ImAGeek wrote:
The hobby is Wargaming; GW are part of that hobby, as much as they might like to think otherwise.

I like to think of 40k and miniature wargaming in general as two distinct experiences:

1. The hobby of modeling and painting miniatures, and
2. The game of playing those miniatures with others

There are actually a lot of people who don't play the game at all (or once, they did, but no longer), just as there are a lot of people who only do the minimum amount necessary to play their game pieces -- last year, I saw a bunch of people frantically trying to paint up 1850 points of Space Wolves in 1 week to make it in time for a tournament... that is not a "hobby" in any sense of the word, in my mind

 Talys wrote:


GW may disagree with you. First page of content in the BRB says: "At its heart, a game of Warhammer 40,000 is a shared experience between fellow hobbyists."

It doesn't matter what GW says. 40k is a game that happens to be a wargame. It is not, in any way shape or form, its own hobby distinct from wargaming, nor a niche subset of wargaming. Its just one of dozens of settings and rulesets available.

Some models, like Dark Eldar Raiders and Imperial Knights are just not made for easy transportation. I don't know how often I've broken something just getting it from point A to B, on the fragile models. It's one of the things I hate most about 40k as a game (taking models from one place to another), to be frank. The time it takes to pack those big, delicate models is high, too.

This is why my friends all play in my basement, where I give them ample storage to keep their difficult-to-transport models, should they choose -- but of course, not everyone has this option.

Certainly, some models are more difficult. All of my old chimeras had all of their antennas broken off because I couldn't come up with a reasonable storge solution at the time. My almost entirely foot Guard at the moment stores super easy in a single BF bag. Knights and finicky kits like Dark Eldar a little problematic, but if you have the money, BF and other custom bags are available, or simple tupperware and foam, or strong magnets and a toolbox (and some care not to be violent with it) will do for some of those models. Its how friends of mine moved around their Imperial BFG fleets, which are pretty finicky and ungainly.

I have a budding RPG group in the making, and it looks like I'll be the storage and printer for all materials, which works out fine seeing as I have the largest basement, and plenty of space to put everything.

Without going through each of your points, yes, you're right, and the game is what you make of it. Of course, you can just play with Dark Vengeance primed black and be happy with that. It could be a more accessible game/hobby in terms of price (and I would be happy if it were). None of this, really, was my point though -- I was just saying, if you want a game where the gaming pieces are more like tokens than models that were lovingly crafted, **in my opinion** there are other games that are a better choice. I know lots of people who don't like 40k, because they have no interest in fiddling with 8 pieces of plastic and a base to build each basic troop, when with another game, they can just take each miniature, plunk it into a base, and play.

If people are treating the gaming pieces as tokens, they're just not interested in the hobby aspect, that's all. They may still enjoy wargaming, as options exist in other games for pre-painted, or just using tokens. FFG's X-wing springs to mind as an example of the former. I intend to show my friends X-wing, seeing as they like the RPG a lot.

My point has, and always will be, that GW's prices are not representative of their quality or technical ability. They're overpriced and should be lower. That's all.

 Talys wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
The hobby is Wargaming; GW are part of that hobby, as much as they might like to think otherwise.

I like to think of 40k and miniature wargaming in general as two distinct experiences:

1. The hobby of modeling and painting miniatures, and
2. The game of playing those miniatures with others

There are actually a lot of people who don't play the game at all (or once, they did, but no longer), just as there are a lot of people who only do the minimum amount necessary to play their game pieces -- last year, I saw a bunch of people frantically trying to paint up 1850 points of Space Wolves in 1 week to make it in time for a tournament... that is not a "hobby" in any sense of the word, in my mind

Not the point I was making; GW are not their own hobby seperate from the rest of the Wargaming hobby.

Yeah, fair enough. Anyhow, I was just making the point that the modelling aspect of 40k can (and should) be separated out from the gaming aspect, because although they often appeal to the same people, that's not always the case, and they are very different in nature.

Personally, when I think of "hobby" I think more of the modelling part of it, than rolling dice with friends. For example, I do not consider playing D&D a hobby

Why though? It is a hobby.

I'm still waiting to hear how WM/H is more expensive than 40k on a per model basis (I'm ignoring all the rules and extraneous cost of 40k).

 ImAGeek wrote:
Why though? It is a hobby.

Well, It's not "D&D-ing" it's roleplaying.

Just like 40k is part of the wargaming hobby.

 Chute82 wrote:
Paints will be going up 25 cents a pot
Hobby tools 3~10% up in price
Glue up 35 cents
Spray paints up $1.25 a can
Aegis defense line will be $37
Realm of battle board going up to $330
Realm of battle board imperalis $363 June 1st

This is accoriding to my flgs

Who the hell in their right mind chooses GW paints?

You can buy paint and tools of the same quality for a third the price.

 Talys wrote:
For example, I do not consider playing D&D a hobby

On that note, we'll have to disagree. Fairly strongly.

As a new GM, the amount of work and time spent lovingly writing, crafting, and preparing entire story arcs as well as all the possible forks and environments they can go down, RPGs are absolutely a hobby in my eyes. They even still allow for modelling/painting if that's what you base your definition on.

I think he's trying to say that "GW" is a hobby, but D+D is not.

Because D+D is a part of the RPG hobby, yet, because reasons, GW is not part of the wargaming hobby?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talys wrote:

GW may disagree with you. First page of content in the BRB says: "At its heart, a game of Warhammer 40,000 is a shared experience between fellow hobbyists."
.

Where is it defined that "hobbyist" is "player and purchaser exclusively of GW products" and not simply "wargamer and modeller."

Why keep arguing with Talys? His view on the wargaming hobby is his view, he is not going to change it.

I see it clearly games works shop tactical marines 40$ 10 marines
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Space-Marine-Tactical-Squad

Valkir heavy troopers 59$ 20 troopers
http://dreamforge-games.com/collections/everything/products/eisenkern-valkir-heavy-trooper (now on sale for 41.30$)

What I don't understand is this:

Yes, GW figures offers "customization" in the sense that you get X many parts and can build what you like. My argument to this is that it's an illusion. That customization is basically meaningless; there's zero differentiating an Ultramarine with MkVI armor and a purity seal on his left leg, wielding a boltgun with a Marksman trophy dangling on the edge from an Ultramarine wearing MkVII armor with a studded MkIV-era (or was it MkV? I forget) shoulderpad, a purity seal on his right shoulder and wielding a boltgun with the winged skull or from an Ultramarine wearing MkVII armor with no purity seals, a chestpiece with tubing and a boltgun with the Aquila on it.

These are illusionary choices and are superfluous. You have customization where none is needed, and this is generally used as an excuse to justify high prices (e.g. But I get 75 pieces in the kit! Yes but you can still only make 10 guys. Who cares about 75 pieces?) or disparage other companies e.g. Privateer where you have like 3-4 different torsos, maybe 2-3 different heads and everything else looks identical.

The crux of this issue I think is the difference between someone who "collects 40k miniatures" and someone who "plays Warhammer 40k". The collector is going to care more about being able to customize individual guys in a unit with umpteen different parts so no two are alike. The gamer isn't going to give a monkey's butt about that, because they're all the same on the field, so getting extra parts to make this guy have X markings and this other guy have Y markings is minutiae.

GW definitely wants to cater to the first group (to the exclusion of all else) and that's what is causing the divide. If I'm not mistaken, someone like Talys seems likely to be more of the collector; he (?) wants to have lots of pieces and build Brother Argentum, who fought on Caspia IV and earned a marksmanship award for shooting down Badtoof the Ork Nob, and Brother Remus whose faith is an inspiration to his battle-brothers and always goes to battle adorned with purity seals with litanies of valor, and all the rest. So those individual parts that ultimately mean nothing mean a lot to Talys because it lets him customize what he wants.

To someone who plays the game first and cares about customization second, those bits are irrelevant bits and bobs that might as well not exist and just exist to jack up the cost of an already-expensive kit. You're building 7 Space Marines with boltguns, one with a flamer, one with a missile launcher and a Sergeant with a powerfist, and that's all you're doing. The rest is extras that aren't needed.

That's the difference. The GW price is acceptable to the person who cares about getting 72 pieces in a kit that builds 10 guys because those 72 pieces lets him build 10 unique (or largely unique anyways) guys and each one has a different story, and Brother Argentum is not the same as Brother Remus who is not the same as Sergeant Julian. The GW prices are not acceptable to anyone who cares more about building 10 guys with X/Y/Z weapon options. Neither side is wrong, but both sides need to understand that the price is not "okay", it's just whether or not you accept it.

The collector will, the gamer will (probably) not. The underlying problem is that GW only cares about the former, and not about the latter while paying lip service to the latter and trying to build a game that caters to both while selling in a way that only caters to the former (e.g. 5 guys in a box when a gamer wants 10, and not providing enough weapon options for the entire squad because a collector is more likely to build one of each rather than double up)

WayneTheGame wrote:
These are illusionary choices and are superfluous. You have customization where none is needed, and this is generally used as an excuse to justify high prices (e.g. But I get 75 pieces in the kit! Yes but you can still only make 10 guys. Who cares about 75 pieces?) or disparage other companies e.g. Privateer where you have like 3-4 different torsos, maybe 2-3 different heads and everything else looks identical.

Well, they're not quite illusionary. They're illusionary if you don't mind your 30 tactical marines to have just 3 styles. If you want your 30 tactical marines to look different from each other, then it's kind of important. There are also three types of customization:

1. The "illusionary" ones -- like rifle scopes, belt accessories, purity seals, grenades, and that kind of thing
2. The WYSIWYG gaming ones -- plasma rifles, lascanons, bolt pistols, and chainswords all do different things in the game
3. The significant pose ones -- Whether a space marine is leaning back and aiming, standing at ready guarding, or leaping into the air (with a jetpack) make models totally different

To a lesser degree, different marks and styles of power armor falls into category 1, although some are quite different from others. For instance, Grey Knights look *totally* different from Iron Hands.

WayneTheGame wrote:
The crux of this issue I think is the difference between someone who "collects 40k miniatures" and someone who "plays Warhammer 40k". The collector is going to care more about being able to customize individual guys in a unit with umpteen different parts so no two are alike. The gamer isn't going to give a monkey's butt about that, because they're all the same on the field, so getting extra parts to make this guy have X markings and this other guy have Y markings is minutiae.

GW definitely wants to cater to the first group (to the exclusion of all else) and that's what is causing the divide. If I'm not mistaken, someone like Talys seems likely to be more of the collector; he (?) wants to have lots of pieces and build Brother Argentum, who fought on Caspia IV and earned a marksmanship award for shooting down Badtoof the Ork Nob, and Brother Remus whose faith is an inspiration to his battle-brothers and always goes to battle adorned with purity seals with litanies of valor, and all the rest. So those individual parts that ultimately mean nothing mean a lot to Talys because it lets him customize what he wants.

To someone who plays the game first and cares about customization second, those bits are irrelevant bits and bobs that might as well not exist and just exist to jack up the cost of an already-expensive kit. You're building 7 Space Marines with boltguns, one with a flamer, one with a missile launcher and a Sergeant with a powerfist, and that's all you're doing. The rest is extras that aren't needed. That's the difference. The GW price is acceptable to the person who cares about getting 72 pieces in a kit that builds 10 guys because those 72 pieces lets him build 10 unique (or largely unique anyways) guys and each one has a different story, and Brother Argentum is not the same as Brother Remus who is not the same as Sergeant Julian. The GW prices are not acceptable to anyone who cares more about building 10 guys with X/Y/Z weapon options. Neither side is wrong, but both sides need to understand that the price is not "okay", it's just whether or not you accept it.

You hit the nail on the head! I think you understand it perfectly. Although, in fairness, I do play probably as much as a lot of casual players (up to 20 hrs a month?). To me the individual parts are valuable to customize the models, because a model is no different than a Dungeons & Dragons character sheet -- there is a story to the character, and eventually, when the model is retired, the model is an epitaph to their glorious deeds. Just like in D&D, the "Character Background" is just as important as Constitution; Charisma is not a wasted stat. I want to have fun with my models, even if they get rolled over by some Ork horde.

I guess, more broadly, I just have fun building or painting scifi stuff, and I don't have much interest in building the same thing over and over again, though I don't mind building variations of the same thing, especially when I can play a game with those variations.

Anyhow, thank you for understanding my viewpoint, even if it's different than yours (and probably a lot of gamers).

WayneTheGame wrote:

The collector will, the gamer will (probably) not. The underlying problem is that GW only cares about the former, and not about the latter while paying lip service to the latter and trying to build a game that caters to both while selling in a way that only caters to the former (e.g. 5 guys in a box when a gamer wants 10, and not providing enough weapon options for the entire squad because a collector is more likely to build one of each rather than double up)

Well, this is a problem for both. I think the vast majority collectors still want to collect useful models that fit the fluff. They might build ONE guy with a heavy bolter because it looks cool, but they sure aren't going to outfit every tactical squad they model with them. And I pretty much guarantee you the heavy bolter guy gets the bits (torso/legs/etc.) that are the least favorite of the bunch The coolest bits go to the grav gun, the plasma, the meltagun, that kind of thing.

It is a particular pain with units like Grotesque, which come in 1s but are played in minimum 3. Of course, when GW gives people all of the weapons options for a box, everyone screams that jetbikes with scatter lasers on each one is massively overpowered, made worse by the fact that they come that way in boxes, so everyone can actually play them that way

I am also very happy to concede that a huge portion of the 40k fanbase doesn't play 40k the way Games Workshop does. I'm as scenario-minded and "narrative" a player as any, and our group doesn't come close to the type of battles that they seem to outline in their "battle reports" (if you can call them that). As a game, 40k has lots of room for improvement. While I might argue that the miniatures are a good deal for modelling, I'd never argue the rules are a good deal for gaming! But still I have a lot of fun with it, shortcomings and all.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Talys wrote:
For example, I do not consider playing D&D a hobby

On that note, we'll have to disagree. Fairly strongly.

As a new GM, the amount of work and time spent lovingly writing, crafting, and preparing entire story arcs as well as all the possible forks and environments they can go down, RPGs are absolutely a hobby in my eyes. They even still allow for modelling/painting if that's what you base your definition on.

Upon reflection, you are probably right. I've never thought of them as a hobby (any more than MMORPGs), even though I have played RPGs dating back to the 80s. But yes, the loving work spent on creating the game world and such, as you put it, most certainly qualifies it as a hobby.

Maybe it's just because most of my RPG groups eventually devolve into an hour of "What do you doooooooooo?" "Let's order pizza!"

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Why keep arguing with Talys? His view on the wargaming hobby is his view, he is not going to change it.

I see it clearly games works shop tactical marines 40$ 10 marines
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Space-Marine-Tactical-Squad

Valkir heavy troopers 59$ 20 troopers
http://dreamforge-games.com/collections/everything/products/eisenkern-valkir-heavy-trooper (now on sale for 41.30$)

I have worked with Dreamforce kits, can't even compare to GW IMO. Did not have fun assembling them, did not enjoy the available poses so on and so forth.

Also why is something that is opinion based being argued? It's an OPINION. Talys I think is arguing against the people stating opinions as facts. Yes x costs more than y. That is objectively true. However the VALUE of x and y are purely subjective to each individual. Saying something is more expensive is pointless without considering the value of what you are comparing. Once again value is not solely in currency.

You compare those heavy troopers to marines, easy enough. However what if I want to trade? I think it would be much easier to trade those marines than the heavy troopers. What about accessibility? Maybe my local game store does not stock it and I prefer to support them. Aesthetics. Maybe those models don't fit with the rest of the GW range or my army/not the size. Maybe they don't look fun for me to paint or pose? Maybe they are not quite the right size giving me an advantage/disadvantage in game?

What if more actual models is a burden and so I need fewer models to go farther rather than more models? With the marine kit I can magnetize all the options so that I don't have to make a marine for each option. Now those 10 marines in the kit could count as 15+ models in my collection that I would have had to assemble and paint otherwise. Also reduces my storage. Now because of those options I can now travel easier with my army, bringing multiple lists and options with me using the same models. Combined with the electronic codexs on my iPad and the new GW cases I can actually travel very light with a full army with many options.

All of these things can factor in for me when looking at a model range.

Once again price is objective, value is subjective.

Without having a shared definition of what a war gaming hobby, or just a hobby in general is then a conversation of what constitutes one or the other is also pointless.

No, I'm not trying to argue something subjective is "wrong" because it doesn't align with my view (can't speak for anyone else, obviously) I'm saying that one cannot put forward one's own personal experience as a support for a view when one's experience differs widely from they typical.

One cannot say "x is better than all other examples of its type" then respond to "here's y" with "ah, but y doesn't have the a that x has" when a was never part of the original conversation either.

It's fine to like things, but if you try and justify them rather than simply be content to proclaim your liking of those things, expect people to examine your justification and challenge it where they feel it warrants challenge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:

Without having a shared definition of what a war gaming hobby, or just a hobby in general is then a conversation of what constitutes one or the other is also pointless.

Seriously?

If you need these things defined for you, this probably isn't the discussion for you.

 Azreal13 wrote:
No, I'm not trying to argue something subjective is "wrong" because it doesn't align with my view (can't speak for anyone else, obviously) I'm saying that one cannot put forward one's own personal experience as a support for a view when one's experience differs widely from they typical.

One cannot say "x is better than all other examples of its type" then respond to "here's y" with "ah, but y doesn't have the a that x has" when a was never part of the original conversation either.

It's fine to like things, but if you try and justify them rather than simply be content to proclaim your liking of those things, expect people to examine your justification and challenge it where they feel it warrants challenge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:

Without having a shared definition of what a war gaming hobby, or just a hobby in general is then a conversation of what constitutes one or the other is also pointless.

Seriously?

If you need these things defined for you, this probably isn't the discussion for you.

If we had a shared definition then group membership would be clear cut, but it is not, That is my point. Without having a strict set of inclusion and exclusion criteria arguing is or isn't is pointless. It's like arguing semantics while speaking a different dialect.

I also included in my post(that you decided not to quote) things covering my subjective preference. I have no problem being challenged when it is presented as an inquiry. What I don't like is being challenged and insulted for my preference.

Secondly in your example there is no way to directly compare x and y outside of very few objective metrics. The rest of the comparisons are subjective and so any direct comparison is flawed from the start.

What does the price of a war machine model matter if it doesn't help me play the game I want to play. I bought a full cryx army, enjoyed the models, did not like the game at all. Regardless of price those models were less valuable to me because I did not enjoy playing with them.

Same token I bought a grey Knights army, enjoyed them for a little bit but then did not enjoy playing them. They lost their value and so I traded them. It is not system specific.

I have thought about starting infinity or malifaux, great models. However I am intimidated by the infinity models for painting, I am not as much of a fan of the aesthetic and I just don't have the ability to start and learn multiple new games right now, much less become good enough to play them well.

Just because it is not for me does not mean I feel the need to insult other people's choices. I recognize that other people place different values on other things than I do and I respect that. All I ask is the same in return.

 Leth wrote:


If we had a shared definition then it would be clear cut what is and isn't. That is my point, without having a strict set of inclusion and exclusion criteria arguing one is or isn't does not make sense.

hobby1
ˈhɒbi/Submit
noun
1.
an activity done regularly in one's leisure time for pleasure.
"her hobbies are reading and gardening"
synonyms: pastime, leisure activity, leisure pursuit, leisure interest, amateur interest, sideline, diversion, avocation, divertissement, enthusiasm; recreation, relaxation, entertainment, amusement; informalthing
"her hobbies are reading and gardening"

Leth wrote:Secondly in your example there is no way to directly compare x and y outside of very few objective metrics. The rest of the comparisons are subjective and so any direct comparison is flawed from the start.

Of course there is.

You say "show me a plastic kit that has as many pieces as a GW kit for less money."

This is an objective measurement, a clear set of criteria it's easy to compare.

I say "sure, here's this kit, it has x pieces which is the same as y GW kit, but it costs z% less."

I have, objectively, provided evidence to fulfil your demand.

It is then unacceptable to turn around and say "ah, but I didn't mean that sort of kit" after the fact. Which is essentially what Talys did and what sparked this tangent.

You might as well just ask "show me another company that is making a plastic kit which look like GW Space Marines, but cost less, and BTW I have to like them as much as GW SM." Which would be more up front and would save us all wasting a bunch of our time.

