard forces etc.

People are talking like GW would make the Imperium fail at everything. That wouldn't sell the game. The Imperium would succeed or fail just as it has, except it wouldn't be marines doing the succeeeding.

Hellebore

Godzooky
19-07-2010, 15:15
You mean like how inquisitors, sisters of battle and the adeptus mechanicus use ALL the equipment space marines use?

If space marines didn't exist then the 'only marines can use land raiders' edict would never have been issued, thus allowing the guard to use them like they did during the Crusade.

No, the fact is that the only difference is the lack of geneseed. Nothing else marines have would disappear if they did. Every vehicle they use is an STC design found by the AdMech and granted to the marines. The only things you could argue wouldn't exist are things like the redeemer and crusader, units that are unsanctioned modifications. Even the Razorback was decreed to be a derivative design by the AdMech.

Hellebore

Fair enough, but these STCs only exist within 40K lore because marines have always been primarily there to require them. Other factions gaining access could be viewed as GW using fluff and other factions to sell more of the same kits.

Hellebore
19-07-2010, 15:20
Fair enough, but these STCs only exist within 40K lore because marines have always been primarily there to require them. Other factions gaining access could be viewed as GW using fluff and other factions to sell more of the same kits.

No, the rhino and land raider were part of imperial army forces during RT. Even Harlequins could have them. They were not originally space marine only vehicles.

Hellebore

Nexus Trimean
19-07-2010, 15:27
I Played Marines First, without them i would not have my beloved IG.

Godzooky
19-07-2010, 15:28
No, the rhino and land raider were part of imperial army forces during RT. Even Harlequins could have them. They were not originally space marine only vehicles.

Hellebore

I guess that depends on whether you're using current background or a scrappy '80s mishmash of largely superseded concepts to support your point.

And I said primarily marines, not exclusively.

Tymell
19-07-2010, 16:08
Hellebore: I can see the point you're making, but I think it's getting to the point where we'd be arguing over terminology. Where do you draw the line, for example, between a space marine and an enhanced superhuman?

If it had been a normal human commander who rebelled in the heresy instead of Horus and the marines it would have been a very different event. It wouldn't be the Emperor's chosen sons motivated by their feelings of superiority over normal humans and their sense of alienation from their father (figure). It would no longer have the primarchs and their varied backstories and personal relations. The forces of Chaos that resulted would be different, and many events that followed featuring those marines would be changed.

The point is space marines -are- an important part of the background and setting as it stands. You could replace them with something else, yes, but if that something else is very different then you've changed something significant (not irreplacable, but significant); if it's not very different (e.g. still genetically-enhanced humans with primarchs etc) then you haven't truly removed space marines.

I do agree though that space marines aren't what make 40K special. For me it's a mix of the races and the dark, gothic setting that make it good. I'd still have that, space marines or no. If any one single thing makes it unique I'd says it's the Imperium as a whole, it's attitude, style of rule, what it represents, etc.

But anyway, the OP seems to be more about whether we still would have been attracted to the hobby without them, and I would have been, so "yes" is my answer to that.

Elanthanis
19-07-2010, 16:28
40k wouldn't be 40k without Space Marines. I might play it, but it would truly be a different game.

Sai-Lauren
19-07-2010, 16:29
Space Marines are what separates 40K from every other painted miniatures game. Why do you see retail outlets that specialize in carrying GW stuff, but not any that carry VOR: The Maelstrom? Or Void? Or Steve Jackson's OGRE? Space Marines, that's why.

Why do independant retail outlets carry 40k, WFB and LoTR, rather than miniatures for ECW, ACW, Ancients, Medieval and other wargaming periods? Why have only Warmachine and Flames of War managed to get any significant store presence? Why is a company like Skytrex effectively a two man band?

Answer: GW's size, name and marketing muscle/ presence - the last two of which they've nearly always had to an extent - is what's given them the market. Shops wil only sell stuff that they can be sure they'll make a profit on, and most people play GW games over other games because of their availability and the ability to find an opponent.

If they hadn't had Space Marines, then GW's size and marketing power would still have induced shops to stock other 40k lines, whilst RTB01 would have been multi-part Imperial Guardsmen.



There was never any mention of what put the Emperor on the Golden throne, other than a great series of battles. The Emperor is said to be immortal but one day he made the golden throne himself and sat down for no apparent reason to have his life sustained. Going by the same ambiguity that is endemic in RT the great series of battles is a prefect description of the Horus Heresy.

I'm sure it is at the very least intimated that it's age, if not outright stated. And there's definately no mention of anything like the Heresy in the historical chronology - so there's a retcon right there.



Yeah, but at that point it wouldnt be 40K. The question then would be "Would you play a Space based Fantasy Wargame"

Hmm - Daemons?
Psychic powers that are effectively magic spells, and have their users branded as things like witches?
Heroes winning against impossible odds and villains who've been returned from the dead more times than Freddy Kruger and Jason Voorhees multipled together?

No, 40k's not a Space based Fantasy Wargame at all... ;)

Hellebore
19-07-2010, 16:35
I guess that depends on whether you're using current background or a scrappy '80s mishmash of largely superseded concepts to support your point.

And I said primarily marines, not exclusively.

:rolleyes: So now you've decided that 40k only existed with current background? Way to be biased. 40k started with RT whether you want to accept it or not. And in RT, you are wrong. As this question is in regards to marines never having existed, it means they didn't exist FROM RT, which means subsequent material would change to fit that - which as I've said would still be a tiny tiny change.



Hellebore: I can see the point you're making, but I think it's getting to the point where we'd be arguing over terminology. Where do you draw the line, for example, between a space marine and an enhanced superhuman?

If it had been a normal human commander who rebelled in the heresy instead of Horus and the marines it would have been a very different event. It wouldn't be the Emperor's chosen sons motivated by their feelings of superiority over normal humans and their sense of alienation from their father (figure). It would no longer have the primarchs and their varied backstories and personal relations. The forces of Chaos that resulted would be different, and many events that followed featuring those marines would be changed.

