It probably isn't. My local store is still going strong, and I'm slowly trying to work my way back into it. Even thinking of picking up Eldar and once the new Nid book drops, building upon my Tyranids a bit more.
I would ignore what people say on here in regards to quitting the hobby for the most part. People just love to complain, I have zero complaints at my FLGS we have a huge crowd and more people are joining every other week it seems.
It's super dead in my area, had 3 flgs spread over the main towns locally, now there is zilch and nobody is even remotely interested in 7th after the experience of 6th.
40k seemed to be dying out around my area, each time I went to the FLGS it seemed like 40k nights were getting smaller and the store was planning them further and further apart, the local GW as well seemed to be a ghost town compared to what it was in years gone by....
But the past few times I've been past the local GW there's actually been a decent crowd there, and none of them were playing AoS or LotR, so maybe 40k has gotten a 2nd wind.
40k isn't dying, at least not completely. The models continue to sell, which frankly is the most important factor in a game continuing to move forward.
Is the 40k "scene" dying? Somewhat. I think that the big, national/regional events are going strong, although I heard rumblings that even Adepticon had room in some events in the last few years. Also, smaller, garage-hammer type groups keep going.
What seems to have dwindled is the middle class. Pick up and play nights, local tournaments, that sort of thing.
In my local area, we've actually had a solid influx of new players. Several of the players who got burnt out and went to play different games are starting to come back. We have tournaments about once a month at the local game stores. I'm currently in both an escalation league and an ongoing campaign. Tuesday nights and Saturdays both frequently see 40k games being played.
My city isn't huge, but we still have three game stores that support 40k plus a hobby store that at least sells the models. A relatively small town not too far away is holding its own tournament this weekend, and the local group is hosting a GT-style event in a few months.
So no. I'd say 40k seems perfectly healthy here in my area. The internet just has a habit of declaring that the sky is falling.
The tournament scene is probably a bit less strong than before as the current edition encourages negotiating good games with your opponent in advance and doesn't have the tightest of rules sets, but that's not too big a problem for me. Tournaments have always favored a couple armies over every other book that was out at the time, so the ramped-up power imbalance isn't too big a deal to me either.
40k isn't dying, despite what appears to be GW strangling it's own IP to death. What we are seeing is the natural progression of a niche hobby attempting to weather the gobal economy while trying to retain it's place as a global leader. 40k's audience has aged, and newer, younger blood aren't coming into the hobby like they use to. Yet, GW has diversified their IP into other genres, and those genres are doing great! And their core just keeps getting better, which does attract young bloods while keeping us long fangs full (one might even say bloated).
Martel732 wrote: The narrative of me dying and Xenos laughing at me? Yeah, thanks GW.
Git Gud?
Hahahah. Git Gud with BA? I welcome you to try. I had a new record a few weeks ago... Eldar forced 74 armor saves in one turn. Two more than the old record.
I believe the problem stems from all the new releases. For me at least, It's really hard to get excited about 40k. Every new thing i see i compare it to a Knight, or Wraithknight, or Scatterbikers, or Decurion. New Mont'ka? some cool stuff, but none of it is better then Tau book formations.
Wanna get excited about a new Tau book? Nah, just a reprint. That makes me wonder if that's all Dark Eldar will get. Our latest book removed almost all of our flavour, i believe we now have below 10 unique special rules, 3 of which are dodge.
In a game where nothing is balanced, and the community has to balance itself in what games are deemed fair or not, you're obviously going to have problems of people not seeing eye to eye, which inevitably disenchants you with the game.
ALEXisAWESOME wrote: I believe the problem stems from all the new releases. For me at least, It's really hard to get excited about 40k. Every new thing i see i compare it to a Knight, or Wraithknight, or Scatterbikers, or Decurion. New Mont'ka? some cool stuff, but none of it is better then Tau book formations.
Wanna get excited about a new Tau book? Nah, just a reprint. That makes me wonder if that's all Dark Eldar will get. Our latest book removed almost all of our flavour, i believe we now have below 10 unique special rules, 3 of which are dodge.
In a game where nothing is balanced, and the community has to balance itself in what games are deemed fair or not, you're obviously going to have problems of people not seeing eye to eye, which inevitably disenchants you with the game.
At least it has for me at any rate.
I hear you man, I left DE for Daemons, and I won many a RTT with DE... Was just time to move on, GW sucked the life out of that army for me.
I don't move on because I strive to give GW minimal money. I probably should just quit. But I've got the models and no one will buy BA. I could add an IK or two, but then it would be a half-assed IK list with gakky BA allies.
I think it varies from place to place; the current state of the game is more appealing to some but not to others. What I've recognized in my area is that more people only game with their close friends, since they don't want to keep haveing the sort of discussion GWs forcing you to have before a game. I've noticed some people who were playing WHFB completely abandoned GW when they dropped that game's support. Many more veteran players are abandoning 40k proper in favor of 30k because they don't want to deal with game imbalance to the extent 40k now does.
It does not seem to be getting many new players or new players in general, at least in my country. AoS did not help w40k either, people don't want to go in to a system that maybe made unplayable in a year or two. So they go to safer systems like x-wing or warmahordes. Even ifninity is doing realy well, and I thought it would never do with all those metal models.
What I think (hope) you're seeing is a result of bad decisions that were made years ago. GW backed themselves into a corner with really expensive codexes, rulebooks, and miniatures that resulted in a ridiculously high barrier to entry. Now that there are other game systems that are easier (cheaper) to get into, you may begin to see an increase in new 40k players, but I wouldn't hold your breath. GAMESworkshop needs to realize that they are in fact a game company and put more effort into balancing and rulemaking their most complex game system. Allies, Formations (in their current state), and LOW/Strength D shenanigans are great for getting people to buy huge super-expensive models, but they're terrible for the game and make it impossible to balance.
Well, I think it's not. But if so, it will take time.
The activity in our gaming group is rather high. Players complain as always about prices, rules, and missed opportunities. But they are still there, debating, playing maelstrom missions, and buying stuff.
krodarklorr wrote: Well, then again, the tournament scene is dying, in my opinion. And around here its certainly true.
Indeed, it appears that the tournament scene is getting thinner. There are players willing to play tourneys but the rule set, the tournament rule and missions do not look very promising.
40k is dying a slow death here, with more and more people putting up their armies for trade for MTG cards or X-Wing.
I say it's cuz of GW's hardline stance on being a "model company". Rules are hilariously imbalanced and there's no incentive on any of the hobby aspects. No encouragements of converting miniatures or sculpting, just buying their "conversion packs" and paint by numbers. No encouragement to scrounge for materials to make terrain or cool stuff like that, just "buy this expensive citadel realm of battle board!" the name also puts people off now. No one here thinks "Astra Militarum" sounds badass, more like something a 4th grade kid half-assed for his creative writing story.
GW also moved out of the major shopping centers, so going to one of their stores has become a hassle rather than just "pop in and have fun", while other stores are feeling that GW products doesn't sell well enough to justify dedicating floor space to it (the ones that do inevitably have the tables double for another game system or use flip tables with a grass mat over it).
Less people might be playing, but that could just be natural ebb and flow, but that said, 40k is far from dying. Plenty people still play, and more importantly, plenty people still buy in.
As much as other wargames have grown in the last five years, 40k is still the 400lb gorilla in the room.
Here's a list I put together of Amazon's "Toys and Games" rankings for another thread. X-Wing, Armada, and Imperial Assault are doing better than any GW starter set is. Make your own conclusions from that.
Age of Sigmar Starter: #59,362
2014 Dark Vengeance: #52,911
Betrayal at Calth: #26,572
Escape from Goblin Town: #305,015
Warmachine Two Player set: #77,165
Infinity Operation Icestorm: #92,835
Dropzone Commander: #96,819
Forbidden Stars: #24,545
original X-Wing starter: #3,329
Force Awakens X-Wing starter: #2,224
Imperial Assault: #3,171
Star Wars Armada starter: #5,203
Zombicide Season 1: #5,401
Zombicide Season 2: #41,967
Zombicide Season 3: #28,301
Battlelore Second Edition: #45,512
GW on a whole has been on a decline for over a year, and even those figures are somewhat inflated by the large number of gak vidya licenses that GW is handing out like candy. If they weren't getting so many royalties from those 5-minute mobile diversions, I suspect the company would be very close to folding right now.
From my view, attending a local games club and friends with my local games store, GW games are falling in popularity.
I’ve been a staunch defender of Games Workshop in recent years; the models, quality, service and even price. While I still believe in the models, service and quality the price has finally got me, or at least my local club.
18 moths ago 40K was as popular as ever at my local games club. Now, you’re lucky to see a single 40K game once a month. I personally would play most weeks with just the models I have, but other players have pretty much dropped the game.
While GW go from big models to bigger models other companies are going back to the small clam packs. In my circumstances I may have an extra £10-£15 a week to spend in my LGS; that’s a pack of Heroclix, an X-Wing or Attack Wing Ship, a small card game or LCG pack. From GW that’s… well, not a lot. An Ork army only needs so many Meks or Mad Doks. Yes I could save that money, but we all know that doesn’t happen when you have cash to burn in a games store.
So right now I really can’t see myself moving forward with GW. But I still wish them success, after all the Warhammer 40,000 universe is fantastic.
I just got back into it after a decade. Decided my obsession was enough to register at this reputable forum for such hobbies.
I used to play Chaos, but I find having a sexy elf magic party with spikey bits to be more fun. Got the SO involved with Space Wolves too...
Sure, prices are high, but the amount of time I spend on the hobby is money saved by the only alternative in my small town (drinking at the local bar). I'd much rather pack a bowl of dat hackle-lo (Morrowind reference) and paint ma' crazy modded mini's than deal with 'oomans anyway.
Most of my new armies were acquired through bartering and trades anyways. Just recently got $1500 CDN of models for 7K MTG cards. SW were traded for a crap load of old pc parts.
Between modding, conversions and being a dirty space pirate, you can offset a lot of the cost and still keep the scene alive.
Hardly, but here's the deal: Dakka is one of the most anti GW places I've managed to find online. You WILL hear a ton of people whining and saying their quitting on this site. Yes, GW is doing some bad business practices, but in recent months, they've seemingly been taking steps in the right direction (bringing back specialist games, plastic 30k, board games that are more then worth their dollar value for what you get, all recent codexies near the same power level).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheWaspinator wrote: Here's a list I put together of Amazon's "Toys and Games" rankings for another thread. X-Wing, Armada, and Imperial Assault are doing better than any GW starter set is. Make your own conclusions from that.
What? Star Wars games are selling well? Hmm, I wonder if it has anything to do with a majorly hyped movie coming out in 4 days
asorel wrote: GW on a whole has been on a decline for over a year, and even those figures are somewhat inflated by the large number of gak vidya licenses that GW is handing out like candy. If they weren't getting so many royalties from those 5-minute mobile diversions, I suspect the company would be very close to folding right now.
Unrelated but I wish a Dawn of War 3 or Space Marine 2 (Heresy Boogaloo) would be made instead of all those borderline shovelware games and micro transaction filled apps.
I highly doubt 40k is dying so much as GW is thinking their business is unsinkable despite all the cracks that are starting to appear. GW will sooner capsize and sell off the company (so the board can cash in before they hit the bottom) before 40k as a game system is done. Making an AoS version of 40k that replaces 40k proper will sink the company. GW as a company has a few years left in the tank unless they make some catastrophically bad decisions before then. Its possible GW could restructure its design, sales, and management system but honestly I think the heads of the company are too complacent and disconnected from the importance of creative design and new ideas to ever make such a change. Their sluggishness to adapt to the internet is something that highlights how outdated their business plan is.
Brennonjw wrote: Hardly, but here's the deal: Dakka is one of the most anti GW places I've managed to find online.
Oh, my sweet summer child, so much you have to learn. This message board is by leaps and bounds the most tolerant of GW shillery I visit. But, to be fair, this is the only place I visit with any sort of positive attitude towards GW.
Brennonjw wrote: Hardly, but here's the deal: Dakka is one of the most anti GW places I've managed to find online. You WILL hear a ton of people whining and saying their quitting on this site. Yes, GW is doing some bad business practices, but in recent months, they've seemingly been taking steps in the right direction (bringing back specialist games, plastic 30k, board games that are more then worth their dollar value for what you get, all recent codexies near the same power level).
asorel wrote: GW on a whole has been on a decline for over a year, and even those figures are somewhat inflated by the large number of gak vidya licenses that GW is handing out like candy. If they weren't getting so many royalties from those 5-minute mobile diversions, I suspect the company would be very close to folding right now.
Unrelated but I wish a Dawn of War 3 or Space Marine 2 (Heresy Boogaloo) would be made instead of all those borderline shovelware games and micro transaction filled apps.
I highly doubt 40k is dying so much as GW is thinking their business is unsinkable despite all the cracks that are starting to appear. GW will sooner capsize and sell off the company (so the board can cash in before they hit the bottom) before 40k as a game system is done. Making an AoS version of 40k that replaces 40k proper will sink the company. GW as a company has a few years left in the tank unless they make some catastrophically bad decisions before then. Its possible GW could restructure its design, sales, and management system but honestly I think the heads of the company are too complacent and disconnected from the importance of creative design and new ideas to ever make such a change. Their sluggishness to adapt to the internet is something that highlights how outdated their business plan is.
I think these two quotes best sum up the thing about GW. They're big and lofty enough to keep floating, but without some changes, they may sink and capsize eventually. Also, all the negativity surrounding them, even if they did change, may not be enough to bring people back.
From the words of Rick Priestley, co-creator of Warhammer and creative head until 2010, the company doesn't give a damn about balanced gameplay anymore, sales dept is running the place.
The reason 40k is dying is because rules don't matter.
“The role I had in the studio was with staff working on game development and design, and they’d pretty much decided that game development and design wasn’t of any interest to them. The current attitude in Games Workshop is that they’re not a games company, it’s that they’re a model company selling collectibles. That’s something I find wholly self-deceiving and couldn’t possibly agree with.”
Telly wrote: . Allies, Formations (in their current state), and LOW/Strength D shenanigans are great for getting people to buy huge super-expensive models, but they're terrible for the game and make it impossible to balance.
But hey, that's just one guy's opinion.
Thats an opinion I can't agree with. All the things you mentioned are fine my opinion. It's just the points costs that are are ridiculous.
The current point system undervalues fast units and gargantuan creatures.
Ambiguous rules with variable interpretations which are never covered in faqs are the biggest threat in my opinion.
I only started two years ago but currently Warhammer 40k is a cheaper hobby than buying rpg books/big books in Canada and playing games. So here I am. I get more hours out of each model too for my time. And I got a lot of time due to my disabilities. I have noticed a small decline in players at the FLGS but it's currently holding strong. Though Armada and X-Wing continue to gain ground rapidly. I myself having a Rebel fleet.
Gamgee wrote: I only started a year ago but currently Warhammer 40k is a cheaper hobby than buying rpg books/big books in Canada and playing games.
...How? You only need to buy RPG books once, and are under no obligation to play the newest edition. 40k codices cost about as much as a D&D PHB these days, with models on top of that if you don't play with proxies.
Brennonjw wrote: Hardly, but here's the deal: Dakka is one of the most anti GW places I've managed to find online. You WILL hear a ton of people whining and saying their quitting on this site. Yes, GW is doing some bad business practices, but in recent months, they've seemingly been taking steps in the right direction (bringing back specialist games, plastic 30k, board games that are more then worth their dollar value for what you get, all recent codexies near the same power level).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheWaspinator wrote: Here's a list I put together of Amazon's "Toys and Games" rankings for another thread. X-Wing, Armada, and Imperial Assault are doing better than any GW starter set is. Make your own conclusions from that.
What? Star Wars games are selling well? Hmm, I wonder if it has anything to do with a majorly hyped movie coming out in 4 days
It's also noteworthy that Forbidden Stars, a standalone 40K-themed board game, is doing better than the much-touted Calth box.
Brennonjw wrote: Hardly, but here's the deal: Dakka is one of the most anti GW places I've managed to find online. You WILL hear a ton of people whining and saying their quitting on this site. Yes, GW is doing some bad business practices, but in recent months, they've seemingly been taking steps in the right direction (bringing back specialist games, plastic 30k, board games that are more then worth their dollar value for what you get, all recent codexies near the same power level).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheWaspinator wrote: Here's a list I put together of Amazon's "Toys and Games" rankings for another thread. X-Wing, Armada, and Imperial Assault are doing better than any GW starter set is. Make your own conclusions from that.
What? Star Wars games are selling well? Hmm, I wonder if it has anything to do with a majorly hyped movie coming out in 4 days
It's also noteworthy that Forbidden Stars, a standalone 40K-themed board game, is doing better than the much-touted Calth box.
All of this is GW's sales dept at work. They're spamming rulebooks, supplements, 30k, boardgames, video games, and not even consistently so. Tau books are way different than what they did with Necrons and Eldar. They keep changing things month to month, bouncing ideas onto the playerbase to see which one hooks us the most. But so far all of them are failing and none are catching a big enough playerbasefish to actually be worth duplicating. Decurion Formations being the exception and now spammed in every book. Even Age of Sigmar is just an attempt at something new which doesn't seem to be baiting anything either.
They're spending all these resources trying to figure out what the next big addiction will be for us. If they don't find it soon, 40k might become 50k: Age of Suckmore.
Gamgee wrote: I only started a year ago but currently Warhammer 40k is a cheaper hobby than buying rpg books/big books in Canada and playing games.
...How? You only need to buy RPG books once, and are under no obligation to play the newest edition. 40k codices cost about as much as a D&D PHB these days, with models on top of that if you don't play with proxies.
It's flippin 80-100+ dollars for an RPG core book here. Way more with shipping added in. Where as my FLGS has a 10% discount on 40k, I can get that to an even better one since I know the owners, and one additional discount adds up to cheaper 40k. It's still expensive, but the other options are more expensive. I might read an RPG expansion book once if its one of those with no rules and all fluff. I don't buy rulebooks for 40k. Where as I can always bust out my models and have a game with my friends. Video games are terrible these days. Micro transaction riddled filth not worth their 80 dollar asking price new or the 50 dollar season pass and then the 50 dollars of cosmetics that aren't in game. Many of these games have less hours than painting a 40k model and ask just as much or more.
Edit
Thank god I got a year of Numenera books coming in on the cheap thanks to me backing their kickstarter last year or I would have no RPG books at all. And all wargames and no rpg's makes Gamgee a very dull boy.
Gamgee wrote: I only started a year ago but currently Warhammer 40k is a cheaper hobby than buying rpg books/big books in Canada and playing games.
...How? You only need to buy RPG books once, and are under no obligation to play the newest edition. 40k codices cost about as much as a D&D PHB these days, with models on top of that if you don't play with proxies.
It's flippin 80-100+ dollars for an RPG core book here. Way more with shipping added in. Where as my FLGS has a 10% discount on 40k, I can get that to an even better one, and one additional thing all adds up to cheaper 40k. I don't buy rulebooks. Video games are terrible these days. Micro transaction riddled filth not worth their 80 dollar asking price new or the 50 dollar season pass and then the 50 dollars of cosmetics that aren't in game. Many of these games have less hours than painting a 40k model and ask just as much or more.
If you don't buy rulebooks (which I presume means torrenting or some other solution), why are you complaining about the cost of RPG rulebooks, which would be privy to the same alternatives? Even with a 20% discount, 2 troops and an HQ is going to set you back nearly a hundred dollars canadian, and that's without paint. And most armies need more than that. Unless you're buying from Chinaman, I'm simply not seeing how the math works. Nor am I certain why you just went off on a tirade about vidya. I don't disagree with some of your points, but I have no idea why you brought them up in the first place.
I'm the GM for life. That's why. :( I have to look up rules asap and I can do that faster than any computer. Also I enjoy laying down and reading RPG books. Where as the rules for 40k are just rules. I'm not going to crack open a book and relax reading up on special rule interactions in 40k. As opposed to the new and interesting world in an RPG book. I used to play games and collect/host RPG games as my primary hobbies. Now I still rpg obviously since I have the books, but can't buy new ones since its price is hard to justify if I won't be sure of running it. Then that leaves video games, but that's simply out of the question barring the rare good game I find. So now I play host rpgs and play 40k since it was cheaper than games and I wasn't left with a gaping hole filled with regret after my purchase.
Gamgee wrote: I'm the GM for life. That's why. :( I have to look up rules asap and I can do that faster than any computer. Also I enjoy laying down and reading RPG books. Where as the rules for 40k are just rules. I'm not going to crack open a book and relax reading up on special rule interactions in 40k. As opposed to the new and interesting world in an RPG book. I used to play games and collect/host RPG games as my primary hobbies. Now I still rpg obviously since I have the books, but can't buy new ones since its price is hard to justify if I won't be sure of running it. Then that leaves video games, but that's simply out of the question barring the rare good game I find. So now I play host rpgs and play 40k since it was cheaper than games and I wasn't left with a gaping hole filled with regret after my purchase.
Not enough to justify their price though. A new Numenera book is 190 pages of glorious setting details, new class options, new monsters, and new ideas to implement into my games at half the cost (expansion book). Accompanied by lovely art. Some core RPG's can have hundreds of pages of content for setting and lore and even a few short stories.
I get like a tiny tiny morsel of writing in 40k rulebook/campaign book. Or I could get an entire book devoted to it free of the crap I don't want or need like rules for missions to play out ect. I also collect a small rebel fleet for Armada on the side.
GW has taken a beaten in the last few years but they are still the biggest company selling minis. X wing is a well designed game that has a massive IP behind it and in my view isn't quite the same thing since the models come assembled and painted.
What I still find telling is that so many other companies that make minis make them that are clearly compatible with 40k or inspired by a 40k model. the IP of 40k is still it's most valuable asset.
In my local area it is still going strong, but it used to be better there are less and less young players coming into the game and its harder to get people interested because of the large initial investment in both time and ££...
However I think 30k has given a lot of my local players a second wind and players I haven't seen in months have come out a lot more due to my flgs now doing 30k nights... tbh I am more excited than ever about my hobby (much to my partners disapproval ) and its all thanks to 30k!
That maybe doesn't bode well for 40k though, which is a pity because even if the balance is weak the setting could sell the game by itself and they think they should give video games a proper second look as DOW was what brought me in...
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
There are no FLGS in my metro area (250K+ people) that sell 40K anymore. The only one that did went under this spring. There is a general hobby store that sells 40K, but doesn't seem to move a ton of product. No codexes ever in stock. Outdated kits still on the shelf still at full price.
There are no play areas left. The FLGS that had them was the one that went under. M:tG, D&D, and Yu-Gi-Oh are really the only games in town anymore.
At my FLGS there is a small, but dedicated group of 40k players. Unfortunately for me they don't show up that often, making it hard to get games in. So is 40k dying? No. But it's certainly not doing great.
My area had a GW--sorry, Warhammer store open up recently so... I'm not sure. I haven't been there yet (might go this weekend, since I've never been inside a "real" GW shop before). There's another store that has a 40k community after one shop closed up last year, but the other shops in the area tend to focus more on Warmachine (which is good because I play Warmachine currently).
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
Yes there is...
I live in Boston...
Pandemonium in Cambridge, battleground games on the south Shore, you soldier in the north shore..
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
Yes there is...
I live in Boston...
Pandemonium in Cambridge, battleground games on the south Shore, you soldier in the north shore..
I've heard on multiple occasions that Panda is a dwindling community for 40k, and that a lot more of it is shifting towards NH. Haven't heard a word about those other two stores from about a dozen or so people who play or have played 40k in recent history, so can't make any opinion on those.
Though TTA did close and it was trying to foster a 40k community that didn't do too well.
