RAGE @ games workshop

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.

**Jidmah**

Are we both talking about the OS that let you delete other people's files if you had nothing but their IP?

Unless that person knew how to lock down their system, of course, in the days before firewalls and virus scanners available for everyone.

**Fafnir**

As a little boy at the time, Windows 98 was the coolest thing ever. And it played games that weren't Nicolai's Trains.

You wouldn't believe how freaking awesome that is for an 8-year-old.

**Joey**

Jidmah wrote:
Joey wrote:You mean a card game costs less than highly-detailed plastic models? Well blow me down.

A game is a game. When you can get into one game and keep playing it for years or more for the price equivalent of a single, unpainted unit, one of them is expensive.
For the equivalent of one WH40k Army, including paints, you can keep playing for decades. It worked pretty well for me.

Please do not circumvent our word filter. Thanks Manchu

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=amb_link_163789787_2?ie=UTF8&rh=n%3A300703%2Ck%3AB007WPF2OK%7CB007WPF718%7CB007WPF7FE&page=1&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_r=1VPSR9MSHS42F32NXD19&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=293278887&pf_rd_i=300703
PC/Console games cost a bucket-load and will probably be quicker to complete than to paint a ten-man squad.

Oh, well, you picked the worst game currently popular. So let's pick the worst possible ten man squad then, shall we? What's the cost a ten man squad of SoB again?
Mass Effect 3 took me longer to complete than painting and assembling a unit of 20 ork shoota boyz and it even has that awesome multiplayer mode which you can sink time in after completing the game. And while boyz are one of the cheapest per model unit, they were still more expensive than ME3.

Or the basic rules of most P&P games. In terms of nerdy man toyz, warhammer is about as expensive as it gets.

Right, because rulebooks+plastic models cost more than just rulebooks. Great job.

Great job at completely missing the point, I'd rather say. The BRB and the BGB are both more expesive than the base rules of any P&P game. And you need a codex to play, too. So just for the 40k rules you could get 3-4 rule books for any P&P system you like to play.
The point was, you can get into any P&P hobby by buying a book, and start playing for months and years. If you buy a box of marines and paint, your busy for no longer than a week. To actually get into 40k you have to get at least AOBR and a painter's starter set. In any other hobby, that kind of money sets you up for years.
So playing 40k is a waste of money, no matter how you look at it. Saying that having miniatures gathering dust on a shelf is a better waste of money than getting smashed and having fun for the evening is hypocrisy at best.

You genuinely want a "perfect" ruleset. That renders everything you say about GW invalid.

You must be one of those people who have been brainwashed by GW to think that perfect rules are impossible to archive.
That's a myth. If perfect rules could not be archived, then how is possible to program any real time strategy game ever? Very few of those simply crash and refuse to continue when a certain event happens. And no RTS is more or less complex than a tabletob game, GW is simply unable to playtest or even make simple test, like checking a new special rule against every other model out there. Considering that half the models are space marines with almost no difference in rules, that should be done in about a day. One day to provide an FAQ at launch of a codex for the interaction of two rules which might conflict. You know, like every other company selling rules - or even giving them out for free.
MTG has a 200 page rulebook which leaves absolutely no room for interpretation, and is perfectly readable. Any rules question can definitely answered within minutes, no RAW vs RAI, no "How would you play it", no YMDC, no dicing off. You simply have an answer.

If you believe that GW rules are as good as they get, you are as much as fool as someone thinking that Windows98 was the best windows ever.

A Town Called Malus wrote:Your point may have been better made by selecting a game series that isn't known for having a 4 hour long campaign and being ridiculously over-priced, I can't remember ever seeing anyone else charge £40 for a PC game without it being a special edition. For the PC you can buy Skyrim for under £30, Mass Effect 3 for under £20 (in fact you could get all 3 Mass Effect games for under £40).

This, a thousand times over. Besides, most people buying that series aren't exactly playing the single-player campaign, but spend days, if not weeks in playtime online shooting each other. That's more time than painting ten miniatures, too.

I assume you don't buy any models then since they're so expensive?
Pretty much the definition of "too expensive" is choosing not to buy something. I mean, the gall of these people to charge £20-£30 for something that will keep you entertained for weeks (months, years).

