Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think that complaining about FW and buying GW is gagging on a gnat and swallowing a horse.

FW is a little bit expensive, but it is also a specialty product. FW doesn't sell, doesn't expect to sell, and isn't set up to sell a huge amount of product. If FW started selling a single kit like some GW kits, they'd need to restructure the company. It is designed as a specialty store, to sell limited amounts of models to hobbyists. They don''t benefit from the economies of scale of other GW production, and they don't get the budget for design, modeling, and production that GW central does. It isn't two guys in a basement, but it's not the Design Studio and the GW production line, either.

I think that their prices could be a little lower, but overall, they are about in line with what business they anticipate doing.

On the other hand, you have GW proper, who has in-house plastic mold tooling, and charges completely random prices for various kits with the exact same number of sprues and size. $20 to $28 US for a single monopose character in plastic? Ridiculous. $50 for some 10 man units? Insane.

When the part of the company that is doing 90% of the business overcharges by about 30%, complaining about the 10% of the business that overcharges maybe 20% seems misguided.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Ferraris are a Veblen good.

The OP suggests that keener pricing may result in greater sales, which isn't an idea without merit.

Can you please try and contribute rather than just hurl insults?

Maybe or is it just more thinly veiled whining about pricing? The reality is that business does not increase enough to cover deep discounts and lets be honest here that is what hobbyists are looking for. It's just does not make good business sense. Look at how many discount retailers go out of business. It is not a sustainable business model unless huge volumes are being turned over.

BTW, I owned game stores for over 10 years. So, I do a know a thing or two about this business.

I didn't hurl insults, I made an observation. The constant complaining about GW's pricing is the deadest horse on the ranch. So, please stop being so oversensitive.

 primalexile wrote:
Just recently I found a different "source" I now have 3 armies comprised of all FW and it cost less than one of their armies. I would rather my money go to FW but they are insane to charge what they do.

And of course, what price whine thread would be complete without people proudly declaring how they're entitled to buy illegal recasts if GW doesn't give them what they want.

As resin miniatures go - they aren't horribly priced. Some are even fair.

The nature of their work has suffered though - what with their new focus as Marines'R'Us. I used to like to see what the new releases were - but that has largely gone the way of the dodo, each release is a lot like the last release.

It would be interesting to see them raise their prices a touch. That would probably kill off GWs business in the RotW outside of Europe and North America. I know a lot of people in Australia and New Zealand in particular who are only still buying GW products in the form of Forge World...

Da Butcha wrote:
I think that complaining about FW and buying GW is gagging on a gnat and swallowing a horse.

FW is a little bit expensive, but it is also a specialty product. FW doesn't sell, doesn't expect to sell, and isn't set up to sell a huge amount of product. If FW started selling a single kit like some GW kits, they'd need to restructure the company. It is designed as a specialty store, to sell limited amounts of models to hobbyists. They don''t benefit from the economies of scale of other GW production, and they don't get the budget for design, modeling, and production that GW central does. It isn't two guys in a basement, but it's not the Design Studio and the GW production line, either.

I think that their prices could be a little lower, but overall, they are about in line with what business they anticipate doing.

On the other hand, you have GW proper, who has in-house plastic mold tooling, and charges completely random prices for various kits with the exact same number of sprues and size. $20 to $28 US for a single monopose character in plastic? Ridiculous. $50 for some 10 man units? Insane.

When the part of the company that is doing 90% of the business overcharges by about 30%, complaining about the 10% of the business that overcharges maybe 20% seems misguided.

This is my main problem, too. Forge World models are expensive, yes, but they're gorgeous, well sculpted, and made of better quality material. If I really wanted something from Forge World, I'd have no problem with the prices. They're honestly quite fair, when you take into account the work that goes into the master sculpts, the size, the quality, etc.

