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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
File off the aquilas and use it as a 30k Imperial Militia army using the original Cadian gear STCs.

What if you don't want to play 30k? What if you find 90% power armour v power armour the cure for insomnia? What if you think the whole game is besmirching the mythology of 40k?

 Grimtuff wrote:
What if you find 90% power armour v power armour the cure for insomnia?

I always love how you phrase things.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
File off the aquilas and use it as a 30k Imperial Militia army using the original Cadian gear STCs.

What if you don't want to play 30k? What if you find 90% power armour v power armour the cure for insomnia? What if you think the whole game is besmirching the mythology of 40k?

Then you're silly, because 0% of the games I have played have been power armour vs power armour.

I play Ordo Reductor and Solar Auxilia.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
File off the aquilas and use it as a 30k Imperial Militia army using the original Cadian gear STCs.

What if you don't want to play 30k? What if you find 90% power armour v power armour the cure for insomnia? What if you think the whole game is besmirching the mythology of 40k?

Then you're silly, because 0% of the games I have played have been power armour vs power armour.

I play Ordo Reductor and Solar Auxilia.

And you know this is typical how?

Oh, I don't think it's typical.

But when I tell someone to play Imperial Militia and Cults I can guarantee 0% of their games will be power-armour vs power armour, because their army doesn't have power armour.

So it would be typical for them, of course, if they take my advice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If other people enjoy PA vs PA that's fine, whatever. I have ways of ensuring that doesn't happen, if I don't like it, by choosing what army I play.

Revolutionary, I know.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
File off the aquilas and use it as a 30k Imperial Militia army using the original Cadian gear STCs.

What if you don't want to play 30k? What if you find 90% power armour v power armour the cure for insomnia? What if you think the whole game is besmirching the mythology of 40k?

Then you're silly, because 0% of the games I have played have been power armour vs power armour.

I play Ordo Reductor and Solar Auxilia.

Remind me of the fluff that has Guard v. Guard? Traitor Guard, right? Still, the issue is 30k sounds boring, because it's basically Imperial vs. Imperial in some form or another.

 Krug001 wrote:
Hey 40k Folks -

Why are people so negative, yet stick around? Why do people who seem to have nothing, but bad, to say about the hobby not just do something else? There are tons of different things to do with your time - why pick something that infuriates you?

We are trying to help those who still think GW is 'the hobby', maybe 25 years ago when the choice was 40k or nowt that might have been true, but now with the magic of the interwebs and more games and rulesystem choices than ever I'm afraid the a clunky ruleset that doesnt know what it is supposed to be anymore just won't cut it, well that and GW just has the sort of face you never get tired of punching...

OMG!

GW is Geoff!!

To more respond in a slightly on topic way, I've an itch to spend some Chrimbo money on Dreadball.

Interested?

If you want evidence that GW is sinking, don't take our word for it. A quick glance over the last 5 financial reports will tell you all you need to know. If you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend the only evidence for the failure of 40k is a bunch of whining on internet forums, there's not much point engaging you in further debate. Quality of rules is up for debate, numbers in a financial report are black and white. It's not just my personal opinion that GW is losing money.

 Toofast wrote:
If you want evidence that GW is sinking, don't take our word for it. A quick glance over the last 5 financial reports will tell you all you need to know. If you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend the only evidence for the failure of 40k is a bunch of whining on internet forums, there's not much point engaging you in further debate. Quality of rules is up for debate, numbers in a financial report are black and white. It's not just my personal opinion that GW is losing money.

To be fair, GW isn't loosing money. Sales revenue is going down year on year but they're still making a profit.

Bartali wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
If you want evidence that GW is sinking, don't take our word for it. A quick glance over the last 5 financial reports will tell you all you need to know. If you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend the only evidence for the failure of 40k is a bunch of whining on internet forums, there's not much point engaging you in further debate. Quality of rules is up for debate, numbers in a financial report are black and white. It's not just my personal opinion that GW is losing money.

