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.

 insaniak wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Except for many people who are just getting into tabletop wargaming it IS a comparison. They don't come in with strong feelings about skirmish vs. army scale, they come in to the FLGS and see that the most popular games are 40k and Warmachine/Hordes. And for them it IS relevant that starting a PP game is "spend $50 on a starter set and come in for WM/H night", while for a GW game it's "spend $200+ and come in for newbie-only night once a month" or "spend $500-1000+ and you can play real 40k on 40k night". The barrier to entry for real 40k is MUCH higher thanks to the larger game sizes.

Sure, if your sole criteria for choosing a game are entry price and the number of other people who play it, that would be valid. But that seems like an odd reason to buy into a game, to me. It goes into the same sort of category as people suggesting Flames of War as an alternative to 40K... sure, it's a wargame. But it's not a wargame that I have any interest in actually playing, regardless of how much or little it costs to buy into it, or how many other people are playing.

Interest in a game, for me, comes from liking the setting, the miniatures and the scale, as well as having a rules system that is fun to play. And while Warmachine certainly (IMO) has those all going for it, that puts it in the 'another game that I would like to play' basket rather than the 'alternatives to 40K' basket.

Actually, cost of entry is a big component with why I choose a game. If I like the setting, and like the models, I then look at the price of entry. I don't have a big gaming area to play with and my flgs doesn't play much other than 40k and Flames of War, so I often look at what the price is to get 2 starter sets so I can teach people to play. Every game I play has at least 2 starter boxes painted up.

Granted, my reasoning is very anecdotal and everyone chooses the game they like for some reason or another.

Here is what it comes down to for me.

1) GW is more expensive to get into
2) PP is more expensive on a per model basis
3) Both games I have to spend money
4) I enjoy 40K more than Warmachine
5) My FLGS has a large community for both games.
6) I have a lot more friends in the 40K community and the community is a lot more accepting at teaching new players, while the PP guys tend to isolate themselves, pretending to look down on the 40K players
7) I don't want to invest into another game. I already have WHFB, WH40K, Malifaux, Firestorm, Flames of War and Necromunda.

 Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
It's a good comparison because 40k doesn't have a skirmish-scale game.

Er... that's exactly what makes it a bad comparison.

If someone says 'I want to buy a truck, but don't want to pay for a Mack, what's a good alternative?' is offering a Mini as an alternative in any way relevant?

A skirmish game is not an alternative to 40K. It's a completely different style of game. Yes, you can say that a skirmish game is cheaper to buy into... but that's really a bit of a 'Derr, really?' observation. Buying a single text book is also generally cheaper than buying an entire set of Encyclopedias.

Except for many people who are just getting into tabletop wargaming it IS a comparison. They don't come in with strong feelings about skirmish vs. army scale, they come in to the FLGS and see that the most popular games are 40k and Warmachine/Hordes. And for them it IS relevant that starting a PP game is "spend $50 on a starter set and come in for WM/H night", while for a GW game it's "spend $200+ and come in for newbie-only night once a month" or "spend $500-1000+ and you can play real 40k on 40k night". The barrier to entry for real 40k is MUCH higher thanks to the larger game sizes.


(Now, that doesn't mean that GW's prices per model are unfair or that the PP games are better, but GW does a horrible job of making their games accessible to new players.)

In that case, if the scale of the game is irrelevant and value for money on a per-model basis is absolute, everyone should just play Infinity.

You can buy a 300pt 'army' for peanuts. This is as big an 'army' as you'll ever need.
No models are redundant or worthless - you can literally buy an army of your favorite models, and as long as it fits in the selection criteria, it's going to be something you can win with as long as you know how to play it.

That's far better value for money than even PP offers. Added bonus is the models are drop dead fething gorgeous.

 insaniak wrote:
Interest in a game, for me, comes from liking the setting, the miniatures and the scale, as well as having a rules system that is fun to play. And while Warmachine certainly (IMO) has those all going for it, that puts it in the 'another game that I would like to play' basket rather than the 'alternatives to 40K' basket.

Yeah, but you're an experienced wargamer and have a good idea of what you like. A new player isn't going to know nearly as much about whether they'd prefer skirmish vs. army or whatever, and they're going to be a lot more influenced by who is playing, and how much it costs to get started. They might be leaning towards 40k for setting reasons, for example, but when they find out that it's going to cost $500+ to even start playing 40k the $50 starter price for WM/H starts looking very appealing even if it wasn't quite their top choice otherwise.

