5313
Post by: Tetchy
GW's interim financial results are out and they continue to show the "Gaming Giant" is in poor financial health.
No dividend again, further losses in Europe wipe out gains in US and UK.
Apoc hasn't saved the day.
http://investor.games-workshop.com/news/announcements/2008-01-22_interim_results.doc
4786
Post by: legoburner
Some snippets from the document:
- Revenue at £54.6m (2006: £54.6m)
- Pre-exceptional gross margin at 69.9% (2006: 70.9%)
- Exceptional items – cost reduction programme £(0.6)m (2006: £nil)
- Pre-exceptional operating profit up £0.6m to £1.1m (2006: £0.5m)
- Operating profit at £0.5m (2006: £0.5m)
- (Loss)/earnings before tax (£0.2)m (2006: £0.1m)
- (Loss)/earnings per share of (0.4)p (2006: 0.2p)
Tom Kirby, Chairman, and Mark Wells, Chief Executive of Games Workshop, said: “These half-year results are encouraging; we have re-established constant currency sales growth in the UK, the Americas and Asia Pacific, our gross margins remain strong, and our cost reduction programme is delivering the overhead reductions we expected. We remain a growth business and are now getting benefits from the efforts our staff have been making. There is still much to do, and we are united in our determination to do it.” We have opened five Hobby stores and closed 18 during the period, leaving us with 335 at the end of November 2007. Compared to November 2006, sterling has strengthened by 8.5% against the US dollar and weakened by 1.2% against the euro. We have shown below our sales progression in constant currency terms so that readers can better understand the figures. We still expect the cost reduction programme to result in annualised cost reductions of £7m. REVENUE BY GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SALES OPERATION IN LOCAL CURRENCY: <table><tr><td>Six months to2 December 2007</td><td>Six months to26 November 2006</td></tr><tr><td>Continental Europe</td><td>€28.6m</td><td>€32.0m</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>£18.8m</td><td>£17.0m</td></tr><tr><td>The Americas</td><td>US$24.2m</td><td>US$22.9m</td></tr><tr><td>Asia Pacific</td><td>Aus$9.2m</td><td>Aus$8.9m</td></tr></table> ---- So reductions in gross margins, 300K drop in profit before tax and no increase in revenue, and a recession in the US looms for this year (good luck luxury goods!).
459
Post by: Hellfury
That "Constant Currency" bit is somewhat misleading.
While it gives facts it doesnt give all the facts. For instance, didnt the US dollar depreciate nearly 9% this year?
Though I hope Osbad will chime in with a very concise post anytime now.
1270
Post by: Osbad
I've been reading the report, which is why I haven't chimed in until now. 
Some pertinent facts that give food for thought are:
1/ In the US the sales teams have done well and grown revenue by 10%. This hasn't impacted on group turnover though because the when translating that back into £GBP the decline in the dollar (8.5% in the period) means that they are back to square one. Bit of a bummer that! Also of course, US inflation means that "real growth" is somewhat smaller.
On the plus side, as this is the largest segment of growth it indicates that perhaps some of the old US-related issues are being sorted out at last. Also Apoc was popular. Look for more Apoc-related income in the next 6 months' results. How long can they keep it up though? How many Baneblades and Space Marine Companies can the fanbase absorb before sales start dipping again?
{EDIT: I just read on another forum that there is the possibility that a lot of the North America sales are actually cannibalised European sales. Allegedly Neal sells a lot to Europe which is made attractive by the exchange rate (the Euro is even stronger against the $ than the £ is). If this is true to any significant extent, then the whole "US sales are up, Euro sales are down" argument is null and void and indicates that GW's pricing strategy is as rubbish as many believe it to be - the very idea that it is cheaper for Monsieur le Frog to order a Land Raider from a store in the US and have it shipped to him in the Pas de Calais than it is for him to walk into his nearest GW store and buy one off the shelf is just absolute lunacy!}
2/ In the UK and Asia (essentially Oz!) sales have grown impressively over the same period last year. This perhaps is down to Apocalypse as much as anything I'm guessing, although again around 4% of it can be put down to simple price inflation.
3/ Very bad news in Continental Europe (i.e. Europe outside of the UK). Independent stores sales have tumbled again. The remaining GW stores are reporting steady sales, but indie stores in Europe are dumping GW at an annual rate of >8%. Add in the effect of inflation and it looks like volume sales are down around 1/8 over last year.
4/ Last year the first 6 months counted for 49.2% of annual sales. Applying that rate to the first six months turnover this year and it predicts an annual turnover of £111,262k. If I discount that for a year's inflation (around 3.5% in the UK, although it feels like GW's inflation rate is around 5% or so) that comes out as a 3% FALL in real terms. WHich isn't good.
5/ Increased efficiency is demonstrated, but without increasing turnover its only buying them time, not solving their long term problems.
Some "worrying" markers in the report:
1/ Debt has grown to £15m from £10m over the 6 months. Witholding the dividend isn't sufficient to finance their redundancy packages, they've had to borrow money to pay for it as well. Not good, but what else could they do? Their gearing ratio has increased from 33% to 50%. Not good news for shareholders, but it looks like they were expecting it and share prices have remained steady on the day. Clearly the share price dropping back before Kirby's resignation as CEO was the existing shareholders baling being "tipped the wink" that he hadn't manage to deliver any "growth" in the half-year!
2/ Bottom line, I remain unconvinced by Kirby's assertion that "growth is just around the corner". Ignoring exceptional items, operating profit for the 6 months to November 06 has indeed doubled from 1% to 2% of turnover. But when you consider that this includes 2 months of Apocalypse hype and although there is another couple of months of pre-Christmas Apoc-hype to come in the results for the next half-year, it isn't exactly looking stunning. Kirby has been peddling the "return to growth is just around the corner" message for 3 years now and has delivered jack- sh*t. No wonder he had to go!
So I see no great cause for optimism in these figures other than in US$ terms there was growth in sales in the US for the first time in ages, but that will mean nothing if the (currently larger) European market disappears! In the US GW faces much greater competition from PP and the like, and has much lower operating margins. The US is an expensive market to service due to its highly competitive ethos.
Maybe GW have "bottomed out" and maybe there will be slow but organic growth in the US to come. But GW are still a ways off from turning the corner, even if the rate of decline has slowed some.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Good summary, Osbad. Thank you.
In my opinion it was the LoTR bubble that made GW look like they were growing for several years, but their costs were growing equally fast so their profit was actually fairly static as a proportion of their turnover.
There is surely a maximum natural market for 40K/WHFB, in which case they cannot grow once they have saturated it.
I advocate GW selling a range of other games not just 40K/WHFB. It would maximise their investment in retail space. Re-introducing Talisman was a move in this direction.
3806
Post by: Grot 6
The news is about what I'd expect them to put out in the current situation.
A couple of good skirmish games brought them out of the hole in the late ninties. Space Hulk, Necromunda, and Gorkamorka come to mind right off, but I think it might be high time that GW start looking to other areas, and possibly cutting some of the extended companies and bringing in the fold. Would save them a few on overhead, operations costs, and cut a little of that baby fat.
The future for them is probibly going to be coming up with another product, seeing that LOTR is going down. Possibly something along the lines of that new RPG that they were coming up with, or maybe even a whole new skirmish game, based around the space marines, or something.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
LoTR is going to be perked up by the Hobbit films, though they won't arrive for 2-3 years.
5642
Post by: covenant84
Simple answer to me is to turn 'hobby centres' into hobby centres and not doss holes for some of the smely kids you get in them. they could run more 'regional' painting and modelling competitions, especially in the run up to Golden deamon, and more mini campaigns. The Birmingham store have had some great ideas in the past but they seem to come at a slow rate or arn't publicised as well as could be. Activities like this would encourage more of the serious gamers to keep adding to armies (especially for 'most imaginative army' type prizes) and give more 'target' to the younger gamers. Years ago many stores had a rule no unpainted minitures allowed, now it's rare that I see a fully painted amry being used, never mind a well painted one - and this goes for staff too, I've not seen staff using fully painted person armies rather than store ones for ages. Surely doing things like this would encourage players to take it a bit more seriously rather than the classic it's Christmas, well blow a load on it and then discover girls....
I personally am put off playing instore when I've got a fully painted army with some nice conversions when I end up playing someone who can't be bothered to even build the models fully, never mind colour them. It's not that I don't like playing unpainted armies - I do because I enjoy a game but when this is happening so regulalry in stores what are the customers meant to think? 'Oh this is a great game with nice pricy models but painting them and having an impressive looking army to be proud of is not actually important - the painted models in the window are just for show'. GW needs to get a grip and encourage gamers to become ore involved with the hobby. That way they may retain more customers. I think I read somewhere that the majority of customers stick with it for 2 years, and to keep the growth rate up they need to be buying an average of 5 armies in that time. Not going to happen me thinks.
My opinion anyways. When i started a hobby centre was that, now they seem more like shops with a little bit extra there.
170
Post by: RanTheCid
Osbad wrote:
1/ In the US the sales teams have done well and grown revenue by 10%. This hasn't impacted on group turnover though because the when translating that back into £GBP the decline in the dollar (8.5% in the period) means that they are back to square one. Bit of a bummer that! Also of course, US inflation means that "real growth" is somewhat smaller.
Which much of GW's manufacturing for the US located in the US, the fall of the dollar is only going to impact GW in the net profit that is "transferred" back to the UK. Its possible that GW kept most if not all of the US revenues in dollars to hold off on currency conversion costs, which makes the US more of a win for GW.
5376
Post by: two_heads_talking
would equalizing prices across the board help to balance out the dollar vs sterling vs euro thing? In otherwords, make it the same to purchase at a the brick and mortar of your local shop vs buying across the pond with shipping? It's all good for Neil as he sees his sales go up and GW makes the same from him whether he marks it up or down. but as was mentioned when someone can have it purchased, shipped and all that for cheaper than walking a block, somehting is terribly out of balance.
514
Post by: Orlanth
Kilkrazy wrote:LoTR is going to be perked up by the Hobbit films, though they won't arrive for 2-3 years.
I dont think so. The Saul Zaentz company will have seen how GW run with this and will push the licence price up.
1321
Post by: Asmodai
Good points covenant84. They do need to push the painting and hobby aspect a bit more.
I don't think 5th edition will do much to help 40K beyond a momentary spurt of rulebook sales.
BI will be releasing Dark Heresy soon, so that's a new market for them. (They have WFRP, but there's always been a glut of Fantasy RPGs on the market.) It probably won't be more than a drop in the bucket.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Orlanth wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:LoTR is going to be perked up by the Hobbit films, though they won't arrive for 2-3 years.
I dont think so. The Saul Zaentz company will have seen how GW run with this and will push the licence price up.
There will be a negotiation. If GW are sensible they will not pay more for the licence than it is worth.
5744
Post by: Stormtrooper X
Is it just me or does it seem like both the quality and quantity of support from GW has gone down in the last couple years? I remember when they used to have sneak peeks for new models almost every week and now you're lucky to see something once a month. Also the content of White Dwarf has dwindled as well. An article on each Fantasy, 40k and LOTR; a battle report and then just tons of pictures of painted models. There just doesn't seem to be much meat to it anymore. The website is also slow with new content and we'll not even go into the FAQ issues. If you want your product to grow you have to support it non-stop and it just seems like they've lost a lot of steam. Apoc had some good hype and support, but just because it's launched doesn't mean it's time to sit back and expect your sales to boom. Also, a lot of the Apoc stuff you can't get anymore or at least Alliance doesn't seem to be able to get it.
5313
Post by: Tetchy
Stormtrooper X wrote:Is it just me or does it seem like both the quality and quantity of support from GW has gone down in the last couple years?
No its not just you.
That's the impact of misusing the revenue from the " LotR bubble", if, instead of p*ssing it away on a badly managed first attempt at Warhammer Online and some new racking for the mould-making department they had invested it in revamping and re-energising their other core games by employing new, fresh exciting talent with an interesting vision they might have really taken off into the stratosphere.
However, they didn't and now we have a corporation with no leadership running around like a headless chicken trying to persuade its increasingly disenfranchised customer base that the lacklustre rehashes and hackneyed cliches which is all it can afford to come up with are still a viable and interesting form of entertainment...
Not that I dislike their current product range or anything... 
4713
Post by: efarrer
Anyone who thought Apocalpyse would save the company wasn't paying attention tot he remainder of the releases in the last half of last year.
Fantasy
Mostly re-releases (5 man boxes) during the summer event. (No new units or armies)
High Elves (Very limited range released, dragon and characters IRC) No units
That's about it.
LotR
Gondor (new stuff was all metal blisters and one plastics box) in August and then nothing till the new year
40K
Chaos (Possessed, Terminators, and a plastic character box, some metal characters)
Apocolypse (enough releases for two codex releases, which is good since the chaos one was not well received as far as I've heard)
So two codex releases in a six month zone (Chaos and High elves) and a largely inconsequential LotR release (much as I love the game)
I'm frankly impressed that they managed to hold on to where they were. No wonder they are trying to get a new version of 40K before summer. I'll be quite suprised if 40K5 isn't released in April, to try to get the game sales going before the annual report.
4062
Post by: TheSecretSquig
The bottom line for me to explain the falling sales in the UK, which any simpleton can understand, except the business idiots at GW, is the products are overpriced. I never buy anything from GW, I buy it all on ebay and save 20% on the cost. I now have more disposable income now, than I did 10 years ago, but now spend significantly less on their products. Not because I don't want their products, but I pick a box of marines up, and I just can't justify to myself the worth of them. I have painted an entire Space Marine Company of Legion of the Damned when the box sets were £12 for a Tactical Squad (all metal). That same squad would now cost me £65 ! If you look at any other model kits, GW are at a minimum of x4 the price and people just can't justify anymore to themselves paying £20 for 10 plastic models.
If they reduced their prices (which they never will) people may actually spend more money, cause they'll feel they are getting value for money. I've been in this hobby now for 20 years, and the inflation busting price increases are going to drive the hobby out of existance.
3828
Post by: General Hobbs
Osbad wrote:
So I see no great cause for optimism in these figures other than in US$ terms there was growth in sales in the US for the first time in ages, but that will mean nothing if the (currently larger) European market disappears! In the US GW faces much greater competition from PP and the like, and has much lower operating margins. The US is an expensive market to service due to its highly competitive ethos.
.
In my area there are a few Warmachine and Hordes players. Not enough for me to consider that as competition for GW. Are there really that many other players out there for you to do so? Do you have numbers to back up that assertion?
3828
Post by: General Hobbs
TheSecretSquig wrote:The bottom line for me to explain the falling sales in the UK, which any simpleton can understand, except the business idiots at GW, is the products are overpriced..
You do realize that compared to Warmachine, Confrontation, Reaper etc, GW's figures and kits are cheaper for the most part. They get you with character models, but not with the basic troops. If thats the case, then how can one claim they are overpriced, if thats the market. I don't deny they are expensive, but when you throw out words like overpriced, you have to back it up.
1639
Post by: Flagg07
General Hobbs wrote:how can one claim they are overpriced, if thats the market. I don't deny they are expensive, but when you throw out words like overpriced, you have to back it up.
1) Live in Oz, Europe, Canada, or any other country
2) Purchase from GW U.S. (full retail)
3) Have it shipped internationally
4) Save a significant amount of $$ by not buying from your homeland
What more do you need to show that GW's products are overpriced?
1321
Post by: Asmodai
General Hobbs wrote:TheSecretSquig wrote:The bottom line for me to explain the falling sales in the UK, which any simpleton can understand, except the business idiots at GW, is the products are overpriced..
You do realize that compared to Warmachine, Confrontation, Reaper etc, GW's figures and kits are cheaper for the most part. They get you with character models, but not with the basic troops. If thats the case, then how can one claim they are overpriced, if thats the market. I don't deny they are expensive, but when you throw out words like overpriced, you have to back it up.
Well, overpriced varies from person to person.
GW's products do have a high buy-in cost. You're looking at $400-1500 to build a 2000 point army. A force for Warmachine or Infinity doesn't cost much more than $150. You get a lot more stuff with the GW product, but it's still a bigger investment of time and money.
Many people can't afford to blow a month's rent on an army. Teenagers are likely to buy a 360 or PS3 for the same cost instead. The result is that GW priced itself out of a large part of the market. Battle for Skull Pass was a good solution to this - $75 for two playable armies with decent variety. Battlefleet Gothic used this approach too. If 40K comes out with a BfSP equivalent, that will hopefully quell some of the problems that the pricing is causing.
5397
Post by: deathmonger
Pricing maybe one of much problems GW is facing. I think that maybe this kind of hobby is losing ground against instant pleasuring activities like consoles. That does not only lessens their revenue but decreases the customer to hobbist convert rate whitch is the main income to them. ( I have a job now and I can tell you I do spend 100 EUR in warhammer stuff in a month gladly. That's about the amount of money I spent on GW in a whole year when I was 14).
So, there maybe some smart people there at Nottingham who are analysing this way deeper than we do!! 
1795
Post by: keezus
General Hobbs wrote:You do realize that compared to Warmachine, Confrontation, Reaper etc, GW's figures and kits are cheaper for the most part. They get you with character models, but not with the basic troops. If thats the case, then how can one claim they are overpriced, if thats the market. I don't deny they are expensive, but when you throw out words like overpriced, you have to back it up.
Comparing model to model, Privateer is usually fractionally more expensive on a per model basis when comparing metal figs, and significantly more expensive when considering GW plastics. The trouble is that GW is targetting casual and new gamers - where the startup cost between the two system is an important deciding factor in starting up.
40k startup cost:
$90 Battleforce (if not playing Tyranids or Space Marines)
$15 Commander Model (to make a legal list)
$60 Battle for McCragge or rulebook for the rules
$22 Codex
-----
$187
Warmachine/Hordes startup cost:
$50 Starter box
$00 Rules: Quickstart included
$00 Army rules: Stat cards included
-----
$50 (even adding in the cost of the main rulebook Prime: Remix, the startup is still less than 1/2 the cost of 40k)
Edit: Even going by the best case scenario: 2 buddies buy Battle for McCragge and want to play actual 40k games with the contents, you're still looking at $104 startup since they'll need the SM codex and the Tyranid codex - and neither will have a legal army - going by the main ruleset.
The second factor is the add-on cost to make the army battle worthy. The disparity increases when you consider building up to standard sized armies for play (I'm going by tournament size but discounting tournament worthiness). I was in a FLGS two years ago with my 1/2 built IW army (1250 points at the time), and I had already spent $500Cdn on it, and it wasn't even close to being completed, even though most of it was plastic - basic troopers, bike models, tanks etc - the only metal bitz were converted oblits, vindicator and some techmarine models. A battleforce usually weighs in around 20-25% of your 1850. In Warmachine/Hordes, the starter box gets you 70% of the way to 500 which is basic play size, and roughly 50% to get to epic size games.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
But what you are forgetting is that the kiddies see is
$50 Warmachine's 3 figures in a start up box with a piece of paper
Vs.
$60 Battle for Mcragges 92-page Warhammer 40,000 rulebook, twelve (12) Termagants, six (6) Genestealers, ten (10) Space Marines, one (1) Imperial Pilot. eight (8) Spore Mines, detailed scenery, dice, twelve (12) paints, and a paintbrush.
702
Post by: Jmznudd
Osbad wrote:
{EDIT: I just read on another forum that there is the possibility that a lot of the North America sales are actually cannibalised European sales. Allegedly Neal sells a lot to Europe which is made attractive by the exchange rate (the Euro is even stronger against the $ than the £ is). If this is true to any significant extent, then the whole "US sales are up, Euro sales are down" argument is null and void and indicates that GW's pricing strategy is as rubbish as many believe it to be - the very idea that it is cheaper for Monsieur le Frog to order a Land Raider from a store in the US and have it shipped to him in the Pas de Calais than it is for him to walk into his nearest GW store and buy one off the shelf is just absolute lunacy!}
Having lived here in Romania for the past 18 months, I can tell you, that I wouldn't buy a GW product from Europe if I could help it. Because of the devaluation of the dollar against the Euro, buying a 15 Euro model (if it were equally priced $15 in the US), I'm automatically adding $6 to my price.
