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.

Irkjoe wrote:They are just examples from 40k, blast templates are another good one. Any mechanics that depict actual fighting are what separates a wargame from a game.

Good thing that 40k has shooting and melee mechanics then, doesn't it?

Sorry, but you can strip facings, templates, and morale from the game, and it's still a wargame.

The idea that your soldiers won't always do what you want or that vehicles have limitations with how they move and shoot. The "war" part of wargame.

Well hang on here, that's not what you just said a second ago. Is it the unreliable action, or is it the fighting that's important? Because those aren't the same thing.

I certainly don't think it's the unreliable troops part, but we're getting into subjective territory here.

Arbitrator wrote:Competition is healthy and god knows GW needs some now they're falling back into old habits.

So, uh, support the competition instead of GW then? When the competition is good enough to challenge GW, then it will have worked, but I don't see how competition simply not being up to standard yet is anything but their own issue?

Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:Quite simply a war game is a game about war. A miniatures war game would be a game about war that uses miniatures. That's pretty much it.

This is the only true definition of a wargame. It's in the name. A war game. A game about war. Everything else is a development from that core concept.

Irkjoe wrote:I think there needs to be a simulation aspect to it.

Like, uh, models? And dice?

Like 95%+ of GW products, characters are massive, indefensible rip-offs. When I started, I bought my metal Company Master for $14-$15. The primaris dude (who can't wear his fething helmet) is $40.

The problem with GW, is the loyal player base that will buy whatever they make, at whatever they charge.

A perfect example is a few posts back, where someone (this is not meant as an attack, mind you) acknowledged the high prices, and admitted they'll buy the character anyway if they like how it looks. They are free to do so, of course, but this choice also contributes to the problem.


GW sculpts aren't always that nice, either. Their technology has improved, mostly- but the designs are poor as often as they are good. Many scream "CAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDD!!!!!" and are soulless GW's present team of sculptors are not especially talented, for the most part.

The characters have a lack of options too, which is obnoxious.

Quick shoutout to the poxwalkers kit, which isn't even a character, but has been released out here for $47 (before tax) despite them being too lazy to have re-tooled the sprue to remove the useless bit of plague marine and the front half of one of his arms. But I guess the premium price reflects the premium quality or something. I guess the GW Kool Aid really is that tasty.

I'm a big converter who digs a chance to assemble a character out of other parts as much as I like getting access to the unique parts on character sculpts. At the end of the day it matters comparatively little to me personally because if a character is unreasonably priced I am happy not buying it, whereas if a character is reasonably priced I am happy to buy it. Conversions are probably happening either way.

It is still irksome to witness levels of pricing so high that I rarely/never see a given hero on the table not because its rules are bad or unfun but simply because players do not want to pay for it (and/or because they don't want to be forced into ordering it direct).

Blastaar wrote:
The problem with GW, is the loyal player base that will buy whatever they make, at whatever they charge.

A perfect example is a few posts back, where someone (this is not meant as an attack, mind you) acknowledged the high prices, and admitted they'll buy the character anyway if they like how it looks. They are free to do so, of course, but this choice also contributes to the problem.

Hyperbole and failure to understand subjective appeal also contributes to the problem, since it causes feedback to be a cascade of madness instead of a series of well-reasoned points.

 Arbitrator wrote:
I keep seeing video games get touted a lot, but how many games will be pulling in that much money these days? There's Total War and... maybe Vermintide 2? The rest of them are either ancient, or have a player base in the double/single digits.

Not to mention Dawn of War 3 pretty much gutting it's own player base.
Vermintide 2 has seen a massive influx of players though. So that's pretty hard to gauge, all things considered.

Guardsmen kits is 30-40 usd depending where you are, giving you only 10 bodies with sparse options. For the same price I can get WGA Grognard kit with their newer offerings giving you 24 bodies, a bunch of different head options and more weapon options. For the same price of a GW Hvy Weapons Box for Guard, you can get there box that includes 12 bodies instead of 6 and get all the stuff from the command box for no extra, all in plastic.

Everyday I try to justify buying a near 20 year old box set to add to my army but it is becoming harder. Worse now that pewters are gone and Catachans are all pretty much in the online store .

DoW3 was a third-party game with Warhammer 40k labels stuck on. It is a Warhammer game like tomatoes are a fruit.

 Oborosen wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
I keep seeing video games get touted a lot, but how many games will be pulling in that much money these days? There's Total War and... maybe Vermintide 2? The rest of them are either ancient, or have a player base in the double/single digits.

Not to mention Dawn of War 3 pretty much gutting it's own player base.
Vermintide 2 has seen a massive influx of players though. So that's pretty hard to gauge, all things considered.

Total War and Vermintide are the big royalty makers for GW games atm, of which part of their success most likely was the cause of the Fantasy coming back.

 BlackoCatto wrote:
Guardsmen kits is 30-40 usd depending where you are, giving you only 10 bodies with sparse options. For the same price I can get WGA Grognard kit with their newer offerings giving you 24 bodies, a bunch of different head options and more weapon options. For the same price of a GW Hvy Weapons Box for Guard, you can get there box that includes 12 bodies instead of 6 and get all the stuff from the command box for no extra, all in plastic.

