Voss wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Voss wrote:

Overread wrote:I think one key aspect that GW has the edge on is the highstreet stores. Whilst almost every other retailer is fleeing the highstreet, GW is holding out (and as yet hasn't had to pair with food outlets at a national level to survive).

I'm always dubious about this. Its a factor that doesn't matter anywhere but Britain (and maybe Austrailia/NZ). The rest of the world gets by fine relying mostly on indie stores.

The thing is if you go into a GW store the only thing you can buy is GW product. From models to books to paint to brushes to glue - its all GW direct sales.

Yes. That's a bad thing. Sure the direct sale thing is good for GW as a business, but nuts to that. Its bad for customers.

But the overall point is it means that there's shops with staff who have nothing but GW to sell to new customers.
In terms of growing your local GW playing scene its fantastic. Meanwhile an Indie store might love wargames, but they might have several different brands. For a brand wanting to make it big this is a bad thing. It means that their direct customer contact point (the indie store) is not pushing just their product but loads of others. This makes it a lot harder to grow your game.

Community leader programs (like the PG) run well are thus essential to growing your brand outside of storekeepers. At least your community reps will have a vested interest in promoting the game locally and are an essential force at growing a business.

I just don't agree. Warhammer spread here largely without stores or community programs (though they had both, neither matched the geography). It maintains its presence without either.
Other games that have spread successfully in places I've been did so without community programs or stores. Battletech, X-wing, Dust, that weird sci-fi game from the Confrontation folks, Infinity, Malifaux, all those grew without the support you're talking about.
The GW stores that survive here don't have a local playing scene (the first wave stores did, but GW culled those as failures and tried again later). They're irrelevant to maintaining or growing a 'scene' here.

The things you're deeming 'essential' have never been required.

I think the aspect we are differing on is that your looking at GW's growth in markets overseas, whilst I'm looking at their market in their home nation, the UK. The way I see it is their overseas market was able to grow partly because of their firm grasp on the UK market. The UK market dominance gives them the edge in income which allows them resources for marketing and alternative product display and licencing of their IP and basically everything that helps them stand out against the other brands in other nations. It helps put them on the map and promote the game and push it forward in those markets. Plus the pattern of allowing local indies to build a community and then opening a local GW brand store is something they do do overseas. It's not superfast because GW isn't taking out big loans to force their way into the market en-mass; but it is happening at a steady rate.

Online also has an impact, that big UK market (and honestly now US market) can produce loads of photos, stories, articles, guides, videos, twitches etc... Loads of material that markets GW for zero cost to GW! GW doesn't need the Evy metal team they've got legions of fans showing off their top quality painting of GW models today. In fact I'd argue that GW's promotion and push of Evy Metal as concept has dwindled over the years. It's not that its not there, its just not as much a marketing cornerstone that GW needs now that the community does it on the internet.

You need experience and capital to run a company. Logistics, management, marketing, production, HR, etc. BTW not a single person is going to be skilled in all that, you need specialists in every branch.

You also need a considerable amount of luck.

Moreover you need the market power to force your customers to buy stuff. GW has become very successful at that with the Codex system and the Primaris stuff. Sure many will complain, but they will but it regardless. That is something any theoretical rival of GW needs to learn.

You aren't thinking quadrimensionally.

There is no need for a company to rival GW. Will be enough when people will start to design and print their own miniatures.

Then, finally, Warhammer will become a pure IP and we won't have to relate anymore with their cringe business approach. And, of course, then Disney will purchase it

 Tyran wrote:
You need experience and capital to run a company. Logistics, management, marketing, production, HR, etc. BTW not a single person is going to be skilled in all that, you need specialists in every branch.

You also need a considerable amount of luck.

Moreover you need the market power to force your customers to buy stuff. GW has become very successful at that with the Codex system and the Primaris stuff. Sure many will complain, but they will but it regardless. That is something any theoretical rival of GW needs to learn.

I would agree to luck.

In all honesty GW has amased its market dominance by being in the right place at the right time. It has hardly provided the best rulesets or the best minis but has been able to consistently leverage its position to stay ahead and be THE name that is referenced with regards to ttmg.

Consider that it has taken GW 30+ years to get to where it is. 30 years to get to a position where they seriously thought they owned copyright to basic geometric shapes.
Consider the Memes GW have generated.
They were able to destroy one of their oldest game settings and systems and still stay ahead.

Clones and competitors rely on a thriving GW to sell their own goods. I would argue that without a GWmonopoly(?) these companies wouldnt exist at all and wouldnt think about operating.

I doubt anyone will come along to directly compete.

The same way the advent of the sewing machine ended the clothing trade?

It’s mainly about the models for me and the ease of matches.
So I’d have to find a game with miniatures I liked the look of and it would have to be popular enough to make finding games a possibility.


Also, there’s waves of comments everywhere about GW being clueless or terrible at what they do.
To some degree, yes, they make a lot of decisions that seem bad.
Keep in mind though that it’s a long lived and established company.
To get where they are now is not luck or blind faith.

Their business model is not super friendly, but it works and it’s stood the test of time.


If it was easy to make a company that could rival them, we would see tons of new companies popping up every now and then.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The same way the advent of the sewing machine ended the clothing trade?

Sure.

I mean I'm not saying its impossible to create an IP that would be as popular as 40k (as an example). But to directly compete with what GW has built? from scratch? (which is the question posed)

As an example look at companies who are providing games based on popular IP. Do TTMG games based on SW for example generate revenue equivalent to GW?

Are they as long lived?

Is Mantic a serious long term competitor for GW's crown?

Privateer?

Warlord?

Prodos or whoever they are now? CMoN?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The same way the advent of the sewing machine ended the clothing trade?

You have that bass ackwards.

GW is the sewing machine in your example. The sewing machine created the clothing trade into an industrial juggernaut. Before Isaac Singer came along it took roughly 14 hours to make a single shirt. GW made wargaming into what it is today and several other satellite companies would not exist were it not for them.

Crossed wires. Was replying to Cybtroll.

Racerguy180Made in us wrote:3) Develop a game(or series of) that offers depth of player involvement while also able to be picked up quickly by new players(to wargaming).

This one might be off the mark. Having studied the market and the industry for a long time, I (alongside countless others who have done the same) have more or less come to the conclusion that even though this is what gamers say they want or think they want, it isn't actually what they want. GWs games have succeeded because they have a gakky game, not in spite of it (though the fact that their minis are top tier certainly doesn't hurt). Its easy to pick up and play, relies on mechanics that give players good dopamine hits and tactile stimulation (rolling lots of dice), etc. etc. etc. Because GWs games have been a historical gateway into the hobby as a whole, GW has basically defined the mechanical landscape and programmed certain expectations into the community for what a game should look like and play like, which is why so many competitors out there design games along the same mechanical paradigms. Bolt Action, Flames of War/Team Yankee, and countless others are basically subtle tweaks on the GW "engine". FFG, PP, and Wyrd also both have their own "engines" (although Warcaster is a major rework/evolution of it), but have not been successful in shaping the market - I only know of one other game designed and released by an outside publisher that utilize the FFG and PP engines and absolutely none that use Wyrds (and none of these other games are particularly popular), vs literally hundreds that are "40k/Fantasy but..." for GWs games. There are some other engines out there beyond that but they are absolutely obscure and unknown. Basically theres lots of "inertia" behind GWs game design that make it hard to really step away from it from the standpoint of consumer success, games that are a departure from that are faced with pushback, resistance, and hostility as a result of lizard brain responses to something new/which doesn't fit the established norms that the broader community has been programmed to expect.

 Vaktathi wrote:


FFG got close, with Xwing for a bit, but that was in large part due to mishandlings on GW's part and a confluence of new Star Wars movies, and didn't last.

The interesting thing about FFG is that they have succeeded, in part, on breaking GW's hold. GW is no longer the "gateway game" behemoth that it once was - for a long time it was assumed that 90% or more of those coming into the hobby came in through GW's products, and then all the other games out there picked up their communities from GWs cast offs as players got fed up with various issues with GWs product offerings or their tastes refined/matured, etc. This is something that Warmachine never really managed to accomplish, the majority of the community was built on the back of GW turncoats, which is why when GW got its gak together the community largely abandoned the game and went back to 40k.

X-Wing and Legion (and to a lesser extent Armada which has suffered from a lack of product availability and a languishing release schedule for the last few years) are now a significant source of new tabletop gamers who haven't ever touched GW games (note, I said significant, not necessarily a majority). X-Wing and Armada especially as their pre-assembled and pre-painted nature and small buy-in values make for a very low barrier for entry into the hobby which makes the transition into self-built and painted miniatures less imposing (which allowed an easy "pipeline" into Legion). Unfortunately, GWs games are such a behemoth that this pipeline often leads people to GWs products anyway. I think, over time, this might help open the market a bit more and increase the communities openness to games that are a bigger departure from GWs rule styles (though, this probably means that these games will need to look more like FFGs to get past the lizard brain response).

The real trick though is longevity, IMO. GW is in part seeing a renaissance today because its re-attracting people that quit 3-6 editions ago. Folks that played in the 90s or early 2000s and then lost interest, but now have time and money and are being recaptured through their nostalgia. I think, in part, any contender will need to try to do the same by bringing in high-turnover younger players through high visibility avenues and then be willing to hold out for them to grow up and come back 20 years later, the only company that really has a chance of doing this at the moment is FFG via the Star Wars properties, but in order for this approach to pay off FFG has to still have the Star Wars license in 2 decades time.

2) Have a ruleset that promotes strategy instead of arcady, in-your-face, pay-to-win tactics/units - basically avoid Warmachine-like design and focus on a bolt-action type design

I think you have this backwards, Warmachine has strategy and tactical gameplay, 40k has listbuilding.

Infinity can compete with GW on individual sculpt quality but they're still making single-pose metal minis.

Sculpt quality - yes. Aesthetics - no. Infinity is extremely generic in its appearance and suffers from a high degree of "sameness" in its miniatures designs. Even veteran Infinity players complain about how its sometimes difficult to differentiate miniatures from eachother. They have got better over time in this respect, but the visual identity is not there and thus far theres nothing that truly reaches "iconic" status.

Mantic has the breadth of kits but they're still in historical-wargames

I think you meant Warlord. Mantic isn't doing anything historical to my knowledge, and is instead doing the "generic-brand GW products" thing.

A better game that you could basically use the same minis for

Minis are what make money and allow games to succeed. Nobody will ever get as big as GW making a better game that people are buying GWs minis to play.

Basically, to beat GW you need to follow their playbook and put in the time. You can't license your way to this. Licensing deals are inherently transitory and place limitations on a companies products. Whether you are FFG with Star Wars or CMON with ASOIF, they are a licensing renewal failure away from losing any momentum they make in rivaling GW.

This. The only way to be successful licensing a game is to be able to transition gamers from a licensed property to an unlicensed one. FFG tried to do this with Rune...Wars? Whatever it was called. Didn't work, there was no interest in the game despite sharing a lot in common with X-Wing and its been discontinued as a result. When FFG inevitable loses the Star Wars license (not a question of if but a question of when) they will be back to square zero. Same with CMON with ASOIF unless they manage to develop a game a few years down the line that they can transition the community to. Likewise Atomic Mass with the Marvel game.

And that is the problem. Who else in the miniature war-games business owns their own compelling and wide reaching IP that comes close to Warhammer 40K? I think we can safely say, nobody.

Privateer Press *could* if they hadn't mismanaged their own IPs so poorly. Removing fluff from the rulebooks, and making rulebooks pointless/unnecessary, was a dumb move. The game community is largely divorced from the concept of fluff, most only know it or understand it at the top level but know little or nothing about it in depth or detail as a result, because it wasn't accessible. PP tried to transition the fluff to novels, but because there was no connection between the novels and what the players were familiar with (i.e. the game), nobody bought them.

Owning their own IP outright is quite the thing here.

Consider Kenner, the Grandaddy of working the Star Wars IP.

They held the license from the get-go. And because Star Wars was the first massively impactful merchandising effort, it may surprise people just how sweet Kenner had it - at first.

See, by 1978, Kenner coined in around $100,000,000 in Star Wars sales. Lucasfilm’s cut? Something daft like a meagre $50,000 (this is me recalling from The Toys That Made Us on Netflix. Exact figure may be off, but it was laughably small by comparison, even if we add a further zero).

So it was lucrative to say the least. Until....someone at Kenner forgot to send the cheque to Lucasfilm. At which point the whole license was renegotiated.

Licenses are also commonly time limited, it would seem. It seems likely to me that if your product line is selling well, the Licensor may want a bigger slice of that delicious pie you developed. And their demands may push you into the “not really worth it anymore” territory.

There’s also the risk that if your product line is a slow burner, that once renegotiation takes place, they simply refuse, and that’s you stuffed, even if sales were starting to increase.

Heck, if things go really poorly, you may face financial penalty. Why? Because the Licensor holds more of the cards, so the contract is far more likely to favour them in terms of termination details than you. Sure, they might be keen on entering the TTWG market, but that doesn’t mean they need your specific company.

But, to develop your own IP takes a helluva lot of effort, especially if you want it to stand out.

GW in many respects just got lucky at the right time. Next to Dr Who and 2000AD, it’s one of Britain’s most enduring sci-fi offerings. It’s also a glorious hodge-podge of contemporary influences, welded into something truly unique.

 Overread wrote:

Spoiler:

Voss wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Voss wrote:

Overread wrote:I think one key aspect that GW has the edge on is the highstreet stores. Whilst almost every other retailer is fleeing the highstreet, GW is holding out (and as yet hasn't had to pair with food outlets at a national level to survive).

I'm always dubious about this. Its a factor that doesn't matter anywhere but Britain (and maybe Austrailia/NZ). The rest of the world gets by fine relying mostly on indie stores.

The thing is if you go into a GW store the only thing you can buy is GW product. From models to books to paint to brushes to glue - its all GW direct sales.

Yes. That's a bad thing. Sure the direct sale thing is good for GW as a business, but nuts to that. Its bad for customers.

But the overall point is it means that there's shops with staff who have nothing but GW to sell to new customers.
In terms of growing your local GW playing scene its fantastic. Meanwhile an Indie store might love wargames, but they might have several different brands. For a brand wanting to make it big this is a bad thing. It means that their direct customer contact point (the indie store) is not pushing just their product but loads of others. This makes it a lot harder to grow your game.

Community leader programs (like the PG) run well are thus essential to growing your brand outside of storekeepers. At least your community reps will have a vested interest in promoting the game locally and are an essential force at growing a business.

I just don't agree. Warhammer spread here largely without stores or community programs (though they had both, neither matched the geography). It maintains its presence without either.
Other games that have spread successfully in places I've been did so without community programs or stores. Battletech, X-wing, Dust, that weird sci-fi game from the Confrontation folks, Infinity, Malifaux, all those grew without the support you're talking about.
The GW stores that survive here don't have a local playing scene (the first wave stores did, but GW culled those as failures and tried again later). They're irrelevant to maintaining or growing a 'scene' here.

The things you're deeming 'essential' have never been required.

I think the aspect we are differing on is that your looking at GW's growth in markets overseas, whilst I'm looking at their market in their home nation, the UK. The way I see it is their overseas market was able to grow partly because of their firm grasp on the UK market. The UK market dominance gives them the edge in income which allows them resources for marketing and alternative product display and licencing of their IP and basically everything that helps them stand out against the other brands in other nations. It helps put them on the map and promote the game and push it forward in those markets.

That process took years- almost 18 years just to establish 100 stores. GW built on other things first (D&D and so on), but were already 3 editions into 'warhammer fantasy' in 1988 when I bought my first rulebooks and minis in London from a store that wasn't GW.
You're skipping forward past an absurd amount of their buildup to the point they were already established, and only then creating the dominance you're taking as a given, even in the UK market.