My problem is when I want a handful of Skyclaws, and it's $40 for ten of them, in plastic. Or when a pack of 3 TWC that contains less plastic and took less work to produce costs $15 more, because on top of their already inflated prices, they then price things based on how they perform on the field, screwing the young player who can't afford more than some boyz, grots, and a couple meks on the pay from their first, crappy, minimum wage job, but giving guaranteed wins to the guy who can drop $450 on a 3 Knight without blinking.

 crazyredpraetorian wrote:
Ferraris are expensive! They should be more affordable, too.

Can you guys get any more entitled? It's a hobby. Hobbies cost money.

And the award for adding absolutely nothing to the conversation goes to...

 Peregrine wrote:

 primalexile wrote:
Just recently I found a different "source" I now have 3 armies comprised of all FW and it cost less than one of their armies. I would rather my money go to FW but they are insane to charge what they do.

And of course, what price whine thread would be complete without people proudly declaring how they're entitled to buy illegal recasts if GW doesn't give them what they want.

Probably not a discussion for this thread, but that's usually what people tends to do: when someone does not give you what you want, you look for it elsewhere.

 Korinov wrote:
Probably not a discussion for this thread, but that's usually what people tends to do: when someone does not give you what you want, you look for it elsewhere.

No, that's what entitled people do. A more reasonable person would say "GW's prices are too high, I'll spend my money on something else" instead of buying illegal recasts because they feel entitled to have GW's products.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
And the award for adding absolutely nothing to the conversation goes to...

You, for posting a spammy reply to a perfectly legitimate post. Pointing out that most GW price complaints are the equivalent of demanding a cheaper Ferrari is a constructive thing to say. The fact that you disagree with an opinion doesn't mean that it isn't adding anything to the discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
they then price things based on how they perform on the field

No they don't. GW's product line is full of expensive kits with terrible rules, and cheaper kits with awesome rules. And knights are in that second category: the model is expensive, but since it costs so many points it's actually very cost-effective compared to an equal point total built from multiple cheaper kits.

Peregrine mate, your coming across as a proper elitist snob, I don't think that's your intent but that is how your coming across.

Its not entitlement to want something to cost less so they can enjoy it, it is simply wanting to pay what they believe to be a fair price, which is entirely subjective, calling them entitled for making an entirely fair and subjective point makes you seem alto worse than I think you intended.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Korinov wrote:
Probably not a discussion for this thread, but that's usually what people tends to do: when someone does not give you what you want, you look for it elsewhere.

No, that's what entitled people do. A more reasonable person would say "GW's prices are too high, I'll spend my money on something else" instead of buying illegal recasts because they feel entitled to have GW's products.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
And the award for adding absolutely nothing to the conversation goes to...

You, for posting a spammy reply to a perfectly legitimate post. Pointing out that most GW price complaints are the equivalent of demanding a cheaper Ferrari is a constructive thing to say. The fact that you disagree with an opinion doesn't mean that it isn't adding anything to the discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
they then price things based on how they perform on the field

No they don't. GW's product line is full of expensive kits with terrible rules, and cheaper kits with awesome rules. And knights are in that second category: the model is expensive, but since it costs so many points it's actually very cost-effective compared to an equal point total built from multiple cheaper kits.

Yeah, until you take into account that Knights basically cost more in terms of actual money in exchange for the fact that they cost 1/2-2/3 of what they should cost, pointswise, for how they perform.

And c'mon Man, you know Damn well That gw prices models based on how they perform on the table, they have always done this in the 25 years I've been playing, I find it hard to believe you haven't noticed

 Formosa wrote:
PIts not entitlement to want something to cost less so they can enjoy it, it is simply wanting to pay what they believe to be a fair price, which is entirely subjective, calling them entitled for making an entirely fair and subjective point makes you seem alto worse than I think you intended.

Wanting something to cost less isn't entitlement. What is entitlement is buying illegal recasts when GW doesn't meet your demands because you feel like you have a right to own GW's products no matter how many laws you have to break to get them.

Why are you saying there illegal? Making them is illegal, but buying them isn't in the UK as far as I'm aware, is it in the US?

