Did the launch of mk4 make any difference to the player base or community? It looks to have been a complete flop as far as I can tell.

It certainly didn't revitalize the community here in Poland, but I wouldn't call it a flop. A few players appeared or returned (also with new mk4 armies) but also a few left because of the transition to mk4 and too many models being unplayable.

All in all we have a stable but pretty bad attendance at local events here in the capital. Last weekend there were 8 people playing in a WM tournament, which is similar to the last few years. For comparison, a Warhammer Fantasy Battles 6th edition tournament on the same day gathered 44 players... So, yeah.

Our FLGS group never cared, we didn't like the rules changes(no facing, no back strikes, movement changes etc..) in MK IV so we are still playing MKIII friendly games at 50 points as standard, with no theme lists. we have a regular group of between 8 and 12 players on any given game night who have at least one army to work with.

I think the core problem is past the actual launch of the edition, PP hasn't been aggressive with marketing MKIV outside of their own current community/customerbase.

Far as I'm aware they still lack a proper local rep system (which IMO is essential for pretty much every scifi/fantasy game out there which isn't GW because GW has their own dedicated shops and staff and market leader weight); they've not pushed themselves into the influencer market in a heavy way so that every month/week there's a boatload of causal marketing.

In a way I feel like right now MKIV is a steady the boat kind of deal. Which makes some sense as they've been reworking how they release their entire model range.

But yeah I feel like its a missed trick and there should have been way more push for marketing from them.

 Overread wrote:
I think the core problem is past the actual launch of the edition, PP hasn't been aggressive with marketing MKIV outside of their own current community/customerbase.

This. PP has done almost no advertising outside of existing WM/H players, many of whom are pretty annoyed at the way Mk4 has been rolled out, the split of Legacy vs prime, some of the rules changes for things that were not broken in the first place etc.

Also

1) No work has been done by PP to rebuild relationships with stores and distro. Most stores were burnt by PP in the Mk3 and the whole "mystery boxes" sagas and have no desire to put PP products on their shelves when they can fill it with other products.
2) PP is only really currently selling Mk4 products in very expensive £130+ army boxes which makes it very hard for people to impulse buy or to sell the new game to people.
3) The reputation of PP and of the WM/H community is still mud among the wider wargaming communities if indeed those people even know of the game or company anymore. That coupled with 1 & 2 means that its very very hard to get anyone new into the game.

I think its too early to say its a failure. But its not the surge back to form/prominence that PP were hoping for and its largely their own fault. In a recent podcast one of the PP designers effectively admitted that while they have staff producing/packing products, their game and model design teams were so tiny people were wearing 3-4 hats each. I think the only things that can "save" PP is a huge injection of cash by an external investor. They have such a great IP, but the company is now a shell of a shell of its former self, stripped of talent and peddling a product very few people actually want to buy at the price point they are offering it at.

Sadly I think they were hoping Monster Apoc would save them but now the firm they partnered with for the boardgame version is hitting bad times and might well be that Monster Apoc at best delivers only if backers spend considerably more; and at worst might not even ship properly.

If they've lost their in-house art team they really should be leaning so hard on youtubers and such. Sending them free product; paying for painting tutorials and such. Pushing their content out however they can get it out to get more notice.


I also agree, PP needs cash, but I think more than that what they need are upper managers with a sense of where they are taking the firm and effective tools to get there. Right now PP kinda feels like they've got a few ideas but now power/drive to push or head anywhere outside of treading water; which isn't bad in itself save that their current position isn't all that healthy.

My LGS has zero PP products on the shelf, with a bunch of older stuff left locked up in storage, only accessible if you ask for it.
There are no events. No game days. Not even their paints are on the shelves any longer.
My LGS is HUGE and carries nearly everything available.
WM/H used to have a dedicated section, games twice a week and tournaments every month. Now? Nothing.
From here, MK4 did absolutely nothing. Except perhaps drive what little was left of the customer base away completely.

Sunno wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I think the core problem is past the actual launch of the edition, PP hasn't been aggressive with marketing MKIV outside of their own current community/customerbase.

This. PP has done almost no advertising outside of existing WM/H players, many of whom are pretty annoyed at the way Mk4 has been rolled out, the split of Legacy vs prime, some of the rules changes for things that were not broken in the first place etc.

Also

1) No work has been done by PP to rebuild relationships with stores and distro. Most stores were burnt by PP in the Mk3 and the whole "mystery boxes" sagas and have no desire to put PP products on their shelves when they can fill it with other products.
2) PP is only really currently selling Mk4 products in very expensive £130+ army boxes which makes it very hard for people to impulse buy or to sell the new game to people.
3) The reputation of PP and of the WM/H community is still mud among the wider wargaming communities if indeed those people even know of the game or company anymore. That coupled with 1 & 2 means that its very very hard to get anyone new into the game.

I think its too early to say its a failure. But its not the surge back to form/prominence that PP were hoping for and its largely their own fault. In a recent podcast one of the PP designers effectively admitted that while they have staff producing/packing products, their game and model design teams were so tiny people were wearing 3-4 hats each. I think the only things that can "save" PP is a huge injection of cash by an external investor. They have such a great IP, but the company is now a shell of a shell of its former self, stripped of talent and peddling a product very few people actually want to buy at the price point they are offering it at.

I never understood the bad reputation for the community thing, everyone I met was great and very friendly. My impression was super casual players didn't like the tightness of the rules and players wanting that for competitive play. And people unable to understand page 5 was tongue in cheek banter and set the mood for the games play style. They got upset and I know on some forums even today you have guys obsessed with gak talking the game and it's players. Years after it died.

I think right now everyone's kind of hoping PP dies and the warmachine brand is sold to a better company to revive. Its a very 2000s ip and is out of style now but give it a decade and it will roll back 8n like 80s and 90s is now. WWF themed steam punk skate boarding robots are my idea and no one else can use it! Until then it's going to drag on as a zombie company trying to cling to life by selling 3d printed junk to whales. But even those whales will move on at some point.

It's a shame we never got the original computer game. And the one on steam is broken and can't be played at all due to missing files.

I think the community issue was more that some communities became hyper-competitive environments.

That's not bad in itself, but hyper competitive environments can be very difficult to get into for newbies and casual players because the competitive players will just win more times than not as they will oftne take things more seriously and often (not always) be better players.

There is some of the whole "this is because of Page 5", however I feel that that is a bit of a red-herring argument as all page 5 said was "play well and don't be a git"; however some did use it to try and trump up "play well" as "beat seals"




The issue really came around when MKIII hit and PP went through a series of bad choices and mistakes that tanked casual level support. So the game had a dwindling population and what was remaining were high skill high competitive players. Which in turn, as noted earlier, is a bad environment for fostering new blood. So the problem snowballed.

Couple to things like no local reps any more and such and you've a game that relies on a solid, but niche core and, over time, just bled out players.







Bad reptuation was also at the shipping end. Many stores had issues getting hold of any stock. Furthermore when PP started rapidly selling off stock (this is more a USA/Canada market thing) from their own warehouse this tanked the value of their own product. Local stores couldn't compete with keen players getting vastly better offers direct from PP with the grab-bags. Once in a very long while is fine, but this happened enough and at the same time as PP selling less well in general; that it did impact stores selling their stock.

So stores, on two fronts, didn't have a good time stocking PP products. Which when you, again, couple to a game on a big downward swing of popularity; means many stores just don't want to bother.



Also lets face it, the market is bigger than it was and more loaded with game systems. When PP started there was a bit of a bubble of not much else out there being done seriously because GW had dominated for so long. So PP had a much easier time growing; in todays' market there's a lot more competition going on. Not just in the niche itself but in the market in general.

So you've got to bring your A game to marketing, community building, game design, events etc....Heck just look over at Dropfleet and Dropzone; two games under one firm that have not risen to holding a big market share and yet both games are basically sitting as the only current big-name games in their genres.

Dropfleet has Zero active competition outside of garage style one-man-bands selling fleets for Billion Suns; meanwhile Dropzone is much the same.

But you've got do more than just have a product. Again marketing, social outreach; community building; events; advertising etc.... all come into play.

Yo7 wrote:
Did the launch of mk4 make any difference to the player base or community? It looks to have been a complete flop as far as I can tell.

In some ways I feel mk4 is what mk3 should have been. Is it enough? I don't think so, at least yet.

Pp was the mover and shaker in the industry, but that was 15 years ago. A lot of their talentvis away. Going from novels to doing hengehold-via-twitter shows where they ate. They've not learned. Unlike gw, Theyve not evolved.

No ones interested here. But I'll wait and see

 Overread wrote:
Sadly I think they were hoping Monster Apoc would save them but now the firm they partnered with for the boardgame version is hitting bad times and might well be that Monster Apoc at best delivers only if backers spend considerably more; and at worst might not even ship properly.

If they've lost their in-house art team they really should be leaning so hard on youtubers and such. Sending them free product; paying for painting tutorials and such. Pushing their content out however they can get it out to get more notice.


I also agree, PP needs cash, but I think more than that what they need are upper managers with a sense of where they are taking the firm and effective tools to get there. Right now PP kinda feels like they've got a few ideas but now power/drive to push or head anywhere outside of treading water; which isn't bad in itself save that their current position isn't all that healthy.

Mythic has burned them so hard on the board game Kickstarter. So many people were looking forward to that but unfortunately PP picked a lemon to partner with for it. I’ll be surprised if it ever sees the light of day.

 Overread wrote:

Also lets face it, the market is bigger than it was and more loaded with game systems. When PP started there was a bit of a bubble of not much else out there being done seriously because GW had dominated for so long. So PP had a much easier time growing; in todays' market there's a lot more competition going on. Not just in the niche itself but in the market in general.

So you've got to bring your A game to marketing, community building, game design, events etc....Heck just look over at Dropfleet and Dropzone; two games under one firm that have not risen to holding a big market share and yet both games are basically sitting as the only current big-name games in their genres.

Dropfleet has Zero active competition outside of garage style one-man-bands selling fleets for Billion Suns; meanwhile Dropzone is much the same.

But you've got do more than just have a product. Again marketing, social outreach; community building; events; advertising etc.... all come into play.

I'm not sure the market is bigger. Board games are doing better than then but it's a totally different audience. There's way more things fighting for the teenage market now and they often override wargaming. Its harder to get little Timmy to care about model kits when Minecraft and star wars logo sets exist,

There's more attention on alt GW games but how many are even competing in the same space? I wouldn't compare Frostgrave to warmachine for example. Age of sigmar seems to be the biggest hurdle in the way now. Theres no need for a steam punk fantasy game when GW Provide it in their eco system.

Of course local meta matters more than global so maybe its different for you. I would be curious what games you think are big now and back then. Warmachine used to carry stores the way the way tcgs do. I don't think any thing but gw products do that now. Its mostly entry fees and food paying for stores around me. More cafe less game store. Which is fine, but its a very different vibe to the stores of old.

TBH I'm not sure it's been clear to many that mk4 actually "launched". They kind of did an extended public beta while they rolled out initial product/preview battlegrouos, which then became the games formal "launch" with the full initial retail product offering. The line between "beta" and "release" isn't really clear and came with no fanfare, so to most the game really launched at some point late last year with not much in the way of product or rules to support it, rather than a couple months ago when the core army boxes for the launch factions went on sale.

The implications of this on marketing and hype cycles, etc really need not be explained in great detail, other than to say that PP probably missed its mark and window to capitalize on the hype and buzz generated for the mk4 launch when they announced it last year ny not having a fully realized and finalized product ready to go on a specific release/launch date.

Yo7 wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Also lets face it, the market is bigger than it was and more loaded with game systems. When PP started there was a bit of a bubble of not much else out there being done seriously because GW had dominated for so long. So PP had a much easier time growing; in todays' market there's a lot more competition going on. Not just in the niche itself but in the market in general.

So you've got to bring your A game to marketing, community building, game design, events etc....Heck just look over at Dropfleet and Dropzone; two games under one firm that have not risen to holding a big market share and yet both games are basically sitting as the only current big-name games in their genres.

Dropfleet has Zero active competition outside of garage style one-man-bands selling fleets for Billion Suns; meanwhile Dropzone is much the same.

But you've got do more than just have a product. Again marketing, social outreach; community building; events; advertising etc.... all come into play.

I'm not sure the market is bigger. Board games are doing better than then but it's a totally different audience. There's way more things fighting for the teenage market now and they often override wargaming. Its harder to get little Timmy to care about model kits when Minecraft and star wars logo sets exist,

There's more attention on alt GW games but how many are even competing in the same space? I wouldn't compare Frostgrave to warmachine for example. Age of sigmar seems to be the biggest hurdle in the way now. Theres no need for a steam punk fantasy game when GW Provide it in their eco system.

Of course local meta matters more than global so maybe its different for you. I would be curious what games you think are big now and back then. Warmachine used to carry stores the way the way tcgs do. I don't think any thing but gw products do that now. Its mostly entry fees and food paying for stores around me. More cafe less game store. Which is fine, but its a very different vibe to the stores of old.

I think when it comes to carrying stores the last 20years has seen the relative cost for running a store go up and up. The result is stores have had to focus more and more on higher profit lines. I figure that's why MTG has taken over so many; along with things like food and such. It's not just wargaming, its everything and its also a big reason why a lot of traditional highstreets are starting to get very empty or seeing stores that change hands fairly often. Even big named brand stores are struggling on the highstreet.
Alongside stores getting more expensive, the internet made running an online shop easier; yes more competition but at least you don't have to pay a fortune in rent and rates for a highstreet shop.

So I do agree, wargames cannot easily carry a store with sales like they used too. I don't think that's a fault of wargames as a market, its just a reflection of the sorry state of highstreets today and the real world costs of running a shop in an environment that is honestly highly hostile to actually running a shop.




That said back when PP was around there were far fewer middle-weight wargames. My impression is that today's market has a lot more and with GW's market so large they can only just keep up with production; that tells me that either everyone is buying like crazy; or we've got actual expansion and growth. That the number of customers overall is greater and that's giving room for more firms to establish themselves. It doesn't mean its easy, but I think the fact that instead of GW and PP; we instead have dozens of other model markers and a thriving 3D printing market with alternate model lines - all that tells me that the market has indeed grown.
That doesn't mean its become the biggest thing; its still a very niche hobby; but its distinctly bigger than it was. And yeah there's more competition; video games a huge threat to free time for kids; but we've also got adults introducing their own kids to wargames; we've got legions of youtubers introducing people to painting and collecting; we've got video games that interest and draw people into the wargaming scene (yes a lot of that is GW, GW are still the biggest, by far, draw into the wargame market as a whole - at least for fantasy and sci-fi)

chaos0xomega wrote:
TBH I'm not sure it's been clear to many that mk4 actually "launched". They kind of did an extended public beta while they rolled out initial product/preview battlegrouos, which then became the games formal "launch" with the full initial retail product offering. The line between "beta" and "release" isn't really clear and came with no fanfare, so to most the game really launched at some point late last year with not much in the way of product or rules to support it, rather than a couple months ago when the core army boxes for the launch factions went on sale.

The implications of this on marketing and hype cycles, etc really need not be explained in great detail, other than to say that PP probably missed its mark and window to capitalize on the hype and buzz generated for the mk4 launch when they announced it last year ny not having a fully realized and finalized product ready to go on a specific release/launch date.

Big part of their issue with the too early announcement and overlong beta was one of their play test groups getting bitter and breaking their NDA and starting to tell people about it before they were ready.

 AduroT wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
TBH I'm not sure it's been clear to many that mk4 actually "launched". They kind of did an extended public beta while they rolled out initial product/preview battlegrouos, which then became the games formal "launch" with the full initial retail product offering. The line between "beta" and "release" isn't really clear and came with no fanfare, so to most the game really launched at some point late last year with not much in the way of product or rules to support it, rather than a couple months ago when the core army boxes for the launch factions went on sale.

The implications of this on marketing and hype cycles, etc really need not be explained in great detail, other than to say that PP probably missed its mark and window to capitalize on the hype and buzz generated for the mk4 launch when they announced it last year ny not having a fully realized and finalized product ready to go on a specific release/launch date.

Big part of their issue with the too early announcement and overlong beta was one of their play test groups getting bitter and breaking their NDA and starting to tell people about it before they were ready.

Leaks will always happen.

Beta tests divide player bases badly though. Half want to jump in early and half when it's finished and out the door. You cut your player base in half and some wanting the final release never play as they find something else to play instead. If you're all in on digital micro managing rules any way just call the beta the launch and say rules may change as players get their hands on it. Effectively the same thing but you don't get people waiting for release. Its the 4th edition, you should know what works and doesn't by now.

The main issue is just that it still doesn't feel like mk4 has actually released. The Legacy armies are all well and good, but the new armies don't have most of their product 6 months after releasing all their rules.

What's compounding that is the SR pushing for 100 point games that are easy for the Legacy armies to support, but the new armies really only can by buying multiple starters and spamming their limited options. All the advantages of scaling the game down and making it more accessible have been lost by not having the new armies ready to lead and instead leaning back on Legacy collections.

Most of the local crew is interested, but giving it a year or so to work things out. We've got a few waiting for Dusk and Khymera specifically but whether its really worth pushing to make a regular thing again will largely come down to how well PP can stabilize its production and start getting these army boxes out on time.

It's also really odd that they chose to finally merge Hordes and Warmachine (which honestly should have happened back in M2 or M3) they then chose to release all the Warmachine factions first.

So basically MKIV is a huge deadzone for their entire Hordes market. I know it was never quite as big as Warmachine, but it was still a good chunk of players.

I know there's a few new armies being proposed sneaking in here and there, but again the lack of big marketing noise about it is a huge issue. They lost those hordes players who saw MKIV during its launch because they also saw that in the roadmap; they were a long long way off. And that was before you factor in the inevitable shuffling and delays that happen with multi-year roadmaps.

They should have come out of the gate with MKIV guns blazing with 1 force from each well rounded at the very least; perhaps 2 per game well rounded.

Esp as its all 3D printed now, so there's no complicated moulds to pay for nor process.

There are a few playing it at a couple locations here in Phoenix. At least, I see people posting meet-ups on Facebook rather regularly at 2 of the larger places in the metropolis.

I haven't gone to them as I'm too busy with Battletech at a closer location at the same time.

Just saw today someone wrote in a Warmachine Night on our June event calendar. No idea who or what their plan/s for it might be though.

Haven't really been hanging out at LGSes to see, but personally it only solidified my dropping the game, honestly. I don't like the new aesthetic (less Steampunky, more sci-fi); I don't like that a large chunk of my collection will probably be unusable in the "Prime" format or whatever it's called; I don't like some of the rules changes that I saw in the early preview. Generally, nothing in it that tempted me to "get back into it," as it were.

Been going through my minis collection and selecting some for "deep storage" and putting those in Feldherr card boxes/foam, and shoving into the garage. Pretty much all my Warmachine/Hordes stuff is in there currently, with a few exceptions for some unknown "I could use this in..." situations, though frankly those are probably gonna go in, too. I can't bring myself to part with any of my painted stuff, and the last time I tried to sell off any of my NIB stuff at local swap-meets and the like, there was zero interest (and that was still in Mk III so I doubt there's any increased interest now).

Edit: So I guess you could say it did "make a difference" for me: it got rid of any lingering waffling about getting back in.

 LunarSol wrote:
The main issue is just that it still doesn't feel like mk4 has actually released. The Legacy armies are all well and good, but the new armies don't have most of their product 6 months after releasing all their rules.

What's compounding that is the SR pushing for 100 point games that are easy for the Legacy armies to support, but the new armies really only can by buying multiple starters and spamming their limited options. All the advantages of scaling the game down and making it more accessible have been lost by not having the new armies ready to lead and instead leaning back on Legacy collections.

Most of the local crew is interested, but giving it a year or so to work things out. We've got a few waiting for Dusk and Khymera specifically but whether its really worth pushing to make a regular thing again will largely come down to how well PP can stabilize its production and start getting these army boxes out on time.

Big part of that is that PP caved to its existing player base demands instead of holding to its guns. Originally PP intended 50pts to be the competitive format for the first year so as to enable ease of entry for new players. The existing community is myopic and self centered and demanded 100 pts for it's sameness to the established mk3 75 point standard, which most people outside the core community otherwise consider too large.

To be honest, I play only a few times a year at the FLGS and do my monthly pick-ups, but I do follow a number of game websites, youtube channels, social media, etc. And until I just saw this posting I didn't realize that
Warmachine 4.0 had even dropped. Trust me, I am fully aware of 10th Editon 40k is about to come out and Star Wars Shatterpoint is being pushed like crazy. So locally it was once a hub of Privatteer press
games and now it seems to be almost zero. Whatever they did to kill their fanbase, they did a good job.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
The main issue is just that it still doesn't feel like mk4 has actually released. The Legacy armies are all well and good, but the new armies don't have most of their product 6 months after releasing all their rules.

What's compounding that is the SR pushing for 100 point games that are easy for the Legacy armies to support, but the new armies really only can by buying multiple starters and spamming their limited options. All the advantages of scaling the game down and making it more accessible have been lost by not having the new armies ready to lead and instead leaning back on Legacy collections.

Most of the local crew is interested, but giving it a year or so to work things out. We've got a few waiting for Dusk and Khymera specifically but whether its really worth pushing to make a regular thing again will largely come down to how well PP can stabilize its production and start getting these army boxes out on time.

Big part of that is that PP caved to its existing player base demands instead of holding to its guns. Originally PP intended 50pts to be the competitive format for the first year so as to enable ease of entry for new players. The existing community is myopic and self centered and demanded 100 pts for it's sameness to the established mk3 75 point standard, which most people outside the core community otherwise consider too large.

This is unfortunate. How did it transpire? Play testers and established event organizers complained or something?

The problem is PP isn't in "get new people" mode. They are still trapped in "please our current customers" mode because they 100% need them.

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Whilst the PP side of Monster Apoc is good; the recent disaster is going to tarnish that with a huge slew of issues IF it fails to deliver (or delivers only with a sharp price spike for customers)

So PP 100% needs their current Warmachine market on their side.


That would also fit with their £150 bracket new sets. That is not a welcome pack; that's a pack for existing customers.



Which I guess is part of the root of one of many issues PP has right now. MKIV isn't being marketed heavily and its not being pushed for new customers or long-lost customers.
The rules are built for them ;but the marketing and price points are built for the existing fanbase.



Thing is PP could easily have had 100 point games for big events and then scaled back to another game mode for 50 or such. GW has done this in spades and its worked great for them. Meanwhile PP surely must realise that almost every other game that became large only did so through lots of smaller products nad marketing getting new customer on board.








Honestly I don't know if PP just don't realise their issues or if they have such a shortfall of finances that they just can't envision making any other approach work for their bottom line without taking too much risk.

Mk3s 30 quid starters were perfect entry points but no one could get them

 Overread wrote:

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Which is a shame because it’s a pretty great game. Very dynamic play and quite different from Warmachine/Warhammer.

 Genoside07 wrote:
. Whatever they did to kill their fanbase, they did a good job.

It wasn't one thing. It was death of a thousand cuts, missteps, poor decisions and denials.

I was a massive WM/H and PP fanboi. I loved the game and the models. It was always the company and some elements of the community that were the issue. And upon reflection, it was always that way, even back in the days when WM/H was at its zenith.

The fall has been a long time coming.

One can be a fan of the models, and the game system/universe without liking the company or where they are currently taking the game. i feel the same about PP/WM/H as i do about GW and 40K. i hate everything about where the game is at/is going, the change in mechanics and aesthetics for PP specifically so i do what i did with 40K. freeze it where it was good and build a player community around that.

Our FLGS is a very lucky place. we have some players who play multiple days during the week and we have an all day game day every Saturday on top of that. we have a couple dozen regular and semi-regular players who play just about everything. including over a dozen players for circa 5th ed 40K and about 10 (many with more than 1 army/faction) who still actively play WM/H MK III

Without an active and positive community i think any game system will die no matter how good it is.

 AduroT wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Which is a shame because it’s a pretty great game. Very dynamic play and quite different from Warmachine/Warhammer.

Honestly I'm shocked they didn't port some of the ideas into Warmachine. The biggest problem skirmish games have is having niche models that never see table time as you make the armies bigger. Warcasters living sideboard during games is a fantastic way to allow you to build an army that includes niche and situational models that might only see the table now and then, without crippling your army. That it also allows you to bring dead units back to the table to use again also opens up a whole avenue of options and sacrificial tactics that regular wargames, again, often outright shun (because you often win on kills).

I thought it was a very smart system that included a lot of great ideas and its a huge shame it hasn't taken off. Personally I think its stuck as PP doesn't want to market nor sell metal models any more but they've not put that game onto the 3D print production system. So they just aren't doing anything with it - which coupled to PP's very quiet marketing means its deadin the water.

Overread wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Which is a shame because it’s a pretty great game. Very dynamic play and quite different from Warmachine/Warhammer.

Honestly I'm shocked they didn't port some of the ideas into Warmachine. The biggest problem skirmish games have is having niche models that never see table time as you make the armies bigger. Warcasters living sideboard during games is a fantastic way to allow you to build an army that includes niche and situational models that might only see the table now and then, without crippling your army. That it also allows you to bring dead units back to the table to use again also opens up a whole avenue of options and sacrificial tactics that regular wargames, again, often outright shun (because you often win on kills).