To be fair, GW isn't loosing money. Sales revenue is going down year on year but they're still making a profit.

Which, if not addressed, will simply continue going down and theyn they WILL be losing money and the game will die....

I'm annoyed about them adding slowed things like centurions (I can't be the only one who thinks moar armour over power armour looks ridiculous). I haven't read much of the new fluff so I'm still running on the old fluff and my imagination. This is probably why I still love 40k so much. I don't see the rules as a big long-term problem. The sooner GW dies, the sooner "real" game designers can start working on the game again (an ip this strong will always have a buyer).

That said, players ought to take command of their gaming life. If their isn't a gaming club in your area THEN START ONE! The WHFB crew in my area have taken ownership of the game and are tweaking the 8th ed rules to perfection. Yea they can't go to another city and expect the players there to be on the same page, but honestly, how often do you play in another city? This game was started by people who wrote "home brew" games and that's where it should end up. Back in the players hands.
*gets down from soap box*

 Kavish wrote:
That said, players ought to take command of their gaming life. If their isn't a gaming club in your area THEN START ONE!

This is a lot easier said than done. In the US at least, most people don't WANT a "club" they want a shop to go to, that's why FLGSes are so prevalent here. If it's not something they can buy in a store and go down to a store every weekend or so, they aren't interested. I've looked around in my area for historical games, Infinity, Bolt Action, Kings of War, Frostgrave, etc. basically various things I'm interested in and would like to try out, and the general attitude I've gotten is that people go to a store, feel it's their "home" (to the point of trash talking other stores or treating people who frequent those stores as outsiders), and will only ever consider playing things that store can stock else they feel like they are "betraying" the store owner by not giving him money. Trying to round up people and say hey let's form a club and rent a room once a month to play lots of games is going to get you looked at like you are stupid and/or crazy, because there's XYZ Games where everyone goes on weekends to play, and people aren't interested in expanding from their own cliques.

That's what I've seen, anyways. The US game store mentality is very cliqueish. Try to pitch a new game, and you're likely to be told by the store owner to feth off because he's not wanting to stock it (and sometimes not even let you play it in his shop because he can't/won't stock it), and bringing it up to the players will often get you told to feth off for trying to push your "pet game" on everybody else. I've had it happen when I asked some Warhammer Fantasy (back when it was alive) players about Kings of War, which I was interested in. I've gotten told that nobody is interested when I bring up things like Infinity or Bolt Action, and historical gaming would never get traction in a store because it would likely be hard for the shop to buy the figures in most cases (some exceptions like FoW exist but then again no shop I've seen in the area, and there are like 3 I've been to that are open and 2 that closed last year, have anyone playing FoW at all), and daring to suggest that people buy them elsewhere gets you told to feth off for not wanting to support the shop.

The gaming club exists basically like a secret society - you need to know someone who can get you an "in" with the club, or else you'll never hear about it existing. I'm sure they are out there, but I don't know anyone who knows anyone, and like I said trying to form it without having like a bunch of people already willing to do it is a monumental effort for likely little gain because it's easier to just play what everyone else plays at the local game shop.

Well for everyone who doesn't want to play 40k but is stuck with models.. check out Frostgraive (I think that is how you spell it). Its a small skirmish style game, but the IP writes rules.. they don't have their own model line. A few people at my FLGS were play testing it yesterday, looked like fun.

 Toofast wrote:
It's not just my personal opinion that GW is losing money.

Games Workshop is not loosing money. I don't care how business say it, when you are making Profit, you are not loosing money. You are making money. I don't know how or when not making as much profit as the year before is loosing money. Loosing money is when you are in the negative, in the red. GW is in the black and making profit. Not as much profit as it did before, but profit in the millions non the less.

Yes the profit is shrinking year to year and if GW doesn't change soon, then GW can be in the red then they would be loosing money. For the last 10 years profits are going down, there is no debate about that.

