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.

It's already very cheap for the investment of money to hours of enjoyment ratio.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Crispy78 wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

I get that GW have additional overheads - rent, staff costs, printing the instructions and cardboard box, possibly distribution - but come on now...

What do you mean 'possibly' distribution?

Presumably the spawn kits which GW sell directly through their webstore don't incur as much in the way of distribution as those which are sold through their stores or independent retailers.

Crispy78 wrote:
Yes, distribution. The cost of their staff, buildings, machinery, uniforms, fitting out retail stores, IT equipment and services, phone bills, office furniture, stationery... Every single thing that GW as a company pays for, it pays for out of money raised by selling miniatures, paints, licenced video games, etc.

Those costs are all still baked in to the £8 spawn just as much as they are the £25 spawn.

The reason so many older kits with the comparatively lower prices get moved to webstore-only is literally because GW would be selling them at a loss if they redesigned the packaging to mesh with newer product and put them on the shelf.

Span your collecting over 20 years. Don't buy an entire army all at once. Don't buy the gak units for a given army.

Martel732 wrote:
Span your collecting over 20 years. Don't buy an entire army all at once. Don't buy the gak units for a given army.

Generally agree on spacing out purchasing. Sure, buy a nice core of units (or just start with Kill Team!), but you don't need everything all at once.

However, I will disagree on not buying bad units generally speaking. The bad units of one edition can become the stellar units of others, and the inverse is true too (Guard Veterans, for example). Pick the units that you think look good from a playstyle or aesthetic perspective, if you're interested in getting involved beyond the immediate rules. But, if all you care for is winning in the current edition, sure, get the meta units.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Span your collecting over 20 years. Don't buy an entire army all at once. Don't buy the gak units for a given army.

Generally agree on spacing out purchasing. Sure, buy a nice core of units (or just start with Kill Team!), but you don't need everything all at once.

However, I will disagree on not buying bad units generally speaking. The bad units of one edition can become the stellar units of others, and the inverse is true too (Guard Veterans, for example). Pick the units that you think look good from a playstyle or aesthetic perspective, if you're interested in getting involved beyond the immediate rules. But, if all you care for is winning in the current edition, sure, get the meta units.

But you spaced out. So get them only when they are decent. I know GW will randomly dumpster them in the future. I own six predators. Trust me. I know.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Span your collecting over 20 years. Don't buy an entire army all at once. Don't buy the gak units for a given army.

Generally agree on spacing out purchasing. Sure, buy a nice core of units (or just start with Kill Team!), but you don't need everything all at once.

However, I will disagree on not buying bad units generally speaking. The bad units of one edition can become the stellar units of others, and the inverse is true too (Guard Veterans, for example). Pick the units that you think look good from a playstyle or aesthetic perspective, if you're interested in getting involved beyond the immediate rules. But, if all you care for is winning in the current edition, sure, get the meta units.

You don't even need meta to win tho. Just don't take the terrible units. Like TH/SS terminators in a Land Raider.

Asking what units to avoid" is better than asking "what units to get?"

I want to know what kind of galaxy brain level you have to be operating at to space your collection out over 20 years and not buy any crappy units in that time, that's amazing. we've had what, six out of eight editions in the past 20 years?

Crappy at the time. 90% of it is garbage now. Still beats buying a unit that is bad at the time.

Martel732 wrote:
Crappy at the time. 90% of it is garbage now. Still beats buying a unit that is bad at the time.

Maybe. But in my experience, the best way to leave the hobby after investing a large sum of money in it is to buy a currently competitive army while you're still figuring the game out. The player who owns 12 kits and 9 different units is going to be able to weather balance changes far better than the player who owns 12 kits and 4 different units. Just in the cross-over from 7th to 8th we had a player who outright purchased a guard summoning spam army (whoops) a player who purchased a WK/Scatbike army, and a player who purchased a drop pod army based on that crazy LE formation who then all got utterly hosed by the edition changing and all their builds being terrible/now illegal. Even in the least extreme cases, I had a competitively minded player start, complain each game that he had to field like 50 tzaangors and 0 rubrics to be at all competitive, and as soon as he got done painting the tzaangors the deep strike changes dropped making the whole strategy ineffective, then rubrics got like 4 buffs in a row. If he'd just been buying and painting what he wanted to in the first place, he'd have started with a less competitive army but at least one he enjoyed while he was building and painting it, and then he would have had something solidly upper-mid tier later on when he got everything built and painted.

