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.
Ah forget it. I don't care what anyone else thinks about prices.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/05/28 02:02:00
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life.
Thanks for the economics refresher Ozymandias. It's been a long time since the one college econ class I took but your explanation puts things in a better perspective. I am very brand loyal to GW but I just can't shell out the bucks now that I am a married man that doesn't have tons of disposable income. As of now I only buy 1-3 GW products a year (not counting White Dwarf). If the prices were lower I would certainly end up spending more per year since the price per unit would be less daunting per trip to the cash register.
Surtur wrote: It is simplest to think of it in competition with every other wargame, in which case there are tons of alternatives and substitutes
It might be simplest but I don't think it paints the full picture. Most people that get out of GW aren't going to replace it with a competitors wargame. I know my friends and I play multiple systems from multiple manufacturers but I also know we are in the minority in the local gaming scene. Most people don't even collect multiple forces for a single system, let alone multiple systems. The real competition for GWs market is just life. Their customers grow up, and stop wanting to play with toy soldiers. Second is other hobbies and interests like camping, paintball, motorbikes, video games, and so on.
Griever wrote: Not to mention, I can buy just diablo 3 and enjoy it.
Don't even get me started. If I buy Diablo 3 I then have to buy a whole new PC.
"Did you ever notice how in the Bible, when ever God needed to punish someone, or make an example, or whenever God needed a killing, he sent an angel? Did you ever wonder what a creature like that must be like? A whole existence spent praising your God, but always with one wing dipped in blood. Would you ever really want to see an angel?"
Milisim wrote:I find the reverse argument is true with videogames... Most games I buy are overhyped. I buy them for $60 and then within about 10-14 days later, I delete it from my HDD.
I could buy a couple of boxes of models for that and play with them for the rest of my life....
Im not saying that $60 for a few plastic models is a good deal, im just saying Video games are an even WORSE purchase in most cases compared to playing TT games.
However, video games go down in price fairly quickly over time.
"It is the great irony of the Legiones Astartes: engineered to kill to achieve a victory of peace that they can then be no part of." - Roboute Guilliman
"As I recall, your face was tortured. Imagine that - the Master of the Wolves, his ferocity twisted into grief. And yet you still carried out your duty. You always did what was asked of you. So loyal. So tenacious. Truly you were the attack dog of the Emperor. You took no pleasure in what you did. I knew that then, and I know it now. But all things change, my brother. I'm not the same as I was, and you're... well, let us not mention where you are now." - Magnus the Red, to a statue of Leman Russ
Kaldor wrote:
It might be simplest but I don't think it paints the full picture. Most people that get out of GW aren't going to replace it with a competitors wargame. I know my friends and I play multiple systems from multiple manufacturers but I also know we are in the minority in the local gaming scene. Most people don't even collect multiple forces for a single system, let alone multiple systems. The real competition for GWs market is just life. Their customers grow up, and stop wanting to play with toy soldiers. Second is other hobbies and interests like camping, paintball, motorbikes, video games, and so on.
Although it is also just local experience, I have the complete opposite picture. When we started with Warmachine/Hordes here locally, we drew in a lot of people that had quit GW either recently or a few years ago - our initial original playerbase was late 20-somethings and 30-somethings (many with families and children) that had stopped playing GW games but due to the local GW-exclusive gaming scene had nowwhere to go until we showed up. The same thing is happening now with Infinity - old 40k players are showing up realizing that there is an alternative to 40k. Several of them continue playing 40k. Many of these people also start multiple systems. The only ones that tend to stay entirely exclusive are the tournament-invested players and the background-obsessives.
For what many people think is GW's real market - the 10-15 year olds they use the churn'n'burn strategy on - you are undoubtedly right, though.
Ozymandias wrote:Well the strength of Australia's dollar is a relatively new phenomenon. And the average income of an Australian is higher than the average income of a US citizen, so I don't think your prices are going down anytime soon.
And don't they pay more for everything down under? Like isn't a video game $60US but $100Aus?
It has less to do with income and more to do with when prices were set vs the exchange rate at the time. AUD$100 games made sense when your pre-current gen games were US$50 and your dollar was worth twice ours. Ditto GW prices as they were set when the £ was worth three times the Aussie dollar. They've never been redone. Of course, there's currently an open submission government look into these high prices and how they can be changed.