 Formosa wrote:
And c'mon Man, you know Damn well That gw prices models based on how they perform on the table, they have always done this in the 25 years I've been playing, I find it hard to believe you haven't noticed

No, GW very clearly does not price their models based on their tabletop performance. Example:

Stormtalon gunship, a decent flyer rules-wise that a lot of marine players like: $45 (http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Space-Marine-Stormtalon-Gunship)

Nephilim fighter, one of the worst units in the game and a model kit that nobody who cares about winning would ever buy (unless it's for a conversion project): $75 (http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Dark-Angels-Nephilim-Jetfigher)

What GW does do is a degree of pricing units relative to their point cost rather than their material costs (tactical squads are more expensive than guardsmen, etc) so that the total cost of buying X points worth of models is relatively constant, but that doesn't have anything to do with how powerful the unit is. The real explanation for expensive overpowered models is that GW sucks at writing rules, and the "pay to win" stuff is the most memorable form of their balance failures.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
Yeah, until you take into account that Knights basically cost more in terms of actual money in exchange for the fact that they cost 1/2-2/3 of what they should cost, pointswise, for how they perform.

No, they don't cost more, and that's the whole point of what I was saying. Add up the price of the model kits required to build "conventional" units with a total point cost equal to a single knight and you'll find there isn't much of a price difference. In fact, depending on what army you play, buying X points worth of knights might actually be cheaper than buying X points worth of "conventional" units. The whole "knights cost too much" thing is nothing more than a myth started by people who stopped thinking about it once they saw the $140 price tag.

you have made the big mistake. Gw prices the models based on how they do on the table, elites cost more because there better, fast attack too, but since gw doesn't have a clue about there own game these days, they still price them this way, and sure you can throw a couple of examples of where it failed, but near enough the entire line is priced in this way, it's worse in fantasy

 Peregrine wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
And c'mon Man, you know Damn well That gw prices models based on how they perform on the table, they have always done this in the 25 years I've been playing, I find it hard to believe you haven't noticed

No, GW very clearly does not price their models based on their tabletop performance. Example:

Stormtalon gunship, a decent flyer rules-wise that a lot of marine players like: $45 (http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Space-Marine-Stormtalon-Gunship)

Nephilim fighter, one of the worst units in the game and a model kit that nobody who cares about winning would ever buy (unless it's for a conversion project): $75 (http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Dark-Angels-Nephilim-Jetfigher)

What GW does do is a degree of pricing units relative to their point cost rather than their material costs (tactical squads are more expensive than guardsmen, etc), but that doesn't have anything to do with how powerful the unit is. The real explanation for expensive overpowered models is that GW sucks at writing rules, and the "pay to win" stuff is the most memorable form of their balance failures.

If I buy a wolf pack, with ten marines in it, I can run it as a maximum of 560pts, just with the bitz provided in the box, by running it with the most expensive weaponry in the box. All together, there's about 800 points worth of possible combinations in the box. If I buy a box of TWC for $15 more, I can run them at a maximum of 285 points, with maybe 400 points worth of total gear in that one box. That's not pricing based on the points, that's pricing based on the fact that hands down, TWC perform better on the table. That's not to say that there are never exceptions. Land Speeders, for example, are on of the most reasonably priced models I've seen compared to their utility, size, number of components, etc. But by and large, GW prices are largely based on tabletop performance.

AnFéasógMór wrote:
Yeah, until you take into account that Knights basically cost more in terms of actual money in exchange for the fact that they cost 1/2-2/3 of what they should cost, pointswise, for how they perform.

No, they don't cost more, and that's the whole point of what I was saying. Add up the price of the model kits required to build "conventional" units with a total point cost equal to a single knight and you'll find there isn't much of a price difference. In fact, depending on what army you play, buying X points worth of knights might actually be cheaper than buying X points worth of "conventional" units. The whole "knights cost too much" thing is nothing more than a myth started by people who stopped thinking about it once they saw the $140 price tag.

