Hi all,

I, perhaps, take too much of a perverse pleasure in this sort of news, but it has come to my attention that all unsold copies of Dreadfleet - at least in this part of the world - are to be removed from sale, collected and then destroyed. It appears the all-too-high-price point for this failure of a game has reached the level where GW knows they cannot sell any more and thus have decided to cut their losses. Space Hulk it was not, and when your main target is 8-12 years olds it turns out that nostalgia over Man'O'War, a game that doesn't even count as a 'Specialist Game' isn't a great selling point.

They did a similar thing after 4th came out, sending all the left over 3rd Ed boxes (and all those plastic Marines and Land Speeders) to landfill.

Make of it what you will, and, again, it may be a GWOZ only thing, but there you go. Anyone who is still craving a Dreadfleet fix might be able to find one in our scattered network of gaming stores (assuming you can find one of them), but otherwise Dreadfleet is leaving our shores, so to speak.

Last I heard it had sold out elsewhere. Oz seems an area where GW's not doing as well, for perhaps understandable reasons.

there already gone in the uk stores

Lar'shi wrote:there already gone in the uk stores

And yet it's still available on both the UK and US webstores...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1350015a

It's a shame that it didn't do well, since it's actually a great deal of fun.

warboss wrote:

Lar'shi wrote:there already gone in the uk stores

And yet it's still available on both the UK and US webstores...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1350015a

EDIT: Well they're still on sale, meh

At $190AUD that's the equivalent to just over $200USD or just under £130.

Now understand why they don't sell here.

Besides, having all your copies sitting in your central distribution hub is probably more sesible than having all your copies scattered around the country in stores gathering dust.

Not to mention people are using Space Hulk's minis doubling as cheap plastic character models. Cant do the same without dread fleet now they removed Man of War

ArmorOfContempt wrote:It's a shame that it didn't do well, since it's actually a great deal of fun.

It's a spin off of the less popular line whose minis have no use outside of it's niche game. I only played prior editions of Space Hulk twice and frankly didn't like it much... but I bought two copies of the most recent version right when it came out. Even if I never play Space Hulk again, I've still got a counts-as-Deathwing army and a fellow local player has tons of unique Ymargl (sp?)genestealers in his Nid army. I can't say I'm surprised that it didn't sell like hotcakes.

warboss wrote:

ArmorOfContempt wrote:It's a shame that it didn't do well, since it's actually a great deal of fun.

It's a spin off of the less popular line whose minis have no use outside of it's niche game.

So what? It's a complete game in a box, and a damn fun one at that.

I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Destroyed? That's just...odd. Although first thing I thought of (Gaming company destroying its own product in shame);



/How in the hell do I get out of this pit!!

ArmorOfContempt wrote:

warboss wrote:

ArmorOfContempt wrote:It's a shame that it didn't do well, since it's actually a great deal of fun.

It's a spin off of the less popular line whose minis have no use outside of it's niche game.

So what? It's a complete game in a box, and a damn fun one at that.

So is UNO but that doesn't mean it'll sell to the larger portion of players who use cards to play poker. My point was that one of the reasons Space Hulk sold so well (and quickly) was that the contents were usable in the most popular game line they make (40k), not just in the niche game they were included with. The same can't be said of Dreadfleet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

IF the rumor is true, it's probably got to do more with some tax loophole/write off that will actually net the company more money than selling them at a discount.

AgeOfEgos wrote:
/How in the hell do I get out of this pit!!

Thanks for the laugh...I hadn't thought of that in years!

@Warboss i mean its already been recalled or at least from my local GW as there was a few copies then they got packed up and shipped of

Where on earth is "Recalling and Destroying" "cutting losses"?
Nobody can be that dumb to decide that it's better to spend the cash on destroying the stuff, rather than to cut the price in half and actually sell the stuff.

I think I'm going to check next week if the local store still has their mointains of Dreadfleet. They should have at least 20-40 copies left after my last count.

Edit: Hilarious typo

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Exactly.

Not only that, but they can't load them into a dude's basement and keep them for twenty years either.

Thank god. Dreadfleet was a horrendous idea.

Lar'shi wrote:@Warboss i mean its already been recalled or at least from my local GW as there was a few copies then they got packed up and shipped of

I believe they did the same thing with Space Hulk IIRC. They had the company stores ship back their remaining copies so they could just put them all in one place and sell/ship them from the webstore warehouse. With Spulk, though, I believe it only took 2 months before supplies got low enough to warrant them concentrating the game like that.

Korraz wrote:Where on earth is "Recalling and Destroying" "cutting losses"?
Nobody can be that dumb to decide that it's better to spend the cash on destroying the staff, rather than to cut the price in half and actually sell the stuff.

I think I'm going to check next week if the local store still has their mointains of Dreadfleet. They should have at least 20-40 copies left after my last count.

Didn't you get the memo? The only thing Games Workshop does is fail. Everything is a disaster, and the only times you're supposed to feel joy in your life is when they mess something up.

Quiet down white knight. We don't need you derailing the thread.

Are you positive on them being destroyed? Sounds odd. Shipping them back to the UK warehouse sounds more realistic.

The thing that makes me sad about this is it might make them decide to scrap future non-core games.

According to Harry and hastings they've had Blood Bowl set for next year, with 4 teams and everyhting you need packed into the box planned, with maybe rules for other teams not in the box.

If this kills that, and future, projects, it makes me sad, and the relish people have over this makes it sadder.

I was just at GW Scottsdale this Friday and they still had some copies... I'm still not sure if it's worth the 115 USD, and I'm someone that enjoys both miniature war games and pirate related items. I think my main problem with it is that the design of all the pieces are just too cartoon inspired for my liking.

-Loki- wrote:The thing that makes me sad about this is it might make them decide to scrap future non-core games.

According to Harry and hastings they've had Blood Bowl set for next year, with 4 teams and everyhting you need packed into the box planned, with maybe rules for other teams not in the box.

If this kills that, and future, projects, it makes me sad, and the relish people have over this makes it sadder.

Agree. Picked up a box at discount and a few extra ships and pieces of terrain of Ebay. Amusing little game and hope it would do OK. If this is as big a failure as it looks to be, GW will not try another game outside their core three games for another decade. Inquisitor was the last game that ended GW's "alternate game cycle" they use to have. That also was a disaster and everyone realized it when it came out. That was back in 2000.

At least Inquisitor had nice looking models to go with it.

my local store still has 4 dread fleets in stock and mine remains unbuilt all but the zandri, the rest is all going to go on a shelf in my games room

I have completely boycotted GW since the RoW and latest price rise shenanigans.

However, if GW dropped the price in Australia for Dreadfleet to about $100 I would seriously consider picking up a couple of copies.

This sort of game in a box is usually fun and I know I would have no worries getting others to play.

I would have bought it if it was cheaper. The models and scenery looked really good but not $200AU good. Why is GW so against discounting their products?

Also Dreadfleet isn't the only thing getting removed. Those fancy brushes, the WFB observatory thing and the Fortress of Redemption are all going.

Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability. The fun part about Man O' War or Battlefleet Gothic is that you could collect an entire fleet and then fight against other fleets in a campaign style setting. I didn't care for the weird 'one of each' approach to the ships that Dreadfleet took. If you could buy a High Elf or Imperial Fleet and Fight against the Sartosan Vampire Fleet that would be pretty cool and be a good tie in to the core fantasy game. The scenery, models, and table that they made for Dreadfleet were all really quite nice. It is too bad that they didn't market it very well.

In my opinion GW has really F'd up their IP for the WH Fantasy Universe lately. All the players I know hate 8th Ed. Fantasy. Storm of Magic is a just plain awful expansion to the game and for some reason everything is now glowing green or purple and covered in overpriced stupid looking monsters. I just hope they have the decency not to ruin the far superior 40k Universe IP.

If they were going to have a re-release of an older game, then Blood Bowl would be a much better choice. The thing about Blood Bowl is that it is still an excellent game with good models. I have a blast playing it using the current rules and participated in a league a few years ago. If they re-released the game, but included some remade Dungeonbowl or other pitch alternatives they would have a real winner on their hands.

Samwise158 wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability.

It wasn't meant to have it, they never said it would have it and never planned to do it. It's a boxed board game, like Space Hulk, Space Crusade, Hero Quest, etc.

If they lower the price rather then destroying it, that will lower the integrity of the game's name. As well as leaves a bad taste in the mouth of loyal customers that bought the game in the first place for the full price.

Korraz wrote:Where on earth is "Recalling and Destroying" "cutting losses"?
Nobody can be that dumb to decide that it's better to spend the cash on destroying the stuff, rather than to cut the price in half and actually sell the stuff.

I think I'm going to check next week if the local store still has their mointains of Dreadfleet. They should have at least 20-40 copies left after my last count.

Edit: Hilarious typo

Luxury brands (and GW sees itself as the Mercedes of mini games) will do that to maintain their exclusive status.Think of the ads you hear from time to time with prices so low we can't say them on the radio.

Even some licences will include clauses their stuff cannot be discounted to keep from the dollar store stigma.

-Loki- wrote:

Samwise158 wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability.

It wasn't meant to have it, they never said it would have it and never planned to do it. It's a boxed board game, like Space Hulk, Space Crusade, Hero Quest, etc.

And yet all the other examples you gave in fact DO have collectability and use beyond the game they came with... therein lies the difference and a possible reason for lower sales.

H.B.M.C. wrote:They did a similar thing after 4th came out, sending all the left over 3rd Ed boxes (and all those plastic Marines and Land Speeders) to landfill.

Why send plastic kits straight to landfill instead of melting them down to be recycled? If the costs of these materials are rising, GW should be more economical in situations such as this.

Deathly Angel wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:They did a similar thing after 4th came out, sending all the left over 3rd Ed boxes (and all those plastic Marines and Land Speeders) to landfill.

Why send plastic kits straight to landfill instead of melt the kits down to be recycled? If the costs of these materials are rising, GW should be more economical in situations such as this.

Because then you realize the cost for the actual material is $1, and the process of recycling it costs $3

Its not that it costs GW alot to produce no. It costs almost nothing ( material wise )

The problem with GW is, they don't know how to boost the revenue anymore, to the point of the few cents per product makes a large impact.
This is why their business plan is messed up to many people, people that thinks lowering price to boost sales volume, GW have no confident in that.
So what we end up now is cut store amounts, cut material cost, increase price for the people that will pay w/e anyways. ( a good example for this type of strategy is how SM accounts for 50% of sales )
In the same idea, they'll maximize the profit for those addicted GW, and forget the rest of unstable buying customers.

-Loki- wrote:

Samwise158 wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability.

It wasn't meant to have it, they never said it would have it and never planned to do it. It's a boxed board game, like Space Hulk, Space Crusade, Hero Quest, etc.

I think we all understand that it was never supposed to be a game that offered expansion, but many of us would have had more interest in it if it did.

And all the skull islands looked terrible as well.

I recall back in the day, GW Canada had a gajillion Epic boxsets in the warehouse, and were going to provide Dice for each table for 40k and WFB for the Grand Tournament. So what did they do?

Open up 80+ boxes, used the dice from Epic, and threw the rest out. Then again, back then, for staff, they used a 400 dollar a night hotel for Conflict Montreal for example. Seriously, we didn;t need to be in the Delta Continental, sure it was kitty corner to the event, but a crappy motel out in the burbs would have been fine lol. To no one's surprise, GW Canada doesn't exist anymore, though GW NA still sends its managers to Vegas what? 3 times a year on company dime? Haven't they heard of video conferencing?

Fat_Little_Ripper wrote:At least Inquisitor had nice looking models to go with it.

And GW is actually still selling them. I just purchased the Deathwing Space Marine as a project to convert and paint up just for kicks.

They also recalled any unsold megaforces yesterday.

Samwise158 wrote:

In my opinion GW has really F'd up their IP for the WH Fantasy Universe lately. All the players I know hate 8th Ed. Fantasy. Storm of Magic is a just plain awful expansion to the game and for some reason everything is now glowing green or purple and covered in overpriced stupid looking monsters. I just hope they have the decency not to ruin the far superior 40k Universe IP.

It's weird, because my circle of friends, who have been playing since 5th edition LOVE 8th edition fantasy. They think it's superior to other editions, because it's all about infantry and blocks of troops-not who has the scariest monster. I love 8th, and all the books coming out in hardcover are balanced. They are all fairly equal in power, yet still unique.

On topic of dreadfleet, we all stayed far away from that travesty. They can do whatever they want with the scraps.

Well thats what you get when 80% of your entire business model is based on sales of MARINES.... Sales of a wooden boat game are destined to be low......

Now if they made a one off campaign in a box with Marines vs Chaos or something like it would sell like hot cakes.... Interchangeable models, more marines etc....

Im not talking a new AoBR im talking about a space hulk type game based on 40k world.... But since that would actually make money, they go for the wooden boats idea instead

-Loki- wrote:

Samwise158 wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability.

It wasn't meant to have it, they never said it would have it and never planned to do it. It's a boxed board game, like Space Hulk, Space Crusade, Hero Quest, etc.

Perhaps it should have been sold through normal retail outlets then (i.e. Toys-r-us...or foreign equivalent). IIRC Space Crusade was a Milton Bradley partnership...why doesn't GW sell starter games through normal retail chains if they want to attract new players in the 8-14 age group? Sales are there, right? Heroscape being evidence of it...unless I'm wrong. (Should say Heroscape WAS evidence).

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:They also recalled any unsold megaforces yesterday.

With those, at least, they can just take the sprues an stick them into individual retail boxes.

And seriously, those who didn't get Dreadfleet are missing out. Dreadfleet, a few friends and some beers is a great way to spend an evening. It's a really, really fun game.

I’m not surprised Dreadfleet didn’t sell very well (especially in Oz).

I think the main issue was that it suffered from a case of confusion between being a boxed game and a miniatures wargame (large rule book and lack of snap-fit miniatures). Value for money was also an issue as it was priced fairly highly ($190AUD) and didn’t contain many miniatures.

Personally I think GW would have been better off with another skirmish game like Space Hulk or a re-release of one of their more popular boxed games (like Bloodbowl).

Personally I’m not surprised that unsold copies are to be destroyed. “Weird and wacky” decisions seems to be GW’s MO nowadays.

ArmorOfContempt wrote:

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:They also recalled any unsold megaforces yesterday.

With those, at least, they can just take the sprues an stick them into individual retail boxes.

And seriously, those who didn't get Dreadfleet are missing out. Dreadfleet, a few friends and some beers is a great way to spend an evening. It's a really, really fun game.