When it comes to a potential rival, there is plenty of time and opportunity to grow, they just have to not screw the pooch the way so many companies before them did. Or abandon the table the way WotC and FFG tend to do.

Plus the pattern of allowing local indies to build a community and then opening a local GW brand store is something they do do overseas. It's not superfast because GW isn't taking out big loans to force their way into the market en-mass; but it is happening at a steady rate.

Literally never seen this happen. GW does some select targeting of high volume commercial areas in the suburbs (malls and the like, and even then, its definitely upscale suburban, most major US cities don't have a GW store), but that's not where indie stores live and thrive. They can't afford to. Successful ones tend to be a couple rings further out in lower rent areas on the fringe. Or even further out on the rural/suburban divide.
Most GW attempts to do otherwise have failed- I can remember shopping in a couple independent stores that rented out the location of a GW store after it died after the first wave expansion. The most prominent being LA, well Santa Monica to be precise. The faint imprints of the GW sign were still smoked onto the building because of the smog, just to add insult to injury.

Online also has an impact, that big UK market (and honestly now US market) can produce loads of photos, stories, articles, guides, videos, twitches etc... Loads of material that markets GW for zero cost to GW! GW doesn't need the Evy metal team they've got legions of fans showing off their top quality painting of GW models today. In fact I'd argue that GW's promotion and push of Evy Metal as concept has dwindled over the years. It's not that its not there, its just not as much a marketing cornerstone that GW needs now that the community does it on the internet.

Word of mouth is word of mouth. That its on the internet now makes little difference, its what really grew the company initially.
What pushes a lot of players into GW is other players in the indie shop that already play... and don't play other things. Same as it was in the 80s or 90s.
People are continually attracted to new games, but other companies don't last in the market under their own mistakes.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Crossed wires. Was replying to Cybtroll.

I see, thought you were replying to the post above. Apologies!

And that is the problem. Who else in the miniature war-games business owns their own compelling and wide reaching IP that comes close to Warhammer 40K? I think we can safely say, nobody.

Battletech
and from a point of view the IP is bigger than 40k, but today for most people it is a Video Game IP and not a boardgame/tabletop/wargame

things might change again, and GW was lucky to be there when Battletech struggled (they made a similar bad decision like GW did with Warhammer/AoS, but there was no second and third line game to back it up) but it is still there and can rise again

Another one is Gundam
no real tabletop/wargame there yet but if they ever decide to enter the market they would be a big player right from the start
there is already a big fanbase and people are using different homebrew rules for some wargaming action with the models (and there is enough for several game, make a 1/144 Skirmish Game with 2-4 big models, a 1/144 wargame with infantry and tanks and a 1/200-1/400 game using full gundam armies)

Literally never seen this happen. GW does some select targeting of high volume commercial areas in the suburbs (malls and the like, and even then, its definitely upscale suburban, most major US cities don't have a GW store), but that's not where indie stores live and thrive. They can't afford to. Successful ones tend to be a couple rings further out in lower rent areas on the fringe. Or even further out on the rural/suburban divide.

Here GW has done different, the used the Indi Store to build up the Community, when that one was big enough they killed the Indi Store by adding restrictions on which and how much GW stuff they get and than they open a GW Store near location of the old store (the Indi Store might still exist but without GW products or only the very basic ones)

but very likely that their US strategy for stores is different

Tyel wrote:
...At its core the major advantage GW have is that people play their games. Obviously they have stores themselves - but there is also a usually vibrant tournament and club scene covering a large part of the world..,.

This is the key. Even when GW were doing things very poorly you had pretty much the best chance of picking up a pick up game using one of their systems. It’s an inertia that’s hard to overcome.

I think that its like WOW and MMOs. People play WOW because... everyone else does.

People play 40k and AOS because... everyone else does.

You have to be able to have a game that everyone else plays, where you can go into any store in the world and know you are going to get in a game against anyone.

Thats the main pull of GW games.

A new game would need as many players AND a world championship tournament scene to begin to even make GW itch a little in discomfort.

Not even the Star Wars games with the most popular sci fi IP of all time have been able to do that, albeit xwing has come close in its zenith days.

No one wants to go out, spend $500-$1000 on a miniatures army, paint it up, and then go down to their store and sit there by themselves or play the same 2 or 3 people forever because everyone else is playing 40k. That is a HUGE (and I think impossible) obstacle to overcome.

That’s one reason I want to see more people treat tabletop games like board games: if you want to play, you supply a complete game. When I played BFG, I had to buy ships for multiple fleets to get my friends to play. My friends would buy other games that I could play with 0 investment.

The prices are also much smaller for non-GW games. You could make two forces with lots of options for Frostgrave for a lot less than $500. For $500, one can supply two or more factions for dozens of non-GW games. The fact you think people are investing $1000 per faction for non-GW games kind of baffles me.

but this a reason why people still play the game no matter what GW is doing

because the invested 1000$ for something you can get for 50$ from another brand
if you no have spend 1050$ and only do not play the GW game, people feel like they have wasted the 1000$
while spending 50$, playing once and shelf the game is not a big deal compared to the 1000$

hence why boardgames and boardgame like tabletops are so popular right now, they are very cheap compared to other options (GW, PC Games, etc) and if you only play them once with friends you still feel like your 50$ investment mattered compared to a 70$ single player PC game that is played thru in one evening

also, because people are used to high GW prices, they see everything else that is cheaper as bad
because it must be, otherwise they would have wasted money if you get the same quality from someone else for less, and not taking about the models here but also the rules and colours (people say that GW colours are the best quality you can get and nothing else is coming close because they are the most expensive ones and even much cheaper artist grade high quality colours must be worse than GW and if you proof them wrong the argument changes to availability and if you proof them wrong again, they get angry and say they still stick with GW because they already have a lot and don't like to change)

I think a big part is accessibility. Not talking about rules or anything, just that GW stuff is easy to get in most areas. They have solid shipping coverage, but they also have stores.
I'm in Austria, which is basically the ass end of availability for such stuff and still got 2 Warhammer stores around here.

If I look beyond the horizon at some other games/miniatures, they often come with huge shipping or take forever to get here. CMON for example even has their store region locked it seems, cause I simply can't access it and have to go through their distributor website, which doesn't have the same stuff available.

Treating this purely as a hypothetical business exercise:-

The core strength of Games Workshop's business model is that everything is in-house. Product development, to manufacturing, to the high street. Every step is controlled by them except owning the buildings the shops are in and the raw material production. And both of those things are easily replaced (leasing a building or sourcing another plastic derivative is not hard). In other words, they have an immense level of control which can be manipulated as best suits to meet whatever form of competition arises.

If I was going to compete with them, I'd need the backing of someone with deep pockets willing to pay to jump the steps below, or I'd need to have a profitable retail setup ready to go as a base (aka five plus stores of my own). Because there's no way I can compete without being able to market directly to the customers. I can always buy in other hobby product at first (it's how GW started). There are plenty of other companies out there, and FLGS's do well enough with good management. But I'd need to focus on that core retail base for the first step.

Assuming I've got my first five profitable stores, I can start working on my product and IP and set up a small design studio with the profits from the stores. Easiest way to do this would be to license something with mass appeal like Star Wars. But it would be easy enough to make a Battletech style game or somesuch with lots of expansion potential. Heck, I could do both. Again, Games Workshop did both back in the day. Cash flow is king at that stage, because the cash flow enables me to invest in my own IP and growing my store base. As my own product lines hit the shelves, I can then slowly reduce how many other ranges my stores are carrying in favour of my own lines. That's standard commercial practice in a lot of fields.

Now I've got five plus stores and a decent game out, I can start building the network effect. The more stores I have, the greater the customer base for my game. The real jump however, would be from turning my little studio which produces the game into a manufacturing hub. I'm clearly going to have to outsource initially, HIPS machines are not cheap. I could finance to borrow the money to pay for them, but I suspect that might chew up too much credit and cripple the business. What I'd really look for would be a business angel/seed investor at this stage.

Assuming past market trends have held, I could actually use Games Workshop as an example of the potential return for a partner. If I've got something like a dozen stores plus at this stage and a little studio and we're predictably in profit (however minimal)? I reckon you could sweet talk a partner with serious cash into funding the cost of the machines and factory. You'd have to surrender control of a good chunk of the company and corporatise, but you could do it.

From there, you basically turn into Games Workshop. You buy up a paint range company, slowly excise the remaining external product lines, pay off your investors, and so on. Next thing you know, you just turned fifty and your company is their number one rival. Congrats?

--------------------------------------------------------

Where most game companies fall down is taking the wrong way to build this. They're either nerds buying a job and so their retail store fails. Or they start with the wargaming company/IP, making them almost completely dependent on other parties to market/sell their product and produce the goods. This makes them one trick ponies. A good retailer can sell anything to turn a buck and a manufacturer can make lots of things for other customers. But a small wargaming company can really only sell what they can commission other people to make and market for them.

I should note that the internet has made it possible to do some degree of marketing on their own (hence the growth in model companies), but the minute they hit a blip? A bad edition, or a production stall? They're screwed. Whereas the retailer just swaps to something else profitable which they can get hold of. It's a business version of all the eggs in one basket, and the basket is very easily upset.

No, you either need to start from the manufacturing end (meaning you can produce plastic for lots of different other sectors) or the retail end. Starting with the wargaming bit in the middle is a surefire way to cripple yourself from the word go.

This does raise the question about places like Troll Trader (Tabletop Combat) and Wayland games (Warcradle). Both of which have basically got stores doing the money rolling and then have bought out failing/struggling wargame companies that hit those "blips". Though it seems that they themselves have trouble getting things going in good speed (WC has spent what 4-5 years getting anything from Dystopian Wars and Spartan back on the market and would have only managed to just release at the start of this year if it were not for corona - though they have got plastic casting now as part of the process).

That said they do have the backing of stores for a steady income; they are not reliant on the games alone.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
That’s one reason I want to see more people treat tabletop games like board games: if you want to play, you supply a complete game. When I played BFG, I had to buy ships for multiple fleets to get my friends to play. My friends would buy other games that I could play with 0 investment.

The prices are also much smaller for non-GW games. You could make two forces with lots of options for Frostgrave for a lot less than $500. For $500, one can supply two or more factions for dozens of non-GW games. The fact you think people are investing $1000 per faction for non-GW games kind of baffles me.

Well because when I look at every wargame I've seen played, the cost for a full force is about $500-$1000 for a non skirmish scale game. Thats a pretty wide range but thats about what I see people spend. I'm talking 40k and AOS here, so the scale of those games matters to me in this discussion.

A game like frostgrave is more akin to warcry which I don't see much played at all. In fact I don't see most GW games played with any regularity, just 40k and to a side degree AOS.

Also people here don't buy models for other people to play games with. Thats cool that you all have that going but here we don't really do that. I don't know how common that is, since that isn't something I hear very often.

Statistx wrote:
I think a big part is accessibility. Not talking about rules or anything, just that GW stuff is easy to get in most areas. They have solid shipping coverage, but they also have stores.
I'm in Austria, which is basically the ass end of availability for such stuff and still got 2 Warhammer stores around here.

If I look beyond the horizon at some other games/miniatures, they often come with huge shipping or take forever to get here. CMON for example even has their store region locked it seems, cause I simply can't access it and have to go through their distributor website, which doesn't have the same stuff available.

Also visibility.

In the U.K., GW dominate the high street scene. They’re typically just off the main areas, but not so far that you don’t get significant passers by. There’s apparently a marketing thing where 1% of people advertised to will buy your product (picked this up from Fact Fiend, so third info at best). And I’m assuming the same goes for passing trade.

So, if I’m right, the theory goes that one in every hundred passers by will drop in and buy something. How GW’s in-store demos might affect that will have to be picked up by someone who actually knows their onions here, but I can’t see it hurting.

And if we look at store layouts? When done correctly, your store should be fairly open spaced, with products facing out. This helps with clear visibility, and relative ease of shopping. The staff are trained to be friendly and welcoming, and able to show off the hobbies potential to would be customers. And, here’s the trick. You are not selling it to Little Timmy. You’re selling it to the Bringers of Cash, Little Timmy Senior & Little Timmy’s Mum. Because Little Timmy is already sold.

That’s then backed up with Beginners sessions, which parents are also encouraged to attend (mixed results, but hey). After a few weeks, and a few purchases of various goodies, you’ve got ‘em.

That’s one in one hundred passers by, theoretically.

The overall Beginners Sessions really are key. Little Timmy approves, and shows it off to Johnny, Jimmy, and Spazz. Little Timmy’s parents might discuss the wider hobby (creativity, mental arithmetic, patience, reading) with their peers, which can bring further new blood, especially in middle class dormitory towns like wot where I live.

Will all of them stay on as long as we have (31 years and counting)? Of course not. But, by having a built in gaming and social venue, a well run store, where no group of gamers is allowed to hold particular sway, can maximise involvement.

That formula hasn’t really changed since I got going. Friendly, welcoming space. Knowledgable staff, the stuff I want to buy (there on the shelf, or more modernly, the mail order terminals), and a place to actually do my hobby. It’s just been better refined in terms of staff training.

It’s also about as universal an experience as can be expected. Yes, some stores won’t be as good as others, but it’s still the same basic template. All under GW’s direct control, because the stores aren’t franchises.

FLGS? Some offer a genuinely better experience. Some are sadly pretty dingey and run down looking. They’re also, typically, harder to stumble across, so don’t get as much passing traffic.

One other thing that having their own stores does for GW is it lets them gather data really fast and accurately on what works and what sells

We may well remember the idiotic Kirby comment that GW didn't need to do market research or words to that effect,

but looking at what is selling in their own stores, how fast, and in combination with what other stuff

GW releases a new faction, the Megarachnids as a taster, and Bobs Best Games releases Scary Space Spiders, both companies start with a unit and a couple of characters

Both get preorder data from individuals: very helpful, but people online and looking at for stuff are probably already fairly heavily involved in the hobby and are probably not where the majority of the money will come from (although they are important drivers)

both get preorder data from distibutors and independent stores, but this is far less useful as it doesn't represent sales, boxes may languish on shelves, or may move but only if discounted. If less is hitting the shelves that month maybe stores & distributors order more than they would normally, If there's a lot going on maybe they order less product than they really want as they're having to spread their cash around

But GW has a big advantage they get sales numbers from their own stores, how many boxes sell each day, do sales stall, are the growing as word of mouth spreads, are customers talking about them etc

GW will know months before Bobs whether the new faction is well received and worth carrying on the roll out with (and these new factions can stall even if well received if nothing new arrives for ages).

Without the direct data Bob's is doing far more guessing, and working a lot more slowly, maybe the faction is a hit but they don't support it fast enough, maybe it goes the way of the Fire Slayers and they've committed too much design and production time before they realise it and are in production for a not very popular wave 2 before they realise their player base isn't interested

I think the best notion is to look at how GW started out, and then look at some of the decisions that made them big, like bringing plastics production in-house, bringing artists in-house, and lately leveraging that production capability to make games.

Also don't forget a GW store staff member only has to sell GW products. No matter what he picks off the shelf to sell, he's promoting and selling GW products.


A 3rd party store has many many different product lines and types. From wargames to card to board to digital to anything else. As a result if you're relying on 3rd party stores then there's a risk that your stuff might not sell just because it "doesn't sell" whilst things that do sell already get more attention and focus.

