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.

Removed.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Doesn’t work though, does it?

Like. At all. All gatekeepers manage is to look like petulant children who never learned to share.

That’s it, that’s the sum of gatekeeping efforts.

I've never actually seen it happen in real life either. It's always people in online communities.

 ForgedSteel wrote:
I love 40k, I love the feeling that comes with pouring hours and hours into an army an be able to see a finished result. Thats why I am concerned about this.

The lack of Diversity in this Hobby.

Whenever I go to play a game with others -at a local hobby store etc.- it seems like the only demographic I see are white men in there 30s-50s. There is nothing wrong with this; however, I am wondering why there is a lack of diversity in the hobby. It seems like there are very little people of Color, or the LGBTQ+ community. Much less women.

It sucks because this hobby feels like it should be applicable to all people regardless of race, religion, etc. I wonder why there is such a lack of diversity and what can we do as the community to encourage more people -of all walks of life- to join?

I won't argue that the demographic is primarily white men, especially age 30-50. However, the past fifteen to twenty years I've seen other demographics enter the hobby. They're still quite a small segment of the hobby, but they are present and growing. And on my part, the more, the merrier.

As far as LGBTQ+ goes, I've never asked because frankly I don't care. I'm there to play WFB, not have an intimate discussion about sexual preference and/or identity. If they present ambiguously I'll ask their pronouns, otherwise I'll assume what they present as is how they want to be identified. There is a time and a place to discuss such VASTLY private and personal issues, and over a pickup game of Warhammer in a game store is generally neither the time nor the place. I really don't care if any, all, or none of the people I meet across the table are LGBTQ. I'm not planning on having.... ahem, 'intimate relations' with them, I'm playing Warhammer with them. Their intimate details are frankly none of my business.

TLDR; I'll play anyone who shows up to play, and I don't care who they are so long as they're not jerks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

trexmeyer wrote:
Why does this matter at all?

Hell, I've played 40K, WHFB, T:WH, and some other video game adaptations I don't recall perfectly. I think the setting is great. I think the figurines are great. It's obviously not top-tier writing, but it's fun.

I wouldn't encourage anyone to play the tabletop versions ever. The cost sink is fething obscene. The tabletop games are honestly grifts.

I'll grant you it's not a cheap hobby to get into, but try comparing it to quality sports gear sometime. My army is not ever going to wear out no matter how often I play; pads and uniforms and balls most definitely will if used regularly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
If it’s just “Diverse folk in my area aren’t interested in 40k” then it’s not an issue.
If it’s “Diverse folk are interested, but there’s barriers stopping them from joining” then that’s an issue.

The biggie is economics. We can hate it all we want, but fact is white men earn more money on average. It's unfair, but the complex economic, societal, and political issues that have caused that particular problem go well beyond the scope of this forum. All we can do is welcome the people who DO want to start the hobby, and start slow-grow escalation leagues so people can play while they build up their forces.

 Gert wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Doesn’t work though, does it?

Like. At all. All gatekeepers manage is to look like petulant children who never learned to share.

That’s it, that’s the sum of gatekeeping efforts.

I've never actually seen it happen in real life either. It's always people in online communities.

I have, multiple times.

Move for a job, check out a new places to game, walk into a gaming store, briefly watch a game of the L5R miniatures game (this was years ago), hear a conversation about how slavery was a benefit to the slaves, walk out, not go back.
Another, the D&D group had their favorite pejorative for any bad situation or poor dice roll. And they had some very gay dice indeed, if the frequency of the yelling was any indication.
A third, oh, look its the Civil War again, and how things 'weren't so bad'

When that's the background conversation, there's at least some passive gatekeeping going on, if it isn't outright intentional baiting of strangers as litmus test of how they'll react.

Voss wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Doesn’t work though, does it?

Like. At all. All gatekeepers manage is to look like petulant children who never learned to share.

That’s it, that’s the sum of gatekeeping efforts.

I've never actually seen it happen in real life either. It's always people in online communities.

I have, multiple times.

