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.

kburn wrote:
For socialisation, boardgames do far better with mates. They don't need to read 300+ page rulebooks, and you can play it with anyone, which is why its booming.

Yeah, but the chief advantage of tabletop gaming is that it is a hobby you can also practice alone - assembling & painting models, composing lists, arguing on the internet (*looks around*), and reading those lengthy tomes. Board games don't afford you that kind of hobby time. Wargaming's one chief advantage is what GW keeps claiming to be leaning on.

@Massawyrm - some kind of misquote there, I didn't say that

But anyways, boardgames, skirmish games, larger scale war games and computer games all serve a different niche of nerd. There are so many factors -- the modeling, painting and hobby is just as important to me as getting together with friends.

 Talys wrote:
@Massawyrm - some kind of misquote there, I didn't say that

But anyways, boardgames, skirmish games, larger scale war games and computer games all serve a different niche of nerd. There are so many factors -- the modeling, painting and hobby is just as important to me as getting together with friends.

=D fixed. Missed a line of code. =/

Warmachine fulfills my need for a good game with fair matches that I can just go to my FLGS and find someone to play with. It does something for me that no computer game or even board game can do.

I think Infinity has the highest quality metals and Malifaux has the highest quality plastics.

 Massawyrm wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
How did it not work? I remember 3-5th edition being quite popular locally compared to what it is now. The financial reports looked better for the company as well.

This is demonstrably false. GW's best years were 2012 & 2013, with 2013 (when 6th was in full swing) being the company's best year in its history. 2014 saw a big drop, which while a worse year than 2010, was still a better year than 2005 - 2009, and 2011. For reference here is the 2011 AR, the 2013 AR, and the 2014 AR.

Are you kidding me?

FY2012 and FY2013 are not even close to GW's best years.

You might want to familiarize yourself with the concept of inflation before you start linking to financial reports.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Warmachine fulfills my need for a good game with fair matches that I can just go to my FLGS and find someone to play with. It does something for me that no computer game or even board game can do.

I think Infinity has the highest quality metals and Malifaux has the highest quality plastics.

Pretty much totally agree with this. WMH is my favourite game overall, Infinity models are my favourite metals overall (although PP lately has been doing a fantastic job too) and Malifaux are my favourite plastics. Some of the big GW plastic kits are awesome, like the Knight (do wish the legs were poseable though) but overall their model quality isn't that amazing these days. It's pretty inconsistent. Certainly not 'best models in the world' anymore.

 Thud wrote:
You might want to familiarize yourself with the concept of inflation before you start linking to financial reports.

Yep. That was a dunderheaded mistake. I accidentally a word.

It was supposed to say it's *Modern* history. As the discussion was about post-ebay GW, it isn't really worth comparing numbers to anything earlier than 5th ed.

 Massawyrm wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
How did it not work? I remember 3-5th edition being quite popular locally compared to what it is now. The financial reports looked better for the company as well.

This is demonstrably false. GW's best years were 2012 & 2013, with 2013 (when 6th was in full swing) being the company's best year in its history. 2014 saw a big drop, which while a worse year than 2010, was still a better year than 2005 - 2009, and 2011. For reference here is the 2011 AR, the 2013 AR, and the 2014 AR.

And yet, that wasn't at all what you said, nor was it what we discussed.
We'd have to define when Ebay was considered large enough to be a threat. I'd like to say 1997, since that year showed a dramatic growth in transactions compared to the previous year.
But fair enough.

 Massawyrm wrote:

 Thud wrote:
You might want to familiarize yourself with the concept of inflation before you start linking to financial reports.

Yep. That was a dunderheaded mistake. I accidentally a word.

It was supposed to say it's *Modern* history. As the discussion was about post-ebay GW, it isn't really worth comparing numbers to anything earlier than 5th ed.

So... After 2002 when it bought Paypal, or after 2008 (post-worldwide expansion of eBay), or after 2011?

