Wow, those knights are incredible. I think they've been knocking it out of the park on the new models.
I'm not clear on the battle tome though. Is it like the Dreadhold one, which is mostly about the fortress, and this mostly about Archaon and those knights? Or is it a full undivided Chaos army book?
Love the knights. Feels like they'll be rather large knights (at £60 for 3, you'd hope so!). Plus, I'm not sure what all the whining about the Battletome is about. The rules for all the models are free to download. The tomes are just fluffy books with a few scenarios in.
Mymearan wrote: Yeah they are way too expensive even if they are as big as a Dracoth. Damn it GW
So, the full price for the chaos release so far is 256€ (archie+3 ugly bastards + battletome) I can guess the Sorcerer next week will be roughly 40€ (but it may be more expensive) which will round it all up at 300€... provided there are no further releases.
Now - and this is actually a serious question to the Chaos players out there - how much Chaos FB could you buy with 300€ back when 8th came out? I am just looking for a quick comparison here.
Mymearan wrote: Yeah they are way too expensive even if they are as big as a Dracoth. Damn it GW
So, the full price for the chaos release so far is 256€ (archie+3 ugly bastards + battletome) I can guess the Sorcerer next week will be roughly 40€ (but it may be more expensive) which will round it all up at 300€... provided there are no further releases.
Now - and this is actually a serious question to the Chaos players out there - how much Chaos FB could you buy with 300€ back when 8th came out? I am just looking for a quick comparison here.
16 block soldiers aka warrios of chaos. Archon on a minecraft horse and a sorc.
They look about the same size (a bit taller mounts and bulker riders but the bloodcrusher mounts look broader) but maybe they're bigger than the pics make them out to be like Archaon.
Now - and this is actually a serious question to the Chaos players out there - how much Chaos FB could you buy with 300€ back when 8th came out? I am just looking for a quick comparison here.
At the beginning of 8th you got the Force Boxes for 80€ with 16 Marauders, 12 Warriors, 10 Hounds and 5 Knights
Mymearan wrote: Yeah they are way too expensive even if they are as big as a Dracoth. Damn it GW
So, the full price for the chaos release so far is 256€ (archie+3 ugly bastards + battletome) I can guess the Sorcerer next week will be roughly 40€ (but it may be more expensive) which will round it all up at 300€... provided there are no further releases.
Now - and this is actually a serious question to the Chaos players out there - how much Chaos FB could you buy with 300€ back when 8th came out? I am just looking for a quick comparison here.
I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
Grimskul wrote: I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
But won't they look pretty on the shelf? I mean, that's what 80% of the customers do, right?
Grimskul wrote: I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
You need less.
Those three Knights are going to be a viable unit. In 8th, you would have likely been looking at getting two or three boxes to make a decent unit. Much the same applies with everything else (speaking as a Dark Elf player who had a unit of Witch Elves...).
Grimskul wrote: I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
You need less.
Those three Knights are going to be a viable unit. In 8th, you would have likely been looking at getting two or three boxes to make a decent unit. Much the same applies with everything else (speaking as a Dark Elf player who had a unit of Witch Elves...).
Two or three boxes was often less than this one box of new knights. Only a handful of similarly high-priced units compare, really.
They do look nice imo, a little busy but I like the 'used-to-be-a-horse' look of the steeds.
Grimskul wrote: I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
You need less.
Those three Knights are going to be a viable unit. In 8th, you would have likely been looking at getting two or three boxes to make a decent unit. Much the same applies with everything else (speaking as a Dark Elf player who had a unit of Witch Elves...).
3 bloodcrushers worked in 8th. 6 worked a lot better, and we the most you'd ever need. 9 would be way too many.
How much do these three cost? That's right, the same as 6 bloodcrushers.
Now how many do you actually need in AoS? There is no minimum, but then there wasn't in 8th either. WD seems to imply 6 is a good number though...
The new chaos knights look cool, but not sure if they are $120 cool... the current chaos knights are $40, if these guys are replacing that kit I'm going to be super disappointing.
Also kinda like the current ones more for kit bashing. Will be a shame to lose that kit.
Can someone tell me if they will be replacing the Knights? If yes I need to head to my lgw to grab a box before their gone.
Grimskul wrote: I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
You need less.
Those three Knights are going to be a viable unit. In 8th, you would have likely been looking at getting two or three boxes to make a decent unit. Much the same applies with everything else (speaking as a Dark Elf player who had a unit of Witch Elves...).
3 bloodcrushers worked in 8th. 6 worked a lot better, and we the most you'd ever need. 9 would be way too many.
How much do these three cost? That's right, the same as 6 bloodcrushers.
Now how many do you actually need in AoS? There is no minimum, but then there wasn't in 8th either. WD seems to imply 6 is a good number though...
Let me just add... *Cough* Mournfang Cavalry *Cough*
I think/hope they aren't replacements, as they seem to be a monstrous cavalry version of regular knights. I don't see why the two kits shouldn't exist alongside each other, especially since the chaos knight kit is still a good set of models.
It lookes like they are called (I can't read Norwegian or whatever it is, perhaps their called Vanguard?), Knights of Ruin.
If so, they will not replace the current knights. If they did replace the current knights they would have to change the battalion box too, with the half assed AoS support we have seen so far I can't imagine them doing that.
I wouldn't think they're replacing the regular knights. They seem a bit more of a special choice than that. Still eager to know more about the Battletome. Would much prefer an undivided book than an Archaon special a la the Dreadhold.
jonolikespie wrote: It lookes like they are called (I can't read Norwegian or whatever it is, perhaps their called Vanguard?), Knights of Ruin.
If so, they will not replace the current knights. If they did replace the current knights they would have to change the battalion box too, with the half assed AoS support we have seen so far I can't imagine them doing that.
It's German
And all unit names are now in English in every language. So they are Varanguards, Knights of Ruin. Not Chaos Knights (could be rebranding, though).
My first thought was some play on Varangian guard, vikings in byzantine service. But I've no real idea, maybe there is someone who is just called Varan and they are his guard.
They couldn't squeeze a fourth one in to at least get a 4 horsemen theme going?
Maybe the theme of AOS is that you need to forge your own narrative harder and not rely on decades to centuries to millenia of fluff and backstory and existing interest? Trashing all that unnecessary stuff along with the new value in an almost 100% price increase is what AOS is all about, baby!
In all fairness, you could probably fit that DBA army within one of the knights (minus the bases of course!). It's probably best to compare the $100 trio of knights to the $55 trio of bloodcrushers. If they are the same size, that is a doubling of price in 5 years.
It's true that bigger models can be more expensive to create due to more sprues needed and that we are (for some reason) prepared to pay more for bigger things.
Still, equaling a DBA army with one of these knights, as if the volume of plastic was of any concern to anyone is just silly. Ot's completely different products.
Zywus wrote: Why the obsession with size? I'm sure you can get a chunk of plastic 10 times the weight and size of those knights for a pittance.
Surely what's important is the quality and quantity of the sculpts?
You obviously can't ignore size when looking at value. Big beasties are always more expensive.
Size doesn't matter, it's what you do with it.
This message brought to you by the Campaign to Retrieve the Dark Prince
...that said, I honestly kinda like the looks of these guys. They seem about what I'd expect a horrifically mutated servant of Chaos to look like. Something that would have been trapped waaaaay up in the Wastes in the Old World...no longer entirely mortal but not quite a daemon, not seen except in the most dire of incursions, the sort of thing Archaon would use for a bodyguard, no skull acne...looks like some definite effort went into the design.
The price, of course, is disgustingly hilarious. Or hilariously disgusting. I can't decide which.
I can't use bigger models in KoW, at least.. not without hurting myself in game.
I bought more GW stuff in the past 3 months for my Twilight Kin than I had all of 8th edition. If the new Aelf stuff is all supersized models and double price, I don't think I will be able to justify any purchases. But I'm not even sure if GW will be supporting the game in a year or two.
I hope Mantic can somehow buy GW's WHFB molds and sell them at sane prices.
Zywus wrote: It's true that bigger models can be more expensive to create due to more sprues needed and that we are (for some reason) prepared to pay more for bigger things.
Bigger models don't necessarily need more sprues - especially when they are boxed in such small numbers. I'd argue (out of the top of my head, because we don't have access to the sprues for the knights yet) that the amount of sprues/plastic used for those three knights won't be that much more than the amount used for say... a current SM tactical squad, or even HE Silver Helm box (horses included).
Now, if it's easier to bullgak customers into believing it's more expensive because they're a tiny bit bigger? Sure - look at the Stormcast.