Edit: Most people don't even bring 40k stock to conventions as it just doesn't do well, maybe at Connecticon but even then it's so-so.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: I notice TONS of people quitting, and Dakka is at an all time low from an activity standpoint it seems...
You're going to get tons of anecdotal evidence. There will be people leaving and starting all the time.
However, in my experience, yes, its dying, we have turnouts that are a third of what they were for events in 4E and 5E locally. People were asking if Fantasy was dying and there were people ardently denying it even after it was very clearly dead, much like AoS now, you have people fervently saying it's going strong, when major independents are dumping it and starter sets can be had for firesale, at-cost prices that you could never have found for previous starter sets.
Looking at GW financial data, their revenue is declining every single year, particularly adjusted for inflation, and has been since 2004.
I would say that, even if 40k isn't "dying", it's contracting. To my eyes, it's following much the same path as fantasy. I know my local store isn't moving the volume of product it used to, that's for sure.
This is something people need to understand, 40k needs more people joining than leaving, to stay at a stable player base because of how much time it takes to build an army in comparison to the instantaneous nature of quitting.
The statements of Rick Priestley are not very promising:
- Creativity is lacking in the creativity department.
- GW is a miniature producing company for collectors.
The gaming aspect vanishes more and more in the background.
This is the wrong way to go but the road is paved by issueing crappy rule sets.
Looking at GW financial data, their revenue is declining every single year, particularly adjusted for inflation, and has been since 2004.
This is what tells me (and has been telling me for years) that it's dying. All anecdotal evidence aside, one way or another, the hard numbers reported by GW are evidence of a steady decline in the number of players.
Looking at GW financial data, their revenue is declining every single year, particularly adjusted for inflation, and has been since 2004.
This is what tells me (and has been telling me for years) that it's dying. All anecdotal evidence aside, one way or another, the hard numbers reported by GW are evidence of a steady decline in the number of players.
Let's wait for the next half year report by January 12, 2016.
It incorporates sales up to November 29, 2015.
Well, don't know.
The sales of the AoS starter set and subsequent products belong to this period. Now AoS seems to be largerly dead but this will hardly be reflected.
My point being, a single report, even if it shows positive gains, doesn't mean anything, not when the reports over the last several years have all been trending downwards. Two good quarters does not make up for 16 bad ones if such gains cannot be sustained.
If GW is going to pull itself out of its death-spiral, it is going to need to start trending upwards, and continue trending upwards, quarter after quarter, year after year. These gains do not need to be massive, 50% increases in total sales or something of the sort, of course. Even a 2% uptick, sustained, quarter after quarter, indicates a growing market, a growing customer base.
Its not dying but it is much worse off. A lot of people are leaving gw as their reports show each year. 40K wont just disappear but it will get smaller and smaller unless GW fix it
Motograter wrote: Its not dying but it is much worse off. A lot of people are leaving gw as their reports show each year. 40K wont just disappear but it will get smaller and smaller unless GW fix it
Okay if you say so.
I guess UK has a much different GW community as in the rest of Europe.
GW is not very popular here.
Given that GW is a UK company and enjoys a much higher degree of "man on the street" name recognition there than it does anywhere else in the world, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
Yes there is...
I live in Boston...
Pandemonium in Cambridge, battleground games on the south Shore, you soldier in the north shore..
I've heard on multiple occasions that Panda is a dwindling community for 40k, and that a lot more of it is shifting towards NH. Haven't heard a word about those other two stores from about a dozen or so people who play or have played 40k in recent history, so can't make any opinion on those.
Though TTA did close and it was trying to foster a 40k community that didn't do too well.
Edit: Most people don't even bring 40k stock to conventions as it just doesn't do well, maybe at Connecticon but even then it's so-so.
Where about I'm mass are you? Maybe we could get a game in.
If you wanna pm me your Facebook I can add you to a very active group. They're a secret group on FB
Psienesis wrote: Given that GW is a UK company and enjoys a much higher degree of "man on the street" name recognition there than it does anywhere else in the world, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
Even in the UK I think GW is declining.
There was a time when the GW retail empire had crushed all the independents. Now, there's a growing amount of independent shops initially supported by Magic organised play, and more recently FFG's Star Wars games organised play.
It's plain less people are playing 40K. Sales are down year on year. Tournament attendance is down. Less people are talking about the game - posts on the major 40k forums are all down.
Most of the stuff announced this year - AoS, Plastic HH, Specialist Games etc isn't going to change things. They're trying to appeal to the customers left behind, and slow the death spiral as much as possible.
I wonder if GW is actually interested in attracting new miniature buying customers any more ?
Marvel for example doesn't really sell that many comics. It's IPs in TV, film and merchandising are far more profitable for them.
GW have been trying to protect their IP as much as possible, but don't seem to have done much with it outside of the odd mobile game. Perhaps no one is really interested in their IP either ?
Psienesis wrote: Given that GW is a UK company and enjoys a much higher degree of "man on the street" name recognition there than it does anywhere else in the world, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
Even in the UK I think GW is declining.
There was a time when the GW retail empire had crushed all the independents. Now, there's a growing amount of independent shops initially supported by Magic organised play, and more recently FFG's Star Wars games organised play.
It's plain less people are playing 40K. Sales are down year on year. Tournament attendance is down. Less people are talking about the game - posts on the major 40k forums are all down.
Most of the stuff announced this year - AoS, Plastic HH, Specialist Games etc isn't going to change things. They're trying to appeal to the customers left behind, and slow the death spiral as much as possible.
I wonder if GW is actually interested in attracting new miniature buying customers any more ?
Marvel for example doesn't really sell that many comics. It's IPs in TV, film and merchandising are far more profitable for them.
GW have been trying to protect their IP as much as possible, but don't seem to have done much with it outside of the odd mobile game. Perhaps no one is really interested in their IP either ?
So when they fold, no one will pick up the IP, and our models will be useless?!
I though they had good sales in UK. I think the dieing aspect is made a bit over the top, by people. Sure in some places, like for example where I play, the game is stagnant and it may even die in places where there is no shops or clubs near by. But it seems, to me at least, that it is still doing ok in some parts of the world. It sure isn't at the level WFB was, even if some armies are starting to have an entry cost just as bad as some WFB armies.
I can only speak of the smallish area I play at. I attended an 18 player, 1 day event in Colombia, SC and then a 34 player, 1 day event in Aberdeen, NC. For what is essentially an RTT, those are good showings. I typically will game on a Saturday, and the FLGS will have 3-4 tables where 40K is played and a few folks hovering around the tables discussing 40K.
Psienesis wrote: Given that GW is a UK company and enjoys a much higher degree of "man on the street" name recognition there than it does anywhere else in the world, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
Even in the UK I think GW is declining.
There was a time when the GW retail empire had crushed all the independents. Now, there's a growing amount of independent shops initially supported by Magic organised play, and more recently FFG's Star Wars games organised play.
It's plain less people are playing 40K. Sales are down year on year. Tournament attendance is down. Less people are talking about the game - posts on the major 40k forums are all down.
Most of the stuff announced this year - AoS, Plastic HH, Specialist Games etc isn't going to change things. They're trying to appeal to the customers left behind, and slow the death spiral as much as possible.
I wonder if GW is actually interested in attracting new miniature buying customers any more ?
Marvel for example doesn't really sell that many comics. It's IPs in TV, film and merchandising are far more profitable for them.
GW have been trying to protect their IP as much as possible, but don't seem to have done much with it outside of the odd mobile game. Perhaps no one is really interested in their IP either ?
So when they fold, no one will pick up the IP, and our models will be useless?!
Useless in the sense that there will be no official support for the game, yes. Fan-written content will probably continue to exist for another fifty years or more, but that will be basically fragmented groups of players playing their own, home-baked versions of the game.
If GW goes under, I expect that someone will buy the rights to the IP. However, I expect that "someone" to be someone like Zenimax, Electronic Arts, Sega, Sony or some other company interested in the IP as a source for video games and other digital entertainments, not as a tabletop wargame played with plastic soldiers.
Psienesis wrote: Given that GW is a UK company and enjoys a much higher degree of "man on the street" name recognition there than it does anywhere else in the world, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
Even in the UK I think GW is declining.
There was a time when the GW retail empire had crushed all the independents. Now, there's a growing amount of independent shops initially supported by Magic organised play, and more recently FFG's Star Wars games organised play.
It's plain less people are playing 40K. Sales are down year on year. Tournament attendance is down. Less people are talking about the game - posts on the major 40k forums are all down.
Most of the stuff announced this year - AoS, Plastic HH, Specialist Games etc isn't going to change things. They're trying to appeal to the customers left behind, and slow the death spiral as much as possible.
I wonder if GW is actually interested in attracting new miniature buying customers any more ?
Marvel for example doesn't really sell that many comics. It's IPs in TV, film and merchandising are far more profitable for them.
GW have been trying to protect their IP as much as possible, but don't seem to have done much with it outside of the odd mobile game. Perhaps no one is really interested in their IP either ?
So when they fold, no one will pick up the IP, and our models will be useless?!
Useless in the sense that there will be no official support for the game, yes. Fan-written content will probably continue to exist for another fifty years or more, but that will be basically fragmented groups of players playing their own, home-baked versions of the game.
If GW goes under, I expect that someone will buy the rights to the IP. However, I expect that "someone" to be someone like Zenimax, Electronic Arts, Sega, Sony or some other company interested in the IP as a source for video games and other digital entertainments, not as a tabletop wargame played with plastic soldiers.
As far as the IP is concerned, GW is a miniature producing company and the miniatures are made for collectors.
This is what Rick Priestley said in a thread recently.
Not sure if a company is interested in an IP like this.
With regards to who buys them out, I don't see EA or similar taking them purely for the IP. Given the number of game rules and so forth covered in the copyright, and the molds and such that GW owns are wasted if no tabletop game is produced. There's also some difficulty involved when acquiring a company internationally. Not a lot, but enough to deter purchase if you're only planning to use some of the assets. More likely some UK-based toys company will pick it up, and if not them I'd imagine it would be Hasbro, which has shown in the past its willingness to distribute niche content with its purchasing of Wizards of the Coast.
Do people think there's money in large scale miniature games going forward ?
Where you need large(er) sales to justify the cost of the the moulds for plastic multi-part kits ?
Despite there being a lot of skirmish sized games with
metal/resin figures, no one is doing a GW in respect to larger scale games with multi-part plastic kits.
Not profitable enough for other companies to try ?
Hasbro would probably pick them up for cheap. As for the IP, we have a ton of video games coming out soon set in the WH or 40k universe, tons of books, specialty games and new campaigns every few months. GW is smart in one sense, they are diversifying.
I don't think 40k is dying. I think it's shrinking and as it shrinks the problems will only get worse.
I do think the company is dying, but it could hold on for quite a while.
Bartali wrote: Do people think there's money in large scale miniature games going forward ?
Where you need large(er) sales to justify the cost of the the moulds for plastic multi-part kits ?
Despite there being a lot of skirmish sized games with
metal/resin figures, no one is doing a GW in respect to larger scale games with multi-part plastic kits.
Not profitable enough for other companies to try ?
GW is doing plastic because it still moves large amounts of product, courtesy of their competence in days gone by. When GW folds, if for some reason no one buys GW, Privateer Press or some other company would likely increase in size as the old customers seek another source for their vice. If enough of them go to one company instead of spreading around, that company would have reason to start producing plastic kits.
Bartali wrote: Do people think there's money in large scale miniature games going forward ?
Where you need large(er) sales to justify the cost of the the moulds for plastic multi-part kits ?
Despite there being a lot of skirmish sized games with
metal/resin figures, no one is doing a GW in respect to larger scale games with multi-part plastic kits.
Not profitable enough for other companies to try ?
GW is doing plastic because it still moves large amounts of product, courtesy of their competence in days gone by. When GW folds, if for some reason no one buys GW, Privateer Press or some other company would likely increase in size as the old customers seek another source for their vice. If enough of them go to one company instead of spreading around, that company would have reason to start producing plastic kits.
I actually don't want one dominate hegemony in the hobby. I like many really good games going on at once. I like variety and choice.
Bartali wrote: Do people think there's money in large scale miniature games going forward ?
Where you need large(er) sales to justify the cost of the the moulds for plastic multi-part kits ?
Despite there being a lot of skirmish sized games with
metal/resin figures, no one is doing a GW in respect to larger scale games with multi-part plastic kits.
Not profitable enough for other companies to try ?
GW is doing plastic because it still moves large amounts of product, courtesy of their competence in days gone by. When GW folds, if for some reason no one buys GW, Privateer Press or some other company would likely increase in size as the old customers seek another source for their vice. If enough of them go to one company instead of spreading around, that company would have reason to start producing plastic kits.
I actually don't want one dominate hegemony in the hobby. I like many really good games going on at once. I like variety and choice.
Competition is always desirable in a market, but not always achieved. You can't escape the fact that some people are better at playing the game of capitalism than others.
Bartali wrote: Do people think there's money in large scale miniature games going forward ?
Where you need large(er) sales to justify the cost of the the moulds for plastic multi-part kits ?
Despite there being a lot of skirmish sized games with
metal/resin figures, no one is doing a GW in respect to larger scale games with multi-part plastic kits.
Not profitable enough for other companies to try ?
GW is doing plastic because it still moves large amounts of product, courtesy of their competence in days gone by. When GW folds, if for some reason no one buys GW, Privateer Press or some other company would likely increase in size as the old customers seek another source for their vice. If enough of them go to one company instead of spreading around, that company would have reason to start producing plastic kits.
I actually don't want one dominate hegemony in the hobby. I like many really good games going on at once. I like variety and choice.
Competition is always desirable in a market, but not always achieved. You can't escape the fact that some people are better at playing the game of capitalism than others.
Granted, there will always be a number one, it's just the degree of being at the top that I want to shrink.
Our club seems to be branching out to more game systems. There are half the number of 40k games than there used to be. Now its mainly Infinity, WWX, Guidball or some other skirmish game.
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
Yes there is...
I live in Boston...
Pandemonium in Cambridge, battleground games on the south Shore, you soldier in the north shore..
I've heard on multiple occasions that Panda is a dwindling community for 40k, and that a lot more of it is shifting towards NH. Haven't heard a word about those other two stores from about a dozen or so people who play or have played 40k in recent history, so can't make any opinion on those.
Though TTA did close and it was trying to foster a 40k community that didn't do too well.
Edit: Most people don't even bring 40k stock to conventions as it just doesn't do well, maybe at Connecticon but even then it's so-so.
Where about I'm mass are you? Maybe we could get a game in.
If you wanna pm me your Facebook I can add you to a very active group. They're a secret group on FB
I'm currently north towards the NH boarder, but I used to be in the Newton area, which is probably where I'll be moving to in the near future. When I last played 40k it was at Danger Planet, ages ago.
I'd be up for a game but my army won't be complete for a while.
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
Yes there is...
I live in Boston...
Pandemonium in Cambridge, battleground games on the south Shore, you soldier in the north shore..
I've heard on multiple occasions that Panda is a dwindling community for 40k, and that a lot more of it is shifting towards NH. Haven't heard a word about those other two stores from about a dozen or so people who play or have played 40k in recent history, so can't make any opinion on those.
Though TTA did close and it was trying to foster a 40k community that didn't do too well.
Edit: Most people don't even bring 40k stock to conventions as it just doesn't do well, maybe at Connecticon but even then it's so-so.
Where about I'm mass are you? Maybe we could get a game in.
If you wanna pm me your Facebook I can add you to a very active group. They're a secret group on FB
I'm currently north towards the NH boarder, but I used to be in the Newton area, which is probably where I'll be moving to in the near future. When I last played 40k it was at Danger Planet, ages ago.
I'd be up for a game but my army won't be complete for a while.
pumpinchimp wrote: Nah, there are loads of "Getting started" topics on here and reddit all the time.
Eh, those threads are a very bad way to base your statistics of how the game is going. Yes, many people are starting, but this isn't like other games where you just dive in, you have to do a lot of work just to get to the play part of it, and how many of those people drop out long before that point?
Let me put it this way, I just returned to the game and I won't have an army ready to go for almost a year after I've started back due to how long it takes to paint, now how many people will drop out in that year? Let's add a little to this puzzle, my friend and I got back into the game at the same time, he's already given up and I'm going glacially slow, while I know multiple people who started and quit simply because there isn't a big 40k scene near Boston, and it's been dwindling each year.
With the investment time of getting an army ready, 40k needs substantially more players joining than leaving each year, just to stay stable. Growth is another issue altogether.
Yes there is...
I live in Boston...
Pandemonium in Cambridge, battleground games on the south Shore, you soldier in the north shore..
I've heard on multiple occasions that Panda is a dwindling community for 40k, and that a lot more of it is shifting towards NH. Haven't heard a word about those other two stores from about a dozen or so people who play or have played 40k in recent history, so can't make any opinion on those.
Though TTA did close and it was trying to foster a 40k community that didn't do too well.
Edit: Most people don't even bring 40k stock to conventions as it just doesn't do well, maybe at Connecticon but even then it's so-so.
Where about I'm mass are you? Maybe we could get a game in.
If you wanna pm me your Facebook I can add you to a very active group. They're a secret group on FB
I'm currently north towards the NH boarder, but I used to be in the Newton area, which is probably where I'll be moving to in the near future. When I last played 40k it was at Danger Planet, ages ago.
I'd be up for a game but my army won't be complete for a while.
Dude I live in Plaistow NH.
We should play. I got a table and everything.
Awesome, and I'd be totally up for that, but right now I have nowhere near a playable army painted or even built.
If you go to conventions regularly, or play Vintage, you've probably ran into me before though. A year ago I was paid to be at conventions, so ya'know.
I could have worked PAX this year but I'm all like lazy now D:
Canada is pretty big. I can say it's not doing well in Canada. So I wouldn't say it's alive and well up in Canada. Maybe in your area, but that doesn't mean Canada is doing well. I am not saying its' not doing well because we have no idea how it really is doing. All I can say is, 40K or GW is not in my area is 40K doing well.
Well, I think there are companies out there which would buy GW's IP for cheap. But that's it.
As said, GW wants to be seen as miniature manufactorer for collectors. The gaming aspect is not in the focus anymore.
This will decrease the interest of potential buyouters.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I think there are companies out there which would buy GW's IP for cheap. But that's it.
As said, GW wants to be seen as miniature manufactorer for collectors. The gaming aspect is not in the focus anymore.
This will decrease the interest of potential buyouters.
So not only are they shrinking their market by isolating themselves to only modelers and alienating gamers, but they are also restricting their buyout appeal to non-gaming model companies...
That really sounds like they want to die a slow death.
wuestenfux wrote: Well, I think there are companies out there which would buy GW's IP for cheap. But that's it.
As said, GW wants to be seen as miniature manufactorer for collectors. The gaming aspect is not in the focus anymore.
This will decrease the interest of potential buyouters.
That's really stupid. The rules are what drives sales. Get rid of them and you might as well sign your death certificate.
In the UK it's declining, at major stores might I add (Manchester). A few months ago it was tough to get a game in, so the store manager ended up having to split 4x4 boards in half to accommodate everyone. Now it's possible to have two 4x4 boards and still have some boards leftover. This might be partly due to the stupid system they currently have in place (activate unit a turn and only activated units can move shoot, etc). Heavily promotes death stars and their is literally no point bringing a 1500 list or so because due to time requirements for a few people to platy AoS, you'll only move three units max. That's assuming people don't kill your activated units by ganging up, so essentially you've got 2v1, followed by 4v1, etc.
Not sure how my other GW is doing, but from what I hear, it's not doing great, incorporating their own house rules that people disagree with. Also painted models have preferred enemy against unpainted and not everyone has time to paint.
Indeed, the game drives sales and not the pure collection of models and units.
Collectors tend to buy one model/unit of each type of a certain army, while a gamer often fields several exemplars of the same model/unit (spamming).
Our GW had a thriving community when I moved here. The first league I was in started at 24 people and ended with 18 still playing weekly or more. There were fantasy events all the time which were also well attended. Now it's hard to find a game. One FLGS in the area does a tournament once a month, but only gets 6-10 people. The same store will have 20-50 people on days for X wing, hero clix, armada or MTG. Another FLGS went from 90% 40k to 100% WMH in the last 2 years. I just spent a bunch of money on a FW mechanicum army. After 2 months of posting in the local FB40k groups, I still haven't played a single actual 30k game. Sigmar has completely killed off fantasy in the area. I've seen 2 games since AoS was released, one was a trial AoS game, the other was using 8th rulebook. One of the guys playing asked me if I knew anyone buying dark elves because this would probably be his last game.
Literally every other semi mainstream game is picking up players while 40k fades into the background and fantasy vanishes completely...
@Toofast: Oh my goodness. This looks really bad.
In our FLGS, AoS is dead nobody plays it despite the fact that the store owner has sold more boxes Fantasy than 40k in August/September.
40k is just played by a few veterans and 30k got some boost not only due to the board game but because being more balanced (Marines vs. Marines) than 40k.
Moreover, some players moved into other game systems like WMH, X-wing, and bolt action. More balanced and more rewarding to play.
A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
If you're looking for numbers to show what the popularity of the game is doing, I direct you to the last 5 years of GWs financial reports. It's not exactly a secret that revenue has been declining YoY despite faster release pace, higher prices, ALLY EVERYTHING rules designed to increase sales and releases of new core rulebooks for both games, forcing every single player to spend at least $85 to keep playing. If new pockets of players are emerging to replace the old ones, they are smaller and spend a lot less money than the groups of people leaving the game...
Grumblewartz wrote: A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
Yes and no. Sure, niche markets experience ups and downs, but with GW hurting store support and internet sales through their practices, being infrequent about FAQ releases, killing off their own forum, and killing off their tournament scene, on top of their asinine comments, it's hard to say that 40k hasn't been hurt. I don't think its all doom and gloom that everyone says it is, but its hard to deny that large tournaments are less and less frequent.
Grumblewartz wrote: A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
Could you refer me to some of those YouTube channels?
Grumblewartz wrote: A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
Many of those "haterz" were former lovers of the game. What changed? It wasn't, "its cool to hate on GW now, so I'll throw my years of investments out the window." If you really think that, you haven't been listening to a word anyone has said.
Also, you can't blame the economy, it's on the up swing. Why isn't GW?
Also also, other wargames are on the rise while GW in on the decline....um...economy?
Grumblewartz wrote: A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
Many of those "haterz" were former lovers of the game. What changed? It wasn't, "its cool to hate on GW now, so I'll throw my years of investments out the window." If you really think that, you haven't been listening to a word anyone has said.
Also, you can't blame the economy, it's on the up swing. Why isn't GW?
Also also, other wargames are on the rise while GW in on the decline....um...economy?
I used to love the game, but now I would be classed as a 'Hater' by Grumblewartz. Why am I a hater? It's because of a series of disgusting, cheap actions made by GW that has left me out of pocket or made my forces very uncompetitive.
Examples such as:
1) Buying 6th edition from a GW store, then two months later 7th drops. £45 wasted.
2) Same deal for the SM codex - the GW staff don't tell you a new one is out soon - they let you buy stuff and then find out a few weeks later it's useless.
3) Oh and my Imperial Knights codex... let's not forget that one.
4) Dark Eldar codex being re-done, cutting out all the named Characters and any flavour it once had - and charging £30 for the pleasure. It would be cheaper for me to just tear out the pages from my old codex and get the same product
5) Chaos Space Marines - constant neglect codex-wise and has never been rectified properly. The codex was nice when it came out but then every codex since has been powerful in comparison.
6) Not being allowed to play in a GW store unless I bought models or paints as the tables are now for 'new players only' it's a case of reel you in then dump you once they have your money.
