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.

not all rosey, but much more, as i have stated "id buy more"

would say dropping the prices 20% really win them back that much buisness, I'm not pro high prices or anything but personally I don't think that alone is going to bring that man people back. I think the rules behind the game are also a factor to consider, until 3rd ed I was a massive 40k player, I buy the odd but from time to time because I like the models but I don't really have the desire to play it like I used to. If the 6th ed rumours are true then I might start playing and then if you factored that with a price reduction I would more than likely spend more than I do now.

I think most peple with the game as it is would just spend the same but get more models.

Congrats on a well worded and formal letter, it's such a shame GW thought you were some kind of 10 year old or something.
"Caring for our fanbase? Sensible buissiness practice? Foolish child, you do not know who you speak to!"

itsonlyme wrote:would say dropping the prices 20% really win them back that much buisness, I'm not pro high prices or anything but personally I don't think that alone is going to bring that man people back. I think the rules behind the game are also a factor to consider, until 3rd ed I was a massive 40k player, I buy the odd but from time to time because I like the models but I don't really have the desire to play it like I used to. If the 6th ed rumours are true then I might start playing and then if you factored that with a price reduction I would more than likely spend more than I do now.

For me, dropping prices won't bring me back. Prices aren't the main problem... it is the perception of value. As long as the rules are rubbish, I will not return, except as a last resort... (i.e. if I move to an area where GW product is the only miniatures system used.) To give an idea of how far GW has fallen, I'd sooner jump back into MTG than go back to 40k the way it is now - and I quit MTG to go to 40k back in 3rd Ed. Thank the Emperor that there's a decent PP presence where I live.

Grimtuff wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:
Erm, I think yes...as your constant assertation that it's badly run is well, utterly uninformed, by your own admission?

GW ARE badly run though, I believe the cliche of piss ups and breweries comes to mind. They are consumed by their own hubris, and this will be their downfall.

Sorry, I just have to ask; did you twirl your mustache as you made that statement?

I am wondering who here actually expected Wells or his proxy to openly put up their hands and say 'Fair enough, yeah, we're just in it for the lulz and being evil'.

They were never going to admit to wanting maximum profit by various nefarious means. Using ideas like 'protecting Oz businesses' for their East India styled monopolising Down Under and 'raising the quality' for the finecast debacle are fine smokescreens to throw at folks and once they have refined the excuses and given them out enough times, certain in the hobby will continue down the path of knowing they have a very nasty business sense and certain others will adopt these new and flimsy excuses as a gospel.

I personally think, from reading about 'price elasticity', the metal to plastic to plastic prices to metal prices following the tin crisis now resulting in the finecast cheaper material price raise (whew!), the reboxing to contain less for more money... Urgh, the list just goes on and on. But here's the point.

Wells is a manager brought into the company. He doesn't give a flying turd about 'The Hobby', it is a product. He has probably met many kids and then a few older mouthbreathing hobbyists, all fawning about the game. How seriously do you think that guy takes the angry letters from older gamers. He's already read the previous financial reports from Kirby, that state kids are the target, older gamers are either embittered yet addicted or fanatical to the point of spending money for food on the product instead.


The Ivory Tower does not hear legitimate concerns. It is only concerned with the bottom line and if you want anything to come about in the company, vote with your wallet and advise your friends/gaming group to do likewise.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I am wondering who here actually expected Wells or his proxy to openly put up their hands and say 'Fair enough, yeah, we're just in it for the lulz and being evil'.

They were never going to admit to wanting maximum profit by various nefarious means. Using ideas like 'protecting Oz businesses' for their East India styled monopolising Down Under and 'raising the quality' for the finecast debacle are fine smokescreens to throw at folks and once they have refined the excuses and given them out enough times, certain in the hobby will continue down the path of knowing they have a very nasty business sense and certain others will adopt these new and flimsy excuses as a gospel.

I personally think, from reading about 'price elasticity', the metal to plastic to plastic prices to metal prices following the tin crisis now resulting in the finecast cheaper material price raise (whew!), the reboxing to contain less for more money... Urgh, the list just goes on and on. But here's the point.

Wells is a manager brought into the company. He doesn't give a flying turd about 'The Hobby', it is a product. He has probably met many kids and then a few older mouthbreathing hobbyists, all fawning about the game. How seriously do you think that guy takes the angry letters from older gamers. He's already read the previous financial reports from Kirby, that state kids are the target, older gamers are either embittered yet addicted or fanatical to the point of spending money for food on the product instead.