I thought it was a very smart system that included a lot of great ideas and its a huge shame it hasn't taken off. Personally I think its stuck as PP doesn't want to market nor sell metal models any more but they've not put that game onto the 3D print production system. So they just aren't doing anything with it - which coupled to PP's very quiet marketing means its deadin the water.

Kickstarer is usually the biggest marketing tool and promotes its self if its a bit company. But kick starter also puts a hell of a lot of people off and PPs plastic would help that along

aphyon wrote:One can be a fan of the models, and the game system/universe without liking the company or where they are currently taking the game. i feel the same about PP/WM/H as i do about GW and 40K. i hate everything about where the game is at/is going, the change in mechanics and aesthetics for PP specifically so i do what i did with 40K. freeze it where it was good and build a player community around that.

Our FLGS is a very lucky place. we have some players who play multiple days during the week and we have an all day game day every Saturday on top of that. we have a couple dozen regular and semi-regular players who play just about everything. including over a dozen players for circa 5th ed 40K and about 10 (many with more than 1 army/faction) who still actively play WM/H MK III

Without an active and positive community i think any game system will die no matter how good it is.

Battlettech disagrees. Grognard bile sustained that game for decades. Nothing ever dies any more, its all zombies until a desperate reboot comes along. Even in our hobby.

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Big part of that is that PP caved to its existing player base demands instead of holding to its guns. Originally PP intended 50pts to be the competitive format for the first year so as to enable ease of entry for new players. The existing community is myopic and self centered and demanded 100 pts for it's sameness to the established mk3 75 point standard, which most people outside the core community otherwise consider too large.

This is unfortunate. How did it transpire? Play testers and established event organizers complained or something?

So, PP has always had a bit of a problem of listening to its fans. I'll post a long long explanation of why this a problem for them in a bit, but at the moment I'm going to focus on the most recent issues with MK4.

MK4 is not really meant to appease the current fanbase. It's clearly designed as a fresh start, with even the legacy content being full of compromises for existing players. Where it makes sense is making the game enticing for new players. The new rules just work better when played with smaller armies on tables with far denser terrain. Everything about it is more modular and easier to transport and the limited SKUs are probably too large to be as enticing as they need to be, but really do provide you with a full experience with meaningful options in a way that prior starters have completely failed to.

So what's gone wrong? Well, more than anything, they've failed to deliver the new product on time. They keep promising more and more stuff, but have yet to stabilize their release schedule, which is at least 4 months behind and keeps slipping even after stores receive solicitations and preorder dates. This has largely left the new armies in limbo, with Cygnar and Orgoth finally having their 75 point expansion hit shelves literally days ago. Whatever hype was built up for them has long dwindled and the feeling like the game still hasn't really launched yet has people playing wait and see.

And that leads us to what I feel will likely be the mortal wound for the whole thing, which is scenario design. Steamroller was once upon a time a pretty groundbreaking system, but it really hasn't kept up with the times in the last.... 15? years. It's been refined, but more than anything its been stretched to accommodate the ever increasing size of the game. Even in the heyday of mk2, it was designed in a way that demanded full size armies to cover all the objectives with no real way to scale down without the scenario just kind of collapsing. MK4 wants to be a smaller game and early on PP pushed some wildly different (and admittedly kind of terrible) scenario ideas, but when they flopped when presented at WFW to the hardest of hardcore crowd, PP balked and just rereleased SR2022 again. These scenarios are just terrible at anything less than 100 points. A lot of them are dependent on all of MK3s free solos and barely even work at 100 points in MK4.

So you've got a new edition running almost entirely on old players with their old collections running old scenarios that were designed to stress large armies. Those players flock to what works, which is 100 points. Meanwhile the new crowd, the whole purpose of ripping the band aid off in the first place don't even have models and even as they're finally released, are finding themselves thrust into an environment that demands buying 2 of those starters whose main justification is simply that they provide a "full" experience on their own. The complete lack of support for the game at 50-75 points has been choking the life out of the game since MK2. Now though, when the game has been reworked around games more than scale, its honestly just a total killer, IMO.

I think it would be fair to say warmachine bloated into a GW scale game and the current fanbase likes that. But old fans and new simply don't. We liked the skirmish size and we're willing to overpay on minis because you didn't need so many. You can't charge GW prices for any other game. And you know all these extra parts are costing the players jacking the price up. A 2 player box needs to be sub 100 quid unless it's got a huge ip behind it like star wars and PP doesn't have that

Battlettech disagrees. Grognard bile sustained that game for decades. Nothing ever dies any more, its all zombies until a desperate reboot comes along. Even in our hobby.

I do not quite understand what you are point is here. when comparing the game/minis CBT is very different from what PP/GW are doing.

I have been playing CBT since 1987 and i never stopped. there was always small groups of dedicated players. one of the key things about CBT compared to the other 2 games is the core rules have basically never changed in 30 years. even spin off games that may have gone nowhere (the clicks game, the card game etc..) had no real effect on the game. the game was always supported, you could always buy minis and rules and army build programs. because all the rules have always been there to the point i would say they never had a real "edition change" other than a couple needed rules tweaks to charts or things like how AMS works. for the most part they just moved all the rules into 2 camps-the core rules and the huge book of optional rules.

Compared to what PP and GW have done with the edition changes not only have they changed the core rules. they have changed the setting and aesthetics. changing the games to the point that they are not even the same game anymore other than wearing a skin suit of the setting.


That is why CBT has always been playable without having to pick a favorite edition VS what the other companies are doing.

I find it ironic.

For all the heat gw get for their actions surrounding ruthlessly and shamelessly nuking wfb, throwing the player base under the bus and releasing a new game/building a new community to go with it - whilst admittedly flawed, arguably it was the right decision from a business pov and it needed done.

Pp needs a new game with a new community but they are tied by circumstances to a rump community that at the end of the day, and actions catering to them that isn't helping the future of the game.

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
The main issue is just that it still doesn't feel like mk4 has actually released. The Legacy armies are all well and good, but the new armies don't have most of their product 6 months after releasing all their rules.
What's compounding that is the SR pushing for 100 point games that are easy for the Legacy armies to support, but the new armies really only can by buying multiple starters and spamming their limited options. All the advantages of scaling the game down and making it more accessible have been lost by not having the new armies ready to lead and instead leaning back on Legacy collections.
Most of the local crew is interested, but giving it a year or so to work things out. We've got a few waiting for Dusk and Khymera specifically but whether its really worth pushing to make a regular thing again will largely come down to how well PP can stabilize its production and start getting these army boxes out on time.

Big part of that is that PP caved to its existing player base demands instead of holding to its guns. Originally PP intended 50pts to be the competitive format for the first year so as to enable ease of entry for new players. The existing community is myopic and self centered and demanded 100 pts for it's sameness to the established mk3 75 point standard, which most people outside the core community otherwise consider too large.

This is unfortunate. How did it transpire? Play testers and established event organizers complained or something?

LunarSol pretty much hit the nail on the head, but also PP is in an echo chamber of its own making and doesnt really have channels for feedback from outside its core community and fanbase. The owner of the company famously doesn't believe in marketing - which is more than just "convincing people to buy stuff" but also in large part "understanding who buys your stuff, why they buy it, what they want to buy, and what others who aren't currently buying it want/need in order to start buying it". Their only means of really getting feedback is through portals only accessed by the most passionate fans that are actively engaged with the community online, which ignores the thoughts and opinions from the "silent majority" of more casual fans. The fact that their game devs are also closely tied in with the top tier competitive players in the community (first name basis, drinking buddies at major events and conventions level relationships) also probably colors their perception of things through personal relationships instead of taking a wider view of the community as a whole and considering the interests of a broader cross-section of the playerbase.

 Overread wrote:
The problem is PP isn't in "get new people" mode. They are still trapped in "please our current customers" mode because they 100% need them.
Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)
Whilst the PP side of Monster Apoc is good; the recent disaster is going to tarnish that with a huge slew of issues IF it fails to deliver (or delivers only with a sharp price spike for customers)
So PP 100% needs their current Warmachine market on their side.

You say that, but the new edition was tailor-made to appeal to new players on launch. The big announcement was basically "Hey, yknow those armies and miniatures miniatures you've spent decades and thousands of dollars collecting, building, painting, and playing with? Well their all functionally obsolete. We'll release competitive legal rules for some of your legacy models, but you'll only have access to about 40% of the model range across two discrete army lists per faction with strict limitations on how you can field your legacy collection. Don't worry, the remainder will still have rules for use in a second-tier casual play format that we probably won't ever update or balance - try to enjoy it best you can. Oh, and these armies will be 100% separate and discrete from the new armies we are releasing, so no new model releases will ever be backwards compatible with your existing collection. On that note, a number of the factions you've come to know and love over the years will not be returning in the new edition, hope you don't mind! Anyway, please start over from square zero with an entirely new army, thanks!"

 LunarSol wrote:

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Big part of that is that PP caved to its existing player base demands instead of holding to its guns. Originally PP intended 50pts to be the competitive format for the first year so as to enable ease of entry for new players. The existing community is myopic and self centered and demanded 100 pts for it's sameness to the established mk3 75 point standard, which most people outside the core community otherwise consider too large.

This is unfortunate. How did it transpire? Play testers and established event organizers complained or something?

So, PP has always had a bit of a problem of listening to its fans. I'll post a long long explanation of why this a problem for them in a bit, but at the moment I'm going to focus on the most recent issues with MK4.
MK4 is not really meant to appease the current fanbase. It's clearly designed as a fresh start, with even the legacy content being full of compromises for existing players. Where it makes sense is making the game enticing for new players. The new rules just work better when played with smaller armies on tables with far denser terrain. Everything about it is more modular and easier to transport and the limited SKUs are probably too large to be as enticing as they need to be, but really do provide you with a full experience with meaningful options in a way that prior starters have completely failed to.
So what's gone wrong? Well, more than anything, they've failed to deliver the new product on time. They keep promising more and more stuff, but have yet to stabilize their release schedule, which is at least 4 months behind and keeps slipping even after stores receive solicitations and preorder dates. This has largely left the new armies in limbo, with Cygnar and Orgoth finally having their 75 point expansion hit shelves literally days ago. Whatever hype was built up for them has long dwindled and the feeling like the game still hasn't really launched yet has people playing wait and see.
And that leads us to what I feel will likely be the mortal wound for the whole thing, which is scenario design. Steamroller was once upon a time a pretty groundbreaking system, but it really hasn't kept up with the times in the last.... 15? years. It's been refined, but more than anything its been stretched to accommodate the ever increasing size of the game. Even in the heyday of mk2, it was designed in a way that demanded full size armies to cover all the objectives with no real way to scale down without the scenario just kind of collapsing. MK4 wants to be a smaller game and early on PP pushed some wildly different (and admittedly kind of terrible) scenario ideas, but when they flopped when presented at WFW to the hardest of hardcore crowd, PP balked and just rereleased SR2022 again. These scenarios are just terrible at anything less than 100 points. A lot of them are dependent on all of MK3s free solos and barely even work at 100 points in MK4.
So you've got a new edition running almost entirely on old players with their old collections running old scenarios that were designed to stress large armies. Those players flock to what works, which is 100 points. Meanwhile the new crowd, the whole purpose of ripping the band aid off in the first place don't even have models and even as they're finally released, are finding themselves thrust into an environment that demands buying 2 of those starters whose main justification is simply that they provide a "full" experience on their own. The complete lack of support for the game at 50-75 points has been choking the life out of the game since MK2. Now though, when the game has been reworked around games more than scale, its honestly just a total killer, IMO.

100% this.

I'll also add that, having done a lot of playtesting at 50 pts prior to PP determining 100 to be the way forward, the game just plays better at 50. Its fast, brutal, tactical, fun, and not overwhelming. 100 pts is just a brutal slog with too much going on.

Yo7 wrote:
I think it would be fair to say warmachine bloated into a GW scale game and the current fanbase likes that. But old fans and new simply don't. We liked the skirmish size and we're willing to overpay on minis because you didn't need so many. You can't charge GW prices for any other game. And you know all these extra parts are costing the players jacking the price up. A 2 player box needs to be sub 100 quid unless it's got a huge ip behind it like star wars and PP doesn't have that

I think its more that PP bloated into a old-GW style company and hasn't managed to find its proper footing as a company and organizational culture since then. They have a lot more staff, overhead, and operational bloat than other miniatures companies of similar levels of popularity do, likely a relic and artifact of when they were in growth mode prior to the mk3 collapse. PP at its infancy was the anti-GW, it was hip, modern, community oriented, etc. The rules were in many ways revolutionary for its time and at the forefront of contemporary game design trends when it launched. Then through multiple editions of warmachine the company basically completely stagnated as new competitors entered the scene and blew right past PP by appealing to ever more modern player sensibilities and pushing the envelope even farther than PP did, to the point that even GW has managed to "get with it" and make PP look like the stale dinosaur in the room, even while the actual stale dinosaur that is Battletech is leading its own little renaissance by reintroducing younger generations of gamers to extremely crunchy old school wargaming.

To clarify, I say old-GW because PP has a very old-GW way of viewing the market and interacting with their customer base, whereas nu-GW is a lot more engaged across a pretty wide cross-section of its fanbase through different channels, but also more keenly aware of overall industry design trends, etc. Many of the changes being made for 10e are exemplary of this, some of the changes are things that competitive players have been desirous of, but many more are for what the filthy casuals like me have been crying for since very early in 9th ed - in all (and I say this as a tabletop game snob and a fierce GW critic who has been reasonably convinced that the majority of the GW rules studio couldn't design a decent tabletop game if their lives depended on it) it appears to be a very modern tabletop ruleset with sound design principles underlying it while still being true to 40ks roots in most respects. I am impressed. Mk4 WM on the other hand has vastly improved playability and taken some very positive steps in the right direction, but is being held back in part by PPs unwillingness to really rip the bandaid off and push for play formats beyond the comfort zone that is the streamroller packet (which has long been an anchor around the games throat).

The thing is there was no one single thing that caused PP's decline, it was a series of elements coupled to a lack of steadying or promoting elements that helped counterbalance the negative.

GW on the other hand has had negatives too over the years; heck canning Old World was one of the biggest blunders on many fronts.

However the thing is GW always had counter-balance elements and even when they were on a decline it was a gradual thing.




The biggest thing is likely that GW delivers on models. For lines that are current and not withdrawn, you can get them.

PP on the other hand had huge issues with supply outside of their core home regions. These issues burned stores and players and the result was even if you were a fan, there could be hoops to jump through to get stock.


Also one big change GW made which I think helped turn their numbers around; is that they started talking through marketing. GW now does 7 days a week, every day marketing through their various social media and direct media channels. PP on the other hand, as we've noted earlier, is near silent and they are not tapping into youtube content creators in a big way either.


GW makes sure you hear about their models that they do sell; they make sure those models are in stores - with some iffy supply overseas as a result of stocking and shipping aspects.
But in general you can hear about and buy GW models.



I think PP also burned themselves on gateway, again we've said before that PP has been shifting to these big, expensive packs as the only gateway to their games. Sure GW has just shifted their gateway "battleforces" up a price, but they are still sub £100 and they are also not the only option. You can buy individual models easily; you can get into Killteam and Underworlds and Warcry for 1 pack of cheaper models. They promote and made a game of Killteam instead of just having it as a page in the main rules.


That's a trick PP should have seen and capitalised on. Let their established players have their 100point battles by all means. Just introduce a 50 point system or a 25 that allows newbies into the game. Then market the heck out of that system to promote it with tournaments and such so that established players are tempted to play it too for variety. That's basically what GW did and it works great; new players can get right in and game quickly and old players are encouraged to also play for those formats to increase the active player pool for them.


I don't think PP needs a new game or a new IP. I think what they need is a sorely required cash injection coupled with sound business and marketing choices to promote, adapt and get what they have out into the world and get people aware of it and talking about it. And not talking about it like in this thread; but talking about the future; about awesome stuff coming.

And also get their production system stored out so that people can get their models; get into the game affordably and all .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Overread wrote:
The problem is PP isn't in "get new people" mode. They are still trapped in "please our current customers" mode because they 100% need them.
Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)
Whilst the PP side of Monster Apoc is good; the recent disaster is going to tarnish that with a huge slew of issues IF it fails to deliver (or delivers only with a sharp price spike for customers)
So PP 100% needs their current Warmachine market on their side.

You say that, but the new edition was tailor-made to appeal to new players on launch. The big announcement was basically "Hey, yknow those armies and miniatures miniatures you've spent decades and thousands of dollars collecting, building, painting, and playing with? Well their all functionally obsolete. We'll release competitive legal rules for some of your legacy models, but you'll only have access to about 40% of the model range across two discrete army lists per faction with strict limitations on how you can field your legacy collection. Don't worry, the remainder will still have rules for use in a second-tier casual play format that we probably won't ever update or balance - try to enjoy it best you can. Oh, and these armies will be 100% separate and discrete from the new armies we are releasing, so no new model releases will ever be backwards compatible with your existing collection. On that note, a number of the factions you've come to know and love over the years will not be returning in the new edition, hope you don't mind! Anyway, please start over from square zero with an entirely new army, thanks!"

Honestly I'd forgotten about that bit; if partly only due to the fact that the only force I've got in any shape is Everblght and for some reason PP decided to put Hordes way after Warmachine in the updates.

But yeah invalidating whole armies in a big swathe is a bad move. I've never understood why PP never did what GW has done successfully for years and just - updated old sculpts with new sculpts and re-released them. Loads of pepole rebuy the same models to generate easy sales because the new one is cooler/different/perhaps bigger but at least differently designed. There's a lot of love they can also do with poses with 3D printing that they can't do with metal and such so with skilled sculptors they could go wild.

chaos0xomega wrote:

I'll also add that, having done a lot of playtesting at 50 pts prior to PP determining 100 to be the way forward, the game just plays better at 50. Its fast, brutal, tactical, fun, and not overwhelming. 100 pts is just a brutal slog with too much going on.

This is what really irks me. I've absolutely loved what I've played of Mk4. I've been leaning towards 75 simply because while I think 50 feels great for Warcasters, Warlocks just require too much Warbeast investment to feel like they have much in the way of options at 50. 75 feels about right for them and sees a bit more variety show up in my Warcaster armies.

I'm definitely on board with promoting the game again, but the products to push just aren't available yet. My main fear is just that by the time they are, the old bad habits will be too entrenched to be worth getting people interested in a leaner experience, even if that's only because the game is effectively dead outside of the ever dwindling tournament grinders. Either way, at the moment I'm turning my legacy collection into "final" 75 point lists that scale down to 50 pretty easily.

I'm not saying anything above is wrong but comparing anything to GW is like comparing your garden to Everest. Even if PP did try to use the Internet better they're not going to come close to the reach GW has. When a GW designer farts we get 12 lore channels discussing the new nurgle plague. GW isn't even a tabletop game in the same sense WWE isn't wrestling any more. Its an unique market that happens to contain those things because it grew out of them. Even if you had the same budget and did everything the same you couldn't compete on brand alone. You need to do something to stand out and not be cookie cutter like everyone else. Maybe I'm too old now but I can't see a wider culture that is even ready for a move beyond GW. Warmachine grew out of the edge teen period of rapid expansion into steam punk, shoulder pads and jackass. You don't have anything close to that any more. You have faux 80s nostalgia, safe spaces and super hero movies that already have their own games being made. How do you ride the current cultural wave beyond Heman board games and painting an army navy and neon green/pink. PP are definitely behind the curve but is a warmachine style rise to glory possible without a wider culture willing to take risks instead of buying shatterpoint, crisis protocol and GWs stuff? Players have budgets and battle droids aren't cheap (most games have sky rocketed in price making playing multiples hard and fear of wasting money is lurking)

Been some great posts by people on here, laying out the issues. But its nothing that we haven't covered over and over and over again with PP since the launch of Mk3 and maybe a bit before. The fact that its the same issues, complaints, missteps and denials probably is a good indication as to why PP is barely limping along.

WM/H ironically is how I found DakkaDakka, despite it being mainly GW focused because it was a board outside of the immediate WM/H community where the game could be discussed. If PP managed to turn things around then im here for it but im not going to be lifting a finger to help. Too many years of the same issues, taking the same hits, knocking my head against the same brick walls. My goodwill is 110% spent. Im massively enjoying other small games like Malifaux right now.

If a company continues to act like this then maybe, just maybe, it just doesn't deserve to survive.

Yo7 wrote:
Warmachine grew out of the edge teen period of rapid expansion into steam punk, shoulder pads and jackass. You don't have anything close to that any more. You have faux 80s nostalgia, safe spaces and super hero movies that already have their own games being made. How do you ride the current cultural wave beyond Heman board games and painting an army navy and neon green/pink. PP are definitely behind the curve but is a warmachine style rise to glory possible without a wider culture willing to take risks instead of buying shatterpoint, crisis protocol and GWs stuff? Players have budgets and battle droids aren't cheap (most games have sky rocketed in price making playing multiples hard and fear of wasting money is lurking)

You're fairly on point here. I'd also add wmh was 'the right game; right time' to capitalise on gw's late-kirby era shenanigans and nastiness towards the fan base - around 2010 to 14, and that years 'summer of discontent'. Gw was complacent anf openly regarded its own fans with contempt; the alternative to 40k was fantasy and gw was deliberately stripping out any internal 'threats' to their big 2. Furthermore they were contemptuous of innovation or 'change' and would just double down because kirby was a short termer at this point who.couldnt see beyond his pension pot imo. Folks flocked to pp in droves (anyone remember the stock shortages back then becayse they couldnt keep.up?), and at the time pp were the movers and shakers in the industry - they were a step ahead of the curve and were doing things in their games people had wanted done for years.

And here's the thing. Pp stagnated, gw learned. Maje no mistake, gw are just as ruthless as they've ever been - they are not nor will ever be our 'friends', bit they've had a reality check and honesty are better because of it.

Honestly, as you say the 'lightning in the bottle' moment is not there for pp at this moment. Its a 90s style game in the 20s, the cultural momentum is against it, and the other players have stepped up.their game massively.

Honestly the whole "90s game in the 20s" I thing I think gets overblown. I can think of a lot of old games that haven't "moved with the times" rules wise that people still play and have fun with - heck Battletech is mentioned earlier and there's a mountain of boardgames that never change rules (or do so insanely slowly).


I think the whole "modern rules" thing is more people just playing one kind of game for ages and then looking around for something structurally different. It might be wrapped as "new hotness" but in the end its not so much about it being new as it is about it being a different experience that allows for different approaches and something fresh.




So I don't think its the "game" that's the core of the problem for PP. Part of it yes, but I'd argue that the greater problem is the company around the game. I think Warcaster shows this, it is a more modern system and its doing things that Infinity and Wyrd and others aren't doing with its in-game sideboard. It's got that fresh appeal and its - dead in the water.
Launching during Covid with a totally new game did not help; but the company behind it is the bigger problem.

Dystopian Wars also launched during Covid times (heck its original all resin launch was delayed by over a year because of lockdowns) and yet its steadily managed to grow and grow as Warcradle are making very steady, sustained progress with it.

 Overread wrote:
Honestly the whole "90s game in the 20s" I thing I think gets overblown. I can think of a lot of old games that haven't "moved with the times" rules wise that people still play and have fun with - heck Battletech is mentioned earlier and there's a mountain of boardgames that never change rules (or do so insanely slowly).

Yeah, having played actual 90s style tabletop games, I can tell you warmachine is not that. When I think 90s style games I think of games like B5 Wars, Battlefleet Gothic, Crimson Skies, DBA, Warhammer Ancient Battles, Fire and Fury/Johnny Reb, Command Decision, Crossfire, A Fistful of TOWs, Ironclads & Ether Flyers, Dirtside, Epic, Full Thrust, Heavy Gear/Jovian Chronicles, Necromunda, OGRE, Warzone, Vor the Maelstrom, Man O War, Mordheim, etc. None of those really have much in common with the design philosophy of Warmachine. Warmachine released in 2003, but it has more in common with games that released ~10 years later than it did its contemporaries - which is why it was so successful for a time, because it was ahead of its time and moved forward the concept of what tabletop wargames could be like. If anything, its solidly a "2010 game in 2023".

Dystopian Wars also launched during Covid times (heck its original all resin launch was delayed by over a year because of lockdowns) and yet its steadily managed to grow and grow as Warcradle are making very steady, sustained progress with it.

Heh, talk about a 90s game in the 20s.

What you say about the 90s links has merits - thanks fimir showing a different pov on it.

If I may discuss briefly?

I've seen a lot of commentary regarding the association of wmh and the 90s more with the 'x-treme' ethos and over-the-top advertising and 'energy' of the 90s. That's more what I was trying to convey, i think.

in todays more... 'sensitive, inclusive and affirming' era, phrases like 'play like you got a pair' and the ott trash talking of mk1s page 5 are grounds for cancelling and social shame. I know they were chucked in mk3 and always had some push back in our more modern era, but its very much 90s talk - it wouldn't even have folks batting an eyelid back when we were kids.

That said, while The game itself was forward thinking in a lot of ways dont forget it was an early-noughties game based on knowledge from the previous decade so claims of 90s design are not completely unwarranted. They would hsvd drawn on the game-design-theory of that era. If anything these is a lot of crossover in terminology use and game elements from games of that era eg dnd (which makes sense considering the iron kingdoms originated as a d20 game) and I remember remarking on a few subtle similarities between wmh and 2nd Ed 40k game mechanisms at the time - but that was more curious coincidence than anything else.