I could go on, but I doubt it's new for anyone who has experience with this company. So yes, I'm a hater, you may even class me as a hipster because I guarantee my beard is more freaking majestic than anything you could grow. Either way, people turn into 'haterz', they're not born.
For me 40k as a game is dead. I haven't played in a year although i do occasionally get the urge to paint so the hobby itself is still interesting me but the game itself is finished. It's just not what I'm looking for anymore and that's a real shame. I used to have 11 army's all several thousand points now i have 4 at 1500ish each or will when i've finished selling them off and i will probably get rid of another 2 whole army's before I'm finished. That's how bad it's got for me. I just can't be bothered with all the time and effort it takes for a game now. 6th started it but 7th killed it.
Have to echo that. My friends have an Apoc game sorted for Saturday, about 16k. Thing is, I know its going to be hell turkey and canoptek harvest spam with a token effort of my Tyranids against Thunderdome, Sentinels, Warhound titan and if I'm honest, I would be more content painting what I do have.
My friends love playing because they all have competitive armies, due to them jumping on bandwagons after losing badly to said armies. I don't play like that, I don't want to. I've stopped playing like that ever since I took a three Flyrant list to a tournament and felt bad my opponent couldn't do anything all game (even threw a gaunt unit at him just so he could kill something)
I'm just honing my painting skills until I start painting Infinity
Yes, it is GW's fault that people constantly try to break a game that was never designed for competitive play. Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new). Oh x army is better than y army. Spread more hate over things that are 1.) beyond their control; 2.) universal to a game centered on the production of miniatures for a nice market; 3.) my friends are all because they spam the best units of an elite army and I refuse to play anything other than my favorite list that hasn't changed in 4 editions - it is totally GW's fault, yet again; 4.) I quit playing the game 5 years ago but I constantly feel the need to badmouth the hobby because, you know, internet reasons; 5.g) Screw GW for not supporting my favorite army that no one else really plays, but they should spend hundreds of thousands of $$$$...by the way I am not going to buy any of the new sets.
And dude, if you can't find youtube channels with 40k battle reports of all types, I mean...you know that you are trolling. Literally type 40k battle report and search it.
So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
Wulfmar wrote: So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
The threads on the topic causing you the stress and mental anguish. Not the forum - the historical and modelling sections are much more relaxing and constructive
Grumblewartz wrote: A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
What trends are those? Because it certainly isn't GW's financial reports. The economy is in a much better place today than it was 5, 10 years ago, yet GW is not. In previous times, yes, there were fluctuations in the game as people moved out or took breaks, but they were replaced almost immediately by new people coming into the hobby. Now? Now that is not the case. People that step out tend not to step back in, ever.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is GW's fault that people constantly try to break a game that was never designed for competitive play. Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new). Oh x army is better than y army. Spread more hate over things that are 1.) beyond their control; 2.) universal to a game centered on the production of miniatures for a nice market; 3.) my friends are all because they spam the best units of an elite army and I refuse to play anything other than my favorite list that hasn't changed in 4 editions - it is totally GW's fault, yet again; 4.) I quit playing the game 5 years ago but I constantly feel the need to badmouth the hobby because, you know, internet reasons; 5.g) Screw GW for not supporting my favorite army that no one else really plays, but they should spend hundreds of thousands of $$$$...by the way I am not going to buy any of the new sets.
And dude, if you can't find youtube channels with 40k battle reports of all types, I mean...you know that you are trolling. Literally type 40k battle report and search it.
You realise that GW had there own competitive events before right? And the nature of any game with a winner or a loser, kinda makes it competitve.
(Don't look now, but a box of dire avengers used to be 10 models for the same price)
X army being better than Y army could be solved by whoever writes the rules...would that be GW by any chance?
2) This niche market is expanding, other companies manage to create and improve some sembalance of balance with their accompanying games. So quality of rules could be an effect.
3) Bandwagoning is a thing, that would be less of a thing if the game was more balanced ( in before go play chess for perfect balance, I'm not asking for that, just more balance or at least some effort into it).
5) I for one would love to come back. But I'm also older now than I was getting into it originally, so the state of the game ( which is actually the thing that sells the models in my opinion) is rather important to me playing again ( not having anywhere to play is another matter... see me earlier post in the thread). But feel free to keep painting people as 'haterz' with that wide brush. Rather than seeing that a lot of us want the game to succeed and be great.
6) Most certainly screw GW for not supporting my armies. I would love a Chaos codex ( you know one of the mainstay armies in the setting, also probably one of the more popular) that actually does them justice. I'm sure a revitilised Sister of Battle codex would fly off the shelves. But GW doesn't do the research so won't know what sells, instead opting to throw everything at it's consumers without knowing why something will sell. I'd buy chaos chosen kits if they came out, I'd buy chaos havocs with the full range of weapon options, if they came out. If a Chaos Marines codex came out that was vaguely like the 3.5 edition (look at the flavour). I wouldn't be seen for a few days.
But let's face it, you're probably not going to attempt to understand any vaguely nuanced reasoning and just paint with the same brush many others have done before. While complaining about complaining.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new).
Err, no.
Building a Tamiya 1/35 Panther Ausf A at the moment. Far more detailed than any 40K vehicle, and is super heavy sized in comparison to 40K stuff. Cost £15.
Bought a Tamiya 1/35 Stuart yesterday for £11.50
How about Bandai Gundam kits ? Multi-coloured plastic, snap fit and more detailed than 40K mecha. All significantly cheaper than 40K equivalents.
Mozzyfuzzy wrote: But GW doesn't do the research so won't know what sells, instead opting to throw everything at it's consumers without knowing why something will sell.
Seriously people... Let us not speculate on things we don't know. There is too much speculation going on regarding GW. GW does not communicate its actions to its fanbase, and afaik, no one here has worked at GWHQ. Therefore it is not possible to know whether they do research or not, and stating as fact things like "GW doesn't do research" just makes you look dumb. Almost every company keeps statistics on its sales, so if we really do have to engage in speculation it is more logical to conclude that GW probably is fully aware of what sells and what doesn't.
Personally, I think 40k is very far from dying. It is still by far the largest wargame in the world, and still gets lots of new players. That 40k is declining somewhat and not as huge as its used to be is due to increased competition. 20 or 10 years ago, there were not much alternatives to 40k on a comparable level of scale, popularity and quality. Nowadays, there are. This is big difference.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new).
Err, no.
Building a Tamiya 1/35 Panther Ausf A at the moment. Far more detailed than any 40K vehicle, and is super heavy sized in comparison to 40K stuff. Cost £15.
Bought a Tamiya 1/35 Stuart yesterday for £11.50
How about Bandai Gundam kits ? Multi-coloured plastic, snap fit and more detailed than 40K mecha. All significantly cheaper than 40K equivalents.
Yes, but GW is not more expansive than other Wargame Companies. In fact, on a model for model basis, PP or CB, to name two well-known examples, are actually more expansive.
Mozzyfuzzy wrote: But GW doesn't do the research so won't know what sells, instead opting to throw everything at it's consumers without knowing why something will sell.
Seriously people... Let us not speculate on things we don't know. There is too much speculation going on regarding GW. GW does not communicate its actions to its fanbase, and afaik, no one here has worked at GWHQ. Therefore it is not possible to know whether they do research or not, and stating as fact things like "GW doesn't do research" just makes you look dumb. Almost every company keeps statistics on its sales, so if we really do have to engage in speculation it is more logical to conclude that GW probably is fully aware of what sells and what doesn't.
People aren't just pulling that statement out of thin air. It was outright quoted in one of their recent annual reports that they don't do market research.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new).
Err, no.
Building a Tamiya 1/35 Panther Ausf A at the moment. Far more detailed than any 40K vehicle, and is super heavy sized in comparison to 40K stuff. Cost £15.
Bought a Tamiya 1/35 Stuart yesterday for £11.50
How about Bandai Gundam kits ? Multi-coloured plastic, snap fit and more detailed than 40K mecha. All significantly cheaper than 40K equivalents.
Here, here. Bandai's Gundam kits are probably the best plastic model in the world for building, painting, and converting.
If you ever need a robot miniature, it is usually best to find an accurately sized Gundam kit instead.
Internal leg skeleton of the Master Grade 1/100 Nu Gundam Ka.
Spoiler:
Perfect Grade 1/60 Unicorn Gundam
Spoiler:
For $50 less than a Stormsurge, I could get the PG Unicorn Gundam, which is a taller, bigger, more detailed, fully articulated, transforming, snap together model.
This thing dwarfs Warhound Titans at 14" tall.
This is why people are so hoping that Bandai purchase Games Workshop. Their price to quality is phenomenal, able to produce fully articulate body from a solid mold at less than $20 with a full kit to build around it.
Mozzyfuzzy wrote: But GW doesn't do the research so won't know what sells, instead opting to throw everything at it's consumers without knowing why something will sell.
Seriously people... Let us not speculate on things we don't know. There is too much speculation going on regarding GW. GW does not communicate its actions to its fanbase, and afaik, no one here has worked at GWHQ. Therefore it is not possible to know whether they do research or not, and stating as fact things like "GW doesn't do research" just makes you look dumb. Almost every company keeps statistics on its sales, so if we really do have to engage in speculation it is more logical to conclude that GW probably is fully aware of what sells and what doesn't.
People aren't just pulling that statement out of thin air. It was outright quoted in one of their recent annual reports that they don't do market research.
The quote you are likely referring to is:
GW wrote:Our market is a niche market made up of people who want to collect our miniatures. They tend to be male, middle-class, discerning
teenagers and adults. We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants. These things are otiose in a niche.
What this means, is that GW considers research into its customer base unneccesary, because all details are otiose (now that is a funny word) in such a small niche market.
It does not mean however, that GW doesn't do any market research at all, and if you read through the annual reports, you will see many examples of GW having done market research, like SWOT analyses.
I think you are confusing market research (which is incredibly broad and mostly concerned about a company's position in the market) with marketing research (which is research into the customer base). This GW indeed doesn't seem to do, because they think it otiose (I will use that word a lot from now on )
I have recently become interested in painting my models again after taking a break for the last few years.
When I have returned to the hobby I have discovered fantasy seems to not really be a thing anymore so I've sold off most of my Vampire Counts and Elves.
I will keep the remaining 40k models I have purely just to paint in my spare time.
I would like to play some games but it seems no one in the area plays anymore, local store shut nearly a year back, found another store that is phasing out Warhammer stuff because the owner said there's no interest also and the local club seems to just have warmachine/mtg and board games.
Personally I would like to play more 40k, but if there's no one around to play it becomes a bit hard to stay interested.
Long post but just my thoughts as someone wanting to get back into the hobby and finding it difficult to do so.
LethalShade wrote: That would be cool, but I don't really want them to ruin the IP.
If Bandai does purchase Games Workshop, it won't be for their modeling factories. The primary focus of the purchase would be the IPs, and I would hope that whoever purchases them has the wherewithal to maintain the flagship IP.
Wulfmar wrote: So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
. There's a fine line between enthusiastic and insulting.
LethalShade wrote: That would be cool, but I don't really want them to ruin the IP.
If Bandai does purchase Games Workshop, it won't be for their modeling factories. The primary focus of the purchase would be the IPs, and I would hope that whoever purchases them has the wherewithal to maintain the flagship IP.
Bandai generally does good work with IP - since buying Sunrise in 1994 they've kept the Gundam franchise churning along nicely.
Their recently launched Star Wars kits are also amazing.
I can't see Bandai buying out GW though - little appeal in their home market. Be nice if a potential GW buyer sub-contracts the kits out to Tamiya or Bandai though
LethalShade wrote: That would be cool, but I don't really want them to ruin the IP.
If Bandai does purchase Games Workshop, it won't be for their modeling factories. The primary focus of the purchase would be the IPs, and I would hope that whoever purchases them has the wherewithal to maintain the flagship IP.
Bandai generally does good work with IP - since buying Sunrise in 1994 they've kept the Gundam franchise churning along nicely.
Their recently launched Star Wars kits are also amazing.
I can't see Bandai buying out GW though - little appeal in their home market. Be nice if a potential GW buyer sub-contracts the kits out to Tamiya or Bandai though
As long as they don't ruin the story more than GW do, and they don't replace Space Marines armours and gothic design with miniature gundams, I'm fine.
LethalShade wrote: That would be cool, but I don't really want them to ruin the IP.
If Bandai does purchase Games Workshop, it won't be for their modeling factories. The primary focus of the purchase would be the IPs, and I would hope that whoever purchases them has the wherewithal to maintain the flagship IP.
Bandai generally does good work with IP - since buying Sunrise in 1994 they've kept the Gundam franchise churning along nicely.
Their recently launched Star Wars kits are also amazing.
I can't see Bandai buying out GW though - little appeal in their home market. Be nice if a potential GW buyer sub-contracts the kits out to Tamiya or Bandai though
As long as they don't ruin the story more than GW do, and they don't replace Space Marines armours and gothic design with miniature gundams, I'm fine.
Tamiya does more than just Gundam kits... They have a large range of 1/48 WWII models kits that some people are already using for their Imperial Guard.
And besides, some Zeon Mobile Suits can make good Space Marine.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new).
Err, no.
Building a Tamiya 1/35 Panther Ausf A at the moment. Far more detailed than any 40K vehicle, and is super heavy sized in comparison to 40K stuff. Cost £15.
Bought a Tamiya 1/35 Stuart yesterday for £11.50
How about Bandai Gundam kits ? Multi-coloured plastic, snap fit and more detailed than 40K mecha. All significantly cheaper than 40K equivalents.
Yes, but GW is not more expansive than other Wargame Companies. In fact, on a model for model basis, PP or CB, to name two well-known examples, are actually more expansive.
Actually GW are the most expensive out there that I have encountered. To give you some idea of the price difference I can purchase a full 1/56 scale Cromwell tank from Warlord Games, a tank which is fully detailed and far superior to GW's kits and it will cost me a grand total of £18. As opposed to the crappy Leman Russ kit which is close to the £40 mark.
I can get 25 well detailed infantry with all the weapon options and more for £24 as opposed to GW's £22.50 for 10 basic grunts with less than half the weapons available and crappy ape like detailing.
I can get a resin and white metal tank which is made to order for £25.
Hell, for the price of GW's starter set and one codex to go with it I can start any of the following systems and have a full tournament sized (or close too) army for them:
Infinity
Warmachine/Hordes
Bolt Action (I can have two armies for this game)
Dark Age
Dropzone Commander
Battletech
Malifaux
X-wing
and many more.
GW and their prices are so far from the norm that you cant even see it with the Hubble telescope.
Wulfmar wrote: So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
It IS GW's fault that Eldar players can accidentally build a list that BA can almost never beat.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is GW's fault that people constantly try to break a game that was never designed for competitive play.
...
Players may have been led to the error of supposing 40K was for competition use by the points balance system that GW designed, and the numerous competitions that GW ran or sponsored.
Grumblewartz wrote: What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
You might be positive about the hobby, but you're not expressing positivity. You are attacking the character and motives of people that disagree with you, which is inflammatory.
Grumblewartz wrote: Yes, it is GW's fault that people constantly try to break a game that was never designed for competitive play.
...
Players may have been led to the error of supposing 40K was for competition use by the points balance system that GW designed, and the numerous competitions that GW ran or sponsored.
Or that its a wargame.
You mean to tell me that people expect a tactical wargame with complex mechanics, a variety of unit choices and pricy miniatures to be balanced?
Say it ain't so!
Wulfmar wrote: So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
It IS GW's fault that Eldar players can accidentally build a list that BA can almost never beat.
Out of curiosity, what bs are Eldar up to this time? Still Wave Serpents, or is it bikes? I lost track.
LethalShade wrote: That would be cool, but I don't really want them to ruin the IP.
If Bandai does purchase Games Workshop, it won't be for their modeling factories. The primary focus of the purchase would be the IPs, and I would hope that whoever purchases them has the wherewithal to maintain the flagship IP.
Bandai generally does good work with IP - since buying Sunrise in 1994 they've kept the Gundam franchise churning along nicely.
Their recently launched Star Wars kits are also amazing.
I can't see Bandai buying out GW though - little appeal in their home market. Be nice if a potential GW buyer sub-contracts the kits out to Tamiya or Bandai though
As long as they don't ruin the story more than GW do, and they don't replace Space Marines armours and gothic design with miniature gundams, I'm fine.
I love the gothic and baroque aesthetic of the IP. Its what makes 40k visually distinctive, at least to me.
Getting rid of it would be a bad thing.
From 6th to 7th, they nerfed the serpent and everything else got a buff. Every jetbike can now take a scatterlaser. Wraithknights are gargantuan, so they are basically immortal and ignore every speciL rule ever.
Grumblewartz wrote: A lot of 40k hipsters are going on and on about how the game is dying, blah blah blah. It is like anything else these days, if it is big, successful, and popular, it isn't cool - so it must fail. They spew their hate every chance they get, which has driven down activity in the forums - at least, from anecdotal experience. 40k is by no means dying, but it is a niche market and like any other niche market, it will fluctuate in popularity in areas. Some areas that were hubs become ghost towns, while new ones emerge elsewhere. A lot of long-time players like myself are used to playing it for a few years, then switching to another game for a little while. Such fluctuations are represented in the local gaming scene as well.
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
We're not talking about a recent trend, we're talking about an 11 year consistent decline in revenue and large numbers of clubs withering and dying in a time when the economy is ostensibly growing, not shrinking...
Anyways, there are a number of very positive trends that suggest that 40k is trending upwards again. I think one of the biggest is that there are more channels on Youtube than ever, which show many different styles of play.
There's more Youtube channels & videos on everything than there were before...that's just the platform being more widely adopted and mature...it doesn't say anything about the hobby. I can find more stuff about Battefleet Gothic today on Youtube than I could in 2008 when it was still actually...in production, but that doesn't mean BFG is doing well.
"defenders" are sick and tired of the rose tinted goggles and constantly hearing the other side spout that the game is terrible.
"anti-GW" are sick of GW's business practices (aren't we all), and a not balanced rule set.
It doesn't help that the WM/H crowd loves to say their game is cheaper, when it costs the same price, if not more for less models (however, you need less to play a game of WM/H) which just riles up the "defenders" and reaffirms the "anti-GW's" biases (I suppose thats the best word)
BOTH sides get inflammatory, but BOTH sides have points (and seemingly ignore the others points)
I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress), bringing back specialist games, making recent codexies around the game general "power level", the incredibly well priced Calth box set. If they stick to these trends, then the game will probably get better. Yes, the game will still be expensive, but no more then other hobbies if you go a month-by-month basis. In most hobbies, it seems that a high entry cost, and then 40-70 a month there after is a standard amount, and fits well for MTG, video gaming, and other miniature hobbies.
In reguards to the game being broken: I hate to quote BoLS, but "it's not broke untill you break it" yes, there are stupid units and rules, but no, they don't ruin the game IF you don't play in a setting where you typically pay for entry, and then rewards happen because you want to win. In more casual games with friends or just people in your local group, you can make new scenarios, play non-balanced point costs, and other parts of the game that are typically ignored when you play competitively. Though tournaments are how some people enjoy the game, so it must be considered none the less, but I don't think it should be the focus.
How are ANY complain threads even remotely useful? complaining about GW is just a circle jerk on "how bad it is, I mean, it's irredeemable". complaining about complainers is basically just venting and has no real purpose.
TL;DR: Both sides whining have points, but are all dumb anywho
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
They did quite recently, actually. They suck though, and they didn't update the dates, so you wouldn't really know.
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
They did quite recently, actually. They suck though, and they didn't update the dates, so you wouldn't really know.
I literally just looked on their site and all the FAQs are for Jan 2015 at the latest.
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
Nah, they put out some this month, though it was pretty half-assed, they at least resolved the Dark angels ravenwing issue. even though it was pretty lazy, it's baby steps in the right direction.
Another thing I forgot to mention was that their youtube channel focusing on the painting is another good thing. raise interest of new players, and encouraging them to paint with easy painting tips...... although the comments are turned off, looking at this site and others, I completely understand.
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
They did quite recently, actually. They suck though, and they didn't update the dates, so you wouldn't really know.
I literally just looked on their site and all the FAQs are for Jan 2015 at the latest.
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
Nah, they put out some this month, though it was pretty half-assed, they at least resolved the Dark angels ravenwing issue. even though it was pretty lazy, it's baby steps in the right direction.
Another thing I forgot to mention was that their youtube channel focusing on the painting is another good thing. raise interest of new players, and encouraging them to paint with easy painting tips...... although the comments are turned off, looking at this site and others, I completely understand.
Those tutorials are pretty good, I will give them that. Now all they have to do is balance the game, put some actual effort into the rules, bring back WHFB, and design vehicles so they aren't inferior to MC most of the time. I suggest a saving throw determined by the vehicle's facing and what type of vehicle it is, that can only be ignored if the weapon is capable of penetration.
Wulfmar wrote: So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
If only that were the world we live in. Sadly the world we live in is one where the positive "hobby goers" tell people who are discontent with anything to leave. Leading to problems in government, social care, financial ruin, corruption, and countless other areas of our lives when we could have just spoke out against them. No, make no mistake, a world where criticism was valued and the "happy" mindless were told to shove off would be a utopia.
Wulfmar wrote: So much sarcasm, so little content. It will be more constructive to not get emotional, you're not GW so try not to take it personally
If you are annoyed by people complaining about GW, the solution is simple. Don't visit forum threads discussing issues with aspects of GW. There are plenty of other threads that can enrich your GW experience. Bliss is just a click away. You can't come onto a thread to complain about the thread causing you annoyance because you're doing it to yourself. People aren't forcing you to read it.
What a strange world that we live in where the person who is positive about the hobby and game that we are on a forum discussing is the one who is told to leave the forums.
If only that were the world we live in. Sadly the world we live in is one where the positive "hobby goers" tell people who are discontent with anything to leave. Leading to problems in government, social care, financial ruin, corruption, and countless other areas of our lives when we could have just spoke out against them. No, make no mistake, a world where criticism was valued and the "happy" mindless were told to shove off would be a utopia.
Around 6th ed when GW started down the Apocalypse-isation of 40K, the standard response to complaints about their direction was "If you don't like it, you don't have to play".
So people didn't play, hence the declining sales, and shop/club and tournament play dropping off.
If GW want to jettison a section of their player base, they need to recruit new players to make up for it. Which so far they've failed to do.
Let's see...I play at a FLGS that has 8 high quality gaming tables, enough terrain to fill them well, all tables with nice FLG mats. In addition, the other half of the store is reserved for Magic.
I've never seen fewer than 50 people playing MTG on a given night.
The last 40k tournament drew out 7 people. The one before that drew out 3 so it wasn't run.
Meanwhile, at a much smaller FLGS in a mall with 4 gaming tables (different location obviously...this was expanded to 8 on tourney days) where I used to play 5th edition, we would regularly fill the available 16 slots and have at least 6 guys hanging around in the morning in case someone backed out.
Yes 40k is dying, it's just taking a long time to peter out. People are still buying models, but new people aren't getting into the game. High buy-in cost and low purchase security (you have no idea whether your purchase will even be usable a year from now) are huge turnoffs to new players. I've been playing for 24 years now but haven't bought a model in at least 2 years because 40k is probably the worst gaming investment imaginable.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Let's see...I play at a FLGS that has 8 high quality gaming tables, enough terrain to fill them well, all tables with nice FLG mats. In addition, the other half of the store is reserved for Magic.
I've never seen fewer than 50 people playing MTG on a given night.
The last 40k tournament drew out 7 people. The one before that drew out 3 so it wasn't run.