Now we can say GW is loosing sales. GW doesn't sell as much as they use to. People are not buying as much as they use to. And yes one of the reasons why GW is making a profit is because of all the cost cutting measurements they did. Now I believe they have cut down to the bone. So they can't make a profit anymore because I believe there is nothing to cut now. What else is left to cut?

Still GW is not loosing money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jonolikespie wrote:

Bartali wrote:
Which, if not addressed, will simply continue going down and theyn they WILL be losing money and the game will die....

That has been said for over 15 years now. GW will be dead by 2010. It's almost 2016 and GW is still making millions in profit. I guess for a publicly traded company not enough, but almost any other game company there, they would love to have GW profits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grizzyzz wrote:
Well for everyone who doesn't want to play 40k but is stuck with models.. check out Frostgraive (I think that is how you spell it). Its a small skirmish style game, but the IP writes rules.. they don't have their own model line. A few people at my FLGS were play testing it yesterday, looked like fun.

Will check it out. Thank you for mentioning it.

GW is making less and less money every year.

If something does not change then eventually they will not make enough money to pay their rather outrageous costs.

That leads to bankruptcy.

Yes, they can do lots of things to try and change the current downwards trend, but they have had years to do so and haven't yet. Maybe the new CEO will be able to turn it around and it's just a slow process, butn things like AoS aren't helping.

 jonolikespie wrote:
GW is making less and less money every year.

If something does not change then eventually they will not make enough money to pay their rather outrageous costs.

That leads to bankruptcy.

Yes, they can do lots of things to try and change the current downwards trend, but they have had years to do so and haven't yet. Maybe the new CEO will be able to turn it around and it's just a slow process, butn things like AoS aren't helping.

However, some things -are- helping, including actually-discounted bundle boxes, the return to paperback rule-books at lower prices, and the return of specialist games.

It seems they actually are trying to make changes. They have some time before they are bankrupt, and it is possible that enough of the gak they're throwing at the wall will stick and reverse the trend. *Shrug*

40k in my area is not at all dead, We have a group of about 20ish guys that play on at least a monthly basis, we are all in our late 20's to mid 30's.

I really think the biggest effect on the people complaining is who you play with. we all like the challenge of building a competitive list and don't play with TFG. Also we normally do a bit of pre planning and say if we are going to play a cut throat game of have a bit of fun. I would recommend making a FB group for your city or region to help with good discussion.

I agree with the original poster that most of the flakk GW gets is from a very few loud group. what is even more amusing is the fact that at least in our area the people that complain the most haven't played since 4th or 5th

Are the rules prefect no, but no game is and don't say they are.
Is it expensive yes but don't say other games are cheaper. on a per model basis GW is about equal to other models of similar quality.
also from someone who has played on every inhabited continent its the only game of its type i have found that can be found everywhere with relative ease.

Also I think GW is trying to take a Apple approach to there product. really think about it. a premium product model wise. they keep stuff pretty darn secretive, expensive. GW is the Apple of wargaming lol

anyways thats just my 2 cents

just my 2 cents

 Ckilleen wrote:
I agree with the original poster that most of the flakk GW gets is from a very few loud group.

Anyone remember when people actually provided evidence for their statements?

 Ckilleen wrote:
40k in my area is not at all dead, We have a group of about 20ish guys that play on at least a monthly basis, we are all in our late 20's to mid 30's.

I really think the biggest effect on the people complaining is who you play with. we all like the challenge of building a competitive list and don't play with TFG. Also we normally do a bit of pre planning and say if we are going to play a cut throat game of have a bit of fun. I would recommend making a FB group for your city or region to help with good discussion.

Probably the best approach, if you ask me. I wonder if age has something to do with it though? I find as I get older, (or maybe it's just that I mainly play against other folks more in their late twenties and thirties) that a bit of maturity has seeped into us all, and this helps make our gaming a bit better. That or alcohol.

