I took a pretty thorough hobby break for about 2, 2.5 years. I would check in here and there to see the news, but that was about it. When I left, GW seemed to be in free-fall, their reputation was in the garbage can and on a lot of fronts, pretty rightly so.
Coming back in, I look around, they have put out some spectacular models, made starter boxes worth buying, put out a lot of board games with amazing content in the form of 40k compatible minis and pretty decent stand-alone games... re-invigorated the GS Cult, released adeptus mechanicus, progressed the 40k fluff and Warhammer fluff, revived specialist games officially, now recently they have re-engaged the audience on social media AND they are getting back in the tournament scene?
The prices are still high, there is no doubt. Sigmar seems to be having trouble finding it's feet, I think that would be fair to say too... But, it seems they are really pushing to give the audience back the things they missed and wanted, and are reacting fairly quick on majority of fronts now.
So? This new CEO seems to be the kind of guy people were begging for 2 years ago. How do you guys feel about it?
I've said it a couple of times that this is the most positive I've felt about GW in years. Going back to purchasing the Collector's 6th Edition 40k ruleset and finding it invalidated in half the time of any previous release signaled a very downward opinion of GW for me personally, and the issues people had with their products grew increasingly worse over the following years.
The release of Betrayal at Calth seems to represent a dramatic shift. The models are still expensive as you said, but the barrier to entry has been reduced a bit. "Start Collecting" boxes, re-ignition of the Specialist Games (to be seen), talk of organized play even returning- it all points to a company that seems to have finally gotten the lesson.
AOS in general still seems like an albatross that will be difficult to resolve, and I very much doubt it will ever approach the success WHFB had, but I no longer go into a GW news thread and think "oh god, what new horror are they bringing to customers now?"
If they can get a handle on their rules and perhaps tap down some of the insanity in lore and models that's been cropping up (looking at you, Space Wolves), then I'll be very happy with them overall, and will go back to investing in their product.
I don't think GW were in free-fall but then they clearly weren't what they were 5 or even 10 years ago.
I've never really had a bone to pick with GW but there have been positive signs from GW for some time, but they really seem to be ramping things up now.
Next year should be very interesting if/when SGS gets going.
They are on the right track however people need to not get thier hopes up that GW will be releasing amazing rules for AoS or 40k. Expect a simple version of rules for competitve play for AoS. The tournament campaign will likely be very loose rules but hopefully it becomes easy to incorporate it into current tournaments such as ITC. I expect GW to just copy ffg and create a store championship and regional box with swag but with a loose participation ruleset. I don't expect GW to release thier own version of a tourney faq sheet. This would be fine and allow current venues even with seperate
Tough to say. I'm very hopeful, but as you said, prices are still high and the rules still leave a lot to be desired, especially with power creep being so rampant in every new release.
It's a little soon to say they've "re-invigorated GSC" imho
They've extended an olive branch and given some hope, but until they give them a proper dex/list and make them seem loved and not just shoehorned back into the game I'm not ready to start dancing In the streets,
Also, If they ever get round to being bothered to do SOB right and give us some new plastic kits for them then I'll take back all the mean things I've said.
Excellent, excited for my hobby future. The break after AoS did connect me with games I've only ever put on the "one day" pile. This turn ariund has been super fast IMO considering how quick the behemoth that is GW moves. Damage control, new stuff and should GW do something like White Wolf did for customer reconciliation that'd be sweet. Yeah, positive about GW and more importantly, my hobby.
I don't play the games, I am a painter only, so the models are what is most important to me. That being said though, the vitriol and genuine problems the rules and creep etc had on the general view of GW, combined with other problems, really made for sour discussions in general, and an unfortunate predictability of bad decisions.
I used to be a Mod here, trust me, I saw a very large scope of the negative perception by default lol!
Now though, it seems not so predictable that a bad decision is incoming. My hope is, management will finally realize nice models will sell themselves, good rules keep a major portion of the purchasing audience pleased, increase reputation and can do nothing but help the bottom line. There is no tangible benefit to half-ass rules, if you are gonna do it, do it right. That's my take anyways.
That being said, it has been refreshing to participate in threads not 95% full of posts about how things suck, who unfortunately could accurately predict the suckage in general lol!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CT GAMER wrote: It's a little soon to say they've "re-invigorated GSC" imho
They've extended an olive branch and given some hope, but until they give them a proper dex/list and make them seem loved and not just shoehorned back into the game I'm not ready to start dancing In the streets,
Also, If they ever get round to being bothered to do SOB right and give us some new plastic kits for them then I'll take back all the mean things I've said.
I'm waiting GW...
They did for me, as a painter or collector that box was more than enough for me to say that they showed some serious love... that being said, point taken that a 40k player may only be cautiously optimistic from a rules front and as is, not enough to make a big dent. For me though... lots and lots of great models I wanted badly enough that I outright created 30 customs 5 years ago when there was no hope in sight.
I think they've taken some great strides and I hope to see more positive steps. That being said I've never not loved their range of models and I've never held doubts that I would continue to purchase them. Whether I agree or disagree with their conduct I collect the models and play the game as it's the only one I feel really offers more then a skirmish (which I just can't get behind).
Back on the right track? No they are not. Nothing has changed. Starter sets? Pffft. They are just kits they are tyring to get rid of.
Where is the Dwarfs in the starter sets? Where is the Sigmarines in the starter sets? It is all an illusion. GW is still up to it's games. These Starter sets sounded great at first but all I see is a way for GW to get rid of their overstock. If there was was real starter sets, Sigmarnes and all the new releses would be in there as well, not just old product GW wants to get rid off. I guess GW realized they will not get rid of their $100 minis, so throw in a few other minis for free and will sell their over stock now. Getting about 70% instead of 100% is better than 0-20% of what they were selling. No facts just a guess.
GW needs to stop playing games and actually be sincere in wanting to put out an awesome product and experience instead of just making us "suckers" in buying their stuff.
I still buy some of their products, but I still have the "sucker" feeling every time I do. Get rid of the "sucker" feeling and I would be buying so much more.
For me, the real test is how Black Library shapes up in the next few years. Return to MMPBs, finish the Heresy, throw a bone to Fantasy? Then they will truly be back.
That said, all plastic BFG forgives a multitude of sins.
I would say perhaps getting better with regards to some business decisions (giving people what they want! ) Some of the new board games, plastic 30k marines etc.
There's also been a period of less negative press about the company as well, which has probably helped; no lawsuits against authors, small garage companies or trying to close down said companies and websites etc. which had peaked at what became known as the 'summer of terror' (probably what you rmember from a couple of years back MajorTom). No misfires like Finecast either, which was responsible for a hell of the amount of negativity. I think to some extent things have returned to a somewhat more neutral ground since then.
On the other hand the elephant in the room (in terms of deplorable things to do) was the killing off of WHFB. While I can completely understand making a new game in AoS, not continuing support for WHFB in some form (even if it was only a tiny downloads/hobby section on the edge of the website) to cater for the fans that had followed the company from the beginning was a really gakky thing to do. I've seen grown men swallow with a lump in their throat when talking about it (which is some accomplishment, and shows how emotionally connected people can get to their games!) Was it done to force those players who might have remained with WHFB into turning to AoS? If so then it shows a lack of faith in your new product, but in any case that was one of the nastiest moves I have seen, and showed that GW is still very much the 'corporation' in what is otherwise generally a small and personably industry.
What I think has also helped is that there are now enough other games that have reached a 'critical mass' (i.e. last more than a year, you can find a game or club fairly easily) that those who don't like GW's business practices or the games can look elsewhere. I think you used to get a lot of negativity from people who felt they were stuck with playing 40k or WHFB - they wanted to play wargames, paint miniatures, and for a lot of people GW was the only way to do that. It's much easier now, if you don't like the way a game or miniature range has developed, to move sideways onto something else. I remember once a GW-affiliated person commenting "They always come crawling back" about forum negativity. I don't think that's as true these days, customers can pick and choose game affiliation as they see fit, and are therefore less likely to mouth off about it on forums!
So - I think perhaps a 'C' grade now (with 2 weeks detention for the WHFB killing) "improving temprement and has got his avarice under control, has always had the talent but now needs to let that side of his character shine through at the expense of the pure drive for profit margin"
I feel they are improving, but still baby steps. Better than nothing, but there's still the problem of poorly-balanced rules and a very high barrier to entry; the Start Collecting boxes are a good thing (I am very tempted by the Necron one) but doesn't help the problem. The larger problem is that they are still unwilling to consider the game the product and produce things at a reasonable pace (e.g. no waiting a year+ for a codex while a faction that doesn't need a new book gets a new one) and make sure the game is well balanced enough to appeal to everybody.
There's still problems like the rulebook costing $80, a Codex costing $50. No amount of discount via Start Collecting boxes is going to mitigate the fact that if I wanted to start 40k right now with let's say Necrons, I'd need to spend:
That's almost $220 for a tiny amount of figures that's adequate only for the most basic of 40k games, in part because the rules and required materials are so expensive out of the gate before any miniatures are factored in. That's still a HUGE problem. For $220 I can buy basically an entire army for other game systems (sometimes more than one depending on system). Are those figures as nice as GW's? Doubtful, but I'll get a lot more bang for my buck. In fact, I'd feel stupid and/or dirty spending $220 and getting like 16 figures and two books (well one is a set i.e. rules but still). That's not much.
GW might be on the right track, but it remains to be seen how far they're willing to ride those rails, how much horsepower their engine has, and exactly what is in the railcars that engine is pulling along.
GW has always been good at coming up with great ideas, but has been equally as good at executing those ideas poorly.
I've frequently copped it from the pro GW crowd for being a hater. (But just as frequently disavowed them of this notion, and usually kicked their own arguments square in the nards for good measure.)
However, that's always been a misrepresentation, I've always really wanted them to do well, and I've always been happy to praise where I've felt it's warranted. That I so often get accused of a negative stance is purely a reflection on my feelings of GW's actions, not some fixed view.
Taking all that into account.. maybe?
There's a lot which is encouraging, but, so far, it's all been low hanging fruit, either product releases that were almost guaranteed to sell well and be well received (plastic Heresy, GSC) or simple, low risk, low cost (reinstating global social media.)
40K and Sigmar still remain games I'm not currently excited to play, but I guess spending time nearly every day working on my 30K/CSM force after not touching a brush or glue in months tells its own story?
I won't be happy that a corner has been turned until I see a determined attempt to offer a core game that tries to offer an even contest between players where the majority of the outcome is determined by player agency and not by whatever army book is on the upswing or whoever brings the most broken combo.
WayneTheGame wrote: I feel they are improving, but still baby steps. Better than nothing, but there's still the problem of poorly-balanced rules and a very high barrier to entry; the Start Collecting boxes are a good thing (I am very tempted by the Necron one) but doesn't help the problem. The larger problem is that they are still unwilling to consider the game the product and produce things at a reasonable pace (e.g. no waiting a year+ for a codex while a faction that doesn't need a new book gets a new one) and make sure the game is well balanced enough to appeal to everybody.
There's still problems like the rulebook costing $80, a Codex costing $50. No amount of discount via Start Collecting boxes is going to mitigate the fact that if I wanted to start 40k right now with let's say Necrons, I'd need to spend:
That's almost $220 for a tiny amount of figures that's adequate only for the most basic of 40k games, in part because the rules and required materials are so expensive out of the gate before any miniatures are factored in. That's still a HUGE problem. For $220 I can buy basically an entire army for other game systems (sometimes more than one depending on system). Are those figures as nice as GW's? Doubtful, but I'll get a lot more bang for my buck. In fact, I'd feel stupid and/or dirty spending $220 and getting like 16 figures and two books (well one is a set i.e. rules but still). That's not much.
I won't deny it's minor progress, though.
To be fair, if you own a iOS device you can get the codex+rules for $50. Still not much of a help to newcomers or those who don't own one but it's something.
Azreal13 wrote: I've frequently copped it from the pro GW crowd for being a hater. (But just as frequently disavowed them of this notion, and usually kicked their own arguments square in the nards for good measure.)
However, that's always been a misrepresentation, I've always really wanted them to do well, and I've always been happy to praise where I've felt it's warranted. That I so often get accused of a negative stance is purely a reflection on my feelings of GW's actions, not some fixed view.
Taking all that into account.. maybe?
There's a lot which is encouraging, but, so far, it's all been low hanging fruit, either product releases that were almost guaranteed to sell well and be well received (plastic Heresy, GSC) or simple, low risk, low cost (reinstating global social media.)
40K and Sigmar still remain games I'm not currently excited to play, but I guess spending time nearly every day working on my 30K/CSM force after not touching a brush or glue in months tells its own story?
I won't be happy that a corner has been turned until I see a determined attempt to offer a core game that tries to offer an even contest between players where the majority of the outcome is determined by player agency and not by whatever army book is on the upswing or whoever brings the most broken combo.
WayneTheGame wrote: I feel they are improving, but still baby steps. Better than nothing, but there's still the problem of poorly-balanced rules and a very high barrier to entry; the Start Collecting boxes are a good thing (I am very tempted by the Necron one) but doesn't help the problem. The larger problem is that they are still unwilling to consider the game the product and produce things at a reasonable pace (e.g. no waiting a year+ for a codex while a faction that doesn't need a new book gets a new one) and make sure the game is well balanced enough to appeal to everybody.
There's still problems like the rulebook costing $80, a Codex costing $50. No amount of discount via Start Collecting boxes is going to mitigate the fact that if I wanted to start 40k right now with let's say Necrons, I'd need to spend:
That's almost $220 for a tiny amount of figures that's adequate only for the most basic of 40k games, in part because the rules and required materials are so expensive out of the gate before any miniatures are factored in. That's still a HUGE problem. For $220 I can buy basically an entire army for other game systems (sometimes more than one depending on system). Are those figures as nice as GW's? Doubtful, but I'll get a lot more bang for my buck. In fact, I'd feel stupid and/or dirty spending $220 and getting like 16 figures and two books (well one is a set i.e. rules but still). That's not much.
I won't deny it's minor progress, though.
To be fair, if you own a iOS device you can get the codex+rules for $50. Still not much of a help to newcomers or those who don't own one but it's something.
Correct, but that's still a lot to get started, and there's something about having an actual book and not a tablet. I think that's a big thing stopping me right now from choosing to play, beyond the poor quality of the rules. The start collecting box I could easily buy, it's the rulebook and codex that makes the whole prospect off-putting. I can, of course, acquire both in other ways and just pretend I bought the iOS versions, but still.
To put it another way, I could easily go down to my local GW store and pick up a Start Collecting: Necrons box and feel "Hey this is going to be pretty cool". But not when I have to also buy the rules and the codex along with it, then it goes into "I'm spending HOW much??!!"
MajorTom11 wrote: I don't play the games, I am a painter only, so the models are what is most important to me. That being said though, the vitriol and genuine problems the rules and creep etc had on the general view of GW, combined with other problems, really made for sour discussions in general, and an unfortunate predictability of bad decisions.
Maybe I'm overly projecting my own feelings onto the community, but I think some what's happened has been a genuine change in GW. Clearly they are altering their strategy, and they seem to be releasing things that people want, which is good. Some of the change in mood here, I think, has been in people drifting away. I used to always warn that people that barely or no longer play showing up in threads to complain isn't the worst thing, because it shows they might come back. When they stop showing up at all, you know you've lost them.
I've been on Dakka a long time, and I feel like I know fewer of the people here than I ever did. I no longer play 40k, and while I like the idea of finishing my 30k Emperor's Children or Praetorian IG, it's because I want to paint them, not because I want to play with them. As I said, it could just be over generalizing my own experience, but based on the sheer number of "is 40k dying in your area" threads that popped up, I think a lot of people finally gave up the ghost on 40k. Obviously WFB players don't have much of a home in GW land either.
So, I think it's a combination of GW making some slightly better moves, and the bad moves from before finally killing off the lingering interest for a lot of bitter folks.
I'm willing to accept the odd stumble as this appears to be a genuine desire on GW's part to change but if they balls up the BFG redo there will be rage
They appear to want to turn things around, and are taking steps to do that, but their core game is still a complete mess, with rules on top of rules on top of formations on top of rules on top of more formations, and they continue to raise the prices with each new release (Hobbit prices were nuts, AoS prices are worse).
If they cannot get their core games and pricing in order then all the nostalgic attempts to bring people back, no matter how cool their Genestealer Hybrids are, just won't work.
What?! Model prices continue to rise, White Dwarf still sucks, fantasy is still dead, AoS is still a piece of garbage, still no communication with their fanbase, rules still suck, major 40K armies have horrible codexes making them virtually unplayable, still no market research, no support of local game stores.
Releasing a few "Start collecting" boxes with a minor discount doesn't make up for any of the above.
Azreal13 wrote: I've frequently copped it from the pro GW crowd for being a hater. (But just as frequently disavowed them of this notion, and usually kicked their own arguments square in the nards for good measure.)
However, that's always been a misrepresentation, I've always really wanted them to do well, and I've always been happy to praise where I've felt it's warranted. That I so often get accused of a negative stance is purely a reflection on my feelings of GW's actions, not some fixed view.
Taking all that into account.. maybe?
There's a lot which is encouraging, but, so far, it's all been low hanging fruit, either product releases that were almost guaranteed to sell well and be well received (plastic Heresy, GSC) or simple, low risk, low cost (reinstating global social media.)
40K and Sigmar still remain games I'm not currently excited to play, but I guess spending time nearly every day working on my 30K/CSM force after not touching a brush or glue in months tells its own story?
I won't be happy that a corner has been turned until I see a determined attempt to offer a core game that tries to offer an even contest between players where the majority of the outcome is determined by player agency and not by whatever army book is on the upswing or whoever brings the most broken combo.
But, for now, I'm cautiously optimistic.
You pretty much posted my post before I could post my post....
I am definitely more optimistic than I was at this same time last year - which is not to say that I have no urge to burn Age of Sigmar to the ground....
I will also publicly admit that Rountree is very much not shaping up to be the sock puppet that I had expected, and that this is a good thing.
The Auld Grump - I publicly stated my opinion that Rountree would be a sock puppet, so it is only right that I also retract that expectation publicly.
We wrote: What?! Model prices continue to rise, White Dwarf still sucks, fantasy is still dead, AoS is still a piece of garbage, still no communication with their fanbase, rules still suck, major 40K armies have horrible codexes making them virtually unplayable, still no market research, no support of local game stores.
Releasing a few "Start collecting" boxes with a minor discount doesn't make up for any of the above.
- Start Collecting (offering a significant discount)
- Producing soft back books (some AOS books have been remarkably cheap for their page count)
- Reinstating social media
- Specialist Games making a comeback
- Product releases advertised ahead of time
- Attempts to reach non hobby customers
- Release of models long wished for
- Selling more "games"
Perhaps "on the right track" means "finished" where you're from, but over here in the UK, I'd say that qualifies as moves in the right direction, there's simply plenty more to do.
Like many others here, I think GW has recognized they can't continue on like they've been doing - but they're still floundering for what they need to do to fix the issues without creating bigger ones.
They've still got a long way to go, but I hope they keep experimenting with branching out and doing new games (or reviving old ones - c'mon Epic!) and look into ways for providing better value for the money (because they aren't dropping prices any time soon).
I think they've made solid changes, and are starting to turn themselves around.
As someone who started the hobby with 40k and Fantasy I'm glad they're turning things around. On the other hand I haven't played a game of 40k in 3-4 years now due to the rapid decline I felt in terms of affordability, product, and rules.
I honestly can't see myself getting back into it now that I have other games that take up my time and money and I've sold all but my favourite army on the off chance I do get back into it.
I think the only thing I would get from them as of right now is the stand alone games, because they look fantastic to be honest.
Although I don't really do anything with GW anymore, I'm glad they seem to be turning it around, as it's a fantastic IP.
I just hope they keep it up and keep making improvements.
Yes. Like others, I am enjoying the hobby now then I have in a long time. 6th was a kick in the balls from GW, and that's when I definitely thought they completely cut ANY contact from the outside. However, looking at sets coming out recently (BaC, Overkill etc) and the organized play rumoured in another thread, GW are looking to getting their act together, and re-establish their contact with the outside, and more importantly, the customers.
All we need now are the return of GW forums That would be AMAZING
Akragth wrote: Sadly, not for me. The pricing is something that I just can't justify anymore. Not when my dollar spreads much further when I spend it elsewhere.
But it is good to see them at least start toward the right direction. They've got a long, long way to go, though.
Funny you should mention that. There was a price hike here recently. Some things, like paints, went up a few cents. Others, like the Baneblade kit, went up thirty freakin' dollars.
From a business standpoint they're definitely making some good changes with them finally giving us proper savings in bundles with the Start Collecting boxes rather than the annoying "Here's all your models in one basket online for the same price!". Unfortunately, as others as have mentioned ruleswise they still have a long way to go since for me recently the re-release of the WAAAGH! Ghazghkull supplement has been most disheartening given how much they could have fixed in it had they put in an iota of effort. It still boggles me that they don't bother outsourcing their rules if they care more about selling miniatures rather than making a game around them.
Also given that I'm from Canada, where our dollar is already crap, GW prices just continue to be salt upon wounds given that now even if we go on Ebay or other discount sites, most of the currency changes make it so its almost on par from just by buying from GW proper.
Akragth wrote: Sadly, not for me. The pricing is something that I just can't justify anymore. Not when my dollar spreads much further when I spend it elsewhere.
But it is good to see them at least start toward the right direction. They've got a long, long way to go, though.
Funny you should mention that. There was a price hike here recently. Some things, like paints, went up a few cents. Others, like the Baneblade kit, went up thirty freakin' dollars.
I understand that costs fluctuate, but damn.
I believe GW as far as I can throw them Which is zero.
When they actively change their business model that effectively has not changed since 2006, is when they will be on the right track
The reason for the price increases (IMHO) is to make up for the losses of players within their customer base. There is no changes to their business model hence there will be prices increases to continue to make up for loss of revenue due to loss of players.
So no, GW is not on the right track. When Kirby is completely removed from any part of the company is when you might see change.
And please do not tell me Kirby does not have any influence within the corporation. I've served on "a" board of directorship before and during the two years that I served, WE call the shots and THEY listen to us for our direction.
