Avengers Unity Squad?

>Alot this stuff from you guys is really disillussioning me from the fun of comics.

The writers and editors are the ones disillusioning people from the fun of comics.

Just a reminder that you can always pull out of modern comics for a time and read older, better material until new writers come on board with content you know you'll like. People might try to complain or shame you for it, but they can't do a thing about it. Your time is your own, and comic books can be fun if you just get more selective about what you'll read.

Attached: screen-shot-2019-05-05-at-2.44.16-pm.png (982x559, 1.07M)

That's all true, though the main other point I meant was that regardless of whether the books were good or not, the Bendis and Hickman Avengers runs were heavily pushed and promoted by Marvel as important books and sold very well. After Hickman, Marvel have been content to let the Avengers franchise decline. Over 2015 to 2017 they published a number of Avengers spin off books that didn't sell as well and hurt the brand to a point where they downsized back to only one or two books (while other brands like Spider-Man and X-Men keep getting more spin off books even when they don't sell, because of a mentality that only those brands are 'meant' to have a lot of spin offs, and should always have them), and the books that are left are basically irrelevant to the rest of Marvel. They're not really being treated like one of the core parts of the Marvel Universe anymore, editorial under Cebulski seem to have reverted to an 80s/90s approach where they just focus on X-Men and Spider-Man and neglect everything else.

Aaron's Avengers is bad and nobody seems to like it, but it sells at an adequate B-tier book level, so he gets to stay on the book for years, while Marvel have no interest in doing anything with the Avengers he isn't using, even the ones the movies made popular.

It's genuinely weird to think of because all the characters on the Aaron team save maybe Starbrand and Ghost Rider are meant to be some of the big stars they're trying to push forward in the MCU, or at least their monikers.

Avengers was actually pretty popular in the 90s. People kind of assume it wasn't due to a brief downturn leading into Disassembled but that was when the Ultimate line was eating everyone's lunch. Marvel thought all their mainline books needed a revamp to lure in readers, even X-Men which was selling 100k an issue on the main title.

But you are right that X-Men fanbase has a notion that only they can support multiple titles and that they're all best sellers. Even though in reality it is usually one or two X-books at the top of the charts and everyone else hovering in the mid or low tier. And don't get me started on quality, 80% of Wolverine scripts read like rejected Punisher stories.

It feels like editorial doesn't have any priorities for the Avengers line compounded by Aaron being one of their big writers. As long as sales don't shit the bed no one is paying attention and no one with clout is angling for the book so he's on it until whenever even though from a business perspective it's a subpar arrangement.

Bendis set the precedent for clearing out all the characters whose 'home' book was Avengers, like Hank Pym, Wasp, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch and Vision, and since then most Avengers runs have just been teams of solo book heroes plus a few random characters the writer or the editor wants on the team. So Aaron's book is mostly pushing characters who are in the MCU, but they aren't necessarily "the Avengers" in the MCU, and characters who are get ignored by the comics.

Even Avengers fans tend to downplay how Heroes Reborn and Rob Liefeld were what made the book one of Marvel's top sellers in the 90s, but the book remained a top 10 book through the years afterwards when Perez returned to the title. The downturn in the years afterwards was largely due to not getting and keeping another star artist on the book, as well as the Avengers having to compete with The Ultimates. Marvel could have turned sales around without needing to do something as drastic as Disassembled and New Avengers, but Millar and Bendis convinced Marvel that they needed to turn the Avengers into a JLA style team of Marvel's biggest heroes.

And you're right about the X-Men books. Uncanny X-Men, X-Men and Wolverine were usually around the top of the charts in the 90s, but the fans seem to think the entire line outsold everything else, try to show them evidence that the Heroes Reborn and Heroes Return books were outselling X-Factor, X-Force, etc, and they refuse to believe it.

It seems like a lot of people on Any Forums have fixed ideas of which Marvel books sell and which ones don't, and those ideas are firmly based on what sold in the earlier 90s when the X-Men line was at it's peak sales.

krakoa is here to stay

Kang Dynasty was Busiek saying you didn't need the Ultimates to tell those kinds of stories.

People also focus on the line relaunch that coincided with Morrison, where the X-line did dominate the top ten...until the relaunch bump wore off and it went right back to normal.

>this change is going to be permanent
How new to comics are you?

>Kang Dynasty was Busiek saying you didn't need the Ultimates to tell those kinds of stories.
If so, he was trying to compete with the scale, but not the style, an Avengers epic that went on for over a year wasn't the same kind of story as the 'widescreen action' of The Ultimates.

>People also focus on the line relaunch that coincided with Morrison, where the X-line did dominate the top ten...until the relaunch bump wore off and it went right back to normal.
So people are focusing on one month when there were a lot of new #1s that sold well and pretending sales were always like that?