Just because it is not for me does not mean I feel the need to insult other people's choices. I recognize that other people place different values on other things than I do and I respect that. All I ask is the same in return.

I'm not seeing many insults, I'm seeing people expressing a preference, feeling compelled to justify the preference and then getting defensive when people challenge their justifications.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Leth wrote:


If we had a shared definition then it would be clear cut what is and isn't. That is my point, without having a strict set of inclusion and exclusion criteria arguing one is or isn't does not make sense.

hobby1
ˈhɒbi/Submit
noun
1.
an activity done regularly in one's leisure time for pleasure.
"her hobbies are reading and gardening"
synonyms: pastime, leisure activity, leisure pursuit, leisure interest, amateur interest, sideline, diversion, avocation, divertissement, enthusiasm; recreation, relaxation, entertainment, amusement; informalthing
"her hobbies are reading and gardening"

I may be going out in a limb here, but would the "wargaming hobby" be a pastime that fulfils the above criteria whilst doing some,thing in and around wargaming?

I mean, call me crazy!

I don't understand how you came to that conclusion, Leth.

You're arguing symantics, now.

It's a good line of thinking to ask for a comparison, it doesn't hold to move the goal when some shows you one.

Another case in point is Vic's miniatures. Her quality is well ahead of the curve for the price.

When someone calls all people who do x a negative, I do x, they are saying something negative about me. Also the condescending tone can be insulting as well. As if you were talking down to a child.

Also great, anything can count as a hobby. So if that is the definition then what is the point of even talking about it?

I never moved the goal so I am not sure what you are referencing.

Yes Vic has great quality and if I was just collection models to collect models then they might be in the running if it weren't for other companies like raging Heros.

Sorry, there's a lot of rant there dude and not a lot of content.

The point of talking about it is that "Warhammer" is not a hobby in and of itself, that's just GW marketing doublespeak and needs to be addressed whenever people start to get drawn into that way of thinking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You're also taking a lot of stuff which was directed at another person's posts as if they were directed at you. Probably best you don't do that for the sake of your continued sanity.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Sorry, there's a lot of rant there dude and not a lot of content.

The point of talking about it is that "Warhammer" is not a hobby in and of itself, that's just GW marketing doublespeak and needs to be addressed whenever people start to get drawn into that way of thinking.

What rant? I am confused as to where you are getting the rant from?

Warhammer according to your definition is a hobby. Anything done in leisure time is a hobby. Warhammer includes all the aspects from building, planning, painting and playing, each component could be considered a hobby. While someone might not engage in all aspects of the Warhammer hobby it is still a hobby none the less

I don't take them as directed at me unless people talk about it in generalities. If you say "x person" then that is one thing, but if you respond to them with "all of x type of people" then it is a generalization

 Azreal13 wrote:
Sorry, there's a lot of rant there dude and not a lot of content.

The point of talking about it is that "Warhammer" is not a hobby in and of itself, that's just GW marketing doublespeak and needs to be addressed whenever people start to get drawn into that way of thinking.

Its actually kinda hilarious if you think about it. It is a subcategory of a hobby but saying its not part of the wider hobby is like saying a poodle is a poodle but not a dog

Sooo... Any idea on what other prices are to be bumped up?!

Since that's what the thread is for and all...

 Leth wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Sorry, there's a lot of rant there dude and not a lot of content.

The point of talking about it is that "Warhammer" is not a hobby in and of itself, that's just GW marketing doublespeak and needs to be addressed whenever people start to get drawn into that way of thinking.

What rant? I am confused as to where you are getting the rant from?

Warhammer according to your definition is a hobby. Anything done in leisure time is a hobby. Warhammer includes all the aspects from building, planning, painting and playing, each component could be considered a hobby. While someone might not engage in all aspects of the Warhammer hobby it is still a hobby none the less

I don't take them as directed at me unless people talk about it in generalities. If you say "x person" then that is one thing, but if you respond to them with "all of x type of people" then it is a generalization

Well, the post before the edit didn't make a lot of sense, and then you went back and added stuff in, which is sometimes a sign that someone is getting worked up and posts without actually fully gathering and expressing their thoughts.

Intentional or not, you're coming over as a bit worked up, so if that's the case, I was just suggesting taking a breath as there's real,y no need.

You keep saying I'm making some sort of generalisation which seems to have offended you, but you're going to have to help me out here, cause I'm not seeing it.

Lord Corellia wrote:
Sooo... Any idea on what other prices are to be bumped up?!

Since that's what the thread is for and all...

Historically the annual GW price hike was everything they sell in one go. It got to the point we could set our watches buy it before GW stopped it in favour of each new kit being more expensive than the last *cough*70AUDfive man boxes*cough*. Now it appears we're just getting both types.

Although maybe I'm just cynical and it will only be the items listed in the OP.

Lord Corellia wrote:
Sooo... Any idea on what other prices are to be bumped up?!

Since that's what the thread is for and all...

Yeah, I saw this thread had amassed a few pages since I saw it last and assumed there was some rumours about the price hike. I want my time back for reading through all these pointless posts

You could have walked away at any time.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Leth wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Sorry, there's a lot of rant there dude and not a lot of content.

The point of talking about it is that "Warhammer" is not a hobby in and of itself, that's just GW marketing doublespeak and needs to be addressed whenever people start to get drawn into that way of thinking.

What rant? I am confused as to where you are getting the rant from?

Warhammer according to your definition is a hobby. Anything done in leisure time is a hobby. Warhammer includes all the aspects from building, planning, painting and playing, each component could be considered a hobby. While someone might not engage in all aspects of the Warhammer hobby it is still a hobby none the less

I don't take them as directed at me unless people talk about it in generalities. If you say "x person" then that is one thing, but if you respond to them with "all of x type of people" then it is a generalization

Well, the post before the edit didn't make a lot of sense, and then you went back and added stuff in, which is sometimes a sign that someone is getting worked up and posts without actually fully gathering and expressing their thoughts.

Intentional or not, you're coming over as a bit worked up, so if that's the case, I was just suggesting taking a breath as there's real,y no need.

You keep saying I'm making some sort of generalisation which seems to have offended you, but you're going to have to help me out here, cause I'm not seeing it.

O not at all, I am trying to type it all on my iPad and it's doing a lot of auto correcting or weird sentence stuff that is not making sense. It also means that I am trying to get my idea across quickly since its kind of annoying to type. I am then going back and re reading some of my stuff and realizing that it doesn't make sense or I am leaving out something necessary for it to flow correctly.

I am 100% open to the idea that it is a carry over from a majority of threads like this where what I am describing has occurred and that it is not the specific poster that I am referring to that has done it, but rather a one off here or there that has tainted my perceptions of the thread overall.

 Azreal13 wrote:
You could have walked away at any time.

But you normally assume when a *rumours* thread clocks up several pages in a day that there might be, oh, I dunno, maybe some discussion of the rumours or possibly even a new rumour

Maybe we should start a new thread "Is GW overpriced and what is the definition of a hobby" ??

 Azreal13 wrote:
You could have walked away at any time.

You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave after reading through this one.
Just going to go on ahead and put it out there, that other companies figures are out there. They can be used in addition to the game components inherent for the game. Any game works the same way.
You could play it with green army men if you so choose.
Wargaming is the hobby. Not companies inherent products.
GW uses basic level sales to push product, make a sale, and make a profit. They didn't invent the tabletop gaming industry. They use the perceived value to justify the price hikes. You don't have to like it, at the end of the day, it is what it is. If I crank out a 2 buck sprue, and charge you 10 for it, it's a profit.

Other then that, the price hike is more then likely going to come in both the new stuff coming out, and circular through the year as we get dazed with more diamonds.
Price for the walking tank is up to 60 bucks, local from my FLGS.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
You could have walked away at any time.

But you normally assume when a *rumours* thread clocks up several pages in a day that there might be, oh, I dunno, maybe some discussion of the rumours or possibly even a new rumour

Maybe we should start a new thread "Is GW overpriced and what is the definition of a hobby" ??

Already there. It's an ongoing theme.

 Leth wrote:

Spoiler:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Why keep arguing with Talys? His view on the wargaming hobby is his view, he is not going to change it.

I see it clearly games works shop tactical marines 40$ 10 marines
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Space-Marine-Tactical-Squad

Valkir heavy troopers 59$ 20 troopers
http://dreamforge-games.com/collections/everything/products/eisenkern-valkir-heavy-trooper (now on sale for 41.30$)

I have worked with Dreamforce kits, can't even compare to GW IMO. Did not have fun assembling them, did not enjoy the available poses so on and so forth.

Also why is something that is opinion based being argued? It's an OPINION. Talys I think is arguing against the people stating opinions as facts. Yes x costs more than y. That is objectively true. However the VALUE of x and y are purely subjective to each individual. Saying something is more expensive is pointless without considering the value of what you are comparing. Once again value is not solely in currency.

You compare those heavy troopers to marines, easy enough. However what if I want to trade? I think it would be much easier to trade those marines than the heavy troopers. What about accessibility? Maybe my local game store does not stock it and I prefer to support them. Aesthetics. Maybe those models don't fit with the rest of the GW range or my army/not the size. Maybe they don't look fun for me to paint or pose? Maybe they are not quite the right size giving me an advantage/disadvantage in game?

What if more actual models is a burden and so I need fewer models to go farther rather than more models? With the marine kit I can magnetize all the options so that I don't have to make a marine for each option. Now those 10 marines in the kit could count as 15+ models in my collection that I would have had to assemble and paint otherwise. Also reduces my storage. Now because of those options I can now travel easier with my army, bringing multiple lists and options with me using the same models. Combined with the electronic codexs on my iPad and the new GW cases I can actually travel very light with a full army with many options.

All of these things can factor in for me when looking at a model range.

Once again price is objective, value is subjective.

Without having a shared definition of what a war gaming hobby, or just a hobby in general is then a conversation of what constitutes one or the other is also pointless.

I rest my case, i have put together GW kits since the 90's as well as the dreamforge kits, and the only thing that is different is that GW kits do not require much skill, and the Dreamforge ones need a little more skill, still less than when you go into bandai HG or Tamiya kits.

What i tried to point out is that certain people will NOT change their view even if you come with reasonable arguments or examples.

So what ever i say or point out will not change your view. I am heavily invested in the GW "HHHobby" but i know (and buy)that are things from other companies that are cheaper and/or have better quality than GW.
One simple reason to see that GW is getting too expensive is by seeing how many recasts are available on GW products compared to the other makers.

When a conversation is degenerating into a last-word competition, it's probably at an end.....

 Blacksails wrote:
The simple fact is that other companies can produce multi-part plastic kits with as much technical skill as GW for roughly half the cost or even cheaper.

Some of them use injection moulding technology that makes GW's look like rock carvings. Bandai have kits with multi-coloured plastic sprues and moving parts; they must be using slide-moulds or something but I can't even figure out how they do it. But they still managed to come in much cheaper even after international shipping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talys wrote:
I am being perfectly honest when I say, there are no companies that produce company-scale scifi model collections with the versatility of GW factions, aesthetic notwithstanding. Disagree? Give me a link. Just one!

But since it's science fiction, why are you confining yourself to a single source? You can buy GW mini's to field in Deadzone, or Foundry mini's to field in 40K. You keep talking about the range of GW, but if you combine *everything* you'll get a much bigger range and something more suited to you personal tastes.

I mean, I get that you've got no interest in anything based on history, but that doesn't mean historic mini's can't be used as conversion fodder, or that historic mini's somehow don't count for comparisons (even if they are sculpted by the same people, using the same techniques, and cast in the same way). It's not that historics are cheaper to make - there's potentially more research involved in making sure it's correct (because historics have more rivet counters than sci-fi) - it's just that there's no restrictions on use and they tend to be built for larger games. Perry mini's are a good example at a pretty round 50p/mini. Sculpted by the guys who did most of the LOTR/Hobbit stuff for GW, using Renedra for the casting, but done with the intention of fielding *huge* armies. Like, 400+ mini's a side armies on 12' tables. That's still only £200/side in minis at RRP.

There are also plenty of "wargamers" that play multiple games. I have armies for: 40K, Fantasy, Malifaux, Bolt Action, Flames Of War, Roman-era 28mm, Spartan=era 15mm, Steampunk, and no doubt a few I've forgotten about. So there's plenty of overlap between genres for most people and you must be aware that you're sci-fi only interest and huge throughput are somewhat unique.

@Jehan-reznor -- I have nothing at all against Dreamforge. I own a few Eisenkern sets and a Leviathan, and I hope they succeed.

It's funny you should say that DF kits "require more skill", because that's just code for, "the parts don't fit perfectly". With GW plastic kits, we get irritated if two pieces don't fit to the fraction of a millimeter. It's only ironic because that leads into the whole "quality" thing. But anyhow, that conversation is a total waste of time.

I certainly agree that you get more parts and more models per dollar from Dreamforge (ergo: better value, for sure). However, I don't think their kits offer as much as GW kits if you take price out of the equation. In other words, if you have a shelf with all the GW human bits and a shelf with all the Dreamforge human bits, the unique looking stuff you can build out of the GW collection just stomps the DF collection.

That leads to two things: first, and most obviously, DF's collection is tiny. I mean, it's so tiny, that you can easily buy everything in one trip to the hobby shop. When I decided to get into Dreamforge, that's actually what I did. It was really cool, and then they had nothing new, well, it seemed like forever.

Which is the second problem: they take forever to come out with new stuff. To mean, this is a big turn-off, because new stuff excites me and keeps me going within an ecosystem. Not only does GW's library dwarf DF's, but in 2015, GW has already produced many multiples of brand new models than DF has ever produced since its inception.

Let's count 'em -- Harlequins - several kits, Skitarii - several kits, Cult Mechanicus - several kits, Necron Overlord, Eldar Jetbikes, Autarch and Farseer on Bike, Bloodthirster, 4 assassins, and IK update. Within the next few weeks we'll have several new Space Marine kits. You can't even say they're just rehashed stuff, because AdMech is extremely unique, and like nothing produced by GW or other companies, the Harlequins have lots of new stuff, and the Bloodthirster is totally new.

Look at last year -- everything from Nagash and Treeman Ancient to Imperial Knight and Glotkin. Those are not rehashed models. They are awesome, creative works of art (to me).

For some people, this is a detractor, because "they can't keep up". For me, it's not just cool... it's AWESOME to see an avalanche of kits pumped out at this cadence -- essentially, something new every week. Yeah, I would not be happy if they were just all Rhino chassis tanks. But that clearly isn't the case. No, I can't model everything that GW produces at this rate, but that is a wonderful thing, because it means, there will always be something that I love to work on waiting for me.

For me, I will never be happy with a company that has one sculptor/designer (Dreamforge) as my primary hobby, and while I like supporting small indie companies, and Mark is an awesomely talented fellow, it's just not big enough for me. I don't know if he'll ever grow the company from a design standpoint (since he hasn't in over a decade...). Incidentally, you can't have been modelling Dreamforge kits since the 90s, as the company didn't exist until some time after the change of the millennium.

I think the point Talys was making was that if you want to buy Space Marines, then the only option (other than from some darker, hidden Chinese or Russian corners of the internet, but that's a story for another time..) is to buy them from GW. That will obviously be worth the purchase to someone who wants those things, even if the cost is relatively more if one compares the template of "28mm plastic man with gun".

That's probably a big reason why Fantasy sales appear to have dropped, there are any number of high quality alternatives these days for anyone who wants to make an Empire or Undead army, and they're often substantially cheaper. In fact, I can't remember the last time I saw a WFB army that didn't have miniatures in it from Mantic or Perry. It could also be why GW apparently plan to launch a version of 'historical space marines' if rumours are true, again so that if someone wants to play a game within that universe, only their own higher-priced miniatures will do.

Now, the big question that introduces itself here is where exactly this 'value' lies and how much you rate these miniatures when compared to other miniatures on the market. And this is partly why GW makes every effort to distance its own wargaming miniature and paint line from others within the same industry, perhaps why they don't have any official presence at the biggest international games expos. How much does this price elasticity stretch which will make someone buy one of these things over say an Infinity trooper or a Mantic Corporation guy? Hell, a Maelstrom's Edge trooper? At what point does someone say "jeez, why can't this game be as cheap as the one the guys are playing over there?" This point will probably be different for everyone.

What I think is undeniable is that there are more and more wargamers that have turned to the plethora of other games and miniatures on the market. This is evidenced by the massive growth of the industry over the past 3-4 years and GW's 'holding station' and even decline of sales over the same period.

Herzlos wrote:

But since it's science fiction, why are you confining yourself to a single source? You can buy GW mini's to field in Deadzone, or Foundry mini's to field in 40K. You keep talking about the range of GW, but if you combine *everything* you'll get a much bigger range and something more suited to you personal tastes.

You misunderstand me. I buy tons of stuff from companies other than GW. I don't dislike any other company's offerings, but for my primary hobby, I like the big collection.

Herzlos wrote:
I mean, I get that you've got no interest in anything based on history, but that doesn't mean historic mini's can't be used as conversion fodder, or that historic mini's somehow don't count for comparisons (even if they are sculpted by the same people, using the same techniques, and cast in the same way). It's not that historics are cheaper to make - there's potentially more research involved in making sure it's correct (because historics have more rivet counters than sci-fi) - it's just that there's no restrictions on use and they tend to be built for larger games. Perry mini's are a good example at a pretty round 50p/mini. Sculpted by the guys who did most of the LOTR/Hobbit stuff for GW, using Renedra for the casting, but done with the intention of fielding *huge* armies. Like, 400+ mini's a side armies on 12' tables. That's still only £200/side in minis at RRP.

There are also plenty of "wargamers" that play multiple games. I have armies for: 40K, Fantasy, Malifaux, Bolt Action, Flames Of War, Roman-era 28mm, Spartan=era 15mm, Steampunk, and no doubt a few I've forgotten about. So there's plenty of overlap between genres for most people and you must be aware that you're sci-fi only interest and huge throughput are somewhat unique.

I also have some painted Warhammer Fantasy miniatures, enough Malifaux to be playable, everything in 3 Infinity factions, and about 40% of Privateer Press' miniatures (though only a tiny percentage of that painted). Ironically, I never got into LoTR/Hobbit. I really didn't love the models (even though I loved LoTR, the movie). I bought 1 box of elves and 1 box of riders when they were being cleared out for $10, and that's it Oh, yes, and I have about 150 Reaper miniatures, about half of which are painted. Some, actually pretty good paintjobs.

I'm not a big fan of taking Eisenkern and making them Imperial Guard. I'm just fine with other people doing it, but for myself, I like my 40k units to codex I am willing to make my own meltaguns, but dammit, they better look exactly like real meltaguns. I don't want a stand-in. Besides, why not just model the Eisenkern as Eisenkern, and the Leviathan as a Leviathan?

Because the ethos of GW was (when I started back in the 90's) "Do whatever you think looks cool". Why should my IG look like the codex IG? Why do I need to field bobbleheaded Rambos? Why can't my Sentinels look more like those Star Wars walkers they are a clone of? Why can't I field ewoks as ratlings?
Part of that was also that a lot of units in the codex didn't even have models, but they've fixed that now... by removing entries from the codex.

You certainly collect more than I do, but I take it you prefer things to be in discrete collections i.e. a Dreamforge shelf, a PP shelf, etc, rather than in categories like a sci-fi shelf and a fantasy shelf?

 Talys wrote:
That leads to two things: first, and most obviously, DF's collection is tiny. I mean, it's so tiny, that you can easily buy everything in one trip to the hobby shop. When I decided to get into Dreamforge, that's actually what I did. It was really cool, and then they had nothing new, well, it seemed like forever.

I don't understand why this matters. Can't you just mix and match or do you need to stick to specific companies? I tend to buy the stuff I like as I encounter it regardless of who it's from (my to-do box has stuff from probably 20 manufacturers).

I get that GW's release rate dwarves most individual companies, but it's dwarfed by the sum of all other companies. I literally cannot keep up with the new releases coming out of the hobby and my to-buy list is growing faster than I can spend my money.

Herzlos wrote:
Because the ethos of GW was (when I started back in the 90's) "Do whatever you think looks cool". Why should my IG look like the codex IG? Why do I need to field bobbleheaded Rambos? Why can't my Sentinels look more like those Star Wars walkers they are a clone of? Why can't I field ewoks as ratlings?

