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 think the real trick GW are missing here is the lack of gateway games. I was drawn into the gw world by a combination of heroquest and space crusade. Not only do those games appeal to a wider market, they are cheaper and way more accessable.
If your target market is new gamers I think having a vehicle which is easily accessable and cheap and in the same medium would be a good move.
A lot of gamers of a certain age would have been brought in by these two gems of games.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
While I started with Warhammer Fantasy Battle (second edition) I had more luck bringing people in with Mordheim and with Warhammer Fantasy Role Play than with the main game itself.
TheAuldGrump wrote: And, for the record, WH40K is more expensive than knitting.
Both are hobbies.
Therefor anytime I see somebody saying 'it's less expensive than golf!' I will reply with 'And more expensive than knitting, your point?'
Comparing apples to earmuffs really does not work, so it is inherently a flawed argument.
The Auld Grump, and, also for the record, depending on location, golf can cost less.... using the same tried and true method of buying used.... (I have a friend that paid $30 for his entire set of clubs - at a yard sale.)
And for the record, among young males video games and possibly even wargaming are far more popular than knitting(starter kits running about $20), making knitting a little less relevant to a comparison between hobbies.
So what? Golf is not that popular among young men either - and folks make that comparison on a regular basis.
So... knitting it is.
While Apples do not equal Earmuffs a Stupid Comparison does equal a Stupid Comparison.
The Auld Grump
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/16 03:57:58
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
While I started with Warhammer Fantasy Battle (second edition) I had more luck bringing people in with Mordheim and with Warhammer Fantasy Role Play than with the main game itself.
TheAuldGrump wrote: And, for the record, WH40K is more expensive than knitting.
Both are hobbies.
Therefor anytime I see somebody saying 'it's less expensive than golf!' I will reply with 'And more expensive than knitting, your point?'
Comparing apples to earmuffs really does not work, so it is inherently a flawed argument.
The Auld Grump, and, also for the record, depending on location, golf can cost less.... using the same tried and true method of buying used.... (I have a friend that paid $30 for his entire set of clubs - at a yard sale.)
And for the record, among young males video games and possibly even wargaming are far more popular than knitting(starter kits running about $20), making knitting a little less relevant to a comparison between hobbies.
So what? Golf is not that popular among young men either - and folks make that comparison on a regular basis.
So... knitting it is.
While Apples do not equal Earmuffs a Stupid Comparison does equal a Stupid Comparison.
The Auld Grump
So in my opinion, which is obviously different than yours, I feel that Wargaming and Video Gaming are a far better comparison than Knitting is to Wargaming. I'm not making the comparison that golf is a similar hobby, so I'm not one of the folks. You are more than welcome to compare anything with anything, just as I can as well. So I will probably continue to use video gaming to compare to wargaming, just as you will continue to use knitting.
While I started with Warhammer Fantasy Battle (second edition) I had more luck bringing people in with Mordheim and with Warhammer Fantasy Role Play than with the main game itself.
TheAuldGrump wrote: And, for the record, WH40K is more expensive than knitting.
Both are hobbies.
Therefor anytime I see somebody saying 'it's less expensive than golf!' I will reply with 'And more expensive than knitting, your point?'
Comparing apples to earmuffs really does not work, so it is inherently a flawed argument.
The Auld Grump, and, also for the record, depending on location, golf can cost less.... using the same tried and true method of buying used.... (I have a friend that paid $30 for his entire set of clubs - at a yard sale.)
And for the record, among young males video games and possibly even wargaming are far more popular than knitting(starter kits running about $20), making knitting a little less relevant to a comparison between hobbies.
So what? Golf is not that popular among young men either - and folks make that comparison on a regular basis.
So... knitting it is.
While Apples do not equal Earmuffs a Stupid Comparison does equal a Stupid Comparison.
The Auld Grump
So in my opinion, which is obviously different than yours, I feel that Wargaming and Video Gaming are a far better comparison than Knitting is to Wargaming. I'm not making the comparison that golf is a similar hobby, so I'm not one of the folks. You are more than welcome to compare anything with anything, just as I can as well. So I will probably continue to use video gaming to compare to wargaming, just as you will continue to use knitting.
