the decline of 40k

[Kovnik Obama]

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE.

HOW IS IT NOT CLEAR THAT I WAS REFERRING TO THE EDITION UPDATE FORMAT???

I NEVER SAID GW WAS LESS PROFITABLE THAN PP : I SAID ITS A PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANY' OF COURSE ITS GONNA BE MORE PROFITABLE.

and I'm not sayiong anything about the models being OOP, I'm saying ARMIES ARE DISCONTINUED, and CHOICES ARE DISCONTINUED.

[Gir]

Wow...

Not only your playing dumb, but your a liar.

Bad troll.

I don't care about fantasy, and I have literally never heard of Dog's of War.

and I'm not sayiong anything about the models being OOP, I'm saying ARMIES ARE DISCONTINUED, and CHOICES ARE DISCONTINUED.

That last army to be discontinued (for 40k at least) was squats. Many many many many decades ago.

I'm also interested in how many 40k choices have been dropped, as I can't think of anything stand out.

[Kovnik Obama]

Dog's of War were a mercenary-themed army which was discontinued in, what, 2002-3? With the Chaos Dwarf thats 2 armies for fantasy, 3 in total. Since we where discussing GW's business practices, i didn't stop myself at mentionning Fantasy.

40k choices that were discontinued ; just look at all the Heroes that are dropped from one codex to the other. IG heavy weapon platform that changes base format. Its not that many choices, mind you, and it's not as terrible as loosing you entire army, like Dog's of War or Chaos Dwarf. But it's still ****ty practices, when you think this is all a hobby. And more than anything, its not necessary. PP prooved it ; every single choices ever to come out is still 100% supported, without any edition lag.

GW doesn't discontinue choices every other day (thank god). But when I see an option, with some rules, and that I decide that I want to buy that option, I feel raped when I later discover that I payed money for something I can't use anymore. And no, "count as" isn't the same thing.

[rocdocta]

sure GW may make a bit of money. but they have an unethical business model that is more akin to a cigarrette company than a hobby company. ie keep people on a tread wheel of addiction. lets face it, what bigger group of OCD people are there than gamers?!

All the rules get changed not for the betterment of the game, but to sell different things.

It is like a skewed Natural selection. the selling games are kept and the good but less selling games are discarded and never seen again. it may really shock some people that 15 years ago systems like:
BFG, Epic, Gorkamorka, Necromunda etc were not just stocked in some sort of Indiana Jones Warehouse but actively promoted! Now its just 40k and fantasy. and dumbed down versions of both.

do you remember when in 40k:
- all armies had different movement rates so the stat meant something?!
- terrain blocked LOS so it could be used tactically
- FNP was not a game wide crutch that was rare
- Fearless was a rare unit rule
- when there wasnt the blandness of universal rules. Each army felt unique and not boxed into the same pigeon hole... "oh you play necrons..so they are plague marines with some kind of save?
- when tanks lived in fear of glancing and transports were rare?
- when there were 2 damage tables! this allowed more results! but must have been thought too hard for some to grasp and was condensed into that rubbish 1 table.
- when there were data sheets per vehicle with multiple damage entries for turrets, tracks, hull, etc. Much more detail.

ie mech 40k is a prime example. for the points of 2 marines that cost the player about $10, they can sell a rhino that costs a player $50 or $60. They are just value adding their own product to sell more high cost models.

I have played since 94 so have seen all the game cycles. Always cracks me up to see people defending GWs business model until the day they realise that they too are stuck with obsolete or redundant old models and are forced to buy the next big thing...

In the quest to remove "wasted" profit by supporting other games, is the GWs product line destined to condense into 1 single product with 1 single phase? flip a coin to see who wins... sarcasm i know...but it may only be a matter of time...

[fuzzbuket]

@rocdocta

that sounds rather fun!
--
for discontinued units see

tryannic war vets
LORd Solar marchius
inquisitor lords
familiars
sages
Inquisitorial stormtroops
Inquisitor Land raider
chaplin xavier
... and few more

--

[Gotthammer]

I feel raped when I later discover that I payed money for something I can't use anymore.

I seriously doubt the feelings are similar.

It is like a skewed Natural selection. the selling games are kept and the good but less selling games are discarded and never seen again.

That's not some evil GW business pratice - it's common sense. Go into your local supermarket, find a product you've never bought, and nobody ever seems to buy. In time it will disappear from the shelves. Even if some people buy it in your local area, it doesn't mean it's popular everywhere.
The company will look at sales as a whole vs how much money they could potentially make using the shelf space to stock something they'll sell more of / have a higher profit margin on.

do you remember when in 40k:

- Took four or more hours to play?
- Terrain was based on True Line of Sight (it has been in three out of five editions!)?
- You would randomise equipment on a D100 chart?
- Vehicles had crew who could escape the wreck and continue to fight?
- There were six vehicle damage tables?
- Nobody had vehicles because GW didn't make any?
- The robot program system that was impossible to make work?

Always cracks me up to see people defending GWs business model until the day they realise that they too are stuck with obsolete or redundant old models and are forced to buy the next big thing...

I've got so much obsolete stuff I can't use anymore in official rules (marine jetbikes, various spec weapons, robots etc). My solution? Put them on a display shelf and if I feel like using them write my own rules for them, counts as them, or play an older edition. No need to spend more money if you don't want to.

