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.

Dude, I've seen you start a post (not to me) with "I agree" or similar, and then write four or more paragraphs on why you didn't agree.

On more than one occasion.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Dude, I've seen you start a post (not to me) with "I agree" or similar, and then write four or more paragraphs on why you didn't agree.

On more than one occasion.

I'm allowed to agree with one part of someone's post, but not another. Also, I may agree in principle, but not on a particular or specific aspect. It's just not all absolutes. My life is filled mostly with shades of grey and mixed feelings about most subjects.

Just like AOS. I actually like it. But I think 3 solid months was a mistake. And I acknowledge I could well be wrong.

GW's biggest mistake in my opinion would be the gross over complication of rules and interactions in 40k.

I haven't played 40k in a couple years, but I've kept my armies and continued to paint, so I keep a finger on its pulse and check the local groups out from time to time. I also travel A LOT, to the point of where my definition of FLGS changes every couple months (I have driven further than the distance between Mosco and Berlin in just one of the many moves I did, and several others were in the 200-400 mile distance range) traveling that much, and seeing that many stores and communities, really puts into perspective how screwy the game is right now. Every store I've been to has had a completely different take on how rules work, army building, "acceptable" playstyles, house rules, and other quirks. No other game that I play has this problem. For example, an X wing group in Flagstaff AZ plays pretty much identically to a group in Fargo ND, and they're both similar to the groups I met in St. George Utah, Denver Colorado, and Salt Lake City. I have a few lists I like to run and can take them anywhere with no issue, only changing it up if I meet a particularly new or particularly good player.

With 40k, one place would have no lords of war, 1500pts max, and 'theme' tourneys that were basically just game days where the winner didn't matter. Then the next one over would be hyper competitive, 2,000pts or whatever the standard was, anything goes, where rules interpretation was considered an art form. Then formations really got out of hand and it all got weirder. There's simply so many confusing wordings, unclear language, and bizarre interactions that the game REWARDS YOU for trying to exploit it. It inspires a toxic community, and leads to an unpleasant experience for everyone as players contort rules into ways that benefit them the most and practically take legal courses so they can shut down the opponents attempts of doing the same.

Simply put, GW's biggest mistake was to not simplify and focus on improving the core of its games. The models are still cool, the background is still cool, they have everything they need to reel people back in, they just need to fix this ungodly mess they've created. Instead of stripping everything down, putting the brakes on for a while, and really analyzing what they need to do to fix it, they have an attitude of just throwing gak at the wall until it sticks, hoping it works itself out.

This in turn forces players to house rule, which can be extremely frustrating for people joining a new group.

Think about it this way. You've dropped $125 on books to play the game. You've studied over them, gotten a good grasp of the rules, and brought an army that, according to your book, is completely legal and good to go.

You show up to the FLGS, and are told "sorry, we don't play that way here." This could be something minor, say they play a different points value, to massive issues like they straight up won't play your army or invalidate large parts of it (yes, I have seen this. Little Timmy eldar players get it the most) Imagine how frustrating that is, to have potentially hundreds of dollars of models you put time and effort into being invalidated because that group plays differently. Imagine how a guy like me feels, where its literally pointless for me to try and build an actual 40k army because everywhere I go people are playing different house rules that may as well be a completely different game?

From my understanding, this is the same gak that happened to Fantasy, and if GW doesn't get its head in the game soon, it'll kill 40k the same way. They need to streamline the next edition, trim the fat, cut down on "snowflake" rules for individual units and make use of the massive amount of special rules they already have. Kill the formations, or at least tone them down. Put one guy in charge of overseeing codex production, balance them all together, then release the initial wave all together with a new edition as a clean slate. Realize that a tight and balanced ruleset does NOTHING to limit narrative play, if anything it helps it.