A much better comparison than either is... dun dun duhn! another wargame!
Yes, that's right folks! There are other wargames out there!
Why compare Warhammer 40K to an Atari 1200 when you can compare it to Infinity, Dust, or Starship Troopers?
Why compare Warhammer Fantasy to turning the heel on a sock when you can compare it to Malifaux, Kings of War, or WARMACHINE?
That is what I call comparing Apples to Apples - whether a Granny Smith or a Macintosh, there is grounds for comparison.
Otherwise you are just comparing hobbies to hobbies - and knitting is just as fair a comparison as golf or game consoles.
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
5th ed was pretty good. Vehicles were too powerful, but using 6th ed's hull point system, and perhaps giving everything an additional hull point more than the game states, seems to balance that. GW's answer to my concerns is 'then play that with your mates and enjoy it!' which is great if you haven't just moved across the US to a new area and then have to stand there and explain to a new group of people, or a stranger in a shop you've somehow convinced to play, that you'd like to use a previous edition with several tweeks and adjustments and the following is allowed but the other following list isn't.
So - serious question as I'm about to start playing properly again in a "hosting at my place with my models" way, and don't have much experience with either 5th or 6th - why this setup of rules specifically?
While I started with Warhammer Fantasy Battle (second edition) I had more luck bringing people in with Mordheim and with Warhammer Fantasy Role Play than with the main game itself.
TheAuldGrump wrote: And, for the record, WH40K is more expensive than knitting.
Both are hobbies.
Therefor anytime I see somebody saying 'it's less expensive than golf!' I will reply with 'And more expensive than knitting, your point?'
Comparing apples to earmuffs really does not work, so it is inherently a flawed argument.
The Auld Grump, and, also for the record, depending on location, golf can cost less.... using the same tried and true method of buying used.... (I have a friend that paid $30 for his entire set of clubs - at a yard sale.)
And for the record, among young males video games and possibly even wargaming are far more popular than knitting(starter kits running about $20), making knitting a little less relevant to a comparison between hobbies.
So what? Golf is not that popular among young men either - and folks make that comparison on a regular basis.
So... knitting it is.
While Apples do not equal Earmuffs a Stupid Comparison does equal a Stupid Comparison.
The Auld Grump
So in my opinion, which is obviously different than yours, I feel that Wargaming and Video Gaming are a far better comparison than Knitting is to Wargaming. I'm not making the comparison that golf is a similar hobby, so I'm not one of the folks. You are more than welcome to compare anything with anything, just as I can as well. So I will probably continue to use video gaming to compare to wargaming, just as you will continue to use knitting.
A much better comparison than either is... dun dun duhn! another wargame!
Yes, that's right folks! There are other wargames out there!
Why compare Warhammer 40K to an Atari 1200 when you can compare it to Infinity, Dust, or Starship Troopers?
Why compare Warhammer Fantasy to turning the heel on a sock when you can compare it to Malifaux, Kings of War, or WARMACHINE?
That is what I call comparing Apples to Apples - whether a Granny Smith or a Macintosh, there is grounds for comparison.
Otherwise you are just comparing hobbies to hobbies - and knitting is just as fair a comparison as golf or game consoles.
The Auld Grump
Yes, I'm quite aware that there are other wargames out there. I personally haven't had enough experience with any of them to use them as a comparison. Video Gaming used to be a fairly big hobby of mine, and thus I'm far more comfortable using it as a comparison. I CAN compare Warhammer 40k to Infinity or Warmachine, but I wouldn't be doing more than scanning their websites for information. (I've tried starting infinity, but everyone else seemed to lose interest before I could ever get a game in. ) I understand some people prefer those games to Warhammer 40k, and that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
5th ed was pretty good. Vehicles were too powerful, but using 6th ed's hull point system, and perhaps giving everything an additional hull point more than the game states, seems to balance that. GW's answer to my concerns is 'then play that with your mates and enjoy it!' which is great if you haven't just moved across the US to a new area and then have to stand there and explain to a new group of people, or a stranger in a shop you've somehow convinced to play, that you'd like to use a previous edition with several tweeks and adjustments and the following is allowed but the other following list isn't.