**nosferatu1001**

Days *before* virus scanners? You jest.... yes people often didnt stick a firewall on, meaning their C$ default share (sgh, ms!) was wide open

Was handy when working at HP and we got hit by code red (oneof the ones that spread through network shares, and IIS, from memory) - there was a rogue 98 machine sittingspewing garbage at me, and noone claimed ownership - one rewrite of autoexec.bat later, to halt boot with a "get this machine cleaned up!" and a reboot later, all was sorted....

**Joey**

I run XP with no firewall or anti-virus and it's fine.
I do use Spybot for the spyware though. The internet's a lot safer than you'd think.

**nosferatu1001**

It really isnt. You can get by without AV, if youre careful, and I imagine youre actually running NT5 behind a NAT, correct? You do realise thats also esssentially a stateful firewall?

**TermiesInARaider**

Joey wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
Joey wrote:You mean a card game costs less than highly-detailed plastic models? Well blow me down.

A game is a game. When you can get into one game and keep playing it for years or more for the price equivalent of a single, unpainted unit, one of them is expensive.
For the equivalent of one WH40k Army, including paints, you can keep playing for decades. It worked pretty well for me.

Please do not circumvent our word filter. Thanks Manchu

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=amb_link_163789787_2?ie=UTF8&rh=n%3A300703%2Ck%3AB007WPF2OK%7CB007WPF718%7CB007WPF7FE&page=1&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_r=1VPSR9MSHS42F32NXD19&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=293278887&pf_rd_i=300703
PC/Console games cost a bucket-load and will probably be quicker to complete than to paint a ten-man squad.

Oh, well, you picked the worst game currently popular. So let's pick the worst possible ten man squad then, shall we? What's the cost a ten man squad of SoB again?
Mass Effect 3 took me longer to complete than painting and assembling a unit of 20 ork shoota boyz and it even has that awesome multiplayer mode which you can sink time in after completing the game. And while boyz are one of the cheapest per model unit, they were still more expensive than ME3.

Or the basic rules of most P&P games. In terms of nerdy man toyz, warhammer is about as expensive as it gets.

Right, because rulebooks+plastic models cost more than just rulebooks. Great job.

Great job at completely missing the point, I'd rather say. The BRB and the BGB are both more expesive than the base rules of any P&P game. And you need a codex to play, too. So just for the 40k rules you could get 3-4 rule books for any P&P system you like to play.
The point was, you can get into any P&P hobby by buying a book, and start playing for months and years. If you buy a box of marines and paint, your busy for no longer than a week. To actually get into 40k you have to get at least AOBR and a painter's starter set. In any other hobby, that kind of money sets you up for years.
So playing 40k is a waste of money, no matter how you look at it. Saying that having miniatures gathering dust on a shelf is a better waste of money than getting smashed and having fun for the evening is hypocrisy at best.

You genuinely want a "perfect" ruleset. That renders everything you say about GW invalid.

You must be one of those people who have been brainwashed by GW to think that perfect rules are impossible to archive.
That's a myth. If perfect rules could not be archived, then how is possible to program any real time strategy game ever? Very few of those simply crash and refuse to continue when a certain event happens. And no RTS is more or less complex than a tabletob game, GW is simply unable to playtest or even make simple test, like checking a new special rule against every other model out there. Considering that half the models are space marines with almost no difference in rules, that should be done in about a day. One day to provide an FAQ at launch of a codex for the interaction of two rules which might conflict. You know, like every other company selling rules - or even giving them out for free.
MTG has a 200 page rulebook which leaves absolutely no room for interpretation, and is perfectly readable. Any rules question can definitely answered within minutes, no RAW vs RAI, no "How would you play it", no YMDC, no dicing off. You simply have an answer.

If you believe that GW rules are as good as they get, you are as much as fool as someone thinking that Windows98 was the best windows ever.

A Town Called Malus wrote:Your point may have been better made by selecting a game series that isn't known for having a 4 hour long campaign and being ridiculously over-priced, I can't remember ever seeing anyone else charge £40 for a PC game without it being a special edition. For the PC you can buy Skyrim for under £30, Mass Effect 3 for under £20 (in fact you could get all 3 Mass Effect games for under £40).