But even if you accept the idea that it's down to average household wage, it doesn't explain why the prices in Japan/Brazil/NZ/South Africa are all so much higher than the UK/US. I can't imagine all these countries are making money hand over fist in comparison to the UK/US.
Lanrak wrote:I was responding to the impression the previous poster had about Mantic wanting you to use only thier miantures.(I could have totaly misunderstood!)
I am sure they would prefer you to use some of thier minature and hobby product range.
BUT getting the games played by gamers and generating positive word of mouth appears to be far more important to Ronnie.
And I think he is right!
That was the same post I was responding to, too.
Possibly misunderstood what I was trying to say as I did kinda fluff it up. Pretty much mantic range is ugly to me, but they will obviously, for their own game have units which they make the models for like for example dragon cavalry I think the elves have. Simple economics make a game, why not make the models too and cash in . They should however push their range for the game, which they do.
infinite_array wrote:
nkelsch wrote:
infinite_array wrote:
Dysartes wrote:I didn't think KoW insisted that you use Mantic figures - though I'm not 100% sure on that.
Nope.
In fact, there's a thread over in the KoW forum discussing using the KoW rules with 10mm minis - something I want to try out.
Dear god, that would be awesome.
If someone made 6mm or 10mm figures and had a good ruleset with them I would be really attracted to trying out that game system. What 10mm models are they using with the KOW rules? I am not aware of much fantasy 10mm.
Pendraken!
Awesome line of 10mm Fantasy. You've got Orcs, Goblins, Men, Elves, Dwarves, Undead, and a tone more.
Basing to use is Warmaster-style (so people can use their Warmaster and Warmaster Ancients for KoW and KoW Historical), so 40mm x 20mm basing, 5 infantry to a base. Then change all measurements from inches to centimeters.
That does indeed open up an very, very interesting possibility, I just still have trouble getting past that interview with Alessio being a hardcore "YOU VILL PLAY AZ I HAV COMMANDED OR ZE LABOUR CAMP VILL BE ZE NEXT STOP!!" type.
Still I'm hoping AoW can also bring some competition to the market of fantasy wargames. But with how much the AOW heroes costare they really that different to GW's pricing in the rest of the world? Here in the UK they are roughly the same, albeit some very nice sculpts.
And will they go down the pitfall of GW type pricing for upcoming regiments? eg: This unit is an elite unit, we shall charge more, as that knid of pricing risks another lot of forums with the same threads but with GW replaced with AoW.
End of the day if those divendends payed out were "truely spare money" then the company is A: still making a lot of profit, its good for a while yet unless everyone realises they have played for mugs since the mid 90's and B: Gouging us for the short term, after all, inventors now don't care about the long term returns, with the money they made to have it "truely spare" the company is doing well and doesn't need another hike in the products prices, unless it is to start to cover the rising overheads from shop floor space, to R&D.
With all the kickstarters happening of late, what if GW turned around and lowered prices but we had to help them fund future projects I wonder...
GW acts like they are the only miniature war-gaming company on earth, and that's why they treat their products as if they were inelastic. From their perspective they are bread, milk and petrol, not high-end chocolate and gourmet potato chips.
Just Dave wrote:However, video games go down in price fairly quickly over time.
That's an interesting point. Over time games go down. Over time, 10 Cadians cost more than 20 Cadians used to cost. That's... significant, I think.
I just bought Kingdoms Of Amalur. I ordered it from a place in the UK called "Ozgamers", as it's a site set up specifically to sell games and other related items to Australians. Shipping is free, and prices are greatly reduced compared to on-shore retailers. They're the Maelstrom of 360/PS3/PC games. Now this game, Kingdoms Of Amalur, cost me AUD$30. This was after a AUD$20 price drop it had the other day. I look at EB Games in OZ and JB Hi-Fi and it's AUD$108 from EB and AUD89 from JB. I got it for AUD$30.
Hi Vermillion.
I think Alessio was trying to say ' Kings of War can support competative play IF you want to play it that way.'
But his enthusiasm/passion for his own game, may have given the wrong impression to more casual gamers.
KoW is a clean elegant system that it SO easy to add narrative too if you want to.OR play competative games with chess clocks if you want to.Or find a middle ground you are happy with.
