Switch Theme:

What Game Lines Do You Think GW Should Focus On?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in de
Regular Dakkanaut





Imperial Knights Renegade Rebooted[u]

I would like to see a game system in which you control only superheavy units like Stompas, Imperial Knights, Baneblades, etc. All these units come with hit locations for front, side and rear. Each hit location has a number of structure or hit points which are crossed off when the particular area is damaged like it is done in Battletech. It could be a terrific wargame. This would give me the necessary incentive to start building & painting my Imperial Knights. Just using these units in regular 40K is in my opinion just not appropriate.
I am well aware that GW already sold this kind of a game but it was very lacklustre. It had only a front hit location for the units involved and it´s sole purpose was to push sales for the Imperial Knights. GW, you can do better than that.


Other game lines that should be focused on:
- 40K

- Space Hulk & Deathwatch Overkill:
New scenarios & characters presented regularly in White Dwarf magazine would be highly appreciated.

- Necromunda:
This skirmish game should include lowlifes with high-tech (e.g.: hive gangers). SWA is severely lacking in this regard.

- Battlefleet Gothic

- Epic (Adeptus Titanicus)

- Blood Bowl:
Where are the team booster packs? I want to collect 16 team members and not just 12.


Game lines that should be neglected:
- AOS
   
Made in us
Maddening Mutant Boss of Chaos





I think they are doing the right thing by focusing on their image and updating it.

The two main games should be their focus, that being 40k and AoS. Right now I feel like 40k got some major working and should be left to cool a bit before they start working it again.
Aos needs some guidance through some choppy waters. As of right now, IMHO, AoS feels fleeting at best.

Large/smaller scale versions of these games should be peripheral to the main games.

RPGs should still be kept to third party developers.

Specialist games should be left to FW to handle.



 
   
Made in gb
Lieutenant Colonel




Last time I looked GW just had minature lines with a few rules scribbled down ad hoc as they go along.(in the last few years at least.)


So if they actually wanted well defined game range with properly defined and developed rules with a clear game play and scale at the start.
It would make a refreshing change to the current publications .
   
Made in fi
Fresh-Faced New User




Moneywise : Space Marines, and occationally some opponents for them.

Personally I like GW washes. Their games - except LotR - are useless junk. Some AoS models are nice, but as theres no game behind that interests me the washes are all I'm buying. So : more washes is my suggestion !
   
Made in nl
Regular Dakkanaut




smaxx wrote:
Moneywise : Space Marines, and occationally some opponents for them.

Personally I like GW washes. Their games - except LotR - are useless junk. Some AoS models are nice, but as theres no game behind that interests me the washes are all I'm buying. So : more washes is my suggestion !

3 posts total. All anti-GW.
Are you sure you're new here? :-)
   
Made in au
Norn Queen






Spiky Norman wrote:
smaxx wrote:
Moneywise : Space Marines, and occationally some opponents for them.

Personally I like GW washes. Their games - except LotR - are useless junk. Some AoS models are nice, but as theres no game behind that interests me the washes are all I'm buying. So : more washes is my suggestion !

3 posts total. All anti-GW.
Are you sure you're new here? :-)


Not everyone joins this site right when they begin their hobby journey.
   
Made in se
Been Around the Block




Sweden

I've actually gotten to wondering, since reading the earlier posts by Peregrine, OrlandotheTechnicoloured, Stormonu, ph34r, and frozenwastes:

would GW be better served by dropping AoS, and focusing the resources from that on 40k instead? I have no proof either way, but I wonder if they'd be making more money if they didn't have to split studio time and resources between two different product lines, instead of putting all their support behind one and pushing that.

Like... I love Warmachine/Hordes, but I suspect that if PP released a sci-fi wargame on the same scale as their steampunk fantasy, it'd harm the latter more than they'd profit from the former.
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






Spiky Norman wrote:
smaxx wrote:
Moneywise : Space Marines, and occationally some opponents for them.

Personally I like GW washes. Their games - except LotR - are useless junk. Some AoS models are nice, but as theres no game behind that interests me the washes are all I'm buying. So : more washes is my suggestion !