This, a thousand times over. Besides, most people buying that series aren't exactly playing the single-player campaign, but spend days, if not weeks in playtime online shooting each other. That's more time than painting ten miniatures, too.

I assume you don't buy any models then since they're so expensive?
Pretty much the definition of "too expensive" is choosing not to buy something. I mean, the gall of these people to charge £20-£30 for something that will keep you entertained for weeks (months, years).

Okay, wow. This is all strawman logic, not to mention completely broken, in terms of definition.

First of, the whole 'I assume you don't buy any models then since they're so expensive?' thing? Entirely baseless. He never said anything about not buying models, just that GW models are very expensive. Which, compared to other games, they are. NOT, that they were so prohibitively expensive that he'd never buy them. Not that you specified GW, just models in general, which just adds on more fail to your argument. Basically, what you just pulled is textbook strawman. He said one thing, and you extrapolated from that a completely exagerated model of what he actually said, and attacked that with your rebuttal. Basically, your counter-argument was launched against something that NOBODY ACTUALLY SAID, thereby accomplishing nothing.

Also, when you define 'too expensive', you're just wrong. Too expensive is not a word in a book, it is a concept, and it is his decision as to what too expensive means to him, and what he does when things are too expensive. Yes, to me, personally, GW models and games and nicknacks are 'too expensive'... For me to be buying $500 worth of the crap on a monthly basis. That doesn't however, mean I can't drop, say, ~$160 for three Land Raiders, and make that my pet project for a summer. It's my term to define. Not yours.

**Joey**

He's saying something subjective that I am subjectively disagreeing with.
So obviously I'm wrong because anyone who doesn't hate GW is probably Matt Ward in a Draigo suit, miright?
Also lol

Too expensive is not a word in a book, it is a concept,

It's my term to define. Not yours.

Megalols.
Also, yes. Something is too expensive if the cost prevents you from purchasing it. Something is expensive if it's expensive but you still buy it.
I just don't see why people insist on whinging about the price when they still buy it.
Take the cinema, it's obviously too expensive, but do you really hear people say "Oh man the Avengers was awesome but THE BASTARDS WERE CHARGING A TENNER RAHH CORPORATE GREED spankers". No, you don't.
Expensive!=Too expensive.

**TermiesInARaider**

Joey wrote:He's saying something subjective that I am subjectively disagreeing with.
So obviously I'm wrong because anyone who doesn't hate GW is probably Matt Ward in a Draigo suit, miright?
Also lol

Too expensive is not a word in a book, it is a concept,

It's my term to define. Not yours.

Megalols.
Also, yes. Something is too expensive if the cost prevents you from purchasing it. Something is expensive if it's expensive but you still buy it.
I just don't see why people insist on whinging about the price when they still buy it.
Take the cinema, it's obviously too expensive, but do you really hear people say "Oh man the Avengers was awesome but THE BASTARDS WERE CHARGING A TENNER RAHH CORPORATE GREED spankers". No, you don't.
Expensive!=Too expensive.

Well, you're doing it again. I never actually said that. It's one thing when you argue over opinions, but what you're doing is basing your argument on words that were never said. Do you understand? While I do have serious issues with how GW manages and markets its game, and with the game itself, I still like it. And just because I like it, doesn't mean I'm Matt Ward in a Draigo Suit. I would totally be Edward Elric dressed up as Link, if we're talking cosplay. But I digress. Basically, you're the only person who actually said something that crazy. You're arguing with yourself.

And you're still missing the point. It's not that black and white. If you had a girlfriend, say, and your first anniversary was coming up, would you take her out to a nice dinner? Quite possibly. I know I would, and I know I'm not alone. But would you proceed to go to that expensive steakhouse every week? No. That's TOO expensive. It doesn't just apply to the product, it applies to the rate at which the product is consumed. GW's prices are high enough to prohibit me from shelling out $120 a month for a tactical squad each week. That doesn't mean I'm NEVER going to buy ANYTHING GW makes because it's all TOO EXPENSIVE. That's a child's way of thinking. You find a way to fit it into your budget, however it may fit.

**Joey**

Then why are you argueing with me?
I originally replied to someone to said "the price is simply unjustifiable " and was complaining about the rules being imperfect.
I'm also a pretty slow painter so there's that. I could paint a single guard model in an avening to an *acceptable* standard. There's no way I could paint a tactical squad in a week though.
I guess people who paint really fast are getting less value for money...

