Apoc V.2 - cynical marketing or giving us what we want?

[Denzark]

I am quite happy with Apoc 2. I like the new forgeworld toys and the backing to put them on 40K tables. However, some of them are so good as to be serious game changers.

Looking at the Marines, I give you the Assault Ram (Ten Terminators assaulting out of a fast skimmer?) The Lucius Drop Pod (Bjorn or your favourite Death Dread first turn assaulting?) and also the Land Raider Monolith, aka Achilles.

Now I know that there are debates about point, capabilities, amount of transport etc. Personally i like them, and yes some of it is pure fluff. But, it now occurs to me more heavily than before that real life economy plays a part in the game - as these resiny goodnesses cost beaucoup dollar.

I view this as a luxury which I can afford so don't biatch about prices - when it becoems too much I will vote with my feet.

But i wonder if anyone thinks this is all about marketing, or a way to get more cool stuff into our armies, after all, variety is the spice etc?

Your thoughts please?

[DrLove42]

Theres one or two things that are a bit bent, the worst of which you've already mentioned.

But as long as your opponent is informed they should be able to plan around it.

Al lot of whats in there is either apoc only (so crazy OTT broken sh** is expected - aka the Phantom Titan :D) or is very reasonably balenced for 40k.

For your example...the Achilles for instance is agonisingly expensive. But it can't carry passengers. it is in effect a 300pt+ point sink that is hard to kill, but can't do too much.

[eldargal]

Well its FW, they have these issues. I don't think it so much about selling shiny new kits than it is about giving great models great rules.

My group is actually considering restricting the deployment of assault rams, not so much because they overpowered but because it seems ridiculous deploying a ship used for ship boarding parties to a regular battle against foot-based armies or a mech Eldar/Dark Eldar. What the heck is your assault ram going to ram?

[SotonShades]

For the most part, it feels more like bringing some of the older units not covered in Apoc/Reload more in to line with the current GW version of Apoc, with a nice sprinkling of new toys. Sure there are a few over powered Apoc Only bits, which I think is great personnally, but everything marked for regular 40k games feels pretty tight to me. Like Eldargirl said, it's very easy to houserule on stuff like the Assault Ram; how you do that will depend on your group and how you want to play. Those who want to play an uber competitive game can tighten the screws and not let you play this book, but I feel they'd be missing out on tactical challanges that tweak armies rather than changing them, rather than trying to force balance using the standard Codicies (which we all know are far from perfectly balanced anyway).

New rules and new toys good. Yes some of it is to help sell more of said toys, but it is FW. Most of us who buy those models will do so whether they have sweet rules or not simply because "Oh look at the awesome!" I know that is why I have a Minotaur, and that thing is pathetic!

[AbusePuppy]

My group is actually considering restricting the deployment of assault rams, not so much because they overpowered but because it seems ridiculous deploying a ship used for ship boarding parties to a regular battle against foot-based armies or a mech Eldar/Dark Eldar. What the heck is your assault ram going to ram?

By this same logic, shouldn't Terminators (which are most often used in deep-space boarding actions) be banned? And Vindicators banned when you aren't playing on ruin-heavy boards? Etc?

If you don't like something from FW it's fine to ask your opponent not to use it, but banning something because the fluff doesn't fit seems rather silly.

[Cherub]

Well its FW, they have these issues. I don't think it so much about selling shiny new kits than it is about giving great models great rules.

My group is actually considering restricting the deployment of assault rams, not so much because they overpowered but because it seems ridiculous deploying a ship used for ship boarding parties to a regular battle against foot-based armies or a mech Eldar/Dark Eldar. What the heck is your assault ram going to ram?

All they have to say is all our thunderhawks are busy and its all we have atm, and our stormravens are still with the BA and GK's

[Lane]

What the heck is your assault ram going to ram?

Maybe they are assaulting a Craftworld and they rammed a bit further than expected.

I wonder how many armies will have assault rams that look like Storm Ravens.

[Gir]

None of that matters in Australia, where Forgeworld toys are cheaper then off the shelf plastic kits.

[eldargal]

That isn't logic, that is silliness.:p Yes terminator armour is used for that but there is also much more fluff about them spearheading attacks on the field and whatnot. Unlike the Assault Ram which is a single purpose vehicle for ramming.

You will note I never said 'ban', I said restrict its use. It will be fine in Apocalypse, Planetstrike and Ciies of Death (could see it smashing through buildings) but if the game features nothing that warrants a boarding vessal then it won't be used. We are big into narrative games and campaigns so there will be plenty of opportunities to use it, people just won't be able to turn up with a fast skimmer designed to baord space full of terminators to games where it makes no sense for it to be deployed.


By this same logic, shouldn't Terminators (which are most often used in deep-space boarding actions) be banned? And Vindicators banned when you aren't playing on ruin-heavy boards? Etc?

If you don't like something from FW it's fine to ask your opponent not to use it, but banning something because the fluff doesn't fit seems rather silly.

[Legoklods]

None of that matters in Australia, where Forgeworld toys are cheaper then off the shelf plastic kits.

Is that because the shelf plastics are much more expensive in Australia, or because FW is alot cheaper down under??

[Gir]

Is that because the shelf plastics are much more expensive in Australia, or because FW is alot cheaper down under??

Plastics are really expensive here, and while the poiund is down, getting stuff from forge world is really cheap.

[LordGrise]

I think it's a marketing ploy. An executive who doesn't play, doesn't collect, and doesn't care about 40K as a game (but does care plenty about sales) would do exactly what we're seeing - offer game-changers for restricted sale, but at a premium price. It's the only way someone with that mentality could imagine anyone wanting these models at these prices.