 Ckilleen wrote:

Are the rules prefect no, but no game is and don't say they are.

Said no one, ever.

To be fair, there's having flaws, and there's having flaws and being completely uninterested in fixing them, . Gw's rules writing and approach to balance is terrible and amateurish. There is no denying this, and it is a huge hurdle. Gw lead the pack in this category I afraid.

 Ckilleen wrote:

Is it expensive yes but don't say other games are cheaper. on a per model basis GW is about equal to other models of similar quality.
also from someone who has played on every inhabited continent its the only game of its type i have found that can be found everywhere with relative ease.

But other games are cheaper. That's a huge point that must be made, and repeated. 'Per model' comparisons are also quite misleading - cost of entry, total cost of play and upkeep costs are far more relevant in these discussions than the price per model.

And just an FYI- 40k isn't the only 'universal' game out there. Five years ago you would certainly have been correct and while it is still somewhat true, it's less true than it was, and ive also found that other games have cought up in the universality stakes - it's quite easy to get games in for warmachine, infinity, flames of war, malifaux, bolt action and so on. I can get games in of every commonly played Wargame within an hours drive of where I live here in Scotland if I had a mind to. We are in a golden age of gaming right now. It's quite great.

 Ckilleen wrote:

Also I think GW is trying to take a Apple approach to there product. really think about it. a premium product model wise. they keep stuff pretty darn secretive, expensive. GW is the Apple of wargaming lol

I'll be honest with you. gw do a lot of things deserving of criticism, but they do some things great. They can be slick. I went to warhammer world for the first time last Monday, and by the golden throne, was I impressed. Paid my money to go in and see the exhibitions and I was blown away. They've still got it. I will go back, if only for a pint at bugmans!

vipoid did you read the sentence directly after that? I did provide evidence. to be exact there is only 3 people in my area that are vocal about how terrible Games Workshop is. I could supply names but that seems unnecessary.

 Ckilleen wrote:
vipoid did you read the sentence directly after that?I did provide evidence.

I did:

 Ckilleen wrote:
what is even more amusing is the fact that at least in our area the people that complain the most haven't played since 4th or 5th

That's not evidence. That's just an unrelated anecdote.

 Ckilleen wrote:
to be exact there is only 3 people in my area that are vocal about how terrible Games Workshop is.

Well, that's at least closer to evidence, though certainly wasn't what you said in your previous post.

However, you're making two assumptions - firstly that only the "vocal" (a really useless word) people have a problem with GW/40k (as opposed to some people disliking GW/40k, but not wanting to say so in public to avoid arguments or such), and 2) that the people in your area are more representative than any or all online forums.

Deadnight I do agree the rules are the weakest point in the hobby. but that's when you take them at a tournament setting and people try to waac. If you put some comp restrictions on tournaments and some more "soft scores" it would help a lot.

Yes infinity is cheaper than 40k but the game is designed around a small skirmish scale. Warmahordes same thing but if you built an equal sized model count army is is about equal. Xwing yes you play with only a few ships that cost about $15 a pop but you need so many extra ships to get the cards that are "good" Ive been playing xwing since it came out and damn it is expensive to keep up completive buying 4 gak ships just to get the 4 upgrade cards you need for the 4 good ships you are playing. I haven't played FOW so I can't say for sure but having looked at my friends collections and knowing how much it they cost it seems just as expensive.

I was just in Japan 2 months ago and the only games i could find that had an active community was 40k, MTG and Yu-gio




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Ckilleen wrote:
vipoid did you read the sentence directly after that?I did provide evidence.

I did:

 Ckilleen wrote:
what is even more amusing is the fact that at least in our area the people that complain the most haven't played since 4th or 5th

That's not evidence. That's just an unrelated anecdote.

 Ckilleen wrote:
to be exact there is only 3 people in my area that are vocal about how terrible Games Workshop is.