Meanwhile, at a much smaller FLGS in a mall with 4 gaming tables (different location obviously...this was expanded to 8 on tourney days) where I used to play 5th edition, we would regularly fill the available 16 slots and have at least 6 guys hanging around in the morning in case someone backed out.
Yes 40k is dying, it's just taking a long time to peter out. People are still buying models, but new people aren't getting into the game. High buy-in cost and low purchase security (you have no idea whether your purchase will even be usable a year from now) are huge turnoffs to new players. I've been playing for 24 years now but haven't bought a model in at least 2 years because 40k is probably the worst gaming investment imaginable.
could be local ebbs and flows (happened where I play once or twice) but who knows. Honestly, most people find out about the game online, and then they bump into the 7 metric tons of people whining, and I think that scares away more people then the price. A "starter (~1500)" army of your faction (books included) is roughly the same as getting a console, starting your gaming PC, or most other Hobby entry costs, so I doubt high buy-in. Also, not sure why you brought up purchase security, unless your referring to books. Almost all of the basic models for an army haven't been made obsolete in years, and same goes for most vehicles, unless your referring to a new version of the model coming out.
Honestly, I feel that the game's "new population" is hurt by the price less then it is by the community, 'cause yes, were scorned, but the only other more toxic community that I can think of is the Total War forums.
We live in a universe where the negative views of some users on DakkaDakka are the major turn-off from the game while simultaneously the negative users are an unprepresentative minority because there are far more people who like the game who never visit forums.
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Let's see...I play at a FLGS that has 8 high quality gaming tables, enough terrain to fill them well, all tables with nice FLG mats. In addition, the other half of the store is reserved for Magic.
I've never seen fewer than 50 people playing MTG on a given night.
The last 40k tournament drew out 7 people. The one before that drew out 3 so it wasn't run.
Meanwhile, at a much smaller FLGS in a mall with 4 gaming tables (different location obviously...this was expanded to 8 on tourney days) where I used to play 5th edition, we would regularly fill the available 16 slots and have at least 6 guys hanging around in the morning in case someone backed out.
Yes 40k is dying, it's just taking a long time to peter out. People are still buying models, but new people aren't getting into the game. High buy-in cost and low purchase security (you have no idea whether your purchase will even be usable a year from now) are huge turnoffs to new players. I've been playing for 24 years now but haven't bought a model in at least 2 years because 40k is probably the worst gaming investment imaginable.
could be local ebbs and flows (happened where I play once or twice) but who knows. Honestly, most people find out about the game online, and then they bump into the 7 metric tons of people whining, and I think that scares away more people then the price. A "starter (~1500)" army of your faction (books included) is roughly the same as getting a console, starting your gaming PC, or most other Hobby entry costs, so I doubt high buy-in. Also, not sure why you brought up purchase security, unless your referring to books. Almost all of the basic models for an army haven't been made obsolete in years, and same goes for most vehicles, unless your referring to a new version of the model coming out.
Honestly, I feel that the game's "new population" is hurt by the price less then it is by the community, 'cause yes, were scorned, but the only other more toxic community that I can think of is the Total War forums.
Exalted especially considering the number of "Go play WMH/X-Wing/FoW/etc." posts that show up in "New to 40k, where do I start"
It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
That says more about the game than it does about the players. Infinity, for example, has a much more positive and healthy veteran community for the simple fact that it is a better game.
Yes I'm generally anti-GW (with respects to pricing, the recent rapid turn-over of codices which has left a massive jilted feeling, the removal of fluff and flavour (see Dark Eldar) and the actions of some of the stores preventing non-newbies to play on them).
You won't see a single complaint from me about games such as SAGA, Lion Rampant/Dragon Rampant, Frostgrave, Ronin, Bolt Action and a series of other games. The reason is simple - those producers listen to the players (I've even visited Warlord Games HQ and had very pleasant email conversations with Osprey and Gripping Beast about the games). The games are balanced because they care about making a good game - rather than using the excuse that they are a model shop first (which makes little sense considering GAMES Workshops history. The rulebooks are written to the best of their ability and they aren't constantly being slightly modified to force you to spend more - a model used by MTG and other collectible games I don't personally care for. They also provide all the rules in one book, avoiding the sort of pay-to-win situation we have with GW and the formation dataslates.
I used to like much of GW, but that has changed - now I'm more a fan of the fluff and background. I've found far more pleasure in the Black Library compared to the game for the reasons stated above. Rather than the annoyance of playing 40K, I read a book instead. If I want to play a physical game, I play one of the ones I mentioned above, for the reasons stated.
So yes, you may consider me a vocal anti-GW person, but I didn't suddenly decide this. I am also a very vocal pro-Saga, Frostgrave etc person. Essentially I say exactly how I feel based on my experience. In my opinion, GW deserves what I say about it because I'm literally stating my experience with it.
could be local ebbs and flows (happened where I play once or twice) but who knows. Honestly, most people find out about the game online, and then they bump into the 7 metric tons of people whining, and I think that scares away more people then the price. A "starter (~1500)" army of your faction (books included) is roughly the same as getting a console, starting your gaming PC, or most other Hobby entry costs, so I doubt high buy-in. Also, not sure why you brought up purchase security, unless your referring to books. Almost all of the basic models for an army haven't been made obsolete in years, and same goes for most vehicles, unless your referring to a new version of the model coming out.
Honestly, I feel that the game's "new population" is hurt by the price less then it is by the community, 'cause yes, were scorned, but the only other more toxic community that I can think of is the Total War forums.
Sure, some core units have staying power. Tactical Marines are a safe buy, as are Jetbikes.
Some armies tend to suffer a lot more than others though. For example, if you played CSM in 5th edition, 6th hit and now you need to buy a ton of cultists. Now in 7th the CSM codex is nearly unplayable, so it's time to pick up the Khorne Daemonkin codex - along with a bunch of Flesh Hounds and Bikers as your core units. IG players suffered similarly - I feel bad for the guys who went out and bought 3+ Hydras for use in 5th only to find them useless in 6th.
To be perfectly fair, it's honestly not the rules so much as it is the release schedule. For a game based upon army building rather than individual units, 40k could really benefit (both from gameplay and business perspectives) from a slower release schedule that permits metagames to be broken and reform.
Kilkrazy wrote: We live in a universe where the negative views of some users on DakkaDakka are the major turn-off from the game while simultaneously the negative users are an unprepresentative minority because there are far more people who like the game who never visit forums.
Kilkrazy wrote: We live in a universe where the negative views of some users on DakkaDakka are the major turn-off from the game while simultaneously the negative users are an unprepresentative minority because there are far more people who like the game who never visit forums.
Schrödinger's Hater?
Coiuld be Pavlovs hater. Conditioned to turn up at the sound of someone praising GW.
GW games are completely dead at my FLGS...and our store is the only one with dedicated gaming space for miles and miles.
Still going strong in order of popularity here...
Warmahordes
Malifaux
Infinity
Guildball is picking up steam
Games like X-Wing, Imperial Assault, and Star Wars: Armada are seeing play as well.
Kings of War gets play occasionally, equal mix of GW model armies and Mantic ones.
Of course, it helps that there is an active Press Ganger there on game night every week, who schedules regular tournaments, leagues, and launch events. I have no doubt if GW made some balanced competitive rules and started supporting something like thier 'Outrider' program again, that things would pick back up for them here. Most of the people there every week have multiple armies for either 40K, Warhammer Fantasy (pre-AoS),or both (me)...they just find playing those other games to be more fun/rewarding
Iron_Captain wrote:
Yes, but GW is not more expansive than other Wargame Companies. In fact, on a model for model basis, PP or CB, to name two well-known examples, are actually more expansive.
Your point would have merit if wargames were based around buying a single model. Comparisons on a model for model basis can be incredibly misleading. A more accurate measure is based on cost of entry as well as the total cost of an army.
Saying CB have more pricy single models is correct (but the quality is outstanding). Saying its more expensive as a game is false, as you need about ten of those models and you’re ready to game at a top level.
GW games are very much on the top end of the price bracket, both with cost of entry and total cost of play. And even if we want to talk about the 'single' model category, I can guarantee you I can find any number of examples of gw producing single models at price points that are nothing if not exorbitant.
Grumblewartz wrote:
The decline of local clubs is also, it seems, partially driven by the economy in general. 40k, board games, etc. are not an incredibly safe investment. Even now when nerd is cooler than ever, it isn't easy to turn a major profit. So, with the economic down turn, many stores are shifting their focus, using their space in order to diversify their product, leaving less room for tables that don't generate that much money (most people buy product online because it is cheaper).
If anything, board games etc tend to see a bit of a boost during economic downturns, and to be fair, the economic downturn argument doesn’t really hold water any more. I remember a few years ago Kirby talking about their product being recession proof as well.
Grumblewartz wrote:
Yes, it is GW's fault that people constantly try to break a game that was never designed for competitive play.
So its tims fault be picked blood angels and bob picked necrons eh? Assuming malevolent intentions behind this is asinine. Some people will try and break the game, plenty more just want to play it, and it doesn’t help when the game’s appalling balance gets in the way. 'I love the idea of airborne guard!' back in fifth was often enough to get labelled as tfg, and that has everything to do with gw writing terrible rules. It didn't have to be that way. So yes, it was gw's fault.
And by the way, gw used to run tournaments. 40k used to be the game where everyone was welcome.
Grumblewartz wrote:
Yes, it is their fault the game is sooooooo expensive (oh wait, don't look now, model WWII tanks of any quality are at least $45 new).
Well, yes it is. Its even more ridiculous when they half the contents of the boxes (dire avengers for example) and jack up the prices at the same time, whilst simultaneously pushing for bigger games with ridiculously expensive centre pieces…
Grumblewartz wrote:
Oh x army is better than y army. Spread more hate over things that are
1.) beyond their control;
Balancing the game (ie not making x army better than y army) is actually entirely within their control. They’re the writers.
Its called power creep, and yes, cynically invalidating someones previous purchases at the altar of new shinies fosters ill will and resentment. This also plays into the argument of 'gw should write a balanced game where everyone can be on the same level'.
Grumblewartz wrote:
4.) I quit playing the game 5 years ago but I constantly feel the need to badmouth the hobby because, you know, internet reasons;
The ‘game’ and the ‘hobby’ are two entirely separate things. 40k is not the hobby. Don't be so naive or short sighted. Badmouthing asinine and counter productive business practices is fair game. And to be fair, you don’t need to play the game of 40k to have an interest in the topic. Plenty people don’t actually play the ttg. For many, it’s the painting/converting. For others it’s reading the fluff. For others it’s a general interest in gaming. GW, being a big player is often a central point of discussion. And they do a lot of things worthy of comment
Grumblewartz wrote:
5.g) Screw GW for not supporting my favorite army that no one else really plays, but they should spend hundreds of thousands of $$$$...by the way I am not going to buy any of the new sets.
Ironically – possibly because they’re not supporting your favourite army? And surely, this links into making a decently robust system that supports those armies so they’re all viable?
Brennonjw wrote:
It doesn't help that the WM/H crowd loves to say their game is cheaper, when it costs the same price, if not more for less models (however, you need less to play a game of WM/H) which just riles up the "defenders" and reaffirms the "anti-GW's" biases (I suppose thats the best word)
Please don't speak for 'the wmh crowd' like we're a hive mind?
Because I personally think you are wrong. I don’t think its fair to say that the WMH crowd says the game is cheaper. Some might, and they're only seeing part of the picture. And often, others in the very same community point this out. Wmh is certainly far cheaper to buy into, and it is far easier to expand your army – all the costs are not front loaded for example. But I would disagree with the notion that it ‘costs the same price’. Lets be clear – it can do. It can be as pricy as 40k. Cavalry for example can be quite pricy, and cavalry based armies (vlad3 charge of the horselords comes to mind immediately) can be ridiculous, but these are far from the norm. hordes armies tend to come in quite a bit cheaper for example. I know of quite a few legion of everblight, or circle of orboros 2-list pairs that come out at very reasonable prices and often quite a bit cheaper than your 40k armies.
Brennonjw wrote:
I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress), bringing back specialist games, making recent codexies around the game general "power level", the incredibly well priced Calth box set. If they stick to these trends, then the game will probably get better. Yes, the game will still be expensive, but no more then other hobbies if you go a month-by-month basis. In most hobbies, it seems that a high entry cost, and then 40-70 a month there after is a standard amount, and fits well for MTG, video gaming, and other miniature hobbies.
the problem here is that gw have to ‘stick to those trends’ for it to take effect. I remember the same words being spoken at the start of 5th ed when folks felt that the ‘stripped back’ back-to-basics chaos and DA codices would herald in a new era of anti-power creep, and these pointed to a general power level that would be followed through for the edition. Hopes were high, and then those same hopes were dashed on some very sharp rocks when orks, space wolves, leafblower guard followed and then there were grey knights which took 5th and broke its back. I’ve seen those same comments said for 6th, and now 7th and the sad truth is that their past performance indicates that no, they will not do as you suggest. Calth is great for what its worth, and while people are hopeful of the return of specialist games, there is every chance GW will miss the goal with it. I’ll wait and see though.
Brennonjw wrote:
In reguards to the game being broken: I hate to quote BoLS, but "it's not broke untill you break it" yes, there are stupid units and rules, but no, they don't ruin the game IF you don't play in a setting where you typically pay for entry, and then rewards happen because you want to win. In more casual games with friends or just people in your local group, you can make new scenarios, play non-balanced point costs, and other parts of the game that are typically ignored when you play competitively. Though tournaments are how some people enjoy the game, so it must be considered none the less, but I don't think it should be the focus.
It’s not that simple. the problem with this approach is that often breaking the game is not intentional. 'Until you break it' can be as simple as 'oh man! I love the idea of these biker saim hann eldar!' Its not necessarily because of ‘tournaments’. No reward. Just two people picking armies they think are Kewl. It just happens. Quite often in the case of gw games, and far too often to be anything other than a bad thing. Tim plays blood angels. Bob plays saim hann. Its often not fair that two players, with no individual input, start on such radically different power levels. ‘don’t break it’ is kind of hard when the logical conclusion is tim can only play a handful of builds to play at bobs feet, and bob has to leave 90% of his stuff at home because its on another level to time as well. Thst doesn't strike me as either fair, or well designed.
Home brewed rules can be great fun (its how we usually play Flames of War) but they are not necessarily a ‘better way’, and often have just as many hurdles to jump though. This approach often risks fragmenting and fracturing the playerbase, as without a universal framework, everyone is essentially playing a different game. There is great value in just being able to turn up and say '1500pts? Roll scenario' and go.
‘sorry, we don’t play flyers or super heavies here’ means the guy with 5 knights is flat out of luck ,and its not really his fault. He didn't 'try to break it'. But here he is, not able to play. Because of a bunch of reasons.
And As a final point though, it is a bit annoying to have to fix a game at our end when it’s a job the developers should have done at theirs.
GW charges a premium price for its rulebooks. It's reasonable to demand a high level of writing quality in said rules and frankly absurd to say that it's the players' responsibility to balance them. Isn't that what we're paying GW to do?
TheWaspinator wrote: GW charges a premium price for its rulebooks. It's reasonable to demand a high level of writing quality in said rules and frankly absurd to say that it's the players' responsibility to balance them. Isn't that what we're paying GW to do?
Or just stop buying and torrent. Like I started doing.
Depends on your local scene, but we will have a better picture in January when they release their financials.
This last year IMHO is arguably one of their better/best years from a modeling/release standpoint, with the Admech being one of their best top to bottom releases ever.
I too have been somewhat jaded by the direction the game has been going since 6th edition, ie ApocHammer 40k, but I thankfully play with a group that is thriving and weeds out the BS.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheWaspinator wrote: GW charges a premium price for its rulebooks. It's reasonable to demand a high level of writing quality in said rules and frankly absurd to say that it's the players' responsibility to balance them. Isn't that what we're paying GW to do?
This is easily my biggest beef with GW. I could understand if they were giving them out for free, but when a single book is $50+, I would hope they fix their errors more frequently.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, but GW is not more expansive than other Wargame Companies. In fact, on a model for model basis, PP or CB, to name two well-known examples, are actually more expansive.
Your point would have merit if wargames were based around buying a single model. Comparisons on a model for model basis can be incredibly misleading. A more accurate measure is based on cost of entry as well as the total cost of an army. Saying its more expensive as a game is false, as you need about ten of those models and you’re ready to game at a top level.
Which is why you can't compare Infinity to 40k. They are on a fundamentally different scale, with the only similarity that they both make use of miniatures. It is somewhat like the difference between buying a Nintendo DS and buying a super high-end gaming PC. The DS allows you to fully play games at a much lower cost than the PC. The PC gives you more, but at higher costs. Just as playing a game of 40k gives you much more miniatures on the table than playing a game of Infinity will. That said, the big question, is gaming on that expansive PC really more fun than gaming on the DS? Maybe the DS games are actually better designed and more fun? The answer to that will depend on the player. Personally, I enjoy wargames with lots of miniatures better than wargames with less miniatures.
Regardless, the whole argument is invalid because you can also play a game of Kill Team with only 10 GW miniatures. Therefore GW still is much cheaper than CB In my opinion, the comparison should therefore not be based on the costs of playing a single game (which in the end, you could make as big or small as you want it to be) but on the value you get for the money. When I buy a box of 10 GW figures, I get 10 highly customisable figures with lots of extra options. When I buy 10 Infinity miniatures, I get 10 monopose figures at a higher cost. Buying the GW box just gives me more stuff for less money, and therefore is imo cheaper. In the end, 10 miniatures are 10 miniatures, I can do the same things with them. I can even play a full game of Infinity with my 10 GW miniatures!
Saying CB have more pricy single models is correct (but the quality is outstanding).
It is a matter of opinion, but their quality imo is not always that great. CB produces some really outstanding miniatures, but others are not nearly as nice. Of course, that holds true for GW as well ( Gorilla Cadians!)
Deadnight wrote: GW games are very much on the top end of the price bracket, both with cost of entry and total cost of play. And even if we want to talk about the 'single' model category, I can guarantee you I can find any number of examples of gw producing single models at price points that are nothing if not exorbitant.
The game, yes. That is true. 40k really is one of the most expansive games, altough for a large degree that also depends on how large you want your game to be. You can play a 1000pts game quite cheaply. For the models, GW is expensive when compared to pure scale model companies, but not when compared to other wargame companies. It is also not expansive compared to most other hobbies. For what I paid for my mountainbike, computer games and sailing boat, I could have had a lifetime supply of all the 40k models I ever want.
[quote=Deadnight 673317 8325993 nullAnd As a final point though, it is a bit annoying to have to fix a game at our end when it’s a job the developers should have done at theirs.
Couldn't agree more. It does not remove the fun from the game, but having to chat about houserules every time does get annoying. It is a pity 40k is hardly fun to play without house rules.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Ask yourself what happened to turn all that around.
It is a pity 40k is hardly fun to play without house rules.
That should be a big, honkin' huge red flag to anyone interested in the game.
Which is why you can't compare Infinity to 40k. They are on a fundamentally different scale, with the only similarity that they both make use of miniatures. It is somewhat like the difference between buying a Nintendo DS and buying a super high-end gaming PC. The DS allows you to fully play games at a much lower cost than the PC. The PC gives you more, but at higher costs. Just as playing a game of 40k gives you much more miniatures on the table than playing a game of Infinity will. That said, the big question, is gaming on that expansive PC really more fun than gaming on the DS? Maybe the DS games are actually better designed and more fun? The answer to that will depend on the player. Personally, I enjoy wargames with lots of miniatures better than wargames with less miniatures.
Regardless, the whole argument is invalid because you can also play a game of Kill Team with only 10 GW miniatures. Therefore GW still is much cheaper than CB .
He, to be fair - it Depends what ten miniatures you take though. Ten Bolter marines? Sure, why not. Now chuck in that ba chaplain, some vanguard, stern guard or whatever and the price rocks up. Meanwhile I can go with some Caledonians and some single model blisters or whathaveyou. Absolutist statements that 'gw is still much cheaper' fall apart under a bit of scrutiny (or at best, aren't as clear cut as you'd like them to be) and will get you into trouble here,
In any case, Kill team isn't 40k. so there's that. :p it's not the main game. Its a very stripped back game using some elements and game mechanics of the main parent 40k game, and a whole bunch of limitations, restrictions and bans a heck of a lot of stuff you'd normally see etc. so let's talk about a generic 300pt infinity list versus a generic 1850pt 40k list. Is gw cheaper? Probably not.
Fo me, what's galling isn't necessarily the price tag per mini - I don't mind paying. It's the cynical cash grabs - halving the contents of the boxes while jacking up the prices, invalidating codices and models to force you to buy the next shiny and keep up with the meta. Then there are the rulebooks and codices and so on...
You like wargames with lots of miniatures over those with very few? Fair play. I prefer the latter, personally. Neither of us is wrong in our opinions.
And to be fair, you can very much compare and contrast infinity and 40k. They're both wargames using 28mm models. You can compare rules, model quality, price to play etc. strengths, merits and differences.
In my opinion, the comparison should therefore not be based on the costs of playing a single game (which in the end, you could make as big or small as you want it to be) but on the value you get for the money. When I buy a box of 10 GW figures, I get 10 highly customisable figures with lots of extra options. When I buy 10 Infinity miniatures, I get 10 monopose figures at a higher cost. Buying the GW box just gives me more stuff for less money, and therefore is imo cheaper. In the end, 10 miniatures are 10 miniatures, I can do the same things with them. I can even play a full game of Infinity with my 10 GW miniatures!
.
The 'value you get for your money' is open ended. I love infinity, so I get great 'value for my money' from that. Then there is buying second hand Etc. to have an honest conversation on this, you need to look at the go-to sizes and the total cost of play.
And I disagree with you. Those 10 miniatures are all well and good, but with infinity - that's you ready to rock and roll. In 40k, that's a squad. You can play Mickey Mouse games of kill team with it, and you can ignore those huge battles with loads of models that you claim to love as well and it's those things that really make 40k what it is. And you then still need a bunch more to get up to a 'normal' size. Cost of entry and costs of armies should be considered too, for the simple reason that the discussion doesn't end with ten models.
By the way, I might have issues with your proxies! then again, I have played intro games of warmachine with space marines too...
The game, yes. That is true. 40k really is one of the most expansive games, altough for a large degree that also depends on how large you want your game to be. You can play a 1000pts game quite cheaply.
.
Other games can be scaled down too, just as easily. Thousand pointers in 40k? Here's 150pts infinity, and mangled metal/tooth and claw in warmachine.
What's the default, or 'go-to' size that most people play? Back when I played it was 1500-1850pts and thousand pointers were mainly for newer players. And even then, it's a very limited scale.
For the models, GW is expensive when compared to pure scale model companies, but not when compared to other wargame companies. It is also not expansive compared to most other hobbies. For what I paid for my mountainbike, computer games and sailing boat, I could have had a lifetime supply of all the 40k models I ever want.
.
And when compared to what I pay for my marathons (£50 to enter, and £100 for good trainers) it's a hell of a lot more expensive! For what it's worth though - don't talk about 'normal hobbies' in the same breath as sailing boats, mountain bikes and that - wow, that's a whole different level! I'm envious by the way. Now, if we're talking about boozing, then it's quite a bit cheaper!
Generally though I'll agree with you - I don't see wargaming as ridiculously expensive on the whole - it's easy enough to put aside £10 a week as a hobby budget that'll get you a decent chunk of stuff over a long period of time. For me, the problem is the bloody painting (looks at lead mountain and groans!)
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
When was dakka never a rant fest in part?
I mean the majority of posts on dakka are not rants, but like all things, all it takes is one turd in the punch bowl for no one to want to drink any,
NuggzTheNinja wrote: Let's see...I play at a FLGS that has 8 high quality gaming tables, enough terrain to fill them well, all tables with nice FLG mats. In addition, the other half of the store is reserved for Magic.