I'm happy to play people who model other stuff as proxies, kitbashes and scratchbuilds as long as those proxies are believable, identifiable, and the right size, with recognizable weapons

Herzlos wrote:
You certainly collect more than I do, but I take it you prefer things to be in discrete collections i.e. a Dreamforge shelf, a PP shelf, etc, rather than in categories like a sci-fi shelf and a fantasy shelf?

Yup! That's exactly what I do. I like the discrete collections, and finishing a faction/collection to a satisfactory level gives me great happiness! Until tomorrow, when I realize it would be so much better with [fill in the blank].

Herzlos wrote:
I don't understand why this matters. Can't you just mix and match or do you need to stick to specific companies? I tend to buy the stuff I like as I encounter it regardless of who it's from (my to-do box has stuff from probably 20 manufacturers).

I get that GW's release rate dwarves most individual companies, but it's dwarfed by the sum of all other companies. I literally cannot keep up with the new releases coming out of the hobby and my to-buy list is growing faster than I can spend my money.

See, for my primary obsession, I like to be able to add on whenever I want to (which is often). I love working on something else because it's cool, but I don't like to be forced to do something else, because there's nothing left to work on. Plus, I actually do game (about 20 hrs a month -- a couple of really long nights ), and 40k is the game we play. Most of my buddies don't model anything other than 40k and WMH.

 Talys wrote:

Without worrying about the 40k universe, please tell me which company produces SciFi kits that would let me do that kind of kitbashing, using accumulated plastic parts that aren't specifically meant for that purpose but that are numerous and flexible enough that I can express what is in my mind's eye using premade components.

Dreamforge Games, Mantic, Wargames Factory, (AnvilIndustries, PuppetWars, etc if not plastic only)

And for GW, this only really works with Space Marines.

Mantic?

The only bashing in that scenario would be your head and the nearest wall.

Besides the point that you're ignoring every other name he mentioned, DoJ, how many mantic kits have you bought?

The Division Of Joy wrote:
Mantic?

The only bashing in that scenario would be your head and the nearest wall.

And you said?

The Division Of Joy wrote:
When a conversation is degenerating into a last-word competition, it's probably at an end.....

@Talys when i mean more skill i mean more skill, Dreamforge apc and leviathan have more moving and even screws, i don't think i have seen a gw kit witch needed screws

I have..

Far too much deadzone, A shed load of Enforcers and some plague. I had Marauders as well, but got rid.

4 dreadball teams (Vermynn, Judwan, Nameless, Martians)

And over $200 Dollars worth of Kings Hold coming.

And have had hands on with the hard plastic Enforcers, which are better than the restic I have.


Why would I mention any other companies when I don't have the minis? Unlike some on this forum, I don't have an axe to grind, simply commentary on the models and companies I have bought from.

From my experience with Mantic, they produce models that are poorly made to fit multiple poses. They do not lend themselves well to kitbashing thanks to the model poses and sprue placement.

If you tried, it would end up frustrating you to the point you would want to bash your head against the wall.

Have I explained enough?

Worth noting, I have had these experiences, and yet have thrown hundreds of pounds at them on a kickstarter. I like them as a company, I want them to do well. Hell, the DKH minis look ace single pose minis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

The Division Of Joy wrote:
Mantic?

The only bashing in that scenario would be your head and the nearest wall.

And you said?

The Division Of Joy wrote:
When a conversation is degenerating into a last-word competition, it's probably at an end.....

@Talys when i mean more skill i mean more skill, Dreamforge apc and leviathan have more moving and even screws, i don't think i have seen a gw kit witch needed screws

How is my comment a last word competition? understand if english isn't your first language and i've taken the tone of your message wrong

No it is not but comments like that are also degenerating the thread

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
No it is not but comments like that are also degenerating the thread

Hardly. This thread is about GW price increases, we are now so far off topic, that I don't know whats going on. Someone mentioned a company that would provide a comparable kitbashing experience to GW. I gave it the response it deserved.

The progression of the thread has been largely logical, the discussion is still, essentially, about the comparative values of various manufacturers vs GW and people's preferences thereof.

Ok, it isn't specifically about the price of paint or tools, but I can still see the original topic from where I'm stood.

The Division Of Joy wrote:
Mantic?

The only bashing in that scenario would be your head and the nearest wall.

Or using GW Bits if Mantic don't have enough
http://www.brueckenkopf-online.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Hobbykeller-Mantic-Peacekeeper-Terminator-Bits-Umbauten-17.jpg

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

@Talys when i mean more skill i mean more skill, Dreamforge apc and leviathan have more moving and even screws, i don't think i have seen a gw kit witch needed screws

I have... the old Bloodthirster and the old Swarm Tyrant (both metal) would definitely need screws for propper assembly and to avoid wings-arms-heads falling off all the time. Too bad they didn't have any.

I dunno if 'designed to require screws' and 'could use screws 'cos they keep falling apart' are quite the same thing.

So...

Does the WD have anything other than just pictures of the new kits? Say, a dataslate for Assault Marines or a hint for the next couple weeks?

 Vermis wrote:
I dunno if 'designed to require screws' and 'could use screws 'cos they keep falling apart' are quite the same thing.

This. I have a DFG leviathan and the screws are largely there so that you can pose the model in any dynamic position that you like. Compare that to a GW Knight where you have to have a dremel, saw and numerous other tools and such to even produce the semblance of mobility; it can be done but only if you're willing to spend countless hours working on it.

 Vermis wrote:
I dunno if 'designed to require screws' and 'could use screws 'cos they keep falling apart' are quite the same thing.

Eh, close enough...
- GW design team

Considering those models were made in the mid 90s I think we can let that one slide..

To be fair, the old metal Khador 'jacks for WARMACHINE had bad fits as well.

Big kits, in metal, are prone to warping.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
To be fair, the old metal Khador 'jacks for WARMACHINE had bad fits as well.

Big kits, in metal, are prone to warping.

The Auld Grump

Big kits, in metal, are also prone to falling apart when knocked over :( And falling over at the slightest bump of the table. There's nothing I hated more about wargaming than big, metal kits. For modelling, it was fine (if a lot of work) but to actually transport and play a large size, non-square vehicle or complex creature (like a dragon) as a nightmare.

Talys, you forgot "looking at them wrong". That's the biggest cause of metal models collapsing into dust.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Talys, you forgot "looking at them wrong". That's the biggest cause of metal models collapsing into dust.

hahahaha yeah

Or sitting in the display case wrong >.< I had a dragon that I a zillion pins in sitting in a display case, and the head fell off, I swear because a raccoon walked across the back yard 50 feet away. I never even played with the damn thing, lol.

 Talys wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
To be fair, the old metal Khador 'jacks for WARMACHINE had bad fits as well.

Big kits, in metal, are prone to warping.

The Auld Grump

Big kits, in metal, are also prone to falling apart when knocked over :( And falling over at the slightest bump of the table. There's nothing I hated more about wargaming than big, metal kits. For modelling, it was fine (if a lot of work) but to actually transport and play a large size, non-square vehicle or complex creature (like a dragon) as a nightmare.

I'm a firm believer that the generation of age 30+ modellers now are far better at modelling, and have far more patience, than the younger generation simple because of the trial/ordeal of putting together those old fantasy dragons.

 Pacific wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
To be fair, the old metal Khador 'jacks for WARMACHINE had bad fits as well.

Big kits, in metal, are prone to warping.

The Auld Grump

Big kits, in metal, are also prone to falling apart when knocked over :( And falling over at the slightest bump of the table. There's nothing I hated more about wargaming than big, metal kits. For modelling, it was fine (if a lot of work) but to actually transport and play a large size, non-square vehicle or complex creature (like a dragon) as a nightmare.

I'm a firm believer that the generation of age 30+ modellers now are far better at modelling, and have far more patience, than the younger generation simple because of the trial/ordeal of putting together those old fantasy dragons.

I get annoyed building some plastic kits so yeah that generation probably does haha.

All this talk of big metal miniatures reminds me of my old old Dark Eldar Talos.


RIP about ten thousand of those little plastic flight stands. They just couldn't support the weight.

On the topic of actual price increases the new C:SM assault marine kit is now $41 USD.

Somehow making it a dollar more than the damn Vanguard Vets.... How does that math work?

 SickSix wrote:
On the topic of actual price increases the new C:SM assault marine kit is now $41 USD.

Somehow making it a dollar more than the damn Vanguard Vets.... How does that math work?

Something something bitz something something best toy soldiers in the world

 RatBot wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
On the topic of actual price increases the new C:SM assault marine kit is now $41 USD.

Somehow making it a dollar more than the damn Vanguard Vets.... How does that math work?

Something something bitz something something best toy soldiers in the world

Of course what it really means is that there will be an $8 price increase on the Vanguard Vets! (and probably all other kits LOL). $60 ancient terminators anyone??

 Talys wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
To be fair, the old metal Khador 'jacks for WARMACHINE had bad fits as well.

Big kits, in metal, are prone to warping.

The Auld Grump

Big kits, in metal, are also prone to falling apart when knocked over :( And falling over at the slightest bump of the table. There's nothing I hated more about wargaming than big, metal kits. For modelling, it was fine (if a lot of work) but to actually transport and play a large size, non-square vehicle or complex creature (like a dragon) as a nightmare.

So much this.

Dropping a mortis pattern dreadnought and watching the parts spread out like a goddam exploded diagram will stay with me forever.

 Pacific wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
To be fair, the old metal Khador 'jacks for WARMACHINE had bad fits as well.

Big kits, in metal, are prone to warping.

The Auld Grump

Big kits, in metal, are also prone to falling apart when knocked over :( And falling over at the slightest bump of the table. There's nothing I hated more about wargaming than big, metal kits. For modelling, it was fine (if a lot of work) but to actually transport and play a large size, non-square vehicle or complex creature (like a dragon) as a nightmare.

I'm a firm believer that the generation of age 30+ modellers now are far better at modelling, and have far more patience, than the younger generation simple because of the trial/ordeal of putting together those old fantasy dragons.

That's like saying "vietnam veterans are much less prone to be annoyed by bad weather since they were stuck kneed deep in mud for weeks while constant rain poured down on them". It may be the case, but people may argue that's simply not worth it.

GW raising prices on the paints really sucks for me. I love the paints but with them raising prices its gonna be hard for someone in my position to keep buying them. When youre basically poor because of a fixed income and have little to spend it makes staying in this hobby extremely hard. I have to save every month and cut out things I would normally buy just to get a model or a pot or two of paint. At this rate I will never have what i need to play a game. Guess I got into this at the wrong time....

 honeybadger33 wrote:
Guess I got into this at the wrong time....

You got into gaming at the right time, in fact it's never been better in terms of price, range and availability. GW, on the other hand, you've missed by at least a decade.

If you're on a budget and need paint's, have a look at the Vallejo or Coat D'Arms paint. Same quality, cheaper, bigger bottles.

Indeed, it was about 2005 that GW decided a new strategy to fix their problem of falling sales -- regular substantial price increases.

Well, the price increase on paints is finally going to push me to Vallejo. Not a huge loss for me.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Indeed, it was about 2005 that GW decided a new strategy to fix their problem of falling sales -- regular substantial price increases.

It's for this reason along with the very regular gaming tax (Annual/Bi-Yearly re-released codices and rule books) that I've stopped buying GW products.

They do lovely models (in many cases) but that's not enough to justify the prices.


I'm downsizing my forces / selling some of them off as I don't want to be beholden to GW. I'm selling off my Dark Eldar army (currently old codex, didn't buy the new one) and a mostly complete Plague Marine army (again, their codex will be invalid soon).

I still only have the 6th Ed. rulebook as I expect 8th Edition will be released early next year and I can just skip out 7th altogether.

My Thousand Sons will remain, my Orks will remain (although they don't have the current codex) and I will be downsizing my Space Marines (down from 5K) to perhaps 2500pts.


I've ended up moving to SAGA by Gripping beast (where all the army rules are in the main rule book and are not invalidated by new book releases) as well as a game published by Osprey Games called Ronin - again all rules and units/factions are included in a roughly £11 book.

After playing these two, I can safely say their rules are clear, crisp, fun and sensible. I do feel rather let down in many ways by GW :/

Sadly for me, the regular price increases (in the form of new kits and reboxings) is causing me to reduce what I buy on things I don't really "need'.

For example, I was thinking of picking up a dunecrawler for a terrain project I am working on.

its $66. For a vehicle thing. Three sprues. what the hell?

Even at my FLGS that gives discounts, it just too much.

I used to buy every new codex, just to have them - kind of for completeness, but also I used to like to read the fluff.

That stopped about a year or so ago.

Note: this is not a complaint, nor am I saying 'their prices are too high" or they don't have value, etc.

I am saying that for me (and many of my friends - several others used to buy every book) I am not making as many purchases as I would have if the prices were less.

davethepak wrote:
Sadly for me, the regular price increases (in the form of new kits and reboxings) is causing me to reduce what I buy on things I don't really "need'.

For example, I was thinking of picking up a dunecrawler for a terrain project I am working on.

its $66. For a vehicle thing. Three sprues. what the hell?

Even at my FLGS that gives discounts, it just too much.

I used to buy every new codex, just to have them - kind of for completeness, but also I used to like to read the fluff.

That stopped about a year or so ago.

Note: this is not a complaint, nor am I saying 'their prices are too high" or they don't have value, etc.

I am saying that for me (and many of my friends - several others used to buy every book) I am not making as many purchases as I would have if the prices were less.

I hear you. I used to buy every codex when they were soft backed, even if only for bathroom reading. While GW has gotten away from sweeping increases on everything, the new kits and reboxed sets are simply becoming too expensive.

davethepak wrote:
nor am I saying 'their prices are too high" or they don't have value, etc.

I am saying that for me... I am not making as many purchases as I would have if the prices were less.

Uhmm...

Sweet Jesus, just saw what's gone up on the GW site today!

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Ten-Man-Assault-Squad

£50 for a squad of 'new' assault marines. - That's the same as a Stormraven Gunship

Or £30 if you buy two of the old boxes from Darksphere to make a 10-man squad.

Those grav pistols are mighty expensive!



At least the Chapter Upgrade packs on in-line with previous upgrade packs like the Iron Warriors and Chaos Biker packs

I look forward to next week's release, the AUD$70 Dev Squad.

$14 points per Marine. Kit damn-well better have 4 of each gun.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I look forward to next week's release, the AUD$70 Dev Squad.

$14 points per Marine. Kit damn-well better have 4 of each gun.

Each box will have half a tactical sprue and a single demi-sprue with a random heavy weapon. Heavy bolters are commons, missile launchers are rares, plasma cannons are ultra-rare, and lascannons are one in a thousand, foil-stamped hologram sprues. Gotta Collect 'em All!

 the_Armyman wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I look forward to next week's release, the AUD$70 Dev Squad.

$14 points per Marine. Kit damn-well better have 4 of each gun.

Each box will have half a tactical sprue and a single demi-sprue with a random heavy weapon. Heavy bolters are commons, missile launchers are rares, plasma cannons are ultra-rare, and lascannons are one in a thousand, foil-stamped hologram sprues. Gotta Collect 'em All!

Following the comic book industry collapse from 15-20 years ago you forgot the signed limited edition prints, or the sets that will be make in different colors. Sure you'll wind up painting them anyway, but you'll need to buy Moar so you can brag that you have the blood Angels red plastic assault squad sprue in mint condition, not to mention the ultra smurf blue tactical squad with only slight fixing on the edge of the sprue. But your still after the hard to find dark angel green scout squad sprue as only four of those have ever been known to come out of the closet.

I had to check and make sure that I hadn't accidentally chosen Aus as my country. $82usd for 10 miniatures is a heavier tax than the previously egregious blood knights. There can be no excuse for a price that high for 10 models but I'm sure that someone will be along shortly to tell me to shut up and feel privileged that GW even offers these models for sale. Just think for a moment what you can buy in the real world for $82.

Go home Games Workshop, you're very drunk.

I like that the new limited edition Space Marine book is 130 euros (so maybe $145?). Now THAT is a good investment that won't become valueless in two years, no-siree!

 agnosto wrote:
I had to check and make sure that I hadn't accidentally chosen As as my country. $82usd for 10 miniatures is a heavier tax than the previously egregious blood knights. There can be no excuse for a price that high for 10 models but I'm sure that someone will be along shortly to tell me to shut up and feel privileged that GW even offers these models for sale. Just think for a moment what you can buy in the real world for $82.

That's just plain crazy for plastic models. GW buisness plan keep raising prices on models to make up for falling sales. Soon people are going to need a second job or a personal loan just to buy GW stuff

$82... for ten models....

Ten plastic models....

The question is no longer 'Is GW CRAZY?!' but, rather, 'How CRAZY Is GW?!!'

Goodbye, GW. They are coming to take you away, ha, ha!

The Auld Grump

 Chute82 wrote:
Paints will be going up 25 cents a pot
Hobby tools 3~10% up in price
Glue up 35 cents
Spray paints up $1.25 a can
Aegis defense line will be $37
Realm of battle board going up to $330
Realm of battle board imperalis $363 June 1st

Honestly the only thing I buy from GW hobby-side is the paint pots. This is because I'm kind of locked in. I have used them so long that it would look weird to do an army in anything else without custom blending certain shades.

They've already pushed me out of 40k and it appears they're pushing me out of fantasy (I won't derail the thread into discussing the mess that is those things) and while I do feel suck with the paint pots, if it gets too much worse they'll push me out of that as well.

I get it, this is an expensive hobby, I am not crying about having to spend money, but when I look at GW spray primer compared to say board to pieces, which is better quality (imo) has an adjustable fan-tip nozzle AND is half the price... well...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 agnosto wrote:
$82usd for 10 miniatures is a heavier tax than the previously egregious blood knights.

Are you sure? Because Blood Knights are $99 for 5 AND are finecrap AND are monopose AND come with no extra bits AND look just plain stupid with the batwings everywhere.

Not saying $82 for 10x assault marines is sane, I did a doubletake myself, but I think blood knights still take the cake on stupidity.

I don't understand that shock of the 10 man squad... The five man box is $41. X2 is $82 dollars.

I was shocked that the new 5 man box was more expensive than the Vanguard box. Which means the Vanguard box is going to get a hefty price increase.

Love how of course no discount. $82 for 10 plastic dudes that are only a fraction of an army.

Also they apparently have another insanely priced bundle (just under $1000) with exclusive rules in it.

And people still support this horsegak.

WayneTheGame wrote:
Love how of course no discount. $82 for 10 plastic dudes that are only a fraction of an army.

Also they apparently have another insanely priced bundle (just under $1000) with exclusive rules in it.

And people still support this horsegak.

i, for one, don't have a problem with price increases...
i just don't pay retail for the things i want...

if i want something, whether it be a miniature, a surfboard, or whatever, i buy it...
price doesn't matter one bit...
all that matters is how badly i want something...
once i know i want something, then i go looking for the hook-up, because i like that feeling of getting a deal, instead of paying full retail...

personally, i am glad that my friends in the GW design studio are gainfully employed to write, sculpt, draw, and paint...
as long as they keep producing products that i want to paint, i will be happy to buy them...
if i can help my friends continue to live the dream, that's awesome to me...
behind every miniature manufacturer in this industry are real people with families to support, people who i care about, and am happy to support...

cheers
jah

 jah-joshua wrote:
personally, i am glad that my friends in the GW design studio are gainfully employed to write, sculpt, draw, and paint...

Unfortunately if they price everyone else out of 40k, they won't be doing too much of that any more.

 Shas'O Dorian wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
$82usd for 10 miniatures is a heavier tax than the previously egregious blood knights.

Are you sure? Because Blood Knights are $99 for 5 AND are finecrap AND are monopose AND come with no extra bits AND look just plain stupid with the batwings everywhere.

Not saying $82 for 10x assault marines is sane, I did a doubletake myself, but I think blood knights still take the cake on stupidity.

I had no idea they had gone that high. I stand corrected.

 jah-joshua wrote:

personally, i am glad that my friends in the GW design studio are gainfully employed to write, sculpt, draw, and paint...

Personally I'd rather see GW collapse and have all that talent snapped up by the other, better companies on the market who will not tie their hands, put them under insane deadlines and generally stifle creativity while engaging in pervasive business practices (at best).