Everyday I try to justify buying a near 20 year old box set to add to my army but it is becoming harder. Worse now that pewters are gone and Catachans are all pretty much in the online store .

Yea, double goes for SoB players from a little while back. Because they've just gotten some new life into their models.

I just wish that GW would offer more kits to upgrade more of their base models. Because it's only a few armies with dedicated upgrades for each of their specialist units. I'd easily pay about 25$ for a box of special weapons. Hell, the spare bits alone would be well worth the expense.

 Irkjoe wrote:
[

And my point about the miniatures was that if the simulated warfare doesn't make a wargame then it has to be miniatures, a table, and I should also have listed terrain. The best definition of a wargame is simulated warfare with miniatures, terrain, and a table(surface or floor whatever). That's the minimum imo.

So 40K by your definition is a wargame (even if you don't agree in the way the war is simulated).

Can we move to a more interesting topic?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm a big converter who digs a chance to assemble a character out of other parts as much as I like getting access to the unique parts on character sculpts.

Sadly this is becoming less and less of an option, as GW squeezes everything into a sets of wargear that cannot be mixed'n'matched like they used to.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm a big converter who digs a chance to assemble a character out of other parts as much as I like getting access to the unique parts on character sculpts.

Sadly this is becoming less and less of an option, as GW squeezes everything into a sets of wargear that cannot be mixed'n'matched like they used to.

Which pretty much increases everyone's need for 3rd party options.

Especially when it comes to some of the more obscure options, like combi weapons, or even shields in most cases.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm a big converter who digs a chance to assemble a character out of other parts as much as I like getting access to the unique parts on character sculpts. At the end of the day it matters comparatively little to me personally because if a character is unreasonably priced I am happy not buying it, whereas if a character is reasonably priced I am happy to buy it. Conversions are probably happening either way.

It is still irksome to witness levels of pricing so high that I rarely/never see a given hero on the table not because its rules are bad or unfun but simply because players do not want to pay for it (and/or because they don't want to be forced into ordering it direct).

Blastaar wrote:
The problem with GW, is the loyal player base that will buy whatever they make, at whatever they charge.

A perfect example is a few posts back, where someone (this is not meant as an attack, mind you) acknowledged the high prices, and admitted they'll buy the character anyway if they like how it looks. They are free to do so, of course, but this choice also contributes to the problem.

Hyperbole and failure to understand subjective appeal also contributes to the problem, since it causes feedback to be a cascade of madness instead of a series of well-reasoned points.

No hyperbole. Despite shoddy rules and high prices, GW's profit continues to grow. We all know this. Subjective appeal is one thing- knowingly overpaying for a product is another.

A while back there were pre-orders for a "life size" Cookie Monster on Hasbro Pulse. I thought it was awesome. But the price tag.................. I did not place an order.

Sure, many people probably are happy enough playing 40k. It remains a poorly designed game, priced to fleece players. Both can be true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
DoW3 was a third-party game with Warhammer 40k labels stuck on. It is a Warhammer game like tomatoes are a fruit.

Heh. I quit that series after DOWII.

I engage in the 40K hobby entirely for the fluff/setting. I paint the minis, play the wargame and the RPGs, read the BL books, and I used to collect the old boardgames. If 40K somehow went away, I would not be seeking to replace it with other wargames because I am not invested in their lore, and don't have the time or inclination to become so. For me, playing the wargame is just a byproduct of my interest in the setting.

When WFB was discontinued, I didn't care for the AoS 'setting', and I haven't replaced that hobby time with another wargame.

The fluff and setting of 40k does not have to be inseparably linked to the tabletop rules.
There are rulesets designed specifically to work with 40k models and factions, and others which can be quickly adapted with a little homebrewing.
Something I find very perplexing is "I don't want to play X because I like 40k models" when X is designed to use 40k models.
Although I never understand brand loyalty in general.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
The fluff and setting of 40k does not have to be inseparably linked to the tabletop rules.
There are rulesets designed specifically to work with 40k models and factions, and others which can be quickly adapted with a little homebrewing.
Something I find very perplexing is "I don't want to play X because I like 40k models" when X is designed to use 40k models.
Although I never understand brand loyalty in general.

Ease of access I guess.

In 40k, an Intercessor, Ork Boy, Necron Warrior etc are known quantities, just based off their visual qualities (though Intercessors may need a reminder as to what flavour of Bolt Rifle they’re carrying, at least for me!).

Transplant into another game? Not so much.

There’s also the possibly asinine question of why would I use 40k models for another game, when I can just play 40k?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
The fluff and setting of 40k does not have to be inseparably linked to the tabletop rules.
There are rulesets designed specifically to work with 40k models and factions, and others which can be quickly adapted with a little homebrewing.
Something I find very perplexing is "I don't want to play X because I like 40k models" when X is designed to use 40k models.
Although I never understand brand loyalty in general.

