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.

Sim-Life wrote:

herjan1987 wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Indeed, prior to AoS, WHFB was generating only like 5% of GWs total profits (in part because many of the new releases for WHFB never managed to make back their production costs). The new game has been much more successful financially speaking.

Sorry, but thats just proper bull droppings. WHFB was still profitable, but not as much as some people would have like it to be. This is from hastings.

This. People love to trot out that WHFB was basically not ever selling anything with no evidence whatsoever.

On the contrary, there's a lot of evidence that given proper love it did sell.

The first End times books (before becoming an obvious cash grab with dwindling page numbers and crazier rules) sold out on release. Nagash, the morghast, etc. sold out, to the point that some Nagash kits were shipped on blank boxes, etc.

And then.... you know what came next.

I still hold AoS figures suspect. First because there's no absolutely no context (some times it's sales, some times it's profits, whatever) and because what I hear from the actual boots on the ground (shops). Second, because there was a massive clearout of old WHFB models that was so successful they did re-runs of some items.

Obviously the bean counters are chalking that as AoS sales.

Can we try and avoid this degrading into which sold better than the other. We can't possibly say. All the financial reports said was that the last few months of AoS classed sales sold has monthly sales better than WFB monthly sales in last couple of years and leave it as that.

On the question yes I am slightly annoyed because WFB may not have been in such a bad way if they had actually spent a bit more time on it; in hindsight it's like 8th was damned from day one and setup to squeeze the last penny out of it before it was scrapped. On the other hand I don't think it would have solved the overriding problem of cost. However having an updated WFB WHQ and Old World Skirmish game would have been a pleasant surprise and may have acted as more of a gateway.

Instead of AoSuck they could have updated Mordhiem and Warbands. now you have three ways to play WFB. Mordhiem for 5-10 mini range, Warbands which is around the size of what AoS is and then WFB for your large scale games. Everyone wins and if they wanted to stream line it they already had great rules to do so with the Lord of the Rings rules. Those are much better rules than the over simplified mindless rule set AoS is.

motski wrote:

swarmofseals wrote:

I'm sad that the Old World went and agree that it wasn't strictly necessary. It might have been a terrible decision.

I doubt anyone at GW HQ considers it a terrible decision as AoS is now selling better than WHFB as per their financial report.

I mean it's pretty easy for a game that's had like 6+ months of constant releases and exposure to sell better than a game that was put on the back burner with a few sparse releases per year, with those releases constantly being inflated in price to insane levels ("Hey you want a unit of these basic guys? Ok, just buy them 10 at a time for $60-something AUD. Did we tell you that you'll probably want 30-40 guys in a unit? And you'll probably want at least 2 of those? Plus some smaller Archer units that are made from the same kit?").

If GW had changed their strategy a small amount they could have continued selling WHFB. Instead they decided to mostly ignore it when they weren't trying to price-gouge the player base and ended up nuking the entire game and setting when the decided being the 3rd most popular ttg in the world wasn't enough.

Drahazar1 wrote:
Instead of AoSuck they could have updated Mordhiem and Warbands. now you have three ways to play WFB. Mordhiem for 5-10 mini range, Warbands which is around the size of what AoS is and then WFB for your large scale games. Everyone wins and if they wanted to stream line it they already had great rules to do so with the Lord of the Rings rules. Those are much better rules than the over simplified mindless rule set AoS is.

Hmmm, speaking of which I do hope they start up a new Mordheim ruleset in AoS, though what would they fight for I wonder..

Also really, AoSuck? You couldn't have come up with something more creative?

I've said this on other websites, I'm sure it's been said here as well but for me, WHFB/AoS is a hybrid entity at the moment, in that it consists of the 'lore' from the Old World that I've always read and loved, with the new game/rule 'system' - rules are always in flux and to me this is just another version of the game.

Any rule edition can always be jumped to, etc. I'm not involved in tournament scenes/competitive gaming so I get to do what I want with my Fantasy universe.