But wait, there's more! European nations tax the hell out of things. The lovely "VALUE ADDED TAX" permeates many (if not all) of Europe. In Romania, for example, the VAT is 19% Imagine adding 19% on all your products in the US. Oh, and at least in Romania, everything is imported, which means you get his with the import tax.
Now, why is it cheaper to buy through the mail? Simple, cheaper dollar and no taxes. Mailing to Western Europe may be pricey, but if you buy in bulk (or split shipments with friends) the overall cost will be less.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anything your saying, just pointing out these beautiful little facts.
Think of it like this too. US exports are on the rise... why? Because of the cheaper dollar. Its really no different in this case (yes, I know this parallel is flawed). If GW tried to price their US stocks at EU prices, they'd have to shut down their US stores, because a 40-50% price increase would be needed.
-Jmz
161
Post by: syr8766
Slight tangent, but this thread over at The Miniatures Page on "Gaming and Recession" is interesting and somewhat pertinent to this discussion.
3572
Post by: Zoned
keezus wrote:
Edit: Even going by the best case scenario: 2 buddies buy Battle for McCragge and want to play actual 40k games with the contents, you're still looking at $104 startup since they'll need the SM codex and the Tyranid codex - and neither will have a legal army - going by the main ruleset.
Actually, the Battle for McCragge box has all the stats and rules for the models it contains, so no codexes are necessary (though, to be fair, the Tyranid rules are going off of the old 3rd ed codex.) And this is technically enough for two players to start playing, whereas in Warmachine you'll need two starter boxes for two players, so the bare minimum cost is actually higher in Warmachine.
Realistically though, each starting path is good in different ways. GW's starter boxes win out for truly new hobbyists - easy to build/paint plastic models, more helpful beginner guides on how the game works (not the rulebook, but the Read Me First book each box contains,) two armies, and usually some decent terrain (BFSP excluded.)
Privateer boxes are better for experienced hobbyists - their starters have better detailed models, more or less full rulesets for all the contents (quick start rules and stat cards,) and models that you could realistically build a competitive army out of. Assembling the figures isn't beginner friendly, though, since the large metal models can require pinning and green stuff use. To this day the arms on my Skorne Cyclops still fall off.
I agree that 40k and WHFB require more money to complete tournament sized armies, but who really stops building their Privateer Press armies at 500pts? I feel the bottom line for each game is that if you enjoy it, you're going to spend more money into it.
After my Stryker list I'm going to try a Siege list. I'll buy different 'jacks and units to go better with him.
After my first 500pts of Eldar, I'm going to add on some units that will make up for my weaknesses or emphasize my strengths.
Good gaming!
Zoned
5046
Post by: Orock
Pimping out their IP's to be turned into mmo's was a step in the right direction. If warhammer online is half as popular as world of warcraft was, thats just printing money for them. And 40k is being brainstormed for the mmo project as we speak. Also what is their real problem with turning 40k into a cg movie. Anyone that saw beowulf knows the technology is there now to do it justice, are they afraid of money?
3828
Post by: General Hobbs
[quote=Asmodai
GW's products do have a high buy-in cost. You're looking at $400-1500 to build a 2000 point army. A force for Warmachine or Infinity doesn't cost much more than $150. You get a lot more stuff with the GW product, but it's still a bigger investment of time and money.
Many people can't afford to blow a month's rent on an army. Teenagers are likely to buy a 360 or PS3 for the same cost instead. The result is that GW priced itself out of a large part of the market. Battle for Skull Pass was a good solution to this - $75 for two playable armies with decent variety. Battlefleet Gothic used this approach too. If 40K comes out with a BfSP equivalent, that will hopefully quell some of the problems that the pricing is causing.
Just an anecdote: I used to work at a FLGS. He carried GW, Confrontation, Warmachine etc. He ended up having 50% and 75% sales to get rid of the non selling Confrontation and Warmachine product.
I'm not going to invest in 150 bucks in a game where, in my region, there is no one to play against, or in a game that might fail ( see Chronopia), resulting in a loss of my money. On the flip side, I can always find a Warhammer or 40K player. Hell, I can find LOTR players more often then any other game.
Sure, it costs more to buy alot of GW stuff. But you can still have great games of 40K at 1000 points, or 1500 for Fantasy and not spend alot. You are adding in the immediate gratifacation of having a 2500 point army right away.
The reason I got into GW games was via a need for figures for my RPG group. Warhammer Orks were cheaper and alot easier to get then any other company's. They still are.
So the best bang for my buck are GW figures.
3572
Post by: Zoned
Well, the other thing for me when it comes to the amount of money spent on 1700-2000pts of GW armies is that, by and large, you get tons of models for your armies.
I mean, sure, it's nice that I only have to spend ~$150 canadian for a tournament worthy WM army. I probably have to spend 2-4 times that amount on my GW armies. But I also got at least 2-4 as many models, and realistically more like 3-5 times as many (due to the plastics.)
I like having that many models to paint and play with. Building and painting is not a drag for me. When I set up my 1700pt 40k army and my 500pt WM army at the FLGS, I know which one turns more heads and gets people more excited. When I laid out my entire 8000pt Apocalypse force, I know it made people want to build an army as stupidly huge as that too.
You spend more, but you also get more.
Zoned
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
No reason why you can't use GW figures for other games.
They just need some of the skulls and eagles taken off.
4003
Post by: Nurglitch
I've done that. I rather like the look of Imperial Guard and Space Marines once all the hokey eagle and skull shaped flash is trimmed off.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
All my SMs are first edition beakies with all the Imperial bits stripped off, converted bolters and everything. I didn't buy them for the Hams, I bought them for general use SF figs. (Same for my Termies. Well, I got them for Space Hulk mainly.)
Some of my metal SMs and IGs I used to have predate 40K. The IG was called the Army in those days.
I sold all my classic Imperial Army on eBay for big dosh last year.
4003
Post by: Nurglitch
Yeah, I was around during the Rogue Trader days, I remember. They never looked generic enough in those days and I was too busy playing Battletech.
5164
Post by: Stelek
TheSecretSquig wrote:The bottom line for me to explain the falling sales in the UK, which any simpleton can understand, except the business idiots at GW, is the products are overpriced. I never buy anything from GW, I buy it all on ebay and save 20% on the cost. I now have more disposable income now, than I did 10 years ago, but now spend significantly less on their products.
Exactly. I have almost double the income I did when I was 20, and I can 'dispose' of more than what my whole salary was back then if I wanted to.
Point is, I don't. I don't have 'must show everyone my uber army' syndrome, I'd rather it be cheap so I can have more of it.
GW doesn't really 'get' that when they were releasing army lists every other month; I was spending 5 grand a year easy on new stuff.
Now I spend 50$ a month, if that.
Thankfully my FLGS offers a 20% discount, so I usually avoid ebay as the last thing I'd ever want is a sh*t GW store in my town.
Never been to one that was about socializing, which is why I go where I go and spend what I do to keep it going.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
GW still make money if you buy stuff off eBay or from a non-GW shop.
695
Post by: Drake_Marcus
Ok boys and girls. Let's not let this degrade into a pricing argument outside of academic terms. :p
Seriously- I'm happy that the company isn't in free fall. But the generous work of Osbad shows we shouldn't necessarily assume the next report will be golden.
Good point on the market saturation, but honestly I have a hard time believing they've reached that. Other manufacturers are gobbling up GW sales. Prepaints are still robust sellers but not not all due to the prepainted nature. Rules, relative popularity, advertising and content have a great deal to do with it as well.
Honestly, I'd welcome a real licensed product- like Star Wars. Yeah- I said it. Hasbro owns SW, but Lucus proved with Decipher that the SW license isn't a given when a giant wades in with a tempting offer from left field.
1952
Post by: Mr. Bombadidaloo
covenant84 wrote:well blow a load on it and then discover girls....
Did you mean that the other way around? *sorrie couldnt help myself*  
...i have always, and still think, that the LOTR range is a huge problem for GW financially. they've dedicated too much production to the LOTR line, they've dedicated too much of even store space and the White Dwarf magazine to pushing LOTR, and the result? more often than not, they'll sell a starter set and *maybe* one other box to a kid, and that will be all the LOTR he'll buy his entire life time, because as soon as he realizes WH or WH40k is the "real deal" he'll either move to those systems or get frustrated he got suckered into the "baby system" and leave his GW interest in the dust. and sorrie to all you full-fledged adult LOTR players, i'm not trying to make it out like you're playing the kiddie game, but that is certainly how GW is marketing it in their stores; i can say this with full confidence every time i see a staff member introduce "what Games Workshop is all about!" to a brand-spankin-newbie. they've put waaaay too much into the LOTR train, and it's runnin on tracks that are fallin apart quicker than GW can lay them.
780
Post by: PatoX
Games Workshop is one of the few companies that I can think of that spends gobs of resources on acquiring new customers, but practically none on retaining their existing base.
GW needs to stop focusing on the quick hit of a new customer that will spend hundreds of dollars upfront. Even their philosophy of releasing codexes every 6 months or more seems to follow this philosophy. Do they do it in the hopes that an existing player will start a new army every time?
Instead, GW needs to figure out ways to market to their veterans. They probably also need better a acquisition tool, besides their starter sets--it's daunting for a non-miniatures player to paint up an entire army.
For whatever it's worth, it seems they need to:
1) Simultaneously release a unit or a model for every single army (ala Privateer Press).
2) Tighten up their rules system, release all the codexes in one batch, and support their rules with updated FAQ's and officially moderated forums
3) For Warhammer 40,000, stop pushing Space Marines. They don't push one faction in Fantasy. When everyone brings a Space Marine army, it makes for a boring game.
4) Drop Lord of the Rings--it sucks up valuable resources
5) Go after the mainstream with more skirmish games that introduce players to their two money-maker game systems
6) Go even more mainstream with pre-painted.
7) Mass produce more Forgeworld stuff
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Thing about GW is that a lot of their new customers are 12-year old boys who naturally fall out of it a few years later no matter what GW might do to retain them.
4062
Post by: TheSecretSquig
I still feel that their products are overpriced for the average Joe. I enjoy playing the games, but its the building, converting and painting what keeps me happy. Recently I've started to look at other model kits. For the price of a Basilisk, I can buy 3 model tanks of the real world at the same (ish) scale. I've just bought a Perfect Grade Gundam model kit and its huge. The same weight of Plastic in GW figures would cost 3 or even 4 times the cost of this kit.
GW are loosing money from customers such as myself, who can't justify spending the money, when for the same amount, you can get so much more. Take Forgeworld for instance. It was set up as an experiment to build specialist resin kits that would be sold on a small scale, so the prices were high to reflect this. When Forgeworld instantly became a mainstream business, did the prices drop to reflect that they were in fact selling more that they thought they would ? No. Forgeworld claim (when I've spoken to them) that the price of resin is high, which drives the cost up. Total  !! At SALUTE (Big Games Convention in London) I buy loads of resin terrain from a company called Ainsty. Its really high quality stuff, all the excess resin has already been sanded off for you (unlike Forgeworld) and weight for weight its less than half the price.
If someone has £10 to spend every week on their hobby, they can't really buy anything from GW for about 3 to 4 weeks saving. Now they have £40 in their pocket. Do they buy the Tactical Squad and Rhino with a couple of paints, or do they buy a Xbox Game. GW is not pocket money anymore, and thats why they are loosing out.
I wanted to buy 6 Appocolypse Basilisk Batterys 2 weeks ago. I go to my local GW store with my £300. I'm happy to buy 18 Basilisks for £300, but they've stopped doing the Appocolypse sets. "But we can sell you 18 single Basilisks" "ok, I'll take them", "that will be £450", "but I can still buy the sets of Ebay for £45 each, can't you sell me the 18 for £300, like you were just before Christmas?" "No". So I walk out the store, and spend the money on Ebay instead. OK, GW still make profit from me, but oneof their stores lost the oppertunity to take £300 from me, and make more profit, as the middle man was cut out.
Now, how about GW introducing something like a loyalty card, bit like the Skulz promotion they did. There is no reward for being a loyal customer, other than the ever increasing costs to build your army. Even the armies are now about spending money, not the army....
The new Chaos Space Marine Codex for example. As a Thousand Sons Player, I had very strict rules on what I could have in my army, No bike, raptors, etc and squads of 9 for everything. New codex I can have anything I want, which ruins peoples themed armies, because if they don'y take advantage of the new codex (and thus spend money to do it) you get mashed everygame. I spent £54 ON 9 Screamers because I need 9, their my only FA choice, and the're have decent in CCW. Now they are usless, and have the same stats as other models, which cost significantly cheaper. So why would anyone now by a Screamer model at £6, when they can buy 3 demonettes at £6 for the same stats ? ? ?
4884
Post by: Therion
Great post. GW and Forgeworld pricing is really out of this world. GW does consider their customers price insensitive since they feel that because they dominate the market you'll buy their stuff no matter the cost.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
PatoX wrote:For whatever it's worth, it seems they need to:
1) Simultaneously release a unit or a model for every single army (ala Privateer Press).
2) Tighten up their rules system, release all the codexes in one batch, and support their rules with updated FAQ's and officially moderated forums
3) For Warhammer 40,000, stop pushing Space Marines. They don't push one faction in Fantasy. When everyone brings a Space Marine army, it makes for a boring game.
4) Drop Lord of the Rings--it sucks up valuable resources
5) Go after the mainstream with more skirmish games that introduce players to their two money-maker game systems
6) Go even more mainstream with pre-painted.
7) Mass produce more Forgeworld stuff
I'd agree with all of these.
Speaking of skirmish games, I could see potential if GeeDub started developing skirmish games that tied in more tightly with their core games better. I could see great things for a Mordheim-esque 40K themed game where players built warbands. We know they recycle the rules for these things from game to game, so that's not a problem. And rather than invest in lots of new miniature production that takes up shelf space they could just make skirmisher sprues for each faction. That way it requires minimal investment on their part, generates excitement in the hobby, and the minis could theoretically still be tied back into most of our main 40K armies, yet still brings them extra money.
As for price- I used to have a lot less money than I do now. And back then, I spent far more on 40K. When prices were lower, I often bought minis as an impulse any time I saw something that struck my fancy. My friends were much the same. Nowadays none of my friends buy anything from GW, and I cannot justify any purchases unless they are for a ruthelessly-vetted armylist. Low prices = more experimentation/converting = more fun in the long run = a sustained customer base.
466
Post by: skkipper
when prices get to high you can always go old school.
no not stealing
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7459586@N08/2067291144/
181
Post by: gorgon
Interestingly, one rumor on Warseer was that a 40K skirmish supplement may be on the way.
The trouble with that, of course, is that it's a 40K supplement instead of a separate (but related) system that leads into 40K.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
A skirmish supplement with a boxed set of figures could be a gateway.
1321
Post by: Asmodai
gorgon wrote:Interestingly, one rumor on Warseer was that a 40K skirmish supplement may be on the way.
The trouble with that, of course, is that it's a 40K supplement instead of a separate (but related) system that leads into 40K.
It does seem problematic that you'd need a $75 rulebook (main game), a $75 supplement (ala Apocalypse) and two $35 rulebooks (Codexes for each side) for people to get into the game. That's $220 before they buy a single model. That's not really going to serve the purpose a skirmish rules set is supposed to serve - i.e. luring people in with a low entry price.
514
Post by: Orlanth
GW does need to produce skirmish 40K rather than a cut down of them ain ruleset. The skirmish game should play more like Rogue Trader and have cutomisation options for ebvery model. This is however the oposite trend to what Gw are actually doing. And conflicts with the way the studios heads are stuck in the sand.
This leads to be big change Gw can make.
Even their prices can be tolerated if their studio could be. Franjkly if they rewrote the rules and mass released ALL the army books and codexes people would be happier, happy cuastomer are loyal customers.
I seriously think that the simple mechanic of sacking Jervis Johnson and cronies would result in a share price rise. The investors are not stupid, they know where the companies real weaknesses are.
GW will one day have their night of the long knives, it will either be done by themselves, or done when they are taken over. The former gives them more control and more of a chance. the company has so much going for it, a few headcappings would allow the profit to flow, so someone somewhere will see the business opportunity that a thorough purge will bring and will move to act on it, buying now whilwe shares are low. Fixing the company then selling off or riding the transformation long term.
Yes, the current pricing is a problem, but a simple price freeze and shake up would restore customer support enough to buy time to improve profitability and stabilise for the company to afford a price restructuring.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
The basic rules structure of 40K, the stat line and so on, is complex enough for a role-playing game. They could easily do a skirmish supplement which was a comlete set of rules in its own right, with all the individual customisation options.
They should also split the main rulebook down into several smaller and cheaper books:
Standard Rules including Missions
40 in 40 and Kill Team go into the Skirmish supplement
Fluff goes into a Fluff guide
Campaigns
Then you have Cities of Death, Apocalypse and Planet Strike as separate add-ons.
If a player buys everything then GW gets lots of money, but you can have a decent starting experience for just the cost of the core rules. Result!
1795
Post by: keezus
Orlanth wrote:GW does need to produce skirmish 40K rather than a cut down of them ain ruleset. The skirmish game should play more like Rogue Trader and have cutomisation options for ebvery model. This is however the oposite trend to what Gw are actually doing.
While I would LOVE for them to do this, GW has become very bitz unfriendly and ultimately can not accomodate a conversion driven line the way they once could - due to all the once metal bitz being transitioned to plastic sprues meaning:
1. A metal trooper conversion from GW costing around $30 worth of bitz (i.e. $4 for the metal weapon sprue, $3 for the backpack, $2 for the alternate head, $3 for the extra arm and $18 for two figs to cut apart to kitbash the body would now cost something like: $10 for a plastic accessory sprue, $10 for a different accessory sprue, $45 for three different body/torso/leg sprues. (e.g. a custodes model needing a space marine body sprue + arms, bretonian legs, high elf heads, IG accessories and Tau backpacks.  )
This would be ok if you could still get the metal equivalent but:
2. If it is on a plastic sprue, the metal versions will have vanished from the online store / bitz service.
3. If you needed something like a "right handed powerfist (found only on the assault sprue)" or "MK6 shoulder pads" you'd have to either grit your teeth and buy a complete sprue from GW for that one piece... barter from somebody who hasn't used theirs, buy from a third party like The Warstore or kitbash one out of greenstuff and plasticard.
The naysayers will state that you can trade, or buy plastic bits seperately or that you get lots of "bonus" bitz once you've used what you needed from the sprue, and I agree it can be done... but the days of GW making converting easier with their excelent bitz service is gone. These days, you can't rely on GW to help you go that extra mile and you have to put in lots of extra work to get that unique army / squad etc.
The further "streamlining" (read: removal of archive bitz) of the online store and bitz service is further proof that GW is becoming much less conversion friendly than the GW of old. The once vaunted bitz catalogue is a hollow shell of its former glory. Privateer on the other hand, once castigated for not having a bitz service even has the components for their LE figures listed on their online bitz order catalogue.
1656
Post by: smart_alex
Is there a way to get a breakdown by game and even by army/expansion etc. I thought APOC would save the day, forge world i backed up months with flooded orders.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
Orlanth wrote:GW does need to produce skirmish 40K rather than a cut down of them ain ruleset. The skirmish game should play more like Rogue Trader and have cutomisation options for ebvery model.
They have INQUISITOR, which you can play with standard 40K models. Nothing forces you to use the 54mm figs.
They have the rules for the KILL TEAMS, which is skirmish level 40K.
They are allegedley planning on a Skirmish supplement (like Apocalypse).
Necromunda is now free for download
Gorkamorka is now free for download
The Rogue Trader Rules still exist if none of the above options are Rogue Trader enough for you.
