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.

Are you expecting GW to do backflip on every single release? Because that's what this would represent. Complete back on tried and true release pattern they have been following for years.

There's nothing new in this release pattern that they haven't done. Nothing whatsoever to hint they might be changing it. So if you believe this might be one you must be expecting them to do u-turns on release pattern for every single release.

tneva82 wrote:
Are you expecting GW to do backflip on every single release? Because that's what this would represent. Complete back on tried and true release pattern they have been following for years.

There's nothing new in this release pattern that they haven't done. Nothing whatsoever to hint they might be changing it. So if you believe this might be one you must be expecting them to do u-turns on release pattern for every single release.

Ok, you're talking crap, but whatever then, yes, I must think they're doing the biggest U-turn in business history, bigger than Sega dropping out of the hardware market, bigger than the collapse of Lehman Brothers......

Or, maybe they'll just re-purpose sprues to make some new SC boxes. They've done it in AOS, so why not 40k?

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I doubt they will be only putting out a few thousand of these boxes. This is to get people down with a whole new army. so I'd imagine the " Limited " run will be extremely generous. They want to get people to get a foot in the army to feed them all the new releases to come along with it more fully. As well they will want people to double dip with the holiday sets and this box make it a double whammy for some customers.

So if they are smart it'll be at a good price as the first taste, then have the breath taken away later on.

Not to sound too gloomy about something we can't really judge yet, but Sisters are a prime candidate for mishandling. I'm not even sure it has anything to do with how "smart" GW is.

GW is averse to taking risks especially with regard to overstocking and from what we've seen over the years they seem to be content with determining a number of boxes they are sure they can sell, and if the profit from that exceeds manufacturing cost by a certain amount they'll make the box. There's no indication that demand plays a role in any but the most basic sense. As in, they know they'll sell more Marine boxes than Tyranid boxes, so they'll make more of one that features Marines than one that features Tyranids.

Age of Sigmar's last battle box was goblins versus trees and GW could by far not satisfy demand, clearly underestimating how many people wanted that box. Before that ghouls versus rats didn't fare much better, selling out very quickly. I consider myself lucky that I got my hands on one of those. By contrast the Khorne versus Slaanesh daemons box was available for a good long while.

I could see this becoming a problem for Sisters, too, and I really hope that GW is willing to do several production runs of the box if they don't make enough in the first place. The problem with Sisters is that GW has no relevant data to go on to determine how many boxes to make. All it takes for the release to get botched is for GW to default to their usual procedure. You would in fact they're smarter than that, but it's not easy to rule out that they're not.

Or I guess setting the price at a stupid level could also sink Sisters regardless of any other factors.

Hope none of that happens. You know. Emperor willing.

 Geifer wrote:
I could see this becoming a problem for Sisters, too, and I really hope that GW is willing to do several production runs of the box if they don't make enough in the first place. The problem with Sisters is that GW has no relevant data to go on to determine how many boxes to make. All it takes for the release to get botched is for GW to default to their usual procedure. You would in fact they're smarter than that, but it's not easy to rule out that they're not.

Well, this is part of why I hypothesised that the box might be a test, of sorts, to gauge the market, at least in part to see how big the market segment might be.

In other words, you aren't going to know the market for the box, but the box sales can then give you a data point for the rest of the things in production. So, it is hard to say, from here/now, if they should make it an unlimited set, or not, there are merits to either approach.

However, what I think is a "given" or a close to one as there is, will be that if the box sells very well/sells out, we will see full kits/full release sooner rather than later. If it does not sell well, I think the rest of the new stuff will only trickle out over a few years.

tneva82 wrote:
Are you expecting GW to do backflip on every single release? Because that's what this would represent. Complete back on tried and true release pattern they have been following for years.

There's nothing new in this release pattern that they haven't done. Nothing whatsoever to hint they might be changing it. So if you believe this might be one you must be expecting them to do u-turns on release pattern for every single release.

Is this still about the SC! thing? Because you've been wrong about that for like 3 pages now. AoS Stormcast SC! 1 used repurposed sprues from the starter set.

The repurposed sprues didn't even make a complete unit.

 H wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
I could see this becoming a problem for Sisters, too, and I really hope that GW is willing to do several production runs of the box if they don't make enough in the first place. The problem with Sisters is that GW has no relevant data to go on to determine how many boxes to make. All it takes for the release to get botched is for GW to default to their usual procedure. You would in fact they're smarter than that, but it's not easy to rule out that they're not.