The point is space marines -are- an important part of the background and setting as it stands. You could replace them with something else, yes, but if that something else is very different then you've changed something significant (not irreplacable, but significant); if it's not very different (e.g. still genetically-enhanced humans with primarchs etc) then you haven't truly removed space marines.


I don't see how. The Emperor's children are called Sensei. If he had 20 literal sons grow up to be his actual generals for his crusade, their inherent feeling of entitlement and superiority wouldn't have been any different.

I really cannot see how you can argue that the event would be very different. It would have been a civil war, it would have had brother fight brother and it would have been tragic.

That those brothers couldn't spit acid or fart lightning in no way diminishes the tragedy or awesomeness of the saga.

They wouldn't need to be superhuman. The sisters of battle are as close to normal human space marines as you can get and would still be suitably heroic. Starship troopers isn't crap because the STs can't breath underwater or spit acid.

The Chaos gods favour anyone of worth. Horus the Imperial Army commander would have drawn just as much attention, and because the story would have been written with that in mind, it wouldn't have been strange at all. He would have become a great daemon prince and challenged the emperor for control of the galaxy. EDIT: In fact it has the potential to be even more epic, tragic and amazing because there wouldn't have been any daemon prince-esque characters on the Imperial side. The mere flesh of man against the horrors of the night.

The only things the marines would change in these scenarios is that there would have been 10 killing 3000 orks single handed and the other juvenile superhero crap that has been associated with them rather than a regiment of guard doing the same thing. There would still have been heroic leaders and sergeants.

If you simply replaced marine chapters with guard regiments then the only variables that change are the OTT ones, the ones that IMO detract from the setting rather than adding to it. Anyone can say that their hero defeated a bazillion enemies with flexing biceps, it takes a little more skill to write about it with more control.

Hellebore

Tymell
19-07-2010, 17:18
The point I'm making though is if you change it you'll end up with one of two things:

1.) You change quite a lot. Make it ordinary generals that turn traitor, no superhuman superiority complexes, no geneseed variations, no sons of the Emperor, etc etc. In this case you're changing something significant, and thus the result isn't the same. I'm not saying it would be worse though.

2.) You change very little. It's still superhuman sons of the Emperor etc. In this case you're not truly removing space marines, just altering them in minor ways.

I'm not arguing that space marines are the reason 40K is good or that removing them renders it weak or generic. Only that they are important in the setting as it is currently.

massey
19-07-2010, 17:39
Why do independant retail outlets carry 40k, WFB and LoTR, rather than miniatures for ECW, ACW, Ancients, Medieval and other wargaming periods? Why have only Warmachine and Flames of War managed to get any significant store presence? Why is a company like Skytrex effectively a two man band?

Answer: GW's size, name and marketing muscle/ presence - the last two of which they've nearly always had to an extent - is what's given them the market. Shops wil only sell stuff that they can be sure they'll make a profit on, and most people play GW games over other games because of their availability and the ability to find an opponent.

If they hadn't had Space Marines, then GW's size and marketing power would still have induced shops to stock other 40k lines, whilst RTB01 would have been multi-part Imperial Guardsmen.


GW wouldn't be dominant without marines. Independent shops do stock a lot of those other products. I can get AT-43 miniatures at my store. I can get Infinity miniatures. I can get Anima: Tactics. I used to be able to get Vor: The Maelstrom, Crimson Skies, and a dozen other miniature games.

GW's growth from a fairly small company into, well, they're still a small company all things considered, but a large company for miniature wargames, directly relates to increased sales in Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40K. The biggest component of those sales? Marines. It's been said that there are two types of 40K players: people who play space marines and people who have space marines as their second army. That's how well they sell. GW hasn't always had the marketing power that they now enjoy. They certainly weren't as big as companies like TSR or FASA (as both of those companies are no longer in business, GW is certainly larger now). Some estimates put Marine sales as 40% of GW's total business. Even GW has admitted that Marine sales allowed them to invest in the new plastic molding technologies that have created such great kits over the last 5 years or so.

You are right, in that people play GW games because they are easily available and it is not difficult to find an opponent. Most of those opponents play Space Marines. They keep the doors open. If GW's marketing influence was enough on its own to make people buy things, we'd all be playing Mordheim right now.

You could still play 40K today if Space Marines had never been invented. It would look a little different, background and game mechanic-wise. But there's an old Renegade Legion box sitting on the back shelf of our game store. I'm sure the owner would take 5 bucks for it if I wanted to buy it from him. And I've got a Car Wars rulebook somewhere. So you can play old games if you want to, nobody will stop you. But to pretend that GW would be rolling along just fine without 40% of their sales is totally disingenuous.

samiens
19-07-2010, 17:59
I love how this argument has come down to 'Would you still play space marines if the space marines were marginally altered by not having gene seed and a name change?'

A rose by any other name... springs to mind

So would I have played 40k without marines in that unbelievably literal context? Probably. Would I have been attracted to 40k without power armour (well terminator armour in my case)- probably not

barrangas
19-07-2010, 18:47
1.) You change quite a lot. Make it ordinary generals that turn traitor, no superhuman superiority complexes, no geneseed variations, no sons of the Emperor, etc etc. In this case you're changing something significant, and thus the result isn't the same. I'm not saying it would be worse though.

It's possible that the Sensie could have been used, so you end up with super human psychics, immune to the threats of the Warp instead of Primarchs. They also would have bigger daddy issues too. So you couldhave ended up with psychers who purposely turned to chaos rather then being corrupted by it. End result could have been the similar story wise, played up the danger of psychers, and still ties into lore.

The possibilities of what could have taken the place of the Horus Heresy are up to the imagination. I'm of the oponion that 40k could have survived not having the space marines, especially given 20+ years of developement.