And of course there's always the people who really love the idea of 40k but give up because they can't afford to spend $500+ just to get started. The sad truth is WM/H is going to scare away a much smaller percentage of their potential customers thanks to the smaller army cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Loki- wrote:
[In that case, if the scale of the game is irrelevant and value for money on a per-model basis is absolute, everyone should just play Infinity.

Sure. I agree that Infinity is a good deal, but the subject of the thread was PP vs. GW, not "what's your favorite game".

And then of course there's the popularity factor. 40k and WM/H are extremely popular (at least in my area) and it's easy to find opponents, while Infinity just doesn't seem to have that kind of player base yet. Veteran gamers might be able to pick it up as a secondary game and not feel too bad about not being able to play very often, but it's much less appealing as a first game.

I will admit that PP is very appealing to me. I like the setting and the lower entry cost. I still like GW but I can only buy a unit at a time. Meaning it will take quite a while to be able to play. I don't plan on quoting 40k but I am seriously considering setting it aside for a time.

Honestly with the annual price increase plus an increase every time they have a new release it's not going to take GW very long to out pace me. It's a bummer really but I like to build and paint mini's. Plus tossing dice . If its not GW it's somebody elses.

How does cost of entry for a doe-eyed mini collecting noob make a game cost me less money per model? How does it make 50$ for 10 models cost less than 10$ of other models because someone else somewhere can have a low cost of entry?

It makes no sense and it is just race war propaganda in people who have an agenda to promoting one game system and exterminating those who play other systems.


That is why I collect the models I enjoy painting which crosses most manufacturers... And I still don't see why the model I bought is cheaper for me because someone else spews talking points about the new players gaming in a made up scenario.

Everyone should play dreadball by this logic... It is low cost of entry, and it would make me happy and provide me with people to play with. And since like lots of people who promote gaming intolerance in FLGS I will say how you are better off and it is cheaper regardless if you like the models, the fluff, the rules or the game. Play my game!!!

PP and Gw both cost exactly the same and are both in the middle of the pack for minis. Play what you enjoy, not what is supposedly cheaper for people in random circumstances which may or may not apply to you.

nkelsch wrote:
How does cost of entry for a doe-eyed mini collecting noob make a game cost me less money per model? How does it make 50$ for 10 models cost less than 10$ of other models because someone else somewhere can have a low cost of entry?

Nobody said it did. They said that the TOTAL cost of playing the game is less, not that the per-model cost is less.

It makes no sense and it is just race war propaganda in people who have an agenda to promoting one game system and exterminating those who play other systems.

It makes perfect sense because, as I've explained, the TOTAL cost of playing a game is a very relevant factor.

Everyone should play dreadball by this logic... It is low cost of entry, and it would make me happy and provide me with people to play with. And since like lots of people who promote gaming intolerance in FLGS I will say how you are better off and it is cheaper regardless if you like the models, the fluff, the rules or the game. Play my game!!!

Except there's a huge difference between "cost is a factor" and "cost is the only factor".

For most gamers these days it is rarely a question of GW vs. PP and generally a question of new GW army vs. new game. Most folks these days are finding it much more appealing and economical to pick up a new wm/h army over their second or third 40k army. Now more than ever you are seeing people who regularly play more different games instead of more armies in one game.
I for one love this, as it creates a community of more well-versed gamers each having his or her own eclectic stable of games. As people branch out to new games they become more aware of what they like and what is out there helping the industry grow in leaps and bounds compared to how stagnant it has been in recent decades with a single giant company dominating the consumers' view of tabletop gaming.

Still, if the line had to be drawn between PP and GW I would firmly be in the PP camp. I feel GW is sorely behind the times on how they structure their games and what the expect of their customers. The startup costs and ideal army builds are unrealistic and conflicted with the product range offered. Fantasy Flight and Forgeworld do more to grow the 40k IP in a year than GW itself has in the last decade.

 Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
The argument is PP needs less overall models so it becomes 'cheaper' because of the perceived value of needing 25 10$ figures opposed to 120 10$ figures..

Which is a weird basis for comparison. It's like arguing that a Mini is cheaper than a Kenworth semi... Sure, it's technically true, but not particularly useful if you want a truck.

Just about any skirmish game is going to wind up cheaper than an army-based game in the same scale.