So until Kirby is completely out of the picture, you are going to see more or less the same as you are seeing now. More players leaving the game for something else that they enjoy.
I took a pretty thorough hobby break for about 2, 2.5 years. I would check in here and there to see the news, but that was about it. When I left, GW seemed to be in free-fall, their reputation was in the garbage can and on a lot of fronts, pretty rightly so.
Coming back in, I look around, they have put out some spectacular models, made starter boxes worth buying, put out a lot of board games with amazing content in the form of 40k compatible minis and pretty decent stand-alone games... re-invigorated the GS Cult, released adeptus mechanicus, progressed the 40k fluff and Warhammer fluff, revived specialist games officially, now recently they have re-engaged the audience on social media AND they are getting back in the tournament scene?
The prices are still high, there is no doubt. Sigmar seems to be having trouble finding it's feet, I think that would be fair to say too... But, it seems they are really pushing to give the audience back the things they missed and wanted, and are reacting fairly quick on majority of fronts now.
So? This new CEO seems to be the kind of guy people were begging for 2 years ago. How do you guys feel about it?
Not everyone considers "progressing" the fluff a positive thing, particularly given the outcomes. That said, credit where it's due, they're doing a lot right recently, or at least making the right kind of noises - long term, my own personal view will be entirely decided by how they handle the new SG division; when that was announced they traded on nostalgia for the old SGs, but I'm not particularly encouraged since the only rumours we have on older-style games indicate a big scale change for Epic/Adeptus Titanicus(if it returns in that form at all) and that they don't know yet what the fluff for the new Blood Bowl will be, which isn't encouraging for those of us hoping the SGs would be a vehicle for them to produce material for the real Warhammer Fantasy(ie new Mordheim) rather than AoS rubbish.
So yeah, the usual from GW; some good, some bad, some meh - the proportion of good to bad has just started to increase over what we were used to before, they've still got a long-ass way to go.
On the other hand the elephant in the room (in terms of deplorable things to do) was the killing off of WHFB. While I can completely understand making a new game in AoS, not continuing support for WHFB in some form (even if it was only a tiny downloads/hobby section on the edge of the website) to cater for the fans that had followed the company from the beginning was a really gakky thing to do. I've seen grown men swallow with a lump in their throat when talking about it (which is some accomplishment, and shows how emotionally connected people can get to their games!) Was it done to force those players who might have remained with WHFB into turning to AoS? If so then it shows a lack of faith in your new product, but in any case that was one of the nastiest moves I have seen, and showed that GW is still very much the 'corporation' in what is otherwise generally a small and personably industry.
Also yeah, this. This single move burned a lot of bridges for me, had they not been so drastic in their attempt to eradicate all traces of real Warhammer and convert everyone to the new One True Faith AoS, all the good moves they've made recently would be building goodwill rather than mitigating the disappointment and annoyance they generated.
I wouldn't consider myself a fan or a hater, just to start out. I wanted to get back into the hobby and GW almost killed it for me. How they treat internet shops is frankly insane. The IP problems just seem anti-community. The pricing is just predatory and 40k seemed, at the time to be half supported.
This is more personal but I couldn't fething buy a necromunda gang in a store or find anyone to play with who had minis. The scene was like three guys playing 40k and that was almost it.
in my opinion it felt like every passing month 40k got more and more Space Marines. 30k seems like a natural progression of that for me.
When End Times rumours started coming in I thought, yes! a chance for them to update some of the themes that lines follow. I thought maybe we'd get a ragged empire troops and maybe Orcs would get more brutal and less... in my opinion silly looking. Same with goblins more cunning less slapstick. Not that those are bad, It just seems I don't know dated?
When they announced the SGC was reopening I was optimistic that GW might finally turn things around. Forgeworld in charge of the models is slightly aggravating but still I'm hopeful.
When the Deathwatch Overkill box was 'leaked' I felt like at the very least they were listening, or going through a back log of most requested products.
We will see how it goes, but assuming they reboot or fix 40k, Get pricing and regional pricing under control, and make entry as easy as is possible given the nature of our hobby, then I'd say they are on track. Free Downloadable 40k rules would be a great start. Just the rules, plain pdf... make it as unattractive as they want and hype up the pretty great art and abundant fluff they have in their books.
I'm still not going anywhere near a GW game until they fix their prices, but they do seem to be going in a better direction. I nearly bought Operation Overkill (as a Tyranid player I'm a sucker for Genestealer Cults) until I saw that $320 sticker which is absolutely absurdly insane.
However, I do feel the same as Alpharius. I don't see them ever attempting to fix their core games because they really don't think they need fixing, and the game designers who did think so have left. So I can't see my Tyranids ever hitting a 40k battlefield again.
However, Warhammer Quest? I'll be hitting that pre order button day 1. Absolutely loved the gak out of Warhammer quest, and a redone game with better miniatures would be absolutely ace.
There are still problems but they've been doing some good stuff lately. GW is like a kid; praise them all the time and they become fat spoiled and dumb, but chastise them all the time and they have no idea what the right direction is.
Actually that latter one sounds more like my last relationship...
After End Times, my collecting GW came to a screaming halt. AOS did nothing for me and not picked up any new stuff in a long while. But I still follow what is going on in the war gaming world and
was surprised to hear they attended and showed new product at GAMA. But I loved to see Deathwatch overkill and was the first thing I bought from them in over a year..
I am sure they will also be at Gen Con again this year. I understand they need to make new product to sale, but bad choices was made on the AOS side that will take some time to fix.
All I can say is I am hopeful and do see changes in their attitude for 2016.. Only time knows... and there is to much competition out there for them to continue down the road of bad choices.
The funny thing is when AOS was released, I had a number of friends send me sympathetic emails and posts on my face book about how GW had slapped the face of their veteran gamers.
-Loki- wrote: I nearly bought Operation Overkill (as a Tyranid player I'm a sucker for Genestealer Cults) until I saw that $320 sticker which is absolutely absurdly insane.
...
However, Warhammer Quest? I'll be hitting that pre order button day 1. Absolutely loved the gak out of Warhammer quest, and a redone game with better miniatures would be absolutely ace.
I feel like the new CEO has noticed that the building is one fire and has ordered the staff to stop filling all the fire extinguishers with gasoline. But no real progress has been made.
Price are still pants-on-head stupid
40K rules are still a ridiculous mess
40K is now competing with Warhammer 30k: All marines all the time
Pretty much everyone who liked Fantasy is still pissed that they blew up the world and replaced it with Warhammer- Age of Sigmar: "Lets shoehorn some spacemarines in here too."
So while the starter boxers are OK-ish, and I'm happy that specialists games are coming back soon. I still feel pretty confident that even if GW were to produce a product I like it would be a) more than I am willing to pay for it b) not enough to drag me away from the other games/lines I have spent the last 5 years or so investing in.
They're being shown the right track by the successes forgeworld have made. I couldn't love 30k more, the foc is relevant again and I'm no longer forced to play what 40k has become, which is apoc, 30k feels like 40k did in 5th.
I feel like 6-7th gave the entitled of every gaming club and flgs free reign to just make the game totally suck. "Jus let mi plah wit mah toyzz!" isn't a ruleset, entitled brats don't make for good opponents and the paint by numbers ruleset just balkanized everyone. I'm still
sortof in awe with how 7th got rid of the army creation rules but at the same time somehow made them more convoluted. They threw the baby out with the bathwater all so the most annoying mouth breather in the club would shutup about being allowed to use his
baneblade. 30k had the common sense to at least index crazy to higher point levels instead of insisting we were always at war with eurasia (40k was always apoc silly, a hick hick).
30k is actually getting old faces back, we just had a tournament this weekend and every game was incredibly close even with massive variance from army to army. GW would do well to maybe finally realise that jervis's bull gak has gone on long enough and forcing
everyone to play asymmetric apoc level crap and accusing anyone wishing for a more balanced approach (the foc) of hating fun or not valuing fluff. The slight shift in marketing and the nice value starter sets are fine but they don't fix a fundamentally broken game. You still
see their shameless crap in the latest aos release, who in their right mind is going to buy 3 dragons for 600$ to play what was sold as a simple skirmish game? 40k was once a simple skirmish game you could play with your friends in a couple hours, now it's bloated
mess of flavour of the week formation/detachment idiocy. I'll go back to 40k when it goes back to being one faction, one codex, one foc, no silly crap. Oh and maelstrom is awful, adding the twister spin dial to your missions and fitting the word tactical into as many
paragraphs as possible does not improve the game one iota.
Well I never... Just spotted on the new Warhammer 40,000 facebook page:
"FAQs eh?
All right, let’s knuckle down and do this.
What one (just one, there’s rather a lot of you guys…) rules question do you want answered or clarified? Jot it down in the comments and we’ll take them to the Game Designers on your behalf. We’ll even return with answers, we promise. It might take a week or two but a collated list of freshly approved FAQs will be yours post haste"
Alpharius wrote: GW would have to 'fix' 40K and make it playable again for me to get excited about it once more.
Problem there is I don't think GW thinks 40K needs to be fixed?
I think that 40k is a lost cause at this point. Its needs to be completely redesigned, if not split into 2 separate games; neither of which are likely to happen.
I am certainly interested in whatever they do with Epic although given the quality of the current community ran rules there is a lot of trepidation as well. Decent models (for a reasonable price) and a ruleset that draws heavily upon what already exists (and which pays attention to the sterling work that players have done over the last decade) would get me to actually buy a GW product. That hasn't happened for a long time.
Crispy78 wrote: Well I never... Just spotted on the new Warhammer 40,000 facebook page:
"FAQs eh?
All right, let’s knuckle down and do this.
What one (just one, there’s rather a lot of you guys…) rules question do you want answered or clarified? Jot it down in the comments and we’ll take them to the Game Designers on your behalf. We’ll even return with answers, we promise. It might take a week or two but a collated list of freshly approved FAQs will be yours post haste"
Well, I have to say boys though I can certainly understand your pessimism after years of decline on the rules front, I have to say, it really seems to me from a marketing/Pr perspective that many of these moves are harbingers of them re-integrating the client and the scene into their direct domain again. Too many things are happening at the same time and though by no means would I make a huge bet on it, I think the next Ed of 40k may be a surprise whenever it comes around. Could well eat my foot on that one, no doubt, but I guess the point is it no longer feels strictly impossible like it did the past few years... dare to dream lol!
They are definitely moving in the right direction, but they still have a bit to do to regain their former glory in my opinion. However, I'm enjoying the hobby more than ever, so I don't have a lot to complain about.
Asking players about what they want to be faq'd is nice and all that, but it really shows how much care and attention GW has given to their rules in recent years.
They need to ask players about what needs to be clarified.
recent announcements have been amazingly exciting! Black Library is pumping out some good old stories at long last and a return to some board games going is music to my ears.
Schmapdi wrote: I feel like the new CEO has noticed that the building is one fire and has ordered the staff to stop filling all the fire extinguishers with gasoline. But no real progress has been made.
Businesses (especially those the size of GW) turn more like a cruise ship than a sports car. Any turn is going to take time to show its results.
They have my attention with some of the new releases like the Start Collecting boxes and I think the board games are a good idea. AoS is a complete miss for me, but it COULD have been good.
However, prices are still too high, the value is not there for the game systems and the competition in the market at the moment is just too high for me to consider their games and models. I'm more likely to buy stuff for LOTR than anything else.
Crispy78 wrote: Well I never... Just spotted on the new Warhammer 40,000 facebook page:
"FAQs eh?
All right, let’s knuckle down and do this.
What one (just one, there’s rather a lot of you guys…) rules question do you want answered or clarified? Jot it down in the comments and we’ll take them to the Game Designers on your behalf. We’ll even return with answers, we promise. It might take a week or two but a collated list of freshly approved FAQs will be yours post haste"
It has over 1k of questions in 4 hrs. Not sure how many are the same but they opened up Pandora box
Sigvatr wrote: AoS was way back in Kirby's times. Culling an existent game system and introducing a new one takes far longer than a year or two.
Then again, given the effort put into AoS...that might not be the case
I reckon GW could bash out AoS in as little as three months if desperate. They would have to drop all the usual 40K releases for a few months to do it.
To go back to the 40KFAQ requests, I lost interest in 40K when GW spooged all the Apocalyse etc. stuff into it and doubled the cost of books. I've got nothing to ask abotu 7th edition since I never bothered to read any of it. I don't agree the game needs to be replaced, for my taste they could take it back to the 5th edition setup and go on from there. Alternatively, I would be happy with an Age of Emporer for the simplification and cheap rules.
Interestingly, your personal anecdote in regards to 40k directly fits to the change we and other tournaments in Western Germany undertook. The tournaments my wife and I organize have all been scaled down back to 4th first and then 5th - and there's an enormous positive feedback. 7th is a terrible, terrible mess of convuluted rules, of thousands of little pieces thrown together, forcing players to spend hundreds of dollars to field a single army just for the rules (!), let alone the models. 40k 7th is completely inaccessible for beginners as they are immediately overwhelmed. 5th was the best edition for 40k, in our opinion, with a few little flaws that can be easily fixed (i.e. Transporter Spam) and then, you're good to go. Fast, action-packed matches without 50% of your playtime spent on looking up and remembering what feels 4 special rules for every single army in the game.
At this point, 40k receiving the AoS treatment makes little to no difference. Points no longer serve as a balance mechanism as every last bit of balance has been thrown overboard.
GW will never go back to 5th or anything similar, for once because they would never, ever admit mistakes, and also because they don't /want/ the game to be balanced. The sole reason for why GW started to initiate AoS was to reduce the effort spent on what takes most of your time: balance. With 40k now not having balance anyway, Ao40k is the way to go. Formations already exist and can be easily transitioned, the armies are there, the Skirmish level is there etc. It would be an easy transition.
Some armies will see culling, especially some Space Marines orders, but alas. Hopefully, after Tomb Kings, Necrons will also be deleted from 40k. Let them rest, they suffered enough.
Crispy78 wrote: Well I never... Just spotted on the new Warhammer 40,000 facebook page:
"FAQs eh?
All right, let’s knuckle down and do this.
What one (just one, there’s rather a lot of you guys…) rules question do you want answered or clarified? Jot it down in the comments and we’ll take them to the Game Designers on your behalf. We’ll even return with answers, we promise. It might take a week or two but a collated list of freshly approved FAQs will be yours post haste"
It has over 1k of questions in 4 hrs. Not sure how many are the same but they opened up Pandora box
GW can rebuild it, they can make it stronger, but they don't wanna spend a lot of money.
Spoiler:
Kilkrazy wrote: I lost interest in 40K when GW spooged all the Apocalyse etc. stuff into it and doubled the cost of books. I've got nothing to ask abotu 7th edition since I never bothered to read any of it. I don't agree the game needs to be replaced, for my taste they could take it back to the 5th edition setup and go on from there. Alternatively, I would be happy with an Age of Emporer for the simplification and cheap rules.
Aosing it would be going too far, all we really need back from 5th is being able to assault from reserves again, 6-7th if faq'd can work, it's just the army creation that needs overhall, that and 7th eds complete lack of terrain rules.
Sigvatr wrote: Interestingly, your personal anecdote in regards to 40k directly fits to the change we and other tournaments in Western Germany undertook. The tournaments my wife and I organize have all been scaled down back to 4th first and then 5th - and there's an enormous positive feedback. 7th is a terrible, terrible mess of convuluted rules, of thousands of little pieces thrown together, forcing players to spend hundreds of dollars to field a single army just for the rules (!), let alone the models. 40k 7th is completely inaccessible for beginners as they are immediately overwhelmed. 5th was the best edition for 40k, in our opinion, with a few little flaws that can be easily fixed (i.e. Transporter Spam) and then, you're good to go. Fast, action-packed matches without 50% of your playtime spent on looking up and remembering what feels 4 special rules for every single army in the game.
At this point, 40k receiving the AoS treatment makes little to no difference. Points no longer serve as a balance mechanism as every last bit of balance has been thrown overboard.
GW will never go back to 5th or anything similar, for once because they would never, ever admit mistakes, and also because they don't /want/ the game to be balanced. The sole reason for why GW started to initiate AoS was to reduce the effort spent on what takes most of your time: balance. With 40k now not having balance anyway, Ao40k is the way to go. Formations already exist and can be easily transitioned, the armies are there, the Skirmish level is there etc. It would be an easy transition.
Some armies will see culling, especially some Space Marines orders, but alas. Hopefully, after Tomb Kings, Necrons will also be deleted from 40k. Let them rest, they suffered enough.
I'll agree on 5th being the best but oddly for me I'll go ahead and be the optimist and hope and pray someone at gw can look at all the love and enjoyment and nostalgia forgeworld has won over with 30k and apply those lessons to saving 40k. It gives me hope that they can still save 40k by separating it from all the silly apoc crap and giving us the best attempt at 5th in 7th possible. Just indexing silly crap to point level being played can be done with a few key strokes and would and could do the game a lot of good, it would just give people who prefer 40k level point levels a more coherent game.
Schmapdi wrote: I feel like the new CEO has noticed that the building is one fire and has ordered the staff to stop filling all the fire extinguishers with gasoline. But no real progress has been made.
Businesses (especially those the size of GW) turn more like a cruise ship than a sports car. Any turn is going to take time to show its results.
Schmapdi wrote: I feel like the new CEO has noticed that the building is one fire and has ordered the staff to stop filling all the fire extinguishers with gasoline. But no real progress has been made.
Businesses (especially those the size of GW) turn more like a cruise ship than a sports car. Any turn is going to take time to show its results.
I say, Captain Smith, isn't that an iceberg?
The Auld Grump
Ideally you stay out of the waters with the icebergs and keep a close eye out for strays. Sometimes however you don't see the iceberg until its too late and still strike it even after you've started to turn. GW has started to turn, but is it too late to keep from hitting that iceberg looming ahead?
GW are a veritable racing trimaran in comparison to a truly large business, they're big for wargaming, sure, but they're not that large, even simply in the wider toy and model sector, let alone for a business in general.
The issue wasn't so much "Iceberg" it was with acknowledging the iceberg existed, and the subsequent stubborn refusal to believe that the iceberg posed any threat.
Rountree is, effectively, simply turning the wheel with the iceberg somewhere still on the horizon.
With GW having their plans laid out years in advance, it does make it harder for them to change course. Its hard to say how much stuff is still in the pipeline from Kirby's time that it was just too late for Rountree to have done anything about if he were so inclined.
And it is hard to see icebergs when you're looking at the world through rose-colored glasses.
Yeah, even if we assume that the new AoS minis were already in production as WHFB minis and just got rebased and rebadged, from what I've read around and about, you're looking at 6-9 months just to get books and boxes printed and distributed.
Whatever impresion you may get from the quality of the final product, AoS would have been in development for at least a year or more before we saw it.
Ghaz wrote: With GW having their plans laid out years in advance, it does make it harder for them to change course. Its hard to say how much stuff is still in the pipeline from Kirby's time that it was just too late for Rountree to have done anything about if he were so inclined.
And it is hard to see icebergs when you're looking at the world through rose-colored glasses.
Pretty much everyone with any first hand knowledge concurs that they're not working years in advance though. They'll have a road map, and obviously production has lead in times for various things, but they're just as capable of turning something out in a couple of months and dropping it into the schedule as they are producing something and sitting on it for several years.
Yeah sorry but there is no way, Endtimes/AoS was a massive launch in packaging, artwork, stories, product development, logistics and multimedia. You don't just change one of your core products, address every race in the game with 100's and 100's of pages of rules, fiction and artwork in a few months. They may be able to knock out a small release in a few months, especially if they are just new models with no codex, of a smaller supplement dex, but something of that scale eclipses that kind of thing on every level. I guarantee you AoS was in the works minimum 2 years, if not more.
I'd say that even a year and a half is a very low estimate. GW did not just introduce a new game, they deleted their secondary gaming system and even they will have thought twice before doing so. Even after having made said decision, they still had to write all the rules, as bad and lacking as they are, think of models, plan their design, have them made etc. all while still trying to maintain their only remaining system that is what keeps them afloat. GW removed the most important and thus most time-consuming part of the game by no longer providing a balance mechanism, but still, there's a lot of work done by a smaller team. I'd go with 2 - 3 years of planning ahead, strongly leaning towards 3.
GW is starting to struggle now as the market changes. GW has been the only effective supporter for tabletop games for a long time, but now, with so many other companies out there, some of them growing stronger by the minute, GW is starting to lose their strong position. GW failed to adress their problems, i.e. the ridiculous pricing and poor writing in time, openly neglecting and rejecting large parts of their customer base (and continuing to do so), rather spending time and money on senseless trials. We're not talking End Times (heh) here, but GW will continue to lose its importance over the next few years and if they continue to openly ignore their problems, they will go down.
Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
AoS rules were designed with the sole purpose of cutting down cost. Removing balance from the game means removing the largest part of developing time other companies. The rules are poorly written and lacking, but still, it took time to come up with all the text, formatting it, designing it etc.
Last but not least, rules and models could only be released together so splitting doesn't make much sense.
Yup, 100% with Sigvatr. Production of this scale is a weakest link endeavour, as in, you can only release as fast as the slowest part can be completed. The sheer amount of writing that went into Endtimes was staggering. Let's not forget Endtimes was absolutely done as a lead in to AoS, they were not mutually exclusive entities. So tack on End Times to AoS as a combined entity, tally up all the models, every bit of artwork, every book, every page, all the painting, the pictures, the design and production work, stocking, logistics... yeah. It was absolutely massive. Probably one of the biggest undertakings GW ever did, and as we said, 2 years would be a bare minimum, and 3 would be far, far more realistic and arguably still on the conservative side.
MajorTom11 wrote: Yeah sorry but there is no way, Endtimes/AoS was a massive launch in packaging, artwork, stories, product development, logistics and multimedia. You don't just change one of your core products, address every race in the game with 100's and 100's of pages of rules, fiction and artwork in a few months. They may be able to knock out a small release in a few months, especially if they are just new models with no codex, of a smaller supplement dex, but something of that scale eclipses that kind of thing on every level. I guarantee you AoS was in the works minimum 2 years, if not more.