Wrath
19-07-2010, 20:42
almost half of the listed Armies on GW's site are Marines of one variety or another and they push them on every nub who walks through the door... Of course they are going to sell. If the other factions got the love from GW and their retailers as Marines did then the numbers would even out.

@hellebore: Agree, almost, 100%.

massey
19-07-2010, 20:56
almost half of the listed Armies on GW's site are Marines of one variety or another and they push them on every nub who walks through the door... Of course they are going to sell. If the other factions got the love from GW and their retailers as Marines did then the numbers would even out.


Again, if GW could force people to buy things through their evil powers of persuasion, we'd all be playing Mordheim. For some reason, people are drawn to Space Marines. Telling GW that they'll sell just as much other stuff as they do Marines is like telling a candy bar company that they can sell just as much candy if they stopped using chocolate. "The only reason people buy chocolate is because it's pushed on them!" Riiight.

Wrath
19-07-2010, 21:26
Again, if GW could force people to buy things through their evil powers of persuasion, we'd all be playing Mordheim.


nah, model count is too low and the overlap with fantasy is too high, no profit.



For some reason, people are drawn to Space Marines. Telling GW that they'll sell just as much other stuff as they do Marines is like telling a candy bar company that they can sell just as much candy if they stopped using chocolate. "The only reason people buy chocolate is because it's pushed on them!" Riiight.

actually chocolate sells so well because of market saturation... bad example. :shifty:<and it is so GD tasty!!!>

They are not so much drawn to Marines as inundated with them. They have focused on 1 faction above all others and the rest of the fiction suffers for it. lol I listened to one guy talking to a new guy who was looking to get into the hobby and he worked through the whole list of marines extolling their strengths and then just listed off the Xenos quickly. Oddly he stopped at Eldar and went into a little depth, secret fetish I think.

If you have a guy who seems to know what he is talking about tells you in depth why these guys are "teh awezoms" and the others are meh and you only have cash for one or the other. Well guess where that cash flow is going to go.

Vaktathi
19-07-2010, 21:27
Again, if GW could force people to buy things through their evil powers of persuasion, we'd all be playing Mordheim. For some reason, people are drawn to Space Marines. Telling GW that they'll sell just as much other stuff as they do Marines is like telling a candy bar company that they can sell just as much candy if they stopped using chocolate. "The only reason people buy chocolate is because it's pushed on them!" Riiight.

Lets be real here, do you honestly think that SM's occupy the same place relative to all other armies as they are now if GW had more equally distributed their development and marketing efforts? I think it'd be very hard to make that case.

They might still be extremely popular, but when half the releases are Space Marines, and they're cheaper than many other armies, it's hard not to get into Space Marines. GW has actively promoted SM's above and beyond other armies. I'm sure if another army had a subfaction book, like Speed Freaks, Siege Regiments or Harlequins, they'd do quite well if given the same lavish attention that SM subfactions get.

Marketing is a powerful tool, the iPhone would not be what it is without it, it'd be just another smartphone amongst a sea of them. However it gets the attention and interest and is thus the sensation it is today. Likewise, SM's are the product that gets the most marketing and attention and thus are the most popular army.

Craftworld
19-07-2010, 21:30
I think it'd be very hard to make that case.

No harder than it would be for you to make yours.

You simply do not have the proof required to claim that if other factions had equal marketing time and support, that they'd do as well if not better.

I believe personally that Marines are absolutely iconic, and without them this game has little to make it stand out in a newly formed sea of wargaming; and that's as an Eldar player.

Vaktathi
19-07-2010, 21:41
I didn't say they weren't iconic, in fact I said very much the opposite earlier in this thread.

I was however stating that marines likely wouldn't be as popular as they are now (e.g. entire local meta's often consisting almost entirely of marines) were it not for GW's marketing methods. They'd still be very popular, maybe still the most popular army, but certainly not what they are now. The idea that the market *demanded* 7 marine books (comprising nearly half the available armies) is a bit much, especially when at any given time two or three are relegated to the "uncompetitive" heap.

In fact, I'd probably be willing to bet money that GW might make more money if they consolidated SM armies, thus reducing sales & development cannibalization.

FarseerMatt
19-07-2010, 22:10
I believe personally that Marines are absolutely iconic, and without them this game has little to make it stand out in a newly formed sea of wargaming; and that's as an Eldar player.

Perhaps if Space Marines had never been then their nearest equivalent, Battle Sisters, would have come to the forefront, and 40K would stand out as the game where the girls save the day - there'd be even more parallels drawn between 40K and Dune (Fish Speakers), and there'd be a thread every other week on Warseer about whether it was possible to create male Battle Sisters :p

Trust me something would have filled the gap. I mainly play Eldar (love the complexity and contrasts in their backstory) but there's something in every army's background I can get behind, whether it's the twisted idealism of some Chaos followers who believe that the Emperor betrayed them and that their battle for revenge is justified, or the heroism of the Guard, or the tragedy of the Necrons being twisted into the soulless abominations they are today.

The reason I single out Battle Sisters is because, in general, everyone wants to be the elite armies and the inherently superior hero, the god of death who mows his way through hordes of lesser enemies (Halo etc), and the well-equipped well-trained Sisters have this covered pretty well (plus the whole religious thing which is another hallmark of 40K).

Personally I'd love to see more universes where the comparitively ordinary guys (Imperial Guard!) band together and use clever or exceptional tactics to defeat the superior "elite" foe against the odds, but that's a different topic :)

negZero
19-07-2010, 22:25
From the group of guys I play with only one plays Marines (Chaos), so really Space Marines wouldn't be missed by this Eldar player.

massey
19-07-2010, 22:32
They are not so much drawn to Marines as inundated with them. They have focused on 1 faction above all others and the rest of the fiction suffers for it. lol I listened to one guy talking to a new guy who was looking to get into the hobby and he worked through the whole list of marines extolling their strengths and then just listed off the Xenos quickly. Oddly he stopped at Eldar and went into a little depth, secret fetish I think.