Seriously, compare some of the recent Eavy Metal paintjobs to the stuff the painters have on their own personal facebook pages and the difference is night and day. The official stuff makes them look hilariously incompetent while their own personal projects are great. Either they have ridiculous schedules or are being told to dumb everything down.

I think this is a good example of that, I find it hard to believe the weapons and the hair/fur where painted by the same person:


I can't imagine the artists like having to include the latest kit in every new friggen bit of art like they have lately. The Knight release last year was probably the worst offender off the top of my head, it was the same bloody picture but with the knight recoloured and the armies clashing in front of it swapped around half a dozen times.

As much crap as PP get for being all about the game and having no hobby side of things to it that is very much a bad stereotype that comes from the players, not the studio, who consider themselves a company of creative types for creatives. In their podcasts they talk about sitting down to write a fluff bible of 400 pages then having to stop themselves at 800. The damn CEO of the company recently did the artwork for the 10th anniversary No Quarter. That is the kind of company I want employing the creative types currently stuck in the GW design studio.

Why is everyone comparing the 10 man set to the price of the 5 man set, especially when the assault squad is a 5 man box, and the 10 man set is probably just 2 boxes of 5?

I mean, this would be like people getting excited over a CAD$180 set with 6 centurions.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
personally, i am glad that my friends in the GW design studio are gainfully employed to write, sculpt, draw, and paint...

Unfortunately if they price everyone else out of 40k, they won't be doing too much of that any more.

that is not your problem, mate...
that is their problem, and it is not even in their control...
the design studio is not in control of the company...

i don't deal in what-ifs, doom and gloom, or what the future may hold...
i deal in the moment, and the joy of creative expression...
nothing else matters to me...
it is not my job to worry about what GW management decides to do with their business...
it is my job to paint to the best of my ability, and enjoy the hell out of it...

unless i come across enough millions to buy GW, and run it how i would like to (which means as a private company that is not beholden to shareholders), then there is nothing i can do to change the intentions of Kirby and the beancounters...
i would rather give what little i can to help support my friends, than to throw up my arms, say "Kirby is evil", and not buy things that i like...
me boycotting GW would not help my friends keep their jobs, or get me better Space Marines...

i like Citadel minis, so i buy them...
i also like a deal, so i buy them at the cheapest price i can...
then i paint up a $6 Assault Marine, and sell it for $200 to a collector who appreciates my talent and hard work...
remind me again why i should be upset...

it is perfectly reasonable for you to say that GW may drive themselves into the ground like Rackham did, but i still have boxes full of Rackham minis, there is still a demand for those models, and i can still enjoy painting them, and earn a living off of my hard work painting them to a world-class standard at the same time...
GW and 40K may go the way of the Dodo (which would be a bummer), but there will always be a market for OOP Citadel minis...
i make it a point not to get upset about things that are out of my control, and instead focus on what i can do, which is to put awesome paint jobs on cool miniatures...

cheers
jah

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
$82... for ten models....

Ten plastic models....

The question is no longer 'Is GW CRAZY?!' but, rather, 'How CRAZY Is GW?!!'

Goodbye, GW. They are coming to take you away, ha, ha!

The Auld Grump

That was the correct response...

Notice the uptick on the clearance sales on dakka?


Just saying, Wort, if your still lurking, go tell your masters that the cut is too deep this time, the patient is bleeding out...

 jonolikespie wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:

personally, i am glad that my friends in the GW design studio are gainfully employed to write, sculpt, draw, and paint...

Personally I'd rather see GW collapse and have all that talent snapped up by the other, better companies on the market who will not tie their hands, put them under insane deadlines and generally stifle creativity while engaging in pervasive business practices (at best).

Seriously, compare some of the recent Eavy Metal paintjobs to the stuff the painters have on their own personal facebook pages and the difference is night and day. The official stuff makes them look hilariously incompetent while their own personal projects are great. Either they have ridiculous schedules or are being told to dumb everything down.

I think this is a good example of that, I find it hard to believe the weapons and the hair/fur where painted by the same person:

Spoiler:

I can't imagine the artists like having to include the latest kit in every new friggen bit of art like they have lately. The Knight release last year was probably the worst offender off the top of my head, it was the same bloody picture but with the knight recoloured and the armies clashing in front of it swapped around half a dozen times.

As much crap as PP get for being all about the game and having no hobby side of things to it that is very much a bad stereotype that comes from the players, not the studio, who consider themselves a company of creative types for creatives. In their podcasts they talk about sitting down to write a fluff bible of 400 pages then having to stop themselves at 800. The damn CEO of the company recently did the artwork for the 10th anniversary No Quarter. That is the kind of company I want employing the creative types currently stuck in the GW design studio.

i hear you, but i am a part of this industry, so i can give a little bit of insight here...

1. yes, the 'Eavy Metal team is told to keep things simple (unless it is a special project for White Dwarf, like the internal Harry the Hammer painting contest, or the custom models that were made when the Ultramarines movie came out) and be very fast...
if they were all allowed to work at their own pace, nothing would ever be on schedule...
if they were allowed to take every mini to a Golden Demon standard, no kid would ever start painting (at least that is the boss' logic)...

2. i am friends with most of the people on the 'Eavy Metal team, past and present, and you are correct, their personal projects are mind-blowing, though i think that saying the studio work "makes them look hilariously incompetent" is pretty harsh...
i think the studio stuff looks just fine for the purpose it serves...
some painters have not been happy with the way the team is run, and quit...
others have been stoked for the potential to advance within the company, and became sculptors...
still others have been content with the job, and are still on the team after more than a decade...

neither the 'EM painters, nor the army painters, that currently work at HQ have ever expressed that they felt their creativity was being stifled, or else they would not still be there...
some people have quit, while others enjoy their work, so they stick around...
no one is chained to a desk...

3. GW going under does not guarantee that any of the artists, sculptors, or painters would get another job doing the same kind of work, especially not on salary...
the GW design studio is the biggest in the industry...
the other operations are a handful of people at most, and even that is rare in this business...
the majority of the work in this industry is freelance, and hard to come by, as we creative types are a dime a dozen...

4. PP is a privately held company, which is a whole other beast...
a better kind of beast, i agree, but a whole other way of running a company...
the way a company in a creative field should be, in my opinion, but they are not going to snatch up all of the GW design studio if Kirby finally kills the goose...
they don't have the budget, and neither does any other company in the industry...
i would not be so quick to wish that my friends would have to be out on the street, struggling in the freelance sharktank...

5. PP also has a maximum standard of painting for their studio painter, i know, because i painted for them under Mike McVey, and Ron Kruzie (the current miniature studio head) has been one of my best friends since high school...
the idea is to strike a balance between speed and presentation, with speed taking a high priority...
it doesn't matter how good you can paint, if you can't paint fast you are out...
look at a box of PP minis and a box of GW minis, there is not really any difference in the quality of the paintjobs on either box front...
they are both very nice standards for a hobbyist to aspire to...
clean paint jobs, in attractive colors...

6. Matt Wilson is an artist...
even as the CEO of PP, he is still an artist first in his soul...
Kirby is an account iirc, which means he has no soul, but instead has a void filled with your money...
joking aside, it is not a surprise that the owner of a company, who can't help but draw and express his creativity, is doing the cover for the 10th anniversary of the magazine he helped to create...
if you think Matt doesn't run a business, go up to him at GenCon, and ask him for a free t-shirt...
you will be in for a surprise...

like i said, i am loyal to PP, as the first company to ever publish my work in rulebooks, a company created by three artists who's work i admire, and the employer of some of my friends...
that doesn't mean that i would want to see GW fail, and send some of my other friends to the unemployment office...
i am sure that GW would be a better company if Brian Ansell had not sold, and they had not gone public, but that is not the way things came to pass...

i know that i am just a lone voice in the wilderness, but this is how i feel...
i love GW for the great minis they produce, the jobs they provide, the worlds they have created, and that's it...
i don't owe them anything, and they don't owe me anything...
i buy what i like, at less than Kirby would like me to, and don't stress the rest...

cheers
jah

 jah-joshua wrote:
i make it a point not to get upset about things that are out of my control

I don't get upset either... I just discuss. It's not like I'm kept awake at night worrying about GW. If we didn't discuss things there wouldn't be much of a point in having a forum

I appreciate that you feel GW stuff is still worth buying and painting. You don't have to feel the need to explain that. It's obvious that if you feel something is worth the time and money then you spend the time and money on it... it's so obvious that it kind of goes without saying

For me, GW has long passed the point of being worth my time and money. Though I still like 40k and would rather see it become something I would once again like to put my time and money in.

It should be pointed out though that he only feels it's worth buying and painting if he can get it at a discount. That he refuses to buy retail is pretty much an admission that the retail asking price is way too high.

Also kind of a weird stance to take when you make such a big deal out of supporting the company, and your friends employed at said company. Buying retail supports GW more than buying online at a discount, and buying directly from GW's website supports them the most as they take all the profit from it. But whatever.

 Wulfmar wrote:
Sweet Jesus, just saw what's gone up on the GW site today!

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Ten-Man-Assault-Squad

£50 for a squad of 'new' assault marines. - That's the same as a Stormraven Gunship

Or £30 if you buy two of the old boxes from Darksphere to make a 10-man squad.

Those grav pistols are mighty expensive!



At least the Chapter Upgrade packs on in-line with previous upgrade packs like the Iron Warriors and Chaos Biker packs

I didn't notice any vanilla tac squads. Did I just overlook them?

I eagerly await the first meltdown when someone accidentally views the Australian page when checking the new prices. Our 10 man assault marine bundle is $140.

 Wulfmar wrote:
Sweet Jesus, just saw what's gone up on the GW site today!

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Ten-Man-Assault-Squad

£50 for a squad of 'new' assault marines. - That's the same as a Stormraven Gunship

Or £30 if you buy two of the old boxes from Darksphere to make a 10-man squad.

Those grav pistols are mighty expensive!



At least the Chapter Upgrade packs on in-line with previous upgrade packs like the Iron Warriors and Chaos Biker packs

true, but 10 for only one handy click. seems worth it to me.

$70aud for five minis? LOL!

 Sidstyler wrote:
It should be pointed out though that he only feels it's worth buying and painting if he can get it at a discount. That he refuses to buy retail is pretty much an admission that the retail asking price is way too high.

Also kind of a weird stance to take when you make such a big deal out of supporting the company, and your friends employed at said company. Buying retail supports GW more than buying online at a discount, and buying directly from GW's website supports them the most as they take all the profit from it. But whatever.

i think you misunderstand me...
i don't pay retail for 90% of the things i buy...
to be honest, most of the things in my life are free, like clothes, surfboards, paints, and models, because i get sponsored...
i look for a deal because that is the kind of person that i am...
i am a hustler, who has been on the street corner since i was 10 years old, making moves
i don't live any kind of normal life, and haven't since i was a little kid...
hell, i'm 40, and have never had a bill (phone, credit card, whatever)...
i've just surfed and painted my way around the world...
so, i guess, based on that, i should never speak up in a discussion about money...

i never said i will ONLY buy on a discount or that i REFUSE to pay retail for anything, i just take advantage of a discount when it is there...
if anything i want is direct only, i'll buy it, but why should i pass up the chance to let my homie order it for me, and get the employee discount???
why should i pay retail if a discount is on offer???
my money is still going to GW...
i may be crazy, but i am not stupid...
if i can get a deal, i'm going to go for it, that is just how i am...

i thought we were having a discussion, and i shared my feelings...
i was not trying to make a "big deal" out of anything...
when i take the 20% on offer in a friend's shop, that also employs people, both GW and the store are being supported...
i may only be spreading the love a little bit at a time, but i am still doing my little part to support what i enjoy...
i wasn't climbing on a high-horse, or getting self-righteous, i'm just explaining why i'm not upset about the fun things in life getting a little more expensive every year...

i'll go back to painting quietly now...

cheers
jah

 Sidstyler wrote:
It should be pointed out though that he only feels it's worth buying and painting if he can get it at a discount. That he refuses to buy retail is pretty much an admission that the retail asking price is way too high.

Also kind of a weird stance to take when you make such a big deal out of supporting the company, and your friends employed at said company. Buying retail supports GW more than buying online at a discount, and buying directly from GW's website supports them the most as they take all the profit from it. But whatever.

That's a bizarre conclusion to draw.

I almost never pay MSRP on GW product simply because I can always buy with a 25-35% discount, depending on whether it's a regular or web-only order, and which store I go to. So, other than some outlier event (like that Golden Ticket contest, which was fun, I guess, and at Christmas time, when I wanted one of the Ork Christmas cards to give to someone), the reason to buy at a discount is because... you can?

Also: there's a great reason to buy from your FLGS rather than directly from GW. It's how you support your local hobby store! I like my local stores much better than I like GW's retail stores. I'm a strong believer that local stores are a better advocate for their product. And my local stores sell non-GW stuff, of which I buy plenty. Plus, when you buy GW (or PP, Vallejo, whatever) product from your local store, you can potentially support two companies that you like!

 jah-joshua wrote:
2. i am friends with most of the people on the 'Eavy Metal team, past and present, and you are correct, their personal projects are mind-blowing, though i think that saying the studio work "makes them look hilariously incompetent" is pretty harsh...

Some of it does, for example this exists:

That's the same piece copied in photoshop 11 times?

 jah-joshua wrote:
i wasn't climbing on a high-horse, or getting self-righteous, i'm just explaining why i'm not upset about the fun things in life getting a little more expensive every year...

Well then never mind I guess, because that's kinda how I interpreted it.

@Talys: I do support my local stores. Only thing is I don't get discounts because I really don't think they can afford to sell at a discount, so every time prices go up it does affect me if what I'm after is GW product. Consequently I don't really buy that much anymore.

 Sidstyler wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
i wasn't climbing on a high-horse, or getting self-righteous, i'm just explaining why i'm not upset about the fun things in life getting a little more expensive every year...

Well then never mind I guess, because that's kinda how I interpreted it.

@Talys: I do support my local stores. Only thing is I don't get discounts because I really don't think they can afford to sell at a discount, so every time prices go up it does affect me if what I'm after is GW product. Consequently I don't really buy that much anymore.

Standard trade discount for stores is 40% (so, that's the same thing as a 40% profit margin). I have supported my stores since Rogue Trader, and they simply look at it another way: gross profit, rather than profit margin.

Once upon a time, 5 miniatures cost $10. They made $4 on that box.. Now, this was a long time ago, so that $4 went further back then.

At some point, many years later, 5 miniatures cost $25. They could have made $10 a box. Instead of pocketing all that, they gave me a discount -- about 15%, so they made $6.25 a box.

Years after that, 5 miniatures went to $50. They could have made $15 a box. But instead of pocketing all that, they gave me a bigger discount -- about 25%, so they made $7.50 a box.

Those aren't exact numbers, obviously, and it didn't happen in exactly those steps, but you get the idea. It wasn't necessary for my local store to make $15 off of each box of space marines they sold me, because it wasn't like where I used to buy 5 boxes, now I only buy 1. I was still buying 5 boxes, and they only really needed to make about $7-8 a box, so they just gave me a 25% discount.

They recognize that every time GW increases prices, they actually make more money if they just sell the product to me at MSRP. So what do they do? They share the cut of that with me. It works out a little better for them, and it makes it a little easier for me. So I show my appreciation by going there and buying stuff from them

This, by the way, is why 30%+ discounts are possible now. The dollar amounts are so much higher that there are still profits to be had, even with significant discounts. It's also not just the box of 5 marines that costs more, too. it's that there are lots of big, jumbo boxes that cost $150+.

 Talys wrote:

They recognize that every time GW increases prices, they actually make more money if they just sell the product to me at MSRP. So what do they do? They share the cut of that with me. It works out a little better for them, and it makes it a little easier for me. So I show my appreciation by going there and buying stuff from them

There are a lot of people out there who are not like you though and have stopped buying 5 boxes.

I don't know about Canada but stores in Australia are seeing less sales and they are blaming it on GWs business practices making them less money.

Your entire point is based on the idea that sales are remaining flat as the price changes, and yes that would give a greater profit to the FLGS, but GW sales are plummeting.

 jonolikespie wrote:
There are a lot of people out there who are not like you though and have stopped buying 5 boxes.

I don't know about Canada but stores in Australia are seeing less sales and they are blaming it on GWs business practices making them less money.

Your entire point is based on the idea that sales are remaining flat as the price changes, and yes that would give a greater profit to the FLGS, but GW sales are plummeting.

Oh, I won't argue at all with you that the Australian/New Zealand prices are insane. It doesn't make any sense to me.

The discounts make a huge difference, though. What some hobby stores do is they have tiered discounts, so that if you spend over a you get x%, over b, you get y % over c you get z%. However, you are, of course, right: some people have fled 40k, because the aggregate price is too high.

It's still a huge component of what my 3 favorite stores sell, though, and they would be in some serious trouble if they had to make do without GW products.

The point is the ultimate fate is with the consumers. And if enough consumers flee GW it doesn't matter what they or your FLGS do.

And honestly I am in the 'hope GW gets bought out or collapses and sells IP' camp at this point.

Their pricing, and other practices are clear indicators that they are deep into a death spiral.

 SickSix wrote:
The point is the ultimate fate is with the consumers. And if enough consumers flee GW it doesn't matter what they or your FLGS do.

That's happening here, a fair few FLGSs here don't need GW any more and are happy to drop them as no one ever has anything good to say about how GW treats their trade customers. I'd have said that in two years time GW will have few FLGSs carrying their product still but with their recent new set of trade terms approved by the ACCC I would say only 1 year as they themselves will be cutting a lot of ties (all those pesky, freeloading online only stores) and the larger stores seem to be in the position og GW needing them, not them needing GW as GW seems to want to believe.

 Talys wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
i wasn't climbing on a high-horse, or getting self-righteous, i'm just explaining why i'm not upset about the fun things in life getting a little more expensive every year...

Well then never mind I guess, because that's kinda how I interpreted it.

@Talys: I do support my local stores. Only thing is I don't get discounts because I really don't think they can afford to sell at a discount, so every time prices go up it does affect me if what I'm after is GW product. Consequently I don't really buy that much anymore.

Standard trade discount for stores is 40% (so, that's the same thing as a 40% profit margin). I have supported my stores since Rogue Trader, and they simply look at it another way: gross profit, rather than profit margin.

Once upon a time, 5 miniatures cost $10. They made $4 on that box.. Now, this was a long time ago, so that $4 went further back then.

At some point, many years later, 5 miniatures cost $25. They could have made $10 a box. Instead of pocketing all that, they gave me a discount -- about 15%, so they made $6.25 a box.

Years after that, 5 miniatures went to $50. They could have made $15 a box. But instead of pocketing all that, they gave me a bigger discount -- about 25%, so they made $7.50 a box.

Those aren't exact numbers, obviously, and it didn't happen in exactly those steps, but you get the idea. It wasn't necessary for my local store to make $15 off of each box of space marines they sold me, because it wasn't like where I used to buy 5 boxes, now I only buy 1. I was still buying 5 boxes, and they only really needed to make about $7-8 a box, so they just gave me a 25% discount.

They recognize that every time GW increases prices, they actually make more money if they just sell the product to me at MSRP. So what do they do? They share the cut of that with me. It works out a little better for them, and it makes it a little easier for me. So I show my appreciation by going there and buying stuff from them

This, by the way, is why 30%+ discounts are possible now. The dollar amounts are so much higher that there are still profits to be had, even with significant discounts. It's also not just the box of 5 marines that costs more, too. it's that there are lots of big, jumbo boxes that cost $150+.

Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a store that gives 25% off, though. In fact, around here the best a store can do is 10% off, or GW will stop supplying them.

A lot of the sentiments I've seen in this thread regarding the Assault Marines remind me of my thoughts when the AdMech Dominus kit came out. When I saw this model was coming up I was sure I'd buy it just for painting. But £22 for one infantry model? Even if I get it with a 20% discount at my LGS that's still £17.60.

I like the model. It is very detailed. It looks good. But it is simply too expensive. Other companies could give me anywhere between 10-40 miniatures (which would probably be multipart and the same material) for that price.

 Fezman wrote:
A lot of the sentiments I've seen in this thread regarding the Assault Marines remind me of my thoughts when the AdMech Dominus kit came out.

Yep. That thing was absurd.