**TermiesInARaider**

Joey wrote:Then why are you argueing with me?
I originally replied to someone to said "the price is simply unjustifiable " and was complaining about the rules being imperfect.
I'm also a pretty slow painter so there's that. I could paint a single guard model in an avening to an *acceptable* standard. There's no way I could paint a tactical squad in a week though.
I guess people who paint really fast are getting less value for money...

What I'm trying to explain to you is that that isn't something for you to decide. If he thinks it's worth it to him, then it is. If not, then you have no place or ability to say anything to the contrary. That person thinks that it's not worth his money. If that bothers you, then you're just going to have to deal with it.

And the rules are imperfect. At times, they're downright atrocious. One thing that Blizzard did get right when they ripped off 40k was they made it into as close to a flawlessly balanced game as they could. That's why it took damn near ten years for Starcraft II to come out. The team responsible said that they would not release it unless it was as close to perfect as possible. Contrast that to GW, who have a habit of just releasing things without properly balancing and play-testing them, as well as making bad rules in general, though that is open for interpretation and opinion. The end point is that saying GW's rules are imperfect is spot on. Whether that level of imperfection is within tolerable limits is another thing entirely. For you, it seems to be. I just spent $500 a few days ago ordering all the supplies I need to get started, so clearly, I'm willing to accept the fact that the game isn't perfect. But if someone says they can't accept that, and that bothers you, for some reason, again. Deal with it, because it's not going away.

**Joey**

So no one should ever disagree with anyone on something that's subjective, ever?
It's true that the price is as frustrating as your income - when I was unemployed it was much harder finding the spare dosh for some models, working full time, less so.
I don't hold with the idea that the rules are "broken" though. Outside of one or two nigglers (wound allocation of multiple AP weapons leaps to mind) the rules are alright.
Yes GK/SW/BA are more powerful than other codexes for no obvious reason but they can all be defeated, or avoided if you like.

**BlapBlapBlap**

I think this thread has come to the end of the line.

**Jidmah**

Joey wrote:I assume you don't buy any models then since they're so expensive?
Pretty much the definition of "too expensive" is choosing not to buy something. I mean, the gall of these people to charge £20-£30 for something that will keep you entertained for weeks (months, years).

Wow. You waste so much space by quoting my entire post just to answer to the first sentence? And on top of that you assume something which I just told you the very opposite of? That hit ratio would even be an insult to ork shooting.

On top of that, the word "too" never appeared in my post at all. Warhammer40k was too expensive for me when I was a kid and I saw all those awesome tanks and dragons behind glas at the store where I bought my magic cards. Almost twenty years later I have a job and can afford to have a decent ork army, thousands of magic cards, a good number of P&P books, dozens of pc games and still go out with my friends. What you are saying is when I chose to spend my hobby money for the month that I'm wasting it unless I spend it on GW miniatures. That, personal opinion or not, is utter nonsense.

Joey wrote:I run XP with no firewall or anti-virus and it's fine.
I do use Spybot for the spyware though. The internet's a lot safer than you'd think.

Almost all modern malware is spyware. The days of viruses bombing your pc with not safe for work images are over.
Spybot is nothing but an anti-virus program with additional features.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It really isnt. You can get by without AV, if youre careful, and I imagine youre actually running NT5 behind a NAT, correct? You do realise thats also esssentially a stateful firewall?

This. If you got any device at all from your ISP, you can bet your hat on it being configured as a firewall.

**TermiesInARaider**

Joey wrote:So no one should ever disagree with anyone on something that's subjective, ever?
It's true that the price is as frustrating as your income - when I was unemployed it was much harder finding the spare dosh for some models, working full time, less so.
I don't hold with the idea that the rules are "broken" though. Outside of one or two nigglers (wound allocation of multiple AP weapons leaps to mind) the rules are alright.
Yes GK/SW/BA are more powerful than other codexes for no obvious reason but they can all be defeated, or avoided if you like.

Again, straw-man logic. You're the only one who said that. Nobody said you can't put in your two cents. Nobody said you can't discuss things. But you can't honestly expect to get anywhere with it. He thinks this, you think that. The beginning of any legitimate, reasonable conversation is a respect for what the other person has to say as a legitimate viewpoint, based on reasonable factors.