I see the Kings of War rules as a solid foundation to allow gamers to play the games they want to.
Which is the antithisis of GW plc core games.Where they TELL you how they want you to play and with what models .(EG play the same way they do, or the game falls apart!)
From my experiance its far easier to add narrative and make up your own senarios for a well defined internaly consistant rule set.
Than it is to find a way to make a poorly defined inconsistant rule set work for competative play.
You can still down load free rules and army lists from Mantic.So to try out KoW is very cheap.
If you dont like it you have wasted about 20 sheets of printer paper MAX!
Compared £70 for WHFB rule book and army book?
FACT GW plc has a gross margin of 76%.
Thats 76% profit BEFORE logistics and retail costs are accounted for.
And only 13% profit after the cost of logistics and retail are taken out.
(Spending about £70m on B&M stores, when you only make £16M profit is ridiculous!IMO.)
So if GW plc adjusted its buisness model to suit todays market.They could HALVE retail prices and make MORE profit!
Hyd wrote:Pretty much what I wanted to answer after reading the OP. I raised an eyebrow when Ozymandias mentioned luxury products as an example of inelastic goods, as they usually have a high number of substitutes available ; essential goods, on the other hand, are unanimously considered inelastic (you can only curb your consumption of gasoline or water so much, thus you'll have to accept price changes on those).
The rationale about relative inelasticity being the reason for repeated price hikes still stands. Indeed, the way you could say GW products are inelastic is if we assume its customers are extremely loyal and therefore do not consider other options as satisfying substitutes. It's already been mentioned what can make this true : great intellectual property, an established presence and worldwide community, relative quality of models.
However, they might be running into problems if we consider customer loyalty to be their best asset. It's no secret here that they are getting on the nerves of their "core" fanbase with an apparently increasing disregard, and some are quitting as a result. If we assume their main target is teenagers, they have quite a challenge on their hands if they want to retain their loyalty.
So unless they somehow "recruit" more mature customers than they lose, or unless they do manage to shape youngsters into long-term loyal clients, that key asset of theirs might be unravelling. Which means they're overestimating the inelasticity of their products.
Pure conjecture on my part, but their lingering first-mover advantage in the world of non-historical wargames (you could say they are to fantasy miniatures what Apple is to tablets) might be all that keeps them afloat today. I can't see them gaining ground at present, and the numbers seem to indicate they're losing some. As Surtur pointed out (thanks by the way, your post was not lost on me at least !), they're running out of easy solutions.
I agree with this. One of GW's strongest asset is its customer loyalty, which is largely driven by GW's fictional universes. Thus, GW views its IP as an incredibly important asset. However, GW has not been husbanding customer loyalty very well over the past few years. I think there are folks at GW, such as Mr. Wells, that have a mind to change this state of affairs, but I think it is one of the most significant reasonas why GW seems to be declining. GW takes its customers for granted, due to a long period of market dominance.
Kirasu: Have we fallen so far that we are excited that GW is giving us the opportunity to spend 58$ for JUST the rules? Surprised it's not "Dataslate: Assault Phase"
AlexHolker: "The power loader is a forklift. The public doesn't complain about a forklift not having frontal armour protecting the crew compartment because the only enemy it is designed to face is the OHSA violation."
AlexHolker: "Allow me to put it this way: Paramount is Skynet, reboots are termination attempts, and your childhood is John Connor."
I plan now just ot buy stuff of 3rd parties, I still ant stuff nos but these prices are killing me so now I order from places like the war store and companies that use ebay. I recently bought 30 blood letters from a company nos for $60 USD inlcuding shipping. GW will charge me over $90 USD iclding shipping. It just doesn't make economic sense for me to buy from GW. My local GW is consantly trying to convince us that we need to support them, and my response it always, "when your coperate supports us, the gamers I'll support you".
It's a tiny plastic truck, selling for £40+.
I'm all for economic demand, but if they have to charge that much to fill a mould with the cheapest toy resource on the market, then the company must be making sickeningly bad financial decisions.
Milisim wrote:I find the reverse argument is true with videogames... Most games I buy are overhyped. I buy them for $60 and then within about 10-14 days later, I delete it from my HDD.
I could buy a couple of boxes of models for that and play with them for the rest of my life....