That's just it, there's a huge distinction between a massive ground up overhaul of one of your two core product lines and, say, a Space Marine accessory sprue.
I'm not saying that there aren't things that require planning from a long way out, but it's equally folly to think that everything they produce is painstakingly plotted out years in advance.
I guess if one believes that nothing short of that sort of overhaul is needed to make 40K appealing again, I can see how one may then consider it could take years for it to take place. But then look at the time between 6th and 7th, I can't believe that was ever planned as it happened, and that 7th was a reaction to 6th's reception, rather than 6th was always expected to last a year and a bit (or however long it was.)
A complete revision, if that is indeed the intention, may take a little while, but don't assume for a second that GW are somehow powerless to react because everything is minutely planned out to 2018 with no room for manoeuvre, the changes will come, just smaller, more incremental and not all together.
Azreal13 wrote: But then look at the time between 6th and 7th, I can't believe that was ever planned as it happened, and that 7th was a reaction to 6th's reception, rather than 6th was always expected to last a year and a bit (or however long it was.)
I suspect that 7th ed was rushed out faster than originally planned due to 6th ed's reception, but I don't think it was written from the ground up in the time after 6th ed dropped... As messy as 7th ed is, getting the rules revised, getting books planned (and for all their faults, the current rulebooks are really nicely designed), printed, distributed worldwide... I don't believe there's any way that it would have been possible to get all of that done in the time between them noticing that everyone hated 6th edition and the 7th ed release.
I think it's more likely that 7th edition was what they were aiming for all along, but they went to it via 6th to lessen the extremity of the change - Ease us all into it, rather than repeat the 2nd/3rd ed changeover - but the response to 6th ed forced them to speed up the process rather than allowing things to get too out of hand.
That's just a guess... but it seems far more likely than that they wrote a whole new edition and got it out into stores within a year..
MajorTom11 wrote: Yeah sorry but there is no way, Endtimes/AoS was a massive launch in packaging, artwork, stories, product development, logistics and multimedia. You don't just change one of your core products, address every race in the game with 100's and 100's of pages of rules, fiction and artwork in a few months. They may be able to knock out a small release in a few months, especially if they are just new models with no codex, of a smaller supplement dex, but something of that scale eclipses that kind of thing on every level. I guarantee you AoS was in the works minimum 2 years, if not more.
That's just it, there's a huge distinction between a massive ground up overhaul of one of your two core product lines and, say, a Space Marine accessory sprue.
I'm not saying that there aren't things that require planning from a long way out, but it's equally folly to think that everything they produce is painstakingly plotted out years in advance.
I guess if one believes that nothing short of that sort of overhaul is needed to make 40K appealing again, I can see how one may then consider it could take years for it to take place. But then look at the time between 6th and 7th, I can't believe that was ever planned as it happened, and that 7th was a reaction to 6th's reception, rather than 6th was always expected to last a year and a bit (or however long it was.)
A complete revision, if that is indeed the intention, may take a little while, but don't assume for a second that GW are somehow powerless to react because everything is minutely planned out to 2018 with no room for manoeuvre, the changes will come, just smaller, more incremental and not all together.
That's pretty fair I would think. I am certainly not saying they can't get anything done in months. Aos is a different ballgame than say the last necron release though I guess is the point as you mention.
They are going in the right direction, but the prices are just way out of my comfort zone, Betrayal at calth i bought, but price wise it is not in line with boardgame prices from other companies.
I have a space marine army, so i could fool my self in needing them, but the genestealer cult one, although the mini's are gorgeous, i could not justify the cost for some minis that i do not have an army of.
As i play a lot boardgames, and have some of the miniature ones, they usually have less miniatures but the rules are better implemented. (although zombicide has more mini's)
I am looking forward to Battlefleet Gothic re-release (they should have made a re-release as the new PC game comes out), but if the base boxs is near the 200$ mark then i am running for the life pods!
Ghaz wrote: With GW having their plans laid out years in advance, it does make it harder for them to change course. Its hard to say how much stuff is still in the pipeline from Kirby's time that it was just too late for Rountree to have done anything about if he were so inclined.
And it is hard to see icebergs when you're looking at the world through rose-colored glasses.
There are plans and there are plans and there are actual production capabilities.
No doubt GW have a plan going forwards three months, six months, a year and probably up to five years. BUt GW isn't building nuclear reactors or designing new antibiotics that have to pass a rigorous test protocol to be licensed. It designs and manufactures small plastic toys and writes and prints the books associated with them. GW owns all its design, art, layout, printing and manufacturing in house. It can change direction very quickly if it wants to.
Just because they are seemingly slightly less bad at the moment doesn't mean they actually are going to do any long term changes.
The main issues continue to fester (and I'll ignore the Old World blowing up):
- 40k is galloping towards AoSification,
- The prices. I mean... do we even have to point that out?
- Some of the new miniatures are... less than stellar, though of course, liking or disliking something is purely subjective.
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
But are they to be included or not? One can't say "it's just 4 pages of rules - so easy to learn" for one thing and then quote over 400 pages for another.
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
Even ignoring that, the idea that smaller product=doesn't take as long or is the result of laziness or what have you is silly. Especially in the field of writing, being succinct is much more of a skill than bashing out as many words as possible. In many niches, such as usage guides or manual writing, fewer words is the entire goal and challenge of the job.
I don't see the 4 pages of core rules as not taking a long time. The easier route is piling on the pages and coming up with a million side rules. I think obviously the design goal was not to let that happen. That said, GW are not kings at wording and are in need of someone who can remove ambiguities.
On topic, I'm quite optimistic about GW, though I've never been much of a critic besides the usual price groaning over the years. I feel like they're listening to the community and are engaging us again, likely spurred by the increase in competition they're seeing.
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
But are they to be included or not? One can't say "it's just 4 pages of rules - so easy to learn" for one thing and then quote over 400 pages for another.
Well in this case we were discussing how much work would be needed to write the rules, not how easy or hard the game is to learn, so they would be included.
The statlines are derived by an algorithm. You plug in the originka WHFB stats and it spits out the AoS stats.
The special rules need to be written individually. If we suppose it took an average of 10 minutes to look at the original WHFB special rule, convert it and write a version for AoS, There are say 800 special rules in the War Scrolls. That's 8,000 minutes of work, which is 133 hours, which is about four 35-hour weeks. Put four guys on it and the job can be finished in a single week.
That's an extremely presumptious post. I assume you have nothing backing up any of that and it's just wild guessing? You haven't actually counted the number of rules, compared to make sure they're all analogous to WHFB counterparts, tried writing them yourself in the amount of time allotted per rule, etc? Unless you have, I could throw 5 dice and come up with a number about as likely to be accurate. Not to mention that it assumes 100% efficiency in writing and 100% time allotted to it.
Mymearan wrote: That's an extremely presumptious post. I assume you have nothing backing up any of that and it's just wild guessing? You haven't actually counted the number of rules, compared to make sure they're all analogous to WHFB counterparts, tried writing them yourself in the amount of time allotted per rule, etc? Unless you have, I could throw 5 dice and come up with a number about as likely to be accurate. Not to mention that it assumes 100% efficiency in writing and 100% time allotted to it.
It's not that presumptuous, actually. Taking into consideration how simple the base rules (simple die rolls against a target number, no interaction between opposing miniatures at all) are and adding in the fact that there's really no actual need to check for internal and external balancing, it is indeed possible to establish an algorithm and just flow from there. As for the time necessary for the special rules... I can't say.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you don't agree with my estimation, why not present your own ideas about how big the task is?
For instance, do you think there are more like 8,000 special rules, or it might take an hour to read one and re-write it?
Likely. You assume a maximum efficiency process hich is idealized. GW has often proven that there is little communication between their teams and work in general is rather poorly done - just cross-reference rules in codices. They often had trouble even communicating between designers and artists. Even overseeing the rules and how they interact requires a team to have someone or rather some people overseeing the stuff and cross-communicating between the teams. I don't think that this happens at GW. From what we have seen, it looks like GW has small individual teams, maybe just individuals, working on a specific task and once everyone finished his / her work, the results get mixed together and then (maybe...) proofread. This is extremely ineffective as if there's a problem, you gotta entwine everything again to fix singular problems. This takes time. A LOT of time.
If they cannot get their core games and pricing in order then all the nostalgic attempts to bring people back, no matter how cool their Genestealer Hybrids are, just won't work.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you don't agree with my estimation, why not present your own ideas about how big the task is?
For instance, do you think there are more like 8,000 special rules, or it might take an hour to read one and re-write it?
Likely. You assume a maximum efficiency process hich is idealized. GW has often proven that there is little communication between their teams and work in general is rather poorly done - just cross-reference rules in codices. They often had trouble even communicating between designers and artists. Even overseeing the rules and how they interact requires a team to have someone or rather some people overseeing the stuff and cross-communicating between the teams. I don't think that this happens at GW. From what we have seen, it looks like GW has small individual teams, maybe just individuals, working on a specific task and once everyone finished his / her work, the results get mixed together and then (maybe...) proofread. This is extremely ineffective as if there's a problem, you gotta entwine everything again to fix singular problems. This takes time. A LOT of time.
Yeah sorry KC, but you are desperately off here. And as Sigvatr mentioned, you are forgetting so many steps that you have only timed out a tiny portion of the process. This is the math you presented -
_take WHFB rules
_ plug into algorithm
_re-write special rules
1 hr per page
This is hopelessly idealized and incomplete from a project management perspective… the process would be more like this -
_weeks to months of upper management meetings determining the course to be taken
_Vying solutions presented with feasibility studies for profitability
_Choice made on direction, new round of meetings with multi departmental team leads to begin strategy and verification/QC on core strategy(this includes managing deliverable sequencing between art, fiction, rules, graphic design, product design, logistics, manufacture. All of them do things dependent on completion of other aspects by other teams, i.e, bottle neck city. (Not to mention the contractual and budget management aspects of an undertaking of this size)
_Sequential submission of initial work from department, QC checks, feasibility checks, rules checks. Layout tests, word count definition. Likely a few rounds of this to get things in a reasonable line.
_Take WHFB rules, plug into algorhythm, re-write special rules.
_submit drafts for QC
_Editor/QC returns with comments
_repeat
_editor signs off, content submitted to graphics for layout
_design DNA established for new brand
_Implement layouts
_Submit drafts for QC
_Editor/QC returns with comments
_repeat
_editor signs off, content submitted to printer
_press-proofing
_physical printing
_packing and warehousing
_shipping.
That only covers the words for the rules man. Not artwork. Not model creation. Not model painting. Not photography. Not the plastics tooling and manufacture. Not advertising. Not the significant amount of fiction. All of which require as many steps or more as the ‘simple’ rules, every one of which necessary to completing the job.
Hopefully, it doesn’t sound like a week of work with 4 dudes on it any more, even if it is just the rules?
me: the CORE RULES probably didn't take that long to write being 4 pages
rest of thread: well when you add all the other stuff you didn't talk about that was outside the incredibly specific point then it would take longer.
Why do we care how long it takes to put out a crappy core ruleset? Like somehow a bowel movement that takes longer is more meaningful or representative of hard work or contemplation lol
Rest of thread: it's nowhere near that simple, and consolidating and condensing is often far tougher than expanding. plus the actual writing, even of only those 4 pages, requires significant thought and co-ordination before and after, regardless of perceived quality of result.
You: poop is not more meaningful just because you took a while to pinch it off.
I find that the Catalyst Game Labs tumblr page provides an invaluable insight into what goes into the creative process. For example, here's the process they go through for cover development of a new book. Its a bit more involved than just throwing any old picture on the cover of a book and calling it done.
It can literally be "boss, the printers are on the phone, they need an image for the cover" "right, pick something appropriate from the extensive catalogue of images we have on file from decades of commissioned artwork that is the right format, size etc. and send it over."
In fact, it could be literally "send the first thing that comes to hand."
Putting effort into commissioning a new work and all the inherent back and fourth that comes with that is laudable and an indicator of high standards and an investment by the manufacturer in quality, but it isn't necessary as such.
Saying something can be simple doesn't make it so. I could walk into a bank and steal money. I could. Doesn't mean I will, doesn't mean I at any point thought it was a good idea, doesn't mean anything at all. The presence of a possibility doesn't automatically make it a viable, useable option man.
Just a touch, but interesting all the same in terms of seeing the perceptions of some of the public as to what is involved. It obviously effects the perception of what track they are on, but ultimately, not the topic at hand. That being said, back OT please boys, someone can start a 'what was a realistic produciton schedule for AoS' thread
MajorTom11 wrote: Saying something can be simple doesn't make it so. I could walk into a bank and steal money. I could. Doesn't mean I will, doesn't mean I at any point thought it was a good idea, doesn't mean anything at all. The presence of a possibility doesn't automatically make it a viable, useable option man.
The presence of a possibility de facto makes it useable, as if it isn't useable it isn't a possibility. The viabilty will really depend on the circumstances.
That example I gave wasn't my assumptions on how things work, it was a circumstance I've found myself in, where the substance of promo material changed substantially at a very late stage and the imagery being used was no longer appropriate and needed changing on a very short deadline to make the whole run anything but a huge waste of cash.
It's the same assumption again, just because something can require, and often does require, months or years to plan out in advance, it doesn't mean that some sort of a result can't be turned around in a whole other timeframe if somebody's holding your feet to the fire, and people in general, IME, are awesome at adding extra inefficiencies into what should be a simple process. Especially middle management looking to justify continued employment, and spotting these inefficencies often arises when a fresh pair of eyes looks at the situation, otherwise it becomes "this is how we do it because this is always how we've done it."
Take the new FAQ for instance. What could be simpler than opening up your social media accounts for the players to let you know where the problems are and addressing them? Once the initial document is done, an update every few weeks, or even just a few weeks after each new release, will be all is needed to keep on top of things. Now, short term this can be nothing but a logistical nightmare, but that's their own fault for not doing it sooner. Medium and long term though, assuming they really do answer the questions everyone is asking, it can only be a good thing.
I just hope they don't revert to type under the barrage and turtle up, then I will withdraw any praise I've so far offered!
It's odd because GW has done some things lately that are absolutely awful to me: Killing the Old World, killing off armies, $170 drakes etc. But at the same time I do actually feel they are moving in the right direction with the actual discounts they've been giving, the new push to talk a bit more with fans, specialist games come back and the board games with awesome minis we've been asking for for years. Is it too late for me? I'm not sure. If they keep heading in this direction I could see myself buying a new army to paint and play once and a while. Or just BFG, I will buy that almost no matter what.
Fine tom, you got me, 4 page aos core ruleset, sever hundred page other system rulebooks. No possibility to infer time/effort at all at either sepctrum. For all we now the 4 pages that comprise aos's core rules could have been in the works since before warhammer ever existed. Various other speculative commentary and so on.
Can we just say it's a fair inference that more work goes into larger core rulesets (again, talking about the rulebook, not all the supplements) than goes into rulesets that can be printed on half an ass cheak?
As for GW's direction, cautious optimism is about the most they'll get from me. I think it will be important at some point to differentiate collectors expectations and gamers, there's a tonne of crossover but I think collectors are easier to please than gamers. collectors want value/price like the rest of us, but gamers actually have to play the games, which is a massive undertaking.
Can we just say it's a fair inference that more work goes into larger core rulesets (again, talking about the rulebook, not all the supplements) than goes into rulesets that can be printed on half an ass cheak?
I can't agree with that, and in so many cases in the writing world the opposite is true.
Can we just say it's a fair inference that more work goes into larger core rulesets (again, talking about the rulebook, not all the supplements) than goes into rulesets that can be printed on half an ass cheak?
I can't agree with that, and in so many cases in the writing world the opposite is true.
If I hold down a random letter on the keyboard, can we at least agree it will get to page 4 long before page 200?
- Reboot 40k, it's highly inaccessible for starters. Release Age of the Emperor.
- Release "Starter Sets" that offer models for beginners at actually affordable prices. X-Wing is the top tabletop game right now and the starter is priced extremely well and offers everything you need to start with plus is a great base for your future army. Furthermore, a new ship takes about .25 or .33 of your army's point cost (assuming the standard 100) and comes at ~10ish€. 10ish€ in 40k gets you nothing. A single unit costs, at least, as much as half of what your fleet can cost in X-Wing.
- Close down stores and get back to FLGS. Cutting cost needs to start somewhere and the stores are extremely expensive to maintain.
- Cater to casuals. The competitive scene has been lost permanently for GW. They burnt all bridges and focusing on casuals / beginners is the way to go right now.
- Reboot 40k, it's highly inaccessible for starters. Release Age of the Emperor.
Disagree, 5th was oh so very close. They probably need to stream the excesses of 6th and 7th off into other supplements again, increase player agency, retain hull points, make overwatch involve some sort of sacrifce, and all round generally address the disparity between assault focused and shooting heavy lists, and that would be damn close. The balance issues are largely thanks to the massively erratic levels of the codexes.
- Release "Starter Sets" that offer models for beginners at actually affordable prices. X-Wing is the top tabletop game right now and the starter is priced extremely well and offers everything you need to start with plus is a great base for your future army. Furthermore, a new ship takes about .25 or .33 of your army's point cost (assuming the standard 100) and comes at ~10ish€. 10ish€ in 40k gets you nothing. A single unit costs, at least, as much as half of what your fleet can cost in X-Wing.
As much as I love X Wing, and as much as want 40K to be better, 40K is never really going to compete on price. It can't. This issue disappears if people are excited to play the game, which at the moment, in my experience, they aren't so much. 40K does need to drop barriers to entry, and it could really use a smaller scale game, such as Kill Team, you can use a box or two of models in, but I think the new big boxes are the solution to that, and while it wouldn't be the way I'd choose to go forward, I can understand the thinking.
- Close down stores and get back to FLGS. Cutting cost needs to start somewhere and the stores are extremely expensive to maintain.
I think this is a great idea, but near impossible to execute. GW is their stores now, they're inextricably linked. I just don't see a way they can do this and survive. The relationships with LGS have been damage in a lot of cases, they need to be repaired, and in many cases the disappearance of a local GW would quite likely need to happen first. Either a phased rollout or an overnight change would be difficult to manage and the drop in revenue could very well push them under.
- Cater to casuals. The competitive scene has been lost permanently for GW. They burnt all bridges and focusing on casuals / beginners is the way to go right now.
That's a little pessimistic. It's a big ask, sure, but I've always found that competitive gamers are the least sentimental, they tend to go where the challenge is and where the events are on offer, if 40K becomes a popular tourney event again, people will come back. If anything, it's the casual/fluff players that are the ones that would be harder to draw back, as there's more of an emotional involvement, they are more likely to feel "scorned" and make it personal than the competitives. People, in reality, are more like a mix of the two, so some would likely forgive and forget while others would stay away, but if I was offered the job of reinstating 40K as a popular competitive game, it isn't a challenge I'd feel was impossible.
Azreal13 wrote: As much as I love X Wing, and as much as want 40K to be better, 40K is never really going to compete on price. It can't. This issue disappears if people are excited to play the game, which at the moment, in my experience, they aren't so much. 40K does need to drop barriers to entry, and it could really use a smaller scale game, such as Kill Team, you can use a box or two of models in, but I think the new big boxes are the solution to that, and while it wouldn't be the way I'd choose to go forward, I can understand the thinking.
The second-last starter set of 40k was a good example. Fairly priced and everyone got some good models going. From this point, GW should add more pricing levels. Right now, you got starter and then boom, price explosion. Offer more price levels. Have a "starter kits" for an army with a core unit and one additional choice, bundle choices to small, affordable kits. Have a kit with a core unit,3 paints and a brush at affordable levels. Release boxes that actually scale in price. Or, even easier, offer "bundles" at stores. No repacking, but ou get an in-store markdown. Have a poster showing you possible bundles and the markdown you get if you buy X with Y or X+Y+Z, e.g. buy a unit and a character model, pay less, also buy paints and a brush, get an even higher discout.
That's a little pessimistic. It's a big ask, sure, but I've always found that competitive gamers are the least sentimental, they tend to go where the challenge is and where the events are on offer, if 40K becomes a popular tourney event again, people will come back.
Oh, they will. Yet at this point, a lot of people are furious, including former high level players. By catering to casuals first, GW can start back from the roots and then, once they picked up their pace again, start also getting back to competitive players.
It's irrelevant how long it took them to make the AoS rules if the rules are not good enough to get people to play the game. When I look at them, I think "Huh, so simple that it throws up all sorts of ambiguous weirdness, and also loaded with unit specific special rules? How did they manage to get the worst of both extremes into one rule set?!"
No balancing mechanism has been argued as a positive and I'm willing to accept that seeing it as such is up to the user, but I personally find it pretty lazy.
Other aspects of AoS seem to have had a long lead in though- just look at End Times.
GW are improving, but for me and probably many like me, it's too little, too late. I've already moved on, and mostly keep an eye on GW only because I have full armies for their games and have a lot of fondness for their settings.
I will make this brief, as I've spilled enough virtual ink over the years about GW on Warseer:
No.
In fact, I will go so far as to say it's too late for GW now to ever recover to where they were (barring hostile takeover).
When you look at the gaming industry, the key thing to look at is the network effects for the games. The more people who play a game, the more people who will play a game.
So long as GW retained the crown of the game with the most interest and largest player community, GW could continue to stumble along and would have time to sober up, get things right, and move on with their lives.
I stopped saying much about GW in 2014 because I could see that shift was coming, at least in North America (in the UK, they are in a much stronger position). Now, the dominant game in most places is X-Wing. Fantasy Flight ate their lunch, and the re-release of the Star Wars franchise to smashing success has only caused that snowball to roll downhill faster, now with sharp metal bits sticking out of it as it demolishes other things.
GW lost the momentum and is now in reverse. Forum posting (especially ex-Dakka), google searches, inquiries at gaming shops, etc. are all in decline. I don't think this is recoverable for GW anymore, short of a truly explosive hostile takeover and sudden reversal of virtually all of their business practices around recruitment / retention. My entire group of friends still plays wargames, but none of us are the bitter guy posting on forums; we just stopped, there's no interest and engagement, and nothing GW can do would bring us back as customers unless we turn on the companies we are now buying from (Wyrd and FFG).