Move for a job, check out a new places to game, walk into a gaming store, briefly watch a game of the L5R miniatures game (this was years ago), hear a conversation about how slavery was a benefit to the slaves, walk out, not go back.
Another, the D&D group had their favorite pejorative for any bad situation or poor dice roll. And they had some very gay dice indeed, if the frequency of the yelling was any indication.
A third, oh, look its the Civil War again, and how things 'weren't so bad'

When that's the background conversation, there's at least some passive gatekeeping going on, if it isn't outright intentional baiting of strangers as litmus test of how they'll react.

Well. That's certainly some atrocious luck. I've been in dozens of game stores, and the only time I've ever heard the American Civil War discussed was among ACW historical players... and they didn't discuss the slavery issue, because it was irrelevant to the game they were playing. Sorta like how the Bolt Action players generally do not discuss the Holocaust.

And I've run into some groups who were very unwelcoming to me, and I'm a cis white male!

It really does boil down to the group. Some groups are bad, most groups are pretty good.

I have removed a bunch of inappropriate content from the thread. This is not the place for pushing conspiracy theories about how being inclusive is going to destroy 'western society'.

Voss wrote:
I have, multiple times.

Move for a job, check out a new places to game, walk into a gaming store, briefly watch a game of the L5R miniatures game (this was years ago), hear a conversation about how slavery was a benefit to the slaves, walk out, not go back.
Another, the D&D group had their favorite pejorative for any bad situation or poor dice roll. And they had some very gay dice indeed, if the frequency of the yelling was any indication.
A third, oh, look its the Civil War again, and how things 'weren't so bad'

When that's the background conversation, there's at least some passive gatekeeping going on, if it isn't outright intentional baiting of strangers as litmus test of how they'll react.

Regional differences are quite big I think when it comes to certain places. Obviously in the USA, the ACW is a contentious issue, and having wargames based around it is a bit more real for them. You'll rarely have people talk about slavery and Britain's role in it over here unless you stick to very specific social circles.
I have heard of others experiencing exclusion and bigotry, I absolutely don't mean to demean their experiences. I more just meant that from my perspective, a large portion of vitriol and hatred comes from terminally online individuals who need to go outside more often, which is obviously still an issue but a different one.
I guess it helps that I tend to go to places that are pretty well moderated by the staff, the local GW being my first gaming location and others after that make sure to cater to everyone and make them feel welcome.

 Vulcan wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Doesn’t work though, does it?

Like. At all. All gatekeepers manage is to look like petulant children who never learned to share.

That’s it, that’s the sum of gatekeeping efforts.

I've never actually seen it happen in real life either. It's always people in online communities.

I have, multiple times.

Move for a job, check out a new places to game, walk into a gaming store, briefly watch a game of the L5R miniatures game (this was years ago), hear a conversation about how slavery was a benefit to the slaves, walk out, not go back.
Another, the D&D group had their favorite pejorative for any bad situation or poor dice roll. And they had some very gay dice indeed, if the frequency of the yelling was any indication.
A third, oh, look its the Civil War again, and how things 'weren't so bad'

When that's the background conversation, there's at least some passive gatekeeping going on, if it isn't outright intentional baiting of strangers as litmus test of how they'll react.

Well. That's certainly some atrocious luck. I've been in dozens of game stores, and the only time I've ever heard the American Civil War discussed was among ACW historical players... and they didn't discuss the slavery issue, because it was irrelevant to the game they were playing. Sorta like how the Bolt Action players generally do not discuss the Holocaust.

And I've run into some groups who were very unwelcoming to me, and I'm a cis white male!

It really does boil down to the group. Some groups are bad, most groups are pretty good.

I find its the opposite, and not luck at all. Most people in groups gatekeep their little domain, and tend to be awful people. In spirit and 'gossip' if not in action.
Gamer spaces, at least in my experience, tend to be like high school locker rooms. Same kind of crap talk and posturing, but this time, in the safety of their own spaces, they're the cocks of the walk.

'Most people in groups tend to be awful people' is certainly a take...

Since becoming a Chaos Knight player, I feel VERY discriminated against!

I am quite often referred to as "that guy!" and sometimes even told "there's the door, now go on - sod off!". Whenever I am "allowed" to play, there just isn't enough accessibility on the field of battle - especially in small games - and I can't help it if my Knights accidently tread on other player's units! They just will not stand aside to allow me access to objectives!

Seriously, its like dealing with people who don't hold the door open for others.

And GW only produces extra-large weapons; ITS NOT MY FAULT I ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!