$62 AUD, I recall buying a metal lord of the rings character blister that came with a single infantry model AND a metal cavalry (40mm base) model for only like $24 AUD.

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Fezman wrote:
A lot of the sentiments I've seen in this thread regarding the Assault Marines remind me of my thoughts when the AdMech Dominus kit came out.

Yep. That thing was absurd.

$62 AUD, I recall buying a metal lord of the rings character blister that came with a single infantry model AND a metal cavalry (40mm base) model for only like $24 AUD.

Wait the Dominus is $62 AUD? I thought maybe you'd got the wrong model or something, but I just checked. $62 AUD for one plastic model is crazy. That's £31!

 jah-joshua wrote:

Kirby is an account iirc, which means he has no soul, but instead has a void filled with your money...

I just want to interject that Reaper Miniatures is owned by accountants - yet still seems to have more soul than GW....

The Auld Grump

A picture is worth a thousand words.

I haven't purchased a brand new GW model in 7 years.

It's a sad state, I fell in love with the Warhammer worlds as a kid and I'm not sure how long it will take that horribly mismanaged company to ruin it, but they're certainly doing their best to find out.

Every 3-6 months I check back hoping a glimpse of sanity will come but it seems live they're latest gimmick is to try and sell things in a confusing manner as possible.

When I started playing Warhammer a box of 20 models cost $20. For almost any race/game/army you could think of.

My parents thought that was nuts. Look at them now. Completely ridiculous. If you are still buying models from GW, please stop. Only the complete and total collapse of this company could rescue the Warhammer universe from them.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Fezman wrote:
A lot of the sentiments I've seen in this thread regarding the Assault Marines remind me of my thoughts when the AdMech Dominus kit came out.

Yep. That thing was absurd.

$62 AUD, I recall buying a metal lord of the rings character blister that came with a single infantry model AND a metal cavalry (40mm base) model for only like $24 AUD.

Wait the Dominus is $62 AUD? I thought maybe you'd got the wrong model or something, but I just checked. $62 AUD for one plastic model is crazy. That's £31!

Yes, I thought it was bad enough that it already costs as much as some tank kits in this country...

At this rate, if we ever build a city on the Moon at least Australia will only be the second most expensive place to buy Warhammer.

 Korraz wrote:
Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a store that gives 25% off, though. In fact, around here the best a store can do is 10% off, or GW will stop supplying them.

But, you live in Austria. In the EU (and Canada/US) that is not legal. But in Europe, you can buy GW stuff off the Internet at 25% off, can't you?

Now, I won't disagree that Dominus is expensive. It's USD$36. However, I purchased the model, and as I tinkered with the sprue and blue-tac it together -- that is one of the most amazing models that GW has ever made for a 50mm base. The detail, sculpting, and even options (who doesn't like the robot pope hat?) are just exquisite.

So, yes, he's expensive. But guess what? So is another one of my favorite recent models from Privateer Press -- USD $60 for Borka, also on a 50mm base.




Are they worth $36 and $60 respectively? Obviously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. One thing is clear though: Neither is being priced as a plastic game pieces; they're being priced as miniature collectibles and unpainted miniature sculptures.

Yet one is made from injection molded plastic, and the other is resin.

The one made from plastic has a production cost measured in pennies.

Though I am unlikely to buy either, I would consider the Borka to be marginally more reasonable in its pricing.

The Auld Grump

*EDIT* The bear seems to do a better job of filling its base, as well. Why is the GW figure on a 50mm. base, anyway?

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Yet one is made from injection molded plastic, and the other is resin.

The one made from plastic has a production cost measured in pennies.

Though I am unlikely to buy either, I would consider the Borka to be marginally more reasonable in its pricing.

The Auld Grump

*EDIT* The bear seems to do a better job of filling its base, as well. Why is the GW figure on a 50mm. base, anyway?

Borka is way more expensive than Dominus (40%), though I assure you neither model is priced based on material costs -- which is pennies in both cases. As a relative percentage to the sale price, the cost of the plastic or resin is virtually zero. Both are priced being based on being great sculptures. If you read the PP forums, people are begging for injection molded plastic (and this is the direction of PP).

Dominus fills out his 50mm base nicely. In 40k, the alternative would be a 40mm base, and he would be too big for the base.

To pick another "smaller" 50mm base miniature that I love, Bradigus is also $35, and if you take away the cape (which is just a very simple piece of resin) the miniature is quite small:



And this 40mm base Scaverous, actually belongs on a 50mm base (IMO), and is $40:


Anyways, my point is simple -- why is a well-sculpted 40mm-50mm warcaster in the $40 - $60 range NOT too expensive, when the same price for a 40k HQ is too expensive? My answer is that neither is too expensive. You only buy one for your whole army, so the true cost of the model for PP or GW is high (few sales compared to opportunity costs of modelling it, since every AdMech player will probably buy just 1). I would rather have an expensive, spectacular HQ unit, than a cheap, unspectacular one.

Comparison is a bit weird... I mean PP stuff looks like its double the size of the gw one... and thats not even considering the material.

 loki old fart wrote:
A picture is worth a thousand words.

What does "MES WOR" mean?

 NAVARRO wrote:
Comparison is a bit weird... I mean PP stuff looks like its double the size of the gw one... and thats not even considering the material.

Scaverous and Dominus are actually roughly the same size and bulk, even though Scaverous is on a smaller base. Like I said, he feels like he's falling off his base anyhow. At the prices of these things, the most significant difference in material cost is that plastic is a much more expensive setup and requires a bigger run, but cheaper per unit, while and resin/metal requires smaller runs, but is slightly more expensive per unit. But if you melted down the materials whether it was pewter or plastic, it wouldn't be worth a biscuit at McDonald's, so what does it matter?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here you go, the parts for Dominus and Bradigus side-by-side. I had an unassembled one of each.

Note that the resin pieces of Bradigus aren't that spectacular. The chunks of rock are actually something that I can be made with really basic sculpting skills, and the cape is pretty bland. The only really beautiful sculpting is in the metal model -- I imagine the sculptor spent 90%+ of his time on the metal parts. And he's almost exactly the same price as Dominus.

well lol that is easy, both privateer press and games workshop are ripping us off.

that bradigus model for $35 is a total waste of money. you would never catch me paying that for him. he is like a $8 model with a resin cape and some rocks.

the dominus model looks pretty complicated, I guess I would pay $15. oh well, i guess i will never own either lol.

In regards to PP pricing vs GW you also need to consider the in-game value for each model relative to their respective game systems. I'm not super familiar with WMH, but a Warcaster or even a big solo is going to make a considerable impact on your army list. The Dominus will certainly add value to your army as well, but not on the same level as a WMH solo or caster.

The hobby is wargaming, not warmodeling, warconverting or warpainting. Gaming is what allowed GW and other companies to grow to the size they are. It's obvious not even GW really believes their "we cater to an incredibly small niche of collectors." Look at the amount of rules they sell now, it's more than any game system I've ever heard of.

As the painting and modelling side of of the hobby is what I love the most. £22 doesn't seem too bad for a centrepiece model considering the amount of time I would get for modelling and painting the piece (and admiring it once I am done). And I can't wait to get one for my AdMech.

I do though gawk at the price for a "standard" 40k army. But what it tells me is that people should be playing smaller games! For me a 2000 point army is something I will work to collect over many years. Not bulk buy at once.

But that's just my opinion on things, people can play the game how they want.

 Dendarien wrote:
In regards to PP pricing vs GW you also need to consider the in-game value for each model relative to their respective game systems. I'm not super familiar with WMH, but a Warcaster or even a big solo is going to make a considerable impact on your army list. The Dominus will certainly add value to your army as well, but not on the same level as a WMH solo or caster.

The hobby is wargaming, not warmodeling, warconverting or warpainting. Gaming is what allowed GW and other companies to grow to the size they are. It's obvious not even GW really believes their "we cater to an incredibly small niche of collectors." Look at the amount of rules they sell now, it's more than any game system I've ever heard of.

Nope, I wholeheartedly disagree. The hobby is what you make of it: whether it's gaming, painting, converting, modelling, or simply collecting brand new boxes.

Games Workshop's attitude is that 40k is a game for like-minded hobbyists. The whole ecosystem, and the White Dwarf magazine is as dedicated to painting as it is to modelling as it is to the game. For instance, from a game perspective, what does it matter what the difference is between a Mk VI and Mk IV armor? Or from a space marine in a robe versus one in a plain Mk7 armor versus one in an artificed armor? For that matter, from a *wargaming* perspective, why not just use paper cutouts on round bases for all miniature-based games?

Of course, in a game with 25 miniatures, your one centerpiece model will make more impact, than a game where the median army size is 3 times larger, and the table is almost 2 times larger. In a game with 8 miniatures, each miniature has even more game value, so should each miniature be sold at a price of 4x more? That logic just doesn't make any sense at all, except to say that for some people, 40k is too expensive a game because it requires too many miniatures.

I just disagree with the premise that a model is should sell for more money because it has a bigger impact on the game. A model should sell for more money if it's a fancier model, and it's a smaller run with less sell-through potential. A model should sell for less money if it's a more basic model, and it's a bigger run, because the company is going to sell a hundred times as many. If it were my company, this is how I would price it.

If you really want to compare apples to apples look at the price of Dreamforge plastic kits compared to GW.

Their design work is equal to or superior and the the 28mm Leviathan was the best cast plastic kit I had ever seen and may ever see. It was hard to find mold lines on that kit.

 Bottle wrote:
As the painting and modelling side of of the hobby is what I love the most. £22 doesn't seem too bad for a centrepiece model considering the amount of time I would get for modelling and painting the piece (and admiring it once I am done). And I can't wait to get one for my AdMech.

I do though gawk at the price for a "standard" 40k army. But what it tells me is that people should be playing smaller games! For me a 2000 point army is something I will work to collect over many years. Not bulk buy at once.

But that's just my opinion on things, people can play the game how they want.

Indeed, this is my opinion exactly. 22GBP for a centerpiece model doesn't feel expensive at all, because it's not the mean or median price of models. it's the price of ONE model to stare at and admire, and for all your friends to be wowed by its awesomeness.

For me, relative to the amount of time I spend on each model (anywhere from 6 to 100+ hours), I am more interested in having the better model than the cheaper price. Hence my excitement over things like the new Devastator and Assault squads, despite the prices being more.

 Talys wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Yet one is made from injection molded plastic, and the other is resin.

The one made from plastic has a production cost measured in pennies.

Though I am unlikely to buy either, I would consider the Borka to be marginally more reasonable in its pricing.

The Auld Grump

*EDIT* The bear seems to do a better job of filling its base, as well. Why is the GW figure on a 50mm. base, anyway?

Borka is way more expensive than Dominus (40%), though I assure you neither model is priced based on material costs -- which is pennies in both cases. As a relative percentage to the sale price, the cost of the plastic or resin is virtually zero. Both are priced being based on being great sculptures. If you read the PP forums, people are begging for injection molded plastic (and this is the direction of PP).

Dominus fills out his 50mm base nicely. In 40k, the alternative would be a 40mm base, and he would be too big for the base.

To pick another "smaller" 50mm base miniature that I love, Bradigus is also $35, and if you take away the cape (which is just a very simple piece of resin) the miniature is quite small:



And this 40mm base Scaverous, actually belongs on a 50mm base (IMO), and is $40:


Anyways, my point is simple -- why is a well-sculpted 40mm-50mm warcaster in the $40 - $60 range NOT too expensive, when the same price for a 40k HQ is too expensive? My answer is that neither is too expensive. You only buy one for your whole army, so the true cost of the model for PP or GW is high (few sales compared to opportunity costs of modelling it, since every AdMech player will probably buy just 1). I would rather have an expensive, spectacular HQ unit, than a cheap, unspectacular one.

Having worked with resin - the cost of Borka likely is measured in dollars - though not a lot of them. (2 or 3 dollars worth of resin.)

Borka fills his base - and only the DRAMATIC! POSING!!! style posing allows Dominous to look good on the 40mm base, let alone the 50mm base he comes on. (In case you couldn't guess - I do not like the posing on Dominus, at all. I feel that he would have been better at about the same size as my good friend Fabius Vile.)

By comparison, Borka's pose is dynamic - and looks like he has been caught in the middle of an action, rather than trying to fill up a base that is too large for him.

And, as I said - I think that Borka is only marginally the more reasonably priced of the two. (Better pose, better material, and bigger impact on his game, but a lot more expensive.)

I would not purchase either - but Borka is still the better of the two.

Dominus actually combines several of the problems that I have with recent GW figures. I do not consider him well sculpted - and rather suspect that he started as a smaller miniature and was scaled up to a larger size to have a more expensive model. On a smaller scale... I might have liked him more.

And while I do not like Dominus, he is still a better buy than what they did with Naggaroth for Warhammer.

The Auld Grump - cheap high impact plastic is cheap high impact plastic.

 SickSix wrote:
If you really want to compare apples to apples look at the price of Dreamforge plastic kits compared to GW.

Their design work is equal to or superior and the the 28mm Leviathan was the best cast plastic kit I had ever seen and may ever see. It was hard to find mold lines on that kit.

Dreamforge is great, but the collection is incredibly tiny (you can paint every model they produce in a month), and because it's ONE GUY, the only sculptor will die a happy old man before the collection is a size of significant modelling value.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Yet one is made from injection molded plastic, and the other is resin.

The one made from plastic has a production cost measured in pennies.

Though I am unlikely to buy either, I would consider the Borka to be marginally more reasonable in its pricing.

The Auld Grump

*EDIT* The bear seems to do a better job of filling its base, as well. Why is the GW figure on a 50mm. base, anyway?

Borka is way more expensive than Dominus (40%), though I assure you neither model is priced based on material costs -- which is pennies in both cases. As a relative percentage to the sale price, the cost of the plastic or resin is virtually zero. Both are priced being based on being great sculptures. If you read the PP forums, people are begging for injection molded plastic (and this is the direction of PP).

Dominus fills out his 50mm base nicely. In 40k, the alternative would be a 40mm base, and he would be too big for the base.

To pick another "smaller" 50mm base miniature that I love, Bradigus is also $35, and if you take away the cape (which is just a very simple piece of resin) the miniature is quite small:



And this 40mm base Scaverous, actually belongs on a 50mm base (IMO), and is $40:


Anyways, my point is simple -- why is a well-sculpted 40mm-50mm warcaster in the $40 - $60 range NOT too expensive, when the same price for a 40k HQ is too expensive? My answer is that neither is too expensive. You only buy one for your whole army, so the true cost of the model for PP or GW is high (few sales compared to opportunity costs of modelling it, since every AdMech player will probably buy just 1). I would rather have an expensive, spectacular HQ unit, than a cheap, unspectacular one.

Having worked with resin - the cost of Borka likely is measured in dollars - though not a lot of them. (2 or 3 dollars worth of resin.)

Borka fills his base - and only the DRAMATIC! POSING!!! style posing allows Dominous to look good on the 40mm base, let alone the 50mm base he comes on. (In case you couldn't guess - I do not like the posing on Dominus, at all. I feel that he would have been better at about the same size as my good friend Fabius Vile.) *EDIT* For the record - Bradigus shares the problem of DRAMATIC!! POSING!!!. He does not need a huge base, either.

By comparison, Borka's pose is dynamic - and looks like he has been caught in the middle of an action, rather than trying to fill up a base that is too large for him.

And, as I said - I think that Borka is only marginally the more reasonably priced of the two. (Better pose, better material, and bigger impact on his game, but a lot more expensive.)

I would not purchase either - but Borka is still the better of the two.

Dominus actually combines several of the problems that I have with recent GW figures. I do not consider him well sculpted - and rather suspect that he started as a smaller miniature and was scaled up to a larger size to have a more expensive model. On a smaller scale... I might have liked him more.

And while I do not like Dominus, he is still a better buy than what they did with Naggaroth for Warhammer.

The Auld Grump - cheap high impact plastic is cheap high impact plastic.

 Talys wrote:

 Dendarien wrote:
In regards to PP pricing vs GW you also need to consider the in-game value for each model relative to their respective game systems. I'm not super familiar with WMH, but a Warcaster or even a big solo is going to make a considerable impact on your army list. The Dominus will certainly add value to your army as well, but not on the same level as a WMH solo or caster.

The hobby is wargaming, not warmodeling, warconverting or warpainting. Gaming is what allowed GW and other companies to grow to the size they are. It's obvious not even GW really believes their "we cater to an incredibly small niche of collectors." Look at the amount of rules they sell now, it's more than any game system I've ever heard of.

Nope, I wholeheartedly disagree. The hobby is what you make of it: whether it's gaming, painting, converting, modelling, or simply collecting brand new boxes.

Games Workshop's attitude is that 40k is a game for like-minded hobbyists. The whole ecosystem, and the White Dwarf magazine is as dedicated to painting as it is to modelling as it is to the game. For instance, from a game perspective, what does it matter what the difference is between a Mk VI and Mk IV armor? Or from a space marine in a robe versus one in a plain Mk7 armor versus one in an artificed armor? For that matter, from a *wargaming* perspective, why not just use paper cutouts on round bases for all miniature-based games?

Of course, in a game with 25 miniatures, your one centerpiece model will make more impact, than a game where the median army size is 3 times larger, and the table is almost 2 times larger. In a game with 8 miniatures, each miniature has even more game value, so should each miniature be sold at a price of 4x more? That logic just doesn't make any sense at all, except to say that for some people, 40k is too expensive a game because it requires too many miniatures.

I just disagree with the premise that a model is should sell for more money because it has a bigger impact on the game. A model should sell for more money if it's a fancier model, and it's a smaller run with less sell-through potential. A model should sell for less money if it's a more basic model, and it's a bigger run, because the company is going to sell a hundred times as many. If it were my company, this is how I would price it.

I should start by correcting my stance a little. Painting, modeling, etc. are of course hobbies and are also part of the greater hobby we call "wargaming." In my personal experience, most people buy models because they intend to use them in a game system. Of course the other aspects like collecting and painting come alongside that for many, but for most the heart of this hobby is putting our little toy soldiers on a table and rolling dice. For some people, which seems to be correct in your case, the artistic side of the hobby is what you engage more in. That is of course totally fair and acceptable (and your models look great!), but I think it is a reasonable conclusion that what drives this hobby and the companies producing models is the financial investment of gamers.

Games Workshop got to where they are because they sold models for the games they made, not because some rich elite of collectors and painting machines bought them to put in display cases. "Forging the narrative" and all of this collection marketing speak GW uses is not what their core business was always focused on, and I would argue not even what their core business is focused on today. Yes, their setting and modeling and painting have always been a part, but gaming was at the center of it. Most people bought the models, converted and, painted them to play in the game. Again, if the hobby is not primarily centered around gaming, why does GW flood their flagship product with rulebook after rulebook? GW, despite their best efforts to not know or engage with their consumers, must know that a large percentage (dare I say, majority?) of these consumers buy their models for use in game.

Their competitors are gathering a larger share of the market because they are making games GW abandoned (Epic, Mordheim, Blood Bowl, etc.) or are selling models compatible with 40k/fantasy (Mantic, Dreamforge and so on). And here again we see how gaming drives this hobby, Mantic, PP, Corvus Belli and so on are not growing because they only appeal to painters and collectors. While I do find PPs pricing to be expensive, I think it is easier for people to swallow knowing they only need 1 box or blister to actually put the models on the table as a usable and impactful part of their army. So yes, in a sense, much of the pricing problem for 40k and fantasy is that you need way too many models that cost way too much on a per model basis. My primary game system is Infinity and it is much easier for me to spend 40 dollars for a 5 man link team (Infinity's fancy term for a squad) on a box of 4 Loup-Garous and the sniper blister. This single unit will make up approximately 1/3 of my entire army list and each model can heavily contribute to winning the game. By comparison, a box of 5 assault marines for $41 is not even a full unit most would use in game, nor will each model contribute significantly to winning the game. Sure maybe the sergeant with this powerfist, melta bombs, or someone with a special weapon will make an impact. But the chumps with bolt pistols are really just wound counters who, at best, will typically only kill your enemy's similar wound counters (boyz, guardsmen, etc.).

@Dendarien - I totally agree with your revised position

I think to some degree, Games Workshop sees it too, if the rumors of a Fantasy skirmish game are true. If that takes off, I'm pretty sure they'd make a 40k skirmish game, too.