Maybe there is no good answer. Most of the units I like have been garbage for over a decade now.

Martel732 wrote:
Maybe there is no good answer. Most of the units I like have been garbage for over a decade now.

I've been playing Nids and DE from start of 5th. I feel you very much. At least DE has good units finally and i just sold off my nids b.c i was tired of them. Its the same 4 units that are good for over 10yrs Tyrant, Genestealers, Rippers, Hive guard. Anything else that was good is gone or changed to be bad (Pod, Doom, Tervigon, etc..)

But at least for DE venoms, raiders, warriors, a core of units has almost been a "must" each army has a "must" from 1 edition to another for the most part unless the reset the army (Primaris marines). So there is at least a good core to get players into.

Martel732 wrote:
Maybe there is no good answer. Most of the units I like have been garbage for over a decade now.

Can you maybe see how enforcing a level of non-competitiveness by all players involved purchasing a wide variety of units can help to insulate a play group from all but the wildest of balance changes and lead to everyone feeling less pressured overall to continuously buy new models to stay competitive? The most common cause of a "Casual at all Costs" attitude within a gaming group that I've seen has been literal, monetary cost associated with keeping up with the competitive joneses.

The whole entire castellan meta completely bypassed our 50+ person gaming group because nobody, not one person, bought a castellan. The one guy who bought the kit built a valiant. Same with the tau drone spam meta, same with the loyal 32/soup meta in general.

It isn't perfect, obviously, current meta is an ideal case in point example of how Games Workshop continually finds ways to outdo itself in creating bonkers imbalanced crap. But the costs of not being able to push the game to its competitive limit have never seemed to outweigh the actual cost in dollars of not buying 3 of whatever the new OP thing is whenever the meta shifts in its favor.

I suppose, but it only takes a couple people to bring that arrangement down. It is way easier to be bleeding edge in Starcraft or League of Legends lol.

Much like winning a game of global nuclear war, the only way to win cheap in warhammer is not to play.

Anything else is just degrees of OMG wallet death.

Starting warhammer is expensive, but continuing to play it afterwards can be much, much cheaper.

For the last years, I have been spending exactly 20€ per month on 40k, including paints, books(PA, CA, vigilus), measuring tapes and dice.
I started doing this because I was pretty short on money after my daughter was born, but I still wanted to be able to buy hobby stuff despite that. It's working pretty well, so I simply never stopped doing it that way.

the_scotsman 788009 10791322 wrote:
Can you maybe see how enforcing a level of non-competitiveness by all players involved purchasing a wide variety of units can help to insulate a play group from all but the wildest of balance changes and lead to everyone feeling less pressured overall to continuously buy new models to stay competitive? The most common cause of a "Casual at all Costs" attitude within a gaming group that I've seen has been literal, monetary cost associated with keeping up with the competitive joneses.

The whole entire castellan meta completely bypassed our 50+ person gaming group because nobody, not one person, bought a castellan. The one guy who bought the kit built a valiant. Same with the tau drone spam meta, same with the loyal 32/soup meta in general.

It isn't perfect, obviously, current meta is an ideal case in point example of how Games Workshop continually finds ways to outdo itself in creating bonkers imbalanced crap. But the costs of not being able to push the game to its competitive limit have never seemed to outweigh the actual cost in dollars of not buying 3 of whatever the new OP thing is whenever the meta shifts in its favor.

Only that requires people to be really rich. If people have, on avarge, problem with aquiring a 2000pts army, then they are not going to buy 5000pts of stuff, and even if they do, the chance of them starting with the bad stuff is really small. They would have to be tricked in to buying bad stuff, or the stuff they bought had to suffer some drastic nerfs. Plus if someone does buy 2000pts of an army, and it is bad, and by bad I mean it feels worse then what people localy play, it is really hard to convince someone to buy more stuff. specialy as buying more stuff doesnt asure a better quality of gaming.