I'm glad AoS is doing well, just means more minis for me!

Always be skeptical of "X product line was not profitable" style arguments, at least when it comes to GW.

First, who here has actually seen the numbers?

Second - and more importantly - even assuming WHFB was not profitable, there's the question of why. Was it because the game itself, not just Eighth Edition but the whole idea of mass battles with ranked figures, is really a dead end for the business? Or was it perhaps that they neglected the game, for whatever reasons? The resurgence of interest in LotR/Hobbit has opened my eyes to the fact that whether GW lavishes a line with attention or not does not necessarily reflect consumer appetite.

I think the more likely explanation for the demise of WHFB is that GW decision makers envision the company as first and foremost a producer of high quality miniatures, where quality means intricate detail and dynamic sculpts. This simply syncs up better with a skirmish game format than a mass battles one. In the latter case, you need lots of miniatures that are easy to paint and are relatively statically posed so that they rank up nicely.

So it was probably less "WHFB is dead and we have to change it" and more "skirmish rules better support miniatures-focused marketing."

 Manchu wrote:
Always be skeptical of "X product line was not profitable" style arguments, at least when it comes to GW.

First, who here has actually seen the numbers?

Second - and more importantly - even assuming WHFB was not profitable, there's the question of why. Was it because the game itself, not just Eighth Edition but the whole idea of mass battles with ranked figures, is really a dead end for the business? Or was it perhaps that they neglected the game, for whatever reasons? The resurgence of interest in LotR/Hobbit has opened my eyes to the fact that whether GW lavishes a line with attention or not does not necessarily reflect consumer appetite.

I think the more likely explanation for the demise of WHFB is that GW decision makers envision the company as first and foremost a producer of high quality miniatures, where quality means intricate detail and dynamic sculpts. This simply syncs up better with a skirmish game format than a mass battles one. In the latter case, you need lots of miniatures that are easy to paint and are relatively statically posed so that they rank up nicely.

So it was probably less "WHFB is dead and we have to change it" and more "skirmish rules better support miniatures-focused marketing."

Manchu,

A company like GW does not dump millions into something like AOS, and "discontinue" a product and rules line that they have been selling for over twenty years, for "Minuture-focused Marketing." AOS is a huge risk, and one they would only take if current and future profit projections for WHFB were grim.

Now, I am sure that pivoting to the skirmish and miniature oriented nature of AOS was fully intended, but this is a byproduct of WHFB failing,and GW needing to come up with what they believe the best solution for future sales.

Actually, it makes perfect sense for GW to dump WHFB given their miniatures-centric view of their business. This is why AoS is built around the concept of using whatever miniatures you like, as long as they are AoS miniatures. The premise is, here's something you can do with all the miniatures you've collected, as opposed to collecting certain miniatures to play the game.

WHFB did not have to fail, whether it did or not (no one posting here can say whether it did). There is nothing inherently unmarketable about a ranked mass battles game. But GW did not want to sell that kind of product line.

 Manchu wrote:
Actually, it makes perfect sense for GW to dump WHFB given their miniatures-centric view of their business. This is why AoS is built around the concept of using whatever miniatures you like, as long as they are AoS miniatures. The premise is, here's something you can do with all the miniatures you've collected, as opposed to collecting certain miniatures to play the game.

WHFB did not have to fail, whether it did or not (no one posting here can say whether it did). There is nothing inherently unmarketable about a ranked mass battles game. But GW did not want to sell that kind of product line.

Manchu,

GW would not dump a well established IP and product line and take a huge risk, if it was meeting what the company determined to be an acceptable profit. GW is not a large enough company to take a gamble like that, unless it was the only way forward.

GW did not want to sell the WHFB line because it wasn't meeting their profit expectations. Hastings acknowledged this. GW decided to go the skirmish route with AOS, because it closely matched the significantly more profitable and popular 40k line.