For example, take the idea of GW rules being 'Broken'. You can say that you don't think they are. But the moment you say that anyone who thinks that the rules are broken is just 'complaining', you've compromised all the legitimacy of anything you may have to say. Nobody can take you seriously if you don't take them seriously.

Edit: Also, Jidmah, your sig is seriously the BOMB.

**doc1234**

Joey wrote:
Matt Ward in a Draigo suit

i...would like to see that...

**nosferatu1001**

Jidmah wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:It really isnt. You can get by without AV, if youre careful, and I imagine youre actually running NT5 behind a NAT, correct? You do realise thats also esssentially a stateful firewall?

This. If you got any device at all from your ISP, you can bet your hat on it being configured as a firewall.

Not even then - in order for NAT to work (and the chances Joey DOESNT have a standard router and switch box and instead has a direct old dial up modem hooked straight into the PC is very low) it has to act as a stateful firewall, using packet inspection to determine how to strip / add the appropriate IPs in. It is simply a firewall that you cant really configure all that well (you can normally stick some crude rules in, nothing major) and that isnt particularly fast, but it does the job, which is giving you a class C to play in when you only have a single DHCP'd address to the outside world.

tl;dr: if you use a modem / router to connect to the net, you are almost certainly sat behind a firewall you dont even know about.

**Skriker**

TermiesInARaider wrote:It's gonna be a damn shame if GW goes under, because I personally love this game. I wish it was smarter, I wish it was more balanced, I wish it was managed better and more ethically, with more faith to the people who love it, but I do love it. And I'd be sad to see it go. :/

I definitely agree with this. I still enjoy 40k, warts and all and still love GW's mins as well. Wish the company would wake up a bit and realize that the wolves are nipping at their heels and make some changes to make sure they stay around for a while. I would be *happier* if they fixed some stuff.

40k is still the one game that completely out of the blue I'll decide to start building a completely new army just from looking at the minis.

Skriker

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joey wrote:Anyway I stand by my point. Compared to a lot of other hobbies it's much cheaper. It also never expires. Spend £20 on a Tactical Squad and you'll always have a painted squad that you can use. It is a physical manifestation of your imagination. Games are fun but, by and large, when they're gone they're gone.
Particularly games like COD and FIFA that are essentially DLCs with an insane price tag (as you allude to).

How do games do away? I buy a game for my XBox and I can play it for as long as I like. Heck I still have my original NES system and am playing games that I bought 23 years ago for it. Meanwhile I cannot play any of my WFB or 40k armies from my early days in the game 20+ years ago because the genestealer cult hasn't been a legal list for a long time, and Chaos and Undead both got split into two completely separate and different armies that I didn't have enough points of either to play regular sized games with.

Skriker

**MadmanMSU**

There are 3 gamestores in my city (that I know of) that sell 40k products and have a good size selection. One of them is a Games Workshop outlet, the other are FLGS. The GW store is the closest to me, about 5 mins away.

The guy who runs it is SUPER awesome. I've spent quite a bit of time just shooting the breeze with him, so that's a plus side for the store. I also get free shipping on any products I order online, since they just ship them to the store where I can pick them up.

On the downside, there are only 3 tables in the store. 1 always has promo products on it, and the other two have almost no terrain on them, so no one ever plays there. I always have to go to one of the other FLGS to get games in (which is fine, because the proprietors of those stores do a really good job and treat their community well).

Interestingly, the manager of the GW store is pretty open about the corporate policies. They force him to display his products a certain way, carry certain quantities of things, and focus all his energy on pushing products instead of getting a good community going. GW has some pretty idiotic policies, and those are largely the reason that no one goes to that store to play. I'm fairly confident that the store won't last very long in my area because they don't support any type of community relations whatsoever.

Even though I would love to play at the GW store because its much closer to me than the FLGS, the corporate policies are completely anti-community and prevent people from playing at the store. Despite the fact that I like the manager and it's actually easier for me to buy products at the GW store, I have to support my FLGS because it's where I play. If the FLGS went out of business, I wouldn't have anywhere to play. This is a simple, direct example of how, even with a good manager and a good spot for a store, corporate GW policies still push away a customer.

