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 had assumed that GW wasn't making any of those models anymore anyway. I mean, there are 40K sets on the site that are OOP too.

And another thing, I am a fan of Inquisitor, but I hadn't visited the GW page for it in ages. I could SWEAR that the following page only had 3 or 4 models on it the last time I checked:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCats.jsp?catId=cat490043a&rootCatGameStyle=specialist-games

I can remember the two cult assassins, the preacher, Damien and Artemis being there before, but the rest I honestly think they've just re-added.

Maybe this whole situation is a knee-jerk reaction due to GW's terribly poor customer-relations? They can't do anything without being damned six ways to Sunday on the internet now, but they only have themselves to blame for that.

I'd almost say that they might be bringing back one of the specialist games in some form... Like Space Hulk maybe? Alternate games set in 40K always seem to do better anyway, Space Hulk, Dreadfleet, and the Hobbit have proven that.

Could just be that they plan to use future re-releases of box sets, ala Space Hulk, for yearly spurts of sales instead of a slow trickle. If you think about it, running a set number of box sets that are pretty much guaranteed to sell out each year can make for a fairly reliable figure of income. Perhaps this is preferred to a 'made to order' ad hoc style?
They might even coincide these releases with the licensed computer/video games to cash in on the popularity/ free advertising (thinking of the new Space Hulk and Blood Bowl games coming out this year, for instance).
Makes sense to my mind at least. I'd love to see a new Necromunda.

JWhex wrote:

 puma713 wrote:

*snip*

I think you are very far off base with your assessment of how long the top armies stuck around. The IG has been one of the top armies for a very long time, GK also enjoyed more than just a few months and the SW are still very good. The introduction of allies has clouded things a bit. Skaven, Dark Elves, Lizardmen: all top armies and have been for years not just a few months. There are other examples but Im not going to analyze all the 40k and fantasy armies, I am afraid you are just plainly wrong about this.

That's why it's called anecdotal evidence. I'm not saying I think this was happening - I said I know where it was happening. I am not wrong about something that I witnessed by being a part of the tournament scene in the southern US. However, you seem to be applying your experience to the rest of the world.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Those orcs look like they should be in Mad Max

That's less a GW problem and more a "the production design on the movie" problem.

It's like people blaming GW for the horrid look of the Goblin King. GW didn't design that. The people making the movie did, and it's one of those things in the movie you can look to Guillermo del Toro and go "That's his fault". That thing looked like it walked straight out of a Hellboy movie...

a fat guy wrote:
I'd almost say that they might be bringing back one of the specialist games in some form... Like Space Hulk maybe? Alternate games set in 40K always seem to do better anyway, Space Hulk, Dreadfleet, and the Hobbit have proven that.

I don't think it's that black and white though. Dreadfleet sunk (haha!) because of its limited use in other arenas, the fact that it had an exorbitant cost, and appears to have been born out of a weird sense of nostalgia for Man'O'War yet it had very little to do with that old game, so much so that fans of that game wouldn't want it and people who don't know what Man'O'War was wouldn't care. I think a Blood Bowl or Warhammer Quest box could do quite well despite their WFB setting because they are, like Space Hulk, both genuinely and unambiguously good games*, and could sell on their own merits (not just on misplaced nostalgia).






*And if there was any sense in Lenton, they could be used to draw people into the larger games, but that's a whole other discussion and I'm sure Kroothawk can bore you with the details later.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
Those orcs look like they should be in Mad Max

That's less a GW problem and more a "the production design on the movie" problem.

It's like people blaming GW for the horrid look of the Goblin King. GW didn't design that. The people making the movie did, and it's one of those things in the movie you can look to Guillermo del Toro and go "That's his fault". That thing looked like it walked straight out of a Hellboy movie...

As I said on other thread (or might have been this one, can't remember), one of the problem with The Hobbit The Game was that The Movie didn't really offer many visually imposing characters. Goblins looked just horrible compared to their LOTR counterparts (and not in a good way), Goblin King was just terrible in every respect, there was too much crap CGI and not enough real actors and models, or even semi-decent CGI.

GW can't really be blamed for the Hobbit being lackluster.
When I read the book I pictured the goblins more like the moria ones, and the king no bigger but with like a rusty dwarf crown and on like a throne of bones or defiled dwarf throne
I donno... but not the deformed ghoul scrotum beard thing I saw

Look on the bright side, now Mat Fething Ward cant ruin Epic, Mordheim or BFG, etc.

If I had to guess, I'd say Warhammer World is getting the axe. The company's current retail strategy is against everything WW stands for, after all.

I remember a while ago being given a demo of LotR, and enjoying the game mechanics... But instead of making me want to play LotR, it made me wish we had a 40k analogue.

But then, I also wanted to try Epic, but finding a game is difficult to say the least. I'm not certain that it had a large following except in smaller gaming circles.

 Civik wrote:
I remember a while ago being given a demo of LotR, and enjoying the game mechanics... But instead of making me want to play LotR, it made me wish we had a 40k analogue.

But then, I also wanted to try Epic, but finding a game is difficult to say the least. I'm not certain that it had a large following except in smaller gaming circles.

I had the same experience with War of the Ring. I thought it was a nice rule system (I never played it enough to know if there were balance issues, although I have read people claiming there were.) I thought the transition from LotR to WotR was exactly what should've been done when transitioning 40k to Apocalypse. I thought about trying to translate some 40k codices into WotR lists but decided that it probably wouldn't go well, and if by some bizarre twist it became popular enough for me to find people to play it with, I'd probably get smacked with a C&D over something or another.

Meh. Why do I still give GW money?

I voted for the elimination of the LotR/Hobbit line. I am torn however; I can see the White Dwarf arguement. I would counter by saying that White Dwarf serves as an advertisement for up-coming products and so who have a purpose. I would also add that the $10/issue price tag is restrictive on sales.

When I look at the problem as a whole, I see one main driving force behind the current situation... Price hikes. I understand the concept of increasing costs of production and such, but I fear that there is going to be a tipping point at which they will price themselves out of the market. GW has repeatedly stated that they are producing the best-possible products... I respectfully say.. "No". There are multiple companies that are producing products that on a par with GW. The switch over to hard-cover books, in conjunction with a substantial price increase, is another example. Did players cry out for a hardcover codex? I never heard it.

Looking at the current prices, I have come to the opinion that GW is on a downward spiral.
GW increases their prices to compensate for lesser sales --> People cannot afford to buy as much and so sales drop...

Here is a possible idea... What if GW lowers their prices in conjunction with a media blitz to push for players to build armies.

My economics professor once told us that retail prices are roughly double the cost of producing that item.... Let me show you what I am thinking...

Army Squad = $ 35
Sell 5 sets
= $ 175

If the prices were lowered....

Army Squad = $30
Sell 8 sets
= $ 240

Obviously this works on the idea that you could make more sales... but I feel safe that if things didn't cost as much, players might be more willing to buy more to build up their armies. I myself would like to have a Stormtalon Squadron, but I cannot afford the price tag.

I very much doubt that the LotR and Hobbit lines will be axed - GW has a contract for the license of those properties, so they will be paying money whether or not they get to see pence or shilling.

Cutting White Dwarf seems the best option to me - an ongoing cost in an area that might be better handled by their website. So, the question becomes - does WD turn a profit? I... have no idea. All that I can say for certain is that I don't buy it. (My choice in magazines... National Geographic, and Military History Quarterly....)

Warhammer World... ... ... I'm on the wrong continent. Never seen it, never likely to see it (if I were in the UK then there are many places that are much higher on my 'Must See' list, including places like the Callanish Stones). Limited audience, and an ongoing expense.

The real question is - would getting rid of either WD or WW save enough money? Would getting rid of both?

GW - A C.M.O.T. Dibbler Enterprise....

The Auld Grump, actually... I think that Dibbler has more financial sense....

I remember a few weeks ago, all the doom and gloom started back up again and someone mentioned the TSR downfall. I think (I could be wrong, an article that someone linked wrote that one of the things they did was to cut out specialist games and focus on their primary sellers. I think it also mentioned something about them becoming sue happy too.

I don't know if the would ever drop WD completely. Maybe make it so the only way to get it would be through a subscription. That would certainly make it appear as if the sales of WD have boosted overnight.

Does anyone think they would maybe drop their hobby "supplies" (clippers, knives, paint brushes, etc.)? I don't know how much money we are talking about, but who knows?

I think the biggest problem (it has been addressed many times), is that GW seems to be looking at saving nickels and dimes, when they should be looking at saving $50's and $100's.

aclive wrote:
Does anyone think they would maybe drop their hobby "supplies" (clippers, knives, paint brushes, etc.)? I don't know how much money we are talking about, but who knows?

Probably not. They're just re-branded stuff, so the cost to keep them in stock is negligible and the markup is insane. GW probably makes a lot of money off people who really need a tool asap and/or uninformed newbies/parents who don't know that you can get the exact same tool for a fraction of the price at your local hardware store.

Edge paints it would appear ...

Peregrine wrote:
Probably not. They're just re-branded stuff, so the cost to keep them in stock is negligible and the markup is insane. GW probably makes a lot of money off people who really need a tool asap and/or uninformed newbies/parents who don't know that you can get the exact same tool for a fraction of the price at your local hardware store.

This times a thousand. I used to think that it was the same stuff that you could get in a hardware store, but for maybe a couple of £ more, so I didn't mind supporting GW and getting my supplies at the same time as my models.

Then I realised that this gak was a quarter of the price elsewhere, and unlike citidel stuff, is actually good at what it does. But I'm not going to go on about those crappy files.

TheAuldGrump wrote:I very much doubt that the LotR and Hobbit lines will be axed - GW has a contract for the license of those properties, so they will be paying money whether or not they get to see pence or shilling.

Assuming they're making any money at all that is. If they're paying for the licence *and* losing money on the Hobbit, it'd still make sense to just pull the hobbit, fill that shop space with 40k/fantasy goodies, and simply continue to pay New Line for the license.

I'm pretty sure they're just going to force you to buy something when you go there.

Something like:

Here at games workshop, we like to give back to the community. We have the facilities to rob you blind, letting you smile while we do it. Our state-of the art $20 dollar speakers will blurt out loud, unappealing music, bought off of itunes! As a special deal, if you spend $100 or more, you get access to our gaming tables for five minutes!

I wouldn't be surprised to see Fantasy disappear at some point (not next, or not even soon, but one day). People have said it's unthinkable, but I'd have said the same thing about Epic when I started gaming (seriously, it was in WD as much as 40k or Fantasy back then).

 Lord Bearer wrote:
When I look at the problem as a whole, I see one main driving force behind the current situation... Price hikes. I understand the concept of increasing costs of production and such, but I fear that there is going to be a tipping point at which they will price themselves out of the market. GW has repeatedly stated that they are producing the best-possible products... I respectfully say.. "No". There are multiple companies that are producing products that on a par with GW. The switch over to hard-cover books, in conjunction with a substantial price increase, is another example. Did players cry out for a hardcover codex? I never heard it.

Looking at the current prices, I have come to the opinion that GW is on a downward spiral.
GW increases their prices to compensate for lesser sales --> People cannot afford to buy as much and so sales drop...
Here is a possible idea... What if GW lowers their prices in conjunction with a media blitz to push for players to build armies.
My economics professor once told us that retail prices are roughly double the cost of producing that item.... Let me show you what I am thinking...

Army Squad = $ 35
Sell 5 sets
= $ 175

If the prices were lowered....

Army Squad = $30
Sell 8 sets
= $ 240

Obviously this works on the idea that you could make more sales... but I feel safe that if things didn't cost as much, players might be more willing to buy more to build up their armies. I myself would like to have a Stormtalon Squadron, but I cannot afford the price tag.

This has been said many times, but in a nutshell:
1) Production of GW products averages 25% of the retail price.
2) GW products *seem to* be fairly inelastic. Ie, You drop the price 5% but you only get an additional 2% in sales, or you raise the price 5% and you only lose 2% in sales. To keep the same profit, you need to get *more* sales increase than your price decrease.
3) GW products are very high quality. Some might not appreciate their style, but in the 6 other games systems I play I haven't come across any kits as nice as the Tau Pathfinders I just put together.
4) The codices, and the iCodices, are extensions of that quality. They can't compete with softcover codices, so they hike the price on a higher quality product that is about 3 levels higher quality than people need, but players have no real choice but to buy.


GW seems to be getting leaner and leaner; this helped them for a few years as they trimmed fat, but now they are getting anorexic. Supply issues, especially in GW stores, are beginning to surface. GW stores are moving to low foot traffic areas which pretty much defeats their purpose. Specialist Games might not have made an enormous amount of money, but they did keep other games out of the industry. Now Mantic, Wyrd, Corvus Belli, Spartan have stepped in to fill the gaps that GW left wide open.

I think that dropping Specialist Games may be a sound decision now from GW as they attempt to get completely away from metals, but it would have been good to see it not be necessary.

In terms of 'what next?' Support for a 40k faction. SOB or BT seem likely, as they are pretty much dead already. Sisters units get moved into an 'inquisition' codex or 'adeptus sororitas' unit addition to Space Marines.


Also... it still appears that you can order a bunch of SG stuff on the Australian site. If you're looking for stuff, it may be worthwhile checking that out before paying 20x the price on eBay.

 Riquende wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised to see Fantasy disappear at some point (not next, or not even soon, but one day). People have said it's unthinkable, but I'd have said the same thing about Epic when I started gaming (seriously, it was in WD as much as 40k or Fantasy back then).

I doubt Fantasy will get eliminated. It amy not be as popular as 40k but it has great IP that GW owns and can exploit and use as they see fit. If it does then GW as a whole will not be far behind.

And if/when the Warhammer Creative Assembly game gets released, GW is probably going to find a spike in sales.

Bloody hell. I mean, I knew intellectually that you poor Aussies had it bad, but crikey they want as much for the Light Cruisers as we pay for Battleships in the UK.

Debating whether or not to pay £50 for a Repulsive plus shipping, or to try my luck on ebay. Also, why does it cost GW $40AUD to ship stuff to the UK when ebay retailers can manage it for $10-15AUD?

 Yodhrin wrote:
Bloody hell. I mean, I knew intellectually that you poor Aussies had it bad, but crikey they want as much for the Light Cruisers as we pay for Battleships in the UK.

Debating whether or not to pay £50 for a Repulsive plus shipping, or to try my luck on ebay. Also, why does it cost GW $40AUD to ship stuff to the UK when ebay retailers can manage it for $10-15AUD?

I told my wife I was thinking about doing that for a couple things. I'm pretty sure I'd lose my little fellows if a box arrived from GW Australia now. So, I mean, there's always that way to cut down on the temptation.

BTW, why is the Repulsive such a big deal? I took a look at it and, eh? It doesn't seem all that different from the other Chaos ships.

 Lansirill wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Bloody hell. I mean, I knew intellectually that you poor Aussies had it bad, but crikey they want as much for the Light Cruisers as we pay for Battleships in the UK.

Debating whether or not to pay £50 for a Repulsive plus shipping, or to try my luck on ebay. Also, why does it cost GW $40AUD to ship stuff to the UK when ebay retailers can manage it for $10-15AUD?

I told my wife I was thinking about doing that for a couple things. I'm pretty sure I'd lose my little fellows if a box arrived from GW Australia now. So, I mean, there's always that way to cut down on the temptation.

BTW, why is the Repulsive such a big deal? I took a look at it and, eh? It doesn't seem all that different from the other Chaos ships.

It's more appealing than either of the battleships IMO, and it has a broad range of use; Chaos fleets, obviously, plus Imperial fleets since it's better than their grand cruiser, and also Space Marines can use it as a Heresy-era battle barge. It's also shaped and sized in such a way as to make it a right pain in the backside to convert out of more readily available Chaos parts. Further, if it does come up on ebay, it will either be for obscene amounts of money, or as part of a job-lot with loads of other Chaos ships which are pointless if it's a Marine or Imperial player who wants one.

Meh, they'll probably be out of stock by the time I have spare hobby cash again anyway. On the plus side, I got my order of ships from GW today, and the casts are surprisingly crisp so should make lovely masters.

 Lansirill wrote:

BTW, why is the Repulsive such a big deal? I took a look at it and, eh? It doesn't seem all that different from the other Chaos ships.

Because it's now hard to get, of course!

Also, Chaos has just four different Capital ship types (not counting Planet killer) and Repulsive is one of them. As all the other Chaos cruisers you can have look pretty much the same, it's nice to have some visual variation.

edit. was going to have one for my Imperial fleet, but that dream is gone...

Backfire wrote:

 mayfist wrote:

Would It really be a good thing if WOTC took over ?

No.

Get ready for it. Hearing from multiple people, GW and Hasbro are talking. Hasbro has approached GW ever couple years about selling out and GW normally said "No thanks". This year, "We're listening". Will this lead to GW coming under the Hasbro umbrella? Not sure, mergers and take-overs have fallen apart for legitimate to trivial reasons. These accelerated releases, cuts and closings have all been to beef up profitability to look better on paper. WotC did the same thing prior to them being bought out by Hasbro.

Time to seriously ask, would GW be better under Greg Leeds (current head of WotC) or Tom Kirby?

silent25 wrote:

Time to seriously ask, would GW be better under Greg Leeds (current head of WotC) or Tom Kirby?

No. I quit Magic after WotC ruined it. I started to play 40k because it was like Magic was in the good old times.

Ummm... you do know that WotC has owned Magic since the game first came out?

And, honestly, MacDonalds could do better with GW than Kirby.... I'll have a unit of Space Marines, a Big Mac and a chocolate shake please....

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Ummm... you do know that WotC has owned Magic since the game first came out?

Yes. There's no one else to blame.

silent25 wrote:
Hasbro has approached GW ever couple years about selling out and GW normally said "No thanks". This year, "We're listening".

Actual source on this?