Also, pushing killteam, or even an "age of sigmar" equivalent, but with actually decent rules would be smart too. The arms race of superheavies and GMCs push the game into apoc territory and honestly its just not fun to play for some people. A standard in the 750-1250 pts level that bans superheavies, gmc's, and other really nuts stuff would be a big boon to getting newer players into the hobby as it gives little Timmy a chance to play without having to fight a friggin riptide in a 750 game.

 Talys wrote:

There was certainly not a measurable negative financial impact based on the data they have provided.

Well, December didn't turn out well.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Talys wrote:

There was certainly not a measurable negative financial impact based on the data they have provided.

Well, December didn't turn out well.

Good point!

When I wrote that, I meant, there wasn't a negative financial impact for that half-year, but the December performance being weak is entirely true! And, possibly, Sigmar related.

I agree with someone else's theory -- I think it was AllSeeingSkink's -- that December was negatively impacted by people buying Calth in November. Which could be splitting hairs, because if you move forward income from the next half year, that's the same as doing not as well in the current. Still, the numbers they're talking about are a projection of the whole year's profit of 16m, versus 16.5m for the last whole year (and a forecast by the analysts' of 17.5m). Of course, that's not GOOD, but if they actually hit GBP 16m profits, with so much more product being Fantasy oriented rather than 40k, I think that's some cause for celebration.

In my opinion, GW would be a stronger company being slightly less profitable producing more games, than slightly more profitable, producing fewer games -- especially if fewer means one.

I think this is all splitting hairs, given that the delta is -3% and driven by ForEx rates.

The fact that GW has me caring enough to obtain new GW product (like that new Knight Warden I just picked up), or really, any product at all, that's a level of success that they haven't had in years, when I basically didn't get anything GW.

I bought two Lizard Men starter boxes, because of the keen pricing. I had looked at Lizard Men before, and rejected them on the grounds of expense. This was my first purchase of a GW item since 2012.

One thing I missed in 2015 is the Games Day here in the states, the last one in 2013 was ran like no one was in control or the people in charge are making decisions without talking to anyone. The give away items was buttons, plastic cup and a bag, You would think it would be better to just not make the stuff and reduce the price of admission. Long queues of anything going on, half the time you are waiting in line for the next, next session instead of enjoying other things going on. The forge-world booth was right by the entry doors and when the line quickly filled up it caused the people waiting in line to block the doors making it impossible for the rest of the attendees to even get in..People spoke of the night before having a great time at the battle bunker Memphis where they had BBQ, games and sprue giveaways. Why not add that to the convention instead of the night before. They brought in a catering company to feed the whole convention and it was cheaper and better just to leave the convention to find food else where.Then there the games day figure for purchase only and fine-cast of "marko polo" an empire type figure holding a golden lizard man skull. One thought is to give a figure anyone could use.. Marine.. or more generic fantasy hero. The plastic marine captain when GW rolled out their web page jumps to mind where it is easily converted with simple head swaps.

The leads into another item, I miss the moving away from comparability of the different sets. You could make new models and do crazy conversions with just buying another set and start gluing them together. Now you can't even do simple head swaps in the same set without a ton of green stuff. (I am looking at you Blight kings)

AOS has it problems, but I feel it was a missed chance in 2015. To help compete with X-Wing / Warmahordes they needed to reduce cost and model count to bring in new players, I haven't seen either with any of current GW releases. A number of people complain about balance, I also feel the pre game army building is part of the game it self, that was completely removed. What f they had completely removed another step instead I think they would have gotten the same or worse reaction. Movement.. Just move your model where ever you want... Close Combat you don't roll just who ever has the highest weapon skill wins. It removes the feel of you having a fair game. If they did simple color coding or base cost numbers for each box set, Players would have a start of what was fair instead of the young fellow wondering why no one wants to play him when he only fields Nagash. When I was first getting into gaming, I wanted to prove my self to older players by winning at a game fairly and reading large rule books felt impressive to my young mind.

Yeah, learning a competitive game certainly does add to your investment in the line/world/buying more toys. One of the biggest reasons I feel the lack of balancing mechanic was so obviously a horrible idea.