I've never seen fewer than 50 people playing MTG on a given night.
The last 40k tournament drew out 7 people. The one before that drew out 3 so it wasn't run.
Meanwhile, at a much smaller FLGS in a mall with 4 gaming tables (different location obviously...this was expanded to 8 on tourney days) where I used to play 5th edition, we would regularly fill the available 16 slots and have at least 6 guys hanging around in the morning in case someone backed out.
Yes 40k is dying, it's just taking a long time to peter out. People are still buying models, but new people aren't getting into the game. High buy-in cost and low purchase security (you have no idea whether your purchase will even be usable a year from now) are huge turnoffs to new players. I've been playing for 24 years now but haven't bought a model in at least 2 years because 40k is probably the worst gaming investment imaginable.
could be local ebbs and flows (happened where I play once or twice) but who knows. Honestly, most people find out about the game online, and then they bump into the 7 metric tons of people whining, and I think that scares away more people then the price. A "starter (~1500)" army of your faction (books included) is roughly the same as getting a console, starting your gaming PC, or most other Hobby entry costs, so I doubt high buy-in. Also, not sure why you brought up purchase security, unless your referring to books. Almost all of the basic models for an army haven't been made obsolete in years, and same goes for most vehicles, unless your referring to a new version of the model coming out.
Honestly, I feel that the game's "new population" is hurt by the price less then it is by the community, 'cause yes, were scorned, but the only other more toxic community that I can think of is the Total War forums.
Your joking with the non obsolete thing right? If someone buys an ps4, then it is good for years, unless he breaks it. Now show me an IG army that is not obsolete. What about SW who went from lots of GH and LF, to lots of TWC and ally. Or how about the GK armies, can you tell me where those went?
Vehicles didn't get obsolote? please. IG armies were runing 2-3 vendettas before, now they can't even fit in one, becuse of how much it costs. All the razorbacks SW, GK and BA players unusable. Assault marines out of BA codex, gone too. No one is going to invest 700$ in to something that may last a few months, and at best a year or two.
And I disagree with you. Those 10 miniatures are all well and good, but with infinity - that's you ready to rock and roll. In 40k, that's a squad. You can play Mickey Mouse games of kill team with it, and you can ignore those huge battles with loads of models that you claim to love as well and it's those things that really make 40k what it is. And you then still need a bunch more to get up to a 'normal' size. Cost of entry and costs of armies should be considered too, for the simple reason that the discussion doesn't end with ten models.
You know what I like the most in infinity? The fact that I play a game, there are missions, there are scenarios , there are combos and counters. In w40k you just check who has the highest avarge shot per turn with lowest vunerability, and the game is done. And the missions in w40k are so stupid. In infinity I want FO, medics and engineers, because it is important for missions. In w40k the one who zergs objectives first and gets a better draw hand wins.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
When was dakka never a rant fest in part?
I mean the majority of posts on dakka are not rants, but like all things, all it takes is one turd in the punch bowl for no one to want to drink any,
Actually, in earlier editions, warseer was called whineseer and was considered the negative forum. It was filled with people ranting non-stop about how the game sucks and various other issues people had.
Bolter and chainsword was considered....I don't know a nice way to say it, but it was more for children. It was filled with people rping as space marines, poorly, and the quality of advice was pitiful.
Dakka was considered the more competitive forum/modeling forum. The tactics and modeling threads on here were big draws, and you saw the highest amount of GT winners/players here.
The warhammer forum was also for more serious players, but had a smaller amount of activity. I think it was mainly based in the UK and centered around fantasy, but then the races individual forums took off in a big way (starting with empire, bug mans, druchii, and ogre stronghold later on being the big ones).
Portent was the fluff bible of the forums, but that was even further back. I loved that site, especially one poster whose name started with an I and had an evangelion avatar.
This game is more balanced - Marines vs. Marines.
Here the rule book has not so much influence on the game when you run Marines, a few transports, and a Primarch, and the opponent does the same.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, in earlier editions, warseer was called whineseer and was considered the negative forum. It was filled with people ranting non-stop about how the game sucks and various other issues people had.
Bolter and chainsword was considered....I don't know a nice way to say it, but it was more for children. It was filled with people rping as space marines, poorly, and the quality of advice was pitiful.
Dakka was considered the more competitive forum/modeling forum. The tactics and modeling threads on here were big draws, and you saw the highest amount of GT winners/players here.
The warhammer forum was also for more serious players, but had a smaller amount of activity. I think it was mainly based in the UK and centered around fantasy, but then the races individual forums took off in a big way (starting with empire, bug mans, druchii, and ogre stronghold later on being the big ones).
You speak in simple past. Do the forums have changed?
Kilkrazy wrote: We live in a universe where the negative views of some users on DakkaDakka are the major turn-off from the game while simultaneously the negative users are an unprepresentative minority because there are far more people who like the game who never visit forums.
Schrödinger's Hater?
Maxwell's Demon Hater, perhaps?
In the sense of the Hater being a gatekeeper who when you look at the realities cannot do the work needed.
To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.
If this is true, wasn't it a serious strategic error for GW to turn their enthusiastic veterans into Haters? It didn't happen overnight, it took over five years.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
While I like the game, it's mostly because of the efforts the ITC and others put into the hobby as a whole. I can not in good faith recommend the game to new players though, simply due to GW's business practices and treatment of their product.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
While I like the game, it's mostly because of the efforts the ITC and others put into the hobby as a whole. I can not in good faith recommend the game to new players though, simply due to GW's business practices and treatment of their product.
I'll do the quoteception thing here as I'm responding and agreeing at the same time. I too used to encourage people to play WH40K. I no longer do this - instead I have successfully encouraged 2 friends to take up SAGA, another friend to take up Ronin (because while borrowing my models is nice, they want their own Buntai now) and Once I'm confident enough with Frostgrave, I may encourage others then too. Lion Rampant I've encouraged a further three people to get the rulebook for.
That's 5 people (one of them took up two games) who I have encouraged to start different gaming systems who *could* have been ushered towards GW (for additional detail, two of them were previous 40K players who were considering maybe playing again and buying more models to make their army usable, untill I pointed out that for one Riptide they could buy an entire, large 6pt SAGA army - the other friend that for the Imperial Knight they could have an entire large 6pt SAGA army AND rulebook AND the fancy gaming dice).
To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.
Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?
To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.
Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?
Well pretending we speak of a person that is old enough to earn said 700 bucks... well as long as he is aware of that investment. its the person that decide how to spend that money. i would neighter encourage or discourage him. everyone that earns enough money to spend 700 buck for toys should be adult enough to resonable act.
To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.
Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?
We'd inform him that Eldar is the army little kids buy so that they have enough overpowered gak to compete with the adults. It's an effective and easy to play handicap for inexperienced players that know nothing about wargaming. As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
This game is more balanced - Marines vs. Marines.
Here the rule book has not so much influence on the game when you run Marines, a few transports, and a Primarch, and the opponent does the same.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, in earlier editions, warseer was called whineseer and was considered the negative forum. It was filled with people ranting non-stop about how the game sucks and various other issues people had.
Bolter and chainsword was considered....I don't know a nice way to say it, but it was more for children. It was filled with people rping as space marines, poorly, and the quality of advice was pitiful.
Dakka was considered the more competitive forum/modeling forum. The tactics and modeling threads on here were big draws, and you saw the highest amount of GT winners/players here.
The warhammer forum was also for more serious players, but had a smaller amount of activity. I think it was mainly based in the UK and centered around fantasy, but then the races individual forums took off in a big way (starting with empire, bug mans, druchii, and ogre stronghold later on being the big ones).
You speak in simple past. Do the forums have changed?
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "Do the forums have changed?" unless you are attempting to mock my grammar for some reason?
The use of simple past here is fine, imo, though I'd be hard pressed to find a moment where the forums changed. Obviously it was a gradual shift that took a while, though it was pretty dramatic to someone who had been on them as a lurker for a long time
My guess would be 6th edition, a few months in, was when the forums started to become closer to what they are today, though the warhammer forum died when fantasy did.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Exactly.
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Exactly.
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
So that new players in the process of deciding whether to invest in 40k (or how much to invest) can see a broader set of perspectives and come to a more informed decision.
When I visited Dakka for the first time after getting into 40k, I got a pretty positive vibe about the game. There was a bit of grumbling about how many toys the new Space Wolves had, but otherwise people still seemed pretty hopeful about what the upcoming codexes would bring. It encouraged me to continue purchasing because the negative views here hadn't brought up any "deal-breaker" issues for me. Since that time, there has been a substantial change of direction at GW, and the game has become very difficult for me to play (and difficult to get my friends playing) and it is valuable for others to hear about such things, lest they end up with an army's worth of buyers remorse.
Dakka cannot control what people decide to buy. However, if people come here and read about the issues with the game and decide for themselves that those issues are a deal-breaker, that isn't Dakka's fault. And every person that gets turned off from the game, whether from bad word-of-mouth from veterans that have been priced out or had their armies obsoleted, or from hearing about GW's bizarro, awful legal practices, or from reading about how playing a game often requires an hour of discussion and/or 4+ rolls to determine how the rules work, or any of the other myriad problems with 40k today, that's a bit less $ on GW's revenue sheet. As that number declines, GW is a tad more likely to change direction and/or business models, which means potentially seeking to develop their product in a direction that is more desirable to more people. (Not that I'm necessarily optimistic about that, but it's still possible).
Besides, complaining about complaining adds nothing to a discussion. You're just covering your ears and saying "lalalalala I don't wanna hear it!"
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
So that new players in the process of deciding whether to invest in 40k (or how much to invest) can see a broader set of perspectives and come to a more informed decision.
When I visited Dakka for the first time after getting into 40k, I got a pretty positive vibe about the game. There was a bit of grumbling about how many toys the new Space Wolves had, but otherwise people still seemed pretty hopeful about what the upcoming codexes would bring. It encouraged me to continue purchasing because the negative views here hadn't brought up any "deal-breaker" issues for me. Since that time, there has been a substantial change of direction at GW, and the game has become very difficult for me to play (and difficult to get my friends playing) and it is valuable for others to hear about such things, lest they end up with an army's worth of buyers remorse.
Dakka cannot control what people decide to buy. However, if people come here and read about the issues with the game and decide for themselves that those issues are a deal-breaker, that isn't Dakka's fault. And every person that gets turned off from the game, whether from bad word-of-mouth from veterans that have been priced out or had their armies obsoleted, or from hearing about GW's bizarro, awful legal practices, or from reading about how playing a game often requires an hour of discussion and/or 4+ rolls to determine how the rules work, or any of the other myriad problems with 40k today, that's a bit less $ on GW's revenue sheet. As that number declines, GW is a tad more likely to change direction and/or business models, which means potentially seeking to develop their product in a direction that is more desirable to more people. (Not that I'm necessarily optimistic about that, but it's still possible).
Besides, complaining about complaining adds nothing to a discussion. You're just covering your ears and saying "lalalalala I don't wanna hear it!"
That would be fine if that was what people do. But the majority lurch from one hyperbole to another. X codex is completely useless. X unit has broken the game. It isn't rational at this point. I have already stated that there are legitimate reasons to dislike GW or 40k, so the ad hominem attack is quite inaccurate, but it does serve to elucidate my point. I am asking for people stop spewing hate and that is your response.
Regardless, I will reiterate. If you have stopped playing the game years ago, then please stop bashing GW and 40k at every turn. You aren't even up-to-date with your hatred. If you have a legitimate point, then make it and let it go. No need to spam every conversation.
Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?
vipoid wrote: Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?
You have so incredibly oversimplified the point that I and other posters were making. Seriously.
I think it's not really worth getting into discussion with Grumble.
Not sure how his approach to 40k is.
We in our gaming group are mostly veterans. We like the game, want to have fun, and like the competition. But what GW offers us in return is more and more not what we want to see and have. High prices, crappy rule set, and a negative image we have from the company.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
So that new players in the process of deciding whether to invest in 40k (or how much to invest) can see a broader set of perspectives and come to a more informed decision.
When I visited Dakka for the first time after getting into 40k, I got a pretty positive vibe about the game. There was a bit of grumbling about how many toys the new Space Wolves had, but otherwise people still seemed pretty hopeful about what the upcoming codexes would bring. It encouraged me to continue purchasing because the negative views here hadn't brought up any "deal-breaker" issues for me. Since that time, there has been a substantial change of direction at GW, and the game has become very difficult for me to play (and difficult to get my friends playing) and it is valuable for others to hear about such things, lest they end up with an army's worth of buyers remorse.
Dakka cannot control what people decide to buy. However, if people come here and read about the issues with the game and decide for themselves that those issues are a deal-breaker, that isn't Dakka's fault. And every person that gets turned off from the game, whether from bad word-of-mouth from veterans that have been priced out or had their armies obsoleted, or from hearing about GW's bizarro, awful legal practices, or from reading about how playing a game often requires an hour of discussion and/or 4+ rolls to determine how the rules work, or any of the other myriad problems with 40k today, that's a bit less $ on GW's revenue sheet. As that number declines, GW is a tad more likely to change direction and/or business models, which means potentially seeking to develop their product in a direction that is more desirable to more people. (Not that I'm necessarily optimistic about that, but it's still possible).
Besides, complaining about complaining adds nothing to a discussion. You're just covering your ears and saying "lalalalala I don't wanna hear it!"
That would be fine if that was what people do. But the majority lurch from one hyperbole to another. X codex is completely useless. X unit has broken the game. It isn't rational at this point. I have already stated that there are legitimate reasons to dislike GW or 40k, so the ad hominem attack is quite inaccurate, but it does serve to elucidate my point. I am asking for people stop spewing hate and that is your response.
Regardless, I will reiterate. If you have stopped playing the game years ago, then please stop bashing GW and 40k at every turn. You aren't even up-to-date with your hatred. If you have a legitimate point, then make it and let it go. No need to spam every conversation.
The sad part is that it's not hyperbole that he BA codex is worthless. You can literally do every BA build better with vanilla. So that's where my bitterness comes from. And yes, I've been playing other games more and more.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
So that new players in the process of deciding whether to invest in 40k (or how much to invest) can see a broader set of perspectives and come to a more informed decision.
When I visited Dakka for the first time after getting into 40k, I got a pretty positive vibe about the game. There was a bit of grumbling about how many toys the new Space Wolves had, but otherwise people still seemed pretty hopeful about what the upcoming codexes would bring. It encouraged me to continue purchasing because the negative views here hadn't brought up any "deal-breaker" issues for me. Since that time, there has been a substantial change of direction at GW, and the game has become very difficult for me to play (and difficult to get my friends playing) and it is valuable for others to hear about such things, lest they end up with an army's worth of buyers remorse.
Dakka cannot control what people decide to buy. However, if people come here and read about the issues with the game and decide for themselves that those issues are a deal-breaker, that isn't Dakka's fault. And every person that gets turned off from the game, whether from bad word-of-mouth from veterans that have been priced out or had their armies obsoleted, or from hearing about GW's bizarro, awful legal practices, or from reading about how playing a game often requires an hour of discussion and/or 4+ rolls to determine how the rules work, or any of the other myriad problems with 40k today, that's a bit less $ on GW's revenue sheet. As that number declines, GW is a tad more likely to change direction and/or business models, which means potentially seeking to develop their product in a direction that is more desirable to more people. (Not that I'm necessarily optimistic about that, but it's still possible).
Besides, complaining about complaining adds nothing to a discussion. You're just covering your ears and saying "lalalalala I don't wanna hear it!"
That would be fine if that was what people do. But the majority lurch from one hyperbole to another. X codex is completely useless. X unit has broken the game. It isn't rational at this point. I have already stated that there are legitimate reasons to dislike GW or 40k, so the ad hominem attack is quite inaccurate, but it does serve to elucidate my point. I am asking for people stop spewing hate and that is your response.
Regardless, I will reiterate. If you have stopped playing the game years ago, then please stop bashing GW and 40k at every turn. You aren't even up-to-date with your hatred. If you have a legitimate point, then make it and let it go. No need to spam every conversation.
The sad part is that it's not hyperbole that he BA codex is worthless. You can literally do every BA build better with vanilla. So that's where my bitterness comes from. And yes, I've been playing other games more and more.
I agree that they have it pretty rough, but worthless is still an overstatement and the fact that people don't recognize it as hyperbole is part of the bigger problem. I am not trying to insult you in anyway, and I am not saying you are wrong. But, the usability of the codex is relative to the gaming environment, which is a point that is all too often ignored. If the gaming group consists of say BA, Imperial Guard, Tyranids, and Chaos, for example, the BA codex isn't "useless." It is an outdated codex, no doubt. That is a valid point and I am not trying to minimize it. However, it is perfectly playable in many gaming environments. The spirit of 40k has always been about groups making up their own gaming environment - that is one of the most attractive elements of the game, imo.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Exactly.
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
I think the important point is that people like me left 40K because we disliked various changes that GW made to the game, and now we bash it because it is the other way (as well as not buying anything) to pressurise GW to change the game back.
IG, Tyranids, Orks and Chaos are all less worthless because the marine codex does not have all the same stuff except BETTERER on every page. The BA are a very special case in that they are quite literally worthless compared to vanilla marines.
Also, mysteriously, those lists don't get used much anymore where I play.
Grumblewartz wrote: I agree that they have it pretty rough, but worthless is still an overstatement and the fact that people don't recognize it as hyperbole is part of the bigger problem. I am not trying to insult you in anyway, and I am not saying you are wrong.
That's one hell of a contradiction right there.
You are, by definition, telling Martel that he's wrong. If he's not wrong, then 'worthless' isn't hyperbole or an overstatement - it's an accurate assessment of BA.
To speak seriously for a moment, Haters may have become a major barrier to take-up of the game, because it is the network effect going into reverse. Veterans so dissatisfied with GW that they have not just stopped playing but actively persuade newcomers to take up alternative games.
Ok lets say you have three new people and one of them wants to start IG, you realy think that it is a bad thing to discourage him from spending 700$ or more on an army, or what to tell to the new eldar player who finds jetbikes and knights cool, that his two other friends have no way of dealing with the army he wants to buy?
Well pretending we speak of a person that is old enough to earn said 700 bucks... well as long as he is aware of that investment. its the person that decide how to spend that money. i would neighter encourage or discourage him. everyone that earns enough money to spend 700 buck for toys should be adult enough to resonable act.
But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Exactly.
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
I think the important point is that people like me left 40K because we disliked various changes that GW made to the game, and now we bash it because it is the other way (as well as not buying anything) to pressurise GW to change the game back.
Thank you for explaining your perspective. I can understand where you are coming from. My point is that the GW hate frequently ends up making players and hobby enthusiasts who enjoy the game suffer, rather than GW, by hijacking forums (I am not accusing you, just making a general point about what I have noticed).
But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Kilkrazy wrote: It didn't use to be like that. Veterans used to be the most important selling tool for 40K, thanks to the network effect, and the enthusiasm of forums like DakkaDakka.
Exactly.
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high. I get that there are valid reasons to dislike GW or 40k, but why do people feel the need to constantly bash it? You said your word, you quit 40k, so leave it at that. Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why? It has long since ceased being constructive.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
I think the important point is that people like me left 40K because we disliked various changes that GW made to the game, and now we bash it because it is the other way (as well as not buying anything) to pressurise GW to change the game back.
Thank you for explaining your perspective. I can understand where you are coming from. My point is that the GW hate frequently ends up making players and hobby enthusiasts who enjoy the game suffer, rather than GW, by hijacking forums (I am not accusing you, just making a general point about what I have noticed).
Yes, I am afraid there is an element of that, but it is the price we pay for having a forum for discussion rather than an echo chamber containing only one point of view.
I sometimes get annoyed by so-called "white knights" (a term I dislike and do not use, but you understand the concept) who apparently feel obliged to defend GW from any point made against them, sometimes with increasingly ludicrous arguments, but I recognise they have the right to express their opinion.
As long as we all do it politely and with reference to reasonable facts and arguments, it can't do any harm.
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high.
So?
You don't need to play the game to have a right to comment here. Only a minority do. Plenty folks follow 40k for the lore. Plenty are involved In Terms of just painting and converting. And for plenty others, it's simply an interesting topic to follow and be involved in. And it's easy to be aware and knowledgeable of the state of play to make informed opinions.
Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why?
Because there are valid reasons to dislike gw and 40k? Because gw have burned and pissed off so many former customers and thry don't want anyone else to go down the same road? Because explaining your reasoning behind a negative view being dismissed as a 'seething pile of hate' is juvenile, short sighted and akin to attempting to whitewash the debate.
If someone wants to get into the game, an honest opinion of the downsides and pitfalls and negative aspects of the hobby is still relevant.
And an honest opinion of the downsides, pitfalls and negative aspects of the game is still 'constructive'. It's giving an accurate picture. You don't get to censor the stuff you disagree with and whitewash the responses here.
It may be shocking to many of these people, but a lot of us still like the game. So why not just move on and let those who want to talk positively about the game do so?
Then talk positive about the game. No ones stopping you. But don't be surprised or hostile when someone offers an alternative opinion, or points out the negative aspects of the game and says that it isn't all sunshine and rainbows.
If the gaming group consists of say BA, Imperial Guard, Tyranids, and Chaos, for example, the BA codex isn't "useless." .
And when the group consists of anything else? Here's the thing mate - defining a codex as ok when based against a limited and selectively defined collection of underpowered and poorly constructed codices doesn't mean it isn't 'useless'. It just means you might be able to make it work under very specific circumstances, and when those stars don't align, you're outta luck. But we're not allowed to provide an Honest assessment, or talk about that or display our displeasure at this appalling sense of balance begins this, are we? Coz we're just haterz and grumble sez only approved posters with approved positivity can post....
I The spirit of 40k has always been about groups making up their own gaming environment - that is one of the most attractive elements of the game, imo.
Which falls down the second one person says 'I want to play blood Angels', and the other says 'I want to play saim hann!'. Talking about the 'spirit of 40k' is quicksand. It's a cAtch all term to be all high and mighty and dismiss everyone else for having fun the wrong way whole whitewashing all the problems and genuine issues.
Which is why you can't compare Infinity to 40k. They are on a fundamentally different scale, with the only similarity that they both make use of miniatures. It is somewhat like the difference between buying a Nintendo DS and buying a super high-end gaming PC. The DS allows you to fully play games at a much lower cost than the PC. The PC gives you more, but at higher costs. Just as playing a game of 40k gives you much more miniatures on the table than playing a game of Infinity will. That said, the big question, is gaming on that expansive PC really more fun than gaming on the DS? Maybe the DS games are actually better designed and more fun? The answer to that will depend on the player. Personally, I enjoy wargames with lots of miniatures better than wargames with less miniatures. Regardless, the whole argument is invalid because you can also play a game of Kill Team with only 10 GW miniatures. Therefore GW still is much cheaper than CB .
He, to be fair - it Depends what ten miniatures you take though. Ten Bolter marines? Sure, why not. Now chuck in that ba chaplain, some vanguard, stern guard or whatever and the price rocks up. Meanwhile I can go with some Caledonians and some single model blisters or whathaveyou. Absolutist statements that 'gw is still much cheaper' fall apart under a bit of scrutiny (or at best, aren't as clear cut as you'd like them to be) and will get you into trouble here,
In any case, Kill team isn't 40k. so there's that. :p it's not the main game. Its a very stripped back game using some elements and game mechanics of the main parent 40k game, and a whole bunch of limitations, restrictions and bans a heck of a lot of stuff you'd normally see etc. so let's talk about a generic 300pt infinity list versus a generic 1850pt 40k list. Is gw cheaper? Probably not.