However, that won't happen within the year, probably not even five, and that's really what is needed. My prediction is that GW shrinks to a relatively minor player in the overall gaming market and, essentially, becomes a UK-only player again with a minor presence in NA and the EU.
That won't be sustainable given that they are public and become a very enticing takeover target with where the stock would trade. But it all comes down to this: they needed to re-start growth already, and they haven't done enough while one of their competitors actually got ahead of them in a region (the first time this has ever happened, I would add).
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
Even ignoring that, the idea that smaller product=doesn't take as long or is the result of laziness or what have you is silly. Especially in the field of writing, being succinct is much more of a skill than bashing out as many words as possible. In many niches, such as usage guides or manual writing, fewer words is the entire goal and challenge of the job.
Until you add in the fact that GW did not bother with any balancing mechanism in the new rules - so a lot less time was spent in trying to playtest and balance the rules of AoS.
Kings of War is a succinct rules set.
Age of Sigmar is a short rules set.
Kings of War is a well balanced and flexible game.
Age of Sigmar is a steaming pile of
The Auld Grump
Automatically Appended Next Post: A very real question is - does Rountree view GW as marketing to gamers or to collectors?
The boardgames that are popping up like mushrooms after a summer shower make me suspect that he is marketing to gamers....
Despite all the other things being changed back, 40K is the elephant in the room. From my personal viewpoint, I really want 40K to be cleaned up. I'm not interested in anything else although I agree it's good stuff in itself.
It's impossible to get people into 40k. It's such a huge clusterfeck.
a) "Oh, you want to play this army? Cool! So you need this...and this...and this...and this...oh, you also need models! The books are just a few hundred dollars!"
b) "Okay, move this unit here. Wait, it has a special rule. Move twice. Okay, you can also run. But you cannot assault if you run. Wait, that's Dangerous Terrain. You have to roll. Take an armor save. Your unit has a special rule to reroll armor saves! Re-roll. Okay, you just moved a few inches. Ah, wait, I gforgot that it's special dangerous terrain. Here, you need to roll on that chart to see what it does. Let me look that up...yeah here it is. Okay, roll 2D6. Okay, it's a scary forest. You need to roll a Fear test. Fear is a special rule t- ah wait, you're immune to Fear because you're a Space Marine. Okay, go on. You can move another unit now."
Not a by the book example, but that is how so many situations in 40k went in 6th / 7th. Every rule has a special rule with a special rule. That isn't fun. That's annoying. It's busy work. Sure, it's fun for some who want to really get into a game and get the most out of it etc., but for the casual player or beginner, it's about as fun as doing calculus. Keep in mind that most of us are 40k veterans and already know a lot of rules by heart. Beginner's don't. We grew up with 40k and many rules stayed and did not have to be learned anew. A new player who wants to start with 40k in 7th is easily frustrated or overwhelmed.
Take X-Wing as an example. Or KoW. Or, goddamn, even AoS. A new player sees "Wait, that's all the rules? Awesome! I can learn those!". He's motivated. That's how you get players into a game. X-Wing is the perfect example. Very short rules with a lot of extra rules but every rule is visible on a card and tells you exactly what it does. No looking up. You choose how difficult you want the game to be by starting with fewer points / ships / upgrades. Easy to pickup, very hard to master - I still fly my ships into rocks like a complete moron!
GW MUST simplify 40k. It's the only system they have left that keeps the ship afloat. Not being able to effectively interest fresh blood into the game is deadly.
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
Even ignoring that, the idea that smaller product=doesn't take as long or is the result of laziness or what have you is silly. Especially in the field of writing, being succinct is much more of a skill than bashing out as many words as possible. In many niches, such as usage guides or manual writing, fewer words is the entire goal and challenge of the job.
Sigvatr, if 40k was as fun or easy as Calculus, I would have been able to get all my friends and family into it. Calculus is a succinct ruleset, basically just algebra with a few big concepts to learn. AOS and 40k involve a lot of memorization and flipping through books in a panic; they are more like Organic Chemistry.
Sigvatr wrote: It's impossible to get people into 40k. It's such a huge clusterfeck.
a) "Oh, you want to play this army? Cool! So you need this...and this...and this...and this...oh, you also need models! The books are just a few hundred dollars!"
b) "Okay, move this unit here. Wait, it has a special rule. Move twice. Okay, you can also run. But you cannot assault if you run. Wait, that's Dangerous Terrain. You have to roll. Take an armor save. Your unit has a special rule to reroll armor saves! Re-roll. Okay, you just moved a few inches. Ah, wait, I gforgot that it's special dangerous terrain. Here, you need to roll on that chart to see what it does. Let me look that up...yeah here it is. Okay, roll 2D6. Okay, it's a scary forest. You need to roll a Fear test. Fear is a special rule t- ah wait, you're immune to Fear because you're a Space Marine. Okay, go on. You can move another unit now."
Not a by the book example, but that is how so many situations in 40k went in 6th / 7th. Every rule has a special rule with a special rule. That isn't fun. That's annoying. It's busy work. Sure, it's fun for some who want to really get into a game and get the most out of it etc., but for the casual player or beginner, it's about as fun as doing calculus. Keep in mind that most of us are 40k veterans and already know a lot of rules by heart. Beginner's don't. We grew up with 40k and many rules stayed and did not have to be learned anew. A new player who wants to start with 40k in 7th is easily frustrated or overwhelmed.
Take X-Wing as an example. Or KoW. Or, goddamn, even AoS. A new player sees "Wait, that's all the rules? Awesome! I can learn those!". He's motivated. That's how you get players into a game. X-Wing is the perfect example. Very short rules with a lot of extra rules but every rule is visible on a card and tells you exactly what it does. No looking up. You choose how difficult you want the game to be by starting with fewer points / ships / upgrades. Easy to pickup, very hard to master - I still fly my ships into rocks like a complete moron!
GW MUST simplify 40k. It's the only system they have left that keeps the ship afloat. Not being able to effectively interest fresh blood into the game is deadly.
This.
I wouldn't mind a complicated rules set if the game was balanced throughout.4
I would rather have a core ruleset that can be squeezed into a £20 book (max if I have to pay for it and a Codex) as well as special rules in unit entries/codexes - than have it all in a £50 set of books of which two of them I don't even need for rules.
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
Even ignoring that, the idea that smaller product=doesn't take as long or is the result of laziness or what have you is silly. Especially in the field of writing, being succinct is much more of a skill than bashing out as many words as possible. In many niches, such as usage guides or manual writing, fewer words is the entire goal and challenge of the job.
Age of Sigmar is a steaming pile of
Intelligent case.
By your own standards, that's genius level debating, surely?
Sigvatr wrote: It's impossible to get people into 40k. It's such a huge clusterfeck.
a) "Oh, you want to play this army? Cool! So you need this...and this...and this...and this...oh, you also need models! The books are just a few hundred dollars!"
b) "Okay, move this unit here. Wait, it has a special rule. Move twice. Okay, you can also run. But you cannot assault if you run. Wait, that's Dangerous Terrain. You have to roll. Take an armor save. Your unit has a special rule to reroll armor saves! Re-roll. Okay, you just moved a few inches. Ah, wait, I gforgot that it's special dangerous terrain. Here, you need to roll on that chart to see what it does. Let me look that up...yeah here it is. Okay, roll 2D6. Okay, it's a scary forest. You need to roll a Fear test. Fear is a special rule t- ah wait, you're immune to Fear because you're a Space Marine. Okay, go on. You can move another unit now."
Not a by the book example, but that is how so many situations in 40k went in 6th / 7th. Every rule has a special rule with a special rule. That isn't fun. That's annoying. It's busy work. Sure, it's fun for some who want to really get into a game and get the most out of it etc., but for the casual player or beginner, it's about as fun as doing calculus. Keep in mind that most of us are 40k veterans and already know a lot of rules by heart. Beginner's don't. We grew up with 40k and many rules stayed and did not have to be learned anew. A new player who wants to start with 40k in 7th is easily frustrated or overwhelmed.
Take X-Wing as an example. Or KoW. Or, goddamn, even AoS. A new player sees "Wait, that's all the rules? Awesome! I can learn those!". He's motivated. That's how you get players into a game. X-Wing is the perfect example. Very short rules with a lot of extra rules but every rule is visible on a card and tells you exactly what it does. No looking up. You choose how difficult you want the game to be by starting with fewer points / ships / upgrades. Easy to pickup, very hard to master - I still fly my ships into rocks like a complete moron!
GW MUST simplify 40k. It's the only system they have left that keeps the ship afloat. Not being able to effectively interest fresh blood into the game is deadly.
This.
I wouldn't mind a complicated rules set if the game was balanced throughout.4
I would rather have a core ruleset that can be squeezed into a £20 book (max if I have to pay for it and a Codex) as well as special rules in unit entries/codexes - than have it all in a £50 set of books of which two of them I don't even need for rules.
It is important to distinguish between complicated and complex and not mix the two.
X Wing is complex without being complicated (as is any other rule set you want to hold up as an example of well written rules for that matter.) It provides a great deal of depth without unnecessary flab.
40K is complicated without being particularly complex. There's remarkably little decision making needed, the game itself doesn't present the player with a huge variety of choices to make, but this lack of depth is buried under endless legions of USRs and special exceptions, giving it the appearance of complexity but in reality it's just a complicated mess.
Azreal13 wrote: 40K is complicated without being particularly complex. There's remarkably little decision making needed, the game itself doesn't present the player with a huge variety of choices to make, but this lack of depth is buried under endless legions of USRs and special exceptions, giving it the appearance of complexity but in reality it's just a complicated mess.
Adding to the complication is the one size fits all mindset put forth since 7th. I'm still baffled that someone at GW would think it's ok to whip out a knight in a 500pt game but, as you said, complicated isn't the same as complex. Culture of a gaming store or group can take over there, but it's just more unnecessary politics.
30k has similar hurdles to overcome, no digital support, up to book 6 now and fortifications still require a copy of the stronghold assault book. But at it's core it still feels much more like 5th and with the way the age of darkness force organization works, crazy is heavily limited and only available at about 2000pts and up, which is what 40k desperately needs IMO. Forgeworld also does a good job of separating "with opponents consent" stuff from the core game, something drastically needed to stem the tide of balkanization.
I'd argue that its not and that its quite antiquated. Having to roll three times typically to cause damage has gone the way of the dodo for a good reason in every other ruleset. The all or nothing armour save mechanic, cover being an either/or save, identical movement range across all basic infantry and other unit types and the differences in vehicles and MCs all quickly add up to be a burdensome and clunky rule set that doesn't do a lot well. Let's not even get into the mish mash of battalion level mechanics and individual focused mechanics that confuse the game further.
40k isn't even that tactical. Movement doesn't mean much outside of being able to jet across to as many objectives as possible (in the equally ridiculous Maelstrom missions) because the tables are so small for the size of armies people play combined with long weapon ranges and typically little meaningful cover. 40k is a lot of target priority, knowing the ins and outs of the special rules and abilities of all units on the table, and remembering to capture some objectives along the way, depending on the mission type.
I've played numerous rulesets ranging from spaceship combat to modern warfare and other historicals, and 40k has always struck me as being the least tactically engaging but the most complicated.
So no, I don't think the core of 40k is pretty decent.
So no, I don't think the core of 40k is pretty decent.
Neither do I. The rules have become increasingly incoherent and the game itself is trying to cram everything onto the tabletop.
The end result is that 40k is probably the most cluttered and needlessly complex wargame on the market, any game that is cluttered and complex is badly designed.
I'll probably never get into AoS or back into 40K, but I think the new Specialist Games are a very hopeful sign. If they can redo and properly support them without Dreadfleeting the rules, I'll certainly come back.
Elemental wrote: I'll probably never get into AoS or back into 40K, but I think the new Specialist Games are a very hopeful sign. If they can redo and properly support them without Dreadfleeting the rules, I'll certainly come back.
What does support require? Have they supported any of the other recent boxed games outside of the initial box release?
Ideally a boxed game should stand alone and need no support at all. The rules should be well-written, clear and balanced. Perhaps one set of FAQ and/or errata might be needed.
I'm glad to see that GW has started responding to players' requests. I also don't expect them to change every facet of the company overnight. We're seeing some good changes, so hopefully that's an indicator of what's to come. There's one thing I worry about, and that's GW's unwillingness to scrap the existing "finely detailed resin cast miniatures" (aka Finecast) models and start selling the plastic replacements. I have an Eldar army, but don't want to invest in some of the aspect squads and character models, because GW is trying to get rid of all of the resin stuff before they start selling the plastic replacements. GW knows the resin models are poor quality; that's why they've moved back to plastic for new character models, which is definitely a good thing. They just need to do the honorable thing and pull the resin off the store shelves/hangers so people who want to invest in the game can get good, quality product.
They're not switching characters to plastic because they know that Finecast is poor, Finecast was only ever a stop gap while everything was eventually migrated to plastic.
Regardless of their relative size in the industry, there's still only a finite number of man hours, amount of money and available release dates to get all this done, and while I agree there's some kits that really should have been prioritized and done by now, GW do have a long history of letting things fester for no discernible reason.
I don't have a source for this, but I remember many people talking about how, at the time of the Eldar Codex update in 2012 (2013?), Jes Goodwin said he had to choose between releasing the plastic Wraithguard or releasing the new plastic Jetbikes, which had been done for a long time. If plastic production spots are that limited, I don't expect to see new Aspects until the next Eldar codex update, alternatively in 2-3 years if GW have indeed left the traditional codex update model behind. Wraithguard and Jetbikes badly needed an update, so I can see prioritizing them before the Aspect Warriors which still are very good sculpts (Warp Spiders aside, although their problem is the limited posing and not the sculpts themselves).
Crablezworth wrote: Let's also separate aos "the miniatures" from aos "the core rules". While it may take months to say print a book a or box, it seems like when the game is 4 pages of rules it couldn't have possibly taken too long. I can believe a lot of the logistics took a while but the core game resembles something scrawled on a napkin. Moving away from ranked combat is one thing but this whole models moving by the tail thing is a bit much.
More like 400 pages of rules if you include all the warscrolls.
Even ignoring that, the idea that smaller product=doesn't take as long or is the result of laziness or what have you is silly. Especially in the field of writing, being succinct is much more of a skill than bashing out as many words as possible. In many niches, such as usage guides or manual writing, fewer words is the entire goal and challenge of the job.
Age of Sigmar is a steaming pile of
Intelligent case.
I notice that you carefully trimmed off the actual case, to leave only the
So, you must really be a fan of Age of Sigmar! Trimming away everything that isn't was how they wrote the game!
The important part, and the part you left out, is that much of the time and work spent in writing a game is in balancing the rules.
Which Age of Sigmar left out.
How is that for the case?
GWmay still have some decent game designers, but the approach taken for Age of Sigmar was lazy and slapdash.
It may be salvageable - but my interest in making any such attempt?
Nonexistent.
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* In spite of Age of Sigmar, I find the recent changes to be for the better, by and large.
As has been stated by others, Rountree is likely not responsible for AoS - otherwise I would not be nearly so optimistic for GW's chances....
GW lost the momentum and is now in reverse. Forum posting (especially ex-Dakka), google searches, inquiries at gaming shops, etc. are all in decline. I don't think this is recoverable for GW anymore, short of a truly explosive hostile takeover and sudden reversal of virtually all of their business practices around recruitment / retention. My entire group of friends still plays wargames, but none of us are the bitter guy posting on forums; we just stopped, there's no interest and engagement, and nothing GW can do would bring us back as customers unless we turn on the companies we are now buying from (Wyrd and FFG).
Sadly, I agree. Any changes made now is probably too little, too late.
As long as the network effect worked in favour for GW, they could get away with mishandling and squandering their IP and their fanbase. As soon as these advantages are lost, they need to compete with other game companies on the same terms.
All the positive changes made recently is just turning GW towards being more like what everyone else has done for years. Everything now hinges on 40K, and unless they make a drastic change to the game, it's fanbase will slowly wither away. And I doubt they have the guts, the willingness, or indeed the ability, to go through with something like that.
GW lost the momentum and is now in reverse. Forum posting (especially ex-Dakka), google searches, inquiries at gaming shops, etc. are all in decline. I don't think this is recoverable for GW anymore, short of a truly explosive hostile takeover and sudden reversal of virtually all of their business practices around recruitment / retention. My entire group of friends still plays wargames, but none of us are the bitter guy posting on forums; we just stopped, there's no interest and engagement, and nothing GW can do would bring us back as customers unless we turn on the companies we are now buying from (Wyrd and FFG).
Sadly, I agree. Any changes made now is probably too little, too late.
As long as the network effect worked in favour for GW, they could get away with mishandling and squandering their IP and their fanbase. As soon as these advantages are lost, they need to compete with other game companies on the same terms.
All the positive changes made recently is just turning GW towards being more like what everyone else has done for years. Everything now hinges on 40K, and unless they make a drastic change to the game, it's fanbase will slowly wither away. And I doubt they have the guts, the willingness, or indeed the ability, to go through with something like that.
I agree with everything but one point here - I have absolutely no doubt that GW has the guts and the willingness to turn 40k on its head, if it comes to that. They've done it to FB when they introduced AoS, and I don't think they'll even stop for a second if they feel that 40k needs to change into the Age of the Emprah.
However, much like you, I do doubt that will have the ability to do it properly.
Sigvatr wrote: It's impossible to get people into 40k. It's such a huge clusterfeck.
a) "Oh, you want to play this army? Cool! So you need this...and this...and this...and this...oh, you also need models! The books are just a few hundred dollars!"
This!
After skipping 6th I stepped back into 7th to play some pickup games with a friend who is getting his nephews into gaming. The retail price for the rulebook and the two ork codexes came to $160. I can afford to play 40K, but it's just not worth it anymore.
Sigvatr wrote: It's impossible to get people into 40k. It's such a huge clusterfeck.
a) "Oh, you want to play this army? Cool! So you need this...and this...and this...and this...oh, you also need models! The books are just a few hundred dollars!"
This!
After skipping 6th I stepped back into 7th to play some pickup games with a friend who is getting his nephews into gaming. The retail price for the rulebook and the two ork codexes came to $160. I can afford to play 40K, but it's just not worth it anymore.
Indeed. I don't care what anyone says, it's great that someone can pick up a box of AoS models and start the hobby, not feel like they need to go down a $200 checklist just for the rules.
I'm still baffled that someone at GW would think it's ok to whip out a knight in a 500pt game but, as you said, complicated isn't the same as complex. Culture of a gaming store or group can take over there, but it's just more unnecessary politics.
If they had working rules and stats then a 500 points knight vs infantry battle could be fun on a small table and narratively fulfilling (think: guerrilla takedown of a big beast). Of course for that you would need rules where the knight would have many detailed mechanics (more like two or three units on one base) and the possibility for individual systems to break while the infantry hides in the terrain around it and both sides try to target weaknesses while either surviving the attack or managing to dismantle the knight.
The battle could be about the knight trying to maneuver in a favourable position while adjusting systems (weapons, shields, movement range, whatever) while the infantry would have to try to stay out of the knights firing arcs (or get vaporized) and try to dismantle it piece by piece. Just add specific missions and a variety of useful options for both sides and you have a game where people can buy more to explore sideways upgrades but still have a real game for (GW) cheap. And if you want a bigger fight add another knight on one side and more infantry (and bikes or other smaller vehicles) on the other and things get a bit more interesting for both sides. But that type of skirmish game wouldn't need three knights on each side, plus a few tanks, and shovels full of infantry. :/
GW lost the momentum and is now in reverse. Forum posting (especially ex-Dakka), google searches, inquiries at gaming shops, etc. are all in decline. I don't think this is recoverable for GW anymore, short of a truly explosive hostile takeover and sudden reversal of virtually all of their business practices around recruitment / retention. My entire group of friends still plays wargames, but none of us are the bitter guy posting on forums; we just stopped, there's no interest and engagement, and nothing GW can do would bring us back as customers unless we turn on the companies we are now buying from (Wyrd and FFG).
Sadly, I agree. Any changes made now is probably too little, too late.
As long as the network effect worked in favour for GW, they could get away with mishandling and squandering their IP and their fanbase. As soon as these advantages are lost, they need to compete with other game companies on the same terms.
All the positive changes made recently is just turning GW towards being more like what everyone else has done for years. Everything now hinges on 40K, and unless they make a drastic change to the game, it's fanbase will slowly wither away. And I doubt they have the guts, the willingness, or indeed the ability, to go through with something like that.
I agree with everything but one point here - I have absolutely no doubt that GW has the guts and the willingness to turn 40k on its head, if it comes to that. They've done it to FB when they introduced AoS, and I don't think they'll even stop for a second if they feel that 40k needs to change into the Age of the Emprah.
However, much like you, I do doubt that will have the ability to do it properly.
You got a point
AoS might prove they got the guts, but it goes against them having the ability to create a decen system.
Reinholt wrote: I don't think this is recoverable for GW anymore
I don't necessarily agree. They are rapidly losing market share and I very much doubt that any single company will ever be able to monopolise the Wargaming market like GW did in the 90s/00s; they also have a lot of burnt bridges to mend with former customers and some crippling issues with their products and structure.
However they are still the biggest name in wargaming and they have a lot of brand recognition outside this fairly niche world. It would take some truly radical changes but GW could still come out on top. I don't think they will and while the current positive steps are a good sign they are things that have been asked for by their customers for years and even so they are peripheral to the main reasons for GW's decline; poor rules, poor value for money and a very high entry cost. On the other hand maybe more profound changes have already been planned, time will tell as always.
At this stage I suspect that GW will improve enough to stay alive but they will inevitably be eclipsed by other, better, companies who already provide superior products. Unless they get bought out of course (which may or may not be good for 40K).
I'd argue that its not and that its quite antiquated. Having to roll three times typically to cause damage has gone the way of the dodo for a good reason in every other ruleset. The all or nothing armour save mechanic, cover being an either/or save, identical movement range across all basic infantry and other unit types and the differences in vehicles and MCs all quickly add up to be a burdensome and clunky rule set that doesn't do a lot well. Let's not even get into the mish mash of battalion level mechanics and individual focused mechanics that confuse the game further.