So - serious question as I'm about to start playing properly again in a "hosting at my place with my models" way, and don't have much experience with either 5th or 6th - why this setup of rules specifically?
Well, the point of this thread is to suggest that if everything is permissible in 40k now, then an expansion that counters that would seem a good money spinner for the company, specifically for playing tourneys and games with strangers.
To that and why I mentioned the above, the removal of casualties, movement, combat etc was all very fluid in 5th and I'd argue that it was the closest to tournament friendly or competitive that we ever saw. My only criticism of it was the 'parking lot' of razorbacks etc that became so common. I think hull points were a good idea for countering that, but perhaps went too far in the opposite direction and the obvious solve to that would be adding another point to each.
But I'd honestly be happy with a trimmed up 6th ed for tourneys.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Any opponent of mine who wants to play a non Apocalypse game with a Super Heavy will be told in clear explicit terms where he can stick it.
Back into his case so he can play with something else?
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
Medium of Death wrote: Skirmish 40K (or how the game used to be before things started getting crazy)? Personally I'd like to see smaller scale battles with elite troops facing off against some larger enemies/hordes etc. A bit like kill team, but expanded.
It's hard to believe GW didn't caveat the use of Super Heavies to be only worth X percent of the total army point value or something.
FW made this rule set. It's called Zone mortalis. I'm scratch building a spaceship board and FW puts out some of their own. But you don't that that to play. A Very Thickly populated 4x4 city fight style board can accomplish the same concept and make a area to play zone mortalis on. (Bassicly ALOT of impassible wall terrian, buildings, and bunkers.)
It's actually prety fun, but such a huge investment interrian no one plays it sadly.
Just read through the rules in the latest Imperial Armour and they do seem pretty awesome. Although i can see why it would be rarely played. Something halfway between this and kill team might be something. I'd imagine there would be lots of rage if people felt their bigger units were invalidated, although it would probably encourage sales across the board of ranges if people make multiple mini-forces.
Medium of Death wrote: Skirmish 40K (or how the game used to be before things started getting crazy)? Personally I'd like to see smaller scale battles with elite troops facing off against some larger enemies/hordes etc. A bit like kill team, but expanded.
It's hard to believe GW didn't caveat the use of Super Heavies to be only worth X percent of the total army point value or something.
FW made this rule set. It's called Zone mortalis. I'm scratch building a spaceship board and FW puts out some of their own. But you don't that that to play. A Very Thickly populated 4x4 city fight style board can accomplish the same concept and make a area to play zone mortalis on. (Bassicly ALOT of impassible wall terrian, buildings, and bunkers.)
It's actually prety fun, but such a huge investment interrian no one plays it sadly.
Just read through the rules in the latest Imperial Armour and they do seem pretty awesome. Although i can see why it would be rarely played. Something halfway between this and kill team might be something. I'd imagine there would be lots of rage if people felt their bigger units were invalidated, although it would probably encourage sales across the board of ranges if people make multiple mini-forces.
Yah the big two thing that stops it from being more of a thing is:
1) It's not promoted enough.
2)You need not only the time and money to have a large enough collection of terrian to play it. But you also need the space the store all that terrian.
While I started with Warhammer Fantasy Battle (second edition) I had more luck bringing people in with Mordheim and with Warhammer Fantasy Role Play than with the main game itself.
TheAuldGrump wrote: And, for the record, WH40K is more expensive than knitting.
Both are hobbies.
Therefor anytime I see somebody saying 'it's less expensive than golf!' I will reply with 'And more expensive than knitting, your point?'
Comparing apples to earmuffs really does not work, so it is inherently a flawed argument.
The Auld Grump, and, also for the record, depending on location, golf can cost less.... using the same tried and true method of buying used.... (I have a friend that paid $30 for his entire set of clubs - at a yard sale.)
And for the record, among young males video games and possibly even wargaming are far more popular than knitting(starter kits running about $20), making knitting a little less relevant to a comparison between hobbies.