Sure as hell not. But the 1850pts 40k list will also give you a lot more toys than the 300pts Infinity list will.
Deadnight wrote: Fo me, what's galling isn't necessarily the price tag per mini - I don't mind paying. It's the cynical cash grabs - halving the contents of the boxes while jacking up the prices, invalidating codices and models to force you to buy the next shiny and keep up with the meta. Then there are the rulebooks and codices and so on...
I agree with you here.
Deadnight wrote: And to be fair, you can very much compare and contrast infinity and 40k. They're both wargames using 28mm models. You can compare rules, model quality, price to play etc. strengths, merits and differences.
Oh, you can compare all right. But just as with comparing apples to oranges, you have to wonder whether that comparison has any meaningful value.
In my opinion, the comparison should therefore not be based on the costs of playing a single game (which in the end, you could make as big or small as you want it to be) but on the value you get for the money. When I buy a box of 10 GW figures, I get 10 highly customisable figures with lots of extra options. When I buy 10 Infinity miniatures, I get 10 monopose figures at a higher cost. Buying the GW box just gives me more stuff for less money, and therefore is imo cheaper. In the end, 10 miniatures are 10 miniatures, I can do the same things with them. I can even play a full game of Infinity with my 10 GW miniatures! .
The 'value you get for your money' is open ended. I love infinity, so I get great 'value for my money' from that. Then there is buying second hand Etc. to have an honest conversation on this, you need to look at the go-to sizes and the total cost of play.
And I disagree with you. Those 10 miniatures are all well and good, but with infinity - that's you ready to rock and roll. In 40k, that's a squad. You can play Mickey Mouse games of kill team with it, and you can ignore those huge battles with loads of models that you claim to love as well and it's those things that really make 40k what it is. And you then still need a bunch more to get up to a 'normal' size. Cost of entry and costs of armies should be considered too, for the simple reason that the discussion doesn't end with ten models.
True. Yet to me, those 10 miniatures are a far higher value because I can assemble them in whatever way I want as part of a slowly expanding and unique personalised miniature army. In 40k, every group of Space Marines is unique, but in Infinity, all Caledonians look exactly like all other Caledonians, maybe just differently painted. As someone who values the miniatures far more than the actual game, this is extremely important to me. The greatest fun on 40k is not playing the game, it is building and collecting the army. Again, it is things like this that make Infinity and 40k really hard to compare.
Iron_Captain wrote: By the way, I might have issues with your proxies! then again, I have played intro games of warmachine with space marines too...
For the models, GW is expensive when compared to pure scale model companies, but not when compared to other wargame companies. It is also not expansive compared to most other hobbies. For what I paid for my mountainbike, computer games and sailing boat, I could have had a lifetime supply of all the 40k models I ever want. .
And when compared to what I pay for my marathons (£50 to enter, and £100 for good trainers) it's a hell of a lot more expensive! For what it's worth though - don't talk about 'normal hobbies' in the same breath as sailing boats, mountain bikes and that - wow, that's a whole different level! I'm envious by the way. Now, if we're talking about boozing, then it's quite a bit cheaper! Generally though I'll agree with you - I don't see wargaming as ridiculously expensive on the whole - it's easy enough to put aside £10 a week as a hobby budget that'll get you a decent chunk of stuff over a long period of time. For me, the problem is the bloody painting (looks at lead mountain and groans!)
Mountainbiking and sailing are rather normal hobbies afaik. I know a lot more people who mountainbike or sail than I know people playing miniature wargames, so what is the 'normal hobby' really? (Also, with my boat, there is no need to be envious. It is over 50 years old and I bought it for about €500. The yearly harbour and maintenance costs are much more expansive than the boat itself! )
I would like to know how many people on here bashing GW on a daily basis still play the game? The % seems awfully high.
So?
You don't need to play the game to have a right to comment here. Only a minority do. Plenty folks follow 40k for the lore. Plenty are involved In Terms of just painting and converting. And for plenty others, it's simply an interesting topic to follow and be involved in. And it's easy to be aware and knowledgeable of the state of play to make informed opinions.
If you don't play the game, it will be hard to make any insightful comments on it. At best you will be stuck echoing what others have said.
Every single thread opened up for a someone who says they are interested in getting back into 40k is turned into a seething pile of hate. Why?
Because there are valid reasons to dislike gw and 40k? Because gw have burned and pissed off so many former customers and thry don't want anyone else to go down the same road? Because explaining your reasoning behind a negative view being dismissed as a 'seething pile of hate' is juvenile, short sighted and akin to attempting to whitewash the debate. If someone wants to get into the game, an honest opinion of the downsides and pitfalls and negative aspects of the hobby is still relevant.
And an honest opinion of the downsides, pitfalls and negative aspects of the game is still 'constructive'. It's giving an accurate picture. You don't get to censor and whitewash the responses here.
The critical comments are important, but I think the problem that Grumblewartz sees with it is that it is no longer constructive because too often it devolves into an unending repetition of the exact same opinions over and over and over again in every single thread about GW, and even worse, in many unrelated threads as well. That is where it goes from being constructive criticism to whining. Unfortenately some people just can't seem to pull themselves away from 40k, even if they hate it. That is why they keep coming back to post negativity, which greatly diminishes the fun of Dakka for people with more positive attitudes. As an example: There is nothing constructive about posting "Go play something game X instead" in a thread of someone asking about how to get started 40k. That is just rude and off topic.
vipoid wrote: Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?
You have so incredibly oversimplified the point that I and other posters were making. Seriously.
Not really, because the reverse of what he said is what you're asking, and your finger-waving orkmoticon just makes you look like an ass.
The critical comments are important, but I think the problem that Grumblewartz sees with it is that it is no longer constructive because too often it devolves into an unending repetition of the exact same opinions over and over and over again in every single thread about GW, and even worse, in many unrelated threads as well. That is where it goes from being constructive criticism to whining. Unfortenately some people just can't seem to pull themselves away from 40k, even if they hate it. That is why they keep coming back to post negativity, which greatly diminishes the fun of Dakka for people with more positive attitudes.
As an example: There is nothing constructive about posting "Go play something game X instead" in a thread of someone asking about how to get started 40k. That is just rude and off topic.
Thats so true! Critik just for bashings sake is worthless and doesn't help to get a full picture. Especialy if someone wants to start a 40k army. Of Course he should be informed about problems, e.g. said BA codex doesn't work that well when set up against SM,Tau , Eldar. . But its a huge difference between " worthless forget it" and " Be aware that you will face serrious problems."
Suggesting sombody rigt out that he should forgett 40k at all seems always like a insult against said newbie. then instead of providing this guy the nessecary informationn in a objective way he gets the underlying message " you are to stupid to decide for your own! let me help you with this"
The flip-side to that is you get a newbie dead-set on playing BA, you tell them "this is an uphill struggle, but, here you go" and, six months later, newbie is back with a raging hatred for GW because he spent $500 on a BA army and is getting wiped off the board by his friend's Tau gunline or Eldar list by Turn 3 in every game.
You can then tell them that either they try to convince their friend to change their list, they buy a different army (another $500+ outlay), or to make up some variant rules (not always an option, depending on locale and local meta). You are more likely to end up with someone who says "Feth this", ebays their toys, and jumps to another game entirely and will never touch another GW product in their lives.
Better to be upfront and say "this army sucks right now, it might one day get an update and be much better, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen". This, though, leads to the promulgation of Tau and Eldar lists (or whatever the current hotness is, this is not just a modern problem) which is basically rewarding GW for creating unbalanced units, because you're pushing people to buy them, and that's bad for the game overall.
_ghost_ wrote: Suggesting sombody rigt out that he should forgett 40k at all seems always like a insult against said newbie. then instead of providing this guy the nessecary informationn in a objective way he gets the underlying message " you are to stupid to decide for your own! let me help you with this"
Not at all. The fact that said newbie is on a forum, asking questions, means he is looking for advice. It seems far more dishonest to try and pretend that everything is great - almost like you're trying to trick newbies into making bad investments.
That newbie has a right to know if his army will get its ass handed to it in virtually every game, regardless of how well he plays. He has a right to know that he'll receive no help whatsoever from GW, because they don't even consider 40k a game - just a load of models that they inexplicably provide rules for. They have a right to know that the rules in those £50 rulebooks and £30 codices are worse than the rules many other tabletop games give away for free.
If the newbie doesn't care about the game being a mess (or if that appeals to him), then he won't care about that stuff. If he's only interested in models or fluff, then he might not give a damn which army is best. And, as with any advice, he is free to ignore it. But, it is far better that he hears the full story before he makes a significant investment in the game. Honestly, unless you work for GW's marketing department, why sugar-coat the sorry state of the game?
Sure as hell not. But the 1850pts 40k list will also give you a lot more toys than the 300pts Infinity list will.
And it costs a hell of a lot more. Which was the bloody point. And it has every chance of being entirely invalidated with gw's next codex/edition update.
Oh, you can compare all right. But just as with comparing apples to oranges, you have to wonder whether that comparison has any meaningful value
If you're talking about fruit in a general sense, or value per fruit, or how the fruit companies treat their customers, and grow their crops then yes it does.
True. Yet to me, those 10 miniatures are a far higher value because I can assemble them in whatever way I want as part of a slowly expanding and unique personalised miniature army. In 40k, every group of Space Marines is unique, but in Infinity, all Caledonians look exactly like all other Caledonians, maybe just differently painted.
Every single space marine is the same bloody homogenous and boring power armour, just with slightly different bling or nipples on the armour. They're not as 'unique' as you'd claim. And it gets worse when you consider the sheer hard-on gw has for them and their over saturation in both the lore and the table top, And it makes sense that every Caledonian looks Similar It's a pretty small culture from a tiny part of the universe. And even then I have mormaers, grey rifles, the 2nd and 6th scots, volunteers, galwegians, Caterans , wulvers, William Wallace and so so. Full blooded army of bile, anger, fire, passion, bitterness and good old fashioned spite. Kinda like Scotland really.
It's far easier to claim that all grey hunters look the same. Same power armour, pelts and bolt guns and statline at the end of the day. And if you go 'but paint schemes/conversions!' Then what's stopping me giving every Caledonian his own unique tartan and converting them? There's 4000+ tartans out there and plenty opportunity to convert.
And what's stopping me slowly expanding a unique personalised miniature army with any other game? Hmm?
As someone who values the miniatures far more than the actual game, this is extremely important to me. The greatest fun on 40k is not playing the game, it is building and collecting the army. Again, it is things like this that make Infinity and 40k really hard to compare.
Be careful about those absolutist statements about defining what 'the greatest fun is'. At least qualify it as 'in your opinion'. Because it's not a 'fact'. And let's be clear, in terms of contrast - valuing the miniatures - I value my infinity miniatures more than Almost anything I've done for 40k (some tau and kroot conversions aside - and I love those boys!) so there's that. Which goes back to cost of play. Which is a big deal to a lot of people.
Mountainbiking and sailing are rather normal hobbies afaik. I know a lot more people who mountainbike or sail than I know people playing miniature wargames, so what is the 'normal hobby' really?
They're hardly cheap though. Really Good mountain bikes can set you back a massive chunk of cash.
(Also, with my boat, there is no need to be envious. It is over 50 years old and I bought it for about €500. The yearly harbour and maintenance costs are much more expansive than the boat itself! )
Like I said, the fact you can talk about this and it's maintenance so off handedly is nice, but not indicative of cheapness on the part of 40k or that these are 'normal hobbies'. Here- not at all!
If you don't play the game, it will be hard to make any insightful comments on it. At best you will be stuck echoing what others have said.
Unless you are knowledgeable about the meta, which plenty people are. It's not hard to read a codex with previous understanding of a the game, or to read the rules and understand what's good, bad and flat out broken and open to abuse.
I don't need to be a Chelsea fan to understand how poorly they are doing in the football- I can plainly see it on the TV.
. Having valid reasons of disliking gw and 40k is enough of a reason to Bring it up and point it out when the topic is brought up. If I dislike something, it's perfectly acceptable to discuss this and point this out. Or are we going down the road of censorship, echo chambers and stating that 'only posters who agree with me are allowed to comment'?
Remember the original comment I responded to was basically saying that while it was ok to dislike 40k and gw, it's apparently not ok to talk about it. Obviously of course, this being a sub forum dedicated to gw/40k, opinions relating to either have no place here.
The critical comments are important, but I think the problem that Grumblewartz sees with it is that it is no longer constructive because too often it devolves into an unending repetition of the exact same opinions over and over and over again in every single thread about GW, and even worse, in many unrelated threads as well. That is where it goes from being constructive criticism to whining. Unfortenately some people just can't seem to pull themselves away from 40k, even if they hate it. That is why they keep coming back to post negativity, which greatly diminishes the fun of Dakka for people with more positive attitudes.
Grumbles is also previously blaming the players for the faults in the game and wants a skewed narrative that hushes up criticism and only allows people that are positive about 40k to post. That's hardly a 'constructive' or an entirely honest attitude either, is it? But I guess that's ok?
If it comes up in different threads posted by different people discussing gw, and aspects of the game then maybe there is a reason for it? Smoke and fire, and all that. If it's an off topic rant, the mods will step in. A lot of Internet debates in everything are endless repeats of previous threads. Talking issue about a specific set of opinions being repeated over and over again is pointless - this is part and parcel of the internet. These threads are part of forum bingo And there will always be someone new who wishes to bring it up. Don't be surprised when the same points of view get repeated. You don't get an echo chamber in this I'm afraid.
Calling it 'whining' isn't helping matters either. There is a difference between constructive criticism, objective analysis and this 'whining'. And to be fair - that whining is going on on both sides. whining about whining is somewhat amusing.
As an example: There is nothing constructive about posting "Go play something game X instead" in a thread of someone asking about how to get started 40k. That is just rude and off topic.
It's relevant though. Maybe not phrased like that though lol.
Jeebus Cripes. I don't log on for a few days and this thread blows up. I couldn't even get through the 8 pages of whining, flaming and a few good posts. XD
The local game shoppe is closing after signing their deal with the devil, but living in oil country and buying a bunch of miniatures to try and turn for profit when world oil price has gone down (and the chuckleheads here blame the new provincial government... when they can't even point out Saudi Arabia on a map) is like attempting auto-erotic asphyxiation when you are impotent... a whole lot of effort for no gain.
However, it has lead me to the local group, which I am happy for, having only moved here 4 years ago. I also tried clearing them of whatever models they do have that are relevant to the ones I am working on (minus orks, they're beerhammer only).
I guess what I am trying to say is although it seems bleak, there must be enough fanboys and old geeks looking to relive their glory days out there to keep the hobby alive. (I say this as I constantly have talks with a friend on how to kill GW... doo de doo de doo.)
Oh well... when it all comes down to it, at least we had fun.
Gamgee wrote: People often mistake shrinking with dying.
Most things wilt before they die :/.
Your assuming a lot of things.
1. It's dying.
2. It's not sick.
3. It can't be fixed.
4. A donor can't be found (new owner)
5. It's not just a down tick because of factors outside of their control.
Gamgee wrote: People often mistake shrinking with dying.
Most things wilt before they die :/.
Your assuming a lot of things.
1. It's dying.
2. It's not sick.
3. It can't be fixed.
4. A donor can't be found (new owner)
5. It's not just a down tick because of factors outside of their control.
So many factors.
1.) This is a safe assumption when things are going downhill. Whether it dies or not is a different matter.
2.) Sickness is a path to death, if not treated even basic ailments can lead to death.
3.) This is not an assumption, something can be dying and be fixed. Dying does not equate to impossible to fix, it simply means it needs fixing before it does die D:
4.) See point three, you can be dying until you find a donor, after the transplant you won't be dying anymore potentially.
5.) It's a rather consistent tick, and whether or not it's in their control doesn't matter to a dying state. Some forms of dying can be in our control, others can not, that's just how reality functions. We can control a bleeding wound that is causing us to die, we can not control aging which is causing us to die, in either case we're dying, but the decline is visible, and it becomes rapid in the case of either becoming critical.
Basically, what I'm saying is that dying does not mean dead, it simply means if something isn't done it will lead to death.
Gamgee wrote: People often mistake shrinking with dying.
Most things wilt before they die :/.
Your assuming a lot of things.
1. It's dying.
2. It's not sick.
3. It can't be fixed.
4. A donor can't be found (new owner)
5. It's not just a down tick because of factors outside of their control.
So many factors.
1.) This is a safe assumption when things are going downhill. Whether it dies or not is a different matter.
2.) Sickness is a path to death, if not treated even basic ailments can lead to death.
3.) This is not an assumption, something can be dying and be fixed. Dying does not equate to impossible to fix, it simply means it needs fixing before it does die D:
4.) See point three, you can be dying until you find a donor, after the transplant you won't be dying anymore potentially.
5.) It's a rather consistent tick, and whether or not it's in their control doesn't matter to a dying state. Some forms of dying can be in our control, others can not, that's just how reality functions. We can control a bleeding wound that is causing us to die, we can not control aging which is causing us to die, in either case we're dying, but the decline is visible, and it becomes rapid in the case of either becoming critical.
Basically, what I'm saying is that dying does not mean dead, it simply means if something isn't done it will lead to death.
Exactly.
Like an airplane going down. It doesn't mean it will crash, only that if they don't pull up they will. I don't see GW pulling up any time soon. How long they have to reach the ground? No idea, but if they don't do something, they will go down.
Gamgee wrote: People often mistake shrinking with dying.
Most things wilt before they die :/.
Your assuming a lot of things.
1. It's dying.
2. It's not sick.
3. It can't be fixed.
4. A donor can't be found (new owner)
5. It's not just a down tick because of factors outside of their control.
So many factors.
1.) This is a safe assumption when things are going downhill. Whether it dies or not is a different matter.
2.) Sickness is a path to death, if not treated even basic ailments can lead to death.
3.) This is not an assumption, something can be dying and be fixed. Dying does not equate to impossible to fix, it simply means it needs fixing before it does die D:
4.) See point three, you can be dying until you find a donor, after the transplant you won't be dying anymore potentially.
5.) It's a rather consistent tick, and whether or not it's in their control doesn't matter to a dying state. Some forms of dying can be in our control, others can not, that's just how reality functions. We can control a bleeding wound that is causing us to die, we can not control aging which is causing us to die, in either case we're dying, but the decline is visible, and it becomes rapid in the case of either becoming critical.
Basically, what I'm saying is that dying does not mean dead, it simply means if something isn't done it will lead to death.
Exactly.
Like an airplane going down. It doesn't mean it will crash, only that if they don't pull up they will. I don't see GW pulling up any time soon. How long they have to reach the ground? No idea, but if they don't do something, they will go down.
I forgot who said it, but there was a quote that went along the lines of "We're all in a giant car that's headed towards a brick wall at a hundred miles per hour, and we're all arguing about where we'd like to sit..."
I know some people might say that we should vote with our wallet, but honestly, we all like the minis and want the game to be good, so we don't want to simply kill it by not buying. I guess things like the ITC are the actual voting, as it's a display of desire for something more, even on as small of a level as their power extends. At least we haven't hit the level of some games, where people state that the company shouldn't care about a game if people are leaving, since it went from highly profitable to losing money, instead of asking themselves why that shift happened, right?
Grumblewartz wrote: But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Okay, I'm going to have to stop you right there because you are drinking the Kool-Aid.
The founders of GW didn't make the game to come second to selling models, they were intrinsically linked together, neither one more important. The models were doofy and the game was fun. The real problem happened when their marketing department gained too much power in GW and started making more calls about models instead of the game, as one of the former founders lamented in an interview.
Grumblewartz wrote: But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Okay, I'm going to have to stop you right there because you are drinking the Kool-Aid.
The founders of GW didn't make the game to come second to selling models, they were intrinsically linked together, neither one more important. The models were doofy and the game was fun. The real problem happened when their marketing department gained too much power in GW and started making more calls about models instead of the game, as one of the former founders lamented in an interview.
My stupid theory is that it was easy to pirate rules, but hard to pirate models, so they tried to go with that in a weird alien logic type of way :/. I mean it makes sense in a business type of way if you don't consider reality as a thing.
Grumblewartz wrote: But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Okay, I'm going to have to stop you right there because you are drinking the Kool-Aid.
The founders of GW didn't make the game to come second to selling models, they were intrinsically linked together, neither one more important. The models were doofy and the game was fun. The real problem happened when their marketing department gained too much power in GW and started making more calls about models instead of the game, as one of the former founders lamented in an interview.
It isn't a theory. It is their printed, stated policy.
Grumblewartz wrote: But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Okay, I'm going to have to stop you right there because you are drinking the Kool-Aid.
The founders of GW didn't make the game to come second to selling models, they were intrinsically linked together, neither one more important. The models were doofy and the game was fun. The real problem happened when their marketing department gained too much power in GW and started making more calls about models instead of the game, as one of the former founders lamented in an interview.
It isn't a theory. It is their printed, stated policy.
It's their very recent policy, which many view as a cop out.
From 3rd - 5th, GW very much treated this game as a competitive wargame, in every sense of the term.
I might have missed it in 8 pages of this but has anyone actually reported their local community to be *growing*, or is the counter to 'it's dying in my area' simply 'it's not declining in mine'?
I ask this because in Australia it would seem that there is nowhere it is really growing. Our largest online retailer, who boast they are the largest FLGS in the southern hemisphere, post pictures of all their new stock arriving. A table of stencils here, two tables of some obscure game there, a literal pallet of PP or Infinity stuff now and then, and god dammed shipping containers of x wing. They used to show off the one table of GW stuff, but have stopped doing that over a year ago. They still haven't aknowledged the existence of AoS either and told the ACCC GWs products had fallen to 10-15% of their revenue. If you'd allow me to be a pessimist for a moment I'd suggest GW lost Australia as a market around the launch of 7th.
Grumblewartz wrote: But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Okay, I'm going to have to stop you right there because you are drinking the Kool-Aid. The founders of GW didn't make the game to come second to selling models, they were intrinsically linked together, neither one more important. The models were doofy and the game was fun. The real problem happened when their marketing department gained too much power in GW and started making more calls about models instead of the game, as one of the former founders lamented in an interview.
It isn't a theory. It is their printed, stated policy.
It's their very recent policy, which many view as a cop out.
From 3rd - 5th, GW very much treated this game as a competitive wargame, in every sense of the term.
I in 2nd edition the game was still kind of in that weird limbo between the two; they did, however, have and encourage tournaments since they had Rogue Trader Tournaments (RTTs) and the Grand Tournament. Then as you point out, 3rd shifted more to a homogenized game with solid rules, versus 2nd edition's still somewhat wacky and differing special rules per army. I understand 4th and 5th did similar, and then 6th decided to backtrack to similar to 2nd edition with lots of various things that some armies have and some don't, but they have kept the core rules from 3rd edition ever since.
I think the underlying issue is A) GW doesn't realize that good rules will sell models and people aren't likely to buy whatever junk they put out because "zomg kewl model" if it's gak on the table, and B) The rules are for a platoon-level game a la 3rd edition, but they keep tacking stuff on without actually improving the core rules to facilitate it better.
Grumblewartz wrote: But the army doesn't work, if a friend wants to buy a motor bike and you know it does not work or will break after 2-3k km, your not going to tell him it is a bad idea to buy it. Not everyone is ready for the GW xpiriance, where you can spend 700$ or more on an army and it is unplayable, a new player or even someone that played other systems won't be ready for something like that.
As the hobby itself is a social pastime rather than anything super competitive (at least by the rules), different styles of armies exist that suit different player types.
Ok dude.a Game that is a table top game witha clear winner and loser is a non competitive. What next some crap about painting being as important as playing the game?
