Why I left GW and what I went to instead

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.

**Yonan**

I'm reminded of a scene from Human Traffic. "If you wanna work in this firm then wake up and get real!" except the boss is GW and the staffer is the playerbase. "If you wanna play in this setting then mortgage your house and pay us!"

**Toofast**

Some of you forget that value is a relative term, not an absolute one. Each person has their own idea of value. For the amount of time I spend playing and painting my models, along with the cost of my other hobbies, 40k is still a good value to me. I could go out and spend $300 at the club on a table and a bottle of patron for one night of fun. I could go to the shooting range and spend $100 on ammo and range time for 1-2 hours of fun. I could take my S2000 to the track and spend $1,500 on tires, brakes and track time for 1-2 afternoons of fun. Or I could spend $500 - 1k on an army and rule books that will give me hours of enjoyment modeling and painting and years of enjoyment playing the game.

**jonolikespie**

Yes, value is subjective, but there are some things that aren't.

Halving the contents of a box and not lowering the price, or releasing a codex that is lacking a significant number of options the last one had and those options then being offered as additional extras you now have to pay for, are both objectively lowering the value of something.

**Jehan-reznor**

Toofast wrote:
Some of you forget that value is a relative term, not an absolute one. Each person has their own idea of value. For the amount of time I spend playing and painting my models, along with the cost of my other hobbies, 40k is still a good value to me. I could go out and spend $300 at the club on a table and a bottle of patron for one night of fun. I could go to the shooting range and spend $100 on ammo and range time for 1-2 hours of fun. I could take my S2000 to the track and spend $1,500 on tires, brakes and track time for 1-2 afternoons of fun. Or I could spend $500 - 1k on an army and rule books that will give me hours of enjoyment modeling and painting and years of enjoyment playing the game.

Yes, for you, but for a lot of people the discrepancy has become too large, that is why a lot people switch to other game systems with a lower entry point. Or stop completely and rather spend that money on the range, fishing gear, car, bar or those bars in America with the ladies strangling a pole

**Herzlos**

Toofast wrote:
Some of you forget that value is a relative term, not an absolute one. Each person has their own idea of value. For the amount of time I spend playing and painting my models, along with the cost of my other hobbies, 40k is still a good value to me. I could go out and spend $300 at the club on a table and a bottle of patron for one night of fun. I could go to the shooting range and spend $100 on ammo and range time for 1-2 hours of fun. I could take my S2000 to the track and spend $1,500 on tires, brakes and track time for 1-2 afternoons of fun. Or I could spend $500 - 1k on an army and rule books that will give me hours of enjoyment modeling and painting and years of enjoyment playing the game.

Yup it is relative, but it's not as if there's no comparible competition for GW.

If you compare GW's toy soldiers to track days, it looks very cheap, but if you compare GW's toy soldiers to the toy soldiers produced by any other company, often with the same sculptors and materials (HIPS/Metal - not Finecast), then GW almost always looks very expensive.

I Spend more or travel or cars than I do on wargaming, but I've seen that in the wargaming space GW is by far the most expensive across the board. I've used the price of GW tanks to start new games (This starter set is less than a Leman Russ - It's hardly a big gamble).

**-Loki-**

Toofast wrote:
Some of you forget that value is a relative term, not an absolute one. Each person has their own idea of value. For the amount of time I spend playing and painting my models, along with the cost of my other hobbies, 40k is still a good value to me. I could go out and spend $300 at the club on a table and a bottle of patron for one night of fun. I could go to the shooting range and spend $100 on ammo and range time for 1-2 hours of fun. I could take my S2000 to the track and spend $1,500 on tires, brakes and track time for 1-2 afternoons of fun. Or I could spend $500 - 1k on an army and rule books that will give me hours of enjoyment modeling and painting and years of enjoyment playing the game.

It's absolutely a relative term. But I look at it like this.

When I got into Infinity, it cost me $80au for a 300pt list. Competitively playable and, given their track record of balance, unlikely to ever be unplayable.

When I got into Malifaux, it cost me $75au for a 40ss list. While the 'standard' is 50, one more single purchase will get me there.