That's why so many are heavily reliant on local representatives in the community to promote their game; because even a store that does like the game and does promote it, sitll has many competing brands on offer. Plus the main bread-winner might well not be that game (indeed we oft hear its card games). Whatever the breadwinner is that is going to get the lions share of attention and promotion.


Wargames typically take up a lot of shelf space for a slower turnover of stock; cardgames in contrast take up far less space and have a very high rate of product turnover.



Indeed wargames like Warhammer are actually quite an old business model of long term products. Consider that you can still use today generation 1 Space Marine models and they are not only legal in the game, they still stand up well mechanically. Sure you might have to change the base here and there; but by and large most things have kept valid. There's a few things lost and gained and a few change size (eg the old greater demons have jumped up to FW sized demons now), but even there conversions and counts as (eg old greater demon = demon prince).

In contrast card games cycle cards very fast - MTG cycles every year with a rolling block update system. Sure there's the format that allows you to use any cards, but that's a very different format - the standard limited format on the current blocks is what remains the most popular in most regions.

So not only does the product sell fast and easy but it also has a built in time limit; once past there's a new slew of products that the same customers want.

It’s also worth noting that since they became Big, GW haven’t really dabbled in business borrowing.

If memory serves, the only time they’ve borrowed was during the post-LOTR slump, to provide a dividend to share holders. However, they may well have had some early years borrowing for tooling etc.

That’s really quite unusual in the modern day. And may not be easily replicable due to ever increasing shop rental and local tax costs. At least, not without it being done by someone who is already fairly wealthy.

Even just to get a decent number of plastic kits out requires a decent chunk of cash, whether or not you’ve got you’re own production facilities and blokes wot makes the molds.

GW are also in the best position to dictate the baseline of the industry. The bog standard. What satiscraptory might look like.

What do I mean by that? They’re the Ford of Wargames. By no means the cheapest, by no means the swankiest. But a widely considered middle ground.

If you want to compete, you need, at first, is do what GW aren’t, or find a niche and be better at it. If your sculpts can’t match GW’s? The market is very unlikely to pay GW prices for them, for example.

The difficulty there of course in the very modern day? GW have remembered they can grow as many thumbs are there are gaming pies. You’ve got mass battle, you’ve got skirmish, you’ve got dungeoneering, you’ve got dog fighting, you’ve got semi-deck building games too.

And in terms of market research, I dare say the obvious initial fault might be to listen to complaints about GW’s offerings alone.

Now, that is not a back handed “lol stfu complainers”. Many complaints are valid (Necromunda’s book cycling and poor proof reading etc). But you’ll also need to understand what it is GW are doing right in the eyes of the satisfied. Because you’re gonna need a fat old dollop of that, too.

Finally? Luck. In the internet age, there’s a lot of offerings out there. Some on Kickstarter, some from bigger names etc. This all means that you can have the objectively tightest rules set, the objectively nicest models at good price point, and still fail - because there’s so much choice out there.

Worse, and I accept this is unlikely...if you do start gaining traction, a half dozen malicious people with various sock puppet accounts can quickly spread negative reviews. (No i am not saying or implying this happens on Dakka).

GW are GW because when GW started? There was no GW. Citadel was sculptors creating models that could be used in AD&D. Eventually that was married to WHFB, which started out as a generic rule set usable with pretty much any Fantasy Figures - another way to use an existing collection. It took some time for Warhammer to become Warhammer proper. I’m not sure that path exists anymore, because of GW’s success an early, RPGesque focus on background and a narrative for your battles. It’s become expected by the market.

 Eldarain wrote:
Time machine.

This is the most correct answer in this thread.

GW became what they are due to a combination of timing, smart business decisions, and luck.

Rivaling them now while not impossible; would be a near insurmountable task.

Honestly the only way I could see it happen is if someone with Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos money got pissed at GW for whatever reason and decided to spend their fortune burning them to the ground.

Considering that GW has seen their number of customers grow over the last few years with a big marketing push; tihs suggests that there's a greater market than that which GW has already tapped into.

The core issue is that its mostly only GW tapping into the market. So the designs, themes, concepts and branding are all GW. For a large majority (esp in the UK), GW is the gateway to wargames, esp for the larger under 20s market.


So there's actually loads of creative gaps that another firm could exploit and market too.

The issue is that it is going to be expensive and it will take time and luck.

So basically you need someone that can throw millions even if there is no guaranteed return of investment, specially not in the short term.

Basically you need a corporation and people that are willing to lead this project and potentially sink with it if it fails, and I'm talking only somewhat rhetorically, people could easily lose their standing in the industry for such failure.

 Overread wrote:
Considering that GW has seen their number of customers grow over the last few years with a big marketing push; tihs suggests that there's a greater market than that which GW has already tapped into.

The core issue is that its mostly only GW tapping into the market. So the designs, themes, concepts and branding are all GW. For a large majority (esp in the UK), GW is the gateway to wargames, esp for the larger under 20s market.


So there's actually loads of creative gaps that another firm could exploit and market too.

Push hasn’t even been that big. Still no traditional advertising campaign, just a far better in-house push.

We may also be seeing the second/third gen thing, where those like myself that cut their teeth as kids, are now old enough to have kids the right to play (no kids on my behalf. Never been my bag).

Kids drag their Dad’s in, Dads rediscover an enjoyment of their youth, the rest is just profit and increased sales.

True that's certainly taking place. So another firm advertising/marketing to a different or related crowd could indeed have room to grow without having to "steal/poach" GW's market directly.

Honestly I'd actually welcome that. I do worry that with GW bearing the brunt of advertising/marketing outside of the established; it holds the whole market back. Most of the other companies into wargaming rely almost entirely on GW customers leaving the GW ship; or at least being open to other games. It means any time GW does poorly the market rapidly expands and any time GW does well its a rapid contraction.

If we got a second or third firm drawing in more fresh customers it might create a bigger buffer pool. Of course the flipside is if there are two big names in town people might just jump between the two.

Freely admit, too many pints in to properly reply right now

During the Kirby days, GW left a lot of area for rivals to sneak in and grab a bite of the apple. In fact, they did by focusing on areas GW was retreating from with the closing of Specialist Games.

Mantic's Dread Ball= Blood Bowl
Spartan's D-Wars= Epic
X-wing= Aeronautica Imperialis
Frostgrave= Warcry/Mordheim
War Machine= Kill Team/Necromunda

Then, GW smartened and decided to build strategic loyalty in brand. If you wanted to play at a different scale, they have it in house with Titanicus and Apocalypse. If you wanted skirmish, they have it with Warcry and Necromunda. If you wanted a sports theme, they have that now too.

Now a days, there are not a lot of niches that GW has not sunk their tentacles into. That makes it harder for a competitor to sink their own teeth into an underserved market and give themselves a platform to grow upon.

If GW keeps up their current strategy and expand into a BFG and EPIC range, they will have sucked all the opportunity for a competitior to "start small" and grow big.

There's a considerable amount of off-brand imitators out there though. Heck, I started Titanomachina about 9 years ago to hop on that bandwagon. Fortunately by the time I was scooped by the new Adeptus Titanicus it had mutated into its own thing, but still.

A lot of these takes rely on a newcomer trying to beat GW at its own game. I see 3d printing as eventually redefining the entire space. Beat GW to that punch and anyone stands a chance to dethrone them.

3D printing will eventually change the retail landscape quite significantly, although I feel not until the process is significantly simplified... but is difficult to monetise, and doesn't do anything to get people actually playing your game.

Ultimately, what a new company needs is people playing their game. The gaming community (at least in scifi/fantasy gaming - historical gamers seem to be more brand agnostic) has always been reluctant to try new things, by and large. Nobody wants to invest in the new game until they see that everybody else is playing it, which is a bit of a catch-22.

 insaniak wrote:
3D printing will eventually change the retail landscape quite significantly, although I feel not until the process is significantly simplified... but is difficult to monetise, and doesn't do anything to get people actually playing your game.

At the same time whilst you can buy a really good printer, most people still use bookbinders and printing services. In fact even though the price of top end printers has come down somewhat; in general most people use their home printer for printing casual stuff. If they want to spend money on it they tend to keep using normal printing services.

I wonder if 3D printers might end up the same. A small handful buy ones that can actually do pro-end stuff; whilst the masses get ones to cast a cup or bowl badly and the operator still has no idea how to remove the mould lines or to fix basic issues (how many people get confused on how to do toner or clean the head in their paper printer). I feel like 3D printing is going to make some big differences, but perhaps not the ones people think.

Also I agree its very hard to monetise, especially if you want to be more than 1 person designing 3D models. That's a market that seems to work; but much beyond that I don't think is easily possible. I can't see a firm as big as GW easily running off customers buying 3D print files from them. I also see issues when production is left in the hands of the customers.

Yeah, the Patreon model seems to be working for some freelancers and small mini companies, but I can't see it scaling well. The bigger you are, the bigger the risk in relying on what is essentially a subscription service.

Maybe 30+ years ago, I watched Magic the Gathering take over the CCG market, and I'd say there are similarities with GW.

I also play boardgames, so have a contrast between them and Magic.

Essentially, WH40K and Magic are "lifestyle hobby games":
* Those who play "lifestyle hobby games" will only or primarily play these games.
* Those who play "lifestyle hobby games" need to pay a high investment (eg. $100+) to competitively play the game, although less expensive casual entry points exist.
* "Lifestyle hobby games" often have a non-gaming component (eg. painting, collecting and trading) that involves their audience outside of the game.
* "Lifestyle hobby games" typically have heavy company support, in the form of tournaments, store events, prizes, etc.
* "Lifestyle hobby games" often have a rotation of product, retiring older purchases. Players are expected to make continual purchases.
* "Lifestyle hobby games" typically require a community of players to play the game.

Contrast this to boardgames:
* Boardgamers play multiple different boardgames.
* Most boardgames need only one copy, owned by the owner, to play with.
* Most boardgames do not have a non-gaming component, although may have a BGG forum for strategy discussion.
* Most boardgames do not have company support, other than maybe an internet representatitve. Some, like FFG, have demo kits.
* Most boardgames are a single purchase that can be played indefinitely, with addtional purchases (eg. expansions) typically optional.
* Most boardgames don't require a community of players for the game, although general gatherings to play boardgame exist.

D&D and Pathfinder are something of a middle ground. They certainly require a community of players who play the game, and are willing to schedule it even into their working lives (eg. a biweekly campaign). Paizo, the company behind Pathfinder, even has company support for game events at game conventions. However, they don't have as much of a non-gaming component. While RPGs can be expensive (eg. a D&D Player's Handbook is $50) this still doesn't compare to WH40K and Magic purchases.

Should mention that chess and shogi, and are also "lifestyle games" but don't have some aspects of "lifestyle hobby games", such as painting, and collecting. While sports are often played casually, serious players will treat them as a "lifestyle games", spending a fair amount of money on equipment and training.

I feel like the big box board games that started on Kickstarter straddle the line, or even cross over. For example, the Shadows of Brimstone community on Facebook is really active, and people seem to be really into it in ways other than just playing the game.

 AesSedai wrote:
A lot of these takes rely on a newcomer trying to beat GW at its own game. I see 3d printing as eventually redefining the entire space. Beat GW to that punch and anyone stands a chance to dethrone them.

Issue for would be competitors is that GW has millions in cash reserve to throw at that problem.

GW Branded Printers. Possibility of uniquely programmed “one and done” STL files. GW branded filament. All little ways that GW can command that market by flexing their brand and cash reserves.

And it’s the branding that matters. To a newcomer, it’s a sign of assurance that specific printer is suited to producing the detail typical of GW’s sculpts. That the filament is the right sort etc.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 AesSedai wrote:
A lot of these takes rely on a newcomer trying to beat GW at its own game. I see 3d printing as eventually redefining the entire space. Beat GW to that punch and anyone stands a chance to dethrone them.

Issue for would be competitors is that GW has millions in cash reserve to throw at that problem.

GW Branded Printers. Possibility of uniquely programmed “one and done” STL files. GW branded filament. All little ways that GW can command that market by flexing their brand and cash reserves.

And it’s the branding that matters. To a newcomer, it’s a sign of assurance that specific printer is suited to producing the detail typical of GW’s sculpts. That the filament is the right sort etc.

I can see it now - legions of geeks arguing over the best brand of filament and printer; lamenting that GW's printer is good, but their filament is overpriced.

The big issue I see is that the first hurdle in a new hobby is the buy-in-price. GW has worked on pushing that down, but going the pathway of high end 3D printers pushes it WAY up. Even if 3D printers became a home item chances are many would have a lower grade made for printing basic household items not high definition models. So chances are it would remain a high bar of entry. Granted it could end up like computer games, whereby the average home PC to surf the net and do emails isn't enough, but its easily justified to get a higher end machine for gaming.

That kinda depends on a massive 3D printing revolution to happen. Somehow I feel that specialist goods like models will be on the back end of that rather than the front end; even if model making is currently a front-end part of the market.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Issue for would be competitors is that GW has millions in cash reserve to throw at that problem.

GW Branded Printers. Possibility of uniquely programmed “one and done” STL files. GW branded filament. All little ways that GW can command that market by flexing their brand and cash reserves.

And it’s the branding that matters. To a newcomer, it’s a sign of assurance that specific printer is suited to producing the detail typical of GW’s sculpts. That the filament is the right sort etc.

Remember when GW used those vast resources to release their own army builder software 15 years or so ago?

It didn't exactly set the world on fire.

Honestly, GW feels sluggish on occaision.
Probably precislcly becuase they are so large and domineering .

Exploiting that is possible, but difficult.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I feel like the big box board games that started on Kickstarter straddle the line, or even cross over. For example, the Shadows of Brimstone community on Facebook is really active, and people seem to be really into it in ways other than just playing the game.

I'd say if they consistently offer expansions, miniatures and other goodies, boardgames can tap a little bit into the other aspects too, just look at Kingdom Death.
You got an expensive base game that obviously still sold like crazy and they regularily offer up expansions and miniatures that are counted among the best, at least see it in a lot of suggestions threads for non-GW minis.
If they'd also offer less crazy priced versions, they could expand a lot, but that's a different philosophy

Not Online!!! wrote:
Honestly, GW feels sluggish on occaision.
Probably precislcly becuase they are so large and domineering .

Exploiting that is possible, but difficult.

The problem with a big business is its a bit like an oil tanker. It's got vast wealth and vast potential and vast resources to do stuff. But at the same time its a huge moving object that can't quickly change course without dumping vast amounts of that wealth in one big go.

GW moving into 3D printing and changing the whole design of their company would be hard; they've got long term staff expecting to move up and retire casting plastic; designing sprue, working the machines, packing etc... They've got machines, distribution, factories etc... Their whole system is built to run a certain way. A massive shift that might well result in them having almost no factory production and cutting out a huge number of staff and resources is a big change. It's the kind of change you want to put off because you hope you can push through and not have to basically rebuild the company into a new system that, who knows in 3 years could totally change again.

Newer firms can muscle in during these changing moments, they can take the risks because to them it doesn't matter. They have to take a big risk anyway to get into the market so they can either risk it the traditional way or the new way. If they get it right they might just rise up and overtake the big name; get it wrong and they fall to the side.




We saw this with cameras. Kodak was vast and powerful in the film era. When digital game along they didn't jump in with both feet, it was too different; too big a change and back then it wasn't even superior to film. It was a novelty but distinctly not as good a product at the end. Other firms did, they made big investments, took the risk and the digital got better in a very short span of time. Suddenly the market shifted and digital overtook film. It still wasn't technically superior, but it was digital, it was instant, it was computer based. Today Kodak is a shadow of its former self and has given away the market lead to Canon, Nikon and Sony.