I swear to God, let me hit the Powerball for some insane amount of money, and I will try to mount a takeover of GW, if only to get the above-mentioned I-don't-have-the-word out of the God-blessed decision loop. Parasites is too strong a word (they do serve a necessary function) but at the same time they are not symbionts, because their decisions are not in the long-term best interests of the game or the company.

Gah. Rant over, but witness ye and remember. I just hope the bean-counters aren't counseling to discontinue any armies on the grounds of poor sales - my Tau would be first on the chopping block. Been waiting months for Broadsides to come back out...

[Scrumblegort]

I think some people may be being overly cynical about this. Its not like Forgeworld's models are over powered, most seem to be overpriced if anything. Also, this is already a hobby where the money one is willing to invest in it has a direct impact. Ignoring the use of proxies, counts-as, and magnets, there is technically nothing restricting anyone from playing any army other then how you choose to spend your money. I don't own a Tyranid army, because I chose not buy them, do I think people should have to ask me first if they can use their Tyranids? No. So why should individual units be any different really?
Using the Tau as an example lets say Guy A loads up on say tons of Crisis Suits and Hammerheads (which would get expensive VERY fast), and he has teams outfitted for every role. Then we have Guy B, he doesn't have as much money, he has a Battleforce, and a few other individual boxes of units he bought. If Guy A and Guy B have a battle, Guy A is going to be at an advantage just because he will be much more flexible when it comes to building a list. If you ever play somebody who always seems to have the same list, it could be because thats all they have for that army, and once the familiarity sets in that opponent can become very predictable unless you consciously handicap yourself. I'm not trying to say that people who don't invest their entire pay check into the hobby are bad players, or that people who buy more models are all WAACkos. Just that the amount you spend can affect your performance.
Now assuming Forgeworld units aren't overpowered which I generally feel they aren't, I don't see buying Forgeworld resin much different then buying GW's plastics. I myself can't afford to casually purchase Forgeworld stuff, but if someone else is I don't think they should have to ask to use their lovely expensive resin, just as I wouldn't say "Hey dude you can't use that Dreadknight, because I don't own the Grey Knight codex so its new and scary to me."

[Dalleron]

If someone at GW decided to drop an army based strictly on sales, I'm pretty sure that Dark Eldar would be gone by now. This of course would be before the massive re-dux of the Dark Eldar.

Currently, I think Sisters would be chopped due to sales, if that's what it went by. Sure the armies are out there, but how have they sold in the last 5 years? I'm thinking not so great. The crap spawned WD codex isn't going to help that I'm thinking. Which is funny, because locally, those 2 issues of WD are hard to find.

[eldargal]

There is little to indicate that the executives have much creative input at FW at all, certainly not enough to tell them to power up certain units like the Caestus to boost sales. At all the FW seminars at recent Games Days FW talks about doing what they think would be cool and indeed some things now for sale were started as pet projects by sculptors not intended for sale (Vermin Lord, possibly that Master of the Forge chap). For GW proper (which is not what thie thread is about) then yes, executives do have more input, but probably not as much as a lot of people think. Apparently Marketing was less than impressed with the Medusae pack giving a spare head enabling you to make two medusae but they didn't stop it happening, for example.


I think it's a marketing ploy. An executive who doesn't play, doesn't collect, and doesn't care about 40K as a game (but does care plenty about sales) would do exactly what we're seeing - offer game-changers for restricted sale, but at a premium price. It's the only way someone with that mentality could imagine anyone wanting these models at these prices.

I swear to God, let me hit the Powerball for some insane amount of money, and I will try to mount a takeover of GW, if only to get the above-mentioned I-don't-have-the-word out of the God-blessed decision loop. Parasites is too strong a word (they do serve a necessary function) but at the same time they are not symbionts, because their decisions are not in the long-term best interests of the game or the company.

Gah. Rant over, but witness ye and remember. I just hope the bean-counters aren't counseling to discontinue any armies on the grounds of poor sales - my Tau would be first on the chopping block. Been waiting months for Broadsides to come back out...

[Denzark]

I find this quite interesting. I didn't expect 'the suits' would have much input in design in terms of form or fluff, but some of the capabilities, and in particular the decision to allow them in vanilla 40K, just seems too good to be simply benign. Otherwise you could have just issued a FAQ (or errata or whatever GW says is rules binding nowadays) stating that these FW units can be used in vanilla 40K, with a comprehensive list of every permissible unit.

I wonder if the 9 people to date who laugh about crushing their enemies with expensive resin mean it, or have a sense of irony. I for one don't think it will be long before we see the newbitz I mentioned in my OP popping up regularly in tournaments, especially Throne of Skulls which, whilst not the biggest, is for me the best indication of how GW thinks tournaments should go (based on the fact it is their tournament at their HQ...)

[eldargal]

I honestly doubt the suits had anything to do with it, though obviously I don't know for sure. I think it was just FW getting fed up with people saying they are 'unofficial' and laying it all out in a simple to follow fashion. They may have got a little excited letting the Caestus and whatnot in regular games I admit.:)

[Denzark]

Fair but by RAW all of the 'fluffy' good stuff from other IA books that I would like to see (salamanders, odd tanks, etc) hasn't been given the 40K tick - on A4 column format, they could mention every single small unit for every army inside of 3 pages, to give that final seal of approval.

[eldargal]

Well it has really, the book does say 'like all FW rules they are official nd intended for the appropriate type of game' or whatever. You just have to establish what you think is acceptable for a regular game of 40k with your gaming circle.