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.

Mannahnin wrote:Hmm. Maybe so. The bit I remember hearing about was an image of the berserker/bomb carrier (and/or a mini for him) leaking.

The Berserkers, as I recall, were only part of it. Haldir and the Lothlorien Elves from Helm's Deep were the other part.

From what I recall, even The Two Towers video games didn't show the Helm's Deep parts because of the presence of the Elves.

Makes sense. Two surprises which weren't in the books, both dramatic parts of the big set-piece battle in that movie.

Man, if they released a Blood Bowl box set, Space Hulk\Dreadfleet style, I would buy it, even if it were $100.

Also, perhaps with rules that were less like playing an excel spreadsheet.

So, on-topic, it would be cool if someone posted the useful bits of that chat here. Not that Reddit is blocked, so much as I refuse to wade into it's horribad interface.

The most interesting part of that to me was the confirmation in one of the comments that the lead designer is most responsible for everything and that New line Cinema is behind the massive crackdown on information,

That was pretty interesting to say the least, wasn't expecting that kind of info

Assuming any of its true.

I once got a swag of rumours and information regarding GW from an 'ex-staffer' and so far all of its turned out to be baloney.

I really couldn't get a good read of what was being discussed due to the format which was poor and hard to follow but when he stated that 'listens to the online community' I just deleted the tab, the guy was ether lying through his teeth or talking out of his arse.

There is no excuse for GW's actions.

Its a pretty boring AMA. Hes one of those super positive people that never say a bad thing ever.

Thees89 got a lot of these, but I'm going to chime in on number 4.

Basically, the number one question we would get asked is "When is x coming out?" I mean, it was like a hundred to one the most common question we'd hear from both retailers and gamers. People always wanted to know what was coming out next. And that's reasonable!

Games Workshop's policy is not to release information farther than one month out, for a valid business reason: the company doesn't want you saving your money until next month, they want you to spend it NOW.

AND next month.

At some point some information was leaking out about releases that were more than a year away (I can't remember the name of the website), and the studio was understandably upset about it. If, for example, you were an IG player, and knew that next year the new IG plastics were coming out, there's not a lot of incentive for you to buy the current metals, especially because you KNOW you're going to get the new stuff.

This logic may not make sense, and I'm not defending or promoting it; I'm just explaining some of the thinking behind the scenes.

Hmm. That's pretty dumb and kinda scummy. I would feel bad.

Facinating...

In case it hasn't already been mentioned, neither of these guys have worked at GW for 5+ years so you can't put much stock in what they are saying. That 5 years has them missing out on all of 5th edition 40k and the massive changes there, the release of 8th Fantasy, the huge boom in royalties from computer games and the sweeping changes to games development and company policies (cost cutting etc).

I agree with those who didn't find the conversation very illuminating. On most of the big, juicy questions where I wanted to see some candid, straight-shooting answers he opted for cheery positivity and "I don't really know, but in my opinion..."

Also, a couple of times other people jumped in to answer important questions, but they just gave near-verbatim copies of the same sort of reasoning we've seen in discussion threads on places like Dakka and Warseer... no real insider info, or express confirmation of why policy X exists or why decision Y was made.

The one interesting thing I took from it was the claim that 40K and WFB sales are basically on par with each other.

He says Space Marines make up 12% of total GW sales and 40k/Fantasy are roughly the same popularity level. Found those two things the most interesting.

Harriticus wrote:He says Space Marines make up 12% of total GW sales and 40k/Fantasy are roughly the same popularity level. Found those two things the most interesting.

Generic vanilla marines or all imperial marines? Sales or revenue?

I actually found the article very interesting (a little one sided but interesting).

The keeping future releases underwraps is totally understandable when you think about it. If GW announced a new version of 40k was being released in (say) July, how many copies of the current rule book/AOBR would they sell between now and then? Very little. So they keep the details quiet and people buy the rules and game as normal and six months worth of sales are not affected. Same applies for anything in the pipeline. Would you buy a codex if you knew it was being replaced in six months?

The business model for GW works especially the "Goblin unit" of pricing. If people play the games to win they are going to pay extra for a more competitive unit. It's just a fact. I read a post about a non-battlesuit army for Tau would be too uncompetitive. So guess what, Battlesuits are more expensive than fire warriors. Players will pay to have the suits to be competitive rather than building a cheaper uncompetitive army. I'm happy to be proved wrong on that but if you want the best unit in the vampire counts army you better be prepared to shell out some serious money on those blood knights.