When Tyranids got their 6th edition update, I balked at the cost. $100au for an Exocrine that would make up 1/15th of an army? $115 for a Harpy which would take up less?

Now, I have bought a lot more for Infinity, and have a Gencon order on the way for Malifaux. These companies are giving me significantly better value, in my opinion. For less than I was going to pay for a new big Tyranid, I got a whole list for each game. For the cost of the Harpy, I could even throw in the Malifaux rulebook. Infinitys rules are completely free, but I bought them in support of a company that's actually paying attention to its fanbase.

3 years ago my Tyranid army that I have now cost me roughly $1000au. From research into other games, I could have comfortably bought what I did to start both Malifaux and Infinity, and comfortably bought average sized armies for another 3-4 games.

I can't see what metric of 'value' you can look at GW's products with these days (when actually comparing it to other wargames - apples to apples and all that) and think 'yep, that's the best bang for my buck'. Especially if it's someone newly coming into the hobby.

**Kilkrazy**

Value has an aesthetic personal i.e. subjective dimension and an objective dimension.

To some degree a toy solder figure is just a toy soldier figure. A game itself won't play any better by using a figure from company X instead of an alternative from company Y.

GW figures are objectively more expensive than most other equivalents, so your choice to buy the GW version is based on personal preference.

**Big Blind Bill**

I've played 40k since 3rd edition, having a break in between 4th and 6th. During that time the prices of some kits have more than doubled - but the miniatures remain the same, and the quality of the books has decreased. (Compare a 3rd edition codex, which cost £12, to a 7th SW book, which costs £30, and both the monetary cost and the quality differences will strike you.

I still play warhammer 40k, as I know the rules, like the fluff and already have the models. I however no longer buy legitimate GW products, and refuse to purchase the overpriced and poorly written codices.
If I pay £30+ for a book, then I shouldn't have to check to see if there is a day 1 errata to correct it.

**Wayniac**

Big Blind Bill wrote:
I've played 40k since 3rd edition, having a break in between 4th and 6th. During that time the prices of some kits have more than doubled - but the miniatures remain the same, and the quality of the books has decreased. (Compare a 3rd edition codex, which cost £12, to a 7th SW book, which costs £30, and both the monetary cost and the quality differences will strike you.

I still play warhammer 40k, as I know the rules, like the fluff and already have the models. I however no longer buy legitimate GW products, and refuse to purchase the overpriced and poorly written codices.
If I pay £30+ for a book, then I shouldn't have to check to see if there is a day 1 errata to correct it.

Or, worse, day 1 dataslates you need to buy to bring back an option you used to have which was removed...

**Chute82**

When you start comparing other hobbies to 40k , I could go to walmart pick up a $20 fishing pole and a dozen worms. Don't need a Gloomis GLX (($400) fishing rod to go fishing.

**jonolikespie**

Chute82 wrote:
When you start comparing other hobbies to 40k , I could go to walmart pick up a $20 fishing pole and a dozen worms. Don't need a Gloomis GLX (($400) fishing rod to go fishing.

But in that scenario would the Gloomis GLX be significantly better than the Walmart one?

GW doesn't have that. The vast majority of their range is laughable when compared to models of equal price from other companies.

At the moment I am looking at both of these (spoilered for sice):

Spoiler:

I can't find a terribly good pic for a size comparison but I found this:

Spoiler:

The first is the same price as this:

Spoiler:

And the second this:

Spoiler:

They are bigger, a good quality resin, and much more detailed. I just don't see any way GW can compete there. They are popular because they are popular, that's it. Once they fall below that critical mass, which seems to have happened here in Oz already, they will simply crumble.

There is just no reason for me to go back to them in any meaningful way while I am throwing more and more money at other companies.

**Chute82**

Oh I agree with you, the price is not worth what you get in return. I

**Smacks**

Toofast wrote:
Some of you forget that value is a relative term, not an absolute one. Each person has their own idea of value. For the amount of time I spend playing and painting my models, along with the cost of my other hobbies, 40k is still a good value to me. I could go out and spend $300 at the club on a table and a bottle of patron for one night of fun. I could go to the shooting range and spend $100 on ammo and range time for 1-2 hours of fun. I could take my S2000 to the track and spend $1,500 on tires, brakes and track time for 1-2 afternoons of fun. Or I could spend $500 - 1k on an army and rule books that will give me hours of enjoyment modeling and painting and years of enjoyment playing the game.