If you have a guy who seems to know what he is talking about tells you in depth why these guys are "teh awezoms" and the others are meh and you only have cash for one or the other. Well guess where that cash flow is going to go.

There's a guy at our local store who does the same thing, only he's obsessed with Tau. He spends time trying to sell people in the store on buying a Tau army, and in the end they walk out the door carrying Marines.

I can tell you my personal observations (and since I've known the owner of our local game store for like 17 years, his observations too). People here tend to buy Marines, Guard, and Eldar. I'll see two new guys walk into the store and go over to the 40K rack. One will buy Marines. One will buy something else. They sell out virtually their entire Marine section every single week. And while there are different variations of Marine codex, they don't really take up any more shelf space because of it. Tyranids and Eldar both take up nearly as much room on the shelf as Marines, but they don't sell as well.



Lets be real here, do you honestly think that SM's occupy the same place relative to all other armies as they are now if GW had more equally distributed their development and marketing efforts? I think it'd be very hard to make that case.

They might still be extremely popular, but when half the releases are Space Marines, and they're cheaper than many other armies, it's hard not to get into Space Marines. GW has actively promoted SM's above and beyond other armies. I'm sure if another army had a subfaction book, like Speed Freaks, Siege Regiments or Harlequins, they'd do quite well if given the same lavish attention that SM subfactions get.

[quote]Marketing is a powerful tool, the iPhone would not be what it is without it, it'd be just another smartphone amongst a sea of them. However it gets the attention and interest and is thus the sensation it is today. Likewise, SM's are the product that gets the most marketing and attention and thus are the most popular army.

Again, tell the candy companies that they can make just as much money by not selling chocolate and see how far that gets you. 40K without marines is just another no-name sci-fi miniatures game.

My first thought when I saw Space Marines, before I ever heard of Warhammer 40K: "Whoa, those guys look like Stormtroopers." Then I saw Space Hulk and thought that Terminators looked awesome (and Genestealers were pretty sweet too -- they looked just like Aliens). Then I saw Orks and Imperial Guard and thought "Those guys are stupid. Why they hell would I want to play them when I could play Space Marines?"

And that's how a lot of people feel. Space Marines are awesome. Are they awesome because 40K is about them? Or is 40K about them because they're awesome? Considering that I had never read anything about them when I first saw them, I'd say it's the latter.

Craftworld
19-07-2010, 22:44
I didn't say they weren't iconic, in fact I said very much the opposite earlier in this thread.

I know you didn't, I'm simply stating why I feel as I do.


I was however stating that marines likely wouldn't be as popular as they are now (e.g. entire local meta's often consisting almost entirely of marines) were it not for GW's marketing methods. They'd still be very popular, maybe still the most popular army, but certainly not what they are now. The idea that the market *demanded* 7 marine books (comprising nearly half the available armies) is a bit much, especially when at any given time two or three are relegated to the "uncompetitive" heap.

Do you really think that Games Workshop forced Marines on the masses?

Do you believe that they created the demand for Marines?

I think it's the other way around, Marines show high demand so they focus more on Marines, and make variants of them for additional sales.


In fact, I'd probably be willing to bet money that GW might make more money if they consolidated SM armies, thus reducing sales & development cannibalization.

We'll just have to disagree here.

People can complain about the masses all playing Marines, but whenever I introduce a friend to the game they are always drawn to the Marines.

This isn't because of me forcing them on them; it isn't because we go into a GW and they're brain-washed by aggressive advertising, they are just drawn to them.

You can argue their stance, but they're the "good guys" and humans at that, something many people enjoy in games of any nature. Unlike other games you don't sacrifice the "rule of cool' to be a good guy. You can be a noble, mass-murdering super-human.

Vaktathi
19-07-2010, 22:45
Again, tell the candy companies that they can make just as much money by not selling chocolate and see how far that gets you. 40K without marines is just another no-name sci-fi miniatures game. A poor analogy, and not what I was really going after. A better one would be telling Mars that 19 different varieties of Snickers bars probably aren't needed at once (if they were to do such).



And that's how a lot of people feel. Space Marines are awesome. Are they awesome because 40K is about them? Or is 40K about them because they're awesome? Considering that I had never read anything about them when I first saw them, I'd say it's the latter.I'm not disagreeing that SM's can't be awesome or that they aren't iconic of the 40k universe, however I am saying that 40k has plenty of other awesome stuff and that much of the popularity of SM's is due to overmarketing. Again, was there really a market demand for half the armies of the game to be Space Marines?

When one product is pushed, marketed and made available so much more than others, of course it is going to be the most popular. If I can buy ten plastic kits for a few hundred dollars and use it for four or five different army books that usually come around once a year and it's easy to build and paint and always stocked and appears without fail in every single major story and stuff like computer games, it's hard to get up the drive to start that other army that's got a lot of metal and costs almost a thousand dollars and I have to direct order half the units and they get an update once every 4-7 years and may get mentioned or appear once in a while in the fluff and video games and whatnot?



Do you really think that Games Workshop forced Marines on the masses?

Do you believe that they created the demand for Marines?

I think it's the other way around, Marines show high demand so they focus more on Marines, and make variants of them for additional sales.Demand for marines *is* high, no doubt. But I find it hard to believe the market demanded 7 marine books, and wouldn't also have at least similar demand for another armies subfactions. SM's are far more accessible for any new player than just about any other army, and people don't have problems finding the models they need.


People can complain about the masses all playing Marines, but whenever I introduce a friend to the game they are always drawn to the Marines.

This isn't because of me forcing them on them; it isn't because we go into a GW and they're brain-washed by aggressive advertising, they are just drawn to them.

You can argue their stance, but they're the "good guys" and humans at that, something many people enjoy in games of any nature. Unlike other games you don't sacrifice the "rule of cool' to be a good guy. You can be a noble, mass-murdering super-human. My experience isn't too dissimilar, although I do very often also see new people want to do one army, but start marines because of the reasons I've outline above. I've also seen almost as many people initially drawn to Orks however (mainly for the sillyness factor) It's hard to make the choice to invest in an IG army for instance when you know it's going to cost 3x what a Space Marine army will and require a lot more building and painting.