Despite the idiocy, I find it funny that people always make the "GW is totally going out of business" argument. GW has turned a profit every year for at least 2 decades, even during this current recession. Even with poor policies and bad rulebooks, they're still making a profit, so I don't think they're going out of business anytime soon.

**Skriker**

MadmanMSU wrote:Interestingly, the manager of the GW store is pretty open about the corporate policies. They force him to display his products a certain way, carry certain quantities of things, and focus all his energy on pushing products instead of getting a good community going. GW has some pretty idiotic policies, and those are largely the reason that no one goes to that store to play. I'm fairly confident that the store won't last very long in my area because they don't support any type of community relations whatsoever.

Despite the idiocy, I find it funny that people always make the "GW is totally going out of business" argument. GW has turned a profit every year for at least 2 decades, even during this current recession. Even with poor policies and bad rulebooks, they're still making a profit, so I don't think they're going out of business anytime soon.

Of course GW isn't the only company guilty of stupid policies. I worked for a hobby store back in the mid '90s that grew from a single mom and pop store. They eventually got up to about 7 separate stores, but they stocked EVERY store the same because they wanted to cover every possible contingency, so we had no control over our stock at all. We could show them sales figures where we sold 0 paint by number sets and massive numbers of another product, but they wouldn't let us turn any of the paint by number shelving over to support the popular products, so often we had just enough of anyone thing to make customers come in and then leave frustrated because we didn't have enough of it. So GW isn't really alone there. Not surprisingly this chain collapsed back down to its original store because they had no clue on how to run a chain and wouldn't let their managers be anything other than overglorified errand boys.

The reason that GW has turned a profit every year is because they keep raising their prices for no apparent reason other than to keep their profits up. They sell *less* product, but make their profits. They've been doing that for a long time now and for part of that time there really wasn't much of an alternative market out there except for historicals for competition. The simple fact now is, though, that there are companies out there doing it better than GW now that enable people to play their games for less money, with better written rules and less issues. That is going to start telling on GW if they don't change their attitudes. Eventually they will price themselves out of the market if they just keep up with raising prices as a profit plan. They need to start doing things differently. During the time they had no compeition they had a free hand to really set themselves up as the pre-eminent miniatures gaming company going forward for decades, but instead they used the time to milk their customers of as much cash as they could. Now they are reaching that breaking point. Many people can't even consider playing 40k or WFB. It is just too expensive for them. These aren't little kids trying to make an army on a small allowance, but people with jobs and real income that can't afford the initial outlay to get into the game. Any new friends I try to get into the hobby look at the price tag and say, "No thanks!" and I have some very well paid friends.

Skriker

**keisukekun**

I don't believe GW models are prohibitively expensive. In actuality they are just about the same (or better) than other game systems. Lets look at some examples:

Warmachines: While it may be cheaper to build an army in warmachine since its armies are smaller, per model the models are pretty much the same price. Only difference is GW models normally have more parts/larger/come with more units and options and some of the kits can actually be two different models with some extra work with magnets.

Dust tactics: Not sure on the investment you need to make for a whole army but the models themselves cost 15-20 for a 4-5 man squad or 25-30 for a walker. Really as close as makes no difference in my opinion except it doesn't look like the squads have any options whatsoever.

Battletech: Not really a comparable game but I play this mostly. You mostly limited to pewter figures which run 10-15 each which is about the same as most of the finecast/old metals. Of course you dont have to buy a lot of stuff but me and others are usually of the opinion "need one of everything for different games" since in battletech you dont normally run the same unit over and over unless your doing a campaign. Because of this I have over 200 Mechs, vehicles, etc and others I know have upwards of 400-600. Goddamn is my carrying case heavy btw.

Basically any game that includes model armies is going to be expensive. Whether or not you or anyone else is willing to pay to play is another matter. Most of my gw stuff I buy used on ebay and what i buy new i get from my flgs.

As far as the ruleset goes, I agree it needs some work but a complete reboot would probably piss off more people than it pleases. I just hope it becomes more balanced and streamlined in the future

**Zathras**

I prefer my FLGS to the local GW store here because of more space to play (10-15 tables worth of space opposed to 3), no hard sales pitch for GW products and a discount for pre-ordering product. They also carry resin bits for conversions and other miniatures that I've used for proxies of GW figs in Finecast, such as the Dark Age Ice Elemental I'm using for a C'tan shard....