Im not saying that $60 for a few plastic models is a good deal, im just saying Video games are an even WORSE purchase in most cases compared to playing TT games.
This is nonsense.
I bought this game in 2003. I'm still playing it to this day.
If you are wise, and purchase the right product, on the right platform, it can serve as the bases for modding and player generated content, in which case a $20 or $30 purchase can be extended to a lifespan of 4 or 5 years, easily. Community building, networking, competitive play, or as a creative outlet. I was pretty astonished by the modeling in Firestorm over Kronus, for instance - I should have expected that from 40k fans, but quite literally the modder's texturework surpasses the developer's, and there are something like 10 times as many color schemes per army. Keep in mind, all of that content is free, it has to be free by law, but it inevitably extends the lifespan of the product and the enjoyment I get out of it quite a bit.
I'm sorry, somewhat off-topic, but a pet peeve of mine, and to the point - it's all about wisdom and how you spend your money. Some guys are augmenting their tabletop gaming with Privateer Press, the secondhand market, or some other form of modeling while this all blows over and the price hits the ceiling from market pressure and rebounds into something of a more sensible range.
I don't buy games when they're $60, and a lot of people that have been playing videogames for many years will tell you that's stupid, and that you only do it in cases of big mega blockbuster releases, typically with games like Halo or Gears of War that hold their value over the years on the resale and primary market and also happen to have an unusual amount of content and specially high production values, e.g. stuff that actually make it worth the $60 cost of entry.
Anyway, cheers.
Fang, son of Great Fang, the traitor we seek, The laws of the brethren say this: That only the king sees the crown of the gods, And he, the usurper, must die.
Mother earth is pregnant for the third time, for y'all have knocked her up. I have tasted the maggots in the mind of the universe, but I was not offended. For I knew I had to rise above it all, or drown in my own gak.
With the past few years being so hard across the world economically I have felt the pinch. That said the past decade if I have bought a computer game it has HAD to last (crazy assed ex's and all that) so I've been following the above advice for games already .
Second hand games being a bargain though seems to be becoming rarer. Prices for them are slowly creeping closer and closer to the price of the new counterparts, and with the talk of one use DLC codes becoming more popular it shows that game makers want games to become something that is paid for over and over.
The economics behind it is fair IMO (the makers getting a small amount each sale to unlock x, y or z, or DLC) but with digital downloads becoming more the norm I am feeling sadder and sadder about the future of second hand books, games and so on.
Miniatures however being sold second hand seem to vary between retaining value, increasing and decreasing depending on demand. Obviously limited editions will rise in value so long as there are collectors, but with the prices of new rising, how long until even second hand the demand for them starts pricing people out the market?
Let us hope more companies look at GW, see the numbers behind the figures and realise that toys are for all
Ozymandias wrote:Well the strength of Australia's dollar is a relatively new phenomenon. And the average income of an Australian is higher than the average income of a US citizen, so I don't think your prices are going down anytime soon.
And don't they pay more for everything down under? Like isn't a video game $60US but $100Aus?
Max Payne 3 cost me 89.
Tactical marines cost me 62.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm a fairly big gamer, and I'm seeing a slightly different argument coming out of the side here
When I play games or buy things, I use a time-for-money system, except on things where the usage is necessary (phone, PC.)
Good time for money is usually 1$/hr.
bad time for money is usually 1$/6minutes (10$/hr)
Video games vary a lot for me, I get a lot out of some (mount and blade costing me $50 all up, but I have 300 hours clocked on it - $1 for six hours of gameplay.) and others I get very little out of (Space marine, I paid $100 but only played for 15 hours, $6.xx an hour.)
But of course, this doesn't take into account enjoyability:
Shogun 2: TW I got a $1 ratio for, but in the end that linked to me simply wanting to finish the game and by the end of it I no longer enjoyed it.
Bastion got me a $2 for every hour but I loved every second of it.
Warhammer... warhammer can work the same way.
Think about this:
I have a unit of tactical marines that I use in every game. I've had them for 2 and a half years. I payed $50 for them and I've used them in (by my approximation) 2 games a month for those two years, each lasting say, two hours. that's 260 games and 520 hours of game time - more than I got out of Mount and blade! yet I paid the same.