Well, that's at least closer to evidence, though certainly wasn't what you said in your previous post.

However, you're making two assumptions - firstly that only the "vocal" (a really useless word) people have a problem with GW/40k (as opposed to some people disliking GW/40k, but not wanting to say so in public to avoid arguments or such), and 2) that the people in your area are more representative than any or all online forums.

It really comes down to this though, People that are unhappy will complain and tell as many people as will listen. (very easy to do on the internet) and people that are happy do not care or want to waste the time they are busy having fun and playing a game they love. (I am stuck at work and can't be playing or building models ) GW is the big fish in a very small pond and people will keep them under a microscope for that very reason.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anyway I am done with work for the weekend have a great New Year!

 Ckilleen wrote:
Deadnight I do agree the rules are the weakest point in the hobby. but that's when you take them at a tournament setting and people try to waac. If you put some comp restrictions on tournaments and some more "soft scores" it would help a lot.

No, not always. What happens when its fifth ed, and I simply love the idea of airborne guard? Or when I love the idea of saim hann biker eldar and my mate loves blood Angels?

You don't need 'tournaments' and 'waac' to break the game, and often, you don't even need to be remotely malicious to accomplish it either. It just happens, because I like x and you like y. And it's unfair on both to say 'sorry, you can't play that'.

Comp is a terrible idea as well. I've never seen a good comp system, and most boil down to the writer punishing others for having fun the wrong way with the wrong cool toys.

And soft scores as well - you shouldn't be 'rewarded' for being a good sport for example- that's common courtesy, and frankly, something you should be doing anyway. Same with painting - not everyone views it in the same light.

 Ckilleen wrote:

Yes infinity is cheaper than 40k but the game is designed around a small skirmish scale. Warmahordes same thing but if you built an equal sized model count army is is about equal.

Irrelevant. Pointless point is pointless, inaccurate and misleading. You don't play 'equal sized model count armies'. So the argument that 'if you took more stuff that you normally wouldn't, then it would cost as much as 40k, so therefore they cost the same' is one of the worst arguments you can make.

 Ckilleen wrote:

I was just in Japan 2 months ago and the only games i could find that had an active community was 40k, MTG and Yu-gio

Where in Japan, if I may ask? First thing I did when I moved to Scotland was find out what got played and where. And basically, everything is played here. Some of it was a bit more underground, but I found it eventually.

And I've been places where 40k was simply not played - it, and all other gw games were dead.

I think there is a lot going on with GW that explaining the discourse as people being overcritical is being disingenuous.

Going back to 5th edition (the highpoint for GW in terms of profits and sales), the ubiquity of 40k was at its pinnacle. Codexes were softcover, but cost $35, and cycled every 4 years or so. The same applied to the main rulebook (around $70). Collector editions of things existed, but were rather few and in-between. The cost of the Collector's 5th edition was $90. All armies were books until themselves, and so required (at least the attempt at) balancing to keep games fair.

6th edition was released, and heralded the release of hardcover books. While the quality of these books increased notably, the cost did as well. This became quickly compounded by 7th edition, which cut the release time of all books in half. You were now paying much more for books that lasted much less time, regardless of the technical quality of the books themselves. Collector's editions became a parody of themselves, codexes often costing double the cost of the previous main rulebook! (and promptly invalidated just as quickly). Additionally, as armies became able to be allied, new supplement-grade books started coming out, only still maintaining the cost of the previous codexes (i.e. Harlequins, Imperial Knights).

Price increases have continued unabated over the last ten years, now appearing heavily in new releases. And beyond all of that, the size of the game- that is, the cost of playing the same 1500pt experience of older editions- has risen and risen.

I think the voices of dissent have grown over the last few years, a symptom of the growing frustration of the customer base. And I believe that this is reflected in the declining revenue of GW.

 jonolikespie wrote:
GW is making less and less money every year.