My only issue with the GW business model is the lack of advertising. They could bring in a lot of new players if they spent some money. I'm guessing the majority of people found out about the hobby is through a friend (I know I did). Although I think LOTR may have brought some players in. The only marketing is the White Dwarf magazine which is also very clever. We basically allow GW to make a profit on its advertising because that is what the magazine is. Even the battle reports and strategy articles focus on new releases and highlight that you NEED the more expensive releases to make your army competitive.

Just my two cents.

ShumaGorath wrote:Generic vanilla marines or all imperial marines? Sales or revenue?

All imperial. Here is quote:

VladtheEmailer wrote: It's true that space marines make up roughly 12% of sales, and all of the other races make up roughly 2% each, but that's lumping Ultramarines, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc. all in one big bunch.
40k and Fantasy actually split right down the middle in terms of actual sales. Popularity, as you say, may tend towards 40k in your area, but overall, both are really equally popular, according to the actual sales figures.
The "best" players are the ones who run armies they are proud of. A LOT of math goes into the playtesting (as flawed as it may prove), and I helped a bit with that (having a degree in math, I was asked a couple of times for insight into how much something might be worth; this was mostly informal, of course, as I didn't work in the design studio, but my point is that they thought about it).
I've seen people win with every single race, so I can't advocate one over the other.
Except, of course, High Elves, which are clearly superior to Dark Angels.

Powerguy wrote:In case it hasn't already been mentioned, neither of these guys have worked at GW for 5+ years so you can't put much stock in what they are saying. That 5 years has them missing out on all of 5th edition 40k and the massive changes there, the release of 8th Fantasy, the huge boom in royalties from computer games and the sweeping changes to games development and company policies (cost cutting etc).

I would put more stock in what he says, working with 5 year old info, than I would in anything asserted by the armchair CEOs on internet discussion boards. They were also at the company for over a decade, and I'm sure they are much more knowledgeable on company operations than anyone here can claim to be.

I was pretty bothered by the, for lack of a more delicate term, snobbishness they had towards playing the game. Basically, if you don't name every model in your army, paint individual heraldry, and play every game as a narrative then you're doing it wrong.

I was really bothered by the well-worn "GW's a miniatures company, not a games company" combined with his assertion that the pricing for the public was directly tied to a model's in-game performance.

There's a lot of contradictions in this guy's view of how GW works; I kinda hope he's just an elaborate troll or wasn't that high in the food chain.

Cadaver wrote:

Powerguy wrote:In case it hasn't already been mentioned, neither of these guys have worked at GW for 5+ years so you can't put much stock in what they are saying. That 5 years has them missing out on all of 5th edition 40k and the massive changes there, the release of 8th Fantasy, the huge boom in royalties from computer games and the sweeping changes to games development and company policies (cost cutting etc).

I would put more stock in what he says, working with 5 year old info, than I would in anything asserted by the armchair CEOs on internet discussion boards. They were also at the company for over a decade, and I'm sure they are much more knowledgeable on company operations than anyone here can claim to be.

Tbh that goes without saying, anyone who listens to a CEOs address rather than looking at the actual numbers to work out what's going on is an idiot. My point was that on the operational side of things some stuff might still be relevant, but anything numbers related is incredibly unreliable. GW has changed quite a bit in the last 5 years both in terms of rules development and business policies so even the day to way stuff could be different (we know they have cleaned house once which undoubtedly saw some things change). Just as an example, given the massive boom from 5th edition 40k over the last 4 years and the way that 8th Fantasy has failed pretty hard there is no way I can believe that 40k and Fantasy sales are roughly equal, things would have been leaning towards 40k even before 8th arrived. Of course we can't say definitely otherwise, but missing the most successful era of 40k and probably the least successful launch of a Fantasy edition can't be good for you data.

Seems just the basic stuff we've been told before. Miniatures not games. FUN FUN FUN tournaments are bad! Blah blah blah.
Goblin Index is hated but good to have some proof.

One thing I must ask though. Who is Dirty Steve?

VikingScott wrote:Seems just the basic stuff we've been told before. Miniatures not games. FUN FUN FUN tournaments are bad! Blah blah blah.
Goblin Index is hated but good to have some proof.

One thing I must ask though. Who is Dirty Steve?