And we're right back to where I started:

 Manchu wrote:
even assuming WHFB was not profitable, there's the question of why. Was it because the game itself, not just Eighth Edition but the whole idea of mass battles with ranked figures, is really a dead end for the business? Or was it perhaps that they neglected the game, for whatever reasons?

It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Furthermore: whether or not WHFB was inherently doomed to failure, or neglected by a company unwilling to and/or incapable of supporting it, there would not have been much risk in rebooting WHFB into AoS. The only other option would be to discontinue without replacing WHFB, either all at once or by allowing it to continue to wither on the vine.

I'll preface this by saying that I DO NOT like AoS AT ALL.

That being said, Fantasy was dead and needed a reboot. No one was buying new armies, games and clubs consisted of people that already had their armies and were not buying anything new.

And I've noticed locally that AoS games are slowly creeping up in size to the point (at least around here) where they're looking like WHFB games.

Given time I think that AoS will eventually become WHFB again.

I haven't given up on my WHFB, it's just collecting dust under the bed while we go through this "transition phase". At least I know have the time to catch up on my back-log of painting and I've even finally started collecting and painting that dwarf army that I've been meaning to get around to. I just collect and play based off of the 9th age ruleset. It's a good game I would suggest giving it a go.

 Manchu wrote:
And we're right back to where I started:

 Manchu wrote:
even assuming WHFB was not profitable, there's the question of why. Was it because the game itself, not just Eighth Edition but the whole idea of mass battles with ranked figures, is really a dead end for the business? Or was it perhaps that they neglected the game, for whatever reasons?

It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Furthermore: whether or not WHFB was inherently doomed to failure, or neglected by a company unwilling to and/or incapable of supporting it, there would not have been much risk in rebooting WHFB into AoS. The only other option would be to discontinue without replacing WHFB, either all at once or by allowing it to continue to wither on the vine.

There is a risk, and it is not small at all. The millions poured into development, marketing, new models etc etc is not a small investment for a company of GW's size. In addition, if AOS was to perform worse, then this would have been a huge loss to GW.

I disagree with your assumption. AoS relies on a massive back catalog of models. There is no evidence that the models and books developed specifically for the launch represent a larger expenditure than simply supporting WHFB with further releases. The only additional costs would be developing the AoS rules, which are four pages long.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
Where was this for the last decade before they decided to kill off the game that literally put GW on the map?

I disagree with that statement.

2013 saw about half a dozen Army books, various plastic kits some of which were for older army books, 1 Multiplayer expansion, 1 Campaign book, and numerous scenarios and battlefield DLC to supplement the stale BRB scenarios. Compared to the release schedule of years previous, that was a pretty explosive surge of WHFB.

Looking back, I feel like 2013 was GWs last push to make WHFB work or at least more profitable than it was.

End Times saw just as much activity. Granted, the decision to usher in AoS had almost certainly been made by then. Then again, weren't Stormcast sprues ©2014, indicating the decision probably went back to 2013?

 nels1031 wrote:


I disagree with that statement.

2013 saw about half a dozen Army books, various plastic kits some of which were for older army books, 1 Multiplayer expansion, 1 Campaign book, and numerous scenarios and battlefield DLC to supplement the stale BRB scenarios. Compared to the release schedule of years previous, that was a pretty explosive surge of WHFB.

Looking back, I feel like 2013 was GWs last push to make WHFB work or at least more profitable than it was.

Yeah I agree with this, GW did try with all the supplements, to expand the game and get interest going. Storm of Magic, Blood in the Badlands, Triumph and Treachery, Mighty Empires. I mean they really did try. It's just the fact that the game did suffer from the fact that army building was a chore compared to other games. I don't have the highest opinion of AoS but the way the release schedule works and the "Take what you want, play how you want!" aspect, at least from a marketing perspective, is superior in every way.

My main beef is with the fact they could have done all of this without completely destroying the Old World.