 Formosa wrote:
elites cost more because there better, fast attack too

This is just laughably wrong, for two reasons:

1) Elites and FA aren't better. Each unit is generally more powerful, but they also tend to cost more points to make up for it. Remember, overpowered units are defined by their price to performance ratio, not merely by how big their numbers are.

2) GW's prices don't work this way. A 5-man terminator squad costs $50 compared to $40 for a 10-man tactical squad, but the 5-man terminator squad also costs a minimum of 200 points compared to ~150ish for the tactical squad. So if you want to add 1000 points to your army as cheaply as possible you're better off buying the terminators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
If I buy a wolf pack, with ten marines in it, I can run it as a maximum of 560pts

Why are we talking about stupid units? Nobody is ever going to use a 560 point squad of 10 marines unless they hate winning. When you instead look at more realistic units that you'll see that price and power are weakly connected at most, while price and point cost tend to have a much stronger connection.

But by and large, GW prices are largely based on tabletop performance.

Except they really aren't. Bad units often have expensive kits, and cheaper kits can be some of the most overpowered models. The idea that the most overpowered stuff is the most expensive is nothing more than confirmation bias.

Sigh, I see your one of those people that need everything spelled out for them and is unwilling to even consider that other opinions may have merit, ok I will do my best.

Here's what we know, terminators are bad in the current meta, this is due to the mass amount of ap2 around, we know this because we play(test) the game, thus we see terminators as subpar and not very good for the points. The plastic box has less in it that the tactical box but still costs more, why is this?

now in the world of gw, terminators are an excellent choice for everyone, they are an elite choice and thus you will need less of them, they are great on the tabletop due to stormbolters and a 2+ save, but a low model count, so let's charge a bit more as they are better and as an elite, you will likely only want a couple of boxes.

Back to reality, we know how the game works, so we wonder "why am I paying more for less plastic? " your answer is that gw seems to pick a magical number out of a hat and apply it to units arbitrarily, my answer uses prior knowledge and experience of gw business practices.

have I explained this better than last time?

AnFéasógMór wrote:
which disadvantages people who chose to spread out their spending

Sorry, but if people don't have enough self control to save up their money for a single big purchase instead of rushing to spend their money as fast as they earn it then they get no sympathy from me.

or even people who preferred to build an army conceptually, rather than just to win tournaments.

What does that have to do with prices? I'm not disputing the fact that GW's game balance sucks and hurts people whose theme is on the weak end of their balance mistakes, but those balance mistakes happen the same way regardless of the price of the models involved.

 Peregrine wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
If I buy a wolf pack, with ten marines in it, I can run it as a maximum of 560pts

Why are we talking about stupid units? Nobody is ever going to use a 560 point squad of 10 marines unless they hate winning. When you instead look at more realistic units that you'll see that price and power are weakly connected at most, while price and point cost tend to have a much stronger connection.
.

Except that the overall point value of the box is relevant. Of course nobody's going to run a 560 point squad of 10 marines. It's the fact that the points are there that matters. When I built my second squad of wolf pack marines, the only things I touched off of the sprue were the legs and torsoes. There were so many good weapons available on the first sprue, I didn't need the ones from the second one. My TWC? All armed with the weaponry from my wolf packs, because the TWC box doesn't come with most of the really good weaponry I need. My Las-Plas on my razorbacks? Converted with plasma guns from wolf packs, because they don't come with the kit needed to make the twin-linked plasma gun. Many of the cheapest, basic marine boxes contain more overall utility and gear than a lot of your elite units. But they're priced lower just because GW says "oh, well, they're just basic marines, so they should cost less than this elite box".

 Formosa wrote:
The plastic box has less in it that the tactical box but still costs more, why is this?