I wouldn't call warmachine 90s in any sense. Its a very masculine 00s, like the WWF attitude era and Jack ass being early 20s guys being.. Well guys. The 90s extreme was more surfer and less macho.

Reading the thread I do think that's wanted by a lot of men now so maybe a revival is possible. Or a one page rules style warmachine using 3d printed minis and a similar rule set. I've considered working on something like that myself. It wouldn't be too difficult but you need to gain attention for it and I'm unsure how. Plus I despise character Jack's as a concept as they invalidate basic choices so I would murder hobo like half the range...

Is Dystopian Wars still around? I haven’t heard hide nor hair of that one since the relaunch.

 AduroT wrote:
Is Dystopian Wars still around? I haven’t heard hide nor hair of that one since the relaunch.

That's the thing about minis games. Whatever you think is big or dead or whatever might be thriving or non-existent somewhere else. Even in my local era there was a long time where 40k appeared dead, but actually had one of the biggest playerbases completely secluded to a network of basement games. Con attendance is a useful indicator, but also the kind of myopic view that lead to a lot of PPs problems in the first place. A tall tree with weak roots that falls in a storm.

 AduroT wrote:
Is Dystopian Wars still around? I haven’t heard hide nor hair of that one since the relaunch.

There's a couple of threads on it and WC have been steady at releasing new models every month for a range of factions. They are even up to airships for some forces now. They've also done a rare thing and earlier plastic modles have had updates to their moulds as they've advanced their skill. Mostly this has been things like changing the smaller central turrets from fixed part of the mould to stand alone parts (which also meant the barrels are free standing not fused into the base of the ship); and also giving most factions three or so different small turret options instead of just one.

I think its a long way from mainstream or big leagues, but its had what I consider a steady sustained level of support and growth. No massive spurt but a steady one.



News thread (linked to the last page cause that's more relevant as its a rolling news thread)
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/960/708649.page
Fan thread
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/800528.page

I think that PP is a little bit like a band that recorded a fluke one hit wonder. The thing with a lot of one hit wonders is that they didn't have another hit because they just didn't have the talent or ideas to merit one.

Warmachine was a buzzy, minor player in Mark I. It was in MK II that it really blew up. Instead of asking why they've dwindled since then (they clearly aren't a well run company), the question is why did it blow up? Why did it become such a big hit?

I think it had a lot of the stuff that you need (decent to good models, great lore, etc) but I do think the competitive aspect was the key. Steamroller was, at the time, such a change to how games can be played. Having objectives plus caster kill, with two lists, made things really interesting. And when you got rocked, it was quick.

But that's not enough in 2023. Other games have better scenarios, and other game certainly have comparable to better lore and models. I think they've just been out of ideas since early MKII.

 Polonius wrote:
It was in MK II that it really blew up. Instead of asking why they've dwindled since then (they clearly aren't a well run company), the question is why did it blow up? Why did it become such a big hit?

Possibly. Warmachine has locally evolved from blowing up in quite spectacular manner in 2010-2012 to the point of it being a somewhat sizable alternative to WH40K to people asking: "What is Warmachine? First time hearing about it" nowadays. Like, both Malifaux and Infinity still exist and have dedicated communities, but Warmachine just completely vanished as if it was never there in the first place.

I was personally put off by the game's fans' attitudes. "We're the real deal, GW and other games suck ass and are complete trash in comparison to our competitive flagship, hell yeah, play like page 5 says you to do so!". I have some Khador, Cryx and Legion models bought 10+ years ago, and they range from OK (Legion's warbeasts are cool) to bloody terrible, this is some of the worst posing and sculpting quality I've ever worked with, so it didn't help matters for sure.

Good point about steamroller scenarios. Once upon a time they were cutting edge scenario design. Today they are generic, flavorless, and boring. They've overstayed their welcome, other games are demonstrating thst you can have exciting fun and engaging scenario design that is balanced while still feeling like it has some basis in narrative. Steamroller scenarios are just bland.

 Overread wrote:
I think the core problem is past the actual launch of the edition, PP hasn't been aggressive with marketing MKIV outside of their own current community/customerbase.

Far as I'm aware they still lack a proper local rep system

They had the best one around. They took it out back and shot it in the head. The playerbase declining since that moment is pure coincidence...

At one time I had a collection of Khador, Cryx, with a few gators and trolls, but got out years ago. My memories of the games I played were fair at best, ending with most of the last games leaving a bad taste in my mouth and the reason I got out. When you are not having fun in a game there is not much reason to continue, again I don't expect to win but also don't care for being curb stomped either. Even comparing it to Necromunda, the game is a little broken but I still enjoyed the games I lost and the times I played. Even with a Jacked up Goliath that caught fire on the second turn and was never injured but spent most of the game running around the board on fire never rolling to put out the flames. Or going cheap with one weapon and bringing a "magic bullet" where you roll a "one" and a jam on your first shot then fail your ammo check. Those are funny bad memories, but being silly in Warmachine just got you stomped faster. I guess I am not a competitive player and that is what most players were.

Genoside07

I can understand that, i found that the hardcore WM/H steamroller players were that toxic group i never enjoyed playing with. even in MKIII we never use theme lists, or play steamroller. we play at 50 points instead of 75 and have a very casual fun approach to the game which is why we still play it. like any other game system if you are going to spend an hour or two per game you play you want it to be an enjoyable experience, not a lesson in frustration no matter if it is a PP game, a GW game or any other game system.

Press gangers being cancelled was over a wotc judge Labour laws..

I still refuse to believe the page 5 dude bro meme is real. I was very active at the peak and never met one. I was the biggest jerk I ever met and it was never about page 5. That feels like an Internet rumour becoming an urban legend

Page 5 things are odd - I always get the feeling its more a USA thing than a UK/EU thing; but in the end it is odd.

I think in the end its just that regular jerks or people with a very competitive attitude and low social skills simply leaned on it.

I think also there was use of page 5 to justify basically "seal clubbing" in that people who were good at the game would always play their best and would win over newbies or the casual players/less skilled.


That isn't unique to Warmachine, but I think the fact that it attracted a lot of competitive style people (over warhammer and such which can be played competitive but never tried to be a tight competitive rules system) resulted in a bit of an over concentration in some regions.



But yeah PG being closed down was one of their biggest issues; as was the fact that they never tried to work out a way around it to get something like it going again in a different form. If you're not GW and don't have your own stores and a massive marketing system; you need a local rep system.

Almost every wargame that does well has one because you need that one person in every club to push your game; to be invested into it and to have a standard of game skill and also support from others to push through the "no one plays locally" bubble. To run demo game after demo game; to have a half decent pair of starter forces (at least) and a table and terrain and to draw people in.

What game even still has that kind of ambassador type program? I’m not aware of any.

Dystopian Wars, Malifaux, Infinity (least fairly sure Infinity has one). I'm also pretty sure that One Page Rules is developing/running their own as well.

There's no denying, the Press Ganger system was very effective and well known. It certainly was very effective.
Basically if you don't have your own stores and staff, having an ambassador system is very important and greatly helps toward growth and promotion of the game.

I think when you look at games which are doing well, an effective ambassador system is often built in somewhere within its structure. For some it might be very informal and mostly used just to help coordinate events and pool resources. A few might be "fan run"; meanwhile others might come with perks for those who take part; tests and approvals to gain the title and such.

Again PP set the tone with that - having a test to make sure entries knew the game; requiring 2 starter pack armies, built and painted from different forces; etc..

 Overread wrote:


I think also there was use of page 5 to justify basically "seal clubbing" in that people who were good at the game would always play their best and would win over newbies or the casual players/less skilled.

I've always seen it as a contradiction. Page 5 (point 3) explicitely advised defying convention, fail-safe formulas and status quo which is the exact opposite of copying a cookie cutter netlist spamming the same optimal model.

It was also quite clear that beating newbies brings no honour or bragging rights.

Cyel wrote:

 Overread wrote:


I think also there was use of page 5 to justify basically "seal clubbing" in that people who were good at the game would always play their best and would win over newbies or the casual players/less skilled.

I've always seen it as a contradiction. Page 5 (point 3) explicitely advised defying convention, fail-safe formulas and status quo which is the exact opposite of copying a cookie cutter netlist spamming the same optimal model.

It was also quite clear that beating newbies brings no honour or bragging rights.

agree on both points. Seal Clubbing is the worst, and I've seen it so much in Warmachine and 40K communities.

 AduroT wrote:
What game even still has that kind of ambassador type program? I’m not aware of any.

Conquest TLAOK pushes its Vanguard program really hard.

 Overread wrote:
The problem is PP isn't in "get new people" mode. They are still trapped in "please our current customers" mode because they 100% need them.

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Whilst the PP side of Monster Apoc is good; the recent disaster is going to tarnish that with a huge slew of issues IF it fails to deliver (or delivers only with a sharp price spike for customers)

So PP 100% needs their current Warmachine market on their side.


That would also fit with their £150 bracket new sets. That is not a welcome pack; that's a pack for existing customers.

Funnily enough the one side of PP that seems to be doing well are the Iron Kingdoms books for 5e. Time really is a flat circle.

Granted, you could sell raw sewage on Kickstarter and if it had a "5E license" it would make a quarter of a million, but they've been doing pretty good numbers on their books even when delving into the pretty niche parts of the setting like the Deep Wilds. Aside from a few copies of the initial corebook having dodgy binding the distribution side of it has gone pretty well too.

Honestly I'm constantly amazed how much 5th ed books from 3rd parties fund for on Kickstarter. Even fairly unknown or small name or just new firms seem to do really well with that market.



That said I think it highlights why we have so much chatter about PP and why they haven't vanished - PP can do things. They are not an outright failure; far from it. However they seem to have glaring holes and problems and appear to make choices that don't set them up for good progress and growth.

PP feel to me very much like GW did in the last years of the Kirby management team - chock full of wasted potential and making choices that, to customers and fans on the outside, seem to just miss the mark

With the right manager, the right team and the right choices I feel PP could turn things around a lot from what they currently are. But getting there and getting there on a damaged income is certainly not easy.

 Overread wrote:
Honestly I'm constantly amazed how much 5th ed books from 3rd parties fund for on Kickstarter. Even fairly unknown or small name or just new firms seem to do really well with that market.



That said I think it highlights why we have so much chatter about PP and why they haven't vanished - PP can do things. They are not an outright failure; far from it. However they seem to have glaring holes and problems and appear to make choices that don't set them up for good progress and growth.

PP feel to me very much like GW did in the last years of the Kirby management team - chock full of wasted potential and making choices that, to customers and fans on the outside, seem to just miss the mark

With the right manager, the right team and the right choices I feel PP could turn things around a lot from what they currently are. But getting there and getting there on a damaged income is certainly not easy.

That's kind of like saying your local team could win a world Cup if it just had better players.. PP now is a totally different group of people and likely staffed by fanboy's unable to create because they're obsessed with the status quo they adore so much (true for most industries these days.) Lack of experiences outside of their pet game leads to stagnation more than anything else.

Nepotism is also a huge deal in wargaming. If you're part of the Nottingham crowd you can get a game off the ground super easy a lot of the big ones are the same bubble in warlord, mantic etc. All being GWs retirement location. Breaking in fresh is super difficult and often the ones that do are an older version of GWs rules retooled..

Maybe it's being in the UK and our attitude to sportsmanship but seel clubbing is usually a failure to communicate. Most competitive players are happy to play softer lists if asked. I never had that problem unless tournament training was on and then I knew I was taking a clubbing to get a game. A smaller size game usually meant less broken combos and weaker casters didn't take much storage space to bring a switch. I was heavily online at the time as well and the page 5 thugs didn't seem to crop up until 2d terrain by which time I considered the game dead any way. Maybe that's part of it?

Yo7 wrote:
Press gangers being cancelled was over a wotc judge Labour laws.

That’s the PP spin on it, sure. Of course, pressgangers were very different from the WOTC judges. Who, it turns out, had the case dismissed in 2017.

I never believed that line, and in retrospect it’s even sillier. It was an expense and by then, PP was eating its seed corn.

The problem with PP is they fell below critical mass of participants. You need to get a certain level of people playing the game to make it look more attractive for new people to get into that game and find opponents. It often takes luck to hit that number, and once you do it can sustain itself fairly well unless something F’s it up. Warmachine came out and was middling. They geared up into the improved mkII right about the same people were most fed up with GW which gave them a good boost and let them blow up nice. Guild Ball was able to piggyback off them later which gave GB a good boost. However this caused WM numbers to dip a bit, and PP way overdid their reaction to this and dropped mkIII too early before it was ready, and that bungled released tanked their player base below that good critical mass and it’s really hard to recover from that. GB meanwhile got pretty successful for awhile, too successful for Steamforged who could not supply the models for players. People Wanted to play that game but Couldn’t get it. Then SF discovered how much money they could make far easier running board game Kickstarters for popular video game IPs that they could just print and dump out there and didn’t have to worry about supporting them. Never mind they always deliver way late. GB was summarily dropped without even being finished. Oh, and they blamed the players for it.

Over here, bushido also ate into the conpetitive circuit (and more recently marvel crisis protocol s)

 AduroT wrote:
The problem with PP is they fell below critical mass of participants. You need to get a certain level of people playing the game to make it look more attractive for new people to get into that game and find opponents. It often takes luck to hit that number, and once you do it can sustain itself fairly well unless something F’s it up. Warmachine came out and was middling. They geared up into the improved mkII right about the same people were most fed up with GW which gave them a good boost and let them blow up nice. Guild Ball was able to piggyback off them later which gave GB a good boost. However this caused WM numbers to dip a bit, and PP way overdid their reaction to this and dropped mkIII too early before it was ready, and that bungled released tanked their player base below that good critical mass and it’s really hard to recover from that. GB meanwhile got pretty successful for awhile, too successful for Steamforged who could not supply the models for players. People Wanted to play that game but Couldn’t get it. Then SF discovered how much money they could make far easier running board game Kickstarters for popular video game IPs that they could just print and dump out there and didn’t have to worry about supporting them. Never mind they always deliver way late. GB was summarily dropped without even being finished. Oh, and they blamed the players for it.

9th ed 40k (Maybe 8th? I lose track of the hard reboot editions these days) was the real killer as I recall. GW put on the good cop act for 6 months and all the suckers ran back to the price hike merry go round. I'll even admit I bought a few books intending to try then never did.

Ah, true, I did forget the detail they bungled their mkIII release right into GW’s successful PR reboot. Turns out when your initial brand recognition is the anti-GW and you build your base off of disgruntled GW players angry at their current behavior, mimicking that behavior at the same time the other company is trying to appear to turn it around is going to see the base flip flop right back to their former love.

And that's why I hate when fans (or even a firm) market themselves as the "anti-GW". Because if how you're introduced to something and how it presents is starting off on a negative foot and starting off with "we are better than X, X is evil and horrible and you should hate them"

Well it doesn't produce fans and an attraction beyond that. Which means if X goes and does something good, suddenly all that "anti" marketing flies right out the window.

Yo7 wrote:

9th ed 40k (Maybe 8th? I lose track of the hard reboot editions these days) was the real killer as I recall. GW put on the good cop act for 6 months and all the suckers ran back to the price hike merry go round. I'll even admit I bought a few books intending to try then never did.

8th was the reboot that you are referring to, I think. I don't think it was the 'real killer' on its own, though it was a significant part of it.

Truth was, gw under roundtree made some significant shifts in direction from the kirby era that have been massively successful. 8th was a part of it. Better community outreach (still enjoy my regimental standard), social media use, nicer models as well as the reintroduction of their 'specialist games', and intro boxes/boxed games have all played their part. I don't think it's so much a 'good cop act' as an acknowledgement thst kirby era gw was myopic and short termist and frankly they needed to do better. Respectfully, calling people 'suckers' id uncalled for. No, gw are not our 'friends' and yes, they charge through the nose, but as someone who firmly 'refused to buy gw' for about 10 years, and had a blast on the pp train for mk2, its gw games/products that i have genuinely enjoyed the most these last five years. This is neither 'bad' or 'wrong'. I don't think I'm the only one in this boat.

Yeah Kirby was very much by the numbers short term gains kind of management. It worked and lets not forget he turned GW around from a company bleeding money when he took over to one that was very profitable by the end of his time.

However I think his short term goal approach, whilst good for the company in the early days of his management at getting the finances in order; wasn't something that resulted in a firm doing its best in long term gains.

Essentially he took over GW, repaired it and built it up, but it needed a different style of management and a different approach to actually take GW up from the foundation he helped establish in his time.


Other things like a lot of separation of the top end from the fans were also issues. GW was doing abnormal things at a time when every other firm was jumping into social media and "esports/geeksports" was starting to grow from a handful of people doing a LAN party to big events - GW was backing out of all of that; heck it outright shunned and feared the internet.

So yeah when Roundtree took over there were big changes and it took what Kirby helped establish and grew from it. Sure GW are still GW and still have GW issues with things like rules; but no longer are we having to rely on rumours to know what's coming in a few weeks or such

Overread wrote:And that's why I hate when fans (or even a firm) market themselves as the "anti-GW". Because if how you're introduced to something and how it presents is starting off on a negative foot and starting off with "we are better than X, X is evil and horrible and you should hate them"

Well it doesn't produce fans and an attraction beyond that. Which means if X goes and does something good, suddenly all that "anti" marketing flies right out the window.

One page rules community is doing that right now. It's not a problem if you have something to back it up. It becomes a problem when all you have is bile. Warmachine was the anti gw in pretty much every way but it was also a solid game. You're always being compared to the biggest thing in town so you may as well embrace it and run with it. But that doesn't mean every post is based around GW models or how much their games such, which is an issue with OPR right now, its being used as a waiting room for 10th ed.

Overread wrote:Yeah Kirby was very much by the numbers short term gains kind of management. It worked and lets not forget he turned GW around from a company bleeding money when he took over to one that was very profitable by the end of his time.

However I think his short term goal approach, whilst good for the company in the early days of his management at getting the finances in order; wasn't something that resulted in a firm doing its best in long term gains.

Essentially he took over GW, repaired it and built it up, but it needed a different style of management and a different approach to actually take GW up from the foundation he helped establish in his time.


Other things like a lot of separation of the top end from the fans were also issues. GW was doing abnormal things at a time when every other firm was jumping into social media and "esports/geeksports" was starting to grow from a handful of people doing a LAN party to big events - GW was backing out of all of that; heck it outright shunned and feared the internet.

So yeah when Roundtree took over there were big changes and it took what Kirby helped establish and grew from it. Sure GW are still GW and still have GW issues with things like rules; but no longer are we having to rely on rumours to know what's coming in a few weeks or such

I thought they kept the hype window pretty small still? Maybe its because I don't follow GW and don't care about them in any way but I see 3d print stuff releasing almost immediately when something is revealed. When I've been given GW models as gifts I've found the sprue lay outs confusing and tedious to build. Half a foot attached to a base and the kneepad to neck line stuff just isn't fun to me. Makes me hate building models when I feel guilty for not building a gift I got. So could just be my ignorance and my interest in 3d printing exposing me to more of it than the main channels. But I'm also an old man and I hate hello fellow kids posts that make up most companies social media stuff. I would rather have an impersonal distant company than a Web 3.0 one posting memes and paying off YouTube crestors. Seen enough space marine painting tutorials for a life time and the new 40k box is being sent out for free to a lot of people spamming my feed yet again...

One thing that I found sad, but also gave me some hope. I was in the One Page Rules Discord (basically the heartland of their online interactions and all) and someone joined their general chat complaining that they had to leave another group because it was full of GW fans. They left the OPR Discord not an hour or two later because they found that even OPR fans on the OPR Discord also still played Warhammer and bought GW models and liked them and complimented them.

It was sad in that it was 100% backing up that concept that hate bred hate. However it also gave me hope because honestly whilst there are those who are die-hard haters; the overwhelming majority run the gauntlet from "I don't care" to "I love both".




As for GW's marketing today, they give about a 3 month release window on upcoming things. So within a bit we tend to know what's going to roughly happen for about 3 months. This varies, there are times when its just before a big event preview where we know a little less and GW has experimented with roadmaps and other slightly longer term marketing.

I do agree 3D printing is scary fast and GW can now expect anything previewed to be a 3D model by the end of the day; if not a few days later.

Personally I find such copy-cat work boring and dull. I far prefer when designers go their own way and do their own models and styles.

 Overread wrote:


It was sad in that it was 100% backing up that concept that hate bred hate. However it also gave me hope because honestly whilst there are those who are die-hard haters; the overwhelming majority run the gauntlet from "I don't care" to "I love both".

Agreed. I remember when I was 'selling' wmh to other players back in the day, I would try and sell the game on its own merits and not misleading 'but its cheaper' arguments or 'hating on gw' bile.

Haters will always be haters and its disheartening. I remember once back in the day a couple of haters unloading on gw as 'terrible and out of touch' because the then-new stormcast had helmets with a sun-motif (or halo) and since most kids were atheist it was proof gw were out of touch and incompetent. I mean... how can you argue with that?! Tying so much of your emotional health and identity
with the actions and products of a company that just makes toy soldiers is unhealthy. There's a point where you should just take a step back, and maybe just go for a long walk snd enjoy the sunshine. Fandoms can be incredibly problematic.

 Overread wrote:


I do agree 3D printing is scary fast and GW can now expect anything previewed to be a 3D model by the end of the day; if not a few days later.

Personally I find such copy-cat work boring and dull. I far prefer when designers go their own way and do their own models and styles.

There's a bunch of 'not-kriegsmen'*and other 'not-marines' that keep popping up in my fb. I mean... fair enough and whilst cheaper which isnt a bad thing, it would be nice to see sculpts that are not just obviously low-effort piggy backing on gw's ip with known/popular sculpts.

*gasmasks have 2 hoses and the filter casing is behind, not in front.

 Polonius wrote:
I think that PP is a little bit like a band that recorded a fluke one hit wonder. The thing with a lot of one hit wonders is that they didn't have another hit because they just didn't have the talent or ideas to merit one.

Warmachine was a buzzy, minor player in Mark I. It was in MK II that it really blew up. Instead of asking why they've dwindled since then (they clearly aren't a well run company), the question is why did it blow up? Why did it become such a big hit?

I think it had a lot of the stuff that you need (decent to good models, great lore, etc) but I do think the competitive aspect was the key. Steamroller was, at the time, such a change to how games can be played. Having objectives plus caster kill, with two lists, made things really interesting. And when you got rocked, it was quick.

But that's not enough in 2023. Other games have better scenarios, and other game certainly have comparable to better lore and models. I think they've just been out of ideas since early MKII.

I think its easy to underestimate how much Warmachine really changed table top games. Steamrollers objectives are one thing (also one that was fan created) but the real breakthroughs come from the Focus system adding a resource management layer to turns and probably most importantly, rules being codified into a consistent language that players could rely on being consistently applied. These things seem obvious now, but back in 2010 they were definitely not the norm. To a degree this was taking what Magic was doing and applying it to the table top space, but at the time is was the exception and definitely not the norm. The problem now is of course that those innovations are the norm. The kind of rules language PP used is pretty standard, and secondary resource mechanics are the heart of nearly every system to the point where GW finally went back and retrofitted one into 40k.

As for Warmachine's stagnation, I see it more as a path to hell paved in good intentions. I mentioned a way back about PP having a problem listening to their fans, and this is where it really kicked in. They got into the business of making their game the best it could be and addressing fan complaints. The rules got tighter, cleaner, with almost every spec of grey washed out, but the focus for years was making the game fair over making the game fun. You can really see it in feats, which lose that wow factor by mk3 and become very safe and simple effects overall. Always siding with precision, the game got "better" but only in the ways that appeased the tournament crowd and pretty quickly that built a steeper and steeper hill to climb with no place to start.

As much as losing the PG was a loss, I've never considered it that big of a deal. The free stuff was a nice perk, but if that's what it took for people to sell the game... IDK, most games have people that do that work actually for free. Losing the badge really didn't change anything for me personally. For me the real issue was that long before the PG was disbanded, the game had just become impossible to sell to new players. Even in the last years of MK2, there was just absolutely no support for anything short of 50 (modern day 100) point games. You could demo fine, but people quickly bounced off of a community that was only willing to play tournament practice. The appeal of Journeymen events had long since dried up.

To a degree the community is to blame for this, but I also kind of get it. That's where 100% of PPs efforts were put and honestly, 35 or smaller point games were miserable and lacked any of the scenario support that the game had come to rely on to force engagement. Even in MK2, Steamroller had been pushed to stretch large armies thin and just did not work well with less. More than anything that's my frustration with Mk4. It's just a huge improvement to a more approachable game, but with scenario support back to 100 or bust.... Pretty much everything they sacrificed is all for nothing, IMO.

 Overread wrote:
One thing that I found sad, but also gave me some hope. I was in the One Page Rules Discord (basically the heartland of their online interactions and all) and someone joined their general chat complaining that they had to leave another group because it was full of GW fans. They left the OPR Discord not an hour or two later because they found that even OPR fans on the OPR Discord also still played Warhammer and bought GW models and liked them and complimented them.

It was sad in that it was 100% backing up that concept that hate bred hate. However it also gave me hope because honestly whilst there are those who are die-hard haters; the overwhelming majority run the gauntlet from "I don't care" to "I love both".




As for GW's marketing today, they give about a 3 month release window on upcoming things. So within a bit we tend to know what's going to roughly happen for about 3 months. This varies, there are times when its just before a big event preview where we know a little less and GW has experimented with roadmaps and other slightly longer term marketing.

