Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dysartes wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Automatically Appended Next Post:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So can we officially call it Deadfleet yet?

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

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

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

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

H.B.M.C. wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'll do you one better

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

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

Ehsteve wrote:I'll do you one better

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Location? and whats a ton for it worth exactly?

LunaHound wrote:

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

Location? and whats a ton for it worth exactly?

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

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

An interesting point.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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