The Ivory Tower does not hear legitimate concerns. It is only concerned with the bottom line and if you want anything to come about in the company, vote with your wallet and advise your friends/gaming group to do likewise.

Kids are the target? With a $600 investment requirement I think that is the hard part from getting the hobby to grow. Add to that the product being "outdated" on nearly an annual basis by codex creep so you are talking an annual expenditure of $600 to have fun. Assuming you want a competitive game where you have a chance to win.
I don't know about you but averaging $50 per month of allowance is a pretty steep amount to get a kid interested especially when he receives his last $50 installment and then lo and behold a new codex arrives on the scene and make your investment worthless.

Kids are the target? With a $600 investment requirement I think that is the hard part from getting the hobby to grow..

Why not hop down to your local GW and test that theory?

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I am wondering who here actually expected Wells or his proxy to openly put up their hands and say 'Fair enough, yeah, we're just in it for the lulz and being evil'.

They were never going to admit to wanting maximum profit by various nefarious means. Using ideas like 'protecting Oz businesses' for their East India styled monopolising Down Under and 'raising the quality' for the finecast debacle are fine smokescreens to throw at folks and once they have refined the excuses and given them out enough times, certain in the hobby will continue down the path of knowing they have a very nasty business sense and certain others will adopt these new and flimsy excuses as a gospel.

I personally think, from reading about 'price elasticity', the metal to plastic to plastic prices to metal prices following the tin crisis now resulting in the finecast cheaper material price raise (whew!), the reboxing to contain less for more money... Urgh, the list just goes on and on. But here's the point.

Wells is a manager brought into the company. He doesn't give a flying turd about 'The Hobby', it is a product. He has probably met many kids and then a few older mouthbreathing hobbyists, all fawning about the game. How seriously do you think that guy takes the angry letters from older gamers. He's already read the previous financial reports from Kirby, that state kids are the target, older gamers are either embittered yet addicted or fanatical to the point of spending money for food on the product instead.


The Ivory Tower does not hear legitimate concerns. It is only concerned with the bottom line and if you want anything to come about in the company, vote with your wallet and advise your friends/gaming group to do likewise.

+1

Every time someone sends a letter all you get in return is a pre-formatted form letter. If you do not like the price, "imbalance", or some other things find another company to provide your hobby and wargaming stuff.

We can try and butter this up, it's not as good as it used to be arguement but thats just nonsense. Remember some of the balancing issues back in the day? Imperial Assassins with Vortex Grenades as Wargear? There were some insane choices back then.

You can say price isn't the issue (fair enough) and start quoting, unfair rules or unbalanced rules? But then you start pushing specific example (which is possible as nothings perfect) where as 95% of the rules are solid. If the Rules were broken no one would play, there are more tournaments for 40k than ever before at a lower level than just Grand tournaments. Nevermind the GW Ivory tower, some people need to get real and live in the real world not their own heads. GW is not Evil, it is a for profits company with Share Holders.

Alot of people in this hobby need to get out their own Ivory Tower built on a foundation of pseudo-business-intellect and a skew morality. You want it buy it, don't want it then walk away from it, bitching that it's not as good as it used to be makes you sound like old man.

If you took an Nemesis Dread Knight back to the 1997 people would be blown away by it. I recently read my old Painting guide by John Blanche, it took me back, but things have evolved massively and for the better since then. It's too easy to be negative and revert to a sarcastic, irrational standpoint based on "I'm right, your wrong" rather than an objective view point.

Mastiff wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:
Erm, I think yes...as your constant assertation that it's badly run is well, utterly uninformed, by your own admission?

GW ARE badly run though, I believe the cliche of piss ups and breweries comes to mind. They are consumed by their own hubris, and this will be their downfall.

Sorry, I just have to ask; did you twirl your mustache as you made that statement?

Nah, I was stroking my Goatee. I genuinely want to see GW burn to the ground, and out of those ashes arise a new, better, reborn company. They are going have to fall on their arse quite hard and I think this year's financials will be the beginning of the end, all we need is another Pokemon or equivelant to rid GW of the kiddies spending their pennies and the rest will topple.

mwnciboo wrote:

carmachu wrote:

Do you REALLY want to get into the arguement of how Disney treats its customers, release information, and accessability to its products vs how GW does the same? Because GW will LOSE that arguement hands down.