I do agree 3D printing is scary fast and GW can now expect anything previewed to be a 3D model by the end of the day; if not a few days later.

Personally I find such copy-cat work boring and dull. I far prefer when designers go their own way and do their own models and styles.

I'm with that guy tbh. If I want warhammer I can get warhammer any where online, I don't need OPR to be warhammer lite with furries. There's not much value in that compared to even other games like Kings of war, which is warhammer lite but still distinct beyond that. And the OPR community is a joke compared to the people paying the bills for it. There's very little activity on any of the hubs for how large the patreon is, it really is people buying GW proxies and the rules basically exist away from that.

I think you underestimate the good hate does. Its easy to say it only spews bile but it doesn't just do that. If I hate what PP has done to warmachine and make my own open source version my hatred lead to a new and possibly better game system. Hate is a fantastic motivator when you properly direct it. PP did that with warmachine and it went really well for them. Hate isn't a bad thing, it's one of the best tools any one can have, it's the bitterness that ruins things. People need to move on and find something to focus on instead of whine about their ex game. Their ex isn't changing course because of them and its better to accept it and use the hate of what that game became to build a new collection of models and invest in a new community. I had to do the same thing with a tcg recently and how bad that game got and how much I hated playing it lead me back to mini games and finishing old projects so they're table ready

On the game size thing. I felt like 35 points in mk2 was the sweet spot. But PP were trying to keep up with GW with huge models. The new bloodthirster looks mighty big compared to even the extreme models. So it's identity of big smash robots tried to keep up and look what happened there.. Colossals were essential not to be left behind by GW and look impressive on the table but the game warped completely around using them and the small skirmish game many of us bought into was gone. 3 Jacks, a unit, caster and 1 or 2 solos were no more. Brawl tried to recapture that magic but I don't know how that stands in the mk3 to 4 limbo land were in.

Yo7 wrote:

 Overread wrote:
One thing that I found sad, but also gave me some hope. I was in the One Page Rules Discord (basically the heartland of their online interactions and all) and someone joined their general chat complaining that they had to leave another group because it was full of GW fans. They left the OPR Discord not an hour or two later because they found that even OPR fans on the OPR Discord also still played Warhammer and bought GW models and liked them and complimented them.

It was sad in that it was 100% backing up that concept that hate bred hate. However it also gave me hope because honestly whilst there are those who are die-hard haters; the overwhelming majority run the gauntlet from "I don't care" to "I love both".




As for GW's marketing today, they give about a 3 month release window on upcoming things. So within a bit we tend to know what's going to roughly happen for about 3 months. This varies, there are times when its just before a big event preview where we know a little less and GW has experimented with roadmaps and other slightly longer term marketing.

I do agree 3D printing is scary fast and GW can now expect anything previewed to be a 3D model by the end of the day; if not a few days later.

Personally I find such copy-cat work boring and dull. I far prefer when designers go their own way and do their own models and styles.

I'm with that guy tbh. If I want warhammer I can get warhammer any where online, I don't need OPR to be warhammer lite with furries. There's not much value in that compared to even other games like Kings of war, which is warhammer lite but still distinct beyond that. And the OPR community is a joke compared to the people paying the bills for it. There's very little activity on any of the hubs for how large the patreon is, it really is people buying GW proxies and the rules basically exist away from that.

I think you underestimate the good hate does. Its easy to say it only spews bile but it doesn't just do that. If I hate what PP has done to warmachine and make my own open source version my hatred lead to a new and possibly better game system. Hate is a fantastic motivator when you properly direct it. PP did that with warmachine and it went really well for them. Hate isn't a bad thing, it's one of the best tools any one can have, it's the bitterness that ruins things. People need to move on and find something to focus on instead of whine about their ex game. Their ex isn't changing course because of them and its better to accept it and use the hate of what that game became to build a new collection of models and invest in a new community. I had to do the same thing with a tag recently and how bad that game got and how much I hated playing it lead me back to mini games and finishing old projects so they're table ready

I think what you call "hate" is what I'd closer consider "dislike"

It's fine to dislike something; totally fine. You can dislike something but still respect it and those who take part in it.
You can also take your dislike of something and turn it into something good by identifying what you dislike and why and then providing something that resolves those problems into something you do like; with the view that others will have a similar liking for what you've designed.


Hate on the other hand is slightly different. Hate isn't just disliking something; its deeper than that. It's also generally not seen that those who hate something will show respect toward those who don't hate that thing.



Disliking GW is when you move onto other games; when you try something else; promote that other thing locally and aim to encourage others to join in by showing how much fun you can have and how its different and better than flaws in GW.
Hating GW is when you move onto other games but still spend time being snide toward GW/those who enjoy GW. It's when instead of encouraging others to take part in another game, you deride their enjoyment of GW.



Dislike is simply that and can be used in a very positive way
Hate is not just disliking but hating, its a negative element. Those who hate will sling that hate at others.

I can't speak for everybody, but right around when MKIII dropped I moved away from my gaming group, and never really played WMH again. After a while, I realized why I didn't miss it: I never had fun playing it, at least not after the first few battle box games.

The game was too hard to play casually. Unless you exactly match skill levels, games can and will end super fast. that's fine if you're trying to "git gud," but it doesn't make for a particularly relaxed affair.

Yo7 wrote:

On the game size thing. I felt like 35 points in mk2 was the sweet spot. But PP were trying to keep up with GW with huge models. The new bloodthirster looks mighty big compared to even the extreme models. So it's identity of big smash robots tried to keep up and look what happened there.. Colossals were essential not to be left behind by GW and look impressive on the table but the game warped completely around using them and the small skirmish game many of us bought into was gone. 3 Jacks, a unit, caster and 1 or 2 solos were no more. Brawl tried to recapture that magic but I don't know how that stands in the mk3 to 4 limbo land were in.

The Brawlmachine folk got upset about MK4 and quit. I haven't followed the specifics of it too closely as the Discord became a hotbed for bitterness and I decided to cut it out of my list. 50 pt MK4 honestly captures the same spirit and due to the smaller unit sizes honestly feels more varied and interesting than Brawlmachine lists at that size. The main issue is the lack of official scenarios for that size. The brawlmachine scenarios are still available and work great though. I use them for 75 as well. If you want to capture the Brawlmachine spirit a little closer, I'd also recommend reducing the FA on models by 1 for every 25 points played below 100 (this effectively makes most things FA:2 and removes huge bases from 50/limits them to 1 at 75). Personally, I'm preferring 75 points just because Warlocks get very restricted at 50 with their minimum beast loadout, but either option with significantly more terrain than usual has really provided the experience I've been looking for.

Somebody mentioned the idea of a critical mass of gamers, and I do like that idea. It also means you have people coming up with different gaming modes. It's easy to forget, but stuff like MTG Commander and even modern 40k missions are basically fan products adapted. Once a game loses the fan base to create play modes, it really does lock into the ride or die folks.

I think people chase alternate games more as an ideal more than a reality. I can't say I've seen many that aren't geared towards competitive play that have worked out as well as people imagine they will. The casual playerbase is absolutely vital though, as it's what makes games feel like a community that outsiders want to be a part of. It's also what ensures new players can get in some fun games while they learn.

 LunarSol wrote:
I think people chase alternate games more as an ideal more than a reality. I can't say I've seen many that aren't geared towards competitive play that have worked out as well as people imagine they will. The casual playerbase is absolutely vital though, as it's what makes games feel like a community that outsiders want to be a part of. It's also what ensures new players can get in some fun games while they learn.

Depends where you play. A lot of groups hidden away in garages play a hell of a lot of alternative games. It's more about finding a public venue that does it.

Yo7 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I think people chase alternate games more as an ideal more than a reality. I can't say I've seen many that aren't geared towards competitive play that have worked out as well as people imagine they will. The casual playerbase is absolutely vital though, as it's what makes games feel like a community that outsiders want to be a part of. It's also what ensures new players can get in some fun games while they learn.

Depends where you play. A lot of groups hidden away in garages play a hell of a lot of alternative games. It's more about finding a public venue that does it.

This.

It's very easy to assume "Game X is a failure or dead" when you never see it at the FLGS. But, let's be honest, not everyone plays at public places. Hell, I haven't played a game in any of my LGSes in years (even before Covid), because, well, I have the space and I like not having to deal with randos, and can curse and be an ass as much as I want with my buddies at my (or their) home without worrying about offending kids or something. That said, seeing what stock moves at various shops can give some indication of whether or not there's a hidden community, but with as much online purchasing as is available these days, even that isn't totally telling.

"Alternate" games like OPR, Frostgrave, A Song of Blades and Heroes, etc. probably do quite well in those hidden clubs/homes that we don't have insight into. When they're also miniature agnostic rulesets, it's even harder to really judge how many people are playing them.

Still, Warmachine/Hordes certainly feels like it's fallen off quite a bit from its heyday. And I know many shops won't stock it now, due to some of the past issues. I have no clue how much "private" PP gaming might be happening, but signs are that it isn't doing the gangbuster comeback that it sounded like they were hoping for.

Big stores like Wayland and Firestorm in the UK still stock Warmachine and Hordes, but I notice that they don't make much noise about it (granted wargames in general don't get much noise unless your GW).

So there's still some customerbase. However smaller stores don't seem to stock it at all.


In contrast you can find quite a few stocking games like Infinity, Malifaux, Dystopian wars and such.

I agree, lots of games happen in private with friend and social groups; but if the stores (esp online) aren't really stocking a game in a big way that's a sign.





Also today I'd say social media is also a good measuring stick. You might not see much One Page rules in highstreet stores, but you certainly see lets-plays, painting guides and more getting steadily more common on youtube, twitch and FB.
Again if there's an active community you'll get content appearing; if there's no active community you won't.

NOTE - social media is also somewhat age reliant, some older generations might make less use of it or operate on older/less well travelled websites .

 Overread wrote:
Big stores like Wayland and Firestorm in the UK still stock Warmachine and Hordes, but I notice that they don't make much noise about it (granted wargames in general don't get much noise unless your GW).

So there's still some customerbase. However smaller stores don't seem to stock it at all.


In contrast you can find quite a few stocking games like Infinity, Malifaux, Dystopian wars and such.

I agree, lots of games happen in private with friend and social groups; but if the stores (esp online) aren't really stocking a game in a big way that's a sign.





Also today I'd say social media is also a good measuring stick. You might not see much One Page rules in highstreet stores, but you certainly see lets-plays, painting guides and more getting steadily more common on youtube, twitch and FB.
Again if there's an active community you'll get content appearing; if there's no active community you won't.

NOTE - social media is also somewhat age reliant, some older generations might make less use of it or operate on older/less well travelled websites .

I see where you're coming from but there's 2 points I've learned over the years.

The internet is not real. Social media absolutely will lie to your face and manipulate you if it can get you to see an extra ad. I've noticed when I've tried to use it that I often miss new things to get old posts shoved in my face. So it's very hard to judge real engagement on those communities, especially with how common bots are across the board. Too much keeping up with the Jones to use it as a real gauge.

More related to computer games then tabletop but in my experience the people most often in threads are the least likely to be players. If I can play lets say Halo or I could talk about it, you need a damn good reason not to just play Halo. So the most talkative online don't represent the actual players, usually quite the opposite. It's a problem I noticed on the PP forums and wider blog sites today. There's loads of articles complaining about stuff no one playing the game cared about. I was reading a Kings of war article and it threw in modern politics commenting on the tomb Kings.. No one at the table has ever cared about skeletons shooting poison arrows while wearing vaguely historical head wear. But you find a lot of complaints like that on sites like reddit and twitter. And I doubt those people even really care, it's just easy attention while screaming into the void that is a million sad and lonely people desperate for attention online..

It's sad to hear about the brawlmachine guys but I can understand why squatting everything may have been the end for them. Again I'm really hoping we see a 3d print focused rule set based on older editions. The core rules are really strong and there's potential for making something great out of them. I'm not a good enough player to balance such things and I don't know how popular sticking to prime factions and ret would be. Everything else seems gimmicky if not desperate and you would need to cut the bloat some how. You would also need to decide if you allow the massive models or not and i can see slap fights whichever you pick. They're expensive but also game warping.

Yo7 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I think people chase alternate games more as an ideal more than a reality. I can't say I've seen many that aren't geared towards competitive play that have worked out as well as people imagine they will. The casual playerbase is absolutely vital though, as it's what makes games feel like a community that outsiders want to be a part of. It's also what ensures new players can get in some fun games while they learn.

Depends where you play. A lot of groups hidden away in garages play a hell of a lot of alternative games. It's more about finding a public venue that does it.

Typo on my part. I mean alternate game modes. I play like 20 systems and posted nearly the same sentiment a few back because I totally agree.

 LunarSol wrote:

As much as losing the PG was a loss, I've never considered it that big of a deal. The free stuff was a nice perk, but if that's what it took for people to sell the game... IDK, most games have people that do that work actually for free.

In my experience - no they don't. Setting up, organizing, and running events and building a community is hard work, for those that do it well its like a second full time job. I don't know anyone who truly does it for free for any game on a long term basis, most people I've find that start doing it either find a way to get compensation for it or quit if they don't. Locally, the only community organizers at my local stores are all getting paid out for the effort one way or another, even for 40k.

Also don't undervalue the power of group support. Having a formal organised network of people all doing the same thing - organising local games, events, drumming up support and such - can be a huge mental support and form of encouragement to people.

It can also help open doors, build associations between clubs; allow for inter-club events; swap ideas etc....


Even before you get to a few perks from the company, you've already got a huge support structure that; properly run; helps motivate people.



It's also not simple and takes up time running such a system. So if the parent company closes it down its REALLY hard for scattered people to unite and organise and such.


A bit of formality can also help keep people engaged, they've an invested and vested interest in the game doing well and keeping going because that means more perks for them; more gains and such.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

As much as losing the PG was a loss, I've never considered it that big of a deal. The free stuff was a nice perk, but if that's what it took for people to sell the game... IDK, most games have people that do that work actually for free.

In my experience - no they don't. Setting up, organizing, and running events and building a community is hard work, for those that do it well its like a second full time job. I don't know anyone who truly does it for free for any game on a long term basis, most people I've find that start doing it either find a way to get compensation for it or quit if they don't. Locally, the only community organizers at my local stores are all getting paid out for the effort one way or another, even for 40k.

It is indeed lots of work, that is basically what i have been doing since 2008 when i took over the Saturday late night gaming volunteer position at my FLGS. although i do not run tournaments anymore, i just set up for pre-planned games. The reason why our store does so well and attracts players from all over (some people drive up to an hour just to get there) is the community. It is in a way a full days work that is also a funs days work. i bring a full car load of extra gaming aids, terrain, and even minis or armies for people to use. My compensation is having a space to play all day long (usually from 2pm to sometime after 3am) and hang out with fellow gamers. the game system being played doesn't matter. people at the store play a couple dozen different game systems.

chaos0xomega wrote:

In my experience - no they don't. Setting up, organizing, and running events and building a community is hard work, for those that do it well its like a second full time job. I don't know anyone who truly does it for free for any game on a long term basis, most people I've find that start doing it either find a way to get compensation for it or quit if they don't. Locally, the only community organizers at my local stores are all getting paid out for the effort one way or another, even for 40k.

In my experience they absolutely do. I've never seen any people who organise events, locally or country-wide for any system earn any money out of it. This is also true for huge international events held in Poland (like ETC or WTC).

This is just people passionate with the game and the community who want to see them both grow so that they never run out of people to play their favourite game with. It was as true 25years ago for huge WFB tournaments as it is now for all types of games, GW or not.

 aphyon wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

As much as losing the PG was a loss, I've never considered it that big of a deal. The free stuff was a nice perk, but if that's what it took for people to sell the game... IDK, most games have people that do that work actually for free.

In my experience - no they don't. Setting up, organizing, and running events and building a community is hard work, for those that do it well its like a second full time job. I don't know anyone who truly does it for free for any game on a long term basis, most people I've find that start doing it either find a way to get compensation for it or quit if they don't. Locally, the only community organizers at my local stores are all getting paid out for the effort one way or another, even for 40k.

It is indeed lots of work, that is basically what i have been doing since 2008 when i took over the Saturday late night gaming volunteer position at my FLGS. although i do not run tournaments anymore, i just set up for pre-planned games. The reason why our store does so well and attracts players from all over (some people drive up to an hour just to get there) is the community. It is in a way a full days work that is also a funs days work. i bring a full car load of extra gaming aids, terrain, and even minis or armies for people to use. My compensation is having a space to play all day long (usually from 2pm to sometime after 3am) and hang out with fellow gamers. the game system being played doesn't matter. people at the store play a couple dozen different game systems.

And that's a big point why companies need a rep system specific to them. If someone is running a local club or store on their own; they've no loyalty to any one game system.
They'll run with what's popular at the store or with whatever game(s) they want to promote. They might be a die hard Infinity fan for 9 months and then decide they want to focus on Malifaux. If the local scene also shifts they are more than happy, but it means they'll stop putting as much effort into the Infinity. If no one else takes up the torch that club could see a drift from Infinity to Maifaux.

That's 100% great and fine for the gamers, but it means Infinity loses out on sales from that group.

However if the local person is invested as a rep for a specific firm there's more pressure/incentive on them to keep that game going. At the very least to ensure it remains supported and such.

The strangest thing I find about this thread is the fact that many people are saying they have similar experiences about the game and are located everywhere, I would imagine pockets of good locations and bad. But when you get the same results basically globally of bad experiences with your game, I would think a game company would take notice and start trying to figure out ways to address those problems. But one thing I think that really hurt MK4 was at one point at the end of MK3 everything was on clearance everywhere and even PP had a ton of discounted stuff, people that still collected bought up everything they wanted at dirt cheap prices.

 Genoside07 wrote:
The strangest thing I find about this thread is the fact that many people are saying they have similar experiences about the game and are located everywhere, I would imagine pockets of good locations and bad. But when you get the same results basically globally of bad experiences with your game, I would think a game company would take notice and start trying to figure out ways to address those problems. But one thing I think that really hurt MK4 was at one point at the end of MK3 everything was on clearance everywhere and even PP had a ton of discounted stuff, people that still collected bought up everything they wanted at dirt cheap prices.

Did you even read the thread? Not everyone had bad experiences, quite a few have disagreed with it. There has always been a subset of gamers crying about "cheese" or how broken this, that or the other is and they really hat warmachines competitive nature.

You need to remember most players with good experiences have moved on. This forum is a ghost town now, so you're getting a very small and bias view on things. Players who had good experiences but moved on to other games aren't checking threads like these. Horror stories get repeated but good experiences stay mostly in the mind.

My bad experiences were with the hard core steamroller players. the group we play with now are casuals so we still have fun with WM/H MKIII. we just purposely avoid doing things that makes the game not fun like steam roller, theme lists, certain powerful combos (the forsaken delivery system for legion is a glaring one). and games over 50 points. we also from time to time enjoy playing WHFB style infantry machine with no casters/warlocks, battle engines or jacks/beasts. just ranks of infantry.

As an interested but cautious ex-player who didn't experience any horror stories, Mark IV seems a bit of a missed opportunity in that it wiggles Warmachine further into its niche.

I understand that a big part of the appeal for the player base was tight rules and tournament play, but like aphyon above describes, I really wanted to see how the tight mechanics could be used in more interesting, exploratory and narrative ways such as games without 'jacks and Warcasters; with looser restrictions on what could be taken, and so forth. All of that could have been included by having more 'game modes' – a complement (and narrative-based opposite) to Steamroller, for example.

As I understand things (and as noted I haven't been keeping up to date since they closed their forum) Privateer Press have flirted with model-based semi-role-playing games – it's a shame Mark IV didn't fold something like that in (develop a journeyman Warcaster into an Epic one, perhaps).

It's a shame – to me at least – that they've doubled-down on restrictive tournament-based competition, rather than taking the opportunity to invite in more than existing players (who, from what I can see, are a bit miffed that many of their models have been permanently mothballed).

 Apologist wrote:
As an interested but cautious ex-player who didn't experience any horror stories, Mark IV seems a bit of a missed opportunity in that it wiggles Warmachine further into its niche.

I understand that a big part of the appeal for the player base was tight rules and tournament play, but like aphyon above describes, I really wanted to see how the tight mechanics could be used in more interesting, exploratory and narrative ways such as games without 'jacks and Warcasters; with looser restrictions on what could be taken, and so forth. All of that could have been included by having more 'game modes' – a complement (and narrative-based opposite) to Steamroller, for example.

As I understand things (and as noted I haven't been keeping up to date since they closed their forum) Privateer Press have flirted with model-based semi-role-playing games – it's a shame Mark IV didn't fold something like that in (develop a journeyman Warcaster into an Epic one, perhaps).

It's a shame – to me at least – that they've doubled-down on restrictive tournament-based competition, rather than taking the opportunity to invite in more than existing players (who, from what I can see, are a bit miffed that many of their models have been permanently mothballed).

Do you need official sanctions to ask your friends if they want to do a 35 point game with no warcasters?

PP have been releasing narrative and campaign content for years. It's just that you hardly heard about anyone being interested in it or playing it (maybe people did in their basements, but who knows?) And it's not like this content was particularly compelling or well designed.

I haven't personally paid for the subscription service in the Mk4 app, but people that have have been pretty happy with the narrative game content it provides.

Yo7 wrote:


Do you need official sanctions to ask your friends if they want to do a 35 point game with no warcasters?

He's not wrong.

Technically folks don't need permission to play 'outside' the rules. That is correct.

But its not that easy, is it?

one thing you'll find in the wargaming community as a whole is a lot of folks are conservative by nature and most wont step out of officialdom. Folks will present a strong and often pathological desire to adhere to the 'official' and 'proper' ways of playing, as defined by the rulebook. And this 'default' mode of play can be quite narrow in scope.

If its not a 'proper' game mode, folks often won't even hear you out when you request a 'not-proper' game. That's the simple truth. As gw learned with '3 ways to play' having this codified in the rulebook confers legitimacy to game modes that would otherwise be largely dismissed out of hand. Whilst me and my group just do our own thing anyway, plenty other groups don't have that luxury.

Yo7 wrote:
Do you need official sanctions to ask your friends if they want to do a 35 point game with no warcasters?

No, I don't – but a significant portion of people that I play with are considerably more conservative and less happy to make things up. They prefer the comfort of the writers' permission – and I don't fundamentally disagree with that urge. A simple box-out that says 'Warmachine is intended as a competitive fast-paced brawl set in the key moments of larger battles – but if you want to explore a larger-scale experience of warfare in the Iron Kingdoms, or simply want to see whether you can come back from a Warcaster kill, why not try a game of [X] Mode? Here are the simple modifications we've found keep the game fun and exciting for both players:
* The game doesn't end on Warcaster death , but on [X] condition
* etc.

(or whatever)
...would be simple to add, require little or no additional work on the designer's behalf, and go a small way to broadening the appeal.

Time is precious, particularly gaming time; and the more spent discussing what we want from any particular game, the less time spent actually playing. This is particularly important for our group, as we're all getting older and have less free time. If someone – either PP themselves or the community at large (because Warmachine does have history on its side) – has worked out fun alternate game modes, why not include them to make things easier and more appealing to casually interested gamers, or those who want an easy road to try it out?

At the moment, speaking as an potentially interested outsider, Warmachine doesn't seem to want to be a broad church for all tabletop wargaming styles – Privateer Press seem happy to appeal to a niche with Mark IV. Contrast this, as Deadnight says, with GW's 'three ways of gaming' (Matched, Narrative, Open) to basically create a shorthand for different groups of tabletop wargamers to find games that they'll enjoy – and expand the appeal of their flagship game.


That's fine – but it's not going to revive the 'glory years' of Warmachine.

Honestly, most of the official content for Mk4 has been narrative. Even at conventions, the main attractions have been these really excellent event scenarios and most of their news articles are about elements that the competitive community is pretty resistant to (interactive terrain). You're likingly not hearing much about because the community has such a tendency to ignore anything that isn't about winning the next Steamroller, but some of the new content providers are starting to really have fun with this kind of stuff and get the word out.

The lack of non-competitive content in Warmachine has always been something of a vicious cycle. There's more of it out there right now then there's been in years and if that's what you'd like to see, I'd absolutely recommend giving it a try. Feed the beast you want to grow and all that.

Thanks for the heads-up – I'm more than happy to be corrected!

I used to haunt the PP official forum for discussion and news; is there anywhere equivalent these days you'd recommend to have a look at?

Deadnight wrote:


If its not a 'proper' game mode, folks often won't even hear you out when you request a 'not-proper' game. That's the simple truth. As gw learned with '3 ways to play' having this codified in the rulebook confers legitimacy to game modes that would otherwise be largely dismissed out of hand. Whilst me and my group just do our own thing anyway, plenty other groups don't have that luxury.

What three ways to play demonstrated is that gamers will self-order into a "tiered" system with each of the three ways to play being ranked on a scale of officiality based on perceived levels of balance and actual levels of competitiveness, with matched play (specifically matched play following the latest Chapter Approved/GT Mission Pack) being seen as the most officalist and legitimate way to play, followed by Matched Play (without CA/GT Mission Pack), followed distantly by Narrative play, with Open play bringing up the distant rear (so much so that 10e appears to have dropped Open Play and moved it to just Matched and Narrative play).