40k isn't even that tactical. Movement doesn't mean much outside of being able to jet across to as many objectives as possible (in the equally ridiculous Maelstrom missions) because the tables are so small for the size of armies people play combined with long weapon ranges and typically little meaningful cover. 40k is a lot of target priority, knowing the ins and outs of the special rules and abilities of all units on the table, and remembering to capture some objectives along the way, depending on the mission type.
I've played numerous rulesets ranging from spaceship combat to modern warfare and other historicals, and 40k has always struck me as being the least tactically engaging but the most complicated.
So no, I don't think the core of 40k is pretty decent.
Agree with this ^
On top of the mess listed above we have the huge imbalances. So is GW on the right track? As a tyranid player my 6th ed nid dex is crap (and was crap the day released after 4 yours of the 5th ed nid dex garbage) and was followed by dataslates, some new unneeded units (such as the toxicrene/malceptor, not the pod, which was removed and then brought back with an expensive kit), rather than fix the subpar units/biomorphs, followed by supplements and the need for FW units such as the malanthrope. The rules are spread all over and the cost for all the rules is absurd and it still only provides a mediocre army with practically a monobuild (flyrant spam). So ask me again when a 7th ed nid dex is released where it is similar to Eldar (not the OP parts but from Eldar players I have heard many times that almost everything in the dex is a decent choice). When I can buy one dex at a reasonable price and use all my models/options (because effort was put in the dex to make it a good product - not an OP one), models that I spent a fortune on (but most sit on the shelf and collect dust) to try to make my army work from 4th to 5th, and then 5th to 6th, etc, then GW may be on the right track!
I used to think of myself as a painter first, gamer second. Because I disliked the protracted arguments over bad rules, and the general 4 hours required for a game (setup and cleanup have to be taken into account). Most of my friends have kids, I run a business, we can't commit to that level anymore.
Then I committed the heresy of buying prepainted miniatures. And the game was much better. Look at that. With a good ruleset, with comparatively few miniatures on the table, I can have a lot more fun *with people* instead of at my painting station. More is not necessarily best. Though if it is for you, good on you.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: More is not necessarily best. Though if it is for you, good on you.
Nailed it. Although it suits GW just fine to push the big kits and in turn the scale of the game, it doesn't help us, the people that can't invest more than 4 hours to playing a game. I can see a lot of people leaving 40k simply because everyone they ask for a game wants to play 3000pts.
I think it depends on who you ask whether gdub is on the right track.
They've done well introducing a few really nice 1 time boardgames with models you can play in their other games.
I think the models in the starter sets are beautiful (AoS and 40k)
but ask a Warhammer Fantasy player how he feels. Ask an Ork player how he feels about having to rebuy the same expansion book, rather then receive some kind of errata.
Once you get past starter games and board games, how you feel really depends on what faction you play. I honestly like the whole 7th ed. maelstrom of war, with the cards. I think its fun.
The balance of the main game between armies (40k) is what stinks.
Reinholt wrote: I will make this brief, as I've spilled enough virtual ink over the years about GW on Warseer:
No.
In fact, I will go so far as to say it's too late for GW now to ever recover to where they were (barring hostile takeover).
When you look at the gaming industry, the key thing to look at is the network effects for the games. The more people who play a game, the more people who will play a game.
So long as GW retained the crown of the game with the most interest and largest player community, GW could continue to stumble along and would have time to sober up, get things right, and move on with their lives.
I stopped saying much about GW in 2014 because I could see that shift was coming, at least in North America (in the UK, they are in a much stronger position). Now, the dominant game in most places is X-Wing. Fantasy Flight ate their lunch, and the re-release of the Star Wars franchise to smashing success has only caused that snowball to roll downhill faster, now with sharp metal bits sticking out of it as it demolishes other things.
GW lost the momentum and is now in reverse. Forum posting (especially ex-Dakka), google searches, inquiries at gaming shops, etc. are all in decline. I don't think this is recoverable for GW anymore, short of a truly explosive hostile takeover and sudden reversal of virtually all of their business practices around recruitment / retention. My entire group of friends still plays wargames, but none of us are the bitter guy posting on forums; we just stopped, there's no interest and engagement, and nothing GW can do would bring us back as customers unless we turn on the companies we are now buying from (Wyrd and FFG).
However, that won't happen within the year, probably not even five, and that's really what is needed. My prediction is that GW shrinks to a relatively minor player in the overall gaming market and, essentially, becomes a UK-only player again with a minor presence in NA and the EU.
That won't be sustainable given that they are public and become a very enticing takeover target with where the stock would trade. But it all comes down to this: they needed to re-start growth already, and they haven't done enough while one of their competitors actually got ahead of them in a region (the first time this has ever happened, I would add).
I'm not sure I agree with this. X-wing is a successful game, but why is it an successfulgame?
-It has a desirable price point that makes it easy to pick up and expand (that nice round £25-£30 for a starter and £10 per expansion).
-The rules are quite simple.
-Everything comes pre-painted, allowing you to play a good looking game for no effort (especially good for busy adults), and there is no need for supplementary paint/glue purchases.
-Being based in space, there is no necessary requirement for terrain to make the game work well, and it can be played on a minimum sized board.
-It ties in with an extremely successful name that's well known within the public eye and has a veritable mountain of background already written.
-The way that new boxes have new rules cards that can be applied to other ships than the one in the box incentivises a 'collector' like approach to purchases.
-The packaging is such that it can easily be rolled out in larger more general toyshops and stores.
All these together make it easy to sell, easy to collect, and easy to develop. But 40K? It ticks very little of the above, and never has done. Yet it has been (in the field of wargaming) a fairly resounding success commercially, trumping all of it's 80's rivals. Why was that?
-It can package itself as 'hobby' with a complete artistic side (lots of assembly, painting, and conversion).
-It provides play space directly to help integrate new players and spur them into further purchases.
-It can utilise high end manufacturing techniques and materials (HIPS) to produce technically complex and visually appealing models.
-It successfully established it's own appealing 'fluff' universe that extends beyond the model line.
-It appeals to the collector sense of wanting to own everything within an army, and then to collect further armies beyond it.
Those are, I would argue, GW's core traits/competencies that got them to where they are, and bar the last two, these are not fields in which X-Wing competes very well. Don't get me wrong, X-Wing is a good competitor for 40K, but only in a more general sense. It occupies the space in the market that was previously filled by Heroclix and the like. It's simply mastered it in the same way Magic has mastered the Trading Card section. Yes, it can compete in a general sense for GW's dollar/pound, but you will always have people interested in one but not the other. Not every Magic player likes assembling complex kits, and not every 40K player likes shuffling cardboard around a table.
The Games/Hobby pie has been expanding steadily for quite some time now. So long as GW retains roughly the same size slice, it doesn't matter to them if the pie is made bigger, and so someone else (X-wing) gets a larger slice. GW's financial slowdown seems to have...well, slowed down of late. Assuming Rountree can turn it around even slightly, I don't see GW having much trouble keeping their market share.
The real issue will be if one of the smaller hungrier direct competitor companies manages to scrape together the financial backing to target that same exact niche as GW and do it better whilst GW stagnates. Mantic's had a stab at it, and is doing alright at sucking up the old Warhammer playerbase, but has the issue that it's extremely derivative of GW and as such is extremely vulnerable to GW mounting any kind of fightback. All it takes is 'Warhammer: Alternative old-school universe' the ruleset being released with a streamlined rulebook and a tasty starter and they're straight on the backfoot. Shieldwolf has the ambition, but not the financial resources. Spiral Arm is just finishing digesting their KS, and is shaping up quite nicely, but will take time to get anywhere near the range GW offers if they plan on sticking solely to HIPS, not to mention will need to bear a heavy deficit for a few years (time will tell if they have the necessary resources).
All told, I think GW is safe for at least a few years more.
Major Tom, good to see you back. I agree with a lot of things you mention trending to the positive.
However, ultimately, what good do any of those things do if no one can afford them?
Yes the start collecting boxes are 'relatively' less expensive ways to finally get started on a 40k army.
But $30 mono-pose characters? $165 dollars for Deathwatch which has less minis than BaC?
Yes I agree the new CEO is doing things people have wanted for years. But if they don't get their pricing under control then it's for naught anyways.
**PS.
Going off Reinholt's post, honestly I agree with him. There were two major Table Top groups in my city. One has completely abandoned GW. The are Warmahorde lovers all the way and don't look back. My FLGS mainly supports a very competitive tournament crowd. These guys are lawyers and have good careers. So they will probably keep on keeping on until the bitter end. But how is the community going to reverse this shrinking trend? It can't. Every release the game gets more expensive and more complicated. Pandering to salty veterans now isn't going to save them.
To be honest, there are plenty of rival rulebooks and figure ranges on the market.
If GW can make a profitable business out of selling £20 cavalry figures to well-heeled and undemanding (as regards rules quality) figure collectors, that is probably what they will do.
GW's main strength is their giant £100 plastic monster kits. If you really have to have a large plastic dragon for Dragon Rampant, you might have to hold you nose and buy the GW one.
Kilkrazy wrote: To be honest, there are plenty of rival rulebooks and figure ranges on the market.
If GW can make a profitable business out of selling £20 cavalry figures to well-heeled and undemanding (as regards rules quality) figure collectors, that is probably what they will do.
GW's main strength is their giant £100 plastic monster kits. If you really have to have a large plastic dragon for Dragon Rampant, you might have to hold you nose and buy the GW one.
Or you can go to Reaper, and look in their Bones line.
And buy two dragons instead of one.
Trust me, there is competition for large plastic monster kits.
Using myself as an example - I have sixteen large dragons from the Bones line, one big arse spider from the Bones line, I have freakin' Cthulhu from the Bones line, and I have a skeletal dragon of absurd size from the Bones line....
And none of the big plastic monsters from GW. (On the flip side - I do have a fair amount of the GW big plastic terrain kits - about four years old, now.)
*EDIT*
Dragon, terrain, and adventurers - $75... a lot less than a hundred quid.
The Auld Grump - it helps that I really don't like many of those big plastic GW monsters....
Kilkrazy wrote: To be honest, there are plenty of rival rulebooks and figure ranges on the market.
If GW can make a profitable business out of selling £20 cavalry figures to well-heeled and undemanding (as regards rules quality) figure collectors, that is probably what they will do.
GW's main strength is their giant £100 plastic monster kits. If you really have to have a large plastic dragon for Dragon Rampant, you might have to hold you nose and buy the GW one.
Or you can go to Reaper, and look in their Bones line.
And buy two dragons instead of one.
Trust me, there is competition for large plastic monster kits.
Using myself as an example - I have sixteen large dragons from the Bones line, one big arse spider from the Bones line, I have freakin' Cthulhu from the Bones line, and I have a skeletal dragon of absurd size from the Bones line....
And none of the big plastic monsters from GW. (On the flip side - I do have a fair amount of the GW big plastic terrain kits - about four years old, now.)
*EDIT*
Dragon, terrain, and adventurers - $75... a lot less than a hundred quid.
The Auld Grump - it helps that I really don't like many of those big plastic GW monsters....
Well, they offer free shipping on order >£60 in the Uk, I'm sure I could find a few paints to get me over that threshold if I were buying that dragon kit.
GW isn't on the right track and not even close. Honestly when they killed fantasy and made Age of Sigmar, branded us as 'not wanted for the store' and made us into AoS haters it alienated me to such a large degree. Their big releases for AoS is just circle bases for all the crap they already had instead of squares. If you want to do warhammer fantasy you can't buy movement trays anymore and all the bases are getting replaced. If you want 8th edition rules that's gone too. I mean you can't even play warhammer fantasy in the store anymore (at least in the USA) and yet all their other games can be played in their store.
GW spit on their fantasy players and then laughed as they pooped in their hand. Not only that but 40k is an imbalanced pile of crap.
------
What they've done right however is make some nice looking models. That's seriously about it. I'm so ready to quit GW. Making fantasy players out to be the bad guy while 40k players has just as much tau and eldar OP armies carrying games for their players.
Fantasy needed good video games and such to broaden their fan-base. Instead they kill off our universe and for a while say nothing about doing it. Then the super BIG announcement that seems to be 9th edition is....your game is dead and here's something scrawled on toilet paper for rules and background as our new beer and pretzels game that costs hundreds of dollars and replaces a game with 28 years of lore and background to it. Not only that but it felt like if you didn't like their new game you weren't welcome so it was like a 'Thanks for the money suckers!' feeling for fantasy players. Fantasy needed to be revitalized but what they did was crap.
I am trying to move on to 40k with dark eldar but they just suck right now. Not only that but every time I go to a GW I have to put up with seeing Age of Sigmar everywhere as a way of saying 'Your game is dead. Deal with it!'. Then there's the 40k power gamers playing all the OP crap in their OP armies (usually tau and eldar).
I'm just fed up with GW. As a customer I've never felt more mistreated by a company.
Yet, if you remain a "customer" (i.e. you're still spending money on their product) you've completely invalidated every other thing you've written in that post.
Azreal13 wrote: Yet, if you remain a "customer" (i.e. you're still spending money on their product) you've completely invalidated every other thing you've written in that post.
Which is why I'm heavily considering quitting and may very well quit. I'm just looking for an alternative. I really just don't know what game I'd move on to.
Besides often when I walk into the GW I've felt like a huge dollar sign and only well received if I buy so often. Sometimes the GW manager has shown it if I haven't bought in a while there.
I used to be big into 40k and Fantasy. But the rules have gotten steadily worse, the games have become more and more about big centre piece models and less and less about actual armies.
I was already disconnected and mostly moved on to KoW when AoS hit, but I was actually pretty interested in it, because I love the Old World and a skirmish game with simplified rules seemed pretty cool to me.
But the implementation is very lacking as far as I'm concerned. Leaving points aside, I decided to look through the rules again and see what sort of force I could put together with my stuff. But I realised that every single unit has different rules for even basic stuff like musicians and standards - what appear at first to be simplified rules are actually full of pointless crunch. I was hoping for something elegant like Saga, but it's really not what it's sold as.
I was still willing to just let it go though, until the recent dumping of entire ranges with little warning or ceremony. I think it's very poor form on GW's part the way they're doing it. Their business model relies a lot on the fact that our armies are labours of love, projects that take us whole periods of our lives to finish. Without that emotional connection, the models themselves would not be worth the money we pay for them.
By dumping the setting, they did the first round of damage. But those of us who like the old setting can still access it through other ways - scans of old books, WFRP pdfs, so on.
Dumping ranges is more serious. I feel sorry for all the people who were slowly putting a force together and some unit that they were slowly saving for or planning for is now gone with practically no warning. That's poor form, and a crappy way to treat customers who you rely on for your profits.
I think we often look at these things as just a balance sheet, pure profit and loss. But honestly, at times GW is just a morally bad company, and in something as trivial as miniature wargaming that's...sad.
Yeah man. Sad thing is I started back in '07. Dawn of war 1 got me into 40k and after 2 and a half years I started warhammer fantasy some time around the 7th edition skaven book (mostly because I played the 'mark of chaos' PC game). Over that time the power level of the book got lower and lower even though the complaints about it raged on even with elves, gun-lines, ogres and vampire counts on the field. We were leagues better than O&G and beastmen but our book was not meant for 8th. That reason alone meant we had 8 pages of FAQ. GW just shows less care about the game and even said they were a models company. All it is about is the big models and they did that more with 40k. Gargantuan creatures are becoming more of a thing and the bog standard troop has little importance anymore.
Anyway when fantasy died I had about 3k points of skaven that are just sitting collecting dust now with bits un-built or half finished. I even collected 'End Times' so killing Fantasy after a big buying period for fans was such a slap in the face.
You know what's sad is I want to play dark eldar for 40k but they also currently suck. I want to play them because I like dark eldar with hover bikes and hover boards as well as a similar mad scientist theme that skaven had. As I said though the tau just hard counter them.
I just can't stand it. I've never felt more disillusioned and alienated with GW. When AoS was introduced I saw Fantasy players hold a hand up to their face and drop their jaws in shock. For the most part I don't think I've seen any fantasy fans play the game and it's just for 40k players and painters.
What GW did to fantasy players was wrong and I feel like I should legitimately boycott GW with other fantasy players. I just don't know what other game I'd play and where else to go. I've only ever played GW games.
Flaming you might want to check out Kings of War - most of the old fantasy armies have a KoW equivalent and the game is gaining a lot of traction in WHFBs wake.
Otherwise best move would be to get a 1 or 2 close gaming buddies and look through the games section of a retailer, visit an FLGS or even look right here on Dakka for something you like the look of. Step into a non GW game can feel a bit strange the first time but really they are all the same in concept, and there are a hell of a lot better crafted ones out there than 40k or AoS.
I'm not sure I agree with this. X-wing is a successful game, but why is it an successfulgame?
-It has a desirable price point that makes it easy to pick up and expand (that nice round £25-£30 for a starter and £10 per expansion).
-The rules are quite simple.
-Everything comes pre-painted, allowing you to play a good looking game for no effort (especially good for busy adults), and there is no need for supplementary paint/glue purchases.
-Being based in space, there is no necessary requirement for terrain to make the game work well, and it can be played on a minimum sized board.
-It ties in with an extremely successful name that's well known within the public eye and has a veritable mountain of background already written.
-The way that new boxes have new rules cards that can be applied to other ships than the one in the box incentivises a 'collector' like approach to purchases.
-The packaging is such that it can easily be rolled out in larger more general toyshops and stores.
All these together make it easy to sell, easy to collect, and easy to develop. But 40K? It ticks very little of the above, and never has done. Yet it has been (in the field of wargaming) a fairly resounding success commercially, trumping all of it's 80's rivals. Why was that?
-It can package itself as 'hobby' with a complete artistic side (lots of assembly, painting, and conversion).
-It provides play space directly to help integrate new players and spur them into further purchases.
-It can utilise high end manufacturing techniques and materials (HIPS) to produce technically complex and visually appealing models.
-It successfully established it's own appealing 'fluff' universe that extends beyond the model line.
-It appeals to the collector sense of wanting to own everything within an army, and then to collect further armies beyond it.
Those are, I would argue, GW's core traits/competencies that got them to where they are, and bar the last two, these are not fields in which X-Wing competes very well. Don't get me wrong, X-Wing is a good competitor for 40K, but only in a more general sense. It occupies the space in the market that was previously filled by Heroclix and the like. It's simply mastered it in the same way Magic has mastered the Trading Card section. Yes, it can compete in a general sense for GW's dollar/pound, but you will always have people interested in one but not the other. Not every Magic player likes assembling complex kits, and not every 40K player likes shuffling cardboard around a table.
The Games/Hobby pie has been expanding steadily for quite some time now. So long as GW retains roughly the same size slice, it doesn't matter to them if the pie is made bigger, and so someone else (X-wing) gets a larger slice. GW's financial slowdown seems to have...well, slowed down of late. Assuming Rountree can turn it around even slightly, I don't see GW having much trouble keeping their market share.
The real issue will be if one of the smaller hungrier direct competitor companies manages to scrape together the financial backing to target that same exact niche as GW and do it better whilst GW stagnates. Mantic's had a stab at it, and is doing alright at sucking up the old Warhammer playerbase, but has the issue that it's extremely derivative of GW and as such is extremely vulnerable to GW mounting any kind of fightback. All it takes is 'Warhammer: Alternative old-school universe' the ruleset being released with a streamlined rulebook and a tasty starter and they're straight on the backfoot. Shieldwolf has the ambition, but not the financial resources. Spiral Arm is just finishing digesting their KS, and is shaping up quite nicely, but will take time to get anywhere near the range GW offers if they plan on sticking solely to HIPS, not to mention will need to bear a heavy deficit for a few years (time will tell if they have the necessary resources).
All told, I think GW is safe for at least a few years more.
Agreed about the relative safety of GW for the years to come. There will be no crash, I'm pretty sure of that. And even if there is a significant dip in revenue, they are probably in a good position to try and right the ship. If RIM can afford to do so with their Blackberry for years on end before the grave finally beckons, so can GW.
In the list of points you raise on GW, some I saw as a drawback, however. Namely:
-That play space is all but gone on our side of the pond. In the only shop left in my province, there are demo tables set up in permanence, but that is the only gaming that goes on there. Demo games, with the demo stuff. They'll have occasional special events, but no regular gaming or open gaming days. Especially since 4' x 4' tables can only ever accomodate so many points. Meanwhile an X-Wing, Malifaux or Infinity tourney can accomodate a lot more players per square foot.
-That fluff has a lot of dross in it. I'm not saying other games don't. But especially since I have insider info that GW wants to move away from an Imperium full of people to something more epic and removed from any trace of humanity, is bound to stop resonating with readers. Dan Abnett's fiction was too human, too gritty, to mundane for them to care much about it anymore. Again, this will come down to taste, so YMMV.
-The collector impulse is alive and well in other games, fear not. Malifaux is especially cunning with its cross-faction models. "just a taste of Neverborn can't be bad for you, can it?"
I'm trying to stay as much away from painting myself as an X-Wing enthusiast in this post as possible, but it's genuinely a good game. Like I said, my concerns are quibbles, not objections.
I was one of the first naysayers of GW back in the "things going to gak" period but even I gotta say their recent movements have been one in the right direction. Personally it all started with the AdMech Forces; the models were actually very awesome, not that badly priced, and for once weren't another xerox of another army (the same could not be said for the continuous amounts of Space Marines, which seemed solely to be aimed at stealing mechanics from non-loyalist space marine armies).
Granted, the AdMechs weren't without their own problems (split into two books, having hilariously bad balance, weird-ass effects that required a computer to remember what they all did, etc) but credit where credit is due. The Start Collecting Boxes are awesome value for what they are (mostly) and are a great throwback to the original Battleforces, which were decent value, a good add-on or the basis of a new army. In addition, you should check out the Battle for Vedros, which is a MUCH better way of trying to "AoS" 40k than AoS did for Fantasy.
Is it all perfect? Nope. Not by a long shot. But they are finally moving towards the right direction and, personally, I'm fully willing to support their newer changes with my dollars. But only the good ones (I am not dropping 120 dollars on three monstrous cavalry-sized models. I'm talking about the Varanguards)
Okay, here's the thing: *if* GW is finally moving in the right direction again, it still doesn't matter to me. Because they moved so far off in wrong directions, I can't even really see them from my wargaming hobby anymore.