This whole argument says that GW prices are reasonable. They aren't. They are only as reasonable as the value YOU get out of the marines.
Me, being a person who makes a point of playing a game or two every month at the least, gets a lot out of my models. But Jim Crow, the bloke who plays salamanders but doesn't play more than four times a year, gets far less out of his unit of tactical marines than me - even if he has had them the whole time.
So, I'm saying you get what you put in. The price is too high, but I will pay it because of what I get out of my $62.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/06 08:14:16
I started to play 40k in the early 90's and slowly saw their increase in price and their decrease in figures per blister(/box)
every price increase came with some reason what was often BSIMHO, (metal prices bla, bla).
When i lived in Europe there were a lot of makers of miniatures in Germany and England who didn't feel the need to increase their prices.
I was an avid collector of space marine stuff and even that i have a good paying job, i always had a "mental" limit about what i would spend per month on GW stuff.
So paying 35$ for one figure in resin (which IMO is for showcase models not table top figures) is jus ludicrous.
If they don't change their course then in a few years they will be a footnote in history.
This article from January says all is well, they're obviously neutral, I doubt GW effed it all up too much in 4 and a bit months.
A company being in profit is healthy if they can sustain it. If they can't sustain it though the company is in serious trouble.
GW's revenues have been fairly static since the LoTR bubble burst yet in that time they have had an annual above inflation price rise (I think it averages out to about 7%). If all was well in GW towers then their revenues would be increasing by the same margin, they haven't.
The most logical explanation for this is that their sales are falling at about the same rate as their price increases and have been for years. They are in profit as they have low overheads (aside from their hugely expensive shops) and have aggresviely cut costs but there isn't much more than they can do now short of moving their manufacturing to the far east or closing all their shops.
The annual price increase is simple idiocy and I think the culture at GW is to blame; they clearly see themselves as distinct from their competitors, that they are intrinsicly superior and that their customers will blindly follow them. I don't think that GW will ultimately go under, they aren't in immediate danger and they have time to set their house in order, but they really need a good sharp shock. I think the wargaming landscape will look quite a lot different in 10 years time.
On a personal level I haven't bought anything from GW retail in about 4 years now and what little GW stuff I buy collect comes from Ebay.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/06 08:39:45
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
I was an avid collector of space marine stuff and even that i have a good paying job, i always had a "mental" limit about what i would spend per month on GW stuff.
So paying 35$ for one figure in resin (which IMO is for showcase models not table top figures) is jus ludicrous.
It's insane, GW takes it's customers for granted and that's the problem. In America at my local GW there are alot of kids who have big budgets because of their parents, that is one of the problems the peopel who will drop 1,000's of dollars a year. They are what inmho are the main cause of this, people who will follow GW blindly. They are what keeps the company afloat. Without people like them they would be seriously suffering.
IMO the price increases will mean that increasingly people will buy to a list rather than trying out different unit types. Less and less will buy directly from GW [why would you?] and will instead buy from discount webistes [ok GW still get their cut ] and from Ebay. Also fewer will start new armies.
This has been the impact on me. I bought 1500 points of CSM from Gifts for Geeks 4 years ago and have only bought from ebay since then. I've managed to get 1000 points of Lizardmen together without GW getting a penny of my money. The Night Lords army I've wanted to collect for years will probably never happen. And the only money GW get from me is £4.50 a month for White Dwarf, and they probably won't get that anymore because the last few issues have been shocking. Ok I'm only one person but I don't think I'm in a minority. Surely these price increases aren't sustainable?
Someone earlier in the thread mentioned that people less often attack Privateer Press's pricing when they are are on par with, or sometimes more than GW products, and I think it's a fair point to bring up. Why does PP garner so much positive attention from gamers, who while unhappy paying $82.50 for a Stormraven, won't think twice about shelling out $84.99 for a Battle Engine? Is it because we know once Privateer has announced a price for something it doesn't suddenly jump up 20% the next year? Is it because with PP they're constantly engaging their customer base on both their official forums, and at conventions and events that aren't just their own money grab? Perception means a lot. Privateer Press works hard to EARN my hobby dollars. They don't take for granted that I'll keep buying their product regardless of what they say or do, and that makes all the difference to me. Add onto that that aside from their occasional sale they aren't competing against independent retailers, and they don't tell me what retailers I have to purchase from, it makes me a happy customer that keeps returning to their game when I get bored.