Three ways to play also added to complexity, product/brand confusion, and effectively split the player base along preferred lines of play, instead of doing the sensible thing which most other games do and develop a system that might appeal to all players equally.

 LunarSol wrote:
Honestly, most of the official content for Mk4 has been narrative. Even at conventions, the main attractions have been these really excellent event scenarios and most of their news articles are about elements that the competitive community is pretty resistant to (interactive terrain). You're likingly not hearing much about because the community has such a tendency to ignore anything that isn't about winning the next Steamroller, but some of the new content providers are starting to really have fun with this kind of stuff and get the word out.

The lack of non-competitive content in Warmachine has always been something of a vicious cycle. There's more of it out there right now then there's been in years and if that's what you'd like to see, I'd absolutely recommend giving it a try. Feed the beast you want to grow and all that.

Am I the only one remembering No quarter being full of narrative stuff and scenarios? I swear I used to see it a lot.

I still don't understand why it's difficult to arrange no caster games. It takes 5 minutes to arrange and with all of today's social techs it's even easier. Send a group message asking if any one fancies a no caster game a couple of days in advance of game night or ask to do it next week at a game night. There's always one weird guy looking to home brew scenarios up for it.

Honestly? In my experience playing without a caster just strips out the interesting decisions from the game and turns it into a very dull move and roll kind of affair. Without the ability to tilt the 2D6 curve in your favor through buffs and the like, there's not a lot that makes the game interesting outside of the setting and in that context I find it a lot more fun to interact with via the RPG systems (particularly the pre-5E edition that uses a similar combat engine to the Wargame).

FWIW, this is also why I've had significantly more fun with smaller point games. It results in less of the boring mechanical interactions and a greater emphasis on the unique resource driven aspects of the game.

All that said, its absolutely worth trying for yourself and if you really like it, absolutely go for it. In particular, check out the recent additions of interactive terrain. I think it can create some really solid table designs for that kind of scenario.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Apologist wrote:
Thanks for the heads-up – I'm more than happy to be corrected!

I used to haunt the PP official forum for discussion and news; is there anywhere equivalent these days you'd recommend to have a look at?

PP actually reopened their forums, but I don't think they've been hugely popular. Just not a lot of people signing up for new forums these days. I would recommend looking into Tried and True. They've got a mix of content on YouTube, a Podcast, Facebook, Discord etc and have been building a community with a pretty fresh take on Mk4 with a good mix of playstyles.

aphyon wrote:My bad experiences were with the hard core steamroller players.

They were the ones who drove most of the casuals back to 40K when their 8th Edition dropped, Sigmar when the General's Handbook dropped, or X-Wing for those who liked competitive games without the hobby horse.

I don't know if the ones meeting up right now locally are still the hard core steamrollers who didn't give up, or the casuals who actually took it back.

Yo7 wrote:Do you need official sanctions to ask your friends if they want to do a 35 point game with no warcasters?

When someone tells you, "We only play Steamroller here.", one gets the idea that a game format being officially sanctioned is the only way you'll get a game. Of course, that was over 7 years ago when they told me that, and I have no idea what they're doing now as I'm at a better store and game format now.

LunarSol wrote:The lack of non-competitive content in Warmachine has always been something of a vicious cycle. There's more of it out there right now then there's been in years and if that's what you'd like to see, I'd absolutely recommend giving it a try. Feed the beast you want to grow and all that.

You mean non-competitive content your local people will play with, right? Because there was A LOT of narrative/non-competitive stuff in Mk 2 and Mk 3. It was like pulling teeth to get people to recognize that locally, though.

 Charistoph wrote:

aphyon wrote:My bad experiences were with the hard core steamroller players.

They were the ones who drove most of the casuals back to 40K when their 8th Edition dropped, Sigmar when the General's Handbook dropped, or X-Wing for those who liked competitive games without the hobby horse.

I don't know if the ones meeting up right now locally are still the hard core steamrollers who didn't give up, or the casuals who actually took it back.

Yo7 wrote:Do you need official sanctions to ask your friends if they want to do a 35 point game with no warcasters?

When someone tells you, "We only play Steamroller here.", one gets the idea that a game format being officially sanctioned is the only way you'll get a game. Of course, that was over 7 years ago when they told me that, and I have no idea what they're doing now as I'm at a better store and game format now.

LunarSol wrote:The lack of non-competitive content in Warmachine has always been something of a vicious cycle. There's more of it out there right now then there's been in years and if that's what you'd like to see, I'd absolutely recommend giving it a try. Feed the beast you want to grow and all that.

You mean non-competitive content your local people will play with, right? Because there was A LOT of narrative/non-competitive stuff in Mk 2 and Mk 3. It was like pulling teeth to get people to recognize that locally, though.

There's nothing wrong with competitive people wanting to play a game competitively. I'm not a competitive player myself but I've played with plenty who are in all types of games. I've never found them drive any one out of the game. While I've personally left plenty of game communities because the casual player base were to put it nicely.. complete and utter tossers. I've never seen any group of gamers more whiny and outright hostile to new ideas than 'casual' players. I've seen so many way too invested in the meta of the game and barely touching a model. Suggesting a rule get cleaned up or some factions need adjusting because they barely function and you're met with tirades of "Just home brew it with our pay walled custom army maker" from 5 different people. They're absolutely terrified of any sort of structure to help support competitive or even random pick up games despite it being something they personally could just ignore.

Competitive groups usually filter out the worst people with sportsmanship awards, needing training partners and being a small and rather well known group doing it. You can't be competitive if you don't turn up. It generally leads to play hard but do it above board and in a friendly way communities forming. While casual groups have zero gate keeping to the worst behaviour and often spiral into circle jerks of the worst possible people since they invest the most time on things outside the game.

This could be a UK thing and the way we approach competition vs the American way of approaching it. But its an attitude I've seen become way more toxic than the competitive scene generally is. Terminally online casuals with upvotes terrified someone might play the game in a way they don't like and possibly change it to be a tighter, more competitive rule set. I miss the days where home brew at your own home was normal and accepted while shops and clubs represented a more structured play area. Felt like the best of both worlds for everyone involved. The internet seems to have ruined both sides of that.

Yo7 wrote:
There's nothing wrong with competitive people wanting to play a game competitively. I'm not a competitive player myself but I've played with plenty who are in all types of games. I've never found them drive any one out of the game. While I've personally left plenty of game communities because the casual player base were to put it nicely.. complete and utter tossers. I've never seen any group of gamers more whiny and outright hostile to new ideas than 'casual' players. I've seen so many way too invested in the meta of the game and barely touching a model. Suggesting a rule get cleaned up or some factions need adjusting because they barely function and you're met with tirades of "Just home brew it with our pay walled custom army maker" from 5 different people. They're absolutely terrified of any sort of structure to help support competitive or even random pick up games despite it being something they personally could just ignore.

There's being competitive, and then there is gating the game off from anyone who is either new or wanting to explore other formats.

When I hit the table, I like to give it my all. However, I'm not the type that set up a "bring a tournament list or nothing" attitude that affected both the 40K community (from 5th through 7th) and the WarMaHordes community (Mk II and Mk III) locally for a time.

Meanwhile in my Battletech group, we're trying all sorts of scenarios and perfectly willing to toss crazy ones aside to help people learn the game. A far different attitude from what I received from the 40K and WMH folks here.

Yo7 wrote:
Competitive groups usually filter out the worst people with sportsmanship awards, needing training partners and being a small and rather well known group doing it. You can't be competitive if you don't turn up. It generally leads to play hard but do it above board and in a friendly way communities forming. While casual groups have zero gate keeping to the worst behaviour and often spiral into circle jerks of the worst possible people since they invest the most time on things outside the game.

That doesn't work if there are no sportsmanship awards, or in the times between tournaments which, again, have no sportsmanship awards, and/or people use all of for "tournament training" (hence, the "tournament list or nothing" crowd). There's a certain level of toxicity when you aren't getting a game until you've spent a month's rent on models.

And then there are the ones who prey on new people between tournaments and treat "competition" as justification for being an a. Hopefully they get caught, but a fair few have been subtle about it.

Yo7 wrote:
This could be a UK thing and the way we approach competition vs the American way of approaching it. But its an attitude I've seen become way more toxic than the competitive scene generally is. Terminally online casuals with upvotes terrified someone might play the game in a way they don't like and possibly change it to be a tighter, more competitive rule set. I miss the days where home brew at your own home was normal and accepted while shops and clubs represented a more structured play area. Felt like the best of both worlds for everyone involved. The internet seems to have ruined both sides of that.

It's probably an American thing. Too many here take competition very seriously. But I've yet to see a casual group do any notable level of gatekeeping here. It's always the "tournament-only" crowd which does.

Yo7 wrote:

There's nothing wrong with competitive people wanting to play a game competitively.
.

I’d add the caveat that whilst there’s nothing wrong with competitive people wanting to play a game competitively with each other, this is a ‘time and place’ thing and very much something everyone needs to consent to. Bring a bleeding edge list into a group with ‘grass league’ level lists, and yes, you have a problem. Neither is necessarily a ‘wrong’ approach, but its probably going to make a lot of folks bitter.

Remember, we are all heroes in our own stories. None of us see ourselves as a bad guy. But you don't hsve to be a bad guy to be a villain in someone else's story.

Yo7 wrote:


I'm not a competitive player myself but I've played with plenty who are in all types of games. I've never found them drive any one out of the game.

Sadly, I have. I’ve met some fantastic folks who played competitively. I’ve also met some fantastic folks who are only interested in the casual scene. Almost like decent folks ecist in both camps. I’ve also seen one competitive player destroy a game in a city, entirely through their own efforts. I've known one toxic casual at all cost player - on these forums. Check out 'traditio'. His posts are a hoot. But I doubt his approach would destroy a community, it would just be a target for ridicule.

In several countries Ive lived in, ive been the guy who walked away because of the insistence of competitive players playing ‘their game’ at the expense of mine and everyone else. Played with too many 40k players back in the day who never valued anything less than the S-tier builds and were never willing to consider or accommodate any other approaches. Frankly, it gets tiresome getting stomped on all the time and the game gets incredibly stale when you only ever see the same old 'practicing for a tourney' power builds all the time and play the same few tournament scenarios the whole time. I walked away. Respectfully let them do their thing, but the whole thing led me to leaving 40k for years. Similarly, whilst anecdotes aren’t data, and since this is a wmh sub board, theres a lot of them out there of folks driven off, or never made welcome by the ultra competitive ‘rump’ WMH community.

Remember, playing ‘competitively’ (as its generally understood in the context of wargaming ie ‘list-building-for-advantage’ etc) and ‘wanting a fair game’ are often mutually exclusive.

Yo7 wrote:


While I've personally left plenty of game communities because the casual player base were to put it nicely.. complete and utter tossers. I've never seen any group of gamers more whiny and outright hostile to new ideas than 'casual' players. I've seen so many way too invested in the meta of the game and barely touching a model. Suggesting a rule get cleaned up or some factions need adjusting because they barely function and you're met with tirades of "Just home brew it with our pay walled custom army maker" from 5 different people. They're absolutely terrified of any sort of structure to help support competitive or even random pick up games despite it being something they personally could just ignore.

.

The opposite of competitive isn’t casual. Its non-competitive. The opposite of casual is serious.

And I dunno… but what you describe here - I mean, being ‘way too invested in the meta’ and ‘casual’ seems like a contradiction in terms to me. ‘Casual’ to me reads as ‘less invested’ and ‘less serious’. What you describe reads less ‘casual’ and more generally ‘toxic’ to me.

Yo7 wrote:


Competitive groups usually filter out the worst people with sportsmanship awards, needing training partners and being a small and rather well known group doing it. You can't be competitive if you don't turn up. It generally leads to play hard but do it above board and in a friendly way communities forming. While casual groups have zero gate keeping to the worst behaviour and often spiral into circle jerks of the worst possible people since they invest the most time on things outside the game.

.

I’ve often found the opposite. Back when I played tournaments, sportsmanship was simply a thing competitives gave 0 for every time, under the premise of ‘why would I give other players points’. It wasn’t seen as an incentive, merely another weapon to bludgeon opponents with. Similarly, there was always a predatory ‘edge’ with competitive groups in that, functionally, you turn up with a meta list, or you’re prey. You can’t be competitive if you don’t turn up, thing is, even if you turn up, you’ll often find yourself just being a scalp unless you have the £££ to chase and keep up with the meta, but when you’re coming back with a 10-year old space wolf army that’s completely out of sync with the meta, or simply dont hsve the time to maintain that levrl of 'fitness' because of life (career, wife, kids, pets, sports, other commitments etc) they aint gonna accommodate. They wont hold your hand or pull their punches. I’ve seen plenty awfully toxic behaviour amongst competitive types (I mean Win at all cost and competitive at all cost is a thing as well) so saying competitive filters out the worst people and the worst behaviours is just plain old false. It selects for particular behaviours and attitudes and without restraint or emotional maturity can rapidly toxify.The ultimate problem with competitive play is its an approach that leaves a lot of wreckage in its wake, and a hell of a lot of things are sacrificed on the competitive altar, and to a lot of folks, these sacrifices simply cost too much to be worth it. Competitive aldo has a lot of hidden costs associated.

And for what its worth, We definitely play more ‘casually’ than anything (with fully painted armies, fyi) and I can absolutely guarantee you since its in our houses, we ain’t inviting tossers into our midst. More casual gaming has saved my love of this hobby for what it's worth. I've burned out twice from the competitive scene. It has its place but it shouldn't be seen as an 'aspiration' or the ultimate expression of the game.

Yo7 wrote:


This could be a UK thing and the way we approach competition vs the American way of approaching it. But its an attitude I've seen become way more toxic than the competitive scene generally is. Terminally online casuals with upvotes terrified someone might play the game in a way they don't like and possibly change it to be a tighter, more competitive rule set. I miss the days where home brew at your own home was normal and accepted while shops and clubs represented a more structured play area. Felt like the best of both worlds for everyone involved. The internet seems to have ruined both sides of that.

Whilst I prefer ‘clean’ rules myself, and presumably like yourself, value balance ill add the caveat that i dont dislike imbalance provided the gsne itself is 'interesting'. The problem is that to a lot of folks, that tighter, more competitive rule set becomes very bland and sterile, very fast. They’re not necessarily wrong. A lot of choices and options and 'flavour' folks value often gets boiled out. 'Practicing for a tourney' selects for only a tiny amount of builds and whilst we've all.seen loads of narrative scenarios in no quarter and the gw publications, the tourney pack missions mean the rest often might as well not exist. I won't lie - I did end up getting tired of the symmetrical and supremely abstract wmh 'grab the geometric shape and incorporeal flags in the middle of the board' type scenarios very quickly.

And I'd also add- imo at least, often its not so much folks being terrified someone might play the game in a way they don’t like (but that is often the narrative that is presented as a retort), its more a case of 'so long as it stays in its own lane, its fine'. folks who play (or who want to play) in a casual environment often get annoyed because folks playing it 'in a way they dont like' often comes directly at their expense when those competitive-minded players bring their game where its not wanted, and are often uncaring of the consequences, how others feel (you know, 'git good' and ‘who are you to be telling me what I can take in MY ARMY’), and where it becomes destructive to the gaming ecosystem as a result. Its less toxic and more exhasperation, a lot of the time.

Sad news - PP are ending production of ALL classic Warmachine and Hordes models end of this week

https://home.privateerpress.com/2023/06/13/legacy-model-production-ending

Then maybe my old Mercenaries collection might be worth something in a decade.

Hopefully more than an average Chronopia collection

Well i am glad i got my Khador army done, i bought the last of it when they started talking about MK IV. No need to worry about discontinued models now.

 aphyon wrote:
Well i am glad i got my Khador army done, i bought the last of it when they started talking about MK IV. No need to worry about discontinued models now.

Same.

Second hand markets from now on!

So squashing production of Legacy before all Legacy armies and models have rules?

How will new players get hold of legacy models other than ebay? Not a great look for the game.

Stopping production is the step before removing legacy models from official play entirely.

Only a few models and units available for any of the Nu-Factions. Most of the production has yet to hit stores. The timeline and updates shows the factions will arrive "at some point in the future, probably, trust us guys".

What a fantastic move by PP. This will really encourage old players to come back and new players to get involved.

Its just over, isn't it?

Legacy armies aren't aimed for new players. They are as name suggest legacy. Provide use for existing armies. Not start new ones.

Sunno wrote:


What a fantastic move by PP. This will really encourage old players to come back and new players to get involved.

Its just over, isn't it?

Devils advocate. It won't nrcessarily hurt new players. Being cynical they're being hurt by the slow release.

It's the 'age of sigmar' scorched-earth approach sunno.

I'd argue they might not actually want those 'old players' with 'old armies'. PP might see that 'rump' community as fundamentally toxic and not worth saving. They might see them as fundamentally problematic to the 'new' game. They might want 'new' players. Buying 'new' armies. A 'new' community.They might see the legacy stuff as a millstone round their necks and just want to be rid of it so they can move on.

And I mean... look at aos now. From a business pov, it was the right move. Could be pp's interpretation of how to do it.

Or I might be completely off track- like I said, devils advocate.

Thing is AoS didn't need the scorched earth approach. If anything it actually drastically damaged its growth in its first year or two. All it really needed was a rules system and approach that wasn't built around need 100001 models on the table per side to get a good game.

A lot of that could have been achieved even within the rank and file system or introducing a rank and file for say 800+points and then a skirmishing point system before that etc..


Heck a good many AoS armies today are just Old World models and armies.




GW's move was based on short sighted and confused management interpretation sales and user data with limited user feedback. It was honestly a mistake which is why they had to change things around drastically for 2.0.


PP's move is more of a case that their operation has suffered a significant loss of income forcing them to change to a new production method. They are also moving factories and sites and basically PP just don't have the manpower nor financial support to keep their old stock casting; esp when resin and esp metal prices have gone way up.

Basically they are changing because they don't have resources to not change. They have had some setbacks - Warcaster not taking off during the pandemic; the utter mess of Monster Apoc boardgame that might end up being mothballed and a huge PR disaster and is not their fault. Warmachine and Hordes being a messy spot and having been so for a long time.

PP is cleaning house because they are being evicted to a bungalow. We just have to hope that MKIV or MKV manages to pull things around; though they do honestly seem to also have had a long run of poor/bad/missguided management choices.

Once their key marketing staff quit to start Atomic Mass Games, PP was finished.
That was a lot of good talent to lose and they’ve never recovered.
They need better marketing and management but at this point I’d be surprised if wasn’t already too late for that.

They've still got some benefits; their boardgames and RPG have done well. Monster Apoc is also doing well even outside of the Boardgame version problems. Heck the fact that it funded so well shows that there's an active market.

PP are not a total disaster, they are just in a very big problem spot with what was one their biggest single core earner and game. The thing that put them on the map - Warmachine and Hordes.


They could still abandon the wargame and just do RPG models for their RPG system; they could pull back and focus on boardgames and Monster Apoc. Heck there'd even be a logical argument that they should cut Warmachine and Hordes entirely and focus on their revenue streams that are working and that don't require a huge investment to get working again.

One approach could be to cut dead-weight entirely and focus their resources on their good lines. Build strength and then take Warmachine out of storage in 5 years time and start over.



It's one approach and the fact that they've not done it suggests that they both love the setting they made and also still see it financially viable right now .

 Overread wrote:
Sad news - PP are ending production of ALL classic Warmachine and Hordes models end of this week

https://home.privateerpress.com/2023/06/13/legacy-model-production-ending

Sad news, but probably a very wise decision for a company with limited manufacturing capacity.

I'm not a Warmachine Player, but I just picked up the big Dwarf Walker/Tank thing half off directly from their website.

Question did those who might know more. Looks like allot of plastic kits that are less than a decade old are going out of production. Why is that?

Seems unwise to retire relatively recent products (presumably among you're best?)that also represent your biggest tooling costs.

 Eilif wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Sad news - PP are ending production of ALL classic Warmachine and Hordes models end of this week

https://home.privateerpress.com/2023/06/13/legacy-model-production-ending

Sad news, but probably a very wise decision for a company with limited manufacturing capacity.

I'm not a Warmachine Player, but I just picked up the big Dwarf Walker/Tank thing half off directly from their website.

Question did those who might know more. Looks like allot of plastic kits that are less than a decade old are going out of production. Why is that?

Seems unwise to retire relatively recent products (presumably among you're best?)that also represent your biggest tooling costs.

Plastic was basically one of the big pitfalls they fell into. I know around MKII-III when it started coming out it wasn't all that popular. At least compared to metal/resin. Then on top of that I understand that they had issues with the factory in china even up to having their moulds "held ransom" and such (when your factory is half a world away it creates issues of its own).

On top of that they've long had an issue shipping stuff overseas and I figure they've either burned bridges or just not got the volume to make it practical - hence another reason they've pushed for the 3d printing angle where they can setpu local print hubs. I figure that they are simply retiring that whole side of production in one big go. They want local production hubs and direct control over production and they've chosen 3D printing as their future for warmachine for now.

It's a shame, but I just don't think they've got the resources not popularity to push into things like Siocast or other plastic productions that others are messing with right now. PP need to basically regrow to get back to that stage.

@Overread
Thanks for that. Makes sense that if for PP, plastic kits were seen as a liability that they might be retired.

I buy 3d printed figures, but If I'm going to put down premium game money, I always prefer plastic or metal. Not that my preference matters though as the Warmachine customer/player (whatever that is) is definitely not me.

Very glad to have this Dwarf tank walker kit though. Haven't started assembly yet, but it looks cleanly done. Also got a sweet 2 headed dog figure.

Don't forget aside from a later few HIPS kits(newbehemoth, grolar etc) the pp plastic/resin/restic was almost uniformly regarded as being awful in terms of quality.

I'm still.picking up bits for thr game ('modern' ununits like trenchers and winter guard) and will specifically go for metal.over plastic every time.

PP fell into the PVC trap of the late 2000's. Basically the same thing that turned so many kickstarters into a disaster. Incredible value on production costs based on masters that's quality didn't measure up when put into real production and with delivery times that didn't come close to what was originally promised. Honestly, its not a huge downgrade and works fine for bulky stuff like Trolls, but it was putting them behind on quality, particularly on things that should be a centerpiece like the jacks.

I don't think HIPS has ever been a real solution for them. Even if they could afford it, their "skipped leg day" art style and love of fur and musculature has never been great for the material. GW is one of the few companies that can make it work, but even then lean towards lankier builds than what PP is known for.

Resin was kind of a perfect solution to the quality problem and really, to this day their resins are some of my the best cast models I own. The problem is that a resin model isn't THAT much more expensive, but a 5 man.... 10 man unit of them gets absolutely ridiculous and they quickly priced themselves out of the size their game had grown to, especially for new players.

That all ties into manufacturing technology, methodology, economies of scale, etc. The tech to do low volume production for really small games is there, the tech to do high volume production for really big games is there, but the tech for "in between" where you're too big to do resin/metal, but too small for plastic injection really isn't there. Like there are options, but PVC and Siocast have a lot of issues that make the quality inferior to whats achievable in HIPS or Resin, 3D printing isn't mature enough a technology IMO for it to be viable yet for that scale, lower cost injection molds (ceramic, aluminum etc.) are still pretty expensive and have limitations into whats achievable, etc.

Basically, in the current market, any company/game that isn't well capitalized risks becoming a victim of its own success as it grows out of the "low volume" bracket if it isn't able to find a way to successfully transition into the "high volume" bracket, thats where PP stumbled and fell. The size of the "in between" bracket between those two is fairly large (though getting smaller), so its not an easy transition to make and a lot of stars need to align for you in terms of market conditions, available finances, etc. in order to make it happen. I suspect thats a big part of why there really isn't a direct competitor to GW, because bridging that gap and scaling up is expensive and difficult, GW managed to do it successfully because they were at the right place at the right time with the right people to make it happen and survive the internal turmoil and changes in business model that scaling up entailed for them. As Elongated Muskrat would say "space is hard", and nobody has yet managed to pull off that same feat - PP included. The only games/companies that come closer are under the Asmodee umbrella, but the best (indirect) analysis the industry has been able to come up with on those sales figures indicates that none of those games come even remotely close to what 40k manages in a given year.

 Overread wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Which is a shame because it’s a pretty great game. Very dynamic play and quite different from Warmachine/Warhammer.

Honestly I'm shocked they didn't port some of the ideas into Warmachine. The biggest problem skirmish games have is having niche models that never see table time as you make the armies bigger. Warcasters living sideboard during games is a fantastic way to allow you to build an army that includes niche and situational models that might only see the table now and then, without crippling your army. That it also allows you to bring dead units back to the table to use again also opens up a whole avenue of options and sacrificial tactics that regular wargames, again, often outright shun (because you often win on kills).

I thought it was a very smart system that included a lot of great ideas and its a huge shame it hasn't taken off. Personally I think its stuck as PP doesn't want to market nor sell metal models any more but they've not put that game onto the 3D print production system. So they just aren't doing anything with it - which coupled to PP's very quiet marketing means its deadin the water.

A living side board makes games pay to win. Makifaux got the same accusations when they let you list build after scenario was selected. You had to buy almost your whole faction and lug it around if you wanted to be competitive. You're basically carrying a full 40k army so you can use a squad. And those models are often premium price because its a skirmish game

Yo7 wrote:

 Overread wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Warcaster didn't take off in a big way and has been even quieter with news than Warmachine has (a sad thing, but Warcaster was impressive in coming out during Covid without many issues and yet it just never got any traction)

Which is a shame because it’s a pretty great game. Very dynamic play and quite different from Warmachine/Warhammer.