There’s also the possibly asinine question of why would I use 40k models for another game, when I can just play 40k?

Because the other game has better rules for a starter. And the rules are about 1% of the price for a second.
GW's models are great, I don't deny that at all. So instead of buying the same book again, buy more models!
For some games the only obstacle is translating 40k names from their alternative, copyright-free names.

They should have stuck to metal for the character models. Moulds for those are way cheaper to make than for plastic And the more expensive material is not such an issue for small batches characters are needed in.

Plastic would still be essential for big guys like mortarion but I am not a fan of big characters anyway.

Oh and with metal they cant sculpt all of those stupid jumping poses wich would be another advantage.

TBH I wish they had stuck to resin.
Resin is in no way a bad material, they just botched Finecast. Which is a massive shame, as the poor reputation is what got them to move to plastic everything, which just results in silly prices for characters.
I don't like metal much because it's difficult to work with, especially from a modelling perspective.

The thing is, much smaller companies do manage to sell plastic minis made on sprues, and if I'm not mistaken the cost is a few tens of thousands, 50k or so. For a large company like GW, that practically is nothing and so, the molds really aren't that expensive. Their biggest expense wouldn't be on the production side, but rather on the very expensive shops they keep around in many places. And really, GW probably sells more of many of their character sculpts than smaller companies sell of their units. Unless it's a really obscure character, but even then.

That's true.
But I think GW *expects* the return on investment from a mould to by much higher than a smaller company might. GW's minimum baseline is much wider margins.
The existence of their hobby stores shouldn't explain why plastic characters are pretty much the same price as a unit, whereas metal/finecast were more like half the price of a unit.

The stores indeed don't explain why they ask so much for the plastics. The answers is much simpler. Plenty of people are perfectly willing to pay it.

It's the same with arguments about a number of sprues making kits more expensive. In the end, the whole production side of things doesn't cost all that much. It's mostly that there is no real reason to offer more sprues with upgrades and the like when people will already buy the boxes anyways.

50k is for the mold, but that's just the tip of iceberg. The rest of the cost is designing that model and that mold.

I estimate around 25000 characters sold at 25 euros each to reach the break even point.

Unfortunately, no one has any idea of the actual safes figures of GW.

Designing also isn't that insanely expensive, and this 50k was basically sending greens to a company and getting the molds in return.

I don't think the design process is anything like that expensive.
In fact, I've heard from a representative at Warlord games that a sizeable part of their pricing is the commissioning of box art. Yet they see far lower sales volumes than GW.

GW definitely has many costs. Claims that 2000% mark-up are definitely false.
But I don't think GW is running very thin margins at all.

In fact, even GW's own games suggest the cost isn't that high.
Necromunda doesn't see anything like the sales volume of 40k. Plus all the unit designs are very unique, unlike 40k where armies reuse themes and model designs a lot.
And in spite of that, Necromunda boxes are generally cheaper than comparable 40k kits.

The answer is almost exclusively that people pay the money for 40k, so they're happy to let people.

Luckily, we can always consult GW’s actual takings to their actual profits to see what their margin is.

 Dolnikan wrote:
Designing also isn't that insanely expensive, and this 50k was basically sending greens to a company and getting the molds in return.

This.

People seem to forget that GW have their own tooling facilities on site. Do you really think they would be producing limited, one off and anniversary minis in plastic were it prohibitively expensive for them?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
So, uh, support the competition instead of GW then? When the competition is good enough to challenge GW, then it will have worked, but I don't see how competition simply not being up to standard yet is anything but their own issue?

Yes, I do support the competition and as has been said by multiple people in this thread that no matter how 'good' the competition is that unless people are simply willing to try those other products, it doesn't matter if you've got the best wargame on the planet with the best sculpts ever - people need to actually buy into it and put down their 40k/AoS for five minutes and not go running back when the new edition lands for no other reason than "It's 40k."

 BlackoCatto wrote:
Guardsmen kits is 30-40 usd depending where you are, giving you only 10 bodies with sparse options. For the same price I can get WGA Grognard kit with their newer offerings giving you 24 bodies, a bunch of different head options and more weapon options. For the same price of a GW Hvy Weapons Box for Guard, you can get there box that includes 12 bodies instead of 6 and get all the stuff from the command box for no extra, all in plastic.

Everyday I try to justify buying a near 20 year old box set to add to my army but it is becoming harder. Worse now that pewters are gone and Catachans are all pretty much in the online store .

I remember when those same 20 Cadians were £15 for a box. That they're now 10 for £22.50 I'm sure will still be defended as, "b-b-b-but inflation...".

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Dolnikan wrote:
Designing also isn't that insanely expensive, and this 50k was basically sending greens to a company and getting the molds in return.

This.

People seem to forget that GW have their own tooling facilities on site. Do you really think they would be producing limited, one off and anniversary minis in plastic were it prohibitively expensive for them?

I was considering only internal work obviously. Honestly I would be surprised if between workhours and tooling, a model of that quality doesn't cost at least 100k from the moment where it is a scribble on a whiteboard, until you have it in your hands.