Because if you only count after 2011, then yes, 2012 and 2013 were GW's best years since 2014 was pretty damn bad and FY2015 isn't over yet (hint: it's not gonna be good).

After 2008? Nope. 2009, for example. Revenues of over £150m (inflation-corrected) compared to 2012's and 2013's ~£140m (also corrected for inflation). Operating profits were better, but that's hardly surprising as 12-13 was a period of massive cuts in their retail structure (especially in Europe), and to no one's surprise operating profits were thus down again to normal levels (although still below, for example, 2009 and 2010) in the following year.

Or after 2002? Not even close. 2005 was when they peaked. Of course, GW being GW, they pissed away millions on who-knows-what and when the LOTR bubble burst they had three pretty lean years before they picked up again and had a very good year in 2009 with tremendous growth. Which, incidentally, was the first year of 5th edition. But, hey, coincidences, right?


FY12 was an OK year, and FY13 was a bad year for GW. Not catastrophic, but disappointing. The growing margins after tidying up the LOTR mess were over, and revenue was stagnant. So, that'd be the first year of 6th; zero growth, strong margins. Second year of 6th + release of 7th; large decline, halved margins. Is that Fantasy dying, or across the board (read: also 40k) poor performance? I don't know. I keep seeing rumours of all sorts of ridiculous sales numbers for Fantasy, and if it really is the case that Fantasy has lost two thirds of its sales in a very short period of time, then yeah, 6th/7th hasn't been that bad for 40k. We'll see.

Regardless of the Fantasy situation, though, if GW had maintained zero real growth since 2005 they'd have a revenue of around £200m today. They're pretty far from that (£123.5m in FY14, with further losses reported in the first half of the current FY). This is not the golden age, this is the decline.

Akiasura wrote:
We'd have to define when Ebay was considered large enough to be a threat. I'd like to say 1997, since that year showed a dramatic growth in transactions compared to the previous year.

In terms of the gaming industry, ebay didn't become a real threat until mid to late 00's. Until that time, storefront sell through was still considered part of the hobby. You went to the game store, looked around, bought the new book or models. GW built their whole model on that - they wanted people playing the game in stores. It was their best method of advertising. Hence all the prize support for tournies. Once Ebay altered its rating structure away from reviewing buyers, and made it easier for the average person to unload the goods from their garage, there was a massive uptick in the amount of gaming stuff online. Once home based "game stores" started appearing on ebay (Guys who got business licenses and bought direct from game wholesalers only to sell on ebay) it became a place that you could find just about anything you were looking for. And it started to erode the sell through market. Now we live in an era where buying from an FLGS is considered more of a giving back aspect of the community rather than the core. GW moved away from their in store marketing model and tried to find other ways to build the business.

Nowadays though, if someone learns about 40k, one of their first stops is to ebay. As I said before, one can now live out their entire lifecycle of playing 40k without giving a red cent to GW. And they're trying to find ways to work around that.

 Massawyrm wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
We'd have to define when Ebay was considered large enough to be a threat. I'd like to say 1997, since that year showed a dramatic growth in transactions compared to the previous year.

In terms of the gaming industry, ebay didn't become a real threat until mid to late 00's. Until that time, storefront sell through was still considered part of the hobby. You went to the game store, looked around, bought the new book or models. GW built their whole model on that - they wanted people playing the game in stores. It was their best method of advertising. Hence all the prize support for tournies. Once Ebay altered its rating structure away from reviewing buyers, and made it easier for the average person to unload the goods from their garage, there was a massive uptick in the amount of gaming stuff online. Once home based "game stores" started appearing on ebay (Guys who got business licenses and bought direct from game wholesalers only to sell on ebay) it became a place that you could find just about anything you were looking for. And it started to erode the sell through market. Now we live in an era where buying from an FLGS is considered more of a giving back aspect of the community rather than the core. GW moved away from their in store marketing model and tried to find other ways to build the business.