GW could go the same way or perhaps the 3D printing revolution never happens. Heck we can remember that in the 90s VR was going to take over the world, yet it never did. Even today, 30 years later, its still not really taken over gaming. It's far more stable than it was and its seeming that it will settle down into a steady growth within the market; but it never rose to dominance like some predicted 30 years ago. Same with 3D TVs they had a huge amount of noise made about them a few years back, yet it never really translated into an actual change. Perhaps we've another 30 years before 3D printing becomes a household thing. OR heck who knows perhaps there's a huge push against plastics and 3d printing falls to the side as household good start being made of more green and long lasting materials.

 insaniak wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Issue for would be competitors is that GW has millions in cash reserve to throw at that problem.

GW Branded Printers. Possibility of uniquely programmed “one and done” STL files. GW branded filament. All little ways that GW can command that market by flexing their brand and cash reserves.

And it’s the branding that matters. To a newcomer, it’s a sign of assurance that specific printer is suited to producing the detail typical of GW’s sculpts. That the filament is the right sort etc.

Remember when GW used those vast resources to release their own army builder software 15 years or so ago?

It didn't exactly set the world on fire.

True, but army builders are an oddity, insofar as they’re useful, but not essential. If I’ve got my books, I don’t need army building software.

Of course, that changes in the tournament scene. TO can dictate a specific one to be used, to better ensure list accuracy for hundreds of participants. Helluva lot easier to check too.

 Overread wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Honestly, GW feels sluggish on occaision.
Probably precislcly becuase they are so large and domineering .

Exploiting that is possible, but difficult.

The problem with a big business is its a bit like an oil tanker. It's got vast wealth and vast potential and vast resources to do stuff. But at the same time its a huge moving object that can't quickly change course without dumping vast amounts of that wealth in one big go.

GW moving into 3D printing and changing the whole design of their company would be hard; they've got long term staff expecting to move up and retire casting plastic; designing sprue, working the machines, packing etc... They've got machines, distribution, factories etc... Their whole system is built to run a certain way. A massive shift that might well result in them having almost no factory production and cutting out a huge number of staff and resources is a big change. It's the kind of change you want to put off because you hope you can push through and not have to basically rebuild the company into a new system that, who knows in 3 years could totally change again.

Newer firms can muscle in during these changing moments, they can take the risks because to them it doesn't matter. They have to take a big risk anyway to get into the market so they can either risk it the traditional way or the new way. If they get it right they might just rise up and overtake the big name; get it wrong and they fall to the side.


We saw this with cameras. Kodak was vast and powerful in the film era. When digital game along they didn't jump in with both feet, it was too different; too big a change and back then it wasn't even superior to film. It was a novelty but distinctly not as good a product at the end. Other firms did, they made big investments, took the risk and the digital got better in a very short span of time. Suddenly the market shifted and digital overtook film. It still wasn't technically superior, but it was digital, it was instant, it was computer based. Today Kodak is a shadow of its former self and has given away the market lead to Canon, Nikon and Sony.

GW could go the same way or perhaps the 3D printing revolution never happens. Heck we can remember that in the 90s VR was going to take over the world, yet it never did. Even today, 30 years later, its still not really taken over gaming. It's far more stable than it was and its seeming that it will settle down into a steady growth within the market; but it never rose to dominance like some predicted 30 years ago. Same with 3D TVs they had a huge amount of noise made about them a few years back, yet it never really translated into an actual change. Perhaps we've another 30 years before 3D printing becomes a household thing. OR heck who knows perhaps there's a huge push against plastics and 3d printing falls to the side as household good start being made of more green and long lasting materials.

This is preciscly my point, however i'd like to add to that, that GW has room for competitors allready, basically, GW is in many regions extremely dominant, in regards to TG. However, f.e. over here, during 6th and 7th, they shattered the backbone of the local scene through a combination of nutjob prices and terribad rules, and suddendly alot of other games showed up. to the point that they now that the scen is overall more healthy.
GW is, to a degree relying on their hegemonial structure, sometimes ignoring to their detriment the rules foundation and models.

I've enjoyed reading this thread, although I feel there is too many negative comments about needing lots and lots of money. I may have a solution(especially because of the current world situation), it may be simplistic but it has possibilities. First I will say this;
Somewhere out there in the world(maybe even someone reading this thread) someone may well have created a brilliant set of rules, with a workable backstory full of ideas. It comes under the law of averages, it has to exist. So, if you have what you think is a brilliant ruleset tell us about it!

Here's my idea;
It always comes down to funding, instead of trying to do it all yourself spread it around. If you have a ruleset that you can't fund why not speak to figure manufacturers? You could go to them saying you want to publish this ruleset but have not got much in the way of funds, if they can help fund the publishing you will allow them to create a faction for the game. Now it may seem unrealistic with just one manufacturer but if you go to other companies also(each one making a different faction) then in theory you could have a game up and running with multiple factions ready to go on day one. Later funding could be done by issuing licences to new companies (for a fee) who wish to participate, that way you could have a stream of new releases on a regular basis with each company able to concentrate on their one faction without trying to cover all factions.

This is just an idea, thinking out loud, so to speak.

But! With the world being very different now, many companies are going to have to rethink how they do things to survive. If someone manages to create a wargame that can rival or better the current leaders, surely it would make more sense to risk it rather than create a small line of minis that have no link to any other game or system? Why not invest on something that may well be the next big thing?

Again, simplistic, but many things are created from simple basic ideas.
Like, don't like. Just think about it!

Overhead, you do realize that 3D printing at home isn’t the future, right? It’s the present. Check out the BFG FB group; people buy $150 printers and then print out fleets that cost $1000 at retail. Dudes with printers sell the ships for half the original retail price and build up print farms with the profits.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slipstream, we’ve all been hoping for years that the smaller companies would pool their resources together and designate one or two rule sets as the “unofficial” rule sets of non-GW gaming.

BFG models are kinda old and crap for a game that hasn't been supported for decades.

While 3D at home is a thing, and if you are good enough and have a 3D printer good enough you can print current GW miniatures, it still isn't cheap on money nor on time.

3D printing isn't a threat to GW, not yet.

 Overread wrote:

The big issue I see is that the first hurdle in a new hobby is the buy-in-price. GW has worked on pushing that down

no, they have constantly pushed it up
by increasing the game size and the price of the models, the only "cheap" entry are board games and those are an entry to the "GW-Hobby" and not Wargaming

so adding a 3D Printer to that range, were you enter the "GW-Hobby" with a board game and up buying a 1000$ Printer to print your own GW models

Guys, a printer like an Ender can cost as little as $100, and can print out enough terrain to fill an entire table for maybe $60 in filament. That puts it in direct competition with GW’s new push for terrain. With YouTube videos and helpful threads even on Dakka, setting up the printer takes only about as much time as assembling the GW terrain would take. You can paint pieces as you print more. The savings on terrain alone pay for the device.


As for BFG being dead...it isn’t, now that people are printing whole fleets. GW dropped the ball and they’ll have a hard time recapturing that market.

I get stuff 3D printed for me by a friend, and he charges very reasonable rates, but I don't see 3D printing ever taking over from mass-production. It's like expecting home-printing to take over from full offset printing.

There's quality issues as well as cost issues. Again, I like the 3D prints I get, but damned if I don't miss the ease of working with GW plastic and admiring their design work.

BFG is (sadly) not a current line. So it’s a hard sell to me as proof that 3D Printing is the end of GW’s current business model.

Better to look at current games, and try to extrapolate from the info we reasonably know, what percentage are 3D printing their armies.

I’m not arguing it’s the end of GW, but I do feel like GW’s constant price hikes and price trolling will push more people towards 3D printing rather than competing miniature companies.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
BFG is (sadly) not a current line. So it’s a hard sell to me as proof that 3D Printing is the end of GW’s current business model.

Better to look at current games, and try to extrapolate from the info we reasonably know, what percentage are 3D printing their armies.

Like I've before I think terrain will be the first victim of the 3d-apoc, full armies are still a ways off as whilst the tech is there it needs a prod to get it to i-wotsit mass use simplicity and even GWs latest push to use of branded offical terrain will just result in 'game standard' .stl files popping up in short order, unless GW try to IP basic shapes, and even the low end machines can knock that out to a passable level


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I’m not arguing it’s the end of GW, but I do feel like GW’s constant price hikes and price trolling will push more people towards 3D printing rather than competing miniature companies.

Id like this to be true but despite the intertubes being a thing for a while people still display woeful lack of curiousity, although if 3d printing becomes a regular part of IT teaching at school thatll help

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Overhead, you do realize that 3D printing at home isn’t the future, right? It’s the present. Check out the BFG FB group; people buy $150 printers and then print out fleets that cost $1000 at retail. Dudes with printers sell the ships for half the original retail price and build up print farms with the profits.

Aye but last I checked print farms are not as good for global mass production as a plastic injection moulding system.
So at some point either GW has to turn all its stores into mini-production facilities or the customer has to pick up the tab. The other aspect is that I was more talking about the mass market rather than the online hobby niche - where even here not everyone has a 3D printer. They are still somewhat exotic - getting more common, but not commonplace.

I know eff all about 3D printing capabilities, so take the next with a healthy dose of salt and be mindful of my admitted ignorance.

I’m not trolling, or other wise being deliberately obtuse. In other words? I’m not picking a fight.

But we’re all familiar with GW’s terrain, yeah? It’s incredibly modular, and no floor need be glued to the next, giving it serious flexibility. ]
Yes each upper floor needs to be smaller in footprint than the other, otherwise it looks proper daft.

Example, picking the largest and most expensive offering from GW as the range stands?

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Sector-Imperialis-Basilicanum-2018

£65. Not cheap by any stretch. But having bought two? A most excellent kit.

This is three stories high (oh gods I probably sound like wrestling no-mark Enzo Amore). It has seriously impressive statutes. And if, like a sensible person, you don’t glue the floors to each other, makes for at least three useful pieces of one story terrain (the one story being the ground floor).

Now for my admitted ignorance. I know that 3D printers can screw I t up. And that it takes time to 3D print.


Genuinely open question to those with 3D printers that have tried similar files? How long did it take to print? What sort of clean up time was involved? Did it print with similar modularity? If it was modular, did the components sit neatly with each other?

Super serial open questions. Only caveat being that my own filter is “lazy with decently deep pockets, and really enjoys building kits”

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

Like I've before I think terrain will be the first victim of the 3d-apoc, full armies are still a ways off as whilst the tech is there it needs a prod to get it to i-wotsit mass use simplicity and even GWs latest push to use of branded offical terrain will just result in 'game standard' .stl files popping up in short order, unless GW try to IP basic shapes, and even the low end machines can knock that out to a passable level

I think we're likely to see the MDF terrain start to shrink in the not too distant future... while it can be very pretty, it's fiddly and time consuming to make it so, at least working solely in MDF. The convenience of injection moulded plastic terrain will keep it relevant for a while yet, though.

 Overread wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Overhead, you do realize that 3D printing at home isn’t the future, right? It’s the present. Check out the BFG FB group; people buy $150 printers and then print out fleets that cost $1000 at retail. Dudes with printers sell the ships for half the original retail price and build up print farms with the profits.

Aye but last I checked print farms are not as good for global mass production as a plastic injection moulding system.
So at some point either GW has to turn all its stores into mini-production facilities or the customer has to pick up the tab. The other aspect is that I was more talking about the mass market rather than the online hobby niche - where even here not everyone has a 3D printer. They are still somewhat exotic - getting more common, but not commonplace.

I’m not talking about GW production. At all. I’m talking about something on the consumer end that will bring down demand.

But how much demand?

GW’s customers come in great numbers.

To make a significant dent? What percentage will go the 3D route, and assuming GW offer a legit 3D printing route? What fraction might strap on that wooden leg?

Music industry (eventually) adapted. Why can’t GW follow suit in some manner?

Because generally speaking the solution to piracy has been shown to be a reasonable price point.

As someone who works in the 3D printed tabletop products business, its not really very profitable (as in - profit margins are good if you don't assign a cost to production time) and doesn't scale very well. 3D printing might hurt GWs margins, but its not going to put them out of business, and no company running a print-at-home product line is going to get as big as GW in my lifetime - theres major technological hurdles that need to be surmounted before thats a feasible possibility, but those technologies are generally regarded as antithetical to 3d printing hobbyists (i.e. DRM, proprietary file types, license term enforcement, etc.).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But how much demand?

GW’s customers come in great numbers.

To make a significant dent? What percentage will go the 3D route, and assuming GW offer a legit 3D printing route? What fraction might strap on that wooden leg?

Music industry (eventually) adapted. Why can’t GW follow suit in some manner?

It depends. When someone starts showing off pictures of GW-style printed terrain on a large (unofficial) FB group, there will inevitably be people who ask where he got the terrain, who then print their own or sell printed terrain. So far, 28mm terrain is not close to critical mass for this. However, some more price hikes or much-loved OOP terrain boxes would shove a bunch of customers into the world of 3D printing. We’re seeing a lot of options appear in the News and Rumors subforum; the more options that exist, the more likelihood a customer will find a set too good to pass up because it’s cheaper and cooler than the goofy skull gates or whatever latest thing.

I doubt GW will adopt 3D printing before it’s too popular and widespread to co-opt. They will probably fight it, though, the same way they fought against Chapterhouse.

It depends what you mean by a serious dent, too. GW has doubtlessly lost market share they could have kept, but they are so adept at capturing whales and honeymooners thT they are making money hand over fist. If GW released a plastic terrain set that looked exactly like an empty coffee tin with space marine icons glued to it, it would still sell out in an hour. There is a significant chunk of the customer base who will buy only GW.

It seems absurd, but GW is very adept at creating a sense of ownership and buy-in to their products. I stopped playing over a year ago, but I'm still painting up my backlog and chatting on GW-oriented forums. It's surprisingly difficult to quit cold-turkey.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I know eff all about 3D printing capabilities, so take the next with a healthy dose of salt and be mindful of my admitted ignorance.

No, I think you're part of the answer why 3D printers aren't (yet) going to take over miniature production.

Some of you may have noticed that paints, and boardgames (as well as arts and crafts and scrapbooks) aren't computers. Yet, videogames, photoshop, youtube, social media, etc. clearly shows that computer hobbies are certainly out there. I'd posit that some hobbyists with non-computer hobbies are entirely uninterested in a 3D printers because 3D printers (as well as apps for boardgames, which are even easier to use) are more on the computer side of things than non-computers.

As others have said, owning a printer doesn't mean you're not buying books or that you're making your own cards for gaming. We'll have to see how well 3D printing replaces conventional shopping in general to see its affect on the miniature games hobby.

Technology usually goes through three phases: Enthusiast, Business, and Consumer. The Enthusiast is willing to learn all the intricacies and pay good money for a new technology. Business has the money, and makes this technology more commonplace. Consumer wants something cheap and easy to use, and only cares about how the technology can improve their lives, not the technology itself. Often, Enthusiasts confuse the Enthusiast phase for the Consumer phase, because they don't understand how little interest or tolerance a Consumer may have for a technology.

I don’t play video games and can’t stand ebooks. But I’ve printed out a bunch of spaceships and tanks.

The only way a company will topple GW is with innovation and making GW obsolete...

Say for instance someone created a neoprene game mat with sensors imbedded within that can read NFC chips that are placed into the bases of the minatures...

Then create a tabletop game simulator that allows that player to play anyone in the world.

Moving your minature allows the player you face to see the minature move on thier simulator.

Something like this will topple GW... kinda like how blockbuster disappeared because people stopped renting moves from a store.. GW will exist as long as the market exist in its current form.

gungo wrote:
The only way a company will topple GW is with innovation and making GW obsolete...