Dirty Steve used to run a column in WD. People would ask him questions and advice and he'd answer.

Mewens wrote:I was really bothered by the well-worn "GW's a miniatures company, not a games company" combined with his assertion that the pricing for the public was directly tied to a model's in-game performance.

There's a lot of contradictions in this guy's view of how GW works; I kinda hope he's just an elaborate troll or wasn't that high in the food chain.

That's their company philosophy; you can accept it, or not, but don't expect it to change.

That's not what he said. He said it was tied to their point value, not in game performance. Those two may overlap, but he didn't specifically say it was based on model performance, he said it was based on unit price.

He's definitely no troll, though.

Powerguy wrote:
Tbh that goes without saying, anyone who listens to a CEOs address rather than looking at the actual numbers to work out what's going on is an idiot. My point was that on the operational side of things some stuff might still be relevant, but anything numbers related is incredibly unreliable. GW has changed quite a bit in the last 5 years both in terms of rules development and business policies so even the day to way stuff could be different (we know they have cleaned house once which undoubtedly saw some things change). Just as an example, given the massive boom from 5th edition 40k over the last 4 years and the way that 8th Fantasy has failed pretty hard there is no way I can believe that 40k and Fantasy sales are roughly equal, things would have been leaning towards 40k even before 8th arrived. Of course we can't say definitely otherwise, but missing the most successful era of 40k and probably the least successful launch of a Fantasy edition can't be good for you data.

We can speculate, but we don't know for sure. Local and even regional figures aren't a reflection of the entire consumer base, so we just can't say with any certainly what global sales figures look like, because we don;t have that info. We have anecdotal evidence and conjecture. My point is, he knows, or did know this info very well being in trade sales. I hold his knowledge of the company in higher regard than people on this forum, many of whom seem to have a vested interest in wanting GW to fail, or at the very least a strong desire to believe GW are doing poorly, because of whatever grudges they hold.

Brother SRM wrote:
Dirty Steve used to run a column in WD. People would ask him questions and advice and he'd answer.

He was also the US Staff Photographer. Most of the images from WD when I was growing up were taken by him. His answers column was awesome back in the day. Even if their info isn't the most current, it's extremely cool for me personally to hear about their experiences in the company, especially about the old days that I am pretty nostalgic for.

I've read through all of that mess and really there is nothing new to me that I already knew about. Really I was hoping for something new and refreshing about the corporation.

At times you get far better information on this site on what is going on with the hobby than what is floating around the ebbs and flows of the interwebs.

Good Job Dakka.

Silver_skates wrote:I actually found the article very interesting (a little one sided but interesting).

The keeping future releases underwraps is totally understandable when you think about it. If GW announced a new version of 40k was being released in (say) July, how many copies of the current rule book/AOBR would they sell between now and then? Very little. So they keep the details quiet and people buy the rules and game as normal and six months worth of sales are not affected. Same applies for anything in the pipeline. Would you buy a codex if you knew it was being replaced in six months?

Nope. And maybe, if they announced things ahead of time i'd do what happened with PP when 2nd ed Warmahordes came out: I would get excited about the new edition, play games with the Beta Test rules, discuss things with my local game group, and buy new models secure in the fact that nothing I had that was useful was changing. Or, like GW, I could hear a RUMOR that 6th ed MIGHT be coming out within the year, and buy NOTHING because I'm too worried that the new army I'd rather buy will be totally obsolete. Why would I do this? Because I am a gamer and I spend time on this little known place called THE INTERNET where people share rumors about games.

The business model for GW works especially the "Goblin unit" of pricing. If people play the games to win they are going to pay extra for a more competitive unit. It's just a fact. I read a post about a non-battlesuit army for Tau would be too uncompetitive. So guess what, Battlesuits are more expensive than fire warriors. Players will pay to have the suits to be competitive rather than building a cheaper uncompetitive army. I'm happy to be proved wrong on that but if you want the best unit in the vampire counts army you better be prepared to shell out some serious money on those blood knights.

*snip*

Just my two cents.