So what? Golf is not that popular among young men either - and folks make that comparison on a regular basis.
So... knitting it is.
While Apples do not equal Earmuffs a Stupid Comparison does equal a Stupid Comparison.
The Auld Grump
So in my opinion, which is obviously different than yours, I feel that Wargaming and Video Gaming are a far better comparison than Knitting is to Wargaming. I'm not making the comparison that golf is a similar hobby, so I'm not one of the folks. You are more than welcome to compare anything with anything, just as I can as well. So I will probably continue to use video gaming to compare to wargaming, just as you will continue to use knitting.
A much better comparison than either is... dun dun duhn! another wargame!
Yes, that's right folks! There are other wargames out there!
Why compare Warhammer 40K to an Atari 1200 when you can compare it to Infinity, Dust, or Starship Troopers?
Why compare Warhammer Fantasy to turning the heel on a sock when you can compare it to Malifaux, Kings of War, or WARMACHINE?
That is what I call comparing Apples to Apples - whether a Granny Smith or a Macintosh, there is grounds for comparison.
Otherwise you are just comparing hobbies to hobbies - and knitting is just as fair a comparison as golf or game consoles.
The Auld Grump
Yes, I'm quite aware that there are other wargames out there. I personally haven't had enough experience with any of them to use them as a comparison. Video Gaming used to be a fairly big hobby of mine, and thus I'm far more comfortable using it as a comparison. I CAN compare Warhammer 40k to Infinity or Warmachine, but I wouldn't be doing more than scanning their websites for information. (I've tried starting infinity, but everyone else seemed to lose interest before I could ever get a game in. ) I understand some people prefer those games to Warhammer 40k, and that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Then I wish you luck in finding some other wargames to compare GW games to - but neither WH40 nor WHFB has much to do with game consoles - excepting perhaps games based on the settings. (I have played some of them - the ones that I have played bore some, but not much, similarity to the tabletop games.)
As for opinions - even if you do try, say, Infinity... you are still allowed to prefer WH40K.
There are only two fantasy wargames that I prefer to Warhammer Fantasy Battle - and even in those cases I only prefer them to the more recent incarnations of WHFB. (The old Battlesystem by TSR and Kings of War, to be specific.)
The thing is that having a limited scope of comparison does not make the comparison valid - it just means that you lack the information base to make a meaningful comparison.
As for gaming consoles and golf being more expensive hobbies than fantasy wargaming... there are definitely exceptions. It depends on how deeply you want to spend in all cases. Folks can get into tabletop gaming and golf pretty cheap if they are willing to buy used.
I will likely never buy a game console - the only one that I ever owned was so far back that Pong was one of its built in offerings, along with a 'shoot the moving block' game. (Predating even the Atari that I mentioned above.)
But I do own several computers - and even have games on them.
I spend more on miniatures gaming than I do on games for my PCs - and that is without opening my wallet to the folks at GW. (Hell, I spent more on the Reaper Bones Kickstarter than I did on computer games.)
The thing is that playing games on my computers is not why I own the machines - my most used software are things like PagePlus, Daz, and WordPerfect. Oh, and Firefox. Campaign Cartographer sees more use than any of my games, aside from oldies like XCom (the original), Alpha Centauri, Civilization IV, and Master of Orion II.
And Campaign Cartographer can be considered an extension of tabletop gaming - smudging the lines.
So... even if we accept the comparison of video games to tabletop games, it is full of exceptions - in both directions. Some folks have spent more on a GW army than I have spent on both of my computers and their software put together.
On the other hand I know someone that spent more money on one computer than on their car. (The fellow is in the industry - working QA for a tech firm in Clinton Mass..)
So, it is better to compare like to like - I go with knitting as an argument in reductio ad absurdum. But it is inherently no better and no worse a comparison than golf.
I may, under duress, admit that console games are slightly closer, but not by all that much. Perhaps closer to comparing Apples to Grapefruit than Apples to Earmuffs....