Sprue count doesn't enter the equation for GW pricing, so that's not something we can really look at. It's usually size of model+amount you would need in an army, with a few exceptions. So Elites are almost always more expensive, as are big models. Lately they've been making all their Elite model way bigger, so that = gakfeth expensive kits.
Not inclined to do an Archaon faction so its easy to skip these... If they released Nurgle things then it would be more problematic.
Design is different of what I would expect so its a 50/50 for me, the price kills any potential impulse buy though.
NAVARRO wrote: Not inclined to do an Archaon faction so its easy to skip these... If they released Nurgle things then it would be more problematic.
Design is different of what I would expect so its a 50/50 for me, the price kills any potential impulse buy though.
I'm holding out a bit of hope that the fact Rotbringers got a section on the webstore, but have not received a battle tome yet, might mean there's a battle tome or possibly even further update to that faction coming down the line.
Grimskul wrote: I'm dreading the updates for other armies now considering this is the new norm they're going for. Half the reason why 8th edition WFB did so poorly was because of the high entry costs to get a proper army going, they just seem to be doubling down on that problem.
You need less.
Those three Knights are going to be a viable unit. In 8th, you would have likely been looking at getting two or three boxes to make a decent unit. Much the same applies with everything else (speaking as a Dark Elf player who had a unit of Witch Elves...).
Yeah but the three Varanguard knights cost $100 and a box of 5 Chaos Knights costs $33 so I can get 15 Knights for the price of 3 Varanguard so I'm getting a viable unit for the price in WFB 8th as well. It's just a matter of whether or not a gamer would prefer 15 Chaos Knights in WFB or 3 Varanguard in AoS.
NAVARRO wrote: Not inclined to do an Archaon faction so its easy to skip these... If they released Nurgle things then it would be more problematic.
Design is different of what I would expect so its a 50/50 for me, the price kills any potential impulse buy though.
I'm holding out a bit of hope that the fact Rotbringers got a section on the webstore, but have not received a battle tome yet, might mean there's a battle tome or possibly even further update to that faction coming down the line.
Same here, at the moment Im building around it by getting the available kits but Im willing to bet we are going to have some mounted Nurgle nasties of some kind in the future.
oni wrote: I'm really surprised that some people don't like these. I think the models are amazing.
I'm completely dismayed by the price.
Considering they are charging the same as they did for the old pewter blood dragon knights for plastic is insane.
I like metal minis like everyone else, though a big part of it is nostalgia. That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper. Almost every modern GW plastic mini is far more intricate than its older metal counterpart, for models like these you don't have to pin, which is a big pain in the rear, and surfaces match precisely almost 100% of the time on new, small minis, with clever covering pieces that reduce the amount of putty/gs work dramatically. Plus, they're infinitely better gaming pieces, because they don't fall apart.
Yes, the material is less valuable. But how many people take their lead or pewter minis and melt them down? How many people value their collection of minis by the value of the raw material? It's almost all packaging, distribution, and profit in that box anyways, regardless of the material. I mean, in almost every case, minis are priced based on what people will pay for them and what the company wants to make, not on material cost. It's the same reason that digital downloads of bestseller games are not discounted even though they cost less to produce than media counterparts; the price is just based on how much the company thinks people will pay.
I tend to agree, I would happily pay the same price for a plastic model of equal quality than I would a metal model. Metal doesn't really hold any extra value for me, and I much rather working with plastic.
Alpharius wrote: I'm more surprised when someone isn't even a little bit dismayed over 3 for 100 US$ / 80 EUR / 60 £!
To be fair, I probably wont get them, at least not right away.
At $50, I'd buy them, they'd go on a shelf and I would dream of painting them one day. At $100, I'll happily buy them when I want to model them. But realistically, that will never happen because there will always be something else I want to work on more, usually with a cool futuristic weapon attached to it. About the only way I'm likely to get this is if it shows up as a doorcrasher for a sale.
Which isn't to say that I'm complaining about the price; quite the opposite... It's high enough that I won't frivolously buy it just to line a shelf, and low enough that discounted, I wont feel overpriced if I want to model it Threading the needle!!
oni wrote: I'm really surprised that some people don't like these. I think the models are amazing.
I'm completely dismayed by the price.
Considering they are charging the same as they did for the old pewter blood dragon knights for plastic is insane.
I like metal minis like everyone else, though a big part of it is nostalgia. That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper.
Because GW themselves so much as said so when they began producing these multi part plastic kits around 18 years ago.
If the company tells you in their own monthly publication that the sole reason for these kits is to make affordable armies your customers are going to take such a thing as gospel.
oni wrote: I'm really surprised that some people don't like these. I think the models are amazing.
I'm completely dismayed by the price.
Considering they are charging the same as they did for the old pewter blood dragon knights for plastic is insane.
I like metal minis like everyone else, though a big part of it is nostalgia. That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper. Almost every modern GW plastic mini is far more intricate than its older metal counterpart, for models like these you don't have to pin, which is a big pain in the rear, and surfaces match precisely almost 100% of the time on new, small minis, with clever covering pieces that reduce the amount of putty/gs work dramatically. Plus, they're infinitely better gaming pieces, because they don't fall apart.
Yes, the material is less valuable. But how many people take their lead or pewter minis and melt them down? How many people value their collection of minis by the value of the raw material? It's almost all packaging, distribution, and profit in that box anyways, regardless of the material. I mean, in almost every case, minis are priced based on what people will pay for them and what the company wants to make, not on material cost. It's the same reason that digital downloads of bestseller games are not discounted even though they cost less to produce than media counterparts; the price is just based on how much the company thinks people will pay.
Plastic costs next to nothing at the industrial level and its all computer made after that, the process has only gotten cheaper as time goes on yet GW charges more. Its not a hard concept to grasp. They are keeping the price as is or rising on items that should be cheaper. Not to mention age of shitmar is suppose to be their "entry level" system, its pretty discouraging when 3 models worth $3 of plastic is $120. It certainly isn't winning over the people that threw AoS in the dust.
GW has entered the age where they are now charging x4 what a model should cost, they got away with it when it was x2 for awhile but now they've just gone overboard.
Brighter news is the Chinese recasters quality is only getting better.
I even doubt they are THAT much bigger than normal Chaos Knights. Those are rather big. Just give them more dynamic poses (no one needs for a rank and file system but whatever AOS), make the horses lift 2 of their feet and tada.
5 Chaos Knights on 60mm round bases for 20 pounds.
Ravenous D wrote: the process has only gotten cheaper as time goes on yet GW charges more. Its not a hard concept to grasp
As long as it takes at least one person to make the models, there is a salary to be paid. I'm assuming there is more than one person working per model design...
Not saying that it takes a year per model (although, it might, throughout the entire design phase) but between that, and the cost of making the molds, and storage & shipping and all that other stuff that they have to pay for, the cost of the plastic itself has little to nothing to do with the cost of the model.
Ravenous D wrote: the process has only gotten cheaper as time goes on yet GW charges more. Its not a hard concept to grasp
As long as it takes at least one person to make the models, there is a salary to be paid. I'm assuming there is more than one person working per model design...
Not saying that it takes a year per model (although, it might, throughout the entire design phase) but between that, and the cost of making the molds, and storage & shipping and all that other stuff that they have to pay for, the cost of the plastic itself has little to nothing to do with the cost of the model.
Which is a grand total of 8% (IIRC) of the model's cost. It's buried in their financial report somewhere, someone more literate in those documents can grab this please.
I saw these and thought "Oh nice unit of knights for my WoC force" then saw the price tag! I might as well buy into another game system for that and probably have a complete force/team/gang etc
What's raw materials got to do with retail price. The raw materials involved in many creative type industries are minuscule, it is things like demand, supply, perceived value by rational consumers and other such stuff in western style economic theories etc that determines 'correct' market price, not raw materials particularly..
oni wrote: I'm really surprised that some people don't like these. I think the models are amazing.
I'm completely dismayed by the price.
Considering they are charging the same as they did for the old pewter blood dragon knights for plastic is insane.
I like metal minis like everyone else, though a big part of it is nostalgia. That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper. Almost every modern GW plastic mini is far more intricate than its older metal counterpart, for models like these you don't have to pin, which is a big pain in the rear, and surfaces match precisely almost 100% of the time on new, small minis, with clever covering pieces that reduce the amount of putty/gs work dramatically. Plus, they're infinitely better gaming pieces, because they don't fall apart.
Yes, the material is less valuable. But how many people take their lead or pewter minis and melt them down? How many people value their collection of minis by the value of the raw material? It's almost all packaging, distribution, and profit in that box anyways, regardless of the material. I mean, in almost every case, minis are priced based on what people will pay for them and what the company wants to make, not on material cost. It's the same reason that digital downloads of bestseller games are not discounted even though they cost less to produce than media counterparts; the price is just based on how much the company thinks people will pay.