Say for instance someone created a neoprene game mat with sensors imbedded within that can read NFC chips that are placed into the bases of the minatures...

Then create a tabletop game simulator that allows that player to play anyone in the world.

Moving your minature allows the player you face to see the minature move on thier simulator.

Something like this will topple GW... kinda like how blockbuster disappeared because people stopped renting moves from a store.. GW will exist as long as the market exist in its current form.

That would be an interesting development for sure. But, and this is a question asked out of my own ignorance, could that technology be solely proprietary? Would it involve entirely custom chips based on unique designs? Because of not, what would be there to stop GW just churning out their own version?

My thinking here is that NFC stuff is pretty common place. Amiibo, Contactless Payment, my work security pass, radar keys for disabled toilets etc are all very common place examples of NFC usage. Could such an implementation be patented to the point that anyone else using it has to pay you a license fee? And, given how hard it is to crack into the wargames market, could you get it out in sufficient numbers to recoup what is, ultimately, a cost in addition to those involved in TTGs?

Because GW have pretty deep pockets. If you’ve sunk millions into your company to develop this ace sounding product (and it does sound ace!), and hit the financial skids? Someone is going to come and buy up, whatever is left?

Like this?:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778078.page

CMON and Xplored are teaming up to bring players the next evolution in board gaming. Teburu is a gaming console that seamlessly integrates the physical and digital worlds, keeping players focused on the board and its components while the system takes care of game rules, enemies’ behavior, and storytelling events.

Half and Half games are the worst examples of wishy thinking and wont be any kind of threat to GW, the odd app for boardgames, like the Cthulu one, are about as far as the idea needs to go.

The only threat to GW is if folks start dabbling in other games but as has been pointed out their retention-fu is strong and a constant influx of new players currently makes heratics like me largely irrelavent

gungo wrote:
The only way a company will topple GW is with innovation and making GW obsolete...

Say for instance someone created a neoprene game mat with sensors imbedded within that can read NFC chips that are placed into the bases of the minatures...

Then create a tabletop game simulator that allows that player to play anyone in the world.

Moving your minature allows the player you face to see the minature move on thier simulator.

Something like this will topple GW... kinda like how blockbuster disappeared because people stopped renting moves from a store.. GW will exist as long as the market exist in its current form.

That solves your army. How would you see where opponents models are? Computer screen? Then that's not really different to say tabletop simularor except more clumsy...

I can't see that being as popular as you think because in the end all you'd see for your opponents units is a square/hex on the board highlighted with a circle representing the base. It loses the interaction of a physical game and isn't really as fast to process, play nor visual as a digital game. It's sort of stuck between the two.


Now I could see microchips in model bases being a thing, but the trick would be how the information is working in the game and it would likely rely on very tight links to a good mobile app to function. Even then you'd still likely have to keep turning to the app to plug in basic data (eg wounds).


Honestly I'd see something like holographic games being more of a threat; rather than clumsy hybrids of digital and physical products.

Distribution and availability of a decent product everywhere at a reasonable level with rules that are clean. Having a set style and an easy entrance to play point is also key.

Mantic has the rules, but they shot the retailers many years ago and are trying to get them back now, which is a hard battle to fight. Plus they keep playing around between plastic, metal and resin/plastic. There is no uniformity even within their ownstyle.

Infinity has too much for me to look at, it's visually overwhelming and my painting skills don't do it justice. Cost to enter is also higher.

I never played Privateer stuff, but they switched material and the rules I heard went to gak.

Rulesets don't matter. Rules largely don't matter to the gw crowd. Its the experience. The social experience plus the fact their investment is safe by such a massive player base.

The rules have been a trash fire forever and they still bring in new players because everyone else is playing it.

The best ruleset in the world by another company won't change that.

 Theophony wrote:
Plus they keep playing around between plastic, metal and resin/plastic. There is no uniformity even within their ownstyle.

it is not playing around but trying to get a full range of miniatures for all factions without going bankcrupt.

one thing they learned over time was that people want a full range of minis for their faction but they cannot afford to do everything an HIPS and it takes time to get stuff
yet Resin and Metal is made in house, so easy for them to make and add parts/models the people are asking for which would be too expensive and too slow in HIPS

remember, the fiasco of the first Basilean Men at Arms happend because KS Backers demanded that the models need to be delivered fast and not "good" (Speed over Quality)


FFG has a similar problem, a lot of people won't start until the factions are a complete range, having Options to chose from in each slot and not just core models and commanders
and they also struggle to bring everything in HIPS (for Legion) and keep stuff in stock

they have chosen a more save starting point by rules coming with the models so people are not missing something as they don't know what is there, except for the obvious (like Legin having an oprative slot but no model yet, people know that something will be there)


it took GW years to get HIPS manufactored in house, others don't have the luxury and need to work with different materials

gungo wrote:
Then create a tabletop game simulator that allows that player to play anyone in the world.

Well, it's already being done on TableTop Simulator...



Also found Warhammer Online, although it's an MMORPG. I'll let others discuss WH40K in videogames...

Recruitment of new players is the key. Forget rules quality, miniature price points, production methods etc. The tabletop hobby needs new blood constantly which means new never been involved before hobbyists.

Until another company has its own stores no one in miniature gaming will threaten GW. Warhammer's competition is PlayStation, Xbox, smartphones, any other hobby/trend for young people's time and money.

Yes people often 'graduate' into other game systems, manufacturers and versions of tabletop gaming. But it was GW that put a brush and dice in their hands and opened the portal from the wallet to the pile of shame. Speak to historical gamers of a certain age and they will often have similar stories of starting with airfix. Shift down the generations and GW becomes the universal story.

Aye and with airfix/Revel sort of out of the general lime light these days (along with Meccano); that leaves GW taking a lions share of the "hands on creative" hobbies outside of arts and crafts and the mature lego lines.

In fact of all those games only Lego and GW have really persisted in any strength at the younger end of the market; and of that part of Lego surviving was marketing itself out to the movie tie-in industry side of things.

Many of the other hands on hobbies are all limited to a more mature market, which is fine for now whilst nostalgia rules, but it leaves them with far less youthful recruitment and a ticking time bomb that their market is continually going to shrink. I can see companies like Hornby having trouble in years to come when they've no youth to replace the older generations.


Historical games are much the same, though because they sort of cross over with sci-fi adn fantasy games they can at least expect to get some from GW's massive recruitment of new gamers. But, again, there's no massive marketing drive to get people who are not already wargamers/modelmakers into the hobby.

If you look at the history of hornby etc and the number of times they've been bought and sold as a company it really shows how little profit there is in it. It would have been entirely reasonable for GW to have been bought up at some point in the last 20 years when it wasn't doing so great. Hasbro would love to get they're hands on it.

Totally agree with the point about hands on hobbies. So much of it now rides in the wake of GW and it really should be recognised.

This is a great thread


For me personally:

1. Miniatures: Decent quality figures I rank this ahead of rules quality only because the models are usually the most expensive element of a game by far. If the rules are bad they can be fixed, you can use different ones or create your own. If the models are bad...

2. Rules: Ideally both fun and pseudo-realistic. I personally love highly tactical rules that make the course of a game seem like a feasible battle on some level (whether its fought with spears or railguns). I don't enjoy games with an over-reliance on synergies and buffing, or excessive randomness for things that shouldn't be random, e.g. units running. Compactness is also vital -the core rulebook and army list book should cover everything, with optional campaign books.

3. Lore / Background: Not essential (for games that are intended to be more generic), but if its rich and fascinating, painting and gaming will be more immersive and enjoyable, not to mention reading into it. I still follow the 40k universe despite having being disenchanted with the game itself a long time.

4. Factions: Distinct, well-balanced factions that handle differently. A decent variety of units, loadout options and upgrades in each. If 40k is excessive in the regard, many newer games like Warpath suffer from the opposite.

TheBrushKnight wrote:
Recruitment of new players is the key. Forget rules quality, miniature price points, production methods etc. The tabletop hobby needs new blood constantly which means new never been involved before hobbyists.

Until another company has its own stores no one in miniature gaming will threaten GW. Warhammer's competition is PlayStation, Xbox, smartphones, any other hobby/trend for young people's time and money.

Yes people often 'graduate' into other game systems, manufacturers and versions of tabletop gaming. But it was GW that put a brush and dice in their hands and opened the portal from the wallet to the pile of shame. Speak to historical gamers of a certain age and they will often have similar stories of starting with airfix. Shift down the generations and GW becomes the universal story.

This is very true in many ways.

Lately however (at least in America), it is Wizkids with the Nozlur range and Reaper with Bones that are putting brushes in peoples hands.

Now that I think about it; if Reaper set their minds to it they could become the GW of America - they produce their paint and minis at their Texas factory, and they have a (albeit mostly defunct and neglected) set of wargame rules. Hire Alessio at Riverhorse to breathe life into them, invest in a plastic injection machine and it's off to the races. They certainly could open their own stores in major American cities. However I don't think Ed wants to deal with what that would mean.

Reaper are big, but they seem to be happy being the "odd model" company and "RPG" supply company. They don't seem to have as much desire to be a wargaming company. I figure that they've got their niche and they feel that they make more than enough in that niche that they don't need to go "fighting" for another market.

A great part of their power is also appealing, esp with Bones, to the RPG and casual market who really don't care about models in the same way as wargamers. It's really interesting to see how powerful GW made "The Hobby" elements in their marketing because DnD models can be perpainted, a bit on the cheap side, often happy with just a white undercoat etc... And some might only see use once or twice if ever.

On the flipside they could have gone full "Kingdom Death" with highly detailed customisable player characters and such. But DnD isnt' interested in that kind of investment and Reaper and such are happier making characterful character models instead of complex customisable ones.

GW changed the models aspect from pure gaming aid to be a modelling hobby as well

you see more and more GW models on scale model communities and there also the price is not a big problem (as you don't need an army)

but it also changed how Wargames care about their model

it is a pure marker on the table, a cardboard cube on a round base with a name tag on it will tho the same job as well as a 40€ model
yet the wargamer says the model needs to be the best looking available and does not care about the price
even if it only gets a terrible paint job and you want care about the high details as soon as you start playing

gaming models need to look good for the game, hence most R&F models look boring and miss details on the individual models as the important part is that they look good as regiment in formation from the distance

Skirmish models come with individual poses for each as you don't want 2 similar models in a 10 models game

and GW is the in the middle, using large amount of models in a Skirmish like games, yet already a 5 model squad as double poses that need a lot of work to change them
and people at the same time do not care about it because you need such a huge amount that double poses won't matter anyway on the table but the models also need to be as much detailed as possible

so there is no chance for someone like Reaper to get into the GW market
they could to Wargames but not for the GW customers as those want to have scale models to play with and not just game markers

Lokking at Mantic, those tried to sell "Markers" to GW clients and the main complain was that the game is bad because the models don't look as good as GW ones do
people rather paid 10 times the amount of money for a worse game than playing a game with "bad" models

and the funny thing is, the best selling Mantic games are those that attract different costumers
Deadzone and Walking Dead are considered Boardgames and Wargames/TableTops by a lot of people and this is reason why they sell

I'd say the number of people buying GW miniatures purely to paint them is possibly higher than the number of people that buy them purely to play after a 3-colour paint job.

Back in the eighties and early nineties GW had personality, they were crazy, fun and passionate, it’s how they became the best. Then they lost all that and now GW has no soul, they try and recapture that same vibe by “paying tribute” to the early days, but they’re missing what made it special.
That’s what another company would need to make me switch, passionate, fun people are hard not to follow and support.

Graveyard of indie games is full of 'passionate, fun people". For every indie hit there's thousand failed projects made by just as passionate people.

To actually challenge GW you need two things that are two sides of the same issue:
1) You have to get people who invested hundreds if not thousands of dollars to get over their sunk cost feeling
2) you need to guarantee there is a quick, widespread acceptance of the new game to provide enticing playerbase, otherwise point 1 kicks in full force.

Everything else is secondary.

Like it or not more companies survive because of people who are bean counters first and passionate second. Many a passion project has died because those in charge don't understand how to balance their books; how to forecast investment; how to hedge their bets etc... There's many a person who has sunk all their money into the most fantastic product and then run out of money to actually bring it to market.


Also I'd still maintain that if your business model for making it into wargames involves/relies upon poaching users from another franchise then you're onto a losing strategy from the start. What you need is a meas to get customers before GW gets the; to attract new customers from new niches that GW doesn't outreach into.

Don't aim for the 20-40 year old geek who already has a huge warhammer army or three and, no matter what you try, will always still have a GW interest. Go for the 8-15 year olds who don't yet have armies; who are ripe and fresh and haven't got years of collections. Heck its exactly what GW does.

GW isn't out there trying to steal customers of PP or Mantic or others; they are out there getting kids into their games. Fresh new blood that is a clean slate to introduce to wargames, to mould and to impress upon at a formative young age.

Going for the 8-15 might actually be the more expensive option thought. GW can afford it because they managed to capture the pre-existing/growing gaming market in the 80s, when the competition was pretty much all ran from some shack in Farting-upon-Thyme or Nowhereville, Oregon. They have slowly built up media and street presence, and are attractive enough to put their brand on Monopoly or Risk these days, the entry-level board games.

A new company would have none of that, limiting their presence to LGS's and online...and none of those are where you capture the 8-15 demographic cause a kid that never heard of wargames won't wander into "MyWargameisBest.com" randomly and order a starter.

If you're not Hasbro or WizKids putting your licensed products on walmart shelves, the best you can do is poach.

 Overread wrote:

GW isn't out there trying to steal customers of PP or Mantic or others

one could argue that GW is actually doing that

if a company found a niche GW released a game for that, sometimes with a little bit more success but mostly just to get those people into buying some GW models and use them in the main game

Cronch wrote:Going for the 8-15 might actually be the more expensive option thought. GW can afford it because they managed to capture the pre-existing/growing gaming market in the 80s, when the competition was pretty much all ran from some shack in Farting-upon-Thyme or Nowhereville, Oregon. They have slowly built up media and street presence, and are attractive enough to put their brand on Monopoly or Risk these days, the entry-level board games.

A new company would have none of that, limiting their presence to LGS's and online...and none of those are where you capture the 8-15 demographic cause a kid that never heard of wargames won't wander into "MyWargameisBest.com" randomly and order a starter.

If you're not Hasbro or WizKids putting your licensed products on walmart shelves, the best you can do is poach.

Aye I admitted such as well. That said there might be ways but it might be sideways attacks rather than frontal. Eg you might release board games aimed at those generations rather than a pure wargame. There are ways to penetrate that market or at least influence it in some form. Granted its a tricky market to influence today or back then. Don't forget GW was also competing against Airfix, Meccano, Hornby, Lego, Lego Technic and loads of other brands and companies that I forget now.
If anything the physical kids toys market might actually be easier to penetrate now in terms of competition; the hard part is that digital entertainment has risen to powerfully compete with that market. Back then digital games were around, but nowhere near the volume, diversity nor market penetration.

kodos wrote:

 Overread wrote:

GW isn't out there trying to steal customers of PP or Mantic or others

one could argue that GW is actually doing that

if a company found a niche GW released a game for that, sometimes with a little bit more success but mostly just to get those people into buying some GW models and use them in the main game

GW does indeed compete, but half the time they aren't stealing the customers, they are enticing former GW customers to come back to GW. At the same time you can tell that its not their primary focus; heck until the CEO change GW wasn't even really trying to go for those customers at all. GW has always had their strongest focus on the younger market ot get fresh blood into the hobby. I think its a big part of why they've survived so well over the years; because for every old customer they lose, they aim to replace them with fresh younger customers. This creates a healthy cycle of customers for GW and whilst it will rise and fall generation to generation, broadly speaking it ensures they maintain a healthy income of new customers.