3 posts total. All anti-GW.
Are you sure you're new here? :-)
Hey, I'm pretty sure that my first three posts here were anti-GW. (This was during a period where GW seemed to be doing their damnedest to lose what audience they had left. Right now, GW... seems to be trying to turn things around, so I am not nearly as vocal about how much GW sucks these days - they aren't suing third parties, they aren't shutting down charity books on Amazon, and, while they currently don't have much I am interested in, at least they are seeking customer feedback, rather than boasting that they do not.)

The Auld Grump - it helped that I had already switched to Kings of War before Age of Sigmar came out....

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in gb
Wolf Guard Bodyguard in Terminator Armor



UK

Dropping prices because seriously what parent is buying their kid a starter at £95.
   
Made in ca
Posts with Authority




I'm from the future. The future of space

 Mangod wrote:
I've actually gotten to wondering, since reading the earlier posts by Peregrine, OrlandotheTechnicoloured, Stormonu, ph34r, and frozenwastes:

would GW be better served by dropping AoS, and focusing the resources from that on 40k instead? I have no proof either way, but I wonder if they'd be making more money if they didn't have to split studio time and resources between two different product lines, instead of putting all their support behind one and pushing that.

Like... I love Warmachine/Hordes, but I suspect that if PP released a sci-fi wargame on the same scale as their steampunk fantasy, it'd harm the latter more than they'd profit from the former.


I think there's something​ about the life cycle of a customer where interest in a game can wane so it's a good idea to have another game to sell them. For example, I think a lot of AoS players right now started because of boredom with 7h edition 40k. So AoS (post GHB) probably kept GW some customers they might have lost had 40k been all there is. Genres also go in trends and there will be years when fantasy is on the up swing.

A points system is a tool to create balance. Let's use it to intentionally seek out imbalance in order to win and then blame the game designer for it not working!  
   
Made in fi
Fresh-Faced New User




Spiky Norman wrote:

3 posts total. All anti-GW.
Are you sure you're new here? :-)

Sorry... Yeah, got hit hard by AoS and won't buy anything else than washes from that company any more.

But, on a more positive note, the new Bloodbowl looked like a great release that probably sells well if continued to be supported.
Also Hobbit has got some nice, though ridiculously priced models. AoS looks like doing better nowadays after initial negativity and is probably worth keeping as an alternative for 40k players. Because as said, it's good to have some variety in offering.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/28 17:43:39


 
   
Made in es
Krazed Killa Kan




Barcelona, Spain

Yeah. While having a ton of games isn't good because you will half-ass their support, putting all your eggs in one basket isn't really a wise decision. Personally, I think they should either a) Kick up a notch on bloodbowl's support or b) Make another game from newcloth as a mainstay. 3 in my opinion is the magic number.
   
Made in us
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot






Once 8e 40k drops, I'd be rather pleased if GW focused a little more of their attention into Blood Bowl. There are already a decent number of rebooted teams, Humans, Orcs, Dwarves, Skaven, and Gobbos, but with well over a dozen others, it'd be nice if newcomers to the game felt like they had more options without buying super old models or doing heavy conversion work.

Revel in the glory of the site's greatest thread or be edetid and baned!
 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Every trip to the FLGS is a rollercoaster of lust and shame.

DQ:90S++G+M+B++I+Pw40k13#+D+A++/sWD331R++T(S)DM+ 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






 frozenwastes wrote:
 Mangod wrote:
I've actually gotten to wondering, since reading the earlier posts by Peregrine, OrlandotheTechnicoloured, Stormonu, ph34r, and frozenwastes:

would GW be better served by dropping AoS, and focusing the resources from that on 40k instead? I have no proof either way, but I wonder if they'd be making more money if they didn't have to split studio time and resources between two different product lines, instead of putting all their support behind one and pushing that.

Like... I love Warmachine/Hordes, but I suspect that if PP released a sci-fi wargame on the same scale as their steampunk fantasy, it'd harm the latter more than they'd profit from the former.