Plastic costs next to nothing at the industrial level and its all computer made after that, the process has only gotten cheaper as time goes on yet GW charges more. Its not a hard concept to grasp. They are keeping the price as is or rising on items that should be cheaper. Not to mention age of shitmar is suppose to be their "entry level" system, its pretty discouraging when 3 models worth $3 of plastic is $120. It certainly isn't winning over the people that threw AoS in the dust.
GW has entered the age where they are now charging x4 what a model should cost, they got away with it when it was x2 for awhile but now they've just gone overboard.
Brighter news is the Chinese recasters quality is only getting better.
That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper.
Because Games Workshop used to make a point of saying that their switching from metal to plastic models was a conscious decision in order to save money both in production and for the buyer. And back in the day it showed. The 2nd edition metal Tactical Squad cost around $35. The new plastic, bigger, more detailed and more intricate plastic Tactical Marines at the dawn of the 3rd edition cost I believe $17.99 originally.
These were the prices in the same year, keep in mind. Superior plastic squads and regiments used to be half the cost of their older metal counterparts. Now GW charges more for plastic than their older inferior metal units ever cost.
Costs aside, these models are getting more and more intricate! The trend is that the newer plastics are far superior in terms of technical detail and posing to plastics that are from as recent as 5 years ago. Compare these to Grey Knights and Dark Eldar for example. I sure hope they continue to modernize the rest of the fantasy races to match this new level of detail!
If they ever released a new faction of new dynamic-style orc kin I would probably go bankrupt. Here's hoping!
That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper.
Because Games Workshop used to make a point of saying that their switching from metal to plastic models was a conscious decision in order to save money both in production and for the buyer. And back in the day it showed. The 2nd edition metal Tactical Squad cost around $35. The new plastic, bigger, more detailed and more intricate plastic Tactical Marines at the dawn of the 3rd edition cost I believe $17.99 originally.
These were the prices in the same year, keep in mind. Superior plastic squads and regiments used to be half the cost of their older metal counterparts. Now GW charges more for plastic than their older inferior metal units ever cost.
Amen!
Naughty GW, some of us still remember all your promises
That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper.
Are you drunk right now? Let's walk through this slowly -
It is PLASTIC. The plastic costs GW less than TWO US DOLLARS/POUND. They are making over 1000% profit on each box they sell, more on the larger kits.
Not only that but compared to other plastic products, mainly gundam models, GW miniatures are pretty inferior. Even the absolute smallest gundam models are fully poseable and don't even require glue to complete. From there, it starts looking worse and worse for GW by comparison. A Wraithknight is $115 USD. I can buy a gundam the exact same size at that price that has lights in it. It [/b]comes pre-wired with working LEDs[/b] and all I need is a battery. Not only that, but the plastic used for gundams is more or less better than the plastic GW uses.
So in short, GW minis are
1. More expensive than they should be by a huge margin
2. Inferior to other, highly intricate models, both in terms of complexity and plastic used.
3. Not worth the price we're being forced to pay for them
So please, don't attempt to say that GW's prices are anything short of absurd. You might be willing to pay those prices, but they are still absurdly high.
Price aside, I kinda like them. I'd love to see them in the "flesh". One thing I appreciate about not needing to rank up anymore is that things can get pretty dynamic with their Fantasy models. I don't think they've consistently hit it out of the park with the new found "freedom of motion" but I like it as a general direction.
As to the bickering about price- I get being upset about the GW pricing, but I don't get being upset that someone doesn't share your take on the perceived value of an item.
That said, I really don't understand why people think that a plastic mini should be any cheaper.
Are you drunk right now? Let's walk through this slowly -
It is PLASTIC. The plastic costs GW less than TWO US DOLLARS/POUND. They are making over 1000% profit on each box they sell, more on the larger kits.
Not only that but compared to other plastic products, mainly gundam models, GW miniatures are pretty inferior. Even the absolute smallest gundam models are fully poseable and don't even require glue to complete. From there, it starts looking worse and worse for GW by comparison. A Wraithknight is $115 USD. I can buy a gundam the exact same size at that price that has lights in it. It [/b]comes pre-wired with working LEDs[/b] and all I need is a battery. Not only that, but the plastic used for gundams is more or less better than the plastic GW uses.
So in short, GW minis are 1. More expensive than they should be by a huge margin 2. Inferior to other, highly intricate models, both in terms of complexity and plastic used. 3. Not worth the price we're being forced to pay for them
So please, don't attempt to say that GW's prices are anything short of absurd. You might be willing to pay those prices, but they are still absurdly high.
By that logic, the $75 digital download of Halo 5 cost Microsoft $0.0001 to upload to my Xbox, so surely I am being ripped off, since I could have gotten a box and a disc that cost $1 to produce.... right? Especially when I can go to Steam and buy a game that might be just as fun for $5. That also costs $0.0001 to upload to my PC.
In my original post, I was basically saying that I don't get why people would prefer (or pay more) for metal miniatures like the chaos knights over their plastic counterparts, because unless you're melting them down to make body armor in some post-apocalyptic future, they're superior in pretty much every meaningful way. I wasn't suggesting that they're cheap and I even said that even though I liked the models, I wasn't going to buy them unless it was some boxing day special, as that they are too expensive to just buy and stick on the shelf (as Chaos isn't really my thing).
If you don't like GW minis and don't think they're worth the price... don't buy them I don't understand the, "Not worth the price we're being forced to pay for them" thing, because nobody's forcing you to do anything. If you think they're beautiful and you really want them, go at it. It's pointless to compare them to Gundam (as has been done endlessly in zillions of other threads); they're *different*, the people who like one or the other will simply buy that. For me, blinking LED lights in an 14" model that I spent 100 hours painting sounds very unappealing, but hey, if you want that... there's plenty of like-minded people, and the kits can be readily had.
Wow, still trotting out the same old arguments then Talys?
I don't even get the comparison you're trying to draw with video games, but as they're a completely different medium with a completely different cost structure, I think it's fair to say that's irrelevant.
Much better to compare like for like, hmmm? So, by all means draw comparisons with some other HIPs kits and see if you can make these look good value.
As for the lame old "if you don't like it dot buy it" schtick, nobody gives a gak whether you like it or not, look at the points made, it isn't an aesthetic comparison, it isn't about what you like, it's about more detailed, superior quality, more intricate, larger models being produced for a lower price. That's nothing to do with how it looks, that's based on objective, measurable, tangible qualities.
Azreal13 wrote: He's hyperbolic, but the core of his argument is valid.
Ignoring the value of everything other than the cost of the materials is not a valid argument. Couple that with mention of GW forcing anyone to do anything and we've shifted into the realm of screeching lunacy.
Posability, snap fit assembly and lights are not something I value in a miniature; so the rational portion of the argument is at best subjective.
The vitriol expressed for people that still enjoy Warhammer is pretty sickening honestly.
Not valuing them and them not being an indication of greater intricacy, and therefore logically a more expensive design process, and still maintaining a better retail price are not the same thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Equally, the vitriol is being expressed, if at all, for a company persistently trying to gouge more and more money out of fewer and fewer people, not the people themselves.
But I also see Talys point that no one is forcing people to buy the models.
As a long time fan, I am getting scared of GW prices and what they might ultimately do to the company, ever day newer model company's are popping up with lower prices and models with good quality.
GW might make some bad ass models hands down, but the game is heading in a direction of exclusion where only a few people will be able to purchase their models.
The really scary part is, what if they are raising prices on models to close the gap of lost profit?
Azreal13 wrote: Wow, still trotting out the same old arguments then Talys?
It's really the same argument, so yes, the logic hasn't changed from last week You're perfectly free to disagree, of course.
Azreal13 wrote: I don't even get the comparison you're trying to draw with video games, but as they're a completely different medium with a completely different cost structure, I think it's fair to say that's irrelevant.
The comparison is simple: in both cases, the cost of raw materials relative to the selling price is negligible. Archaon is $200; whether he were made of pewter, lead, plastic or resin is totally irrelevant from the stand point of profit margin. And unless you're going to melt it down, what does it matter what the material *cost* the manufacturer?
Azreal13 wrote: Much better to compare like for like, hmmm? So, by all means draw comparisons with some other HIPs kits and see if you can make these look good value.
That's totally off topic from this thread. This thread is about AoS models and, at the moment, the new Chaos knights, not a rehash of Gundam or whatever.
Azreal13 wrote: As for the lame old "if you don't like it dot buy it" schtick, nobody gives a gak whether you like it or not, look at the points made, it isn't an aesthetic comparison, it isn't about what you like, it's about more detailed, superior quality, more intricate, larger models being produced for a lower price. That's nothing to do with how it looks, that's based on objective, measurable, tangible qualities.