Also I have the question, how the 20 year thing work, when your under 20 years? I mean in 20 years there maybe no GW or models. How many people that started 20 years ago still play? I mean the majority of people at my store were people that were 20 or 30 plus, but am not sure how their number compare to the number of people that started, but left. I have my doubts, and no data, that my area always had the same 20 something people playing. specialy as out of the 7 people that started with me only 2 were still playing after two years.

Still playing here.... 23 years in....

It's just how I"ve made it affordable. I only collect one army.

Overall been doing this GW thing 31 years now, starting with WHFB 3rd ed.
Been playing 40k since '92. (so 28 years & 8 editions)

In the circles I play miniatures games (not just Gw stuff) in we count several in the 20yr+ bracket, several in the 5-15yr or so range, and several more at 5yrs or less.
None of these are people I started with.

As for the "What If...." concerning 20 yrs in the future? You don't really worry about it. You play games in the here & now.
Sometimes - like at present with this pandemic, when work/family makes it all but impossible, or when you find an edition that just doesn't satisfy you - it works out that you don't play much/at all. So you play some other game/catch up on the painting etc/or you put the {40k} into storage & do something else completely for awhile.
The one thing you shouldn't do if you quit? (unless you're dead certain you won't be back) Get rid of your models. You think they're expensive now? Check back in 20 yrs..... There'll have been so many price hikes.... So you put them & the books into watertight containers & store them safely away.

On GW not existing in 20 yrs: Doesn't matter. The books they've published & models they've made will still exist.

I reiterate:

I've had great VALUE from warhammer.

There's a thread on paper substitutes. THAT would be fairly cheap, especially if you bought second hand older codices.

I still basically maintain that you can do warhammer cheaper, but not cheap.

ccs has some great points above!

I started with 40K in 1996. I had been playing 1:285 Microarmour. The box art on some Space Marine/Titanicus product caught my eye. I picked up some Space Marines and went with Dark Angels. I probably spent $400 in 1996 Canadian dollars on my force. I still roll the Predators from time to time, and Azrael still strides the tabletop some 24 years later. The Tacticals, Devastators and Assault Squad got repainted by my son as Flesh Tearers when 8th dropped.

I am still playing Dark Angels 24 years later. The metal Scouts that I bought circa 97/98 are still staples in my lists today. I spent around $300 CAD on Primaris in the first six months or so of 8th Edition. I estimate I've played 100 or so Matched Games at the FLGS' with that core force. The Intercessors and Hellblasters have been a great gaming investment. I spent $150 on Black Knights who have also had many, many games on the tabletop - no regrets. The $110 Stormraven? More of a display piece. The $90 Dark Shroud? Worth every penny!

The $300 I spent on WHFB Dwarves in 2001? Money not well spent since I didn't play them. The $400 on LOTR models? Also not well spent since I didn't play. The $500 on Epic? The collecting was fun, but nobody played so sad face. The money I've ****ed away on beer over the last 30 years? Who knows...The $120 on the 40K 2nd Ed Box Set? Money well spent! All those models are still in play, even the buildings and the cardboard Ork Dread is proudly on my shelf!

 Jidmah wrote:
Starting warhammer is expensive, but continuing to play it afterwards can be much, much cheaper.

For the last years, I have been spending exactly 20€ per month on 40k, including paints, books(PA, CA, vigilus), measuring tapes and dice.
I started doing this because I was pretty short on money after my daughter was born, but I still wanted to be able to buy hobby stuff despite that. It's working pretty well, so I simply never stopped doing it that way.

That is about the wisest way to follow the hobby. Slow, measured and planned. I commend you and that way does also make it not too expensive to continue. Though I agree the start up for the game these days is intense. Pricing out only doing a battalion of moderate size for sisters is looking to end up around 4 to 5 hundred US dollars. That is crazy.

So, 10 dollars a week over a year? A month to get into Kill Team?

That is still awful expensive and not taking into account the other items such as time, paint, storage which further bloat the cost out.