Dropping the metaphor, in the last 5 years, my wargaming budget has doubled or tripled compared to the 10 years prior, but the only thing GW I have bought in that time has been one paintbrush (that forked the first time I touched it to a model) and one bottle of Khorne Red (because a Foundation-thickness version of red gore is just too useful to me.)
Instead of GW, I dabbled in Warmachine/Hordes, but moved away from that fairly quickly into a series of different games that all do different things for me. FFG has a lock on space combat for me with X-Wing and Armada, with X-Wing being my current "big company supported" game. But I don't play X-Wing constantly, because there are so many fantastic other games produced by small companies these days.
Frostgrave is an elegant and enjoyable fantasy skirmish campaign game. If GW put out a new Mordheim in their all-new, we-listen-to-you-really Specialist Games, I wouldn't even look twice at it. It would likely be $150-$175 USD just for the core box set, whereas for $65 I could buy into Frostgrave from scratch with the rulebook, a wizard blister, and a box of more plastic soldiers than a single warband needs. And a new Mordheim would have needlessly complex rules, whereas Frostgrave does a great job balancing simplicity in play with having all the right crunchy calculation in the endgame phase.
And the list goes on. I'm working on This Is Not a Test to give me some Fallout-themed post-apoc campaign gaming, and my Kickstarter of the new Deadzone has just given me pdfs of the new rulebooks that seem to make a good game even better. So I have no need of Necromunda, now. Kings of War is rocking the regimental fantasy gaming for me right now, so I didn't even pay attention to Age of Sigmar other than to go, "Wow, that looks really dumb, and looks like a really dumb thing for GW to do. Glad it doesn't affect me." I've got Dungeon Saga to tinker with, and FFG is about to release an app that runs the Descent 2e Overlord for you, so honestly...I'm okay without Warhammer Quest, which has always been my "If GW rereleases this, I'll be in trouble," game. Oh, and the Warpath pledge manager just closed out, so in the next year, I should have a passable replacement for 40K.
Basically, anything GW does right now, I can get 3 to 4 games - that do it better - for the same or less money. So, is GW getting better? As a wargaming hobbyist, *I don't care.* GW's fortunes as a game company only interest me as a business curiosity. I only check business and trend threads on them to see how that company I used to buy a lot of overpriced crap from is doing in this new golden age of wargaming, not because I'm interested in any of their products.
Hey, that's cool news about that FFG app! I will definitely get my hands on that whenever it launches.
I'm in a similar place to you, but I am still picking some stuff up. I'm a serial Fantasy army collector - GW Dwarves, Orcs, Chaos, Mantic Undead, Historical Knights - all the tropes in the rainbow. The recent purges have pushed me to grab a small high elf, wood elf and Skaven force. I may round it all out with a couple of boxes of Dark Elves and some Beastmen as a sort of farewell to the Old World.
I've no real interest in AoS and no faith that it's going anywhere good.
I'll admit, Kings of War has me tempted to pick up a box each of GW Ghouls and Grave Guard - my current stash was built with WHFB 8e 30-man units in mind, and I'll like to kick the ghouls up to two 20-man KoW units or a 40-man horde as need takes me, and being free of assembling all 30 Grave Guard the same way means I'm tempted to do 20 each of sword & board and double-handed weapons.
...but then I look at the price. The Grave Guard are especially egregious. I've been living in a world where plastic minis almost never reach $2 per figure in a box! (And don't give me that "but they're so high quality" nonsense - look at the Perry bros, Gripping Beast, and Fireforge boxes. If they can sell those minis at that price, Grave Guard should be $20 *max*.)
So, yeah. Crap rules mean I don't give a crap about GW's games. Crap pricing means I hesitate to buy their miniatures, even when adding to my collection of their stuff I bought all of 7 years ago - which I'm tempted to do because someone else out there is making a much better game that could use this old(er) collection of minis.
Maybe GW is turning things around...but for me its likely too little too late.
Didn't the Ad Mech Skitarii book have a walker that was more than a dollar per point, even before you voncert it to CAD? If that's not egregious pricing, I don,t know what is. And don't get me wrong, I don't mind paying the right price for something that I will use. By use I do not mean "put on the table, get shot off the table promptly."
Kilkrazy wrote: To be honest, there are plenty of rival rulebooks and figure ranges on the market.
If GW can make a profitable business out of selling £20 cavalry figures to well-heeled and undemanding (as regards rules quality) figure collectors, that is probably what they will do.
GW's main strength is their giant £100 plastic monster kits. If you really have to have a large plastic dragon for Dragon Rampant, you might have to hold you nose and buy the GW one.
Or you can go to Reaper, and look in their Bones line.
And buy two dragons instead of one.
Trust me, there is competition for large plastic monster kits.
Using myself as an example - I have sixteen large dragons from the Bones line, one big arse spider from the Bones line, I have freakin' Cthulhu from the Bones line, and I have a skeletal dragon of absurd size from the Bones line....
And none of the big plastic monsters from GW. (On the flip side - I do have a fair amount of the GW big plastic terrain kits - about four years old, now.)
*EDIT*
Dragon, terrain, and adventurers - $75... a lot less than a hundred quid.
The Auld Grump - it helps that I really don't like many of those big plastic GW monsters....
In the us, sure, but nowhere else.
A quick Google turned up three places in the UK alone - average price 60 GBP....
Nice try....
*EDIT* To be clear - those are online retailers that carry Reaper's Dragons Don't Share - the specific model that I used in my example....
The Auld Grump - last time I checked, 60 was still less than 100....
*EDIT 2* Sad thing - I actually think that GWis moving in the right direction - but one of the things that they still need to do is market research.
Psychopomp wrote: I'll admit, Kings of War has me tempted to pick up a box each of GW Ghouls and Grave Guard - my current stash was built with WHFB 8e 30-man units in mind, and I'll like to kick the ghouls up to two 20-man KoW units or a 40-man horde as need takes me, and being free of assembling all 30 Grave Guard the same way means I'm tempted to do 20 each of sword & board and double-handed weapons.
...but then I look at the price. The Grave Guard are especially egregious. I've been living in a world where plastic minis almost never reach $2 per figure in a box! (And don't give me that "but they're so high quality" nonsense - look at the Perry bros, Gripping Beast, and Fireforge boxes. If they can sell those minis at that price, Grave Guard should be $20 *max*.)
So, yeah. Crap rules mean I don't give a crap about GW's games. Crap pricing means I hesitate to buy their miniatures, even when adding to my collection of their stuff I bought all of 7 years ago - which I'm tempted to do because someone else out there is making a much better game that could use this old(er) collection of minis.
Maybe GW is turning things around...but for me its likely too little too late.
Your comment is Valid.
Now why don't we take a look at Google trends and see how much interest there is on the interwebs... eh???
Now I have stated before and I'll state this again.
1. In retail it is a lot harder to get new customers and keep them than to retain your old customers who you know are going to come back. If you really want growth you need to keep as much of your old customer base while farming for new. Then you try to convert the new to become a reoccurring customer. This is usually done by good customer service and/or reasonable price on product.
2. When you lose a customer because of a negative reaction. Not only will you lose that customer, you will suffer the collateral damage from that negative customer as that customer will remove would be new potential customers via Word of Mouth, via their bad and negative experience when dealing with said company.
3. When you price yourselves to the point in the belief that a "plastic" toy is a collectors item when it is actually not, you are in trouble. Boy you see a lot of Luxury Toys being Dumped on Ebay now on the cheap because the overall health of the game in question is piss poor.
4. 2006 is the tipping point to the beginning of the end as "the leader" in the hobby and the years of posting on the "whys" in here still hold true. This is where I saw first hand the changes of the company's business model. December 2006 was the last "Horaah" of what was an actual Miniatures Game Company with the quality of support given to the games in question.
Turning around??? To what??? No. As stated before They are "NOW" a British company with some global influence. Before they were really a global company on the verge of being one of the big game companies. But no. Greed is and continues to be the reason why Games Workshop has flat lined itself to be non issue. And it will be a non issue until Kirby is completely gone. Otherwise flat line in everything as a company. No real growth. Sucking the majority of profits to the share holders. The Game company is their virtual Piggy Bank.
And that is one the reasons why you have heard recently with business analysts In England on their concerns with their financial forecasts of Games Workshop earlier this year.
It is too late for Games Workshop to reclaim what they have lost. All they are able to do is to be in this flat line position (because of their current business model) and as long as there are enough people in England supporting this game, Games Workshop will continue to survive. But if there is a serous erosion to the company's British player (and commonwealth countries) base. then Games Workshop is over.
I think some of you are misinterpreting the meaning of my question a bit. That's ok, but, if you would, allow me to clarify here:
My question was/is, are they back or headed back to the right track. What I mean by that is are they starting to make good, positive decisions again.
I think some are taking that to be me asking 'Has GW now fixed everything and imminently about to be profitable?'
Lol that would be great but I don't think even the most optimistic fan would be thinking that, they dug a big hole. Some things will be nigh-on impossible to fix, I don't see how they can repeal what, in my opinion, is about 40-25% overpricing depending on the product. That's gonna be a tough one indeed.
The rules, not a great outlook either at the moment, but I do think that there is more interest on their part for that aspect of the business than there has been in a long while. What is to come of it remains to be seen, if anything.
There is little doubt rules and prices are still in a bad way.
So, taking away those macro problems, my question was really more towards the micro things that are starting to gain momentum. Frankly, I think if they see that these smaller, less impactful but still positive steps are having an impact and rubbing people the right way, they may realize that engaging with the audience again is a good thing for them if they can be agile with the information they get.
Given the policies of basically 2006 - 2014, these are big fixes symbolically if nothing else, at least for me.
The rules, not a great outlook either at the moment, but I do think that there is more interest on their part for that aspect of the business than there has been in a long while. What is to come of it remains to be seen, if anything.
You are a decent guy and respect your comments. I think in this case there is a age difference between us. I have been doing miniatures since 1970. I've been involved in the entertainment industry in one manner or another for 42 years. I've been a hard core capitalist pig since 1989. Yea I can laugh at myself as I am an old fart. My investments do involve retail development.
But as a business man I just do not see anything at this moment that tells me that GW is doing anything to turn it around in any significant manner. On the contrary I see that same old business practices. Roundtree is nothing much as a puppet to Kirby as Wells was before he stepped down. I see limited runs on new product (Lost Patrol). I see low level licensing on IP's in the video game market. We have also seen that the first time ever that Games Workshop lost its dominance in the US, All things pointing to a downward trend. Hell even their stock of late is in a downward trend. It is approaching its 52 week low.
But I see Absolutely see no marketing research and the continued use of the company as a piggy bank is what I do not like. You need R&D and marketing to have a continue presence globally.
They have serious changes to make in order to get the confidence of what is left of their player base because.... You can not make up ill will that has been done, in the past to the indies store and frustrated veterans that have gone to other games and/or left the game entirely.
So Major Tom if you see some sort of positive approach in some of the recent moves well I guess you do.
I just don't. I just see feeble attempts within with a small amount of money that they are given to create new and useful content. And the majority of the profits goes to the shareholders. And Kirby is the single most holder of shares in this company. You see the problem? And it won't change until Kirby leaves. So you will get a flat line company without any serious growth.
They need to invest less to the shareholders and more into the company as a whole. This means more marketing and R&D into new and different IP's. Until I see a significant change the answer is still a polite no and my previous comments still stands.
On a personal level I spent 35 grand on this game in 26 years. I loved the original premise of the game. I love playing the GT circuit. I loved holding tournaments. I love painting. I had 26 years gaming that I thought the investment of enjoyment was well spent But now they have lost 20 grand from me since I stopped playing and I have invested that amount on other games and/or helped individuals get back on their feet.
There is just no significant turn around of enjoyment and/or justification that I see that I would pay money into a luxury game that I can easily afford.
MajorTom11 wrote: Given the policies of basically 2006 - 2014, these are big fixes symbolically if nothing else, at least for me.
I am just picking on this specific part to point out how subjective the entire matter is - GW has so thoroughly rejected their playerbase that most of their actions so far prove very little compared with the downhill slide that was the aforementioned period, and culminated in the birth of AoS.
For me (and a few others) these are not big fixes. I'd wager they are not fixes at all, because the main issues (crap rules, rampant price hikes) are still there, and growing.
I will never regain my trust in GW after AoS but, as I said, this is all subjective.
MajorTom11 wrote: Given the policies of basically 2006 - 2014, these are big fixes symbolically if nothing else, at least for me.
I am just picking on this specific part to point out how subjective the entire matter is - GW has so thoroughly rejected their playerbase that most of their actions so far prove very little compared with the downhill slide that was the aforementioned period, and culminated in the birth of AoS.
For me (and a few others) these are not big fixes. I'd wager they are not fixes at all, because the main issues (crap rules, rampant price hikes) are still there, and growing.
Yep, At this point it's just re-arranging deckchairs on the Titanic.
It could lead to more significant changes I guess, but at the moment, these minor improvements are basically meaningless
MajorTom11 wrote: Given the policies of basically 2006 - 2014, these are big fixes symbolically if nothing else, at least for me.
Adding to what others have said, look at your own word choice, here. symbolically. This is exactly right, as these are symbolic changes giving the appearance of meaning but no actual meaning in and of themselves.
Better rules? Nah! But here's an organized play so you can try to herd kittens and get people all playing our crap rules in your store for a certificate! It's focused around tanks, so he who spends the most money on big models and datafaxes wins!
Games Workshop can put as much lipstick on their pig as they want. Hell, they can give it an entire Mary Kay makeover, if they want. But it's not going to lure me away from the Golden Age of Wargaming, where I've got so many great games going at once, I get option lock at the painting table - much less the store!
Right track. It seems that GW focusses at supplementary or expansion rules atm.
This seems to be a different track.
The same holds for AoS where we see books with warscrolls and formations in there.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: More is not necessarily best. Though if it is for you, good on you.
Nailed it. Although it suits GW just fine to push the big kits and in turn the scale of the game, it doesn't help us, the people that can't invest more than 4 hours to playing a game. I can see a lot of people leaving 40k simply because everyone they ask for a game wants to play 3000pts.
This is my problem with the war gaming hobby that has resulted in me being a painter/collector. Between my wife and constantly ringing work phone I'm lucky if I get an hour of peace and quiet, much less the several hours required for a proper game. I need bite sized pieces.
I don't think you're alone in that, and to an extent it's a symptom of the modern age. Probably why we have seen an explosion in popularity of skirmish war games, and pick up and play boardgames.
The all-day recreation of Omaha beach that my club put on years ago was wonderful to behold, but it took so much work to set up and these days people don't seem to have (or want to make perhaps) the time.
wuestenfux wrote: Right track. It seems that GW focusses at supplementary or expansion rules atm.
This seems to be a different track.
The same holds for AoS where we see books with warscrolls and formations in there.
This would not be a bad thing if the core rules/armies were all updated and balanced. Then they could focus on campaigns (or AoS equivalent) with additional formations/supplemental things. Instead, it seems like they are ignoring updating some things to push out these supplements, and follow the same tired approach (e.g. Marines/Not-Marines get more than everyone else because they are more popular, because they get more than everyone else because they are more popular repeat ad infinitum).
I could spend pages commenting on The Good, The Bad and The Fugly of GW and it's policies, past and present. But to wit, and to the point...yes, they're tacking back nicely. Shame they had to go so off track and do so much damage before doing so, though.
BigWaaagh wrote: I could spend pages commenting on The Good, The Bad and The Fugly of GW and it's policies, past and present. But to wit, and to the point...yes, they're tacking back nicely. Shame they had to go so off track and do so much damage before doing so, though.
That's what happens when you have a greedy moron running things. Rountree is trying to fix that.
Trying to pin all the blame on Kirby alone is delusional to say the least.
GW's biggest issues are stupidly overpriced models and garbage rules, so far Rountree has done very little to fix either. The discounted boxes are a step in the right direction, but still far from fixing the issue as a whole (hello Wulfen and new AoS kits) and probably more a strategy to clean warehouse space. They also appeared all of a sudden at past Christmas, barely weeks before we learnt from Rountree himself that December had been quite disappointing in terms of sales (so a panic button smashing move too).
How is it delusional? If he (Kirby)was CEO and the company performs poorly under his reign, then it's absolutely his fault. A lot of the new stuff, has spent several years in the pipeline.
Korinov wrote: Trying to pin all the blame on Kirby alone is delusional to say the least.
GW's biggest issues are stupidly overpriced models and garbage rules, so far Rountree has done very little to fix either. The discounted boxes are a step in the right direction, but still far from fixing the issue as a whole (hello Wulfen and new AoS kits) and probably more a strategy to clean warehouse space. They also appeared all of a sudden at past Christmas, barely weeks before we learnt from Rountree himself that December had been quite disappointing in terms of sales (so a panic button smashing move too).
Thing is.. the "stupidly overpriced models" are largely part of the "push bigger and bigger games" mindset. On their own, they aren't THAT terrible. The problem is when you A) Need multiple $50 boxes for a normal army, and B) Often need to buy "supplemental" boxes to get the option you want because GW won't give all available options in a single box (presumably to encourage this kind of supplemental purchase).
$50 for a tactical squad (I think it's $40 but whatever let's pretend) in and of itself isn't bad. It's when you need to add a Rhino (another $40?) and a Devasatator kit (because you want a heavy weapon that's not a missile launcher) that it gets stupid for a single unit (although you get bits left over at least from the Dev kit), because you need to repeat most of that 3 times, maybe 4 times or more. Or nonsense like Assault Marines being $41 for a half-size unit, so you need to pay $82 to get a full unit. Either make the rules so that a 5-man squad is the normal size, or put 10 guys in a box. Instead, the big issue is GW pricing is all over the place and really seems to boil down to "How much can we get away with charging" which IS a problem. Also their stupid "one-click collections" that save you nothing over buying the units individually.
angelofvengeance wrote: How is it delusional? If he (Kirby)was CEO and the company performs poorly under his reign, then it's absolutely his fault. A lot of the new stuff, has spent several years in the pipeline.
Therefore it makes sense to credit those things to Kirby?
It's like people who credit Rafa Benitez with winning the Champions League with Liverpool, but fail to account for the fact that the squad had been assembled over previous seasons by Gerard Houllier and Benitez had done very little to add to it.
Besides, the impact of a CEO on company performance is debatable..
Now, I think GW go against this trend to some degree, as they do with so many things, and the cult of personality around Kirby is a lot stronger than with faceless executives in, say, financial services companies, and consequently a lot more responsibility for any performances, or lack thereof, can be laid at his feet, but there is a statistically supported argument that it wasn't all him. Or, more accurately, his involvement was moot.
You can get 100 or so Perry Miniatures for the same price.
It's all relative. $50 for a hundred historical minis is all well and good if that's what you want. But it means didly when what you want is space marines. I spent £70 on a dozen models from hasslefree minis this morning (great site btw). Price per mini isn't my number one concern.
(But I was clever. I trawled eBay for a load of riders and warriors of Rohan, and they're gonna do for me as my stand in historical figures with my mates!)
angelofvengeance wrote: How is it delusional? If he (Kirby)was CEO and the company performs poorly under his reign, then it's absolutely his fault. A lot of the new stuff, has spent several years in the pipeline.
It's slightly more complicated than that. There are often factors that are beyond the control of the CEO or company -- so sometimes, success or lack thereof is not within the control of the executive. As an example, music album sales have plummeted, and it's nobody's fault that there will likely never be a title that dethrones MJ's Thriller.
The question to ask, really, is, under other leadership, would shareholders likely have seen better returns in the short, medium and long term? It's not a very simple question to answer, and it's better answered by a dispassionate third party than by people who are invested in the hobby/game, because the latter will tend to conflate, "I don't like the state of things" with, "this wasn't profitable for the company".
Also, there are different metrics by which to measure performance. Revenue, profit, growth, market share, share price, and dividends, for instance -- and by some of those metrics, GW has done better than by others. Keep in mind that I'm not defending Kirby; only that it's more complicated than "Poor performance = bad CEO". It could even be "Great performance = bad CEO", because with another CEO, it might be much better performance.
Rather than dismaying about GW I am hopeful about them now. I like their discounted intro boxes and all of the boxed games. Formations were a smart way for them to increase the value of terrible models without needing a new codex, new rulebook, or something else drastic.
I think GW has made significant strides to get back into customer's good graces, but the hard part will be dealing with the long-term effects of their previous errors.
GW's games are such significant investments of capital that sales shift at a delayed pace to the actions of the company itself. We might still see years of GW sales diminishing from customers who decided to quit and not enough new blood working to replacement. So much of 40k's success was based on its ubiquity which IMO was their most valuable asset. The damage to that attribute alone cannot be understated.
Hopefully, GW will continue to right their path and we might begin to see a return to the game's more universal popularity. I know personally I've seen less and less of the game played. If GW can really look into the core reasons why customers are choosing other games over their own, I believe that they will then be on a better track than they might have ever been previously.
Accolade wrote: I think GW has made significant strides to get back into customer's good graces, but the hard part will be dealing with the long-term effects of their previous errors.
I really don't think we can say that they have made significant strides.
Well, in a way it is significant strides for being GW, but have they really started doing anything above what any other game company worth it's salt has been doing for years?
And as you say, they haven't really done much to adress the core problems. Until they do, all the half-arsed FAQ's and discount bundles of overpriced models achieve is re-arranging the deck-chairs of the sinking ships.
I don't think GW will get on the right track until they realize that good rules matter just as much, if not more, than cool figures, and also that you can't charge an arm and a leg AND nickle and dime people to death by putting only 5 models in a $50 box but encourage/"require" 10 models, or not giving all the options in a box so you force people to buy a second box just to get options for the box they already bought.
I really think GW has done it for themselves they tore their own world down just for the sake of more sales and ended up with a half-made game. I might sound harsh but i really think they deserve the damage!
angelofvengeance wrote: How is it delusional? If he (Kirby)was CEO and the company performs poorly under his reign, then it's absolutely his fault. A lot of the new stuff, has spent several years in the pipeline.