Personally I think its jealously, deep down. We have big feet and they just can't stand it. But there's no thought for us Knight players having to purchase taller boxes...

But let us not gloss over elitist attitudes from Imperial Knight players, who disapprove of my Tzeentch Chaos Knights - accusing them of not being "true knights". At least I'm bringing CHANGE to the hobby!

Many excellent points given here.

I guess there is some of this "posturing" which I've witnessed with certain types of folk (no mention of color/etc, and no mention of GW or Warhammer in particular) and my lack of interest that I've held onto.

I don't mean to say I don't care for hobby stores as a place I or people can go to have fun. Or that I wouldn't go to one, just today I've got plenty to keep up with on the stead.

Now what I have found in my day (and my anecdotal is just that, not indicative of this community or any other, and even not of my entire experience) ...is the irony that once you change the environment around, the oppressed "nerd" can sometimes turn around to become the tyrant once in their own domain.

This is human nature I'm pretty sure, and more a matter of upbringing and character, and a likely result of being bullied themselves, but having the lack of discipline in their life to know better then what they do.

I suppose some were never taught the golden rule.

My gateway into wargaming was through DnD, and then playing Total Warhammer with my roommate. As a person who is a couple of the categories you describe, I really don't have any desire to interact with the wider community and pretty much thought this would be solo or the odd game with my partner.

I have had enough issues with the typical gamer population with ttrpgs. A couple weeks ago I went into two different store that sold wargamming stuff and the atmosphere wasn't exactly kind or welcoming to women. I do not like being treated like I do not know anything, I do not like being asked if I have a boyfriend that plays, I do not like being viewed as a piece of meat.

I have a lower tolerance for this stuff after like a decade and a half of ttrpg dramas, and I'm really not likely to go back to either store (not having what I wanted in stock didn't help lol) or any other.

However, down the road, if someone wants to play a onepagerules game in my local area and seems pretty chill, I would be interested. I just have no interest in interacting with the community at large at this point due to past interactions.

Edit, rereading the thread and seeing the mod note and some of the replies that were here really brings the point into focus that these spaces tend to be hostile.

 makeitorky wrote:

I have had enough issues with the typical gamer population with ttrpgs. A couple weeks ago I went into two different store that sold wargamming stuff and the atmosphere wasn't exactly kind or welcoming to women. I do not like being treated like I do not know anything, I do not like being asked if I have a boyfriend that plays, I do not like being viewed as a piece of meat.

To be fair, I've seen or heard what you've described everywhere from MMORPGs to dungeon powerlifting/bodybuilding gyms. A lot of men treat women like trash.

I honestly feel like just a good chunk of it is that it takes a very particular blend of interests to be into the miniatures tabletop type of thing and even if you are 40k isn’t a setting everyone is going to enjoy. I think diversity is increasing with the new people getting into the hobby but the hobby I think just generally doesn’t expand at a great pace. I think that we should all just be decent people who don’t yell slurs at the game store but besides that I think it doesn’t really require any intervention.

 ForgedSteel wrote:
I love 40k, I love the feeling that comes with pouring hours and hours into an army an be able to see a finished result. Thats why I am concerned about this.

The lack of Diversity in this Hobby.

Whenever I go to play a game with others -at a local hobby store etc.- it seems like the only demographic I see are white men in there 30s-50s. There is nothing wrong with this; however, I am wondering why there is a lack of diversity in the hobby. It seems like there are very little people of Color, or the LGBTQ+ community. Much less women.

It sucks because this hobby feels like it should be applicable to all people regardless of race, religion, etc. I wonder why there is such a lack of diversity and what can we do as the community to encourage more people -of all walks of life- to join?

Could also be your local area perhaps? My area is a mixed bag of stuff, yes mostly white males from the 20s to 50s but also a fair few people of Asian descent who are always welcome. In the circles I frequent there are a good of members of the LGBTQ+ including plenty of Trans peeps I know personally even couple of furries to hilariously.

There's also the chance that people keep aspects of them selves hush hush ya know? For fear of being ostracized which is a shame, it's a good hobby to let people express themselves I reckon. You want your hello kitty army? Go for it I won't judge..... much.