 Vaktathi wrote:

FFG got close, with Xwing for a bit, but that was in large part due to mishandlings on GW's part and a confluence of new Star Wars movies, and didn't last.

I'd argue that X-Wing was more a case that the majority of people picking it up weren't already tabletop wargamers and those who were, didn't really view it under the same lens as they did... well, tabletop wargames.

It's arguably why historical wargames don't really have too much overlap with sci-fi/fantasy wargames, because the two audiences can and absolutely do overlap, but at the end of the day you're either into more real-world, grounded rulesets and models or you're not. A Flames of War player probably isn't going to stop playing Flames of War if GW suddenly produce the most balanced, fun, amazing ruleset ever - even though they might also play 40k, they won't drop FoW in the same way a Warmahordes or Infinity player might, but they might drop FoW for another WW2 ruleset.

The reason I mention that is because going back to X-Wing, anybody who's going to really 'rival' GW has to be someone who can bring in an audience who weren't really involved with wargaming before then. CMON's ASOI&F isn't huge, but there's a notably big proportion of players who never actually touched wargames before but were pulled in under the assumption it was 'like a bigger board game' (being designed by CMON and featuring on Kickstarter helped) and even years after it's release you still see that a good amount. Star Wars is... Star Wars, but Legion has a lot of Imperial Assault and X-Wing players who didn't touch GW games. The D&D miniatures are very popular and a lot of people get into painting them up.

The problem with trying to grow your brand from existing GW players is that, as 8th showed, most of them are probably going to go running back GW as soon as Malibu Stacy has a new hat because those 'ex'-GW players already invested hundreds/thousands of hours and pounds into the GW Brand(tm). Anybody who's going to potentially rival GW going forward is going to do so by not trying to siphon off GW converts. It's going to be like X-Wing a few years ago and, to a less relevant extent, board games now, by bringing in a new audience who're drawn in by something other than 'another unassembled, unpainted tabletop wargame', even if that is ultimately the endgame.

Joyboozer wrote:
Back in the eighties and early nineties GW had personality, they were crazy, fun and passionate, it’s how they became the best. Then they lost all that and now GW has no soul, they try and recapture that same vibe by “paying tribute” to the early days, but they’re missing what made it special.
That’s what another company would need to make me switch, passionate, fun people are hard not to follow and support.

Ronnie has that going for Mantic. Whether it’s real or just canny illusion, he gives the company the air of a passion project.

Dave Lewis is the personality behind Dropfleet/Dropzone, widely beloved by the fans for his fanatical attention to details. After TTCombat bought out the company, fans complained that TTC had him locked in a basement ...and TTC went along with the joke. They also release great exclusive miniatures that show a connection with the memes and fascinations of the community.

Reaper has a heavy presence on their forum, and a rapport with some of their fans that borders on intimate.

These companies have all built up loyal fanbases, extensive product ranges, and reputations that all seem to emphasize a dependable and improving product.

Wargames Atlantic seems on their way, so far, but they seem a bit sober in their aspirations, being more historically-minded.

They also release great exclusive miniatures that show a connection with the memes and fascinations of the community.

A small side-note, I am really irked by how easily people are swayed when business entities do those "we're in touch with our fanbase" things. No company is your friend.

No, but it’s nice when they make the effort to try to appear like they care.

While I agree bean counters are necessary, marketing/ PR departments ruin everything they touch and are more who I had in mind as being not needed when you have passionate creative people.

That is such a hot take so hot it burned a hole in the fabric of reality, because it is pure nonsense.

Without marketing, you cannot reach out to new customers, and without new customers the whole thing is simply not viable.

That is such bs it stained the fabric of reality. You need marketing, not a marketing department. Unless your intended audience is hipsters.

Joyboozer wrote:
While I agree bean counters are necessary, marketing/ PR departments ruin everything they touch and are more who I had in mind as being not needed when you have passionate creative people.

But what use is passion if no one sees it? Marketing/PR is the backbone of a company getting customers. Look at any company and advertising and marketing is a cornerstone to them doing well. Often as not substandard products cna sell better than superior ones because the substandard has a vastly more effective marketing system. Heck consider that some major computer games like Call of Duty reportedly spend more money marketing and advertising than on developing the game itself.


If your company does not invest enough into marketing and PR then you are basically at the mercy of the customers totally. If you are at that stage then most of the time you won't get big. You get the rare situations like Minecraft where the product simply takes off and strikes a chord with the community leaders. Resulting in a huge amount of basically free and self perpetuating marketing that takes off like a storm. Which is supremely rare to happen.

Marketing isn't evil, its purely about communication of your product to your customers and to new customers. It's about informing and outreaching information that your product, your brand, your company exists in the world. If you don't do that then many potential customers will simply never hear of you.

Who would you say was responsible for most of the product promotion to people outside the hobby over the majority of GWS existence, GW or distributors and retailers?

Joyboozer wrote:
Who would you say was responsible for most of the product promotion to people outside the hobby over the majority of GWS existence, GW or distributors and retailers?

In the UK I'd say GW itself. They have shops on the highstreet with their own staff in many towns. Back in the 90s they were often in prime highstreet locations with bright stores, tables, models and all. Even smaller ones had two or three staff on at any one time. They were also in many towns that either had only poky small geek shops or no geek shop at all, so GW stores very much were the welcoming to the wargame market. Heck earlier they even ran TV averts though I think they ended fairly fast as costs rose very quickly.

Today GW still has a great number of stores on the highstreet, though they've moved out of the best locations to the secondbest and stores are now often one staffer only. But that's more a reflection of how costs on the highstreet have gone insane over the last years.

The same GW who at their peak had a CEO who bragged they didn’t need to advertise? The same GW who used a magazine publisher to advertise their lotr product line so they didn’t have to spend the money to do so themselves?
*Edit* also, I think we’re supposed to call them Warhammer stores, because of the successful rebranding and marketing campaign.

Joyboozer wrote:
The same GW who at their peak had a CEO who bragged they didn’t need to advertise? The same GW who used a magazine publisher to advertise their lotr product line so they didn’t have to spend the money to do so themselves?

Well the 90s wasn't Kirby era fully. Plus honestly GW didn't "need to advertise" for a long while because they had highstreet stores advertising for them; their own magazine advertising for them etc... GW hasn't really used traditional advertising/marketing in a very very long while. I don't really recall seeing them advertising in other magazines, on billboards etc.... I suspect mostly because they have their own stores and are a niche product. So they aren't looking at a mass market advertising campaign.

Kirby I think rested on the power of GW for a long while and it was good times at the start, but come the end they were bleeding customers and there was clearly a need for a new direction. Remembering that even without paying for adverts online, GW wasn't really using the internet for anything more than their store front. I think in part it was because they were protecting the importance of White Dwarf as their advertising product and likely felt using the internet was going to rob them of the point of having WD. At the same time their early attempts at internet use was the GW forum that burned in fires of trolling and bad moderation/community management.

So they got stung and didn't feel a need; fastforward and the new CEO has certainly changed a lot of that and GW is now putting out community articles every single day of the year. Coupled to an active youtube channel and even streaming some major games at events as well. Plus they appear to be connecting with and attending events as a company far more so.

Marketing isn't evil

This really isn't the place to discuss why capitalism is unsustainable

Joyboozer wrote:
That is such bs it stained the fabric of reality. You need marketing, not a marketing department. Unless your intended audience is hipsters.

And who makes marketing? the marketing department.

Even if it is a very small company of 5 people, one of those 5 should preferably be a marketing major. And as the company grows so does the marketing needed, so you hire more people to do marketing, and then you have a marketing department.

 Arbitrator wrote:

It's arguably why historical wargames don't really have too much overlap with sci-fi/fantasy wargames, because the two audiences can and absolutely do overlap, but at the end of the day you're either into more real-world, grounded rulesets and models or you're not. A Flames of War player probably isn't going to stop playing Flames of War if GW suddenly produce the most balanced, fun, amazing ruleset ever - even though they might also play 40k, they won't drop FoW in the same way a Warmahordes or Infinity player might, but they might drop FoW for another WW2 ruleset.

I agree there. We had this discussion at our FLGS at one point, as to why exactly some of us don't play Bolt Action. Certainly for myself (I'm 36) and a guy in his late 40's we don't play it as it is no longer pretend. For all the atrocities there are in 40k etc., it is still a work of fiction, what Bolt Action represents is not. We had parents or grandparents that really fought what we are "playing" and it leaves a bad taste in your mouth for people of a certain age.

So, no matter how good a ruleset could be; I know for fact there are people that simply won't drift into IRL stuff, but there are others (curiously, many of them serving in the RAF in the case of our FLGS) that will hop between each no problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joyboozer wrote:
The same GW who at their peak had a CEO who bragged they didn’t need to advertise? The same GW who used a magazine publisher to advertise their lotr product line so they didn’t have to spend the money to do so themselves?
*Edit* also, I think we’re supposed to call them Warhammer stores, because of the successful rebranding and marketing campaign.

They are rebranding them because of general colloquialism of people calling them "The warhammer shop(s)". Now, you are in danger of genericising your brand name there and time will tell for that (see also: Hoover, Jet Ski, Jacuzzi, Band-Aid, Kleenex etc.etc.). But the idea is they want GW to be synonymous with wargaming.

You see it everywhere on the internet already, with random people on Reddit etc. posting a picture of mini that is clearly not a GW mini and asking "What Warhammer model is this???".

 Grimtuff wrote:

So, no matter how good a ruleset could be; I know for fact there are people that simply won't drift into IRL stuff, but there are others (curiously, many of them serving in the RAF in the case of our FLGS) that will hop between each no problem.

There was certainly a sizeable number of gamers who jumped from 40k to FoW when it was in its prime.

 insaniak wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

So, no matter how good a ruleset could be; I know for fact there are people that simply won't drift into IRL stuff, but there are others (curiously, many of them serving in the RAF in the case of our FLGS) that will hop between each no problem.

There was certainly a sizeable number of gamers who jumped from 40k to FoW when it was in its prime.

There absolutely was (one of the head people for FoW used to be a manager at my local GW), but from personal experience I know there are people that won't take the step to historicals, especially WW2 historicals due to it still being so comparatively recent.

Yeah, I'm one of them. I was constantly puzzled by people recommending FoW as an alternative to 40k, since they just didn't seem comparable to me. I can get behind some historicals (I have a vague interest in WW2 naval games, mostly just because I like warships and don't care about the historical elements, and I've toyed with the idea of buying into a fighter plane themed game like Blood Red Skies, but have no interest at all in reenacting historical land battles. The idea gives me the creeps. Which is not a judgment on those who enjoy such things (that would be somewhat hypocritical) but they're just not my thing.

I see the line about GW and marketing a lot. I'd argue that they've realised that they have no need to do so.

If you look at their latest end of year financial report, they give some stats on Warhammer community usage.Its got 8 million unique registered users, averages145 million hits per year and got 4 million views of the 9th Ed 40k video in 24hrs this year.

Why invest in marketing when you've got that sort of gravitational online pull?

GW's community page IS marketing.

Thing is you only come to a website if you know its there so who is bringing those 8 million users there; who is ensuring that you get new fresh users there every day? Stores directing people to the website; school clubs; staff; advertisements; white dwarf (it is sold on highstreet stores at least in the UK); franchise games and products (Warhammer Total War; Dawn of War etc...)


Basically if you rely on one kind of marketing then there's a high chance that you will reach a peak and then get stale. Different people engage and will be snared by different marketing approaches so by having a broad stroke of options you run a high chance of reaching more people from more diverse backgrounds.
In addition it helps reinforce each other. How many people will check the FB or Community pages for news when their store owner tells them something new is coming; how many check it out regularly because of the club or group they are in etc....

GW's multi-faceted marketing approach is what helps give them that online pull and, importantly, helps maintain it without relying on paying for google ads and the like.

insaniak wrote:Yeah, I'm one of them. I was constantly puzzled by people recommending FoW as an alternative to 40k, since they just didn't seem comparable to me. I can get behind some historicals (I have a vague interest in WW2 naval games, mostly just because I like warships and don't care about the historical elements, and I've toyed with the idea of buying into a fighter plane themed game like Blood Red Skies, but have no interest at all in reenacting historical land battles. The idea gives me the creeps. Which is not a judgment on those who enjoy such things (that would be somewhat hypocritical) but they're just not my thing.

Most historical wargaming isn't recreating specific battles though.
Usually there are army composition lists for which of the troops one can take (usually following a standardised classification system) for a particular army combined with a points system. The game is then a "what if" battle between two evenly matched armies that could potentially have been fielded by their nations in a particular time period (eg: Late Medieval German vs Mongols).

jim30 wrote:I see the line about GW and marketing a lot. I'd argue that they've realised that they have no need to do so.

If you look at their latest end of year financial report, they give some stats on Warhammer community usage.Its got 8 million unique registered users, averages145 million hits per year and got 4 million views of the 9th Ed 40k video in 24hrs this year.

Why invest in marketing when you've got that sort of gravitational online pull?

Marketing is presumably how they got there and the things you mention are actually marketing.

I don't know if it's been suggested already as I only read the first page but I think a large videogame studio with a popular, established IP could have the ability to be a success. I could maybe see a Diablo game being pretty cool. And the obvious one to me is League of Legends. But that would be much more focussed purely around the game itself, like a mini wargame version of MTG. And would play like the most concentrated hero hammer you could imagine lol

The thing is this wouldn't be a bad thing for GW at all IMO. Thousands of new potential customers would be brought into the hobby of wargaming which is only a good thing for them. I doubt many 40k players would cross over entirely, having so much already invested.

What would it take?

Outside of a time machine and some serious money?

GW contrast paints. Now *that* was marketing. Store demos, videos, and even events showing off professional-level painters, despite the product aimed at novice painters.

fwiw, KS is marketing up the wazoo, to the point where some established companies use KS for marketing under the guise of fundraising. Teasers... community manager... good communication... forum advertising.. it's all marketing. I've also seen marketing faceplants from various small companies that haven't ruined them, but cost them a fair chunk of their potential customer base. (Prodos and Cryptozoic come to mind...)

 ced1106 wrote:
GW contrast paints. Now *that* was marketing. Store demos, videos, and even events showing off professional-level painters, despite the product aimed at novice painters.

In fairness GW isn't as bad as this as some other firms. Infinity comes to mind as a range which markets using some really outstanding paintwork on their models which is not easy to replicate - especially when many of their models are also generally much smaller and closer to "realistic" instead of "heroic" proportions.

Contrast Paints were well marketed, but also a solid product.

I’m a reluctant painter myself. My skill never coming close to my ambition. As a former Gifted Kid in School, that means I just tend to give up unless I’m quickly competent.

Contrast? Knocked out 20 battle ready Ossiarchs in a mere four hours. Just need to crack on with the rest!

Yeah Contrast has been a game-changer for me. I still do fancier painting as well but just being able to get the basics done with One Thick Coat is a huge time-saver, and that means I do loads more painting because it feels fun rather than a chore.

When I first got into the hobby, I went to my local GW and the staff were very snobby, this almost stopped me from entering the hobby to begin with.

Then Heroquest and Space Crusade happened and I was able to get my hobby fix without having to deal with GW staff directly.

A few years later GW seemed to understand this issue and the staff became much welcoming. I then became a very loyal fan and have been so for a very long time.

Then GW released a statement saying that anyone who didn't think like them politically wouldn't be missed if they left the hobby. Now I go elsewhere for my models.

Short answer? Make me feel welcome and don't preach at me about your political views or any other non wargaming related views.