Well, this is part of why I hypothesised that the box might be a test, of sorts, to gauge the market, at least in part to see how big the market segment might be.

In other words, you aren't going to know the market for the box, but the box sales can then give you a data point for the rest of the things in production. So, it is hard to say, from here/now, if they should make it an unlimited set, or not, there are merits to either approach.

However, what I think is a "given" or a close to one as there is, will be that if the box sells very well/sells out, we will see full kits/full release sooner rather than later. If it does not sell well, I think the rest of the new stuff will only trickle out over a few years.

Probably. It certainly sounds sensible. GW reacted with spectacular swiftness to the failed original release of Age of Sigmar and the thing that got in the way their were production lead times taking them a year to put fixes in place - technically a long time, but unprecedented and speedy compared to their normal time frames.

Sisters won't have that problem. GW resolved to overhaul the line, the designs are done and if they aren't yet, the molds will be too soon enough. I don't know how they schedule their production runs, but sales data from November may well allow them to manufacture more Sisters (or hand over the production slot to another army, depending on how it goes) three or four months later.

I'll contradict the idea that a bad release will see the full army release split up into smaller releases over time, though. GW doesn't work like that. What's done now is going to be released and any bad sales will be mitigated as best as possible with stock management. They're not cutting any molds over a weekend and unless the actual Sisters release is half a year or more out, the investment has been made and they're going to try to make the cost back.

Edit: Also, just to say that clearly, the Sisters release at this point has been scheduled and it will happen at the scheduled time. GW doesn't shift things around because they want to test the water first. They commit and see things through.

 H wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
I could see this becoming a problem for Sisters, too, and I really hope that GW is willing to do several production runs of the box if they don't make enough in the first place. The problem with Sisters is that GW has no relevant data to go on to determine how many boxes to make. All it takes for the release to get botched is for GW to default to their usual procedure. You would in fact they're smarter than that, but it's not easy to rule out that they're not.

Well, this is part of why I hypothesised that the box might be a test, of sorts, to gauge the market, at least in part to see how big the market segment might be.

In other words, you aren't going to know the market for the box, but the box sales can then give you a data point for the rest of the things in production. So, it is hard to say, from here/now, if they should make it an unlimited set, or not, there are merits to either approach.

However, what I think is a "given" or a close to one as there is, will be that if the box sells very well/sells out, we will see full kits/full release sooner rather than later. If it does not sell well, I think the rest of the new stuff will only trickle out over a few years.

That's super dumb. I'm sorry but that's just a really, really dumb conclusion to draw.

So what you're saying is that the army will be literally impossible to play with first party models unless this random one off starter box(with monopose minis that don't have even HALF of their full options) sells big? That's the most shoot yourself in the foot thing I've ever heard. The box has the codex in it. People will know what units they need before this box even comes out.

The metals are on LCTB. By the time this boxset comes out they'll be gone outside of ebay resales. This isn't like space marines who can afford to just not have an impulsor for months and it doesn't affect anything. If they don't come out with new immolators, new exorcists, new dominions, new celestians, new arcos, new repentia, new seraphim with all their options, new battle sisters with all their options, new penitent engines with all their options, etc, it will be literally impossible to play the army with first party models for a lot of new players. Especially when you consider that the Ebay metals tend to be right around GW's insane retail prices right now, BEFORE the massive market shock that would happen as a result of new options becoming competitive. If they have things in the codex that are either totally new units or totally new equipment options, this gets even worse.

If they do your (stupid) strategy, they can literally just dumpster everything that doesn't come out by march because I can guarantee you 90% of people will have either decided not to do a sisters army, have filled in the missing units with ebay metals, or have made the missing units with 3rd party models/conversions.

The majority of sales will come as a result of the pent up demand for plastic SoB. If they delay the release by more than a few months (Up to february to account for christmas being a deadzone) that demand will dissipate quite a lot as people find workable substitutes.


I have 2000$ saved for sisters of battle and even I would just buy Raging heroes or w/e to actually get to PLAY my army rather than wait years (lol) to get kits. And if I have everything I need to play the army and the kits aren't coming out anytime soon, well, there are a lot of other things I could do with that 2k.