Though on the ethnic diversity aspect the area has a solid population of Indians, but I never see them playing or in clubs. Occasionally you'll see a kid or teen be brought in with parent, they seem keen and the clerks are being their usual... slightly too pushy selves. But the parents seem to guide the new folks out when possible. Anecdotal I know, but just something that stuck in my memory.

My wife paints better than I do, but she wouldn't be caught dead in a gaming store for most of the standard reasons - the smell, the creepy vibes coming from some of the gamers. They just aren't (on the whole) appealing places for the fairer sex.

I don't blame her, given that the local gaming club and conventions always have that stale smell going on.

I haven't been in the stores lately, but when I was last it was mostly full of teenage boys, whilst the conventions and clubs were full of middle aged men.

I think the setting itself is a bit of a problem - there are a lot of people who don't seem to appreciate that the game is a parody of fascism and not a tribute to fascism, it's overly complicated and confusing to get into, and a lot of it is just silly.

It also turns out that women generally prefer to play co-operative games than competitive games.

I know GW does what it can do try and deal with bigotry, but I'm not sure what they can actually do about diversity.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
I honestly feel like just a good chunk of it is that it takes a very particular blend of interests to be into the miniatures tabletop type of thing and even if you are 40k isn’t a setting everyone is going to enjoy. I think diversity is increasing with the new people getting into the hobby but the hobby I think just generally doesn’t expand at a great pace. I think that we should all just be decent people who don’t yell slurs at the game store but besides that I think it doesn’t really require any intervention.

We can also look back at our own childhoods here.

As mentioned many many times, I used to love 2000AD as a kid, and still do. Parents would never buy it for me as it was too mature for Tiny Me. But every haircut at Chainsaw Harry’s, there was the stack of back issues.

From there, Heroquest. The adverts for which were a white sausage fest. Prior to that, Fighting Fantasy. Indeed, 80’s and 90’s Fantasy and SciFi was predominantly white male protagonists for the most part. He-Man for instance didn’t have a single non-white Hero until the release of Clamp Champ, toward the end of the line’s life.

GW itself didn’t really feature non-white models for years and years.

A chunk of that seems to be Marketing Assumptions. That the expected demographic would be young white men and boys. Exclusionary thinking. But not actively exclusionary, just a bad assumption, the sort that “everyone knows that” but few had ever bothered to test. Note I am note casting aspersions about the motivations of companies or individuals, just The Amorphous Whole being a bit daft and self-fulfilling prophecies.

It wasn’t really until the late 90’s that we started to see a wider representation in media, and even then it was quite slow and occasionally ham fisted.

And don’t get me wrong. Money is likely still the driving motivation here. For the sake of some inclusion (art, writing, sculpts, all of which you were going to produce anyway) you can let people see themselves in the setting, which hooks attention. But hey, inclusion is inclusion, even when it’s ultimately Quest For Cash.

Of course whether GW’s efforts to widen their appeal is the root cause of their frankly stellar increase in sales is something we can only speculate on, as we lack the data necessary to dig into. But largely anecdotally, going “woke” has hardly sent GW broke, has it? Coincidence it might be, but it’s had rather the opposite effect.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


GW itself didn’t really feature non-white models for years and years.

A chunk of that seems to be Marketing Assumptions. That the expected demographic would be young white men and boys. Exclusionary thinking. But not actively exclusionary, just a bad assumption, the sort that “everyone knows that” but few had ever bothered to test. Note I am note casting aspersions about the motivations of companies or individuals, just The Amorphous Whole being a bit daft and self-fulfilling prophecies.

It wasn’t really until the late 90’s that we started to see a wider representation in media, and even then it was quite slow and occasionally ham fisted.

Speaking for the United Kingdom, much of these assumptions were literally true - going by stats from Wikipedia, in 1981 the demographics was still 96.1% 'White British' by their definition, followed by 94.5% in 1991, 89.7% in 2001, 82.1% in 2011, which is the last year that a census took place. The popluation being anything other than lily-white in any meaningful numbers is a much more recent development than people seem to think.

True that. And worth keeping in mind.

trexmeyer wrote:
Why does this matter at all?

Right?

I mean, if I'm playing a game of 40k and the other guy happens to be gay... like what the hell difference does that make?

Diversity has no inherent value. People have value. Who they are is significantly more important than what they are, and people are far more complex than just their race, sex or sexual orientation.