It also doesn't hurt that there's almost always a new marine book on the horizon for someone to hop on or transfer their list to or something, always keeping their army up to date. I've seen people go from C:SM, to C: DA back to C:SM, the C:SW with the exact same army of models in 4 years.

Finally, I overwhelmingly see store employees mentions SM's of some variant as a first time army for new players, it's never Daemons, Eldar, IG or Tau, but Chaos Marines, Space Wolves or Space Marines. In that environment, where SM's are the cheapest, most available, most marketed, most visible, army that is the one they all hear about when learning about the game, even if they were indifferent between any army at the start or maybe leaning another way, is it hard to see where SM's would often win out regardless?

EDIT: My CSM's were started in large part *because* I could get them purchased and built in a fraction of the time it would take me to do my first Imperial Guard army. The fluff and background and visuals played a part no doubt, but being able to get the army bought and built in 4 months instead of the 8 or 9 I was looking at with my IG didn't was a huge incentive to start them.

Wrath
19-07-2010, 23:00
Again, tell the candy companies that they can make just as much money by not selling chocolate and see how far that gets you. 40K without marines is just another no-name sci-fi miniatures game.


lol, so everyones sweet tooth is going to go away because of a sudden lack of chocolate? no, other candies would start selling more...



My first thought when I saw Space Marines, before I ever heard of Warhammer 40K: "Whoa, those guys look like Stormtroopers." Then I saw Space Hulk and thought that Terminators looked awesome (and Genestealers were pretty sweet too -- they looked just like Aliens). Then I saw Orks and Imperial Guard and thought "Those guys are stupid. Why they hell would I want to play them when I could play Space Marines?"


soooo because you made a connection with another popular IP it made you want to buy a certain army. A connection that, if you had not in fact read anything on 40K, would lead you to think conscripts in kewl armor. That made you want to play SM over other normal guys not in kewl armor and getting shot in almost every image presented of them. Go marketing! :wtf:

Green-is-best
19-07-2010, 23:07
lol, so everyones sweet tooth is going to go away because of a sudden lack of chocolate? no, other candies would start selling more...

You're making the assumption that there is a fixed demand for 40k products, which there isn't. What if there was 50% of the demand for Marine-less 40k? That'd be a pretty big problem.

Hicks
19-07-2010, 23:14
Without marines there is no Heresy and it's really that fluff that pulled away from fantasy to try 40K. I can't say I would never have tried 40K, but it would have taken a lot longer for me to be interrested by the game.

J-man
20-07-2010, 00:21
I said "No, Something would have been missing"

This is simply because the sheer joy I get from killing the Emperor's finest (especially Calgar's smurfs) is beyond compare and is a fundamental part of the 40k experience for me.

Tbh though, it's hard to imagine 40k without marines. And I have to credit GW's poster child race with getting me interested in 40k in the first place.

Tymell
20-07-2010, 00:26
I'm of the oponion that 40k could have survived not having the space marines, especially given 20+ years of developement.

So am I :) All I'm really saying is even if it would survive and be no worse off, it would still be different. I'm saying marines are a big part of what it currently is, and to remove them -would- impact what it is. I'm not commenting on whether it would notably weaken it though.

Wishing
20-07-2010, 00:43
You can argue their stance, but they're the "good guys" and humans at that, something many people enjoy in games of any nature. Unlike other games you don't sacrifice the "rule of cool' to be a good guy. You can be a noble, mass-murdering super-human.



And that's how a lot of people feel. Space Marines are awesome. Are they awesome because 40K is about them? Or is 40K about them because they're awesome? Considering that I had never read anything about them when I first saw them, I'd say it's the latter.

I think both of these elements are crucial to the marine success - that they look really really cool with their scary helmets and big shoulder pads, and that they are both anti-heroes and the defenders of humanity. People like humanity and like being good guys, but also like being badasses.

No other 40k army has as much mass appeal, which is why GW market them so much. My beef with GW isn't that they overmarket the marines - they do it cause people want them - my beef is that they could have put more effort into giving all the non-marine factions mass appeal too, but they didn't. The other factions are cool, but they're not iconic and don't have the same wow! factor.

GW have shown that they had the ability to create an eminently marketable and iconic model archetype for 40k. Why did they choose to just make one such army for 40k, instead of making 4 or 5 different ones?

LonelyPath
20-07-2010, 01:00
Since I play so many armies, a lack of SM wouldn;t bother me to much. Also, while my first army was the original Grey knights from Slaves to Darkness, it was the Genestealer lists from WDs 115 and 116 that really got me into the game.

Grubnar
20-07-2010, 01:14
Since Space Marines were not my first, or even second army, my answer is:
Yes.

Xyrex
20-07-2010, 06:58
Somehow, i dont think 40k would be 40k without the marines. If GW focused more on some other race, I simply wouldnt buy them. Maybe the guard, but thats it. I will never play nids, orks, necrons, ect. (though orks could be fun). I was only in 40k for the marines.

Corax
20-07-2010, 07:12
Finally, I overwhelmingly see store employees mentions SM's of some variant as a first time army for new players, it's never Daemons, Eldar, IG or Tau, but Chaos Marines, Space Wolves or Space Marines. In that environment, where SM's are the cheapest, most available, most marketed, most visible, army that is the one they all hear about when learning about the game, even if they were indifferent between any army at the start or maybe leaning another way, is it hard to see where SM's would often win out regardless?

Space Marines are the "gateway" drug that gets the kids hooked. Its only later on that they graduate to "harder" drugs like Orks or Imperial Guard. :angel:

barrangas
20-07-2010, 07:15
A better one would be telling Mars that 19 different varieties of Snickers bars probably aren't needed at once (if they were to do such).