 Geifer wrote:
I'll contradict the idea that a bad release will see the full army release split up into smaller releases over time, though. GW doesn't work like that. What's done now is going to be released and any bad sales will be mitigated as best as possible with stock management. They're not cutting any molds over a weekend and unless the actual Sisters release is half a year or more out, the investment has been made and they're going to try to make the cost back.

That's a fair point, my phrasing was poor there. I didn't really mean smaller releases over time, like, not a box a month or something. I was more so thinking that better sales on the box means the "full army" would just be out sooner rather than later. So, perhaps 2 big releases, say, 3-4 months apart to get it done, as opposed to maybe 3 releases 6 months apart. It's hard to say if the "full kit" molds have already been cut or not. Obviously, if they are, the sunk-in costs are already high and you'd want to recoup as soon as possible. However, I don't know what GW's "turn time" is, so I don't know if the molds, for a prospective 2020 release would already be done or not. If they are, the paradigm I hypothesize might still be the case, but rather than "optimizing" a release time frame, it might just be to try to "optimize" for a prospective production/stock level.

All in all though, it could certainly be the case that none of that is the case, as I assuredly do not understand, in any real way, GW's marketing and release "strategy." In fact, the very plausibility of my paradigm is likely a big strike against it actually being the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:
That's super dumb. I'm sorry but that's just a really, really dumb conclusion to draw.

Well, please do explain, to an idiot like me, exactly what then your idea for the release window of all the new kits would be then?

So, the box in November and then what? What release window averts your paradigm where the box is out and the "limited" army is unplayable and unappealing?

Sure, my idea might be stupid, but you presented nothing as an alternative. So, please do enlighten us with your (presumably erudite) release strategy that does not suffer the same problem?

Shall we expect the full army the week after? The month after? Obviously you have a much keener grasp of these things, so set us straight on them please.

ERJAK wrote:

I have 2000$ saved for sisters of battle and even I would just buy Raging heroes or w/e to actually get to PLAY my army rather than wait years (lol) to get kits. And if I have everything I need to play the army and the kits aren't coming out anytime soon, well, there are a lot of other things I could do with that 2k.

Be prepared to do something else then. There isn't any indication a full release is happening in the short term.

On the optimistic side, I expect the full Sisters release to start in the January slot.

ERJAK wrote:

(Psst, I don't think he realizes you can take bases off of stuff and put new ones on)

Slap some old space marines onto 32mm bases and say they are primaris guys and see how much mileage you get

Lets try and be a bit more polite in our discourse please.

Ta.

 H wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
I'll contradict the idea that a bad release will see the full army release split up into smaller releases over time, though. GW doesn't work like that. What's done now is going to be released and any bad sales will be mitigated as best as possible with stock management. They're not cutting any molds over a weekend and unless the actual Sisters release is half a year or more out, the investment has been made and they're going to try to make the cost back.

That's a fair point, my phrasing was poor there. I didn't really mean smaller releases over time, like, not a box a month or something. I was more so thinking that better sales on the box means the "full army" would just be out sooner rather than later. So, perhaps 2 big releases, say, 3-4 months apart to get it done, as opposed to maybe 3 releases 6 months apart. It's hard to say if the "full kit" molds have already been cut or not. Obviously, if they are, the sunk-in costs are already high and you'd want to recoup as soon as possible. However, I don't know what GW's "turn time" is, so I don't know if the molds, for a prospective 2020 release would already be done or not. If they are, the paradigm I hypothesize might still be the case, but rather than "optimizing" a release time frame, it might just be to try to "optimize" for a prospective production/stock level.

All in all though, it could certainly be the case that none of that is the case, as I assuredly do not understand, in any real way, GW's marketing and release "strategy." In fact, the very plausibility of my paradigm is likely a big strike against it actually being the case.

So on the marketing and release strategy, here's my take on what happened. December 2017 got in preliminary results of the community survey which among whatever else may have been in there suggested that there is market for plastic Sisters that GW previously did not believe was there. We know that this must have been a big and immediately apparent point because the sketches shown in one of the Battle Sister Bulletins have a copyright of 2017. They would have been commissioned for a presentation or a test to see if there was enough material, ideas or capability of the designers to make the project happen. Whatever the case, the project was greenlit before March 2018 (or in that month at the latest) to allow for the announcement of incoming plastic Sisters late in the month.