A friend answered the question with 'Kirby's still with the company'.

The Auld Grump

Overwhelmingly Age of sigmar seems to be the answer here, when i think about war games i'm thinking about a game that simulates battle in one era or another, this is what i want out of a war game and age of sigmar does not deliver it any any shape. How will they have a hope in hell of selling premium priced products for such a poor system. i wonder how many archeons and varangian's they've sold with those mega price tags!

Age of Sigmar was some mistake heh.

Opening its doors on January 1st, 2015.

Well, GW put the IP of WHFB on hold and created an IP by introducing AoS last year. This allowed other games like KoW to fill the space. When WHFB would come back, they would have to compete with KoW more than ever.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, GW put the IP of WHFB on hold and created an IP by introducing AoS last year.

They didn't put it on hold, they axed it. It's a rather important difference.

 vipoid wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, GW put the IP of WHFB on hold and created an IP by introducing AoS last year.

They didn't put it on hold, they axed it. It's a rather important difference.

They axed the game, not the IP. The Warhammer IP is still being licensed for use in video games. It also forms the foundation of the AoS IP, and could further be integrated there. And the IP can always come back. They could, for example, bring back WHFB in all its glory twenty years from now just by setting it before End Times, or even retconning End Times out with time travel shenanigans (see: Star Trek 2009), or make a prequel like 30k. Heck, Blood Bowl is coming out and it will still be in the fantasy setting, and likely Mordheim will be as well. So the IP isn't dead. Heck, it's not even on hold. It's just that the highest profile users of the IP (WHFB and novels) aren't actively using it.

I'm late to the party, but I'll try to be a little more granular than just "Age of Sigmar."

For me, it's not Age of Sigmar itself - the idea of a totally new version of Warhammer on round bases pulled me, a 40k player, into their fantasy world. I discovered how much I loved their fantasy kits for the first time, as the vast numbers needed to play the game had always scared me off before.

So, for me, it's not AoS. It's the AoS fluff. I didn't hate it on sight, I set out to learn all that I could by reading the novels and the expansion books. And, I feel I can safely now say it's:

1. Awesomely over the top

2. Completely impossible to identify with

It's a setting where nothing seems to matter, designed only to keep big burly guys smashing other big burly guys, who will respawn and come back and smash different big burly guys. It's not a game for kids, but the conflict depicted feels just like a story a six year old might tell himself while playing with action figures.

I really wanted to like it, but in my head canon all of my games will continue to be imagined in the Old World, until such time as GW either goes back to that IP, or just shutters this end of the business.

Oggthrok wrote:
I'm late to the party, but I'll try to be a little more granular than just "Age of Sigmar."

For me, it's not Age of Sigmar itself - the idea of a totally new version of Warhammer on round bases pulled me, a 40k player, into their fantasy world. I discovered how much I loved their fantasy kits for the first time, as the vast numbers needed to play the game had always scared me off before.

So, for me, it's not AoS. It's the AoS fluff. I didn't hate it on sight, I set out to learn all that I could by reading the novels and the expansion books. And, I feel I can safely now say it's:

1. Awesomely over the top

2. Completely impossible to identify with

It's a setting where nothing seems to matter, designed only to keep big burly guys smashing other big burly guys, who will respawn and come back and smash different big burly guys. It's not a game for kids, but the conflict depicted feels just like a story a six year old might tell himself while playing with action figures.

I really wanted to like it, but in my head canon all of my games will continue to be imagined in the Old World, until such time as GW either goes back to that IP, or just shutters this end of the business.

I can identify with this, the fluff of a game was almost always the deciding factor for me and this AoS storyline just seems like a teenager could have come up with the entire thing (no disrespect to teenagers or anyone that got into the story ) I just cannot seem to get interested in it.

The same massive mistake they have been making for years.Believing Tom Kirby's view that market research is not needed.