If you don't want to play large scale battles you have at least 5 options in the 40K universe outlined for you right there.
You could also try a free gaming system like WARENGINE which people convert 40K stats for all the time, which lends itself nicely to skirmish level gaming and is completely customizable.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
smart_alex wrote:Is there a way to get a breakdown by game and even by army/expansion etc. I thought APOC would save the day, forge world i backed up months with flooded orders.
It turns out a fair proportion of 40K players think Apoc is rubbish. I don't think the price helps either.
844
Post by: stonefox
To emphasize Kil's point:
(comic found here)
5462
Post by: adamsouza
What's NOT to like about APOCALYPSE is you own a big enough army already to play it ?
You can ignore force organization and use models that would be collecting dust otherwise.
You can field TITANS !!!!
Not since 2nd edition have we had rules for our Armorcast models.
5164
Post by: Stelek
I haven't played a game of Apoc yet.
What's the point? Figuring out how to grab handfuls of lovingly painted models and yanking them off the table faster than my wife spends my paychecks?
Please. I only need to put up with precisely ONE of those events.
26
Post by: carmachu
Zoned wrote:
I agree that 40k and WHFB require more money to complete tournament sized armies, but who really stops building their Privateer Press armies at 500pts? I feel the bottom line for each game is that if you enjoy it, you're going to spend more money into it.
After my Stryker list I'm going to try a Siege list. I'll buy different 'jacks and units to go better with him.
After my first 500pts of Eldar, I'm going to add on some units that will make up for my weaknesses or emphasize my strengths.
Same issue applies to 40k and WHFB....who really stops building their army at 1500/1850 and 200pts for the two different games?
26
Post by: carmachu
Kilkrazy wrote:No reason why you can't use GW figures for other games.
They just need some of the skulls and eagles taken off.
Which games? 40k doesnt exactly have that much utility outside 40k.
Fantasy has some....I personally like using alot of Confrontation models for my D&D game.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
I know someone with a Hordes Troll army made almost entirely or Ogre Kingdoms models.
26
Post by: carmachu
adamsouza wrote:Orlanth wrote:GW does need to produce skirmish 40K rather than a cut down of them ain ruleset. The skirmish game should play more like Rogue Trader and have cutomisation options for ebvery model.
They have INQUISITOR, which you can play with standard 40K models. Nothing forces you to use the 54mm figs.
They have the rules for the KILL TEAMS, which is skirmish level 40K.
They are allegedley planning on a Skirmish supplement (like Apocalypse).
Necromunda is now free for download
Gorkamorka is now free for download
The Rogue Trader Rules still exist if none of the above options are Rogue Trader enough for you.
If you don't want to play large scale battles you have at least 5 options in the 40K universe outlined for you right there.
Right, we have options if we choose.
But your not listening.
GW NEEDS to doa skirmish level gateway game and support it. Its how you get people into games. Itrs why PP is so successful....quickstart rules, amngled metal and gateways into larger games.
GW doesnt do that. Thats how I got into the game with spacehulk...we started with terminators and moved into bigger armies back then... GW has nothing organzied, nothing.
26
Post by: carmachu
adamsouza wrote:What's NOT to like about APOCALYPSE is you own a big enough army already to play it ?
You can ignore force organization and use models that would be collecting dust otherwise.
You can field TITANS !!!!
Not since 2nd edition have we had rules for our Armorcast models.
You can build incredibly silly and insanely powerful armies with no balance.....it takes the worst of 40k and makes it its key component.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
TheSecretSquig wrote:I now have more disposable income now, than I did 10 years ago, but now spend significantly less on their products.
If you look at any other model kits, GW are at a minimum of x4 the price and people just can't justify anymore to themselves paying £20 for 10 plastic models.
If they reduced their prices (which they never will) people may actually spend more money,
I spend less than a decade ago, because I decided I had "enough" minis. And after some very aggressive pruning of armies and models, I consolidated down to somewhat fewer, but more comprehensive, armies.
GW plastics are, model for model, the best value you can get.
GW effectively reduced their per-model prices with the Apocalypse packs. They moved a *lot* of product in the US this holiday season.
806
Post by: Toreador
I have yet to run into something so overpowered and silly. We have a Apoc day at the shop the last weekend of every month, and it has been great so far. It might just be the people we play with though....
5462
Post by: adamsouza
You can build incredibly silly and insanely powerful armies with no balance.....it takes the worst of 40k and makes it its key component.
OUTSIDE of the tournament setting and in a friendly game setting.
Some of us are in this hobby becuase we like to build stuff, and then actually get to use it.
I've been itching to use STOMPAs and TItans for years and having the rules to do so with my friends is fantastic.
Their OPTIONAL rules, it's not like Warhound titans will be destroying the tournament scene.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
Toreador wrote:I have yet to run into something so overpowered and silly. We have a Apoc day at the shop the last weekend of every month, and it has been great so far. It might just be the people we play with though....
VDR lent itself to people creating the absurd.
APOCALYPSE is using GW Datasheets. There is a better built in sense of balance.
4921
Post by: Kallbrand
Apoc possibilites for pepole who like it, skirmish for those who like that and doesnt have enough models and the standard games is very good.
WD have become a commercial paper that should be free so thats no big surprise. All the small games that have been killed off.. well thats all big losses.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
carmachu wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:No reason why you can't use GW figures for other games.
They just need some of the skulls and eagles taken off.
Which games? 40k doesnt exactly have that much utility outside 40k.
Fantasy has some....I personally like using alot of Confrontation models for my D&D game.
There's a bunch of different SF skirmish rulesets out there. Most of the 40K infantry and a lot of the vehicles would work fine. It depends on how much Dark Future branding you can tolerate. I filed all the skulls, eagles and so on off my SMs, and converted the bolters and other kit, and now I have a load of generic SF armoured infantry.
Tau convert without any modifications at all.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
adamsouza wrote:What's NOT to like about APOCALYPSE is you own a big enough army already to play it ?
You can ignore force organization and use models that would be collecting dust otherwise.
You can field TITANS !!!!
Not since 2nd edition have we had rules for our Armorcast models.
The fact that it doesn't actually provide solid rules for using such large forces.
The speeding up of the game pretty much amounts to (A) don't bring everything on at once and (B) kill stuff off very quickly with big weapons.
So what you get is basically official permission to play the kind of mash-it-up big games people have always played. But you pay £30 for the privilege.
26
Post by: carmachu
Kilkrazy wrote:carmachu wrote:
There's a bunch of different SF skirmish rulesets out there. Most of the 40K infantry and a lot of the vehicles would work fine. It depends on how much Dark Future branding you can tolerate. I filed all the skulls, eagles and so on off my SMs, and converted the bolters and other kit, and now I have a load of generic SF armoured infantry.
Tau convert without any modifications at all.
And they are?
Just saying there are many doesnt do much good, I'm actually asking what they are.
26
Post by: carmachu
adamsouza wrote:
OUTSIDE of the tournament setting and in a friendly game setting.
Some of us are in this hobby becuase we like to build stuff, and then actually get to use it.
I've been itching to use STOMPAs and TItans for years and having the rules to do so with my friends is fantastic.
Their OPTIONAL rules, it's not like Warhound titans will be destroying the tournament scene.
And if you have like minded people thats cool. I agree occassionally throwing down with all you got can be fun.
But in a meeting of strangers.....it has no real balance. *shrug* Not even the data sheets are balanced. The deals that came with it were great...but the game itself wasnt.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
carmachu wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:carmachu wrote:
There's a bunch of different SF skirmish rulesets out there. Most of the 40K infantry and a lot of the vehicles would work fine. It depends on how much Dark Future branding you can tolerate. I filed all the skulls, eagles and so on off my SMs, and converted the bolters and other kit, and now I have a load of generic SF armoured infantry.
Tau convert without any modifications at all.
And they are?
Just saying there are many doesnt do much good, I'm actually asking what they are.
2 minutes research brought me this list.
AT-43
Chain Reaction 2
Dropwing
Infinity
Rezolution
Stargrunt II
Starship Troopers
Strike Force 70,000
Terran Wars 2255
These are all rules for 15mm to 30mm figures. Some of them have their own figure ranges.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
adamsouza wrote:They have INQUISITOR, which you can play with standard 40K models. Nothing forces you to use the 54mm figs.
That's not a proper skirmish game, that's more of a competitive RPG. GW needs a gateway game that new players can play right out of the box, and don't have to wait on someone to figure out how to be a GM.
They have the rules for the KILL TEAMS, which is skirmish level 40K.
No, Kill Team forces your opponent to play an army of faceless goons. No one wants to do that.
They are allegedley planning on a Skirmish supplement (like Apocalypse).
We'll have to see how this goes.
Necromunda is now free for download
Gorkamorka is now free for download
Both of these games have limited factions. For an ideal skirmish game, you should be able to make characterful miniatures to use in the skirmish but also use them in your first 40K army. Gorkamorka works for Orks, Necromunda perhaps works if you are doing a heavily converted IG force, and otherwise there's not a lot of mini cross-over.
The Rogue Trader Rules still exist if none of the above options are Rogue Trader enough for you.
Rogue Trader is not a credible option in this day and age. You roll on a chart for equipment for cryin' out loud.
You could also try a free gaming system like WARENGINE which people convert 40K stats for all the time, which lends itself nicely to skirmish level gaming and is completely customizable.
I don't think the point is that we don't have skirmish options. More that GW does not have a good skirmish game that will build a player base without costing them an arm and a leg. Looking up obscure, open-source games on the internet just to play with your minis seems to defeat the purpose of the exercise. GW should make it easier for newbies to get involved, not harder.
161
Post by: syr8766
JOHIRA wrote:
The Rogue Trader Rules still exist if none of the above options are Rogue Trader enough for you.
Rogue Trader is not a credible option in this day and age. You roll on a chart for equipment for cryin' out loud.
Don't be so down on random stat rolls. GASLIGHT is built on that (especially for their characters) and most people love that game. D&D has had a roll-your-stats mechanism for years and has so far succeeded.
I think it depends on your assumptions going into the game. If you expect set stats and customization options (i.e. 40k 2nd-4th ed.), then I can see how you'd be disappointed. If you're expecting to play a skirmish game with set stats for mooks, no customization, several elements of built-in unpredictability, and a greater focus on game play rather than army creation, then it's a different ballgame. If the skirmish based game is meant to be a gateway to playing GW games, then it's not meant for grognards like us who want to fiddle with maths to determine the best wargear-selection-to-points ratio.
Probably the compromise in this would be Necromunda/Mordheim: basic stats for figures and customizability when you choose your 'army', but as you campaign with them, they earn bonuses/demerits in a random way, pick up different weapons, etc. Now, the question is: can they take the mechanics of 'munda/'heim and convert it out to deal with 'regular' 40k/fantasy? Mordheim probably succeeds in this better than 'munda, but I think it's possible.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
Warmachine and Hordes are not all that cheap, though (like 40k and WH) you can reduce your costs by deliberately building a force that costs less money.
That said, my standard 500pt Cryx list, using a starter box so I saved a little, runs over $160 MSRP. That’s without counting a rulebook, templates, counters, the faction deck, or the other models I’ve bought to try out or for some variety. When I count that stuff in, I’ve spent another $124 on models (and I’m dropping another $45 tonight to get a box of 6 Bane Thralls) and about $100 on rules and accessories. So my total investment as of today, for a bit over 1000pts and supporting stuff (not counting paints or glue), is around $430. That’s pretty comparable to a 40k army, though my 40k armies have more models.
1795
Post by: keezus
Mannahnin wrote:Warmachine and Hordes are not all that cheap, though (like 40k and WH) you can reduce your costs by deliberately building a force that costs less money.
That said, my standard 500pt Cryx list, using a starter box so I saved a little, runs over $160 MSRP. That’s without counting a rulebook, templates, counters, the faction deck, or the other models I’ve bought to try out or for some variety. When I count that stuff in, I’ve spent another $124 on models (and I’m dropping another $45 tonight to get a box of 6 Bane Thralls) and about $100 on rules and accessories. So my total investment as of today, for a bit over 1000pts and supporting stuff (not counting paints or glue), is around $430. That’s pretty comparable to a 40k army, though my 40k armies have more models.
With all due respect, it is hard to argue that GW offers similar value on a per dollar basis when you look at the proportional investiture to -begin- playing. GW has a much higher initial investment needed. While you can spend $150 or so dollars to buy a 500 point list in WM/Hordes (rulebooks initially optional due to downloadable quick-start rules and stat-cards), that same $150 only buys you a battleforce +squad box +leader (dicscounting the necessary cost of rulebook/codex), which is only enough to play at the rarely seen 500-750 level - sure, you get more models with GW, but you'll be spending 3x that to get to competitive play.
I agree that Warmachine is just as expensive once you really get into it and start buying additional armies / options - but instead of having one "standard sized" 1850 point army, the same money can buy you several 500 point WM/Hordes factions, a single faction with lots of options and/or faction crossover figures like Mercs. Even in your example, using your $430 number, by your own admission, that's enough to almost buy your initial WM army 3x, where as your 40k player would have his one 1850 army with few (if any) options. The other thing is that with the GW model, you really have to shell out the money to be competitive. Before the great nerfing in the summer of 2007, I had a $90 Everblight list that was highly competitive. (Starter +seraph x2 +forsaken x2 +Vayl). The Kreuger woldwarden list is similarly cheap and effective. That same $90 would barely cover the cost of the required rulebooks in 40k.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
The cost of the rules is a big deal. They need to publish a smaller, cheaper rulebook for those of us who don't particularly care to see the same old stuff repeated again with increased focus on the imperium and nice new artwork.
I'm not too annoyed at paying what I do for a codex, but the core rules could be stripped down to basics and sold for a tenner.
26
Post by: carmachu
Mannahnin wrote:Warmachine and Hordes are not all that cheap, though (like 40k and WH) you can reduce your costs by deliberately building a force that costs less money.
That said, my standard 500pt Cryx list, using a starter box so I saved a little, runs over $160 MSRP. That’s without counting a rulebook, templates, counters, the faction deck, or the other models I’ve bought to try out or for some variety. When I count that stuff in, I’ve spent another $124 on models (and I’m dropping another $45 tonight to get a box of 6 Bane Thralls) and about $100 on rules and accessories. So my total investment as of today, for a bit over 1000pts and supporting stuff (not counting paints or glue), is around $430. That’s pretty comparable to a 40k army, though my 40k armies have more models.
Except with more options. 10-12 dollars on a new caster and you can recycle all the old models...*shrug*
5462
Post by: adamsouza
Warmachine does litterally have a less expensive entry point, but I fin that the average Warmachine player spends as much on his Warmachine force as he does on his 40K forces.
Well, at least I do
And the people I play Warmachine with do.
The Warjacks are great points per $$, but the Tournament scene in Warmachine revolves around the infantry types. Then you buy a box and 2 blisters and you've spent $40-$50 a unit on low point but exceedingly usefull infantry. Build 4 of those units, buy a solo charecter here and there, and a new Warcaster, and you've spent as much as a 40K army.
806
Post by: Toreador
Or more on his Warmachine stuff. All the entry points don't really matter much when the standard game being played is 750 to 1000pts. Throw in the number of rulebooks you have to have to be able to know and counter the enemies troops (because not knowing what special powers they have can and will lose you a game in one round of "Oh? It can do that?")
Games aren't cheap, but that is why they are a hobby. Comparisons aren't that great because it is all in what you are willing to spend, which has more to do with how you like the game, than the cost of it.
780
Post by: PatoX
Even if the starting price for a Privateer Press army and and Games Workshop army are the same, there's a huge difference between the two.
Privateer Press does not screw over players by making units and jacks obsolete. In fact, they do things to give value to weaker units. Also their strategy does not involve selling a whole new army every time.
And as someone else mentioned, a new caster is almost like giving yourself a new army.
Finally, Privateer Press actually supports there rule system and their business seems to be booming.
Even with all that, I prefer GW models and fluff, but it's hard to spend my dollars with GW, because of their lack of support and poor marketing to veteran players. I'm sure this has something to do with the ill health of the company.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
JOHIRA wrote:adamsouza wrote:They have INQUISITOR, which you can play with standard 40K models. Nothing forces you to use the 54mm figs.
That's not a proper skirmish game, that's more of a competitive RPG. GW needs a gateway game that new players can play right out of the box, and don't have to wait on someone to figure out how to be a GM.
They have the rules for the KILL TEAMS, which is skirmish level 40K.
No, Kill Team forces your opponent to play an army of faceless goons. No one wants to do that.
They are allegedley planning on a Skirmish supplement (like Apocalypse).
We'll have to see how this goes.
Necromunda is now free for download
Gorkamorka is now free for download
Both of these games have limited factions. For an ideal skirmish game, you should be able to make characterful miniatures to use in the skirmish but also use them in your first 40K army. Gorkamorka works for Orks, Necromunda perhaps works if you are doing a heavily converted IG force, and otherwise there's not a lot of mini cross-over.
The Rogue Trader Rules still exist if none of the above options are Rogue Trader enough for you.
Rogue Trader is not a credible option in this day and age. You roll on a chart for equipment for cryin' out loud.
You could also try a free gaming system like WARENGINE which people convert 40K stats for all the time, which lends itself nicely to skirmish level gaming and is completely customizable.
I don't think the point is that we don't have skirmish options. More that GW does not have a good skirmish game that will build a player base without costing them an arm and a leg. Looking up obscure, open-source games on the internet just to play with your minis seems to defeat the purpose of the exercise. GW should make it easier for newbies to get involved, not harder.
You have skirnish options. It's just none of them seem to conform to your preconceived notions of what they should be.
The bread and butter of Warhammer is Large Table top battles, a skirmish game will only ever be an intersting side project.
The Battle for Skull Pass Hobby Set, with a 128-page Warhammer rulebook, one hundred and nine (109) Citadel miniatures, detailed scenery, dice, gaming markers, twelve (12) Citadel paints, and a paintbrush for $60 is about as good as t gets for making it an easy on newbies. They just need a comparable product for 40K
Also,
* Rouge Trader has a point calculator, Instead of rolling randomly, build the force you want and dertimine it's point value.
* Inquisitor doesn't need a GM. It's only an RPG for people who want it to be. Otherwise it's a set of guidelines for fighting with more detailed small forces.
* You are not going to get a game with Skirmish detail, allowing you a million options, and then get to use them unmodified in your 40K game. The game stopped being that detailed after 2nd edition, which Gorkamorka and Necromunda are based on.
* Kill Team - use the guidelines to build a force, and then play against someone who did the same.
26
Post by: carmachu
adamsouza wrote:
You have skirnish options. It's just none of them seem to conform to your preconceived notions of what they should be.
The bread and butter of Warhammer is Large Table top battles, a skirmish game will only ever be an intersting side project.
No.
Skirmish is a gateway. Its how you get folks in and progress.
Yes I have options....but none of them are turely a skirmish GAME, that does what its supose to do.
1795
Post by: keezus
Toreador wrote:Or more on his Warmachine stuff. All the entry points don't really matter much when the standard game being played is 750 to 1000pts. Throw in the number of rulebooks you have to have to be able to know and counter the enemies troops (because not knowing what special powers they have can and will lose you a game in one round of "Oh? It can do that?")
Toreador: I don't know why people insist on perpetuating that once you get to the magical 1000 points, that Warmachine becomes more expensive than 40k. My Menite horde has a MSRP of around $450 - it is 55 infantry with a Vanquisher, a Revenger and a squad of Vengers - considering that the Vengers cost more than 1/5 of the total army cost, just cutting them out for a warjack could easily make 1000 points for less money so I'd rate army cost as even -at best- if one insists on comparing 1850 40k vs 1000 WM.
Adamsouza wrote:Warmachine does litterally have a less expensive entry point, but I fin that the average Warmachine player spends as much on his Warmachine force as he does on his 40K forces.
Well, at least I do
And the people I play Warmachine with do.