You will also want to consider that GW prior to the community survey was prone to making fun of (plastic) Sisters in reaction to what's been going on in the wider community. Their social media presence at the time was fairly new and they went along with some of the jokes among their customer base. Notably after the survey, when they must have realized how many potential customers they hit by being in on the jokes, they ceased making them (that's specifically Sisters jokes). It should be noted that they haven't dropped this approach to marketing in general. You need only look at the way today's article on the new Sigmarine Questor is written to see they are trying to connect to the community in much the same way as they did back then. And this article is only the latest, but by far not the only one of its kind.

We can assume that this is the reason why GW chose to promote Sisters so far in advance. They don't do that for anyone else, and it very much looked like damage control to make Sisters players forget about the jokes and get excitement going. Crucially, GW also committed to releasing plastic Sisters. No ifs, no buts. The decision was made and they would not go back on it. The only point they did not commit to was the release in 2019, aiming for it but making no promises.

The coming army box is a way to be technically correct on the 2019 release without requiring the release of the full kits to make an army. Those are coming but it appears that it is much easier for GW to release a very limited number of sprues made for an army box within this short a time frame than to slot in a full army release. We've known from previous statements that anything approaching large projects take GW 18-24 months to realize, and with an announcement in March 2018 with not much time to prepare the project beforehand November 2019 is at the very low end of that figure. For another number, the lone Sister we already got out of this was released 15 months after the announcement.

GW has really long lead times. We as customers won't realistically see any change of what GW might decided based on what they learn from it any sooner than a year out, and that's in a general way. In terms of any single project there is no reason to assume that GW reacts in a shorter time than their stated 18-24 months. Like I said, damage control for Age of Sigmar in its most basic shape, the General's Handbook, made its way to the customers after a year, and being announced after nine months. And the original Age of Sigmar release was by all accounts a worst case scenario. I have severe doubts that a single, minor 40k line would warrant that kind of reaction, particularly at a time like this when 40k and GW in general couldn't be more successful. A slow selling Sisters line would by far not be ideal, but would hardly make a dent in GW's bottom line and in time recoup the cost and turn profitable.

For this reason I don't see why GW would use data from the boxed set release in any more than the usual sense. GW's release dates are set and we've only seen them change when outside factors completely out of GW's influence got involved, like shipping issues from China. A flexible Sisters release based on the army set's performance is not just atypical of GW's usual approach, it would also be disruptive of other releases that would have to switch release slots accoridngly. And, as mentioned, there is no potential for catastrophic failure or such critical success that GW would feel the need to leave their steady course.

Back to marketing, considering not everyone is on board with a boxed set of monopose models and limited options for the original release of the codex (I don't subscribe to Erjak's emphatic way of stating this, but I very much do to the point that having a codex without being able to buy and field a substantial portion of the units in it is neither objectively ideal nor will it go down well with a fair number of prospective players) I think the idea is that they've chosen to give out information about plastic Sisters that will not be part of the box to reassure people that a full and proper army release is on the way, even if it does not come quite as quickly as many of us would have hoped. And GW held back any information on the latter as long as possible and only saw their hand forced when pictures of the boxed set hit the Internet.

On the grimmer side, from out perspective anyway, GW gave no indication of any new options whatsoever. Which makes sense in the context of GW's usually tight lipped approach to upcoming releases. They are mortally afraid that some 3rd party garage operation might threaten the initial release of any new kit or kit with new options, and won't lose a word about such a thing until they are within a reasonable time from release and want to get people pumped about it. To a lesser degree this has happened even to things that we are familiar with and that GW told us would be faithfully adapted to plastic from the known old models. Many an article from the Battle Sisters Bulletin that revealed new information didn't actually reveal anything new at all but simply confirmed that what they promised earlier, faithful adaptation, worked out just as advertised. Add to that the occasional filler article and GW's marketing, the unprecedented glimpse into the design process they advertised in 2018, only took off in spring 2019 and has in larger parts been GW's adaptation of the idea of speaking without saying anything. All about evoking positive emotions without actually sharing information.

 Geifer wrote:
The coming army box is a way to be technically correct on the 2019 release without requiring the release of the full kits to make an army.

Well, I agree with this and already alluded to as much before.