Honestly I'm shocked they didn't port some of the ideas into Warmachine. The biggest problem skirmish games have is having niche models that never see table time as you make the armies bigger. Warcasters living sideboard during games is a fantastic way to allow you to build an army that includes niche and situational models that might only see the table now and then, without crippling your army. That it also allows you to bring dead units back to the table to use again also opens up a whole avenue of options and sacrificial tactics that regular wargames, again, often outright shun (because you often win on kills).

I thought it was a very smart system that included a lot of great ideas and its a huge shame it hasn't taken off. Personally I think its stuck as PP doesn't want to market nor sell metal models any more but they've not put that game onto the 3D print production system. So they just aren't doing anything with it - which coupled to PP's very quiet marketing means its deadin the water.

A living side board makes games pay to win. Makifaux got the same accusations when they let you list build after scenario was selected. You had to buy almost your whole faction and lug it around if you wanted to be competitive. You're basically carrying a full 40k army so you can use a squad. And those models are often premium price because its a skirmish game

Arguably no more than any other wargame is "pay to win".
The Sideboard isn't infinite in scope so you are still building a limited pool of models. It just allows you to have more models in the sideboard than you might use in any one battle, which means you've space to put situational models into the force not just the most generalist high performers.

It only becomes a "pay to win" if the balance of the core game is really bad; or if the sideboard has no functional/practical limit.

Also you can kind of argue that any wargame is pay to win in that you have to buy models to compete and certain models are going to be good in each army. Again this is not really an issue with the idea of a game, its purely down to how well the game is balanced out and if the designers are openly designing it so that only high cost, high value models are worth taking.

A living side board makes games pay to win. Makifaux got the same accusations when they let you list build after scenario was selected. You had to buy almost your whole faction and lug it around if you wanted to be competitive.

As a huge Malifaux player, this is not how it really works. You declare your faction but then roll up (draw for) you whole strat, deployment and schemes prior to selecting your actual crew. So this reduces the number of "null games" where you turn up to find your selected force has no chance in that scenario, because the game is hugely scenario based. In most friendly local games the general accepted convention is that you selected for ahead of time and sent to the opponent using the Malifaux app so you turn up at the table with your crew. For big comps, yes people are bringing quite a few models but its normally small packages of models that work well with each other and you use them a you see fit.

You're basically carrying a full 40k army so you can use a squad. And those models are often premium price because its a skirmish game

I can see why you might think that from outside the game looking in but this is an overstatement. As I alluded to above. The most I have carried to a competition in the UK has been 20 models and that's about normal. Its a small box of models. Compare that to the number of models you take to a 2 list SR?

Theres a bit of a difference between buying an army and having to buy every model in a faction to compete. You can always buy a strong army in any game but its expected to perform a general set of scenarios. Having specific models excel at some scenarios and then list building after scenario is picked is such a huge advantage its in a different league. You're literally paying to have more advantages in more situations. Which is generally not how a traditional list set up works.

Yo7 wrote:
Theres a bit of a difference between buying an army and having to buy every model in a faction to compete. You can always buy a strong army in any game but its expected to perform a general set of scenarios. Having specific models excel at some scenarios and then list building after scenario is picked is such a huge advantage its in a different league. You're literally paying to have more advantages in more situations. Which is generally not how a traditional list set up works.

Honestly I think you're splitting hairs.

Building any army in any game is going to involve spending money unless someone gifts you an army for free.
Your opponent is also the very same, they are paying for their army.


Both sides have paid for their armies and put them on the table.
At no point is one side favoured for spending more money than the other. Living sideboards have unit limits as well, just like building a regular army. The only difference is that you're spending money for a larger collection of models than you might use in any one game. For a vast number of wargamers this is a bonus because it means that you are not just restricted to the most statistically common good performing models to use; you can go wild with niche and situational models that sometimes never see the light of day outside of casual games or specific pre-arranged matches and such.

You don't pay more money than your opponent to gain battle advantage; which is basically the hallmark of the "pay to win" concept. Pay to Win is mostly a concept for video games in the "free to play" market where a free player and paying player can have very different in-game stats because the paying player can pay for better weapons, better ammo, better boosters or whatever. This gives them an in-game advantage over their free-to-play opponent. Often this advantage can indeed mean that the paying player has an easier time winning - ergo they are paying to win.


In a wargame, with our without a sideboard, this isn't really a thing; its just part and parcel of the hobby in general.
It's not even like collectable card games where you are at the mercy of either random pack draws or buying limited production/access cards at inflated prices.

It is a hair worth splitting, though.

If the game needs two sets of models (your main army, and your side board), someone who was sold on "Oh, you only need the one army to play" and then goes out and sees people playing with side boards (more expensive) is going to have questions. "Oh, sure you can play with just your army. Don't mind the fact that paying for the extra side board will give you an actual chance in the game..." isn't really going to help.

For what it's worth, I also play Malifaux, and it's amazing how much resentment that you don't have fixed lists and instead can choose entirely different selections of models between games can stir up in people expecting to just "buy an army" and be done. But being able to buy all of the models for a faction and use any of them that you want doesn't buy you a win because
- A lot of the models are situational, and it's not usually obvious which are better than others in various situations
- A lot of the models are about same effectiveness as the other models, so you're not really buying any benefit if you own all of them

Sideboards or being able to choose specific models for specific scenarios or opponents means a bigger collection of models is more effective than a smaller collection of models. But "pay to win" would mean that the person with the most models win, and the person with the biggest collection doesn't win. The person who uses their collection best wins.

Sunno wrote:

I can see why you might think that from outside the game looking in but this is an overstatement. As I alluded to above. The most I have carried to a competition in the UK has been 20 models and that's about normal. Its a small box of models. Compare that to the number of models you take to a 2 list SR?

It's long been a perception problem for Malifaux. The ability to take anything from the faction in any game leaves outside players with the impression that there is an advantage to having the option to do so. It takes a lot of games to appreciate that every model has so many options that its more important to take stuff you know how to use effectively than any sort of "best" list for the scenario. I think M3E's keyword focus has been a huge help, though I wouldn't mind a few more limits to make it clear how much you can just focus on a master or two rather than an entire faction.

You can call it pay to win, pay for advantage or whatever you want but it means the same thing. The more you spend the higher chance of having a package to make the game easier to win for you. If someone buys two box sets they're less likely to have the models best suited to a scenario as opposed to someone who buys ten. It doesn't mean they auto win by owning more models but it is undeniably an advantage.

In theory its an advantage, but in practice its really not. The reason you get this sentiment from Malifaux players is that most of us have bought a ton of stuff feeling that need, only to realize you don't actually use a lot of it or get any real benefit from doing so. It ends up being as much about having the "right" models as any other game system, though thankfully in M3E its not nearly as eclectic as it was in M2E and you can accomplish a lot more by focusing on specific masters.

Yo7 wrote:
You can call it pay to win, pay for advantage or whatever you want but it means the same thing. The more you spend the higher chance of having a package to make the game easier to win for you. If someone buys two box sets they're less likely to have the models best suited to a scenario as opposed to someone who buys ten. It doesn't mean they auto win by owning more models but it is undeniably an advantage.

Thing is that's kind of the same for every single wargame. Different situations and different opponents will benefit different army compositions. The player who has 1 army composition only is always going to suffer to a degree compared to the player who has more options. Heck if you take the same army to game every week your opponents will eventually build perfected counter-armies to your theme. Even if they aren't "power gaming" they will often err toward things that do better and use more of them etc....

This is just part and parcel of wargames unless you go approach it like chess where you've two predefined set armies within the rules. Ergo no army building phase

I totally agree with that, I also understand why the way Malifaux does it "feels" different to people.

 Overread wrote:

Yo7 wrote:
You can call it pay to win, pay for advantage or whatever you want but it means the same thing. The more you spend the higher chance of having a package to make the game easier to win for you. If someone buys two box sets they're less likely to have the models best suited to a scenario as opposed to someone who buys ten. It doesn't mean they auto win by owning more models but it is undeniably an advantage.

Thing is that's kind of the same for every single wargame. Different situations and different opponents will benefit different army compositions. The player who has 1 army composition only is always going to suffer to a degree compared to the player who has more options. Heck if you take the same army to game every week your opponents will eventually build perfected counter-armies to your theme. Even if they aren't "power gaming" they will often err toward things that do better and use more of them etc....

This is just part and parcel of wargames unless you go approach it like chess where you've two predefined set armies within the rules. Ergo no army building phase

There's a world of difference between army evolution and having more options to make your list from being part of the design

Sadly I don't think MKIV did much of anything to help Privateer Press as the company doesn't look to be doing very well. I have certainly been both negative and critical of MKIII since its release, but I was really hoping that MKIV would have been more successful to bring back the game into the mainstream since I brought up in past forums here on Dakka that PP needed to drop MKIII and completely overhaul the game for it to survive long term.

Youtube shows very little activity of either people posting battle reports or people watching them, with most BRs generating 1.5k views if they are lucky. Contrast that with a new game like Shatterpoint that gets considerably more videos made with views being 5k-20k on average. Internet forums don't seem to have changed much either with some threads here and there on Reddit or Dakka being made and only gaining minimal passing interest.

Locally here in East MD nothing at all has changed. Stores that used to run Warmachine events at least once a month still have 0 interest in MKIV with 0 local players trying to bring back the game. My personal group still have our collections which don't include any armies that will be supported in MKIV and we already have our own house ruled version of MKII that we can play when we want. MKIV just simply doesn't provide anything we need from a price, ruleset, miniature, or lore point of view. It just fails on every metric we would use to decide if we want to buy into new product.

IMHO even though MKIV changed a decent amount of rules in an attempt to seperate itself from MKIII it wasn't enough.
Jack Customization
No Facings or Free Strikes
Unit Movement
Terrain and Elevation
Command Cards
Spell Racks
Themes finally dead
and some others

My point on it is that these are all really just modifications to MKIII which was really just modifications to MKII which can make MKIV feel like MKII.75 from the outside looking in.
What I think the game really needed was a complete redesign from the ground up, changing everything about the game including the stats on the models, the health/damage system, dropping steam roller and redesigning how missions work. Make it look and feel like a whole new game just like AOS was to Fantasy.
However, I would have also kept more of the old factions while dropping their old ranges and starting with fresh sculpts.

What we have now is people with MKIII armies that have no incentive to switch to MKIV with a too similar ruleset to drop their current armies and buy all new factions for a game that mostly plays the same as it has since 2015. People that got off the MKIII train are not seeing enough changes to Warmachine to come back and give it another try. Or more likely its just been too long and those players who quit in early MKIII have moved on and are not interested in returning. And new potential players just are not seeing the game at all due to lack of store and community support.

PP missed the window to release MKIV in 2018-2019 when they still had a community of players willing to give them a chance to fix the issues with MKIII. GamesWorkshop took just 2 years to drop 6th edition and release 7th while PP sat on the failed MKIII for 6 years. This turned out to be a devastating mistake for the game and the company.

Ultimately PP is still a private company and will probably just continue to shrink over the next 5 years until they have just a dozen or so employees. If the owners wanted to sell for profit, they missed that window by years. They already discontinued their larger production and moved everything in house with resin printers to cut costs as much as possible.

Also interestingly if you go to Glassdoor you can see plenty of reviews from 2019-2022 of people leaving and reporting just how bad a state PP was in even back then. While its certainly possible PP could turn things around, their other game systems have not gained much traction with the exception of Monsterpocalypse.

I quite like Mk4, but the total lack of product for it has left it pretty DOA. There was a fair amount of hype this time last year, but none of that has turned into a tangible game. The Legacy updates are great, but with the new armies failing to materialize, the ability to attract new players with the more accessible rules is pretty lost and even old players have largely been left waiting for the game to feel like its actually out.

By simplifying it for a broader audience it also lost its appeal to the more hard-core players. Its identity was tied to being a tighter, more serious game than warhammer. By removing core identity like fixed warcasters and free strikes you lost what made it different to warhammer. Being fixed models was part of its appeal and now its far closer to warhammer so its less its own unique market appeal

At the same time chasing that goal is been part of what has reinforced some of the dwindling market aspects of their game.

Chasing hyper competitive player resulted in a club atmosphere, impression and rules system that was not as friendly toward newbies.

The market is also very different now as you don't have a legion of experienced gamers screaming for a game and having no outlet. They have multiple outlets.


I think changing some aspects to make MKIV more casual friendly was a correct move. Perhaps they went too far on a few areas, but in general I think it was a right move to try and attract as broad a spectrum of new gamers as possible. Not going for a niche that isn't really there as easily any more; and instead going for generalist.

The issue is they also managed to gut more of their existing fans by gutting armies en-mass; gutted their Hordes market almost entirely by putting those armies way further down the release schedule. Then they also just haven't made enough waves in marketing.

They aren't appearing regularly in painting videos; nor gaming videos; they aren't appearing on Beasts of War regularly nor other sites. PP needed to not only get product out the door, not only get new product out the door but also maximise their exposure and marketing.
Again since MKIV the noise from them has dwindled; there just doesn't seem to be the hype/energy/money behind it to really push things forward out of the market they already have.


Honestly I wonder if one issue is that they were hoping for a big Monster Apoc surge of sales off the back of the Kickstarter that is now floundering and falling apart (not PP's fault). Income that they could use to keep Monster Apoc in the limelight but also then funnel into more investment for Warmachine as well.

I think at the moment their focus has been on cutting out most of their production facilities to move to 3D printing. I think the MonPoc KS was mostly about finding a way to make the game available without having to handle the production, particularly since I'd not be surprised to learn they're trying to get away not producing other components like dice and maps and such.

To be fair dice, maps, cardstock, books, manuals and such are often outsourced, even GW outsources all that material.

Yo7 wrote:
By simplifying it for a broader audience it also lost its appeal to the more hard-core players. Its identity was tied to being a tighter, more serious game than warhammer.

Appealing to a small % of the tournament crowd is exactly how WM got ugly looking tables of 2D terrain and arguments on measurements down the MM which was certainly a contributing factor to the exodus of MKIII.

 Overread wrote:
The issue is they also managed to gut more of their existing fans by gutting armies en-mass; gutted their Hordes market almost entirely by putting those armies way further down the release schedule. Then they also just haven't made enough waves in marketing.

They aren't appearing regularly in painting videos; nor gaming videos; they aren't appearing on Beasts of War regularly nor other sites. PP needed to not only get product out the door, not only get new product out the door but also maximise their exposure and marketing.
Again since MKIV the noise from them has dwindled; there just doesn't seem to be the hype/energy/money behind it to really push things forward out of the market they already have.

While I still hold my position that MKIV was too little, too late and not enough changes to save the game, I also agree that if MKIV had a chance of being a moderate success then gutting their hordes product line and having a poor online market presence sealed the fate of MKIV.

I think if Dusk was on shelves right now and Brineblood was set to go on sale at GenCon I'd feel very different about it. Instead they've been adding a month to the schedule every month to the point where the promised March releases are now finally available and the idea of Trolls releasing this year seems dubious at best. I played against real Dusk models last December, but it amounts to nothing if 8 months later their starter box doesn't even have a reliable release date.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I can't even imagine what a mess this has to be for retailers still willing to carry their products. There's thousands of dollars in SKUs available to pre-order but the dates on them have zero reliability. I'd have a HARD time taking anyone's money and tracking the order long enough to deliver the product whenever it might arrive.

 LunarSol wrote:

I can't even imagine what a mess this has to be for retailers still willing to carry their products. There's thousands of dollars in SKUs available to pre-order but the dates on them have zero reliability. I'd have a HARD time taking anyone's money and tracking the order long enough to deliver the product whenever it might arrive.

And it's been hard to get any local retailers to carry their products at all. The one closest to me, and the largest in the area won't even touch Privateer Press models any more, even MonPoc. Too many were burned during Mk III, and it left a bad taste.

The owner of the second largest shop in the area was on good terms with the creators of Privateer Press, as he used to play Warhammer with them, but last I heard even he isn't carrying much, if anything at all. I haven't had a chance to nip down there for a while, and they are having a Merc Market at the end of next month. Maybe I'll check them out and see what's up. But if I do, it will be because I'm trying to unload everything of my Warmachine collection that isn't a Mk III Starter box.

 Noir Eternal wrote:


Youtube shows very little activity of either people posting battle reports or people watching them, with most BRs generating 1.5k views if they are lucky. Contrast that with a new game like Shatterpoint that gets considerably more videos made with views being 5k-20k on average. Internet forums don't seem to have changed much either with some threads here and there on Reddit or Dakka being made and only gaining minimal passing interest.

This is an unfair comparison because 1. Shatterpoint is a brand new game and 2. It has the magical words: Star Wars.

How does Warmachine compares to games like Bolt Action, Saga, Dropzone Commander, Mythic Americas, Kings of War, Conquest, Infinity, Moonstone, Bushido or Malifaux? Do they have significantly more views? Are these games dead, too?

Also, you complain that WM did not change enough, others complain that MK4 changed too much.

In Europe Warmachine is carried by all majors sites: fantasywelt, firestorm, wayland, elementgames. There are plenty of tournaments listed both on T3 and longshanks, and a decent number of log plays on bgg. MK4 did not turn the game on it's head, but it is far from a failure.

 emanuelb wrote:

 Noir Eternal wrote:


Youtube shows very little activity of either people posting battle reports or people watching them, with most BRs generating 1.5k views if they are lucky. Contrast that with a new game like Shatterpoint that gets considerably more videos made with views being 5k-20k on average. Internet forums don't seem to have changed much either with some threads here and there on Reddit or Dakka being made and only gaining minimal passing interest.

This is an unfair comparison because 1. Shatterpoint is a brand new game and 2. It has the magical words: Star Wars.

How does Warmachine compares to games like Bolt Action, Saga, Dropzone Commander, Mythic Americas, Kings of War, Conquest, Infinity, Moonstone, Bushido or Malifaux? Do they have significantly more views? Are these games dead, too?

Also, you complain that WM did not change enough, others complain that MK4 changed too much.

In Europe Warmachine is carried by all majors sites: fantasywelt, firestorm, wayland, elementgames. There are plenty of tournaments listed both on T3 and longshanks, and a decent number of log plays on bgg. MK4 did not turn the game on it's head, but it is far from a failure.

As crazy as it sounds there was a time when warmachine meant more in the gaming space than Star War does. It wasn't until legion and X wing star wars became a real tabletop property. I'm a nerd XD didn't hold the market sway it does now.

The changes issue is because they make little sense. If you want the game to be simpler why make a spell deck to make warcasters more complex? Jacks we're getting out of hand and making them a modular body is a great idea as it effectively makes all the old models into a single book entry. The current system lacks personality and has no market at all. Which is ultimately mk4s problem. Its gutted page 5, the old lore, the competitive nature so what's the point of these games any more? You have a soulless game for no one. No nostalgia, no new market and best of all.. No bloody miniatures. Olds dead and news resin juice in the vat delayed by months. And PP is the poster child for mass production resin 3d printing for a company and they're... Well we're on page 5 or 6 now. So yea. PP is not only bad for themselves but also for a wider industry. When this bombs and PP calls it and everyone agrees 3d printing isn't viable for a production solution

Well in a positive news I just bought a haul of metal trenchers for a project.

Seriously ugly models when you think.about it but they have their own charm too.

With that and going back to the topic, PP has some nice models in the past, even if the game was hard to play, if the models looked great you could easily use them elsewhere, but their heavy theming really makes it hard to mix it with other games, A lot of Khador models have a giant logo blazon on most of the models that are a pain to remove if you thought the model would look better without it. What could the privateer press do to win back customers? I think in part they don't have models that make nonplayers want to buy them. Their designs just seem to stagnate compared to other companies, I have a number of Infinity models and I don't play the game, but if I need something for a Sci-Fi rpg game, like star wars or something, they have some great models to pick from. I have always been a big fan of giant monkeys, most of the Monsterpocalypse Ape models just seem off and most reviews say they are a pain to put together. Wiz Kids recently released a Giant Ape model that looks great, but if you compare it to a Mosterpocalyse model, there just seems like theirs is missing something or needs to be re-edited or better reviewed.

Part of the problem is that what they've done for Mk4 is what they need to do, they just haven't delivered.

The Preview Battleboxes need to be an actual SKU and not a limited product. Getting them down to $60 or so would be a huge improvement.

The Army boxes are honestly pretty great.... they just need to exist. Of the 6 armies they've announced only 3 have been released and have JUST gotten their expansion boxes nearly a year later. I know people very excited about the new Legion successor, but that was months ago and at the rate things are going I can't see that army available by March. They need to hype and deliver product within a reasonable timeframe. Not a year later.

They need to promote smaller point games. 50 is honestly a great format and 75 feels like a very full experience. Letting the community push it to 100 when all the new armies really feel tuned to 75 is just a massive blunder. More than anything, they NEED scenario support for something other than 100 points.

They need to stop with the sloppy fixes. Trample had two obvious issues with the new rules they fixed with weird major core rule changes that removed a lot of interesting elements from things that didn't need fixing. They've returned to the habit of siding on balance over fun and are quickly making things duller than they need to be.

I really enjoy Warmachine, but at the moment PP is just not making a product I can sell. In some ways I mean than metaphorically, which has been a problem since the late days of Mk2. Lately though, that's been a literal problem and one I think means Mk4 is kind of sunk before it even left port.

 LunarSol wrote:

They need to stop with the sloppy fixes. Trample had two obvious issues with the new rules they fixed with weird major core rule changes that removed a lot of interesting elements from things that didn't need fixing. They've returned to the habit of siding on balance over fun and are quickly making things duller than they need to be.

What's wrong with Trample in Mk IV that wasn't wrong with it in Mk II? (Or Mk I for that matter?)

Mk I Trample is pretty much a classic "These mechanics would be fine in an RPG" set of rules, where it'd be perfectly fine to spend several minutes carefully working out each attack as the model moved. But if you're playing in a timed setting, you need to have mechanics that can be resolved in a timely manner or no one will ever use that attack.

Now, what trample could really use is some way to make room for the trampling model, and it would have been really nice if Trample included a stipulation that each of the attacks were resolved as if the trampling model were in base contact each of the models, so that things like Soul Taker would work on that model that got trampled over but is now out of range when the attack is resolved.

But, again, that's been a limitation of Trample since it got simplified for MkII.

https://www.loswarmachine.com/mark-3-5/2023/7/24/mark35-beta-10?fbclid=IwAR2Rs8o44P5ylbSPk-M9a3GGJlVwGOPvB3PYos9dmJPsp97gefnAlJNC4F4

Good initiative, the community was getting so large that dividing it seems like a great move.

 LunarSol wrote:
Part of the problem is that what they've done for Mk4 is what they need to do, they just haven't delivered.

The Preview Battleboxes need to be an actual SKU and not a limited product. Getting them down to $60 or so would be a huge improvement.

The Army boxes are honestly pretty great.... they just need to exist. Of the 6 armies they've announced only 3 have been released and have JUST gotten their expansion boxes nearly a year later. I know people very excited about the new Legion successor, but that was months ago and at the rate things are going I can't see that army available by March. They need to hype and deliver product within a reasonable timeframe. Not a year later.

They need to promote smaller point games. 50 is honestly a great format and 75 feels like a very full experience. Letting the community push it to 100 when all the new armies really feel tuned to 75 is just a massive blunder. More than anything, they NEED scenario support for something other than 100 points.

They need to stop with the sloppy fixes. Trample had two obvious issues with the new rules they fixed with weird major core rule changes that removed a lot of interesting elements from things that didn't need fixing. They've returned to the habit of siding on balance over fun and are quickly making things duller than they need to be.

I really enjoy Warmachine, but at the moment PP is just not making a product I can sell. In some ways I mean than metaphorically, which has been a problem since the late days of Mk2. Lately though, that's been a literal problem and one I think means Mk4 is kind of sunk before it even left port.

Sorry if I missed something really obvious in the past but do you own a games store Lunar?

If so, what is the retailers perspective and opinion of PP next to other "smaller than GW" games makers like Wyrd or Covus Belli. My understanding was that game stores (if they were stoking anything other than GW) were really happy to work with those other makers and have a good view of them, where as PP, its largely a straight "no".

 solkan wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

They need to stop with the sloppy fixes. Trample had two obvious issues with the new rules they fixed with weird major core rule changes that removed a lot of interesting elements from things that didn't need fixing. They've returned to the habit of siding on balance over fun and are quickly making things duller than they need to be.

What's wrong with Trample in Mk IV that wasn't wrong with it in Mk II? (Or Mk I for that matter?)

Per the original MK4 rules you couldn't make trample attacks at all because during the trample movement you moved out of an enemy melee range and couldn't attack via the disengagement penalty. Yes, everyone knew that wasn't how it was supposed to work, but instead of making an exception for trample, they just removed screening altogether by making disengagement only if you started engaged to resolve it.

The other issue is a side effect of the proliferation of Dual Attack. The ability was pretty rare in Mk3, but notably let you trample and shoot for a significant threat range extension. Since it was limited to mostly stuff like the Blitzer it was just kind of a neat interaction but when you put it on dedicated ranged platforms it gets pretty abusive. Rather than limit it to not working with trample, they decided to just say you can't power attack and shoot with dual attack anymore, which removes the entire design of a lot of mk4 weapons that were designed with an open fist/gun combination that lets you throw a model then shoot it knocked down.