I totally understand and can sympathize with people who like the 40k universe, but can't possibly find the time to model and paint -- or pay for -- a modern 40k army. If GW is to grow its marketshare (which may or may not be a part of its mission or vision, who knows), I think this is an important issue to tackle.

Aside from the arms race, bigger models, more complexity, and higher prices, people in 2015 as compared to 1990 generally have less time, and generally have less disposable income to spend on entertainment and hobby. These are indisputable facts, as average wages have not kept up with inflation, and the median number of hours people work and commute to make a living have gone up. Whether GW wants to accommodate those changes in the world, or embrace its core fanbase (or seemingly more intelligently, both...) is up in the air.

The obvious solution for GW is to take a page from PP, and have a good game which requires fewer models, and to keep the existing game, to cater to the demographic which enjoys that.

But what do I know!

By the way, thank you very much for the compliment

 Talys wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
If you really want to compare apples to apples look at the price of Dreamforge plastic kits compared to GW.

Their design work is equal to or superior and the the 28mm Leviathan was the best cast plastic kit I had ever seen and may ever see. It was hard to find mold lines on that kit.

Dreamforge is great, but the collection is incredibly tiny (you can paint every model they produce in a month), and because it's ONE GUY, the only sculptor will die a happy old man before the collection is a size of significant modelling value.

And that has absolutely nothing to do with the point SickSix was making. GW's model engineering and production quality is poor when compared to what Wargames Factory has been doing working with Dreamforge, Wyrd, Kingdom Death, and others. You can argue aesthetics and the extensive 20+ year GW catalog all you want, but it does not change the fact that GW has largely done little when it comes to evolution or innovation in model manufacturing in the past 10 years. Other companies are the one leading the way, GW is the one falling behind, as they would rather spend their money on dividends, executive salary, and upgrading their website than actually investing in their own business.

To be honest I'm not sure I want a lot of advancement in 28mm figures. Assembling a whole army of infantry that each require about 20 parts would be a nightmare.

Large models like robots and vehicles are a different matter, though, and GW are 25 years behind the curve on those.

 Talys wrote:
@Dendarien - I totally agree with your revised position

I think to some degree, Games Workshop sees it too, if the rumors of a Fantasy skirmish game are true. If that takes off, I'm pretty sure they'd make a 40k skirmish game, too.

I totally understand and can sympathize with people who like the 40k universe, but can't possibly find the time to model and paint -- or pay for -- a modern 40k army. If GW is to grow its marketshare (which may or may not be a part of its mission or vision, who knows), I think this is an important issue to tackle.

Aside from the arms race, bigger models, more complexity, and higher prices, people in 2015 as compared to 1990 generally have less time, and generally have less disposable income to spend on entertainment and hobby. These are indisputable facts, as average wages have not kept up with inflation, and the median number of hours people work and commute to make a living have gone up. Whether GW wants to accommodate those changes in the world, or embrace its core fanbase (or seemingly more intelligently, both...) is up in the air.

The obvious solution for GW is to take a page from PP, and have a good game which requires fewer models, and to keep the existing game, to cater to the demographic which enjoys that.

But what do I know!

By the way, thank you very much for the compliment

Glad to see a response like this. Too often these conversations about GW devolve into shouting matches because people are emotionally tied to their models, hobby, etc. (and there is no judgment in that, I am certainly attached). I think most people, including those who have drifted from GW and those who continue to be customers, would be better served by a more cohesive ruleset and reasonable pricing structure. I think GW would also gain tremendously from focusing on their rules more, engaging with their customers and reconsidering their ever-increasing prices. Re-expanding their business model to compete with the plethora of skirmish, naval and mass battle systems can only help them.

Personally, gaming is what brings me to this hobby. There is something about moving models around, rolling dice and building armylists that is just not satisfied by any other game (CCGs, video games, etc.). I do not buy GW's models anymore, not because they are not great models or simply because of their price, but because I do not enjoy the rules they have been releasing since the end of 5th edition. I absolutely love my orks and still paint them, but the rules have gutted them. To even get back into the game I would be shelling out hundreds for just rules, not to mention the models I will need just to get my orks to the bottom of the dogpile. If GW wrote an amazing ruleset I'd be a lot less sensitive to their prices.

@Dendarien - Yes, it's nice to agree on things For me, it's miniatures first, gaming second, though it wasn't always this way. In the 90's, it was gaming first, and miniatures second. But really, there's no reason both camps can't be equally catered to.

By the way, I don't think cheap prices are a good excuse for poor rules or models, and vice versa. I wouldn't want to play a game that wasn't fun, even if it were cheap, and I wouldn't want to build models I didn't like, just because they cost less. There are just so many interesting things to do in this world, and relatively little time

@Kilkrazy - I think we're almost there in the GW hobby.

The typical basic, modern GW humanoid infantry model consists of, at a minimum - lower torso, upper front, upper back, left arm, right arm, weapon, backpack, head. So 8 pieces for your simplest model. For most space marines, add 2 more for shoulder pads; for some models, add a second weapon (like a pistol in one hand, a sword in another). Mind you, this was also the plastic marine of the late 80's -- it's just that most models produced are like this now, whereas back then, you could buy one-piece metal minis.

There are many optional adornments like belt accessories (pistols, pouches, grenades, knives, etc), banners, pelts, auspex or iron halo -- some have a game function, others are cosmetic.

So, I think we're pretty close to 11-15 pieces for the most basic unit, "fully built". Another way to look at it is that Death Company is a 5 man unit, and contains 94 pieces in the kit (though of course you won't use them all). I don't think the model complexity will shrink, as GW is moving towards scenic bases and 2-part legs.

It actually takes a lot of time and thought to put together something as basic as a tactical squad, if you want it to look nice -- matching shoulder insignia, looking of singular purpose and unified as a squad, without looking "samey", and so on.

If you don't enjoy that kinda thing, yeah, building 2 tactical squads, 3 assault squads and some devastator and centurion squads would really suck... It would be, "give me snapfit or give me death!"

 Talys wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
If you really want to compare apples to apples look at the price of Dreamforge plastic kits compared to GW.

Their design work is equal to or superior and the the 28mm Leviathan was the best cast plastic kit I had ever seen and may ever see. It was hard to find mold lines on that kit.

Dreamforge is great, but the collection is incredibly tiny (you can paint every model they produce in a month), and because it's ONE GUY, the only sculptor will die a happy old man before the collection is a size of significant modelling value.

Your logic is completely backwards. If anything the single guy sculpting all his miniatures and with a smaller catalog should be charging MORE for his product. GW is a multi-hundred million dollar company with an established production system, design system and it's own distribution. Many of their models have been 'paid for' long ago. They should be undercutting every other producer out there!

And size of catalogue has NOTHING to do with detail quality, production quality and price LOL.

 SickSix wrote:
Your logic is completely backwards. If anything the single guy sculpting all his miniatures and with a smaller catalog should be charging MORE for his product. GW is a multi-hundred million dollar company with an established production system, design system and it's own distribution. Many of their models have been 'paid for' long ago. They should be undercutting every other producer out there!

And size of catalogue has NOTHING to do with detail quality, production quality and price LOL.

1. A single person making all the decisions has way less overhead than a large company doing a lot of stuff. Why does the lone programmer cost less per hour than someone with less skill at Accenture? Why does a solo homebuilder/contractor cost less than a large construction company? Why does an independent electrician cost less per hour than the big company that wires up the condo building? There are economies of scale, yes. But generally speaking, a 1-man show is much more efficient than a large corporation with many mouths to feed. The 1-man show can win out on everything except the basis of scale and certainty. If the one guy gets hit by a bus or wins a lottery, that line of products has a good chance of ending.

2. Size of catalog has EVERYTHING to do with detail quality, production quality and price:

- It's MUCH harder to make a hundred plus new models a year designed by a team of people over 30+ years to be consistent in theme, continuity, and quality, than a couple of models each year designed by 1 guy.
- As you use molds, they degrade. The more times you use it, the poorer the cast. So small run companies (like Forge World) will have fewer mold lines and better casts than mass produced product.
- A large catalog is really expensive to produce, stock and distribute. The easiest way to save on prices is to have fewer SKUs, and sell more of a smaller number of sets.

That being said, frankly, none of this I really care about, because none these things are is my problem. I like modelling cool stuff, and I like having cool stuff to model. With Dreamforge, as I said, after 1-2 months of fun, everything is built and painted, and then it sits in a display case for 3 years, before there are enough models to give another couple of weeks of fun. The release cadence is just not suitable for me to carry as a primary hobby. It doesn't mean I won't buy their stuff, it just means it can't keep me busy.

I have great respect for Mark Mondragon.

So much fallacy so little time.

There's quite a bit here, and I'd normally multi quote and respond to each point, but it's late and I'm tired, so..

Whoever said the thing about the legality of GW refusing to supply third parties who deep discount? Don't be so naive. They don't refuse to supply on those grounds, they find some other reason, manufacture one if needed. I think one could even argue they've made wholesale changes to their Trade Terms in order to get the result they want. I can't decide against employing a woman on the grounds that she is female, or not attractive, or any other gender reason. I simply declare I don't feel she'd be a good fit in the company and unless I'm an utter moron and spew the real reason everywhere, no one can prove any different.

Secondly, the point several have made about "prices aren't important, I don't pay RRP." For heavens sake, basic maths people! 20% discount on £50 is still a greater total than 20% discount on £45, just because you've convinced yourselves that you've somehow mitigated the cost doesn't mean you're unaffected.

Incidentally, these are price rises on products that are produced, designed and manufactured for approx 1/4 of RRP. Double the traditional retail mark up. These are also prices that, in the main, are derived from petrochemicals, when the price of crude is at a decently low price, and lower than it has been than over the last several years. In addition to all this, this is a price rise when UK inflation is in the negative for the first time in over half a century.

There is no justification for the rise outside of GW's inefficiencies, inadequacies or greed, all masked under the guise of giving Malibu Stacey a new hat.

Finally, GW IS NOT A HOBBY!

@Az - People sue for that getting terminated because of illegal reasons and win all the time. But anyhow, there are TONS of stores that sell at 25% discount, including the best known, DarkSphere. Why would GW care if one store discounted 25% while others don't? I'm not saying it doesn't happen; I'm wondering why they would do such a thing.

In my area, within 20 minutes driving distance of a GW store, there are 3 stores that discount between 10% and 25% (some have a "volume" thing going, so if you buy more you get a bigger discount). Nobody other than GW has a walk-in price of retail.

Now, of course MSRP prices are important. However, as I pointed out, as the years (decades) have progressed, the stores I shop at have gone from no discount to upwards of 30%. The reason is because on the bigger ticket items, they make more money per sale, and they just are able to discount them more heavily. In 1990, I didn't know of any store that discounted 25% for walk-in. If this doesn't happen in your neighbourhood, I'm sorry for you, man.

The justification of raising prices is profit maximization, which in a free market system, is something that most companies endeavor to do. Why does maximizing the profit on their new product make them any greedier than any other company? It's not just Ferraris and Chanels, man. Nike does the same thing every year with their shoes. Nestle does it with your shrinking chocolate bars and rising prices every year. Lays does it with potato chips, and Maxwell House coffee tins shrink as the price rises. Do you think those shoes made in China at slave-labour wages have the savings passed on to you, or do you think they sell cross-trainers at the highest price that the market will bear? When a Reeses Peanut Butter Cups shrink, are those savings in manufacture on to you? Nope. Outside of a short sale period to promote the new product, the price goes up.

If you don't like the way the world works, I get it. But you're kinda stuck with it, and it's not just GW.

Finally, nobody is disputing that GW models are expensive. I've merely pointed out that there are PP models that have just as wide a profit margin, that don't cost more to produce -- not in a material way, anyhow -- and they don't get the same angst.

Yeah, people sue all the time.

Firstly, they don't win all the time, and secondly, you really are being naive if you think every job you didn't get was purely and simply because there was a better candidate. (Well, maybe not in your very specific case, but it happens all the time.)

I can tell you this because I've been involved with recruitment and have witnessed it. Mostly on the side of skills winning out, I'm glad to say.

I've even resigned from a job because a candidate was hired for his looks over another candidate who had direct relevant experience. The appointment was not my decision in that case, but I had input, and it turned out to be so disastrous that it cost me money as a consequence in lost bonuses.

It happens all the time and it's only the really dumb people who give others sufficient reason to even suspect, let alone enough to sue.

How exactly is a price rise profit maximisation when their profits are shrinking? It only counts as profit maximisation when, you know, profits are maximised. If you're driving away your customers because prices are too high all it is is a dumb idea. Doubly so when prevailing economic conditions don't support it.

As for PP? Well, hasn't that discussion been done to death, but it boils down to the fact that people don't care because PP act like they give a gak.

@Az - Oh, I misunderstood. Sure, lots of people are selected for reasons other than merit; the workplace surely is not a meritocracy. But nobody ever said you had to hire the smartest or hardest working candidate either; a lot of unbiased employers will hire someone based on their personality, a better connection, or whatever.

On the other hand, firing someone for a bad reason is a good way to be sued or taken to the labor dispute board (or equivalent) in a first world nation. I think that's a better analogy to GW axing a distributor for discounting. In most jurisdictions, there's a way to get rid of an employee without actually firing them, too. I mean, you don't have to hold on to someone you don't like, for whatever reasons, forever -- unless it's a union.

Going back to profit maximization, I didn't say that GW is successful at it I don't know to be truthful -- perhaps, even if they lowered their price, they would make even less, because no matter what, people would STILL buy other stuff instead. I have no idea. I'm just saying that they aren't particularly greedy (anymore than any other company) for wanting to make the most money they can.

And yeah, PP may "feel" like they give a crap about their players, but it doesn't much change what I can buy at the store and how much it costs I know that a lot of people have a hard time having fun with GW rules, so I certainly can't fault those people for not liking GW; that just isn't the case in our group. Not that we play every 40k rule exactly as written (does anyone?); the rules are just not a hindrance to our fun.

It's a fairly normal state of affairs that your average consumer is happier to pay a premium for a variety of reasons, one of which is they feel the manufacturer or retailer warrants their support for some reason. PP tap into this very successfully, whether one personally believes it to be genuine enthusiasm or cynical capitalism, much like Apple, it doesn't really matter.

Oh, and "the rules aren't a hindrance to our fun" is the greatest damning with faint praise of a GW product I've read in some time. The rules should really be supporting or enhancing your fun when you meet up to play a game, don't you think? I mean I don't count "I went to a restaurant and didn't get food poisoning" to be a great night out. But then I guess it depends how remote the part of Canada you live in is!

LOL Az

It's all what you make of the game, man. I played AD&D from the ages of 10 - 25 pretty much religiously, LOVED the game, but we teaked all sorts of rules.
When Rogue Trader came out, there weren't even (real) lists. Players made their own.

So, I guess I just herald from the days of yesteryear when a rulebook was just a bunch of words on a piece of paper, and if you didn't like it, you changed it. Our group (which includes people from approx 18 - 55, plus some of their girlfriends who come and play once in a blue moon) doesn't treat 40k like a video game, and have no issue with rules coming out of the box not optimal for our gaming scene. Sometimes, when a person has a really nice model they like to play, but it's just crappy weak in the codex, we'll do our own buff to it. And tone it down in a couple of weeks if it doesn't work out. When I say that we tweak the rules, it's not an indictment of the game, for us. It just means that we don't take 40k rules -- or any other game we play, for that matter -- as gospel that can never be changed for the benefit of our entertainment.

Again, I know this isn't everyone situation, and if you want something that's more straightforward, with relatively clean rules that you can just pull out of the box and play... 40k is just the wrong game. And yeah, in a lot of situations, to make the game work competitively, you have to tweak it -- but obviously, some people have done this (ITC for instance).

I wouldn't care about the rules being gak if they weren't priced as if they were well-designed.

That's the problem with "houserule 40K". If I'm going to basically just be making up my own rules, why am I paying top dollar for theirs?

If 40K's rules were just PDF's that you download for free from GW's website, no one would ever complain about their lack of of value.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I wouldn't care about the rules being gak if they weren't priced as if they were well-designed.

That's the problem with "houserule 40K". If I'm going to basically just be making up my own rules, why am I paying top dollar for theirs?

If 40K's rules were just PDF's that you download for free from GW's website, no one would ever complain about their lack of of value.

If the free PDFs were fun to play, then yeah, nobody would complain about the lack of value. However, if they didn't provide a fun framework (modified or not), then they'd be as worthless as their price.

I guess this is what I mean my rules being fun for us -- what comes in the codices and in the BRB is pretty cool stuff. Our group has in common that we love the 40k game world, and the art, and fluff and all that, and we actually like about 99% of the rules. We drool and things like the cool robot pope, even if his army isn't all that, and his giant robots look dorky. The little bit that we don't like is just not that big a deal.

Yes, there are a lot of books, and yes, they're expensive, but you surely don't need to buy *every one*. For most people, I think a $20 (or free) mini rule book plus 2 codex (max) for about $50 -- less whatever discounts -- should do the trick. If you can't have fun with that, whether the total price is $25 or $125 really won't help either way... because you'll just be wasting $25 and more importantly, your time afterwards.

 Talys wrote:
If the free PDFs were fun to play, then yeah, nobody would complain about the lack of value. However, if they didn't provide a fun framework (modified or not), then they'd be as worthless as their price.

The rules are worthless and unplayable whether they're free or not, and GW has not shown anyone that they're capable of changing that...in fact the game is just getting worse. So if I had to choose between free .pdf's of unplayable rules or paying $200+ for the bare minimum I need while still getting the same worthless, unplayable crap for rules then I know what I'd rather have.

At least then some of the GW faithful would actually have something to back up these constant accusations of being whiny or "entitled" when complaining about GW's poor product. "You can't complain about the free rules, you got what you paid for!"

 Talys wrote:
LOL Az

It's all what you make of the game, man. I played AD&D from the ages of 10 - 25 pretty much religiously, LOVED the game, but we teaked all sorts of rules.
When Rogue Trader came out, there weren't even (real) lists. Players made their own.

So, I guess I just herald from the days of yesteryear when a rulebook was just a bunch of words on a piece of paper, and if you didn't like it, you changed it. Our group (which includes people from approx 18 - 55, plus some of their girlfriends who come and play once in a blue moon) doesn't treat 40k like a video game, and have no issue with rules coming out of the box not optimal for our gaming scene. Sometimes, when a person has a really nice model they like to play, but it's just crappy weak in the codex, we'll do our own buff to it. And tone it down in a couple of weeks if it doesn't work out. When I say that we tweak the rules, it's not an indictment of the game, for us. It just means that we don't take 40k rules -- or any other game we play, for that matter -- as gospel that can never be changed for the benefit of our entertainment.

Again, I know this isn't everyone situation, and if you want something that's more straightforward, with relatively clean rules that you can just pull out of the box and play... 40k is just the wrong game. And yeah, in a lot of situations, to make the game work competitively, you have to tweak it -- but obviously, some people have done this (ITC for instance).

This post made me think. It really did. The conclusion I came to is that the 'you get out what you put in' mindset is complete BS. I could sit down and put a lot of effort into rebuilding the rules in a way that would be fun to play imo, but I'd never be able to find an opponent.

I'd be changing the game drastically so although my local GW redshirt is a cool guy and would probably allow me to play it in store I would not try to force it on people there looking for pick up games of 40k. That's unfair on them and impractical to actually teach the game at the table.

I could take it to the local warhammer club but I do not like those guys (or rather I should say I dislike the club and everything about how it is run). I stopped going there a year or two ago because they had 0 interest in other games and where all the kind of players to jump on the latest cheese filled netlist.

There is a new group I do play with regularly but none of them have any interest in GW games or products and I doubt even half of them have ever assembled a GW model as a lot of them are new to the hobby and we play x wing and warmahordes fairly exclusively.

The final option I have is my roommate, who likes the setting but not the rules, likes narrative campaigns and is generally exactly the kind of person I'd want to do a project like this with... But has already turned it down as only playing each other and only 2 person map based campaigns sound like they'd get boring quickly to him.


The entire argument of being able to fix the rules becomes irrelevant if you're not lucky enough to have a sufficiently large group of like minded people.