Closer still would be to compare tabletop wargaming with tabletop RPGs - but that comparison can be diluted by the fact that the same miniatures can be used for both.... And the leak can run both ways. (I know several people where the chain of causality ran D&D -> Mordheim -> Warhammer -> Kings of War, and a few folks where it ran WHFB -> D&D -> Pathfinder.) Apples to Pears?
The Auld Grump - the rambling length of this reply is a good indication of why I should not be posting at 1 A.M....
Automatically Appended Next Post: Back on topic - I think that GW's current thinking is that having smaller games cuts into the sales of their two big games.
That the folks that buy Necromunda are not likely to spend the money to get into WH40, and that the folks that buy Mordheim are not likely to spend the money to get into WHFB.
This... runs pretty much exactly counter to my own experience - folks seem a lot more likely to get hooked by the smaller game and then make the jump into the big game.
I know at least three four people that have their old Mordheim warbands as the starting point of their fantasy armies. (Even while typing I remembered another - two Empire, one Orcs & Goblins, one Dwarfs.)
That all four are now playing Kings of War has more to do with not liking the current rules to Fantasy than the price - these are armies that are already complete, and have been for almost a decade.
My own jump went more along the lines of making a jump from historical miniatures gaming to fantasy role playing and fantasy wargaming. (I was introduced to Dungeons & Dragons and Chainmail at about the same time - and played each for the first time in the same week.)
1976 that was.
My first Warhammer game was with the second edition - and the McDeath scenario pack... designed for small armies.
The Auld Grump
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/12/17 06:31:49
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
Again, I'm not asking for a smaller game, I'm asking why doesn't GW produce, under it's auspices of 'everything should be available for you to choose', a set of rules for fluid, somewhat more balanced tournament or pick up games?
It seems a great way to make a sale of a book whilst also silencing a number of critics and would enable people to really have any game they want with the GW system, including a restrictive one, under the umbrella of freedom to choose which game you play.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Again, I'm not asking for a smaller game, I'm asking why doesn't GW produce, under it's auspices of 'everything should be available for you to choose', a set of rules for fluid, somewhat more balanced tournament or pick up games?
It seems a great way to make a sale of a book whilst also silencing a number of critics and would enable people to really have any game they want with the GW system, including a restrictive one, under the umbrella of freedom to choose which game you play.
Well, it could be one of three reasons- 1. They don't care. 2. The care but it's not worth it to them to produce it. 3. They just haven't done it yet.
I personally think the main goal is pushing out codexes ATM. They may have something lined up, they may not. If they DID make a ruleset like that, I would be interested in it, even though I have no interest in actually playing a tournament.
I think the biggest reason for them not doing it is because it would take effort.
Escalation, the stronghold one, codex =][=, the dataslates they are putting out.. hell even the Fantasy one for multiple people wouldn't have taken any effort compared to what a competitive ruleset for 40k would require.
At the moment GW have no interest in trying new things or expending effort on anything that isn't a safe bet (like new codices).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/17 12:36:36
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
A much better comparison than either is... dun dun duhn! another wargame!
Yes, that's right folks! There are other wargames out there!
Why compare Warhammer 40K to an Atari 1200 when you can compare it to Infinity, Dust, or Starship Troopers?
Why compare Warhammer Fantasy to turning the heel on a sock when you can compare it to Malifaux, Kings of War, or WARMACHINE?
People don't like doing that because many other wargames have a much higher per-model cost than 40K/WHFB which doesn't help the point they're trying to make (that GW are big meanies).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/22 20:03:35
A much better comparison than either is... dun dun duhn! another wargame!
Yes, that's right folks! There are other wargames out there!
Why compare Warhammer 40K to an Atari 1200 when you can compare it to Infinity, Dust, or Starship Troopers?
Why compare Warhammer Fantasy to turning the heel on a sock when you can compare it to Malifaux, Kings of War, or WARMACHINE?
People don't like doing that because many other wargames have a much higher per-model cost than 40K/WHFB which doesn't help the point they're trying to make (that GW are big meanies).