Both were pretty minor issues exclusive to trample solved with sweeping changes that broke more than they fixed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunno wrote:

Sorry if I missed something really obvious in the past but do you own a games store Lunar?

If so, what is the retailers perspective and opinion of PP next to other "smaller than GW" games makers like Wyrd or Covus Belli. My understanding was that game stores (if they were stoking anything other than GW) were really happy to work with those other makers and have a good view of them, where as PP, its largely a straight "no".

I do not. I just act as a community manager for an eclectic group that plays a lot of different systems. I demo a lot of different games and work with stores to figure out how to get players what they need, but I don't have any financial stake in the matter outside of needing people to play all the games I own.

PP's history with stores is a strange one. I feel like their challenges are pretty similar to Wyrd/CB and the like in terms of problems with SKU bloat and the changes to distribution, but they bore the brunt of those issues and absolutely failed to pivot to address them. When online stores really took off, local shops felt very burned, being completely unable to compete to support their players in either selection or price. By the time PP put some discount caps in place, wholesale distributors had become their primary point of sale and got left with huge volumes that shops weren't ordering. Distributors just aren't stocking PP anymore and that makes it a nightmare for most stores to get at a viable price. A few have tried to work with PP's direct distribution but the stocking requirements weren't worth it, particularly with a lack of good starter products.

Part of the problem is just that Warmachine had gotten too big and jumped on the PVC bandwagon as a mid-tier solution that didn't pan out along with going way too deep on 120 mm resin centerpieces. They ended up with this huge game with a million SKUs that couldn't be bundled efficiently. Distribution for most games has shifted to way more of a FOMO model of big one off releases with far less emphasis on carrying things long term. Wyrd repackaged its crews into box sets for M3E, CB has had huge success with army bundles and Code One and obviously GW has a new big army in a box set every other month. You just don't see this with PP products. They dabbled with it in Warcaster but the pandemic and use of metal and Kickstarter distribution meant that wasn't taking off in stores. Theoretically that's the goal of mk4 as a whole, but the high model count resin puts it at a rather unattractive sticker shock for shelves. Funny enough, even at an unattractive price, those army boxes have generated more buzz than anything they've done in years. Unfortunately, none of that matters when they've completely failed to get them delivered to players and instead let mk4 float along on the backs of legacy armies.

LunarSol wrote:

*snip for brevity*

I do not. I just act as a community manager for an eclectic group that plays a lot of different systems. I demo a lot of different games and work with stores to figure out how to get players what they need, but I don't have any financial stake in the matter outside of needing people to play all the games I own.

Thank you for your service comrade. Although I did it a lot during Mk2 and some of Mk3 I just couldn't in good conscience or faith do it for PP any more.

Now im happily teaching and being a friendly face in our local Malifaux community (i.e. that schuck who is just about average and happy to paly anyone).

Sunno wrote:

LunarSol wrote:

*snip for brevity*

I do not. I just act as a community manager for an eclectic group that plays a lot of different systems. I demo a lot of different games and work with stores to figure out how to get players what they need, but I don't have any financial stake in the matter outside of needing people to play all the games I own.

Thank you for your service comrade. Although I did it a lot during Mk2 and some of Mk3 I just couldn't in good conscience or faith do it for PP any more.

Now im happily teaching and being a friendly face in our local Malifaux community (i.e. that schuck who is just about average and happy to paly anyone).

Yeah, I pull in a lot of players with Malifaux, though the game duration has made it a little difficult compared to stuff like MCP lately. One of my top games though. I've definitely got players that are interested in Mk4 and have really enjoyed playing it as well. I just can't really turn that hype into momentum for the game when there's no product available to turn hype into real games on the table.

We had a giant WM/H group locally at the end of MKII into MKIII, but that all evaporated early on thanks to several missteps which lead to the big LGS clearancing out their stock and repurposing the shelf space for more Warhammer or whatever Star Wars game it was that month.

I don’t get down there as much anymore, but I can honestly say I haven’t seen any WM games played since mid-3rd nor have I seen PP products on any of the nearby store shelves.

 Noir Eternal wrote:

What I think the game really needed was a complete redesign from the ground up, changing everything about the game including the stats on the models, the health/damage system, dropping steam roller and redesigning how missions work. Make it look and feel like a whole new game just like AOS was to Fantasy.
However, I would have also kept more of the old factions while dropping their old ranges and starting with fresh sculpts.

For what it's worth, I started with MkI. Skipped MkII completely due to other commitments (although was still slowly collecting models, because they were cool and I was totally going to start playing again) and then tried to get back in with MkIII, but was bamboozled by all the extra complexity. It wound up being too steep a learning curve to relearn the game along with all of the stuff that had been added in the interim, and my limited game time went elsewhere. MkIV killed my interest completely by droping the original factions... but completely redesigning the game would have killed it just as effectively. I don't want to have to learn a new game... I want a more accessible version of MkIII. Or, probably more accurately, I want MkI, but with a more balanced ruleset and all of the faction expansion from MkII and III.

For my money, what they should have done is returned to something more like MkI, concentrated on balancing the game and making it easier for beginners and casual players to pick up, and doubled down on streamlining the model range by combining similar Jacks into single kits with options.


No idea if that would have been a profitable enough option for them... but it's the one that would have convinced me to buy back in. As is, I'll hang onto my old models and, if and when I find an interested opponent, maybe look at trying out MkIII again and just ignoring themes.

 insaniak wrote:


For my money, what they should have done is returned to something more like MkI, concentrated on balancing the game and making it easier for beginners and casual players to pick up, and doubled down on streamlining the model range by combining similar Jacks into single kits with options.

I think I would have preferred something like this as well. But maybe that is just because the new designs have left me cold, for the most part.

Reboot, pare down a lot of the redundancy (especially in the core factions) and have nice minis in a material that isn't awful to work with. The aesthetic/setting was the best part of WM/H IMO and the only thing that didn't need an overhaul.

Schmapdi wrote:
I think I would have preferred something like this as well. But maybe that is just because the new designs have left me cold, for the most part.

That definitely didn't help... I really dislike the more scifi styling of the MkIV models. The aesthetic of the original models was a very large part of what kept me buying them even when I wasn't playing. I have no interest in any of the new stuff I've seen so far.

 insaniak wrote:


For my money, what they should have done is returned to something more like MkI, concentrated on balancing the game and making it easier for beginners and casual players to pick up, and doubled down on streamlining the model range by combining similar Jacks into single kits with options.

I'd never go back to mk1 personally. It wasnt balanced. Like, at all. That game was all sorts of abuseable shenanigans (Vladimir 2 and the flying dragoon?) and incredibly poorly constructed/conflicting order of activation issues. Plus jacks were terrible. And remember the novel worth of rules they'd put in tiny font on thr cards?

Plus it was a vastly smaller game then. Now if you want to condense the rosters and shrink the factions ro mk1 levels that's fine - plenty faff could get cut (seriously, would anyone miss kossites or zervoka?) but you're still deleting while swathes of factions.

Mk2 was where it all came together. Mk2 cleaned up most of the issues with mk1. Early mk2 is the 'golden' era imo.

Deadnight wrote:

Plus it was a vastly smaller game then. Now if you want to condense the rosters and shrink the factions ro mk1 levels that's fine - plenty faff could get cut (seriously, would anyone miss kossites or zervoka?) but you're still deleting while swathes of factions.

I mean, I wouldn't be sad to see far less emphasis on infantry. Jacks were always what this game was supposed to be about.

Mk2 was where it all came together. Mk2 cleaned up most of the issues with mk1. Early mk2 is the 'golden' era imo.

As I said, I skipped MkII, so I don't really have a basis for comparison. Don't remember if I even got the MkII rulebook... Might have to have a dig through the storage boxes and check.

I think the only real problems MK2 had were

1) Some gamey elements - eg how charging and running worked in that it was better to declare charges that would fail to move further earlier in the game than it was to run. Things that the rules allowed but you wouldn't pick up on reading them etc...

2) By the end it was confused as to its identity. You had a skirmish game trying to be a wargame.
This is mostly because the armies expanded a LOT during MK2 across Warmachine and Hordes and people got bigger collections so they wanted to use more models and that meant bigger forces. However it was still built around a system for smaller forces and the caster was still a massive focal point of every army.

Honestly they should have split the game at the end of MK2 into 2 formats - a skirmisher and a wargame so that both sides could have been satisfied. However MK3 tried to combine the two, was rushed out and also cme with all the other problems and issues that we've been over already.

 insaniak wrote:

I mean, I wouldn't be sad to see far less emphasis on infantry. Jacks were always what this game was supposed to be about.

I mean, it's in the name. Warmachine. Singular. :p it's ironic. Hordes isn't about literal hordes either. Infantry has always been q big component, inbgge model line and lore (irusks 4th assault battalion had 20,000 infantry and 80 jacks...)

But yes, jokes aside I get your point though I disagree warjacks were meant to be what the game was 'about', I do think their profile needed to be... enhanced? 2-3 jacks would be the sweet spot

Biggest issue was focus as a mechanic. Outside of a handful of casters and yhe protectorate obligatory choir, it was really difficult to run more than one or two jacks.

Imo convergence was 'peak' focus with every caster having a field Marshall ability and jacks using the warcasters mat and rat.

 insaniak wrote:

As I said, I skipped MkII, so I don't really have a basis for comparison. Don't remember if I even got the MkII rulebook... Might have to have a dig through the storage boxes and check.

I played both mk1 and mk2. 2 was lightyears ahead of mk1 in pretty much every aspect. I honestly felt even et the end, it needed mk2 prime rather than mk3... Peak pp.

Yeah, for the game to be about warjacks it had to have a lot of infantry in it.

If everone is big and special then everyone is totally average. Warjacks needed this backdrop of dozens of regular Joes to feel unique and powerful.

Mk4 is the best jack edition by a long shot, but still uses infantry well. Reducing units to 5 is an enormous improvement. I'd say its as close to feeling like what Mk1 was going for as they've ever gotten.

As much as Mk2 was the glory days, I could never go back. Half of my sprawling collection is just a result of wanting some jacks that kind of work, but they just don't. Mk3 is significantly better, but the bloat is very noticeable and games can really drag. Scenario support for 50 point games might be the overall winner, but hard to say. I really like Mk4 at 75, but PP doesn't seem to be keeping the ship on course.

I do think the concerns of the aesthetic of mk4 aren't really as prevalent in the actual models as it is in the build up to release. Part of it is simply that Cygnar has always been a bit more high tech and renders tend to make lines look a little sharper than they do with an actual coat of paint. Orgoth similarly look signfiicantly better without the garish NMM scheme. Overall, I quite like the look of the new armies in person.... when I can actually see models in person....

Orgoth still need trousers though....

Deadnight wrote:
Orgoth still need trousers though....

You can certainly paint tights on them if you like.

 LunarSol wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Orgoth still need trousers though....

You can certainly paint tights on them if you like.

I mean plate armour; bug-eyed sperm helmets and tights is a look, i suppose.

I just don't know if it's a good look. :p

I'm in the "Mk2 was the golden era" camp. There were some gamey elements that needed to be addressed for sure, and many steamroller widget fetishism issues in the community that needed to be stamped out, but overall the game was solid. Mk3 in many ways could have improved on that if they didn't launch half-finished, unplaytested, and without any of the theme lists ready to go. I think they tried too much with the mk3 rollout (and did similar with mk4), and would have benefited from dialing it back and trying to go evolutionary rather than revolutionary with their approach. I do partially agree that late mk 2 armies got too big - that was one of the flaws of mk3, is that they went bigger, when they really should have scaled back slightly.

And I agree the aesthetic issues are overstated a bit. The new look does definitely skew more futuristic than in the past, but I dont think you can look at Brineblood Marauders, Khymera (as far as the artwork isconcerned) or the new Magnus and say "this looks scifi". Orgoth would fit well with the previous aesthetic if you tone down the paintscheme (as LunarSol pointed out), Dusk are about as scifi as Ret and Convergence were. Only Cygnar and Khador really took a bend towards scifi, but Khador got their by way of dieselpunk so they are a bit more grounded.

I feel like Mk3 and Mk4 are both improvements on Mk2, they just don't benefit from being clearly the best game systems of their era the way Mk2 did. So many games built themselves on the Mk2 foundation; Malifaux 2E, Guild Ball, even eventually 40k. Since then we've had a generation of games that built on those games that built on Mk2. In many ways the biggest issues with Mk3/4 is that they haven't kept up.

I get the rose tinted glasses for the edition, but I feel like people forget just how miserably bad Jacks were and how completely backbreaking Cryx and Cygnar were to play against (though Mk4 will quickly remind you with the stupidity that is Wolfe).

I've never quite understood some of the things people got so upset about with mk3. Like Skorne being bad was some kind of new feature of the edition and not a continuation of Skorne being one of the worst factions of all of mk2. In a lot of ways I've always seen the heat Mk3 took at launch as more of people lashing out at their frustrations with mk2 and feeling like not enough changed to fix it.

 LunarSol wrote:
I feel like Mk3 and Mk4 are both improvements on Mk2, they just don't benefit from being clearly the best game systems of their era the way Mk2 did. So many games built themselves on the Mk2 foundation; Malifaux 2E, Guild Ball, even eventually 40k. Since then we've had a generation of games that built on those games that built on Mk2. In many ways the biggest issues with Mk3/4 is that they haven't kept up.

I get the rose tinted glasses for the edition, but I feel like people forget just how miserably bad Jacks were and how completely backbreaking Cryx and Cygnar were to play against (though Mk4 will quickly remind you with the stupidity that is Wolfe).

I've never quite understood some of the things people got so upset about with mk3. Like Skorne being bad was some kind of new feature of the edition and not a continuation of Skorne being one of the worst factions of all of mk2. In a lot of ways I've always seen the heat Mk3 took at launch as more of people lashing out at their frustrations with mk2 and feeling like not enough changed to fix it.

I think its also important to remember that MK3 wasn't the only issue that caused so many to leave. It was kind of the focal point around where things changed, but there were lots of other little and small things, both within PP and outside of PP that contributed to the decline.

Again taken in isolation its not that bad, but when you add in all the other things that happened, including GW taking some good lessons and improving for a while - you get a snowball effect where all together they caused a big change.

For sure. I think one of my great frustrations with the community in Mk3 is just how many people were looking for a sword to fall on and actively blew up anything they could into an excuse to quit. Even GW fans rarely grind axes as hard as Warmachine fans have since Mk3.

 LunarSol wrote:
For sure. I think one of my great frustrations with the community in Mk3 is just how many people were looking for a sword to fall on and actively blew up anything they could into an excuse to quit. Even GW fans rarely grind axes as hard as Warmachine fans have since Mk3.

They blew up their forums, which was a community hub, and nothing in its place.
They instituted a MAPP policy and called the players who bought from online source ‘Free Riders’.
The policy was even named that.
Then they killed the PG program.
Then they forced retailers to buy direct.
Then they liquidated stock as mystery boxes.

They did a lot more to stymie their efforts to grow and expand the game and community.
But this is what I can just recall off hand. It really felt they almost had a disdain for their own community and did their best to destroy the relationships between the company, retailers and players.
It was a lot more than a mere edition change that caused all of this. And all of it was preventable and every decision they made was theirs to make.
I think it has less to do with players wanting a sword to fall on and more to do with the egregious decisions that PP made outside of the edition change that caused all the hate. They’ve basically alienated nearly the entire community that supported their games.
It has very little to do with edition changes. But more in how those rollouts were handled and how the interactions with their communities basically fell apart.
Now they’re having trouble with a new edition yet again, because their roll out is half baked at best.
It’s obvious they aren’t doing great financially, otherwise they would have waited to get MK4 out with at least 4 factions, and rules for Legacy armies. Instead we have a poor attempt at a launch with two and a half armies and everything getting pushed out farther and farther.

I personally feel it has more to do with *how* they’ve launched new editions vs the editions themselves.

+1 to many of the points Ghool made.

PP as I recall did a panic reaction to MTG event organisers going up against Wizards about pay whlist being volunteers and panic struck a huge chunk of their volunteer system - mods on the forum, the pg program and such.

Thing is even though forums back then were dwindling, PP's was pretty darn active and their social media wasn't active and the 3rd party options (fan run) weren't as active. Their forum was and whilst it had your normal ups and downs, it was by no means hotbed of hostility - until they blew most of it up.


Again I agree that PP made a series of mistakes around the MKIII edition which cause a snowball effect. People might blame one part more than the others (eg I often blame shutting down the PG system as a major contributing factor) but in the end it was all them combined.

Ontop of that Games Workshop at the time was having a big turnaround in attitudes. So not only did PP burn a lot of bridges, but GW opened a golden gate for many. So not only were people looking for a reason to leave, but another firm was giving them a reason to welcome them in.

I can also agree, PP aren't in a good spot. Warcaster the honestly did really well in getting their models out even during the Pandemic, but launching a new game during a pandemic was freaking hard. Heck Warcradle paused their Dystopian Launch for a year or more and shifted from full resin to plastic and resin during that time because it just wouldn't work for them.

So Warcaster was dead in the water and never got the support after hte Pandemic to grow and right now seems to be stuck in limbo after the last KS.

Monster Apoc is honestly doing well and I would not have blamed PP to go all in on it - however their recent KS by another firm has blown up in their face and even if it funds its going to be a nightmare. Still its their strongest line right now I wager.


PP need a steady earner that's getting media attention, products being released and growing community. The only game of theirs I really see going that is Monster Apoc. Everything else is either in limbo or lifesupport and some of that are the choices PP have made over the years.


Heck I woudln't be surprised if they wound up being an STL selling firm at some point because its clear that their production side is seriously struggling.

Oh, I remember how disgusted I was by the toxicity of the forums at the start of mk3 (and even a bit earlier, after the card leak) and how absurd the accusations were. I could see it for my faction, Protectorate, where so many people were just hell bent on moaning how unplayable it was (because some of the mk2 broken things were toned down) even though it was just a perfectly good, powerful, well balanced faction, which for me was obvious from playing games with them in the pretty competitive Polish meta where they fared great.

But no, there were pages upon pages of whining on how the change of the timing of fire damage (could use Focus now) completely neutred the faction...eh.

Oh true as soon as MK3 hit things turned toxic, but it didn't help that they'd gutted the forums just before and shut down the PG and that MK3 was somewhat rushed out etc...

Pp forums were a salt mine steeped in groupthink and snark. Good riddance.

Pressgangers was the hig one.

As for the 'sword' comment, I was a big fan of mk2, and everything in early mk3 felt like pp 'doing a gw' but with less competence. It wasn't that I was determined to not enjoy/hate the game, pp's antics did that for me all on their own and never gave me anything to enjoy in it.

I remember a tournament in early mk3 and mechanically speaking, I was bored of the game. Had that sudden epiphany that I was done with mk3 sadly.

Cyel wrote:Oh, I remember how disgusted I was by the toxicity of the forums at the start of mk3 (and even a bit earlier, after the card leak) and how absurd the accusations were. I could see it for my faction, Protectorate, where so many people were just hell bent on moaning how unplayable it was (because some of the mk2 broken things were toned down) even though it was just a perfectly good, powerful, well balanced faction, which for me was obvious from playing games with them in the pretty competitive Polish meta where they fared great.

But no, there were pages upon pages of whining on how the change of the timing of fire damage (could use Focus now) completely neutred the faction...eh.

Could be worse. I was in Mercenaries trying to switch to Skorne.

Overread wrote:Oh true as soon as MK3 hit things turned toxic, but it didn't help that they'd gutted the forums just before and shut down the PG and that MK3 was somewhat rushed out etc...

Things were toxic before hand. It just became stronger and more vocal, especially when army creation looked more like replicating all of 40K 7th Edition's problems.

I may not be remembering this 100% correctly but I vaguely recall our top WTC player taking Skorne to WTC at the time, just to spite the whiners. The team placed top, as always, but I don't remember his individual results. He was confident enough to do so, though.

I remember a tournament in early mk3 and mechanically speaking, I was bored of the game. Had that sudden epiphany that I was done with mk3 sadly.

My experience was just he opposite. didn't care for MKI or II generally, hated the tournament crowd and tournaments in general. MKIII however is a blast. but we play friendly so for us MK III is great at 50 points with no theme lists with 3d terrain and all the terrain rules. my general take on MKIV is -great production idea especially modular jacks-terrible dumbed down rules. doesn't even feel like WM/H kinda like how 8th ed was to 40K. and the modernish tech aesthetic is bleah. i like my steam punk. but i have a huge MK III khador army and a solid group of like minded players, so as with GW i don't care what PP is doing we can still play the game the way we enjoy it.

 LunarSol wrote:
So many games built themselves on the Mk2 foundation; Malifaux 2E, Guild Ball, even eventually 40k.

...wut?

I don't think Mk3 was the main problem for PP, the game still sold really well - according to icv2, in 2018 Warmachine was still one of the top dogs, beating AoS in sales: https://icv2.com/articles/markets/view/41010/top-5-non-collectible-miniature-games-spring-2018

But since then, the game dropped from the top.

My issues with MK4 are: 1. they burned their bridges by stopping production for everything not Mk4. I understand the backlog was too much to handle, but dropping everything was too much. They could have dropped 60% of the line, everything released before 2016, or 2015, whatever. But not all. This way, the options for a new player are drastically reduced: instead of 15 factions, you have..3? Plus, there are so many cool models released/rereleased recently.

2. the price - which is stupid. I made a comparison of starter sets for the main wargames, and Warmachine came out on top by far. A starter for mk4 costs 170 eu. If you want to get into 40k, you can buy a starter for half the price (and a similar amount of models). Conquest has starters for 120 eu, which includes 2 rule books for 2 games. AOIAF and Legion cost around 110~eu. KoW has 80 eu 2p starters, and Dropzone 60 eu 2p starter. And all of them give you more than just models.

The price for infantry is also stupid - I was happy finding a box of 10 Bane knights for 62 eu - best deal online - that until I found that 12 household guards from Conquest costs 34 eu. ASOIAF elite infantry (12 dudes) are around 38eu. Even in 40k, I can buy 10 hellblasters for 40eu.

I just don't get how PP survives with these prices.

I still like this game, though. I love the models, the universe, and the rules seems much better than most.

Yes, I don't know how prices are mentioned so rarely here. They are really absurd, to the point PP eliminated me as a customer ~5 years ago or more. Whenever I wanted something I was just trying to find it second hand, scratch build it or find a cheaper WYSIWYG alternatives for conversion (for example I used many GW models and it saved me 1/3 to 1/2 of the price...and I mean normal retail price, not second hand!).

For me it's easy to understand how people searching for a game to start look at the entry prices for different games and PP falls somewhere far behind the total absurdity point and is not even considered as a serious choice. If I can buy Massive Darkness 2, a few kg heavy box with dozens of minis for not much more than a single character warjack I can use for absolutely nothing on its own, then yeah, you can guess where my money is going to go.

I think the reason we don't mention price as much is because so many of us are on the fence before we even get to wanting to buy the models in the first place.

Which is a REALLY bad sign.

Heck for me I'm an Everblight fan so I've basically nothing for a long while before PP even has things for the army I once collected (that apparently got shattered or something and now part of it is pirates?)

Which was another thing, combining the games (which honestly marketing wise should have been done way back in MK2) was a solid move but then having the Hordes material years after the Warmachine was a poor choice to really snub Hordes players as a whole for a long time. I get production was an issue, but axing the whole line and then dripping out replacements was not the best move. Even if they'd shut down retail and upped pricing it would have been good to keep some core production going in some form and roll armies over one by one.



But yeah way back on page 1 I think we were mentioning that along with all hte other issues, having a super high buy-in price is a really poor move from PP in growing the game. Burning bridges with established fans and then having buy-in prices that are basically set for established buyers not totally new people is a really strange move.

They need cheap buy-ins to get people back into the game. Without them they are still relying on the same dwindling core of established gamers they had before, which is just not a healthy position. Especially when already former and current fans are balking at the prices they are asking for.

You know I feel like MKIV is made from a series of problems the firm has at the company end. They've asked themselves how to solve problems that they have in the head-office end of things. So they are not totally daft plans, they are just plans made for solving their problems without then pausing to ask who the market for their game is; what the focus is; who they are really targeting and what the goal of their market growth is. Ergo they are not answering consumer questions with their product line.

 Overread wrote:
I think the reason we don't mention price as much is because so many of us are on the fence before we even get to wanting to buy the models in the first place.

Which is a REALLY bad sign.

Heck for me I'm an Everblight fan so I've basically nothing for a long while before PP even has things for the army I once collected (that apparently got shattered or something and now part of it is pirates?)

I'm in a similar boat - my faction (Cryx) doesn't even exist anymore, from what I can see, and I don't like the changed aesthetic on the new models, so the prices are pretty much irrelevant.


I do wonder if PP worked themselves into a corner by making the decision to move to 3D printing but then having the end result wind up costing more than they had originally planned on. They would have presumably done a cost analysis on outsourcing conventional production against 3D printing, but production costs everywhere went up significantly in the last few years, and it's possible that in that time the cost increases for 3D printing (at least the way they're doing it) outpaced the increases elsewhere due to demand and/or labour issues. That would make more sense than deciding to move to 3D printing if it was always going to be more expensive.