The crux of the situation is, regardless of actual "gaming value for your dollar", the fact that players can be seen to spend more on Warmachine/AT43/Confrontation/Infinity etc than 40k, it is just an indication that those respective systems have done more to stimulate their customers into spending money than Games Workshop. When I give money to Privateer Press - I'm excited about buying the new hotness to enhance my army. When I give money to GW, I grumble that they had arbitrarily nerfed half my army and now I have to shell out a few hundred bucks to fix my army.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
PatoX wrote:Privateer Press does not screw over players by making units and jacks obsolete.
Really? The original Cryx Slayer Helljack is completely, totally obsolete compared to the self-generating Helljack that came out later. Game-wise, you would NEVER field a Slayer when you have the option for the alternative.
But that doesn't matter, either, because you wouldn't field Jacks in competitive gaming, anyways, because Infantry has made Jacks obsolete.
Which is completely stupid, because the entire *point* of Warmachine is to play with Jacks because Jacks differentiate Warmachine from every other 28-30mm semi-skirmish game.
The very idea that PP isn't in it for the money, and isn't making stuff obsolete is utter nonsense. The notion that PP is somehow different / better than GW is pretty silly. If you play at the same relative levels of competitiveness, there's no difference.
PP is still in the Rogue Trader phase. We'll see where they end up 20 years from now.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
keezus wrote:My Menite horde has a MSRP of around $450 - it is 55 infantry with a Vanquisher, a Revenger and a squad of Vengers - considering that the Vengers cost more than 1/5 of the total army cost, just cutting them out for a warjack could easily make 1000 points for less money so I'd rate army cost as even -at best- if one insists on comparing 1850 40k vs 1000 WM.
One could similarly replace a $15 SM Commander with a $3 bitz Commander. The point is that competitive forces are going to have similar costs when all is said and done, because that is what the standard gamer's budget allows for, and games will expand to consume that wallet.
The crux of the situation is, regardless of actual "gaming value for your dollar", the fact that players can be seen to spend more on Warmachine/AT43/Confrontation/Infinity etc than 40k, it is just an indication that those respective systems have done more to stimulate their customers into spending money than Games Workshop.
Nope. The crux is that GW has an established base of models, whereas the competition is all new build. When PP WM moves to their equivalent of 2nd Edition, and rebalances the entire line, I can guarantee the vitriol will be much stronger than what GW is getting today.
When I give money to Privateer Press - I'm excited about buying the new hotness to enhance my army. When I give money to GW, I grumble that they had arbitrarily nerfed half my army and now I have to shell out a few hundred bucks to fix my army.
As above, wait until your PP base is reaches parity in spend, and PP then decides to go to a new edition. Because, eventually, PP will be forced to do this if they are to stimulate new sales of existing product.
Tho to be honest, I think the PP model is unsustainable long term, and the most likely approach for PP will be to sell more like MtG, and to "retire" various models after some number of years, converting everything to a semi-collectible limited edition format.
But getting back to spend, I've spent a couple hundred recently after a long dry spell. I enhanced my Imperials with a Baneblade, more Transports, and more Troops. This doesn't bother me at all. It's not like I'm barred from playing my other stuff.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
carmachu wrote:
Skirmish is a gateway. Its how you get folks in and progress.
Yes I have options....but none of them are turely a skirmish GAME, that does what its supose to do.
1.) Provide evidence that Skirmish is a gateway, and not just a player preference
2.) Provide examples of how Necromunda and Gorkamorka fail at being a skirmish game and list what would be needed to qualify as such
5462
Post by: adamsouza
The crux of the situation is, regardless of actual "gaming value for your dollar", the fact that players can be seen to spend more on Warmachine/AT43/Confrontation/Infinity etc than 40k, it is just an indication that those respective systems have done more to stimulate their customers into spending money than Games Workshop.
 The real point is that people bash you over the head with Warmachine is cheaper than Warhammer 40K as a selling point, and if you play competitively your likely to spend as much if not more.
It doesn't matter why you spend as much, or more.
What matters is that if you enjoy the game you probably will spend that much.
Making the "it's cheaper and better than 40K' mantra full of what makes the grass grow 
Now, before people think I'm a GW fanboi spewing my love juice for 40K  I own and play damn near every faction for BOTH games.
I held of of Warmachine when it was released becuase I thought it was another money pit like my Warhammer Addiction.
Then a bunch of people I knew were playing it and all of them "it's cheaper", "you can play with just a starter" sucked me into it.
It's a damn fine game, but it's NO DIFFERENT from 40K in turns of how much money it's going to to cost you.
I'm back to playing 40K because it allows me to model more. My biggest gripe about Warmachine is the lack of options. It's like a CCG without radom distribution.
Sure I can use this guy or that guy, but I can't change his gear, or model him from bits.
806
Post by: Toreador
I think one of the differences is that changing the caster means that you almost always change up the force. For 750pts of Cryx I have spent a lot more than I have on my 1500pts of Orks. Primarily this is because I have entirely different load outs for each Cryx caster. This means I almost have separate armies in a sense. I have to have a bigger collection of models to swap out for different games than I do with 40k. It's like card games in a way. I have to have a lot larger pool to draw from because I constantly have to change up my army.
It's one thing GW doesn't have at this moment. It can't just keep adding models to all the armies every so many months. It has a saturation point, and I would assume just like Rackham did, PP will eventually get to it. You just can't keep releasing things to infinity. Games do have to cycle to keep people purchasing.
26
Post by: carmachu
adamsouza wrote:
1.) Provide evidence that Skirmish is a gateway, and not just a player preference
2.) Provide examples of how Necromunda and Gorkamorka fail at being a skirmish game and list what would be needed to qualify as such
1) *points to PP*
Working quite well toget folks into the game. Sapce hulk USE to do the same, when it was out, at least in my area.
2) Are they in print? Are the models availaible for ease of use, ease of play? Or is it damn difficlut to get the models for a novice. Where are they, BTW? EITHER on specialist game site, or somewhere similar that you have to download, barely supported(6 months of no releases)
AND neither game gateway into 40k or fantasy.....(you can even throw in Mordhiem as well). Each game has its own models, its own circle....there's no incentive to buy into it bigger when ~$40-$60 gets you all you need to play, depending on if someone has the game book or not.
I have to list whats needed to qualify? What are you, 10 years old? You dont understand the concept of gateway?
Something that is small scale, skirmish, that includes the WHFB or 40K models, that allows you to transition into the larger games with eth models you have. You cant do that with gorkamorka or mordhiem, or necromunda.(ok ok, you might now, finally be able to do so with orks...but its taken 8 years to even get close).
Whats needed is a skirmish game that will use say, a squad of marines or a platoon of guardsmen that plays self contained, yet will push you to eventually go bigger.
Space hulk did that for us. Terminators and eventual rules had the use of tactical marines in it, and when 2nd ed came around it was a natural gateway to build a bit bigger into the game....granted it was flawed since the base was terminators, but it worked a bit.
26
Post by: carmachu
JohnHwangDD wrote:keezus wrote:My Menite horde has a MSRP of around $450 - it is 55 infantry with a Vanquisher, a Revenger and a squad of Vengers - considering that the Vengers cost more than 1/5 of the total army cost, just cutting them out for a warjack could easily make 1000 points for less money so I'd rate army cost as even -at best- if one insists on comparing 1850 40k vs 1000 WM.
One could similarly replace a $15 SM Commander with a $3 bitz Commander. The point is that competitive forces are going to have similar costs when all is said and done, because that is what the standard gamer's budget allows for, and games will expand to consume that wallet.
Doesnt change the play style nearly as much. He could keep roughly the same force, and just replace the warcaster and have adifferent army, where as you need to change units, Your army doesnt play that much different from chaplin to librarian to force commander.
Nope. The crux is that GW has an established base of models, whereas the competition is all new build. When PP WM moves to their equivalent of 2nd Edition, and rebalances the entire line, I can guarantee the vitriol will be much stronger than what GW is getting today.
Thats an if. GW its a certainty. We'lls ee if they do.
As above, wait until your PP base is reaches parity in spend, and PP then decides to go to a new edition. Because, eventually, PP will be forced to do this if they are to stimulate new sales of existing product.
Actually.....when the story arc climaxes in Legends, afterwards new factions might happen, which aliviates the need to "retire" them.
Instead of losing something, something additional will appear.
Tho to be honest, I think the PP model is unsustainable long term, and the most likely approach for PP will be to sell more like MtG, and to "retire" various models after some number of years, converting everything to a semi-collectible limited edition format.
But getting back to spend, I've spent a couple hundred recently after a long dry spell. I enhanced my Imperials with a Baneblade, more Transports, and more Troops. This doesn't bother me at all. It's not like I'm barred from playing my other stuff.
Nor is PP stuff.
I worry that it might be unsustainable. But right now....who knows. Its all going fine and alot of fun.
806
Post by: Toreador
Seems one of the biggest gateway games right now is Dawn of War. "You mean this is also a boardgame?"
Yep, they need some other games to help lead people in. The old board games and Space Hulk did a decent job, but a small scale skirmish more on the order of Necromunda, with small starter boxes would be a great lead in. For both Fantasy and 40k.
But it would be just as easy to do some basic 40k in 40 minutes rules for 500 point factions, come out with a starter box for each and let people go at it. If they found it fun, they could add more things until they got to full blown 40k.
5782
Post by: Terminizzle
IMO, GW needs to:
1. Cut down on the superfluous junk in the rulebook- Lose the 30 or so pages of black and white gothic sketches, and cut down tremendously on the background in the rulebook. Provide the basic story, and point readers to games workshop's website to read more background and other information about the individual armies. Players who want the big rule book for the "fluff" will go read it on the net. The rulebook should be available for about as much as a codex.
2. Look up the term "equilibrium point". I don't know a thing about marketing or economics, but I know what an equilibrium point is, and solely because of that think I am qualified to understand what GW is doing wrong. "Fewer sales this year? Price hike!" Wrong.
3. Cut down on games that aren't profitable for a period. Spend more money on cool projects/ ideas after you have a business that actually makes money.
4. Do a lot more advertising. WD should literally be free- I think they'd make more money off it. Hell, maybe each WD could have a few pages at the beginning explaining the hobby. Of course, they'd have to cut costs to put out WD for free, but it could be bi-monthly and they wouldn't have to find crap to fill it with every issue. If WD can't be free, surely some sort of mag they put out a couple times a year explaining the hobby and showing off some awesome models could be.
5. Pick up the license for something more socially acceptable. Unfortunately LotR didn't quite do the trick. Market it as a thinking strategy game as well as a vast hobby opportunity, not as the perpetuation of a tiny niche. I can't really come up with a good example, 10,000 BC maybe?
I want GW to do well obviously, but it's really hard to imagine that happening in the long run the way things are now.
Edit: Can't believe I forgot Dawn of War. Huuuge opportunity for GW right there with the game's relative success. I also love the idea of a Skirmish game being widely sold. Every copy of Dawn of War should have included a small insert about the hobby that showed off awesome minis.
A Dawn of War skirmish game has some potential too- maybe even make 2 versions; Dawn of War: Space Marines vs. Orks and Dawn of War: Chaos vs. Eldar. Pre-painted minis would go a long way in a product like this towards attracting new players for sure. With a small rulebook containing rules for the (2 or so) units included in each army as well as some eye catching pictures of other models and explanations of how powerful some of them are (Avatar, etc) that would be a huge gateway and could be sold for as little as 40-50 bucks (based on realistic costs compared to other boxed games, not usual GW costs).
Think about that. A player picks up the DoW skirmish box set because they like the DoW computer game. They love the models and are already pretty enthralled with the 40k universe. The skirmish games are fun, but not as rewarding as the combats between massive armies in the DoW PC game. To me, that sounds like an instant 40k player.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
I have to list whats needed to qualify? What are you, 10 years old? You dont understand the concept of gateway?
Yes you needed to list something. You were expecting the rest of us to be on the same page as you like it some sort of evident truth.
Did it make you feel better to insult me ?
I understand the concept of Gateway. I don't consider recycling the same models as a prerequisite.
You are confusing the way you think it should be with the right way.
D&D has a $25 Starter box with rules and miniatures.
If you like the game and get hooked, you go out and buy more books that make the starter box useless.
If someone plays Necromunda, which is FREE, with a bunch of figures they convert from a IG BOX, which is cheap and they get hooked on the 40K universe, it worked as a Gateway Game.
I know plenty of people who graduated up to D&D after playing HEROQUEST.
People who play 40K after Space hulk.
Just becuase you have a narrow vierw of what a Gateway Game should be doesn't mean I'm obligated to agree with you.
1321
Post by: Asmodai
Terminizzle wrote:
Edit: Can't believe I forgot Dawn of War. Huuuge opportunity for GW right there with the game's relative success. I also love the idea of a Skirmish game being widely sold. Every copy of Dawn of War should have included a small insert about the hobby that showed off awesome minis.
It didn't?
That surprises me considering that every Black Library book ever published has an ad for 40K in the back.
5782
Post by: Terminizzle
Not in the copy my roommate bought, or in the copy he got when he returned the first copy because it wasn't supplied with a CD key. GW must tell people not to support 40k related products.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Toreador wrote:Yep, they need some other games to help lead people in. The old board games and Space Hulk did a decent job, but a small scale skirmish more on the order of Necromunda, with small starter boxes would be a great lead in. For both Fantasy and 40k.
But it would be just as easy to do some basic 40k in 40 minutes rules for 500 point factions, come out with a starter box for each and let people go at it. If they found it fun, they could add more things until they got to full blown 40k.
Actually, a generalized Skirmish game would be better. Space Hulk is really a scenario game. Necromunda is closer, but has more emphasis on refereed campaign gaming.
As a gateway system, Skirmish 40k should focus around regular squad boxes, rather than Skirmish-specific boxes, and then it should grow to be more like 40k in 40m. So it should be possible to play a squad of Space Marines against a squad (or two) of Imperial Guard.
For 500 points, isn't that basically a Battleforce box?
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Terminizzle wrote:1. Cut down on the superfluous junk in the rulebook-
2. Look up the term "equilibrium point".
3. Cut down on games that aren't profitable
4. Do a lot more advertising. WD should literally be free-
5. Pick up the license for something more socially acceptable.
1. A lot of the attraction of 40k is the fact that it has lots of Fluff. And 'Eavy Metal pr0n. Cutting it out pretty much destroys 40k, because 40k would never compete as a pure rules system.
2. GW prices according to market point - what the market will bear.
3. GW appears to have cut way back on Specialist Games.
4. If someone is willing to pay $5 for WD, why should GW give it away?
5. I have no idea what you're talking about here. The point of GW gaming is to have IP that they own and control, rather than to pay royalties to someone else. GW got out of Dr. Who, Star Trek, etc. more than a decade ago.
5782
Post by: Terminizzle
JohnHwangDD wrote:
1. A lot of the attraction of 40k is the fact that it has lots of Fluff. And 'Eavy Metal pr0n. Cutting it out pretty much destroys 40k, because 40k would never compete as a pure rules system.
2. GW prices according to market point - what the market will bear.
3. GW appears to have cut way back on Specialist Games.
4. If someone is willing to pay $5 for WD, why should GW give it away?
5. I have no idea what you're talking about here. The point of GW gaming is to have IP that they own and control, rather than to pay royalties to someone else. GW got out of Dr. Who, Star Trek, etc. more than a decade ago.
1. I absolutely agree, and addressed that. The rulebook isn't the only book with background/ fluff in it, and I'm not suggesting removing it completely.
2. Never heard of "Market Point". As you've used it, it just sounds like abstract nonsense. The Equilibrium Point is the point (i.e. price, number of sales) that maximizes profit. It is not the most possible sales, or the highest possible price, as these essentially never maximize profit.
3. Well, that's good then.
4. So more people are exposed to the hobby. More players generate more revenue than WD.
5. Well, Star Trek is not something I'd call socially acceptable by any means.
161
Post by: syr8766
The best examples of skirmish as entry point would be GASLIGHT to "Battles By GASLIGHT", and Urban War scaling up to Metropolis (latter is probably better for our purposes here). Comparable figures/rules, scaled up, so whereas before with, say, Urban war, you needed ~5-6 figures that acted somewhat independently, now you need many times that and they act as units.
514
Post by: Orlanth
Terminizzle wrote:
1. Cut down on the superfluous junk in the rulebook- Lose the 30 or so pages of black and white gothic sketches, and cut down tremendously on the background in the rulebook. Provide the basic story, and point readers to games workshop's website to read more background and other information about the individual armies. Players who want the big rule book for the "fluff" will go read it on the net. The rulebook should be available for about as much as a codex.
No no no. That is what they did for 3.0 The fluff lite codex was a disaster, it just added to the dumbed down schtick GW were beat with and lost them sales. Gw have learned from this and have added more backstory than before. I would like to see a little less artwork and more text though.
Terminizzle wrote:
2. Look up the term "equilibrium point". I don't know a thing about marketing or economics, but I know what an equilibrium point is, and solely because of that think I am qualified to understand what GW is doing wrong. "Fewer sales this year? Price hike!" Wrong.
You are preaching to the choir here with this, however so do most of us.
Terminizzle wrote:
3. Cut down on games that aren't profitable for a period. Spend more money on cool projects/ ideas after you have a business that actually makes money.
I would go further and all but scrap some internal hobby lines. The internal hobby games are those games designed for ansupporting a handful of studio playwers with the resources and time for the game. Inquisitor is the prime culprit. Most players cannot afford the time or money for =I= figures except as 'large sculpture pieces, yet to play =I= properly you are expected to cut up and convert them as you go along. Your henchman lost his legs in the last battle, so out comes the saw..... Not remotely viable. Keep the game rulebook but reconfigure the miniatures gallery for play with standard 40K miniatures. The old minis can still remain as mail order pieces. Brother Artemis has his place, its on the mantlepiece, not the gaming table.
Terminizzle wrote:
4. Do a lot more advertising. WD should literally be free- I think they'd make more money off it. Hell, maybe each WD could have a few pages at the beginning explaining the hobby. Of course, they'd have to cut costs to put out WD for free, but it could be bi-monthly and they wouldn't have to find crap to fill it with every issue. If WD can't be free, surely some sort of mag they put out a couple times a year explaining the hobby and showing off some awesome models could be.
Advertising is expensive, however ther excess space in White Dwarf can be used for general hobby articles, including those for other peoples work. If you want to advertise GW, use White Dwarf and make White Dwarf accessible to non GW players. White Dwearf readers are helped with how to guides for building new kits, but dont need the advertising tanyone who reads White Dwarf alreasy has access to the release information so they dont need 30pages of trade mag hype to tell them again.
Terminizzle wrote:
5. Pick up the license for something more socially acceptable. Unfortunately LotR didn't quite do the trick. Market it as a thinking strategy game as well as a vast hobby opportunity, not as the perpetuation of a tiny niche. I can't really come up with a good example, 10,000 BC maybe?
I agree, but the contract they should have tried to get was/is Star Wars. That single deal would save the company, for a while at least. I dont put it past the current management to shoot golden geese.
5782
Post by: Terminizzle
Orlanth wrote:
I agree, but the contract they should have tried to get was/is Star Wars. That single deal would save the company, for a while at least. I dont put it past the current management to shoot golden geese.
Might be pushing it, but I even thought 300 was a decent opportunity.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
I pitty the poor bastard taht decides to play the 10,000+ persian Empire
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
adamsouza wrote:I pitty the poor bastard taht decides to play the 10,000+ persian Empire
Meh. He's no worse off than the Ork player against Nidzilla.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
No mostly I was thinking about buying and painting 10,000+ models
1795
Post by: keezus
JohnHwangDD wrote:As above, wait until your PP base is reaches parity in spend, and PP then decides to go to a new edition. Because, eventually, PP will be forced to do this if they are to stimulate new sales of existing product.