derek wrote:Someone earlier in the thread mentioned that people less often attack Privateer Press's pricing when they are are on par with, or sometimes more than GW products, and I think it's a fair point to bring up. Why does PP garner so much positive attention from gamers, who while unhappy paying $82.50 for a Stormraven, won't think twice about shelling out $84.99 for a Battle Engine? Is it because we know once Privateer has announced a price for something it doesn't suddenly jump up 20% the next year? Is it because with PP they're constantly engaging their customer base on both their official forums, and at conventions and events that aren't just their own money grab? Perception means a lot. Privateer Press works hard to EARN my hobby dollars. They don't take for granted that I'll keep buying their product regardless of what they say or do, and that makes all the difference to me. Add onto that that aside from their occasional sale they aren't competing against independent retailers, and they don't tell me what retailers I have to purchase from, it makes me a happy customer that keeps returning to their game when I get bored.
That and their products are the same price here in Australia as they are overseas.
Also I am free to buy from discount web retailers, however at the moment I am choosing to buy local from the Combat Company cause they do a good job and ship free and fast.
Its a very good point you raise above. I don't think I have seen one negative topic started on PP business practices.
Some of the models may be priced the same but I need a lot less of them to play. They are clearly making a lot of right moves IMHO.
The other important factor about PP is that you only require a handful of models. Certainly they are expensive individually but a 50 point PP army is significantly cheaper than a 1750 point GW army.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
Palindrome wrote:The other important factor about PP is that you only require a handful of models. Certainly they are expensive individually but a 50 point PP army is significantly cheaper than a 1750 point GW army.
Sure but then you play a smaller game without so many models. Some people like the bigger games.
You can always just use less GW models and have smaller games. You could even play kill team battle missions which only requires a 200pt force or something and each model acts by itself. You could even twist the rules for your own benefit so you don't need to stick to the FOC or even to the minimum requirement of models per unit. If the codex gives a pointage for 5 models in the squad you can always work out what one would cost instead and do it that way.
I know that some people have legitimate gripes about GW but I never understood the "You don't need as much" argument. Some people might not need as much food as I do but it doesn't stop me from stuffing my face unneccesarily and it doesn't stop anybody else from buying less than me to eat.
Problem is that it is already ingrained in the miniature wargaming culture that 1500-2000 is the "normal" point game. It's hard to find a game to play with a 500-point army when everyone brought a 1500-2000 and they would feel like it would be a waste to bring all those minis and only play with a handful of them.
It's also widely believed that the game is more imbalanced (not saying that 40k is balanced... ever) in smaller point games,so there's also a stigma for that.
Palindrome wrote:The other important factor about PP is that you only require a handful of models. Certainly they are expensive individually but a 50 point PP army is significantly cheaper than a 1750 point GW army.
Sure but then you play a smaller game without so many models. Some people like the bigger games.
You can always just use less GW models and have smaller games. You could even play kill team battle missions which only requires a 200pt force or something and each model acts by itself. You could even twist the rules for your own benefit so you don't need to stick to the FOC or even to the minimum requirement of models per unit. If the codex gives a pointage for 5 models in the squad you can always work out what one would cost instead and do it that way.
I know that some people have legitimate gripes about GW but I never understood the "You don't need as much" argument. Some people might not need as much food as I do but it doesn't stop me from stuffing my face unneccesarily and it doesn't stop anybody else from buying less than me to eat.
Eh, had a longer post, but I'll sum it up this way:
If you just wanna have loads and loads of models, then GW is a better deal. But if you want to play games, PP is a better deal, unless for some reason you simply can't bring yourself to play skirmish scale games. And even then, if you want loads and loads of models, there are still manufacturers who sell 'em for less than GW does.
Also, I personally tend to find smaller games of 40K or Fantasy to be far less engaging than larger games. Generally to get the best bang for your buck you're playing 1500-2000 point games anyway.
Hell, if playing with boatloads of models is what makes the game for you, then play 10mm or 6mm Historicals. You can have thousands of models!
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2012/06/07 23:59:05
heartserenade wrote:Problem is that it is already ingrained in the miniature wargaming culture that 1500-2000 is the "normal" point game. It's hard to find a game to play with a 500-point army when everyone brought a 1500-2000 and they would feel like it would be a waste to bring all those minis and only play with a handful of them.