This argument comes up a lot, but it is entirely false. The ability to sit down and be creative for hours, or have fun with your friends, is something that belongs to you already. It is not sold at GW. Give me a pen and paper (often can be found for free), and I can also spend hours being creative, drawing, making paper planes, or playing anything from tic-tac-toe to some fantastic homebrew RPG with my friends. The possibilities are endless, indeed priceless, but that belongs to me, not GW.

The other issue is that some activities are inherently expensive. Take for example: space exploration. Space exploration is inherently expensive. The fuel is expensive, the equipment is expensive, the people and expertise required to support a space flight are expensive. Even though contracts are fulfilled by the lowest bidder, and they cut costs whenever they can to get the best value possible, it is still just an inherently expensive activity.

War gaming is not inherently expensive. Miniatures cost pennies to produce, dice are cheap etc... Take a look at historical wargaming companies like Victrix to see how cheap good quality 28mm miniatures can be (and these aren't even the cheapest). The reason 40k is expensive is because GW make it expensive. It is not inherently expensive, and historical war gamers get just as much enjoyment and hours out of their hobby as you do. Claiming you are are still getting 'good value' because it is cheaper than a weekend at the track (or space exploration) is just deluding yourself.

**-Loki-**

Chute82 wrote:
When you start comparing other hobbies to 40k , I could go to walmart pick up a $20 fishing pole and a dozen worms. Don't need a Gloomis GLX (($400) fishing rod to go fishing.

The problem is this is not a good comparison. Where you compared a cheap rod to an expensive rod? Good comparison, apples to apples. Wargaming to a fishing rod/car/day at the track/time with a lady of the night/etc? Bad comparison. Comparing the value of Games Workshop games to other wargames? Good comparison.

**Wayniac**

-Loki- wrote:
Chute82 wrote:
When you start comparing other hobbies to 40k , I could go to walmart pick up a $20 fishing pole and a dozen worms. Don't need a Gloomis GLX (($400) fishing rod to go fishing.

The problem is this is not a good comparison. Where you compared a cheap rod to an expensive rod? Good comparison, apples to apples. Wargaming to a fishing rod/car/day at the track/time with a lady of the night/etc? Bad comparison. Comparing the value of Games Workshop games to other wargames? Good comparison.

Yes but that would make GW look bad, which is why that comparison is rarely used

**MWHistorian**

Sure, value is relative. GW is expensive and a poor value relative to other miniatures games such as Malifaux, Warmachine and Infinity.
You may enjoy it and that's fine. But that's also not the point. 40k is just one game out of many and its by far the most expensive and yet the most convoluted with day one DLC's, a company that can't be bothered to make FAQ's in a timely way or even acknowledge that there are problems to be fixed.

You might like 40k, but you can't honestly say its a good value in comparison to the other games out there.

**Breng77**

To some extent GW games vs other games in not a great comparison though. I certainly won't argue that GW games cost more to play they do. But that is a scale of game issue more than a cost of product issue.

People are using Malifaux as a comparison. Sure the game is way cheaper to play, but on a per model basis it is every bit as expensive.

The larger GW issue is that of cost of their rules, cost of updating your army etc. Now its value vs that of other games is relative to how much you enjoy each game. Right now 40k is a bad value for me because I am enjoying playing Malifaux more at the moment. So why spend more on something I'm not enjoying, but if I wanted to play an army scale game and didn't like the smaller scale 40k becomes a better value.

My larger issue is that I cannot honestly intro people to 40k anymore because the buy in from scratch is absurd.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I still play 40k, but it is becoming more of a secondary game for me after years of it being my primary hobby.

**Hulksmash**

-Loki- wrote:
The problem there is you're just looking for a game that replaces the game you're currently playing. I think that sort of misses the opportunity going on right now in the wargames industry. There's so many unique gaming experiences out there, a lot that are quite cheap to enter with their own fantastic miniature range to enjoy.