It's a good comparison because 40k doesn't have a skirmish-scale game. If you want to play a game in the 40k universe using the normal 40k models you have to invest a lot more more money up front. And it gets even worse because it's hard to find games below 1000-1500 points even if the rules allow you to play it at a smaller scale. As a new player trying to get started the PP games are significantly cheaper than starting 40k/fantasy, especially since PP starter sets are (apparently) useful, while GW starter sets are garbage.

Total nonsense. The Company Command Squad I'm building for my IG-counts as-AdMech army does model-for-model double duty as a full warband for 28mm Inquisitor; a single squad of my planned Tallarn Imperial Guard could easily substitute for one of several different Necromunda gangs; an Ork player's basic 1 HQ + 2 Troops army which would barely function in 40K provides enough models to run a four-player GorkaMorka campaign.

So if you really want to insist that we judge this on how cheap it is to get into the company's products based purely on how many models it takes; 7 beats 25 at the same cost per model.

If you can't find players in your area who will play any of the three available 40K skirmish games, or the 40K space game which also has a similar investment to Warmachine, that's a real shame, but stop pretending that they don't exist in order to justify your personal choice to switch systems and the apparent need that generates in some of you lot to belittle anyone who didn't make the same choice.

nkelsch wrote:
...

They instantly discount a model per model cost analysis, or the value for people who collect models and not even play the games because it helps them promote their narrative that GW is evil and overpriced where every alternative out there is super cheap and shows GW is unreasonable.

...

Without going into the question of model versus model pricing, there is a non-trivial point to be made that GW, as a company, is vulnerable to charges of unethical conduct that PP (indeed, most gaming companies) are not similarly vulnerable to. A fairly extensive investigation exists in the Chapterhouse Lawsuit thread. That, however, is only the most public example of what I would classify as a pattern of abuse of the legal system*, wherein GW has used their superior resources to force smaller companies to comply with GW's directives, not on the basis of appropriate rights, but by threat of financial ruin incurred by defending against a merit-less lawsuit.

Whether the threat (or, indeed, attempt) to destroy a small business concern can be fairly characterized as evil, is, of course, subject to personal moral standards, but it is worth noting that, to the best of my knowledge, no such similar actions have been undertaken by PP. While not everyone wishes to consider the moral conduct of the manufacturer, for those that do GW remains, according to my knowledge, the only company in this field vulnerable to accusations of this type and magnitude.


*Please not that this is a personal, academic opinion, and is not to be taken as a binding in any professional context. I'm an attorney, I'm not your attorney.

I hate both companys. But I play both games. To me, their D-baggery is present in equal amounts, just with slightly different flavors.
In the end, I like both games (40K and warmahordes), and play them. But neither company is better than the other.

 Yodhrin wrote:
The Company Command Squad I'm building for my IG-counts as-AdMech army does model-for-model double duty as a full warband for 28mm Inquisitor;

Not even the same rules as 40k, and not common. I'm glad you've found a use for the models, but this isn't very helpful for a new 40k player.

a single squad of my planned Tallarn Imperial Guard could easily substitute for one of several different Necromunda gangs;

Except not, since you don't have all the various upgrades. In fact Necromunda is especially bad for this because you get random weapons and need to have available models sitting around gathering dust in case you need that option. It's a game for experienced players who like converting, not a newbie game.

an Ork player's basic 1 HQ + 2 Troops army which would barely function in 40K provides enough models to run a four-player GorkaMorka campaign.

Not 40k. Don't care.

If you can't find players in your area who will play any of the three available 40K skirmish games, or the 40K space game which also has a similar investment to Warmachine, that's a real shame, but stop pretending that they don't exist in order to justify your personal choice to switch systems and the apparent need that generates in some of you lot to belittle anyone who didn't make the same choice.

Except:

1) They aren't 40k. If you're a new player and want to play 40k it doesn't really help to say "hey go play BFG it's cheap". Nor does it help to say "go play a game of poorly equipped gangs scavenging to survive in the hive city" when they want to play a game of "heroic gods of combat fighting to the death to purge the galaxy of the xenos and the heretic".

and

2) Nobody plays them. I don't care if you're lucky enough to have a friend who likes to play the niche games, if you go into your FLGS on 40k night nobody is going to be playing Necromunda/BFG/whatever. You either bring a 1000-2000 point 40k army or you don't even bother showing up.

 deathholydeath wrote:
I hate both companys. But I play both games. To me, their D-baggery is present in equal amounts, just with slightly different flavors.
In the end, I like both games (40K and warmahordes), and play them. But neither company is better than the other.

How so?