It's not lame at all. The person I was responding to said that GW was FORCING us to buy these allegedly overpriced models. To which I responded, they're not forcing us to do anything at all.
The objective, measurable, tangible qualities of a toy or collectible or piece of art (depending on how you view your models) is not the same as an ounce of gold or a kitchen appliance. For these things, it comes down to: Do I want it? Do I want it more than alternatives? Do I want it enough for its price? Can I afford it?
If the answer is to all 4 is yes, then it will be a buy; otherwise, it won't be. It doesn't matter how intricate or hard to produce or technically awesome the skulls are, if you're turned off by skulls everywhere, you won't like a model with skulls everywhere, technical qualities be damned.
I honestly don't get why people defend GW's pricing practices. It's one thing to think for yourself that its "worth" the money but competitively speaking it only hurts them in the long run. Unless you admit that their pricing structure is unreasonable it ends up sending the message that what they're doing is A-Okay which means the continual price increases limits the entry of others into the game and prevents them from improving in their offerings.
I have a friend who absolutely loves Chaos and adores the new Archaon and his special knights, after seeing the prices though he balked and had to pass on them. He loves Chaos, but not at the cost of a significant amount of his current paycheque. GW is missing out on a lot of impulse buy money by taking this route. Just because its a skirmish game doesn't mean you can just go willy nilly on the pricing.
GraywarTS wrote: The really scary part is, what if they are raising prices on models to close the gap of lost profit?
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I'm pretty sure this is exactly what's happening. GW perceives that its customer base is shrinking, or at least the number of people spending big on its type of hobby, so its solution is to raise the prices. Note that I'm not endorsing this; it just looks, to me, like writing on the wall that this is GW's playbook.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grimskul wrote: I honestly don't get why people defend GW's pricing practices. It's one thing to think for yourself that its "worth" the money but competitively speaking it only hurts them in the long run. Unless you admit that their pricing structure is unreasonable it ends up sending the message that what they're doing is A-Okay which means the continual price increases limits the entry of others into the game and prevents them from improving in their offerings.
I have a friend who absolutely loves Chaos and adores the new Archaon and his special knights, after seeing the prices though he balked and had to pass on them. He loves Chaos, but not at the cost of a significant amount of his current paycheque. GW is missing out on a lot of impulse buy money by taking this route. Just because its a skirmish game doesn't mean you can just go willy nilly on the pricing.
I think it's off-topic, but I believe that in the absence of GW, the next big popular game system would simply end up doing the same thing -- charging as much as it could for its models to maximize profit. It's not that I enjoy continuous price increases (I clearly would prefer cheaper products), I just have come to expect this of the *entire world* -- people charging what they can get away with, especially when they have the most popular product. Competition is healthy though, and should keep various companies honest.
It works both ways, of course -- with GW increasing prices, PP and Wyrd have less resistance to raising their prices too.
I completely understand how a lot of these models are just too expensive for some people, especially people who aren't already invested in the game or faction, and if you don't attract new folks, that's not a good thing. But anyways, looking at the Chaos Knights in isolation, I would have been shocked if they had been released for much cheaper.
People keep using the "you aren't forced to buy them/obviously someone is buying them" argument to justify the cost, but three years of falling sales tell us that enough people are leaving GW behind to outweigh new and continuing customers. Suffice it to say the price scheme does not make sense from a business standpoint on that ground alone. Further, while only a fraction of the cost for plastic is in the initial startup once the designs are finalized and molds are made that small fraction becomes a main cost factor going forward (as compared to more expensive materials). When a given sculpt gets used for a decade or more, the difference in material price becomes progressively more relevant to the model price. We also know that plastic is cheaper for GW since for quite a while the plastic models were notably lower in price than the metal/finecast ones and there is no way they would have been selling at a significantly lower margin for that long. Finally, we can see from other companies in both wargaming and related industries that it is possible to market these models at a profit for much lower prices.
It all adds up to the price being excessive and a losing proposition for everyone involved, and there is no justifying that.
Sidenote: I would gladly give up GW's current model quality in exchange for their prices from 10-15 years ago. Above a certain threshold I don't care how nice the model looks because it is too expensive to justify the purchase.
the gundam argument about them being better quality is so idiotic. They are in no way comparable. At the very least, point to Perry miniatures, who makes excellent models (not as good as GW, but excellent nontheless imo) at a really good price. But I agree that these GW prices are absurd.
The pricing really, really, really reminds me of DC and Marvel's ongoing decline.
When I was a kid they'd sell 300k copies of a comic for 50 cents to a 1 dollar.
Today they sell 30k or less for $4-$5.
They're chasing an ever shrinking market by charging the remaining addicts more.
(of course there's more to it, Marvel makes more with one successful film than they can in 50 years of comic publishing, plus they both have robust TPB and digital sales which are not revealed but my basic point remains)
Retail really hurts gw's bottom line and is a big part of why these kits are as expensive as they are. Gw spends between 20 and 30 million pounds a year on rent and salaries alone. There is also heating, electricity, shipping, store shelving etc
That means at least 2 million £20 purchases a year just to break even. Most of these costs are something that no other company in the same business has to bear.
I personally think that Gw should get out of retail, reduce all prices by 30% and hit the convention circuit hard, but they will never do this.Its a shame, because these are lovely models.
As a side note if they released one of these as a hero monster model for £20 (the same price as a worlock on jetbike) I wonder if the reaction would be the same.
Chikout wrote: Retail really hurts gw's bottom line and is a big part of why these kits are as expensive as they are. Gw spends between 20 and 30 million pounds a year on rent and salaries alone. There is also heating, electricity, shipping, store shelving etc
That means at least 2 million £20 purchases a year just to break even. Most of these costs are something that no other company in the same business has to bear.
I personally think that Gw should get out of retail, reduce all prices by 30% and hit the convention circuit hard, but they will never do this.Its a shame, because these are lovely models.
As a side note if they released one of these as a hero monster model for £20 (the same price as a worlock on jetbike) I wonder if the reaction would be the same.
This is not necessarly true. The profit margin on what they sell in their stores is probably twice as much as what they get from selling to LGS. It all depend on wether the number of unit they sell in the GW stores is enough to compensate for the cost of these stores.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People keep using the "you aren't forced to buy them/obviously someone is buying them" argument to justify the cost, but three years of falling sales tell us that enough people are leaving GW behind to outweigh new and continuing customers. Suffice it to say the price scheme does not make sense from a business standpoint on that ground alone. Further, while only a fraction of the cost for plastic is in the initial startup once the designs are finalized and molds are made that small fraction becomes a main cost factor going forward (as compared to more expensive materials). When a given sculpt gets used for a decade or more, the difference in material price becomes progressively more relevant to the model price. We also know that plastic is cheaper for GW since for quite a while the plastic models were notably lower in price than the metal/finecast ones and there is no way they would have been selling at a significantly lower margin for that long. Finally, we can see from other companies in both wargaming and related industries that it is possible to market these models at a profit for much lower prices.
It all adds up to the price being excessive and a losing proposition for everyone involved, and there is no justifying that.
Sidenote: I would gladly give up GW's current model quality in exchange for their prices from 10-15 years ago. Above a certain threshold I don't care how nice the model looks because it is too expensive to justify the purchase.
The price scheme makes sense if you factor in the abysmal state of AoS sales. They still need to recoup the cost of the model design, mold design, and mold fabrication. That still tens of thousands of dollars. When the CHS case showed the vast majority of models sales are in the firsts month, all that cost has to be made back right away. The price can be low when you can sell several thousand units, but not when they are likely expecting to only sell a couple hundred.
For the price of three boxes of knights, you can get two boxes of Betrayal, which is an entire army. That shows you how few units they expect to move of the knights. It is likely being put out in a desperate attempt to cover cost and hope they sell some.
If you don't like GW minis and don't think they're worth the price... don't buy them I don't understand the, "Not worth the price we're being forced to pay for them" thing, because nobody's forcing you to do anything. If you think they're beautiful and you really want them, go at it. It's pointless to compare them to Gundam (as has been done endlessly in zillions of other threads); they're *different*, the people who like one or the other will simply buy that. For me, blinking LED lights in an 14" model that I spent 100 hours painting sounds very unappealing, but hey, if you want that... there's plenty of like-minded people, and the kits can be readily had.
What I meant was that if you want to buy the models, and you want to use those models, you have to pay those prices. Obviously no one is making you purchase them in the first place, but if you do purchase them you have to buy them at that price.