Nowadays though, if someone learns about 40k, one of their first stops is to ebay. As I said before, one can now live out their entire lifecycle of playing 40k without giving a red cent to GW. And they're trying to find ways to work around that.

Why don't you try addressing Thud's posts? Or my earlier ones? Because so far you've said contradictory statements, or changed the goal posts. Granted, this may have been a typo where you missed a word, but considering the part I quoted (and bolded) in my last post, I doubt that.

Your later comment is very anecdotal
I do agree with you about the FLGS being giving back from the community. Frankly, I think my local store is run terribly and should change the model from selling me products I'd rather buy online (which includes comics and graphic novels) to becoming more of a hangout spot. Think the comic book store from Kick-ass. But that is wildly off topic.

I appreciate your change in tone to a more civil one.

Barthus wrote:


Here's some other great games:
Malifaux:
This one is becoming really hard for me to resit picking up. I've heard amazing things about their new rules set. It looks great when set up on a nice table, and its extremely low cost compared to 40k

Infinity:
I tried this one back in its 2nd edition. I can say I didn't enjoy it as much and I thought I would. That said, they're in their 3rd edition now and I've played a game or two with the new rules. Its much better, and this is probably the best looking minis game I've ever seen with a properly set up table.

Warmachine:
Shameless plug for my favorite. Very very steep learning curve, but incredibly rewarding once you get the hang of it. I cannot recommend any other game more than this one. I understand many players dislike the looks of the minis, but the gameplay is worth it, I promise. There's a reason you hear a lot about this game from people who've left 40k.

X Wing:
I've heard nothing but good things about this game. I've only had a demo game, but it was very fun. It is very different from most other games out there, but it's become quite popular.

Dropzone Commander:
Much like X-Wing, I've heard really good things about this one. I've seen 3 or 4 games played, but I've not yet had a demo. Seems like a ton of fun, and if you've ever had an urge to play epic 40k, this game reminds me a lot of that.

With the exception of X-Wing, no one around here, in any of the local clubs, plays these games. People used to play Warmachine, but like most non-GW mini games, it was a passing fad. Between Pirates, Warmachine, DUST, Starship Troopers, Battletech, Dreamblade, and Confrontation, I've seen too many games come and go to buy into any new ones without some kind of reassurance that I'm not pissing my money away on minis for a game nobody in the area's going to play in a year.

Unlike RPG's, where I can drop $30-90 for everything I need to run/play indefinitely, 40k is a monumental time and money investment, as is every other mini game. If I'm going to make an investment like that ever again, I want to know its a reliable one.

WMH has been around for over a decade and are still growing. Its not a fad.

Anecdotal evidence: last night my wife, not knowing anything about tt gaming said "your Warmachine game looks way more popular than that Warhammer one."

 MWHistorian wrote:
WMH has been around for over a decade and are still growing. Its not a fad.

In the big picture, it might not be a fad--but for gaming groups it very well might be.

 MWHistorian wrote:
WMH has been around for over a decade and are still growing. Its not a fad.

Anecdotal evidence: last night my wife, not knowing anything about tt gaming said "your Warmachine game looks way more popular than that Warhammer one."

Our last journeyman league at the shop had over 24 players. The 40k escalation league had 3 players sign up and was canceled.

 Chute82 wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
WMH has been around for over a decade and are still growing. Its not a fad.

Anecdotal evidence: last night my wife, not knowing anything about tt gaming said "your Warmachine game looks way more popular than that Warhammer one."

Our last journeyman league at the shop had over 24 players. The 40k escalation league had 3 players sign up and was canceled.

However, as Kan said, in individual metas/groups it might be a fad. But in general it's not and is definitely growing.

Exactly, our local WMH scene has pretty much imploded thanks to a couple of key players moving away.

I know for a fact those guys still play where they are now though, so the game hast lost players, just our club.