Another reason I love 40k is the background. I get to make my own space marine chapter or imperial guard regiment. Even my titan legion has its own story.

Wargaming is essentially political, and when the 'political view' is "Don't be rude about people" I can't help but feel your loss is a net gain for everyone else.

Yeah that inclusive statement was mostly "if you're racist/insulting/whatever then we won't tolerate you at our stores - good bye"

Which is basically GW store policy for years and years anyway. They just said it at the time because, well, honestly all the big firms were saying the same sort of things.


It seems a rather odd reason to walk out of GW stores, especially since it was a management release and likely had no actual impact or change in policies, especially at the local level.

Nurglitch wrote:
Wargaming is essentially political, and when the 'political view' is "Don't be rude about people" I can't help but feel your loss is a net gain for everyone else.

Wargaming is not political, it's an escape from all that noise. I don't care about your political views or anything else about you, I just want to enjoy a game of toy soldiers, but your right, its not nice to be rude to people or make them feel like their loss would somehow be a net gain for everyone. Thanks for the correction.

 Overread wrote:
Yeah that inclusive statement was mostly "if you're racist/insulting/whatever then we won't tolerate you at our stores - good bye"

Which is basically GW store policy for years and years anyway. They just said it at the time because, well, honestly all the big firms were saying the same sort of things.


It seems a rather odd reason to walk out of GW stores, especially since it was a management release and likely had no actual impact or change in policies, especially at the local level.

On the other hand, the fewer chud-right vermin infesting FLGSs, the better.

Mr.Giggles wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:
Wargaming is essentially political, and when the 'political view' is "Don't be rude about people" I can't help but feel your loss is a net gain for everyone else.

Wargaming is not political, it's an escape from all that noise. I don't care about your political views or anything else about you, I just want to enjoy a game of toy soldiers, but your right, its not nice to be rude to people or make them feel like their loss would somehow be a net gain for everyone. Thanks for the correction.

War is, in the immortal words of Clausewitz, a continuation of politics by different means. By definition then, wargaming is an inherently political endeavor, regardless of whether its the politics of the grim dark far future or of another period, and regardless of whether or not you view it as a game/form of entertainment or an escape, etc. Doubly so when you realize that its a social hobby, and thus social interaction with others and the political baggage that comes with that is inherent to the medium.

If you want to avoid politics, go play Solitaire.

Joyboozer wrote:While I agree bean counters are necessary, marketing/ PR departments ruin everything they touch and are more who I had in mind as being not needed when you have passionate creative people.

That's the perfect encapsulation of why many companies based around the owner's hobby fail. Marketing and PR is how people find out about your amazing passion project and without it your company will fail regardless of how good the product is. I think what is true, and what GW has often fallen afoul of in the past, is you shouldn't let your marketing/PR/accountancy departments make creative decisions about your core products.

Mr.Giggles wrote:

Then GW released a statement saying that anyone who didn't think like them politically wouldn't be missed if they left the hobby. Now I go elsewhere for my models.

Short answer? Make me feel welcome and don't preach at me about your political views or any other non wargaming related views.

If you think it's political to release a statement saying "be inclusive, don't be rude" I think you've either spectacularly missed the point of the statement or you may be one of the people they want to exclude. As corporate statements in the wake of the BLM protests went GW's was right up there with the blandest of them all but I have no idea how anyone could actually take offense at the core message.

As corporate statements in the wake of the BLM protests went GW's was right up there with the blandest of them all but I have no idea how anyone could actually take offense at the core message.

Because the people complaining about "politics" have politicized kindness. When the instantaneous response to "help others feel welcome in the community and exclude those who don't" is "WAAAAHHHH POLITICS IN MY HOBBY", it shouldn't be that hard to figure out that they see being a gatekeeper or a cockwomble as their god-given right which is being infringed upon by a bunch of leftists.

For me to switch over, I feel like I’d have to play a game that I really loved the aesthetics and gameplay to, just like a Dawn of War (#2 was my fav) and then for a store with a bunch of minis on it to exist that have same quality as GW stuff, it’d be really hard to do I think but I’d always consider it for sure

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Contrast Paints were well marketed, but also a solid product.
I’m a reluctant painter myself. My skill never coming close to my ambition. As a former Gifted Kid in School, that means I just tend to give up unless I’m quickly competent.
Contrast? Knocked out 20 battle ready Ossiarchs in a mere four hours. Just need to crack on with the rest!

Ian Sturrock wrote:Yeah Contrast has been a game-changer for me. I still do fancier painting as well but just being able to get the basics done with One Thick Coat is a huge time-saver, and that means I do loads more painting because it feels fun rather than a chore.

Yeah, Contrast was the perfect Marketing Clue

Take Something that already exists and is used by people for years, mix some new colours and sell it for a premium price as the shiny new thing that was not there before

The only thing Contrast paints did was enabled the "only GW" crowed to use speed painting techniques being there for 20 years with paints from other brands
problem was just those were not related to wargaming and GW advertised their way of painting so people doing the "GW Hobby" did not even thought about

long time ago, Silver Colour Spray + Tamiya Clear colours were the way to go for speed painting metallic Marines, specially Pre-Heresy Thousand Sond and Alpha Legion
White Primer + Green Ink was used for Orks (one layer for Grots, 2 layers for Boys, 3 for Bosses, Purple+Green for Black Orks)
Lot of people here got back to their original Washes/Inks from other brands after the hype as only some Contrast paints work really well while some colours are worse

GW re-invented the wheel with, after their marketing made you forget that wheels exist inside the GW Hobby and did a perfect job to let people believe it is really something new

and it is the same with everything GW is doing
GW is the only company doing a SciFi Wargame, and they are making the best possible rules, and it is something that was not there before
GW is the only company doing such big plastic models, and those are the best you can get for the price, and nothing as good as this has been made before

same with the paints, if you only know GW and some 3rd party products that provide alternatives to GW products (Vallejo has 2 main colour ranges, the good one and the one that was made to match the previous GW colours which should have been the next Citadel ones but they lost the contract, and people in the GW Hobby now the brand as an alternative for Citadel, while it is a standard art supply company and was a name in the art/model painting scene long before that) those things are really new to you
and the new fancy and shiny model for 150$ is the best model you have ever seen before and no one has done something like that, because you don't know that perfect grade Gundams exists or what scale model companies have done with their SciFi ranges

Marketing is everything here, and GW is very good in making people really believe that everything they to is the best possible that could be done and that they are the first in doing so

@kodos

Sorry, what other Contrast-equivalents are there out there? Is it just that it's a thick wash or something?

Inks and washes. You did the same basic thing with inks and washes.

 auticus wrote:
Inks and washes. You did the same basic thing with inks and washes.

Most inks and washes I used prior to contrast don't hold a candle. Contrast was a legit game changer without me having to make my own and make enough for an entire army and possibly future purchases so my armies would match. Could you do it before, sure. Could you get the same results for the speed and time put into the product, nope.

The only IP in the wargaming arena that i can think of that has the depth that GW has is classic battletech/mechwarrior. having started out around the same time as 40K, with a depth of lore as deep as anything GW ever wrote. then add a catalog of video games, novels, a collectable card game, a hero clix game and even a tv series to go along with the TT miniatures game. the fan base tends to be more in localized groups that the widespread nature of 40K that GW has created for many reasons(even though the fan base is just as devoted-never get a house davion and house kurita player started you will never hear the end of it)

The 2 main problems for it are
1.Unlike GW when the original parent company FASA went under the IP has changed hands between multiple companies and in some cases parts of it were broken off on their own. microsoft owns the video game side, wizkids had the card/clix game. ironwind metals makes most of the minis (new kickstarter aside) catalyst has the miniature game part and so on. so the kind of command and control of the IP is not available the way it is for GW.

2.The game itself, as a long time player i absolutely love it, however as a skirmish game it is super complex rules wise that directly makes it a small scale and long playing game. also because the scale is 1/300 there is not a lot of room for the hobby side of things other than painting.

There are currently many other game systems out there that are better than 40K ( i play several of them) but building/promoting the communities to support them is harder to do because GW has such a more accessible product.

 Hulksmash wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Inks and washes. You did the same basic thing with inks and washes.

Most inks and washes I used prior to contrast don't hold a candle. Contrast was a legit game changer without me having to make my own and make enough for an entire army and possibly future purchases so my armies would match. Could you do it before, sure. Could you get the same results for the speed and time put into the product, nope.

some of those Contrast colours, like the flesh one is better (as there was not really one) while others are similar or worse than the ones I used before

but Contrast overall was nothing special and did not enabled people in doing something that was not possible before (except in the GW bubble were anything but Base/Layer/Shade was heresy and therefore any brand not offering a Base/Layer/Shade setup was seen as inferior)

all about Marketing and creating a bubble that keeps people away from other companies

GW is not the only company doing it that way hence why the comparison with Apple or Blizzard/WoW is legit

Because if there's a non-GW set of Contrast-type paints I'd love to buy some.

Nurglitch wrote:
Because if there's a non-GW set of Contrast-type paints I'd love to buy some.

Army Painter Quickshade, Vallejo Game Ink, Liquitex Acrylic Ink, Tamiya Acrylic Color Clear, GreenStuffWorld Intensity Ink etc.

or mix Acrylic Medium (like Liquitex Matte Medium) 1:1 with Airbrush Flow Improver and add any fine high pigment colour you want to create your own Contrast paint
(eg Creatix Airbrush Color works already like Contrast if diluted 1:1 with water)

from comparison, GW did a good job with their Yellow and Orange, White to some point and the Flesh, but those are 4 colours out of a whole range that added something new

Mr.Giggles wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:
Wargaming is essentially political, and when the 'political view' is "Don't be rude about people" I can't help but feel your loss is a net gain for everyone else.

I don't care about your political views or anything else about you, I just want to enjoy a game of toy soldiers

"I don't care about your political views" literally means you don't care if the person opposite of you at the table is a neo-nazi or burns crosses in their spare time. Not exactly something to be proud of.

 kodos wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:
Because if there's a non-GW set of Contrast-type paints I'd love to buy some.

Army Painter Quickshade, Vallejo Game Ink, Liquitex Acrylic Ink, Tamiya Acrylic Color Clear, GreenStuffWorld Intensity Ink etc.

or mix Acrylic Medium (like Liquitex Matte Medium) 1:1 with Airbrush Flow Improver and add any fine high pigment colour you want to create your own Contrast paint
(eg Creatix Airbrush Color works already like Contrast if diluted 1:1 with water)

from comparison, GW did a good job with their Yellow and Orange, White to some point and the Flesh, but those are 4 colours out of a whole range that added something new

Not true. Back Templar is excellent as is Skeleton Horde. Some of the reds and blues are also very good, while I have mostly found the purple disappointing.

Mr.Giggles wrote:

Then GW released a statement saying that anyone who didn't think like them politically wouldn't be missed if they left the hobby. Now I go elsewhere for my models.

Short answer? Make me feel welcome and don't preach at me about your political views or any other non wargaming related views.
.

Except, they are wargaming related, since this is a social hobby and so much is built on the back of 'community'.

"Warhammer is for Everyone. One of the great powers of our hobby is its ability to bring people together in common cause, to build bonds and friendships that cross divides. We believe in and support a community united by shared values of mutual kindness and respect.
Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be.
We will never accept nor condone any form of prejudice, hatred or abuse in our company or in the Warhammer hobby.
We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray through miniatures, art and storytelling so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to.
And if you feel the same way, wherever and whoever you are, we’re glad you are part of the Warhammer community. If not, you will not be missed.”

Nothing political about believing in, or promoting 'mutual kindness and respect' or not condoning predjudice, hatred or abuse, especially in a social hobby. This just seems like common courtesy to me, and being a decent person, not politics.

Deadnight wrote:

Mr.Giggles wrote:

Then GW released a statement saying that anyone who didn't think like them politically wouldn't be missed if they left the hobby. Now I go elsewhere for my models.

Short answer? Make me feel welcome and don't preach at me about your political views or any other non wargaming related views.
.

Except, they are wargaming related, since this is a social hobby and so much is built on the back of 'community'.

"Warhammer is for Everyone. One of the great powers of our hobby is its ability to bring people together in common cause, to build bonds and friendships that cross divides. We believe in and support a community united by shared values of mutual kindness and respect.
Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be.
We will never accept nor condone any form of prejudice, hatred or abuse in our company or in the Warhammer hobby.
We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray through miniatures, art and storytelling so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to.
And if you feel the same way, wherever and whoever you are, we’re glad you are part of the Warhammer community. If not, you will not be missed.”

Nothing political about believing in, or promoting 'mutual kindness and respect' or not condoning predjudice, hatred or abuse, especially in a social hobby. This just seems like common courtesy to me, and being a decent person, not politics.

Exactly. If that offends somebody's bitter, hateful worldview, then good riddance to them.

 harlokin wrote:

Not true. Back Templar is excellent as is Skeleton Horde. Some of the reds and blues are also very good, while I have mostly found the purple disappointing.

I have not noticed any difference in the result of Skeleton Horde and Seraphim Sepia, the Contrast and the GW Shade already turns out the same (so even if you ignore the other brands no reason to go with the more expensive Contrast colour here)

I don't use Black very often but prefer the Army Painter one here

the Blues are depending on the tone you want, Contrast offers some different ones to other brands but no real difference in how they work so it ends up with wich colour you need if you don't want to mix it

 kodos wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

Not true. Back Templar is excellent as is Skeleton Horde. Some of the reds and blues are also very good, while I have mostly found the purple disappointing.

I have not noticed any difference in the result of Skeleton Horde and Seraphim Sepia, the Contrast and the GW Shade already turns out the same (so even if you ignore the other brands no reason to go with the more expensive Contrast colour here)

I don't use Black very often but prefer the Army Painter one here

the Blues are depending on the tone you want, Contrast offers some different ones to other brands but no real difference in how they work so it ends up with wich colour you need if you don't want to mix it

To be fair, I don't think there is a vast difference. Skeleton Horde is a bit more reliable in effect, for me, and has a more yellow tinge.

I'll add that I wouldn't want another company to rival GW. GW is a public company with a responsibility to make a profit for their shareholders. Their loyalty is, rightly and ethically, with their shareholders and not with our hobby. That's what you get when a company gets big enough to go corporate like that.

Smaller, private, companies can be loyal to us, the customers and hobby. They are not obliged to use their IP and game to leverage as much profit as they can (the root of why GW treat their games so badly IMO).

You can have Mantic's "your hobby, your way" (for example). Sure, they have to be realistic and consider what is feasible, but they can put the game and hobby before profit to an extent.

difference would also be that the people from those smaller companies play their own games

no way the CEO of GW played the early version of 9th 40k during the playtesting phase to see how it progressed, or painted his own army

 harlokin wrote:

To be fair, I don't think there is a vast difference. Skeleton Horde is a bit more reliable in effect, for me, and has a more yellow tinge.

yeah, slightly different tone and easier to use if you are a messy painter (GW Shades turn out terrible if you are using too much and are not careful)

but not that brand new technique that was impossible before

it is still just "Wash over White Primer" with some colours being new or improved versions of previous ones
and it is not even the first time for GW, GW Inks that were around 3rd Edi 40k were advertised similar (still missing the good old Chestnut Ink) as were their previous version of the GW Washes

 kodos wrote:

but not that brand new technique that was impossible before

it is still just "Wash over White Primer" with some colours being new or improved versions of previous ones
and it is not even the first time for GW, GW Inks that were around 3rd Edi 40k were advertised similar (still missing the good old Chestnut Ink) as were their previous version of the GW Washes

Just my experience, but Contrast paints enabled me to paint Kabalites, which I wasn't able to do previously. Traditional edge highlighting on such small models is beyond my fine control, while the high detail/few flat surfaces nature of the sculpts really play to Contrast paint's strengths.