Tho to be honest, I think the PP model is unsustainable long term, and the most likely approach for PP will be to sell more like MtG, and to "retire" various models after some number of years, converting everything to a semi-collectible limited edition format.
Interestingly, I heard a rumour that PP has decdided that the upcoming expansion for Warmachine will be the last, and while the game will continue production, other than errata, there will be no new supplements for the game. Hordes is getting one additional book after Evolution and then that game is going the same way.
Edit: I don't know about stimulating sales. If you are a causal gamer, you don't care a bout new editions, you'll probably buy your one army, play it for 2 summers and move on. If you are a hard core wargamer, you will probably not stop with one army anyways. There are 10 factions in the privateer world - as no one faction stands out above the others in overall power, there's no reason not to expand into another faction - especially when the armies and models all play differently. I think that 40k is forced to drive sales through rules revisions partly because the rule set is so unbalanced and large portions of the product line are non-sellers. Granted, PP has its set of models with terrible gameplay effects (necrosurgeon anyone?), but the appear to be actively rebalancing model abilities through errata - an example of this is the Repenter gaining auto-fire on its flamethrower. You don't need to release a new edition to do this.
514
Post by: Orlanth
Terminizzle wrote:Orlanth wrote:
I agree, but the contract they should have tried to get was/is Star Wars. That single deal would save the company, for a while at least. I dont put it past the current management to shoot golden geese.
Might be pushing it, but I even thought 300 was a decent opportunity.
Why is is pushing it, Lotd of the Rings is no second place fantasy, it is as big as Star Wars, always was. Allowing for GW sculpt quality and resources they could really run with a Star Wars contract.
5787
Post by: Aquila
Jmznudd wrote:Osbad wrote:
But wait, there's more! European nations tax the hell out of things. The lovely "VALUE ADDED TAX" permeates many (if not all) of Europe. In Romania, for example, the VAT is 19% Imagine adding 19% on all your products in the US.
Do you think that is bad? HAH! In Iceland you can expext to pay up to 30% extra as per "Value added tax" so you have next to nothing to complain about 
Aquila
1423
Post by: dienekes96
Orlanth wrote:I agree, but the contract they should have tried to get was/is Star Wars. That single deal would save the company, for a while at least. I dont put it past the current management to shoot golden geese.
Both TTT and ROTK outgrossed the three Star Wars prequels worldwide. I completely understand the emotional ties GW has to Tolkien's work...their Warhammer universes are intimately tied into the Lord of the Rings series, so pursuing that deal made perfect "emotional" sense to the company. Lucasfilm/Hasbro would want far too much control to allow GW to even consider Star Wars, and SW iconography runs counter to the ethos of Warhammer and Warhammer 40K.
It only makes sense because Star Wars fans are well known for buying almost anything with the logo on it, from pet Halloween costumes to Darth Vader sprinklers (google them...they exist). On the business side, it might swallow up the existing GW universes, leaving only Star Wars. Who in the hell wants that? Star Wars has enough toys in the world.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
syr8766 wrote:Don't be so down on random stat rolls. ....I think it depends on your assumptions going into the game. If you expect set stats and customization options (i.e. 40k 2nd-4th ed.), then I can see how you'd be disappointed.
I'm not down on random stat rolls, I'm saying they're unsuitible for a 40K skirmish game designed as a gateway to get more players into the hobby. It is a mechanic that is utterly foreign to 40K as it is played now. The gateway needs to be somewhat similar.
Probably the compromise in this would be Necromunda/Mordheim: basic stats for figures and customizability when you choose your 'army', but as you campaign with them, they earn bonuses/demerits in a random way, pick up different weapons, etc. Now, the question is: can they take the mechanics of 'munda/'heim and convert it out to deal with 'regular' 40k/fantasy? Mordheim probably succeeds in this better than 'munda, but I think it's possible.
Now this I agree with absolutely. Something like Necromunda but without the location-specific limitations. Some kind of game where the basic squaddies from every 40K army can appear regularly. A few abstract rules (squad coherency, some of the nuances of target selection and casualty removal) are perhaps simplified but the meat of the game remains. For this game I imagine myself as a newb picking up some cheap minis that I like the look of and playing a few games. If I don't like how my initial minis play I can easily switch to a different faction. Once I find a team that looks and plays how I like, I get involved in a league night at my local FLGS. As my team builds experience/takes casualties I end up with a larger pool of minis than I can realistically play in on skirmish scenario. And then I look at 40K on the next table over and realize that I can use most of my figures as a head start on an army for that same faction in 40K. It doesn't matter if every option for those characters transfers over to 40K, what matters is that I can use the models and keep playing bigger and bigger games, and have fun at every step along the way.
Now, yes, we can already do all these things. Back when my friends still played, one of them refused to buy a shadow field for his Archon until he earned it by winning a few battles without it. But we were already quite deep into the hobby- he was already on his second army. GW needs a game along these lines I think that has all of this spelled out explicitly by GW, with decent rules and a wide variety of scenarios for people who have no idea what they're doing.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
JohnHwangDD wrote:PatoX wrote:Privateer Press does not screw over players by making units and jacks obsolete.
Really? The original Cryx Slayer Helljack is completely, totally obsolete compared to the self-generating Helljack that came out later. Game-wise, you would NEVER field a Slayer when you have the option for the alternative.
The Deathjack and Seether haven’t made the Slayer obsolete. At 154pts to 110pts, you can afford a Nightwretch and a Slayer for the same price as a Deathjack. The Deathjack is indeed awesome, but I’m still fielding a Slayer in my standard build. The Seether is much closer; at 113 its improved stats over the Slayer really annoyed me when I first saw it, but when actually playing with it I found that its berserk-type rule is a big drawback, and has really limited its use in my forces.
The Slayer did compare poorly to a number of heavy jacks from other factions, until PP introduced the Two Handed Throw power attack, which adds significantly to its utility.
JohnHwangDD wrote:But that doesn't matter, either, because you wouldn't field Jacks in competitive gaming, anyways, because Infantry has made Jacks obsolete.
Which is completely stupid, because the entire *point* of Warmachine is to play with Jacks because Jacks differentiate Warmachine from every other 28-30mm semi-skirmish game.
One of the things PP has been doing a very impressive job of, is tweaking the rules and introducing new stuff in ways that corrects the balance of previous units, without having to errata the originals. The Trample power attack, for example, gives heavy warjacks a better counter to infantry spam. Unit attachments gave new powers and upgrades to somewhat lackluster units like Winterguard and Satyxis Raiders.
Warmachine does have an issue with infantry forces stealing the glory from jacks. This is basically due to a flaw in the focus mechanic. As it’s a fixed resource each turn, and your jacks are competing with your caster for use of it, fielding a force with fewer jacks means you can get more mileage out of the caster. The Hordes fury mechanics avoid this issue, making Warlocks dependent on their beasts for power, as opposed to the reverse. PP has, however, recognized this and has introduced Warcasters for WM who have spells and abilities which allow them to more easily control and enhance multiple jacks at once. Thus giving players the ability to make competitive jack-heavy forces. Kharchev and Darius are the obvious examples, but Amon is good for this as well, and Cryx is finally about to get theirs (Mortenebra).
JohnHwangDD wrote:The very idea that PP isn't in it for the money, and isn't making stuff obsolete is utter nonsense. The notion that PP is somehow different / better than GW is pretty silly. If you play at the same relative levels of competitiveness, there's no difference.
No one’s saying PP isn’t in it for the money. But I disagree with your thesis that they’re deliberately making stuff obsolete. Quite the contrary, a lot of their units in the last few expansions have enhanced lagging units or introduced new counters to units which were complained about as overpowered.
I will say that there are some similar balance issues, including top-tier units/lists, at high levels of competitive play, but not to the same extent. And PP makes what appear to be more careful adjustments, in a more timely fashion, as opposed to us having to wait 4-5 years for a codex or rulebook revamp for 40k, in which the adjustment is often a major pendulum swing.
JohnHwangDD wrote:PP is still in the Rogue Trader phase. .
Depends on what you mean by that. They are indeed relatively young as company, and the game has only been around for four years now. But they have learned from GW and others. Their system is far superior to RT; their development, design, and marketing are all far more advanced than GW’s was in the 80s or 90s. They’re much more responsive to their customers, and they’ve adopted a different design/production/release model which lets them work in a significantly different manner from GW.
JohnHwangDD wrote: We'll see where they end up 20 years from now.
Yes indeed. I’m curious to see how they sustain it over the long haul. So far, so good, honestly.
734
Post by: Dal'yth Dude
A Dawn of War skirmish game sounds interesting. But I'd go the other way and make it much simpler and distinct from the mechanics of 40K. Prepaints could be a draw, market research could answer that.
If skirmish games alone were enough to get people into 40K Necromunda would have succeeded by now.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Basically any company that works to actively shaft its customers by deliberately making stuff obsolete is not going to build a loyal fanbase.
Some examples for and against:
Electronics generally -- Everyone know this gets cheaper and better as technology advances. People are not sensitive about obsolescance.
Cars -- Well they wear out.
Football shirts -- Fans effing hate having to buy a new strip every year because the teams keep changing the design. You don't need the strip to go matches though.
5782
Post by: Terminizzle
Orlanth wrote:Terminizzle wrote:Orlanth wrote:
I agree, but the contract they should have tried to get was/is Star Wars. That single deal would save the company, for a while at least. I dont put it past the current management to shoot golden geese.
Might be pushing it, but I even thought 300 was a decent opportunity.
Why is is pushing it, Lotd of the Rings is no second place fantasy, it is as big as Star Wars, always was. Allowing for GW sculpt quality and resources they could really run with a Star Wars contract.
Let me rephrase:
I might be pushing it by saying 300 was a decent opportunity.
2700
Post by: dietrich
keezus wrote:Interestingly, I heard a rumour that PP has decdided that the upcoming expansion for Warmachine will be the last, and while the game will continue production, other than errata, there will be no new supplements for the game. Hordes is getting one additional book after Evolution and then that game is going the same way.
What Matt Wilson has said is that the next Warmachine expansion will be the last in this 'story arc' and will wrap up a lot of loose ends. Presumably, it'll leave some "hints" of things to come. iirc, the suggestion is that after the next expansion, the timeline will advance like 5 years for the next expansion. Mr. Wilson has said that it is not the 'end' of the game, just the current story.
PP has been addressing the "infantry-machine" issue by introducing more spells/effects/weapons that easily kill light and medium single-wound infantry, particularly in Hordes (cheap AoEs with medium strength, auto-hitting effects, effects that remain in play and do damage, etc.).
If GW did a DoW 'boxset', I'd buy it, and it could be a good intro to the game. It seems like that is what BoM was intended to be, a good intro to the game with small forces and condensed rulebook. Maybe Orks vs. Space Marinez Hurr! will sell better.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
Dal'yth Dude wrote:A Dawn of War skirmish game sounds interesting. But I'd go the other way and make it much simpler and distinct from the mechanics of 40K. Prepaints could be a draw, market research could answer that.
If skirmish games alone were enough to get people into 40K Necromunda would have succeeded by now.
A few DOW cheapo box sets with prepainted figures and abbreviated rules that was mass marketed as a toy and not a hobby product would probably work wonders.
As for Necromunda, I don't think it was ever intended as a gateway game. Necromunda always came across as a way for 40K players to have MORE detailed charecters in a way that would have been too cumbersome for 40K's large scale battles. I do belive they dropped the ball by simply not converting rules for every 40K faction at the time.
I understand that Space Marines, or Tyranids would have probably mopped the floor with Hive Gangers, but they could have had a second tier to the game without gangers, where you could have used a squad of the military factions in the universe.
I started working on such fan rules myself, but I've abhored the melee rules in Necromunda ever since the release of Mordheim. Did do some work on what I like to call Necroheim, which is basically Necromunda with Hordheim's melee and damage resolution.
735
Post by: JOHIRA
Dal'yth Dude wrote:If skirmish games alone were enough to get people into 40K Necromunda would have succeeded by now.
I'm not so sure. Necromunda is problematic in that the factions are almost completely separate from 40K armies. This is part of the reason that I've never gotten involved in Necromunda despite being aware that the mechanics are quite good and despite there being a fairly steady (if small) fan base consistently playing it. None of the gangs appeal to me, and playing would require me to buy a load of new figs that I can' use in my present armies.
I'm against pre-paints simply because painting is part of the this hobby. I'd rather see hobby stores introduce a "painting night" where for the cost of a pot of paint people can use a shared set of paints and some gently used brushes and learn how to paint together.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Mannahnin wrote:JohnHwangDD wrote:The original Cryx Slayer Helljack is completely, totally obsolete compared to the self-generating Helljack that came out later. Game-wise, you would NEVER field a Slayer when you have the option for the alternative.
The Seether is much closer; at 113 its improved stats over the Slayer really annoyed me when I first saw it, but when actually playing with it I found that its berserk-type rule is a big drawback, and has really limited its use in my forces.
The Slayer did compare poorly to a number of heavy jacks from other factions, until PP introduced the Two Handed Throw power attack, which adds significantly to its utility.
If I have to pay more money to buy a new rulebook/codex from PP to update my Slayers, how is that different from buying a rulebook from GW to update my CSM? And doesn't that, by definition, make my original rulebook obsolete? Also, more expensive than the starter & Quickstart? Yeah.
JohnHwangDD wrote:But that doesn't matter, either, because you wouldn't field Jacks in competitive gaming, anyways, because Infantry has made Jacks obsolete.
Which is completely stupid, because the entire *point* of Warmachine is to play with Jacks because Jacks differentiate Warmachine from every other 28-30mm semi-skirmish game.
One of the things PP has been doing a very impressive job of, is tweaking the rules and introducing new stuff in ways that corrects the balance of previous units, without having to errata the originals.
Warmachine does have an issue with infantry forces stealing the glory from jacks. This is basically due to a flaw in the focus mechanic.
As above. Rules tweaks mean you buy more rules, so my original rulebook is obsolete, more spendy.
Warmachine is *great* at the 350-500-pt level. You have enough Focus, and the game is cheap and fun. At 1000 pts, it's a totally different game, and you might as well be playing 40k or WFB.
JohnHwangDD wrote:The very idea that PP isn't in it for the money, and isn't making stuff obsolete is utter nonsense. The notion that PP is somehow different / better than GW is pretty silly. If you play at the same relative levels of competitiveness, there's no difference.
No one’s saying PP isn’t in it for the money. But I disagree with your thesis that they’re deliberately making stuff obsolete. Quite the contrary, a lot of their units in the last few expansions have enhanced lagging units or introduced new counters to units which were complained about as overpowered.
If units were lagging, weren't they obsoleted by the overpowered stuff? I just don't see the distinction you're making here.
I will say that there are some similar balance issues, including top-tier units/lists, at high levels of competitive play, but not to the same extent. And PP makes what appear to be more careful adjustments, in a more timely fashion, as opposed to us having to wait 4-5 years for a codex or rulebook revamp for 40k, in which the adjustment is often a major pendulum swing.
If 40k were as small in scope as WM, GW could support it in a similar way.
JohnHwangDD wrote:PP is still in the Rogue Trader phase. .
Depends on what you mean by that. They are indeed relatively young as company, and the game has only been around for four years now.
1st Edition, continuous expanding stream of new units every month. Continuous creation of rules to support new stuff. All supplement-based.
JohnHwangDD wrote: We'll see where they end up 20 years from now.
Yes indeed. I’m curious to see how they sustain it over the long haul. So far, so good, honestly.
Yeah, they're doing OK. But 20 years is a long time.
963
Post by: Mannahnin
JohnHwangDD wrote:If I have to pay more money to buy a new rulebook/codex from PP to update my Slayers, how is that different from buying a rulebook from GW to update my CSM? And doesn't that, by definition, make my original rulebook obsolete? Also, more expensive than the starter & Quickstart? Yeah.
No argument that they didn’t get it exactly right the first time. But Privateer added all the “new core” rules into the freely available errata and FAQs on the website. Each of the rulebooks has added more units (though those rules are still on the cards), more rules, more fluff, campaign stuff, etc. So they each have value. But I never had to buy a rulebook other than Prime to play, and I didn’t, until they released Remixed. Remixed incorporated the new rules, FAQs, and Errata directly into the book so that I didn’t have to carry as much, and added a ton of new art (much of it in color) and other cool fun stuff. And they still kept the price at $25, which is pretty darn cheap for what you get.
JohnHwangDD wrote:As above. Rules tweaks mean you buy more rules, so my original rulebook is obsolete, more spendy.
Nope, because the rules tweaks are available for free. If you want the convenience of having them all in a new book with nice new art, you can pay for that if you choose.
JohnHwangDD wrote:Warmachine is *great* at the 350-500-pt level. You have enough Focus, and the game is cheap and fun. At 1000 pts, it's a totally different game, and you might as well be playing 40k or WFB.
I agree. Warhammer’s still my favorite game, with 40k second, and WM/Hordes third. WM/Hordes don’t scale up well, IME, because the depth and number of special rules, and the way the rules interact with individual models, take up too much time when you get to have an actual army’s worth of them.
JohnHwangDD wrote:JohnHwangDD wrote:The very idea that PP isn't in it for the money, and isn't making stuff obsolete is utter nonsense. The notion that PP is somehow different / better than GW is pretty silly. If you play at the same relative levels of competitiveness, there's no difference.
Mannahnin wrote:No one’s saying PP isn’t in it for the money. But I disagree with your thesis that they’re deliberately making stuff obsolete. Quite the contrary, a lot of their units in the last few expansions have enhanced lagging units or introduced new counters to units which were complained about as overpowered.
If units were lagging, weren't they obsoleted by the overpowered stuff? I just don't see the distinction you're making here.
I think there’s a difference between obsolete units and ones which are slightly behind the power curve. Most of those units weren’t supplanted by better versions; they just weren’t quite as good as they should be on first release. Like the Pyre Troll, which they errata’d to add a new special ability. Or my Necrotech, who I do find to be useful, but will be even more useful when I start fielding him with Mortenebra. There are very few really cruddy units in WM or Hordes which no one ever bothers with.
JohnHwangDD wrote:Mannahnin wrote:I will say that there are some similar balance issues, including top-tier units/lists, at high levels of competitive play, but not to the same extent. And PP makes what appear to be more careful adjustments, in a more timely fashion, as opposed to us having to wait 4-5 years for a codex or rulebook revamp for 40k, in which the adjustment is often a major pendulum swing.
If 40k were as small in scope as WM, GW could support it in a similar way.
I don’t get what you mean. Are you talking about the number of armies? Privateer’s up to 10 now, right? 4 core factions for each WM & Hordes, plus Mercs/Minions, and the new pirate army.
JohnHwangDD wrote: JohnHwangDD wrote: We'll see where they end up 20 years from now.
Mannahnin wrote:
Yes indeed. I’m curious to see how they sustain it over the long haul. So far, so good, honestly.
Yeah, they're doing OK. But 20 years is a long time.
It is a long time. This may just be my perception, but their approach and their sales numbers seem to suggest that they’re doing a lot better than any of the previous challengers to GW’s dominance, like Warzone, VOR, Confrontation, etc. I’m an unapologetic GW fan, and I recognized that their business strategies have got to be pretty decent for them to have survived for this long. But I’m not blind to the fact that they could be doing a better job, and that they might be able to learn from some of their competitors. Or the fact that PP has replaced GW as the dominant game in my home city/gaming group.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Mannahnin wrote:No argument that they didn’t get it exactly right the first time. But Privateer added all the “new core” rules into the freely available errata and FAQs on the website. Each of the rulebooks has added more units (though those rules are still on the cards), more rules, more fluff, campaign stuff, etc. So they each have value. But I never had to buy a rulebook other than Prime to play, and I didn’t, until they released Remixed.
OK, it's not so bad, but really then, "Remixed" is kind of like the RT Compilation / Compendium / BotA. Sure, technically, you can play with Quickstart and the cards, but that isn't really how people play. You buy the rulebooks as they come out.