There are far more factors going into the costs of actually developing and creating the models. Marketing (not that GW does a lot of that) paying the various retail staff, renting physical locations, paying the writers, designers, etc.
The point is that GW could be selling more for a lower price and turning more of a profit because more people are buying the models.
As for the video games comparison, costs are completely different. Not only that, but there are constant sales, prices are lowered over time, and even the newest consoles are sold at little more than double the cost of a Stormsurge. Think about that. I can absolutely guarantee that developing, creating, and shipping an Xbox One or PS4 took far more time, energy, and resources than creating any model GW has put out in the last few months.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People keep using the "you aren't forced to buy them/obviously someone is buying them" argument to justify the cost, but three years of falling sales tell us that enough people are leaving GW behind to outweigh new and continuing customers. Suffice it to say the price scheme does not make sense from a business standpoint on that ground alone. Further, while only a fraction of the cost for plastic is in the initial startup once the designs are finalized and molds are made that small fraction becomes a main cost factor going forward (as compared to more expensive materials). When a given sculpt gets used for a decade or more, the difference in material price becomes progressively more relevant to the model price. We also know that plastic is cheaper for GW since for quite a while the plastic models were notably lower in price than the metal/finecast ones and there is no way they would have been selling at a significantly lower margin for that long. Finally, we can see from other companies in both wargaming and related industries that it is possible to market these models at a profit for much lower prices.
It all adds up to the price being excessive and a losing proposition for everyone involved, and there is no justifying that.
Sidenote: I would gladly give up GW's current model quality in exchange for their prices from 10-15 years ago. Above a certain threshold I don't care how nice the model looks because it is too expensive to justify the purchase.
The price scheme makes sense if you factor in the abysmal state of AoS sales. They still need to recoup the cost of the model design, mold design, and mold fabrication. That still tens of thousands of dollars. When the CHS case showed the vast majority of models sales are in the firsts month, all that cost has to be made back right away. The price can be low when you can sell several thousand units, but not when they are likely expecting to only sell a couple hundred.
For the price of three boxes of knights, you can get two boxes of Betrayal, which is an entire army. That shows you how few units they expect to move of the knights. It is likely being put out in a desperate attempt to cover cost and hope they sell some.
Maybe if they stopped pricing people out of the hobby, they wouldn't have to hope. They would just sell stuff. 40k could be huge, but GW is holding itself back.
Those prices are straight from the Grand Marshal of Dumb Business Choices. Pricing injection molded kits to the stratosphere plays against the strength of injection molded plastic, namely, the ridiculously cheap repeat costs of production (something like 20 cents a frame in plastic and electricity).
Age of Who Cares? will never become a money making machine for GW because you cannot aggressively expand a game where 3 guys cost $100, or even 5 guys cost $50. You can only sell to a tiny fragment of a tiny hobby. Unless my income goes up substantially, there is no chance I will be buying anything GW sells at the new (or even oldish) price points, even thought I think lots of the new stuff is really cool. I think a lot of people are in the same boat. GW could blast the competition into oblivion by marketing aggressively to average income/willingness to pay chumps like me, and leveraging the fact that they could sell the worlds best figures at the worlds best prices. GW could sell their stuff at Perry prices. Who on earth would even give Mantic/Warlord/Wargames Factory/Dreamforge, etc. etc. a second look if they could get GW stuff for 50c a figure? Heck, even $1 a pop wold have me back on the wagon in a heartbeat.
GW's tooling is in house, this means they should be able to make a tool for way less than any of the companies going through WGF or Renedra, and with the advantage of their enormous (relatively) brand awareness and hundreds of hobby shops, they should be able to just sell the competition into oblivion. I could have talked so many friends into wargaming if I could have pointed to any of the Warhammer armies they liked and said "You can get started for $75" (like lots of other great games) instead of "You can get started for... uh.... nevermind."
puree wrote: What's raw materials got to do with retail price. The raw materials involved in many creative type industries are minuscule, it is things like demand, supply, perceived value by rational consumers and other such stuff in western style economic theories etc that determines 'correct' market price, not raw materials particularly..
People need to stop pretending that talking about the relative cheapness of plastic production means the cost of the material and nothing else.
Plastic is cheaper because the actual plastic is cheaper, sure, but it's also cheaper because of the vast, vast, literally order-of-magnitude-vast reduction in labour costs and other time savings over other production methods; you can sculpt on the computer making revisions in real-time and port the finished 3d model right into the milling machine software to make the moulds(as opposed to sculpting traditionally, which takes longer, or having to insert an intermediate step involving 3d printing initial masters then making production masters from them before you can even begin casting product), the moulds take literally years to wear out(where resin & metal moulds need to be replaced regularly, taking time away from production and adding labour costs), the casting is largely automated and can produce at a far, far higher volume than metal or resin for a fraction of the cost.
Even accounting for "perceived" value, many of GW's prices are mental, not just because they're so hilariously out of proportion relative to the cost of production, but because they're so ludicrously out of proportion compared to GW's own existing products. As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread, we already have a unit of large plastic monstrous cavalry for a Chaos faction, Bloodcrushers, and they're half the cost of these models. Dragon Ogres appear to also be similarly sized, and are also only slightly more than half the price. A consumer might be willing to pay such a mental price, but even assuming neoliberal orthodoxy as a baseline there's no way to argue that decision is rational.
In the end though, the "correct" market price is the one people will pay, so we'll have to wait and see if this hilarious gambit of GW's to double-down on the "sell less for more" strategy that has been doing so well for them of late will work.
Dreamforge Valkir 59$ (now 37$) for 20
GW Terminators 50$ for 5
Difference overhead Dreamforge 1 guy (As far as i know)
GW stock holders and Kirby's wife needs a new Jacuzzi! (And a zillion employee's)
Jokes a side the production costs are the same, material costs are the same, only design costs and how much profit the maker wants to create is different.
Yodhrin wrote: In the end though, the "correct" market price is the one people will pay, so we'll have to wait and see if this hilarious gambit of GW's to double-down on the "sell less for more" strategy that has been doing so well for them of late will work.
We don't need to wait, they've shown significantly falling sales for a while now.
Dreamforge Valkir 59$ (now 37$) for 20
GW Terminators 50$ for 5
Difference overhead Dreamforge 1 guy (As far as i know)
GW stock holders and Kirby's wife needs a new Jacuzzi! (And a zillion employee's)
Jokes a side the production costs are the same, material costs are the same, only design costs and how much profit the maker wants to create is different.
Only the Valkir are Tactical Marine equivalents, not Terminator. And they're cheap only if you live in the US. And they're produced in China. And the line appears to be dead.
Talys wrote: By that logic, the $75 digital download of Halo 5 cost Microsoft $0.0001 to upload to my Xbox, so surely I am being ripped off, since I could have gotten a box and a disc that cost $1 to produce.... right? Especially when I can go to Steam and buy a game that might be just as fun for $5. That also costs $0.0001 to upload to my PC.
I'm not sure comparing physical product (minis) to digital product is such a good idea. Both of them have their development costs, but:
1 - physical products costs vary based on medium. Changing from one medium (metal) to a cheaper medium (plastic) reduces costs
2 - the software industry has remained relatively stable in price (i think there's been a 10-20$ increase over like 10+ years at most)
3 - software comes down in price over time
Talys wrote: If you don't like GW minis and don't think they're worth the price... don't buy them I don't understand the, "Not worth the price we're being forced to pay for them" thing, because nobody's forcing you to do anything. If you think they're beautiful and you really want them, go at it. It's pointless to compare them to Gundam (as has been done endlessly in zillions of other threads); they're *different*, the people who like one or the other will simply buy that. For me, blinking LED lights in an 14" model that I spent 100 hours painting sounds very unappealing, but hey, if you want that... there's plenty of like-minded people, and the kits can be readily had.
People agree with you. That's why total revenue is falling year on year - people don't think they're worth the price and they stop buying. If i'm going to do a quality comparison for a non-gamer reason, gundam kits end up being superior. If i'm going to do a quality comparison for a gamer reasons, most other rulesets are superior.
Talys wrote: By that logic, the $75 digital download of Halo 5 cost Microsoft $0.0001 to upload to my Xbox, so surely I am being ripped off, since I could have gotten a box and a disc that cost $1 to produce.... right? Especially when I can go to Steam and buy a game that might be just as fun for $5. That also costs $0.0001 to upload to my PC.
I'm not sure comparing physical product (minis) to digital product is such a good idea. Both of them have their development costs, but:
1 - physical products costs vary based on medium. Changing from one medium (metal) to a cheaper medium (plastic) reduces costs
2 - the software industry has remained relatively stable in price (i think there's been a 10-20$ increase over like 10+ years at most)
3 - software comes down in price over time
1. Depends on the volume. Plastic is cheaper per pound, but the molds are more expensive by an order of magnitude. Anybody can cast metal models in their basements, HIPS, not so much.