This raises an interesting question about GWs business practice. Is having so many SM codexes a good idea or bad idea on a business level? On one hand your giving SM players incentive for picking up a new codex and a few new models so they can use their existing army to "play as...". On the other a SM player could theoretically play 5 armies, with one with out to much trouble.


So am I :) All I'm really saying is even if it would survive and be no worse off, it would still be different. I'm saying marines are a big part of what it currently is, and to remove them -would- impact what it is. I'm not commenting on whether it would notably weaken it though.

I got that, I was just using your post as a convient lean into the example ;).

There seems to be the opinion by a lot of people that 40k Fluff couldn't be supported with out the SM. I just think the Horus Heresy would have happened with a different group of the Emperor's minions, so the only real change is in those armies with SM. To get back OT though, the question becomes assuming the Horus Heresy still happens with another party (whether Sensie or Robotic RoUS), would the game still interest you?

Wrath
20-07-2010, 07:36
There seems to be the opinion by a lot of people that 40k Fluff couldn't be supported with out the SM. I just think the Horus Heresy would have happened with a different group of the Emperor's minions, so the only real change is in those armies with SM. To get back OT though, the question becomes assuming the Horus Heresy still happens with another party (whether Sensie or Robotic RoUS), would the game still interest you?

dunno about that, the Poll seems to say otherwise. Truth is any single army could be removed and the world would continue. If you want proof, Squats. The removal of Squats was hugely criticized by almost all players during 2nd. GW is still here. Did they lose customers? yea. Did they care? I'm sure more then a few did but as an entity - no. Did it stop people from buying more GW products? well you can see the answer for yourself.

As to the last bit, yea I would have no problem with a game with no Marines. I started with Chaos in 2nd and would of just picked a different army to start with, maybe pure Daemons force. :D

massey
20-07-2010, 07:42
Guys, I'll let the poll results speak for me. Remember that this is Warseer, a website notorious for marine hatred. For people to post on Warseer (or any online forum about the game), they normally have to be more than a casual player. We are talking about a fairly "hardcore" section of the 40K community.

And yet, 39% of respondents stated that they would not play 40K without marines. Another 11% said they weren't sure. That's over 50% of people on Warseer who either absolutely would not play the game or don't know if they would still play the game. In other words, less than half of the people who responded say that they would still play the game without marines.

Assuming that there is no difference in spending between the two groups, you're looking at GW bringing in between 40 to 50% less revenue by dropping marines. That's a significant impact.

madprophet
20-07-2010, 07:43
I have never fielded a Space Marine army - though I have given in to the dark side and am working on Chaos and Loyalist marines now, but neither will ever be my main army - I began as a guard player and with over 5000 points of painted Valhallans I can clearly live without the Marines.

At this point I could theoretically field an Infantry Company, an Armored Company and a Recon Company and still have air support and artillery in reserve.

Yes, I am insane and I am an hopeless geek :D

Wrath
20-07-2010, 07:55
@massey: you sure your not from marketing? cause you can skewer numbers like no ones business. oh let me try.

49.54% say that they would play even with Marines gone, and another 11% that was unsure. hey that is over 60%.

You sure you don't work for Limbaugh or something?

Craftworld
20-07-2010, 08:21
dunno about that, the Poll seems to say otherwise. Truth is any single army could be removed and the world would continue. If you want proof, Squats. The removal of Squats was hugely criticized by almost all players during 2nd. GW is still here. Did they lose customers? yea. Did they care? I'm sure more then a few did but as an entity - no. Did it stop people from buying more GW products? well you can see the answer for yourself.

As to the last bit, yea I would have no problem with a game with no Marines. I started with Chaos in 2nd and would of just picked a different army to start with, maybe pure Daemons force. :D

The world, yes. This hobby, no.

Wrath
20-07-2010, 08:30
The world, yes. This hobby, no.

lol, Tow that line my brutha.

Craftworld
20-07-2010, 08:52
lol, Tow that line my brutha.

I just call it like it is. Games Workshop responded to a demand; that's how business works.

Did they need fourteen-thousand Marine variants? Probably not, but there's a reason they've created so many divergent chapters. Marines are their top sellers, it's stressed time and time again.

None of us know if Marines got popular because they were supported; or supported because they were popular.

You can make statements like "The hobby would be fine" or "Given equal support xenos would match or even outsell Marines"; but it's opinion, not fact.

In my opinion, green is a superior color to blue, but that doesn't make it true because I think it.

Vaktathi
20-07-2010, 09:12
I just call it like it is. Games Workshop responded to a demand; that's how business works. That's how rational business works in theory. Not how actual business works in practice. (like a gamestore near here that went overboard dumping everything into Heroclix and pushing that at the expense of everything else, when nobody cared about it, hence why it doesn't exist any longer):p It's very possible they could have started out as some would call pet projects of the development studio back when the SW book came out in 1994 as the first army outside of the basic Codex Imperialis. As forum goers, we don't have access to that kind of information, but as SW's really weren't *that* ridiculously popular or divergent before they got their own book (which came out before the standard template Ultramarines book), it's hard to see the demand for that first codex being a response to market pressures. It's more probable they were done to *build* demand, not in response. (oooooh look at the new and even *cooler* marines and all they can do! buy them!)

Craftworld
20-07-2010, 09:15
If you consider the plot of Warhammer 40K though, it's not that shocking to consider.

If not for the Heresy, the Imperium would have stomped across all races and worlds, and "won" for all intents and purposes.

This is the Imperiums story, we're just playing in it. ;) Perhaps that's where all the Marine angst stems from. Everybody loves to hate "the man".

massey
20-07-2010, 13:48
@massey: you sure your not from marketing? cause you can skewer numbers like no ones business. oh let me try.

49.54% say that they would play even with Marines gone, and another 11% that was unsure. hey that is over 60%.

You sure you don't work for Limbaugh or something?