I've been known to do it from time to time, as myself and quite a lot of people in my gaming group don't mind getting fewer models when both the start up cost and "final" cost of a standard sized, functional force are vastly lower. I don't really give a crap about having tons and tons of models since I'm a super slow painter, and (especially in the case of WHFB), painting tons of models of the same type is dreadfully boring, and I'd rather just get to the "playing the game part" as quickly as possible. I still like building and painting models, it's just not the main attraction for me. But, if you like having a boatload of models and/or are really, really into painting/converting big army-sized collections of dudes, then GW is obviously the better choice.
To address the OP, I think such a supplement wouldn't do anything that a TO couldn't do, or two people playing a friendly game couldn't do without a few minutes of discussion, though such a supplement could help streamline that process, but if the guys at GW were clever they'd find some interesting stuff to add to make it attractive. Who knows, like other people have said, maybe there's something in the works?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/22 20:41:36
People don't like doing that because many other wargames have a much higher per-model cost than 40K/WHFB which doesn't help the point they're trying to make (that GW are big meanies).
'Many wargames' being...what? Infinity, Malifeux, Warmachine/Hordes and Flames of War?
I think you're vastly underestimating the number of cheap, easily affordable yet good quality miniature ranges out there.
From my own personal experience...Gripping Beast, Musketeer Miniatures and Wargames Factory. I was able to get Anglo Saxon metal figures of comparable quality and scale to GW's LOTR range for as little as £3.00 a model. Plastic miniatures - 44 models for £20, less than 50p each (vs the Hobbit SBG's £2.50 each).
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Again, I'm not asking for a smaller game, I'm asking why doesn't GW produce, under it's auspices of 'everything should be available for you to choose', a set of rules for fluid, somewhat more balanced tournament or pick up games?
I want to say "because they do not care", but that's not fair. Some if it is down to a lack of... perspective (the way the GW studios plays their rules is 'fine' from their perspective, so there's no impetus to improve as they don't see the flaws we identify on the first day of any release), and some of its down to a lack of time. I'd also say that some of it is due to a lack of choice. The folks upstairs (Kirby et al) run things, and I doubt they have much in the way of table-top experience and focus more on what they can sell to create short term profits rather than what's good for the game.
Scott-S6 wrote: People don't like doing that because many other wargames have a much higher per-model cost than 40K/WHFB which doesn't help the point they're trying to make (that GW are big meanies).
Of course a lot of those games don't require anywher near the amount of miniatures a GW game does... but we'll skip over that little (oft-repeated, oft-ignored) factoid.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/12/22 21:17:37
Scott-S6 wrote: People don't like doing that because many other wargames have a much higher per-model cost than 40K/WHFB which doesn't help the point they're trying to make (that GW are big meanies).
Of course a lot of those games don't require anywhere near the amount of miniatures a GW game does... but we'll skip over that little (oft-repeated, oft-ignored) factoid.
That factoid is just as "ignored" as the one which gets used to counter it:
You may not need "anywhere near the amount of miniatures a game", but you do have some games where things are incredibly fluid and where you might want to swap things up. Or as in the case of Infinity(a game I really do like, mind) you have the subfactions being unable to use items from the "main" faction or the other subfactions, you also have availability issues where some items might only be in certain boxes and nowhere else, forcing you to either trawl eBay or use ShaeKonnit's box splitting service.
I'm ignoring the profiles missing models for the sake of being reasonable, as nobody really argues that you cannot make a reasonable proxy as long as it is something different to anything already in your force.
Simply put though, Infinity is a game where you might end up spending just as much as a small Fantasy or 40k army just to have a reasonable variety of things to field and so that you can confuse regular opponents as to who your Lieutenant is.
Kanluwen wrote: That factoid is just as "ignored" as the one which gets used to counter it:
Oh here we go. Red alert. All hands to defender stations. Divert all auxiliary power to shields! We've got a GW to defend!!!
Kanluwen wrote: You may not need "anywhere near the amount of miniatures a game", but you do have some games where things are incredibly fluid and where you might want to swap things up. Or as in the case of Infinity(a game I really do like, mind) you have the subfactions being unable to use items from the "main" faction or the other subfactions, you also have availability issues where some items might only be in certain boxes and nowhere else, forcing you to either trawl eBay or use ShaeKonnit's box splitting service.