I think there's something​ about the life cycle of a customer where interest in a game can wane so it's a good idea to have another game to sell them. For example, I think a lot of AoS players right now started because of boredom with 7h edition 40k. So AoS (post GHB) probably kept GW some customers they might have lost had 40k been all there is. Genres also go in trends and there will be years when fantasy is on the up swing.
I would not be surprised if GW lost more WHFB players from the roll out of AoS than WH40K players that they held onto. *EDIT* Let us say, going from local observation only, that they lost 3 WHFB fans for every two WH40K fans that switched to AoS rather than leaving GW entirely. Not pretending that these are realistic numbers, just clarifying what I was trying to say. And this does not count the folks that just switched to AoS from WHFB.

But that WHFB 8 had already done enough damage that those same WHFB fans that they had lost were already not playing the newest version of the game, and were just holding onto their older armies, in the hopes that WHFB 9 would be better.

Instead, GW went haring off in a completely different direction with AoS, and so those players gave up on WH, and rather noisily.

From what I could see, this had been a continuing process, with the major competitor for each new edition of Warhammer being the previous editions of the same game.

But that those same fans that were still playing the previous editions were also hoping that Warhammer would recover, and come out with a well tested and balanced edition.

Instead... AoS - which had the same effect on the Warhammer community that D&D 4e had on the D&D community.

The Auld Grump - I honestly think that GW would have profited more by marketing AoS as a separate, but miniatures compatible, game from WHFB.

*EDIT* To clarify, again, I had already made the switch to Kings of War when WHFB 8 came out - but the number of local folks that were interested in KoW started climbing when 8 rolled out, then skyrocketed when AoS came out. It just does not scratch the same itch. Some folks, myself included, like having a rank and file fantasy battle - be it Warhammer, Battle System, or Kings of War. AoS may be a fine game, but it is also a game that I have zero interest in playing again - I tried it with the first free version, and loathed it. I has gotten better, I gather, but that initial exposure was not something that made me at all interested, at least in any positive fashion.

By the same token, I do think that Forge World could regain some of those lost WH players by releasing a Heritage Edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/28 19:15:45


Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in ca
Posts with Authority




I'm from the future. The future of space

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
I honestly think that GW would have profited more by marketing AoS as a separate, but miniatures compatible, game from WHFB.


I don't. I don't think very many people were actually buying WHFB stuff during the end of 8th. Like way less than what GW needed to keep it going.

The only real thing wrong with AoS is how they launched it. The damage was already done by 7th and 8th.

And they seem to be avoiding every pitfall they fell into with AoS with the new version of 40k. Had they

a) advanced the timeline without definitely destroying the world (making the age of the empire a historical epoch that just concluded)
b) came out with serious army books for each of the grand allainces at launch
c) had the three ways to play and points nailed down at launch

AoS would have been a great move. New 40k is basically AoS modified for the sci-fantasy setting and then launched properly.

AoS likely has more players than 8th edition WHFB but still less than 7th (only real source are icv2 numbers) so it's definitely a move in the right direction for GW, but that probably has more to do with their recovery with the General's Handbook than the launch.

Some folks, myself included, like having a rank and file fantasy battle


I think this is a dying market fractured among many different games. It's cool and I'm glad people have games they enjoy, but I think GW was smart to get out of it. It peaked in late 6th edition in terms of people playing those kinds of fantasy games and it is largely better served by historical rules anyway.

By the same token, I do think that Forge World could regain some of those lost WH players by releasing a Heritage Edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle.


I totally agree. That is exactly how GW should continue games set in the Old World.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JzGcnSTe6s&t=1m29s

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/29 00:23:33


A points system is a tool to create balance. Let's use it to intentionally seek out imbalance in order to win and then blame the game designer for it not working!  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I agree with most of that except:

A) I preferred that they moved the setting on to a new one instead of just making an "Aold Wyrld" where they corrupt the old setting for copyright and stuff more and more things into it that purists don't want.

Better they gave it a ending and moved on like they did, IMO.

I can also make a new Bretonnia in AoS as any number of hidden or lost kingdoms but if it got killed off in the Old World then it's gone for good.