The scene were I live, for WMH, seemed to implode due to (A) a player everyone wanted to avoid, but would always insist on a game, and (B) several key players switched to Star Wars (although A may have caused B).

Which is too bad. 40k is better for me than WMH, but WMH is better for some other players. I wish both would do well.

 Massawyrm wrote:
They know. They hate it. They stay loud and bitter hoping things will change next edition. (Spoiler warning: they won't. GW already tried to save the game by making it a competitive game. It didn't work.)

When was this?

About the time the game was really popular, the edition that most people still cite as the closest GW got to a solid, balanced rule set, the one that would have likely needed only a handful of minor tweaks and revisions to have been viable for competitive play.

Thank heavens they changed their minds!

So I got paid today and I am really really really considering looking at a Khorne Daemonkin Warband box. But then I remember how unbalanced the game is and how I'm probably spending $230 on stuff that's barely playable trash without spending a few hundred more (nevermind most of the local players only like to play 1850 points and pretend it's competitive), and on top of that I'd want a nice fluffy army that would likely get steamrolled against other players who don't play all that fluffy armies or play the right kind of fluffy armies, and I have to ask myself why on earth I'd really consider playing 40k again? I already play Warmachine.

Not snark, I've actually been trying to figure out good reasons why I should even take another look at 40k.

I've been really interested in trying to start up a few other game systems in my area, but after demoing a few it didnt go so well.

I tried Infinity, and the first few games were cool, but then each army really played the same as the other, and no matter what I tried it felt like each game was TAG vs TAG with other guys on the sideline.

I tried MERCS as well, but it didnt feel balanced. The guy I was playing with to teach me the rules lost to me 6 times, he was playing USSR and I was playing some sneaky fast guys. It felt like the fast guys always had the advantage no matter what.

Dreadball I actually really like, there are 2 other players in my area but they don't play often, as they work a lot and we have time setting up days to play.

Malifaux looks pretty cool, but I can't stand the model range. I heard the rules are fun but if I don't like the models I just can't do it.

Then I tried both X wing and Firestorm Armada. X wing was fun, and I might consider getting it, the only problem is the lack of model range. Firestorm Armada on the other hand was great fun, but no one in the area is interested in playing it, so If i bought the models they would just be nice display pieces.


Sadly Warhammer is the one that stays because everyone in my area plays it. I haven't tried Warmahordes, but i think i might try it out next. The models look nice, just need to find someone to teach me to play.

 luky7dayz wrote:
I've been really interested in trying to start up a few other game systems in my area, but after demoing a few it didnt go so well.

I tried Infinity, and the first few games were cool, but then each army really played the same as the other, and no matter what I tried it felt like each game was TAG vs TAG with other guys on the sideline.

I tried MERCS as well, but it didnt feel balanced. The guy I was playing with to teach me the rules lost to me 6 times, he was playing USSR and I was playing some sneaky fast guys. It felt like the fast guys always had the advantage no matter what.

Dreadball I actually really like, there are 2 other players in my area but they don't play often, as they work a lot and we have time setting up days to play.

Malifaux looks pretty cool, but I can't stand the model range. I heard the rules are fun but if I don't like the models I just can't do it.

Then I tried both X wing and Firestorm Armada. X wing was fun, and I might consider getting it, the only problem is the lack of model range. Firestorm Armada on the other hand was great fun, but no one in the area is interested in playing it, so If i bought the models they would just be nice display pieces.


Sadly Warhammer is the one that stays because everyone in my area plays it. I haven't tried Warmahordes, but i think i might try it out next. The models look nice, just need to find someone to teach me to play.

I'd really suggest keeping with Infinity. There are so many answers to TAG's that I'm kind of puzzled to how your group is doing TAG battles. Playing with objectives helps a great deal with that as well.
I play Uberfall Kommandos and they're a unique CC unit with a ton of special rules and don't play like anything else. The more you learn, the more options there are.
Just my $.02

 MWHistorian wrote:

 luky7dayz wrote:
I've been really interested in trying to start up a few other game systems in my area, but after demoing a few it didnt go so well.