If something does not change then eventually they will not make enough money to pay their rather outrageous costs.

That leads to bankruptcy.

I agree. A lot of us have been saying that for over 15 years. I gave up about 10 years ago saying that is what is going to happen. I am still shocked they haven't yet. I am glad they are not, but shocked non the less. I guess all the cutting to the bone for the last 2 years really helped them. I guess they would have been in the red if they didn't do the cost cutting measures.

Yes, they can do lots of things to try and change the current downwards trend, but they have had years to do so and haven't yet. Maybe the new CEO will be able to turn it around and it's just a slow process, butn things like AoS aren't helping.

Yes I believe the new CEO may turn the company around. We are seeing changes now, thing is isn't the new CEO a Kirby crony so basically doing what Kirby wants, or is he actually doing things his way now?

Also you do you have proof of AoS not helping? Just asking because I really like to know how well AoS is going for GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ckilleen wrote:
Also I think GW is trying to take a Apple approach to there product. really think about it. a premium product model wise. they keep stuff pretty darn secretive, expensive. GW is the Apple of wargaming lol

I agree GW seems to be taking the Apple approach, but seeing how Microsoft is doing really well for their Surface and Apple loosing ground, maybe GW needs to do some changes now.

Also GW is not a premium product. Taken as a whole, their are pretty rubbish when including rules, support for rules etc, GW can't say they have a premium product. Heck a lot of other companies have better minis now than Citadel so GW can't say that either. One thing I do give GW is their Customer Service people. They are top notch.

Davor wrote:
Also GW is not a premium product. Taken as a whole, their are pretty rubbish when including rules, support for rules etc, GW can't say they have a premium product. Heck a lot of other companies have better minis now than Citadel so GW can't say that either. One thing I do give GW is their Customer Service people. They are top notch.

I see GW in a really weird position here. Either they are a wargaming company and they have better models than their competition, but have utter gak rules and support so can't call their product premium, or they are a model company (as they claim) and the rules don't weigh them down. The problem is then you're not comparing model quality to Mantic or PP, your comparing it to Tamiya and Nocturna. Actual model companies with no game attached. And GW's model quality just falls on it's face compared to actual collector model companies.

Then there is the whole thing where PP's new resin/metal hybrids and CB's metals are both better detailed than any GW plastic characters I've seen recently.

 jonolikespie wrote:
The problem is then you're not comparing model quality to Mantic or PP, your comparing it to Tamiya and Nocturna. Actual model companies with no game attached. And GW's model quality just falls on it's face compared to actual collector model companies.

Exactly. Historical kits have better detail than anything GW produces and (usually) cost less. If you take away the gaming aspect of the hobby you're left with a product line that has limited detail, blocky designs, loose fit tolerances, etc. GW does some nice stuff relative to the rest of the miniature wargaming industry but they lose badly when you compare them to anything outside of that niche.

 vipoid wrote:

 Ckilleen wrote:
I agree with the original poster that most of the flakk GW gets is from a very few loud group.

Anyone remember when people actually provided evidence for their statements?

To be fair, people who have quietly walked away don't make any noise, although they still exist as lost customers.

I'm not sure that GW is necessarily loosing money just because they have a poor business model. If they'd have been doing things the way they do them now ten years ago, they'd still be doing quite well.

IMO, it is more the emergence of new and probably objectively better companies on the fantasy/sci-fi market that is causing GW profits to go down.
It seems to me that people take the opinion 'Why bother throwing money at GW when I can throw less money at a better organised company with a better written rule set to back it up?'

To para-phrase something I saw on the forums about a year ago, "GW used to be the 400 pound gorilla in the near-empty room when it came to non-historical wargaming. Now it's still the 400 pound gorrila, just surrounded by 200 pound chimps"

I still love playing 40k, and I'll probably continue throwing my money at GW well into the future for less and less return, but it's about time I branched into something else.