Point is, back when I started you spent like 200 maybe a bit more and you'd be set for a good long time. Now, that barely gets a toe in with an actual army. As for killteam not everyone enjoys killteam, I know I don't enjoy it much.

It's an expensive hobby to start up in a number of ways really can't make it cheap. Maintaining it can be cheap if you follow moderation but even that is hard with the level of burn and churn GW do which has gone up intensely high. When I started, you got a codex, rule book, it would be a good 3 years or more before you'd need either of those again.

Now ? It's a codex maybe every year or two along with multiple splat books you may need lets say 2, at minimum every year and perhaps a new, revised rulebook every couple years. Manageable if you only run one army, run a few though ? That'll cost ya with releases like every week.

The only good thing from this current pandemic is a slow down in new stuff for a bit. I'm actually kinda grateful for that. In the longer term with how long it may be before players can really mingle again, this could be a rough time for the hobby but maybe a time we may see actual deals or lowered prices.

Moriarty wrote:
So, 10 dollars a week over a year? A month to get into Kill Team?

That is a lot of money. I think a lot of people would struggle to pull that in a month. But kill team seems like a good option, or any skirmish game . Much cheaper, and still is a game, easier to paint and control what ever the local meta is. Only problem is finding people to play skirmish systems. w40k seems to make up the majority of everything table top.


By the way was there ever any attempt from GW or someone private to check what the player retention in w40k is? Like out of a 100 people starting how many still play the game after a 1, 5 and 10 years.

Karol wrote:

Moriarty wrote:
So, 10 dollars a week over a year? A month to get into Kill Team?

That is a lot of money. I think a lot of people would struggle to pull that in a month. But kill team seems like a good option, or any skirmish game . Much cheaper, and still is a game, easier to paint and control what ever the local meta is. Only problem is finding people to play skirmish systems. w40k seems to make up the majority of everything table top.

$10 a week is variable depending on a persons income and situation - for some it will be a fortune, for others they could just stop going out to eat once a week at a restaurant and save that much and for others they regularly lose that much down the back of the couch and don't notice it at all.

Fact is any hobby has a base-line cost and whilst you can work around getting in cheaper (eg secondhand), the new product will have a generally fixed price of entry. You can argue about it as much as you like, but so long as the parent company is earning a healthy income and generating profit, they wil continue to charge that much.



As for GW being the only name, that's often true. It's big and because its big it remains big. However with effort you can start up any game locally if you want. You might need to buy two starter forces for the game; the rules and materials and make a show with a half decent game board and do some introduction games. Ergo you have to be a passionate salesman to help sell the game to your local area. To learn the rules and provide demos and entice people in. Nicely painted models of your own help

That would be $520 over a year, that should be plenty to start you pretty much any army you want.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Now ? It's a codex maybe every year or two along with multiple splat books you may need lets say 2, at minimum every year and perhaps a new, revised rulebook every couple years. Manageable if you only run one army, run a few though ? That'll cost ya with releases like every week.

The only good thing from this current pandemic is a slow down in new stuff for a bit. I'm actually kinda grateful for that. In the longer term with how long it may be before players can really mingle again, this could be a rough time for the hobby but maybe a time we may see actual deals or lowered prices.

Does it really feel that fast for you? I guess it might feel that way if you are running some variant of space marines, but even for orks I had no trouble just getting all the new stuff and more using my method. The only thing released during 8th I don't own (yet) is the squig trukk, but not for the lack of money.

Also just a point for thought - smoking is typically considered affordable by many and yet many who smoke will easily spend more than $10 a week on smokes without it impoverishing them.


Sometimes its not cost its priorities and what you choose to spend your money on.

Or, you could, you know, play smaller games and not rush people,e to play at 2,000 when they're just learning.

I played A Lot of 500-1,000 games. It took a while before we had enough folks that could play at 1,000 or higher. It wasn't until I came back for 8th that everyone and their dog played 2,000, which was basically my entire collection.

Personally, I like 1,000-1,500 point games.

Yeah $520 a year is fairly modest. I have a monthly budget that I either save or spend for hobby expenses. I hit 20 years in the hobby in December and I still have the armies I started with. I've bought and sold different armies throughout the years but that was a personal decision.