 Manchu wrote:
End Times saw just as much activity. Granted, the decision to usher in AoS had almost certainly been made by then. Then again, weren't Stormcast sprues ©2014, indicating the decision probably went back to 2013?

Yeah, I didn't mention the End Times releases because that's where most folks complaints of destroying fantasy start.

As to your comment that I quoted, I'll supplement it by pointing out the Wood Elves Army book, which I believe was the last Army book released for 8th Edition, had plot hooks and tidbits of something coming that only make sense when those story threads were tied in the various End Times books. Not to mention the High Elf Princess kidnapped by Manfred storyline that started in the 8th Edition BRB(I think, memory fails me atm) and continued across various Army books, again culminating in the End Times.

Let's say for the sake of argument that GW did try to "save WHFB." Why then did they fail? To put it more specifically, why didn't any of their efforts attract sufficient numbers (whatever those might be) of new customers?

During the same period, GW raised prices multiple times, curtailed online retail sales, moved more and more products to direct-only sales, and tightened agreements to bar customers in certain regions from taking advantage of better prices in others. In short, the toys became a lot more expensive.

As the name implies, mass battles games require a lot of miniatures. That doesn't just mean buying a lot of models - it also means assembling and painting a lot of models. So we're talking about a product line that is already expensive, in terms of the customer's time. So you're adding increased prices to that cost.

This period is also characterized by increasingly complex and detailed sculpting, including larger models. WHFB is played with ranked formations, limiting the miniatures' range of poses. Additionally, highly detailed models just add to the time costs discussed above - and ranking doesn't really reward spending lots of time on each figure.

In summary, GW's larger business model at the time was simply incompatible with supporting a mass battles game. It's no coincidence that another company took off around this time, focused on sleeker rules and affordable models. But of course, they have very different business models.

I disagree with that statement.

2013 saw about half a dozen Army books, various plastic kits some of which were for older army books, 1 Multiplayer expansion, 1 Campaign book, and numerous scenarios and battlefield DLC to supplement the stale BRB scenarios. Compared to the release schedule of years previous, that was a pretty explosive surge of WHFB.

Looking back, I feel like 2013 was GWs last push to make WHFB work or at least more profitable than it was.

Yea, 2013 was definitely a push. Although I'm not certain if it was 6 army books, but I could be wrong.

This is an example of maybe the last ditch effort on GW part. However I'm talking more recently developed things that AOS has going for it like a full campaign that is actually being promoted online by GW and even has interactive elements to it by changing rules etc. as the war goes on.

They are streaming tournament play now.

And they have all of those start collecting boxes that allow you to basically purchase a single box and play. Something that Fantasy needed desperately and never received. Even battalion boxes weren't legal armies in most cases.

Can this be attributed soley to new management?

Well, there's certainly signs of projects having to start before Roundtree and other people are also affecting what the company does but I'd imagine he's a big driving force for GW's upswing.

Can't say for certain, though.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Drahazar1 wrote:
Instead of AoSuck they could have updated Mordhiem and Warbands. now you have three ways to play WFB. Mordhiem for 5-10 mini range, Warbands which is around the size of what AoS is and then WFB for your large scale games. Everyone wins and if they wanted to stream line it they already had great rules to do so with the Lord of the Rings rules. Those are much better rules than the over simplified mindless rule set AoS is.

Hmmm, speaking of which I do hope they start up a new Mordheim ruleset in AoS, though what would they fight for I wonder..

Also really, AoSuck? You couldn't have come up with something more creative?

Haha, same here. I hope we might see a focus on explorers going through ruins throughout the realms left behind after chaos invaded.

Lots of possibilities for what any warband might be seeking in terms of relics, magic or knowledge and each location can be effected by numerous events depending on the realm like shadows swarming in to completely scatter your forces or the forces of nature and chaos clashing so one side of the ruins heals while the other inflicts disease.