Well, that was in fact the purpose of the game form the start. The founders of GW liked making models, so they created a game to sell it. The game came 2nd and that has been their stance ever since the start. It was a segment of the gaming community that tried to make it hyper-competitive. Your claim that there is a clear winner and loser isn't as black and white as you seem to suggest. The core rule book gives generic missions, but every single edition has encouraged players to make up their own missions and otherwise amend the game as they see fit.
Okay, I'm going to have to stop you right there because you are drinking the Kool-Aid.
The founders of GW didn't make the game to come second to selling models, they were intrinsically linked together, neither one more important. The models were doofy and the game was fun. The real problem happened when their marketing department gained too much power in GW and started making more calls about models instead of the game, as one of the former founders lamented in an interview.
It isn't a theory. It is their printed, stated policy.
Not sure where you got that idea. GW doesn't have "printed policies," so I can only assume you're basing that on the recent semi-annual ravings of the Chairman?
The mistake you've made is taking a leap from "mass battle games were created as a vehicle to sell more models" which is absolutely true, Rick Priestley says as much in the article that's been linked to "we actually don't give a gak about the game, we're only making it to give people a reason to buy the models and we have absolutely no investment in making it good" which is a commonly held theory but, for obvious reasons, isn't a stated aim.
Nobody can dispute the games are a good way to drive model sales, but the flaw in "modern" GW as opposed to the era where the likes of Rick and Alessio were still involved is they don't seem to realise that if you're not making a game that people are excited to play, they're not going to buy your models.
The two are intrinsically linked, in fact, they're symbiotic, and without one, the other withers and dies, which is what I believe we're seeing start to happen.
Psienesis wrote: The flip-side to that is you get a newbie dead-set on playing BA, you tell them "this is an uphill struggle, but, here you go" and, six months later, newbie is back with a raging hatred for GW because he spent $500 on a BA army and is getting wiped off the board by his friend's Tau gunline or Eldar list by Turn 3 in every game.
You can then tell them that either they try to convince their friend to change their list, they buy a different army (another $500+ outlay), or to make up some variant rules (not always an option, depending on locale and local meta). You are more likely to end up with someone who says "Feth this", ebays their toys, and jumps to another game entirely and will never touch another GW product in their lives.
Better to be upfront and say "this army sucks right now, it might one day get an update and be much better, but there's no guarantee that will ever happen". This, though, leads to the promulgation of Tau and Eldar lists (or whatever the current hotness is, this is not just a modern problem) which is basically rewarding GW for creating unbalanced units, because you're pushing people to buy them, and that's bad for the game overall.
I have never actually seen that happen. People who hate GW tend to be veterans (hell, I never seen someone dislike GW who wasn't a veteran of at least a few editions) who have been dissapointed with the direction or decisions GW has taken, not new players. In fact, most new players do plenty of research before jumping into something expansive like 40k, and already know about the state of the game.
Sure as hell not. But the 1850pts 40k list will also give you a lot more toys than the 300pts Infinity list will.
And it costs a hell of a lot more. Which was the bloody point. And it has every chance of being entirely invalidated with gw's next codex/edition update.
Apart from the infamous Squats and a few character models (still pissed about that) GW rarely invalidates its models.
True. Yet to me, those 10 miniatures are a far higher value because I can assemble them in whatever way I want as part of a slowly expanding and unique personalised miniature army. In 40k, every group of Space Marines is unique, but in Infinity, all Caledonians look exactly like all other Caledonians, maybe just differently painted.
Every single space marine is the same bloody homogenous and boring power armour, just with slightly different bling or nipples on the armour. They're not as 'unique' as you'd claim. And it gets worse when you consider the sheer hard-on gw has for them and their over saturation in both the lore and the table top, And it makes sense that every Caledonian looks Similar It's a pretty small culture from a tiny part of the universe. And even then I have mormaers, grey rifles, the 2nd and 6th scots, volunteers, galwegians, Caterans , wulvers, William Wallace and so so. Full blooded army of bile, anger, fire, passion, bitterness and good old fashioned spite. Kinda like Scotland really. It's far easier to claim that all grey hunters look the same. Same power armour, pelts and bolt guns and statline at the end of the day. And if you go 'but paint schemes/conversions!' Then what's stopping me giving every Caledonian his own unique tartan and converting them? There's 4000+ tartans out there and plenty opportunity to convert.
Every one of the Tactical Marines in my collection has a different combination of armour, head, weapons and accessoires. Not to mention that they all have different poses. Meanwhile, My Warmachine collection has 20 Winter Guard, but 15 of them look exactly the same as the first 5. There are only 5 unique Winter Guard in the entire world. That is boring. the same is true for Infinity. Every unit has a hard limit on the amount of variety in clothing, weapons and pose. It is the difference between multipose and monopose miniatures. And yes, you can claim that apart from your Caledonian unit, you also have different units, but those are different units. Apart from tactical Marines, I also have Scouts, Assault Marines, Veterans, Terminators, Captains, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, Rhinos, Predators, Drop pods, Dreadnoughts etc. And again, even the units I have two or more of, are unique.
And certainly you could convert an Infinity army, but is very hard to do and your modelling possibilities will never be as large as with a 40k army. How often do you see converted Infinity armies? If you play against a player who also plays Scottish Ariadna, chances are you are both going to have exactly the same models.
And if you think Grey Hunters all look the same, I would like to invite you to just type "Grey Hunters" into google image search. Does the fact that they all wear a different variant of power armour make them the same? How many of them are truly the same?
Fact is that if you are a modeller, and you care more about miniatures than about rules, you are likely going to have a lot more fun with 40k than with Infinity, even though I will admit Infinity is the better designed game.
As someone who values the miniatures far more than the actual game, this is extremely important to me. The greatest fun on 40k is not playing the game, it is building and collecting the army. Again, it is things like this that make Infinity and 40k really hard to compare.
Be careful about those absolutist statements about defining what 'the greatest fun is'. At least qualify it as 'in your opinion'. Because it's not a 'fact'. And let's be clear, in terms of contrast - valuing the miniatures - I value my infinity miniatures more than Almost anything I've done for 40k (some tau and kroot conversions aside - and I love those boys!) so there's that. Which goes back to cost of play. Which is a big deal to a lot of people.
Mountainbiking and sailing are rather normal hobbies afaik. I know a lot more people who mountainbike or sail than I know people playing miniature wargames, so what is the 'normal hobby' really?
They're hardly cheap though. Really Good mountain bikes can set you back a massive chunk of cash.
True. I was lucky to get a really good bargain, otherwise I would never have been able to get a good one. But you can have as much fun with a cheaper one. Many more people ride mountainbikes than play 40k.
(Also, with my boat, there is no need to be envious. It is over 50 years old and I bought it for about €500. The yearly harbour and maintenance costs are much more expansive than the boat itself! )
Like I said, the fact you can talk about this and it's maintenance so off handedly is nice, but not indicative of cheapness on the part of 40k or that these are 'normal hobbies'. Here- not at all!
Almost everyone I know can sail. It depends on where you live I guess.
. Having valid reasons of disliking gw and 40k is enough of a reason to Bring it up and point it out when the topic is brought up. If I dislike something, it's perfectly acceptable to discuss this and point this out. Or are we going down the road of censorship, echo chambers and stating that 'only posters who agree with me are allowed to comment'?
Remember the original comment I responded to was basically saying that while it was ok to dislike 40k and gw, it's apparently not ok to talk about it. Obviously of course, this being a sub forum dedicated to gw/40k, opinions relating to either have no place here.
It is okay to discuss negative aspects, it is okay to point it out when the topic is brought up, such as in this thread. But there is a difference between this and the same people bringing up the same things yet once more again in unrelated threads. That is just annoying and actually takes away value from otherwise perfectly fine arguments.
The critical comments are important, but I think the problem that Grumblewartz sees with it is that it is no longer constructive because too often it devolves into an unending repetition of the exact same opinions over and over and over again in every single thread about GW, and even worse, in many unrelated threads as well. That is where it goes from being constructive criticism to whining. Unfortenately some people just can't seem to pull themselves away from 40k, even if they hate it. That is why they keep coming back to post negativity, which greatly diminishes the fun of Dakka for people with more positive attitudes.
Grumbles is also previously blaming the players for the faults in the game and wants a skewed narrative that hushes up criticism and only allows people that are positive about 40k to post. That's hardly a 'constructive' or an entirely honest attitude either, is it? But I guess that's ok?
If it comes up in different threads posted by different people discussing gw, and aspects of the game then maybe there is a reason for it? Smoke and fire, and all that. If it's an off topic rant, the mods will step in. A lot of Internet debates in everything are endless repeats of previous threads. Talking issue about a specific set of opinions being repeated over and over again is pointless - this is part and parcel of the internet. These threads are part of forum bingo And there will always be someone new who wishes to bring it up. Don't be surprised when the same points of view get repeated. You don't get an echo chamber in this I'm afraid.
Calling it 'whining' isn't helping matters either. There is a difference between constructive criticism, objective analysis and this 'whining'. And to be fair - that whining is going on on both sides. whining about whining is somewhat amusing.
It is telling though. Clearly there are a lot of people annoyed with the constant repetition of the exact same negative opinions by usually the exact same people in both related and unrelated threads over and over again.
As an example: There is nothing constructive about posting "Go play something game X instead" in a thread of someone asking about how to get started 40k. That is just rude and off topic.
It's relevant though. Maybe not phrased like that though lol.
How is it relevant? This person is asking for advice about how to get started with 40k, not about what game he should play instead of 40k, or what good alternatives to 40k are.
I love GW's IP. I love the narrative potential of 40k.
I don't want to keep up with the radical meta shifts of competitive play. It's not that I can't, but I found spending $500+ every six - nine months less than satisfying. It just wasn't worth it.
Now, with Forgeworld bringing back specialist games, I might spend some of my hobby dime there. GW needs smaller games that hook into the larger games in some way. Execution Force seems like a great step in that direction.
IF I happen to be at the LGS and I see anyone near the GW section, I amble over and say howdy.
THEN I begin to ask them what brought them to that section. If it is someone already involved with the game I make small talk for a bit and then move on.
If it someone new or thinking about getting into the game; or even thinking about buying some GW for someone as a gift, I swing into action.
I say something along the lines of;
"That was once a really well supported game, but it is slowly dying off. The manufacturer even ended one of their games about a year ago and dropped support."
or
"Do you like Star Wars? Because there are FOUR fantastic games out for it right now."
or
"Those prices are a bit gougy and GW has been known to kill off entire armies before. Have you looked at XXXXXX? They are really well supported and have a robust tournament system so you can play for fun and glory against your friends!"
Practically anything that falls out of my mouth makes GW look like the gaks that they are.
IF I happen to be at the LGS and I see anyone near the GW section, I amble over and say howdy.
THEN I begin to ask them what brought them to that section. If it is someone already involved with the game I make small talk for a bit and then move on.
If it someone new or thinking about getting into the game; or even thinking about buying some GW for someone as a gift, I swing into action.
I say something along the lines of;
"That was once a really well supported game, but it is slowly dying off. The manufacturer even ended one of their games about a year ago and dropped support."
or
"Do you like Star Wars? Because there are FOUR fantastic games out for it right now."
or
"Those prices are a bit gougy and GW has been known to kill off entire armies before. Have you looked at XXXXXX? They are really well supported and have a robust tournament system so you can play for fun and glory against your friends!"
Practically anything that falls out of my mouth makes GW look like the gaks that they are.
Confession time. I do the same thing. I encourage them with other games so the FLGS gets monies. I just steer them away from GW.
Wouldn't call this being a barrier. Someone who feels cheated by gw policy may never play a table top ever again. I have yet to find some who left warmahordes or ifinity and didn't start playing something else. I have never seen someone quit xwing.
I have seen a ton of people pick up wfb or w40k, and never come back.
Apart from the infamous Squats and a few character models (still pissed about that) GW rarely invalidates its models.
What about BA assault marines and their razorbacks, people who played BA ended up without legal armies when GW made the last new codex.
Or when demons were removed from csm dex and there were no ally rules in 5th.
Makumba wrote: Wouldn't call this being a barrier. Someone who feels cheated by gw policy may never play a table top ever again. I have yet to find some who left warmahordes or ifinity and didn't start playing something else. I have never seen someone quit xwing.
I have seen a ton of people pick up wfb or w40k, and never come back.
Apart from the infamous Squats and a few character models (still pissed about that) GW rarely invalidates its models.
What about BA assault marines and their razorbacks, people who played BA ended up without legal armies when GW made the last new codex.
Or when demons were removed from csm dex and there were no ally rules in 5th.
Or just near-useless like my Penitent Engine and Repentia heavy army. They actually nerfed those two units and they were far from stellar to begin with.
Sure as hell not. But the 1850pts 40k list will also give you a lot more toys than the 300pts Infinity list will.
And it costs a hell of a lot more. Which was the bloody point. And it has every chance of being entirely invalidated with gw's next codex/edition update.
Apart from the infamous Squats and a few character models (still pissed about that) GW rarely invalidates its models.
Not what I was referring to bud, and you know it. What I was referring to was get invalidating whole builds. Like, for example how third edition was very heavily mechanised (rhino rush being the affectionate nickname) only for this whole play style to be invalidated in fourth, with rhinos and about ninety percent of transports being turned into death traps. Anyone who build their army a certain way all of a sudden found it necessary to invest in a whole different line to remain effective. The same shifts wwere forces on the game in the transition to fifth (with a push on armour), sixth (flyers, super heavies, etc) and seventh.
You also saw in codex shifts how things were randomly made different and changed around, and not necessarily to make things better. And a lot of people got screwed over this way. Builds have been made invalid - a mate of mine back home had three 40k armies invalidated by this.
Then there is other examples. Nidzilla was a tyranid thing in fourth ed for example, and the old carnifex was a pretty mean beatstick. New codex is released and the carnifex was essentially castrated and forcibly invalidated as a legitimate choice with the 'big new' being the cynically forced in go-to big bad bug. All those people who liked and bought into nidzilla saw their whole damned armies effectively castrated with a cynical cash grab forced on them. A lot chose to walk instead.
Not only is the initial investment pricy, but long term health is questionable as well.
Every one of the Tactical Marines in my collection has a different combination of armour, head, weapons and accessoires. Not to mention that they all have different poses.
Like I said, same homogenous and boring power armour, bolters, just with different bling. They're not as unique as you claim - there is only so far 'snarling helmet less face' can be pushed.
And yes, you can claim that apart from your Caledonian unit, you also have different units, but those are different units. Apart from tactical Marines, I also have Scouts, Assault Marines, Veterans, Terminators, Captains, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, Rhinos, Predators, Drop pods, Dreadnoughts etc. And again, even the units I have two or more of, are unique.
Read what I wrote. I never said 'apart from' - all the things I listed - wulvers, galwegians, 2nd/6th Scots, Caterans, volunteers, mormaers, grey rifles etc are all Caledonians. And they all look different if you're talking about a whole 'codex-equivelant', then I can play that game too.
And if you think Grey Hunters all look the same, I would like to invite you to just type "Grey Hunters" into google image search. Does the fact that they all wear a different variant of power armour make them the same? How many of them are truly the same?
Fact is that if you are a modeller, and you care more about miniatures than about rules, you are likely going to have a lot more fun with 40k than with Infinity, even though I will admit Infinity is the better designed game.
Like I said - boring, homogenous power armour with slightly different bling. At the end of the day, they're all the same bloody thing to me.
And let's be honest here - I know people that care more about the miniatures than the rules, and thry go absolutely bananas over the quality and sheer beauty of the infinity sculpts, and look at stuff from 40k with its squat, out of proportion heroic look and go 'meh'. You're doing that thing with ansolutist statements again.
If you play against a player who also plays Scottish Ariadna, chances are you are both going to have exactly the same models.
I've also seen plenty identical, or near-identical space marine and tau armies and whatever else going at it. Same models. And so on. Amusingly, I've seen some stunningly converted wmh armies amid the grey legions too.
It is okay to discuss negative aspects, it is okay to point it out when the topic is brought up, such as in this thread. But there is a difference between this and the same people bringing up the same things yet once more again in unrelated threads. That is just annoying and actually takes away value from otherwise perfectly fine arguments.
In a thread titled 'is 40k dying' points raised regarding the reasonings behind why this is the case - ie reasons why people are leaving the game - price, shoddy balance etc are not 'unrelated'.
You don't see them pop up in 'painting and modelling'. But general discussion? Yeah, fine...
It is telling though. Clearly there are a lot of people annoyed with the constant repetition of the exact same negative opinions by usually the exact same people in both related and unrelated threads over and over again.
And those same people also seem to want to sweep all criticism away and say 'gw is fine. GTFO you haterz'
How is it relevant? This person is asking for advice about how to get started with 40k, not about what game he should play instead of 40k, or what good alternatives to 40k are.
'Because I think starting 40k is a bad idea? I'll explain why. Here are the hurdles you will face. Wargaming is fun, but before you invest, look at what else is there too,'
IF I happen to be at the LGS and I see anyone near the GW section, I amble over and say howdy.
THEN I begin to ask them what brought them to that section. If it is someone already involved with the game I make small talk for a bit and then move on.
If it someone new or thinking about getting into the game; or even thinking about buying some GW for someone as a gift, I swing into action.
I say something along the lines of;
"That was once a really well supported game, but it is slowly dying off. The manufacturer even ended one of their games about a year ago and dropped support."
or
"Do you like Star Wars? Because there are FOUR fantastic games out for it right now."
or
"Those prices are a bit gougy and GW has been known to kill off entire armies before. Have you looked at XXXXXX? They are really well supported and have a robust tournament system so you can play for fun and glory against your friends!"
Practically anything that falls out of my mouth makes GW look like the gaks that they are.
Confession time. I do the same thing. I encourage them with other games so the FLGS gets monies. I just steer them away from GW.
If someone came up to me and started pestering me like that I would give them the stink eye. If I want your opinion I'll ask. I researched extensively before jumping into this hobby and I did ask the FLGS owner a ton of questions before diving in (mostly paint related).
IF I happen to be at the LGS and I see anyone near the GW section, I amble over and say howdy.
THEN I begin to ask them what brought them to that section. If it is someone already involved with the game I make small talk for a bit and then move on.
If it someone new or thinking about getting into the game; or even thinking about buying some GW for someone as a gift, I swing into action.
I say something along the lines of;
"That was once a really well supported game, but it is slowly dying off. The manufacturer even ended one of their games about a year ago and dropped support."
or
"Do you like Star Wars? Because there are FOUR fantastic games out for it right now."
or
"Those prices are a bit gougy and GW has been known to kill off entire armies before. Have you looked at XXXXXX? They are really well supported and have a robust tournament system so you can play for fun and glory against your friends!"
Practically anything that falls out of my mouth makes GW look like the gaks that they are.
Have you no sense of decency? Or something better to do with your time? When people need advice they will ask for it. What you do is just rude.
There is plenty of reason to be critical or negative about GW. But going from constructrive criticism and providing honest advice when asked to harrasing others about it crosses too many lines. I'd advise you to do some critical self-evaluation.
Now hold on guys, while I don't encourage what Jamesk1973 does directly, it doesn't sound like he's just running up to people and harassing them with his opinions. He does mention that he makes contact first with a greeting and then if the conversation continues he provides his opinion, as opposed to just walking up to them and stating that opinion.
I mean if you saw a new person at your LGS looking at a game you play, would you consider it particularly wrong to go up to them, introduce yourself, and then chat about the game if the conversation progresses?
IF I happen to be at the LGS and I see anyone near the GW section, I amble over and say howdy.
THEN I begin to ask them what brought them to that section. If it is someone already involved with the game I make small talk for a bit and then move on.
If it someone new or thinking about getting into the game; or even thinking about buying some GW for someone as a gift, I swing into action.
I say something along the lines of;
"That was once a really well supported game, but it is slowly dying off. The manufacturer even ended one of their games about a year ago and dropped support."
or
"Do you like Star Wars? Because there are FOUR fantastic games out for it right now."
or
"Those prices are a bit gougy and GW has been known to kill off entire armies before. Have you looked at XXXXXX? They are really well supported and have a robust tournament system so you can play for fun and glory against your friends!"
Practically anything that falls out of my mouth makes GW look like the gaks that they are.
Have you no sense of decency? Or something better to do with your time? When people need advice they will ask for it. What you do is just rude.
There is plenty of reason to be critical or negative about GW. But going from constructrive criticism and providing honest advice when asked to harrasing others about it crosses too many lines. I'd advise you to do some critical self-evaluation.
And I'd advise you not to be so judgmental. It's called "conversation." I don't just run up to them like a used car salesmen. And I don't consider telling people the cons of something a bad thing.
Technically the Squats figures are still completely valid, but you would have to choose a different codex. Squats players generally use Imperial Guard.
The Squats are popular enough for I think two non-GW ranges of Space Dwarves to be in production; Ollies' Armies' Scrunts, and the Hasslefree Grymn.
Have you no sense of decency? Or something better to do with your time? When people need advice they will ask for it. What you do is just rude.
There is plenty of reason to be critical or negative about GW. But going from constructrive criticism and providing honest advice when asked to harrasing others about it crosses too many lines. I'd advise you to do some critical self-evaluation.
Look at you Iron_Captain, with your blinkered view and jumping to conclusions - making judgements of others... You did a bad thing Captainy, a bad thing - go back under your rock.
As it happens, I help run the club and we guide new players towards games that they might enjoy, so of course this comes up in conversation. What they get is honest advice based on a range of wargames.
IF I happen to be at the LGS and I see anyone near the GW section, I amble over and say howdy.
THEN I begin to ask them what brought them to that section. If it is someone already involved with the game I make small talk for a bit and then move on.
If it someone new or thinking about getting into the game; or even thinking about buying some GW for someone as a gift, I swing into action.
I say something along the lines of;
"That was once a really well supported game, but it is slowly dying off. The manufacturer even ended one of their games about a year ago and dropped support."
or
"Do you like Star Wars? Because there are FOUR fantastic games out for it right now."
or
"Those prices are a bit gougy and GW has been known to kill off entire armies before. Have you looked at XXXXXX? They are really well supported and have a robust tournament system so you can play for fun and glory against your friends!"
Practically anything that falls out of my mouth makes GW look like the gaks that they are.
Have you no sense of decency? Or something better to do with your time? When people need advice they will ask for it. What you do is just rude.
There is plenty of reason to be critical or negative about GW. But going from constructrive criticism and providing honest advice when asked to harrasing others about it crosses too many lines. I'd advise you to do some critical self-evaluation.
And I'd advise you not to be so judgmental. It's called "conversation." I don't just run up to them like a used car salesmen. And I don't consider telling people the cons of something a bad thing.
From Jamesk1973's description, it is even worse than car salesmen... Advice should only be given when asked for, otherwise it is incredibly rude. And trying to steer people away from a game that you don't like they got interested in to a game that you do like, based on your personal and subjective preferences, is even worse. People don't need you to tell them the cons of something. And it is ironic that you advise someone else to not be so judgemental.
Have you no sense of decency? Or something better to do with your time? When people need advice they will ask for it. What you do is just rude.
There is plenty of reason to be critical or negative about GW. But going from constructrive criticism and providing honest advice when asked to harrasing others about it crosses too many lines. I'd advise you to do some critical self-evaluation.
Look at you Iron_Captain, with your blinkered view and jumping to conclusions - making judgements of others... You did a bad thing Captainy, a bad thing - go back under your rock.
As it happens, I help run the club and we guide new players towards games that they might enjoy, so of course this comes up in conversation. What they get is honest advice based on a range of wargames.