B) FW could pick up the Old World but with the expense of rank and file models and how generic many Old World soldiers are I don't see them making much of a profit to justify it.

As for dropping AoS? Absolutely not.

That'd be like Nintendo dropping everything but Mario or Blizzard just having Warcraft.

The loss of customers who enjoyed the variety and the reduction of the "net" being cast out for new customers would do far more harm than good.
   
Made in ru
Pulsating Possessed Chaos Marine





FW picking up the Old World setting would be hilarious considering how many models are needed to play a rank&file game and how much FW models tend to cost.

Progress is like a herd of pigs: everybody is interested in the produced benefits, but nobody wants to deal with all the resulting gak.

GW customers deserve every bit of outrageous princing they get. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Indeed, unless they make every soldier a work of art (easier to do with skirmish) it's hard to see people not using not-Warhammer models instead.
   
Made in au
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Lord Kragan wrote:
Personally, I think they should either a) Kick up a notch on bloodbowl's support or b) Make another game from newcloth as a mainstay. 3 in my opinion is the magic number.


If reports out of Warhammerfest are correct, that is exactly what's happening. BB proved so popular that they're hiring more people for plastics production, and doing more plastics. That sounds like more support to me.

As far as new games are concerned, Adeptus Titanicus is coming after being delayed because* of the great feedback it got (so they went to make it better). People are lapping up the specialist game stuff, and as long as they stop doing idiotic things like making Shadow War a limited release, they should only grow their business with these sorts of things.



*I imagine that a lot of current FW delays are also because of the bad news with Alan Bligh, so the above is probably not the only reason for the delay.

   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Laundry Operative #666







 Azazelx wrote:
 TheAuldGrump wrote:

How long is Rountree going to be the 'new' CEO, anyway?


Until the taste of Kirby (and Bligh) is gone from our collective?


Did you really mean Bligh there, Azazelx, or were you thinking Merrett?

Latest blog post - Unboxing: Oathsworn Miniatures: Burrows & Badgers - New Blood - 29/05/2017

Dakka plog attempt #3 - A miscellany of miniatures

2017's "A Tale of Many Gamers Painting Challenge" - Part 1 - January to June - Time to get your paint on...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
 
   
Made in gb
Captain




London

 Strg Alt wrote:
Imperial Knights Renegade Rebooted[u]

I would like to see a game system in which you control only superheavy units like Stompas, Imperial Knights, Baneblades, etc. All these units come with hit locations for front, side and rear. Each hit location has a number of structure or hit points which are crossed off when the particular area is damaged like it is done in Battletech. It could be a terrific wargame. This would give me the necessary incentive to start building & painting my Imperial Knights. Just using these units in regular 40K is in my opinion just not appropriate.
I am well aware that GW already sold this kind of a game but it was very lacklustre. It had only a front hit location for the units involved and it´s sole purpose was to push sales for the Imperial Knights. GW, you can do better than that.



And this is to be played on a 6x4? It's what Epic is for
   
Made in gb
Focused Fire Warrior




Eastern Fringe

I think GW really needs to ramp up time, effort and energy regarding specialists games. I'd really like this to be the "4th section" of GW, There are just so many things they could do with the worlds they have.

The first rule of unarmed combat is: don’t be unarmed. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Bring back Mordheim. There, I said it.
   
Made in gb
Thane of Dol Guldur





I don't think GW should be doubling down and hyper-focusing on just two core lines (40K and AOS). They tried that for a decade, and it simply didn't work and saw an explosion in competition with new competitors embracing the niche genres and gamers that GW ignored (Mordheim/Necromunda, Battlefleet Gothic, Epic/Warmaster, mass battle Fantasy/Kings of War, Bloodbowl etc).

They ought to be diversifying their ranges and re-engaging with those niches and communities, but keeping 40K as a strong backbone.

That means retaining The Hobbit SBG as a specialist Forgeworld line (it has a thriving if modest community with a very active tournament circuit), Bloodbowl, bringing back Necromunda and Mordheim, bringing back the Epic/Warmaster scale games.

All of which GW is doing in some form or another.
   