Not really sure what you are getting at here, the comparison was that they both sell very specific IP items for a premium price and don't allow other 3rd parties to infringe their own IP. It wasn't a comparison of the companies themselves or their methods, just an example of companies charging a premium for access to a certain IP.

nkelsch wrote:While GW seems to be doing 'ok' not great, everyone wants to claim credit that every financial problem is a direct result of thier personal gripe with no experience or evidence that it is related to that. 'Fandom knows best' is a disturbing trend on the internet and even if they are right once or twice, usually that is not the case overall. People want whatever benifits them personally even if it doesn't have a valid buisness case that can be supported without damaging the company.

QFT and very eloquently put i might add.

The HASBRO example is an interesting case study but doesn't compare in scale or scope with GW, with HASBRO's huge sales figures. My argument about Irrational Fans comes to the fore when I read the sublimly ridiculous "Michael Bay Raped my Childhood" arguement.

I 100% Agree with KILLKRAZY the Retail arm is disabling GW, it is an enormous expensive operation and it is the only Gaming System/ Game creator that followed this line. Once the Internet took off with Broadband, well the rest is history, Ebay, discount retails, bits stores are hurting GW and benefiting us.

I think we need to identify more precisely why GW was doing so well in the Late 90's before the Advent of the LOTR. Any Ideas?

They were selling a greater variety of games.

Prices were more reasonable.

They hadn't undergone retail over-expansion prompted by the LoTR years.

Yep, going back to my cinema metaphor, it's kind of like going to the flicks and finding the same two films on week on week out. Occassionally the film gets remade with a few new characters and plot tweaks, but essentially it's the same movie.

In the 90s, GW was showing a good range of "films", such as Blood Bowl, Gorkamorka, Battlefleet Gothic etc as well as its two "blockbusters", 40K and Fantasy.

Kilkrazy wrote:

They were selling a greater variety of games.

Prices were more reasonable.

They hadn't undergone retail over-expansion prompted by the LoTR years.

The incredible thing is that even during the height of the 'boom' GW was borrowing, even though they must have known it was unsustainable.

I worked for the company both during the boom time (which was fantastic in terms of the boxsets flying off the shelves faster than they could come into the store), and during the subsequent dip which was an ugly experience. It became obvious to me even at that time that the company was being populated by 'yes men' who could not seem to fathom that the game sales would drop once the buzz from the movies was over. Higher management and even people from WD were sent to stores on occasion to try and motivate sales of the LoTR line and get it back up to its previous heights, it was not a comfortable time and it's unsurprising that a lot of GW staff left the company during that time.

So the concensus on the drop in sales is part Price but part lack of diversity. So to re-inject life into GW they need to look at diversifying their products? Okay I can see that, well here is my suggestions to re-invigorate their lines.

1. New Blood Bowl Edition
2. New Space Crusade Edition
3. New Hero Quest
4. Necromunda 2.0
5. Epic 40K
6. Gorkamorka
7. LOTR - ready for the hobbit.
8. Some HH based games
9. Battlefleet Gothic.

Maybe this decline was brought on by external factors? revenge of the Squats anyone?

mwnciboo wrote:So the concensus on the drop in sales is part Price but part lack of diversity. So to re-inject life into GW they need to look at diversifying their products? Okay I can see that, well here is my suggestions to re-invigorate their lines.

1. New Blood Bowl Edition
2. New Space Crusade Edition
3. New Hero Quest
4. Necromunda 2.0
5. Epic 40K
6. Gorkamorka
7. LOTR - ready for the hobbit.
8. Some HH based games
9. Battlefleet Gothic.

Maybe this decline was brought on by external factors? revenge of the Squats anyone?

I really can say that I want the Specialist Games to return, not for some just limited edition "here you go" but something that is continually supported by the staff, I would have loved BFG if they still offered it, and I am sure I would really appreciate the return of Warhammer Quest, not the whole WFRP that Fantasy Flight Sells, but something akin to the original that GW made.

1000th Post!

mwnciboo wrote:We can try and butter this up, it's not as good as it used to be arguement but thats just nonsense. Remember some of the balancing issues back in the day? Imperial Assassins with Vortex Grenades as Wargear? There were some insane choices back then.