 Geifer wrote:
GW has really long lead times. We as customers won't realistically see any change of what GW might decided based on what they learn from it any sooner than a year out, and that's in a general way. In terms of any single project there is no reason to assume that GW reacts in a shorter time than their stated 18-24 months. Like I said, damage control for Age of Sigmar in its most basic shape, the General's Handbook, made its way to the customers after a year, and being announced after nine months. And the original Age of Sigmar release was by all accounts a worst case scenario. I have severe doubts that a single, minor 40k line would warrant that kind of reaction, particularly at a time like this when 40k and GW in general couldn't be more successful. A slow selling Sisters line would by far not be ideal, but would hardly make a dent in GW's bottom line and in time recoup the cost and turn profitable.

For this reason I don't see why GW would use data from the boxed set release in any more than the usual sense. GW's release dates are set and we've only seen them change when outside factors completely out of GW's influence got involved, like shipping issues from China. A flexible Sisters release based on the army set's performance is not just atypical of GW's usual approach, it would also be disruptive of other releases that would have to switch release slots accoridngly. And, as mentioned, there is no potential for catastrophic failure or such critical success that GW would feel the need to leave their steady course.

Well, we can consider necessity in so far as necessity goes. That is to say, they might always follow some plan, until the time that they don't. Considering all that you wrote, in prelude, to how we are arriving to a plastic Sisters release, I think it is fair to say this is not exactly a typical release. So, to surmise that they must stay on the same course as any other normal release is tenuous at best. They might, they might not, there is no way for us to know. I simply stated something that seemed plausible to me, as a possibility. That is, that this could be a particularly atypical release and to rely on past typical GW behavior might not necessarily be the best predictor of how things will go here. Then again, it might well be, we can only just wait and see.

Voss wrote:

 CURNOW wrote:
Why are people so obsessed by base size ? There's no rules about it

As Kawauso says. I hate rebasing, but a uniform base size and type helps an army look coherent and uniform (ie... like an army).
The genestealer cult drives me batty with different base sizes for characters and even within units. That genestealers are 25, neophytes are 25 (except gunners), but acolytes are 32 just strikes me as either crazy or grand level of indifference to aesthetics and army composition on GW's part.

That they're clearly going for the same thing for Sisters (especially with the Hospitaler, but also the Mistress Superior) is really annoying.

You know, there's a company , IIRC, that makes adapter rings that increase base size. You just snap them over the base.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Voss wrote:

 CURNOW wrote:
Why are people so obsessed by base size ? There's no rules about it

As Kawauso says. I hate rebasing, but a uniform base size and type helps an army look coherent and uniform (ie... like an army).
The genestealer cult drives me batty with different base sizes for characters and even within units. That genestealers are 25, neophytes are 25 (except gunners), but acolytes are 32 just strikes me as either crazy or grand level of indifference to aesthetics and army composition on GW's part.

That they're clearly going for the same thing for Sisters (especially with the Hospitaler, but also the Mistress Superior) is really annoying.

You know, there's a company , IIRC, that makes adapter rings that increase base size. You just snap them over the base.

I'm aware. But since I don't leave bases bare plastic, it doesn't actually solve anything. I still have to redo the bases.
And it doesn't address anything about the intentionally mixed base sizes for GSC or what we're seeing for a random selection of Sisters models.

Voss wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Voss wrote:

 CURNOW wrote:
Why are people so obsessed by base size ? There's no rules about it

As Kawauso says. I hate rebasing, but a uniform base size and type helps an army look coherent and uniform (ie... like an army).
The genestealer cult drives me batty with different base sizes for characters and even within units. That genestealers are 25, neophytes are 25 (except gunners), but acolytes are 32 just strikes me as either crazy or grand level of indifference to aesthetics and army composition on GW's part.

That they're clearly going for the same thing for Sisters (especially with the Hospitaler, but also the Mistress Superior) is really annoying.

You know, there's a company , IIRC, that makes adapter rings that increase base size. You just snap them over the base.

I'm aware. But since I don't leave bases bare plastic, it doesn't actually solve anything. I still have to redo the bases.
And it doesn't address anything about the intentionally mixed base sizes for GSC or what we're seeing for a random selection of Sisters models.

...or 3rd party bases.

phillv85 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

phillv85 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

phillv85 wrote:
I'm not saying it's imminent, but I do think those models will end up in SC! boxes. We could be a year or two away from it the way the release window seems to be and the lack of kits for the remaining models.

Maybe. But by then the solo kits have been released and it's going to be those that are in SC box, not the mono pose ones. Just like every other SC.

See I don't think it is going to be the full kits. I think they're making these monopose sets to put into SC! boxes down the line to make them less attractive to people who want to buy half a dozen of them. Purely speculation on my behalf of course, we won't know until there is a Primaris Vanguard Start Collecting.