I tried Infinity, and the first few games were cool, but then each army really played the same as the other, and no matter what I tried it felt like each game was TAG vs TAG with other guys on the sideline.

I tried MERCS as well, but it didnt feel balanced. The guy I was playing with to teach me the rules lost to me 6 times, he was playing USSR and I was playing some sneaky fast guys. It felt like the fast guys always had the advantage no matter what.

Dreadball I actually really like, there are 2 other players in my area but they don't play often, as they work a lot and we have time setting up days to play.

Malifaux looks pretty cool, but I can't stand the model range. I heard the rules are fun but if I don't like the models I just can't do it.

Then I tried both X wing and Firestorm Armada. X wing was fun, and I might consider getting it, the only problem is the lack of model range. Firestorm Armada on the other hand was great fun, but no one in the area is interested in playing it, so If i bought the models they would just be nice display pieces.


Sadly Warhammer is the one that stays because everyone in my area plays it. I haven't tried Warmahordes, but i think i might try it out next. The models look nice, just need to find someone to teach me to play.

I'd really suggest keeping with Infinity. There are so many answers to TAG's that I'm kind of puzzled to how your group is doing TAG battles. Playing with objectives helps a great deal with that as well.
I play Uberfall Kommandos and they're a unique CC unit with a ton of special rules and don't play like anything else. The more you learn, the more options there are.
Just my $.02

I played multiple games with TAG vs TAG. Sometimes I would hack their Tag, or they would do the same to mine. It always felt the easiest way would be to go TAG vs TAG. But that wasn't the part that turned me off, it was the fact that playing PanOceana, Yujing, and Aleph they all felt the exact same to me. The only faction that seemed truly different from the rest was Tohaa.

Idk if is just my group but something that 40k always has is this kind of camaraderie and brotherhood to it. Any time I go my my flgs, it is always this warm and jolly good feeling from all the 40k chaps. It goes beyond just being a game, it's a setting to talk about, rules and models to talk about, and the ever fun mocking of Gw's inadequacy. Whenever I played warmachine for a bit I never got that camaraderie, it was just a game, and that feeling of brotherhood was lacking.

Idk maybe im just being stupid, but 40k isn't just a game, it's a group of people enjoying their hobby together.

Clockwork Iron wrote:
Idk if is just my group but something that 40k always has is this kind of camaraderie and brotherhood to it. Any time I go my my flgs, it is always this warm and jolly good feeling from all the 40k chaps. It goes beyond just being a game, it's a setting to talk about, rules and models to talk about, and the ever fun mocking of Gw's inadequacy. Whenever I played warmachine for a bit I never got that camaraderie, it was just a game, and that feeling of brotherhood was lacking.

Idk maybe im just being stupid, but 40k isn't just a game, it's a group of people enjoying their hobby together.

I have the exact opposite experience.
Every time I went for a pick up game for 40k, it was kind of tense almost. Like they looked at me like "I don't know this guy. What kind of army? Tournament practice guy? My fluffy army deserves a chance or eight Imperial Knights?" If felt more like UN negotiation where none of the countries trusted each other.
With WMH it's "What do you play? Khador? Awesome! 50 points? Right on." And we commence setting up. We have time to talk about fluff, armies, fun stuff because we're not negotiating are armies to approach some semblance of balance.
But that's for PUG's. YMMV.

Bharring wrote:
The scene were I live, for WMH, seemed to implode due to (A) a player everyone wanted to avoid, but would always insist on a game, and (B) several key players switched to Star Wars (although A may have caused B).

Which is too bad. 40k is better for me than WMH, but WMH is better for some other players. I wish both would do well.