Not saying that 2nd ed didn't have its problems, I actually think one of the great things about 5th is the vehicle rules and the design of codex's (just the basic principle), generally I perfer the rules of 2nd ed, still balancing is no better now, read the grey knight codex? so its not as unbalanced as certain items but comparative its way out there.

You can say price isn't the issue (fair enough) and start quoting, unfair rules or unbalanced rules? But then you start pushing specific example (which is possible as nothings perfect) where as 95% of the rules are solid. If the Rules were broken no one would play, there are more tournaments for 40k than ever before at a lower level than just Grand tournaments. Nevermind the GW Ivory tower, some people need to get real and live in the real world not their own heads. GW is not Evil, it is a for profits company with Share Holders.

Price doesn't matter if the rules don't provide enough enjoyment, this is a person think, I love the models but if the rules don't reach my expectations I'm not going to buy multiples of the same model, I have no need as I have no need to buy a army, simply put I am not going to buy models for the sake of it, I don't mind paying more for a product if it provides me with the right amount of enjoyment but it is also true that if I can recieve the same enjoyment for less I will go for the cheaper product (depending how much cheaper it was vs quailty)

Alot of people in this hobby need to get out their own Ivory

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

If you took an Nemesis Dread Knight back to the 1997 people would be blown away by it. I recently read my old Painting guide by John Blanche, it took me back, but things have evolved massively and for the better since then. It's too easy to be negative and revert to a sarcastic, irrational standpoint based on "I'm right, your wrong" rather than an objective view point.

Maybe, maybe not, I think most people would have been impressed with the greater quailty, like now it would of had mixed responces about the actual look, personally I don't think I have been irrational, your are the one that has said "yeah I'm right your wrong"

*points to price drop comment*

Like I said my feeling is people would than likely spend the same and just get more for it and while I hate the prices that is little reason to drop the prices (which yes I would like) but again just making the prices lower will change the playabity of game for people who don't enjoy it, me apart for some 2nd hand grey knights I haven't really bought any 40k since DoW came out.

facepalm:
I read both letters and I have to say that Mark Wells didn’t respond to any of the OP’s concerns; he just danced around the issue. Seriously, he was better off not responded at all than posting that trash. All in all, there was little substance with Mark Wells’ responses (his claims tended to be more theoretical rather than actual). When taking to account the other “dodgy” responses to customer letters by GW management, it makes me wonder what are they hoping to achieve when they respond to letters such as these (all tend to have the same generic responses so I suspect he's using a template)? I suspect they are only responding to customer letters in a vain attempt to gain a positive image.

On the subject of pointing us in the direction of Jervis in Bugmans bar, I wonder what would happen if a large number of disgruntled gamers wandered down to Nottingham and started asking a lot of questions?

For some reason I started to think about this since we are all thinking about the evil empire. heh

Yoda on beer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMqQMalXvVM

In regards to encouraging angry customers to speak with Jervis face to face, that was a bad idea LOL. I can see the headlines now...

“A man in Nottingham was brutally assaulted by an angry mob in a popular local bar over recent controversial decisions made by miniatures company Gamesworkshop. It is believed the attack was instigated after CEO Mark Wells, encouraged customers to address their concerns face to face with head designer, Jervis Johnson”. Eye witnesses have reported that after the savage beatings, Mr Johnson was forcibly fed various products made by the company. Reports have advised that Mr Johnson is currently sitting in intensive care and is not expected to make a full recovery. No charges have been pressed at this stage”.

candy.man wrote:In regards to encouraging angry customers to speak with Jervis face to face, that was a bad idea LOL. I can see the headlines now...

“A man in Nottingham was brutally assaulted by an angry mob in a popular local bar over recent controversial decisions made by miniatures company Gamesworkshop. It is believed the attack was instigated after CEO Mark Wells, encouraged customers to address their concerns face to face with head designer, Jervis Johnson”. Eye witnesses have reported that after the savage beatings, Mr Johnson was forcibly fed various products made by the company. Reports have advised that Mr Johnson is currently sitting in intensive care and is not expected to make a full recovery. No charges have been pressed at this stage”.

LMAO!!!

Got a bit out of the loop last night (playing my first game of Kings of War having bought into it with money previously earmarked for Dark Eldar what a fantastic game ) but have just caught up.

First, thanks to all who keep complimenting me on my letter-writing skills. My boss clearly owes me a pay rise for being awesome with my client correspondence

As for the more general issues, I basically raised 5 points in my letter - here would be my solutions:

Lack of support for Specialist Games
Sell Blood Bowl to FFG (they do board games better and are respectful of GW IP), scrap Battle of 5 Armies, replace Mordheim, Inquisitor and Necromunda with proper skirmish supplements for Fantasy and 40k, but keep the background alive as 'campaign settings' for those skirmish supplements (initially in WD then as pdf downloads from the net).
Take Epic, BFG, Warmaster and add back in Man 'o War as the new SG range but spin it off into a semi-independant company a la Warhammer Historical and let it stand or fall on its own merits.

Unbalanced rules
Give the designers more time to get things right by altering the release schedule (see below), get rid of codex-creep and make the design team do proper playtesting by trying to break the game with extreme builds. Have more USR's and fewer codex-specific rules.

Release schedule (and the associated rise of 3rd party companies to fill in the gaps)
Change the release cycle for WFB and 40k to 6 years from the current 4, Reduce the number of 40k codices from 16 to 13 (by replacing the SW, DA, BA and BT codices with a Codex: Astartes which would supplement the basic SM codex with variant army lists and chapter-specific unit rules) but then add back LatD to bring it up to 14. Allow Chaos armies to use units from all 3 army books/codices in each system.
No codex/army book to be released without all units having models available or slated for release within 6 months.
Re-introduce a proper bits service.

Paranoid secrecy over new releases
Have an official 'leak' strategy that involves their web team and in-store staff 3 months out from all new releases. Encourage people looking for hints to go straight to them rather than relying on cryptic hints from people potentially worried about their jobs.

Price (including overseas variations)
Re-evaluate the purpose of the retail chain in the internet age. If the primary function is to introduce people to the game, then close stores too small to have multiple intro tables and a good painting area. Make going to the stores a real event, no shoddy painting or table construction (which seems to happen more and more in certain stores). Offer more than the basics - Stores should sell stuff from all GW affiliates (Warhammer Historical, the new SG, GW-based computer games, GW-based FFG stuff, etc).
Once all other business changes have been effected, do a full commercial analysis from first-principles and calculate an accurate RRP based solely on the genuine cost of making the stuff - no more random mark-ups for units because they are 'rare' (in game terms) or just 'new'. Apply this globally adding only shipping and local tax rates as applicable. The leash could then be taken off independent retailers but GW would remain competetive by having regular offers unique to purchases made through them.


My $0.02
[/wall-of-text]

I fundamentally do not agree that making the Rules more watertight will generate more sales. It's akin to having a quality product, which needs to generate greater sales the company decides it needs to improve quality further as this will generate more sales, it is a falsehood. Bottomline is profit margin and pricing. All I can say is "Nero fiddled whilst Rome burned".

In truth I cannot be bothered arguing this anymore, we shall see what happens in the next 10 years.

I've stopped buying both WH and 40k due to the quality of the rules.

And it's not a falsehood. Not having quality rules gives other companies a competitive advantage.

That being said, there is some bad thinking in that post:

Rules but no models

Making models have high up front costs and the company needs to maintain it's cash flow. I don't expect GW to release everything at once or even within 6 months because I don't believe it would be financially viable.

At least if the rules are published, people can convert models.

Bits Service

Again, I don't see this as doing anything other than costing more money than it generates. You can get a lot of the common stuff in bitz packs now anyway. I would remark though that I think some of the kits are poor in terms of the options included compared to army list options (Chaos Terminators I'm looking at you).

Prices

"do a full commercial analysis from first-principles"

"no more random mark-ups for units because they are 'rare' (in game terms)"

Rare = less sales volume = investment in producing the model needs to be spread over fewer units = higher price.

I would suggest even bringing back proper GW run tournaments, even if it's once a year. Make them something for people to be waiting for as soon as the last one is finished. Get rid of stupid things like "sportsmanship" for scoring. Keep it simple. Basic W/L/D points, then a straight knock out. Or even a straight knock out. Turn it into a mini games day if need be.

mwnciboo wrote:I fundamentally do not agree that making the Rules more watertight will generate more sales.

Like I said its not just the rules but its a factor, it is however a factor, your not going to buy a 3000pts marine army if you don't enjoy the game.

Personally I enjoy the rules, and have noticed no holes. I have noticed that there are rules for units without models, but I myself enjoy having to convert miniatures in order to use certain units.

@Baragash - I work in a commercial department and know exactly what I mean by a first principles cost. Lower sales volume can lead to higher prices but does not necessarily have to, it is entirely circumstantial.

Hence why you need to do the analysis properly. I am not pre-judging the outcome of any such analysis, I am simply saying it needs to be done.

As for the bits service, if the demand wasn't there, then the aftermarket providers that GW legal goes after would not exist. If GW were to cater to that market themselves, they will turn a profit by selling bits and reduce their legal costs at the same time.


@mwnciboo - You may not agree, but many people have said before that the rules quality is a factor in their decision to opt for one of GWs competitors. After all, how many people do you know who say 'I like GW because their rules are badly written'? People don't like it or they don't care, but this does not equate to thinking its a good thing.


@spookman - have a look through the YMDC sections on this forum

Chimera_Calvin wrote:@Baragash - I work in a commercial department and know exactly what I mean by a first principles cost. Lower sales volume can lead to higher prices but does not necessarily have to, it is entirely circumstantial.

Hence why you need to do the analysis properly. I am not pre-judging the outcome of any such analysis, I am simply saying it needs to be done.

Sure, but GW is a manufacturer. The R&D costs of models is likely to be
- independent of sales volume
- the largest element of cost by a substantial amount
GW will have a view that the maximum payback period to justify bringing the models to market is has to occur within a given time-frame, and that's where the cost is going to be driven up by the low sales volume.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:As for the bits service, if the demand wasn't there, then the aftermarket providers that GW legal goes after would not exist. If GW were to cater to that market themselves, they will turn a profit by selling bits and reduce their legal costs at the same time.

Aftermarket providers and GW have a whole different set of opportunity costs and limiting factors. If GW cannot produce an entire range for a Codex due to resource constraints, it's not going to switch resources into aftermarket parts unless those parts are going to be a lot more lucrative.

That is apparently why SGs got shuffled off to the naughty corner as well.

Even if they did, if others can bring the parts to the market cheaper, they still will, GW would be better licensing unviable projects rather than suing them IMO.

itsonlyme wrote:

Chimera_Calvin wrote:As for the bits service, if the demand wasn't there, then the aftermarket providers that GW legal goes after would not exist. If GW were to cater to that market themselves, they will turn a profit by selling bits and reduce their legal costs at the same time.

I don't understand why GW felt their is no need for a bitz service, I know used it a lot (until the prices got silly), I infact suse bitz services alot for conversions and what not, its just like how GW felt specialist games didn't actually provide enough sales, I think if they had made a specialist game that uses only exsititing rules they would see a signicant rise in sales as it would provide a low entry cost into the hobby, inquisitor and necromunda could have done this, its not just that, when you get bored of playing 40k rather than looking for another companies game to play you just switch to one of the specialist games until your ready for some more 40k/fantasy.

@mwnciboo - You may not agree, but many people have said before that the rules quality is a factor in their decision to opt for one of GWs competitors. After all, how many people do you know who say 'I like GW because their rules are badly written'? People don't like it or they don't care, but this does not equate to thinking its a good thing.

I think I find with the rules is that hardly cheap, with 40k its £35 for a rule book and £20 for a codex, to me that doesn't suggest they don't matter ( as mwnciboo suggests), thats alot of money invest in a game before you start playing, the price also suggests that the rules are a premium product to me, the sad thing is they are far from it.

Wolfstan wrote:I would suggest even bringing back proper GW run tournaments, even if it's once a year. Make them something for people to be waiting for as soon as the last one is finished. Get rid of stupid things like "sportsmanship" for scoring. Keep it simple. Basic W/L/D points, then a straight knock out. Or even a straight knock out. Turn it into a mini games day if need be.

Well I am actually not a fan of these, I would much rather go to a indie run tournament simply for a comp system, from what I have heard the GW tournaments are really bad now but they seem to making changes to improve them, higher points value is certainly a plus (2400 for warhammer and 1750 for 40k) but lets be honest, warhammer is not a tournament game now, the magic system can win the worst player the game on turn one, they did to really look at that before that start worrying about improving the throne of skulls.