JohnHwangDD wrote:Warmachine is *great* at the 350-500-pt level.
I agree. Warhammer’s still my favorite game, with 40k second, and WM/Hordes third. WM/Hordes don’t scale up well, IME, because the depth and number of special rules, and the way the rules interact with individual models, take up too much time when you get to have an actual army’s worth of them.
Again, exactly like RT - fun skirmish that doesn't scale.
There are very few really cruddy units in WM or Hordes which no one ever bothers with.
If WM/H is as mature of a game as some say, then this is hard to believe. In any system, there will be advantages to exploit, and the hardcore players will gravitate to them.
JohnHwangDD wrote:If 40k were as small in scope as WM, GW could support it in a similar way.
I don’t get what you mean. Are you talking about the number of armies? Privateer’s up to 10 now, right? 4 core factions for each WM & Hordes, plus Mercs/Minions, and the new pirate army.
More like total volume of stuff and installed base. 40k or WFB alone has more armies than WM/H combined. Each has more players with far more stuff "invested". So I see that as the core difference in terms of support impact.
This may just be my perception, but their approach and their sales numbers seem to suggest that they’re doing a lot better than any of the previous challengers to GW’s dominance, like Warzone, VOR, Confrontation, etc.
Unquestionably so. The sculpt & painting quality is very close to par (no thanks to ex- GW painters), and the pricing is very competitive (because GW raised their prices enough to leave room for PP to charge enough to cover their costs and make some profit to grow the game). PP was the right company at the right time to benefit from GW's strategic mistakes.
I’m an unapologetic GW fan, and I recognized that their business strategies have got to be pretty decent for them to have survived for this long. But I’m not blind to the fact that they could be doing a better job, and that they might be able to learn from some of their competitors. Or the fact that PP has replaced GW as the dominant game in my home city/gaming group.
Yup. Most game systems die in just a few years. To go 2 years, 5 years, much less 10 or 20 is very difficult.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
3/ Very bad news in Continental Europe (i.e. Europe outside of the UK). Independent stores sales have tumbled again. The remaining GW stores are reporting steady sales, but indie stores in Europe are dumping GW at an annual rate of >8%. Add in the effect of inflation and it looks like volume sales are down around 1/8 over last year.
That's really bad news. In my area, two indie stores dumped GW products during the last year.
26
Post by: carmachu
There are very few really cruddy units in WM or Hordes which no one ever bothers with.
If WM/H is as mature of a game as some say, then this is hard to believe. In any system, there will be advantages to exploit, and the hardcore players will gravitate to them.
How is it, you come in and argue against Pp, and have NO first hand knowelege of it, and expected to be taken seriously?
The point of PP is that EVERY faction has advantages and expliots. And everything, as long as its within the rules, legal. You can knock down your onw models, throw your own models and completely legal.
Nothing cheesy, beardy, not within the spirit...legal is legal. Illegal is not. Works well for balance.
PP constantly goes back over rules and models to try and keep things viable and balanced.....mechanics fo cygar and khador sucked ass...they came back and gave them jack marshal and made useful.
More like total volume of stuff and installed base. 40k or WFB alone has more armies than WM/H combined. Each has more players with far more stuff "invested". So I see that as the core difference in terms of support impact.
The difference is GW doesnt even try......THAT is a core difference. Tewh fact designers say they make them "good enough" and years of support inbetween books.
They dont try, not that they cant.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
carmachu wrote:If WM/H is as mature of a game as some say, then this is hard to believe. In any system, there will be advantages to exploit, and the hardcore players will gravitate to them.
How is it, you come in and argue against Pp, and have NO first hand knowelege of it, and expected to be taken seriously?
Oh, don't be silly. I've got a Cryx army and I've played tournaments and so on. I've just moved away from WM because PP broke the promise that they started with, that the games would be cheap fun skirmish games that revolved around Warcasters and Warjacks. WM pretty much lost me in the first year because they didn't stick with what they did to bring me into the game. WM turned their fun little game into a just another WFB clone. And then they made my all-Warjack, Slayer-based army non-competitive with the Seether and infantry focus.
So I don't believe that PP is "better" than GW. PP makes stuff obsolete just as fast as GW. But because they're not the "evil empire", people cut them way more slack than GW. As far as I'm concerned, they're the same.
Except the PP game engine is still a RT/2E skirmish engine. It's not nearly as refined or suitable for mass battles as GW's 40k or WFB systems.
Sure, PP fills a nice niche as an alternative. But it's really the same stuff in a different wrapper.
The difference is GW doesnt even try......
You really believe that?
Jervis tries harder than probably any other designer in the industry, because he has a harder job than any other designer in the industry. He's in charge of the industry-leading game (from a $$$ perspective), with a larger installed base of players, and more people on his back trying to drive sales from what is likely a fully-saturated base.
PP can afford to throw stuff and see what sticks. They don't have to worry about backwards compatibility or decades of rules and Fluff having been established. And they can afford to be loosey-goosey with the rules. They can just make stuff up as "errata" to change things, publish FAQs, and then charge for a new rulebook supplement. It's a hell of a model for generating constant sales churn in both rules and models.
It will be interesting when the average PP army pushes 50-100 models and people get out of the incremental mode, but move into an army mode. If PP can swing the transition, they'll come out like champs. Maybe they'll even bring me back.
26
Post by: carmachu
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Oh, don't be silly. I've got a Cryx army and I've played tournaments and so on. I've just moved away from WM because PP broke the promise that they started with, that the games would be cheap fun skirmish games that revolved around Warcasters and Warjacks. WM pretty much lost me in the first year because they didn't stick with what they did to bring me into the game. WM turned their fun little game into a just another WFB clone. And then they made my all-Warjack, Slayer-based army non-competitive with the Seether and infantry focus.
Thank you. But you have to admit you appear to be someone who is talking like one that doesnt have any clue. That you didnt know PP constantly updates things on their site and fields questions?
You really believe that?
Jervis tries harder than probably any other designer in the industry, because he has a harder job than any other designer in the industry. He's in charge of the industry-leading game (from a $$$ perspective), with a larger installed base of players, and more people on his back trying to drive sales from what is likely a fully-saturated base.
PP can afford to throw stuff and see what sticks. They don't have to worry about backwards compatibility or decades of rules and Fluff having been established. And they can afford to be loosey-goosey with the rules. They can just make stuff up as "errata" to change things, publish FAQs, and then charge for a new rulebook supplement. It's a hell of a model for generating constant sales churn in both rules and models.
Believe it? If you have been paying ANY attention to GW over the last couple years, no they DONT try to keep things balanced...until the next edition. FAQ's that langished fo years unattended. Codex updates that lingered dead for years....(orks), the attitude of "good enough"
One person, is not the company. If he's in charge of a industry leading company...then perhaps the company should start acting like it instead of coasting on their heels like they have done for the last couple years before. Its always "what have you done for me lately"..and GW has NOT done anything for me lately. PP? I can count on to keep it active.
Decades of rules? What crack are you smoking? They do NOT worry about whats come before that much...2nd edition, hell even third is of no issue anymore. Hello....crappy chaos codex redux anyone? Traitior legions got thrown to the trash been with the last redo. Spare me the decades of rules to consider. They way they keep invaliding certain things and elevating others show that.
It will be interesting when the average PP army pushes 50-100 models and people get out of the incremental mode, but move into an army mode. If PP can swing the transition, they'll come out like champs. Maybe they'll even bring me back.
I'm content with what is now. I have one solid Hordes army, and a good WM faction. I can add incrimentally without breaking the bank.
Hope you find what yoru looking for.
6035
Post by: Techboss
I'll weigh in on the GW vs PP marketing and current strategy with their games. GW has a much better marketing program because they are more visible than PP in most areas. This is directly linked to pure GW stores in the more populace areas. PP markets their product through local gaming stores, many of which don't have or take the time to do demonstrations of WM and/or Hordes. I became familiar with Warmachine through a fellow gamer who frequented the LGS where we played 40K. From a marketing and exposure stand point, GW has more and therefore should sell more product.
The strategy the PP and GW use to develop and progress their games are vastly different. The two main reasons I like PP over GW is that they have better customer service and they update ALL the armies together. PP has official forums, which they respond to. They post updates fairly quickly on their website and those updates aren't just as ambiguous rules which generated the questions. GW trashed their archaic forums and the FAQs take months to come out. When the FAQs do come out, they're usually just as vague or make so little sense that they aren't useful (see Imperial Tech Priest Sevitors counting towards wargear).
Secondly, PP updates all the factions at the same time. This means that even if their is creep, everything creeps together. I tend agree with a previous poster that units don't become junk as much as the do with GW games with new releases. I use units from Prime, Escalation and later books in my core WM army. Each addition allows you to either keep your list the same or change things up to try or tweak your strategy. When GW releases a new edition, codex, drastic changes happen in the army which require completely retooling the army. Previously useful models are now drastically less effective, while the once bad is now awesome (see obliterators).
I'd say that if GW was running WM and PP was running 40K, I'd be a much happier 40K fan and would have never grown my WM army to the size it is. As it is, every time I think about getting a new GW army, I become ill. Everytime WM releases something new, I'm usually elated because of the value I get from their products.
1918
Post by: Scottywan82
I'd like to ask about the people who keep talking about "kiddies" keeping GW in business. I don't know about the GW chain stores, but there are plenty of younger gamers in my LGS, and none of them play Warhammer or 40K. I think a lot of the young blood that got into 40K with the release of LOTR has disappeared witht the fad, and I really feel that GW is marketing to them still, despite the fact that the market has dried up. Most of the 40K players I know are 18 and older, hold jobs of one sort or another, and have experience playing other games.
Also, in what way is a GW chain store a welcoming image to a new gamer. Sure, maybe a 12-16 year old would be fascinated by the store, but their income source (parent, guardian, whatever) would probably be somewhat daunted by the overwhelming nature of the stores. They don't sell ANYTHING but GW products. It's a bit much if you're new to the game, or with someone who is looking to get into it. What can you assume from a first glance? If all this stuff is for the same game, how much do they need to play? That was the first question out of parents' mouths whenI worked for GW, and it seems pretty reasonable. I really think the corporate offices would have more success NOW (as opposed to a few years ago) by shifting their focus BACK to adult gamers with disposable income and raising the quality of the products to meet the expectations of the adult gamer market. While we were dwarfed by the temporary surge in popularity among young people, adults now form a much more significant portion of GW's customer base, and I think it's something they need to recognize.
6035
Post by: Techboss
I tend to agree with the above poster in the fact that GW should shift from the 12-16 focus to the 20+ age group. There are several GW chain stores around my area, all of them are full of 14 to 18 year olds. The main reason is that the parents see the store as baby sitting service where they can drop $30 on product, leave their kid there for 2 hours while they roam the mall. This age bracket change occurred for two reasons.
The first reason the age bracket changed was because they shifted the points and qualifications for playing games in the store about 4 years ago. They moved from 1500+ point games to 500 point games on the weekends. Secondly, they also dropped the requirement of based and 3 colors for the army to be put on the table. This allowed newer players to access the game more quickly, but because of the low entry cost, the baby sitting syndrome started. Many veterans were put off because of the low points values and the new abundance of kids in the game. Don't get me wrong, some of the kids are pretty reasonable, but some are awful. Thankfully, the points for the games have been raised, but many veteran gamers have moved on to other stores or their own clubs to find games. Therefore, your left with a bunch of kids playing in the GW stores.
I think GW needs to move revise the rules so they are smoother and make logical sense. 40K in it's current formate has quite a bit to be desired as far as logical rules. I love WM over 40K for the fact that the rules, while they have some issues, flow much better and make more sense. I also think people under estimate how much a 12 year old can understand given time and GOOD guidance. Look a MTG, it's more complicated and yet many 10-14 year olds play it.
I also think GW needs to lower their prices and make up the gap in volume. They're current pricing turns many people off from buying new armies and is or has approached the point where it's no longer allowance level money to buy the product. This means veteran players aren't investing more money because they see it as too expensive and the "kiddies" are getting left out because they can buy something else to satisfy their ADD for less money or of better quality for the same money. Fantasy is pretty much non-existent in my area because of the investment needed in order to field an army. People are not willing to spend $700+ for an army when the can buy an Xbox, PS3 and several games for the same money. Just to put in perspective, $700 is about 4 YEARS of World of Warcraft. Based on the fact that I have 2 Fantasy and 2 40K armies, I could have played WoW for 16 YEARS for the same money.
GW also needs to improve their customer service. This has been gone over multiple times in the thread.
3572
Post by: Zoned
I think people need to better define "customer service." What is better customer service? Is it...
-updating FAQs?
-teaching you how to build/paint?
-trying to prevent army creep?
-teaching you how to play?
-communicating more with your customer fanbase?
-providing you with a place to play?
...etc
On some points, PP wins out. On others, GW wins out. Interestingly, I would argue that GW specializes more in getting new gamers, while PP is better at maintaining veteran gamers.
And just for the record, GW mall stores aren't designed to be veteran gaming clubs. They are designed to be recruitment/training centres for new gamers. Battle bunkers and store front locations serve veteran gamers better (bigger and more tables,) so don't be surprised when you see the mall locations crawling with kids.
26
Post by: carmachu
Zoned wrote:I think people need to better define "customer service." What is better customer service? Is it...
-updating FAQs?
-teaching you how to build/paint?
-trying to prevent army creep?
-teaching you how to play?
-communicating more with your customer fanbase?
-providing you with a place to play?
...etc
On some points, PP wins out. On others, GW wins out. Interestingly, I would argue that GW specializes more in getting new gamers, while PP is better at maintaining veteran gamers.
And just for the record, GW mall stores aren't designed to be veteran gaming clubs. They are designed to be recruitment/training centres for new gamers. Battle bunkers and store front locations serve veteran gamers better (bigger and more tables,) so don't be surprised when you see the mall locations crawling with kids.
Not really. Anyone thats paid any attention to the boards any amount of time knows whats been talked about:
Staying ontop of the game problems: ie... FAQ updates, or hell FAQ's at all....."good enough" really isnt.
Communication with the fanbase would be nice, especially with game problems....the sticking their ear in the fingers doesnt cut it.
Updates in army books in a more timely manner....you shouldnt have 8 years for codex orks...thats criminal, considering most ork players are fairly loyal.
And the usual other items that have been mentioned.
5164
Post by: Stelek
If you believe Jervis is "in charge" and "responsible", you are sorely mistaken.
This is the problem at GW, has been for 15 years. The only accountability came with Andy Chambers.
Thankfully, all the "damage" Andy C did (tongue in cheek) will soon be undone.
Personally I can't wait for the power gaming abuses about to be unleashed upon all of you in the form of 2nd edition.
You'll never see a FAQ again, either.
GW will shout 'eff off' to all of us in a few months time.
I guess we'll just all wait and see. I figure 25 mil in debt end of this year, the old guard gone (management and designers), GW closing 50+ stores, and sales tanking completely. I could be wrong. That whole LOTD thing looked like a total cockup from the beginning, and so far it's been as successful as one could hope.
If you wanted to go out of business.
Rejoice, 5th edition is here to save us! Rules designed entirely around 'we are the designers and we are FED UP with you cocks ignoring troops and taking everything else, so eff yourself mates we'll put the screw into the Codices AND the main rules'. Top it off with a healthy dose of worldwide recession, and boy oh boy with the LOTD cash depleted...I guess we'll see just how GW gets through the year.
My accountant buddy wonders who's giving GW money, he read the annual reports and told me to sell what stock I have left. Exciting days, these.
Oh well, at least I've never had a LATD or Squats army, right?
26
Post by: carmachu
Actually LOTR was successful...too much so that it masked all the problems.
131
Post by: malfred
Anecdotally, whenever I see people look at GW stuff in a
shop, they typically only really look at the LotR stuff and
tend to not notice or ignore the rest of the lines. These
people are walk-ins, and probably not going to try to game
at the store or follow the company online or convert up a
LATD army or post pictures of their minis on the Internet.
These people are new customers, so I think LOTR helped
GW out there. As far as how much these people actually
bought compared to how much GW invested in production
and design, I think the answer is they are profiting from
the investment, but not enough for a public company.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Never said LOTR wasn't successful.
It was, for the first two years.
The rest of the lines suffered, and as you pointed out the LOTR cash flow covered this up.
Better actuarial controls would have seen this immediately.
Sadly, GW dropped the ball on that one. Always has.
Which is indeed surprising for a publicly traded company.
1795
Post by: keezus
I saw that Ork Shok Attack Gun in "painting and modelling" and was tempted to buy it. Then I noticed that it is 160% more expensive here in Canada (before taxes) than across the border. Thanks GW, that immediately killed any enthusiasm I had.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
carmachu wrote:
Thank you. But you have to admit you appear to be someone who is talking like one that doesnt have any clue. That you didnt know PP constantly updates things on their site and fields questions?
Excuse me? Just because I'm not waving the pirate flag of a PP fanboi and singing their praises from the mountaintop, that doesn't make me clueless. I'm well aware that PP constantly churns their line. And I'm well aware what a WM/H army costs.
But if we're going to admit things, how about you admit that PP did a 180 in game design from what they originally released, and that they appear to have no intention of getting back to the very roots that made them attractive as an alternative to GW, but rather appear to be in the process of becoming the very thing that you appear to loathe so much: an American clone of GW.
Hope you find what yoru looking for.
Me, too.
But oddly, GW is doing a better job of giving me what I'm looking for.
161
Post by: syr8766
JohnHwangDD wrote:carmachu wrote:
Thank you. But you have to admit you appear to be someone who is talking like one that doesnt have any clue. That you didnt know PP constantly updates things on their site and fields questions?
Excuse me? Just because I'm not waving the pirate flag of a PP fanboi and singing their praises from the mountaintop, that doesn't make me clueless. I'm well aware that PP constantly churns their line. And I'm well aware what a WM/H army costs.
But if we're going to admit things, how about you admit that PP did a 180 in game design from what they originally released, and that they appear to have no intention of getting back to the very roots that made them attractive as an alternative to GW, but rather appear to be in the process of becoming the very thing that you appear to loathe so much: an American clone of GW.
Hope you find what yoru looking for.
Me, too.
But oddly, GW is doing a better job of giving me what I'm looking for.
Please explain your statement in italics, above (italics mine), as there are a lot of ways to understand ' GW clone'. Do you mean taking the company public? 'Codex'/New Release creep? going from skirmish to larger point/model count battles? I'd like clarification please.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
If you go through my previous posts, my basic thesis is that PP appears to be following the GW model, and is currently on the verge of completing their RT-equivalent era. They have the same issuses with skirmish bloat, rules bloat, power creep, rebalancing, etc. It's *everything*.
Granted that PP has the advantage of hindsight and streamlining in their favor. But otherwise, the development is the same.
181
Post by: gorgon
Stelek wrote:You'll never see a FAQ again, either.
GW will shout 'eff off' to all of us in a few months time.
You know, Jeremy Vetock stood in front of 200-300 players at the Baltimore GT and told us that FAQs were imminent. But we all know that 5th edition is on the way. So are they actually going happen? And if so, will they be of consequence?
Fourth edition FAQs don't make any sense now. Fifth edition FAQs make more sense, but how effective and complete can they be if they roll them out right after 5th edition is released? Or will they be more of a watered-down errata sheet with more general clarifications? It's pathetic that they actually have me wanting them to wait another year so that they might have substantive FAQs that actually address the real issues! Argh!
I've defended them so many times on this forum, but I'm tired of being lied to and tired of being told we aren't playing "the right way" by designers who are in absentia for the better part of each edition (they usually pop their heads up at the beginning and near the end of each new edition). Fifth edition is GW's last chance to keep my business.
3806
Post by: Grot 6
" Jervis tries harder than probably any other designer in the industry, because he has a harder job than any other designer in the industry. He's in charge of the industry-leading game (from a $$$ perspective), with a larger installed base of players, and more people on his back trying to drive sales from what is likely a fully-saturated base."