You've just described a problem of choice, something you choose to do but are not required to do. Warhammer Fantasy requires tons of useless models that do nothing except sit in the back ranks and get removed as casualties. That doesn't make them cost any less (and they're getting more expensive). To play the game you need oodles of these models. You do not need to play a sub-faction in Infinity. You choose to do that.
Kanluwen wrote: Simply put though, Infinity is a game where you might end up spending just as much as a small Fantasy or 40k army just to have a reasonable variety of things to field and so that you can confuse regular opponents as to who your Lieutenant is.
And you can spend twice as much as a decent sized 40K army buying every BattleTech 'Mech under the sun, but unlike 40K you don't have to. That's a choice. 40K minitues are very expensive and you needs lots of them. Warmachine models are around the same price and you don't need nearly as many of them.
Simply put though, Infinity is a game where you might end up spending just as much as a small Fantasy or 40k army just to have a reasonable variety of things to field and so that you can confuse regular opponents as to who your Lieutenant is.
Kan... I don't think I really need to say anything. You knew full well that wasn't true as you wrote it..
Kanluwen wrote: That factoid is just as "ignored" as the one which gets used to counter it:
Oh here we go. Red alert. All hands to defender stations. Divert all auxiliary power to shields! We've got a GW to defend!!!
That's top quality posting. I laughed , then realised how much i had missed reading Kanluwen PilGWrim vs the world threads. GET EM KAN! (really hoping this one goes for a few pages )
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
Simply put though, Infinity is a game where you might end up spending just as much as a small Fantasy or 40k army just to have a reasonable variety of things to field and so that you can confuse regular opponents as to who your Lieutenant is.
Kan... I don't think I really need to say anything. You knew full well that wasn't true as you wrote it..
I really do wonder about you sometimes..
As of right now my Corregidor collection is sitting at $240.24 retail. And that consists of a pair of Corregidor boxes, an Iguana TAG, a Wildcat, three Tomcat blisters, and three Hellcat blisters.
Some stuff was bought discounted via The Warstore(Iguana and one of the Corregidor boxes) and Atomic Empire(Corregidor box, two Tomcat blisters and the Hellcat Hacker/HMG blister) and the remainder(Tomcat Engineer, Wildcat with Spitfire, and Hellcat with Boarding Shotgun blisters) were bought at retail price from another local shop when they had them in stock but the other places did not.
There are plenty of different options I can do for lists depending on points totals, but you and I both know that variety is the spice of life for Infinity now don't we?
H.B.M.C. wrote:Oh here we go. Red alert. All hands to defender stations. Divert all auxiliary power to shields! We've got a GW to defend!!!
Riiiiiight. You jump at someone for "factoids getting ignored", but then jump at someone else for disagreeing with you?
H.B.M.C. wrote:You've just described a problem of choice, something you choose to do but are not required to do. Warhammer Fantasy requires tons of useless models that do nothing except sit in the back ranks and get removed as casualties. That doesn't make them cost any less (and they're getting more expensive). To play the game you need oodles of these models. You do not need to play a sub-faction in Infinity. You choose to do that.
Yeah, you "choose" to do that because sub-factions are armies in their own right. Units are available or not to you based on sub-faction choices and the availability of those units(read: the number of models from those groups), their Special Weapons Cost and in some cases their points cost change based on sub-faction or vanilla.
H.B.M.C. wrote:And you can spend twice as much as a decent sized 40K army buying every BattleTech 'Mech under the sun, but unlike 40K you don't have to. That's a choice. 40K miniatures are very expensive and you needs lots of them. Warmachine models are around the same price and you don't need nearly as many of them.
I'm not as familiar with Warmachine, hence why I did not use Warmachine as an example. I am familiar with Infinity though...which is why I used it as an example.
A lot of people bring up the whole "Well you need less models to play a game" bit, but do not actually factor in the realities of the situation.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh yeah, and one of the biggest reasons to play a sub-faction rather than a "vanilla" army?