2. Not true. DLC's are running rampant, games are routinely released incomplete or in alpha as "early access"... In effect you're getting less for more, but with prettier graphics and voice acting. Add to that the fact that the video game market has expanded manifold over the past 25 years. The miniatures market is relatively stagnant (do not confuse it with the boardgame market). Besides, have you seen the prices of other wargames? They'd be considered huge rip-offs 10-20 years ago. The prices of miniatures have risen sharply this millenium. This is a fact, GW is not an outlier.
3. Which is utterly unsurprising. Video games are essentially consumables that provide at best a 10-hour single player experience nowadays, and technology is advancing at such a rapid pace, it makes games look outdated within a couple years. Would you pay as much for Call of Duty 1 as you would for Black Ops III? Conversely, miniatures are stable and the sculpting quality progresses much slower. They can also be used indefinitely. Old sculpts are also much cheaper than new.
4. Gundam kits are superior and sell at volumes any wargaming company can only dream of. They're also not system- or army-bound, and thus each kit can potentially sell to any customer interested in gunpla. A Stormcast player will rarely buy a Chaos kit, and vice versa.
Yeah, what's with the Gundam models? Why would you even compare Gundam to GW?
And then why would you rage about the price? Go buy your pre-wired, oh so superior in price-plastic-anything else Gundam and zoom it around your room.
GW's profits are still over 20kk, making majority (if not all) miniature manufacturers look likedirty peasants.
Dreamforge Valkir 59$ (now 37$) for 20
GW Terminators 50$ for 5
Difference overhead Dreamforge 1 guy (As far as i know)
GW stock holders and Kirby's wife needs a new Jacuzzi! (And a zillion employee's)
Jokes a side the production costs are the same, material costs are the same, only design costs and how much profit the maker wants to create is different.
Only the Valkir are Tactical Marine equivalents, not Terminator. And they're cheap only if you live in the US. And they're produced in China. And the line appears to be dead.
Hm, there are normal troopers making the valkir similar to terminators and if the line is dead is irrelevant to the discussion
CragHack wrote:Yeah, what's with the Gundam models? Why would you even compare Gundam to GW?
And then why would you rage about the price? Go buy your pre-wired, oh so superior in price-plastic-anything else Gundam and zoom it around your room.
GW's profits are still over 20kk, which makes it the undisputed king of the hill, making majority (if not all) miniature manufacturers look likedirty peasants.
Better value for money simple.
And about the profits
-DE- wrote: 1. Depends on the volume. Plastic is cheaper per pound, but the molds are more expensive by an order of magnitude. Anybody can cast metal models in their basements, HIPS, not so much.
GW bought the necessary equipment to manufacture in house and keep costs down around ~lotr times iirc. Costs go down a lot once you start doing things completely inhouse.
-DE- wrote: 2. Not true. DLC's are running rampant, games are routinely released incomplete or in alpha as "early access"... In effect you're getting less for more, but with prettier graphics and voice acting. Add to that the fact that the video game market has expanded manifold over the past 25 years. The miniatures market is relatively stagnant (do not confuse it with the boardgame market). Besides, have you seen the prices of other wargames? They'd be considered huge rip-offs 10-20 years ago. The prices of miniatures have risen sharply this millenium. This is a fact, GW is not an outlier.
DLCs don't tend to comprise a significant portion of the game. Also, computer games can generally be modded for free. Early access games don't tend to cost full price to join, and then you're in already when they finally do launch. Would the video game market have expanded if they kept increasing prices with every release? I don't think so. Yes, the miniatures market is stagnant, and gw is the leader. It seems likely there is a correlation.
-DE- wrote: 3. Which is utterly unsurprising. Video games are essentially consumables that provide at best a 10-hour single player experience nowadays, and technology is advancing at such a rapid pace, it makes games look outdated within a couple years. Would you pay as much for Call of Duty 1 as you would for Black Ops III? Conversely, miniatures are stable and the sculpting quality progresses much slower. They can also be used indefinitely. Old sculpts are also much cheaper than new.
Depends what you play, as i said above games can be modded and come down in price. I wouldn't pay as much for call of duty 1 - literally. At this point it is down in the $10 pile. Miniatures can theoretically be used indefinitely, only not with games workshop. They frequently invalidate the effectiveness of 'old' models to force the 'competitive' gamer to purchase new models. Call of duty 1 will always be call of duty 1 - with or without mods. Old sculpts in gw-land only became 'cheaper' when gw switched to increasing prices on new models instead of annual prices hikes. Otherwise, yeah they became more expensive over time.
-DE- wrote: 4. Gundam kits are superior and sell at volumes any wargaming company can only dream of. They're also not system- or army-bound, and thus each kit can potentially sell to any customer interested in gunpla. A Stormcast player will rarely buy a Chaos kit, and vice versa.
The question is why. Why is one plastic kit more superior (in retail terms) than another? This is where the practices of the companies involved comes in, and gw seems to fall short in a lot of aspects.
So why post this "better value for money" thing here, while you can be assemling you 'better value for money' gundam right now and being happy about it? Why even bother yourself with things about a company, that in your opinion, doesn't give a better value for money?
So why post this "better value for money" thing here, while you can be assemling you 'better value for money' gundam right now and being happy about it? Why even bother yourself with things about a company, that in your opinion, doesn't give a better value for money?
Because this is a forum and he has a right to post his opinion. Do try not to act like a child and tell him to go away just because what he says doesn't match your opinion. It's rude and it just makes you look bad, not the other way around.
So why post this "better value for money" thing here, while you can be assemling you 'better value for money' gundam right now and being happy about it? Why even bother yourself with things about a company, that in your opinion, doesn't give a better value for money?
New Antares plastic boxes are £50 each. Contain a full army and solid starting point. That's value for money.
GW - well, some nice models but not worth the money.
GraywarTS wrote: The really scary part is, what if they are raising prices on models to close the gap of lost profit?
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I'm pretty sure this is exactly what's happening. GW perceives that its customer base is shrinking, or at least the number of people spending big on its type of hobby, so its solution is to raise the prices. Note that I'm not endorsing this; it just looks, to me, like writing on the wall that this is GW's playbook.
...
...
....
GW started a price raising strategy in about 2008, with swinging annual across the board price rises that brought many complaints from players. Volume of sales started falling but revenue was sustained by the increased prices.
In 2010 the policy was extended to doubling the price of army books for WHFB on the basis that being hardback justified the new pricing. WHFB began its ultimately terminal decline.
In 2012 this same policy was applied to 40K rules and codexes. 40K began to decline in sales.
My statements above are based on my interpretation of the financial evidence presented in GW's annual reports.
In the past couple of years, GW have adopted a new pricing strategy, which is to leave most prices static year to year, but put out lots of expensive new model kits -- Nagash, terrain for AoS, the Archaon, Knight Titans and so -- they also are dramatically increasing the price of replacement kits like the new Tau Fire Warriors, which are 50% more expensive then the set they replace.
This strategy seems to have been partly successful given that their latest annual results showed a slower decline in sales than the previous two years. To be sure, slower decline is not as good as an increase.
Talys is of course quite correct that people will spend what they feel is right for a particular product.If you absolutely love the Chaos Knights, you will pass up the opportunity of buying lots of alternative products to have them. But there is a danger of running out of customers to buy these expensive kits.
Hive City Dweller wrote: Costs aside, these models are getting more and more intricate! The trend is that the newer plastics are far superior in terms of technical detail and posing to plastics that are from as recent as 5 years ago. Compare these to Grey Knights and Dark Eldar for example. I sure hope they continue to modernize the rest of the fantasy races to match this new level of detail!
If they ever released a new faction of new dynamic-style orc kin I would probably go bankrupt. Here's hoping!
I would prefer lower quality models that I can afford. Don't get me wrong, I like the centerpieces and epic elite units, but there should be some things anyone can buy.
Hive City Dweller wrote: Costs aside, these models are getting more and more intricate! The trend is that the newer plastics are far superior in terms of technical detail and posing to plastics that are from as recent as 5 years ago. Compare these to Grey Knights and Dark Eldar for example. I sure hope they continue to modernize the rest of the fantasy races to match this new level of detail!
If they ever released a new faction of new dynamic-style orc kin I would probably go bankrupt. Here's hoping!
I would prefer lower quality models that I can afford. Don't get me wrong, I like the centerpieces and epic elite units, but there should be some things anyone can buy.