For those of you who might remember the old, old days of Dakka, mauleed used to have a saying: "Shut up about your fluff and roll your damned armour saves."

I think some of that can apply here.

It can matter.

If you’re ‘Other’ to the general demographic, to see The Thing is inclusive and, as you say, really doesn’t care about you being Other, nobody is actively or passively putting you off.

Not all things appeal to all people. As I said in my first post, all you can do is make your thing as inviting as possible - you cannot actively recruit people that just aren’t interested. But you can look to ensure anyone who expresses an interest finds the same encouragement and welcome as your core demographic.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


GW itself didn’t really feature non-white models for years and years.

A chunk of that seems to be Marketing Assumptions. That the expected demographic would be young white men and boys. Exclusionary thinking. But not actively exclusionary, just a bad assumption, the sort that “everyone knows that” but few had ever bothered to test. Note I am note casting aspersions about the motivations of companies or individuals, just The Amorphous Whole being a bit daft and self-fulfilling prophecies.

It wasn’t really until the late 90’s that we started to see a wider representation in media, and even then it was quite slow and occasionally ham fisted.

Speaking for the United Kingdom, much of these assumptions were literally true - going by stats from Wikipedia, in 1981 the demographics was still 96.1% 'White British' by their definition, followed by 94.5% in 1991, 89.7% in 2001, 82.1% in 2011, which is the last year that a census took place. The popluation being anything other than lily-white in any meaningful numbers is a much more recent development than people seem to think.

You can't blame those people though when you consider the media nowadays.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:



It wasn’t really until the late 90’s that we started to see a wider representation in media, and even then it was quite slow and occasionally ham fisted.

Speaking for the United Kingdom, much of these assumptions were literally true - going by stats from Wikipedia, in 1981 the demographics was still 96.1% 'White British' by their definition, followed by 94.5% in 1991, 89.7% in 2001, 82.1% in 2011, which is the last year that a census took place. The popluation being anything other than lily-white in any meaningful numbers is a much more recent development than people seem to think.

I think I saw somewhere they polled people in the US about how large a % of the population were black. Lots of people who thought it was about a 50/50 split between black and white and thus there not being 50% of politicians, celebrities, CEOs etc being black was evidence of Racism. In fact it is only about 13% of the US population that is black. They also polled on stuff like LBTG and other minority groups. They vastly overestimated the amount of the population that belonged to those groups by up to hundreds of % wrong.

Western media have for the last few decades actually over represented minority groups many times to the point people have a faulty view of the makeup of their own countries.

A thing to also remember is that looking only on % of a population and then seeing how well that group is represented in society and drawing conclusions on that is stupid most of the time. Perhaps it can work for black people in the US since they have been there for a long time. But for most of Europe non white people in large quantities is a very recent thing. Taking Sweden as an example people look at how now we have about 1/3 of the total population with foreign background but we don't have that distribution among higher classes in society like Politicians or CEOs etc and that must be because of racism. But if you go back 30 years that number is rather 1/10th of the population showing that we have a lot of people coming here over time. To get into higher positions take time and if you are migrating there it is much harder even if there are no racism. Adults migrating here is unlikely to be able to have the time to both integrate/assimilate and also get into those higher positions. That takes time and needing to understand the culture. So that entire generation shouldn't really be counted here. Then it is their kids we should look at who have grown up here and learned the language and culture, these are the ones who should be able to reach the top of society about as well as the native population if there isn't any bigotry in the way. But it takes 20-30 years for these to grow up and finish their educations and then maybe 10-20 more years to make careers to put them in those positions. That is the same time it takes for the native population to get there after all. So if we look at the amount of young kids/newly born with foreign backgrounds 30-40 years ago we see that it is a tiny amount of people and thus it is quite natural there still isn't that many that have succeeded now a few decades earlier. If we in 10 or 20 years do the same thing and see that the group hasn't increased however then it might show there are problems in the system. But you can't try to put population % and try to apply them everywhere without taking a lot of factors into consideration.

We have to do the same thing to a degree here in this hobby. Wargaming in the modern version is a relatively new thing and grew from mostly white people in white countries and it will take a long time for it to seep into other cultures/demographics. It is unlikely older people immigrating to the UK for example will ever try a wargame no matter how inclusive it is but their kids might since it is more a part of the local culture of the country and unlike the adults they haven't been fully "formed" yet and can take in new stuff.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/798856.page

There has been a discussion on that recently.