 Sidstyler wrote:

 Talys wrote:
If the free PDFs were fun to play, then yeah, nobody would complain about the lack of value. However, if they didn't provide a fun framework (modified or not), then they'd be as worthless as their price.

The rules are worthless and unplayable whether they're free or not, and GW has not shown anyone that they're capable of changing that...in fact the game is just getting worse. So if I had to choose between free .pdf's of unplayable rules or paying $200+ for the bare minimum I need while still getting the same worthless, unplayable crap for rules then I know what I'd rather have.

At least then some of the GW faithful would actually have something to back up these constant accusations of being whiny or "entitled" when complaining about GW's poor product. "You can't complain about the free rules, you got what you paid for!"

I guess it is a good thing for people like me who enjoy 40k that there are other people who also enjoy the game too =]

Though no doubt it is only in the alternate reality pocket dimension in which I live.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@jonolikespie - you get what you out in has nothing to do with making rules better. It has to do with enjoying the hobby. In other words, if you lovingly craft your models, you'll probably appreciate them more.

In terms of the game it means, the effort you put into a group to make it successful makes or breaks the group. It doesn't imply that you can make something that you see as totally not fun into something awesome by giving it love and attention. For instance, nothing that I can do will make me love golf more. I hate it and hate that I have to participate in it now and then.

If you feel 40k RAW is so different from your idea of a good time, you should pick up another game; there are so many that may be a better fit!! If you think you might like it, but can't find play partners, I dunno, start at an FLGS and try to fire something up. By the way, I picked up the hobby with just 1 friend into it, and it's turned into something that's kept a couple of guys doing the same game from grade school into our forties -- along with a half dozen or so that have joined us along the way. It's really turned into the best of friendships.

 Talys wrote:
Though no doubt it is only in the alternate reality pocket dimension in which I live.

Admitting you live in an alternate dimension is the first step towards phasing back into reality.

 Azreal13 wrote:
So much fallacy so little time.

There's quite a bit here, and I'd normally multi quote and respond to each point, but it's late and I'm tired, so..

Whoever said the thing about the legality of GW refusing to supply third parties who deep discount? Don't be so naive. They don't refuse to supply on those grounds, they find some other reason, manufacture one if needed. I think one could even argue they've made wholesale changes to their Trade Terms in order to get the result they want. I can't decide against employing a woman on the grounds that she is female, or not attractive, or any other gender reason. I simply declare I don't feel she'd be a good fit in the company and unless I'm an utter moron and spew the real reason everywhere, no one can prove any different.

Secondly, the point several have made about "prices aren't important, I don't pay RRP." For heavens sake, basic maths people! 20% discount on £50 is still a greater total than 20% discount on £45, just because you've convinced yourselves that you've somehow mitigated the cost doesn't mean you're unaffected.

Incidentally, these are price rises on products that are produced, designed and manufactured for approx 1/4 of RRP. Double the traditional retail mark up. These are also prices that, in the main, are derived from petrochemicals, when the price of crude is at a decently low price, and lower than it has been than over the last several years. In addition to all this, this is a price rise when UK inflation is in the negative for the first time in over half a century.

There is no justification for the rise outside of GW's inefficiencies, inadequacies or greed, all masked under the guise of giving Malibu Stacey a new hat.

Finally, GW IS NOT A HOBBY!

feeling a little bit condescending and dismissive today, Az??
that post seems a bit harsh...

i can do basic maths, and you are right, getting the same % of discount on a $35 product versus a $30 product still puts me a few bucks more out of pocket, but the addition of new legs, terrain bits, and new weapons (way cooler than Malibu Stacy getting a new hat, imho) makes that a product i will happily pay a few bucks extra for...
there is no need for me to "convince myself that i have somehow mitigated the cost", since the actual cost doesn't matter to me anyway...

i am not effected by a 5 Squid price rise, because i do not FEEL effected by it...
i am still going to buy the product regardless of the fact that a new kit is more expensive than the previous version, simply because i think the new kit looks better than the old one...
if i use up all the money in my pocket, i just go make more...
GW obviously knows what they are doing, because last month i didn't feel the need to buy another box of Assault Marines, but this month i certainly do, and i'm not the only one in this thread saying they are excited about the new kits...

as i clarified before, i don't mind paying retail for something if that is the only option...
my opinion is that someone would be crazy to turn down a discount if it is available, not that the retail price is too expensive...
there is a difference...

i have never once said that i think something is too expensive at RRP, because that doesn't even factor into my logic...
the only question i ever ask myself about any product is, "do i want it???", and "can i get a hook-up???" not "how much does it cost???"...
i don't care about how much something costs, as if i am doing some value versus cost equation in my head...
i go purely on heart and soul, not logic...
all i care about is how cool do i think something is, and how badly do i want it...
in my opinion, money is only there to get cool stuff...
that is the whole purpose to money in my world...

GW may not be a hobby, but collecting and painting miniatures certainly is...
if Space Marines are my favorite thing to collect and paint, does that mean i am doing it wrong???
getting maximum enjoyment out of my time and effort certainly seems to be a worthwhile way to hobby...
i've said it again and again, as much as i love Infinity, Rackham, Ilyad, Studio McVey, PP, and the rest, nothing gets me as excited to paint as a Space Marine mini...
the new sculpts get me even more excited than a 20 year old Marine sculpt, so i am happy about these new kits, and will happily pay a few bucks more for the new ones...

cheers
jah

He's not being condescending. He's just frustrated by wilful blindness (a common symptom when sunlight shines off polished white armour).

 jah-joshua wrote:
i am not effected by a 5 Squid price rise

But it's five whole squid! Do you know how much fried calamari you can make with that?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
He's not being condescending. He's just frustrated by wilful blindness (a common symptom when sunlight shines off polished white armour).

sorry, mate, i don't think i am being wilfully blind, or a White Knight...
i just like what i like, and state that i am fine with paying the price i have to in order to have cool stuff that makes me happy...
i have never said that GW can do no wrong, or that i buy every product they produce, nor been unwilling to praise, buy, and paint the great models produced by other companies...

no need to be so snarky...

cheers
jah

Talys and jah-joshua yes we know you don't mind the prices, and it that it is great value to you.

But the fact of the matter, the amount of people that consider it great value is shrinking, with so many other kickstarter and game systems (Start Wars Armada and x-wing, imperial assault will surely get an upswing after the movie release in December). The gaming world stage is changing, If GW doesn't change their modus operandi others will swing in and claim dominance.

Jehan-reznor wrote:Talys and jah-joshua yes we know you don't mind the prices, and it that it is great value to you.

But the fact of the matter, the amount of people that consider it great value is shrinking, with so many other kickstarter and game systems (Start Wars Armada and x-wing, imperial assault will surely get an upswing after the movie release in December). The gaming world stage is changing, If GW doesn't change their modus operandi others will swing in and claim dominance.

I'm happy that people find other games entertaining, I really am. I am likewise happy for people who enjoy golf and baseball, despite that I can't stand either, and I hope their sports and games that I have no interest in thrive. Yet, some people have a venomous attitude towards GW, when their only crime is that they have a different vision of what a product and game should be (for example, a playable model collection, rather than a competitive tabletop sport).

It seems some people don't understand how anyone could possibly enjoy 40k as a game or 40k modelling as a hobby, or feel that 40k miniatures, despite their high price, are still the nest value in collectible scifi armies. You know, things that are an opinion and a matter of personal taste.

But the part that gets me the most is that some people like to argue GW and their products suck and yet they complain that GW's prices are way too high. I find this duality hilarious, because if you believe this, what does it matter how cheap or expensive their product is, if it sucks? I mean, I wouldn't play a bad video game regardless of price, so why would I spend a zillion hours on a hobby I didn't like?

I likewise don't understand the attraction to bad free rules, or even GOOD free rules. I mean, I want the company to succeed, and if they just write rules for free, where is the revenue derived from? What is the incentive to write new stuff, draw new pretty diagrams, and paint new artwork? To me, half the codex of fluff is half the value of the book; I get it that some people think that half is wasted paper. So they should either suck it up, or play another game!

At least I'm defending something I like. I can't imagine bothering to give my time to debate a subject on a game I didn't like or didn't feel or would never return to. If I have no intention of playing or collecting 40k, what do I care what robot pope costs, or if the latest codex is printed in 2 years or 10, or whether a $200 limited edition book is insane? Certainly, I could never imagine in my wildest dreams coming back *every week* on every new release to criticize the same company

H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Talys wrote:
Though no doubt it is only in the alternate reality pocket dimension in which I live.

Admitting you live in an alternate dimension is the first step towards phasing back into reality.

I was just stating observable science -- just as the earth is a spheroid , I exist in a special transdimensional reality. It must be so, because how else is it that our group keeps on having a blast playing 40k year after year? To me, 40k has always been the ultimate nerd pastime, lol.

lol its because they think people like you keep gw afloat and if you would all just disappear, gw would die already. then more people could play their games or gw would be bought up by another company that was kind and gentle and loved its players and kept prices for models low and their 2000 point csm army would finally be good again.

Btw talys if you didn't have so many nice models painted on your gallery i would have thought you were just bsing lol, but cheers bro, your models are pretty smokin'. if i could paint like that and i had a good group of friends to play with, my gaming life would be so different.

as it is i think the hardest part is to find good friends to play with. there are so many people i've met in game stores that are total donkey-caves that it is just easier to play a competitive game where your goal is to just demolish the person than to play for fun.

but whatever man, i still like 40k! tried wmh, just can't get into the models, so i sold my circle stuff, traded them for a tyranid army, and even though it ende dup being a total douche trade i'm glad it happened coz now i play orks, and have so much more fun than i ever did in hordes.

Talys, I think you are missing the point in some respect.

10 years ago GW published 40K as a wargame that could be played competitively. GW ran numerous tournaments including major national competitions. The rules were explicitly structured for play balance in force selection. (Not very well, but that does not affect the intention of the designers.)

The reason why some people are bitter is because they liked that situation despite its faults. It created for them a fun hobby, which GW have stripped away and ruined in various ways over the past 10 years making it much more expensive and harder to play either competitively or casually.

You may say it is fair enough for GW to change their game. I am sure you will understand, though, why the people who have been ejected are angry about it.

The new situation is good news for people who like an ever-changing variety of models and rules. We will see if it is good news for GW when the mid-year financial statement comes out in July.

Talys, which stores do you go to for a discount? I live in Burlington, Ontario and don't know of any nearby who offer that much...

Fair enough, kilkrazy.

For me, I guess if I were in that situation, I would just give up 40k and play a different game. Perhaps champion that game, instead of coming back each week to bemoan how the latest kit or book from GW is overpriced and of poor quality

Personally, I NEVER found 40k to be particularly well balanced or inexpensive (and I started in the late 80s...). I mean, if GW ever balanced 40k, we'd lose half the topics of our conversations when we got together to play. But yes, relatively speaking, 40k is definitely a more expensive game than it was a decade ago to "keep up with", especially if you're the type that wants to buy all the books. If you loved 40k despite its faults, not being able to afford the new hyper-release-cycle 40k would suck.

As you say, time will tell whether it all works out for GW or if they are forced to strategize anew.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Corellia wrote:
Talys, which stores do you go to for a discount? I live in Burlington, Ontario and don't know of any nearby who offer that much...

I'm on the west coast. :( My 3 favorite stores (I try to share the love a bit!) are Imperial Hobbies, Pastime Hobbies, and Game Stars.

 Talys wrote:
Yet, some people have a venomous attitude towards GW, when their only crime is that they have a different vision of what a product and game should be (for example, a playable model collection, rather than a competitive tabletop sport).

GWs crimes include at least trying to steal artwork from a freelancer who they hired years ago, lying to a judge and failing to come forward with relevant evidence when asked, filing frivolous lawsuits and all kinds of IP and other legal bullying.
As well there is their very clear attempts to put FLGSs out of business when a new GW store opens across the street. Outright bullying in their trade terms and the generally gakky way they treat all their trade partners.
The attitude the management had that their own employees are their biggest threat is kind of terrifying, that says a lot about how poorly they treat their front line staff.
There are all the embargos forcing absurd regional pricing on people.

Don't for a moment think you can write off the negativity, hell even the real hate, people have for GW as simply not liking the focus on models over rules.

 Talys wrote:
I likewise don't understand the attraction to bad free rules, or even GOOD free rules. I mean, I want the company to succeed, and if they just write rules for free, where is the revenue derived from? What is the incentive to write new stuff, draw new pretty diagrams, and paint new artwork? To me, half the codex of fluff is half the value of the book; I get it that some people think that half is wasted paper. So they should either suck it up, or play another game!.

You clearly lack a basic understanding of how free rules and good rules drive sales. The irony is that a model company should understand this perfectly but GW don't.

Corvus Belli's online rules don't have all the art and fluff, if you want those you buy the books. In my experience almost everyone does anyway but it lowers the barrier of entry and allows people to try before they buy.

Good rules then encourages people to buy when they try.

And the best part is when players don't have to fret over rules like in 40k they can let their creativity lead the way. There is no hesitation about if a fluffy all jump pack list will be unfun to play because you'll be at a disadvantage. No one complains if you love a model like the wraithknight and bring 4 of them.

If you're still not convinced just look at CBs growth. In the same years GW has has been cutting costs to the bone Corvus Belli was growing 75% year on year.

@jonolikespie - not to dismiss your points, bud, but I gotta get modelling on my latest BA tactical squad, so I must keep it brief

Your points are not without merit, though I still don't see why anyone would waste their valuable time repeatedly attacking the same company on the same things week after week. It's just mind-boggling to me. I think Kilkrazy's point is more apt, though, as what you've described might deter stores from selling GW, but less so individuals from buying GW.

As a parallel, Walmart treats its employees horribly, yet is one of the largest retailers in the USA. Apple treats its app vendors like gak, yet it remains one of the most popular mobile platforms.

It's not that I don't understand how the "free" model works, I just don't agree that it makes any sense. I own Corvus Belli (yes, all the rulebook versions). But I can't imagine downloading them and theorizing whether it would be a good game before I bought it. Much more likely, I'd ask the guy at the FLGS what he thought, and I'd ask what other players thought, maybe I'd read a review online -- and then I'd just buy the book. I can't even imagine reading a rulebook without the context of the fluff. To me, the value of that really is zero.

However, I do see that a rulebook UPDATE for free would be valuable, especially if it were minor changes only.

Anyways, sorry, man, gotta go -- too much time on forums tonight... will chat with you another time!

 jah-joshua wrote:
sorry, mate, i don't think i am being wilfully blind, or a White Knight...

I wasn't referring to you.

 jah-joshua wrote:
no need to be so snarky...

There is every reason to be snarky. It's part of my charm.

 Talys wrote:

1. A single person making all the decisions has way less overhead than a large company doing a lot of stuff. Why does the lone programmer cost less per hour than someone with less skill at Accenture? Why does a solo homebuilder/contractor cost less than a large construction company? Why does an independent electrician cost less per hour than the big company that wires up the condo building? There are economies of scale, yes. But generally speaking, a 1-man show is much more efficient than a large corporation with many mouths to feed. The 1-man show can win out on everything except the basis of scale and certainty. If the one guy gets hit by a bus or wins a lottery, that line of products has a good chance of ending.

That's maybe how it works in plumbing because of the low overheads, but not in manufacturing. GW, with it's hundreds of employees and in-house everything can do everything for a much lower unit cost than a one-man band that likely has to outsource some design work, master casting, mould making, production, bases, packaging and then pays full whack on everything else.
GW has in-house casting, design, moulding, production, packaging and distribution.

If GW was expensive because it was big, then wouldn't it just split into smaller companies?

2. Size of catalog has EVERYTHING to do with detail quality, production quality and price:

- It's MUCH harder to make a hundred plus new models a year designed by a team of people over 30+ years to be consistent in theme, continuity, and quality, than a couple of models each year designed by 1 guy.
- As you use molds, they degrade. The more times you use it, the poorer the cast. So small run companies (like Forge World) will have fewer mold lines and better casts than mass produced product.
- A large catalog is really expensive to produce, stock and distribute. The easiest way to save on prices is to have fewer SKUs, and sell more of a smaller number of sets.

Again, not how it works. It's much easier to produce 100+ new guys when you've got a 30 year back catalog to work from, especially since you can take the armatures or digital files for the bulk of them (space marines) and modify them. Do you think it's a co-incident all the Marine parts are interchangeable or is it likely they all use the same stock torsos?
GW also has a team of folk, so the little guy has no advantage there.

Moulds degrade, sure, depending on the complexity of the model, but good casters will reject the mould and get a new one made when they need it. Since GW can do it in house whilst most smaller shops have to send them away, GW saves costs and turnaround. The mould maker will also want a profit, and there's shipping overheads, nether of which GW has to deal with when getting moulds made up by Dave in the next room.

Large catalogs are expensive to maintain, and inventory has a cost (which is why GW is driving down the SKU count - they need to have less stock sitting on shelves). But there are many one-man bands, particularly in historicals, who easily have as many SKU's as GW does. Look at what Tumbling Dice or Hasslefree stock, or West Wind (though there#s 6 of them). For a bigger operation, have a look at the Foundry catalog and be stunned at how small the GW collection is.

Warlord Games are producing nearly as much new stuff as GW does on a monthly basis, whilst being much smaller (There's only about 10 of them).

Herzlos wrote:


Warlord Games are producing nearly as much new stuff as GW does on a monthly basis, whilst being much smaller (There's only about 10 of them).

Warlord are an interesting comparison. I think it's great what they do, altho it's not necessarily to my tastes, but the price of their terminator box set is hardly any different to the Space Hulk I've just finished painting.

their historicals make GW look overpriced, but they are a low overhead company, with 50 employees. GW is a high-overhead company, with a network of shops, many in expensive locations, and they are, unfortunately, publicly owned, which encourages a short-term mindset - it's a known problem with British businesses.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Herzlos wrote:


Warlord Games are producing nearly as much new stuff as GW does on a monthly basis, whilst being much smaller (There's only about 10 of them).

Warlord are an interesting comparison. I think it's great what they do, altho it's not necessarily to my tastes, but the price of their terminator box set is hardly any different to the Space Hulk I've just finished painting.

Yeah the Terminator game is costly on a per mini basis compared to the historics, but remember they are also paying license fees on it. Ditto with the Judge Dredd game; it's a bit expensive, but then it's all metal minis under license.

their historicals make GW look overpriced, but they are a low overhead company, with 50 employees. GW is a high-overhead company, with a network of shops, many in expensive locations, and they are, unfortunately, publicly owned, which encourages a short-term mindset - it's a known problem with British businesses.

I don't think Warlord has 50 employees, last time I visited they had about 4 industrial estate units and maybe 10, so maybe they've grown to 15-20.

Anyway, you're missing how economies of scale should work. Sure GW has expensive stores in expensive locations, and an expensive HQ, but they should be a smaller percentage of GW's costs than Warlords set up is to Warlord.

The fact that GW's stores cost them almost all of their profit is because of the way they are run, and not an occupational hazard of stores. Stores should make you money rather than losing it.

Warlord also don't do plastics in-house, I think they use Renedra. So they likely pay at least twice as much per sprue than GW does (giving Renedra a 50% profit margin), and they don't ship as many orders, so are probably in a lower shipping tier than GW, so will pay more there too. They also don't machine their own moulds (again, Renedra does it for them, with a 50% profit margin).

Well, I am pretty new to Warhammer 40,000. My boyfriend introduced me to it, and I've been mostly playing with his friends. I've played a couple of their other games too, but I have to say that the one that attracts me the most is Warhammer.

I'm not very good at painting yet, but I am getting better! Fidgeting with all the Orky bits is just wonderful fun. In the last 8 or so months, I've spent maybe $600 on models, and mostly I just steal my boyfriend's supplies! When it comes right down to the math, Warhammer is less than $80 a month, and we get a lot of fun out of it. I mean, geez, I spend more than that on one trip to the grocery store.

When I read through a few pages of this thread I saw that this was all about paint that went up a quarter (?), but when I looked online, they're still the same price, $5 here in Canada. I don't know how you guys can make such a big to-do over that, even if it did.

Now I guess I wasn't into this way back when it was really cheap, but looking at the prices today as someone new to the game (and the painting!), it really doesn't seem that expensive. We play once, sometimes twice a week, and I think the amount of money each of us puts in the kitty for pizza, wings, chips, popcorn, and drinks is more than the amount of money I spend at the hobby shop. When I compare it to the amount of money I spend on good old fashioned books, it's tiny. But I do really enjoy reading.