Because GW's pricing policy includes a rule that one point should cost $X. The terminators cost more for less plastic because they're more points than a tactical squad, which makes buying 1000 points of terminators cost the same as buying 1000 points of tactical squads. This eliminates the option to save money by buying a low model count army and ensures that GW gets the same amount of money from you no matter what army you choose to play.

now in the world of gw, terminators are an excellent choice for everyone, they are an elite choice and thus you will need less of them, they are great on the tabletop due to stormbolters and a 2+ save, but a low model count, so let's charge a bit more as they are better and as an elite, you will likely only want a couple of boxes.

Do you have any evidence for this train of thought from GW, or are you just assuming it works that way because it fits with your ideas about how GW must work?

your answer is that gw seems to pick a magical number out of a hat and apply it to units arbitrarily

No, that's not it. Did you read what I said at all? The whole point is that it isn't arbitrary, it's a calculated attempt to keep "cheap" armies out of the game. You can't save money by buying an all-terminator army like you could if prices were only determined by the amount of plastic in the box. Nor can you save money by playing with lots of troops instead of expensive elites. If you want a 1500 point Ultramarines army you're going to have to pay at least GW's target price for 1500 points.

have I explained this better than last time?

You're making the mistake of assuming that the fact that I disagree with you means that I didn't understand your explanation.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Korinov wrote:
Probably not a discussion for this thread, but that's usually what people tends to do: when someone does not give you what you want, you look for it elsewhere.

No, that's what entitled people do. A more reasonable person would say "GW's prices are too high, I'll spend my money on something else" instead of buying illegal recasts because they feel entitled to have GW's products.

Well, you may like it or not, but people are actually entitled to do what they please with their own money. And technically recasts are not only "something else", but something that many times has superior quality if compared with the original, official, ridiculously expensive product.

AnFéasógMór wrote:
Of course nobody's going to run a 560 point squad of 10 marines. It's the fact that the points are there that matters.

If I'm never going to use that squad then why does it matter?

When I built my second squad of wolf pack marines, the only things I touched off of the sprue were the legs and torsoes. There were so many good weapons available on the first sprue, I didn't need the ones from the second one.

Now you're talking about extra bits on the sprue, not game balance. The infantry box isn't a good deal because of power level, it's a good deal because it has lots of spare conversion parts.

But they're priced lower just because GW says "oh, well, they're just basic marines, so they should cost less than this elite box".

But what does this have to do with game balance? Some of GW's worst balance mistakes are overpowered "basic troops". For example, if you build a troops-heavy IG army instead of using the expensive elite kits you'll get a cheaper army AND a more powerful army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Korinov wrote:
Well, you may like it or not, but people are actually entitled to do what they please with their own money.

And I'm entitled to judge them for buying illegal recasts instead of doing the right thing and accepting that they aren't going to own GW's products.

And technically recasts are not only "something else", but something that many times has superior quality if compared with the original, official, ridiculously expensive product.

That's nice. They're still illegal.

 Peregrine wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
which disadvantages people who chose to spread out their spending

Sorry, but if people don't have enough self control to save up their money for a single big purchase instead of rushing to spend their money as fast as they earn it then they get no sympathy from me.

or even people who preferred to build an army conceptually, rather than just to win tournaments.

What does that have to do with prices? I'm not disputing the fact that GW's game balance sucks and hurts people whose theme is on the weak end of their balance mistakes, but those balance mistakes happen the same way regardless of the price of the models involved.

Choosing to spread out your spending rather than buy a single big model has nothing to do with lack of self-control. I've dropped $150 bucks on a single 40k shopping trip. Hell, last contract I was working, I could have bought a Knight out of hand if I chose to. I chose to spend that money on multiple boxes, though. Partially, because I have never like Knights, and have no interest in playing one, but mostly because for me, I enjoy painting, I enjoy running a diverse squad, and I enjoy doing conversion work, and buying multiple boxes is better suited to that aspect of the hobby. That's my problem with it, is that GW is punishing players for not buying the one expensive model they want players to buy, just because it gets the money in their pockets faster.

after a quick Google search I can't see why it's ilegal to buy recasts, as I asked before, is this an American thing?

 Formosa wrote:
after a quick Google search I can't see why it's ilegal to buy recasts, as I asked before, is this an American thing?