I'm not sure the income argument is valid. We have plenty of games that can be played on the cheap (Kill Team etc) and still much more expensive board games have much higher percentages of female players. Also a lot of women earn more than man commonly partaking in the hobby (hell, I'm a teacher in Poland, surely not someone you'd call "well off" and I started the hobby as an unemployed student) and still they don't play.

Klickor wrote:


I think I saw somewhere they polled people in the US about how large a % of the population were black. Lots of people who thought it was about a 50/50 split between black and white and thus there not being 50% of politicians, celebrities, CEOs etc being black was evidence of Racism. In fact it is only about 13% of the US population that is black. They also polled on stuff like LBTG and other minority groups. They vastly overestimated the amount of the population that belonged to those groups by up to hundreds of % wrong.

Western media have for the last few decades actually over represented minority groups many times to the point people have a faulty view of the makeup of their own countries.

I don't think it's a media representation issue as more of a prominent group being really bad at judging how big a minority is, especially when it with 'replacement' or 'invasion' rhetoric. That's where the whole "white men are a minority now" or "we're all going to be Muslim soon" rhetoric comes from.

Of course it also depends on where you are; I live in a subburb here that's almost entirely white, but I used to live in a subburb that was almost entirely Pakistani. If I wasn't relatively well travelled and aware, I could have been talked into believing the country was mostly brown.


I've seen studies about men/women in college settings, where men over-estimate the percentage of women in a group and especially their contributions. IIRC if women make up as much as 25% of the conversation, men will respond later that the women dominated the conversation.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

trexmeyer wrote:
Why does this matter at all?

Right?

I mean, if I'm playing a game of 40k and the other guy happens to be gay... like what the hell difference does that make?

Diversity has no inherent value. People have value. Who they are is significantly more important than what they are, and people are far more complex than just their race, sex or sexual orientation.

I largely agree with this, but I think there is a caveat that needs to be applied. I'd rather there were more awesome people involved in the hobby, and if there's some artificial barrier to being more inclusive I'd prefer it wasn't there. That barrier could be to do with marketing focus, or gatekeeping within local communities, or more of a societal issue that isn't directly solvable by the hobby's participants, but if it exists and can be remove as a barrier to entry we should be trying to do that. Identifying why (or even if) various minority groups are less likely to participate in the hobby is the tricky thing.

 Overread wrote:

My points about marketing aren't about GW changing what they do in terms of the product, but more about what marketing and outreach strategies they can use within what they already create. So I'm not suggesting that they change what they make to market to different groups; but change how they reach out to those groups. With the understanding (as best as possible) as to why those groups might not be currently interested in wargaming or painting or hobbying.

I'd question how much marketing they do full stop. Aside from their high-street (or more commonly high-street adjacent) presence, do GW actually do anything to attract interest from new customers that aren't already involved in the hobby scene?

I'd say I can't remember the last time I saw them advertise on TV - but I can: it was the Hero Quest and Space Crusade ads that snared me, and many others of a similar age, back in the day.

Facebook groups and Twitter accounts and so on are all well and good - but they're preaching to the choir. You need to already be aware of Games Workshop to be following them.

I suppose the Hachette magazines are a start at least.

Crispy78 wrote:
do GW actually do anything to attract interest from new customers that aren't already involved in the hobby scene?

They support school clubs, and groups such as Cubs/Scouts via Warhammer Alliance.

The Hachette magazines do get TV advertising.

 Gangland wrote:
Why don't you ask women...?

.

After the previous thread I actually did exactly that. I asked on my go-to boardgaming forum (with a fair representation of women) and there were some answers there - for those of you who can be bothered to use Google Translate from Polish to English here's the link: https://www.gry-planszowe.pl/viewtopic.php?p=1517544#p1517544


Female users there are for example ponika, esspresso, walkingdead. KamradziejTomal asked his wife.

A supporting question from this thread, that may counter the arguments about barriers of entry in games/communities being the issue - how many women, compared to men, are into reading books about military history? There's no income barrier, no gatekeeping so if these make the difference in wargames, there should be a close to equal number of female and male readers of books about historical battles and tank types.