With mine I painted the body Tin Bitz and highlighted with Dwarven Bronze and the crystals in greens, ending with a Snot Green highlight. Looks pretty good.

**Vaktathi**

keisukekun wrote:I don't believe GW models are prohibitively expensive. In actuality they are just about the same (or better) than other game systems. Lets look at some examples:

On a per model basis GW isn't necessarily all that off in terms of pricing, though they have definitely started to eclipse others even there. Where you not $10-15 per model for many manufacturers, looking at GW's finecast offerings, most single models are $18.25-$24 with the cheapest models being in excess of $15, definitely on the more expensive side.

The other issue is that for GW games, you need a hell of a lot more models to play. It's one thing to charge $10-15/model when you only need a 8-12 of them. It's quite another when you need several dozen plus vehicles. The cost of a 2000pt mechanized IG army would get me a fully playable army of every faction for Infinity or Heavy Gear with cash to spare. If I made my current IG tournament army from scratch at MSRP, it'd be over $1,400 before paints, glue, codex, rulebook, etc. Even a cheaper SM army would run ~$600. An Infinity army would run me maybe $120, ~$175 with hardcover rulebook, and you can make a perfectly good starting army with the $115 Heavy Gear starter set that includes rulebook, army lists, rules update book, dice and tape measure.

**Backspacehacker**

I was actuality talking about this with my FLGS owner. Its not directly a GW store but most of his stuff is GW he sells some model stuff but i digress. The thing is, pure GW stores, especially in the US, are hurting GW, they are trying to phase them out, it cost them a lot more time money and resources to get a store, hire staff and stock the place then it is to simply have someone order it from them and ship it out. Its purely an economical dissension, its not GW trying to be donkey-caves, its them trying to keep their business afloat. I like the GW stores and wish there was one where I live, mostly just for the resources and having anything i need for my army right there and ready to go. On the flip side I do rather enjoy having a local owned store, yes some times things are not stocked, and getting things stocked depends on sales, but i like the feel and friendliness of them.

**LunaHound**

Joey wrote:Then why are you argueing with me?
I originally replied to someone to said "the price is simply unjustifiable " and was complaining about the rules being imperfect.
I'm also a pretty slow painter so there's that. I could paint a single guard model in an avening to an *acceptable* standard. There's no way I could paint a tactical squad in a week though.
I guess people who paint really fast are getting less value for money...

Everything you said in that quote is extremely ill thought out.

How fast you "Joey" personally paints, or enjoys is irrelevant with other people.
What you find enjoyable or fun holds no water on anyone else but yourself.

"people who paint really fast are getting less value for money" is one of the funniest thing I have read on dakka.
Because.
1) You dont know whether they enjoy painting of not.
2) You dont know how efficient they are
3) You dont know if once they finish painting, they can go on to game with it sooner or not.

So far everything you said in this thread holds no ground other then speaking for yourself.

**keisukekun**

Vaktathi wrote:
keisukekun wrote:I don't believe GW models are prohibitively expensive. In actuality they are just about the same (or better) than other game systems. Lets look at some examples:

On a per model basis GW isn't necessarily all that off in terms of pricing, though they have definitely started to eclipse others even there. Where you not $10-15 per model for many manufacturers, looking at GW's finecast offerings, most single models are $18.25-$24 with the cheapest models being in excess of $15, definitely on the more expensive side.

The other issue is that for GW games, you need a hell of a lot more models to play. It's one thing to charge $10-15/model when you only need a 8-12 of them. It's quite another when you need several dozen plus vehicles. The cost of a 2000pt mechanized IG army would get me a fully playable army of every faction for Infinity or Heavy Gear with cash to spare. If I made my current IG tournament army from scratch at MSRP, it'd be over $1,400 before paints, glue, codex, rulebook, etc. Even a cheaper SM army would run ~$600. An Infinity army would run me maybe $120, ~$175 with hardcover rulebook, and you can make a perfectly good starting army with the $115 Heavy Gear starter set that includes rulebook, army lists, rules update book, dice and tape measure.