I think this thread title is a bit off putting. Enjoying the background for a game, or even the game itself, doesn't have to prevent you finding these unique experiences, as you don't have to leave it behind. If you really still enjoy Warhamer Fantasy, then keep playing it. If you still enjoy playing 40k, then keep playing it.

But also denying yourself some of these other games where you can buy a complete, playable force and the rules for less than a big GW kit really doesn't make sense to me. Instead of that 6th Trygon or Storm Raven that probably won't hit the table outside of large Apocalypse games, do yourself and your friends a favour by buying a pair of starter boxes and a rulebook for another game, or their 2 player starter if they have it. Dropzone Commander 2 player starter, Malifaux mini rulebook and a pair of starters, Operation Icestorm when it hits the shelves, Flames of War Open Fire, Firestorm Armada Battle for Valhalla, X-Wing, etc. The choice is really quite impressive.

The worst that can happen is you don't enjoy it and you resell it, and you buy that 6th Trygon or Storm Raven the next week. Otherwise, you just found another fun game to play, and you actually don't have to buy more unless you want to.

I think this is one of the better things I've read in this thread. I sill love 40k. I still play 40k. The value of 40k even for the cost still vastly outweighs any other game for me. It's still my main game. However I've got both X-wing Factions more than playable. I'll be grabbing Armada when it comes out. I went in heavy on the soon to be released Wrath of Kings. Now that plastic starters are coming out for DZC I'll be grabbing one of those. The only difference in my 40k spending is that I've consolidated into a single "Faction" (Dark Mechanicus/Iron Warriors) that I can convert up to play any army with lots of cross use. And I don't build for games larger than 2k anymore. Between those two it's freed up the funds for expanding my hobby into other games.

The thing is that I can normally grab enough stuff for around $100 for me and a friend to play. That's a fine purchase for every other month or so for a different game. And if I fall in love or a group of local guys does then I get to play. Otherwise I spend a little time building/painting and, if it really doesn't take off, selling something different

**MWHistorian**

Breng77 wrote:
To some extent GW games vs other games in not a great comparison though. I certainly won't argue that GW games cost more to play they do. But that is a scale of game issue more than a cost of product issue.

People are using Malifaux as a comparison. Sure the game is way cheaper to play, but on a per model basis it is every bit as expensive.

The larger GW issue is that of cost of their rules, cost of updating your army etc. Now its value vs that of other games is relative to how much you enjoy each game. Right now 40k is a bad value for me because I am enjoying playing Malifaux more at the moment. So why spend more on something I'm not enjoying, but if I wanted to play an army scale game and didn't like the smaller scale 40k becomes a better value.

My larger issue is that I cannot honestly intro people to 40k anymore because the buy in from scratch is absurd.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I still play 40k, but it is becoming more of a secondary game for me after years of it being my primary hobby.

That buy in from scratch is what's going to shape the next generation of gammers. My nephew was looking into getting a space marine army and I directed him to Warmachine on the cost alone. "You can start playing with a $50 purchase!" Sounds a lot better than "$50 won't even get you the rulebook!"

**Wayniac**

The biggest issue is that you get more value overall from other games, in part because units make up a larger part of your force.

I just spent $150 on some additions to my Warmachine army:

* Vlad (Warcaster)
* Spriggan kit (Warjack)
* Iron Fang Pikemen (unit of 10)
* Iron Fang Pikemen Officer & Standard (2 guys)
* Greylord Outriders (box of 6 cavalry)

Now granted the Pikemen are very expensive at $85 for the box of 10, so with the attachment it's about $100. The difference is that unit is 10 points, so in a typical 50 point list it's 1/5 of my entire army.

GW feels more expensive even if it really isn't just because you need multiples of virtually everything to get to a normal playable level. So I'd rather spend $50 or more on a Warmachine unit that is a third of my force, than $50 on a single squad for 40k when I need half a dozen more things.

**Selym**

Breng77 wrote:
To some extent GW games vs other games in not a great comparison though. I certainly won't argue that GW games cost more to play they do. But that is a scale of game issue more than a cost of product issue.

People are using Malifaux as a comparison. Sure the game is way cheaper to play, but on a per model basis it is every bit as expensive.