X Wing has taken over my store...well, I should say among the youngish TT wargamimg crowd, because the most popular game there by far is MtG. I'm also seeing lots of RPG-looking board games being played lately. Really, I only see 40k being played by lots of people on 40k Night, which there are 2 nights per week. But as I mentioned earlier in this thread, I havent seen WMH played there in months.

As odd as his may sound, if I had to guess what TT Wargame was most consistently played at my FLGS, I'd have to say historicals using the Warlord Games series of rulebooks. Literally every time I go in, there is at least one if not 3 or 4 historical games being played...of course the owner loves historicals so he really puts in effort to get people interested, and I'm sure that had something to do with it.

 MWHistorian wrote:
WMH has been around for over a decade and are still growing. Its not a fad.

Anecdotal evidence: last night my wife, not knowing anything about tt gaming said "your Warmachine game looks way more popular than that Warhammer one."

Exactly. I was pretty specific for a reason. Warmahordes, and a few others besides may still be growing nationwide, but around here (and by around here I mean my tip of Southern Illinois and across the borders to the clubs I know in the accessible parts of Kentucky, Missouri, and Indiana) I don't know any club with an active presence in those games (at least any that are open to the public). I belong to three different clubs, none of which actively play Warmahordes. Only the new shiny games like STAW, but even that's dying out.

My wallet and hobby time schedule can only support one miniature wargame. Until something supplants 40k as the dominant game, I'm going to stick with the game that has already taken so much of my time and money.

That being said, when RH (if RH) ever publishes rules for their game, I may give it a shot, but that's only because I'll already own a bunch of minis that I'm using as IG.

Clockwork Iron wrote:
Idk maybe im just being stupid, but 40k isn't just a game, it's a group of people enjoying their hobby together.

In my experience and observation, a passion for hobby is something that the vast majority of the players of the other tabletop wargames, with the exception of historicals, do not share. I'm not saying there aren't any hobbyists that are really into WMH. However, the vast majority of people coming to play PUG at FLGS with their WMH, Malifaux -- and obviously XWing -- have little or no interest in the hobby aspect of it. They usually have barely-painted miniatures, play on shockingly bare tables, and that's just not what I'm into. Occasionally, there are some people with great models, but almost never do I see a table that looks great (two nicely painted armies plus decent terrain). In my local scene, in most places, it is considered perfectly acceptable to play WMH or Malifaux with unpainted miniatures.

Now, not EVERY 40k player is into the hobby, but the ratio is much, much higher -- and almost certainly all the people with 5,000 - 20,000+ points worth of models. I attribute this in part to the cuture of the 40k crowd, but a lot of it has to do with the number and the nature of the models. If you're going to invest in thousands of points worth of models, at least some of those models will require intermediate skill to put together, and if you don't enjoy the hobby aspect of it, you're probably going to stop before your collection blossoms. Many 40k players take great pride in their painted toy soldiers. Even the most annoying WAAC players often had cool-looking wave serpents.

In contrast, a lot of WMH players see painting the miniatures as a hassle, and prefer the simpler, monopose, essentially snapfit nature of WMH models. Many players like that if you buy a Menoth Judicator, it will look exactly like what's on the box. They don't think about whether they want to put an Stormspear or an Icarus, a Gatling Avenger or a Chainfist. The last thing they want to do is magnetize parts so that they can swap in, or God forbid, buy 3 versions of a hundred-dollar-plus model. They are annoyed by the attitude that if they're playing an Imperial Knight a couple of days after you bought it, people think they've committed heresy by wrecking a $150 model with a crap paint job. And this is okay: different strokes, right?

If you want to, as you say, enjoy a hobby together, it's just a lot easier to find in the 40k realm. On the other hand, if you want a successful, quick pickup game, it can be lot harder to find in the 40k realm. Certainly, the setup an logistics of the game is against you, and unbalanced rules as written don't help.