I do work with elected officials. :)

But even looking at the numbers your way, big deal. The most you can get is 60% that may still play. That's your high point without marines, the best you can hope for. And again, assuming no disparity in spending habits between the different voters on this poll (and we have no reason to believe that the marine-lovers spend any more or less than the marine-haters), that's at a minimum, a 40% reduction in income for GW's 40K business.

This is not an election. We don't say "oh, 60% wins the vote easily, we all still play 40K". We're talking about having 100 people in the room, and 40 of them get up and leave. Another 11 keep looking at the door. At that point, you're looking at a significant impact to GW's bottom line. That means less models available. And it means fewer stores remain open. Like I said, at our local shop, marines account for about half of all miniature sales. Cut miniature profits by 50% and it may not be worth it to continue stocking all the GW stuff. It's certainly not a guarantee.

They're also going to lose business on people who would normally continue to play the game, but now have no opponents or place to play. If my local store closes down, I'm not going to drive across town to play somewhere else, and I don't have room to play at my house. So that means the 40K stuff goes into storage to collect dust. If my buddies quit the game, the same happens. I once had a good friend who went to watch movies at the theater all the time. She'd see just about every piece of crap that came out. And we all went with her to see them, because that was our thing (it's why I've seen Moulin Rouge). Then she got married and stopped going to see those movies, so the rest of us stopped going as well. This is a friend driven hobby, so not only are 40% of the people leaving, but they're taking their friends with them. "You wanna play 40K?" "Nah, let's go play laser tag."

Again, the best you can hope for is to retain 60% of your player base. That's a massive hit to GW. Like it or not, marines are the cash cow.

J-man
20-07-2010, 13:52
I think when taking the 'good business' approach to understanding the amount of attention given to marines by GW it's also important to consider how little effort they need to expend to write some new chapter codex, compared with any other codex. Having released 5th ed marines as a balanced, fairly varied race within the rules set, it is probably much easier for them to simply come up with new varieties of marines that are 95% similar to the existing codex than it is to release a good, balanced book of any other race.

If they can make $20,000 profit for 50 man-hours spent writing codex:space wolves then why expend 200 man-hours to write the next necron codex which might require 250 man-hours and expect to make $30,000 profit? I'm of the opinion that without an army that fills the role of an uber-hero fighting for the good of all mankind, space marines or otherwise, many players of 40k would never have been interested.

I for one enjoy hating the marines and cutting apart the emperor's finest by shuriken or by tooth and claw, and the more GW elevates their status the more fun the hating gets.

Iracundus
20-07-2010, 14:21
It is not as simple as just $ per man-hour. What development also produces is demand. Think of the Necrons or Tau. Prior to their introduction to 40K, the demand for these races was 0. By opening up a new frontier, the initial effort has built up demand where there was none before and opened up new development and income opportunities. This long term investment in increasing the market needs also to be factored in.

tsutek
20-07-2010, 14:39
For me, now way. Mahreens were among the minis that got me into this hobby 18 years ago in the first place. 40k would not be 40k without them.

I just wish their fluff would have been kept the way it was in RT.. a lot more intriguing, that was.

Take out the mahreens and what you have left is just another star wars rehash. I'd rather play Battletech then..

Sai-Lauren
20-07-2010, 14:51
If GW's marketing influence was enough on its own to make people buy things, we'd all be playing Mordheim right now.

No, because their marketing is basically designed to push Marines because Marines sell, and they sell because they're pushed.

Mordheim, Necromunda, BFG etc, all effectively got released because they had a champion in design who managed to convince the higher ups to get it released. But there wasn't enough belief from management to be able to support those games from within the studio, and when the credit crunch started and Specialist Games effectively got taken out back and shot to save money, they all died.



But to pretend that GW would be rolling along just fine without 40% of their sales is totally disingenuous.

I'm not pretending it, I'm merely stating that's it's a possibility - would the same amount of money that's been spent on Marines over the decades have been spent on Guard or Eldar or Orks or the Squats or Jokaero or Zoats or whatever other race? And would those sales have been the same, or would they have led into other sales?

You're right in one way, I can't say that GW would have been a bigger and richer company if they'd never invented Marines.

Equally, no one can say that GW's made more money by having Marines in 40k and promoting them virtually to the exclusion of all other armies than they would have by not having them and promoting all the armies equally.

And it's not a case of "ok, from midnight tonight, no more Marines", it's no Marines ever, from the moment of the launch of Rogue Trader on.

And if they never existed, there's no Marine shaped gap in 40k, just like there's currently no gaps for Smurfs or Jedi or Predators or anything else you can care to think of that's never been in 40k.



Do you really think that Games Workshop forced Marines on the masses?

Yes.

Nearly all the original articles in WD were about Marines - the implants one is IIRC the first article they ever did.

The cover of RT - Marines. Until the 5th edition hammer, all covers had Marines on them.

The first box set of models. The initial scenario. A decent amount of the pictures (including a double page spread with colour schemes for 12 chapters). A significantly larger amount of background in the rule book (there's no cut away of an Imperial Guard Regiment's HQ, but there is of the Space Wolves fortress-monastary).

The revamped Drednought rules - the Imperial ones might as well have been done as:
Marines have these classes.

Oh, and if you really feel like it, Guard can have them as well.

The first expansion book is even called "Chapter Approved", not "Administratum Approved".



Guys, I'll let the poll results speak for me. Remember that this is Warseer, a website notorious for marine hatred. For people to post on Warseer (or any online forum about the game), they normally have to be more than a casual player. We are talking about a fairly "hardcore" section of the 40K community.

And yet, 39% of respondents stated that they would not play 40K without marines. Another 11% said they weren't sure. That's over 50% of people on Warseer who either absolutely would not play the game or don't know if they would still play the game. In other words, less than half of the people who responded say that they would still play the game without marines.

Assuming that there is no difference in spending between the two groups, you're looking at GW bringing in between 40 to 50% less revenue by dropping marines. That's a significant impact.