And your speculation is based on what? Literally every sc is full kit. If they wanted monoposes in sc plenty opportunities for that. They haven't.

My speculation is based on the fact they're making these monopose models then discontinuing them as soon as the box set is done. It doesn't make sense financially to create the designs, then the mold, then make a few thousand of them then chuck the lot in the bin. Also SC boxes were the first thing that were targeted in price hikes. I think they're looking at ways of getting people an SC box they can't or don't want to really spam a bunch of times to make an army. Another thing is that there is currently no SC CSM box. I mean they could throw the brand new models in the box with a Chaos Lord and some bikes, but why not use the new sprues you made that are sat idle rather than eating into the sales of your new models?

While it would be expensive for an individual, if GW knows they're only going to make 10000-40000 units, rather than making molds that can a million or more units, then they can produce the molds out of softer alloys, tens of thousands of dollars instead of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

If GW knows they're going to be doing more kits on their standard sized sprues, those molds can be recut either for another run or for something different... and when its completely exhausted they can sell it as a pure alloy scrap with their material certs to get more for it. That is to say the costs can pretty spread out.

At the end of the day once they have the digital assets it takes a relatively minimal effort to rework them into monopose or multipart. While there is something to looking at each as separate kits, they share a lot of their development costs. If you're making a pizza and you know you're going to have left over ingredients its easy enough to make another one... GW made the digital assets, probably with semi-poseable kits in mind, having someone go in dynamically pose up those assets, and slice them up for the mold... is a relatively minimal cost. They spent a year and half getting to the point that they have these kits coming out. Even if only one person was ever working on them at any given time, you're still looking at $100000 or more. I'd guess its probably closer to $300000. Rework of the digital models to make alternate kits, might be 3 or 4 weeks. $5000-$10000 of labor and another $10000-15000 for another mold... the profits they make selling these larger boxes pay for that after 350 units. From the past sell outs we know that many times when some set is limited in quantities, GW will produce and sell out of 35000-45000 units globally. These different sets will generate close to that in each regional market. GW sales people will push 10 of everything new on larger stores, but even if they can only sell the standard 2 copies of something that can generate 10000-20000 units of sales per region.... but if they make a new kit and then produce from that same core investment another kit... now they've just doubled their guaranteed sales... and doubled their opportunity to sell. All for less than 10% more. That's just to say its not crazy and the economics of it support what GW does.

With digital sculpting making the monopose and full kits will be very similar (the basic art asset will be done first before being posed, and then 'cut' for the spues),

and actually the monopose stuff is probably harder as the sculptor will have to fudge stuff that won't come out of the mould properly when with the full kit they'll be able to make a separate part in some cases

what might be a limiting factor is sprue production as making 3 different sprues is a lot faster than 20 (and if you use softer metals that are faster to machine you get a cheaper tool that doesn't last as long, but long enough for a short run box set)

and then producing different stuff is also slower as you've got to shut down the machine, change to tools, run start up tests etc

ERJAK wrote:


Is this still about the SC! thing? Because you've been wrong about that for like 3 pages now. AoS Stormcast SC! 1 used repurposed sprues from the starter set.

The repurposed sprues didn't even make a complete unit.

Sorry to drop in, but the 1st SC box for Stormcast had only one sprue from starter set/easy to construct box, that being the two retibutors. The liberators and prosecutors as well as lord celestant were normal production sprues. The newest SC! box, the Thunderhead brotherhood is the starter repacked wholecloth.

My speculation is based on the fact they're making these monopose models then discontinuing them as soon as the box set is done. It doesn't make sense financially to create the designs, then the mold, then make a few thousand of them then chuck the lot in the bin. Also SC boxes were the first thing that were targeted in price hikes. I think they're looking at ways of getting people an SC box they can't or don't want to really spam a bunch of times to make an army. Another thing is that there is currently no SC CSM box. I mean they could throw the brand new models in the box with a Chaos Lord and some bikes, but why not use the new sprues you made that are sat idle rather than eating into the sales of your new models? While it would be expensive for an individual, if GW knows they're only going to make 10000-40000 units, rather than making molds that can a million or more units, then they can produce the molds out of softer alloys, tens of thousands of dollars instead of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

If GW knows they're going to be doing more kits on their standard sized sprues, those molds can be recut either for another run or for something different... and when its completely exhausted they can sell it as a pure alloy scrap with their material certs to get more for it. That is to say the costs can pretty spread out.