Included amongst the cut megaforces was also an outlier: the Empire Battalion was amongst the pile. Wonder who will be getting the next fantasy army book hmm?

BOK says Empire :'P

ArmorOfContempt wrote: It's a really, really fun game.

Yeah, we heard.

There are heaps and heaps of unsold boxes sitting on a snack-display case at my FLGS if anyone wants me to get them one before you won't be able to find this gem anymore.



On a more serious note - it would be interesting to me to find out the cost of destroying mountains of these games versus shipping them back to their respective warehouses. And would FLGS foot the bill for it? If so, then it wouldn't cost GW anything and it really is about saving face.

Well I guess if I really wanted to play Dreadfleet, now's the time to rush out and pick up a box. I wonder how many failures it will take GW to finally wake up and start using common sense? Or am I just wishing against hope?

LunaHound wrote:If they lower the price rather then destroying it, that will lower the integrity of the game's name. As well as leaves a bad taste in the mouth of loyal customers that bought the game in the first place for the full price.

Lots of companys do this. Davids Bridel owned a store(Pricillas of Boston) that just went out of buisness was just givin flack for spay painting unused Vera Wang wedding dresses (like 10,000$ + dresses) instead of giving them to charity. They did not want to devalue her name or other disginers names (infact they usally have contracts with other companys to do this, mabey has something to do with LoTR license).

I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

Grimgob wrote:

LunaHound wrote:If they lower the price rather then destroying it, that will lower the integrity of the game's name. As well as leaves a bad taste in the mouth of loyal customers that bought the game in the first place for the full price.

Lots of companys do this. Davids Bridel that just went out of buisness was just givin flack for spay paaainting unused Vera Wang wedding dresses (like 10,000$ + dresses) instead of giving them to charity. They did not want to devalue her name or other disginers names (infact they usally have contracts with other companys to do this, mabey has something to do with LoTR license).

Thanks, I was wondering if anyone understood my posts xD

maybe they just recalled them to save shelf space and will continue to sell them online.

tkrettler91 wrote:maybe they just recalled them to save shelf space and will continue to sell them online.

I would imagine they would have tons of copies left, over abundance even.

So much that it wouldnt feel like Limited Edition because it'll never sell out

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

It is unavailable from US GW.com.

I've had nothing but fun with the game, and so have the people I've played it with.

I don't think anyone outside the company really knows just how well it did, and I find the gleeful dancing on the supposed grave of the game distasteful. It's like people took dreadfleet as a personal insult. Did it spit in your cereal? Meh.

Mannahnin wrote:Last I heard it had sold out elsewhere. Oz seems an area where GW's not doing as well, for perhaps understandable reasons.

My FLGS has like four copies on 20% off.

newbis wrote:
I don't think anyone outside the company really knows just how well it did, and I find the gleeful dancing on the supposed grave of the game distasteful. It's like people took dreadfleet as a personal insult. Did it spit in your cereal? Meh.

No, but when a company is putting out over-priced, over-hyped games instead of tending to their major lines, it is going to draw the ire of people who are waiting for entire waves of their armies to be filled in (tyranids, anyone?). Some people may feel, 'Why are you scultping boats that no one wants to play with when you could be sculpting Thunderwolves?" or "You could be sculpting [insert your miniature here]."

Instead, they put full focus on this game and, from what I've gathered from forums and websites, it turned most people off.

ArmorOfContempt wrote:

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:They also recalled any unsold megaforces yesterday.

With those, at least, they can just take the sprues an stick them into individual retail boxes.

And seriously, those who didn't get Dreadfleet are missing out. Dreadfleet, a few friends and some beers is a great way to spend an evening. It's a really, really fun game.

I'm gonna (hopefully) trade some empire for a new copy, maybe my friends might like it... though they're not exaclty the miniature gamer sorts...though board games are an easier sell

The Osaka "official" shop still have boxes last time I checked at 15.500 yen each (150€/130pounds aprox) that will take time to sell so it might be a GWAUS thing only.

But then they still have metal blisters too so it might be possible that GWJP doesn´t care about getting back/buying back their product here. (To be honest I don´t know the clauses GW imposes on the local shops.)

M.

newbis wrote:It's like people took dreadfleet as a personal insult. Did it spit in your cereal? Meh.

More like this result is already foretold the first day it was launched.
Its like yes i told you so GW ( not that they'll ever hear it )

but dreadfleet never had the chance in the first place to sell like space hulk did.

-Loki- wrote:

Samwise158 wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability.

It wasn't meant to have it, they never said it would have it and never planned to do it. It's a boxed board game, like Space Hulk, Space Crusade, Hero Quest, etc.

All those had at least two expansions and supporting White Dwarf articles.



Anyway those saying that GW would rather destroy than have a sale that devalues their 'brand image' they are probably right. GW are obsessed with branding, it's common to many big companies. Except GW aren't all that big really, but the likes of Kirby want to give out the impression, or are genuinely deluded into thinking, they are running Apple.

GW used to have sales to shift old stock just like most shops. So the company certainly has changed, setting their prices as the level they do, refusing to discount any items and the constant talking themselves up as the 'world's finest miniatures producer' just seems all part of the same corporate delusion they are operating under - that they make boutique fashion accessories solely for the wealthy, not toys for a niche hobby market.

To explain further on brand image.

Those that originally bought dreadfleet in the initial release, we can consider them as the customers that GW makes money off.

Anyone that buys dreadfleet later now, are not the same type of customer base.

GW will not risk pissing off the alpha customer base to sell a few dreadfleet or else what do they do with the future releases right?

LunaHound wrote:

but dreadfleet never had the chance in the first place to sell like space hulk did.

Right. A game that rekindles an old passion and can even supplement their major line with its included miniatures, or a game that tries to find the niche that was Man 'o War at a price point that makes it difficult to justify the purchase, especially since it doesn't supplement anything? Give me Space Hulk.

nor did the people it was selling to ever even know of man-o-war

puma713 wrote:

newbis wrote:
I don't think anyone outside the company really knows just how well it did, and I find the gleeful dancing on the supposed grave of the game distasteful. It's like people took dreadfleet as a personal insult. Did it spit in your cereal? Meh.

No, but when a company is putting out over-priced, over-hyped games instead of tending to their major lines, it is going to draw the ire of people who are waiting for entire waves of their armies to be filled in (tyranids, anyone?). Some people may feel, 'Why are you scultping boats that no one wants to play with when you could be sculpting Thunderwolves?" or "You could be sculpting [insert your miniature here]."

Instead, they put full focus on this game and, from what I've gathered from forums and websites, it turned most people off.

I guess I just don't expect GW to cater to me.

The correct terminology is 'Dreadfleet scuttled'

It sounds like a GW ruse to make people buy it IMO.

newbis wrote:

I guess I just don't expect GW to cater to me.

I wouldn't consider it "catering to you" by them completing a codex worth of miniatures. That is not catering to anyone, that is fulfulling their obligations to their released rulesets.

George Spiggott wrote:The correct terminology is 'Dreadfleet scuttled'

It sounds like a GW ruse to make people buy it IMO.

Good luck selling it then . At the price they are asking I can get much better WW2 naval war systems with entire US Navy, IJN and RN battlefleets.

M.

PS: I concede that this real wargames are way more complicated than beer and preztles Dreadfleet, but if I want uncomplicated I already got 40K

LunaHound wrote:

newbis wrote:It's like people took dreadfleet as a personal insult. Did it spit in your cereal? Meh.

More like this result is already foretold the first day it was launched.
Its like yes i told you so GW ( not that they'll ever hear it )

but dreadfleet never had the chance in the first place to sell like space hulk did.

Again you have to wonder if those running the company understand the customers. It's like they said "Space Hulk was a board game that sold, lets make another board game".

But instead of just re-releasing an old game again they did something new that many people didn't want. Furthermore it seems, from some accounts, that they produced Dreadfleet in higher numbers than Space Hulk. But the difference is obvious, Space Hulk had huge nostalgia value, it was always going to sell. Even people who had bought it before were buying it again. But Dreadfleet was new, it had to sell entirely upon its own merits which is a bigger ask, it always is for any new game on the market. GW seemed to think people would buy it just because it has their brand name on it. Those people that bought it seem happy with it, but it was just never going to be a runaway success like Space Hulk particularly when GW stuck such a high price on it. Again thinking that because Space Hulk sold for £70 Dreadfleet would too. But nostalgia value has a habit of pushing people to spend more.

If they wanted another Space Hulk they should have done Warhammer Quest. People would have handed over £70 for that no problem. GW are probably going to convince themselves that Dreadfleet failed because of the economy, or because people don't want specialist games, or some other bulls--t meaning we won't see any more boxed games for a while.

Dreadfleet probably sold as well as it could considering the high price, the fact it's an unknown game, and the fact that GW did their usual "we're not going to have any publicity" trick - because that *always* works. Again the comparison with Space Hulk, the game sold partly on nostalgia value, many people knew roughly what to expect, if you want to sell a new game you have to 'sell' the game mechanics. None of the promotional material for Dreadfleet did this in any sort of detail. The just had lots of pretty pictures of ships and lots of talking about 'broadsides' and other nonsense jargon to sound cool, and then expected people to be fighting to give them money for it. The 'review' video on their own website was garbage.

Howard A Treesong wrote:GW are probably going to convince themselves that Dreadfleet failed... ...or because people don't want specialist games, or some other bulls--t meaning we won't see any more boxed games for a while.

Would be my fear as well, that the grey suits use this as the self fulfilling prophecy of specialist games not being popular and that they can use this costly venture to shut down any future efforts to produce new or stand alone games.

I'd personally love it if they rented out Epic, BFG, Seas of Blood and especially Blood Bowl to FFG. Let a company that they already enjoy a strong relationship with take those franchises and run with them.

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

This is from a GW store, so it's not false. But as I said at the start, it could be a GWOZ only thing, or just a GW thing, and not impact non-GW stores at all.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

This is from a GW store, so it's not false. But as I said at the start, it could be a GWOZ only thing, or just a GW thing, and not impact non-GW stores at all.

From my region they are "gone" from the GW Stores.

Adam LongWalker wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

This is from a GW store, so it's not false. But as I said at the start, it could be a GWOZ only thing, or just a GW thing, and not impact non-GW stores at all.

From my region they are "gone" from the GW Stores.

Same as my GW, but I know they are being sent back to the warehouse where ever that is or means

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:Last I heard it had sold out elsewhere. Oz seems an area where GW's not doing as well, for perhaps understandable reasons.

My FLGS has like four copies on 20% off.

Sure, but your FLGS isn't a GW. GW already sold them. There's no doubt that DF didn't sell out near-instantly the way Space Hulk did, but no one expected it to. SH obviously had a built-in market and cross-game applicable minis.

I suspect that any copies left unsold at GW stores are being recalled to be sold out of the warehouse. It seems strange to me that they'd destroy them in Oz, but it might have to do with shipping costs to send them back to Blighty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

This is from a GW store, so it's not false.

Huh? Does that mean that Oz doesn't have the tradition of GW store staff passing out (deliberately or in ignorance) misinformation the way the rest of the world does?

coyotius wrote:

-Loki- wrote:

Samwise158 wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the game was that it didn't have enough potential for expansion and collectability.

It wasn't meant to have it, they never said it would have it and never planned to do it. It's a boxed board game, like Space Hulk, Space Crusade, Hero Quest, etc.

Perhaps it should have been sold through normal retail outlets then (i.e. Toys-r-us...or foreign equivalent). IIRC Space Crusade was a Milton Bradley partnership...why doesn't GW sell starter games through normal retail chains if they want to attract new players in the 8-14 age group? Sales are there, right? Heroscape being evidence of it...unless I'm wrong. (Should say Heroscape WAS evidence).

They have priced themselves out of normal retail chains. Space Crusade, Hero Quest and Battle Masters were produced in co operation with Milton Bradley and were pretty cheap by GW standards. I remember when Battle Masters went on clearance for like $25 all my friends were buying multiple copies because the amount of minis you got for $25 was ridiculous.

Large chains like Wal mart actually dictate price to their supplier, and in Wal marts case demand a decrease in price every year. GW would never give up than kind of control.

Seems like a strange thing to put out misinformation about, hey Mann?

Mannahnin wrote:It seems strange to me that they'd destroy them in Oz, but it might have to do with shipping costs to send them back to Blighty.

This sounds plausible.

Andrew1975 wrote:

Large chains like Wal mart actually dictate price to their supplier. and in Wal marts case demand a decrease in price every year. GW would never give up than kind of control.

+1 GW tried to position their starting kits in Hipercor, the largest spanish retailer some years ago. Everything was pulled out from all the stores just after the "traditional" price raise, IIRC the deal didn´t last a year. I´m guessing the mother company was not happy with GW´s new prices that blocked (not very cheap) stock in stores.

M

H.B.M.C. wrote:Seems like a strange thing to put out misinformation about, hey Mann?

Not if the person is confused, misinformed (possibly innocently; may have misunderstood a joke) or just messing with you.

When I worked for GW I remember asking a senior manager why we didn't have sales to get rid of old stock (There was hundreds of pounds of stuff in the basement that was out of date) or ship it back to HQ for recyling/repackaging.

I was told that the shipping was too expensive to make it viable (fair enough) but that the reason for not having sales was that 'Stores have sales to get rid of old tat. GW does not produce old tat, ergo we can't have sales'.


I lol'd hard

So.... wrong thread, heh. Sorry!

puma713 wrote:

No, but when a company is putting out over-priced, over-hyped games instead of tending to their major lines, it is going to draw the ire of people who are waiting for entire waves of their armies to be filled in (tyranids, anyone?). Some people may feel, 'Why are you scultping boats that no one wants to play with when you could be sculpting Thunderwolves?" or "You could be sculpting [insert your miniature here]."

Instead, they put full focus on this game and, from what I've gathered from forums and websites, it turned most people off.

I'm going to continue to argue that I think GW is quite happy
with the rate at which they update armies. I think anything else
they do is done by extra labor they would just fire or cease to
contract work to should they stop working on those projects.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt a cessation of board games will
lead directly to a speed up of release schedules.

Anyway, I realize you're not making this argument directly
but rather responding to a post questioning the ire of posters
in this thread, but I thought I'd get that out there.

Kroothawk wrote:Are you positive on them being destroyed? Sounds odd. Shipping them back to the UK warehouse sounds more realistic.

I got told that they are being destroyed. Furthermore, a dude at a store actually told me that every GW-employee has to have a Facebook account and that they had to promote Dreadfleet as being limited til the end of this month.

So the limited product was now EXTRA limited!

The same thing is being done to WDs as far as I know. Everything that doesnt sell within timeframe X will be recalled and destroyed. However, that doesnt seem to be true so far, our GW is filled with old copies...

Flachzange wrote:I got told that they are being destroyed.

This is true.

Flachzange wrote:every GW-employee has to have a Facebook account and that they had to promote Dreadfleet as being limited til the end of this month.

This is not quite true; Every store has a Facebook account, not employee.

-Loki- wrote:The thing that makes me sad about this is it might make them decide to scrap future non-core games.
.

That's my concern as well. Whatever people thought of Dreadfleet, it represented the only real effort for GW to do something different (and take a risk) for the first time in years. If it fails, then sadly it means we are even less likely to see them trying to do the same thing again (and who knows what the next project may have been).

I can't understand them destroying them though - why not give them in bulk to someone like Rise (a music/entertainment store here in the UK that gets stuff on discount) or Book Ends? Sell it for $50, everyone sold there is a chance a new person will be hooked into GW and wargaming. The company has become increasingly reclusive over recent years, I think it's a terrible shame they don't try and sell board games through toy stores and the like any more.

Pacific wrote:

-Loki- wrote:The thing that makes me sad about this is it might make them decide to scrap future non-core games.
.

That's my concern as well. Whatever people thought of Dreadfleet, it represented the only real effort for GW to do something different (and take a risk) for the first time in years. If it fails, then sadly it means we are even less likely to see them trying to do the same thing again (and who knows what the next project may have been).

I can't understand them destroying them though - why not give them in bulk to someone like Rise (a music/entertainment store here in the UK that gets stuff on discount) or Book Ends? Sell it for $50, everyone sold there is a chance a new person will be hooked into GW and wargaming. The company has become increasingly reclusive over recent years, I think it's a terrible shame they don't try and sell board games through toy stores and the like any more.

Read the responses in page 2 and 3 on brand images.

For GW to lower the prices is to concede they over estimate the product. And for a company that actively boast on their superiority this is a no no.

ArmorOfContempt wrote:and seriously, those who didn't get Dreadfleet are missing out. Dreadfleet, a few friends and some beers is a great way to spend an evening. It's a really, really fun game.

I believe you. It did look fun. The single, sole reason I didn't but it was it was just too damn expensive. $120 dollars!!

It has no expandability, no tie-ins to any other games. Therefore, by definition, it is a board game - yes? Like Monopoly ($17), or Risk ($25). OK, so the rules are a little more strategic, though, so let's say it's then competing with other niche board games, like Last Night on Earth ($30), or maybe the Dungeons & Dragons board games ($44), or space combat games (which really are naval combat anyway) like Battleship Galaxies ($50) - and the former 2 actually do expand into other games...but the problem is prices, plain and simple.

In my opinion, they cannot exceed $60 for a standalone board game of that type. The only way to do that successfully is by banking on a known good franchise (Space Hulk), which they did not. I'd have bought this game for $60, no hesitation.


So far as why destroy them, I leave you with this.

Risk and Monopoly are really fun and really cheap. If we want we can also paint them up!

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:GW are probably going to convince themselves that Dreadfleet failed... ...or because people don't want specialist games, or some other bulls--t meaning we won't see any more boxed games for a while.

Would be my fear as well, that the grey suits use this as the self fulfilling prophecy of specialist games not being popular and that they can use this costly venture to shut down any future efforts to produce new or stand alone games.

I'd personally love it if they rented out Epic, BFG, Seas of Blood and especially Blood Bowl to FFG. Let a company that they already enjoy a strong relationship with take those franchises and run with them.

Indeed, giving the games over to FFG would benefit everyone. That company knows how to make fun things. Shame that GW doesn't seem to see that.

Flachzange wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:Are you positive on them being destroyed? Sounds odd. Shipping them back to the UK warehouse sounds more realistic.

I got told that they are being destroyed. Furthermore, a dude at a store actually told me that every GW-employee has to have a Facebook account and that they had to promote Dreadfleet as being limited til the end of this month.

So the limited product was now EXTRA limited!

The same thing is being done to WDs as far as I know. Everything that doesnt sell within timeframe X will be recalled and destroyed. However, that doesnt seem to be true so far, our GW is filled with old copies...

That's pretty common with magazines. What else are you supposed to do with unsold magazines other than pulp them? When White Dwarf was a quality magazine you could buy back issues, but they were only limited in quantity. The same is often true of books, although discount stores often buy them up.

Korraz wrote:Where on earth is "Recalling and Destroying" "cutting losses"?
Nobody can be that dumb to decide that it's better to spend the cash on destroying the stuff, rather than to cut the price in half and actually sell the stuff.

I think I'm going to check next week if the local store still has their mointains of Dreadfleet. They should have at least 20-40 copies left after my last count.

Edit: Hilarious typo

In accounting you can write off the value of the unsold units, declare them a loss, and set it against your profit for tax next year.

Example
It may sound stupid but if you are sure you'll never sell the units they are still sitting on your balance sheet and taking up warehouse space you have to pay for.

20,000 units of Dread Fleet with a nominal stock value of £25 each = £500,000

Destroy them and reduce your balance sheet by £500,000.

Pay £200,000 less corporation tax next year.

Will be fun to see the game appear on ebay the moment all copies are gone and then people will kick themselves for not getting it to sell.

Kilkrazy wrote:In accounting you can write off the value of the unsold units, declare them a loss, and set it against your profit for tax next year.

You're correct, but that's not an answer to what Korraz was asking. If you're writing off 500,000 pounds of stock for a 200,000 pound tax credit, you're still losing 300,000 pounds. He was asking why you wouldn't just sell them at a unit price of, say, 35 pounds to cover the costs of selling them, increasing your costs by 200,000 pounds but also gaining 700,000 pounds in revenue, and thus increasing your after-tax profit by 300,000 pounds over the "write them off" option.

Ouze wrote:

ArmorOfContempt wrote:and seriously, those who didn't get Dreadfleet are missing out. Dreadfleet, a few friends and some beers is a great way to spend an evening. It's a really, really fun game.

I believe you. It did look fun. The single, sole reason I didn't but it was it was just too damn expensive. $120 dollars!!

It has no expandability, no tie-ins to any other games. Therefore, by definition, it is a board game - yes? Like Monopoly ($17), or Risk ($25). OK, so the rules are a little more strategic, though, so let's say it's then competing with other niche board games, like Last Night on Earth ($30), or maybe the Dungeons & Dragons board games ($44), or space combat games (which really are naval combat anyway) like Battleship Galaxies ($50) - and the former 2 actually do expand into other games...but the problem is prices, plain and simple.

In my opinion, they cannot exceed $60 for a standalone board game of that type. The only way to do that successfully is by banking on a known good franchise (Space Hulk), which they did not. I'd have bought this game for $60, no hesitation.


So far as why destroy them, I leave you with this.

I've paid 75 USD for a stand alone board game.

Kilkrazy wrote:20,000 units of Dread Fleet with a nominal stock value of £25 each = £500,000

Destroy them and reduce your balance sheet by £500,000.

Pay £200,000 less corporation tax next year.

And then call it the 'Dreadfleet Bubble' in your next annual report, right?

Kilkrazy wrote:In accounting you can write off the value of the unsold units, declare them a loss, and set it against your profit for tax next year.

Example
It may sound stupid but if you are sure you'll never sell the units they are still sitting on your balance sheet and taking up warehouse space you have to pay for.

20,000 units of Dread Fleet with a nominal stock value of £25 each = £500,000

Destroy them and reduce your balance sheet by £500,000.

Pay £200,000 less corporation tax next year.

The thing is, they could accomplish the same write off and generate good will by simply giving the game away for free.

Yeah, lotr bubble, df bubble, fine cast bubbles, sigh

LunaHound wrote:Read the responses in page 2 and 3 on brand images.

For GW to lower the prices is to concede they over estimate the product. And for a company that actively boast on their superiority this is a no no.

Then explain to me finding Black Library books in The Works (a UK discount book retailer)?

GW dont control prices for books and video games

There's plenty of things I didn't like about Dreadfleet (which is why I didn't buy it), but part of me is glad they made an effort to do something new. Its existence didn't particularly offend me and I'm glad some people enjoyed playing it. Still, Blood Bowl next year, eh GW?

Regarding value, this is a funny thing as most things decrease in value as demand falls off (basic rule of economics) and I can't see how someone who bought a product on the initial release would be annoyed about it. I sometimes pay £10 for a DVD on release fully aware that in six months time I will be able to buy it for £3.

AlexHolker wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:In accounting you can write off the value of the unsold units, declare them a loss, and set it against your profit for tax next year.

You're correct, but that's not an answer to what Korraz was asking. If you're writing off 500,000 pounds of stock for a 200,000 pound tax credit, you're still losing 300,000 pounds. He was asking why you wouldn't just sell them at a unit price of, say, 35 pounds to cover the costs of selling them, increasing your costs by 200,000 pounds but also gaining 700,000 pounds in revenue, and thus increasing your after-tax profit by 300,000 pounds over the "write them off" option.

From the accounting viewpoint, the hypothetical 20,000 units are not £500,000 cash, they are worth £500,000 because that is what was paid to build them. GW can't pay their electricity bill with the units. The cash invested in them was spent and it's gone. It can only be got back by selling the units, if that is doable, or by writing them down to zero for the tax write-off.

What GW have to look at is what they can now sell the units for. If GW don't think they can sell the units at a sufficiently high price, it may really be better to destroy them. £200,000 reduction in the tax bill is better than losing some money each year, for ever, if the units really won't sell and are taking up space and insurance costs in the warehouse.

There are various possibilities why GW might prefer not to sell the units cheaply.

One is that GW do not want to devalue their brand by holding a sale. This would also apply to giving the units for free. The first thing that would happen is that everyone who bought a full price copy will be outraged.

Another is that it may not be profitable to sell the games at £35 (or whatever). It might cost £65, which is practically the price they aren't selling at now, so they wouldn't sell. I'm making up these figures for the purpose of illustration.

A third possibility in this case is that GW might be pulling the units back from Australia, where they are too expensive, to sell them in Europe at full price.

malfred wrote:

puma713 wrote:

No, but when a company is putting out over-priced, over-hyped games instead of tending to their major lines, it is going to draw the ire of people who are waiting for entire waves of their armies to be filled in (tyranids, anyone?). Some people may feel, 'Why are you scultping boats that no one wants to play with when you could be sculpting Thunderwolves?" or "You could be sculpting [insert your miniature here]."

Instead, they put full focus on this game and, from what I've gathered from forums and websites, it turned most people off.

I'm going to continue to argue that I think GW is quite happy
with the rate at which they update armies. I think anything else
they do is done by extra labor they would just fire or cease to
contract work to should they stop working on those projects.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt a cessation of board games will
lead directly to a speed up of release schedules.

Oh, I agree completely. But I'm not sure the average 40K gamer who is waiting and waiting and waiting for their model line to be completed understands this.

I liked the idea of Dreadfleet, but it just wasn't for me. Mostly the price + the fact that it was limited = forgotten in a year.

I like that GW took a chance, and I like that they redid Space Hulk, but IMO they really need to stop with these extra games and just focus on their main systems. And then give licenses to good board game companies like Fantasy Flight to make these side project games and specialist games too.

Personally I liked Dreadfleet, The game is enjoyable, and the models are something different to what I normally paint. I'm still in the process of painting it all up. I'll also say that for £70 you got plenty of stuff for the price tag. Better then purchasing £70 worth of guards men for my IG army.

Also it's still available on the UK site.

GW has a long history of destroying its products. Our local GW shop destroyed dozens of books because the BL section was being redone. These very same titles were then restocked a few weeks later.

I do not think that GWs actions prevents the devaluation of their brand. It shows that the product is trash. It does maximize the amount of money GW gets per unit of product sold. They would see it as a horrible thing if you could get your gaming fix for less money. Fortunately there are many other companies that produce products at a reasonable price.

It is sad that GW would rather scrap the games than actually market them and try to attract new customers.

I highly doubt they'll destroy them. I understand why they would, but I'd think they would do something a little more creative to get them off the books. They could be used for Games Day in some fashion. Prizes, Paint & Take... Something other than the bin.

IMO, coming off of a complete sellout of Space Hulk lead GW to reach a little too far with this game; overestimate its sales potential and produce far too many.

The whole situation is unfortunate because Dreadfleet really is a fun game.

-Loki- wrote:The thing that makes me sad about this is it might make them decide to scrap future non-core games.

According to Harry and hastings they've had Blood Bowl set for next year, with 4 teams and everyhting you need packed into the box planned, with maybe rules for other teams not in the box.

If this kills that, and future, projects, it makes me sad, and the relish people have over this makes it sadder.

Blood Bowl yes,about time!

I think Blood Bowl is a different ball game (I punned). It's like space hulk where it's always been popular and seems there's other fantasy football minis getting released so there's definitely more of an audience for it. I know I've always wanted to check it out, just never got to it but I'd definitely pick up the new box set if it comes out for reals.

Ouze wrote:

ArmorOfContempt wrote:and seriously, those who didn't get Dreadfleet are missing out. Dreadfleet, a few friends and some beers is a great way to spend an evening. It's a really, really fun game.

I believe you. It did look fun. The single, sole reason I didn't but it was it was just too damn expensive. $120 dollars!!

It has no expandability, no tie-ins to any other games. Therefore, by definition, it is a board game - yes? Like Monopoly ($17), or Risk ($25). OK, so the rules are a little more strategic, though, so let's say it's then competing with other niche board games, like Last Night on Earth ($30), or maybe the Dungeons & Dragons board games ($44), or space combat games (which really are naval combat anyway) like Battleship Galaxies ($50) - and the former 2 actually do expand into other games...but the problem is prices, plain and simple.

I am inclined to think there is more to the problem than just that. I realise that it's difficult truly to be objective about these things, but Dreadfleet floundered where Space Hulk succeeded because its mechanics failed to impress many boardgamers - see excoriating reviews on boardgamegeek.com by way of example. I don't doubt that nostalgia helped Space Hulk to sell, but its appeal also lay in its simple, uncluttered mechanics and fast, cinematic gameplay (incidentally, also Blood Bowl's strongest selling point). Now Dreadfleet's not a terrible game, but it's too fiddly and time-consuming (and indeed also too bloody expensive) for a beer and pretzels game, and vastly too random to be a decent tactical game.

I suspect, sadly, that the only lesson that Games Workshop will take from this debacle is that "boardgames don't sell", whereas what they need to learn is that badly-written, overpriced boardgames don't (unlike their wargames) sell just because GW released them; the market is just too crowded and competitive for that. It's also indicative of their corporate hubris that they didn't bother to promote the game at Essen Spiel or at Origins, unlike every other games company with a new release.

And yet it's still available on both the UK and US webstores...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1350015a

It still shows, but you cannot add it to the shopping cart. It is not available.

Destroying stock rather than storing it avoids taxes on inventory, costs of storage, etc. There are many good reasons to get rid of something from inventory if it won't sell. I know a lot of people who did buy the game wanted more ships though, they should pull the sprues and sell them separately. But there's probably not enough money in the time and labor involved so they'll just trash it and write it off.

They should do what I suggested originally and that's sell them to toy shops like toys 'r' us or the similar Australian equivalent.

This way they get some money back quick on them (if the sales goes ahead). They also potentially reach a new audience and so put there brand out a bit, all without so much as a tarnished brand.

Looks a lot better than throwing out good stuff, that they simply can't sell.

ceorron wrote:They should do what I suggested originally and that's sell them to toy shops like toys 'r' us or the similar Australian equivalent.

This way they get some money back quick on them (if the sales goes ahead). They also potentially reach a new audience and so put there brand out a bit, all without so much as a tarnished brand.

Looks a lot better than throwing out good stuff, that they simply can't sell.

Genius. But they'll never do it.

It was something they did some years ago, and with some success.

An MB Games/GW copy of Space Crusade was the way I got into wargaming, and got bitten by the 'bug', and I know it was the same for a lot of other people in my age group.

It's so sad that in this day and age it has never been so difficult to get into the games, and Dreadfleet was one of the few ways that didn't require you to sell a body part in order to experience a game.

Recalled? Possibly in Australia (units are being distributed in the UK to Stores, rather than be flogged via the website).

Destroyed? Evidence please!

BrassScorpion wrote:

And yet it's still available on both the UK and US webstores...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1350015a

It still shows, but you cannot add it to the shopping cart. It is not available.

Destroying stock rather than storing it avoids taxes on inventory, costs of storage, etc. There are many good reasons to get rid of something from inventory if it won't sell. I know a lot of people who did buy the game wanted more ships though, they should pull the sprues and sell them separately. But there's probably not enough money in the time and labor involved so they'll just trash it and write it off.

It did when I wrote that. I added both to US and UK shopping carts successfully before the post (sorry aussies, didn't check yours!). That has since changed though.

ArmorOfContempt wrote:It's a shame that it didn't do well, since it's actually a great deal of fun.

Whats the difference? Even if it was the most populr thing going they would deep-six it or relegate it to a forgoten corner on a whim as they have done with all the other great games (Necro, Gorka, etc.)

Take Necromunda for example: Even after all this time it is fondly remembered by most and has a fanatic cult following.

If they released a new Necromunda box set with new models and plastic terrain it would sell like you can't imagine to greybeards and newbs alike, but that would make too much sense...

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Recalled? Possibly in Australia (units are being distributed in the UK to Stores, rather than be flogged via the website).

Destroyed? Evidence please!

Whoa! Mad Dok's back And he's disagreeing with H.B.M.C. already

I saw three copies left for sale in my local GW today. I expect they'll shift within the next couple of months

Not disagreeing as such, just asking for clarification on the statement they're being destroyed.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Not disagreeing as such, just asking for clarification on the statement they're being destroyed.

Good to see you back anyway. Hope all is well

DF is getting the Stalin treatment. All mentions of it are to be purged and all perpetrators sent to liquidation centers.

If you remember back a few months ago where everything GW was nothing but DREADFLEET DREADFLEET DREADFLEET, then you must be mistaken.

I'll stick my neck out and say I loved Dreadfleet.

for £70 I got at least 20+ games out of it against various opponents. Each game averaged at least 2 hours.

40 hours entertainment for £70. In comparison a trip to the cinema is around £10 for me for 2 hours entertainment. 40 hours of cinema would cost me £200.

A brand new video game would cost me £40 for an average of 40 hour's fun before completion (think fallout 3 or eldar scrolls) but without the fun of painting. I know It's a strange way to justify dreadfleet but it stands up in comparison to other forms of entertainment. Plus, a boxed set with painted ship in good condition will see you earn your money back and probably with interest.

I did the same with space hulk, in other words had fun, and sold the game at a profit. WIN WIN

Flashman wrote:Good to see you back anyway. Hope all is well

He never went anywhere. Who he was though was a mystery.

I've been thinking about this, and the price isn't what kept it from selling super-duper-well. It's them trying the "Disney Vault" thing with something new. It worked with Space Hulk because it's an old, beloved property.

And this could have easily worked as an expandable game. Just introduce new boats, preferably in packs of two (one for each side). The boats all have stat cards and everything, so new books wouldn't be necessary.

I rarely saw anyone at the local Game Stores who had any interest in it. To me it just felt like something that was thrown out to make money and would be abandoned soon.

Dysartes wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Read the responses in page 2 and 3 on brand images.

For GW to lower the prices is to concede they over estimate the product. And for a company that actively boast on their superiority this is a no no.

Then explain to me finding Black Library books in The Works (a UK discount book retailer)?

Once something is in the hands of the 3rd party retailer like Barnes and Noble, Tesco or whomever they can (usually) dispose of them however they choose. Some properties might prohibit them from selling off their stock (I've heard that Star Wars has a prohibition like that) but apparently the BL does not.

Similarly your FLGS can sell off Dreadfleet at a loss, give it to Goodwill, or whatever.

Meh, clear weakness with Dreadfleet was the price combined with it not having any tie-ins or use in anything else. If they wanted a standalone game, they shouldn't have charged so much for it.

Pacific wrote:It was something they did some years ago, and with some success.

An MB Games/GW copy of Space Crusade was the way I got into wargaming, and got bitten by the 'bug', and I know it was the same for a lot of other people in my age group.

It's so sad that in this day and age it has never been so difficult to get into the games, and Dreadfleet was one of the few ways that didn't require you to sell a body part in order to experience a game.

GW will never do this as they loose too much control of the product and have to play by major retail chain rules, something they just outright refuse to do. Remember Milton Bradley released every GW licensed game that was ever in retail chains. This was never GW directly. GW does not do retail chains directly, black library is the closest, but black library is not the same as GW.

Harriticus wrote:Meh, clear weakness with Dreadfleet was the price combined with it not having any tie-ins or use in anything else. If they wanted a standalone game, they shouldn't have charged so much for it.

I believe that this is a nice, succinct summary of the issue. A couple of the ships interested me, and I would have considered buying it to play with my friend that doesn't like Warhamms (what kind of friend is that?), but I just couldn't justify the point cost.

Alkasyn wrote:
Indeed, giving the games over to FFG would benefit everyone. That company knows how to make fun things. Shame that GW doesn't seem to see that.

Given that FFG games tend to be 1) expensive 2) buggy

I am not sure how that would be an improvement...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puma713 wrote:
No, but when a company is putting out over-priced, over-hyped games instead of tending to their major lines, it is going to draw the ire of people who are waiting for entire waves of their armies to be filled in (tyranids, anyone?). Some people may feel, 'Why are you scultping boats that no one wants to play with when you could be sculpting Thunderwolves?" or "You could be sculpting [insert your miniature here]."

Instead, they put full focus on this game and, from what I've gathered from forums and websites, it turned most people off.

'Tis funny, because usually GW tends to get criticized focusing TOO MUCH on Space Marines.

For once, they released something which was not Space Marines, and were prompty reviled for it because people were expecting more Space Marines.

ShatteredBlade wrote:I rarely saw anyone at the local Game Stores who had any interest in it. To me it just felt like something that was thrown out to make money and would be abandoned soon.

To be fair, Space Hulk was the same way. Nobody expected further support for it, and it was really just thrown out there. However, people cared because it was an acceptable price with models compatible with 40k.

I just picked up an unopened copy of Dreadfleet for $70 last week. When it was first released sure I was intrigued, but it just wasnt worth $115 to me, although I did flirt with the idea of buying it from a discounter. Im actually really impressed with the kit. A friend and I are going to tackle putting everything together this week. To be honest, the oohing and aahing over the set at my weekly board games night has a couple of us close to starting up WFB.

Ive managed to keep away from WFB and 40k for ages; Space Hulk was the first purchase I had made in probably 5+ years. We'll probably never know how many units of DF were sold or unsold, I just hope that this does not discourage GW from putting out more standalone games like this. If the rumored 4 team Blood Bowl comes out and the contents are as nice as Space Hulk / Dreadfleet, I will almost certainly buy a copy. I would pay even more for them to make a Necromunda set. I dont think there is any reason they couldnt include 4 gangs (or even all of the original six, but I think most people could live without the Orlocks and Goliaths this time around). It would scream for a sequel/expansion though.

Why would GW recall them from independent retailers? They've already sold them to the retailer. They already have the money. They'll recall product from their own stores perhaps.

Prevention of price slashing. GW doesn't want to advertise its failed clearenced game, or let it be that one sitting on the shelf for years. They must maintain the prized limited reputation of these products even though they haven't got a clue what makes them appealing to consumers.

I should imagine that very few retailers bought it in bulk. Most of them don't drink the cool aid and it's expensive to stock. The resulting hype from it being removed will clear up the rest of the stocks, especially if the retailer is internet savvy.

I think some retailers might have thought it would quickly sell out or increase in value like Space Hulk did.

And Dreadfleet is no longer available on GW's US website, which lends credence to the rumors that they are NOT recalling copies in order to sell them in-house; destruction actually seems likely at this point

I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks. If they torch it, well...they can go wild. It isn't worth $115 to me-and even my friends who are nuts about warhammer thought it was a foolish idea and refused to take part in it-and they love 8th edition, storms of magic, and everything else current in fantasy-but Dreadfleet got the leper treatment. So, it can be torched-unless somebody wants to offer me a new copy for $50-then I'll take it. Just shoot a PM. For $50, I'll give it a try. Anything more, I'll spend on my Orcs or BT. If they ever release Bloodbowl though, we'll give that a try for sure-unless it follow the current sale prices and goes for $130. Then it can piss off too.

So can we officially call it Deadfleet yet?

timetowaste85 wrote:I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks. If they torch it, well...they can go wild. It isn't worth $115 to me-and even my friends who are nuts about warhammer thought it was a foolish idea and refused to take part in it-and they love 8th edition, storms of magic, and everything else current in fantasy-but Dreadfleet got the leper treatment. So, it can be torched-unless somebody wants to offer me a new copy for $50-then I'll take it. Just shoot a PM. For $50, I'll give it a try. Anything more, I'll spend on my Orcs or BT. If they ever release Bloodbowl though, we'll give that a try for sure-unless it follow the current sale prices and goes for $130. Then it can piss off too.

Yup, that about sums up my feelings on the matter. Both had really nice production value, but that doesn't mean they're worth the same.

Backfire wrote:For once, they released something which was not Space Marines, and were prompty reviled for it because people were expecting more Space Marines.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that “It wasn’t Marines” was not the reason people disliked Dreadfleet. It was more likely the absurd price point, disconnect with other product lines, and limited use or expansion factor. Yeah, not being a Marine release is going to be pretty far down on the list of Dreadfleet's faults.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:For once, they released something which was not Space Marines, and were prompty reviled for it because people were expecting more Space Marines.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that “It wasn’t Marines” was not the reason people disliked Dreadfleet. It was more likely the absurd price point, disconnect with other product lines, and limited use or expansion factor. Yeah, not being a Marine release is going to be pretty far down on the list of Dreadfleet's faults.

But...........Marines!

Honestly I don't know how WFB does it, they don't even have Space Marines!

HBMC has hit the nail on the head. To add further to his post regarding Dreadfleet’s faults, the amount and nature of the models was also a key issue. The box contained no where near the amount of models it should have ($165 for 10 models is ridiculous IMO). The miniatures weren’t snap fit and required assembly from a sprue like a proper GW kit (snap fit models are a must for boxed games).

Most of the people who bought Dreadfleet did so for the ships (in order to paint and display) rather than the game itself (they more or less acknowledge that they wouldn’t get many games out of it).

For the price you paid, what you got and how you could use it, Dreadfleet was a bad buy. Sure the game might be fun but it’s still a bad buy.

candy.man wrote:HBMC has hit the nail on the head. To add further to his post regarding Dreadfleet’s faults, the amount and nature of the models was also a key issue. The box contained no where near the amount of models it should have ($165 for 10 models is ridiculous IMO). The miniatures weren’t snap fit and required assembly from a sprue like a proper GW kit (snap fit models are a must for boxed games).

Most of the people who bought Dreadfleet did so for the ships (in order to paint and display) rather than the game itself (they more or less acknowledge that they wouldn’t get many games out of it).

For the price you paid, what you got and how you could use it, Dreadfleet was a bad buy. Sure the game might be fun but it’s still a bad buy.

I'll do you one better

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat720006a&prodId=prod1230135a

Honestly Dreadfleet was nothing but a christmas stocking filler (look at the release date and now the removal date).

Ehsteve wrote:I'll do you one better

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat720006a&prodId=prod1230135a

Honestly Dreadfleet was nothing but a christmas stocking filler (look at the release date and now the removal date).

What’s funny about the BloodKnights is the following message:

GW wrote: “Due to high demand, each Citadel Finecast product is limited to five (5) per customer”.

Honestly who would buy more than 5 boxes of BloodKnights, at AUD prices, in one go? 6 boxes would set you back $990. That’s almost a grand for 30 models (most of which would be fragile/miscast anyway).

In regards to the topic, judging by the date range, you are correct that it was an attempt at a Christmas stocking filler.

ironic just as I was considering buying the damn thing...anyone have a copy they want to sell? don't care if its opened/built, just needs to be complete, I will trade a ton for it

Lord Poison wrote:ironic just as I was considering buying the damn thing...anyone have a copy they want to sell? don't care if its opened/built, just needs to be complete, I will trade a ton for it

Location? and whats a ton for it worth exactly?

LunaHound wrote:

Lord Poison wrote:ironic just as I was considering buying the damn thing...anyone have a copy they want to sell? don't care if its opened/built, just needs to be complete, I will trade a ton for it

Location? and whats a ton for it worth exactly?

canada, well at least 1 full army of something PM me and we can talk more
I am trying to get rid of stuff I don't use for something I will

candy.man wrote:(snap fit models are a must for boxed games).

An interesting point.

There's another not-all-that-cheap board game that I got at the end of last year - Super Dungeon Explore. It's a great game, loads of fun, charm and character. It does not have snap-fit models. In fact, it has a lot of models made from hard plastic that require super-glue to put them together. And green stuff. Lots of green stuff. I've seen a lot of comments on how horrible putting together the miniatures was for almost everyone, and I myself nearly flew into a homocidal rage after putting mine together.

Board games really need to contain simple and easy to use miniatures. Even GW's starter sets, which aren't board games, manage to get this right. Space Hulk did as well. I've got FFG's DOOM and The Horus Heresy board games. The most complex thing out of those two things are the Cyberdemons - two pieces that join at the waist. Nothing near as bad as SDE and Dreadfleet.

Being marines helped but it was hardly the only reason Space Hulk was successful. Space Hulk was the prototype for modern marines, it was a very popular and requested game in its own right and lastly it had usable to scale models that could be used in both 40k and Space Hulk, not to mention any straggler copies that were quickly snatched up for use with the new Blood Angels Codex.

Should GW release a blood bowl limited box set it will probably be just as popular as Space Hulk no marines present.

NecronLord3 wrote:Should GW release a blood bowl limited box set it will probably be just as popular as Space Hulk no marines present.

What Fantasy faction would have as much weight as space marine in a team? to be as popular?

the fun factor im not disputing. But people are very picky about teams.

You could play it safe - Human, Orc, High Elf, Undead or even Human, Orc, Dark Elf, Dwarves.

H.B.M.C. wrote:An interesting point.

There's another not-all-that-cheap board game that I got at the end of last year - Super Dungeon Explore. It's a great game, loads of fun, charm and character. It does not have snap-fit models. In fact, it has a lot of models made from hard plastic that requires super-glue to put together. And stuff. I've seen a lot of comments on how horrible putting together the miniatures was, and I myself nearly flew into a homocidal rage after putting mine together.

Board games really need to contain simple and easy to use miniatures. Even GW's starter sets, which aren't board games, manage to get this right. Space Hulk did as well. I've got FFG's DOOM and The Horus Heresy board games. The most complex thing out of those two things are the Cyberdemons - two pieces that join at the waist. Nothing near as bad as SDE and Dreadfleet.

Great post!

The core idea of a boxed game IMO is accessibility and portability. They are quickly accessible, self contained games that can be played anywhere over the course of 1-2 hours. The demographic that boxed games target is normally wider than that of the standard miniatures range. The general idea of a boxed game is that anyone should be able to quickly snap fit/assemble the models together and start playing straight away

In the case of boxed game miniatures that require clipping, filing, green stuffing, assembly, gluing, it defeats the purpose of a boxed game in that not only can the game not be played straight away but your creating a skill barrier as well (especially in the case of SDE where one also has to be capable of painting to Anime standards). In the case of Dreadfleet, not only was this was the case, one could also say that Dreadfleet was more of a “wargaming kit disguised as a boxed game”, rather than a “true boxed game” (as the rules weren’t quick and simplified to boxed game standards).

H.B.M.C. wrote:You could play it safe - Human, Orc, High Elf, Undead or even Human, Orc, Dark Elf, Dwarves.

Ohhh like a mix? I see

Well yeah. I wouldn't do a stand-alone Blood Bowl release without putting 4 teams in the box (otherwise what's the point?) just like I wouldn't do a Warhammer Quest re-release without putting 6-8 heroes in the box.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Well yeah. I wouldn't do a stand-alone Blood Bowl release without putting 4 teams in the box (otherwise what's the point?) just like I wouldn't do a Warhammer Quest re-release without putting 6-8 heroes in the box.

Too many teams to hit the interest of buyer will up the cost of the game too much,
Not enough will not generate enough interest.

This is why i asked what fantasy army or faction can hold the weight anywhere close enough to Space Marines ( even if blood angels )

because they said SM account for 50% of GW income right? ( BA or not is still really high )

Besides , the Space Hulk BA are easily to remove the blood drops, after that its nicely posed + scene base.

Its harder for bunch of blood bowl atheletes to have poses fitting to be converted as easily into fantasy.

Also true - BB miniatures don't make fantastic Fantasy miniatures. Warhammer Quest miniatures do, which is why they should do that rather than BB.

Hmmm I would have to g oogle what Quest is

i am sure i have some models from that game lol

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:For once, they released something which was not Space Marines, and were prompty reviled for it because people were expecting more Space Marines.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that “It wasn’t Marines” was not the reason people disliked Dreadfleet. It was more likely the absurd price point, disconnect with other product lines, and limited use or expansion factor. Yeah, not being a Marine release is going to be pretty far down on the list of Dreadfleet's faults.

I don't think Dreadfleet was at all overpriced for the contents. The ships are big and detailed enough to be used as display pieces, something you can't do with most boardgames.

When Space Hulk came out, there was EXACT SAME COMPLAINING about how expensive it was. But it sold out, because it was Space Marines.

Backfire wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:For once, they released something which was not Space Marines, and were prompty reviled for it because people were expecting more Space Marines.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that “It wasn’t Marines” was not the reason people disliked Dreadfleet. It was more likely the absurd price point, disconnect with other product lines, and limited use or expansion factor. Yeah, not being a Marine release is going to be pretty far down on the list of Dreadfleet's faults.

I don't think Dreadfleet was at all overpriced for the contents. The ships are big and detailed enough to be used as display pieces, something you can't do with most boardgames.

When Space Hulk came out, there was EXACT SAME COMPLAINING about how expensive it was. But it sold out, because it was Space Marines.

I don't remember people complaining about the Space Hulk price but rather the opposite. 11+ terminator marines including a librarian and 25+ genestealers with a broodlord by themselves would run you almost double the sticker price of the board game if you got the multipose versions.

You've got to get over this Space Marine thing Backfire. It's killing your ability to think and act rationally.

Store staff member at GW Wellington NZ confirmed this. Including all of the unsold full Army boxes, they plan on reboxing them, so he told me, back in their respective box sets.

H.B.M.C. wrote:You could play it safe - Human, Orc, High Elf, Undead or even Human, Orc, Dark Elf, Dwarves.

That would be my desired choice. As in my opinion it would allow for the more iconic teams of the game straight out of the box.

Riekland Reavers, The Gouged Eye, Darkside Cowboys and Dwarf Giants.

They then give a greater amount of follow on options.

Human - Middenheim Marauders (or Marauders depending on NAF status) Bright Crusaders, Albion Wanderers, Creeveland Crescents
Orc - Orcland Raiders, War Hawks
Dark Elf - Naggaroth Nightmares (although I prefered the Nightwings name,) Khaines Killers, Dark Renegades
Dwarf - Dwarf Warhammerers, Worlds Edge Wanderers, The Grudge Bearers


Although if High elves where in there, I could take some solace by creating the Kallahir Swifts.

People who think Dreadfleet is overpriced should have a look at Spartan Games products.

DF comes with 10 ships, terrain, monster tokens, the gaming mat, a rule book and two card decks, for £70.

10 Uncharted Seas/Dystopian Wars battleships, which are about the size of the DF ships alone go for about £70-100.
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=pro&pre=spg_tus_ihm_shp_101_001
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=pro&pre=spg_tus_idw_shp_101_001
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=pro&pre=spg_dys_kob_nav_101_000

Add some terrain to that, for let's say £16.
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=cat&cre=min-tus-hob

Some sea monster for £10.
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=cat&cre=min-tus-smo

Rule book, £14 more.
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=pro&pre=spg_tus_ess_rbk_102_000

Two card decks, that's £6.
http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=pro&pre=spg_tus_ihm_gcd_101_001

That's at least £116 (at Maelstrom discount prices) for the same amount of ships, less terrain, less monster miniatures and no gaming mat.
Imo. Dreadfleet is one of the very few reasonably priced GW products.

Except that Uncharted Seas/Dystopian Wars is an expandable wargame where one builds their forces, not a one-off boardgame. Both being based around 'ships' doesn't make them similar.

H.B.M.C. wrote:You've got to get over this Space Marine thing Backfire. It's killing your ability to think and act rationally.

The post which I made original reply specificially complained about release of Dreadfleet in lieu of a Space Marine figure, so I think I am pretty well on the map on this one, thank you.

And yes, there were plenty of complaints of Space Hulk being overpriced. Use search if you don't believe. Most complaints were akin the lines "I am not going to pay that much from a cardboard boardgame" or "it costs more than FFG games". Hmm, sound familiar?

Counter argument was that the figs would cost much more if bought separately, and apparently many people bought the game just for miniatures (granted, some probably wanted Genestealers). But that just proves my point .

I mean, lets be honest here, if GW had released just another wave of Nids and Space Marines or something whichs components could be used in one of their main games, there would be complaints how GW just concentrates on their main selling points and ignores Specialist Games and whatnot (cue whining over corporate mindset and maximising profits etc). You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Backfire wrote:I mean, lets be honest here, if GW had released just another wave of Nids and Space Marines or something whichs components could be used in one of their main games, there would be complaints how GW just concentrates on their main selling points and ignores Specialist Games and whatnot

Not really... ?

If that were the case, then wouldn't we see more "Oh! A new Ogre book? Why aren't they supporting Inquisitor!" or "Vampires again? What about Mordheim?". Except we don't hear that. Ever. At all. People have long since accepted that Specialist Games get nothing.

You're trying to find alternate reasons for Dreadfleet's failings when the failings have been explained clearly to you by several posters in this thread. Dreadfleet didn't fail because it wasn't Space Marines. It failed because it was Dreadfleet.

If only it was Space Marinefleet...

I was one of the ones bitching about how expensive Space Hulk was, but my brother helped chip in a little bit so at the time I only paid $80 for it, which kept it just far enough out of the triple digit range for me to cave and get it (and at that time it had already sold out online IIRC).

Backfire wrote:
When Space Hulk came out, there was EXACT SAME COMPLAINING about how expensive it was. But it sold out, because it was Space Marines.

Wrong.

It sold out because it was a REALLY FUN GAME, that had a lot of high quality materials (minis, boards, etc) in the box.

Jomini wrote:People who think Dreadfleet is overpriced should have a look at Spartan Games products.

(snip).

People who think Dreadfleet is overpriced should have a look at J-class Yacht Racing.

What, they both involve boats and are expensive, and therefore, are analogous, yes?

I felt far more satisfied by my Dystopian Wars purchases than I would by Dreadfleet. I paid £75 and got the rulebook and two boxes of ships to get started. I've heaps of little ships to paint now that make up into two rather nice looking fleets.

The Dreadfleet stuff just looks too random and incoherent. It's a different game of course where all the ships are supposed to be different, but Dystopian Wars has given me two very differently styled fleets and the prospect of much more to build on.

The cost of Dystopian Wars will be higher as I buy more obviously, but I think there's a lot more value in it.

Ouze wrote:

Jomini wrote:People who think Dreadfleet is overpriced should have a look at Spartan Games products.

(snip).

People who think Dreadfleet is overpriced should have a look at J-class Yacht Racing.

What, they both involve boats and are expensive, and therefore, are analogous, yes?

So all price comparisons between miniature companies are now invalid?

lord_blackfang wrote:So all price comparisons between miniature companies are now invalid?

No, just the ones between a board game and non-boardgames, IMO.

H.B.M.C. wrote:You could play it safe - Human, Orc, High Elf, Undead or even Human, Orc, Dark Elf, Dwarves.

I don't think you need to distinguish between the various Elf races for Blood Bowl. I'd settle for well scuplted generic Elves as the agile but fragile team. The other three would be Human (all rounders), Orcs (Strong, but less skilled) and either Undead or Dwarves (tough, but slow).

It makes a lot of sense to me that the games will be destroyed.

Even in large franchises and corporations, when a product is deemed unsellable it is destroyed rather than donated or discounted.

Even where I work, when a customer returns something "damaged" (the wrong colour for their living room) and we have to accept it so as to keep the customer happy so he/she will visit our stores again, we file an adjustment card to the head office and then break it completely, throwing it in the trash. We can't just give it away on the side because it damages the reputation of the chain and someone could return it again even without a receipt, effectively stealing money from the company.

Nightwatch wrote:It makes a lot of sense to me that the games will be destroyed.

Even in large franchises and corporations, when a product is deemed unsellable it is destroyed rather than donated or discounted.

Even where I work, when a customer returns something "damaged" (the wrong colour for their living room) and we have to accept it so as to keep the customer happy so he/she will visit our stores again, we file an adjustment card to the head office and then break it completely, throwing it in the trash. We can't just give it away on the side because it damages the reputation of the chain and someone could return it again even without a receipt, effectively stealing money from the company.

The GW store I used to pop into used to have an annual used and damaged product sale. Where they'd just sell things "as is" and you bought it with the understanding that it might have broken or missing pieces. In those days GW stores had more flexibility.

The simple reason GW won't discount or give away their product, is because they don't want customers to believe they'd ever do it again.

Backfire wrote:When Space Hulk came out, there was EXACT SAME COMPLAINING about how expensive it was.

The two main complaints about how expensive it was were A) price point and B) price of cardboard.

A) Price point, the problem with this complaint is that it completely ignored the contents of the game, the simple fact is these people complained it cost $100 not that it didn't give them a $100 worth of product. The simple counter arguement its cheaper than buy the miniatures separately. Even that ignores the inherent added value of a self contained game or set.

B) The other people who complained did so because the game used cardboard. First what fraction of boardgames use cardboard?-Most, so its at best a problem with the genre and not something unique to the product. Second, it was a high quality thicker printed carboard a material that is deceptively expensive, but most of these people who complained really just wanted plastic tiles. If GW had done that, it would have been a $200 kit and if you thought people complained about price regardless of content before at $200 stores would have been fire bombed.

The difference between Space Hulk and Dreadfleet boil down to one had an establish fan base the other did not. Space Hulk is immediately more accessible and you're right being about marines probably didn't hurt either. So while some people bought the kits for the BA minis, there were also alot of people who were such fans of the two preceding editions that bought multiple copies for themselves. Dreadfleet did not have the advantage of an established fan base or broad base appeal.

d-usa wrote:If only it was Space Marinefleet...

So BFG basically.

I always appreciated the fact that BFG didn't introduce Space Marines until right before it became a specialist game.

I think the most interesting question from all of this is---why did Dreadfleet fail (If it indeed did). From all I've heard (and seen);


The rules are solid and fun
The miniatures are terrific
The ocean mat looks great


So, provided all of those are true, I can really only think of three reasons it might have failed;


Poor product launch (Yes)
Poor pricing model (Yes)
Poor genre (While I'm not a Fantasy fan, I do recognize its popularity-I don't think this is a contributor)



So, Dreadfleet is priced 90 bucks and hyped for a good two months before hand--with tie in Fantasy landing scenarios = success?

So has it failed globally due to high prices or is it just not what gamers are looking for?
I actually thought it looked good during the demo game i saw
at my local GW,it was just the high cost(imo) and the fact not a lot of people seemed to be buying it in store.

shingouki wrote:So has it failed globally due to high prices or is it just not what gamers are looking for?

The latter I think. Price can be a factor, but even if Dreadfleet had been £20, I wouldn't have bought it. The appeal just wasn't there.

I agree with Flashman. Pirates of the Spanish Main was more fun, had better play mechanics, and greater variety of ships. Too bad WizKids' game developement team had to poison it with their shoddy game unit design/costing and utter lack of understanding of what factions are and how they are supposed to work.

AgeOfEgos wrote:I think the most interesting question from all of this is---why did Dreadfleet fail (If it indeed did). From all I've heard (and seen);


The rules are solid and fun
The miniatures are terrific
The ocean mat looks great


So, provided all of those are true, I can really only think of three reasons it might have failed;


Poor product launch (Yes)
Poor pricing model (Yes)
Poor genre (While I'm not a Fantasy fan, I do recognize its popularity-I don't think this is a contributor)



So, Dreadfleet is priced 90 bucks and hyped for a good two months before hand--with tie in Fantasy landing scenarios = success?

The rules are far from being "solid and fun", they are actually too random and make the game long and boring. This has been stated in several specialized board game reviews and has helped turn the board game fans away from Deadfleet.

The miniatures are not terrific, they are overly busy and cartoonish and also suffer from the "too many skulls!" syndrome that seems to pervade newer GW miniature releases. Again, this helped turn the more mature audience away from the product.

The ocean mat looks great, I agree with you there, but it has very poor dimensions that don't allow it to be readily used in other game systems. If the matt had a more standard size (and / or the price was a bit more affordable), it could have helped shift a few more copies from people willing to use it in stuff like Dystopian Wars and similar games.

Several people have already commented that they've seen Deadfleet advertised at 40% off and more, and it still didn't sell, people need to start acknowledging the fact that it was just a bad product in itself and it doesn't even have the redeeming quality of using its components in other systems.

Come tax time, GW can write off production costs for unsold merchandise. But that merchandise has to be destroyed so it has no potental value in the future.

I, for one, feel a bit sorry for Dreadfleet. The miniatures were quite cool (even if the Skabrus looked like a depressed kipper) and it seems to have very in-depth and interesting rules, to the delight of navy nerds everywhere. Now, I haven't played it, and haven't bought it, but if this rumour is true (and that's a big if) it makes me very sad.

So, think the GW Marketing team is already blaming the genre instead of the fact that they weren't going to support it at all?

They should of just done the re-release of Warhammer Quest.....

Squigsquasher wrote:I, for one, feel a bit sorry for Dreadfleet. The miniatures were quite cool (even if the Skabrus looked like a depressed kipper) and it seems to have very in-depth and interesting rules, to the delight of navy nerds everywhere. Now, I haven't played it, and haven't bought it, but if this rumour is true (and that's a big if) it makes me very sad.

And GW cares nothing for your tears since you weren't a customer. As someone who thought it was cool but apparently not cool enough to actually buy, you are partly responsible for your own sadness. Personally, I wasn't in the market for a naval game (let alone a WHFB-based cartoony one with a high price point) so the trashing/discontinuing/concentration of the boxed game doesn't really affect me in any particular way. Good feelings and a general sense of happiness about their product lines don't matter much to a publicly traded company, only sales. If you like something, buy it and it might stick around.

I think the fail came from price mainly, and the limitedness second. Price was too high for mom to buy for lil billy who was begging for that or an xbox, and probably most of the vets that could afford it knew from being a vet that GW would do everything they can to forget the game exists in a year (in this case, much less).

That said, I might have gotten it if I had a regular gaming group and lots of time. But right now if I wanted to get into a boat game, I'd go for Dystopian wars (?).. or just stick with BFG.

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

My question is more related to how this will impact small game stores. Many of these folks own their inventory so it is not as easy as just recalling it. Unless they are going to issue a credit to the store's account at a whole sale price. This seems unlikely as it would cause them to take a heavy Q1 expense to their bottom line. I suspect they are recalling from all GW stores, but will just let whatever the local stores own sell out locally or via ebay. The alternative is very expensive and in my mind that makes it unlikely for them.

Couldn't find this in the thread.

"What's new today" mentioned that Dreadfleet will taken off the GW website and only sold via the GW stores: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/wnt/blog.jsp?pid=1100098-gws.

So, guess that lends some credibility to this rumor (if it can even be called a rumor).

Cheers

Can't say I'm surprised. Dreadfleet simply was an unappealing product (mainly due to the price, IMO), and the poor reviews it received didn't help much either.

I wonder if some of the users who were absolutely certain that it would sell out are willing to admit their error.

Mr Proudhoof wrote:They should of just done the re-release of Warhammer Quest.....

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:I mean, lets be honest here, if GW had released just another wave of Nids and Space Marines or something whichs components could be used in one of their main games, there would be complaints how GW just concentrates on their main selling points and ignores Specialist Games and whatnot

Not really... ?

If that were the case, then wouldn't we see more "Oh! A new Ogre book? Why aren't they supporting Inquisitor!" or "Vampires again? What about Mordheim?". Except we don't hear that. Ever. At all.

Huh? Many people are bitching about that, or variation thereof, all the time. "GW concentrates only on Space Marines, why won't we see BB relaunched?".

H.B.M.C. wrote:
You're trying to find alternate reasons for Dreadfleet's failings when the failings have been explained clearly to you by several posters in this thread. Dreadfleet didn't fail because it wasn't Space Marines. It failed because it was Dreadfleet.

Lets try this: what if Space Hulk had been, say, Kroot vs Necron? Do you think it would have sold out that quickly - or at all? Honestly? What would have been the first comment by many?

"Hmm, looks nice, but those armies don't interest me at all".

And really, you completely misrepresent me: I am not trying to find any "alternative reasons for failing". I am pointing out the hypocrisy of complaining about GW concentrating too much on Space Marines or other similarly "safe" product lines, and then bitching when GW releases something which is NOT part of their main product lines.

I don't give a damn about Blood Bowl, or Inquisitor, or indeed any of the Fantasy line (including Dreadfleet), but if and when they release something on that front, you sure as hell don't see ME whining "Why they had to waste resources on that when they could have finally released Belial mini which is still missing from DA line?"

In addition to what PhantomViper said, I think it's worth pointing out that it's a limited edition board game with a hundred page rulebook and 140 cards. To me, this says that your opponent probably needs quite a bit of time to become familar with the rules, but that they probably can't own a copy to peruse at their leisure.

In other words, just the gross attributes of the game would suggest to a potential customer that it is a poor pick-up game.

Backfire wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:
You're trying to find alternate reasons for Dreadfleet's failings when the failings have been explained clearly to you by several posters in this thread. Dreadfleet didn't fail because it wasn't Space Marines. It failed because it was Dreadfleet.

Lets try this: what if Space Hulk had been, say, Kroot vs Necron? Do you think it would have sold out that quickly - or at all? Honestly? What would have been the first comment by many?

Space Hulk sold out because it was Space Hulk it was a particular game that back in its hayday got a lot of people playing 40k by introducing people to the universe. Its that strong nostalgic value that sold it. If it were Kroot and Necrons then and had the same nostalgic appeal, then yes selling it that way now it would have sold out. But if you're saying had GW made the game into something it was not would it have sold out?-No obviously.

Space Hulk, only a small number of the purchasers were experiancing it for the first time. Dreadfleet 100% of the players were experiancing it for the first time. Dreadfleet lacks an established fanbase and nostalgia, thats why I think it failed. People complain about the price point for both games and the simple reality is that a game at that price level has to really stand out or have an established base who will buy it regardless of price. Space Hulk had it, Dreadfleet didn't.

Moopy wrote:

Backfire wrote:
When Space Hulk came out, there was EXACT SAME COMPLAINING about how expensive it was. But it sold out, because it was Space Marines.

Wrong.

It sold out because it was a REALLY FUN GAME, that had a lot of high quality materials (minis, boards, etc) in the box.

If this was the only criteria Dreadfleet should have sold well, it was a fun game and was made of plenty of quality materials the box for one was very good.

If GW does a stand alone blood bowl with 4 teams in the box I'd really want to see the other teams in print for conversion purposes, and possibly more in white dwarf at a later date.

With all the Warhammer plastics currently available I could imagine some pretty cool converted teams.

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

Or maybe it is going out of production after all.

... out of distribution, to be precise (production is long over being a limited release)

As we mentioned a few weeks ago, Dreadfleet will be disappearing from the Games Workshop website at midnight (PST) tonight. So, if you haven't grabbed your copy yet, make sure you buy one before they sail off into the Galleon's Graveyard.

Some Games Workshop Hobby Centre's may still have a few copies left in stock, but you'll have to be quick to get your hands on them.

So move fast and get your copy before they sail off into the sunset.

From GW site.



....ahhhh....and good by to old rubbish....

Thread should be closed now.

Kroothawk wrote:... out of distribution, to be precise (production is long over being a limited release)

You knew what I meant.

Kroothawk wrote:... out of distribution, to be precise (production is long over being a limited release)

The thing is 'limited edition' is a bit of an ambiguous term. Unless the product is clearly marked with a printed note of some form, or certificate, they can write 'limited edition' an anything they want while they get pumped out by the tens of thousands.

I used to work in an Independent that sold corgi die-cast cars/planes etc. They would sometimes make an initial run of say a particular type of Spitfire with a specific colour scheme, all of those models would contain a note certifying that particular models number out of 2000. But if something sold out particularly quickly, they would make another production run of it. We would get a telephone call from Corgi HQ asking us to remove all of the certificates from stock we still had, otherwise they would get rapped by trading standards. As you can imagine this policy wasn't particularly popular with people who had already bought it, and the company received quite a lot of negative press about it.

Look at a couple of the recent BL books which have been released on limited edition - they come clearly marked with a certain number, which they will not exceed.
AFAIK Dreadfleet has got not certification with it which means it is not 'Limited Edition' in the legal sense of the term. GW would be free to do what they did with Space Hulk, and 'find more stock in the warehouse' if it had sold out quickly.

Marking Dreadfleet as 'Limited Edition' is nothing more than a marketing move, and no different to Burger King putting a 'limited edition' on their latest Heart Buster Maximum and then making and selling a million of them.

aka_mythos wrote:Lets try this: what if Space Hulk had been, say, Kroot vs Necron? Do you think it would have sold out that quickly - or at all? Honestly? What would have been the first comment by many?

Space Hulk sold out because it was Space Hulk it was a particular game that back in its hayday got a lot of people playing 40k by introducing people to the universe. Its that strong nostalgic value that sold it.

I can't believe that so many people debated on this topic. The game failed because:
1. Lack of proper promotion. This is the fundamental rule in maketing of any new product. Not even Microsoft, Apple, Sony will put out any of their new product without adequate advertisment. GW simple is stupid enough to think that players will buy whatever they put out. The game fell flat on its face and GW deserves it. Don't tell me you are dumb enough to see that.
2. Dreadfleet is not a bad game but it is definately not a traditional naval game. Some players simply have no interest in naval battles. Those who do are too unexpected to see how the game is run.
3. Limited edition. This is GW's definition. Space Hulk should be considered limited run,not the traditional view of a limited edition. The lack of future support or expansion is a definite turn off. This is same as buying a product without any warranty. If the official GW forum still exists, I bet you can no longer mention the word "Dreadfleet" there or your post will be deleted. I don't understand why some people put up with this type of nonsense for such a long time.
4. Who is going to buy it? The game is not cheap, though not unreasonable. It takes skills and time to paint up those ships and they are definitely not for beginners. Veteran players already spent lots of money in either 40K, WHFB or both. Do you expect them to spent another $100 on that game and more importantly the tremendous amount of time to paint those ship to a good quality. I bet more of the players already have a hard time keeping up with multiple updates and expansions.
The game was "dead" within a month after its release. I am surprised that some peole simply cannot see it. Blind royality? What did you get from GW actually?

If GW would take the "Space Hulk" model of tiles, a few miniatures, and a small, 30 page rulebook, they wouldn't even need to worry about recalled games.

Eldar Vs Bugs, Necrons Vs Orks, Nids vs IG, etc.etc.etc....

The tiles don't even need to be all space hulk all of the time. Webways, Tunnels, Areas of smashed up roadways, etc.etc.etc....


It doesn't take much to make them and print them on cardstock, or plastic.

The allure of Space hulk is the simplicity and diversion that it gives. The clock idea was awsome, and the easy worry about what your guys can do while you go around and find stuff in a dark hallway doesn't hurt much either. That and the fact that you can openly use your imagination for your game to go to otehr hieghts, such as adding in , not Space Marines, but Orks, or Chaos Termies, or some Wrathguard, in the place of the Termies...

That Dreadfleet was just an outright bad idea. Whoever came up with it as an idea that it would sell well needs thier head examined. We called it as bad mojo when it came out, because there is just no defending stupid, bad ideas.

Howard A Treesong wrote:How many awards has Dreadfulfleet got? Been nominated for any? Or will it be swept under the carpet with some of GW's other embarrassments? Hmmm...

This. Space Hulk has won two Origins Awards (Best Sci-Fi Game 1990 and Best Game 2009). That's two more than all of the rest of GW's output combined.

Grot 6 wrote:
That Dreadfleet was just an outright bad idea. Whoever came up with it as an idea that it would sell well needs thier head examined. We called it as bad mojo when it came out, because there is just no defending stupid, bad ideas.

You called it bad mojo, but you call everything GW puts out these days bad mojo. Don't think the general idea of Dreadfleet was a bad idea and there are plenty of people that like pirates, especially zombie pirates. It suffered from one major issue and that was price. $115 US was a premium compared to all the other coffin box games it was competing for on the shelves. Most top shelf games with that number of detailed pieces were around $90 (which it what I bought my copy at). There have been a lot worst and far more idiotic games that have gone onto the shelves at game stores. At that price though, most everyone I knew did not want to gamble with it. So it stayed on the shelf.

Otherwise it was a minor game with some interesting ideas and nice miniatures. Was it for everyone? No. But then I never cared for Warhammer Quest or Blood Bowl. Again, I was happy to see GW try something different and hope this wasn't so big a failure that it will stop them from trying other stuff. Unfortunately what GW probably took away from this is "Space Marines sell. Other stuff doesn't."

Grot 6 wrote:If GW would take the "Space Hulk" model of tiles, a few miniatures, and a small, 30 page rulebook, they wouldn't even need to worry about recalled games.

Eldar Vs Bugs, Necrons Vs Orks, Nids vs IG, etc.etc.etc....

The tiles don't even need to be all space hulk all of the time. Webways, Tunnels, Areas of smashed up roadways, etc.etc.etc....


It doesn't take much to make them and print them on cardstock, or plastic.

The allure of Space hulk is the simplicity and diversion that it gives. The clock idea was awesome, and the easy worry about what your guys can do while you go around and find stuff in a dark hallway doesn't hurt much either. That and the fact that you can openly use your imagination for your game to go to other heights, such as adding in , not Space Marines, but Orks, or Chaos Termies, or some Wrathguard, in the place of the Termies.

This is actually a really good idea and something that came to my mind last year. Boxed games designed in this fashion could also serve as entry points into GW’s main product line (assuming the boxed games are priced reasonably on not $190AUD like Dreadfleet).

That being said, GW are of the opinion that people will always by their products, no matter the price or quality forevermore. I full on expect this year’s boxed game to be priced at $250AUD.

I really would other tile-sets that are compatible with the Space Hulk tiles. I’ve got a couple of sets of the old Tyranid Attack tiles, and they work with the Hulk tiles (1st, 2nd and 3rd Ed)... but updated Tyranid ship tiles using the new 3rd Ed Hulk art-style? Those would be amazing. Craftworld tiles? More amazing.

I’ve only played 1 game of Space Hulk since buying the 3rd Ed box, but thanks to the fine folks at Fantasy Flight Games I’ve got 10 times my money’s worth out of those board pieces thanks to the 40K RPG’s. More tiles is always a good thing.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

mikhaila wrote:I'd take this with a grain of salt. They could just as easily be sending recalling them for mailorder to sell, rather than keeping them in stores.

Or maybe it is going out of production after all.

Love that they made sure to say, "Some Games Workshop Hobby Centre's may still have a few copies left in stock, but you'll have to be quick to get your hands on them."

As if they sold out in the first place.

Well, I stopped in to my old games store that I can't stand because I wanted to try to buy the old 3.5 Chaos codex from them-it's buried somewhere, so the second owner (who I'm still friends with) promised to look into grabbing it for me. Anyway, point of my rambling is that they got two copies of Dreadfleet into the store at order time. One was a special order for two brothers who love warhammer. The other? It went on a shelf. Guess what was still on the shelf when I went in tonight Still unsold, still unwanted. What a shock, eh?

timetowaste85 wrote:I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks. If they torch it, well...they can go wild. It isn't worth $115 to me-and even my friends who are nuts about warhammer thought it was a foolish idea and refused to take part in it-and they love 8th edition, storms of magic, and everything else current in fantasy-but Dreadfleet got the leper treatment. So, it can be torched-unless somebody wants to offer me a new copy for $50-then I'll take it. Just shoot a PM. For $50, I'll give it a try. Anything more, I'll spend on my Orcs or BT. If they ever release Bloodbowl though, we'll give that a try for sure-unless it follow the current sale prices and goes for $130. Then it can piss off too.

Precisely. Amen, brother. I only read to this post so if others echo your sentiments then count my quoting you as another vote.

Dreadfleet seems to sum up GW's marketing ethos for most of their products:

Very pretty dollies attached to badly written game designs which ultimately amounts to nothing more than overpriced garbage in the end.

Thanks GW for saving me even more money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Proudhoof wrote:They should of just done the re-release of Warhammer Quest.....

This also is a true statement.

Dungeon crawls are really hot right now. As are reprints of older games. Those two factors combined would have made Warhammer Quest a very successful product.

Instead, GW thought they fart magical money making gases and brought out Dreadfleet instead of at least attempting to recreate Man'O'War. The idiocy of the bean counters controlling that company never ceases to amaze.

The product might have had more success in Australia had it been priced around $50-90AUD. The $190AUD for a 10 model board game was way too extreme IMO (for that price, you’d expect 4 times the amount of ships).

Nightwatch wrote:Even where I work, when a customer returns something "damaged" (the wrong colour for their living room) and we have to accept it so as to keep the customer happy so he/she will visit our stores again, we file an adjustment card to the head office and then break it completely, throwing it in the trash. We can't just give it away on the side because it damages the reputation of the chain and someone could return it again even without a receipt, effectively stealing money from the company.

This confuses me - does the firm not think of the potential for good PR available in donating such goods to charities for the homeless (or other areas that might appreciate the support - nursing/care homes, for instance)? If they're concerned about the potential for fraudulent returns, remove the brand label and/or add a second label/tag making it clear that this is what has happened to the product.

The homeless don't have plastic glue.




I know that wasn't the point you were making.

Dysartes wrote:This confuses me - does the firm not think of the potential for good PR available in donating such goods to charities for the homeless (or other areas that might appreciate the support - nursing/care homes, for instance)? If they're concerned about the potential for fraudulent returns, remove the brand label and/or add a second label/tag making it clear that this is what has happened to the product.

This is actually extremely common. Target, WalMart, etc. all throw away all goods that are returned as damaged/defective. I've had friends who worked retail and said how they had to throw away goods that were still fine.

Space Hulk is rightly regarded as a classic. 1st edition is possibly the most tactically interesting, well-designed game GW ever made. The game balance on 3E is kind of screwy, but it's still not a bad game, and it looks amazing.

You only have to look at the popularity of various similar games, to realise how well another Space Hulk type game would do -- Incursion is brilliant fun; even the Gears of War boardgame has similarities to Spulk (although it's probably closer to Tyranid Attack in style). Descent, Super Dungeon Explore, etc., all have that dungeon bash / boarding action feel that is just inherently more interesting than cartoon pirate ships. (And I speak as someone who loves pirates and would play a decent pirate-themed game to death.)

This type of game also fills a massive gap in 40K too -- close quarter combat inside a spacecraft or other structure. It's fascinating and it's fun. So yeah. Spulk sequels, that stand alone and yet are compatible with 3E? They could sell me one of those every year, no problem, even at a £70 price point. Because it's a solidly designed game, and because the minis are inherently appealing too. I've no interest in Dreadfleet when I could buy a Eurogame of proven quality for less than half the price.

I'm hoping for a full page in the September 2012 issue of White Dwarf that just says:

Are you ready for another game?
Well we wanted to re-release Warhammer Quest
but Dreadfleet . . . . . . . . .
So there you go*


*next time better buy the stand alone game or else

Dysartes wrote:

Nightwatch wrote:Even where I work, when a customer returns something "damaged" (the wrong colour for their living room) and we have to accept it so as to keep the customer happy so he/she will visit our stores again, we file an adjustment card to the head office and then break it completely, throwing it in the trash. We can't just give it away on the side because it damages the reputation of the chain and someone could return it again even without a receipt, effectively stealing money from the company.

This confuses me - does the firm not think of the potential for good PR available in donating such goods to charities for the homeless (or other areas that might appreciate the support - nursing/care homes, for instance)? If they're concerned about the potential for fraudulent returns, remove the brand label and/or add a second label/tag making it clear that this is what has happened to the product.

No, they don't want poor and messy people being associated with their furniture. Just like some clothes companies don't make clothes above a certain size (many draw the line at a UK 10 some less), they only want the thin and rich to wear their clothes.

Ian Sturrock wrote:Space Hulk is rightly regarded as a classic. 1st edition is possibly the most tactically interesting, well-designed game GW ever made. The game balance on 3E is kind of screwy, but it's still not a bad game, and it looks amazing.

You only have to look at the popularity of various similar games, to realise how well another Space Hulk type game would do -- Incursion is brilliant fun; even the Gears of War boardgame has similarities to Spulk (although it's probably closer to Tyranid Attack in style). Descent, Super Dungeon Explore, etc., all have that dungeon bash / boarding action feel that is just inherently more interesting than cartoon pirate ships. (And I speak as someone who loves pirates and would play a decent pirate-themed game to death.)

This type of game also fills a massive gap in 40K too -- close quarter combat inside a spacecraft or other structure. It's fascinating and it's fun. So yeah. Spulk sequels, that stand alone and yet are compatible with 3E? They could sell me one of those every year, no problem, even at a £70 price point. Because it's a solidly designed game, and because the minis are inherently appealing too. I've no interest in Dreadfleet when I could buy a Eurogame of proven quality for less than half the price.

Aye, totally agree. Even Doom is worth a couple of hours of a groups time due to the style of game.

Imagine if they re-released Advanced Space Crudase, calling in something a little more catching, with 3-d terrain to go on the board pieces. That sort of release would be a must buy for me. However it also sets a price point for newer players to try out GW's 'worlds' and will often lead to expansion into 40K armies of the same type. I mean how many of us either know folks, or ourselves took up an army based on what came in various boxes over the years.

Hell I think Battlemasters started my interest in Empire for Fantasy.

Completely agree Morathi's Darkest Sin, might be interesting running a poll to see how many of the people who populate these boards were first brought into it through boardgames. My guess would be a fair few.

What with WD being withdrawn from WHSmiths, it has never been harder to stumble across GW and get pulled into wargaming. And if someone does walk into the shop, unless they are mental or rich (or both) the prices would make most parents start looking nervously for the exit.

And absolutely zero effort was made to tie in the Space Marine video game with events in store and tabletop gaming. Why not have a voucher inside for a free plastic mini, or some other reason to get people to enter the store?

It's almost like they want to stay as small as possible, either that or they really need to rethink whether the people in their marketing department deserve their jobs.

timetowaste85 wrote:I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks.

But OTOH, would it sold even that well if it had been just another $60 board game with cheap components as that price range mandates? One part of the appeal which Space Hulk and Dreadfleet do have is that their components are top-notch, beyond what you usually see at board games and there are always people who are willing to pay for what they perceive as premium. If it had been one of the dozens FFG games in their catalogue, would it have stood out? I highly doubt it. In fact, I am pretty sure that even with probably less-than-expected sales, DF still sold much more than most FFG games do, even GW licensed ones.

Gonna have to back up claims like that Backfire. Also a lot of subjectivity there ("beyond what you usually see at board games").

Howard A Treesong wrote:

That's pretty common with magazines. What else are you supposed to do with unsold magazines other than pulp them? When White Dwarf was a quality magazine you could buy back issues, but they were only limited in quantity. The same is often true of books, although discount stores often buy them up.

They used to give them away to kids that started any of the systems! At least that was the case in stores I frequent.

bolo wrote:
This is not quite true; Every store has a Facebook account, not employee.

That I knew! An employee actually told me he had to have an account, and that it was company policy. Im a bit sceptical though.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Gonna have to back up claims like that Backfire. Also a lot of subjectivity there ("beyond what you usually see at board games").

Well, I have played many FFG games, and the miniatures there (whilst not necessarily bad, and for example in Descent, often pretty good) are not similar quality what seen in SH or DF. Of course, they're cheaper (Descent box has 80 minis).

FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

Backfire wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Gonna have to back up claims like that Backfire. Also a lot of subjectivity there ("beyond what you usually see at board games").

Well, I have played many FFG games, and the miniatures there (whilst not necessarily bad, and for example in Descent, often pretty good) are not similar quality what seen in SH or DF. Of course, they're cheaper (Descent box has 80 minis).

FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

Man, I really want to know where you get your numbers beyond mere assumption.

Sources to back up your claims to lend credence to your statements would sure be handy right about now.

Hellfury wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Well, I have played many FFG games, and the miniatures there (whilst not necessarily bad, and for example in Descent, often pretty good) are not similar quality what seen in SH or DF. Of course, they're cheaper (Descent box has 80 minis).

FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

Man, I really want to know where you get your numbers beyond mere assumption.

Sources to back up your claims to lend credence to your statements would sure be handy right about now.

It's all in the almighty Interwebs. FFG company profiles says their 2008 revenue was $12.9 million, with 57 employees: http://www.inc.com/inc5000/profile/fantasy-flight-games

Article from 2010 said they had 64 employees and "revenue of more than $10 million".

SH and DF print run sizes were rumours circulating around when the games were released. Don't know where they originated from.

edit. Should have clarified that I was comparing ANNUAL sales. Most FFG games are available for years (even decades), thus you can't make direct comparison to "limited edition" game.

"Limited edition" is probably one reason why unsold Dreadfleets are being recalled. Makes mockery of whole "limited edition" thing if the game boxes sit in bargain boxes for years to come. Plus, the boxes are huge & take lot of shelf space.

Backfire wrote:
FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

That being said, Mantic's Dwarf King's Hold is rumoured to have sold out of it's initial run of 100,000. More have been sold since, so who knows what their total figure is?
While I don't think the components are up to the sculpting quality of Space Hulk (which was exceptional) they have a rough parity with general WFB stuff, and are far better than a lot of the more generic board games (the D&D ones etc.) which are more expensive. You get 25 or so figures, some nice board tiles and rules in a game that has significant replay value and expandability for 30 GBP on some sites.

That would seem to show there is definitely a big market there. Mantic seems to be making a business out of filling gaps left by GW, so I would say there is definitely room for some kind of future release by the latter if the price and content are right.

What does destroying them involve? Does it involve recycling of the plastic? Or the smashing f them with a hammer?

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

Ravenous D wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

What is the deal with tearing of the covers? We used to get a lot of books without covers for free from a bookstore buddy. Is that just the traditional symbolic way that a book is no longer in circulation and destroyed?

d-usa wrote:

Ravenous D wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

What is the deal with tearing of the covers? We used to get a lot of books without covers for free from a bookstore buddy. Is that just the traditional symbolic way that a book is no longer in circulation and destroyed?

A line of black felt-tip over the upper edge of the pages is good enough for most publishers when a book is remaindered, it essentially ensures that the book can't be sold 'as new', but without making copies unsaleable in second-hand bookshops.

Edit: seems I'm not wholly correct there, unsold hardbacks and trade paperbacks (larger size, usually better paper) get the black felt tip treatment and remaindered (sold off at reduced prices), unwanted stocks of mass market paperbacks (size of a standard Black Library novel) are customarily stripped of their covers (essentially making them unsaleable) and pulped.

English Assassin wrote:

d-usa wrote:

Ravenous D wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

What is the deal with tearing of the covers? We used to get a lot of books without covers for free from a bookstore buddy. Is that just the traditional symbolic way that a book is no longer in circulation and destroyed?

A line of black felt-tip over the upper edge of the pages is good enough for most publishers when a book is remaindered, it essentially ensures that the book can't be sold 'as new', but without making copies unsaleable in second-hand bookshops.

Edit: seems I'm not wholly correct there, unsold hardbacks and trade paperbacks (larger size, usually better paper) get the black felt tip treatment and remaindered (sold off at reduced prices), unwanted stocks of mass market paperbacks (size of a standard Black Library novel) are customarily stripped of their covers (essentially making them unsaleable) and pulped.

What I was told when I worked retail lo these many years ago is that the covers are returned to the publisher as proof of destruction.

Sorry to de-rail thread but I need to ask where the rumour of a Bloodbowl box next year is from. I haven't heard of this before and would like to know more.

Also, interestingly enough, I was at my local GW yesterday and they not only still had their copy of Dreadfleet still on the shelf, they didn't know anything about the recall.

Two caveats:
This was their 4th or 5th order of Dreadfleet because they had sold all their previous copies.

They just conducted an inventory Sunday night, so it's possible that GW didn't even know they still had one there...

I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Don't forget that GW stopped doing sales as people would hold back on purchases until then. I would imagine this is the same here. They don't want people hanging back to see how it goes.

Shepherd23 wrote:I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Please see my post a page or 2 back re. 'limited edition', and what that actually means.

Shepherd23 wrote:I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Well, that's why it's an expensive game. Large print run spreads out the costs. I mean, most of the individual miniatures on GW's range probably aren't made in tens of thousands.

Wolfstan is correct too. Whereas destroying perfectly useful product is horribly wasteful, one probably does not want to train customers to forego initial offering in the hopes that it will be later available at reduced price.

VikingScott wrote:Sorry to de-rail thread but I need to ask where the rumour of a Bloodbowl box next year is from. I haven't heard of this before and would like to know more.

AFAIK its not so much a rumour as it is wishful thinking due to 2012 being the 25th anniversary of BloodBowl.

I guess you could say that GW sunk their battleship!

Johnny-Crass wrote:I guess you could say that GW sunk their battleship!

(Face gets all serious)No. No you couldn't.

PhantomViper wrote:

VikingScott wrote:Sorry to de-rail thread but I need to ask where the rumour of a Bloodbowl box next year is from. I haven't heard of this before and would like to know more.

AFAIK its not so much a rumour as it is wishful thinking due to 2012 being the 25th anniversary of BloodBowl.

Actually, Hastings confirmed it, with 4 teams in the box. Best confirmation you can get nowadays.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/399920.page

My FLGS is selling them for £35 due to the fact only about 12 people bought it.

Grimgob wrote:

Johnny-Crass wrote:I guess you could say that GW sunk their battleship!

(Face gets all serious)No. No you couldn't.

Maybe. But you could say that Dreadfleet didn't make waves in the way GW wanted it to.

Didn't quite rock the boat either. Kind of a sinker, really.

And then it bottomed out.

infinite_array wrote:

Grimgob wrote:

Johnny-Crass wrote:I guess you could say that GW sunk their battleship!

(Face gets all serious)No. No you couldn't.

Maybe. But you could say that Dreadfleet didn't make waves in the way GW wanted it to.

Didn't quite rock the boat either. Kind of a sinker, really.

It certainly was a dread fleet after all.

12thRonin wrote:And then it bottomed out.

You could really say it ran afoul of the market.

I don't know what it's like in other places but I haven't seen a single game of dreadfleet go on at my FLGS. Honestly the whole game itself looks stupid, good riddance.

puma713 wrote:

12thRonin wrote:And then it bottomed out.

You could really say it ran afoul of the market.

And that GW really went overboard with their expectations on how well it'd do.

infinite_array wrote:

puma713 wrote:

12thRonin wrote:And then it bottomed out.

You could really say it ran afoul of the market.

And that GW really went overboard with their expectations on how well it'd do.

They should make whoever dreamt it up walk the plank, as it were.

My local store manager said that if anyone in the store will buy it for the employee discount he would sell it.. It still hasn't been sold.

RetroAssassin wrote:My FLGS is selling them for £35 due to the fact only about 12 people bought it.

Oooh, which is your FLGS? At £35 it might just be worthwhile.

Pacific wrote:
And absolutely zero effort was made to tie in the Space Marine video game with events in store and tabletop gaming. Why not have a voucher inside for a free plastic mini, or some other reason to get people to enter the store?

It's almost like they want to stay as small as possible, either that or they really need to rethink whether the people in their marketing department deserve their jobs.

Just want to chime in with that. I couldn't believe it when I picked up Space Marine and there wasn't any stuff on the miniature game in there. You know what was? FFG and their Rogue Trader/Inquisitor/Deathwatch RPG material. The game sold about 250 - 300,000 copies. How many of those were to non-40k players?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Hi all,

I, perhaps, take too much of a perverse pleasure in this sort of news, but it has come to my attention that all unsold copies of Dreadfleet - at least in this part of the world - are to be removed from sale, collected and then destroyed. It appears the all-too-high-price point for this failure of a game has reached the level where GW knows they cannot sell any more and thus have decided to cut their losses. Space Hulk it was not, and when your main target is 8-12 years olds it turns out that nostalgia over Man'O'War, a game that doesn't even count as a 'Specialist Game' isn't a great selling point.

They did a similar thing after 4th came out, sending all the left over 3rd Ed boxes (and all those plastic Marines and Land Speeders) to landfill.

Make of it what you will, and, again, it may be a GWOZ only thing, but there you go. Anyone who is still craving a Dreadfleet fix might be able to find one in our scattered network of gaming stores (assuming you can find one of them), but otherwise Dreadfleet is leaving our shores, so to speak.

I need to find this landfill.

Johnny-Crass wrote:I guess you could say that GW sunk their battleship!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Omegus wrote:I need to find this landfill.

I heard tell it was this one.

DODcrazy wrote:I don't know what it's like in other places but I haven't seen a single game of dreadfleet go on at my FLGS. Honestly the whole game itself looks stupid, good riddance.

Congrats on your well reasoned argument! Huzzah to you, sir!

Clearly GW didn't shore up enough profits with this one. For those of us that did puchase it though; I don't think our thoughts were too adrift when we spent our money; the miniatures are fantastic.

Backfire wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks.

But OTOH, would it sold even that well if it had been just another $60 board game with cheap components as that price range mandates? One part of the appeal which Space Hulk and Dreadfleet do have is that their components are top-notch, beyond what you usually see at board games and there are always people who are willing to pay for what they perceive as premium. If it had been one of the dozens FFG games in their catalogue, would it have stood out? I highly doubt it. In fact, I am pretty sure that even with probably less-than-expected sales, DF still sold much more than most FFG games do, even GW licensed ones.

Have you played Descent? DF was a one off. I don't see it as even touching FFG in any area at all. As to the original thought, no. Dreadfleet would have took if it were a consecutive game with a point other then the tired old- "Give me your money, NOW!!!, Now @#$ off!!"

Even if it were at 60 bucks, the game doesn't have staying power. Unlike Man O war, there wasn't a specific reason to get attached to it. Was it an introductory game? no. Was it an add on? no.

All it had going for it was a couple of... pretty shineysthat were not all that special. Our stores down here have a couple of copies, and that GW pile is getting smaller and smaller.....

FFG would have done a basic boxed set of more minis thet you can shake a ore at, then spurted out at least two to three add on sets, along with maybe a small box of add ons and the ability to order more ships. FFG is a game company, they make games that have staying power.

GW should have just subcontracted Dreadfleet to them and called it a day, at least then it might have gotten the resepct it would have deserved.

Miniature Market has them on clearance for $70.

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/itc-dread.html?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=After+XMas+Blitz+2012&utm_content=After+XMas+Blitz+2012+CID_98b8c0060c40e5bd60e1aaf35823a6c7&utm_source=Email+Campaign+Monitor&utm_term=Dreadfleet+Battle+at+Sea

This thread has inspired me. I'm finally down to take part in awesome ship-to-ship combat with my friends.

I put in an order for Battleship Galaxies.

Who Knew that Dead Fleet was going to flop. I for one am not surprised since Uncharted Seas is way cheaper, expandable, scaleable and well. You get the point.

Ouze wrote:I put in an order for Battleship Galaxies.

Now that's a game that needs expansions.

Ouze wrote:This thread has inspired me. I'm finally down to take part in awesome ship-to-ship combat with my friends.

This is why I just bought two small fishing boats and some potato cannons

Kroothawk wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

VikingScott wrote:Sorry to de-rail thread but I need to ask where the rumour of a Bloodbowl box next year is from. I haven't heard of this before and would like to know more.

AFAIK its not so much a rumour as it is wishful thinking due to 2012 being the 25th anniversary of BloodBowl.

Actually, Hastings confirmed it, with 4 teams in the box. Best confirmation you can get nowadays.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/399920.page

Thanks for the update Kroot, its nice to see that it was "confirmed"!

If I see a copy floating around for £35, I might buy it.

It's worth that much, not £70 though.

scarletsquig wrote:If I see a copy floating around for £35, I might buy it.

It's worth that much, not £70 though.

There are tons of them on Ebay alone for under £35 starting bids and some around the £35 - £40 mark buy it now; I'm sure a savvy and seasoned Ebay-er could probably pick one up for less than £35, given a bit of luck and a following breeze....

I'd be tempted at that price as well, I'd certainly seriously consider it at least.

At £70 I'm not interested at all. Hell, I still haven't got around to getting Horus Heresy yet, and I'd see that as much better value than DF.

Shepherd23 wrote:I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Maybe they aren't on Dread Fleet, but the production department will have done its sums and made a chart of cost per unit produced.

In other words, if the mould cost £100,000 and you make one unit, it will cost £100,000 but if you make 50,000 units the cost of the mould is only £2 each.

But you have to sell enough units.

Ouze wrote:This thread has inspired me. I'm finally down to take part in awesome ship-to-ship combat with my friends.

I put in an order for Battleship Galaxies.

That deserves an emphatic:

"Bazinga!"

Grot 6 wrote:
Have you played Descent? DF was a one off. I don't see it as even touching FFG in any area at all. As to the original thought, no. Dreadfleet would have took if it were a consecutive game with a point other then the tired old- "Give me your money, NOW!!!, Now @#$ off!!"

Even if it were at 60 bucks, the game doesn't have staying power. Unlike Man O war, there wasn't a specific reason to get attached to it. Was it an introductory game? no. Was it an add on? no.

All it had going for it was a couple of... pretty shineysthat were not all that special. Our stores down here have a couple of copies, and that GW pile is getting smaller and smaller.....

FFG would have done a basic boxed set of more minis thet you can shake a ore at, then spurted out at least two to three add on sets, along with maybe a small box of add ons and the ability to order more ships. FFG is a game company, they make games that have staying power.

GW should have just subcontracted Dreadfleet to them and called it a day, at least then it might have gotten the resepct it would have deserved.

Yes, I have played Descent. I'm not quite sure what your point is there.

My point was pretty simple - would it have sold more as "just another FFG game"? I am pretty sure, no. Some people would have bought it if it was cheaper and expandable, yes. But then again, some other people would have not, because it was not "GW premium". Which group of people is larger? I don't know. However you put it, appeal for fantasy naval game is limited. Suppose someone puts out a LotR naval game, with Elven and Umbar and Gondor fleets, would it be a big seller?

I think my FLGS still has all the copies of Dreadfleet they originally ordered save for the one they bought as a store copy. I never saw a game played an the boxes just sit there.

It doesn't look like a bad game, but it has no tie-in with anything else and is 15% more expensive than Space Hulk with fewer gaming pieces that aren't compatible with other systems and zero nostalgia factor.

No idea what GW was thinking with the Dreadfleet release, and less still with a decision to recall and destroy the copies as opposed to simply putting them on firesale or shipping them somewhere they might sell (I doubt the shipping costs are *that* high that it's more worth destroying them than redistributing them).

Johnny-Crass wrote:

Ouze wrote:This thread has inspired me. I'm finally down to take part in awesome ship-to-ship combat with my friends.

This is why I just bought two small fishing boats and some potato cannons

Now that sounds like a fun game! (and expandable too)

I dont think they would just dump them in a landfill. I work at a car factory that makes bumpers and plastic parts and they grind up the bad parts so they can be used for something else.

Local GW shop was packing up loads of stock and Dreadfleet today to be sent back.

It sounds daft, but stock sitting on a shelf can cost more than destroying it.

GW has millions of pounds worth of stock sitting on shelves in open shops, frequented by the public, with glass windows and a couple of locks.

Compare the insurance cost of that level of assets with no assets or warehoused stock.

Better to spend a penny on shredding a book or storing it until specifically needed than paying for something you don't need if you can get your stock management streamlined.

My LFGS has sold 11 of the 15 copies it has and the owner told me yesterday that he has had not a peep from GW regarding the recall.

FLGS may not get it since that would actually cost GW having to reimburse them in some manner. GW stores sending it back costs nothing outside shipping and a few minutes of an accountant's time to write off that value from the books.

Yeah I really doubt this would include non-GW stores.

A recall would only include independents if the stock was faulty. It isn't, GW just don't want to sell it any more - the independents are on their own. After all, GW have sold that stock (at wholesale price) which is already a profit. They are hardly going to buy them back just because they don't think the independents can sell them.

Howard A Treesong wrote:A recall would only include independents if the stock was faulty. It isn't, GW just don't want to sell it any more - the independents are on their own. After all, GW have sold that stock (at wholesale price) which is already a profit. They are hardly going to buy them back just because they don't think the independents can sell them.

Thats cool, most GW stores exchange items without question.


You could say that..... *puts on sunglasses* Dreadfleet is in dry dock YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Hmm, ~$80 USD (inc. shipping) from Miniatures Market. That's fairly tempting.

Gitkikka wrote:Hmm, ~$80 USD (inc. shipping) from Miniatures Market. That's fairly tempting.

Until you realize that it's still Dreadfleet and will just sit on your shelf unused after you've played it once or twice.

Ravenous D wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:A recall would only include independents if the stock was faulty. It isn't, GW just don't want to sell it any more - the independents are on their own. After all, GW have sold that stock (at wholesale price) which is already a profit. They are hardly going to buy them back just because they don't think the independents can sell them.

Thats cool, most GW stores exchange items without question.


You could say that..... *puts on sunglasses* Dreadfleet is in dry dock YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Well played sir...