It's probibly because he's so busy writing, rewriting, and then throwing away the FAQ's. Someone should go and tell him to go take a vacation.
1077
Post by: davidson
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Jervis tries harder than probably any other designer in the industry, because he has a harder job than any other designer in the industry. He's in charge of the industry-leading game (from a $$$ perspective), with a larger installed base of players, and more people on his back trying to drive sales from what is likely a fully-saturated base.
You mean the guy who refuses to fix errors he admits about and doesn't even know the game's basic rules?
Yea, right. Don't make me laugh.
171
Post by: Lorek
Out of curiosity, to GW staff wear a cup to official events here in the US?
4042
Post by: Da Boss
This malarky with BLI and Dark Heresy smacks of more of the same sillyness. Sad, because I'm really enjoying 40K again for the first time in 4 years. My biggest beef was Orks, and that's sorted.
But all the problems are still there. No faqs, typo laden codices, sluggish release schedual, expensive models, no interaction with customers, no feedback.
If something shady and suspicious ends up with the company tanking, I'm going to be annoyed. But they do seem to be incredibly mismanaged, and contemptous of their fanbase, and this is something they really, really need to address. We all want to like GW, but they make it bloody hard.
1321
Post by: Asmodai
Yep. They were saying right up to release that they were going to be releasing support for Space Marines and Rogue Traders - then reversed course as soon as it sold out. That's not very ethical - and maybe not even very wise in the long-term.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
BLI makes no sense. If the product is hot enough to sell out on preorders, it's crazy not to do the supplements.
26
Post by: carmachu
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Excuse me? Just because I'm not waving the pirate flag of a PP fanboi and singing their praises from the mountaintop, that doesn't make me clueless. I'm well aware that PP constantly churns their line. And I'm well aware what a WM/H army costs.
What did you really expect? No one expects you to be PP flag waver, but look at some of your posts. When you come into a debate of flaws and merits of PP and GW and you dont even seem to come across as KNOWING the strengths of PP but are willing to poo-poo them....you looked ignorant.
But if we're going to admit things, how about you admit that PP did a 180 in game design from what they originally released, and that they appear to have no intention of getting back to the very roots that made them attractive as an alternative to GW, but rather appear to be in the process of becoming the very thing that you appear to loathe so much: an American clone of GW.
Nope. Sorry that doesnt past the muster. They, as of this moment, will never be an american clone of GW. The are repsonives and lilsten and are on top of the game. They keep it tweeked for all factions, and fairly balanced. Something GW isnt and wont.
I have no idea of what 180 yoru talking about, unless the expansion to 750-1000pts....but you never have to play there. I get along fine at 500pts for the moment.
But oddly, GW is doing a better job of giving me what I'm looking for.
*shrug*
I find it odd, but to each their own.....
6035
Post by: Techboss
carmachu wrote:I have no idea of what 180 yoru talking about, unless the expansion to 750-1000pts....but you never have to play there. I get along fine at 500pts for the moment.
The core of JohnHwangDD arguement against PP is that they advertised the game revolving around Jacks and Warcasters, with low emphasis on infantry. WM now plays infantry heavy, with few jacks, thus the "180". He's all hacked off because his all jack 500 point army is pretty useless when compared to what other factions are running. Instead of playing 350 points of Mangled Metal (caster and jacks) he wants to play Jacks and Casters at 500 points. While I'll admit infantry in WM is a bit stronger than Jacks, most lists still run 1-2 jacks. My standard list has 1 marshaled heavy jack which for fills the "shoot at this" and AOE slot for the army. I run a higher percentage of jacks in my WM lists than armor in my 40K lists. Some of that has to do with the FOC, rest has to do with how awful armor is.
26
Post by: carmachu
Techboss wrote:
The core of JohnHwangDD arguement against PP is that they advertised the game revolving around Jacks and Warcasters, with low emphasis on infantry. WM now plays infantry heavy, with few jacks, thus the "180". He's all hacked off because his all jack 500 point army is pretty useless when compared to what other factions are running. Instead of playing 350 points of Mangled Metal (caster and jacks) he wants to play Jacks and Casters at 500 points. While I'll admit infantry in WM is a bit stronger than Jacks, most lists still run 1-2 jacks. My standard list has 1 marshaled heavy jack which for fills the "shoot at this" and AOE slot for the army. I run a higher percentage of jacks in my WM lists than armor in my 40K lists. Some of that has to do with the FOC, rest has to do with how awful armor is.
To which, he has a point.
However, the point doesnt hold up under more intense scrutiny....again, he comes off ignorant as to PP.
Infantry has/does rise to promiance in warmachine. BUT, PP is/has addresss that problem....unlike GW who tends to ignore problems. Introducing things like trample and two-handed throw and other items to bring jacks back into a more prominant position. Or casters that work better with jacks.
They also learned that lesson and adpated it in hordes....beasts are necessary. and you wont leave them out.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
carmachu wrote:you dont even seem to come across as KNOWING the strengths of PP but are willing to poo-poo them....you looked ignorant.
*What* strengths? As far as I'm concerned, there are none.
They keep it tweeked for all factions, and fairly balanced. Something GW isnt and wont.
I dunno. They're buffing and nerfing, same as GW. They just have a lot fewer factions and stuff.
131
Post by: malfred
JohnHwangDD wrote:carmachu wrote:you dont even seem to come across as KNOWING the strengths of PP but are willing to poo-poo them....you looked ignorant.
*What* strengths? As far as I'm concerned, there are none.
I don't see why arguing an opinion on this with JohnHwangDD matters
to you, carmachu. He dismisses PP because he wants to, not because
he has any reason to. PP fans do the same thing with GW (though some
of them do so like lapsed *insert religious group here*).
If either fanbase doesn't want to see the strengths or weaknesses of
the other, that's their own loss.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Aside from having invested time and money into a small pile of rules & minis that I'm unlikely to play, yeah, I've got no reason whatsoever.
...
What I find most amusing is how, when the shoe's on the other foot, somehow, GW is evil. But PP can do no wrong. WTF?
3806
Post by: Grot 6
No.
The difference is that PP is reacting to the situation, making interaction a priority, and, even though they are bringing out more and more for the game, the company is making an ATTEMPT at balence, consistancy, and using feedback from the players as to the nerfs. The fact that they HAVE to do all of the above should tell you that more people play the game, hence... the need for the nerf bat.
The only issue I see with them is that of continuality. "Where do they go from here", kind of thing.
What is PP's Long Term business plan?
GW is in serious trouble. Because... they don't maker ANY attempts at any of the above.
Somewhere along the line, they went from offense to defense, and never gained the initiative back.
The deal is that it isn't about being Evil, its about being stupid.
Stupidity is worse in this case in my opinion.
5164
Post by: Stelek
gorgon wrote:Stelek wrote:You'll never see a FAQ again, either.
GW will shout 'eff off' to all of us in a few months time.
You know, Jeremy Vetock stood in front of 200-300 players at the Baltimore GT and told us that FAQs were imminent. But we all know that 5th edition is on the way. So are they actually going happen? And if so, will they be of consequence?
Fourth edition FAQs don't make any sense now. Fifth edition FAQs make more sense, but how effective and complete can they be if they roll them out right after 5th edition is released? Or will they be more of a watered-down errata sheet with more general clarifications? It's pathetic that they actually have me wanting them to wait another year so that they might have substantive FAQs that actually address the real issues! Argh!
I've defended them so many times on this forum, but I'm tired of being lied to and tired of being told we aren't playing "the right way" by designers who are in absentia for the better part of each edition (they usually pop their heads up at the beginning and near the end of each new edition). Fifth edition is GW's last chance to keep my business.
I've heard the same thing. We all have. For how many years? I can churn out FAQ's for everything in a month. GW can't.
The thread between Carmachu and JohnHwang really illustrates this.
John believes PP is in it's RT days. Since RT involved 5 models per side and the same incredibly gakky rules/support as we get from GW now; and PP's games don't follow this mold in any way shape or form...I'm no big fan of PP, I was 'turned off' for the same reason JohnHwang was--I wanted good looking dreads running around pwning face. All I can say is, at least PP made 20+ dreads that range from 'ok' to 'wonderful'. GW hasn't made a new dread since I started playing. Look, it's a...box! Or a fancy box! Or a box with a fancy head! Wait...it's still a box though. :(
GW isn't evil, they're stupid. PP does lots of things wrong, but they aren't stupid. Most importantly, GW will sell you a umbrella in the desert and tell you you aren't on fire, everything is 'Okiedokie'. PP hasn't earned hell points the way GW has.
If you compare PP with GW, compare PP with other companies. PP might not be my flavor, but they support their product.
Not with 20 pages of metal bitz I could care less about in the back of their trade magazine. That's what the RT days were really all about.
They make stuff that sucks good. They fix flaws and exploits in their game system. They do it on the fly. They've embraced the web.
GW? They haven't. I had a really really REALLY long argument about how it's affecting the quality of tournaments, and without getting into it again let's just say the GW fanbase has changed radically since Andy Chambers left the company.
Take me, for example. I used to spend 5 grand a year on product, and another 2 grand going to GW events. Now, I spend less than a grand a year; and if I can't get in to a GW event for 500 bucks or less I won't go. It's not like my love of the game has changed any, I'll still play 40k every damn day if I could. I hang at my FLGS every weekend.
So what's different? GW keeps treating me like gak, like I'm a dumbass, like I better spend my money with them and if I don't like it, well I should f*ck myself immediately then.
Where's my gaming money going? At the moment, nowhere really. If FOW has a big release, I buy. Besides that, I pay my 'rent' at the FLGS to ensure it stays open (rent is a euphemism). FOW is a well written system, updated constantly. GW product isn't.
GW has been existing on gamer inertia for a very long time now.
Bankruptcy is staring them in the face.
Will they act in time?
Don't know.
The sad thing is, I also am 0.00009999% away from not caring anymore. Too many dick slaps to the face.
3720
Post by: brettz123
As the previous poster said GW has done a lot of stupid things. Things they could fix fairly easily to make the product better (in no particular order)
1. Web support. Update products as soon as you realize there is something wrong. This shouldn't be very hard at all.
2. Make White Dwarf more interesting. I have a subscription and am not planning on cancelling but it is not a very good magazine unless you get it just to look at pretty miniatures. They need to put fluff back into it. Short stories from real writers and experimental rules that you can actually use.
3. They need to realize that tournament players and prepubescent children are not there core audience. Don't treat us like kids. To me this means some more advanced rules that make the game better. Simple ideas like overwatch, different movement speeds for different races, and armor save modifiers would all add some interesting variation to the game. If they can do this in Warhammer why not 40k?
4. Realize that a price hike doesn't mean you are going to make more money. This is a big problem because with ebay it is relatively easy to get what you want for 30% - 50% off of MSRP. Now this means that even if I buy from an online ebay store GW still gets paid but it leads to less and less LGSs which in turn snowballs into less and less local support and this in turn leads to less people being introduced into the game.
5. Bring back outriders.
6. Give us a real gateway game. Now let me explain because some people in this thread seem to have different definitions of what this is. To me a gateway is a game that allows you to play a similiar but simpler ruleset with significantly less miniatures which you can then use in the second game.
This is why I think that inquisitor and necromunda never seemd like very good gateway games to me.
7. Every race should get something every year. It doesn't make much sense for people to go three or four years with nothing to buy for their army.
8. Please design all the army books and codecii at the same time so you don't have power creep within the same edition. You don't need to release them all at once but there is no good excuse for power creep within the same edition.
131
Post by: malfred
brettz123 wrote:
2. Make White Dwarf more interesting. I have a subscription and am not planning on cancelling but it is not a very good magazine unless you get it just to look at pretty miniatures. They need to put fluff back into it. Short stories from real writers and experimental rules that you can actually use.
/guilty for buying it and lowering my expectations.
brettz123 wrote:
6. Give us a real gateway game. Now let me explain because some people in this thread seem to have different definitions of what this is. To me a gateway is a game that allows you to play a similiar but simpler ruleset with significantly less miniatures which you can then use in the second game.
Isn't combat patrol their gateway game? I agree that they
need one, but they also need to push combat patrol as
that game rather than as "something to do when you're
bored with regular 40k."
brettz123 wrote:
7. Every race should get something every year. It doesn't make much sense for people to go three or four years with nothing to buy for their army.
Unfortunately, it seems to be part of their business plan to
attract people to buy NEW armies rather than just sit around
waiting for their armies.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Oh, and while you're at it, don't cancel a profitable product line two days after release and after promising support for ages, you bloody muppets.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the high end GW meetings. I really would. It must be very frustrating for the designers (especially those poor fellas from BI who got the chop)
26
Post by: carmachu
JohnHwangDD wrote:
*What* strengths? As far as I'm concerned, there are none.
Then unfortunately, your worse than ignorant. You're being foolish and a fool.
The bloom is off the rose, with me and GW. I'm not fond of them, but I can acknowlege that they have great strengths to them. Things that are in the "good" column, things they have going for them. A great IP to leverage. Longevity. Worldwide network. All the advantages economically of a publically traded company, among others.
Teh fact you refuse to acknowlege any of PP's strengths makes you look entirely foolish in this discussion.
I dunno. They're buffing and nerfing, same as GW. They just have a lot fewer factions and stuff.
Except once again, its not the same. Every PP book that comes out brings new items to each faction at the ssame time, and things and tweeks whats needed. Or overlooked.
GW's solution to problems tends to be a new edition. They dont even try to updaet a FAQ.
Not even close to the same.
26
Post by: carmachu
Da Boss wrote:Oh, and while you're at it, don't cancel a profitable product line two days after release and after promising support for ages, you bloody muppets.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the high end GW meetings. I really would. It must be very frustrating for the designers (especially those poor fellas from BI who got the chop)
That one really gets me. I have no idea why they stillbirthed a product 3 days after release. Some of their decisions I can almost understand.
Canceling their RPG game on release? WTF are they thinking?
465
Post by: Redbeard
brettz123 wrote:
3. They need to realize that tournament players and prepubescent children are not there core audience.
What if their market research shows that prepubescent children actually are their core audience, from a sales standpoint. I may spend $1000/year on new models, but there's maybe a handful like me shopping at the local GW store, compared to 40-odd kids whose parents, grandparents, etc. etc. buy them models every birthday and christmas. While I may outspend any individual kid, their total expenditures have got to be higher.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
carmachu wrote:Da Boss wrote:Oh, and while you're at it, don't cancel a profitable product line two days after release and after promising support for ages, you bloody muppets.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the high end GW meetings. I really would. It must be very frustrating for the designers (especially those poor fellas from BI who got the chop)
That one really gets me. I have no idea why they stillbirthed a product 3 days after release. Some of their decisions I can almost understand.
Canceling their RPG game on release? WTF are they thinking?
One reason would be if they have calculated how much revenue they reasonably expect to earn and discovered it is less than the cost of publishing the title. I have no idea if that is true, though in a well run company they should have done that calculation before the decided to start designing the game at all, instead of after it was launched.
I still think one of GW's basic problems is that -- ignoring the declining LoTR -- they basically have only one product, Warhammer.
That's divided into SF and Fantasy. Obviously there are differences which are apparent to players but ordinary people must think they are the same thing. It's all about elves or space elves, the Empire or the Imperium fighting Chaos Daemons and stuff.
An RPG derived from either WHFB or 40K fluff is unlikely to appeal to more than a sub-set of the current user base. The nature of RPGs is that you don't sell as many books and figures per player as you do for TTGs, so you need the game to achieve a greater user base to make up the difference.
Just my 2p anyway. I don't have any GW shares.
26
Post by: carmachu
Kilkrazy wrote:
One reason would be if they have calculated how much revenue they reasonably expect to earn and discovered it is less than the cost of publishing the title. I have no idea if that is true, though in a well run company they should have done that calculation before the decided to start designing the game at all, instead of after it was launched.
Thats correct of course....it should have been done prior to launch if they werent going to make enough back.
But I doubt thats it. They sold out of their LE books within hours. And didnt I hear they sold out of their first print run on pre-order?
I dont get it.
An RPG derived from either WHFB or 40K fluff is unlikely to appeal to more than a sub-set of the current user base. The nature of RPGs is that you don't sell as many books and figures per player as you do for TTGs, so you need the game to achieve a greater user base to make up the difference.
No, you dont sell as many as TTG-ers. However, you do get the book into a different market and typtype. And currently a good deal of gamers DO use minis on their battle maps for their RP games...and it could be another revenue source. A few could eventually cross over.
Wouldnt sell lots of minis, mind you. But if you get a few here, a few there, it adds up. In addition to the book sales and revenue.
*shrug* who knows why.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
When WHFRP was launched it did appeal to a wider crowd than WHFB players but the whole scene was somewhat different in those days.
The fluff background was less defined, there was more freedom for players to do their own thing and ignore GW's "Dark Past", also RPGs generally were still on an upswing (this was the late 80s) and the competition was different.
So in general I think the scene was better then for a fantasy game than it is now for an SF game.
Even so it is still a mystery. Why not keep the game going a year and issue some supplements? They must have done the design work for them.
365
Post by: Abadabadoobaddon
Redbeard wrote:What if their market research shows that prepubescent children actually are their core audience, from a sales standpoint.
Well that would certainly explain a lot. All these issues that people have with GW are really only relevant to long(er)-term gamers. There have got to be loads of prepubescent boys who play a few demo games, drop $300-400 of allowance money on an army, never actually get around to finishing it, and then bury it in the closet or put it up on ebay once they discover girls. If such customers represent the majority of the sales then quality rules, product support, timely FAQs, WD content, etc or lack thereof are really pretty much incidental. Why put effort into writing good balanced rules if your typical customer only ever uses them to play a few demo games and maybe a handful of skirmishes with half-assembled, unpainted, FOC-illegal armies in his parent's basement? Good enough indeed.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Are you kidding me?
GW rebalances every edition, based almost entirely on player complaints.
But hey, if you want to ignore reality, far be it for me to suggest otherwise...
1795
Post by: keezus
JohnHwangDD wrote:GW rebalances every edition, based almost entirely on player complaints.
If by "every edition", you mean "the transition between 3rd Edition and 5th Edition", and by "rebalance", you mean "fixing superficial problems without addressing the root cause".
Rogue Trader -> 2nd Edition = completely different game. 2nd Edition -> 3rd Edition = completely different game. Neither of these "edition" changes constitutes a rebalance. In fact, if I understand it correctly, Andy Chambers was planning on making the change from 3rd Edition to 4th Edition to be a complete rewrite.
In my opinion, the reason for GW's failure since 3rd edition is threefold. I'll use a construction metaphor to illustrate my point.
1. You can't build an extra floor on your house unless you oversized the foundation.
When 40k v3 came out, it was largely balanced from the get-go, because it stripped out all the special and wonky rules from v2 and replaced them with the BBB. Unfortunately, when it came time to put back all the "flavour" of 40k, the designers, in their infinite wisdom decided to add in more diverse unit support (additional floors to the house) and all sorts of special rules which invalidated portions of the main rules (knocking out structural columns to make room for an indoor pool or a garage) - resulting in overloading and weakening the foundation. As a result, 40k v3 became fairly "unbalanced" towards the end of its lifecycle.
GW realized this and decided it was time to ditch v3 and build themselves a v4. Unfortunately, they decided that the "house portion" with all its ridiculous amenities was so comfortable that they wanted to keep all that stuff and just re-do the foundation.
2. You can't rebuild the foundation of a house while keeping the above structure without adding a lot of extra support during the transition.
GW failed in this instance because they decided to keep the house while messing with the foundation. They rationalized that because they were not changing it much, that it wouldn't affect the house above. ( - In fact, they couldn't change it much, otherwise the house would collapse!) When it became apparent that portions of the house were wobbly and might fall down (i.e. had no structural support, no hydro or heat etc), instead of fixing it easily at that point by adding some supports (new Codecies, Chapter Approved, FAQs) - they figured that they would just let it be and rebuild that section of house later (by releasing a new Codex several YEARS down the line). The problem was that the people living in that part of the house (the customers) were tired of living in a neglected, and decrepit part of the house and took off for another property (Privateer Press, Flames of War, AT43 etc). Their foreman at the start of the job realized that this wasn't the right approach (Andy Chambers), but management told him to go ahead anyways.