Oh pots and kettles. I will confess to not knowing you personally, and therefore not being able to give a proper judgement. I am just going of your comments in this thread. If you just help people interested in a wargame pick one that is right for them, that is a good, not a bad thing. But if you, like jamesk1973 actively try to steer interested people away from a game based on your personal dislike for a game, that is bad. Again, there is a difference between helping people asking for advice on wargames and trying to pressurise people interested in 40k into getting into a different game instead. And if you can't handle honest criticism of your behaviour, I kindly suggest you be the one to go back under a rock.
Out of interest to you guys who advise people against 40k. (Or in your words give the pros and cons)
Do you also give the pros and cons of the other games you suggest.
For instance for myself every game I have generally tried that has not been 40k I have plowed £30-£150 and the player base has died within a short period and moved onto shiny game x.
For Xwing specifically do you tell them about the high cost/ duplicate model potential for high end tournament play. i.e ships (that I found quite pricy per model, but fine considering small numbers) don't come with every card they can use, so you may have to buy another model you don't necessarily want for the card you do want.
DavidTJ wrote: Out of interest to you guys who advise people against 40k. (Or in your words give the pros and cons)
Do you also give the pros and cons of the other games you suggest.
For instance for myself every game I have generally tried that has not been 40k I have plowed £30-£150 and the player base has died within a short period and moved onto shiny game x.
For Xwing specifically do you tell them about the high cost/ duplicate model potential for high end tournament play. i.e ships (that I found quite pricy per model, but fine considering small numbers) don't come with every card they can use, so you may have to buy another model you don't necessarily want for the card you do want.
In a word, Yes. - If you give rubbish advice, people stop coming to the club.
Iron_Captain wrote: Advice should only be given when asked for, otherwise it is incredibly rude.
That's all well and good, until you start applying it to people who don't ask for advice because they don't know what to ask. If you've never played a wargame before, then you probably won't know that not all units are equal, that some armies are more expensive than others, that some armies are better than others, that GW couldn't give a crap about the rules etc. And, the guy running the store sure as hell isn't going to tell him.
Tinkrr has it right. There is nothing wrong wh approaching someone with a greeting and opening up some casual conversation, judging by their response weither or not you should have further, honest communication about the hobby. It's not like they cannot form their own opinion and are easily swayed by some angry nerd (chillax, mutha-gakkers, just wantonly strokin with a giant gakking brush).
In fact, if someone approached me in this manner, I would welcome the debate, but ultimately it would end at "I just want a sexy elf boat party."
In other words, we mon-keighs will always just do whatever the gak we want.
DavidTJ wrote: Out of interest to you guys who advise people against 40k. (Or in your words give the pros and cons)
Do you also give the pros and cons of the other games you suggest.
For instance for myself every game I have generally tried that has not been 40k I have plowed £30-£150 and the player base has died within a short period and moved onto shiny game x.
For Xwing specifically do you tell them about the high cost/ duplicate model potential for high end tournament play. i.e ships (that I found quite pricy per model, but fine considering small numbers) don't come with every card they can use, so you may have to buy another model you don't necessarily want for the card you do want.
Absolutely.
My favorite game at the moment, WMH, isn't for everyone. It has a very competitive meta (which I'm trying to change) has a very steep learning curve and requires more dedication and knowledge about the game than some others. It's very tense and tactics heavy, so if you want a chill game to toss dice around, it's not for you.
Advice should only be given when asked for, otherwise it is incredibly rude.
You see someone who is going off a cliff, as he is not asking if there is a cliff in front of him, you do not inform him it, as it would be rude to do.
Advice should only be given when asked for, otherwise it is incredibly rude.
You see someone who is going off a cliff, as he is not asking if there is a cliff in front of him, you do not inform him it, as it would be rude to do.
Do you shout out to everyone who is walking to a cliff edge? Normally, when I see people walking towards the edge, I don't assume they are going to walk over it. 99.9% of the times, people have noticed the edge just fine and are just approaching the edge to look down, take a nice picture or whatever.
Personally, I would prefer it to return to the kind of game it was a few years ago, that I enjoyed playing. However if it does not, I have no interest in helping it to prosper in a format that doesn't appeal to me.
It's difficult to know what will happen. I think there is a good chance that GW will AoSify 40K. This actually would suit me quite well.
Well, I think a lot of people would rather it nosedived to the point where GW sells their IP to someone else - someone who might actually give a damn about the game and sell models and rules for reasonable prices.
Well, I think a lot of people would rather it nosedived to the point where GW sells their IP to someone else - someone who might actually give a damn about the game and sell models and rules for reasonable prices.
It is however far more likely the IP will just get picked up by Sega or some other company with zero interest in miniatures. Miniatures are a niche market, 40k has far more potential as a videogame franchise. GW going down isn't going to be good for 40k.
Personally, I would prefer it to return to the kind of game it was a few years ago, that I enjoyed playing. However if it does not, I have no interest in helping it to prosper in a format that doesn't appeal to me.
It's difficult to know what will happen. I think there is a good chance that GW will AoSify 40K. This actually would suit me quite well.
AoSification of 40k would be its death.
AoS is already dead. No suitable missions and no proper army building is the death of a game like this.
Well, I think a lot of people would rather it nosedived to the point where GW sells their IP to someone else - someone who might actually give a damn about the game and sell models and rules for reasonable prices.
It is however far more likely the IP will just get picked up by Sega or some other company with zero interest in miniatures. Miniatures are a niche market, 40k has far more potential as a videogame franchise. GW going down isn't going to be good for 40k.
I'll be honest, with the advent of practical consumer virtual reality next year with dexterous hand contollers, I foresee a number of tabletop war games moving onto a digital board. Heck, while it may be scolded, there are already 40k and Xwing in Tabletop Simulator.
I don't want 40k to die, and would be very happy if they can get their head on straight. But we are entering a market environment that may make it that much harder unless they head it off.
Well, I think a lot of people would rather it nosedived to the point where GW sells their IP to someone else - someone who might actually give a damn about the game and sell models and rules for reasonable prices.
It is however far more likely the IP will just get picked up by Sega or some other company with zero interest in miniatures. Miniatures are a niche market, 40k has far more potential as a videogame franchise. GW going down isn't going to be good for 40k.
I'll be honest, with the advent of practical consumer virtual reality next year with dexterous hand contollers, I foresee a number of tabletop war games moving onto a digital board. Heck, while it may be scolded, there are already 40k and Xwing in Tabletop Simulator.
I don't want 40k to die, and would be very happy if they can get their head on straight. But we are entering a market environment that may make it that much harder unless they head it off.
While I think you're right, many players will be more attracted to the use of VR headsets and dexterous hand controllers (adult entertainment will never be the same again). Many people (myself included) enjoy physically painting and kit-bashing. As much as I enjoy computer games, physical models will still come first for myself and many others. Sitting alone in my room / across from another goggled friend and moving imaginary units would be entertaining as a fad, but I don't feel as attached as I do to models I've spent time and care over. I may be a minority though, I'm the type of person who prefers to build items rather than just buying them from Argos. Wood/metal/plastic working, home DIY - real hands on stuff if what I do to relax.
Well, I think a lot of people would rather it nosedived to the point where GW sells their IP to someone else - someone who might actually give a damn about the game and sell models and rules for reasonable prices.
It is however far more likely the IP will just get picked up by Sega or some other company with zero interest in miniatures. Miniatures are a niche market, 40k has far more potential as a videogame franchise. GW going down isn't going to be good for 40k.
I'll be honest, with the advent of practical consumer virtual reality next year with dexterous hand contollers, I foresee a number of tabletop war games moving onto a digital board. Heck, while it may be scolded, there are already 40k and Xwing in Tabletop Simulator.
I don't want 40k to die, and would be very happy if they can get their head on straight. But we are entering a market environment that may make it that much harder unless they head it off.
While I think you're right, many players will be more attracted to the use of VR headsets and dexterous hand controllers (adult entertainment will never be the same again). Many people (myself included) enjoy physically painting and kit-bashing. As much as I enjoy computer games, physical models will still come first for myself and many others. Sitting alone in my room / across from another goggled friend and moving imaginary units would be entertaining as a fad, but I don't feel as attached as I do to models I've spent time and care over. I may be a minority though, I'm the type of person who prefers to build items rather than just buying them from Argos. Wood/metal/plastic working, home DIY - real hands on stuff if what I do to relax.
I don't see it as completely separate. 3d scanners are dropping in price, and a number of people have already presented software specifically for getting your custom physical model onto the computer for tabletop games. A number of people may prefer it as it gives their models the biggest stage compared to a single FLGS or pictures.
Reminds me of the simulation in Angel Exterminatus (think it was this book?) where the Iron Warriors are playing a game simulating the assault on the Imperial Palace
If GW was really forwards thinking, I could see them release a first party VR tabletop with some inbuilt rules.
They would then most likely have a micro transaction for either each model or army (probably a mix of the two).
I could also see trial models that are unpainted that everything else gets preferred enemy against.
It could be a very profitable model if done right similar to Warframe or League of Legends and raise more interest in the existing model lines and physical game.
I steer people away from 40k when I can and try to show them x wing, Warmahordes or Infinity.
Yes I do give the pros and cons of each to try and help someone find the game that is right for them.
It doesn't come up much though as I wouldn't do it in a GW store and people don't look at GW products at my FLGSs.
Also, hell yes I want 40k to die while I still have fond memories and the fluff is still usable for RPGs. But really I'd have wanted it to die around the end of 5th ed for that. I like the idea of running a Deathwatch game, but don't want to have to deal with centurions, nor crap like murderfang and his murderclaws.
I want 40k to go out with some dignity, unlike my beloved Fantasy and it's 'accident' with Sigmar.
I hope it dies more and more each day now.
Had a large game with some mates earlier (32k total).
It got really boring really fast.
At the same time, I don't want the people to lose their jobs. But GW design team needs to stop collaborating, because they clearly aren't doing a good job.
War Kitten wrote: The hate train is why I can only rarely get 40k games in anymore. 3 armies into 40k....
I feel you, man. Love the fluff, love the artwork, love the models, can tolerate the prices and wish Matthew Ward, my spiritual liege, was back on crunch team.
Frozocrone wrote: I hope it dies more and more each day now.
Had a large game with some mates earlier (32k total).
It got really boring really fast.
At the same time, I don't want the people to lose their jobs. But GW design team needs to stop collaborating, because they clearly aren't doing a good job.
I think the problem here is assuming that the design team is anything resembling what it used to be in earlier editions, as opposed to a product specialist team that's more responsible for simple document assembly & trademark proofing. I think at this point in time, the idea that the "design team" is doing any actual game design, as opposed to simply presenting a product catalog with some "usage suggestions" (read: rules), would be in error
Byte wrote: 40K is very Healthy in my area. But, its not king.
Can you elaborate on healthy? Not to sound rude, I just want to know what that means to you, since I come from other games where healthy means something completely different than it does in 40k, and I'd like to get a reference point for this game.
Is 40k dead? I think they are still selling models. I'd say it's dead in the heart of many die hard players thanks to gw alienating them as they transition into a "model" company. That's much worse to me. Other company's may have less players, but they seem happier with their games and rules set.
There are as many people in our local group as there used to be in 5-th. Or maybe even more. Mostly new. Almost everyone who played 5-th left with the arrival of 6. That allowed me to purchase orkses for cheapo, btw.
But now, there's always enough people to fill at least 3 tables. Sometimes, we've got 5.
Ours is doing fine as well and I see just as much people as ever there. And that's in the many years I glanced over at the 40k players before becoming one. A few of the oldest are getting out of it for various reasons, but then "young" players like myself fill the gap.
I personnally do not like the GW commercial policy and that's why I never buy their books and modelism stuff. Playing IG, I always buy my vehicule second-hand. The only money I give to GW is for my infantry, which I need new in the box for my conversion imperatives.
That being said, I recently joined a very nice LGS in Paris, where the meta is closely administrated to eliminate the power creep between official codexes and where you can play your own rules if they are validated. I spoke with the store manager, who is not exactly in a unpopulated region with low income and aged population. It's Paris, there are plenty of players, more than anywhere in France and he said 40k was not enough to make his store live on.
I know the words of one isolated store manager are not enough to analyse a trend but regarding what I read on Dakka everyday + the situation of the store exposed above, I feel like he's going through the same things; for the 6th he sold almost 70 rulebooks but it fell to 25 when the 7th launched. Now, his 40k range is limitated to the most popular units and occupy a very small space among Infinity, Magic and Warmachine. He told me he was in contact with other LGS in Paris and they all see the same things: 40k is slowly and surely being replaced by Warmachine, principally, and other cheaper and simplier games. And the trend is getting faster since the release of AoS and latest 40kOP stuff. AoS is not working well in his area, and he sold like 5 boxes since the beginning and not that much WFB minis. He did not even spoke about the AoS books; there are two or three in his shelf, they have not moved since I arrived in Paris in september. Plus, he told me he was fed up with GW being too harsh with LGS and it convinced him to switch to other brands.
Once again, this is a complete micro-analysis, nothing to draw macro conclusions about. But there is certainly something wrong with GW and if they keep thinking they are the best while their competitors get stronger in the shadow, they'll soon experience something very bad for them.
For the big Christmas 40k tournament, we barely gathered 12 players. Last night, there were Magic / Malifaux tournaments, and almost 40 people were playing in the store. I think it's clear enough.
Declining maybe. However, ME of all people went to the Warhammer shop that opened up about 45 minutes away... and walked out with a box of Khorne Berserkers to start a Khorne Daemonkin army for their escalation league starting in January.
That speaks volumes I think, given how vehement I am against GW's price gouging and gakky rules. Don't get me wrong, I still dislike the fact they charge more than everybody else for virtually everything, and the fact that they don't care about making a game, but I feel if you play with the right people (and I hope the people at the Warhammer store are the right people) then 40k can be enjoyable. It just requires the same upfront efforts that many historical games require, when it shouldn't.
but I feel if you play with the right people (and I hope the people at the Warhammer store are the right people) then 40k can be enjoyable. It just requires the same upfront efforts that many historical games require, when it shouldn't.
Totally agree with this. The problem is that the mere fact people have to bear the cost of tweaking the game can divert some and make the stop playing.
Not all the LGS have noblebright players who can invest time in adapt the rules and make them really enjoyable !
but I feel if you play with the right people (and I hope the people at the Warhammer store are the right people) then 40k can be enjoyable. It just requires the same upfront efforts that many historical games require, when it shouldn't.
Totally agree with this. The problem is that the mere fact people have to bear the cost of tweaking the game can divert some and make the stop playing.
Not all the LGS have noblebright players who can invest time in adapt the rules and make them really enjoyable !
It's only on that, it's the fact that LGS culture in general is typically the opposite of "club culture" where you don't mind having "Club Rules" that outline house rules, and everybody at least knows everybody else so they aren't going to bring max cheese just to win a game, because they want an enjoyable evening with enjoyable people. LGS/PUG culture, on the other hand, encourages the notion of turning up with what you want, playing a game, and then leaving and maybe not seeing/playing that person again for weeks, if sometimes ever again. It encourages playing the game to win the game and go home feeling that you "won" rather than that you had a fun time with your buddies. It's hard to explain, really, but it's what I've seen and not just in tabletop games. Now, you can have both in the right circumstances, but 40k can IMHO only work with "club culture" and tends to hit a wall with "LGS culture" because LGS culture wants to have balanced rules so you are roughly evenly matched against random opponents.
There's another game shop, also about 45 minutes away, that has a strong 40k following, but I'm pretty certain they are the "LGS Culture" and "competitive" minded 40k shop, so I am reluctant to play there but I feel I owe it to myself to check it out and see, as maybe there are some people who don't want that type of play that I can get with and have leagues and campaigns and actual fun, narrative games versus "Here's my 1850 tournament army I'm taking to <big name con> next month, gg" that tend to be no fun and touch nothing of the rich background of 40k.
It's only on that, it's the fact that LGS culture in general is typically the opposite of "club culture" where you don't mind having "Club Rules" that outline house rules, and everybody at least knows everybody else so they aren't going to bring max cheese just to win a game, because they want an enjoyable evening with enjoyable people. LGS/PUG culture, on the other hand, encourages the notion of turning up with what you want, playing a game, and then leaving and maybe not seeing/playing that person again for weeks, if sometimes ever again. It encourages playing the game to win the game and go home feeling that you "won" rather than that you had a fun time with your buddies. It's hard to explain, really, but it's what I've seen and not just in tabletop games. Now, you can have both in the right circumstances, but 40k can IMHO only work with "club culture" and tends to hit a wall with "LGS culture" because LGS culture wants to have balanced rules so you are roughly evenly matched against random opponents.
There's another game shop, also about 45 minutes away, that has a strong 40k following, but I'm pretty certain they are the "LGS Culture" and "competitive" minded 40k shop, so I am reluctant to play there but I feel I owe it to myself to check it out and see, as maybe there are some people who don't want that type of play that I can get with and have leagues and campaigns and actual fun, narrative games versus "Here's my 1850 tournament army I'm taking to <big name con> next month, gg" that tend to be no fun and touch nothing of the rich background of 40k.
There are parts of the world where the rent is too high for clubs to exist, and people have the option to play at stores or not at all, and the idea that somehow wining is not fun, is so laughable. I have not seen a country or a city that won a worlds or a championship, and was sad about it. Winning is automaticly fun, losing can be made not un fun.
GW is an aimless, wandering, tantrum-throwing, bully of a company.
I feel I am best served by steering anyone not trapped in their gravity well from entering it.
Then I must conclude you have a weird sense of decency. Harassing people with your personal emotions and grudges is rude. You may not view it as harrasment, but if you approached me in such a manner, I would. As would many other people, I am sure.
I also disagree with your view of GW. They are not aimless or bullying, but GW is far larger than other miniatures company, and has lost contact with its roots as a miniatures company and its fans. GW only aims at pleasing its shareholders, making profit and protecting its copyright, like any big company does. This is the root of the problem, not that the GW managers are mean-spirited dimwits who don't know what they're doing.
GW did and does bully FLGS, and they do it a lot. And the fact that they think AoS is a good idea, does prove that they are aimless. I mean the very idea that a company that got so big because people wanted to play their games, suddenly does a 180 and decides it was not the games, but the models that got them all the money speaks volume about their level of understanding of anything.
After reading an article sort of outlining the history of Warhammer as a game, I don't think that it's the company's fault, entirely. The issue is that the Sales Division took charge of GW, and they only care about making a quick buck. Something Priestly said: "One thing Bryan [Ansel, former head of GW,] said was that if the sales people got to be in charge of the studio, it would destroy the studio, and that’s exactly what happened.” I think that the moment that Kirby took over was the moment GW started heading downhill.
dusara217 wrote: After reading an article sort of outlining the history of Warhammer as a game, I don't think that it's the company's fault, entirely. The issue is that the Sales Division took charge of GW, and they only care about making a quick buck. Something Priestly said: "One thing Bryan [Ansel, former head of GW,] said was that if the sales people got to be in charge of the studio, it would destroy the studio, and that’s exactly what happened.” I think that the moment that Kirby took over was the moment GW started heading downhill.
I don't know if the Sales Team have that much input into 40K
The main person that seems to be driving 40K is Jervis, judging by his past standard bearer articles. He wrote about doing away with the FOC and that balance is a bad thing years ago.
Iron_Captain wrote: GW only aims at pleasing its shareholders, making profit and protecting its copyright, like any big company does.
Except GW sucks at doing those things, which makes them incompetent morons. If you're going to screw over your customers to make your shareholders happy then you should at least succeed at it. But, instead, GW has chosen the option where they trash their product lines and make the customers unhappy while simultaneously struggling to avoid losing money every year and generally making any investor who is actually paying attention think very carefully about the wisdom of holding GW shares.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bartali wrote: The main person that seems to be driving 40K is Jervis, judging by his past standard bearer articles. He wrote about doing away with the FOC and that balance is a bad thing years ago.
This is true. Jervis is an incompetent moron who would have been fired and blacklisted by any decently-run company, but apparently he's sleeping with the CEO and nobody can even consider getting rid of him. His delusional rants on game design have been around for years, and you can trace a lot of the game's current problems back to him. Excessive interference from managers with no real understanding of game design isn't helping the situation but even without them the game would probably still suck.
Iron_Captain wrote: GW only aims at pleasing its shareholders, making profit and protecting its copyright, like any big company does.
Except GW sucks at doing those things, which makes them incompetent morons. If you're going to screw over your customers to make your shareholders happy then you should at least succeed at it. But, instead, GW has chosen the option where they trash their product lines and make the customers unhappy while simultaneously struggling to avoid losing money every year and generally making any investor who is actually paying attention think very carefully about the wisdom of holding GW shares.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bartali wrote: The main person that seems to be driving 40K is Jervis, judging by his past standard bearer articles. He wrote about doing away with the FOC and that balance is a bad thing years ago.
This is true. Jervis is an incompetent moron who would have been fired and blacklisted by any decently-run company, but apparently he's sleeping with the CEO and nobody can even consider getting rid of him. His delusional rants on game design have been around for years, and you can trace a lot of the game's current problems back to him. Excessive interference from managers with no real understanding of game design isn't helping the situation but even without them the game would probably still suck.
I’m not sure incompetent is the right word for Jervis.
He’s been very competent in pushing his vision of 40K out to the world. 5th ed was perhaps the antithesis of Jervis-40K, and since then Alessio has gone and two quick editions later he’s bought the game around to Jervis-40K. It remains to be seen if he'll take 40K to the full Jervis of AoS
If anything, it's the management who are incompetent. Not seeing that good rules=sales, and that Jervis is taking the game in a direction that is loosing players and sales.
Bartali wrote: He’s been very competent in pushing his vision of 40K out to the world.
And his "vision" is one of almost unbelievable incompetence. You could write an entire book on the way that Jervis fails to grasp incredibly basic concepts of game design and, through either stupidity and/or sheer narcissism, proudly declares that he has found the One True Way To Play Games. He's a small child smearing the contents of his diaper all over the walls and saying "look mommy, I made a picture".
I wouldn't say dying but definitely declining as prices reach lofty new heights and we now have mini-titans roaming the fields. The game as it stands probably needs a re-invention as there can only be so much more expansion/things to shoe horn in. Now if we put space marines on square bases and gave them crossbows...
I wouldn't say dying but definitely declining as prices reach lofty new heights and we now have mini-titans roaming the fields. The game as it stands probably needs a re-invention as there can only be so much more expansion/things to shoe horn in. Now if we put space marines on square bases and gave them crossbows...
My favorite quote from Rick Priestly
“The role I had in the studio was with staff working on game development and design, and they’d pretty much decided that game development and design wasn’t of any interest to them. The current attitude in Games Workshop is that they’re not a games company, it’s that they’re a model company selling collectibles. That’s something I find wholly self-deceiving and couldn’t possibly agree with.”
As with the Rick Priestly thread it has been demonstrated that discreet elements of GW games are of interest if not the whole of it so it is not "dying" per-se.
The rules are a mess (40k) and it looks like anyone with some good basic game design skills have moved-on.
So GW will continue to shrink in customer base, they may never truly die but they will waste away to nothing if some changes are not made.
Jervis stopped making sense to me a long time ago, I want a strategy game on the table not some RPG with each player alternating being GM.
In the end, we are barely even getting that, since they make models not games now.
My friends and I have moved on to more exciting games for a while, we shall see if they can pull a new rule-set out that may be of interest in the years to come.
Until they decide that getting serious about rules, this "hibernation" (between rules releases waiting for a "good one") could become a death in the long term as interest dwindles.
) and its all thanks to 30k!
because they spam the best units of an elite army and I refuse to play anything other than my favorite list that hasn't changed in 4 editions - it is totally 
)