Made in de
Regular Dakkanaut





 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
 Strg Alt wrote:
Imperial Knights Renegade Rebooted[u]

I would like to see a game system in which you control only superheavy units like Stompas, Imperial Knights, Baneblades, etc. All these units come with hit locations for front, side and rear. Each hit location has a number of structure or hit points which are crossed off when the particular area is damaged like it is done in Battletech. It could be a terrific wargame. This would give me the necessary incentive to start building & painting my Imperial Knights. Just using these units in regular 40K is in my opinion just not appropriate.
I am well aware that GW already sold this kind of a game but it was very lacklustre. It had only a front hit location for the units involved and it´s sole purpose was to push sales for the Imperial Knights. GW, you can do better than that.



And this is to be played on a 6x4? It's what Epic is for


I played Epic aka "Space Marine" myself in the nineties. In Epic you control a few Titans and a couple of infantry, bike or tank companies whereas in my proposed version of Imperial Knights: Renegade you just control a few superheavy units (1 to 5 models) like Imperial Knights or Baneblades. See the difference?

Table size would be the least of our problems. If your battlefield is small just do a 1 model vs. 1 model battle.
   
Made in us
Skilled SDF-1 Pin-Point Barrier Jockey





Mississippi

I agree that GW focusing on only one game line (like 40K) would be a huge mistake. Putting your eggs in one basket rarely turns out well - just ask Radio Shack and Blockbuster, for example.

Thing is, even with their specialist line, they are still relying on past glories. They risk rendering themselves obsolete if they don't push outward and try brand new things once in a while - maybe they could have fun with a Wild West world, for example - instead of setting it in 40K or the Old World/nuRealms.

It never ends well 
   
Made in ca
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





Vancouver BC Canada

 supreme overlord wrote:
I would LOVE to see BFG re-released and a 3 part campaign incorporating 40k, shadow war, and BFG where you fight for resources, strategic assets, and planets.


We did that years ago, Space Fleet for approaching the planet, epic for the initial landings, 40k when it got small enough then necromunda for the little guerilla wars that would pop up. It was most fantastic.


I would LOVE to see epic back with real support same with Adeptus Titanicus ( god I can't wait for that to come out). If AT takes off ( and i'm sure it will) maybe they will do epic in 8mm scale ( it would suck for all of those who had the old epic scales but then they could just play with the new rules with the old models...win win win).

CATS- How are you gentlemen?
CATS- All your base are belong to us.
CATS- You are on the way to destruction.
Captain -What you say?
CATS- You have no chance to survive make your time.
CATS HA HA HA!!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hi%20Welcome



 
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




I am really getting tired of the drop AoS meme. They won't and they shoudn't. And if you really like 40k as a complex game, you don't want it to go away either.

AoS is a good alternative for people who look at the rule book and codex books for 40k and feel their eyes bleed.

AoS is simply aimed at a different crowd, and has great tie in opportunities with Skirmish and Quest. The more ways I can use their models, the more likely I am to buy them.

I don't want 40k to go away just because I don't play it.
   
Made in nl
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Somewhere over the rainbow

They should screw back support for AoS and instead focus on renewing the LotR range. LotR has always had the best ruleset of any GW game, and it has a huge, very well known IP that is much more popular than either AoS or 40k can ever hope to be. LotR has massive potential if GW handles it right (hint: not like they handled the Hobbit stuff, that was just sad)
They should still support AoS, and focus it on the more supernatural side of fantasy (wizards and magic creatures and such) so that it does not compete so much with LotR.
40k should of course remain GW's main line. They might want to make more board games for it, I think those sell well. They should also be really keen on further expanding 40k beyond miniatures.
Apart from that, I do not think they should overextend. Besides these three major lines and FW with the Heresy line, they should maybe do two or three smaller specialist games. For popular ones, I think Blood Bowl, Epic and either Mordheim or Battlefleet Gothic.



The above post was not written by an Alpha Legion operative. Hydra Dominatus. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




The problem with LotR is they're shackled on the miniature content besides what the owners allow them to make.

AoS let's GW make anything they want and expand in any direction with the setting.
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: