Having looked into starting the hobby after painting the starter kit, I'm discovering the negative perspective here on Dakka, and amoungst long-term players (kept at a whisper in store) have regarding GW's policies and the future of GW being very much up in the air long-term.
Collated with the simple fact that Australians pay practically 100-150% more on top of British Pound prices, I'm beginning to think, is this really a hobby I want to get into?
What could happen tomorrow, prices could drop suddenly because GW realise hey we need to turn around. But I get the feeling they won't. Ultimately my question is this, has it always been like this, or is it reaching such a pinnacle now that if you were to pretend you were in my position, or a newbies position considering starting out.....is it worth it, or would you recommend to boycott and let it die out or down until the overall picture is clear?
I realise the value is in my eyes, if I enjoyed the hobby, but I'm having trouble breaking into the scene at the GW store for two reasons. The social groups there are already formed, experienced and knowledgeable - and I am a noob. The second, I'm most definitely guided under the staff members wing to ensure...shall we say, a certain direction and interest is maintained, and any negative influences are avoided - to the young child or younger man, this may seem exceptional customer service, but being experienced in my years I can see it is a great tactic to befriend ones'....finances through interest. Especially so when the friendly staff member became uneasy and avoided many direct questions regarding what is commonly spoken on here.
Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
It might be Dakka, but I have to confess that a number of players at our club who do not post here are in a similar state of mind.
As a vet of nearly 25 years, in some form or another, I can honestly say I've not known it this bad, but then the increased awareness the Internet bri GW may contribute to that.
Regardless, it's a fantastic time to be war gaming, so if you have misgivings about GW, why not explore some of the other options?
In a year, our club has gone from exclusively GW, and almost exclusively 40k, to regularly including Infinty, Warmahordes, X Wing and others, with 40k being perhaps half of what's played.
curran12 wrote: Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
I can understand that.
But from your perspective, are things getting worse?
curran12 wrote: Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
I can understand that.
But from your perspective, are things getting worse?
I was looking at 40k because GW is ultimately my LGS, and there isn't much else unless I go for a 2 hour drive to where other hobby wargames are played.
I didn't even realize that there were this many haters and malcontents until I ventured online. I just played with my friends and enjoyed 40k in that capacity.
With that said, I agree with the above posters that said ignore the negativity and enjoy the game.
But from your perspective, are things getting worse?
Compared to what? I don't take what Dakka says as gospel for my gaming experience. In my immediate area, there are decent events when I want them, and usually a pickup game whenever I have the itch. So all's well.
Am I ignorant of the complaints voiced here? Not at all. But those are not how I gauge my experience.
Look at the data here at this site positive or negative. Read the posts that give a logical answer to what they are saying. A very good example is one game store owner who was a supporter with GW has now conveyed his concern with the recent policies being in placed on LFGS. There are literally hundreds of topics of concern about how GW's policies are hurting the bottom line. You.
Look at the situation where you live. Talk to the people playing at the games stores and see what is popular. Keep an open mind on what they say, but listen to how they say things about a situation.
Bad mouthing a company (or anyone in that manner) or giving praise without logical reasoning (and/or data) behind the comment generally denotes very narrow minded people and these are the kinds of people that can poison your environment.
Next there are other kinds of games than just 40K. Look at the other forums here on this site to take a good look at. 40K is not the "Hobby". Only a part of it.
curran12 wrote: Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
This is largely accurate. I don't think I've been a part of any message board for any game, video, board or miniature based, that isn't largely negative. The people that are happy don't make post saying "I love GW and Space marines! YAY!" but the angry sorts will be making the hater threads.
That said, a lot of these hate threads have good reasons behind them. I've been playing for 15+ years now, and I've never seen the negativity reach this leave of fervor. GW seems to be making a lot of questionable decisions that don't do anything but hurt your average hardcore gamer and line their pockets. Combine that with the fact that there are so many opportunities that they have that they just ignore and it really makes you wonder if they will be around in a few years. Their utter lack of internet presence for example. Outside their online store they do almost nothing to support the game. Miniature War Gaming, a local online retailer in Canada posts battle reports, product reviews and tons of other things that help grow the hobby....but GW pulled the rug out from under them with their new trade account policies, forcing them to shut down.
azreal13 wrote: It might be Dakka, but I have to confess that a number of players at our club who do not post here are in a similar state of mind.
As a vet of nearly 25 years, in some form or another, I can honestly say I've not known it this bad, but then the increased awareness the Internet bri GW may contribute to that.
Regardless, it's a fantastic time to be war gaming, so if you have misgivings about GW, why not explore some of the other options?
In a year, our club has gone from exclusively GW, and almost exclusively 40k, to regularly including Infinty, Warmahordes, X Wing and others, with 40k being perhaps half of what's played.
Now that is cool seeing how your club has been evolving. In my area most have left the hobby or gone to CCG's and Board games. The rest are doing what your club is doing but they are so small of a group now then the CCG crowd.
curran12 wrote: Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
I can understand that.
But from your perspective, are things getting worse?
I was looking at 40k because GW is ultimately my LGS, and there isn't much else unless I go for a 2 hour drive to where other hobby wargames are played.
Again, where in Sydney are you? Because Campbelltown is about a 40 minute drive from the city, and has an absolutely fantastic game store.
curran12 wrote: Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
I can understand that.
But from your perspective, are things getting worse?
I was looking at 40k because GW is ultimately my LGS, and there isn't much else unless I go for a 2 hour drive to where other hobby wargames are played.
Again, where in Sydney are you? Because Campbelltown is about a 40 minute drive from the city, and has an absolutely fantastic game store.
Bankstown. What's the place called?
It's just extremely confusing. I do listen to the guys already in the hobby, and they're just so negative. "GW sucks at this that and we get ripped off etc", yet I don't know if it's because they just love the game or it's a social outlet for them, because rarely are games played at the GW I go to when I'm there. Usually always the same fellas hanging around chatting or painting newly purchased (but not in-store) items.
So overall, people hate the overall business, but love the game. Very confusing to take a standpoint from that.
If you like to paint miniatures, model tanks and push them around a board and roll dice, then it is a great time to start. Tons of variety out there, minis get better every day, painting is easier, tons of large events growing every day.
If you like to paint GW only miniatures, GW only model tanks and push them around a GW only board and GW only roll dice, then it is a potentially disappointing time to start, especially based upon your local area.
While there is lot of reasons for people to complain about GW, not every reason to complain impacts every person. For me, it makes ZERO impact to my daily activity that people in Australia have terrible support and high prices. I have great availability, great places to game, models I like and large, nationwide US events which are fun to play in. Some may argue I need to furrow my brow in anger and change my purchasing and games I play because of other people's experiences. They can't be happy knowing someone somewhere may possibly be enjoying themselves.
But OP, you being in Australia... you are in for a totally different experience than us in the US. So take that in to consideration.
(Personally, I would say don't limit yourself to GW simply because it is the big smelly fart in the room which is in your face. Look around, see what will give you the models you enjoy and the playerbase you can actually play with and if it happens that GW games and products fills that need and makes you happy, so be it.)
azreal13 wrote: It might be Dakka, but I have to confess that a number of players at our club who do not post here are in a similar state of mind.
As a vet of nearly 25 years, in some form or another, I can honestly say I've not known it this bad, but then the increased awareness the Internet bri GW may contribute to that.
Regardless, it's a fantastic time to be war gaming, so if you have misgivings about GW, why not explore some of the other options?
In a year, our club has gone from exclusively GW, and almost exclusively 40k, to regularly including Infinty, Warmahordes, X Wing and others, with 40k being perhaps half of what's played.
Now that is cool seeing how your club has been evolving. In my area most have left the hobby or gone to CCG's and Board games. The rest are doing what your club is doing but they are so small of a group now then the CCG crowd.
Not gonna lie, it's getting tough. We're losing members more often than we gain them, although seldom for gaming reasons, normally work or family related.
Apparently the local GW manager has be instructed to set up a GCN registered club, which we are not. As we are not we cannot advertise in the store for new people. I've pushed for us to start earlier as the opportunity arose at our venue, which will hopefully allow some of the younger players to make it more often, but ironically as the health and diversity of our gaming has grown, our membership has shrunk!
The game is so expensive and it seems like GW wants to drive business away... but the game itself is a blast. I don't regret the 2k I've spent on it at all, but entertainment money to me is a write off anyhow and I have hours of enjoyment from modelling and painting alone. Thats the best part of the hobby to me! Other manufacturers have some bloody nice sculpts too, though...
Zinderneuf wrote: Have to admit, this forum is getting pretty bitter, almost as if it was cool to adopt a snide persona by much of the membership. Sad.
I think there some truth to this as well. Dakka's atmosphere is getting darker.
OP- GW isn't perfect, but either are gas prices(and a ton of other things) and I still like to drive. However, in most cases if one says something positive about GW they are branded fan boys and apologists. The whole thing is stupid. Some people just need to hate.
Zinderneuf wrote: Have to admit, this forum is getting pretty bitter, almost as if it was cool to adopt a snide persona by much of the membership. Sad.
I think there some truth to this as well. Dakka's atmosphere is getting darker.
OP- GW isn't perfect, but either are gas prices(and a ton of other things) and I still like to drive. However, in most cases if one says something positive about GW they are branded fan boys and apologists. The whole thing is stupid. Some people just need to hate.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. The "haters" on Dakka are generally the ones that care the most about GW. We love the games, the lore, the amount of our own history that GW has been a part of. We want GW to succeed - we want them to keep churning out codices and rules and models. It is because of our love of the game and the future of the IP that we are so vocal and seemingly bitter. We disagree with what the company is doing and their business decisions that they're making. If we didn't care or simply hated GW, we wouldn't say anything and would just let GW fold in on itself.
I suggest finding a FLGS or club near you that you like so that you're not stuck with GW. You can always play their stuff if you want, but playing outside their stores will broaden your options a lot.
Regarding the negativity, if you want to go ahead despite it then feel free! There's still loads of discussion to be had that isn't negative. Just hang around the more specific areas of the forums more and you might not even notice it. There's no difficulty finding discussion of 40k, especially, here.
Also, what puma713 just said is awesome and true of a massive number of things in the world other than GW. When it comes to games, people usually criticise because they care.
Has it always been this bad? Yeah, it has. If you go back into the archives of old Usenet postings from 1992 you get stuff like this:
"BTW, I wonder what is going to happen to GW during the coming years. I know a LOT of people who were once Warhammer-addicts (including myself), but are turning away from GW en masse because they don't longer like the "improved" games such as WH40K, WFB or Space Marine. It seems GW is producing more and more stuff that should attract younger players (e.g. steam tanks, noise marines, childish magic etc...). And if so, where are all those younger players going to get the money to buy a lot of expensive miniatures?"
Dakka has a particularly negative culture these days, but that's a reflection on Dakka, not on the community as a whole.
Kingsley wrote: Has it always been this bad? Yeah, it has. If you go back into the archives of old Usenet postings from 1992 you get stuff like this:
"BTW, I wonder what is going to happen to GW during the coming years. I know a LOT of people who were once Warhammer-addicts (including myself), but are turning away from GW en masse because they don't longer like the "improved" games such as WH40K, WFB or Space Marine. It seems GW is producing more and more stuff that should attract younger players (e.g. steam tanks, noise marines, childish magic etc...). And if so, where are all those younger players going to get the money to buy a lot of expensive miniatures?"
Dakka has a particularly negative culture these days, but that's a reflection on Dakka, not on the community as a whole.
You see, that is a similar parallel about GW's current player age that they are going for to those companies that I have posted previously that went bankrupt and/or bought out by another company with less than what the market price should be. Big mistake if they continue this line of thought.
I also agree with Puma's comment. There are many that love the lore, the models and even the game of 40K. But they just hate the company in general
OP - I just started playing 40k in the last 4-5 months. It's a fine time to start, if you know what you're getting into. It's not a cheap hobby, it's time consuming and GW isn't the nicest company to deal with.
That said, I love the models, the rules are interesting and new enough that you won't see a new edition for prolly another 5 or so years, there are lots of people who play and lots of different army types to play with. Plus there are a ton of 3rd party sellers who have great pieces and bits, there are many quality paint and modeling companies and there is no end to articles in the Internet about painting and modeling tips, tricks and techniques.
Is GW worse? Personally, I don't care. Today. In a few years I might but right now I'm just enjoying.
Adam LongWalker wrote: There are many that love the lore, the models and even the game of 40K. But they just hate the company in general
This. And I'm almost at the point where I can barely make it through a normal game of 40K. Love the lore, love the models, bored with the game, and hate the company.
GW has earned every amount of vile darkness that they breed.
In general, people love the setting, love playing games, and love the nastalga of what once was. This new corperate venier in a suit and tie only in it for the outright- "HOW MUCH CAN WE SHILL FROM THE PLEBES... is what people hate the most.
For one, Games workshop is first and foremost a corperate shill(shell) of what it once was. They have taken everything good from the "HHHobby", and turned it into something of a caricature of what once was.
From the "annual price increase", to Finecrap, to complete ineptitude in "Improving" the game without so much as as astandardised FAQ, support, gaming, and support of the general two game systems in general, GW has taken the piss and makes it a point to continue to do so.
Case in point, read over a few of the choice morsels of information amongst the chaff of "Oh, dakka dakka is generally negative". You people do know that most of the players here have pretty much over ten + years in the hobby in general, right? You do know that some of the issues are real? When GW does well, Dakka is the first to say so, unfortunately- They have neglected the very customer/ consumer base that they once cultivated with things such as "Open gaming", scenery construction classes, gaming instruction, bits service, battle bunkers, deals, sales, specialist games, internal support, training programs on how to model, paint, and play, customer support, FLGS support, online information support, pdf's, army lists, How To's from everything from painting to playing, Online worldwide campaigns, Special events, giveaways, general good will, and a reasonable product at a reasonable price.
Dakka is negative? It's cool to be negative? People have no reason to complain about being treated with such disrespect from a bunch of corperation D bags?
I'm sorry, but just because you only have a GW store as your only outlet, you really don't have a leg to stand on.
For one, GW is capable of much much more with even just a little effort. Another point is that, with so much and so many- there is too little effort going to the product/ system that it is almost laughable.
I speak for myself, but others can probibly agree from thier own prospective-
You don't throw down hard earned coin to the tune of thousands of dollars, pounds, euros over many many years just to join the hate is cool crowd.
We love or loved the game and are genuinly frustrated to the point of hate over a company that continues to do everything other the accomplish the mission of selling cool figures for a cool game, and cultivate a gaming community that WANTS to play a good game.
(Then we can go on and on about our games developers, writers, and sculpters and how they are and have been treated...)
When Wart and Wells took it on themselves to turn the game and company in general into thier own personal piggy bank, they lost a whole lot more the just credibility for not only themselves, but the brand.
So, no. OP, the issues have always been there, but never to the point of where they are now that everyone is dumping thier collections, giving up playing, and reducing stock from whole walls to two or less rows, or closing down support for other systems outright.
It's just extremely confusing. I do listen to the guys already in the hobby, and they're just so negative. "GW sucks at this that and we get ripped off etc", yet I don't know if it's because they just love the game or it's a social outlet for them, because rarely are games played at the GW I go to when I'm there. Usually always the same fellas hanging around chatting or painting newly purchased (but not in-store) items.
So overall, people hate the overall business, but love the game. Very confusing to take a standpoint from that.
Sydney has a GW Battle Bunker (as far as I know, it is still operational). GW has been very busy in Sydney moving out of high rent locations, such as Westfields Liverpool and Macarthur Square, to set up what I assume is cheaper shops with fewer staff. They still have a small store in Liverpool and one in Campbelltown off Queen St.
If you are going to head out to Campbelltown though, I would suggest ducking in to The Hall of Heroes (60 Queen St). I know a lot of good folk purchase and play games there, so they will be able to help you out. At the least they can give you some advice regarding the local gaming groups.
My opinion: GW has always been expensive, but the quality of the product and lore has made it worthwhile. When GW started to lose this, by ret-conning their own lore and using substandard materials, I started to take a step back. Recently the company seems to be clutching at straws (...and by that I mean money). It is very easy, once a company like this has disenfranchised you, to be highly cynical whenever the company does something new. For example, to me now, every new Codex is a blatant money grab that nerfs old armies and makes you buy new stuff to stay afloat.
Realistically though, GW is a company that has to make money to stay alive. Everything it does is profit driven, which is ok, but they seem to have forgotten that customer goodwill also attracts a profit. 40K has kept me interested for 20 years now ( getting old), but recently it has been a one way relationship. My advice is that if you can find a good group to game and collect with, 40K can still be a very enjoyable hobby. If you are doing it alone it will take a lot of self motivation.
It's not negativity at all. It's harsh positivity. Wargaming is thriving, or at least on a heavy upswing. GW is in a death spiral. The quality of the sculpts, rules, and even fluff has taken a nosedive in the past couple of years, while prices have increased by 35-100% and GW's behavior has become ever more erratic and antisocial.
If you have non-GW stores or clubs or whathaveyou in your area, check out other systems. Malifaux, for instance, can be started for less than a single vehicle or box of tac marines costs, perhaps even any40k kit since you're in Australia. Warmahordes is pricier but bigger, and still radically cheaper than 40k. Infinity is pricy per model, but encourages proxying, and looks like an amazing game. That's the limit of what I know of other systems, because I stopped looking for a new system on finding Malifaux (playing cards instead of dice, awesome models, and a heavy melee focus (I ran a wych cult in 5th ed, and 6th nerfed what was already a challenging (but awesome) playstyle to the point of uselessness (I blame Ward, since everything horrible in 6th is a straight buff to his pet Necrons, and he's one of the three most conspicuously credited authors for the 6th ed BRB))).
If GW is your only option, find something else to do for a year or so, and check again. Now is the worst time to be starting 40k. If the hobby aspect is your thing, try taking up sculpting: there are a number of threads around by sculptors who are, from what I've seen, more than happy to give advise and comment on how they're doing things. Building a piece from nothing but a length of wire and a lump of polymer clay is many times as satisfying as assembling a kit someone else designed, particularly once it starts coming out decent looking (which takes lots of practice and patience, of course).
Monster Rain wrote: I didn't even realize that there were this many haters and malcontents until I ventured online. I just played with my friends and enjoyed 40k in that capacity.
Same here, but I was also ignorant of all the other games out there and the magnitude of bsGW heaps upon its customers, so ignorance works both ways.
Some interesting replies there fellas. Thanks very much.
If what you are saying is true, and people are selling out their armies I'll keep an eye out on here and eBay for some cheap CSMs. Might be a way into the hobby cheaper as long as they're not expecting to make back what they bought them for.
On the other hand, I have a trip coming up to UK, and having a look at prices over there. I could practically pick up the same army I was looking at for a quarter of the price even after currency exchange.
I think for now, I'll get a start on DV kit, and watch Dakka and GW closely - especially come mid-year where business do their EOFY.
I think what you find online is really more representative of the world at large than what you tend to find in local groups (especially if that local group is centered around a GW store).
You may see more online, but that is often just because people tend to congregate with others of similiar views, while online forums tend to draw based on subject matter, and various aspects like economic conditions and local gaming availability do not impact who logs into a forum.
All of that said, the best advice that I can offer to anyone getting into various aspects of the hobby is to not marry into a company and simply buy what you like. Read the fluff you like, buy the miniatures you want in the scale you prefer and game using the rules which suit you best. There are nearly a thousand companies making miniatures in dozens of sizes and scales and well over a hundred different sets of rules to cover everything you can think of from GMed dungeon crawls and skirmishes to planet spanning campaigns featuring combined arms and space battles.
The only thing that restricts people to use GW figures, with GW fluff, GW rules in GW stores is a false idea that you have to. Most rules are flexible enough to change sizes and figures with little problem. Weapons from one system can easily be shited to be 'counts as' weapons from a different system. If the GW fluff is appealing, I recomend you look at FFGs 40kRPG books as they are (IMO) better written and more consistent than the stuff GW has been putting out.
As someone posted in the thread about the ridiculous showing GW put up at a recent convention, it could be that they are trying to set themselves up for a buyout. It seems like the only logical explanation for the choices they have been making.
As far as my allegiance to GW, they burned my bridge over Finecast. It wasn't that I loved metal, it was that they were pissing on my leg and telling me it was raining. And then they tried selling me a towel to wipe it up with.
I haven't been in a GW store in three years. People liking GW isn't just the result of GW's sinister marketing tendrils or whatever, it's the result of GW putting out legitimately good products. Probably two dozen people were at one of the local stores at midnight last night to pick up Tau stuff as soon as possible. They had probably 30 Tau Codexes on the shelf and one of the guys at the store said that he expected to sell most or all of them in the upcoming weekend.
To me, that speaks of a company that knows their base well and is putting out good products. There's a reason that GW got to where they are, and despite what a lot of the haters and naysayers say they still have the ability to release interesting and appealing products.
OP, "Dakka Discussions" is perhaps one of the most negatively-biased places possible to start a thread about Games Workshop. You need only look at the signatures of several of the posters in this thread to see what kind of ingrained opinions you're dealing with here.
If they knew their customers they wouldnt have the supply issues which have been the subject of many complaints in the past few months (from the flyers to the Tau themselves).
Kingsley wrote: I haven't been in a GW store in three years. People liking GW isn't just the result of GW's sinister marketing tendrils or whatever, it's the result of GW putting out legitimately good products. Probably two dozen people were at one of the local stores at midnight last night to pick up Tau stuff as soon as possible. They had probably 30 Tau Codexes on the shelf and one of the guys at the store said that he expected to sell most or all of them in the upcoming weekend.
To me, that speaks of a company that knows their base well and is putting out good products. There's a reason that GW got to where they are, and despite what a lot of the haters and naysayers say they still have the ability to release interesting and appealing products.
OP, "Dakka Discussions" is perhaps one of the most negatively-biased places possible to start a thread about Games Workshop. You need only look at the signatures of several of the posters in this thread to see what kind of ingrained opinions you're dealing with here.
And which more-objective forum should he post it in? One that is going to paint a gleaming picture of the retail great that is Games Workshop? One that is going to illustrate the love they have for their fans, the arduous pursuit of marketing and inspiring interest in newcomers so the hobby can grow and thrive? Where is that forum? I'd like to hear from the folks that believe the aforementioned values.
I think it is funny that your barometer for how incredibly well they are doing is the fact that the store you visited said he "expected" to sell 30 Tau Codices. Be still my heart.
And the only negative signature in this entire thread is mine. Exaggerate much?
To be honest I think the set of gamers you play with makes or breaks the game. Like anything in life the people you surround yourself with will have an effect on the game you play. I am lucky in that I have about 7 regular opponents who are good friends and top chaps to play against so 40k doesn't become boring for me. We get to spend our Thursday nights having a good chat, being competitive with our toy soldiers and showing each other what we've painted/converted etc. Sometimes I think people take toy soldiers a tad too seriously...even if you have invested a lot of time and money that's YOUR choice and it's not the end of life, it's a hobby, and whilst it's not ultra cheap in the UK when you consider the time you spend building/painting/playing with it (1000s of hours per model over the years!) I can stomach purchasing new stuff (discount stores!)
I also play Flames of War (brilliant game but even on their own forums you get similar experience to here) and used to play Infinity (Loved the models and to an extent, the game but I have much more fun with 40k) so don't be afraid to try new things either just remember to play with decent guys and your games will be much more fun!
Though there are some as blinded by bile as those blinded by the shine of their armour.
Also OP, counteract the prices with Ebay, FLGS (non-GW, sometimes their prices are a little better but most of the time the gaming atmosphere definitely is so it can be worth dropping some cash in them sometimes to support them) and the swapshop. Buy in store, GW'll just want more.
I am not happy in which way GW is going but thanks to the news and rumors thread i have been introduced to many.. many.. many.. many.. alternative game systems and miniature makers! things are looking up for us gamers!
puma713 wrote: And which more-objective forum should he post it in? One that is going to paint a gleaming picture of the retail great that is Games Workshop? One that is going to illustrate the love they have for their fans, the arduous pursuit of marketing and inspiring interest in newcomers so the hobby can grow and thrive? Where is that forum? I'd like to hear from the folks that believe the aforementioned values.
40k General Discussion, on this very board, would probably be a much better place to get a realistic view.
HBMC wrote:It's Kingsley. Talk to him long enough and he'll start to talk about how GW prices haven't gone up and have actually gone down.
Which is unambiguously true for many armies if you adjust for inflation, and true for some even if you don't. "GW constantly and flagrantly increases prices beyond inflation" is essentially a myth, though like many popular myths I suspect it will prove hard to dispel.
To the OP: There are far too many games and model companies to get bogged down looking at just GW. If a GW store is your only answer, housing games at your own home or a friend's with friends and family if possible is a better choice as you'll be free to choose what you want. GW stores only allow GW product on the tables with few exceptions (self made or sparse other company bits) which means they more or less dictate your hobby to their four walls. You've seen and compared the GW prices so you have an understanding how bad it can be for you compared to another country.
If you're looking for gaming, you can try other companies or board games. Other companies have been putting out much more organized, intuitive and streamlined rules. Board games like Catan or Elder Sign are just good fun and they're cheap and there's a ton of them.
If you're looking for modeling, there are dozens of model making companies that do just that and do it better than GW. Reaper is probably the biggest name out there in this type of business and they have an extensive catalogue of miniatures.
If you're looking for a story, pretty much any board game or model game has one. Many people will cite 40k lore as good, but this is sort of a fallacy. 40k has been subject to numerous retcons of varying scale and a highly decentralized story telling method. Even in their Horus Heresy series, their most consistent presentation, they're still inconsistent in portrayals and descriptions. They have an everything is cannon, nothing is cannon approach which signals that they cannot get their act together and present a cohesive universe. Instead, they rely on you to pick through what ever they shotgun at you and hope for the best. Other story lines tend to be more solid, but not without faults, for instance Warmachine is often cited for excessive plot armor in the stories. Many of these faults come from structural problems due to writing inexperience or requirements of a game universe.
I have been a member of DakkaDakka since some time in 2005. In my experience the negative feeling towards GW has been rising for several years. The trigger points have been, not in any order of time or importance;
Rapid price increases Finecast Slow release of codexes, especially for non-Imperial factions Pogrom against Bloodbowl fan sites Case against Chapter House Clampdown on PR and advance information Exchange rate in Australia Closing down game-playing in the shops No advancement in the timeline Retconning key points of fluff Promoting unpainted armies through 'Ard Boyz Stopping official competitions and shows White Dwarf The official forums, gone The annual worldwide campaigns, gone Chapter Approved, gone "Specialist" games effectively gone Confusion and erratic releases of errata and FAQs
These things can be looked at in various ways. Some people are interested from a business/legal angle. Others take a moral view, for or against GW as a "good" company (hence the accusations of "white knights" and "haters".)
The realistic viewpoint though, is, how does this affect my hobby experience?
When you look at that list, how much actually enhanced the hobby experience, especially for veterans, who are more likely than newcomers to be a member of a site like this?
However, it's important to remember that there are two aspects to the hobby. One is the GW HHHobby, in which you play GW models, on GW terrain, built and painted with GW tools, with GW rules, at GW competitions and shops. (Not that last bit so much, any more…)
The other is the "real" war-games hobby, in which you play whatever games on whatever terrain you like. That includes playing with GW models and rules if you like them, or using GW models in other rulesets or using non-GW models in GW rules.
If GW collapsed, none of your models and rules would vanish. There would be a fire sale during which to pick up any units you lacked in your army. Then you would be stuck with whatever edition of the rules and your codex were around at the end.
From a business viewpoint, discussion and argument has gone on for several years about whether GW is healthy as a company. After the LotR boom, sales and profits dropped off a cliff, and GW has been bumping along. The profits have increased, thanks largely to efficiency savings, but there is a suspicion that a fall in unit sales has been masked by higher prices. In that view, GW have been making a lot of mistakes which alienated veterans, who go on to reduce the number of newcomers into the HHHobby by not promoting it, and moving to other games.
But let's not be too pessimistic. The 40K rules (at least) seem to have stabilised quite well in 6th edition. The rate of release of codexes has picked up a lot and the xenon armies are catching up. There are plenty of new model kits. It looks like Finecast may get phased out in favour of polystyrene.
Having looked into starting the hobby after painting the starter kit, I'm discovering the negative perspective here on Dakka, and amoungst long-term players (kept at a whisper in store) have regarding GW's policies and the future of GW being very much up in the air long-term.
Collated with the simple fact that Australians pay practically 100-150% more on top of British Pound prices, I'm beginning to think, is this really a hobby I want to get into?
What could happen tomorrow, prices could drop suddenly because GW realise hey we need to turn around. But I get the feeling they won't. Ultimately my question is this, has it always been like this, or is it reaching such a pinnacle now that if you were to pretend you were in my position, or a newbies position considering starting out.....is it worth it, or would you recommend to boycott and let it die out or down until the overall picture is clear?
I realise the value is in my eyes, if I enjoyed the hobby, but I'm having trouble breaking into the scene at the GW store for two reasons. The social groups there are already formed, experienced and knowledgeable - and I am a noob. The second, I'm most definitely guided under the staff members wing to ensure...shall we say, a certain direction and interest is maintained, and any negative influences are avoided - to the young child or younger man, this may seem exceptional customer service, but being experienced in my years I can see it is a great tactic to befriend ones'....finances through interest. Especially so when the friendly staff member became uneasy and avoided many direct questions regarding what is commonly spoken on here.
Perhaps I should stick to Risk?
Not reading the other answers, I would definitely start a cheaper and a superior tactically game, such as Infinity. War40K does not give me the enjoyment it did, after I embraced the ruleset of Infinity - and a playable army comes at around 100 USD not 500 USD like in War40K.
Knowing what I know now, I'd not start Warhammer 40K.
GW is not the hobby. I don't get why people keep saying it is. If gw died the hobby wont end. GW would but the wargaming hobby would still be around.
Why limit yourself to gw, this is part of the problem with people like the op. I don't mean to be an ass but look around. Why limit yourself with a company who does nothing for the hobby but only for their shareholder's
Motograter wrote: GW is not the hobby. I don't get why people keep saying it is.
What constitutes the hobby is completely personal. If someone only plays 40k through either ignorance of other games or inability to play other games for various reasons, 40kis the hobby. Considering GW still holds the most amount of players, to most people who play wargames, GW is the hobby.
Motograter wrote: Why limit yourself to gw, this is part of the problem with people like the op. I don't mean to be an ass but look around. Why limit yourself with a company who does nothing for the hobby but only for their shareholder's
He made it quite clear that he finds it hard to start other games due to lack of people to play against, being that his LGS is a GW store. That's why, to him, GW is the hobby.
I can appreciate the OPs situation with the GW being the only local game store. My advice is to post on Dakkas "Find a Game" forum regardless of whether or not you end up taking up 40k. You will probably find some locals with places to game.
I think GW policies in Australia are particularly bad. If I lived there I would not consider getting into a GW game. However, if you are dead set on a 28mm dark sci fi large battle game then 40k it is. If you are not, you may want to look into Infinity, War Machine, Mercs, or Dropzone Commander. Infinity and Mercs are very inexpensive for wargames. A starter for Infinity is not much more expensive than the GW paint set (in Australia it may even be less expensive.) The set comes with roughly half of the models to play a 300 point (large) game. The rules are also free online. The Mercs starter is slightly more, but the game is always played with five models, so the investment is still small.
I'd like to add, in my opinion, the future of 40k is in no way bound to GW. Outside of GW stores there are, and have always been lots of players that keep the spirit of the first days, substituting what they don't own (formerly partly just because there were no models, partly because the first rules encouraged you to design your own vehicles) with sometimes fantastic kitbashes, scratchbuilts and proxies. You don't have a community outside of GW stores? Make one! Look for a room to use regularly, have meetings to build your own terrain, be creative! Break free! 40k is so much bigger than what GW made from it - if only they would recognice that, they would prosper...
Going slightly offtopic, I've seen lots of people mention the price of the hobby as a "bad" thing. Whilst GW is more expensive than most other wargaming companies I still think that as a hobby it is pretty damn cheap.
I have 2 armies for 40k, and an army for Warhammer (and a bunch of stuff for other games to, but lets keep to GW for now) in the 20 years I've been playing, counting going to conventions, paints, scenary and eveything I have probably spent around £10k on GW stuff.
Now lets look at my other hobby, which I've been doing for 2 years, of Archery. Here I spent £3k on a reasonable bow - certainly not the best around - and another £1k on accessaries. I spend £200 every 3 months on a new set of arrows and £150 every 6 months on a new target. I also need to spend £120 a month in club membership, and whilst I havn't been to a tournament yet the cost of these is also much higher than wargame tournaments. Over a similar 20 year period I really wouldn't be surprised if I spend closer to £50k on Archery.
So, whilst GW is an expensive hobby when compared to other wargames (and I suppose CCGs should probably be in there too as they tend to attract the same people) in terms of a hobby it's actually surprisingly cheap. Obviously this is based on the UK, in Australia it may well be that other hobbies are much cheaper and GW wargaming is very expensive over there.
curran12 wrote: Part of the problem with Dakka (and any online board) is an echo chamber effect. In all honest, most of the folks here are not all that upset or negative, but the ones you hear from the most are the most upset ones and they just feed off of it and create a sense of overall negativity. So generally I'd ignore what a board is doing when it comes to your enjoyment of the hobby. Focus on those you play with. If they are okay, then that is your barometer.
That said, I would add that Dakka, while pretty cool most of the time, does have more than its fair share of negativity.
This. My sentiments exactly. It's infectious too.
I for one think GW are taking 40K in a really good direction based on the last 4 codex releases not being Space Wolves or GK level strong. It costs alot, but it's a ridiculous hobby when you think about it and a box of, say, Terminators represent more value on the time vs enjoyment graph than most, more expensive, video games
The online community has a way of making EVERYTHING seem terrible. But Ive played a long time, my oldest brother even longer then me, and I know a few guys locally that have played since I was a wee one. Its the people that have been in it a long time that seem to get annoyed/irritated by the way GW has been conducting their business. I see it, and Im smart enough to have said "Nope....no more, GW can have it until they lower prices and pull their heads from their asses" And I havnt touched the game since. I dont really miss it, and I havnt gotten rid of anything, because I know Ill go back to it someday, but for now, Im done with them. Ive moved into other gaming systems and so far Im really digging those
Great post Killkrazy, I think that's it in a nutshell.
To the OP - I think the viewpoint here is more negative because you generally have people who have spent a lot more time than most with the game, reading about GW, and following it's progress. The casual outsider (as someone pointed out a few posts above) can not know about these things, occassionally dabble in 40k and still enjoy themselves just fine - the problem comes where they have been within the GW hobby for a while, and are able to witness the changes taking effect first hand.
I've likened GW's behaviour, and its effect on the fanbase over the years, to the Monty Python Fish Slapping dance (Youtube it), with GW as the nimbly dancing, kipper-wielding man lightly slapping John Cleese in the face repeatedly. Each one of those tiny slaps might be the equivalent of a price rise, the nerfing of an army, Finecast, whatever. Eventually a 'threshold' is reached, and like John Cleese in the video, you feel compelled to lash out with your haddock, smash them round the head with it and knock them into the canal. But how many kipper-strikes each individual can take (or, somewhat perversely, they enjoy the feeling of a wet fish sliding off their cheek!) varies very much on the individual in question and what they deem to be important. (I realise I've just repeated what Killkrazy has said, but in a much less useful and much more ridiculous way!)
With that in mind, I've witnessed many times new users coming to the forum and, believing they are coming from a world of fluffy clouds and roses, to be shocked by what they perceive to be the level of negativity. How those users deal with this varies from sticking their fingers in their ears, perhaps just focusing on one part of the forum (either because they don't care about whatever the issue might be, or choose not to read about it). Sometimes they lash out in a sort of whirlwind of disbelief (think of the bit in the Matrix, when Morpheus has just revealed the Matrix to Neo for the first time), and end up getting banned, before coming back with a grudging acknowledgement that perhaps their is some fire making that smoke. Others, like Kingsley, occupy some kind of dark-matter parallel universe where Mother Teresa invaded from the East, murdering millions as she did so, people take their pet goldfish out for walks and GW is cheaper to buy today than it was 10 years ago Finally, there is the worst sort who enjoy stirring and deliberately posting a contrary viewpoint just to try and get a rise out of the people who have quite obviously made an emotive post about something. Fortunately, these individuals are not common, and usually get bored after a while.
But I think most of us here are just gamers, modellers or painters who want want anyone would want - good products at a reasonable price. It's been painful at times watching GW change from a small, 'by the gamers, for the gamers' company into one 'operated by suits at all levels', and sometimes the worst, crass, aspects of that. But the company is still there, they still have a core of good design guys (who really just think the way we do, for the most part), and there is still the possibility that they will recognise some of the things being done well by their rivals and try and follow suit. And finally, if a GW is your only place to play then don't let any of this put you off. You can be a rational person about it - play whatever game, enjoy it, but at the same time you don't have to agree or disagree with everything that the company does mindlessly, like some kind of right or left wing political nutjob or football fan.
Zinderneuf wrote: Have to admit, this forum is getting pretty bitter, almost as if it was cool to adopt a snide persona by much of the membership. Sad.
I think there some truth to this as well. Dakka's atmosphere is getting darker.
OP- GW isn't perfect, but either are gas prices(and a ton of other things) and I still like to drive. However, in most cases if one says something positive about GW they are branded fan boys and apologists. The whole thing is stupid. Some people just need to hate.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. The "haters" on Dakka are generally the ones that care the most about GW. We love the games, the lore, the amount of our own history that GW has been a part of. We want GW to succeed - we want them to keep churning out codices and rules and models. It is because of our love of the game and the future of the IP that we are so vocal and seemingly bitter. We disagree with what the company is doing and their business decisions that they're making. If we didn't care or simply hated GW, we wouldn't say anything and would just let GW fold in on itself.
It is because we care that we lash out so.
''
Is this a wargaming forum or a Narcotics Anonymous intervention?
40K is still interesting, the issues boil down to company decisions, and general ineptitude.
Dakka has always been darker. We're not here to parrot the party line, if you want that head over to warseer. Dakka is about truth and gaming, with a good dose of information, Number 6.
Overall a common rule with the internet is that people complain a lot more on it than praise things, overall 40k (as that is what you are interested in) prices go up each year, this can be somewhat negated by ordering online from a discount store, the current 6th ed books I think are great books and all balance well with each other, I think 40k is just more expensive than most people would like and there were some real balance issues in 5th edition, (still some in 6th ed, but I think less)
The only person you need to listen to is yourself, if you are willing to pay for warhammer 40k and you enjoy it, then go for it, no need to listen to random people on the internet if you like somthing.
If you're looking for a story, pretty much any board game or model game has one. Many people will cite 40k lore as good, but this is sort of a fallacy. 40k has been subject to numerous retcons of varying scale and a highly decentralized story telling method. Even in their Horus Heresy series, their most consistent presentation, they're still inconsistent in portrayals and descriptions. They have an everything is cannon, nothing is cannon approach which signals that they cannot get their act together and present a cohesive universe. Instead, they rely on you to pick through what ever they shotgun at you and hope for the best.
For storytelling in and the lore of the 40K universe, the Fantasy Flight RPG's replaced GW writing for me a long time ago. Because it has to focus on the armies and big wars, the lore from codexes feels rather "finished", often several editions ago, and you can end up with some rather silly one-upmanship in things getting bigger and badder.
Being in and out of the hobby until a couple of years ago, no, it hasn't been "this bad". GW stuff has always been expensive, but worth the money. Nowadays, they just seem to want to cut out the middleman a little too much.
I think one of the worst things for the hobby has been the internet. A whole bunch of anonymous whining gets hobbyists no where.
Pacific wrote: Others, like Kingsley, occupy some kind of dark-matter parallel universe where Mother Teresa invaded from the East, murdering millions as she did so, people take their pet goldfish out for walks and GW is cheaper to buy today than it was 10 years ago
I actually claim that that many armies are cheaper now than they were in 2004 if you adjust for inflation, and in some cases just plain cheaper. Certainly some units and perhaps armies have gone up in price, but the overall trend is very different.
One interesting thing is that a lot of people seem to think that I'm some kind of GW superfan. I'm actually not. I've been in the hobby since 1998-- but during a lot of that time, I was not playing GW games. When 4th edition 40k started up, I quit the game, since I didn't like the way it was headed. For a long chunk I only played Ætherverse, and then when that died I switched over to some homebrew systems. I only got back into GW when they published 5th edition Warhammer 40k, which IMO has put 40k on a very positive trajectory which we're still on.
I have no real loyalty to GW and would gladly switch to another manufacturer if that was what was popular, good, and being played locally. However, GW is so obviously underrated by the community here that I often feel like I need to provide a voice of reason in some of the GW-bashing threads.
Pacific wrote: Others, like Kingsley, occupy some kind of dark-matter parallel universe where Mother Teresa invaded from the East, murdering millions as she did so, people take their pet goldfish out for walks and GW is cheaper to buy today than it was 10 years ago
I actually claim that that many armies are cheaper now than they were in 2004 if you adjust for inflation, and in some cases just plain cheaper. Certainly some units and perhaps armies have gone up in price, but the overall trend is very different.
One interesting thing is that a lot of people seem to think that I'm some kind of GW superfan. I'm actually not. I've been in the hobby since 1998-- but during a lot of that time, I was not playing GW games. When 4th edition 40k started up, I quit the game, since I didn't like the way it was headed. For a long chunk I only played Ætherverse, and then when that died I switched over to some homebrew systems. I only got back into GW when they published 5th edition Warhammer 40k, which IMO has put 40k on a very positive trajectory which we're still on.
I have no real loyalty to GW and would gladly switch to another manufacturer if that was what was popular, good, and being played locally. However, GW is so obviously underrated by the community here that I often feel like I need to provide a voice of reason in some of the GW-bashing threads.
Now see, this is interesting. I can match your time in the hobby, almost exactly. I quit at the start of 3rd as I didn't like how different it was, and didn't appreciate that in many ways the differences were better for the game as a whole. Nevertheless, I stayed around the hobby, albeit mostly playing CCGs for a couple more years, before quitting entirely except books for almost 10 years. I returned to 40k mid 2010. So our hobby careers are, by and large, comparable.
Where we differ is that, while expensive, my perception of the VFM I was getting all those years ago was never too bad, even when I returned to war gaming, I wasn't too bothered by the prices. As time goes by however,my perception of the value I'm getting is getting lower and lower.
You can do all the mathematical shenanigans you want to try and prove your point, my gut tells me I'm being ripped off by GW to a greater degree than in any other time in our relationship. That is what is important, you may be able to argue that in real terms X boxed set is y% cheaper in real terms, but if I feel ripped off when I buy it, none of that is important.
I've said it before, every discussion on here about price isn't about price, it's about value. Everyone's perception of value will differ, but in many cases, this is where GW really suffers, they simply do not offer value for money to many people.
puma713 wrote: The "haters" on Dakka are generally the ones that care the most about GW.
I don't agree. The biggest haters are generally those who once played GW but now play Warmachine. These disaffected appear on a crusade to convert any and all by denigrating the GW game (all aspects). They are worse than reformed smokers, Amway sellers or those who have embraced a new religion.
I mean I'm happy for you but, no, I don't want to drink a different flavour of Kool-Aid
My favourite quote goes like this: "Time enjoyed wasting is not wasted time".
This quote can also be applied to money. If you "waste" your money, but enjoy doing so, then there's no problem, except I guess, in some circumstances.
And you'll always find negative press for things on the Internet, it's up to you to make your own judgement.
I actually claim that that many armies are cheaper now than they were in 2004 if you adjust for inflation, and in some cases just plain cheaper. Certainly some units and perhaps armies have gone up in price, but the overall trend is very different.
I think that some people are REALLY into the hobby, and as a result you can think things are worse than they are.
I mean, GW do some wacky stuff, but Internet aside it has little bearing on your real life, all that counts there is if you enjoy it, if you have good mates to play with, and a few hundred bucks spare.
Actually, probably less than that. As I said, most people on here have too many models frankly!
I reckon with eBay you could get a nice 1000k army for about 200 bucks.
If you like it, and you can arrord it, then do it.
I actually claim that that many armies are cheaper now than they were in 2004 if you adjust for inflation, and in some cases just plain cheaper. Certainly some units and perhaps armies have gone up in price, but the overall trend is very different.
... ... .
Might you back up your claim with actual facts?
What it basically amounts to: by picking a certain time frame, some models from some armies have gone from overpriced metal to overpriced plastic, thus became cheaper.
So if I had an army with a lot of temple guard, in Oz pricing they were $11 each for metal ones, but now GW have released plastic ones which are currently $6.90 each. So if I picked a timeframe before the metal to plastic conversion and had an army that used a lot of temple guard, the price of that army has reduced.
Examples are usually units where they went from individual blisters to plastic 3-packs, and the 2004 price of 3 blisters is more than the 2013 price of 1 box of 3 plastic models.
And then people say that doesn't count because it is an extreme example falsifying a point... and then compare catchans to catchans because they wouldn't want to use an extreme example to falsify a point.
And then if you mention PP has similar prices or even more expensive in some places model per model, you get told that models become 'cheaper' when you need less of them and that you are blind if you don't see it.
And then a mantic shill pops in and tells us how every model is too expensive and how awesome they are, and then someone brings up third party models being twice the cost of regular models but being cheaper somehow... Then someone mentions Infinity and everyone ignores it because no one really plays it.
Then when the thread devolves into people quoting prices from 30% discounters, Internet recasting and "pay where you play! My FLGS sucks! I have No FLGS! Internet raarrrrrgh" Someone posts an internet meme and the thread is over.
Here are the prices for the Troops units for every 40k army (format is price (inflation-adjusted price)) compared between 2004 and now:
Assault Marines (for Blood Angels): 30 USD (36.41) USD for 5 in 2004 (Sergeants with special melee weapons bought separately at 8 (9.71) USD per), 33 USD for 5 now, Sergeant special melee options included. (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Space Wolf Grey Hunters/Blood Claws: 30 (36.41) USD for 10 in 2004 (special weapon status unclear), 37.25 USD for 10 now with special weapons and special melee weapons included, plus tons of bitz (comparison unclear, probably increase or decrease depending on loadout)
Scouts with melee weapons: 20 (24.27) USD for 5 including Sergeant in 2004 (heavy bolter bought separately at 8 (9.71) USD per): 25 USD for 5 now, heavy bolter included (price increase or decrease depending on loadout)
Scouts with bolters or shotguns: 8 (9.71) USD for 2 in 2004 (heavy bolter bought separately at 8 (9.71) USD per), 25 USD for 5 now, heavy bolter included (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Scouts with sniper rifles: 8 (9.71) USD for 2 in 2004 (Sergeant bought separately at 7 (8.50) per), 25 USD for 5 now, Sergeant and missile launcher option included (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Tactical Marines: 30 (36.41) USD for 10 in 2004 (non-flamer special weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD per), 37.25 USD for 10 now with non-flamer special weapons included (price increase or decrease depending on loadout)
Bloodletters of Khorne: 45 (54.61) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Dæmonettes of Slaanesh: 40 (48.51) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease, but man I liked those old sculpts )
Horrors of Tzeentch: 40 (48.51) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Plaguebearers of Nurgle: 40 (48.51) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Chaos Space Marines: 25 (30.34) USD for 8 in 2004, 37.25 USD for 10 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Dark Eldar Warriors: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004 (special/heavy weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD for one blaster and one shredder or 10 (12.14) USD for two Dark Lances) 29 USD for 10 now with all options included (price increase or inflation-adjusted price decrease depending on loadout)
Dark Eldar Wyches: 30 (36.41) USD for 5 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Eldar Dire Avengers: 30 (36.41) USD for 8 in 2004, 37.25 for 10 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Eldar Guardians: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004 (heavy weapons platforms bought separately with two crew at 20 (24.27) USD per), 36.25 for 10 now with heavy weapons platform included (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Grey Knights: 30 (36.41) USD for 5 in 2004 (special weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD per), 33 USD for 5 now with special weapons included (price decrease)
Grey Knight Terminators: 55 (66.75) USD for 5 in 2004 (special weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD per), 50 USD for 5 now with special weapons included (price decrease)
Imperial Guard plastics (Cadians, Catachans): 30 (36.41) USD for 20 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price increase)
Imperial Guard metals (Valhallans, Steel Legion, Vostroyans, Tallarn, Mordians): 35 (42.48) USD for 10 in 2004, 35 USD for 10 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Necron Immortals: 10 (12.14) USD for 1 in 2004, 33 USD for 5 now (price decrease)
Necron Warriors: 30 (36.41) USD for 12 in 2004, 36.25 USD for 12 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Ork Boyz: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price increase, though new kit has options for special weapons and Nob)
Sisters of Battle: 35 (42.48) USD for 10 in 2004, 64 USD for 10 now (price increase)
Tau Fire Warriors: 30 (36.41) USD for 12 in 2004, 36.25 USD for 12 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Kroot Carnivores: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004, 36.25 USD for 16 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Termagants: 30 (36.41) for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 12 now (price increase)
Hormagaunts: 30 (36.41) for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 12 now (price increase)
Genestealers: 30 (36.41) for 12 in 2004, 30 USD for 8 now (price increase)
So overall, we see that of the 28 basic Troops kits, 6 have gone up in price since 2004, 4 went up or down depending on what loadout you took (and typically went down), 10 went down in price when you account for inflation, and 8 outright decreased in price without accounting for inflation. In other words, 65% of Troops choices have gone down in price since 2004. Since this comprises 8-9 years of nominal "price increases," it's clear that GW does not hike prices as much as many people think.
I actually claim that that many armies are cheaper now than they were in 2004 if you adjust for inflation, and in some cases just plain cheaper. Certainly some units and perhaps armies have gone up in price, but the overall trend is very different.
...
...
.
Might you back up your claim with actual facts?
What it basically amounts to: by picking a certain time frame, some models from some armies have gone from overpriced metal to overpriced plastic, thus became cheaper.
So if I had an army with a lot of temple guard, in Oz pricing they were $11 each for metal ones, but now GW have released plastic ones which are currently $6.90 each. So if I picked a timeframe before the metal to plastic conversion and had an army that used a lot of temple guard, the price of that army has reduced.
Could you do it with actual examples?
I did a study of all the Tau models from 2004 to 2010 (or 2011, I can't remember now) and found that some models inflated much faster than CPI.
However the Tau was always an 80% plastic army so there was not much example of metal moving to plastic.
I personally think that from the miniatures side of things, GW has never been doing better. Right now exists the largest available selection of minis for the largest selection of armies and games there ever has been. At least from the plastics side of things, they are more advanced and user-friendly than they ever have been. The only flaw I can see is Finecast in the place of metal, and that's only from a quality and price standpoint. If they were to be the same cost as metals, and cast with a metal-level of quality, I would be hugely interested in buying into Finecast.
But.....from a company standpoint, GW has never been worse. Especially as a veteran player and long-term consumer (15 years) of GW products. They are increasingly giving out a feeling of "buy our stuff and get the hell out of our store- you're taking up valuable space". They are willfully ignorant of what it takes to be in touch with the consumer base- I honestly think they truly think that we should be kneeling and thanking them for being around, rather than thanking us for keeping their company alive.
They are also completely against the things that other miniatures companies are using to get their product to the fans. Closing all in-store gaming, when it is free advertising for each store, and made them feel like a true LGS. The threatening stance they are taking with bitz purveyors. They constantly harass third-party producers of bitz, when those third-party companies (generally) help buoy GW's own product, or at least the general 40K and Fantasy IP. The old deal with online shopping carts- when no other competing company seems to care one little bit.
It's a very different feel than 10-15 years ago. Back then they didn't give off such a feel of being such an old grump.
The boxed sets were in the 20-25.00 range still. the larger armies had the 16-20 guy boxs, and the blisters were still along the lines of leftovers from the colored era's to that crazy art stuff they brought about with the newer styled sculpts. Case in point, the tyranids, orks, and IG.
Space marines were getting more love, and GW was reducing thier bits sales, reducing blister packs and that 39 buck increase was the after effect of the changes.
Fourth Edition (2004)The fourth edition of Warhammer 40,000 was released in 2004.[25] This edition did not feature as many major changes as prior editions, and was "backwards compatible" with each army's third-edition codex. The fourth edition was released in three forms: the first was a standalone hardcover version, with additional information on painting, scenery building, and background information about the Warhammer 40,000 universe. The second was a boxed set, called Battle For Macragge, which included a compact softcover version of the rules, scenery, dice, templates, and Space Marines and Tyranid miniatures. The third was a limited collector's edition. Battle for Macragge was a 'game in a box', targeted primarily at beginners. Battle for Macragge was based on the Tyranid invasion of the Ultramarines' homeworld, Macragge. An expansion to this was released called The Battle Rages On!, which featured new scenarios and units, like the Tyranid Warrior.
- 40K Wiki.
'04 was the Battle for MacCragge days. We still had hope, and the price increases started getting deeper with no lube around July or so of that year. YOUR prices were after that one.
Ork Boyz: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price increase, though new kit has options for special weapons and Nob)
It has never been better for orks... In addition to 16 boys, you needed 2 metal heavy weapon boyz for 8.99 and 2 Metal Nobz for 10$ each.
So two Units of 10 boyz actually cost 65.38 in 2004. I can get the same thing all in plastic for 58$ today.
Grots were metal and a 4pack was 8.99 and a slaver was like 8$
So 8 grots and a slaver were 25$+ and now they are 16.50$
Kanz were 20$ each, now 46$ bucks.
Nobz were 10$ each and now they 25$ for 5.
About 70% of my models I need are cheaper and better quality. And now I have models which never existed back then as well. They had some flops like the metal kommando/tankbustaz, but they ended up making a neat FW kit for the Kommandoz.
I am very happy about GW prices when it comes to being an Ork player... and when others quit, I get cheap models to loot for my army. While I haven't needed to buy that much from GW recently, if they drop new Ork models, I will be handing them a bunch of my money.
I took them directly from this archive of the GW webstore in August 2004. Feel free to investigate yourself and form your own conclusions if you want. All this information is out there in the public view.
nkelsch wrote:It has never been better for orks... In addition to 16 boys, you needed 2 metal heavy weapon boyz for 8.99 and 2 Metal Nobz for 10$ each.
Very interesting, I did not know that! I suppose that means that the Orks actually went up or down in price depending on loadout despite the reduced size of their kit. Similarly I forgot to put Grots up on that list, and it looks like their price has dropped considerably with the new kit. You can tell I'm less familiar with the Orks!
Dakka can be a toxic environment. Make sure to keep your re-breather handy.
IMO, don't allow any amount of negativity regarding any game or company influence your decisions. Tune all these people out. If a particular game captures your interest, dive in head first and form your own opinion.
Rhinos went from $25 to $30. Terminators went from $30 for 5 to $40 for 5...
If you look at the prices before the June/July price hike - they are significantly lower. Prices after the hike are already a step higher on the way to where we are now. Some things stayed the same...but a lot of things went up (and many of them went up significantly).
That would be trollish...and apparently I have been told that I am one...so...
For me though, it is really less about whether or not there has been an increase (or decrease) relative to inflation and more as to whether or not there has been an increase at all. If you look at other classes of "luxury" goods as everyone likes to say game materials are - you generally do not see them pegged to inflation at all. They might have a commodity related cost to them (cost of tin caused many companies to do price increases on metal miniatures) - but generally speaking these sorts of items remain the same or get less expensive over time.
When I look at how much I paid for a new CD, DVD or video game 10 or even 20 years ago (in the case of video games and CDs) it is almost exactly the same as what I pay for a new item today.
There are a few exceptions - though, really those are few and far between (notably when WotC did the d20 series they bumped the excepted cost for RPG related books up quite a bit for example) - but generally speaking..."luxury" products have flat pricing, it isn't tied to inflation at all.
Kingsley may have been correct in his statement that some army builds are cheaper today than they were in years past. Armies that are built from starter boxes today versus old metal stuff would be an example. However, by and large, it is much more expensive to build an army today than it was in the past. In addition to the price increases, GW has been lowering the points on many units. Necron Warriors are a good example. Thus you need more minis to fill out your force, and minis cost money.
For those who are interested in following the numbers...
The big price hike of 2004 was followed by the big drop in sales in the first half of FY2005 (from 79.8 million in the last half of 2004 FY which was before the hike to 71 million in the first half of 2005 FY...). Might be entirely unrelated though...
Some of the things people complain about really are a bit silly. I mean really who cares if GW shut its official forum down, the forum was just not useful and there are many, many forums. The White Dwarf magazine is not useful to anyone over 12 so just dont buy it and read the better and free articles that are on many hundreds of forums and blogs all over the internet.
If you have the misfortune to live in an area where there are only GW stores and no independent game stores, then their recent policies are definitely alienating people and hopefully there is a game club nearby. GW has abandoned their whole hobby center idea in practice if not in name or advertising.
GW has always been relatively expensive compared to its competitors but in my view it has only been in recent years that they have reached a point where the quality is not good enough for the premium price. The rules writing is especially bad and from what comes out of the mouth of Jervis and others is that they just cant be bothered to write decent rules. More than anything I find this attitude to be just intolerable and I wish they would fire the entire design team and start over fresh.
I think things are ironically a bit better in the US than the UK because we mostly have independent stores and dont have to put up with GW corporate owned stores. This insulates us from some of their more annoying practices like making veterans feel unwanted in the hobby. Also if you know the store owner and they are a decent person, when buying GW's expensive plastic crack cocaine you are also helping out someone you have a personal relationship with.
The complaints about finecast are generally well founded but there is an easy answer, dont buy any finecast.
Your numbers are wrong. I was there and made it a point to grab up a few extra boxed sets from Stoney Point,up in Richmond VA after I got the .... hot tip... at the time.
Back when 3 or 4 boxes would have been enough for some good mobs, specialists, and minimal bits gave you everything you needed. Those "online prices" are gak, as well.
Additionally- If you need reminding, that was also the time around when they had at least 3 good events, and ample support going with all three games, full stores with no room to move, and a steady diet of paint and play, in store events, company events, and that really good Lustria world wide campaign.
The prices you got were from almost gak near christmas of that year.
Want to dig back into dakka's archives? We still have that conversation in there, somewhere.
I've been visiting Dakka and occasionally some other gaming boards since about 1999 or 2000. Even when I stopped playing any tabletop games for about 5 years I was still a regular lurker and enjoyed just keeping up with the hobby.
I started coming to Dakka when they were regularly posting giant multi-table mega-battle reports on the site back in 3rd edition 40K.
That and Batreps.com (RIP) were a big part of getting my 14 year old self into the hobby.
Unfortunately, even for a pessimist like myself things have gotten almost unbearably negative at times. Not for just GW, but for other games and systems too.
Unfortunately, even for a pessimist like myself things have gotten almost unbearably negative at times. Not for just GW, but for other games and systems too.
You know that is a very good point on what you commented on. The negativity of other game systems. Some of this is economy driven as I have seen first hand to other people, while others it is the game system itself. Myself is something different. I'm old skool. I'm into the social interaction aspect of teaching the hobby to others in a social environment. And have fun.
The current GW business model has remove this aspect. Many of their loyal customers are dismayed and do feel betrayed by what Games Work Shop is doing. This lack of social involvement with their customer base is one of the reason for its current stressful state.
The way I see it, things only really started going bad, as in, notably worse than typical internet fan/hate-dom, was in May 2011 when they introduced Finecast, a price hike and the online sales embargo in the space of a month or so.
Since then, policies have become worse and a lot of good will hasn't just been eroded but stamped on.
The Tau thing is a good example of how bad things have become. It probably was a genuine mistake (that GW seems to have worked overtime now to try to correct, I think most stores are helped now), now had the default reaction of "GW are trying to mess with people." Whereas, a few years ago, it would have been, "oh, silly GW, what a bunch of noobs."
So, in my mind, things really are that bad now, with good reason.
This is a free country and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I will say that mob rule is the general atmosphere of this forum. You"ll hear all kinds of people and your personal filter will have to be on if you want the facts. One poster did his homework and provided some data that does work for me. 2-3% must be added every year a company is in business to keep that company at pace with inflation as a rule. To see some numbers on inflation check this out http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation/DecadeInflation.asp
So yelling at GW about price increases has been proven to be, well, free speech, but not fact. I think the strategy of keeping prices down has been pretty good, not great, but good. The product has been good and when compared to the other plastic kits manufacturers, they rank high.
Finecast is proof that most companies do produce boners, but Ford is still around and they had the Pinto.
Another poster talked about other game companies and how they would still be around even if GW stopped producing. I have not seen a Warmachine store in my neighborhood, so I would have to say that GW is still a big player. They are a business and have re-organized the store front. The stock numbers have stayed level so that worked, time will tell if it works in the long term.
Our world is always evolving and any company that doesn't change and try new things will be passed by one that does. GW is not moving quickly enough in new and exciting ways IMHO, one look at games like Bolt Action and Warmachine proves that. I like their product, I think the rules need some innovation, and they need to let go of the old and push the new ideas. I really hope the next years bring some ideas that make us all go crazy.
No, I'm sorry, you'd have to be pants-on-head stupid not to see GW prices have gone up considerably, beyond inflation, and are not getting cheaper. Some pointless cherrypicked figures that don't take into account at-time prices are hardly 'proof' of that. Metal Kanz were $X and now plastic Kanz are $Y doesn't mean anything. How much was a box of three similar plastic models at the time the Kanz were $X? Probably cheaper than they are now. It's a false comparison, comparing two different models to one another as if they were the same. One only needs to look at the models that have been around for a very long time (the obvious example being plastic Guard, but there are others).
sgtpjbarker wrote: Finecast is proof that most companies do produce boners, but Ford is still around and they had the Pinto.
Yes, but you don't need to buy a Pinto to keep your Mustang running, you do however need to buy finecast to build an army in any of GW's game systems.
Finecast was definitely one of the kicks that made me most unhappy. Collecting Tyranids in Australia, when Zoanthropes, Tyrant Guards, Lictors, Hive Guard, Venomthropes and Biovores went to finecast the cost of finishing my army jumped massively, and then I went to buy a couple of the new "finecast" 'nids and the quality was well below that of the old metals, it definitely made me less than happy.
But to the OP, at the end of the day, I think it's worth reading the negative comments and deciding how much they affect you, if at all, and deciding whether or not you can enjoy the game om spite of them.
I personally think GW still make some good games, but they aren't as good as they used to be IMO and the value of them has dropped with all the competition around.
Yeah - right there. Models go to Finecast to avoid the rising price of tin (a perfectly reasonable thing to do for a company looking to save money), and yet their prices go up.
Not down. Not in line with inflation. Not cheaper than a completely different model from a decade ago. More expensive for the same thing in an inferior (and far cheaper) material.
Zinderneuf wrote: Have to admit, this forum is getting pretty bitter, almost as if it was cool to adopt a snide persona by much of the membership. Sad.
Dakka has always been Deadwood, you want a nice, polite, vigorously policed place with picket fences, go visit Warseer, just be careful what you say there or you may find yourself considered the outlaw or malcontent, they have a very rapid and conclusive policies there.
Dakka Dakka 'getting bitter'? When I came here 6 years back, it was a far more aggressive site and going back further, you stumble upon this site with a few questions and went innocently into the 40k forums, utterly dominated by a few names... you'd be torn up in short order.
Dakka is a far nicer place than it used to be, it's mods, for the most part, operate the long, strong leash policy, which is far better suited to me than the immediate sledgehammer approach found elsewhere. Give me Deadwood, not any of these 'civilized' forums...
To the OP, 40k, warhammer fantasy and all the rest of the games GW makes are great, full of 30 years of evolved lore and wonderful imagery. I love them.
The company it's self has become, over the years since it became a public company, accused of being highly aggressive, aloof, cynical and exploitative. I am personally not a fan of the company's corporate side, in fact I'm fairly directly hostile to many of the behaviors it's demonstrated and in the last 2-3 years, that aggression and willingness to hike prices seems to have become 'turned up to 11'. I and many others here, resent these behaviors, others see them as necessary and have a good deal of loyalty to the company. You pay your money and you make your choice. For me, the price of the minis has greatly exceeded how much they are worth to me (the perceived worth by customer) and so I buy far less of them and find it far more difficult to justify my occasional purchasing, both to myself and to my wife. So, with many and varied slights against the hobbyist, cynical pricing, aloof and isolated attitude and a refusal to interact with the community, it leaves people cross.
I love much of what the design studio gives us (although I feel lately, there is pressure on them to produce toys and cash grabs, which has detrimentally affected production) but hate the company's behavior and stance.
If I were to start from scratch, I'd firstly check about the local gaming population and who plays what (it may be that your local gaming community doesn't even play GW games), then, if they do play GW, I'd understand where they play, if not a GW store (and gaming in GW stores is being phased out), I'd likely build a 40k army using Mantic figures.
My answer is if you do not the way GW is going vote with you wallet. I am not saying or starting a boycott but if you dont like what is going of then stop buying your plastic crack. I did two years ago and have not looked back since. There is just too much good stuff to throw money in the hobby to be locked down to one system. So if you just stop buying and stop complaining that will do more in the long run.
I may be a bit of an outsider as I've been gaming since the early 80s (when I was wee) but only started in 40k last year with a bunch of my friends. I've put a couple hundred dollars in, but that was mostly 3rd party and used models.
A lot of my friends haven't stuck with it, and to be honest if I had to do it again, I wouldn't. I love the modeling, but the game itself doesn't return the investment in fun for me. Games like Heroclix, Warmachine or Zombicide have much more bang for the buck imo.
But it is written that one day the empire of sloth will pass away and grownups will take over. On that day I will return, and the squats are coming with me.
Wait, what did the OP ask? Whoose been fething with muh medicine...
H.B.M.C. wrote: No, I'm sorry, you'd have to be pants-on-head stupid not to see GW prices have gone up considerably, beyond inflation, and are not getting cheaper. .
Heh since you referred the term Pants-on-Head Thought I post this url of VGcats. The pants collector. Humorous to say the least.
sgtpjbarker wrote: This is a free country and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I will say that mob rule is the general atmosphere of this forum. You"ll hear all kinds of people and your personal filter will have to be on if you want the facts. One poster did his homework and provided some data that does work for me. 2-3% must be added every year a company is in business to keep that company at pace with inflation as a rule. To see some numbers on inflation check this out http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation/DecadeInflation.asp
So yelling at GW about price increases has been proven to be, well, free speech, but not fact. I think the strategy of keeping prices down has been pretty good, not great, but good. The product has been good and when compared to the other plastic kits manufacturers, they rank high.
And as was pointed out - it was not a good bit of homework (got an A for effort though).
Since I don't have any of the 40K army books handy anymore - I had to wait for someone to do the pointing for me on this...but I started with an old 1500 point Space Marine army list I used back in 3rd Edition - nothing tricky, just a balanced list. To buy everything in FY2004, it would cost $370. FY2005 that jumped up to $425. FY2006 it went to $455. FY2007 it stayed the same. FY2008 actually saw a small drop to $452 (retooled Devastators that were released at a cheaper price). Currently it would cost $516 to do.
If we slide the numbers along for inflation we get $454.75, $505.23, $523.99, $509.47, and $487.40 for FY2008. All of those starting years would mean the price increases are beyond inflation except for the FY2006 prices. But, it gets better still - the 1500 point army in 3rd Edition became a 1418 point army in 4th Edition (2004...not sure which quarter off the top of my head) and a 1437 point army in 5th Edition. Sure, you could soak up some of those points by tagging on extra bits here and there (extra armor on Rhinos, upgrade a Captain to a Chapter Master...) - but the rules tended to favor buying something new like another transport for a squad on foot or one of the shiney units released with the latest Codex...so realistically you can add another $25-50 onto the price of the original army for each new edition.
The bigger issue for me though is that inflation is irrelevant. You look at any class of goods that fall into the optional, luxury or entertainment categories and they are not tied to inflation. They either stay the same or decrease in price over time (or for the few which are tied to a commodity they rise and fall with that commodity). If you look at a new release video game in 2004 - it will run you $49.99. If I go on over to Best Buy today - a new release video game will run me $49.99. Back in 1996 when the first Blood Bowl video game was released it retailed for $49.95. Music, movies, other games, books, sports equipment...
That same trend holds true pretty much across the board - and even into miniatures which other companies are producing (run the same experiment on a company like PP or Reaper to see how their prices have changed in the same period of time...and they are pegged to a commodity that has skyrocketed in the last 10 years. Heck, even if you go much bigger... The base price for a Corvette in 2004 was $46,535 and now it is $49,600 a good $8K below inflation.
So no, inflation is not a factor in whether or not I think the price increases which GW has done are reasonable.
I think one of the worst things for the hobby has been the internet.
Come on man... that has to be one of the most ridiculous things I have read on here in a long time, I don't think you need to say why
The painting and modelling side of the hobby as improved dramatically since the internet forums kicked in. It is truly amazing to be able to see a model that you like and ask the painter how they did it instantly from anywhere in the world. That part of the 40K hobby is rock solid. It takes a certain amount of energy/momentum to keep a hobby going though. GW seems to keep finding ways of sucking the energy out of people at the moment, which I find sad. As I said previously, if you can find a good group they will get you going and keep you going. Trying to maintain enthusiasm by yourself takes a lot of self-motivation. I did it myself when 3rd Ed. blew everything out of the water (at least initially), so I know how hard it is. So...listen to the nay-sayers but make your own decision based on how much energy you have for the hobby.
I would define it as any combination of collecting, modelling, painting and playing with miniatures produced by GW. Others may have a different definition, depending on how creative/obstinate they are.
I think the internet community aspect of 40k is the easiest thing on earth to control. Don't want to hear negative analysis or critques of GW? Don't read Dakka. It's not like any major news isn't eventually disseminated through a dozen or more forums, blogs, and sites.
To the OP: things are different now. I'll try to seperate my own thoughts on 40k these days from a relatively objective assessment. I'll compare things now to when I started, in 2002.
the models are almost universally surperior in scupt quality, although often much less flexibile in their overall buildability. The range is larger, far more is in plastic, and more and more plastic kits can build multiple units. The Starter boxes are incredible, with kickass models for a decent (but no longer great) price. The codexes are better now in terms of internal balance (between the units in a book) as well as amongst the books themselves. Third party manufacturers, and the Indy GT scene have caused an explosion in conversion and competition opportunities.
The bad: GW has steadily reduced what of their range is availabe, shutting down bitz, and then moving more and more stuff into plastic. Of course, now they appear to be cracking down on bitz sellers. Finecast was a complete debacle, coupling staggering QC issues with higher prices made it the punchline of 2011. Increased plastic/finecast hurts those that buy used as well. The embargo on OZ/NZ has left a sour taste in people's mouths.
The ugly: prices! Not all of the price increase is necessarily GW's fault: in 10 years products are going to cost more. Some of the jumps have been jarring: Catachans went from $25 for 20 to $29 for 10. Tacticals went from $25 to $40, with a slight improvment in the special weapon selection. And these are plastic models, that should be far less inpacted by commodities prices. Now, the rise of Warmachine shows that gamers dont' shop entirely on price, but for people that already have any army, realizing you can start a second game for the cost of a small 40k army is a big wake up.
Eight Crisis suits = £80
Two Ethereals = £10
Aun'Shi = £7
Space Pope = £20
Eight metal Stealth Suits = £15
Six Plastic Stealth Suits = £30
Four x 12 Fire Warriors = £60
16 Kroot = £15
Four Devilfish = £72
Two Hammerheads = £40
Two Broadsides = £24
Six Sniper Drones = £24
Codex = £10
Total = £413
Total without VAT = £353
Cost at 2013 prices
Eight Crisis suits = £121
Two Ethereals = £19
Aun'Shi = £10.50
Space Pope = £23.50
Eight metal Stealth Suits = £32
Six Plastic Stealth Suits = £32
Four x 12 Fire Warriors = £88
16 Kroot = £22
Four Devilfish = £90
Two Hammerheads = £70
Two Broadsides = £60
Six Sniper Drones = £48
Codex = £30
Total = £646
Total without VAT = £563
£563/£353 = 1.59 -- a 59% increase in price over 7 years.
To be fair, the Broadside suit has been replaced with a new model. None of the other models are new though some have been changed to Finecast.
My models were bought in 2004-5, and in 2006 after the 4th edition codex release.
Some armies got cheaper; some got more expensive. That's the way it goes. I intend to set up a web app at some point allowing people to easily calculate changes in their army's price. My point is not the obviously wrong "GW prices have decreased for everyone," but rather that prices have decreased for some people and increased for others, so saying that GW constantly increases prices is a false generalization.
People have been saying it's this bad for 20+ years, but it's never actually been this bad.
Unfortunately GW has turned the crazed, obsolete Chaos Dwarf army clutching, GW hating ranter of the late 90s in to the farsighted prophet of today.
Compared to just 10 years ago, I can't go to a Canadian Games Day, I can't enter a Canadian Golden Demon, I can't attend any GW sanctioned events, let alone anything like the five GTs I went to. They can't engage someone who was already commited to their product (me).
I can't even buy the last expansion for 40k at my FLGS! Good thing I don't play 40k anymore I guess.
That's exaggerated by the fact that, if you're a gamer, the market has never been this good, in terms of breadth or depth.
Kingsley wrote: ...saying that GW constantly increases prices is a false generalization.
Except that it isn't. GW raises the prices virtually every year on significant chunks of their entire product line. You cherry pick items like metal Raveners vs plastic Raveners, when the plastic ones are obviously cheaper, yet you don't factor in how much a box of plastic Raveners (which costs the same as a box of Tyranid Warriors - a box that hasn't changed since realease) would be had it come out when the Tyranid Warriors came out. I reckon you'll see a difference.
GW raise prices. Things don't go down. New models get replaced, but no model goes down.
Trying to say that some went up and some went down and "that's life" is basically a golden mean fallacy.
Compared to just 10 years ago, I can't go to a Canadian Games Day, I can't enter a Canadian Golden Demon, I can't attend any GW sanctioned events, let alone anything like the five GTs I went to.
Just because you cant go to GW events does not mean that there are not equal or better events to go to now. There are plenty of big regional events to attend if you are into competitive 40k. I would prefer that GW supported tournaments but since other options are available its hardly a reason to drop the hobby.
NonGW events allow you to use models other than strictly gw so some people would consider this a benefit. Some big whfb events allowed the CD fan army book to be used and GW would never do that, ever.
GW has basically been left behind in the tournament scene in North America and I dont think that is altogether bad. Their last gasp was ardboyz and it is a good thing that abomination has ended,
Kingsley wrote: ...saying that GW constantly increases prices is a false generalization.
Except that it isn't. GW raises the prices virtually every year on significant chunks of their entire product line. You cherry pick items like metal Raveners vs plastic Raveners, when the plastic ones are obviously cheaper, yet you don't factor in how much a box of plastic Raveners (which costs the same as a box of Tyranid Warriors - a box that hasn't changed since realease) would be had it come out when the Tyranid Warriors came out. I reckon you'll see a difference.
GW raise prices. Things don't go down. New models get replaced, but no model goes down.
Trying to say that some went up and some went down and "that's life" is basically a golden mean fallacy.
Certainly some models do go down outside of replacement. Crisis Suits, for instance, just got a price drop. And throwing replacements out seems like a pretty substantial mistake. If I start a new Tau army and want to buy some Pathfinders, you can bet I'm a lot happier buying the new, relatively inexpensive boxed set with lots of options than I am with buying a bunch of expensive blisters with limited posing and conversion potential!
Strictly speaking, that isn't really a "price decrease," it's just a new, cheaper, and better kit in the exact same role. But in practice, that means it's both a price decrease and a quality increase!
AegisGrimm wrote:
...saying that GW constantly increases prices is a false generalization.
Than why is the "yearly price hike" part of the GW fan vernacular?
Because GW increases prices on some items every year. GW also decreases prices on some items (or puts out new, cheaper, and better kits replacing old ones) every year, but a lot of people only pay attention to the price increases. This is both thanks to the general negativity on these forums and the fact that typically the price increases come all it once. If I were in charge of GW, I would mix a few of the decreases in with the increases, which I believe would have a fair chance of mitigating much of the negativity-- but, truth be told, it seems that GW keeps on selling regardless of the negative attitude on some forums, so perhaps they've simply figured out that a lot of the negative voices aren't really potential customers anyway.
Compared to just 10 years ago, I can't go to a Canadian Games Day, I can't enter a Canadian Golden Demon, I can't attend any GW sanctioned events, let alone anything like the five GTs I went to.
Just because you cant go to GW events does not mean that there are not equal or better events to go to now. There are plenty of big regional events to attend if you are into competitive 40k. I would prefer that GW supported tournaments but since other options are available its hardly a reason to drop the hobby.
NonGW events allow you to use models other than strictly gw so some people would consider this a benefit. Some big whfb events allowed the CD fan army book to be used and GW would never do that, ever.
GW has basically been left behind in the tournament scene in North America and I dont think that is altogether bad. Their last gasp was ardboyz and it is a good thing that abomination has ended,
I agree with JWhex. While I wish GW still held big tournaments and events, the independent tournament circuit for 40k has never been stronger, and there are lots of cool new events cropping up. I hated 'Ard Boyz and thought it encouraged the worst elements of the hobby, so I didn't mind seeing it go at all.
Compared to just 10 years ago, I can't go to a Canadian Games Day, I can't enter a Canadian Golden Demon, I can't attend any GW sanctioned events, let alone anything like the five GTs I went to.
Just because you cant go to GW events does not mean that there are not equal or better events to go to now. There are plenty of big regional events to attend if you are into competitive 40k. I would prefer that GW supported tournaments but since other options are available its hardly a reason to drop the hobby.
NonGW events allow you to use models other than strictly gw so some people would consider this a benefit. Some big whfb events allowed the CD fan army book to be used and GW would never do that, ever.
GW has basically been left behind in the tournament scene in North America and I dont think that is altogether bad. Their last gasp was ardboyz and it is a good thing that abomination has ended,
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.
azreal13 wrote: Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.
Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?
Oh, don't know, perhaps because its an excellent shop window that allows them to demonstrate how popular they are, drive sales by insisting on their own models exclusively, generate goodwill with the fan base and control how their brand is perceived in the marketplace?
For the sum total cost of feth all in the grand scheme of things.
It turns out that non-GW sponsored tournaments for GW games are still advertisements for GW games! Also, the point about third party miniatures is overstated at best. I've been to several independent tournaments and third party miniatures-- aside from the very popular Pig Iron Productions alternate heads for IG, Space Marine Scouts, etc.-- have not been common.
H.B.M.C. wrote: What's that phrase again... anecdotal evidence isn't.
If you have evidence indicating that there are lots of tournaments going on that are filled with non-GW miniatures, that GW is losing sales by not running its own events, etc. feel free to post it.
H.B.M.C. wrote: What's that phrase again... anecdotal evidence isn't.
If you have evidence indicating that there are lots of tournaments going on that are filled with non-GW miniatures, that GW is losing sales by not running its own events, etc. feel free to post it.
It's certainly growing as the various cottage-bits companies grow. I've come across Guard armies made from WGF minis, far more non-GW Thunderwolves then the GW versions, God knows how many Dreadnoughts with 3rd party arms, Ork armies with bits taken from all over the place, Marines with 3rd party bikes, and of course the infamous Chapterhouse Tervigon kit. It's even more rampant from what (admittedly little) I have seen of WHFB tournaments, where Mantic and various historical miniatures companies are starting to eclipse the GW armies entirely.
insaniak wrote: It's certainly growing as the various cottage-bits companies grow. I've come across Guard armies made from WGF minis, far more non-GW Thunderwolves then the GW versions, God knows how many Dreadnoughts with 3rd party arms, Ork armies with bits taken from all over the place, Marines with 3rd party bikes, and of course the infamous Chapterhouse Tervigon kit. It's even more rampant from what (admittedly little) I have seen of WHFB tournaments, where Mantic and various historical miniatures companies are starting to eclipse the GW armies entirely.
Good point re: the non-GW Thunderwolves, those were very prevalent in my area for a while. The rest I have not seen, though it may simply vary from place to place. However, it's important to note that many of the "cottage bitz" companies would be acceptable under GW's old rules for model composition, as they typically lend themselves to conversions using GW parts rather than outright replacements.
Kingsley wrote: However, it's important to note that many of the "cottage bitz" companies would be acceptable under GW's old rules for model composition, as they typically lend themselves to conversions using GW parts rather than outright replacements.
And... ?
Sorry, but are you trying to make a point here? I'm not sure what it is, or what exactly this statement does to warrant the "however" at the start of the sentence.
Kingsley wrote: Some armies got cheaper; some got more expensive. That's the way it goes. I intend to set up a web app at some point allowing people to easily calculate changes in their army's price. My point is not the obviously wrong "GW prices have decreased for everyone," but rather that prices have decreased for some people and increased for others, so saying that GW constantly increases prices is a false generalization.
Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.
However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.
A false generalization would mean that there is no value in the saying, "GWs prices generally go up." There clearly is value to that, because the prices do go up!
A better argument is that the gamer gets more value for his money now, compared to 10 years ago. it'll still be a tough sell with some pretty dramatic increases on core units, but as noted while ork boys cost more, they include more meaningful options. Alas, not all kits are like that. I'm looking at you Cadian/Catachan Infantry. But... the models are better, more squad boxes come with all options, and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.
But... the average gamer is simply going to spend more out of pocket to build an army now than 10 years ago. I'd be really impressed if you could show otherwise.
Polonius wrote: and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.
That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.
The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.
Polonius wrote: Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.
However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.
While there are certainly more kits that have increased in price than kits that have decreased in price, the kits that have decreased in price are often the core squads that make up an army (Dark Eldar Wyches, Necron Immortals, Grey Knights, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.) Generally GW's strategy appears to be to keep prices on core units relatively stable while adding new options, but to increase prices on vehicles, characters, and similar "centerpiece models."
Polonius wrote: A better argument is that the gamer gets more value for his money now, compared to 10 years ago. it'll still be a tough sell with some pretty dramatic increases on core units, but as noted while ork boys cost more, they include more meaningful options. Alas, not all kits are like that. I'm looking at you Cadian/Catachan Infantry. But... the models are better, more squad boxes come with all options, and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.
But... the average gamer is simply going to spend more out of pocket to build an army now than 10 years ago. I'd be really impressed if you could show otherwise.
I'm currently working on a tool that will help people calculate this figure for themselves. My impression is that the overall change will depend on situational factors-- for some, their armies cost more than they once would have, while for others their armies are now less expensive. For instance, an Imperial Guard army with lots of infantry will pretty clearly have gone up in price, but a Necron army based on fielding lots of Immortals will pretty clearly have gone down in price.
Polonius wrote: and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.
That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.
The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.
Well, comparing one plastic box that builds two units vs. two kits that each build one... sure.
But comparing a plastic box that builds two units vs. one plastic kit plus a metal bitz pack for the second?
I'm in the "added bitz is added value" camp, although not nearly enough for extra bitz to make a kit cost significantly more than a comparable unit box.
Polonius wrote: and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.
That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.
The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.
Well, comparing one plastic box that builds two units vs. two kits that each build one... sure.
But comparing a plastic box that builds two units vs. one plastic kit plus a metal bitz pack for the second?
I'm in the "added bitz is added value" camp, although not nearly enough for extra bitz to make a kit cost significantly more than a comparable unit box.
I am too, and I would guess most of the gaming population who are active on forums are as well - though that isn't the case in general. I hear with some regularity complaints about extra bits from others. There is the assumption that the make the box cost more than it would have if it just contained exactly what was needed - and then there are also those who have no interest in converting or kitbashing so they don't want to have to deal with any extras when they are done.
Polonius wrote: Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.
However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.
While there are certainly more kits that have increased in price than kits that have decreased in price, the kits that have decreased in price are often the core squads that make up an army (Dark Eldar Wyches, Necron Immortals, Grey Knights, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.) Generally GW's strategy appears to be to keep prices on core units relatively stable while adding new options, but to increase prices on vehicles, characters, and similar "centerpiece models."
Of course, only one unit you mentioned was a troops unit prior to being released in plastic. And comparing modern to 2004 prices (the oldest catalog I have), shows that 5 metal termies was the same as modern plastics, metal Grey knights were cheaper than current plastics, metal wyches were $20 for five instead of $29 for twn, and immortals went from $8 a piece to 5 for $33.
So yeah, when stuff jumps to plastic, it gets cheaper. But the stuff that's always been plastic, or that switched to finecast (i.e., most of the line) have jumped much more dramatically.
I am too, and I would guess most of the gaming population who are active on forums are as well - though that isn't the case in general. I hear with some regularity complaints about extra bits from others. There is the assumption that the make the box cost more than it would have if it just contained exactly what was needed - and then there are also those who have no interest in converting or kitbashing so they don't want to have to deal with any extras when they are done.
I'm willing to assume that at least some of the reason GW can churn out as much plastic as they can is because of the kits doing double duty. I'm ok with it.
Polonius wrote: Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.
However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.
While there are certainly more kits that have increased in price than kits that have decreased in price, the kits that have decreased in price are often the core squads that make up an army (Dark Eldar Wyches, Necron Immortals, Grey Knights, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.) Generally GW's strategy appears to be to keep prices on core units relatively stable while adding new options, but to increase prices on vehicles, characters, and similar "centerpiece models."
Your entire theory on price decreases revolves around the decrease when metal moves to plastic. When I bought the pieces for my wych cult, wyches were $20 for a box of ten. What does it matter that the ancient kits from way back when were tiny, expensive metal kits when since then they've gone up by nearly 50%, along with every other $20 plastic kit?
Sir Pseudonymous wrote: Your entire theory on price decreases revolves around the decrease when metal moves to plastic. When I bought the pieces for my wych cult, wyches were $20 for a box of ten. What does it matter that the ancient kits from way back when were tiny, expensive metal kits when since then they've gone up by nearly 50%, along with every other $20 plastic kit?
Some prices go down for other reasons. For instance, Crisis Suits are now less expensive than they were prior to the new Tau release, despite being plastic and not changing model-wise.
Also, when were plastic Wyches ever 20 dollars for 10? If I recall correctly, they released with the rest of the Dark Eldar revamp at 29.00 for 10 and have stayed there ever since.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote: Your entire theory on price decreases revolves around the decrease when metal moves to plastic. When I bought the pieces for my wych cult, wyches were $20 for a box of ten. What does it matter that the ancient kits from way back when were tiny, expensive metal kits when since then they've gone up by nearly 50%, along with every other $20 plastic kit?
Some prices go down for other reasons. For instance, Crisis Suits are now less expensive than they were prior to the new Tau release, despite being plastic and not changing model-wise.
Also, when were plastic Wyches ever 20 dollars for 10? If I recall correctly, they released with the rest of the Dark Eldar revamp at 29.00 for 10 and have stayed there ever since.
They were released at $20 a box, as were warriors. Raiders were $30, and Ravagers $50 (as I recall). Several months later it all jumped up by about 10%, and then it jumped again (by about as much) at some point, and then again, up to $27 for ten wyches and I stopped looking at the prices at that point.
I entered the hobby 7 years ago, and people were crying the end of GW then too. As long as GW is a company, there will be people with doomsday proclamations.
When they did the back to back to back price spikes like 2 years ago, people said GW was over. We all see how that turned out.
azreal13 wrote: Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.
Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?
Because fan tournaments do not follow the GW only rule.
Again, is there any evidence that this matters at all?
The fact that GW follow the GW only rule indicates it is important to them. They impose it in their own shops and on fan tournaments which they support.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote: [They were released at $20 a box, as were warriors. Raiders were $30, and Ravagers $50 (as I recall). Several months later it all jumped up by about 10%, and then it jumped again (by about as much) at some point, and then again, up to $27 for ten wyches and I stopped looking at the prices at that point.
Looks like we were both wrong-- Wyches and Warriors were both 25 USD at release.
Polonius wrote: and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.
That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.
The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.
Well, comparing one plastic box that builds two units vs. two kits that each build one... sure.
But comparing a plastic box that builds two units vs. one plastic kit plus a metal bitz pack for the second?
I'm in the "added bitz is added value" camp, although not nearly enough for extra bitz to make a kit cost significantly more than a comparable unit box.
Added bitz are only added value if you have the means to use said bits. For example, I have far, far too many Skeleton bits for my Vampire Counts. I now have 20 sword and shield arms from my Grave Guard, 50 spear arms from my Skeletons, Zombie Dragon bits from my Terrorgheist, Crypt Horror bits from my Vargheists, etc. When I look to source the 'core' bits from those boxes, with shipping, I end up paying more than I would simply for another box in most cases, because bits sellers know how much those core bits are needed.
So those added bits are not added value - they're junk. I'm a hoarder when it comes to wargaming stuff, but it's really not worth the effort clipping them off the sprue and keeping them - its quite literally cheaper to buy the box again than source the core parts.
That doesn't make it added value, because there's nothing I can really do with the additional bitz. It's junk, and junk that inflates the price of the kit.
I get that they need to reduce SKU's for shelf space, but as said, it's value to GW, not to the average customer, because the bits just don't have a use after the kit is built..
You know fellas, call me cynical but I can't help but feel that our constant arguing will do anything to affect what actually happens to Games Workshop. I know it would make good business sense to freeze the price increases, stop the draconian copyright enforcement and once more support the 40k community at large. But ultimately all this posturing will be meaningless. It will not be the dakka dakka member who will convince Mr. Kirby and Krew to quit their BS but the silent majority of 40k players who will stop giving GW their money. Capitalism is a democracy and your money are your votes.
I'm not trying to say "Oh, this isn't going to do nothing so stfu!". Quite the opposite, I encourage these arguments. They are nice mental exercises and very interesting to read. I'm just saying that the real fall of GW will not be because of this message board.
BTW, whoever says prices have gone down on items is clearly disconnected from reality. I hardly see a land raider going from 50 to 75 dollars as a price decrease. As for inflation, Games Workshop products aren't food so they shouldn't spike each year like they do.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote: [They were released at $20 a box, as were warriors. Raiders were $30, and Ravagers $50 (as I recall). Several months later it all jumped up by about 10%, and then it jumped again (by about as much) at some point, and then again, up to $27 for ten wyches and I stopped looking at the prices at that point.
Looks like we were both wrong-- Wyches and Warriors were both 25 USD at release.
That may well be. I could have sworn they were $20 though, because I remember them increasing to $22 just a few months later... I may be remembering discount prices, it's all a bit foggy at the moment. So the increases aren't quite as bad as I remembered, GW is still declining in a thriving industry.
There are certainly individual products where the price has increased very little. For example, the Tau Devilfish has gone from £15.32 to £18.33 from 2004 to 2013, (I have deducted the VAT) which is only 20% increase, probably lower than inflation.
However in the context of buying a whole Tau army, the price increases on lots of other units more than make up for the difference.
Kilkrazy wrote: There are certainly individual products where the price has increased very little. For example, the Tau Devilfish has gone from £15.32 to £18.33 from 2004 to 2013, (I have deducted the VAT) which is only 20% increase, probably lower than inflation.
However in the context of buying a whole Tau army, the price increases on lots of other units more than make up for the difference.
I'll have to see if I can find it - but I actually have a spreadsheet of all the core armies using builds that I took out of the WD magazine that illustrates the point quite clearly. A little help with the points value to deal with that issue as well as I haven't bothered in keeping up with Codices since for quite some time....
A box of 10 Marines was $29.95 when I started, now they're $60-odd. They're different models sure, but if you're allowed to apply that for metal-to-plastic, then why not plastic-to-different-plastic?
H.B.M.C. wrote: A box of 10 Marines was $29.95 when I started, now they're $60-odd. They're different models sure, but if you're allowed to apply that for metal-to-plastic, then why not plastic-to-different-plastic?
Yah - but yer Australian...you guys make too much money, so it is just fairer that way...
H.B.M.C. wrote: A box of 10 Marines was $29.95 when I started, now they're $60-odd. They're different models sure, but if you're allowed to apply that for metal-to-plastic, then why not plastic-to-different-plastic?
Yah - but yer Australian...you guys make too much money, so it is just fairer that way...
Honestly, Aussies get robbed that much, Id just take a yearly vacation to Europe to go beer tasting for a fortnight and then buy all my models there. Strip the boxes and sprues down, I bet I could fit 2 grands worth of models in my suitcase with some scientific packing.
Honestly, Aussies get robbed that much, Id just take a yearly vacation to Europe to go beer tasting for a fortnight and then buy all my models there. Strip the boxes and sprues down, I bet I could fit 2 grands worth of models in my suitcase with some scientific packing.
The trick is to take suitcases which fit in each other, so you go there with 1 and come back with 2.
Or take only clothes you hate on vacation and throw them all out when you get ready to leave.
Hell, it may even be cost effective to buy stuff, then go to a shipping store and just ship yourself a package.
H.B.M.C. wrote: A box of 10 Marines was $29.95 when I started, now they're $60-odd. They're different models sure, but if you're allowed to apply that for metal-to-plastic, then why not plastic-to-different-plastic?
Yah - but yer Australian...you guys make too much money, so it is just fairer that way...
We actually don't, our cost of living is higher so our wages are inflated to match.
For example, the Holden SS in Australia costs $50,000 brand new roughly. Imported to USA and re-badged Pontiac, and it costs USA $25,000. This is a car that is supposedly made on Australian shores, yet USA gets it cheaper after import, taxes and LHD conversion. We get ripped off in all aspects of living, and our wages simply equalise the normality of it all.
That said, Warhammer is one of the most expensive hobbies you could take up when you consider cost of a meal to cost of a box of SM in both countries. They're just gouging us really hard, and the majority of hobbyists do not buy into GW, yet GW think the segment of the market who do buy into it, is as much of a large portion as they're going to get from Australia. And they are way off, they're probably missing out on what could be triple the sales if they lowered prices to what USA pay.
So off basic math, they're charging us 150% ontop of USA pay. 1 in 5 customers buy into it, 3 are turned away, 1 not interested lets say. Lower the prices and you're still making a quadruple sale where you were not before. Maths isn't my strongsuit, but GW are being idiots thinking this is they own they hobby market in Australia when they could actually have so much more if they weren't so greedy about it.
I mean here's me, a newbie to it all, and I'd rather get a friend in the UK purchase my army for a quarter of the price overall and send it to me via post to avoid being ripped off. It shows I want to get into the hobby - to the point of reaching out that much. But not at the cost GW want to enforce on Australian, so the sales statistic will go towards UK. Others may buy from USA. So statistical data that GW may rely on sales for, is very skewed when your market is buying from the other. Forcing prices up further to try to offset expenditure and wondering why people aren't buying into the hobby. We are, but not at the price they're asking.
If GW don't realise this soon, they will blame our lack of hobby market interest and most likely shut the stores down completely removing themselves from the market, when they never even tried outside of thinking Aussie hobbyists are cashed up idiots who don't know how to use a PC. If they actually got someone with an IQ to sit there and look at the overall infastructure and direction of GW australia, maybe they would stand a chance. But multiple 1 manning stores is just an indicator that something is drastically wrong on the back end. Shutting a store down for an hour lunch break is losing an hours possible sales. 1 hour of 8 possible lost income is better than hiring a second staff member to cover, or even a casual?
Does that not cry out distress for a business, or at the very least downsizing? I know one thing is very certain, EOFY is going to be very interesting for GW.
PS. On an afterthought, I'm all for the closure of GW stores if it means Australians have access to purchase items at UK price via the website. Zero cost of running to GW, hobby clubs then become where we play. I mean, it's heading in that direction isn't it? Stores halting gaming and relying on clubs to take over. I even heard the manager today say Armies on Parade may not even happen this year, does that mean that GamesDay Australia may not even happen? Who knows.
Stranger83 wrote: Going slightly offtopic, I've seen lots of people mention the price of the hobby as a "bad" thing. Whilst GW is more expensive than most other wargaming companies I still think that as a hobby it is pretty damn cheap.
I have 2 armies for 40k, and an army for Warhammer (and a bunch of stuff for other games to, but lets keep to GW for now) in the 20 years I've been playing, counting going to conventions, paints, scenary and eveything I have probably spent around £10k on GW stuff.
Now lets look at my other hobby, which I've been doing for 2 years, of Archery. Here I spent £3k on a reasonable bow - certainly not the best around - and another £1k on accessaries. I spend £200 every 3 months on a new set of arrows and £150 every 6 months on a new target. I also need to spend £120 a month in club membership, and whilst I havn't been to a tournament yet the cost of these is also much higher than wargame tournaments. Over a similar 20 year period I really wouldn't be surprised if I spend closer to £50k on Archery.
So, whilst GW is an expensive hobby when compared to other wargames (and I suppose CCGs should probably be in there too as they tend to attract the same people) in terms of a hobby it's actually surprisingly cheap. Obviously this is based on the UK, in Australia it may well be that other hobbies are much cheaper and GW wargaming is very expensive over there.
I've spent around $3000 this year alone on biking/cycling stuff and a new bike. Gym/Supplements? 300-400$ on top of that. On Warmachine? 800$ or so, this will go up to around $1200 by summer. Agreed
Don't worry - I am with you all the way on GW bending the Australian (and to a lesser extent Canadian Markets) over...that was mostly a preemptive snarky response since someone will no doubt chime in on how much more people get paid in Australia and all the rest. It is actually even worse than a lot of people think though - since GWUK prices all have their 20% VAT and that is what they use for their base line to start doing their funky regional pricing calculations...so even though US prices are closer to UK prices in terms of exchange rates and the price posted on their website...we are getting hit with an additional 20% price hike since they are not collecting VAT here, but using the price with VAT to calculate the regional price.
Just a handful of them that I repriced this morning to reflect current prices. One of them is illegal now for certain (CSM with daemons) - but the rest should still be legal lists IIRC. The actual points values will have changed of course, but this should illustrate on the larger scale how prices have uniformly increased across the board even though you might have one thing which hasn't gone up much (or possibly even dropped in the case of the Plaguebearers). Just a point of reference - the rate of inflation between 2004 and now is 22.9% ($100 in 2004 would be $122.90 now). While I don't think inflation should apply to non-essential goods, and generally does not in every other case...some people like to use that argument to justify the price hikes.
Space Marines – 1500 point Army WD264 January 2002
FY2013 Prices (Present): $641
1 XV-8 Commander ($41), 2 Boxes of 3 XV-8 Crisis Suits ($65 each), 1 Ethereal ($16), 2 Boxes of Fire Warriors ($36.25 each), 2 Boxes of Kroot ($36.25 each), 2 4 Figure Sets of Kroot Hounds ($24.75 each), 3 XV-88 Broadsides ($50 each), 1 Hammerhead ($60), Codex Tau ($49.50)
59.4% Increase
Eldar – 2000 point Army WD266 March 2002
Spoiler:
Eldrad – 246
Seer Council (3 Farseers, 5 Warlocks) – 392
10 Howling Banshees with Exarch– 189
Wave Serpent – 135
5 Fire Dragons with Exarch – 134
9 Storm Guardians and 1 Warlock, 2 with Fusion Guns – 108
7 Guardians and 1 Warlock, bright lance support weapon – 123
7 Guardians and 1 Warlock, starcannon support weapon – 123
7 Guardians and 1 warlock, starcannon support weapon – 123
3 War Walkers – 300
1 Wraithlord – 120
FY2004 Prices: $422.00
Eldrad ($10), 3 Seer Councils* ($35 each), 5 blisters of 2 Howling Banshees ($8 each), 1 Howling Banshee Exarch ($8), Wave Serpent ($35), 2 Blisters of 2 Fire Dragons ($8 each), 1 Fire Dragon Exarch ($8), 2 Boxes of 8 Storm Guardians ($25 each), 1 Box of 16 Guardians ($30), 3 Support Weapons ($15 each), 3 Metal War Walkers ($30 each), 1 Metal Wraithlord ($30), Codex Eldar ($15)
FY2013 Prices (Present): $602
Eldrad ($20.75), 3 Seer Councils* ($33 each), 2 Boxes of 6 Howling Banshees ($41.25 each), Wave Serpent ($44.50), 1 Box of 6 Fire Dragons ($41.25 each), 2 Storm Guardian Upgrade Kits ($18 each), 4 Boxes of 8 Guardians w/ Support weapons ($36.25 each), 3 Plastic War Walkers ($30 each), 1 Plastic Wraithlord ($46.25), Codex Eldar ($33)
*The 2004 Seer Council was one farseer and 4 warlocks. The current one is one farseer and 3 warlocks. Both cover the needed figures, but you end up with one more warlock per box set in 2004 than you do now.
42.6% Increase
Chaos Space Marines – 2000 point Army WD266 March 2002
So - even if you like to think that these goods should be pegged to a CPI type index - the price increases have been over and above the rate of inflation, generally at twice the rate - though sometimes as much as 3 times the rate of inflation. I'll have to dig back through my files to see if I can find the spreadsheets for the Orks, Tyranid and Dark Eldar as well - but those were actually comparable to these if my memory serves me correctly.
Sean: Your numbers are meaningless as you haven't factored in regional minimum wage rates. You'll find that once you factor those in the prices have, as Kingsley is quick to tell us all, gone down, often by over 150%. In the case of that Eldar army if you buy it in Japan on the second Tuesday of every month GW actually give you money. Pretty sweet deal actually.
nkelsch wrote: The trick is to take suitcases which fit in each other, so you go there with 1 and come back with 2.
That's a really interesting idea. Never thought of that.
Just a handful of them that I repriced this morning to reflect current prices. One of them is illegal now for certain (CSM with daemons) - but the rest should still be legal lists IIRC. The actual points values will have changed of course, but this should illustrate on the larger scale how prices have uniformly increased across the board even though you might have one thing which hasn't gone up much (or possibly even dropped in the case of the Plaguebearers). Just a point of reference - the rate of inflation between 2004 and now is 22.9% ($100 in 2004 would be $122.90 now). While I don't think inflation should apply to non-essential goods, and generally does not in every other case...some people like to use that argument to justify the price hikes.
Cool stuff, but you don't seem to have considered that a lot of old armies relied on blisters for Sergeants, special and heavy weapons, etc. whereas these options are now easily available in plastic. Back in the day it was not uncommon for a basic Space Marine squad to incorporate three different metal models-- one for the Sergeant, one for the special weapon, and one for the heavy weapon-- all of which were purchased in individual blisters. Much of the value of the more recent plastic kit updates has been that they eliminate some of the need to buy these extra kits in order to field the squads you want.
Regardless, I am glad to see people going out there and doing comparisons! Also, where are you getting those prices from? They seem different from the ones I've been pulling from the web archive of GW's online store.
Personally while I may not like some of GW's business practices, it is not enough to get me to stop buying their product, which as far as I am concerned is still solid.
Are the prices more expensive than I would like? Sure but so is food, gas, rent, workout videos etc. As long as I am getting my value out of what I buy I see no problem with the price. Now if you don't think you will get your value out of it then why would you buy it?
Also, as far as adult hobbies go I really don't see a problem with the price, as other people have said compared to other adult hobbies it really is not that bad.
If it was cheaper would I be able to buy more of it? Probably but at the same time it adds value to every piece I have. I have found that I have too much of the stuff and need to reduce the numbers because it is getting in the way of my ability to paint and enjoy it.
The other stuff are essential items. They are tied in directly to the CPI due to all the related supply/demand issues and production costs. Workout videos however are not - they are an extra and as such, you can buy a new workout video today for effectively the same price as you could 20 years ago.
-Terminator Captain (Lysander, but he didn't have a model then so I'll just substitute a generic Termie Captain).
2004 Price: $12.00 USD. 2012 Price: $19.25 USD
-1 Veteran Squad (used a Tactical Squad Box)
-2 Tactical Squads (1 with Missile and Flamer, 1 with Plasma Gun and Lascannon. Used to have to purchase Plasma Gun seperately, still have to purchase Lascannon Seperately).
2004 Price: $30/box of Marines. $9.00 for two Marines with Special Weapons. $8.00 for Lascannon Marine. Total: $107.00.
2012 Price: $37.25/box of Marines. No longer need separate special weapon marines (IIRC). Still need separate Lascannon Marine who is $14.00 now. Total: $125.75, and total lot contains two fewer models.
-1 Whirlwind
same as Predator, IIRC. Interestingly, it's not in the 2004 catalog, but it is currently the same price as a Predator.
-1 Land Raider
2004 Price: $50.00 2012 Price: $74.25
TOTAL:
2004 Price: $402.00
Adjusted for Inflation (2012 Dollars, according to the US Bureau of Labor and Statistics): $488.60
2012 Actual Price: $577.50
Though double checking, I missed a couple things; the old Whirlwind was actually $40, and the box of Terminators didn't include an assault cannon terminator, which is an additional $10. Also when I did this originally, I adjusted 2004 prices for inflation to 2012, below I'll adjust it for 2013.
The 2004 total price, adding in the Assault Cannon Terminator and the extra 5 bucks for the Whirlwind is $417.00, which adjusted for inflation should be $512.51 in 2013 according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, so the 2013 price is still something like 13% more expensive than it should be, and the price has still increased beyond inflation. Unless my math is incorrect, which is entirely possible. Also, the 2012/2013 list technically includes three fewer miniatures than the 2004 list, due to not needing to buy separate special weapons Marines. If you bitz order a single Plasma Gun and Terminator Assault Cannon for the 2004 list, it's $6 instead of $19 for the assault weapon Marine blister and Assault Cannon Terminator, dropping the price back down to $404, which is $496.53 in 2013, so $577.50 is an extra ~16% tacked on. Not as extreme as the above examples, but still above inflation.
Cool stuff, but you don't seem to have considered that a lot of old armies relied on blisters for Sergeants, special and heavy weapons, etc. whereas these options are now easily available in plastic. Back in the day it was not uncommon for a basic Space Marine squad to incorporate three different metal models-- one for the Sergeant, one for the special weapon, and one for the heavy weapon-- all of which were purchased in individual blisters. Much of the value of the more recent plastic kit updates has been that they eliminate some of the need to buy these extra kits in order to field the squads you want.
Regardless, I am glad to see people going out there and doing comparisons! Also, where are you getting those prices from? They seem different from the ones I've been pulling from the web archive of GW's online store.
The metal figures aren't nearly as important as you might think. Most the functionality of basic sergeants and what not existed in the plastic kits back then. You also had the bits service which allowed you to order a single arm with a plasma pistol as opposed to buying a $10 figure (so you might spend an extra $15-20 on bits for all your special weapons). There are some that are worse - orks for example were designed to entail a fair amount of kitbashing at the time as they didn't even have kits or figures for a lot of their core army units. Harder to make an apples to apples comparison there. However with things like Space Marines - you could take those extra bits...you didn't have to by any means.
In terms of doing the number crunching - I have been for a very long time, as have others. Looking at their products as parts of the whole is the only way that you can realistically see how their prices move. From year to year, they might decide to increase all troops by 10% or all vehicles by 10%. However over the course of many years - you end up with the whole of their catalog being increased by 30-50%. Each year the new prices come out - you will have the white knights ride in claiming that they only increased a small portion of the SKUs by the large percentage for that years price hike. The problem of course is that the year before they increased a different portion and next year they will increase a different portion. Looking at prices - this year will probably be like 2004's price hike all over again. Big and everywhere.
Regarding the prices themselves...those are FY2004 prices. That means they are from after July of 2003 and before June of 2004. Most of the links that you have posted have come from FY2005...after July of 2004. That year saw a large price hike at the end of FY2004 (no doubt GW was watching their sales start to slide and figured that higher prices would be a great way to stop that from happening...didn't work so well). It ended up being between 10-25% across the board - so, yes...the numbers you are looking at are probably different...but then again, they wouldn't be FY2004 prices so they should be different.
If you bought SMs in 1988-ish the plastic box was £10 and contained 30 models including a variety of special and support weapons. I can't remember how much the metal figures cost at the time.
The Tactical Box with 10 figures now costs £23.00.
So we have gone from about 28p a figure to about 1.90 a figure in 25 years, which is a 678% increase. (I have taken VAT out of the reckoning.)
According to the Bank of England inflation calculator, the figures would cost 64p each now, due to inflation, so they are 290% more expensive than they "should be".
On the plus side, the detail and poseability of the models has increased a lot.
I would recommend if you are going to get into a table top game, you do so at a FLGS, rather than a GW store. This will allow you to play GW games as well as any other game should you decide things in one game fit you taste more than another game.
As far as GW, here are the infractions that have committed which make me roll my eyes:
1) Doing away with their own forums because of too much negative feedback.
2) Not allowing online stores to sell GW product unless they have an actual store.
3) No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product other than GW.
4) No international sales
5) Emphasing 500 points or less at GW stores (no longer in effect)
6) GW employees being extremely pushy
7) Never having sales
8) No information about anything until it is released
9) GW online only items
10) Finecaste
11) Boxes of models not containing all the parts needed to make all the models in the rule book (CSM terminators)
12) Annual price increase
13) 6th edition 40K being "beer and popcorn" game
14) CSM not having a reasonable codex sense 3.5
15) Constant reshuffling of units as to what is good and bad
16) Annual price increase
17) Legal IP trolls
18) Shutting down bits
19) Rumored no gaming in GW stores
20) Did I mention the annual price increase?
Mmm. Disagree with number 1. Do you remember the GW forums? Endless threads of kiddie babbling - probably couldn't pay mods enough to wade through all that.
Swan-of-War wrote: Mmm. Disagree with number 1. Do you remember the GW forums? Endless threads of kiddie babbling - probably couldn't pay mods enough to wade through all that.
I also remember it being one of the worst forums due to the structure and that fact that nothing was categorized. The GW forums are no worse than the WoW ones or other popular game forums.
Swan-of-War wrote: Mmm. Disagree with number 1. Do you remember the GW forums? Endless threads of kiddie babbling - probably couldn't pay mods enough to wade through all that.
In interface on their old forums was ghastly. And they had a lot of silly rules that boiled down to not criticising them for anything (or mentioning Squats). Also you had to be careful what rules you wrote about, writing up any stats wasn't allowed even moreso than here, I think there were rules against linking to other sites and the forum layout didn't allow for pictures to be posted so that meant you couldn't display your work.
All that meant they wasn't a lot to talk about other than squeeing over new models and asking very generic advice. Given their current refusal to reveal any future product infromation, if they had the forums now they would probably have to make a rule saying you can't speculate on future releases, just in case people started repeating accurate rumours from elsewhere. And telling people not to talk about your product on your own forums would be the dumbest thing ever.
GW closed their forums because they were rubbish and full of childish bickering. That, and they can't completely control what people think and say all the time, so it's best to pull the plug on such an outlet.
Swan-of-War wrote: Mmm. Disagree with number 1. Do you remember the GW forums? Endless threads of kiddie babbling - probably couldn't pay mods enough to wade through all that.
Insufficient moderation was one of the problems. But they weren't all bad... While the general discussion sections were a little tedious, the games development board had some really good discussion, up until it started gradually turning into continual ranting about issues not being addressed and nobody from GW ever responding. The Devs would wander in every couple of weeks, cherry pick a couple of posts to respond to and then be on their merry way, and so people felt that they just weren't being listened to.
But yeah, the forum software was ghastly as well, and certainly did nothing positive for its image.
Swan-of-War wrote: Mmm. Disagree with number 1. Do you remember the GW forums? Endless threads of kiddie babbling - probably couldn't pay mods enough to wade through all that.
Weren't the Mods volunteers?
Yes, some very good ones, too.
3) No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product other than GW.
Nothing wrong with that, the images are GW copyright. If people want to advertise some other product associated with a GW produce they can take a phot for themselves.
13) 6th edition 40K being "beer and popcorn" game
40K has always been a beer and popcorn game. The fundamentals haven't changed since 3rd edition. If anything, 6th edition is more complex than 5th, having re-introduced overwatch.
18) Shutting down bits
I think that was a sound business decision, especially as they were preparing to move to Finecast.
@KK - Number 3 actually refers to using GW images to sell GW products...not products other than GW products. I am scratching my head trying to think of another company that does that, as most companies have no problem with a retailer using 'official' media to sell their products (in fact that is part of the reason companies take the photos).
Granted, that isnt a big issue since retailers a forbidden to sell online anyway (North America at least).
Kilkrazy wrote: 3) No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product other than GW.
Nothing wrong with that, the images are GW copyright. If people want to advertise some other product associated with a GW produce they can take a phot for themselves.
I don't think you can even list the GW products, how much they would be and have a cart feature. You have to call the store and get them to take your order over the phone. I also don't think you can take your own photos either. Basically, GW wants their store to be the only store on the internet to order product.
Kilkrazy wrote: 13) 6th edition 40K being "beer and popcorn" game
40K has always been a beer and popcorn game. The fundamentals haven't changed since 3rd edition. If anything, 6th edition is more complex than 5th, having re-introduced overwatch.
I take my rules clear, concise and logical. Not the crap that GW puts out.
Kilkrazy wrote: 18) Shutting down bits
I think that was a sound business decision, especially as they were preparing to move to Finecast.
That's just too funny. Really, finecaste? Finecaste is going to produce good bits when they can't even produce good models? Even if GW intends to fill the gap, the current crap on their website is 1) from OOP models for the most part and 2) still doesn't fill most of the gaps in their product line. The only good thing I see is that price isn't astronomical; though I am sure that will change.
Kilkrazy wrote: 3) No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product other than GW.
Nothing wrong with that, the images are GW copyright. If people want to advertise some other product associated with a GW produce they can take a phot for themselves.
I don't think you can even list the GW products, how much they would be and have a cart feature. You have to call the store and get them to take your order over the phone. I also don't think you can take your own photos either. Basically, GW wants their store to be the only store on the internet to order product.
You said that people can't use photos for selling stuff other thanGW. Which was what KK said wasn't a problem.
The 'no using pictures of our product to sell our product' rule is indeed batgak crazy.
Finecaste is going to produce good bits when they can't even produce good models?
Best I could find of the GW Internet Retail Policy:
In July of 2003, Games Workshop issued a change in their distribution policy when ordering directly though Games Workshop or any of their distributors. Online sales are strictly done via Games Workshop's own website to ensure their independent retailers that customers will buy specifically at those locations instead of online. The way this is done is to protect their Intellectual Property (or IP for short).
This includes the following:
Pictures (Codex pictures, models, ect...)
Prices
List of product
Electronic Shopping Cart
Online distribution of their products is strictly enforced by Games Workshop North America. This also includes online retail such as Ebay and Amazon. Games Workshop is pursuing individual accounts who have been using Ebay and Amazon to sell their products online.
The European Union is a different market and branch of Games Workshop entirely and have laws in place governing distribution of products.
Sean_OBrien wrote: The metal figures aren't nearly as important as you might think.
In my earlier calculations regarding the price of basic units, I found that the metal figures were very influential, at least for Space Marine figures. The difference between a 30 USD Tactical Squad (with flamer and missile launcher) and a 50 USD Tactical Squad (with plasma gun and lascannon) is pretty substantial. Admittedly you did often get more figures through these blisters, but the price of, say, two lascannons and two plasma cannons (40 2004 dollars) greatly exceeds the price of one Devastator squad today (35 2013 dollars), which comes with both those bits and more, as well as five extra bodies instead of four!
Sean_OBrien wrote: Most the functionality of basic sergeants and what not existed in the plastic kits back then. You also had the bits service which allowed you to order a single arm with a plasma pistol as opposed to buying a $10 figure (so you might spend an extra $15-20 on bits for all your special weapons). There are some that are worse - orks for example were designed to entail a fair amount of kitbashing at the time as they didn't even have kits or figures for a lot of their core army units. Harder to make an apples to apples comparison there. However with things like Space Marines - you could take those extra bits...you didn't have to by any means.
I wish GW would bring their bitz service back.
Sean_OBrien wrote: In terms of doing the number crunching - I have been for a very long time, as have others. Looking at their products as parts of the whole is the only way that you can realistically see how their prices move. From year to year, they might decide to increase all troops by 10% or all vehicles by 10%. However over the course of many years - you end up with the whole of their catalog being increased by 30-50%. Each year the new prices come out - you will have the white knights ride in claiming that they only increased a small portion of the SKUs by the large percentage for that years price hike. The problem of course is that the year before they increased a different portion and next year they will increase a different portion. Looking at prices - this year will probably be like 2004's price hike all over again. Big and everywhere.
How does your theory account for the price of Troops? More Troops straight up decreased in price since Aug. 2004 than increased beyond inflation. It seems to me that GW is attempting to keep the basics cheap while increasing the price of characters, vehicles, and other "centerpiece" or "one-of" units.
Sean_OBrien wrote: Regarding the prices themselves...those are FY2004 prices. That means they are from after July of 2003 and before June of 2004. Most of the links that you have posted have come from FY2005...after July of 2004. That year saw a large price hike at the end of FY2004 (no doubt GW was watching their sales start to slide and figured that higher prices would be a great way to stop that from happening...didn't work so well). It ended up being between 10-25% across the board - so, yes...the numbers you are looking at are probably different...but then again, they wouldn't be FY2004 prices so they should be different.
Ah, gotcha. Yeah, the prices I've been using are from Aug. 2004, as I started doing this analysis in late 2012 and wanted to see what things were like 8 years back.
Kilkrazy wrote: 3) No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product other than GW.
Nothing wrong with that, the images are GW copyright. If people want to advertise some other product associated with a GW produce they can take a phot for themselves.
I don't think you can even list the GW products, how much they would be and have a cart feature. You have to call the store and get them to take your order over the phone. I also don't think you can take your own photos either. Basically, GW wants their store to be the only store on the internet to order product.
You said that people can't use photos for selling stuff other thanGW. Which was what KK said wasn't a problem.
One of those internet things...I understood the intent of the "other than" GW. The other than doesn't refer to the products being sold it refers back to GW, they can use their images - Wayland can't...to sell the exact same product. To restate it with all the words...
No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product with the exception of GW themselves using GW images.
Words are a funny thing as they can have the same ones in a line...but depending on who reads them, they can be interpreted in a different manner.
Kilkrazy wrote: 3) No site can use GW images for the purposes of selling product other than GW.
Nothing wrong with that, the images are GW copyright. If people want to advertise some other product associated with a GW produce they can take a phot for themselves.
I don't think you can even list the GW products, how much they would be and have a cart feature. You have to call the store and get them to take your order over the phone. I also don't think you can take your own photos either. Basically, GW wants their store to be the only store on the internet to order product.
Kilkrazy wrote: 13) 6th edition 40K being "beer and popcorn" game
40K has always been a beer and popcorn game. The fundamentals haven't changed since 3rd edition. If anything, 6th edition is more complex than 5th, having re-introduced overwatch.
I take my rules clear, concise and logical. Not the crap that GW puts out.
Kilkrazy wrote: 18) Shutting down bits
I think that was a sound business decision, especially as they were preparing to move to Finecast.
That's just too funny. Really, finecaste? Finecaste is going to produce good bits when they can't even produce good models? Even if GW intends to fill the gap, the current crap on their website is 1) from OOP models for the most part and 2) still doesn't fill most of the gaps in their product line. The only good thing I see is that price isn't astronomical; though I am sure that will change.
No, the point about Finecast is that it isn't effective for making bits because you can't recycle the materials. The way bits are made is someone puts the mould on the spin casting machine, and runs off a batch of castings. Then he throws away the parts that aren't needed. When they were metals that went back into the furnace to be melted down. Finecast reject parts are just wasted. Given that bits by their nature are the minority of the material in a set of casting, you are wasting a lot of resin.
Sean_OBrien wrote: The metal figures aren't nearly as important as you might think.
In my earlier calculations regarding the price of basic units, I found that the metal figures were very influential, at least for Space Marine figures. The difference between a 30 USD Tactical Squad (with flamer and missile launcher) and a 50 USD Tactical Squad (with plasma gun and lascannon) is pretty substantial. Admittedly you did often get more figures through these blisters, but the price of, say, two lascannons and two plasma cannons (40 2004 dollars) greatly exceeds the price of one Devastator squad today (35 2013 dollars), which comes with both those bits and more, as well as five extra bodies instead of four!
$35 for 5 figures, 1 Missile, 1 Lascannon, 1 Heavy Bolter, 1 Plasma Cannon - plus the Sergeant and some leftovers. Buying singles at $8 per starts to add up - but you buy things in that manner...scatter them throughout your units as needed. Take anything leftover (those were plastic with metal heavy weapons...so you had complete plastic marines if you didn't need something like a Heavy Bolter). They can fill out other fractional units like the Captain's bodyguard and what not. This current plastic set is nice in that it comes with an additional heavy bolter, lascannon and plasma cannon (plus the multi-melta) but functionally it is the same.
On the troops - I might have been off by a FY for their bump - I am going off from foggy memory for the most part on which years had which increases...I have a detailed breakdown, just not handy where I am at, though IIRC the big price surge was FY2005 (which would cover July 2004 through June 2005). Looking at the archive, it looks like the troops had gone up by the end of FY2005.
They definitely increase the costs of things like vehicles and heroes much faster than the troops - but even the troops are outpacing inflation (generally speaking - a notable exception would be those Plaguebearers for example).
Sean_OBrien wrote: They definitely increase the costs of things like vehicles and heroes much faster than the troops - but even the troops are outpacing inflation (generally speaking - a notable exception would be those Plaguebearers for example).
My earlier analysis indicates that that is not at all the case-- there are more Troop units that outright decreased in cost (like Wyches) than Troop units that increased beyond inflation from Aug. 2004 to present.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote: [They were released at $20 a box, as were warriors. Raiders were $30, and Ravagers $50 (as I recall). Several months later it all jumped up by about 10%, and then it jumped again (by about as much) at some point, and then again, up to $27 for ten wyches and I stopped looking at the prices at that point.
Looks like we were both wrong-- Wyches and Warriors were both 25 USD at release.
That may well be. I could have sworn they were $20 though, because I remember them increasing to $22 just a few months later... I may be remembering discount prices, it's all a bit foggy at the moment. So the increases aren't quite as bad as I remembered, GW is still declining in a thriving industry.
They were 20.00. For 16. additional bits, additional splintercannons, additional options.
Don't tell him that though. He's stuck between a rock and a hard place by a little something called logical fallacy.
Kingsley continues to baffle with bullgak and dazzle with diamonds by looking at the substanard pricing and reduced number of newer models, where they overcharged for plasic and finecrap. Don't let that stop you, though.
To go to thier online support, they had endless information and ample downloads that enhanced, not hindered the game. Thier forums were about on par with what you would expect with thier vision of "How We Want to do it", by catering to the lower denominator, and fanboy " Oh.... your soo kewel..." kind of gak from some kids who figured out how to use a computer.
The painting and modeling articles were not that bad and the conversions, additional missions, and other stuff was at least available without having to fight through a gak load of cookies.
Sean_OBrien wrote: They definitely increase the costs of things like vehicles and heroes much faster than the troops - but even the troops are outpacing inflation (generally speaking - a notable exception would be those Plaguebearers for example).
My earlier analysis indicates that that is not at all the case-- there are more Troop units that outright decreased in cost (like Wyches) than Troop units that increased beyond inflation from Aug. 2004 to present.
Wyches were an elite - not troops IIRC and they were metal to plastic switch, and again...you are skipping over the FY2005 price hike when you start at that date. FY2004 to now is a nice 10 year period (which makes for simple maths) and it demonstrates quite clearly the increase in the troops as I posted in the other thread. Just because you don't see the sun at night, doesn't mean it isn't there...
I could point to momentary drops to prove that GW isn't actually doing any price hikes (Assault Marines from FY2005 to FY 2006 through to FY 2008) went from $30 for 5 to $25 for 5. They are now up to $33 for 5. That is an increase even though there was a momentary drop.
Grot 6 wrote: They were 20.00. For 16. additional bits, additional splintercannons, additional options.
We're talking about the new Dark Eldar, not the old ones. And claiming the old Dark Eldar kits had additional bits and options compared to the new one is not going to get you very far. The new Dark Eldar were loved by practically everyone for a reason.
Grot 6 wrote: To go to thier online support, they had endless information and ample downloads that enhanced, not hindered the game. Thier forums were about on par with what you would expect with thier vision of "How We Want to do it", by catering to the lower denominator, and fanboy " Oh.... your soo kewel..." kind of gak from some kids who figured out how to use a computer.
The painting and modeling articles were not that bad and the conversions, additional missions, and other stuff was at least available without having to fight through a gak load of cookies.
Agreed. The old GW website, while substantially less professional, had more interesting content.
Sean_OBrien wrote:Wyches were an elite - not troops IIRC and they were metal to plastic switch, and again...you are skipping over the FY2005 price hike when you start at that date. FY2004 to now is a nice 10 year period (which makes for simple maths) and it demonstrates quite clearly the increase in the troops as I posted in the other thread. Just because you don't see the sun at night, doesn't mean it isn't there...
Wyches were troops if you ran the right HQ (this is what "Wych Cult" refers to) and this option was very popular. As for the specific timing of our comparisons, I think that GW not seriously increasing prices on troops since mid-2004 is fairly meaningful on its own, regardless of what happened prior.
I was looking at 40k because GW is ultimately my LGS, and there isn't much else unless I go for a 2 hour drive to where other hobby wargames are played.
I hear GW is banning gaming from their stores, so keep that in mind when you consider your 'LGS' and if it should really affect your decision of what to play.
Sean_OBrien wrote: They definitely increase the costs of things like vehicles and heroes much faster than the troops - but even the troops are outpacing inflation (generally speaking - a notable exception would be those Plaguebearers for example).
My earlier analysis indicates that that is not at all the case-- there are more Troop units that outright decreased in cost (like Wyches) than Troop units that increased beyond inflation from Aug. 2004 to present.
there's simply no way that's true.
Let me amend that: there is no way, barring cherry picking a definition, that that is true. Because even if you look at basic troops, you have the following metal to plastic switches insce the 2004-2005 catalog (the source of prices I have access to):
Scouts (more expediencies in plastic!)
Sniper Scouts (more expediencies in plastic!)
Plague Bearers
Daemonettes
Bloodletters
Horrors
Nurglings (more expediencies in plastic!)
Grey Knight Strike
GK Terminators
Death company (more expensive)
Wyches
Dire Avengers (more expensive)
Guardians (more expensive per model with the platform)
Immortals
Grots
Orks (in practice)
So, even viewing from that angle, six of the sixteen modern troops kits that were plastic in 2004 are more expensive than they were then! Some are close, like scouts, while others are way higher, like nurglings or guardians. That does get better if you want to include stuff like Ravenwing, which are the same price, but worse for Deathwing. And that's not even counting a few close calls, where the plastic kit is clearly superior, such as the grey knight kits. Well, at least superior in options.
Now, looking at the other troops, things have gone in only one direction (although a lot have stayed more less steady)
CSM (now 10 for $37, were 8 for $25) Steady
Chaos Rhino (was $25, now $37.25) Up
DE Warriors (were 16 for $30, now 10 for $29, but so much better it's a wash) N/A
Raider (was $30, now $37) Steady
Rangers (were 6/18 now 5 for $33) Way up
Eldar Jetbikes (12.50 to 15) steady
Cadians (were 20 for $30, now 10 for $29) Way Up
Catachans (were 20 for $30, now 10 for $29) Way UP
Cadian heavy weapon squad (was for $30, now $39.5) Way Up
Catachans heavy weapon squad (was for $30, now $39.5) Way Up
Necron Warriors ($30 to $36) steady
Sisters of Battle (were 3/$9, are now 3 for $17.25)
Tactical Squad ($30 to $37) steady
Rhino ($25 to $37.25) UP
Razorback ($30 to 41.25) Up
Tau FCW ($30 to $36) Steady
Devilfish ($30 to $36) Steady
Kroot ($30 to $36) Steady
Kroot Hounds (2 for $8 to 4 for $24) UP
Krootox ($15 to $24) Way up
Gaunts (were 8 of each for $30, are now 12 of one for $30) N/A
Genesealers (were 12 for $30, are now 8 for $30) Way up
Tyranid Warriors (were$30, are now $47) way up
This list shows that a lot of basic troop stuff has stayed pretty steady, but a lot has jumped way up. More than enough to balance out any savings from stuff going into plastic.
To OP Why dont we put this to a poll?
If i knew how i would
"Are you currently satisfied with 40k"
Yes
No
Indifferent
Then we should get a better understanding.
Kinda like a petition we could possibly submit to corp GW?
Reason i ask this is im in the same boat as the orig poster. Ive been a whfb player off and on for many years and im just now getting in to 40k. Love the models but hate the price and rules. I like the idea of flyers but not at the expense of the game. I can say ive been upset with fantasy codexs but never the rulebook. I liked the changes in fantasy ( it was easier less cards). Anyway Im reading some pretty negative things on this forum that makes me question "Is 40k dying?" i know not everyone feels this way but what if the majority does
It's never been this bad, GW just doesn't know how to advance into the new era, but don't let that dissuade you from picking up the hobby. I moved form 40k to infinity and I'm about to pick up some Warmachine sets. The hobby of wargaming itself is really strong right now, GW isn't the only one on the block anymore and the hobby doesn't revolve around their products anymore.
I was looking at 40k because GW is ultimately my LGS, and there isn't much else unless I go for a 2 hour drive to where other hobby wargames are played.
I hear GW is banning gaming from their stores, so keep that in mind when you consider your 'LGS' and if it should really affect your decision of what to play.
Yea I'm starting to have a look into other hobby clubs if that should occur.
I went into GWLGS the other day and directly asked the manager about the email that people are receiving with the intent to halt gaming in GW stores. He claims he has no knowledge of such an email and that nothing official has been released internally regarding that. (For Australia I presume he meant).
That said, he did indicate to me that things change and he can't state in black and white that it won't happen in the future. That statement concerned me like as though he personally felt it might happen. He indicated the reason it might be happening now is due to size of GW retails. I can understand that, some stores only have 2 gaming tables and the rest stock shelves, you can't exactly have a large gaming capability in those. One table would be 40k demo games and the other fantasy. With that said, the GWLGS I go to has plenty of stock shelves and 10 tables, + 3 demos for LotR/Hobbit, Fantasy and 40k. So he said it he couldn't see why they would halt gaming, but couldn't say definitively what would happen in the future.
PS. Has anyone else noticed that GW now charge you 25 cents for a bag? Perhaps this is Australia only? That's a bit much isn't it, considering we already pay 100-150% ontop of the rest of the world, and know they're bleeding us for a bag?
GW closed their forums because they were rubbish and full of childish bickering. That, and they can't completely control what people think and say all the time, so it's best to pull the plug on such an outlet.
I think it was (as you mentioned earlier in the comment) because, even back then, pretty crappy looking and disorganised even compared to the other forums of that time.
It was obviously in need of a major refurbishment; GW looked at the costs involved, looked at the type of 'fan input' the site was getting, and thought better of it.
Banicks wrote: PS. Has anyone else noticed that GW now charge you 25 cents for a bag?
Aldi and Target also charge you for bags, just off the top of my head. It's something a lot of businesses started doing back when 'green bags' started becoming popular, to discourage plastic bag use.
Sean_OBrien wrote: They definitely increase the costs of things like vehicles and heroes much faster than the troops - but even the troops are outpacing inflation (generally speaking - a notable exception would be those Plaguebearers for example).
My earlier analysis indicates that that is not at all the case-- there are more Troop units that outright decreased in cost (like Wyches) than Troop units that increased beyond inflation from Aug. 2004 to present.
there's simply no way that's true.
Here are the prices for the Troops units for every 40k army (format is price (inflation-adjusted price)) compared between August 2004 and now:
Assault Marines (for Blood Angels): 30 USD (36.41) USD for 5 in 2004 (Sergeants with special melee weapons bought separately at 8 (9.71) USD per), 33 USD for 5 now, Sergeant special melee options included. (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Space Wolf Grey Hunters/Blood Claws: 30 (36.41) USD for 10 in 2004 (special weapon status unclear), 37.25 USD for 10 now with special weapons and special melee weapons included, plus tons of bitz (comparison unclear, probably increase or decrease depending on loadout)
Scouts with melee weapons: 20 (24.27) USD for 5 including Sergeant in 2004 (heavy bolter bought separately at 8 (9.71) USD per): 25 USD for 5 now, heavy bolter included (price increase or decrease depending on loadout)
Scouts with bolters or shotguns: 8 (9.71) USD for 2 in 2004 (heavy bolter bought separately at 8 (9.71) USD per), 25 USD for 5 now, heavy bolter included (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Scouts with sniper rifles: 8 (9.71) USD for 2 in 2004 (Sergeant bought separately at 7 (8.50) per), 25 USD for 5 now, Sergeant and missile launcher option included (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Tactical Marines: 30 (36.41) USD for 10 in 2004 (non-flamer special weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD per), 37.25 USD for 10 now with non-flamer special weapons included (price increase or decrease depending on loadout)
Bloodletters of Khorne: 45 (54.61) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Dæmonettes of Slaanesh: 40 (48.51) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease, but man I liked those old sculpts )
Horrors of Tzeentch: 40 (48.51) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Plaguebearers of Nurgle: 40 (48.51) USD for 10 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Chaos Space Marines: 25 (30.34) USD for 8 in 2004, 37.25 USD for 10 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Dark Eldar Warriors: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004 (special/heavy weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD for one blaster and one shredder or 10 (12.14) USD for two Dark Lances) 29 USD for 10 now with all options included (price increase or inflation-adjusted price decrease depending on loadout)
Dark Eldar Wyches: 30 (36.41) USD for 5 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price decrease)
Eldar Dire Avengers: 30 (36.41) USD for 8 in 2004, 37.25 for 10 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Eldar Guardians: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004 (heavy weapons platforms bought separately with two crew at 20 (24.27) USD per), 36.25 for 10 now with heavy weapons platform included (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Grey Knights: 30 (36.41) USD for 5 in 2004 (special weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD per), 33 USD for 5 now with special weapons included (price decrease)
Grey Knight Terminators: 55 (66.75) USD for 5 in 2004 (special weapons bought separately at 10 (12.14) USD per), 50 USD for 5 now with special weapons included (price decrease)
Imperial Guard plastics (Cadians, Catachans): 30 (36.41) USD for 20 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price increase)
Imperial Guard metals (Valhallans, Steel Legion, Vostroyans, Tallarn, Mordians): 35 (42.48) USD for 10 in 2004, 35 USD for 10 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Necron Immortals: 10 (12.14) USD for 1 in 2004, 33 USD for 5 now (price decrease)
Necron Warriors: 30 (36.41) USD for 12 in 2004, 36.25 USD for 12 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Ork Boyz: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 10 now (price increase or decrease depending on loadout, as the new kit has options for special weapons and a Nob)
Gretchin
Gretchin 34 (41.79) USD for 13 in 2004, 16.50 USD for 11 now (price decrease)
Sisters of Battle: 35 (42.48) USD for 10 in 2004, 64 USD for 10 now (price increase)
Tau Fire Warriors: 30 (36.41) USD for 12 in 2004, 36.25 USD for 12 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Kroot Carnivores: 30 (36.41) USD for 16 in 2004, 36.25 USD for 16 now (inflation-adjusted price decrease)
Termagants: 30 (36.41) for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 12 now (price increase)
Hormagaunts: 30 (36.41) for 16 in 2004, 29 USD for 12 now (price increase)
Genestealers: 30 (36.41) for 12 in 2004, 30 USD for 8 now (price increase)
So overall, we see that of the 29 basic Troops kits, 5 have gone up in price since August 2004, 5 went up or down depending on what loadout you took (and typically went down), 10 went down in price when you account for inflation, and 9 outright decreased in price without accounting for inflation. In other words, 65% of Troops choices have gone down in price since August 2004. Since this comprises 8-9 years of nominal "price increases," it's clear that GW does not hike prices as much as many people think.
Kilkrazy wrote: It's easy to know what is popular by looking around what people are buying and playing.
Obviously Tau are popular, for example.
Are you going to claim that the really popular models are the few examples that haven't gone up much over the past 10 years, so GW are enjoying huge sales growth?
One example of what's really popular are Troops, because everyone has to have them. Troops haven't gone up much and indeed many have gone down. But the actual specific proportions of Troops kit sales relative to others are very important here, and we don't have that.
Not sure where you are getting the troops staying low from...
If we look at Grey Knights from FY 2004 to now...the basic troop went from 5 for $25 ($5 each) then and 5 for $33 ($6.60) now. +32% If we look at Necrons from FY 2004 to now...the basic troop went from 12 for $30 ($2.50) then and 12 for $36.25 ($3.02) now. +21% If we look at Orks from FY2004 to now...the basic Troop is 16 for $30 ($1.88 each) then and 10 for $29 ($2.90) now. +54% If we look at Tau from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 12 for $30 ($2.50) then and 12 for $36.25 ($3.02) now. +21% If we look at CSM from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 8 for $30 ($3.75) then to 10 for $37.25 ($3.73) now. -1% If we look at SM from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 10 for $30 ($3.00) then to 10 for $37.25 ($3.73) now. +24% If we look at Dark Eldar from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 16 for $30 ($1.88) then to 10 for $29 ($2.90) now. +54% If we look at Nids from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 12 for $30 ($2.50) then to 8 for $30 ($3.75) now. +50% If we look at IG from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 20 for $30 ($1.50) then to 10 for $29 ($2.90) now. +93% If we look at SoB from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 10 for $35 ($3.50) then to 3 for $17.25 ($5.75) now. +64% If we look at Eldar from FY 2004 to now...the basic Troop went from 16 for $30 ($1.88) then to 10 for $36.25 ($3.63) now. +93%
The CSM got a slight down turn - everyone else is up. The change is in the bold at the end of each line. Cliff notes is that close to the rate of inflation is simple bold. Orange is over the rate of inflation but less than double. Red is more the double but less than triple. Bold, Italics, dark red are more than triple the rate of inflation - far and above the regular rate of increase for armies as a whole.
So...troops have gone up. Many of them have gone up a lot. In particular for a guard army which is heavy with troops - they have seen a 93% increase on their troops. Half the armies have seen troop increases that are double the rate of inflation or more.
.
Sean_OBrien wrote: I think what you find online is really more representative of the world at large than what you tend to find in local groups (especially if that local group is centered around a GW store).
You may see more online, but that is often just because people tend to congregate with others of similiar views, while online forums tend to draw based on subject matter, and various aspects like economic conditions and local gaming availability do not impact who logs into a forum.
All of that said, the best advice that I can offer to anyone getting into various aspects of the hobby is to not marry into a company and simply buy what you like. Read the fluff you like, buy the miniatures you want in the scale you prefer and game using the rules which suit you best. There are nearly a thousand companies making miniatures in dozens of sizes and scales and well over a hundred different sets of rules to cover everything you can think of from GMed dungeon crawls and skirmishes to planet spanning campaigns featuring combined arms and space battles.
The only thing that restricts people to use GW figures, with GW fluff, GW rules in GW stores is a false idea that you have to. Most rules are flexible enough to change sizes and figures with little problem. Weapons from one system can easily be shited to be 'counts as' weapons from a different system. If the GW fluff is appealing, I recomend you look at FFGs 40kRPG books as they are (IMO) better written and more consistent than the stuff GW has been putting out.
To the OP
I quote Sean here because I think it is the best advice to have. Ultimately, it is your time and money your spending. If you want to get into 40k, I wish you the best of luck and welcome you to the hobby. I recently posted a similar thread where I made an observation about the increase in the negativity, and state my favorable thoughts on GW. You can check it out here, http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/519641.page. You'll can see for yourself the responses I get. I have to agree with many of the earlier posters, and I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that the negativity is a Dakka thing. Is GW a perfect company? No but then what company is. Does some of the things GW do warrant criticism? Yes, I have made a few critical remarks. However, I think many threads and remarks have gone past intelligent, logical criticism and gone into hate and bashing. It's because of this spread, shift, increase, or whatever adjective you'd like to use in bitterness and negativity that I think will hurt the community far more than anything GW does. You're opening words are prove of that.
Sean has pulled prices from a different time, and therefore he draws different conclusions. His analysis is also less in-depth and omits certain elements that mine doesn't. For instance, I look at unit upgrade options and whether or not they are integrated into kits or need to be purchased in blisters, whereas he's omitted this factor. This is why I judge several units as having either increased or decreased in price, depending ont he options selected. In 2004, I could buy a Tactical Squad for slightly less than the price of that squad today-- but I would need to buy a separate metal blister to take a plasma gun, which would end up increasing the price over that of today's Tactical Squad, which comes with that in the box.
I also look at many more units than he does. Overall, my analysis is more comprehensive. That said, that does not mean that Sean is wrong-- I do think he's presented his data misleadingly, however.
Like I said before, when you start cherry picking or attmpting to prove drops by including all the options and upgrades a unit might take (but often doesnt) you can make it look close. However, you then have to except the issues of units less then full numbers (which happen just as often as you shoe horn an army under a points limit).
If you use full boxes of troops and need all the options...you canshow increases ifmyou start the timeline in FY2005 aftermthe price hike. If you start before the price hike (which is really pertinent when discussing price hikes) and only look at basic troops (as opposed to all the options and special builds)...troops have blown up.
Polonius wrote: I'll give you this much: if you start the clock right after a major price increase, than price increases siince that time don't look so bad.
This timing occurred purely by coincidence, since I first did my analysis in late 2012 and wanted to cleanly go back eight years. However, saying "Troop prices haven't really gone up since mid-2004" is still very meaningful.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sean_OBrien wrote: Like I said before, when you start cherry picking or attmpting to prove drops by including all the options and upgrades a unit might take (but often doesnt) you can make it look close.
You heard it here first, guys-- trying to include all the potential options is "cherry picking." That's the opposite of what cherry picking is.
Polonius wrote: I'll give you this much: if you start the clock right after a major price increase, than price increases siince that time don't look so bad.
This timing occurred purely by coincidence, since I first did my analysis in late 2012 and wanted to cleanly go back eight years. However, saying "Troop prices haven't really gone up since mid-2004" is still very meaningful.
Well, it's meaningful if you're trying to argue that prices haven't gone up. for the record, I don't think its in any way "coincidental." Everything about the way you post shows that you are willing to do a bit of research to find the best facts to fit your case. Which is admirable, in a way. It just makes your conclusions highly suspect.
Prices went up in mid 2004, after staying relatively flat for many years. It was the first major price increase.
Even if you aren't being intentionally misleading, it's sloppy to pick that time, especially when there are very solid reasons to go back two months earlier.
I will agree that including unit options has added value, but don't discount the ease of bitz ordering when coming up with costs for old units. You didn't need a $10 sarge model, you needed a $2 powerfist.
Read the whole post. If you include options then you also need to account for lack of options.
I posted the GK example already. If you need 6 ofmsomething sold in a box of 5...then you are having to buy 4 extra but you need to account for that in you more complex costing. Not doing so is misleading as when you go through various build options...you generally are not using whole box numbers for a pointed army.
That makes your box of 5 for 35 or whatever very pricey way to buy 6 or 7 figures. It is just as valid of a variable for costing as all the options is.
Just to illustrate my point even more, lets take a look at something like the CSM Troops. Even under my basic analysis, they went down in price from the old kits. If we look at what their entry is in the Codex (had to get some help on the entry as I hadn't seen this since the old 3rd Edition books) we find that the base unit is now 4 CSM and one Champion.
Looking at the sprues for the new plastic CSM box you get stuff to make 10 regular marines as well as parts to upgrade one of those to a champion as well as special equipment like a banner and icons. You also get 1 Heavy Bolter, 1 Flamer, 1 Meltagun and 1 Plasma Gun.
They no longer sell singles of the various special weapons or CSM style weapons through the bits service, so you need to use whole boxes to do load outs. In theory you could claim to be able to buy the SM weapons like Plasma Guns and what not...but we have to draw a line somewhere.
Back to the task at hand, if we build a basic 5 man unit with out plastic box - we are paying $7.45 per figure. Again, using your starting point and your full inflationary adjustment - back in August of 2004...that same unit would have been $5 per figure...or $6.15 with inflation to todays dollars.
If we add one figure to the set, we go to $6.21 per figure now and $4.17 then (with the inflated price being $5.12 per figure) - Win Then.
If we add one more figure to the set, we go to $5.32 now and $3.57 then...adjusted to $4.39 now - Win Then.
One more figure to take us to 8 and we are looking at $4.66 now and $3.12 then...adjusted to $3.84 - Win Then.
Now, we get into a unit size that starts to favor the larger boxes...
One more for 9 total figures in the unit, which drops the $4.14 per figure now and...need more figures then.
Here is where then comes back into its own even with pricier metals. As opposed to buying a complete new box of 8 CSM, I can buy a blister of 2 metal ones for $8. I could also add a single figure like an icon bearer or champion for 10. Since we have gotten into all the special stuff...lets stick with the blister of 2...
...So, we have $25 + $8 for a total of $33 which gets us 10 CSM to play with - enough to build our 9 man unit. Each figure works out to $3.67 then or $4.51 inflated. Just there...the old prices cross the threshold from being cheaper. Lets go ahead and go to 11 (works for Spinal Tap after all) - Win Now.
10 Figures... $3.73 now, $3.30 then - adjusted to $4.06 - Win Now.
11 Figures...need another box of plastic now... $6.77 now...need another blister of two figures... $3.73 adjusted up to $4.58 - Win Then.
So...I think that clearly illustrates the first point of the options of the size of the unit and how that might impact your cost per figure per unit. Yes, you may have two or three units which are partial that allow you to use two boxes more effectively...but that would mean that the army method (which I have also posted) is the better way to analyze price increases...we are looking at the troops in a vacuum right now.
Back to the Codex Entry...
So, we can go up to 20 CSM per unit...we will skip that part.
I think the heavy weapons and stuff was a great consternation for you...so, any one CSM may replace his pistol with a plasma pistol or his boltgun with a Flamer, Meltagun or Plasma Gun.
So, the kit has 2 plasma pistols (enough there) and 1 each of the flamer, meltagun and plasma gun. Good to go there as well - but we have to remember that if you want to start doing math for splitting multiple big boxes into even more little units...you might run out of a needed weapon...
More prices...
So, the prices now will remain the same for a bit (and unfortunately we have to skip on access to the bits service which still existed then)...
5 CSM Unit w/ one Flamer then $7 per figure adjusted to $8.60 - Win Now.
6 CSM Unit w/ one Flamer then $5.83 per figure adjusted to $7.17 - Win Now.
7 CSM Unit w/ one Flamer then $5 per figure adjusted to $6.15 - Win Now.
8 CSM Unit w/ one Flamer then $4.38 per figure adjusted to $5.38 - Win Now.
9 CSM Unit w/ one Flamer then $3.89 per figure adjusted to $4.78 - Win Now.
10 CSM unit w/ one Flamer then $4.30 per figure adjusted to $5.28 - Win Now.
11 CSM unit w/ one Flamer then $3.91 per figure adjusted to $4.81 - Win Then.
How about this one, 11 CSM with one Flamer and one Heavy Bolter? $4.82 then adjusted up to $5.92 - Win Then.
At some point between the older CSM sprues in the 8 man box - they also introduced an accessory sprue for the CSM which had things on it like a heavy bolter, plasma pistol, plasma cannon...don't recall exactly what year it was - but I am thinking it might have been in 2004/2005. That would drop those prices for "Then" even further because you don't have to buy the $10 special figure. Utilizing the bits service would also allow you to drop the prices significantly for those special weapons like the Flamer in the example which was worked through.
As I said with the GK example before this example - there are a lot of variables that go into it - but if you want to attempt to do a detailed analysis of troop prices, then you need to really do a fully detailed analysis of it as opposed to cherry picking what details you want to include from the Codex entry.
What sucks is that ive got so much invested in $40k right now: models, rules books, codexs. To switch id have to completely start from scratch (be a noob all over again with some other set of rules, models and codexs).I hate bein a noob.
Ineedvc2500 wrote: What sucks is that ive got so much invested in $40k right now: models, rules books, codexs. To switch id have to completely start from scratch (be a noob all over again with some other set of rules, models and codexs).I hate bein a noob.
This is one way that all companies try to get you-- by making you have enough invested that you don't want to go elsewhere. Don't fall for it! One basic principle of economics is to disregard sunk costs. If you think you'll be happier elsewhere, then by all means abandon ship.
But only bad companies do that. Not paragons of price-reduction and modern marketing strategy like GW, right Kingy?
Ineedvc2500 wrote: What sucks is that ive got so much invested in $40k right now: models, rules books, codexs. To switch id have to completely start from scratch (be a noob all over again with some other set of rules, models and codexs).I hate bein a noob.
Why would you have to stop using the things you've already got?
H.B.M.C. wrote: But only bad companies do that. Not paragons of price-reduction and modern marketing strategy like GW, right Kingy?
Ineedvc2500 wrote: What sucks is that ive got so much invested in $40k right now: models, rules books, codexs. To switch id have to completely start from scratch (be a noob all over again with some other set of rules, models and codexs).I hate bein a noob.
Why would you have to stop using the things you've already got?
Yep...most of the standard tropes which GW treads in work fine in any other game system - there isn't even anything to stop you from continuing to play with the rules as you have them now. I know a couple of groups who play with Rogue Trader rules and 3rd Edition rules still. You can even pick up a box of new miniatures when you feel like it.
There are of course some who will get all bent out of shape over using comparable GW figures as proxies for something like Infinity - but generally speaking people who get bent out of shape over something like that are not much fun to game with.
Banicks wrote: PS. Has anyone else noticed that GW now charge you 25 cents for a bag?
Aldi and Target also charge you for bags, just off the top of my head. It's something a lot of businesses started doing back when 'green bags' started becoming popular, to discourage plastic bag use.
That I don't mind so much because those stores that do charge you for bags have become cheaper in stock.
GW charges a premium already, so paying 25 cents for a bag is a kick in the teeth when we've already established we're paying that much more for their stock.
Ineedvc2500 wrote: What sucks is that ive got so much invested in $40k right now: models, rules books, codexs. To switch id have to completely start from scratch (be a noob all over again with some other set of rules, models and codexs).I hate bein a noob.
Starting another game doesn't mean all your 40k stuff just falls apart and needs to be thrown out.
Why do you keep ignoring the 04 july price jump? You continue to use that after cost.
The figures at that time were a package deal. 20, 25, and 30 respectivly.
Chaos had a 10 man boxed set, a 16 man boxed set, and the obiquitous metal troops for each of their big 4. This was also along the time of the 13th Black Crusade summer tourney, and the introduction of the Cadians in plastics. LATD, necron plastics, etc. Boom times before the fall- which you keep using the after price from. There was IIRC a second price hike with some other excuse.
Compared to whats going on now, it was good.
These prices your touting were for 16 man boxes, as well. Your loking at 10 man costs for twice as much for half the amount of gear in each box. IIRC, there were also at that time the introduction of the plastic heavy weapon boxes, as well as the IG stuff. Point being, your not using the 04 price, your using 3d qtr stuff, introduced right before the holiday season.
Banicks wrote: PS. Has anyone else noticed that GW now charge you 25 cents for a bag?
Aldi and Target also charge you for bags, just off the top of my head. It's something a lot of businesses started doing back when 'green bags' started becoming popular, to discourage plastic bag use.
That I don't mind so much because those stores that do charge you for bags have become cheaper in stock.
GW charges a premium already, so paying 25 cents for a bag is a kick in the teeth when we've already established we're paying that much more for their stock.
Just bring your girlfriend/fiancee/wife along. It's been my experience that their handbags have the internal capacity to hold even something the size of Dark Vengeance/Island of Blood, despite how large they actually look.
Banicks wrote: PS. Has anyone else noticed that GW now charge you 25 cents for a bag?
Aldi and Target also charge you for bags, just off the top of my head. It's something a lot of businesses started doing back when 'green bags' started becoming popular, to discourage plastic bag use.
That I don't mind so much because those stores that do charge you for bags have become cheaper in stock.
GW charges a premium already, so paying 25 cents for a bag is a kick in the teeth when we've already established we're paying that much more for their stock.
Just bring your girlfriend/fiancee/wife along. It's been my experience that their handbags have the internal capacity to hold even something the size of Dark Vengeance/Island of Blood, despite how large they actually look.
None of the above, and I'm afraid handbags just don't suit me darling.
@Hbmc. I realy dont want an all proxy army. I think it may be rude to play someone who has got the right models for army and im playing GW models and having to explain what every unit is and carrying. I could trade but i think it would be at a serious loss for me. Rock-Me-Hard place. I can see why users are bitter with GW.
Ineedvc2500 wrote: @Hbmc. I realy dont want an all proxy army. I think it may be rude to play someone who has got the right models for army and im playing GW models and having to explain what every unit is and carrying.
Get ready for a paradigm shift:
Other games let you use whatever miniatures you want - regardless of manufacturer.
Seriously, go look at Gruntz, or FUBAR, or Tomorrow's War. You can use whatever you want. Mix and match.
Fair enough – I’ve never been a fan of proxies either, except where there is no alternative (my AdMech army is mostly models from other companies other than the Tech-Priests and Servitors), but your stuff remains completely valid for 40K even if you’re not getting any more/supporting GW/whatever.
Ineedvc2500 wrote: @Hbmc. I realy dont want an all proxy army. I think it may be rude to play someone who has got the right models for army and im playing GW models and having to explain what every unit is and carrying.
Get ready for a paradigm shift:
Other games let you use whatever miniatures you want - regardless of manufacturer.
CAN YOU DIG IT?
Not true... Every PP event I have ever seen with PP support requires 100% PP models.
You take the Kings Coin, you do the Kings Bidding. PP has press gangers who do a good job running events and providing support, it is perfectly reasonable for them to expect to promote a single miniature's minis.
I also seriously doubt when Mantic gets its event machine running and they have tourneys for Kings of War that they are going to be thrilled about someone showing up with a GW fantasy army and winning the whole thing. I would not be surprised to see requirements for those events, and I wouldn't begrudge them either.
Banicks wrote: PS. Has anyone else noticed that GW now charge you 25 cents for a bag?
Aldi and Target also charge you for bags, just off the top of my head. It's something a lot of businesses started doing back when 'green bags' started becoming popular, to discourage plastic bag use.
That I don't mind so much because those stores that do charge you for bags have become cheaper in stock.
GW charges a premium already, so paying 25 cents for a bag is a kick in the teeth when we've already established we're paying that much more for their stock.
In my area, the bag thing is a Governmental *TAX* and retailers can never legally pay tax for consumers. We get charged per bag and it has to explicitly be itemized on the receipt as a tax. And while people are like 'they can drop prices', how do they do that when I may be buying 3 items or 20 and may need one bag or 5 bags? And since *EVERYONE* has to pay it, and every retailer is charging it... why should they absorb it? You going to get offended and go to the 'other' store who is still charging you the same bag tax?
"Bag Tax" is reality in the US, and many retailers have already gone nation-wide even in areas without the tax simply to be ready for when it expands and many customers like 'green initiatives' and want retailers to help curb bag pollution. Those customers support those companies because they explicitly WANT the retailers to hassle the crap out of you and discourage plastic bags.
I've been playing on and off since 1997. During this time I've always heard player complain about how bad their favorite game was, regardless of whether the company was GW, Wizards of the Coast, White Wolf, or FASA. Gamers love to bitch and moan about their games and about how they would make it better. The reality is we gamers like to complain. Who knows why, but we do. If you enjoy the game then stick with it. There are tons of options out there and GW is really just a cool way to get into it. There are always groups that form and when you show you really want to play then those groups will bring you in. My FLGS I suppose is unique in that we are in a military heave area so the social groups here are very welcoming of new players (especially since they come and go pretty frequently). Once you've built you're favored army and decide to try something else, then do it. This hobby is all about building up a force and trying something new.
I think the GW games are great, the models are great, and the community is great (sometimes). What sucks is GW's business model. They raise prices when they're doing poorly and make the game less accessible to new players, and they change the rules constantly to the chagrin of many long time players. The combination means less sales so they raise their prices again and look for replacement store managers.
Would I enter the hobby if I were you? Yes.
Would I look into alternate ways of doing so? Very yes.
If the people you play with aren't total sticklers and you aren't planning on any tournaments I support proxying 3rd party models and scratch-building what you can.
nkelsch wrote: Not true... Every PP event I have ever seen with PP support requires 100% PP models.
You take the Kings Coin, you do the Kings Bidding. PP has press gangers who do a good job running events and providing support, it is perfectly reasonable for them to expect to promote a single miniature's minis.
I also seriously doubt when Mantic gets its event machine running and they have tourneys for Kings of War that they are going to be thrilled about someone showing up with a GW fantasy army and winning the whole thing. I would not be surprised to see requirements for those events, and I wouldn't begrudge them either.
One example of a game that doesn't allow proxies in official events doesn't render the point untrue. There are other games out there that do allow you to use whatever models you want.
People are focusing too much on the price issue, while ignoring what I think is a drop in the general "feel" of the game. I feel like I am becoming less and less of a hobbyist, and more of just a consumer in GW's eyes. At least ten years ago, even if that was the case, they did a better job at hiding it.
I wish I could take all the miniatures available from GW now, and go back to 1998 to use them.
nkelsch wrote: Not true... Every PP event I have ever seen with PP support requires 100% PP models.
You take the Kings Coin, you do the Kings Bidding. PP has press gangers who do a good job running events and providing support, it is perfectly reasonable for them to expect to promote a single miniature's minis.
I also seriously doubt when Mantic gets its event machine running and they have tourneys for Kings of War that they are going to be thrilled about someone showing up with a GW fantasy army and winning the whole thing. I would not be surprised to see requirements for those events, and I wouldn't begrudge them either.
One example of a game that doesn't allow proxies in official events doesn't render the point untrue. There are other games out there that do allow you to use whatever models you want.
But yet, the games with the major share of the gaming markets have things in place which kindly encourage or downright demand official models... hardly paradigm shift to say 'other games' allow it when what they mean is 'most of the minor games with very small marketshare allow it while a large percent of the major game systems discourage or disallow it'.
The simple reality is for most gamers, the path of least resistance is using the models explicitly designed for the gaming system either out of ease of use, lack of realistic alternatives or requirement for sponsored events. This is not unique to GW.
Can you play other games with random models? Sure... but it is not always going to be an easy or seamless experience and to give the impression that everyone but GW allows it is false.
Can you play other games with random models? Sure... but it is not always going to be an easy or seamless experience and to give the impression that everyone but GW allows it is false.
Oh dear me. A bit of effort in a hobby that involves assembling and painting miniatures, and then figuring out the rulesets for them. Say it ain't so!
Also, tell me exactly when I said that everyone except GW allows you to use whatever models you want? I pointed out a few rulesets that do so, and I don't recall ever bringing PP into the discussion.
I KNEW there was a reason that Aug- Sep 04 kept nagging my gak...
The introduction of 4th edition 40K. The price increase was double at that point. July, then after the release.
Black Gobbo, Fanatic, Troll were still in full swing, by the way....
!@22#$ on a stick, look at those White Dwarf magazines... Compared to what they shill now, it is like night and day.
Your numbers are good for August/ September, but then they rose again before the holiday rush.
I remember that zombie rush thing we had going for October of that year, as well. Skirmish was in full swing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ineedvc2500 wrote: What sucks is that ive got so much invested in $40k right now: models, rules books, codexs. To switch id have to completely start from scratch (be a noob all over again with some other set of rules, models and codexs).I hate bein a noob.
Yes and no.
Sometimes it is a fresh slate, you get about 50 bucks worth of a new game, take your time and enjoy it and really you don't have the same issues you have with a competitive collective game like GW's got. You take more time on models, learning rules, and bs'ing with your mates then you do trying to keep up with the Joneses, and fight it out with rules lawyers, competition builds, and weasle players. If you get a skirmish game, such as Rafm, Helldorado, Gorkamorka, or others, you take it to another type of experience.
Depending on your group, you can even go other routes, and just try rules sets with your outstanding figures, and just leave the "GW" experience to a side and just have a different type.
Grot 6 wrote: Why do you keep ignoring the 04 july price jump? You continue to use that after cost.
Because it isn't relevant to my argument. Troop prices still haven't increased in over eight years, regardless of what happened before then. The concept that I'm "ignoring" it is also absurd since I have recognized and talked about it in multiple threads now.
I also look at many more units than he does. Overall, my analysis is more comprehensive. That said, that does not mean that Sean is wrong-- I do think he's presented his data misleadingly, however.
You have looked only at basic troops.
No-one makes armies only with basic troops.
No-one "collects" basic troops only, to paint and display.
The facts are that lots of individual kits have increased a lot, so, even though some haven't gone up so fast, the cost of typical armies has increased a lot. Overall the increase has been much quicker than inflation. This affects players and it affects collectors who want to purchase outside the limited range of kits that have not inflated so rapidly.
@grot6
Sadly I dont have a group...just me :( you could say dakka is my group. My local gw store closed. Now i have pegasus hobbies (awesome place btw) has no tables tho. Keeps me busy with project supplies. I was drawn to the complexity of 40k and the models. For some reason i really like the ugly ones. Lol! Seriously tho i love it however Its really hard justifing to the wife the expenses. It really is a single mans game. I think they get jealous of the time, attention, and $ that is devoted to it.
Kingsley wrote: Troop prices still haven't increased in over eight years, regardless of what happened before then. .
Where are you getting that from, because IG Cadians look a hell of a lot more expensive today then they did a couple of years ago?
It's a good point and one that tends to get lost amidst all the bickering over methodology and time spans. The only clear and unambiguous way to compare prices is to compare like for like and one of the few ways to do so is to compare sets which haven't changed material nor radically changed composition. One of the few sets to have done so are the IG plastic boxes like Cadians or Catachans (and maybe some Tyranid stuff - maybe Genestealers?) as they have not changed pretty much at all in ages. The only thing that has changed, is that you get less for more, ie 10 models instead of 20 - the models are the same so the comparison is clear.
That way there is no arguing over whether or not army composition is part of the analysis or whether you are taking into consideration point or squad sizes or any of that nonsense; it is a clear like for like comparison.
If you are comparing the cost of participation in the hobby, which means the cost of armies rather than specific individual kits, then it is fair enough to compare a metal model from 10 years ago with the plastic replacement now.
For example, Tau used to have metal Pathfinders sold in blister packs. These have been replaced with a plastic box set. Pathfinders are an important unit in the Tau codex, and are widely used. Thus, if they have got cheaper it should be taken into account in pricing the army as a whole.
In actuality, some Tau units are as cheap or cheaper now, taking inflation into account, as 7-8 years ago, but others have gone up so much that the cost of a realistic army is much more than it used to be.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you are comparing the cost of participation in the hobby, which means the cost of armies rather than specific individual kits, then it is fair enough to compare a metal model from 10 years ago with the plastic replacement now.
But that's not what he's doing. He's attempting to argue that the prices haven't gone up in 8 years, something that is so obviously wrong it boggles the mind as to how one could even begin to think that.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you are comparing the cost of participation in the hobby, which means the cost of armies rather than specific individual kits, then it is fair enough to compare a metal model from 10 years ago with the plastic replacement now.
For example, Tau used to have metal Pathfinders sold in blister packs. These have been replaced with a plastic box set. Pathfinders are an important unit in the Tau codex, and are widely used. Thus, if they have got cheaper it should be taken into account in pricing the army as a whole.
In actuality, some Tau units are as cheap or cheaper now, taking inflation into account, as 7-8 years ago, but others have gone up so much that the cost of a realistic army is much more than it used to be.
I totally agree, whoever I am trying to counterpoint the pages and pages of arguments that inevitably ensue when someone presents their analysis and almost always it boils down to the methodology chosen being open to interpretation. If we really and seriously wish to make an objective assessment of prices and whether they have risen or not that is unambiguous and inarguable, then really the only way to do it is like for like comparison.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
heartserenade wrote: Why don't we just try computing the prices of army lists instead of individual boxes?
Although for some reason, I can't access the GW website (it says site temporarily unavailable) to use the prices. Weird.
The inherent problem with comparing lists is that they change from edition to edition both in terms of unit usefulness and in terms of point costs so will inevitably introduce some form of bias or skew to the results. But it is a valuable exercise in getting a general 'feel' for how prices have trended over the time span.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Plus it was already done, just using the same units from one period and comparing it to now. The price was always higher. Always. Irrefutably higher.
Yes. Exactly. That is what baffles me. I mean, GW has always been expensive - I remember saving up for a metal Gargant for Epic when I was 11 or 12 and thinking it was bloody expensive even then. I would have thought that saying GW is expensive and has risen in price would be one of the few things not open to argument or interpretation really....
If people want to look into this in detail, here is a suggested methodology.
1. Pick a realistic army, with units in all the force slots. Ideally, you should use your own army. This can include options you don't use every day. 2. Ignore changes to materials or kit upgrades. You have to "buy" the models offered by GW at the time of purchase. 3. Start at any initial year X and compare with the 2013 prices. Price everything in your local currency. If you can't find the price in your start year, use the next earliest price you can find. 4. Remember to strip out sales tax or VAT from the retail prices, and remember that tax rates may have changed. (E.g. , the UK rate of VAT was 17.5%, dropped to 15% for a couple of years, then went up to 20%.) 5. When you have calculated a year X cost and a year 2012 cost, you can compare the effect of inflation on the year X cost. 6. The inflation calculator dates will be taken as year X to 2012, which is the latest year for which figures are available. 7. Use the inflation calculator of your own country's central bank to see the effect of inflation. 8. Having calculated a year X price, a year 2013 price and the year X inflated price, you can compare the inflated price to the current price. 9. If there have been significant upgrades in kits they should be mentioned. For instance the current £30 Broadside is a much better kit than the original £12 version, and can account for part of the increase.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The other thing is we should also compare the rate of price increase of non-GW figures.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Where are you getting that from, because IG Cadians look a hell of a lot more expensive today then they did a couple of years ago?
Plastic Guardsmen (Cadians/Catachans), Sisters of Battle, and all three basic Tyranid units (Hormagaunts, Termagants, and Genestealers) went up in price since August 2004. Every other Troops unit either varies based on options taken or went down in price once you adjust for inflation. Some don't even need to be adjusted-- Gretchin, all four basic Dæmon kits (Bloodletters, Dæmonettes, Plaguebearers, and Pink Horrors), Wyches, both varieties of Grey Knight (power or Terminator armor), and Necron Immortals all went down in price since August 2004 without adjusting for inflation-- that's what happens when you convert from metal to plastic.
Note that Games Workshop only has one more line with Troops to convert from metal to plastic-- Sisters. It's conceivable that the next Eldar codex will have plastic Aspect Warriors in the Troops slot, but by no means guaranteed (aside from Dire Avengers).
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Where are you getting that from, because IG Cadians look a hell of a lot more expensive today then they did a couple of years ago?
Plastic Guardsmen (Cadians/Catachans), Sisters of Battle, and all three basic Tyranid units (Hormagaunts, Termagants, and Genestealers) went up in price since August 2004. Every other Troops unit either varies based on options taken or went down in price once you adjust for inflation. Some don't even need to be adjusted-- Gretchin, all four basic Dæmon kits (Bloodletters, Dæmonettes, Plaguebearers, and Pink Horrors), Wyches, both varieties of Grey Knight (power or Terminator armor), and Necron Immortals all went down in price since August 2004 without adjusting for inflation-- that's what happens when you convert from metal to plastic.
Lord of the Rings stuff all went up in price/less stuff in the box as well.
What about the standard Orc boys for fantasy?
Warriors and Marauders of Chaos were both £18 when I last bought a box of each about 5-6 years ago - each set is £20 currently.
Undead zombies - was £18, now £20.50.
Tyranid Warriors are now £28.50 - they certainly didn;t cost that much a couple of years ago.
To say that GW haven't raised standard troop prices in 8 years is clearly not true.
Plastic Guardsmen (Cadians/Catachans), Sisters of Battle, and all three basic Tyranid units (Hormagaunts, Termagants, and Genestealers) went up in price since August 2004. Every other Troops unit either varies based on options taken or went down in price once you adjust for inflation. Some don't even need to be adjusted-- Gretchin, all four basic Dæmon kits (Bloodletters, Dæmonettes, Plaguebearers, and Pink Horrors), Wyches, both varieties of Grey Knight (power or Terminator armor), and Necron Immortals all went down in price since August 2004 without adjusting for inflation-- that's what happens when you convert from metal to plastic.
Then the product hasn't gone down in price. They replaced the product with another that was cheaper.
The tragedy of all of this is that no matter what time frame you choose, most troops have not gone up that much. Looking 10 years back shows more increases than Kingsley finds due to the big price jump of 2004, but the prices had been stable for many years prior to that.
Where prices have skyrocketed (IG aside) has mostly been in the metals/finecast, tanks, monsters, flyers, and the like.
There is a good point buried in the insanity here, in that people seem convinced that GW has been a price increasing machine. And I was one of them. Looking at the actual prices, the time involved, and the inflation involved (roughly 20% between 2004 and 2012, and 25% between 2002 and 2012), paints a more nuanced picture.
Meaning, regardless of squabbling over time, improvement in kits, material switches, or whatever, the actual price increase of a lot of stuff has been surprisingly (to me at least), low.
That's cold comfort to anybody that collects armies in metal, of course.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: To say that GW haven't raised standard troop prices in 8 years is clearly not true.
GW has raised their standard Troop prices. But generally speaking they haven't done so above inflation, and updates to kits often make acquiring the units you want less expensive. Here's the complete analysis if you want it.
Polonius wrote:The tragedy of all of this is that no matter what time frame you choose, most troops have not gone up that much. Looking 10 years back shows more increases than Kingsley finds due to the big price jump of 2004, but the prices had been stable for many years prior to that.
Where prices have skyrocketed (IG aside) has mostly been in the metals/finecast, tanks, monsters, flyers, and the like.
There is a good point buried in the insanity here, in that people seem convinced that GW has been a price increasing machine. And I was one of them. Looking at the actual prices, the time involved, and the inflation involved (roughly 20% between 2004 and 2012, and 25% between 2002 and 2012), paints a more nuanced picture.
Meaning, regardless of squabbling over time, improvement in kits, material switches, or whatever, the actual price increase of a lot of stuff has been surprisingly (to me at least), low.
That's cold comfort to anybody that collects armies in metal, of course.
Agreed on all points there. I believe that GW's pricing strategy is to keep basic (not necessarily Troops) infantry kits relatively inexpensive, while charging large amounts for characters and "centerpiece units" (tanks other than basic transports, big monsters or flyers, etc.) For instance, with the latest Tau release, Pathfinders-- a core infantry unit-- got a new kit that is vastly cheaper than the old Pathfinders and comes with more options and bitz, while Crisis Suits-- another core infantry (albeit Jet Pack Infantry) component of the army-- were reboxed at a lower per-model cost. However, the new Riptide suit costs 85 USD.
For example the Crisis suit cost £8.51 (ex.VAT) in 2005 and costs £11.11 today (bundle box, ex.VAT) which is only 30.5% price increase. If it had gone up according to the rate of inflation it would cost £10.76 (ex.VAT) so in fact it has gone up hardly at all.
However if you compare the current price of a full Tau army with the price in 2004-6, it is 59% more expensive in actual £££, and 26% more expansive in adjusted for inflation £££.
On the plus side, the metal Stealth suits and Pathfinders have been replaced with plastic kits, and there is a new Broadside kit to replace the old mixed media version.
I took those prices from the 2004-2005 big catalogue, which means they are pre-2004 price jump. I did those prices flat, meaning I did not include inflation. Increase the initial price of any kit by ~20-25% for inflation, and you'll see that while some troops jumped a lot, many did not.
I think it's incorrect to say that troop prices haven't gone up, but it's correct to say that many troops have only gone up at the pace of inflation. Alas, a few outliers really pull the average up. So, yes, the average GW troop is more expensive, regardless of inflation, than 10 years ago. But generally not by as much as people think.
SBG wrote: The game is so expensive and it seems like GW wants to drive business away... but the game itself is a blast. I don't regret the 2k I've spent on it at all, but entertainment money to me is a write off anyhow and I have hours of enjoyment from modelling and painting alone. Thats the best part of the hobby to me! Other manufacturers have some bloody nice sculpts too, though...
If I may leap in, I'd say this is probably the opinion I have of the whole thing. Sure, things are expensive and GW seem set on ruling the miniature world with an iron fist, but I still love the hobby and the modelling itself.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Tyranid Warriors are now £28.50 - they certainly didn;t cost that much a couple of years ago.
To say that GW haven't raised standard troop prices in 8 years is clearly not true.
To be fair, Tyranid Warriors have only been Troop choices as of the 5th edition codex. Prior to that, they were Elite and/or HQ, with wings moving them to Fast Attack.
Without meaning to cause a riot here, why are people so fixated on the 2004 price rise? I know it was a big one - I don't think anyone is claiming it isn't - but if you are going to claim that GW are constantly increasing prices way above inflation each year isn't it better to view the "normal" increase rather than the 1 time "Big" increase?
Hell the increase was nearly 10 years ago, I can't think of any other product where people would say "10 Years ago there was a massive price jump, so prices are always jumping massively". In many ways I think Kingsleys example that doesn't include this is MORE representative of how GW opertate now.
Also, why does it matter that the models switched from Metal to Plastic if you're viewing the cost as an army? Seriously, if the idea is just to get something to play with what does it matter to you, the customer, that the company is using a material that costs them less? Particularly when the general opinion (and I'm not saying this is something everyone agrees with) is that the new material is actually better (comparing metal to plastic here, not Finecast which is a whole other matter).
If Ford (and I'm probably showing a dreadful lack of cars here - do they still make the Kia?) started to make cars tomorrow from a brand new material that is not only better (which for a car I guess would be lighter/stronger?) but cost them less, does that suddenly mean that the car is no longer a Kia? Ofcause it doesn't and I fail to see why an army changeing from metal to plastic suddenly means it is no longer the same army.
Stranger83 wrote: Without meaning to cause a riot here, why are people so fixated on the 2004 price rise? I know it was a big one - I don't think anyone is claiming it isn't - but if you are going to claim that GW are constantly increasing prices way above inflation each year isn't it better to view the "normal" increase rather than the 1 time "Big" increase?
that's a solid point, up until the point where you start counting from right after the price rise. Meaning, I think it's fine to start it then, but only if prefaced with the acknowledgement that it was right after a major price prise.
But this wasn't an obscenely huge jump. It may have been the most comprehensive, but it's similar to later price increases. And one reason to start with that increase is because it came after a relatively stable time in prices. It was the start of "annual price reviews" as we know them now. So yes, if you're interested in the effect of the "price rise era," knocking off the first price rise is improper.
But... what I think would be interesting is to see how far back the early 2004 price went, to give context to the jump.
Stranger83 wrote: Without meaning to cause a riot here, why are people so fixated on the 2004 price rise? I know it was a big one - I don't think anyone is claiming it isn't - but if you are going to claim that GW are constantly increasing prices way above inflation each year isn't it better to view the "normal" increase rather than the 1 time "Big" increase?
...
...
...
.
I did not know there was a huge price rise in 2004.
I have calculated army inflation from 2004 because that is when I bought the 4th edition rules and 3rd edition Tau codex and started to make a Tau army, buying the units in 2005.
My army therefore is a good indicator of the rate of price increases from 2005 to 2012. It's a fairly typical army with a fair selection of unit types, that has been updated in 2006 with the new codex and can be updated again now.
When you look at it, my Tau inflation calculation is based on the post-2004 prices, which means a chunk of inflation has been ignored.
A Land Raider cost $50 in 2004 and $74.25 today, which is 48.5% higher or 24% higher than inflation for the exact same model.
A Leman Russ cost $40 in 2004 and $49.50 today, which is 24% higher and is basically following inflation.
A CSM Predator cost $40 in 2004 and $57.75 today which is 45% higher or 21% higher than inflation for the exact same model.
Lastly, lets look at the rulebook, something that is needed to play the game. It cost $50 in 2004 and now cost $74.25. That's a 48% increase in price, or 24% over inflation, for basically the same product. I have both rulebooks and they are fairly similar. Talk about extortion.
I can pick up the Warmachine rule book for $30 in softcover and would suspect it would be $40 to $45 for hardcover. I can also order it online from a multitude of stores.
Stranger83 wrote: Without meaning to cause a riot here, why are people so fixated on the 2004 price rise? I know it was a big one - I don't think anyone is claiming it isn't - but if you are going to claim that GW are constantly increasing prices way above inflation each year isn't it better to view the "normal" increase rather than the 1 time "Big" increase?
...
...
...
.
I did not know there was a huge price rise in 2004.
I have calculated army inflation from 2004 because that is when I bought the 4th edition rules and 3rd edition Tau codex and started to make a Tau army, buying the units in 2005.
My army therefore is a good indicator of the rate of price increases from 2005 to 2012. It's a fairly typical army with a fair selection of unit types, that has been updated in 2006 with the new codex and can be updated again now.
When you look at it, my Tau inflation calculation is based on the post-2004 prices, which means a chunk of inflation has been ignored.
Yeah, I'm not saying that things have not increased beyond inflation, just that I don't see the exclusion of the 2004 increase as that big a deal as long as you state when you are calculating from (which in fairness Kingsley does), I'd be more concerned if you didn't include the 2012 increase personally than not including the 2004 one.
2004 was a big increase because, if my memory serves me correctly (and it may not), it was essentially a double increase (i.e. they increased prices once then did the "annual increase" almost straight after) - this gave it a much higher increase % than the more normal (and I use the word only in the GW sense, an annual increase is not "normal") annual increase.
The point I was trying to make is that people were slating him for not including the 2004 increase when in actual fact the 2004 one is abnormal. I suppose you could do the 2004 one taking just the "normal" annual increase and not the proceeding "one-off" increase to get an idea of how much they have increased above inflation, if you are trying to see how the annual increase has effected prices, but it's probably much easier to just ignore the 2004 results (I haven't seen the price list tables so cannot comment on how much detail they hold).
A Land Raider cost $50 in 2004 and $74.25 today, which is 48.5% higher or 24% higher than inflation for the exact same model.
A Leman Russ cost $40 in 2004 and $49.50 today, which is 24% higher and is basically following inflation.
A CSM Predator cost $40 in 2004 and $57.75 today which is 45% higher or 21% higher than inflation for the exact same model.
Lastly, lets look at the rulebook, something that is needed to play the game. It cost $50 in 2004 and now cost $74.25. That's a 48% increase in price, or 24% over inflation, for basically the same product. I have both rulebooks and they are fairly similar. Talk about extortion.
I can pick up the Warmachine rule book for $30 in softcover and would suspect it would be $40 to $45 for hardcover. I can also order it online from a multitude of stores.
these actually were the prices for these up through 2006 at least, 2009 for the Leman Russ, meaning that the rate of increase is actually higher.
Stranger83 wrote: The point I was trying to make is that people were slating him for not including the 2004 increase when in actual fact the 2004 one is abnormal. I suppose you could do the 2004 one taking just the "normal" annual increase and not the proceeding "one-off" increase to get an idea of how much they have increased above inflation, if you are trying to see how the annual increase has effected prices, but it's probably much easier to just ignore the 2004 results (I haven't seen the price list tables so cannot comment on how much detail they hold).
You have to set some form of actual basis for the debate. Most people when they talk about the price hikes - they refer to prior to the first big price hikes of FY2004. The August number remained in place from the summer of 2004 through to the next price hike in the spring of 2006 (when things like Tactical Marines went from $30 per box to $35 per box). That price stayed in place until the current price which happened the year before last if my memory is correct (pretty sure those were the troop hikes).
By using a date right after a price hike to calculate if something is inline with inflation is not very helpful - you could go back all the way to the late 1990s when the boxed set was $25 and say "Look - almost no increase as a percentage year over year" - but that is because those prices were stable for much longer periods of time. Since people question the prices in relation to the period where price hikes have been happening...it is best to look at the prices that get hiked. The increase in 2004 was unusual in that they hiked everything at once - but they didn't by any means stop increasing everything. The more recent ones have staggered the increases instead so that it isn't noticed immediately. Since the 2004 increase, troops in general have had 2 increases. They should be due for a third significant increase this year if the pattern holds.
Also, since everything in GW is in relation to their FY period (July to June) then when you refer to things - the FY is more important than the calendar year. Right now - from August of last year to now...prices on a lot of things have been stable. Does that mean there wasn't a price hike last year? No. Does that mean we shouldn't expect a price hike this year? No. GW will no doubt roll out higher prices on a lot of things this year in a month or two and it will only be a few hundred different SKUs of their whole catalog. As a percentage of the catalog - the increase might only be 4 or 5% as a lot of supporters like to point out when the price hike happens. But last year, a different set of SKUs were jacked up and the year before that it was a different set of SKUs.
What I took away from the whole thing was; Price increases are inevitable during good economies and bad. Other companies are not as widely played as GW and can be just as expensive. However, game company X does not treat me with the same disrespect as GW tried to
To me , what is more relevant is my perception of prices now though of course one does remember what that model / unit / Codex / rulebook used to cost and this may affect a willingness to swallow the rise .
The ratmen theme is probably ripped off from The Borribles, an English childrens book published in 1976 which features the "Rumbles" a ratman-like race which itself is based on the "Wombles" an eco friendly ratman-like race from an earlier TV animation series.
Kilkrazy wrote: If people want to look into this in detail, here is a suggested methodology.
1. Pick a realistic army, with units in all the force slots. Ideally, you should use your own army. This can include options you don't use every day.
2. Ignore changes to materials or kit upgrades. You have to "buy" the models offered by GW at the time of purchase.
3. Start at any initial year X and compare with the 2013 prices. Price everything in your local currency. If you can't find the price in your start year, use the next earliest price you can find.
4. Remember to strip out sales tax or VAT from the retail prices, and remember that tax rates may have changed. (E.g. , the UK rate of VAT was 17.5%, dropped to 15% for a couple of years, then went up to 20%.)
5. When you have calculated a year X cost and a year 2012 cost, you can compare the effect of inflation on the year X cost.
6. The inflation calculator dates will be taken as year X to 2012, which is the latest year for which figures are available.
7. Use the inflation calculator of your own country's central bank to see the effect of inflation.
8. Having calculated a year X price, a year 2013 price and the year X inflated price, you can compare the inflated price to the current price.
9. If there have been significant upgrades in kits they should be mentioned. For instance the current £30 Broadside is a much better kit than the original £12 version, and can account for part of the increase.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The other thing is we should also compare the rate of price increase of non-GW figures.
Yes, and then you have to do the same calculation every year between year X and year Y and plot them on a graph to get a realistic idea of increases, as if you pick a year X which was just after a price increase and a year Y that was just before a price increase, you will be underestimating the reality of the price differences relative to inflation. If you pick a year X just before a large price increase, then a year Y just after a large price increase, you will over estimated the price rise relative to inflation.
I personally feel to get a whole picture of the GW pricing you have to go back even further than 2004. If you go all the way back to 2nd edition, it paints a different picture. I don't have the time to go through the numbers, but I feel if you did, you'd find 2nd -> 3rd the price of an "average" army jumped, as the game design changed to encourage more models. Simultaneously though, many kits went metal -> plastic, but often with a quality decrease and given you now needed more models to field an average army, I don't think the price of an army really decreased. Over the coming years, it wouldn't surprise me if the cost of collecting an army dropped down as that's when many core units that were previously metal went to plastic, but I would be surprised if it got back to 2nd edition levels. From there (that's probably about 2003-2004) the price has been rising with a few more metal -> plastic conversions which may keep the cost of certain armies from increasing too much, but armies that were already mostly plastic in 2003-2004 would have increased the most.
That's my feeling at least, I don't have the time right now to try and find exact numbers and definitely don't have the time to test it for various armies which would be required to paint an accurate picture.
You then plot the graphs you get from that alongside graphs of revenue, profit, overall market growth and an inflation curve and you would be able to do quite a comprehensive analysis of GW's changing position and how attitudes toward GW have shifted over the years and the effect on their revenue and then see how poorly GW are managing that revenue by the profit.
So.... anyone have a spare day or two to do all that? Cheers.
Ignoring the single major drop in sales from '09-'10, we still see steady drops of 14-20%, with an average of 21.3% per year since the peak amount of $273k
From 2007-2012 here are the drops:
14% '07-'08, 22% '08-'09, 44.7$ '09-'10, 20.7% '10-'11, 28.5% '11-'12.
Price per unit in 2007 at it's peak was $35. Current price for 2012 is $37.25, a 6.4% increase.
Based on those numbers, if 100% of the units where wholesale, 2007 volume was roughly 12,000, and 2012 was roughly 2500, 20.8% of it's former sales volume.
These numbers of course are for the United States only.
Thoughts?
GW has done nothing in the last few years other than cut costs and raise prices. New releases are more and more expensive, and now we're seeing single units that cost as much as battleforce boxes.
Ignoring the single major drop in sales from '09-'10, we still see steady drops of 14-20%, with an average of 21.3% per year since the peak amount of $273k
From 2007-2012 here are the drops:
14% '07-'08, 22% '08-'09, 44.7$ '09-'10, 20.7% '10-'11, 28.5% '11-'12.
Price per unit in 2007 at it's peak was $35. Current price for 2012 is $37.25, a 6.4% increase.
Based on those numbers, if 100% of the units where wholesale, 2007 volume was roughly 12,000, and 2012 was roughly 2500, 20.8% of it's former sales volume.
These numbers of course are for the United States only.
Thoughts?
GW has done nothing in the last few years other than cut costs and raise prices. New releases are more and more expensive, and now we're seeing single units that cost as much as battleforce boxes.
Ain't no way those numbers are good but there are some mitigating factors. During that time GW created several new products (DA vets, Space Wolf grey hunters and most of all starter sets) that compete directly with the Tac marine box. An addition tac marines can be resold on the secondary market, so GW is also competing with tac marines they made 5, 6, 10 years ago that are now being resold.
Still does not make the numbers good, but there are external factors at play. Do they explain a fall from $270k to $60k? I doubt it.
If we have it, a chart of sales on the same codex over a few editions would be very interesting. It seems that's the only apples to apples sales we might have.
That is interesting. The most recent SM codex was released in 2008. It stands to reason that more people start an army when the codex is new.
Okay, so they're selling fewer units of the basic troop for one army, and it's tapered off over the lifespan of the codex. Maybe that's their expected results? As Kid_Kyoto says, newer alternate marine codexes don't really benefit from the base tactical squad, as they now all have their own base kits.
I'd be interested to see similar unit sales comparisons for core choices for other armies.
Ignoring the single major drop in sales from '09-'10, we still see steady drops of 14-20%, with an average of 21.3% per year since the peak amount of $273k
From 2007-2012 here are the drops:
14% '07-'08, 22% '08-'09, 44.7$ '09-'10, 20.7% '10-'11, 28.5% '11-'12.
Price per unit in 2007 at it's peak was $35. Current price for 2012 is $37.25, a 6.4% increase.
Based on those numbers, if 100% of the units where wholesale, 2007 volume was roughly 12,000, and 2012 was roughly 2500, 20.8% of it's former sales volume.
These numbers of course are for the United States only.
Thoughts?
GW has done nothing in the last few years other than cut costs and raise prices. New releases are more and more expensive, and now we're seeing single units that cost as much as battleforce boxes.
Ain't no way those numbers are good but there are some mitigating factors. During that time GW created several new products (DA vets, Space Wolf grey hunters and most of all starter sets) that compete directly with the Tac marine box. An addition tac marines can be resold on the secondary market, so GW is also competing with tac marines they made 5, 6, 10 years ago that are now being resold.
Still does not make the numbers good, but there are external factors at play. Do they explain a fall from $270k to $60k? I doubt it.
If we have it, a chart of sales on the same codex over a few editions would be very interesting. It seems that's the only apples to apples sales we might have.
Those numbers are directly from GW in their CHS lawsuit. They were submitted as evidence, and if they are way off, then GW perjured themselves to the court.
That same report does have a few codices listed in it across the same time span of 2006-2012.
Those numbers are directly from GW in their CHS lawsuit. They were submitted as evidence, and if they are way off, then GW perjured themselves to the court.
That same report does have a few codices listed in it across the same time span of 2006-2012.
Oh yeah I know. I had to follow you through 3 threads till I found one where we're allowed to talk about it
Cheers. The rules numbers seems to indicate growth in the number of players, 4th ed selling 800k on release, then 5th selling 930k on release.
I don't think the only codex we see through a full cycle is Space Marines which drop from $265k (4th ed release) to $194k (5th ed release).
So maybe vanilla marines are just not the kings they once were?
Ooo.... Rhinos! That might be a good evergreeen product, you get a rhino-using codex every year or two and the only competing product is the Chaos rhino.
they compete with Razorbacks though, especially when after a while people eventually figured out they (used to ) cost the same as a rhino but with extra parts.
I think Imperial Guard is also version to version (or nearly so) though I would need to double check what month the 3rd Edition book was released in 2003. Remember the numbers are based off from a GW FY - so things like the 4th Edition Codex Eldar - released in 2006 was entirely posted to FY2007.
When trying to figure out growth/decrease or flat - you need to look at the price during each FY and split that to figure units. Codices went from $20 to $22 to $25 all the way up to $30 I think in 2012. The 40K Rulebook went from $50 to $57 or so in FY2010 (which means 5th probably was flat over 4th when you calculate across their whole lifespan).
If the rulebook numbers are accurate it can give us a rough estimate of the number of players, on the assumption that most people buy the new edition when it comes out.
Kilkrazy wrote: If the rulebook numbers are accurate it can give us a rough estimate of the number of players, on the assumption that most people buy the new edition when it comes out.
Would tend to agree...though it appears that this might be another instance where things tend to split, merge and reform again...over in the "What significance/size/impact is the 'online community'?" thread - I used it to just crunch some rough numbers to give a broad range of what the player base might be in the US (and how it might hypothetically be extended out to the rest of the world).
The cliff notes version is that in the US - there are probably somewhere around 60,000 to 120,000 active 40K customers (with 90,000 being the sweet spot) with another 30,000 to 60,000 active WFB customers (with around 45,000 being the sweet spot). Extended globally based on the North American Market being roughly 25% of GWs sales - it would work out to 440,000 to 660,000 total active customers. I had heard from an associate a number in the 400,000-500,000 (back in 2009...though looking at 4th Edition sales numbers and 5th Edition sales numbers...there hasn't been a significant change) - which meshes well enough with the calculated figure.
There are two dissenting opinions over there as well which question the methodology...or at least the conclusion of the methodology.
You can also draw some conclusions based on the first year of a Codex release versus the popularity of a given army (useful opposition research if you are a 3rd party bits manufacturer). Space Marines are definitely the flagship - but Imperial Guard look like they are giving it a strong run for its money and may have even beat Vanilla Marines in their 5th Edition releases (Both IG and SM were released in FY2009...with SM being at the beginning of the year and IG being at the end of the year - and the IG putting up substantially better numbers). CSM also appear to have outsold the regular SM as well even before doing any pricing adjustments (with a release in early FY2008).
Unfortunately, there isn't much regarding the various Xenos armies in this chart - though Eldar do make a good showing when compared with the other human based armies. Sort of makes you wonder if GW isn't cannibalizing their Space Marine sales with all the various versions of marines and neglecting the non-human armies. Dark Angels and Black Templars both looked a bit uninspiring, in terms of sales figures. Space Wolves and Blood Angels may not be much better either when the codex pricing is taken into account.
Sean_OBrien wrote: Save you a bit of rooting as they are scattered about in it fairly well...
I'd love to see the volume sales of these books with price per unit at the current FY. That would show how much the inflated prices account for those figures.
Sean_OBrien wrote: Save you a bit of rooting as they are scattered about in it fairly well...
I'd love to see the volume sales of these books with price per unit at the current FY. That would show how much the inflated prices account for those figures.
You'd have to dig out the prices and do the math. Sales is all we have unfortunately and you can best GW is not happy even this much is public.
Amusing thought on these numbers coming out. With marines not looking as strong as everyone though, will we be seeing instead a swarm of not-IG rip offs? This release is a gold mine for third party sculptors. They have direct information on what actually sells.
On those numbers for determining players base, looking to be around 38 - 39,000 copies were sold. Assumed a 55% of sales through GW stores and 45% through FGS at 60% cover price. Though that doesn't mean that is an accurate number. People who don't buy the book and rely on others and those who wait for the box set book likely make up a significant chunk. Growing up, playing group of me and four friends, only I had the book. At the FLGS, 1/3 the players did not buy the hard cover 8th book when it came out. Anecdotal, but still demonstrates book sales are not the be-all-end-all.
The sloppy math and large upwards adjustments I used should fairly well cover things like that (and starter set rulebooks too). The 90,000 number which is where I feel it is most likely to be is about 2 1/2 times your figure for sold copies. Between this and other information - it generally coincides nicely.
You are right though regarding the 3rd party production - though it seems a lot of that is being slipped past right now. There is a lot of area that could be expanded on - especially for the guard which are even more varied than the Space Marine figure lines could ever hope to be. Back in the old IG codex, they had that 2 page spread of 30 or 40 different IG regiments with their different thumbnail sketches and little blurp under them.
The downside of course being that because of the variety and nature of the guard - you really need a more significant commitment to do them than you might need putting out shoulder pads or character models which work with existing GWIG.
Would be hard pressed to call them "rip-offs" though. Very little about the guard is unique when compared to any other infantry based army. Capitalizing on those Eldar sales figures though....that would be a bit more difficult due to the more distinctive nature of the Eldar styling (though I can think of a dozen or so different Space Elves who like to wear body suits with shoulder boards off the top of my head in other fiction).
And considering how much less competition there is in that particular portion of the 3rd party market - it may well be something that you could make a solid go of (especially targeting pricier GW figures like Wraith Guard and the existing Finecast figures).
There are heaps of "not-IG" futuristic infantry models on the market. All of GW's Imperial Guards stylings, including the vehicles and guns, are based on historical designs anyway, so you just refer to a historical original and make a "futurised" version.
So far no-one has done "not-IG" armies based on pre-19th century uniforms, which might be fun.
While there are a lot of figures which are futuristic infantry - a lot of them sort of fail to hit the boxes to become a "not-IG" army. Pig Iron does a pretty good job in selling different heads and what not (as do a few other companies) - but I am always surprised at how few complete armies use other figures as their core.
As far as pre-19th century goes...haven't seen too much, though there is plenty available to convert (especially with a large number of plastics that have come out for historical gamers). I have noticed a bit of tunnel vision though for a lot of 40K gamers in regarding to getting outside of their comfort zones. Books have become more focused on what figures GW sells as opposed to the background that was put in place years ago - so if you were to model something like Remus Crushers (based on Roman Gladiators) or Bushmen of Serica (Boer War type figures) for your IG regiment...most people would likely have a bit of a cow even though both are actual "official" regiments designed by GW.
But - should a company (or individual) go through and do a comprehensive army (like the upcoming KS for female infantry) - I think it might work. It needs to cover a fairly large swath of figures though in order to check all the various boxes of an IG army list, and that can be a tall order for a new company.
Sean_OBrien wrote: While there are a lot of figures which are futuristic infantry - a lot of them sort of fail to hit the boxes to become a "not-IG" army. Pig Iron does a pretty good job in selling different heads and what not (as do a few other companies) - but I am always surprised at how few complete armies use other figures as their core.
Victoria Miniatures has some really good kits for this purpose. One problem though is that they are very expensive-- even more so than GW metal IG. While they are better than GW metal IG (IMO), 50 USD for 10 guys that only cost 50 points in game is a tough price point. That's getting into Forge World territory, and realistically FW Elysians or Death Korps are much better-- albeit substantially less customizable. I think Victoria Miniatures are great for customization bitz and conversions but a little too expensive for entire armies, especially given the fact that some events will not let you use an army of Victoria miniatures and will let you use Elysians or Death Korps.
Kingsley wrote: Victoria Miniatures has some really good kits for this purpose. One problem though is that they are very expensive-- even more so than GW metal IG.
At Oz prices, they're the same price as GW's guard models.
...especially given the fact that some events will not let you use an army of Victoria miniatures and will let you use Elysians or Death Korps.
How many events is that realistically going to be, these days, other than small tournies run in stores that don't sell Vic Minis?
Kingsley wrote: Victoria Miniatures has some really good kits for this purpose. One problem though is that they are very expensive-- even more so than GW metal IG.
At Oz prices, they're the same price as GW's guard models.
Almost the exact same price - especially since Victoria switched to trading under USD as opposed to AUD. That $50 ends up being $48 or so Australian...same price as a box of plastic...
...especially given the fact that some events will not let you use an army of Victoria miniatures and will let you use Elysians or Death Korps.
How many events is that realistically going to be, these days, other than small tournies run in stores that don't sell Vic Minis?
That is the big thing. Realistically, any tournaments now should not have a problem with armies that are entirely non-GW figures. Tournament organizers who write their rules otherwise have deeper issues to deal with... Stores shouldn't have any more problem with Victoria Minis than they do the large swaths of the GW catalog that are direct only.
Kilkrazy wrote: There are heaps of "not-IG" futuristic infantry models on the market. All of GW's Imperial Guards stylings, including the vehicles and guns, are based on historical designs anyway, so you just refer to a historical original and make a "futurised" version.
So far no-one has done "not-IG" armies based on pre-19th century uniforms, which might be fun.
I am aware of it, however Praetorians are based on British infantry of the Sudan and Zulu war era -- 1880s roughly -- and so are not pre-19th century.
I was thinking more of the possibility of an IG army made using say 1700s figures in long coats and tricorn hats, or Persian Immortals of the Graeco-Persian Wars.
Sean_OBrien wrote: While there are a lot of figures which are futuristic infantry - a lot of them sort of fail to hit the boxes to become a "not-IG" army. Pig Iron does a pretty good job in selling different heads and what not (as do a few other companies) - but I am always surprised at how few complete armies use other figures as their core.
Agree there are a lot of armies that add parts of a not-IG army, but none that really go full throttle like some of the companies that do full not-SM armies. Vic Miniatures is the only one I'm aware that goes for the full package and does it well. Sick and tired of some them. By focusing on the GWSM aesthetic they limit themselves. IG can allow for a far larger variety.
And am looking forward to the Raging Heroes one.
Just to add, sad there isn't a good, not-Valhallan/WW2 Soviet winter alternative.
I have to sympathise with you somewhat, especially regarding your experiences in your GW store.
I consider myself fairly new to the game of Warhammer itself (although I have played Blood Bowl, LotR and other GW games), having only just assembled a 1,000 point army and have played a total of 3 proper games (all against my son, played in the living room) and a couple of trial games to get used to the rules.
I used to enjoy taking my son to GW to play a game. He started with the Beginner Sessions on Sundays and had a reasonable amount of time to play a game. Then we started going to the Saturday sessions so that he could get some experience playing against other gamers.
His first real game with his proudly painted Skaven army, and the GW staff member pitted him against 4 players - 2 brothers sharing an army of High Elves, a third an experienced and older player with a big unit of Tomb Kings and the staff member himself giving them gaming advice. My son (11 at the time) almost left in tears.
When I finally painted my own army of 1,000 point Vampire Counts, I went down to the store for a game. The event for the day was advertised on facebook as Staff Challenge and was Warhammer ONLY (not 40K or LotR) and I posted on the page to say I would be going.
I got there and was told by the Store Manager that the event was cancelled due to not having enough staff players for it and we should have let them know, either by phoning or posting on facebook (I felt like saying - "Do you ever actually check your own event postings on facebook to see if anyone has responded?").
He then said "You can still set up and play against another player". I thought "Fair enough - I don't mind who I play against as long as I get to play someone I've never played before".
I was about to start setting up then I was told I would be playing my son (I'm thinking "What? We could have stayed at home for that"). Then I we found out that we would be playing on a 2' by 4' section of the gaming board because the other 4' x4' section was going to be used by 40K players INCLUDING A THIRD STAFF MEMBER who had just turned up.
We had no room to put our cases etc. while setting up (my son was even told to move his boxes out of the way, wherever he tried to put them), barely enough room on the (joke of a) gaming table, and to top it all we only had an hour of gaming time.
The store manager was very apologetic afterwards, though. I think he saw in my face how much of a farce I thought the whole thing had been.
getting old), but recently it has been a one way relationship. My advice is that if you can find a good group to game and collect with, 