At the end of the day once they have the digital assets it takes a relatively minimal effort to rework them into monopose or multipart. While there is something to looking at each as separate kits, they share a lot of their development costs. If you're making a pizza and you know you're going to have left over ingredients its easy enough to make another one... GW made the digital assets, probably with semi-poseable kits in mind, having someone go in dynamically pose up those assets, and slice them up for the mold... is a relatively minimal cost. They spent a year and half getting to the point that they have these kits coming out. Even if only one person was ever working on them at any given time, you're still looking at $100000 or more. I'd guess its probably closer to $300000. Rework of the digital models to make alternate kits, might be 3 or 4 weeks. $5000-$10000 of labor and another $10000-15000 for another mold... the profits they make selling these larger boxes pay for that after 350 units. From the past sell outs we know that many times when some set is limited in quantities, GW will produce and sell out of 35000-45000 units globally. These different sets will generate close to that in each regional market. GW sales people will push 10 of everything new on larger stores, but even if they can only sell the standard 2 copies of something that can generate 10000-20000 units of sales per region.... but if they make a new kit and then produce from that same core investment another kit... now they've just doubled their guaranteed sales... and doubled their opportunity to sell. All for less than 10% more. That's just to say its not crazy and the economics of it support what GW does.

Edit: learned to read.

 Grundz wrote:

Also GW manufactures their own molds in house

This has not always been the case, nor is the case atm in some cases. Since about 2009 som GW products have been made in China.

The Godsworn for example are flat out Made in China. Dread Ambull also bares the 'made in China' mark. While many are still 'Made in UK' the are an increasing number of them sporting 'Designed in UK, Made in China' variant. Rumor has it that if it's Colored Plastic, Easy to Build, or a starter box, it's not made at Nottingham either.

Forgeworld has had some Made in China since at least 2009.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


Forgeworld has had some Made in China since at least 2009.

Employing the recasters who some have said were capable of a better job than Forgeworld?

I must admit that I am looking forward to this.

The box being easy build/ monopose/ whatever doesn't bother me. If I go the full hog with the main release, I'll build those so they don't look like the monopose.

I wonder what they look like against my old metals. Those have been stripped down ready for a repainting so rebasing on 32mm won't be an issue. If I kept them as previously painted I wouldn't have rebased them.

I've carried out some practice colour schemes with Contrast paints on the Anvil Gothic Armoured Nuns in preparation so the Order of the Valourous Heart will rise again.

I'll evenget around to building that Exorcist I've had sitting around for a while and use the spare parts on some of the cheap Conquest Rhinos that are sitting around unbuilt.

I’ve just ordered the last of the metal sisters I need to round out my force. I think I’ll paint the new ones in a different colour scheme to my old ones to keep them distinct. There’s no way I’m rebasing my metals, so they can just go on display on a shelf if people have issue with the 25mm bases.

alphaecho wrote:
I wonder what they look like against my old metals.

Taller by a head. If you're rebasing and that bothers you it's a good time to consider putting a little something on their bases to give them a bit of extra height.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Rumor has it that if it's Colored Plastic, Easy to Build, or a starter box, it's not made at Nottingham either.

Ah thats news to me, but it does make sense that they would send out some of the more limited edition/mainstream stuff with all the brexit nonsense going on.

Just bought two Immolator/SoB rhino kits before they disappear forever!

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Grundz wrote:

Also GW manufactures their own molds in house

This has not always been the case, nor is the case atm in some cases. Since about 2009 som GW products have been made in China.

The Godsworn for example are flat out Made in China. Dread Ambull also bares the 'made in China' mark. While many are still 'Made in UK' the are an increasing number of them sporting 'Designed in UK, Made in China' variant. Rumor has it that if it's Colored Plastic, Easy to Build, or a starter box, it's not made at Nottingham either.

If it has a card product, it gets the "made in China" tag--whether or not all of the product is.

 Geifer wrote:

alphaecho wrote:
I wonder what they look like against my old metals.

Taller by a head. If you're rebasing and that bothers you it's a good time to consider putting a little something on their bases to give them a bit of extra height.

They'll be in the same army, not mixed in with plastic squads so not particularly an issue for me.

So...is this box gonna be worth it ?