[Gir]

I feel raped when I later discover that I payed money for something I can't use anymore. And no, "count as" isn't the same thing.

Yeah, it sure does suck when you try to use your own rules (or the old rules) for your model and GW kicks down your door and beats you with night-sticks until you promise to never use that model again.

[murrburger]

Gotthammer pretty much the nail on the head. But there's something I'd like to add to that.

tryannic war vets
LORd Solar marchius
inquisitor lords
familiars
sages
Inquisitorial stormtroops
Inquisitor Land raider
chaplin xavier
... and few more

Really. Sternguard are pretty much the same damn thing.

Are you kidding? I don't think he belongs in 40K as a character anymore. He can easily be used as noraml IG character, anyways.

Inquisitor Lords? I don't really remember there being an Inquisitor Lord model. They can easily be used as a normal Inquisitor, anyways.

Why not just model a Familiar on the base of your Inquisitor/Librarian/whatever. Sure, it doesn't do anything, but it'll look cool. (I love the models, myself)

Sages can be used as something like a mystic, or servitor. The henchmen have a lot of flexibility.

This argument again? If you want to play an Inquisitorial Warband, either play Guard, or get used to the fact that Henchmen make perfect Storm Troopers. It's not that big of a leap.

Also silly. What's stopping you from using a normal GK land raider?|

Chaplain Xavier? Are people still mad about that? A character that came out in a campaign list? I miss Chaplain Xavier about as much as I miss Cadian Shock Troopers (I don't).

If there's anything destroying 40K, it's a lack of imagination. On the part of the players, not just GW. What is stopping you from building a Salamanders army that doesn't need special rules (even Vulkan) to make itself different? Eldar players complained when they lost the Seer Council, but, you know what? You can make an Ulthwe army out of the vanilla list, and some imagination!

The same goes for Chaos. Do you need 4 heavy support, bassies and vindicators (which they have now) for Iron Warriors, or do you need normal Chaos marines, with normal rules, an appropriate paint scheme and maybe some fluff you wrote?

I really detest the back-of-the-book armies, and I'll glad to see them die. But, on the flip side of thing if you think something is too much a a stretch, what's stopping you from sitting down with your friends, and making your own, fair, balanced army list for something completely original? BoLS used to do it.

[scadugenga]

I don't care about fantasy, and I have literally never heard of Dog's of War.



That last army to be discontinued (for 40k at least) was squats. Many many many many decades ago.

I'm also interested in how many 40k choices have been dropped, as I can't think of anything stand out.

So....1998 was "many many many many decades ago?"

[Xanadu]

Wow, I didn't think people with this kind of views had discovered the BoLS Lounge, merely staying isolated to the comment lulz, insulting anyone with a different opinion to themselves, challenging something new and different (like competitive 40K) or beating on poor Goatboy.

Firstly I want to paraphrase a modicum of sensibility I saw in the endless BoLs comment lulz last week (whilst insulting Goatboy none-the-less):

'Just because it is the Internet, it doesn't mean you can piss in the wind and ignore good grammar and spelling.'

People should learn to adapt to changes between books and be happy that things *have* changed for the better (I'd prefer a new book akin to the GK-scale rewrite for my Eldar rather than the copy-paste that we're stuck with at the moment - try it, it really sucks).

Seriously, you're moaning about some small changes to your previously decrepit codex and things that have changed for the better across the board in this book. Good lord knows how much you'd moan if it had been Cruddace rewriting your codex. ISTs are Henchmen, get it? GK Land Raiders = Inquisitorial Land Raiders.

With regards to the incorporation of FNP into most of the newer codexes, this represents the whole:

'But why can't I have the shiny, Jemima over there has it as does Pauline, but not me...?'-viewpoint. If some dexes had it and others didn't people would moan way more than you do here. I bet you wouldn't moan if you could get more Apothecaries than you could shake a stick at in your dex... Hold on! BA get Sanguinary Priests everywhere...

I understand that you are bitter about the loss of strength 6 to S4, but I'd be much happier with force weapons regardless of a decrease in my guys Strength. . ID is greater than 1 wound in my book.

Characters swapping the FoC around makes fluffier armies possible (making fluff-nuts happier = more likely to shower), the whole:

'I want an army of über-doodz' thing is possible, but due to point costs, with respect to the capabilities of the other 5th Ed codexes *is* balanced.

E.g. A Draigo-wing army has around 25 dudes who will fall over to massed lasguns/shuriken/splinters - proof is in the pudding. 40K is gradually becoming more balanced whether you acknowledge it or not, and thus more suitable for a competitive play style.

With regards to your second point about models, you can still get hold of older sculpts if needs be, so stop moaning about some problems that only affect one of the plastic kits. AFAIK the PAGKs are a good set of models with no real problems, and detailing that would make an older Forgeworld kit jealous... GW's recent track record with plastic kits has been fantastic, I challenge you to find anything wrong with the new DE sculpts other than they don't show enough body on the females for you to touch yourself to.

A few closing pictures:

*
**

@Kovnik Obama

You are one angry little man who I have no time for. Begone.

@Taak

Love you man.

*Obvious Fail here
**Yes the swan is stuck