Probably includng the stuff you is praising the new fellow for.
I wouldn't pin the blame solely on Kirby, as he would answer to the Board of Directors as well as being fed info by the various other parts of the company, like marketing, finances and so on. The horrid streak GW was on may have had a large part owed to Kirby, but something like that can't be done by one man with skewed priorities (basically there's fault at every level of GW for it to happen).
While their rules and pricing are still toilet-circling bad, it is being improved. The new Orruk sets are actually decently priced (save for maybe the clampack characters who arent the Warboss) and they're offering actual deals again (in the form of combined box sets and Start Collecting! sets). The board games are also a good move since it caters to the casual boardgame scene while also giving us oldbloods something we'd like in a cheap, no-nonsense package.
Since GW also want to move towards a tournament scene again, we might actually see true playtesting happen again. It might be too soon to be hurling praise but this is the brightest we've seen from them from literally half a decade now.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: I wouldn't pin the blame solely on Kirby, as he would answer to the Board of Directors as well as being fed info by the various other parts of the company, like marketing, finances and so on. The horrid streak GW was on may have had a large part owed to Kirby, but something like that can't be done by one man with skewed priorities (basically there's fault at every level of GW for it to happen).
It is, however, a sterling example of why the CEO for a company should never also be the Chairman of the Board - the two roles should have different priorities, and a single person serving both roles is quite likely to address one priority without addressing others.
You can get 100 or so Perry Miniatures for the same price.
That's related to what he was saying. It's high individual prices coupled with many required purchases. You get lots of Historial models for cheap, but that's because Historicals tend to have higher limits of models needed and manufacturers know this. They know if they push the prices higher, customers will go elsewhere.
Games Workshop is pricing their models along the lines of skirmish games like Malifaux and Infinity. Getting a box where you're paying around $5-$8 for a single 32mm infantry sized miniature in those games is acceptable because you only need about 20 to have a completely rounded collection, and then you can move on. Some buy more, expand to other armies, etc but that's the same with any game. When you pick up a tactical squad box and a Rhino, you've already spent about as much as you would on those 10-20 models in a skirmish game, and then need to spend much, much more to buy repeats of that tactical squad and Rhino, more tanks, characters, different flavours of Marine for different roles, etc.
Basically, GW's prices aren't bad for the average on the market when compared to games of much smaller model counts. But for the amount of models that are needed for an average sized game (1500pts before I left, so not sure where it is now), they're far, far too pricey.
You can get 100 or so Perry Miniatures for the same price.
That's related to what he was saying. It's high individual prices coupled with many required purchases. You get lots of Historial models for cheap, but that's because Historicals tend to have higher limits of models needed and manufacturers know this. They know if they push the prices higher, customers will go elsewhere.
Games Workshop is pricing their models along the lines of skirmish games like Malifaux and Infinity. Getting a box where you're paying around $5-$8 for a single 32mm infantry sized miniature in those games is acceptable because you only need about 20 to have a completely rounded collection, and then you can move on. Some buy more, expand to other armies, etc but that's the same with any game. When you pick up a tactical squad box and a Rhino, you've already spent about as much as you would on those 10-20 models in a skirmish game, and then need to spend much, much more to buy repeats of that tactical squad and Rhino, more tanks, characters, different flavours of Marine for different roles, etc.
Basically, GW's prices aren't bad for the average on the market when compared to games of much smaller model counts. But for the amount of models that are needed for an average sized game (1500pts before I left, so not sure where it is now), they're far, far too pricey.
The problem i have with GW's pricing structure is that the production cost for GW is much lower than other small companies as they can do everything in house (overhead is higher though) I am into Kingdom death monster and it is very expensive, i payed about 8000yen for the Dung beetle expansion which is essentially 4 miniatures, a booklet, lots of cards, and a location card for the town, but for a small operation KD's stuff is very high quality, so i value them higher, than some of the stuff GW has released recently.
angelofvengeance wrote: How is it delusional? If he (Kirby)was CEO and the company performs poorly under his reign, then it's absolutely his fault. A lot of the new stuff, has spent several years in the pipeline.
It's slightly more complicated than that. There are often factors that are beyond the control of the CEO or company -- so sometimes, success or lack thereof is not within the control of the executive. As an example, music album sales have plummeted, and it's nobody's fault that there will likely never be a title that dethrones MJ's Thriller.
The question to ask, really, is, under other leadership, would shareholders likely have seen better returns in the short, medium and long term? It's not a very simple question to answer, and it's better answered by a dispassionate third party than by people who are invested in the hobby/game, because the latter will tend to conflate, "I don't like the state of things" with, "this wasn't profitable for the company".
Also, there are different metrics by which to measure performance. Revenue, profit, growth, market share, share price, and dividends, for instance -- and by some of those metrics, GW has done better than by others. Keep in mind that I'm not defending Kirby; only that it's more complicated than "Poor performance = bad CEO". It could even be "Great performance = bad CEO", because with another CEO, it might be much better performance.
KIrby kept a tight rein on things at GW. For several years he filled both seats of CEO and Chairman, which put him in such a powerful position that this practice is recommended against by UK company ethics.
There was a strong culture of recruitment for fit into the existing (i.e. the Kirby) culture.
The company's key activities were concentrated in Nottingham. Regional offices that were strong enough to oppose the central HQ were closed, centralising power even more. Long-serving creative staff with high reputations and therefore moral authority to oppose GW's changes of direction, were eased out of the company.
This all happened under Kirby. The results at best were mixed.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: While their rules and pricing are still toilet-circling bad, it is being improved. The new Orruk sets are actually decently priced (save for maybe the clampack characters who arent the Warboss) and they're offering actual deals again (in the form of combined box sets and Start Collecting! sets). The board games are also a good move since it caters to the casual boardgame scene while also giving us oldbloods something we'd like in a cheap, no-nonsense package.
Is anyone buying the boxed games for the game, or are they buying them as a discounted source of models? I've never heard of anyone playing Execution Force or Betrayal at Calth; people bought them for the minis. You can buy BaC game components on eBay for peanuts. I've never even heard anyone mention that Scout game.
Sure, retro games sell well, because they've already got a player base (Space Hulk, Blood Bowl), but the new stuff doesn't seem to be making any impact.
As for all the good new things going on; I get the feeling it's all very reactionary, rather than a planned series of improvements.
In my view GW lost its mojo under Kirby. This was largely his fault for his focus on profits rather than sales through the fostering of the existing player base and by generation of new lines of business. However the company did become more profitable and this put it in a good position to expand sales and put out new games under the new CEO.
The danger now is that having got rid of so many creatives during the Kirby years, the company seems to be unable to move outside its main, 40K paradigm, which accounts probably for 70-80% of sales.
As noted, people are buying the boxed games and starters for the figures, not for their own merits. The 30K rules are a slightly different matter, but even they are (a) derivative of 40K and (b) represent a rejection by many veteran players of what 40K has become in the past few years, which is a bad sign.
In one sense it doesn't matter to GW why people buy their products as long as they do. However, strip-mining the past and cannibalising their own current games is a strategy without a long term future. At some point GW have to get their mojo back and create some new stuff.
AoS can be seen an attempt to move in that direction. From some angles, it's still only a derivation of the previously existing WHFB rules and fluff. In my view AoS does not innovate successfully in rules while in many veterans' eyes its fluff innovations are disastrous. The "Sigmarines" label shows how many people think AoS is just an attempt to make a fantasy version of 40K, which begs the question "Why bother, we already have 40K?"
The jury is still out on AoS, and we must wait until July for possible news of its financial success.
I don't think GW are back on the right track yet, but I do think they are manoeuvring with some problems to get back to it.
Have to say, the news today once again re-enforces my opening post impression for me. They listened. They acted fast. Points in AoS without throwing out the open format for those who want it too. That was a quick reaction, and very plainly spurred by the audience (well, maybe not the audience who play the game as is, but the large audience that skipped it entirely due to lack of points).
The discount Knight's renegade box too was a fantastic move in my eyes as well.
Once again, certainly not saying everything is fixed (prices and overall rules still an issue), but man oh man, they are getting a lot more right than they were a few years ago. This new CEO is very obviously an entirely different kind of leader and I genuinely feel like he cares about his customer as much as his shareholders if not more.
Now all I need is for someone to make Jes Goodwin put out another sketch book and get me his autograph and I'll be good lol
The danger now is that having got rid of so many creatives during the Kirby years, the company seems to be unable to move outside its main, 40K paradigm, which accounts probably for 70-80% of sales.
Yeah, made me very sad to see so many 'names' leaving over the last few years.
I wonder if Jes Goodwin and Alan Bligh will dress up like the Blues Brothers and go on a mission to 'get the band back together'...
Is anyone buying the boxed games for the game, or are they buying them as a discounted source of models? I've never heard of anyone playing Execution Force or Betrayal at Calth; people bought them for the minis. You can buy BaC game components on eBay for peanuts. I've never even heard anyone mention that Scout game.
Sure, retro games sell well, because they've already got a player base (Space Hulk, Blood Bowl), but the new stuff doesn't seem to be making any impact.
For one, I can say that I got Betrayal at Calth (two boxes actually) for the game. Miniatures are nice and definitely something I wanted, but my main motivation was the game. Now having played it couple a dozen times with my friends (including pretty hardcore board / war gamers) it truly shines as an excellent example of GW actually producing good stuff again. Hear me, the game is excellent and you should get one. Shoo, go get it if you enjoy tense gameplay, hard tactical decisions which are all important, very critical manouvering and positioning, risk management which depends on player skill, meaningful weapon loadouts with no dead choices or just plain awesome squad-level skirmish with a delightfully abstract hex grid (no arguing over millimeters here).
It is also very well received at BoardGameGeek, which traditionally has a bit of an aversion to miniature wargaming. It is kind of depressing to see many 40k gamers out there outright dismissing the whole concept of playing the game and just getting the models in the box, when there is actually a very good game in the said package.
On the topic, I also think that GW is making wonderful decisions of late, especially as they're bringing back my loved Specialist Games and actually communicating with their fanbase. Few years of that and we might perhaps see some very good things yet.
How long was Kirby in charge............because his tenure encompasses a lot of the stuff people like and think of as the good old days. It seems easy to blame him for all of ills of the company, when he was in charge during a lot of the good stuff as well. Lot of selective memory happening here.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: How long was Kirby in charge............because his tenure encompasses a lot of the stuff people like and think of as the good old days. It seems easy to blame him for all of ills of the company, when he was in charge during a lot of the good stuff as well. Lot of selective memory happening here.
The great satan enabled your games, people.
Bryan Ansell would be the great Lord, of course.
Livingston and Jackson would like a word...
Kirby is blamed for much, I know I've used his name in vain plenty of times, but the mistake makers are lower down the food chain than him. He was just too high up to be blamed for the design of this or the poor rules for that. Some rungs of upper middle management at Nottingham is where it's at if you want to play the blame game imo. We just use Kirby's name because it's easy to find and latch on to, but I honestly don't think he's had much clue about the creative side of the company for years.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: We just use Kirby's name because it's easy to find and latch on to, but I honestly don't think he's had much clue about the creative side of the company for years.
That doesn't work in the long term though, he can only hide behind 'lowly minions' for so long before he has to take command responsibility, particularly if he actually played the games that his company produced. GW has had about 15 years of shoveling out crap rules, he really should have noticed that.
Some people did but how many more would have stayed loyal customers if GW could be bothered putting effort towards rules design?
I used to spend vast amounts of money on GW (including most of my student loan.....) but now I spent all my toy solider money elsewhere and I have done so for years.
One has to ask was the success "because" or "in spite" of Kirby.
Kirby led a buyout that saved GW from going under. That's a fair certainty and to his credit.
He took the company public. Arguably better for those with their fingers already in the pie than the customer base or the creative integrity of the company.
I believe (I wasn't paying close attention at the time) that LOTR was more about serendipity than any real shrewd moves on the part of GW.
The years subsequent to Return Of The King have seen stagnation and decline, with a steadily increasing nose dive in the last 4 years or so.
There's really very little GW have done at the executive level I can see in a long, long time that one could point to and say yes, that, that was a smart and insightful thing to do.
Here is Kirby's mini bio from the GW Investor Relations web page.
T H F Kirby (age 65), non-executive chairman. Tom Kirby joined Games Workshop in April 1986 as general manager and led the management buy-out in December 1991, becoming chief executive at that time. Between 1998 and 2000 he took on the role of non-executive chairman, returning to the role of chief executive in September 2000. He performed the role of chairman from December 2007 to January 2013 when he became chairman and acting CEO. Following the appointment of Kevin Rountree as CEO with effect from 1 January 2015, Tom became non-executive chairman of the Group. Prior to joining Games Workshop, Tom worked for six years for a distributor of fantasy games in the UK and was previously an inspector of taxes.
I'm not sure Kirby's buyout saved the company from going under.
It's more that Ansell was fed up of being a businessman and seized the opportunity to sell out for wads of cash and set up a pure figure making company.
I would posit that although Kirby was certainly a problem, he could not have done all the damage on his own. There had to be higher ups who were either feeding or enabling the ideas, and who knows who is still running around there. It is clear though, there are other voices gaining volume and momentum inside, voices who remember the customers and not just the shareholders, and who don't treat the interests of the two as mutually exclusive.
Very interesting BOLS article going through the faulty pricing and detached decision making that went into AOS in pretty good detail - they make a good point that although to me the AoS system options/points were a very positive move, they add the sobering reminder that it was also one born of desperation, which I can believe too.
Keep a steady hand on the rudder GW, you guys are smart enough to know what this community wants and needs obviously, address the gameplay and continue to do things that amount to discounted pricing, even if it is just on volume buys to start, and you will see brighter days I am sure.
Reminds my of what my dear state of Kansas has been going through under Brownback.
Back to gaming, I also hope this is a sign of things to come for GW. Their response to AoS was so unlike the company of old I'm still not sure if everyone thinks it will hold.
MajorTom11 wrote: I would posit that although Kirby was certainly a problem, he could not have done all the damage on his own. There had to be higher ups who were either feeding or enabling the ideas, and who knows who is still running around there. It is clear though, there are other voices gaining volume and momentum inside, voices who remember the customers and not just the shareholders, and who don't treat the interests of the two as mutually exclusive.
Very interesting BOLS article going through the faulty pricing and detached decision making that went into AOS in pretty good detail - they make a good point that although to me the AoS system options/points were a very positive move, they add the sobering reminder that it was also one born of desperation, which I can believe too.
Keep a steady hand on the rudder GW, you guys are smart enough to know what this community wants and needs obviously, address the gameplay and continue to do things that amount to discounted pricing, even if it is just on volume buys to start, and you will see brighter days I am sure.
Obviously he didn't do everything by himself, but Kirby set the direction and promoted a monoculture that enabled groupthink leading to a big disconnect from general customer and marketing awareness in favour of accounting based thinking. This was successful in reducing costs and regaining profits, but very unsuccessful in promoting sales. Kirby can't be blamed for the early incompetence revealed by the Chapter House case, but he certainly can be blamed for creating a situation in which such incompetence was allowed to continue and be promoted until it became the basis for an expensive legal case. Kirby is an accountant, not a lawyer or a businessman.
Kilkrazy wrote: I'm not sure Kirby's buyout saved the company from going under.
It's more that Ansell was fed up of being a businessman and seized the opportunity to sell out for wads of cash and set up a pure figure making company.
Have to find it, but Andy Chambers said in a interview a couple years ago, GW would have gone under without Kirby. He had a positive impact on the company early on taking it world wide. But he should have stepped down in early 2000. Heck if he had, we would probably be talking how things were better under him
Kilkrazy wrote: I'm not sure Kirby's buyout saved the company from going under.
It's more that Ansell was fed up of being a businessman and seized the opportunity to sell out for wads of cash and set up a pure figure making company.
Have to find it, but Andy Chambers said in a interview a couple years ago, GW would have gone under without Kirby. He had a positive impact on the company early on taking it world wide. But he should have stepped down in early 2000. Heck if he had, we would probably be talking how things were better under him
It's difficult to argue with the historical facts that once the IPO cash and the LoTR boom were gone, which covers the years 1994 to 2004, GW have been in serious decline in terms of sales.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Wasn't aware that Kirby was involved in writing crappy rules for the games.
Is there no end to this mans evil?
Much like your constant witty one liners, no.
If you mean did he put pen to paper or finger to key then no, obviously not. But most stories of how GW was under his leadership, notably in this millennium, illustrate a strong cult of personality where things were run very much according to his vision. Whether the poor rules were a result of a broader deemphasis leading to poor quality staff or the creation of an environment where the time and money wasn't provided to allow any better job to be done, we don't know. Or it may simply that Jervis was allowed too much freedom to implement his vision where dice rolls and tables rule all and player agency contributes nothing. Either way, there's an element of the quality of a company's product which can be attributed to its management.
I had a lovely chat with GW at their Facebook page yesterday about the 40k Chaos releases or the lack thereof. 'Eddie' was quite assuring that something will happen.
Now, like any Customer support, you always have to take it with a grain of salt - but hey. Customer Service that responds in the fashion they did isn't always the case.
We'll certainly return to the Traitor Legions and Chaos Space Marines in time.
Nothing is announced at the moment, but we'll let you know when we have any news on this page.
Thanks,
- Eddie
Having someone to speak to directly on the internet is the right track imho.
Well it certainly is a good sign that GW is engaging with the community more. It's pretty much expected nowadays that companies have some presence on social media and allow for some feedback which is good.
We'll just have to wait and see the quality of what they produce though.
I am very positive. I think they are releasing boxed sets that represent good value. More importantly for them, they are releasing games that allow you to constantly use their figures across a wide array of rule sets. I remember many times, getting together for WFHB and ending up playing Magic because it was so fast and easy to set up and play. Now you can do the same with some of the new games out.
I'm actually amazed hobbies like this are still around at all. Maybe I'm not interacting with the right people, but it seems like nobody my age wants to put in the time given all the instant gratification alternatives like video games.
Looking at recent events, I think they are back on the right track. They will not win me back, though, I am perfectly happy playing with the 5th Edition ruleset. Furthermore, companies like Kromlech make (imho) much nicer figures and when I compare third-party soldiers with GW's, I find the GW ones ugly. It didn't bother me in the past, as I have quite a collection of ancient miniatures, but I find the whole "Let's make bigger and bigger miniatures and forget the human-sized"-trend rather annoying. And when you have been around third-party figures for a while, you really spot the ridiculous dimensions of GW's miniatures (like oversized hands and heads).
I applaud the changes GW makes nowadays, they lost me but hope they will become succesful again for the people who enjoy their stuff. I spend my money at small miniature companies, like Heresy Miniatures, Kromlech and Maxmini (if the last one finally sends their KS). They have great stuff for my main armies (Nurgle Daemons and Rebel Grotz) and usually cheaper than GW, I feel better supporting the "Little Ones" than the "big, bad baddy"
As a long time Games Workshop fan boy.. I collected it since the late 80's that started all with Space Hulk. I played and loved most of their games over the years. How large.. I live in the Midwest of the United States and traveled to Nottingham for the single reason to see Warhammer world while traveling thru Europe.. Instead of Movie celebrities I have pictures with Jervis and the Perry Twins.. Collecting about every army and the ones I didn't, I would purchase army books of armies I didn't play just to keep up with my opponents. Then freely buy models that looked great but having nothing to do with the armies I collected.. Example was the Green Knight.. Great Model... don't play Britts..
But last year after a long happy marriage, they changed. End times and Age of Sigmar made me feel that they wanted a divorce and wanted to see other people. I was not happy but they were content of trying something new. We separated and I found other things to do, a year later they found out its very hard out there and now wanting me back. They are the ones that left.. Now it is a trust issue and going to be difficult to get me back because I found other loves.
I wrote that as a little bit of a joke.. but when AoS came out it really felt like a slap in the face. I actually had friends knowing I was a large fan send me emails and post on my face book, sympathetic on what Games Workshop did to warhammer.
When AoS first hit.. It reminded me of Epic of years past.. Epic was a small scale version of 40k and had become one of the 3 flag ship games. But GW decided they needed to over haul the game and killed it.. The game was no more.. you could no longer find players and most old players were happy to sale off their army for next to nothing.. Kind of what just happened with Age of Sigmar...
Other things Games Workshop started a strange price structure years ago.. Knowing certain models would sale better.. At one point the witch elves were around $90 for 10 models while other units where $45 for 10 models and with 8th edition rules at the time you need gigantic units to be able to compete.. . This caused me to be more selective in my purchases because my hobby fund was not getting any larger. For someone that would spend Thousands of dollars a year on just Games Workshop products, Now for 2016 only bought Deathwatch Overkill because I am a sucker for Space hulk
Now with the new President they are returning to social media and releasing FAQs. even adding point values to Age of Sigmar, but the sad truth of the matter is .. It is.. To little .. To late.. for me
I have moved on and things in the past that would easily pull money out of my wallet are now gone. Like a divorced couple.. we have a chance to get back together but currently it looks like you still need your free time.
Maybe this was the idea all along... kill the company so they can be more attractive for a buy out.. But for now.. I see Games Workshop is still in troubled waters..
• Bringing back specialty games
• Licencing out tons of video games for GW (some are bad, but still so many options now) such as: Mordheim: City of the damned, Total War: Warhammer, BFG, Blood bowl and now Dawn of War 3
• The PRICES. Using The Flesh Eater Courts for AoS as an example: $180 USD for $280 USD of stuff. It's GREAT value.
• Free rules and community feedback
• Social media presence
• Free painting videos
• Outreach, support and conventions
• Everything moving to plastic (no new finecast sculpts)
Seriously. What a change from just 2 years ago. Bravo GW.
• Bringing back specialty games
• Licencing out tons of video games for GW (some are bad, but still so many options now) such as: Mordheim: City of the damned, Total War: Warhammer, BFG, Blood bowl and now Dawn of War 3
• The PRICES. Using The Flesh Eater Courts for AoS as an example: $180 USD for $280 USD of stuff. It's GREAT value.