It's also widely believed that the game is more imbalanced (not saying that 40k is balanced... ever) in smaller point games,so there's also a stigma for that.
Absoloutely true, but it goes to show that people are still shelling out money for armies at the 1500 - 2000pt range. I was merely making an observation for those who didn't want to shell out that much.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RatBot wrote:Eh, had a longer post, but I'll sum it up this way:
If you just wanna have loads and loads of models, then GW is a better deal. But if you want to play games, PP is a better deal, unless for some reason you simply can't bring yourself to play skirmish scale games. And even then, if you want loads and loads of models, there are still manufacturers who sell 'em for less than GW does.
I was only commenting on the part where PP was better than GW because even though they are the same cost model to model you don't need as much to play. It is perfectly acceptable to play 200pt kill team games instead or slightly twist the rules accordingly to accomodate smaller games. I understand that some people may prefer PP or even do buisness with them because they don't like GW for whatever reason but I was only addressing that point.
Also, I personally tend to find smaller games of 40K or Fantasy to be far less engaging than larger games. Generally to get the best bang for your buck you're playing 1500-2000 point games anyway.
Absolutely, I love the larger games. It's more representative of an actual battle if you know what I mean. I've got nothing against skirmish games, I used to play one called Chainmail when it was about. Not anymore now though since WotC stopped making the models and the game.
Hell, if playing with boatloads of models is what makes the game for you, then play 10mm or 6mm Historicals. You can have thousands of models!
Sorry historicals aren't my thing really. I like the whole idea of futristic gentically modified humans rather than Napleon at the Battle of Waterloo scene. I find it a lot more exciting and interesting. lthough I understand if others do like those kind of games. Funny thing is usually I find history to be an interesting subject, I just don't like playing games on it. I think I've been brainwashed by the computer game industry to think that games should all be about lazer guns and space ships.
As for other games like Mantic, well I don't know anyone who plays. Heck I only know one person who plays Warmachine, my friend who got me into Chainmail and 40k to begin with. However I live in a different location now and I only get a game with him once a month or 2 months when I go home for holidays and despite it being a popular game down at the FLGS in the city near where I live, I'm not really sold on the game. My friend did give me a run down on it and I watched a couple of battle reports to see what it's like but as others have stated "Its just not the same". I liked the look of some of the Infinity models, although a few of them looked horrible to me but when I enquired about it down at the FLGS they only had a few core loyal players who play the game. So it's not the kind of game I can just pop down and get a match.
Gaming wise I go down to GW in the city and I pretty much enjoy it. The people down there are pretty good so I've gotten to know some of them pretty well. Also on tevery second Sunday I go to a gaming club where they play 40k/Fantasy. I also have a friend here at work who plays and he also comes down to the gaming club for a game when he isn't working. We've also arranged to go to Warhammer World next week for a day and booked a table.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/08 12:16:52
The PP prices vs GW prices is something I keep seeing, but no one compares the cost of the AoW character models to GW character model pricing often. OK again AoW are starting up, engaging the fan base and so on, but the prices are on par with GW's AFTER GW raised the prices this time round for finecast/metal.
Attempting to be devils advocate here, is it just the "let's bang on about GW" bandwagon effect?
My personal answer is no, simply because the price rises were not justified in my eyes, and believe that more people should shrug and let it go, use ebay or what they have already and see if lack of sales starts leading to lower pricing. AoW have the excuse of being more expensive in the UK because of importing from Spain.
PP, AoW, and 3rd party bitz companies all cost exactly the same as GW. Which is why I have no issues. Only mantic is less and they have ugly cheap-looking models when it comes to greenskins which I collect.
And every time someone says PP is cheaper due to needing less models... Who said you can't play 1000pt warhammer game? Comparing prices on anything but a model to model standard is disingenuous as a majority of people who buy these models never play the games associated with the games so it is a 'per model' cost.
My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA."
WAAAGH Squigeye: 3500 and counting 
. They should however push their range for the game, which they do.
.
Painting and modelling blog 
Dark Eldar 3000
DKOK 1000
Empire 3000 WIP
] and from Ebay. Also fewer will start new armies.