Link Teams. They're a pretty integral part of the game now, and with the exception of the Tohaa you cannot really field them in vanilla forces.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/23 00:55:02
Simply put though, Infinity is a game where you might end up spending just as much as a small Fantasy or 40k army just to have a reasonable variety of things to field and so that you can confuse regular opponents as to who your Lieutenant is.
Kan... I don't think I really need to say anything. You knew full well that wasn't true as you wrote it..
I really do wonder about you sometimes..
As of right now my Corregidor collection is sitting at $240.24 retail. And that consists of a pair of Corregidor boxes, an Iguana TAG, a Wildcat, three Tomcat blisters, and three Hellcat blisters.
Some stuff was bought discounted via The Warstore(Iguana and one of the Corregidor boxes) and Atomic Empire(Corregidor box, two Tomcat blisters and the Hellcat Hacker/HMG blister) and the remainder(Tomcat Engineer, Wildcat with Spitfire, and Hellcat with Boarding Shotgun blisters) were bought at retail price from another local shop when they had them in stock but the other places did not.
There are plenty of different options I can do for lists depending on points totals, but you and I both know that variety is the spice of life for Infinity now don't we?
That is your choice it is not a requirement of the game. My 40kIG collection as it sits currently cost me over 600 €, but that was my choice and not a requirement of the game (though not by much )
Yeah, you "choose" to do that because sub-factions are armies in their own right. Units are available or not to you based on sub-faction choices and the availability of those units(read: the number of models from those groups), their Special Weapons Cost and in some cases their points cost change based on sub-faction or vanilla.
H.B.M.C. wrote:And you can spend twice as much as a decent sized 40K army buying every BattleTech 'Mech under the sun, but unlike 40K you don't have to. That's a choice. 40K miniatures are very expensive and you needs lots of them. Warmachine models are around the same price and you don't need nearly as many of them.
I'm not as familiar with Warmachine, hence why I did not use Warmachine as an example. I am familiar with Infinity though...which is why I used it as an example.
A lot of people bring up the whole "Well you need less models to play a game" bit, but do not actually factor in the realities of the situation.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh yeah, and one of the biggest reasons to play a sub-faction rather than a "vanilla" army?
Link Teams. They're a pretty integral part of the game now, and with the exception of the Tohaa you cannot really field them in vanilla forces.
None of that matters one bit because those are all player choices, you don't need to have link teams to play or even to be competitive in Infinity, you do need to spend a significant amount above your Corregidor collection to even begin to play in 40K / WHFB, see the difference?
What PhantomViper said, I have been told 300 points is an average sized game in my area. A reasonably competitive Aleph force is looking to cost me all of $100-$150.
To get a 1850 point 40k list I am looking at... oh gak, $828 au.
That's just for 3 tac squads, 2 assault, shrike, a jump pack chaplain, two drop pods, a rhino, a dreadnought, a stormtalon and 5 scouts.
Model by model GW does have an edge over a lot of skirmish games. Because they are skirmish games.
When you price out the average size army vs the average size army I don't think GW can ever win out.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
Unit1126PLL wrote: I can build a 1000-point 40k list for 247.25 retail, one which is quite reasonable.
I can build an 1850-point 40k list for $495. *shrug*
Do those totals include the rulebook and codex?
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
Unit1126PLL wrote: I can build a 1000-point 40k list for 247.25 retail, one which is quite reasonable.
I can build an 1850-point 40k list for $495. *shrug*
And you can use that list vs. any other build and not feel or know you going to lose, becouse you just aren't set up to fight their list. Wow, what would that build be again?
Peter: As we all know, Christmas is that mystical time of year when the ghost of Jesus rises from the grave to feast on the flesh of the living! So we all sing Christmas Carols to lull him back to sleep.
Bob: Outrageous, How dare he say such blasphemy. I've got to do something.
Man #1: Bob, there's nothing you can do.
Bob: Well, I guess I'll just have to develop a sense of humor.
(more)
(building)
(less)
) I understand some people prefer those games to Warhammer 
Campaign Cartographer sees more use than any of my games, aside from oldies like XCom (the original), Alpha Centauri, Civilization IV, and Master of Orion II.