Not only that, GW is repeatedly losing customers over this exact situation. Will anyone's wallet REALLY be able to stomach spending 500$ on 15 really big and flashy Ork models? (Do note that I am going by the current pricing of one Varanguard being pretty much 33$)
I mean, seriously, how many players that would've gladly paid 45$ for a Varanguard box are they actually losing with these ridiculous prices? My bet is on the triple digits to say the least.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well, we've probably all said enough for or against the pricing of the Chaos Knights.
Let's leave that line of argument and wait for a genuine item of news to appear.
Although a couple of points I didn't see mentioned. Just food for thought:
1) I find it a bit silly that GW has invested in plastic technology that allows them to churn out millions of copies for pennies, and then they are limiting the amount of buyers by pricing them ridiculously high. Perhaps they have very limited time on the machines for each kit, nowadays, so they rather produce smaller batches at a time and price them higher? Then again, GW doesn't lose much by pricing any new models high, they can always drop the prices later, and moulds don't take too much storage space. "High novelty price" is a model that works for some products like phones etc., so why not for minis?
2) If it was just a bunch of collectable models, I wouldn't mind the price. However, if it's something you're supposed to play a game with, I find it sad that they are pricing new (and old) players out of the game - less players around hurts everyone who's into The Hobby. Of course, AoS stopped being a proper game when they dropped the army building limitations, but generally speaking.
What baffles me is how they decide their prices...
On one hand you have Horus heresy box, with 30 marines, 2 characters, 5 termies and one dread with the books, rules, cards and dices, for 150$...
And on the other you have 3 models for 100$...
Don't tell me that it took less ressources and work to make the HH box, then the 3 dudes on their horsies, its nonesens.
Even if the price cost of the box is a bargain it still has 12 times more models in.
The Chaos knights are undoubtly good looking and well done, but for 100$?, you can have 20 of the actual knights that are still pretty decent.
3 Knights at 30-35 would have been decent, still more expensive then the 5 man box, but still manageable, but 100 for 3?.
Yeah i know " its a hobby just like golf and gak" except that Golf if you're good at it, it pays, never met anyone that could life off investing in plastic crack apart from a FLGS or equivalant, and even then sometimes i see the face of the manager and that he wish he did another, well paid job, because the guy just earned like 50$ for the day, by selling 2 boxes and some dices or Magic cards...
I can't even tell if I like the look of them because they're hidden under such a thick crust of stuff.
This is one of the problems - minis are inflated like they had a bicycle pump stuck in 'em, get covered in a million and one fiddly little details, and that gets confused with 'quality'.
Price... to paraphrase Kilkrazy and Alpharius, 'nuff said.
Now I understand why nobody was making any joke about their name. Reading your post was required for my brain to compute that, unlike in my country, Varan is actually not a lizard name in English.
Here "Varanguard" basically sounds like "Monitor Lizard Guard" which is... better than Gekkoguard I suppose. But when it comes to striking fear in the heart of your enemy they sure start with quite a handicap.
Chief wrote: So does this mean the old knights will go away? If so i'll have to pick some up.
The new knights could be a completely new unit or they could be a replacement unit for the old regular knights adapted to the new naming scheme. Nobody knows and GW doesn't tell. You have old models, new models, old rules, and new rules and I don't see any clear indicators what this unit will be in the end. Will it be a replacement, an upgrade, or an addition to the army? They have AoS rules but their connection to old knights is not apparent.
Now I understand why nobody was making any joke about their name. Reading your post was required for my brain to compute that, unlike in my country, Varan is actually not a lizard name in English.
Not in english, no, though most people with a passing interest in herpetology should be familiar with the genus Varanus.
That said, I don't think that's a huge proportion of the english-speaking population - maybe about the same number who recognise the kaiju Varan - and I'd agree with earlier posters that it's likely a play on the name 'varangian guard'.
(At least it's not as bad as a new Incredible Hulk villain: Gammon.)
Azreal13 wrote: On repeat viewing, it strikes me that these guys are going to be spectacularly unposeable too.
Well who can afford to buy multiples anyhow?
See, GW thinks of everything.
There does seem to be enough swappable options to make 6+ pretty distinct models. Also...it's plastic.
So when the rail barons get together on their secret island paradise to play AoS, they should have to worry about duplicate Vareindeergamesguards.
Azreal13 wrote: On repeat viewing, it strikes me that these guys are going to be spectacularly unposeable too.
Of course. The more locked they are in pose and options the less 3rd party manufacturers can steal GW's hard earned money by making extra bitz for them.
It is just easier and cheaper for GW to make single pose models than models with lots of possible variation. It is also easier for the designers to give a fixed model a zarjaz pose.
It's a win-win unless you want to vary or convert your models (which of course is one of the main benefits of plastic over metal.)
Given the price, no-one is going to have lots of copies of these models in their army.
Mymearan wrote: They still do, they have conversion articles in WD for example.
The irony being that:
1. Fewer people realize this because WD is generally garbage.
2. Their plastic kits used to be multipose, now they slice them down the middle of the torso or wherever the computer tells them to slice it to maximize production efficiency.
3. They used to sell bitz.
AFAIK most of their kits are still cut the same way, with separate arms, heads and sometimes legs. The monopose models tend to be clampack characters or starter box models. Unless I've missed some truly monopose kits?
Mymearan wrote: AFAIK most of their kits are still cut the same way, with separate arms, heads and sometimes legs. The monopose models tend to be clampack characters or starter box models. Unless I've missed some truly monopose kits?
I can give you an example within a Fantasy faction - the HE's. All of the "new" HE units apart from WL and PG's are pretty much monopose. The IoB SM's are just one big cast like their metal predecessors, and the LSG just have the right arm detachable.
The Sisters of Avelorn are particularly egregious in the fact that the upper half of their arms are actually attached to the front torso, while the two forearms (and therefore, their hands) are connected through the flamey bits to make one single piece too.
As I said before, sprues with this level of interchangeability and customization is what GW should've strived for. In that sense, the HE archers and Spearmen are superior to the majority of the more recent casts, even though their casts are over a decade old.
I personally don't care that much about multiposing to be honest. Single pose models look better and I've never had a problem with repeating poses. Usually GW provides at least a unit's worth of possible poses and any repeats won't be noticed. Multipose has a big disadvantages in that poses will always look awkward compared to the dynamism that is possible in a monopose model sculpted by a good sculptor. The "charm" that Oldhammerers talk about comes almost entirely from the fact that each model used to be a unique individual back in the day.
Are we sure the knights are monopose? Can hardly tell from the blurry photos, but they look like at the least you have some head switch options and the groups of 5 didn't stand out to me with obvious (on first glance) duplicates. I think they're fantastic, anyway.
Interestingly, you can play each model as a unit on its own, and arm them all differently. These are pretty much 3 mounted characters, going for the mounted character price (or slightly cheaper).
I agree, monopose is great. These arnt G I Joes. Were the blightkings not monopose? I bought 2 boxes and have 10 unique guys, they came with so many options!! I will be picking up a box of these knights, they are just too cool.
Mymearan wrote: They still do, they have conversion articles in WD for example.
The irony being that:
1. Fewer people realize this because WD is generally garbage.
2. Their plastic kits used to be multipose, now they slice them down the middle of the torso or wherever the computer tells them to slice it to maximize production efficiency.
3. They used to sell bitz.
I miss that GW got out of selling bitz, but the void has made a lot of companies pop up who make some sick bits...
I really like them - and especially the brilliant one with the axe, bare head and a "horse" posed like the old Dorghar:
Spoiler:
With a scratch built skull helmet he will become the perfect general (for my Kurgan tribe):
Spoiler:
I don't mind the price. Will probably buy the box and use the minis as three separate Chaos lords.
Will remove some spikes - and might replace the beasts heads (very cool but a bit too chaosy) with (cast) Dorghar heads though.
Actually, this is generally my objection with Chaos. But it's totally a personal thing, and I think I'm the exception, being generally a GW aesthetic fan but disliking the Chaos thing.
After seeing it again, I think it would look much less busy if the black plates had a gradient towards the edge (or just solid color) rather than the grey lines. That technique looks really nice on many models but because there are so many plates here and they are all reinforced around the edges anyway I think that element brings the model down as a whole.
Actually, this is generally my objection with Chaos. But it's totally a personal thing, and I think I'm the exception, being generally a GW aesthetic fan but disliking the Chaos thing.
I feel like chaos marines (to a lesser extent) and warriors (the current models, that is) are a perfect balance. These on the other hand....... Ugh....
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: As I said before, sprues with this level of interchangeability and customization is what GW should've strived for. In that sense, the HE archers and Spearmen are superior to the majority of the more recent casts, even though their casts are over a decade old.