Just a thought, but how many people play other games, and would play 40k if Marines weren't in it, or have played in the past, and left due to getting fed up with Marines being pushed down their throats every few months when GW produces yet another Marine codex of a slightly different shade?

Again, I can't say they'd equal or exceed the Marine sales figures, but you can't say that GW would be having a liquidation sale tomorrow without them.

Grand Warlord
20-07-2010, 15:23
For me the Dark Angels brought me into this hobby and so I may have still started playing 4th ed (bout 5-6 years ago) it really would've depended on if another army at the time would've drew me into the hobby.

Keichi246
20-07-2010, 15:27
Well - I honestly have to say Space Marines are what got me into 40k to begin with. I always loved the concept of Powered Armor - and at the time I started I seriously started minis gaming, 40k was pretty much the "only game in town" regarding 28mm-ish scale sci-fi minis. (Mid 2nd edition - other games existed, but were hard to acquire and/or almost no one played them)

So without Space Marines - I would not be playing 40k.

That being said - I am not that much of a Space Marine fan anymore. My poor Dark Angels seem to be the "red headed stepchild" of the GW Space Marine lines - always with the late or "meh" codex. And the Tau are far closer to "hi-tech" Sci-fi and their Crisis Suits are much closer to my vision of power armor ("On the bounce, trooper!").

qsd
20-07-2010, 15:31
Not really sure, but possibly no.
I began with Macragge SM, and even though I play Guard mainly now, that was introduced to me through using allies and Grey Knights.
So it went something like SM > SM w/ GK > Inq w/ inducted IG > Full IG

x-esiv-4c
20-07-2010, 15:31
Most certainly. I found marine armies tend to stagnate the game.

the anti santa
20-07-2010, 19:35
One thing to take note of that is that Warseer does not represent 40K players all that well.

GW make a lot of money off young gamers and they are invariably drawn to 40K over fantasy as guns and tanks are cooler than swords and magic and marines are the army that appeals to them the most.

If they stay in the hobby then they will often move onto other armies and maybe other GW games too.

Other races have had multiple books (Orks had 3 in the RT days, there were several varient guard, Ork and eldar lists in later editions too) and Dark Eldar were even included in the 3rd edition boxed set.

GW care about making money and it costs them quite a bit to bring out new models or develop new rules so they need to make sure these new models will sell. So they can either put a lot of effort into finally brining out a whole new book and range of models for Dark Eldar or release another marine sergeant with a Power fist. The 1st is a big risk the 2nd is pretty much guaranteed to make a profit (as long as it's not Cortez).

Gazak Blacktoof
20-07-2010, 19:37
More sci-fi horror and less "hey, that guy looks just like my dad" models. But unfortunately being able to identify with and look up to a protagonist is a necessity for a lot of people, hence the popularity of human supersoldiers and "just like an ordinary guy" armies.

This is what I don't understand about people that get into fantasy, sci-fi and space-opera and then always decide to cheer on the humans. Surely the compelling part about fictional universes with strange creature, magic and funky technology is the extraordinary bits, not the mundane. Of course I have a brother and a best friend that feel differently.

Kurgash
20-07-2010, 20:51
Started my 40k gaming with Necrons. Went to Chaos. Going back to Necrons on update. Space Marines? meh

insectum7
20-07-2010, 21:03
Space Marines are what finally got me into 40K. I came to it from the Battletech universe and the whole power armor thing was a big factor. The metal Ultramarine Dreadnought and the 2nd Ed. metal Terminators had just come out too and the pics were total badassery. White Dwarf 182

That said, the fantastic Eldar minis drew me to the game as well. I almost played Eldar, but within our fledgling gaming group Eldar were already spoken for. However, the first 40K mini I ever painted was an Avatar.

I do wish marines weren't pushed so hard though. I'm dissapointed that BA and SW have gotten updated codexes before DA and Necrons. I also dislike that both of those chapters seem to wind up playing the "Heroic Bum Rush" strategy all to often.

I honestly think that BA, SW, BT and DA could have been done in one "Codex Armageddon" style book. Where each chapter gets some special characters, rules and units that build off of the basic marine codex, along with the storylines. I think the attempts to make whole books out of them make for some really ridiculous units and rules that really ought not be in the game. Guys in power armor riding on wolves? Death company dreadnoughts? It's a shame these things get priority over whole races like Necrons and Dark Eldar, who could really use some unit balancing and/or new choices.

major soma
20-07-2010, 21:16
I started playing when the imperial guard was called the imperial army, i.e. Rogue Trader. I did eventually switch to BA's when they first came out.

Corpse
20-07-2010, 22:08
If only the choices weren't so checkered black and white with no gray......

I would have picked something like "I wouldn't care either way" or "I would have liked the game just as much without marines"....

Every choice placed is either "I want marines" or "I think it's stupid with them in the game". So I picked "I'm not sure" just to see what people picked... I only voted to see what the results were, nothing more.

-1 vote on "Not sure".

PapaDoc
20-07-2010, 22:44
Just took a look at the results. This place is crawling with heretics. The Emperor is not pleased...

GrogDaTyrant
21-07-2010, 02:28
Just took a look at the results. This place is crawling with heretics. The Emperor is not pleased...

Shuffle up and deal. Not everyone likes marines. But bear in mind that this forum does not accurately represent the 40k player base as a whole, as was mentioned earlier.

MetalGecko23
21-07-2010, 12:05
Shuffle up and deal. Not everyone likes marines. But bear in mind that this forum does not accurately represent the 40k player base as a whole, as was mentioned earlier.

Yeah, Warseer seems to be the center of all anti-marine sentiments. If you trade Space Marines with Eldar/Orks/Imperial Guard the figures would be different. That being said go to B&C and ask the same question an you will get a vastly different answer.

Freman Bloodglaive
21-07-2010, 12:49
Warhammer without Space Marines?

In one word

Warzone