I'm quite serious. There is ample evidence that GW has bullied smaller companies with inappropriate legal actions, and in at least one case they have tried to outright destroy a company with an extremely questionable lawsuit. They have, put simply, attempted to destroy other peoples' livelihoods.

What has PP done that leads you to say "But neither company is better than the other"?

 Buzzsaw wrote:
in at least one case they have tried to outright destroy a company with an extremely questionable lawsuit. They have, put simply, attempted to destroy other peoples' livelihoods

Let's be honest here, the Chapterhouse lawsuit is entirely justified ethically even if legally speaking it's a laughable mess. Chapterhouse is doing little more than ripping off GW's ideas and selling them, they're a parasite on GW and we'd be better off if the owner took the decent way out and voluntarily shut down the company.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
in at least one case they have tried to outright destroy a company with an extremely questionable lawsuit. They have, put simply, attempted to destroy other peoples' livelihoods

Let's be honest here, the Chapterhouse lawsuit is entirely justified ethically even if legally speaking it's a laughable mess. Chapterhouse is doing little more than ripping off GW's ideas and selling them, they're a parasite on GW and we'd be better off if the owner took the decent way out and voluntarily shut down the company.

At the risk of pointing out the blindingly obvious, I disagree.

EDIT: I suppose I should particularize that: I disagree that GW is acting in an ethical manner, I disagree that Chapterhouse is "ripping off GW's ideas", I disagree that "we" would be better off if the defendant were to acquiesce, and I disagree that the decent thing is shutting down.

 Dais wrote:
For most gamers these days it is rarely a question of GW vs. PP and generally a question of new GW army vs. new game. Most folks these days are finding it much more appealing and economical to pick up a new wm/h army over their second or third 40k army. Now more than ever you are seeing people who regularly play more different games instead of more armies in one game.
I for one love this, as it creates a community of more well-versed gamers each having his or her own eclectic stable of games. As people branch out to new games they become more aware of what they like and what is out there helping the industry grow in leaps and bounds compared to how stagnant it has been in recent decades with a single giant company dominating the consumers' view of tabletop gaming.

Still, if the line had to be drawn between PP and GW I would firmly be in the PP camp. I feel GW is sorely behind the times on how they structure their games and what the expect of their customers. The startup costs and ideal army builds are unrealistic and conflicted with the product range offered. Fantasy Flight and Forgeworld do more to grow the 40k IP in a year than GW itself has in the last decade.

I find this to be very true and probably better put than I could have done. I myself was entertaining the idea of that death guard army I've so very liked for some time now, but the chaos update took me back significantly. Good looking models, but the price was a big detractor. Meanwhile, my wandering eyes saw the Judge Dredd kickstarter and my persistent interest in Dredd and the movie pushed me to throw down money that could have very easily gone to GW. The more I thought about other games the more I realized that I cannot afford to maintain, much less get my current GW armies to where I want them to be and some are probably going to be let go and replaced with BattleTech minis from Ironwind, maybe a little more to my PP armies which have grown considerably and maybe some Infinity.

And as Dais said, it's not GW vs PP. Even though they're the big dogs with good reason, either one could very well lose out when compared to the market for miniatures as a whole. Many argue that is exactly what is happening to GW and there is significant evidence that indicates this may be the case that has been combed over in detail and debate many a time. The renaissance and golden age that we seem to be experiencing as players is inevitably good for us and bad for GW. We see progressive ideas being put forth that GW is slow to take up and it seems a new kickstarter launches aver week or two adding another rival to GW. The greatest thing is GW could die tomorrow and we would all be able to move on to other games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
in at least one case they have tried to outright destroy a company with an extremely questionable lawsuit. They have, put simply, attempted to destroy other peoples' livelihoods

Let's be honest here, the Chapterhouse lawsuit is entirely justified ethically even if legally speaking it's a laughable mess. Chapterhouse is doing little more than ripping off GW's ideas and selling them, they're a parasite on GW and we'd be better off if the owner took the decent way out and voluntarily shut down the company.

That's only one. Anyone remember how this was supposed to be a dual manticore/lammasu kit?

http://www.ragingheroes.com/collections/complete-collection/products/manticore

Or how Ronin miniatures who made not primarchs were shut down? The various C&D letters issued at websites that showed anything vaguely warhammer? How GW uses legal wrangling to prevent online sales by 3rd parties of Warhammer models, going so far as to disallow not only pictures but shopping cart usage. I'm sure if I took 30 minutes to google, I could come up with a more significant list, but these are ones that come to mind.