Guy in the Club painted his whole Eldar army with GW Blue Ink over White Primer (kept some parts white for a White/Blue theme) and nothing else in 3rd Edition
was fast and looked impressive

 kodos wrote:
Guy in the Club painted his whole Eldar army with GW Blue Ink over White Primer (kept some parts white for a White/Blue theme) and nothing else in 3rd Edition
was fast and looked impressive

Cool, I haven't seen it, so can't comment.

That said, Contrast (when it works) provides a base colour, highlight, and shade in one coat. Ink does not.

GW could bring out self-painting minis, and some people would still complain that they take too long to dry.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

It's arguably why historical wargames don't really have too much overlap with sci-fi/fantasy wargames, because the two audiences can and absolutely do overlap, but at the end of the day you're either into more real-world, grounded rulesets and models or you're not. A Flames of War player probably isn't going to stop playing Flames of War if GW suddenly produce the most balanced, fun, amazing ruleset ever - even though they might also play 40k, they won't drop FoW in the same way a Warmahordes or Infinity player might, but they might drop FoW for another WW2 ruleset.

I agree there. We had this discussion at our FLGS at one point, as to why exactly some of us don't play Bolt Action. Certainly for myself (I'm 36) and a guy in his late 40's we don't play it as it is no longer pretend. For all the atrocities there are in 40k etc., it is still a work of fiction, what Bolt Action represents is not. We had parents or grandparents that really fought what we are "playing" and it leaves a bad taste in your mouth for people of a certain age.

So, no matter how good a ruleset could be; I know for fact there are people that simply won't drift into IRL stuff, but there are others (curiously, many of them serving in the RAF in the case of our FLGS) that will hop between each no problem.

That's an interesting contrast, because the domain of historical wargaming I've known has appeared to be almost exclusively people 30+ with the odd 'youngster' in their late twenties and the average being about 40-50. The more gamey wargames (Bolt Action especially) tends to pull in the younger end, but still what would be considered older compared to something like 40k or AoS where they can range 12 and up.

 kodos wrote:
Guy in the Club painted his whole Eldar army with GW Blue Ink over White Primer (kept some parts white for a White/Blue theme) and nothing else in 3rd Edition
was fast and looked impressive

I've never had results as consistent and decent looking with shades/washes (certainly not with inks, which I've never managed to befriend as a painting tool) as I have with the contrast. Is it absolutely revolutionary? Probably not. Is it a simple and easily available tool for novice or middling painters (or just ones with no patience) that yields quick and decent results? Yes. If you apply a wash even a little too thick, they will leave a nasty white film, esp. the sepia, I'm yet to see that with contrast.

The other strength of GW?

They have all the resources necessary to follow market trends.

And we’ve seen them do this of late with the Specialist Games range (no, not boxed games GW, give them their proper name!).

This is a solid advantage in terms of protecting their market share.

Compare GW’s current breadth of offerings to the offerings of any other company, and their sheer variety simply dwarfs the competition.

From Underworlds to Necromunda to Adeptus Titanicus and everything in between, GW likely has something to tickle your fancy. And I think we can reasonably predict there’s more to come. Certainly I can’t see Battlefleet Gothic remaining a distant memory forever.

Most of the other firms I've seen try to play the "chase the latest craze" pattern tend to fall apart. Like Spartan Games if you want to run lots of different lines and support them you have to have more than a small team and operation. Otherwise the newest line dominates and the old once popular lines get left behind and lost.

Gamers are a fickle bunch and when they see companies abandoning games they are more apt to walk away. GW has had that with "specialist" games over the years; but they've always kept their 40K and Old World/AoS core going strong.

Cronch wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Guy in the Club painted his whole Eldar army with GW Blue Ink over White Primer (kept some parts white for a White/Blue theme) and nothing else in 3rd Edition
was fast and looked impressive

I've never had results as consistent and decent looking with shades/washes (certainly not with inks, which I've never managed to befriend as a painting tool) as I have with the contrast. Is it absolutely revolutionary? Probably not. Is it a simple and easily available tool for novice or middling painters (or just ones with no patience) that yields quick and decent results? Yes. If you apply a wash even a little too thick, they will leave a nasty white film, esp. the sepia, I'm yet to see that with contrast.

What washes leave weird white films? I’ve never seen that happen, and I drown some of my minis in wash.

Yeah, that sounds like an issue with the undercoat, rather than the wash - maybe not letting it dry fully before applying the wash?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

What washes leave weird white films? I’ve never seen that happen, and I drown some of my minis in wash.

Nuln Oil and Agrax Earthshade, off the top of my head, can sometimes leave white 'tide marks' if diluted with water rather than medium and just slopped on. It's 100% fixable just by applying another light coat.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

Cronch wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Guy in the Club painted his whole Eldar army with GW Blue Ink over White Primer (kept some parts white for a White/Blue theme) and nothing else in 3rd Edition
was fast and looked impressive

I've never had results as consistent and decent looking with shades/washes (certainly not with inks, which I've never managed to befriend as a painting tool) as I have with the contrast. Is it absolutely revolutionary? Probably not. Is it a simple and easily available tool for novice or middling painters (or just ones with no patience) that yields quick and decent results? Yes. If you apply a wash even a little too thick, they will leave a nasty white film, esp. the sepia, I'm yet to see that with contrast.

What washes leave weird white films? I’ve never seen that happen, and I drown some of my minis in wash.

Nuln Oil, Seraphim Sepia, Drakenhof Blue (i think that's the name), which is the only ones I needed to use so I can't say for the others. If you goop too much (especially sepia), it leaves almost grainy white spots once dry. And no, it's not the paint under it not being dry enough. I guess it could be air humidity issue, but again, even if it is, i've never had that problem with contrasts, whereas I had it with GW washes and Vallejo washes (black, blue and sepia/brown respectively)

 Overread wrote:
Most of the other firms I've seen try to play the "chase the latest craze" pattern tend to fall apart. Like Spartan Games if you want to run lots of different lines and support them you have to have more than a small team and operation. Otherwise the newest line dominates and the old once popular lines get left behind and lost.

Gamers are a fickle bunch and when they see companies abandoning games they are more apt to walk away. GW has had that with "specialist" games over the years; but they've always kept their 40K and Old World/AoS core going strong.

It's an interesting way the product is structured. GW continuously rolls out products for Warhammer, and if one doesn't appeal, or appeals to a different segment, they have another one in the funnel. I think this generates continual interest, and revenue, and acts as a kind of engine for sustaining the business. It's kind of interesting to see how these products can either go up, selling more stuff to the same fans, or expand, selling the same stuff to new fans. GW's product also appeals to a broader market than gamers, as there is a very robust hobby of people painting miniatures (often GW miniatures) for the fun of it, so they're not relying on the 'keeping up with the joneses/meta-chasing' that they would if it was a more game-y product like X-Wing. They're more than a gaming company or a miniatures company, and so they're not as exposed to the wavering interests of gamers.

They also have a wider design ethos.

For instance, I have no real appreciation for steampunk. So Warmachine is an easy pass for me, regardless of how I might find it’s rules.

Someone not interested in Star Wars (the weirdo) isn’t going to pick up FFG’s gubbins as a result.

GW? Well, if you’re not into anime stylings, you probs won’t like Tau. But, it’s possible you might find Necrons, Guard etc to your taste.

 Overread wrote:
Most of the other firms I've seen try to play the "chase the latest craze" pattern tend to fall apart. Like Spartan Games if you want to run lots of different lines and support them you have to have more than a small team and operation. Otherwise the newest line dominates and the old once popular lines get left behind and lost.

Gamers are a fickle bunch and when they see companies abandoning games they are more apt to walk away. GW has had that with "specialist" games over the years; but they've always kept their 40K and Old World/AoS core going strong.

Im not sure Spartan was ever chasing a trend, I think Spartan was chasing their own interests without regard for their ability to support them. They grew up too fast/bit off more than they could chew. A lot of the games never even really played into any identifiable trend. Their core games were all naval wargames (which I'm pretty sure hasn't been "trendy" since the 1960s or 70s at the latest) their other games were all over the place in terms of subject matter, but in many cases seemed to be vaguely duplicative of one another. And then there was that weird odd scale (40mm?) Dystopian Legions game - sculpts would have sold like hotcakes if they could have been used as 40k guard standins, but they just had to be different.

If anything, I'd say Spartans problem was it cannibalized its own sales. Uncharted Seas suffered because everyone who bought Uncharted Seas stopped buying it to play Firestorm Armada, and then Firestorm Armada suffered because a lot of people jumped ship to Dystopian Wars.

And then there was Halo... they released a naval fleet combat game for an IP that isn't really associated with space battles, and then released a 15mm scale ground combat game for it when it *really* should have been a 28-32mm scale game instead.

There are plenty of space battles in Halo... If you read the books, kinda like with 40k. Then again BFG is also dead.

I guess naval battles aren't popular outside of Star Wars.

 Tyran wrote:
There are plenty of space battles in Halo... If you read the books, kinda like with 40k. Then again BFG is also dead.

I guess naval battles aren't popular outside of Star Wars.

Yes, and how many people read the Halo books compared to those that played the game? Halo as an IP is associated with ground combat by everyone what knows anything about it. Spartan grabbing the Halo space battles IP is just the kind of thing that many of these games companies do that holds them back. It was a pretty stupid business decision, exacerbated by the fact they already had a pretty decent space combat game.

Slipspace wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
There are plenty of space battles in Halo... If you read the books, kinda like with 40k. Then again BFG is also dead.

I guess naval battles aren't popular outside of Star Wars.

Yes, and how many people read the Halo books compared to those that played the game? Halo as an IP is associated with ground combat by everyone what knows anything about it. Spartan grabbing the Halo space battles IP is just the kind of thing that many of these games companies do that holds them back. It was a pretty stupid business decision, exacerbated by the fact they already had a pretty decent space combat game.

I'd assume the books are fairly well read, given that Halo isn't exactly a 'new' franchise. The first novel, "Fall of Reach", even goes heavily into space battles in it.

Heck, the first game even opens on a boarding action. Second game does too.

Honestly I would be surprised if 1 in a 100 people that have played the Halo games has read even 1 book.

And the same goes for 40k with all its books, or Star Wars.

In general the EU material is read by a very tiny fraction of the consumers.

After thinking about it for a bit, i dont think anyone can do it.
GW has become too large and too diversive, and when they eventualy get around to having re-released epic, BFG and old wars, they will be unstoppable.

And it is not just the gameing part, no one can deny that they make very nice looking models regardless of the range in order to appeal to the non-gaming collectors and painters.


For one company to trying to compete in one single category, they would have to make better looking models, better rules set and have as big distribution power, whitout beeing more expensive then GW.

Now that GW is not afraid to go outside the core two-three games they are essentially making an eco-system where no one ever has to leave GW to get a different gaming experience.

That was why their move away from Specialist Games was so stupid and short sighted in the first place.

Now, they are unstoppable again.

 Easy E wrote:

That was why their move away from Specialist Games was so stupid and short sighted in the first place.

I feel that was a change that was impossible for them to avoid.
Their goal was to end metal casting, and what, 80% of the entire specialist cataloge was metal?

I think it would have been mutch worse if they finecast the specialist range. It was nessessary to end it to begin from new.

GW ended the Specialist Games line because it was a big loss for them

They got the demand wrong outside the UK leading too much boxes that were sitting on shelfs in countries you could not sell anywhere else because of the language

and the core boxes sold were all plastic
but the printed cardboard costs more than the plastic inside and you cannot call them back and sell German Boxes in the UK without re-doing the most expensive part (also a reason why GW stopped doing dedicated boxes and uses now one for all countries and does not translate SG rules any more)

"What would it take for another table top game company to rival GW"

If the new company provided the same or higher value for roughly the same number of customers GW has.

That could take decades to achieve since most of the value GW provides is their vast IP, lore, history, etc, within their model line and other avenues which use their IP.

Touching the SG string again.

Underworlds. What a wonderful concept. Game itself seems pretty well received overall. And the various Warbands are more or less Pocket Money priced.

And it’s that specific price bracket that is a major strength.

No. I am not saying it’s objectively cheap. But, it is affordable. And kinda like WarCry, it’s a way for the designers to invest time and effort in a tiny set of original designs, which might never actually form a full AoS faction.

So for the customer more into the painting, they get a unique project to do a wunnerful job on for a really low price - with the added bonus they could happily field it in its parent game.

That’s something pretty special in GW terms, no?

“Really low price”?

We need a Gaming Theory of Relativity, where prices look smaller to observers in one frame of reference than they do to observers outside that frame of reference.

Isn't there some sort of obsolescence (I mean actually advertised as a feature?) about Underworlds warbands? I remember reading discussions that things (cards only?) would rotate out just like in the CCG world.

 privateer4hire wrote:
Isn't there some sort of obsolescence (I mean actually advertised as a feature?) about Underworlds warbands? I remember reading discussions that things (cards only?) would rotate out just like in the CCG world.

Possibly not at the outset but was fairly obvious that was going to happen, it's the closest GW got to pulling me back it but had an inkling they would make card mistakes on top of rotation so held off, lack of elfs didn't help

Warbands never "age out" but set cards do every 2 years. Its really bit that bad but each "season" will generally cost you about $300 if yours a completionist.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Warbands never "age out" but set cards do every 2 years. Its really bit that bad but each "season" will generally cost you about $300 if yours a completionist.

Worth mentioning that it's supposed to be generic set cards that age out, and even then only if they do not get repeated in a newer set.

One of the few things that really bugs me about Underworlds is that the starter set warbands are never made available until after the starter set is gone and that the generic cards are not really made available in a meaningful way outside of warbands. It's far too "gotta catch 'em all!" for my liking.

a typical TCG but with Minis

but it is true that it is unique for GW as it is reasonable cheap and a good system if you just play at home with family/friends
(same as Magic the Gathering is cheap if you just play at home and don't chase the meta)
which is also a reason for its success

and still if you play on events and try to keep up it is cheaper than AoS or 40k.

 aphyon wrote:
The only IP in the wargaming arena that i can think of that has the depth that GW has is classic battletech/mechwarrior. having started out around the same time as 40K, with a depth of lore as deep as anything GW ever wrote. then add a catalog of video games, novels, a collectable card game, a hero clix game and even a tv series to go along with the TT miniatures game. the fan base tends to be more in localized groups that the widespread nature of 40K that GW has created for many reasons(even though the fan base is just as devoted-never get a house davion and house kurita player started you will never hear the end of it)

The 2 main problems for it are
1.Unlike GW when the original parent company FASA went under the IP has changed hands between multiple companies and in some cases parts of it were broken off on their own. microsoft owns the video game side, wizkids had the card/clix game. ironwind metals makes most of the minis (new kickstarter aside) catalyst has the miniature game part and so on. so the kind of command and control of the IP is not available the way it is for GW.

2.The game itself, as a long time player i absolutely love it, however as a skirmish game it is super complex rules wise that directly makes it a small scale and long playing game. also because the scale is 1/300 there is not a lot of room for the hobby side of things other than painting.

There are currently many other game systems out there that are better than 40K ( i play several of them) but building/promoting the communities to support them is harder to do because GW has such a more accessible product.

You have an excellent point. Most people forget Battletech.

Part of the problem is FASA really didn't know what they were doing, and never hired anyone who did. They made so many mistakes, the most obvious was they didn't even have consistent branding - so many people don't realize that Mechwarrior and Battletech are the same thing!

The boards in Underworlds also age out in addition to the non-faction-specific cards. Plastic models and faction-specific cards do not.