3. You can't rebuild a house if you don't allocate resources to it.
Well now, GW is getting ready to fix their house once and for all ( v5). GW management finally realized that just raising the rent on the tenants (without fixing the house) wasn't going to fix their cash flow problems. They don't have the resources to rebuild the whole house, so the new building has to retain all the old above-ground works and only the foundation is to be redone. The foreman from v4 left the company in disgust after the v4 debacle leaving Jervis in charge (poor guy). Unfortunately for him, management wants the new foundation to be done really fast (6 Months) so they can entice all the old tenants back (i.e. lost customer base). To do this daunting task, Jervis has been given 1/3 of GW's manpower to fix it. - Where's the rest of their staff you might ask... Well, 1/3 of them are working on the very populated house down the street (Warhammer Fantasy). Fantasy managed to build their foundation right during the last big rewrite (5th Ed, Ravening Hordes), and instead of building a new foundation, they just fixed the cracks forming in it between editions. The remainder of GW's design team are working on an a fantastic house across town - which unfortunately, has almost nobody living in it ( LOTR). On top of that, it doesn't look like the company will let Jervis properly support the house before demolishing the old foundation.
And you wonder why 40k seems to be in a bit of a mess.
5206
Post by: snorkle
Great post Keezus. That is an extremely understandable likening. But I think the foreman is also partially to blamed for some crappy supports, such as DA.
131
Post by: malfred
People do live in the LotR house, but very few of them
are actively making the most of it.
1423
Post by: dienekes96
keezus wrote:And you wonder why 40k seems to be in a bit of a mess.
Excellent post.
5164
Post by: Stelek
Keezus, you rock in metaphor land.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Stelek wrote:I'm no big fan of PP, I was 'turned off' for the same reason JohnHwang was--I wanted good looking dreads running around pwning face. All I can say is, at least PP made 20+ dreads that range from 'ok' to 'wonderful'. GW hasn't made a new dread since I started playing. Look, it's a...box! Or a fancy box! Or a box with a fancy head! Wait...it's still a box though. :(
Curious question: Do you consider Venerable Dread, FW Dreads, Penitient Engine, Karamzov, plastic Wraithlord, plastic War Walker, & plastic Carnifex, to be Dreads? I do.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
keezus wrote:And you wonder why 40k seems to be in a bit of a mess.
Not really, because I largely agree with your points in your post.
40k is typical of most large things that have grown organically, without a strong sense of structure. Fixing them is a nightmare, and takes a very long time, because of all of the entrenched positions and such.
It would be interesting to have a WFB player do the WFB version. As I recall, WFB 6 (Big Red Book w/ Ravening Hordes) is the "new foundation", not WFB 5. And like 40k, WFB seems to be carving back on variant lists (Storm of Chaos, anyone?).
181
Post by: gorgon
keezus...excellent post.
Half the problem with 40K is that the product is simply treated as a cash cow by the business end of the company.
"Health of the game be damned, we've got to find a way to sell more SMs. Andy -- oops, I mean Jervis -- you're not allowed change much, because all we want is more of the same milk out of that cow. Oh, and in the meantime fix the game...but don't change much."
The other half of the problem is a design team that changes its mind constantly in mid-edition based on the way they like to play.
(in a whiny tone of voice) "But you're all not playing riiiiight!"
It's like both sides are afraid to let the product grow and breathe -- the business people for financially conservative reasons, and the design team because they act like a bunch of helicopter parents. All these issues are intertwined in a big mess, and as keezus said, the foundation isn't as strong as it is on the WFB side.
The people holding the pursestrings need to find the guts to let their designers do what they need to do to fix the game. And then the designers have to cut the cord and stop worrying whether the balance between assaulting and shooting is precisely "right" according to their world view. Focus on the small tweaks, errata and FAQs that actually make a bigger impact on how we play.
6035
Post by: Techboss
JohnHwangDD wrote:Curious question: Do you consider Venerable Dread, FW Dreads, Penitient Engine, Karamzov, plastic Wraithlord, plastic War Walker, & plastic Carnifex, to be Dreads? I do.
I don't consider the Forgeworld Dreads to be worth considering in the list of dreads that GW has released. They can ONLY be bought through a GW store, not a LGS. All PP jacks can be brought through any LGS or online site. All marine and chaos armies share the same basic vehicles. Most of those are an extra sprue on top of the rhino kit. If you count up the number of unique vehicles, I'd still bet PP has released more models over the same time frame. Remember, the current rhino came out prior to WM even being released.
Speaking of poor model releases, how many YEARS have Orks waited for a new trukk? How many YEARS did people not have a land raider or wave serpent model? At least PP gets their models out within a year of the supplement release, usually within 6 months. I know I went at least 4 years without a land raider because no model existed.
5462
Post by: adamsouza
The turn around time on sculpting and mass producing a white metal model is significantly shorter than that of designing and producing a large heavily detailed plastic model kit.
Since GW absorbed the company that does their plastic models they have significantly reduced the time between plastic model releases.
26
Post by: carmachu
Stelek wrote:Keezus, you rock in metaphor land.
Kudos keezus. that was awsome.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Techboss wrote:All marine and chaos armies share the same basic vehicles. Most of those are an extra sprue on top of the rhino kit.
If you count up the number of unique vehicles, I'd still bet PP has released more models over the same time frame.
Speaking of poor model releases, how many YEARS have Orks waited for a new trukk? How many YEARS did people not have a land raider or wave serpent model? At least PP gets their models out within a year of the supplement release, usually within 6 months.
Yes, SM and CSM share the same vehicles. I don't see what's wrong with that.
If we count vehicles, I don't think PP has any, so GW wins by default. If we count total new sculpt output, GW beats PP hands down - recall that GW has WFB and LotR stuff that comes out each month, too. Also, if we count models, how do we count multi-pose / multi-sculpt plastics (if there are 4 or 5 distinct poses / sculpts, can I count that as 4 or 5 models)?
If you're OK with a very limited model range tied to a very limited army list for the first year, and you're OK with having dribs and drabs come out over 4 years, I suppose PP's approach is OK. PP creates a handful of new models for each new supplement release, and you don't know what they will be in advance. So you have to buy stuff as it comes out, rather than designing against a "final" list.
6035
Post by: Techboss
JohnHwangDD wrote:If we count vehicles, I don't think PP has any, so GW wins by default.
I used the term vehicles to refer to walkers, tanks, monstrous creatures and skimmers as comparing Jacks to Dreads severely limits the GW counter offerings. Anyway, let's take a look at the current offerings and how they compare.
Chaos - 6 monstrous creatures, 6 vehicles (vindicator, predator, rhino, land raider shared)
Demonhunters - 4 vehicles (chimera, rhino, land raider, dreadnaught shared)
Dark Eldar - 4 vehicles
Eldar - 1 monstrous creature, 6 vehicles
Imperial Guard - 6 vehicles, 1 super heavy (chimera shared)
Necrons - 2 monstrous creatures, 1-2 vehicles depending on how tomb spiders are treated
Orks - 7 vehicles (of which only 1 was released upon latest expansion)
Space Marines - 12 vehicles (vindicator, predator, rhino, land raider shared)
Tau - 4 vehicles, 4 suits if you count them
Tyranids - 2 monstrous creatures
Witch Hunters - 4 unique vehicles
Total unique vehicles/monstrous creatures - 59
Total number of Warjack in WM only - 54
Basically, PP has released the same number of different "vehicle" models in the last 5 years (2002-2003 release) that GW has currently available. Note that this doesn't include hordes or the miniatures they are supporting their RPG game with. I'd say the actual "vehicle" releases are 2 to 1 in favor of PP.
JohnHwangDD wrote:If we count total new sculpt output, GW beats PP hands down - recall that GW has WFB and LotR stuff that comes out each month, too. Also, if we count models, how do we count multi-pose / multi-sculpt plastics (if there are 4 or 5 distinct poses / sculpts, can I count that as 4 or 5 models)?
If you're OK with a very limited model range tied to a very limited army list for the first year, and you're OK with having dribs and drabs come out over 4 years, I suppose PP's approach is OK. PP creates a handful of new models for each new supplement release, and you don't know what they will be in advance. So you have to buy stuff as it comes out, rather than designing against a "final" list.
GW releases 20 models a month based on the best estimate I can do between online store sections, but who can really tell without a release schedule. GW also reuses a lot of their models, so you end up double counting when they change the box and release something (Ork Boyz).
PP releases about 10 models a month based on the release schedule posted on their website. These models are unique for the most part, though blisters are usually 2 of the models in the unit box.
827
Post by: Cruentus
First, with regard to PP vs GW: Its apples to oranges. You have a 'skirmish' game compared to a 'battle' game. DIfferent scope, different needs, different feel.
When PP has been churning out Warmachine and Hordes for another 15 years, then I'll be impressed. We've already seen the other two 'competitors': Mongoose ( SST and BF EVO) and Rackham (Confrontation, jury is still out on AT-43) stumble.
With re: to GW and their current state. Some of the complaints, and some of what we're judging them against is their history. Some of us remember RT, and second edition. Back when designers were creating at full speed, new and interesting playtest rules and lists were coming out, and GW was making armies, models, and rules based on what was a 'cool concept'. They weren't constrained by the need to mollify shareholders, watch profit margins, and they certainly weren't worried about how much a mold cost to make (since it was mostly metal). Now we've seen them become a worldwide company, privately traded, and the decisions are made by what moves models, and what raises profits. Of course, we've seen them do poorly at both recently. At the same time, they have huge holdings, over 300 GW stores worldwide, and huge overhead. If they do continue to have difficulties financially, they certainly have a margin for error, and a lot of overhead they can slash quickly. Not to mention, what was once GW, is now also Forgeworld, Black Library, etc.
I'm not forgiving GW their slipshod approach to FAQ's, product support, codex and armylist release shcedules, etc. I think they need new blood and they need to be much more reactive (and in some cases proactive - i.e. better proofreading, editing) to the community and to its customers. This is not to say they should hand over control, or let intraweb yahoos decide what they should do, but important issues are raised about the state of the game and the hobby, and they fall on deaf ears (or so it seems).
As was mentioned earlier, 5th edition will also be my last edition with 40k (and I started during 2nd edition). If GW doesn't get it right with this, and really right ship, I'm going to be playing historicals and other games that have caught my eye (and my disposeable income) while GW has been foundering.
Keezus, you should send that summary over to GW, but make sure to change "house" to "flat" so they understand it... 
5164
Post by: Stelek
I am only talking about Space marine dreadnoughts. The only real dreadnoughts in the game.
Same model since....release. It's an ugly box.
The 'new' versions are heavy plated versions that cost more and are horrible to put together like the ven dread and the FW dreads.
In the end, it's a box. It's ugly. It's old.
PP has released a score of them.
It's shameful GW still thinks we'll buy the horrible models they won't update....frankly I'd love some PP warjacks but GW's so anal about not using anyone elses models I can't run them.
Thankfully, they've made dreads suck in-game for so long I'm actually gaining something by not being able to play what I want. lol
1963
Post by: Aduro
I only thing I don't like about the space marine dreads is the lack of a head gives them no dynamic posability for the most part.
6035
Post by: Techboss
Stelek wrote:I am only talking about Space marine dreadnoughts. The only real dreadnoughts in the game.
Space Marine Dreadnaught has nothing on the Chaos Dreadnaught. It hasn't changed since I started playing the game, my 2nd edition Chaos Dread looks the exact same as the current one. I started 2nd edition in spring of 1998, therefore the model is at least 9 years old, probably more. The plastic SM Dread was released soon after 3rd edition, so like 2000, 2001ish.
5164
Post by: Stelek
The dread model is the same model since the dread was released in the early 90s or late 80s(?) I believe. Way way back.
The plastic SM dread is the same as the metal one, just in plastic. :(
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
If you're defining Dreads so narrowly, then I think you can only count the bipedal Cryx Helljacks against every weapons variation that the SM have ever been allowed: AC&PF; AC&ML; tLC&PF; tLC&ML; tHB&PF, tHB&ML, etc.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Stelek wrote:The dread model is the same model since the dread was released in the early 90s or late 80s(?) I believe. Way way back.
The plastic SM dread is the same as the metal one, just in plastic. :(
Totally untrue. THe plastic SM Dread looks nothing like an Eddy, Fury, or Chuck.
752
Post by: Polonius
JohnHwangDD wrote:Stelek wrote:The dread model is the same model since the dread was released in the early 90s or late 80s(?) I believe. Way way back.
The plastic SM dread is the same as the metal one, just in plastic. :(
Totally untrue. THe plastic SM Dread looks nothing like an Eddy, Fury, or Chuck.
I'm pretty sure he meant the metal dread from 2nd edition that looks strikingly similar to the current plastic one.
Wait, you couldn't have intentionally misunderstood his post in order to make a snarky post? Naw, you probably just never saw the model. It was only produced for about 13 years, so it's pretty easy to miss.
Those old RT dreads, though... unavoidable!
780
Post by: PatoX
It's pretty easy to see that much of Games Workshop's ill health comes from their gawd-awful support for their game system.
It's also ridiculous to equate the current state of Warmachine/Hordes to when Games Workshop produced Rogue Trade. I'm not a huge Privateer Press, but it's obvious that Privateer Press supports their game system 10x more than Games Workshop ever did. Even in GW's early days. Rogue Trader was a beast of a game system. Cumbersome. Clunky. Poorly thought out. Full of holes. And GW did practically nothing to fix it. Same with v2. Remember the virus bombs?
But has Games Workshop done anything to change their business practices from Rogue Trader?
I would say they are still under the delusions that they can operate the same way they did back in 80's. Back in a time when they had almost zero competition.
Well, times have changed. And more experienced gamers are talking with their dollars. And those dollars are getting spent elsewhere. Warmachine. Hordes. AT-43. Flames of War. Starship Troopers. The list goes on. In the last few years I have watched so many veteran players switch to other game systems and never looking back. And this is even more evident from GW's bottom line.
The best thing that Warhammer 40,000 has going for it is the fluff. Nothing compares to those crazy Rogue Trader and version 2 days. That's probably why I'm still interested. But now, all the Warhammer 40,000 stuff is getting so bland. And it seems half the codexes are Space Marine codexes. Vanilla. Black Templar. Blood Angel. Dark Angel. Space Wolves. Did I miss one? It's horrible.
GW survives from the temporary interests of adolescent boys and hard-core fan-bois who believe GW can do nothing wrong.
They need to revise their marketing if they are to survive. The need to read their audience better and adjust. Or maybe they should just get bought out.
3720
Post by: brettz123
Redbeard wrote:brettz123 wrote:
3. They need to realize that tournament players and prepubescent children are not there core audience.
What if their market research shows that prepubescent children actually are their core audience, from a sales standpoint. I may spend $1000/year on new models, but there's maybe a handful like me shopping at the local GW store, compared to 40-odd kids whose parents, grandparents, etc. etc. buy them models every birthday and christmas. While I may outspend any individual kid, their total expenditures have got to be higher.
You may or may not be right. From my experience though I think this is not the case (I could be wrong though as it is just my experience). I have moved around a lot (in the Army for ten years) and have known probably around 100 to 150 players of which less then 10 were 16 or younger. Most of the people I played with never played in any kind of official tournament and most owned at least one larger then normal army.
Not sure if other people have had similiar experiences or not but it would be interested in hearing what people have to say.
26
Post by: carmachu
Stelek wrote:The dread model is the same model since the dread was released in the early 90s or late 80s(?) I believe. Way way back.
The plastic SM dread is the same as the metal one, just in plastic. :(
Not quite.
When switched over to plastic there were three quasi-types of dreads... DA, BA and UM(which was genaric for everyone)..different faceplates and weapons...but over all design was the same. switched to plastic became another "one" the venerable became the "5th"
chaos have it worse as someone pointed out with ONE dread.
3720
Post by: brettz123
carmachu wrote:Stelek wrote:The dread model is the same model since the dread was released in the early 90s or late 80s(?) I believe. Way way back.
The plastic SM dread is the same as the metal one, just in plastic. :(
Not quite.
When switched over to plastic there were three quasi-types of dreads... DA, BA and UM(which was genaric for everyone)..different faceplates and weapons...but over all design was the same. switched to plastic became another "one" the venerable became the "5th"
chaos have it worse as someone pointed out with ONE dread.
Weren't there also variations of the metal one? I seem to remember a metal Space Wolf, Blood Angel, and Dark Angel dreadnought. So more then just one dreadnought. Besides why would GW want to keep coming out with multiple kinds of dreadnoughts anyway?
6035
Post by: Techboss
brettz123 wrote: Weren't there also variations of the metal one? I seem to remember a metal Space Wolf, Blood Angel, and Dark Angel dreadnought. So more then just one dreadnought. Besides why would GW want to keep coming out with multiple kinds of dreadnoughts anyway?
IIRC, there was the special character Space Wolf Dread (Bjorn?) that came with a lightning claw that was all metal. They also released a BA dread with dual CCW in metal. I think the Dark Angels one was the all metal Dread with a ML instead of a DCCW. All of them were basically the same with different arms. The Space Wolf one also had some extra bits like wolf tails, etc.
4588
Post by: Destrado
Yep, the metal Space Wolf one was Bjorn the Fell-Handed. The BA dread, aka "Furioso", is a bit more recent if I'm not mistaken, the same time as the BA 'dex. All in all, Techboss has it nailed down. They could have diferent faceplates (what currently is the sarcophagus), but it meant getting the entire front of the dread.
Chaos have the same Dread (only difference being the feet) for quite some time now - I'm guessing the release of 2nd ed. Codex Chaos. But then again, seeing the gorgeous Dreads that Forgeworld sells, I think that GW would be hard-pressed to release models with similar quality (not to mention being able to release 10 or so different models).
*Points topic back to it's place*
I wouldn't mind GW having it's high prices as long as they actually did some nice deals. Not only it was cheaper a few years ago, every store opening or during a special day per year you'd get the "buy three get one free". And WD subscription deals were very good, too.
5206
Post by: snorkle
The Blood Angels dreadnought was meant to represent Moriar. A Blood Angel who upon being entombed in the Sarcophagus was overtaken by the red thirst or whatever the death-company thing is called. But I never new the Space Wolf dreadnought was Bjorn.
Chaos needs a new Dread. As long as it's plastic people will be able to convert it to fit their legion and I'm sure a lot of people would buy it when it came out. Just because chaos dreads have so much potential awesomeness.
734
Post by: Dal'yth Dude
It seems clear to me that GW wants chaos players to buy defilers and not dreads. I often have a skewed view of reality though.
4588
Post by: Destrado
Or given the Chaos Dreadnought's rules, they weren't that much popular. I think it started in 2nd Edition, when they gave the Dreads the Crazy! rule. Made them a bit too unpredictable.
Ironically, the "chaosier" you are, the less popular you'll be
5206
Post by: snorkle
Well true chaos would be impossible to play with. One turn you'd be winning, the next you roll a 100k on you infinity sided die and your models go to mcdonalds for burgers. I'm sure everybody would love that army.
4588
Post by: Destrado
Chaos isn't only about the loss of perspective and exaggerated behavior, it does have it's randomness, but GW's version has a purpose, being an antithesis of all that's "lawful". Now, here I am getting all philosophical. I'm getting my nicotine shots.
And that would be a hell of an army, snorkle. I would love it. It's like every model is a Big Mek (with a d6 SAG).
5206
Post by: snorkle
That would be an awesome data sheet. Instead of just 3 shokk atakk guns you can have as many as you want! Now if only they were plastic and half-off.
|
|