Those types of kits were pretty damned amazing. I wish we got more of them (and more for 40K - we only got the Marine Commander and the Chaos Terminator Lord, imagine a Warboss or an Autarch kit like that!).
I was a big proponent of the single-frame plastic characters when they first came out. Now they're 2-3 times the price for basically nothing more, I'm steadily going off them.
kendoka wrote: I really like them - and especially the brilliant one with the axe, bare head and a "horse" posed like the old Dorghar
I think they look amazing for the most part. They're just 4x more expensive than they should be.
Looks like a standard bearer with the option to be bald or with a mohawk and the main difference with the old aesthetic is the flames on the banner and the beard being partly fire.
I'm curious if other dwarves will get that or if it just a slayer thing.
@jono: honestly, the last round of Dwarf plastics have a great style, so if they just do new plastic Slayers, i'll be fine with that...
i am liking the style of these new Chaos Knights, now that i see some closeups...
the mutated horse is pretty cool...
at first, in the wide shot, i thought i would give them a pass, but now i'm thinking i might have to get a box...
they should make a suitably nasty looking couple of Khorne characters...
jonolikespie wrote: Looks like a standard bearer with the option to be bald or with a mohawk and the main difference with the old aesthetic is the flames on the banner and the beard being partly fire.
I'm curious if other dwarves will get that or if it just a slayer thing.
And here i was thinking what strange shoulder guards
jonolikespie wrote: Looks like a standard bearer with the option to be bald or with a mohawk and the main difference with the old aesthetic is the flames on the banner and the beard being partly fire.
I'm curious if other dwarves will get that or if it just a slayer thing.
Wow, impressed with that sprue so far. Seems to have enough similarity to the leaping Dragon Slayer clampack model they released last year. Plenty of potential to convert it and hopefully they do a unit with similar features.
I had thought that they would have upscaled the dwarfs as part of AoS so that seems to indicate enough similarity with the existing range. Plus it doesn't seem to have gone crazy with flames everywhere which is nice. I have no interest in playing AoS, or a lot of what has been brought out so far for it, but definitely want to pick up that for one of my slayer units
"Look here at your shiny new Fireslayer! It's a tad bigger than before so it's awesomer (please disregard that it's the same of an Old World human) And we added fire to his beard! Nothing else though, just a fiery beard! Now... fork over 100% more than you did for the latest slayer character, please"
"Look here at your shiny new Fireslayer! It's a tad bigger than before so it's awesomer (please disregard that it's the same of an Old World human) And we added fire to his beard! Nothing else though, just a fiery beard! Now... fork over 100% more than you did for the latest slayer character, please"
Wait, is it confirmed that the Fireslayer is bigger than a standard dwarf model??
"Look here at your shiny new Fireslayer! It's a tad bigger than before so it's awesomer (please disregard that it's the same of an Old World human) And we added fire to his beard! Nothing else though, just a fiery beard! Now... fork over 100% more than you did for the latest slayer character, please"
Wait, is it confirmed that the Fireslayer is bigger than a standard dwarf model??
Nope. I am just making an (un)educated guess as all of the AoS figures cast have been "scaled up" when compared to FB AND it's another reason for GW to charge us more
"Look here at your shiny new Fireslayer! It's a tad bigger than before so it's awesomer (please disregard that it's the same of an Old World human) And we added fire to his beard! Nothing else though, just a fiery beard! Now... fork over 100% more than you did for the latest slayer character, please"
Wait, is it confirmed that the Fireslayer is bigger than a standard dwarf model??
Of course not.
But that won't matter when people can complain about perceived slights!
The current plastic Dragon Slayer is $21. When taken out of his "flying through the air with the greatest of ease" pose, he's taller than the old Dwarf Warrior/Handgunner kit--but the same height as the new Hammerer/Longbeards and Irondrakes/Ironbreakers.
"Look here at your shiny new Fireslayer! It's a tad bigger than before so it's awesomer (please disregard that it's the same of an Old World human) And we added fire to his beard! Nothing else though, just a fiery beard! Now... fork over 100% more than you did for the latest slayer character, please"
Wait, is it confirmed that the Fireslayer is bigger than a standard dwarf model??
Of course not.
But that won't matter when people can complain about perceived slights!
Lt. Donomar StubbornBull wrote: Ah ok! because that is exactly my fear of what they will do too :( but my fingers are crossed that it is same scale as current stunties
Any scaling up would be silly in my opinion but understandable to increase the prices as you say
He LOOKS to be the same size as the "current" crop of stunties.
The most expensive single character figure I have seen was a Tech-Librarian-Rune-Priest of Humakt Space Marine (or something) and cost £22.50.
So £26 is not beyond the bounds of possibility, but let's wait for the kit actually to be launched and then we will see.
As for size, all the other new AoS models have been a bit larger than the previous WHFB type designs, and in fact GW figures have been growing gradually for decades, that's part of their secret for cramming in astonishing detail compared to other manufacturers.
But again, we ought to wait for the figure to come out and then we'll know for sure.
Kilkrazy wrote: The most expensive single character figure I have seen was a Tech-Librarian-Rune-Priest of Humakt Space Marine (or something) and cost £22.50.
So £26 is not beyond the bounds of possibility, but let's wait for the kit actually to be launched and then we will see.
As for size, all the other new AoS models have been a bit larger than the previous WHFB type designs, and in fact GW figures have been growing gradually for decades, that's part of their secret for cramming in astonishing detail compared to other manufacturers.
But again, we ought to wait for the figure to come out and then we'll know for sure.
Which one is that? The most expensive human-sized characters I can find are £20 (chaplain with jump pack, terminators for 40k, Lord Celestant for AoS).
edit: Oh the Tech-Priest Dominus? He's huge, in fact he's on a 50mm base. There are plenty of more expensive bigger characters, most are older releases. Farsight is £30 for example. Lots of mounted Fantasy characters for £23-30.
This one I saw in the shop in Oxford was an SM officer of some kind, and he's tactical dreadnaught armoured infantry with a bunch of stuff -- flag, book, halo, cloak, that kind of thing -- not on a bike or throne.
It was in a standard blister clamshell like most other single infantry figures.
Farsight is a battle suit.
PS: I was so stunned at the price that I went back a few days later to check.
Kilkrazy wrote: This one I saw in the shop in Oxford was an SM officer of some kind, and he's tactical dreadnaught armoured infantry with a bunch of stuff -- flag, book, halo, cloak, that kind of thing -- not on a bike or throne.
It was in a standard blister clamshell like most other single infantry figures.
Farsight is a battle suit.
PS: I was so stunned at the price that I went back a few days later to check.
If you saw it for 20 GBP plus, that was the store bumping the price up.
The only two plastic Terminator Librarians are the Blood Angels Librarian for 18 GBP and the "generic" one for 18.50 GBP.
looks like a test sprue. On the second pic, left side on the sprue, those round pressure markings. I've seen those one other hips sprues that companies post when they have a test sprue to show, before final tooling.
judgedoug wrote: looks like a test sprue. On the second pic, left side on the sprue, those round pressure markings. I've seen those one other hips sprues that companies post when they have a test sprue to show, before final tooling.
Those are actually kinda common on GW stuff now.
My Techpriest from the tank/Techpriest box had them. The Shadow Force Solaq Captain had them as well.
judgedoug wrote: looks like a test sprue. On the second pic, left side on the sprue, those round pressure markings. I've seen those one other hips sprues that companies post when they have a test sprue to show, before final tooling.
Those are actually kinda common on GW stuff now.
My Techpriest from the tank/Techpriest box had them. The Shadow Force Solaq Captain had them as well.
Well I'll be damned. My previous experience had them being the test shots and using a softer plastic for the test sprues. Weird.
Kilkrazy wrote: This one I saw in the shop in Oxford was an SM officer of some kind, and he's tactical dreadnaught armoured infantry with a bunch of stuff -- flag, book, halo, cloak, that kind of thing -- not on a bike or throne.
It was in a standard blister clamshell like most other single infantry figures.
Farsight is a battle suit.
PS: I was so stunned at the price that I went back a few days later to check.
Yeah normal infantry are £20 max. I checked the GW site and couldn't find any more expensive than that.
That more or less confirms Fyreslayers for me. Fire dwarves for Age of Sigamr! I'm so stoked! (no pun intended) Damn the price points, I'm just looking forward to seeing what these guys look like assembled and painted.
Threading the needle!!
The trend is that the newer plastics are far superior in terms of technical detail and posing to plastics that are from as recent as 5 years ago. Compare these to Grey Knights and Dark Eldar for example. I sure hope they continue to modernize the rest of the fantasy races to match this new level of detail!
uh.... nevermind."