I think the issue there is that Infinity and heavy gear and warmachines are smaller scale skirmish games while 40k and fantasy are more about pitting large armies against large armies. Naturally more models cost more money especially if you run a heavy mechanized list. One issue I think GW has is their heavy support is undervalued point wise and underpowered making it necessary to buy a lot of it to do a mechanized list which gets expensive. I think it be interesting to see 40k go the way of fantasy with more limits on the those types of units. from what i understand this is one reason why fantasy is much more balanced since spamming is not really possible

**purplefood**

Grimtuff wrote:
purplefood wrote:
Isengard wrote:
I left after I witnessed the cold-bloodedeness of that regime first hand. I got in one day to find the regioanl manager (who was a deeply unpleasant man) and a couple of guys I did not know in the shop. He asked who I was and I asked him where the manager was as I had seen him a couple of days previously and I was expecting him to be in. he told me he had had issues with the store and therefore had come in and sacked all the staff present. I survived because I was not in that day, although he cheerfully told me he would have scaked me too. he said the policy was a clean sweep, sack the entire store staff and start over.

How did they do this?
AFAIK you cannot just up and sack an entire store staff just because the feeling strikes you the Employment Rights Act gives employees the right not to be unfairly dismissed by his employer.

Stores are/were fiefdoms unto themselves and are governed by the area managers, a lot of things GW does are probably not allowed by employment law (I seem to recall a story of them getting their knickers in a twist when they found out one of their staff who had to go up to head office to get a disciplinary was a member of USDAW. GW staff cannot be members of unions apparently).

If a store was doing bad head office would send in the inquisition (yes, really) to remove any of the taint. If said manager's "taint" had spread to all of the staff the store would be "virus bombed" and cleansed of all existing staff. And, no I am not making this up. I'm sure some other who have actually worked for GW can fill in the blanks here, but many of these things were told to me by a 10 year veteran of GW, so I take them as being somewhat accurate.

Well then the people who are sacked have grounds to make an appeal...
Admittedly they will only get maybe 2-3 months pay but it's better than nothing...

**Silentway**

I'm going to jump on the expensive band wagon simply because I agree they are WAY to expensive for what you get. A couple of plastic pieces, then I have to buy the glue and the paint. Lame.

I'd be way more willing to buy models and start more armies and spend more money on GW items if they droped their price. Almost 70 dollars for a Valkyrie...give me a break

the last time I bought any models was when the new IG codex came out and I havent purchased any since.

**Skriker**

keisukekun wrote:I don't believe GW models are prohibitively expensive. In actuality they are just about the same (or better) than other game systems. Lets look at some examples:

On a fig per fig basis your arguement works, but it loses steam when you compare prices based on what is actually *needed* to play at a standard point level for the game in question. The only games I consistently find myself playing "lower point" battles regularly because of costs is 40k and WFB. I never have that problem with Flames of War, Warmchine or any of the other mini games I play, because a new player can easily invest into the "standard" level for those games with the same amount of money a new player of 40k would be able to get something like an 800 point army with. That is specifically where GW prices are just too high for what they expect for their games and their players. For 40k they need to invest close to $500 to find out they don't like the game or the army they've chosen to start playing. $500 is a lot of money to most people.

I've got parts on order from the Plastic Soldier Company to build my next Flames of War british Late war armored company. It is costing me $75 to purchase *all* of the tanks I need to create a full 1750 army just with the tanks I am buying. I will also have enough tanks to alternate if I want 1 or 2 Firefly tanks in my platoons when I play it. If I add other minis I already have I can expand the force up to 2000 points easily, all for an extra investment of $75. There is not a *single* army in 40k that you can make to a 1750 level for $75 and therer never will be. Heck you can't even just buy the 2 troops units you need for most armies for less than $70, let alone the HQ you need for a legal force and that doesn't include the rest of the 1750 points worth of army.

THAT is the big difference between GW and other games and that is why GW is expensive. Yes this hobby can get as expensive as we want it to, and the sky is the really the limit, but the most important factor for a game's continued existence is how easily and affordably that a new player can start the hobby.

Skriker

**Dayvuni**

LunaHound wrote:Anyone that says 40k is stream lined never seen YMDC forum, which is in Dakka.....

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/forums/show/15.page

Thrice

That is true while models last longer than a dinner, in proportion to other things the price is reasonable but I don't have the number to buy much.