Because market research gives you actual data you could use to arrive at logical and sane decisions, that may be at odds with Tom Kirby's self serving decisions that have made him very rich,with very little effort on his part.And put GW plc on a downward spiral.

GW does constant market research based on web sales and other orders. The big kits sell, up to a point. Smaug was their biggest seller for 2015. The OTT End Times minis put AoS / WFB sales on the map. The biggest seller for 40k was the IKT.

Just because GW's priorities don't align with yours doesn't mean they're not focused. It just means that you are not that important to them. You're mariginal, and GW can do without you.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW does constant market research based on web sales and other orders. The big kits sell, up to a point. Smaug was their biggest seller for 2015. The OTT End Times minis put AoS / WFB sales on the map. The biggest seller for 40k was the IKT.

Just because GW's priorities don't align with yours doesn't mean they're not focused. It just means that you are not that important to them. You're mariginal, and GW can do without you.

Which is clearly the reason why their sales have been positively skyrocketing for the last few years.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW does constant market research based on web sales and other orders. The big kits sell, up to a point. Smaug was their biggest seller for 2015. The OTT End Times minis put AoS / WFB sales on the map. The biggest seller for 40k was the IKT.

Just because GW's priorities don't align with yours doesn't mean they're not focused. It just means that you are not that important to them. You're mariginal, and GW can do without you.

You know that you're stating as fact information when we don't know what they based their top 28 on, right? Without factually knowing the basis for that list, it's just a list. Did they base it on number of unit sold (popular), amount earned from sale of, total margin received from ,etc? If you know for a fact the answer to that question then we can have a conversation, if you don't then your opinion is just as strong as someone else who says the exact opposite.

Just because unknown data doesn't align with your perceived reality doesn't mean that you're correct. It just means that you want to argue. We're all marginal to a company, up until the time that they close the doors because they scared us all off.

GW threw away their customer database from the old web site when they moved on to the new web store.

That is not doing market research based on web site use and orders.

For me the local GW, sorry Warhammer store has a weak following. Their Facebook page is all gak-posts or trying to sell me overpriced plastic.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Talys wrote:

There was certainly not a measurable negative financial impact based on the data they have provided.

Well, December didn't turn out well.

That's more telling that betrayal at calth tanked, and their expected holiday sales were low. Considering how fast their admech/skitarri online bundles sold out i'm surprised they had bad sales.

Unless they're numbered and certificated, how quickly something sells is meaningless. I can turn up to a convention with one model, sell it and declare the day a complete success as I sold out of everything.

It's more likely that, thanks to not knowing why we buy what we buy (or why we don't) they underestimated demand and didn't prepare enough. Selling out of non-limited edition stock quickly suggests they got it wrong, not that their sales were strong.

 agnosto wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW does constant market research based on web sales and other orders. The big kits sell, up to a point. Smaug was their biggest seller for 2015. The OTT End Times minis put AoS / WFB sales on the map. The biggest seller for 40k was the IKT.

Just because GW's priorities don't align with yours doesn't mean they're not focused. It just means that you are not that important to them. You're marginal, and GW can do without you.

You know that you're stating as fact information when we don't know what they based their top 28 on, right?

The fact is that GW published that list, and it makes no fething difference what specific criteria GW used. The list is what it is, and you should just accept it as such. It's historical, so it makes no difference how or why. GW looking backward doesn't drive customer action going forward.

You know a list of "thing you done what selled" in no way provides any real insight, right?

Looking at what went right tells you nothing about what didn't work and what could have been done better. In this instance looking backward can very definitely help you to drive customer action going forward.

GW saw that big kits sold. They responded with End Times Monsters and Knight-class Titans. Those kits sold, to the point that GW doubled down with the Knight Warden.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW saw that big kits sold. They responded with End Times Monsters and Knight-class Titans. Those kits sold, to the point that GW doubled down with the Knight Warden.

There's this thing called margin. Bigger kits have greater margin than smaller kits.

See? I can make sweeping statements that both sound reasonable and have no basis in data-backed fact too!