The larger GW issue is that of cost of their rules, cost of updating your army etc. Now its value vs that of other games is relative to how much you enjoy each game. Right now 40k is a bad value for me because I am enjoying playing Malifaux more at the moment. So why spend more on something I'm not enjoying, but if I wanted to play an army scale game and didn't like the smaller scale 40k becomes a better value.

My larger issue is that I cannot honestly intro people to 40k anymore because the buy in from scratch is absurd.

There is certainly a point made here.
Nothing is quite like 40k. If I want to model things for the 40k universe, it's not like there is an alternative line with gothic aesthetics that also fits in 28mm/30mm heroic.
If I want to play a battle on the scale of 40k, the only alternatives are fan-made, and I can't convince any other players to agree to use non-GW rules, as I get accused of trying to powergame, or something else a TFG would do.

If you're in for the 40k style, GW is the only thing currently that works.

But you can always get stuff from Ebay.

**Breng77**

WayneTheGame wrote:
The biggest issue is that you get more value overall from other games, in part because units make up a larger part of your force.

I just spent $150 on some additions to my Warmachine army:

* Vlad (Warcaster)
* Spriggan kit (Warjack)
* Iron Fang Pikemen (unit of 10)
* Iron Fang Pikemen Officer & Standard (2 guys)
* Greylord Outriders (box of 6 cavalry)

Now granted the Pikemen are very expensive at $85 for the box of 10, so with the attachment it's about $100. The difference is that unit is 10 points, so in a typical 50 point list it's 1/5 of my entire army.

GW feels more expensive even if it really isn't just because you need multiples of virtually everything to get to a normal playable level. So I'd rather spend $50 or more on a Warmachine unit that is a third of my force, than $50 on a single squad for 40k when I need half a dozen more things.

Which was kind of my whole point, per model things are not really more expensive (10 models for $85 is more than any GW infantry box right now, they split those into 5 model boxes). The problem is short of buying 10 Terminators (~$100, 2 kits, so similar in price, would be close to 1/4th of your force), most kits of 10 models run you 100-200 points on the table. So somewhere between 1/20th and 1/7th of a typical force. Most popular games you are spending about $5ish a model, but if you only need 20 or fewer models it is way cheaper.

Lets look at say a Paladin army. Draigo + 20 Paladins gets you a playable army, for ~$250. The problem is those builds are few and far between. Orks which need way more models are still fairly pricey for 10 models.

**Hulksmash**

Yeah, model wise GW actually are still cheaper than most of their competitors on a model for model basis. It's the games themselves where the prices differ. One example:

Kromlech Orc is around $6 each (maybe more)
GW Ork is $3 each

Or look at individual model/unit costs from Puppet Wars. Cost is generallly comparable, sometimes slight lower, but quality and options are far lower.

And let's not even get started on vehicles. GW has the plastic vehicle market locked right now. They just aren't out there.

Dreamforge is the only real example of equal quality being produced at equal or lower prices.

Purely my opinion and I'm not saying GW isn't expensive. It's the most expensive game out there based on overall cost. Just not individual model cost. Where it gets ridiculous is as previously mentioned, Rules. Which is silly. I know the rule prices alone have driven people who used to buy a copy and download another copy have shifted strictly to downloading them.

**Smacks**

Selym wrote:
If you're in for the 40k style, GW is the only thing currently that works.

I think most people here enjoy the style and background of 40k and find it unique. But the problem is GW. It's like being in an abusive relationship. They don't want to listen, they don't return our calls, and they just seem to want to take our money and give back as little as possible. Really, what's the point? Even if you can tolerate the prices now, what about next year when they raise prices again? Or bring out another new edition so they can re-sell C:SM again for the Nth time? The pattern is just going to keep repeating, and putting up with it just re-enforces the bad behaviour.

Even if you are a die hard fan, who would never abandon your one true love... You would still benefit from them being a better company, releasing better rules, and treating their customers with more respect. In fact you would probably benefit the most from that, so why put up with less?

**Kilkrazy**

Historicals are vastly cheaper per figure than GW.