It's illegal to create the recasts, so whether or not buying them is illegal it's still supporting illegal activity. It's only difficult to understand this concept if you're the kind of person whose moral system consists of little more than "what is best for me".

 Peregrine wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
Of course nobody's going to run a 560 point squad of 10 marines. It's the fact that the points are there that matters.

If I'm never going to use that squad then why does it matter?

Um, for exactly the reasons I proceeded to explain literally a second later, in the exact same post?

 Peregrine wrote:
And I'm entitled to judge them for buying illegal recasts instead of doing the right thing and accepting that they aren't going to own GW's products.

Everybody's entitled to his/her own opinion. What the "right thing" is also tends to depend on each one's opinion, don't forget that. I'm also entitled to judge people who buys ridiculously overpriced products from companies with a history of dubiously moral practices.

And by the way, I don't see how "buying recasts" and "accepting they aren't going to own GW's products" are contradictory. Recasts are not GW's products.

That's nice. They're still illegal.

As pirated games and music, I guess.

AnFéasógMór wrote:
Choosing to spread out your spending rather than buy a single big model has nothing to do with lack of self-control.

Yes it does. If you can't buy a $150 kit because every week you obsessively spend your entire hobby budget on the latest new release then that's nothing more than a lack of self control.

Partially, because I have never like Knights, and have no interest in playing one, but mostly because for me, I enjoy painting, I enjoy running a diverse squad, and I enjoy doing conversion work, and buying multiple boxes is better suited to that aspect of the hobby.

But what does that have to do with prices? Your preference to build lots of smaller models instead of one big one doesn't mean that the big one is overpriced.

That's my problem with it, is that GW is punishing players for not buying the one expensive model they want players to buy, just because it gets the money in their pockets faster.

Except that GW doesn't consistently do this. Their product line is full of expensive kits that are weaker than the cheaper alternatives (see the DA flyer vs C:SM flyer example). The knight happens to be a bit too powerful, but it could easily have been the equivalent of the IG Baneblade kit: a weak model that hardly any competitive players would ever use. And then you'd be punished for buying the single expensive model instead of several smaller ones that are better at winning games.

Ok so it's not ilegal, please stop calling people criminals then, and supporting ilegal activities is a massive grey area, you know that thing the whole world is, shades of grey, if your saying that by buying an item that supports ilegal activities makes us guilty of supporting crime, take all your sweatshop clothes back, stop eating McDonald's, stop shopping at walmart, hell just stop everything and go to prison on that white steed and live in that myopic black and white world of yours.

I hate to be insulting, but calling people guilty by association is plain wrong.

 Peregrine wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
Choosing to spread out your spending rather than buy a single big model has nothing to do with lack of self-control.

Yes it does. If you can't buy a $150 kit because every week you obsessively spend your entire hobby budget on the latest new release then that's nothing more than a lack of self control.

You're not very good with reading comprehension, are you? You seem to have this tendency to pick the first sentence of people's posts, use it as a strawman to insult them, and ignore the rest of it. I explained exactly why it's not an issue of self control. The fact that other people like to do their hobbying in a different manner than you do isn't a negative reflection on their character. The fact that you feel a compulsive need to insult them for having a different approach to the hobby, that reflects very poorly on you.

Somebody who goes and buys 2 steaks at the store rather than one steak at Outback isn't lacking the self-control to save up to buy an outback steak, they're making a choice that they'd rather have two steaks from the grocery store.

Partially, because I have never like Knights, and have no interest in playing one, but mostly because for me, I enjoy painting, I enjoy running a diverse squad, and I enjoy doing conversion work, and buying multiple boxes is better suited to that aspect of the hobby.

But what does that have to do with prices? Your preference to build lots of smaller models instead of one big one doesn't mean that the big one is overpriced.

Because my point was that you're being punished in terms of game play for buying all the smaller models, at the same monetary cost, instead of the one big, expensive model you don't want or need.