It'd certainly seperate itself from all the Mordheim clones that are currently out, at any rate.

chaos0xomega wrote:


Indeed, prior to AoS, WHFB was generating only like 5% of GWs total profits (in part because many of the new releases for WHFB never managed to make back their production costs). The new game has been much more successful financially speaking.

That is the most garbage i've ever heard. The complaints when GW ended fantasy was that they pulled in anywhere from 15%-18% and End Times brought it more people. 5% doesn't even agree with GW numbers and from what i saw in the store from buyers they didn't agree with your numbers either unless it flopped everywhere else. In fact AoS was a dead game in the store until probably a couple months ago. It probably picked up when they threw down a points system. What i find funniest of all is when mostly AoS players that played 40k listen to GW and what they saw from the outside of the game and come to their conclusions. Most fantasy players knew AoS was hot garbage and when they played it like i did knew it was even hotter garbage. GW have spent next to no effort on the old armies instead having sigmarines and chaos. Oddly i can't remember anybody in the store buying the new dwarfs or even the new orc army. If i recall there's sigmarines, a couple undead armies and skaven. Funny how the skaven player seems pretty interested in buying my models from me rather than the GW store though. I haven't sold him any but i thought about it. I just find it funny how GW barely releases anything for AoS. It's like it's dead before it even started.

@motski: You mean the same people that won't let us play our 'dead' game in their stores. I wonder why they won't. Perhaps if we could and the still supported their 'dead' game like all the others we'd see how much more popular 8th ed fantasy is.

Barely releases anything for AoS? There's been a flood of releases and focus on AoS since it was released.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Barely releases anything for AoS? There's been a flood of releases and focus on AoS since it was released.

Yeah, there's alot in his statement that doesn't jive with reality.

The first year was pretty saturated with Bloodbound and the Stormcast, I will agree that was pretty poor startup, though they've been making up for lost times it seemed when they started focusing elsewhere.

That and they haven't had a focus on them modelwise lately, though storywise they seem to be trying to flesh them out a bit more.

Well they got a little focus in the recent start collecting sets and are in the new "mini" starter sets as well. There's also Gore Chosen which focuses on Khorne's boys. (Would be nice to get an order version of that, Stormcast have a training arena from the Aelves afterall.)

But this is getting off-topic, so sorry about that.

 nels1031 wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
Barely releases anything for AoS? There's been a flood of releases and focus on AoS since it was released.

Yeah, there's alot in his statement that doesn't jive with reality.

What i stated was what happened in my local GW store. It might not be the same everywhere.

Well after they Squatted Tomb Kings I decided to take my army to 9th age and KoW.

And yes they were Squatted

but they still have war scrolls and can be played and they still sell their mini's.

so where are new mini's for my army. were are the new war scrolls and battalions. were are the new rules and support for my army. That's right no where so TK and Brettonians are squatted.

AoS is on its way to become super bloated with rules, supplements and such. but they have a free app. yeah you still have to buy all the war scrolls that are not base. They have come out with multiple battle tombs and alliance books and more will continue to the point you will have hundreds of books, scrolls and sub factions to keep track of.

yeah you still have to buy all the war scrolls that are not base.

False, all new models have had their Warscrolls loaded onto the GW website, the only thing that isn't loaded onto the site are the Battalion and Allegiance rules.

They have come out with multiple battle tombs and alliance books and more will continue to the point you will have hundreds of books, scrolls and sub factions to keep track of.

Well all the base allegiance rules are within the Generals handbook which apparently is going to be updated by the year, And the battletomes may add new rules to an army but it's not exactly a gaping sprawl like 40k's majority.

That's right no where so TK and Brettonians are squatted.

Yep, though from some of the lore blurbs throughout the books there may be a new TK type army, considering the Crimson Monarchy.. Though of course that'll be up to GW if they capitalize it or not, pity there may not be something for Brets though as I did love the whole holy grail aesthetic.

Nope I don't resent it at all. WHFB had long ago busted off its rails circa 7th edition and was a lot like 40k is now (also a busted off its rails game).