Typical price for 28mm infantry is £1 to £1.50 for metal. Plastic figures, still a relatively limited range but growing surprisingly quickly, are 30p to 50p per infantry figure.

SF and Fantasy producers are able to price higher because GW creates a high comparison point.

**Hulksmash**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Historicals are vastly cheaper per figure than GW.

Typical price for 28mm infantry is £1 to £1.50 for metal. Plastic figures, still a relatively limited range but growing surprisingly quickly, are 30p to 50p per infantry figure.

SF and Fantasy producers are able to price higher because GW creates a high comparison point.

Which doesn't alter the point that for the same type of games out there (i.e. Fantasy & Sci-Fi) you're still looking at costs higher than GW on most similar products on a model for model basis. Historicals to me are meh. I have zero interest. I don't care what they charge for their product. But I do care what Infinity charges per model or what Warmachine/Hordes charges per model. Since they are from the same genre.

Note I'm referring to more rank and file GW models. Once you branch into their characters it gets silly. Though similarly silly in some cases to Warmahordes it's still ridiculous what they charge for individual character models.

**Illumini**

Smacks wrote:
Selym wrote:
If you're in for the 40k style, GW is the only thing currently that works.

I think most people here enjoy the style and background of 40k and find it unique. But the problem is GW. It's like being in an abusive relationship. They don't want to listen, they don't return our calls, and they just seem to want to take our money and give back as little as possible. Really, what's the point? Even if you can tolerate the prices now, what about next year when they raise prices again? Or bring out another new edition so they can re-sell C:SM again for the Nth time? The pattern is just going to keep repeating, and putting up with it just re-enforces the bad behaviour.

Even if you are a die hard fan, who would never abandon your one true love... You would still benefit from them being a better company, releasing better rules, and treating their customers with more respect. In fact you would probably benefit the most from that, so why put up with less?

Great analogy. It really feels like an abusive relationship. "They will change" "they can`t rise prices even more" "next edition will be better". And like an abusive relationship, it is so easy to see from the outside that it is just so wrong.

Leave, dont let Tom Kirby abuse you anymore, it wont get any better.

**Smacks**

Hulksmash wrote:
Historicals to me are meh. I have zero interest. I don't care what they charge for their product.

Are you sure I can't interest you in some badass Roman wolf-hat guys? 49p each?

Spoiler:

**Breng77**

Illumini wrote:
Smacks wrote:
Selym wrote:
If you're in for the 40k style, GW is the only thing currently that works.

I think most people here enjoy the style and background of 40k and find it unique. But the problem is GW. It's like being in an abusive relationship. They don't want to listen, they don't return our calls, and they just seem to want to take our money and give back as little as possible. Really, what's the point? Even if you can tolerate the prices now, what about next year when they raise prices again? Or bring out another new edition so they can re-sell C:SM again for the Nth time? The pattern is just going to keep repeating, and putting up with it just re-enforces the bad behaviour.

Even if you are a die hard fan, who would never abandon your one true love... You would still benefit from them being a better company, releasing better rules, and treating their customers with more respect. In fact you would probably benefit the most from that, so why put up with less?

Great analogy. It really feels like an abusive relationship. "They will change" "they can`t rise prices even more" "next edition will be better". And like an abusive relationship, it is so easy to see from the outside that it is just so wrong.

Leave, dont let Tom Kirby abuse you anymore, it wont get any better.

Actually they have changed, I never minded the prices back when I felt the rules were "decent" (not pushing the play with all your toys all the time), put out at a reasonable pace (prior to all the DLC), and more people around me played (at some point with GW you are paying for the community in addition to the game.). As those things have changed the game has become less enjoyable (cannot often find games, don't enjoy them as much when I do, feel that if I want to compete I am on an endless spending cycle). I still like the game well enough to not sell all my stuff, and will still play but other things now are more likely to gain traction with me than they would have before, I've been more willing to spend on other games (because communities are growing), and split my hobby time etc.

**Easy E**

So, I posted in this thread a while ago about what i spend my hobby time doing now. Mostly runnig a bakery.

However, when ran across this site it was really eye-opening for me.

http://freewargamesrules.wikia.com/wiki/Freewargamesrules_Wiki