Saving on shipping costs by outsourcing the printing globally is a sensible idea on the surface, but from the looking around I've done, to get retail-quality prints it's just too expensive. 3D printing for production only seems viable from a price perspective if you're doing it in-house.

Well, prices may not matter for you considering an mk4 army, but they matter for the natural flow of players in and out of a given game and it was true already in mk3 when prices were starting to get more and more insane.

 insaniak wrote:


I'm in a similar boat - my faction (Cryx) doesn't even exist anymore, from what I can see, and I don't like the changed aesthetic on the new models, so the prices are pretty much irrelevant.

Cryx is still legal - there are 2 armies legal in Prime: Blackfleet and Dark Host. I just ordered a bunch of cryx models for my army.

I another news, I just saw a new model for MK4 - Magnus the unstoppable with a warjack - both looks really cool, even if the jack looks a bit too much like a 40k knight. What's more interesting is that they are available for the legacy prime armies - which is weird, since PP said legacy armies will not get new models. This is pretty great, I will get the new magnus. He is also available at gen con.

https://home.privateerpress.com/2023/07/27/gen-con-2023-and-the-unstoppable-privateer-presence/ - the article with the models.

£55 though. Bit steep.

The Warjack is 80mm so closer to a Redemptor than a normal Warjack. It's the first in a new line of "super heavies". Expensive, but not a surprising price.

They're making him available to Legacy armies because he's supposed to be a celebration of the game's 20th anniversary (also obviously to sell more of them). Personally, I'd be more excited if he could be taken with Magnus2 separately. Taking him as a Journeyman is less exciting to me.

Oh, be honest -he's available to every faction so that he may be sold to as many players as possible

I thought I made that clear enough already

 emanuelb wrote:

 insaniak wrote:


I'm in a similar boat - my faction (Cryx) doesn't even exist anymore, from what I can see, and I don't like the changed aesthetic on the new models, so the prices are pretty much irrelevant.

Cryx is still legal - there are 2 armies legal in Prime: Blackfleet and Dark Host. I just ordered a bunch of cryx models for my army.

I another news, I just saw a new model for MK4 - Magnus the unstoppable with a warjack - both looks really cool, even if the jack looks a bit too much like a 40k knight. What's more interesting is that they are available for the legacy prime armies - which is weird, since PP said legacy armies will not get new models. This is pretty great, I will get the new magnus. He is also available at gen con.

https://home.privateerpress.com/2023/07/27/gen-con-2023-and-the-unstoppable-privateer-presence/ - the article with the models.

Oh boy. More giant models, just what we asked for...

Forums and especially official ones have always been toxic and always will. From fanboys to whiners and cliques. Its all forums ever are.

Early aos sold very poorly. Beating it wasn't hard.

PP selling 100 dollar units was Insane. They seriously need to forget being a production company and switch to the 3d print patreon model if they want to survive. There's no way they don't make more money. And I'm sure it would revive the game. Be the first "real" 3d printed game system.

Technically they won't be the first. There are a few games entirely relying on being 3D printed with their parent companies selling STLs - Blood Fields and Full Spectrum Dominance spring to mind.

Yo7 wrote:
They seriously need to forget being a production company and switch to the 3d print patreon model if they want to survive. There's no way they don't make more money. And I'm sure it would revive the game. Be the first "real" 3d printed game system.

Utterly laughable suggestion. Of the 4 largest 3d printing patreons, none are making more than about $2 mil a year. I can assure you that PP was making a fairly large multiple of that number annually just a few years ago, I would be stunned if they were making less than that now.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Yo7 wrote:
They seriously need to forget being a production company and switch to the 3d print patreon model if they want to survive. There's no way they don't make more money. And I'm sure it would revive the game. Be the first "real" 3d printed game system.

Utterly laughable suggestion. Of the 4 largest 3d printing patreons, none are making more than about $2 mil a year. I can assure you that PP was making a fairly large multiple of that number annually just a few years ago, I would be stunned if they were making less than that now.

Has PP fallen to making less than 1% of GW now or is that just rampant speculation?

there is and was never a company making as much money as GW
GW being the only one that need to publish their numbers so we don't have the exact ones for others, but there are sources to get a very good estimate (and no, 3rd party sales in the USA are not one of them)

and yes the biggest competitors of GW are in the 1-2% range

GW is not the biggest fish in the miniature gaming pond, GW is the pond

Iirc, about ten years ago, i remember seeing 10-20m being bandied around, but that was the glory days of mk2.

More recently i remember reading that minicrate was their best earner.

Wouldn't surprise me if financially they are well off their peak.They've gone from over a hundred employees then to maybe a couple dozen now.

Also, on the $$$/£££ valuers of companies in this industry - gw are the behemoth. Next biggest operators are the likes of warlord which are orders of magnitude smaller. And it very quickly drops down further into 'guy running a hobby/side business out of his garage' level of cottage industry.

 kodos wrote:


GW is not the biggest fish in the miniature gaming pond, GW is the pond

As much as I want to violently and aggressively set this statement on fire to show my objection to it...... I do get what your saying

But I don't think that is quite true. Other games are thriving and yes, they don't have quite the cultural mainstream impact of GW, but they are important. As much as I respect GW, we can't allow them to have the sole monopoly over the wargaming space. If I ONLY had GW, I probably wouldn't be playing anymore. Instead when I turn up to a local Malifaux tournament with 30 other people in my corner of the UK, im please that other games with other approaches exist and have support, quality products and great communities.

Don't forget that many GW gamers also play other systems. Its an ecosystem, with each part feeding the other.

so yes..... but no.... but....

 kodos wrote:
there is and was never a company making as much money as GW
GW being the only one that need to publish their numbers so we don't have the exact ones for others, but there are sources to get a very good estimate (and no, 3rd party sales in the USA are not one of them)

and yes the biggest competitors of GW are in the 1-2% range

GW is not the biggest fish in the miniature gaming pond, GW is the pond

Asmodee and Hasbro both make more than GW does, so wrong right off the bat. There are/were various competitors that pulled in the tens of millions range within the past 5-10 years, which is a good bit over 1-2%.

And Netflix and Disney are also making more than GW, so your point is?

Asmodee and Hasbro are both tabletop gaming companies that produce games with miniatures?

And produce a lot of other stuff
so unlike you want to say that Asmodee or Hasbro is making more money with their Wargaming branche than GW, and there I would like to have any proof with numbers, the comparison is pointless

and for what I can find both make the majority of money with boardgames, cardgames, toys and RGP

but we can look into it to show that MCP, Shatterpoint. X-Wing, Armada and SW Legion are combined outselling 40k, AoS, Necromunda, KT and Warcry

That's a lot of goal post moving, but whatever.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Asmodee and Hasbro are both tabletop gaming companies that produce games with miniatures?

Not sure about Hasbro, but with the restructuring for Asmodee you'd need to look at Atomic Mass Games' numbers, not Asmodee's as a whole. Or in the past, FFG's numbers I guess.

As to PP prices, well... if your company compares unfavorably price wise with melon-fething Games Workshop... well, that's not a great look.

I was in WMH during the heyday of MK2 and it was a lot of fun, it felt like they actually gave a crap about making a good game with steamroller and everything, though you could see obvious cash grabs like the colossals which were, oof.

And then I kinda dropped out a bit after the mk3 transition because i didn't care for where the game was going and got into X-wing instead, which had that similar sort of good, competitive feel.

X-wing went through a needed edition change but it was enough to get me focused on other things, and last I heard, it got handed to some old PP guys(Atomic Mass) to 'caretake it' who had no interest in what X-wing was and threw out rules for what they thought X-wing should be and then tossed it aside so they could go back to their favorite kind of game: Marvel Crisis Protocol and now Star Wars Shatterpoint, these tiny character-based games.

I'd love to go back to try WMH but god the issues in 3rd killed entirety of the game in my area.

Flat 2d terrain focus was bad and game tournaments look really unappealing to other gamers who were used to a very nice collection of terrain

Rules in 3rd changed so much towards the end and theme machine made us longer mk2 players have fragmented lists or play 15+ pts down.

The price was frankly too high and needed too many models. Factor in tournaments and multiple lists and each being totally different themes with not many non warbeast/warjack crossover and its even MORE unappealing than just getting 2k of 40k/AoS and having fun.

The changes to 4th basically gutting my Trollbloods was final straw for me. I check semi frequently but it's done nothing to draw back me or anyone else in our group back.

 Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
I'd love to go back to try WMH but god the issues in 3rd killed entirety of the game in my area.

Flat 2d terrain focus was bad and game tournaments look really unappealing to other gamers who were used to a very nice collection of terrain

Rules in 3rd changed so much towards the end and theme machine made us longer mk2 players have fragmented lists or play 15+ pts down.

The price was frankly too high and needed too many models. Factor in tournaments and multiple lists and each being totally different themes with not many non warbeast/warjack crossover and its even MORE unappealing than just getting 2k of 40k/AoS and having fun.

The changes to 4th basically gutting my Trollbloods was final straw for me. I check semi frequently but it's done nothing to draw back me or anyone else in our group back.

It's just all strange here with MK IV. My son and I loved MK I & II. Dabbled in III, and after some nostalgic discussion we each bought starter boxes for IV.
But after one game each, his interest seems to be drifting. we play tournament Ages of Sigmar at the moment as our main game. the community is fun as hell, and the game is satisfying. We wanted a side system, however, and WM is not holding our interest. There's a few hardcore Privateer fans that are asking us to play, but he and I are really digging Conquest LAoK as our 2nd system. Well, his. I play a ton of stuff.
I don't know what the hump is we haven't gotten over with the new launch, but it's floundering pretty badly here and we were one of the larger west coast groups playing MK III.

Funnily enough, despite my personal... malaise towards wmh my group actuslly asked that I demo/run a few small games.

Using mk3 rules and 'cards', we've been doing aone small games. As a reault I'm trying to flesh out and finish my 'other' armies - ret and cygnar and am still keeping an eye out for good deals.

PP announced the Preview Battlegroups are coming back as permanent parts of the range via their webstore. not clear if it will be available in stores through retailers, but all in all a positive development.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit - Confirmed its coming to retail distribution:

https://community.privateerpress.com/t/battlegroup-boxes-available-again-per-primecast/2736?u=randall

Are these those starter pack sets? If so that's really great news!

Yeah, caster + 2 jacks/beasts.

Glad they saw the light there. They're a really solid entry point and round out the product line a lot better than the random solo caster.

The newly released alt pose Warjack bodies do a great job of adding to the range as well. Being able to buy a body and field it with extra arms from the starter is a pretty great deal.

Yep, that was also a wise decision on their part.

It's something they talked about quite a ways back; it seems like they've actually just been more successful with this than they expected. It feels like they're just now getting a handle on production capacity, which is a good thing to see. I know locally a lot of people are starting to ask about giving it a go as it seems like models are becoming available.

On the retail side, I've had a couple stores ask me about the game. Seems like they're seeing adds in retail catalogs. PP seems to be making progress, its just a pretty deep hole to dig out of.

I'm really excited to see what they have cooked up for SR24. The first true Mk4 scenarios are going to have a big impact on what I think going forward. Hoping I can get ahold of some of the preview material they're sharing this weekend and test it out.

To be fair, there is now some people crawling out the woodwork locally. So its possible that a year or so after launch PP has done enough to get people interested. But im not seeing any stores wanting to stock.

One thing that does disturb me a little is the void between what's left of the old crowd and the new crowd. Old crowd don't seem to want to play the new guys because they are "too casual". Seems like PP has ported those issues from Mk3 to Mk4 in terms of their community.

Doesn't seem to be the case here, quite the opposite. The "old crowd" is really happy that their effort (and there has been a lot of that recently!) pays off and we have multiple new players join the local community with mk4 armies, something we never managed to achieve in the last few years of mk3.

I mean the new crowd are going to be new to the game so they won't be "super competitive top tier players". Which is an issue PP had - their market shrunk back and left only the super keen. Creating a huge skill divide which is totally normal in such a situation.

Now some experienced people will have the desire and skill to welcome and teach newbies and bring them up and engage with them; others won't and will clique off in their own separate group.

As long as PP can grow the newbies and keep growing them, this problem will eventually settle itself out because as time passes some of those newbies will become new oldies and pros and such.


The issue is more hte huge gap and divide and that's always very difficult to bridge. Doesn't matter if its skill, age, gender, social background or such - when there's a really big divide it can be hard to bridge it.

Sunno wrote:
To be fair, there is now some people crawling out the woodwork locally. So its possible that a year or so after launch PP has done enough to get people interested. But im not seeing any stores wanting to stock.

One thing that does disturb me a little is the void between what's left of the old crowd and the new crowd. Old crowd don't seem to want to play the new guys because they are "too casual". Seems like PP has ported those issues from Mk3 to Mk4 in terms of their community.

These kinds of players have been choking the life out the game since Mk2. Best ignored. They can lord over a dead game all they want.

SR24 preview is in the wild. Some interesting stuff. No big zones anymore. Closer to a 40k style objectives with 3" contesting. Different size objectives function like the old zones. Feels a little convoluted but I suspect they've got an objective pack in the works that makes it a bit more meaningful.

Flags now turn area terrain into a scoring zone. There's a cache that you can destroy for a point by sacrificing your combat action.

Notably you now have to be up by 3 at the end of your opponent's turn to win. No more checkmate style scenario wins.

These kinds of players have been choking the life out the game since Mk2. Best ignored. They can lord over a dead game all they want.

Largely agree, build the community you want to see. I just can't get my head around people who see a group of new player who they could mentor and link up with and go...."nah, f those casuals". Seen it so much over the years. Sadly watched a guy on the local chat trying to persuade the old crew to meet/link up with the new crew, tear his hair out and then leave the group after being told "we only need serious players" and "we will come play them if they run a decent Steamroller comp".

Hopefully the new guys will be great to play with. Despite my ongoing pessimism and bias towards PP, these appear to be tiny green shoots. So that's good.

And then they wonder why nobody wants to play the game.

I've noticed that within every community are those who consider whatever they do to be "serious" and they consider that they will welcome no others unless those others are "serious".

What counts as "serious" varies and is often based on some concept that any causal/non serious person allowed in will soon destroy the community entirely and reduce the skill, quality and enjoyment.

It's not unique to Warmachine nor wargaming; I've seen it in photography where some will try and hound off newbies and the less skilled and those who are "just taking snapshots" with arguments that fostering it will destroy all the art of photography or such.



In general that kind of person just lacks the appreciation for different levels of skill and dedication. Not everyone wants their hobby to be the 24*7 living breathing focus of their lives; and many don't even have the total free time to dedicate like that anyway.
They are often present, but when the community shrinks drastically, they can become more of a problem as they are often the most keen and invested so they are often some of the last to leave the hobby (they might well leave and form their own communities though).




They can also never really realise that they are doing this because their focus and reason is to preserve the skill and quality of the group. They want to have bigger communities, they just want only a certain kind and certain skilled kind of person to join. They lack the realisation that broader groups are healthier and that all "pros" only come from newbies.

Sunno wrote:

These kinds of players have been choking the life out the game since Mk2. Best ignored. They can lord over a dead game all they want.

Largely agree, build the community you want to see. I just can't get my head around people who see a group of new player who they could mentor and link up with and go...."nah, f those casuals". Seen it so much over the years. Sadly watched a guy on the local chat trying to persuade the old crew to meet/link up with the new crew, tear his hair out and then leave the group after being told "we only need serious players" and "we will come play them if they run a decent Steamroller comp".

Hopefully the new guys will be great to play with. Despite my ongoing pessimism and bias towards PP, these appear to be tiny green shoots. So that's good.

Agreed.

Gaming has no shortage of self-important elitists, bullies, seal clubbers and toxic miseryguts within its ranks. Pp games are no exception.

Sometimes you have to burn everything to the ground to move forward. When the old guard are largely toxic and actively start being a detriment, they need to be put out to pasture. You dont 'owe' them anything. Move on without them. The community and game doesn't need them to thrive.

Like sunny said, build the community that you want to see.

Thats more or less what GW did with Age of Sigmar. Kinda through the baby out with the bath water, but at the end of the day the majority of people who stuck around were the most open-minded of the fanbase, and then they brought in new blood with great models, half-decent rules, and interesting storytelling.

Shame page 5 wasn't a "don't be a gakhole, this game isn't about stomping your opponent out of existence at all costs and seeking personal glory, its about you and your opponent having fun and telling stories in the setting we have built. If thats not what you're interested in, then this game isn't for you." type message, things might have worked out differently.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Thats more or less what GW did with Age of Sigmar. Kinda through the baby out with the bath water, but at the end of the day the majority of people who stuck around were the most open-minded of the fanbase, and then they brought in new blood with great models, half-decent rules, and interesting storytelling.

Shame page 5 wasn't a "don't be a gakhole, this game isn't about stomping your opponent out of existence at all costs and seeking personal glory, its about you and your opponent having fun and telling stories in the setting we have built. If thats not what you're interested in, then this game isn't for you." type message, things might have worked out differently.

I'd argue GW didn't really do that intentionally with Old World to AoS. GW more just threw the whole product under the bus. Don't forget at the start of AoS GW wasn't even intending it to be an actual game, the only rules were insanely casual joke rules. GW wasn't trying to clean out the old guard, GW was flat out just removing the game and starting a boutique model line. Plus don't forget it failed so hard it triggered a cascade of management changes and a huge turn around of AoS as well as some aspects of GW.

If anything it was more about throwing out the old guard/methods of GW's practice than the customers

Well, we know (thanks to James Hewitt) that AoS was actually originally designed as a serious game and that they had a full size rulebook and everything written up and ready to go and the decision to launch it as a rules-lite novelty product was done at the last minute by a middle manager with more authority than brains.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, we know (thanks to James Hewitt) that AoS was actually originally designed as a serious game and that they had a full size rulebook and everything written up and ready to go and the decision to launch it as a rules-lite novelty product was done at the last minute by a middle manager with more authority than brains.

Yeah though I'd argue that whilst that was a huge nail in AoS early on; I think the hallmarks were earlier. The total lack of any marketing from the end of Old World till almost launch day of AoS was a MASSIVE mistake. I think reception - even with joke rules - would have been a LOT better if GW had been upfront and said.

"Ok we are blowing up old world - it is going away; but we are making a brand new game based on a continuation of the story with a new setting that lets us do amazing new things and stuff".

Yes people would still have raged, but no where near as much as "Old World is gone - its dead - fantasy is dead - 40K only - MORE MARINE LIEUTENANT MODELS!"

Yeah, James has said that that was basically not what was originally planned for the transition to AoS and was a result in the last minute shelving of the core rulebook and the other changes in how they were to proceed with the release in AoS vs what was originally planned.

chaos0xomega wrote:Thats more or less what GW did with Age of Sigmar. Kinda through the baby out with the bath water, but at the end of the day the majority of people who stuck around were the most open-minded of the fanbase, and then they brought in new blood with great models, half-decent rules, and interesting storytelling.

I've said the same thing myself. Or rather, even if it wasn't the official 'the aim', if it did happen that the nuking of the old world/introduction of aos would drive the perceived toxic old guard away in favour of a new demographic/audience, gw wouldn't shed many tears..

chaos0xomega wrote:

Shame page 5 wasn't a "don't be a gakhole, this game isn't about stomping your opponent out of existence at all costs and seeking personal glory, its about you and your opponent having fun and telling stories in the setting we have built. If thats not what you're interested in, then this game isn't for you." type message, things might have worked out differently.

I dunno. Final paragraph is pretty explicit.

'Most importantly - and let's state this loud and clear for the record - page 5 us not permission to be a jaxkass in the name of competition. Its not a shield to hide behind when you're playing like a sissified cheeseball, running down the clock, gaming a scenario, or rules layering your hapless opponents to death. Page 5 doesn't discriminate between genders. And page 5 is never ever EVER a license to diminish another player so you can inflate your own vertically challenged self esteem.
Remember, we all come here to battle out of common love. Respect page 5. Respect each other'.

As over the top as some of the language us (plygap etc), fundamentally it is about not being a jerk. Anyone who was was doing this in spite of the game's manifesto.

Overread wrote:

Yeah though I'd argue that whilst that was a huge nail in AoS early on; I think the hallmarks were earlier. The total lack of any marketing from the end of Old World till almost launch day of AoS was a MASSIVE mistake. I think reception - even with joke rules - would have been a LOT better if GW had been upfront and said.

"Ok we are blowing up old world - it is going away; but we are making a brand new game based on a continuation of the story with a new setting that lets us do amazing new things and stuff".

Yes people would still have raged, but no where near as much as "Old World is gone - its dead - fantasy is dead - 40K only - MORE MARINE LIEUTENANT MODELS!"

Nah, gw can never win. People would hsve raged if gw did anything, really.... or didn't do anything. Or did the other thing... a group of 40k players is called a whine for a reason.

I mean, earlier advertising would have just flatlined the end times sales for a start. The 'lack of marketing' was also peak kirby and based on a contemptuous view of the fanbase - anyone here 10 years ago will remember gw actively being hostile to their own fans and essentially viewing them as being willing to buy whatever they produced just because the gw logo was on it - remember his annual statement that the gw hobby was buying gw? 'Jewel like wonders' and all that guff? Aos not being an overnight sensation, along with several other things at the time was the final kick in the nads thats brought them back down to earth in a lot of ways.

Overread wrote:

I'd argue GW didn't really do that intentionally with Old World to AoS. GW more just threw the whole product under the bus. Don't forget at the start of AoS GW wasn't even intending it to be an actual game, the only rules were insanely casual joke rules. GW wasn't trying to clean out the old guard, GW was flat out just removing the game and starting a boutique model line. Plus don't forget it failed so hard it triggered a cascade of management changes and a huge turn around of AoS as well as some aspects of GW.

If anything it was more about throwing out the old guard/methods of GW's practice than the customers

See above. It was a bean counters game rooted in contempt of the fanbase. But I'm pretty certain that ridding themselves of the toxic old guard would have been seen as a positive - I even remember posting at the time that this would be their motivation. And it worked, ultimately.

I don't think most people read to the last paragraph of page 5, if they dud the message was drowned out by all the HEAVY METAL TESTOSTERONE RAAAAAAAGE on the rest of the page.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I don't think most people read to the last paragraph of page 5, if they dud the message was drowned out by all the HEAVY METAL TESTOSTERONE RAAAAAAAGE on the rest of the page.

I didnt get the 'RAAAAGGE!!', I just saw standard issue trash talking like youd get from football punters in any pub in the land on a saturday when the game is on. It just falls under 'banter' for the most part. Admittediy, Mk1s page 5 was as cringeworthy as it was hilarious and cheeky, whilst still being on point despite being over the top - 'steamrolling over your grandmas house et al'. But I'm glad they toned down the silly for mk2. Personally I always found Mark 2s page 5 to be quite empowering. Kept some of the ott language (though it's toned down and less silly) whilst still communicating the ethos of the game.

Thou shalt not whine.
Come heavy, or don't come at all. Get stuck in.
Give as good as you get. Don't seal club. Don't rely on a crutch list or fail-safe formula. Go after the big names
Win graciously and lose valiantly.
Page 5 is not an excuse to be a jerk.

Not quite 'RRRAAAAGGGGEEEE!' imo. It's slightly more mature. :p

Deadnight has it right, Page 5 was actually quite explicitly against things like copying cookie cutter lists or curbstomping newbies.

The Mk2 version was, but there's a lot of people still offended from interactions they had 15 years ago. (and likely players that still act that way sadly)

 Overread wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, we know (thanks to James Hewitt) that AoS was actually originally designed as a serious game and that they had a full size rulebook and everything written up and ready to go and the decision to launch it as a rules-lite novelty product was done at the last minute by a middle manager with more authority than brains.

Yeah though I'd argue that whilst that was a huge nail in AoS early on; I think the hallmarks were earlier. The total lack of any marketing from the end of Old World till almost launch day of AoS was a MASSIVE mistake. I think reception - even with joke rules - would have been a LOT better if GW had been upfront and said.

"Ok we are blowing up old world - it is going away; but we are making a brand new game based on a continuation of the story with a new setting that lets us do amazing new things and stuff".

Yes people would still have raged, but no where near as much as "Old World is gone - its dead - fantasy is dead - 40K only - MORE MARINE LIEUTENANT MODELS!"

Uhhuh could be my memory being leaky but the gap wasn't that long and info of new game came pretty quickly. Even the end of last end time book hinted it's not complete end.

Big rulebook being shelved if true would at least explain where GW spent over 3 years producing AoS...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I don't think most people read to the last paragraph of page 5, if they dud the message was drowned out by all the HEAVY METAL TESTOSTERONE RAAAAAAAGE on the rest of the page.

Or they read the mk1 one. The paragraph quoted above came in mk2. Mk1 was missing.

tneva82 wrote:


Or they read the mk1 one. The paragraph quoted above came in mk2. Mk1 was missing.

You're right. Though I dud allude to how ott mk1s page 5 was.

That said, the game exploded in popularity between 2010 and 2015, which was the era of mk2, not mk1. During the mk1 era, it was a very niche game with a small community.

Imo a lot more people reas mk2's page 5 than mk1s.

 LunarSol wrote:
The Mk2 version was, but there's a lot of people still offended from interactions they had 15 years ago. (and likely players that still act that way sadly)

I mean, I'm still annoyed about Pete haines' iron warriors rules in the 3.5ed chaos codex but there does come a point where you have to move on and acknowledge the current 'game' rather than being angry and bitter about what was there when we were kids.