• Free rules and community feedback
• Social media presence
• Free painting videos
• Outreach, support and conventions
• Everything moving to plastic (no new finecast sculpts)
Seriously. What a change from just 2 years ago. Bravo GW.
Can you confirm the specialist games? Personally I would like to get into those, since AoS was a big disappointment to me and 40k (with AoS as well) has a high upkeep and buy-in cost that I am not too comfortable with right now when I feel I get more out of a purchase of the competitions' product.
It's official, from GW themselves, Specialist Games was revived earlier this year and the initial products are already well under development, so far Blood Bowl confirmed... rumors of a new, 15mm Epic have been running around, and finally BFG seems like a pretty solid bet. I could just as easily say that they could be absolutely fekking amazing as you could that they will be terrible at this point, no evidence. Chances are though, from the way they have been describing it and the stated intentions they have, I don't think they will stray too far from the previous for games like bloodbowl. I think that will be a pretty safe bet -
180 for 280 worth of stuff is exactly what I was mentioning earlier, I understand they can't just drop the MSRP on individual kits for various business reasons, but offering volume bundles is a great, key way for them to get back in the game imho.
• Bringing back specialty games
• Licencing out tons of video games for GW (some are bad, but still so many options now) such as: Mordheim: City of the damned, Total War: Warhammer, BFG, Blood bowl and now Dawn of War 3
• The PRICES. Using The Flesh Eater Courts for AoS as an example: $180 USD for $280 USD of stuff. It's GREAT value.
• Free rules and community feedback
• Social media presence
• Free painting videos
• Outreach, support and conventions
• Everything moving to plastic (no new finecast sculpts)
Seriously. What a change from just 2 years ago. Bravo GW.
Can you confirm the specialist games? Personally I would like to get into those, since AoS was a big disappointment to me and 40k (with AoS as well) has a high upkeep and buy-in cost that I am not too comfortable with right now when I feel I get more out of a purchase of the competitions' product.
You can currently get Deathwatch Overkill and Betrayal at Calth. Blood Bowl is confirmed and has a facebook page with pictures of upcoming minis.
MajorTom11 wrote: It's official, from GW themselves, Specialist Games was revived earlier this year and the initial products are already well under development, so far Blood Bowl confirmed... rumors of a new, 15mm Epic have been running around, and finally BFG seems like a pretty solid bet. I could just as easily say that they could be absolutely fekking amazing as you could that they will be terrible at this point, no evidence. Chances are though, from the way they have been describing it and the stated intentions they have, I don't think they will stray too far from the previous for games like bloodbowl. I think that will be a pretty safe bet -
180 for 280 worth of stuff is exactly what I was mentioning earlier, I understand they can't just drop the MSRP on individual kits for various business reasons, but offering volume bundles is a great, key way for them to get back in the game imho.
So Blood Bowl was confirmed then.I knew that there was a picture of it, but was not sure if it was a rumor or not. I am sorry to be so skeptical, but do you have links for the other stuff? Would be interested to seem the revive Necromunda and Mordheim.
• Bringing back specialty games
• Licencing out tons of video games for GW (some are bad, but still so many options now) such as: Mordheim: City of the damned, Total War: Warhammer, BFG, Blood bowl and now Dawn of War 3
• The PRICES. Using The Flesh Eater Courts for AoS as an example: $180 USD for $280 USD of stuff. It's GREAT value.
• Free rules and community feedback
• Social media presence
• Free painting videos
• Outreach, support and conventions
• Everything moving to plastic (no new finecast sculpts)
Seriously. What a change from just 2 years ago. Bravo GW.
Can you confirm the specialist games? Personally I would like to get into those, since AoS was a big disappointment to me and 40k (with AoS as well) has a high upkeep and buy-in cost that I am not too comfortable with right now when I feel I get more out of a purchase of the competitions' product.
You can currently get Deathwatch Overkill and Betrayal at Calth. Blood Bowl is confirmed and has a facebook page with pictures of upcoming minis.
Since I have been out of the loop of this for a while, are they independent board games or true tabletop games?
I mean I really like the models, and I might use them if they open up to Kill team or so.
MajorTom11 wrote: It's official, from GW themselves, Specialist Games was revived earlier this year and the initial products are already well under development, so far Blood Bowl confirmed... rumors of a new, 15mm Epic have been running around, and finally BFG seems like a pretty solid bet. I could just as easily say that they could be absolutely fekking amazing as you could that they will be terrible at this point, no evidence. Chances are though, from the way they have been describing it and the stated intentions they have, I don't think they will stray too far from the previous for games like bloodbowl. I think that will be a pretty safe bet -
180 for 280 worth of stuff is exactly what I was mentioning earlier, I understand they can't just drop the MSRP on individual kits for various business reasons, but offering volume bundles is a great, key way for them to get back in the game imho.
So Blood Bowl was confirmed then.I knew that there was a picture of it, but was not sure if it was a rumor or not. I am sorry to be so skeptical, but do you have links for the other stuff? Would be interested to seem the revive Necromunda and Mordheim.
• Bringing back specialty games
• Licencing out tons of video games for GW (some are bad, but still so many options now) such as: Mordheim: City of the damned, Total War: Warhammer, BFG, Blood bowl and now Dawn of War 3
• The PRICES. Using The Flesh Eater Courts for AoS as an example: $180 USD for $280 USD of stuff. It's GREAT value.
• Free rules and community feedback
• Social media presence
• Free painting videos
• Outreach, support and conventions
• Everything moving to plastic (no new finecast sculpts)
Seriously. What a change from just 2 years ago. Bravo GW.
Can you confirm the specialist games? Personally I would like to get into those, since AoS was a big disappointment to me and 40k (with AoS as well) has a high upkeep and buy-in cost that I am not too comfortable with right now when I feel I get more out of a purchase of the competitions' product.
You can currently get Deathwatch Overkill and Betrayal at Calth. Blood Bowl is confirmed and has a facebook page with pictures of upcoming minis.
Since I have been out of the loop of this for a while, are they independent board games or true tabletop games?
I mean I really like the models, and I might use them if they open up to Kill team or so.
I'm not sure what the distinction is you are getting at. They have rules to be played by themselves with the included miniatures, and those miniatures from what I understand can be used in 40K. Not sure if it's like Space Hulk, where you have to put the Terminators on the appropriate bases for 40K and remove them for playing Space Hulk.
MajorTom11 wrote: It's official, from GW themselves, Specialist Games was revived earlier this year and the initial products are already well under development, so far Blood Bowl confirmed... rumors of a new, 15mm Epic have been running around, and finally BFG seems like a pretty solid bet. I could just as easily say that they could be absolutely fekking amazing as you could that they will be terrible at this point, no evidence. Chances are though, from the way they have been describing it and the stated intentions they have, I don't think they will stray too far from the previous for games like bloodbowl. I think that will be a pretty safe bet -
180 for 280 worth of stuff is exactly what I was mentioning earlier, I understand they can't just drop the MSRP on individual kits for various business reasons, but offering volume bundles is a great, key way for them to get back in the game imho.
So Blood Bowl was confirmed then.I knew that there was a picture of it, but was not sure if it was a rumor or not. I am sorry to be so skeptical, but do you have links for the other stuff? Would be interested to seem the revive Necromunda and Mordheim.
• Bringing back specialty games
• Licencing out tons of video games for GW (some are bad, but still so many options now) such as: Mordheim: City of the damned, Total War: Warhammer, BFG, Blood bowl and now Dawn of War 3
• The PRICES. Using The Flesh Eater Courts for AoS as an example: $180 USD for $280 USD of stuff. It's GREAT value.
• Free rules and community feedback
• Social media presence
• Free painting videos
• Outreach, support and conventions
• Everything moving to plastic (no new finecast sculpts)
Seriously. What a change from just 2 years ago. Bravo GW.
Can you confirm the specialist games? Personally I would like to get into those, since AoS was a big disappointment to me and 40k (with AoS as well) has a high upkeep and buy-in cost that I am not too comfortable with right now when I feel I get more out of a purchase of the competitions' product.
You can currently get Deathwatch Overkill and Betrayal at Calth. Blood Bowl is confirmed and has a facebook page with pictures of upcoming minis.
Since I have been out of the loop of this for a while, are they independent board games or true tabletop games?
I mean I really like the models, and I might use them if they open up to Kill team or so.
I'm not sure what the distinction is you are getting at. They have rules to be played by themselves with the included miniatures, and those miniatures from what I understand can be used in 40K. Not sure if it's like Space Hulk, where you have to put the Terminators on the appropriate bases for 40K and remove them for playing Space Hulk.
It was kind of two-fold: If the game was standalone game and/or the models can be used for other games. Since it seems to be the case that both of those seem to yes, that seems to be the case.
Yea, I can't give GW credit for specialist games returning until they actual return. Betrayal at Calth is a stand alone board game, while cool, isn't a specialist game.
It funny maybe, but I'll give credit when they do it and not just say they will do it. Ever been promised something by someone and then they didn't deliver?
I think the simple fact that they are producing games again, shows that they are not just Citadel Miniatures, but Games Workshop as well.
I've written off Dakka for a few reasons, but the prime reason of disinterest has always been due to GW taking the mick. Without GW being a game company, there is little reason to contribute here.
Space Hulk was a step in the right direction, even if its release was only so the trademark and such didn't fall away from disuse.
Now that Warhammer Quest is being released, I thoughti would see what the fuss was about on boardgamegeek.
I no longer care for their lifestyle systems. 40k and WHFB and LotR. Lots of great memories there, but I have better things to do with my life than to dedicate a significant portion to modelling, painting and money and ultimately feel as I have wasted my time when I can play boardgames and have even more fulfilling enjoyment with them.
So in that regard, GW are killing it. Slam Dunk. I could care less about the 40k boardgames as they don't offer what I seek for the price paid. I have no cross tied need to use them in 40k for example so their existence is irrelevant.
But warhams questis quite good, and the only drawback for me is the GW tax they still require. But even then, at least tbey are attempting to realize that my demographic simply refuses to pay $40 for a model any more and are trying to meet us in the middle.with a cheaper character expansion for WHQ.
Baby steps, but in the right direction.
I'll second Pacific's closing sentence on the first page of this thread. A "C". But showing improvement.
I couldn't post this in news and rumours as it would have been OT, but here's the question about GW I wanted to ask:
Is releasing all these new board games/stand alone games, a good idea?
I ask, because for months now, we've heard about GW's financial problems, so when you're creating 3 new games, with 3 completely different sets of models, and all the design costs that go into that (new moulds etc etc etc )
surely that's going to pile on more costs ands thus lose more money?
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I couldn't post this in news and rumours as it would have been OT, but here's the question about GW I wanted to ask:
Is releasing all these new board games/stand alone games, a good idea?
I ask, because for months now, we've heard about GW's financial problems, so when you're creating 3 new games, with 3 completely different sets of models, and all the design costs that go into that (new moulds etc etc etc )
surely that's going to pile on more costs ands thus lose more money?
Not really. For one thing, there is a big audience for these games; people are buying Silver Tower or bought Deathwatch: Overkill who play neither AoS nor 40k, the board games give them a way in which a) makes more than just selling to established players and b) sells more if/when said newcomers buy into the bigger games (I'm sure a lot of people started a Nid force to go with the DW:OK Stealer Cult, or will add some more Demons to the Tzneetchian forces in ST). The moulds/design cost is no higher than whatever 'main game' product they'd be releasing that week anyway, perhaps even lower as they're less complicated figured and duplicated.
I think it's a great idea. There's both the captive audience ready and waiting (especially when the likes of Blood Bowl and Necromunda return in the coming years) and a large potential audience that might be familiar with the setting (particularly with the likes of Total War: Warhammer and Dawn of War coming out) for whom the board games are a great way to get started. The only 'extra' costs are things like the game tiles or any custom dice, which will be a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of a plastic mould anyway.
There's also the fact that this is something the customers want, and have wanted for a long time. For years, when the limited Space Hulk releases were the closest GW got to spin-off, self contained board games, people clamoured for more in the same vein, so it's entirely possible that GW are in fact taking notice of this (from both a business perspective, as people are queuing up to buy such releases, and from a 'giving a damn about the customers' PoV).
GW spend about 20-25% of their revenue on product, i doubt this is going to significantly swing as they're not exactly releasing more product so much as different product.
My own reservation would be whether, considering GW's main corporate priority must be to return to increasing turnover and profit YOY once more, the new releases are expanding the sales are simp,y cannibalizing them.
Still, end of year report is due soon, so we'll at least have a better idea then.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I couldn't post this in news and rumours as it would have been OT, but here's the question about GW I wanted to ask:
Is releasing all these new board games/stand alone games, a good idea?
I ask, because for months now, we've heard about GW's financial problems, so when you're creating 3 new games, with 3 completely different sets of models, and all the design costs that go into that (new moulds etc etc etc )
surely that's going to pile on more costs ands thus lose more money?
Not really. For one thing, there is a big audience for these games; people are buying Silver Tower or bought Deathwatch: Overkill who play neither AoS nor 40k, the board games give them a way in which a) makes more than just selling to established players and b) sells more if/when said newcomers buy into the bigger games (I'm sure a lot of people started a Nid force to go with the DW:OK Stealer Cult, or will add some more Demons to the Tzneetchian forces in ST). The moulds/design cost is no higher than whatever 'main game' product they'd be releasing that week anyway, perhaps even lower as they're less complicated figured and duplicated.
I think it's a great idea. There's both the captive audience ready and waiting (especially when the likes of Blood Bowl and Necromunda return in the coming years) and a large potential audience that might be familiar with the setting (particularly with the likes of Total War: Warhammer and Dawn of War coming out) for whom the board games are a great way to get started. The only 'extra' costs are things like the game tiles or any custom dice, which will be a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of a plastic mould anyway.
There's also the fact that this is something the customers want, and have wanted for a long time. For years, when the limited Space Hulk releases were the closest GW got to spin-off, self contained board games, people clamoured for more in the same vein, so it's entirely possible that GW are in fact taking notice of this (from both a business perspective, as people are queuing up to buy such releases, and from a 'giving a damn about the customers' PoV).
Some good points there, but you're forgetting that Dreadfleet sunk beneath the waves (but I still made a ton of cash ) so a few bad sales here and there might put GW off this approach.
Price for example, could be a factor. Silver Tower has some beautiful models, but £95
GW spend about 20-25% of their revenue on product, i doubt this is going to significantly swing as they're not exactly releasing more product so much as different product.
My own reservation would be whether, considering GW's main corporate priority must be to return to increasing turnover and profit YOY once more, the new releases are expanding the sales are simp,y cannibalizing them.
Still, end of year report is due soon, so we'll at least have a better idea then.
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what dakka's number crunchers can make of that end of year report. My money's on most of the profits going to fund Kirby's pension
Possibly but what seems pretty clear is that board games are going through kind of a renaissance. The money is clearly in them and GW jumping on that bandwagon is very much a good thing.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I couldn't post this in news and rumours as it would have been OT, but here's the question about GW I wanted to ask:
Is releasing all these new board games/stand alone games, a good idea?
I ask, because for months now, we've heard about GW's financial problems, so when you're creating 3 new games, with 3 completely different sets of models, and all the design costs that go into that (new moulds etc etc etc )
surely that's going to pile on more costs ands thus lose more money?
Not really. For one thing, there is a big audience for these games; people are buying Silver Tower or bought Deathwatch: Overkill who play neither AoS nor 40k, the board games give them a way in which a) makes more than just selling to established players and b) sells more if/when said newcomers buy into the bigger games (I'm sure a lot of people started a Nid force to go with the DW:OK Stealer Cult, or will add some more Demons to the Tzneetchian forces in ST). The moulds/design cost is no higher than whatever 'main game' product they'd be releasing that week anyway, perhaps even lower as they're less complicated figured and duplicated.
I think it's a great idea. There's both the captive audience ready and waiting (especially when the likes of Blood Bowl and Necromunda return in the coming years) and a large potential audience that might be familiar with the setting (particularly with the likes of Total War: Warhammer and Dawn of War coming out) for whom the board games are a great way to get started. The only 'extra' costs are things like the game tiles or any custom dice, which will be a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of a plastic mould anyway.
There's also the fact that this is something the customers want, and have wanted for a long time. For years, when the limited Space Hulk releases were the closest GW got to spin-off, self contained board games, people clamoured for more in the same vein, so it's entirely possible that GW are in fact taking notice of this (from both a business perspective, as people are queuing up to buy such releases, and from a 'giving a damn about the customers' PoV).
Some good points there, but you're forgetting that Dreadfleet sunk beneath the waves (but I still made a ton of cash ) so a few bad sales here and there might put GW off this approach.
Price for example, could be a factor. Silver Tower has some beautiful models, but £95
But then again, if you look at equivalent products, it's not as fantasy land pricing as some of their stuff. My own easiest equivalent point of reference would be Imperial Assault by FFG, although the quality of the models isn't quite up to the HIPS Citadel models in Silver Tower, the price from Element Games right now isn't all that different. Taken as a whole, I think IA is the better package, but Silver Tower isn't as bat gak crazy as it could have been. Ditto BaC and Overkill.
Commodus Leitdorf wrote: Possibly but what seems pretty clear is that board games are going through kind of a renaissance. The money is clearly in them and GW jumping on that bandwagon is very much a good thing.
Very much this.
Not only a new renaissance, but a slow moving juggernaut. Millions are being made on kickstarter with extremely crappy games that are simply advertised well enough.
GW are opening their business back up into a much wider audience now.
If you think miniatures are all that they need to keep them afloat, then you'd be ignoring the simple fact that boardgamers out number wargamers by many multiples.
Boardgames are accessible.
Sitting down to buy, assemble, paint, learn the huge amount of rules for an army.... not so accessible.
This is why GW boardgames make such good starting pooints for their wargames.
You can still play the boardgame while you slowly paint your models. Its not some far away concept of "maybe one day, when all this gak is finished, I'll finally enjoy the fruits of my labor". They get to see results in small steps and is far less discouraging to many people.
And it doesn't exclude those who simply don't want to paint anything.
Paradigm wrote: there is a big audience for these games; people are buying Silver Tower or bought Deathwatch: Overkill who play neither AoS nor 40k, the board games give them a way in which a) makes more than just selling to established players and b) sells more if/when said newcomers buy into the bigger games
That's good in theory, but is it really true?
I agree that the boardgames would be a good entrypoint for new customers, (just look at how many of the veterans got started with games like Heroquest) but I wonder how well that works in practice these days, with these games.
These latest GW boargdames are a lot more expensive than the competition and while they are arguably worth that due to the amount and quality of the miniatures included, this depends on the customer having a appreciation of the minis in the first place. An existing GW customer can look at a game like Betrayal at Calth and see a massive discount compared to getting the equivalent models from FW. For a newcomer that might look different.
Are there really a large amount of customes buying these games that was not already customers of GW products? I have no idea of how we could research that but in my little local spot of the world, my impression is that the games are mainly bought by existing GW customers.
Paradigm wrote: there is a big audience for these games; people are buying Silver Tower or bought Deathwatch: Overkill who play neither AoS nor 40k, the board games give them a way in which a) makes more than just selling to established players and b) sells more if/when said newcomers buy into the bigger games
That's good in theory, but is it really true?
I agree that the boardgames would be a good entrypoint for new customers, (just look at how many of the veterans got started with games like Heroquest) but I wonder how well that works in practice these days, with these games.
These latest GW boargdames are a lot more expensive than the competition and while they are arguably worth that due to the amount and quality of the miniatures included, this depends on the customer having a appreciation of the minis in the first place. An existing GW customer can look at a game like Betrayal at Calth and see a massive discount compared to getting the equivalent models from FW. For a newcomer that might look different.
Are there really a large amount of customes buying these games that was not already customers of GW products? I have no idea of how we could research that but in my little local spot of the world, my impression is that the games are mainly bought by existing GW customers.
They probably don't have the same market penetration that they enjoyed back in the 80's when you could find their games in Kmart or when they had partnerships with milton bradley.
But they seem to be testing those waters again. Vedros.
They have name recognition now, and anyone who plays boardgames as a hobby knows who GW is. More likely in the infamous sense now. But they are known.
And while $150 is definitely a lot of money for a boardgame, their is a niche within the demographic that slavenly buys anything up. A lot of people actually.
Good boardgames that are out of print, that many collectors think are compulsoryadditions to their collections, pay.much.more than this. The industry sees some of these secondary market prices and takes advantage of that. Which is why you see so many expensive kickstarter titles.
These customers are boardgamers, and gw is sold in game shops.
New releases are a bit weird. They're making board games that include wargaming miniatures. On the one hand, we're getting awesome quality miniatures for a board game but at a wargame price. The price can limit broad, market appeal, especially with the upcoming push by GW to have some products sold by large-scale retail outlets.
Couch CEOing here but I think they should go one way or the other if they want expand their market to include board game players. Make a board game at a board game price and a wargame at a wargame price, mixing the two limits appeal to people who are looking for a board game and don't care about a wargame.
Edit:
Look at warhammer quest and compare it to Descent; price and number of models. I've become primarily a board game player now but with a background in wargames. When I buy a board game, I want single piece models that I can paint or not paint, I don't care so much about how crisp the details are or how much detail the model has because it's a board game.
Commodus Leitdorf wrote: Possibly but what seems pretty clear is that board games are going through kind of a renaissance. The money is clearly in them and GW jumping on that bandwagon is very much a good thing.
True words, but other companies are making board games that are the equal and often superior to, anything that GW makes, so they've got stiff competition.
It's important to remember that GW's problem is falling sales, not profits. They have maintained their profits by cost-cutting and massive price increases.
There are downsides to the price strategy, and we've seen Rountree introduce cheaper price points for kits by the bundling strategy, also books are getting cheaper.
Anyway, my point is that GW can easily afford to launch a new boardgame and it be a disaster. What they can't afford is not to change their product line-up, because it's the no boardgames, high price strategy that was losing sales, and despite all the cost-cutting efficiencies in the world, if you sales keep on going down eventually you end up in the crap.
Therefore it makes all sorts of sense for GW to launch new board games. I'm not convinced their selection of games is the right mix at the right prices, but they can afford to make some mistakes for a year or two while they try out different things.
) Some of the new board games, plastic 30k marines etc.