I'm not a rich person by any stretch. I am a professional photographer, mostly weddings, and I don't make bundles of money. Still, it seems Warhammer 40,000 is just not as horribly expensive as you all seem to make it. Am I doing something wrong? lol.

To put it into context, how much do you guys think is "normal" to spend on a game each month, anyways?

Anyways, my boyfriend no longer has a choice. He's has to practice Warhammer with me when I want to, so that I can get better and actually win without people cheating and throwing the game!

 Talys wrote:

 Korraz wrote:
Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a store that gives 25% off, though. In fact, around here the best a store can do is 10% off, or GW will stop supplying them.

But, you live in Austria. In the EU (and Canada/US) that is not legal. But in Europe, you can buy GW stuff off the Internet at 25% off, can't you?

Oh, you are completely right. They cannot forbid you from giving a 25% or higher discount.
What they can do however is to give you the advice to not to. Should you not heed this advice, it could happen that new product fails to reach you, on occasion. Not on purpose, of course, mistakes happen, we just didn't have enough to supply everyone. This might happen with increasing frequency. Then we might decide to end our contract with you for numerous reasons, none of which will be the fact that you undercut the GW up the street.

 Sidstyler wrote:

Also kind of a weird stance to take when you make such a big deal out of supporting the company, and your friends employed at said company. Buying retail supports GW more than buying online at a discount, and buying directly from GW's website supports them the most as they take all the profit from it. But whatever.

Had to be done

My one LGS doesn't offer a discount, they have a rewards program that equates to about 10%. I could go to discountgamesinc.com for my PP models and get 30% off but I'd rather support the local store because I can afford to. Now for my GW stuff I go to the other LGS who offers 20% off (doesn't carry much PP) but even then it's hard to keep up when I need 3 boxes of grave guard at 41.25 each to make a unit. I make it a point to support my LGS but I don't then demand more discounts.

AllSeeingSkink wrote: For me, GW has long passed the point of being worth my time and money. Though I still like 40k and would rather see it become something I would once again like to put my time and money in.

I'm starting to agree with you.

GW keeps pricing people out. For a while I stayed, I bought less often, but I bought. I KNOW this is an expensive hobby I KNOW if I want a cheap hobby to look elsewhere but I don't like cheap hobbies, I'm a PC gamer who wanted a kickass machine, I could have built one better than the XBONE/PS4 for cheaper but I didn't want better, I wanted amaze-balls 4k@60fps and was willing to pay for it. I'm a hockey goalie and if you don't know what that costs, well one of my gloves ranges between $200-$500. That's ONE GLOVE, not even a set.

So I was used to and OK with paying GW prices but it's at the tipping point and it comes at a critical moment. I'm a fantasy player and the price hikes at the same time as the insanely uncertain future of fantasy is just pushing me further away. I look at GW prices and look at PP prices or Wyrd prices or FFG with xwing or armada and I just can't justify paying GW prices anymore when there are so many competitors who are so much cheaper and I'm not alone. My local fantasy scene is down to like 4 players regularly (8 semi-regularly) and the local 40k scene is down to maybe 10 from like 30, yet the WM/H scene has grown to well over 30 in the same amount of time. GW may be big dog, they will likely stay there for a while, but they cannot keep on this course now that there's competition & competition that's growing fast.

Vyxen wrote:
When it comes right down to the math, Warhammer is less than $80 a month, and we get a lot of fun out of it. I mean, geez, I spend more than that on one trip to the grocery store.
...
To put it into context, how much do you guys think is "normal" to spend on a game each month, anyways?

To put it into some perspective, I've just started getting into the War Of The Roses (English Civil War circa 1450), using Perry miniatures. That $80 got me 118 multi-part plastic mini's, or an entire army of a pretty decent size. Throw in another $10 for MDF bases. It'll take me a couple of months to get them from sprue to tabletop.

The reason I use this example? The mini's are comparible scale to Warhammer (lots of folk use them as Bretonnians/Empire), in the same material, by the same sculptors, with a similar number of options. Yet the price is completely different.

Now, I love Warhammer too (I've got a large Dwarf force), but compared to other games in the wargaming hobby it's just so much more expensive.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

Herzlos wrote:


Warlord Games are producing nearly as much new stuff as GW does on a monthly basis, whilst being much smaller (There's only about 10 of them).

Warlord are an interesting comparison. I think it's great what they do, altho it's not necessarily to my tastes, but the price of their terminator box set is hardly any different to the Space Hulk I've just finished painting.

their historicals make GW look overpriced, but they are a low overhead company, with 50 employees. GW is a high-overhead company, with a network of shops, many in expensive locations, and they are, unfortunately, publicly owned, which encourages a short-term mindset - it's a known problem with British businesses.

Thing is, being a high overhead company (which I totally agree with, it's the main source of their issues and the reason why at this point they couldn't change even if they wanted to) is totally GW's fault, probably as a result of being run by a greedy former taxman for the last 20 ish years, rather than someone with a little more relevant knowledge and experience.

It isn't a problem inherent to the model making industry, unlike other industries which may rely on low margin, high turnover approach as standard, it's just a symptom of bad management prioritising total control over efficiency and flexibility.

As for the price of Terminator vs Space Hulk, would you agree that, rather than Terminator being notably expensive, that Space Hulk is at least in the ball park of what boxed mini games cost? The top end, sure, but not as far out of whack as some of their other products.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jah-joshua wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
So much fallacy so little time.

There's quite a bit here, and I'd normally multi quote and respond to each point, but it's late and I'm tired, so..

Whoever said the thing about the legality of GW refusing to supply third parties who deep discount? Don't be so naive. They don't refuse to supply on those grounds, they find some other reason, manufacture one if needed. I think one could even argue they've made wholesale changes to their Trade Terms in order to get the result they want. I can't decide against employing a woman on the grounds that she is female, or not attractive, or any other gender reason. I simply declare I don't feel she'd be a good fit in the company and unless I'm an utter moron and spew the real reason everywhere, no one can prove any different.

Secondly, the point several have made about "prices aren't important, I don't pay RRP." For heavens sake, basic maths people! 20% discount on £50 is still a greater total than 20% discount on £45, just because you've convinced yourselves that you've somehow mitigated the cost doesn't mean you're unaffected.

Incidentally, these are price rises on products that are produced, designed and manufactured for approx 1/4 of RRP. Double the traditional retail mark up. These are also prices that, in the main, are derived from petrochemicals, when the price of crude is at a decently low price, and lower than it has been than over the last several years. In addition to all this, this is a price rise when UK inflation is in the negative for the first time in over half a century.

There is no justification for the rise outside of GW's inefficiencies, inadequacies or greed, all masked under the guise of giving Malibu Stacey a new hat.

Finally, GW IS NOT A HOBBY!

feeling a little bit condescending and dismissive today, Az??
that post seems a bit harsh...

Highlighted part should have been your first clue, but it is natural to demonise people with opposing views to your own I guess.

 Azreal13 wrote:

As for the price of Terminator vs Space Hulk, would you agree that, rather than Terminator being notably expensive, that Space Hulk is at least in the ball park of what boxed mini games cost? The top end, sure, but not as far out of whack as some of their other products.

Definitely. Retail* for Space Hulk is a big higher than most games, but it's not outlandish (I paid about the same Super Dungeon Explore).

I think we can all agree that GW's starter box sets are usually good value for money (Assasinorium and dreadfleet excepted), it's just everything else that seems expensive.

*Of course, making it a limited release meant the 3rd party prices were insane, making it seem even worse. £70/£75 for a giant boxed game isn't too far out there, but £140 is nuts.

I'll just pop in to say a few things that have been mentioned already but bear repeating:

Games Workshop products are roughly equal on a per-model basis to its competitor warmachine and some others, but on the whole since you need more models to play the game that still results in Games Workshop being more expensive. This makes it harder to access, and less popular than perhaps it should be. They could make them cheaper, sure. They could also give everything away for free. And don't take that the wrong way---I'm not saying it'd kill them to lower their prices, but I really don't know if lowering their prices would actually solve their problems.

In my opinion, after all of the costs that Games Workshop seems to have cut in recent years, and the fact that almost everything they sell has a near-infinite shelf life, the only way I can imagine they're losing money is in all of the production of new content they've been doing. Plastic isn't cheap, but both creating a detailed miniature, breaking it down into a sprue in a way that's practical, and then creating a new mold for it may not be the cheapest thing to do. And since they seem to be going at it faster and harder than they ever have before, this may all just be one big investment, in which case, hats off to Games Workshop, because I am completely on board with that.

The final report before the accelerated release schedule really kicked off had the cost of sales at ~24% IIRC. This report was also the first to include all the development and design costs as part of the cost of sales rather than a separate item in the financials.

The most recent report showed a mild increase in cost of sales as a percentage (~26% IIRC) and as that percentage is expressed as a fraction of their revenue, which fell, but in actual fact the difference in actual cash is only a few thousand pounds.

So, no, GW aren't spending any notable amount more on making product now than they were under the old release scheme.

Plastic is also very cheap, but I assume you mean that the production of plastic kits isn't cheap, which is a thought that kind of hangs over from years ago. A HIPS kit still requires the most up front investment to produce, but one also has to reconcile that with the fact that GW owns all their own equipment and staff, so they are paying the least it is possible to do so in order to make them. One only has to look at the recent increase in single mini plastic clam packs to understand how cheap plastic production must be for GW now, even at their prices, the volume of those model's sales is not going to be huge, players need perhaps two at most of many, and collectors no real compelling reason to buy more than one, yet GW obviously feel the returns are sufficient to justify he investment.

GW are currently struggling with a combination of falling sales and a dearth of things left to cut from the variable costs, the increased production doesn't seem to be a significant factor at all.

The points inflation is really having a significant impact on the accessibility to the game as well. What we've seen with the most recent releases having formations that offer the next step in the continuum- giving units free upgrades to units, therreby allowing you to cram even more things into the same list.

Both 3rd and 7th edition 40k are the same mid-size battle game, except the army for 7th is probably about twice as big for the same points limit. Are you really getting that much more enrichment from dumping the extra models on the table? I would hazard a guess that most of us really aren't, so we're stuck paying more and more money for the same game. And I don't think that's a pill a lot of people want to swallow anymore.

Herzlos wrote:

Vyxen wrote:
When it comes right down to the math, Warhammer is less than $80 a month, and we get a lot of fun out of it. I mean, geez, I spend more than that on one trip to the grocery store.
...
To put it into context, how much do you guys think is "normal" to spend on a game each month, anyways?

To put it into some perspective, I've just started getting into the War Of The Roses (English Civil War circa 1450), using Perry miniatures. That $80 got me 118 multi-part plastic mini's, or an entire army of a pretty decent size. Throw in another $10 for MDF bases. It'll take me a couple of months to get them from sprue to tabletop.

The reason I use this example? The mini's are comparible scale to Warhammer (lots of folk use them as Bretonnians/Empire), in the same material, by the same sculptors, with a similar number of options. Yet the price is completely different.

Now, I love Warhammer too (I've got a large Dwarf force), but compared to other games in the wargaming hobby it's just so much more expensive.

To give another perspective, I gave up 40K when 6th edition came along, partly because of the direction the rules were going and partly due to cost. If I wanted just to continue playing the game I would have to buy new rules and two codexes for my two armies, this would have cost £110 without any money spent on new unit models. So it came to the point that I could get more fun and variety from more games for less money by not continually paying to maintain my 40K stuff on the new GW upgrade cycle.

With the release of the new Assault Marines, you can now buy about 100 Perry Bros plastic historicals for the same as only 10 space marines. You can make entire large historical armies for the price of a sub-1000 point 40K "army". People still say it is good value for money.

That is one viewpoint and mine is different. They are both personal, of course.

 Talys wrote:
There are many optional adornments like belt accessories (pistols, pouches, grenades, knives, etc), banners, pelts, auspex or iron halo -- some have a game function, others are cosmetic.

It is one of my pet peeves for people to list these add-ons as value added. Disclaimer: I am a modeller first. I convert heavily. I USE THE EXTRA STUFF THEY GIVE ME.

Even so: I have HEAPS of unused pistols, pouches, grenades knives. IMHO, these things are almost entirely worthless, and they make up 30% of the "value added" bits provided. In their virgin form they are too large to fit on the model without making your model look like he's carrying a load of luggage. The pouches in particular barely fit on between the torso and the figure's arms. Holstered pistols are gigantic and awkwardly bulky. Whenever I use them, I have to shave down the pouch about 30% to get a better fit. I have not seen ANYONE use the knives. They sheathed knives are scaled so when glued to the waist they are only slightly smaller than a sword. Marines carrying 2 handers won't use the regular knives, and sgts usually have a ccw/pistol loadout.

My biggest beef is with the included tabbards. I haven't figured out a way to glue this on without it looking like the Marine has a piece of bent steel plating glued to his crotch. These all get chucked into the bitz box... The models where the tabbards are attached to the torso is the better way of doing it.

Things like weapons and in-game options: I understand GW's logic behind the moar weapons moar monies approach, but the additions are getting ridiculous. Soon we'll have portable vortex generators(tm) and twin-linked tempest bovine launchers(tm). All included in the base kit to justify the $10 price increase. Since these are necessary for the customer to use the product as the unit it represents... it's represented the move from "pay to play", to "pay more to play".

Things like alternate heads, shoulderpads, chestplates, purity seals, banner tops: I like and use these, but I have mixed feelings about them making them a "must buy" part of the kit. They don't give enough of the good gubbins for the heavy converters (specialty pieces usually 1 per kit) and give too many gubbins for players who don't care. I think that these would be best moved onto a "conversion sprue" and let modellers buy as many as they want. Right now, the only ways to stock enough parts for conversions is 1: Trade for the sought after bits... (Good luck! They are sought after!) 2. Try your luck with a bits reseller... 3. Buy kits as necessary to get the parts!!!! It took me ages to get enough studded shoulders to complete my MKVI squads. In 4th ed... the only way to get a second assault cannon was pretty much to buy a terminator kit. Nobody I knew had one for trade because everyone used them! Need to trade for thunderhammers? Out of luck... everyone uses their thunderhammers.

I posted a few years ago that GW could have easily controlled prices by selling base kits and conversion kits separately. This could have the bonus of making the base kit cheaper than it is now, but the combined kit more expensive than it is now. e.g. buy a rhino, and then buy an "artillery upgrade" which comes with the whirlwind and vindicator sprues. It would also break the expensive purchases into separate chunks re-enabling impulse buying.

Those skitarii walkers... Kind of wanted to buy. The new Talos? Kind of wanted to buy. The price point stops any impulse buying right in its tracks.

 Sidstyler wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
i am not effected by a 5 Squid price rise

But it's five whole squid! Do you know how much fried calamari you can make with that?

You obviously missed the Tyranid infiltrator.... those 5 Squid are the unit....

The Auld Grump

As always, my problem is twofold:

1) The rules for 40k are, as far as gaming rules go, pretty bad. There's a lot of unclear things (see YMDC) and lots of "RAI vs. RAW" arguments that all but require deciding before the game how to handle things. This in itself isn't bad as it does allow creativity (I play Warmachine and I sometimes do lament how things that should work a certain way don't because reasons), but not when the rules are $85 and a Codex (assuming you don't buy the supplements and extras) is $50; that's a lot of money for rules that need to be "interpreted" and can differ from game to game depending on how your opponent interprets it, and cause conflicts if I feel that the rule means X and my opponent feels the rule means Y.

2) I played during the end of 2nd edition and the start of 3rd edition, so I've seen the game grow from being roughly company level to what it is now, while prices have skyrocketed. This is probably the worst part because you need a lot and it costs a lot, so you are double-dipping (compare to many historical games where if you need a lot the figures are cheap, or smaller games where you don't need a lot and the figures are more expensive) which just feels like you're being taken advantage of.

GW doesn't help with their lousy boxing schemes such as putting 5 models in a box, providing extra crap that won't get used but making you buy a second box to get the all the parts you want (e.g. 4 of the same heavy weapon for a Devastator squad) or making it very costly to field a full unit (e..g Assault Marines, Sternguard) while at the same time the rules making it so you want to field that full unit by making the half unit extremely lackluster. Again, from a playing perspective that makes you feel like you're getting cheated, because while a collector (for example Talys or jah, not to single them out) might be okay with 5 Assault Marines they can customize, but a gamer wants the most bang for their buck and usually that's 10 with specific options that often aren't provided in one box deliberately to get you to buy multiple boxes. Again, if the boxes were reasonably priced this wouldn't be as big a deal but at the price point they are, it feels like robbery. $41 for a box of Space Marines isn't that terrible, but when I realize that I want 10 and the box only has 5, now I have to spend $82 because reasons. That's harder to swallow.

That's always been my issue. It's the nickle and diming and deliberately not including options to get you to buy another box that pisses me off because it inflates the cost of already-expensive figures for no reason other than they can get away with doing it.

If I wanted a fluffy Space Marine army, it would probably cost twice as much as it should because of that kind of gak.

I don't deny that I might enjoy 40k, but it's not worth putting that much money into it on the change I might and still knowing that the company treats me like a rube.

 Talys wrote:

Jehan-reznor wrote:Talys and jah-joshua yes we know you don't mind the prices, and it that it is great value to you.

But the fact of the matter, the amount of people that consider it great value is shrinking, with so many other kickstarter and game systems (Start Wars Armada and x-wing, imperial assault will surely get an upswing after the movie release in December). The gaming world stage is changing, If GW doesn't change their modus operandi others will swing in and claim dominance.

I'm happy that people find other games entertaining, I really am. I am likewise happy for people who enjoy golf and baseball, despite that I can't stand either, and I hope their sports and games that I have no interest in thrive. Yet, some people have a venomous attitude towards GW, when their only crime is that they have a different vision of what a product and game should be (for example, a playable model collection, rather than a competitive tabletop sport).

It seems some people don't understand how anyone could possibly enjoy 40k as a game or 40k modelling as a hobby, or feel that 40k miniatures, despite their high price, are still the nest value in collectible scifi armies. You know, things that are an opinion and a matter of personal taste.

But the part that gets me the most is that some people like to argue GW and their products suck and yet they complain that GW's prices are way too high. I find this duality hilarious, because if you believe this, what does it matter how cheap or expensive their product is, if it sucks? I mean, I wouldn't play a bad video game regardless of price, so why would I spend a zillion hours on a hobby I didn't like?

I likewise don't understand the attraction to bad free rules, or even GOOD free rules. I mean, I want the company to succeed, and if they just write rules for free, where is the revenue derived from? What is the incentive to write new stuff, draw new pretty diagrams, and paint new artwork? To me, half the codex of fluff is half the value of the book; I get it that some people think that half is wasted paper. So they should either suck it up, or play another game!

At least I'm defending something I like. I can't imagine bothering to give my time to debate a subject on a game I didn't like or didn't feel or would never return to. If I have no intention of playing or collecting 40k, what do I care what robot pope costs, or if the latest codex is printed in 2 years or 10, or whether a $200 limited edition book is insane? Certainly, I could never imagine in my wildest dreams coming back *every week* on every new release to criticize the same company

H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Talys wrote:
Though no doubt it is only in the alternate reality pocket dimension in which I live.

Admitting you live in an alternate dimension is the first step towards phasing back into reality.

I was just stating observable science -- just as the earth is a spheroid , I exist in a special transdimensional reality. It must be so, because how else is it that our group keeps on having a blast playing 40k year after year? To me, 40k has always been the ultimate nerd pastime, lol.

While I disagree with you on a number of your ideas/opinions - aloe me to comment on just one of them. Spartan games had every single one of their core game rules - as well as their army specific rules free. They have been for some time. While they may not get revenue from those rules/army downloads - they constantly revise and tweak them in order to balance the game. I dare say their firestorm games are THE MOST balanced games out there rivaling dropzone commander. In fact there was a large recent update to the rules to include a new batch of guys they put out - and we are expecting even more to be added as they add more to there games with very little power creep.

I am not going to say that I hate 40k. I have a sizable custom space marine army that is all in heresy army and vehicles. Be that as it may - I have not played in a long time due to the price increase and the overwhelming power creep of certain items.

It's a little unfair to judge a company if they give out free things and then say that they will have no motivation.