So... that explains Draigo-wing how? If that were the case, GK Termies should cost $100 a box too. And I NEVER found Bloodknights so potent that they should be $100 on the effectiveness scale. In fact, in my VC armies all I ever needed were boxes of skellies. Many, many units of skellies. Each box was EASILY as effective (if not more so) in the 7e meta than BK were. And after the changes to 8e, should not all cavalry have DECREASED in price? The "Dollar/Euro/Peso/Rupee cost= game effectiveness" thing has been mentioned often, and is just as often contradicted. All by "insiders." The only thing these types of AMAs tell me is that no one really knows what is going on at GW. Likely, sadly, least of all GW.

Razorbacks would also be more expensive than whirlwinds.
Flayed ones would be less expensive than necron warriors.
Plague marines would be more expensive than thousand suns.
Vulkan Hestan would be 40 dollars.
Tankbustas would be free.
Hive guard would cost more than lictors.
Assault terminators would cost more than regular ones.

Etc, etc, etc.

ShumaGorath wrote:Razorbacks would also be more expensive than whirlwinds.
Flayed ones would be less expensive than necron warriors.
Plague marines would be more expensive than thousand suns.
Vulkan Hestan would be 40 dollars.
Tankbustas would be free.
Hive guard would cost more than lictors.
Assault terminators would cost more than regular ones.

Etc, etc, etc.

The actual pricing is based more on how many of X you may need. That is sort of how it factors out. I'm probably only going to need a box or two of Terminators in my army. That's $50 each. Meanwhile, the tactical squad has just as much (if not more) plastic in the box, but only costs $37. That's justified to GW by the fact that I'm going to need two to three boxes of tactical Marines in my army while I only need one or two of Terminators.

Metal/Finecast models are priced in bizarro land where up is white and Sunday is Tuesday; some of it makes sense and some of it doesn't.

I’ll have to agree that the article was interesting but wasn’t in depth enough and the opinions were somewhat biased (they tended to gloss over topics they didn’t like). All in all it was a bit of a wasted opportunity IMO.

In regards to the “goblin index”, I reckon this theory was more relevant 5-10 years ago as the pricing is less structured than it used to be. The “bizarro land” pricing index, as mention by Brother SRM, seems to be more of the norm these days and is not solely limited to finecast. I dare say the only prices that partially make sense and fit within the “goblin index” are standard troop boxes like tac marines and standard elites boxes like terminators. It’s non standard things that appear to be priced quite randomly.

Since the majority of economic policies these days seem to come from bizarro land, it makes sense that GW would follow suit.

Really, GW isn't run all that well, their pricing is based entirely on how much you need in the army/points value/arbitrary bananas, and they're so tight-lipped that they scare the customers who don't have a vast disposable income into not buying anything at all for several months at a time if a rumor comes out that maybe in a few months we'll see a new Edition or codex or whatever. Those that have a significant disposable income couldn't care less and will buy whatever because they can.

As for this Q&A, it is illuminating. The guy seems to love GW, but to me it seems that he's following the "well, I had fun/have fun with GW and their products, so why bad-mouth it?" train of thought. Really, I would like someone a bit more objective about GW, but hey. I'm not complaining.

Brother SRM wrote:
Dirty Steve used to run a column in WD. People would ask him questions and advice and he'd answer.

He was also the US Staff Photographer. Most of the images from WD when I was growing up were taken by him. His answers column was awesome back in the day. Even if their info isn't the most current, it's extremely cool for me personally to hear about their experiences in the company, especially about the old days that I am pretty nostalgic for.

Manchu wrote:

VladtheEmailer wrote:I don't know anything about Matt Ward. Sorry!

Clearly.

Not very educational. Seems a nice chappy though.

That actually convinced me that the guy is legit. A troll would have made up all kinds of juicy stuff about what's hot & trendy right now, ie. Matt Ward. Fakes always tell people what they want to hear.

I can't believe people can accept the line that secrecy is used to stop list sales of products going out of production. Or that these two describe it as reasonable, they seem a bit on the kool-aid throughout as though GW can do no wrong.

Yes it stops GW losing money in the months before a rerelease but that's all it is there to do, look after their assets and not their customers. It's plain dishonest and the equivalent of planned obsolescence to sell you something knowing you'll need a new edition in a matter of months. And these rulebooks aren't cheap. It's dishonest, even Wizards of the Coast have made a press release that D&D is having a 5th edition in the planning stages, but GW will sell you stuff with a denial and a smile today knowing that the next edition is probably already in stages of finalisation and only 6 months away from the shelves.

I really didn't get much out of these postings. Their insight, while interesting, is a bit dated. GW is not the same company it was 5+ years ago.