For me, I very much enjoy social and the gaming aspect of 40k. However, I spend much more time on the hobby end of it, partly just because it doesn't require other people and I can squeeze it in whenever I'm able. I would not want to sacrifice one for the other, and I like gaming with people who share a passion for the hobby. It's a kind of nerd nirvana when you are playing with a roomful of guys who will ooo and ahhh at a really cool power sword on a dreadknight that took 12 hours to do just right.

 Talys wrote:

Clockwork Iron wrote:
Idk maybe im just being stupid, but 40k isn't just a game, it's a group of people enjoying their hobby together.

In my experience and observation, a passion for hobby is something that the vast majority of the players of the other tabletop wargames, with the exception of historicals, do not share. I'm not saying there aren't any hobbyists that are really into WMH. However, the vast majority of people coming to play PUG at FLGS with their WMH, Malifaux -- and obviously XWing -- have little or no interest in the hobby aspect of it. They usually have barely-painted miniatures, play on shockingly bare tables, and that's just not what I'm into. Occasionally, there are some people with great models, but almost never do I see a table that looks great (two nicely painted armies plus decent terrain). In my local scene, in most places, it is considered perfectly acceptable to play WMH or Malifaux with unpainted miniatures.

Now, not EVERY 40k player is into the hobby, but the ratio is much, much higher -- and almost certainly all the people with 5,000 - 20,000+ points worth of models. I attribute this in part to the cuture of the 40k crowd, but a lot of it has to do with the number and the nature of the models. If you're going to invest in thousands of points worth of models, at least some of those models will require intermediate skill to put together, and if you don't enjoy the hobby aspect of it, you're probably going to stop before your collection blossoms. Many 40k players take great pride in their painted toy soldiers. Even the most annoying WAAC players often had cool-looking wave serpents.

In contrast, a lot of WMH players see painting the miniatures as a hassle, and prefer the simpler, monopose, essentially snapfit nature of WMH models. Many players like that if you buy a Menoth Judicator, it will look exactly like what's on the box. They don't think about whether they want to put an Stormspear or an Icarus, a Gatling Avenger or a Chainfist. The last thing they want to do is magnetize parts so that they can swap in, or God forbid, buy 3 versions of a hundred-dollar-plus model. They are annoyed by the attitude that if they're playing an Imperial Knight a couple of days after you bought it, people think they've committed heresy by wrecking a $150 model with a crap paint job. And this is okay: different strokes, right?

If you want to, as you say, enjoy a hobby together, it's just a lot easier to find in the 40k realm. On the other hand, if you want a successful, quick pickup game, it can be lot harder to find in the 40k realm. Certainly, the setup an logistics of the game is against you, and unbalanced rules as written don't help.

For me, I very much enjoy social and the gaming aspect of 40k. However, I spend much more time on the hobby end of it, partly just because it doesn't require other people and I can squeeze it in whenever I'm able. I would not want to sacrifice one for the other, and I like gaming with people who share a passion for the hobby. It's a kind of nerd nirvana when you are playing with a roomful of guys who will ooo and ahhh at a really cool power sword on a dreadknight that took 12 hours to do just right.

Bolded part...um....what? Snapfit? No. Try putting together a Father Lucant figure.
Also, WMH has a thriving modeling community.
Go look at NQ Magazine. It's full of conversion and scenery making articles. It's basically what White Dwarf used to be. I've fought as many "Gray Legion" armies as I have unpainted WMH ones, though I have no statistics about that.
And neither do you. (which is the point I'm trying to make) You make a lot of bold, blanket statements that can't be backed up or proven/disproven.
But seriously, go look through NQ magazine and you'll see what mean. In the last issue (I think) they had an article on how to convert a Cygnar jack into a charcater jack from one of the novels. I convert WMH's as well. The author of "Into the Storm" (a WMH novel) has his Halbrediers with Conquistador helmets on. (Because his ancestors were) He beat me with them pretty bad.
I will grant you that conversions are easier due to readily available spare parts in 40k. That is a big bonus for modelers.