I started a Tyranid army around the time Macragge was replaced with Black Reach. There were tons of terms and genestealers on ebay and I got myself a proper horde. I painted them up and took 1000 points (around 80 or so models) to a local 40k night.

I'm fast at moving models. But between movement, fleet and possibly assaulting, my opponent got to sit there and wait while I did upwards of 200 model movements during a turn. Half way through I asked if we can just ignore the order of operations and let me move my fleet move right with my movement phase. We had to modify the rules to reduce his wait time.

And that was at 1000 points. What about at 1500? 1850?

I played a couple more times at 1000 points and then ebayed my army. I felt awful wasting my opponents time like that.

I prefer PP's games because the model count for a normal game is so much lower. I don't care so much about cost, but anything that reduces the wait time during a game where you go while your opponent waits is a good thing. My 50 point cryx army has 30 models in it. And that includes mechanithralls and scrap thralls-- two of cryx's cheapest points per model choices.

Over the last couple years I have never had a game where I felt what I was doing was making my opponent wait needlessly. And the damage system and constant rules interactions make the game much more engaging for both players.

 Surtur wrote:
That's only one. Anyone remember how this was supposed to be a dual manticore/lammasu kit?

http://www.ragingheroes.com/collections/complete-collection/products/manticore

Ok, I'll agree, that one was a bad lawsuit.

Or how Ronin miniatures who made not primarchs were shut down?

Oh, the poor not-primarch manufacturers. Perhaps if they had real talent they should make their own product and stop making thinly-veiled ripoffs of GW's ideas? GW has every right to stop a competing company from making use of their IP and selling models that GW intend to produce themselves.

How GW uses legal wrangling to prevent online sales by 3rd parties of Warhammer models, going so far as to disallow not only pictures but shopping cart usage.

There's no legal wrangling at all involved there. You can sell online with a shopping cart as much as you'd like, GW just won't ship you new inventory at the discounted price. It's entirely sane and reasonable for GW to want to avoid another company setting up an online store that makes their own store redundant, and they have no obligation to help you do it.

Im no GW fanboy by a long shot i pretty much hate them, but in my FLGS it is pitched to me that PP is cheaper.

Personally I hate this sales pitch as they state a comp game of PP is 35 pts... A few hundred bucks to play.

No where does it say in GW that you have to play at 1850 so 35 pts vs 1850 don't stack up.

My overall opinion on GW players is that they play at higher Points because they want bigger armies. There is nothing stopping PP players from going up to higher levels.

Actually in my mind 1850 is too high as it allows access to TOO much of the good stuff. 1500 is where you need to actually make tough choices in your lists.

PP is large in my area as is 40k... I choose to play FOW! LOL.

 Milisim wrote:
No where does it say in GW that you have to play at 1850 so 35 pts vs 1850 don't stack up.

My overall opinion on GW players is that they play at higher Points because they want bigger armies. There is nothing stopping PP players from going up to higher levels.

Just like there's nothing stopping 40k players from going up to 500,000 points vs. 500,000 points. It's completely irrelevant whether or not the rules impose an absolute maximum point cap or not, what matters is the average point values that people play. And the answer to that question is that to play a random pickup game on 40k night at your FLGS you need to spend $500+ on an army, while to play a random pickup game on WM/H night you need to spend $50. Even once you've paid to expand your WM/H starter box and play at the higher end of average games you've still spent way less than the minimum to start a 40k army.

.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Right but my main point was that is how warmachine is being presented to new players. As cheaper, when in reality it is not.

I can simply play Kill team in 40k.... I can spend $50 there as well.

So the $$$ argument is moot in most cases.

 Peregrine wrote:

You can sell online with a shopping cart as much as you'd like, GW just won't ship you new inventory at the discounted price. It's entirely sane and reasonable for GW to want to avoid another company setting up an online store that makes their own store redundant, and they have no obligation to help you do it.

I have to question the logic in that. They may lose more direct sales and lose some profit that way but increased sales volume from more visible product available through more channels could certainly recover the losses; and in a community-based business like gaming the more customers you have, the more opponents new customers will have.

Every other gaming company seems to be doing fine with "redundant" direct sales. Hasbro owns some of the biggest games in the business with MTG and D&D and don't even carry those products on their own webstore, though they do offer their many board games. PP in particular only offer exclusives, starters, and books through their direct sales service, preferring third party retailers and distribution to direct sales. (trying to at least stay a little on topic)

This was already said by others, but my opinions are:

- A single playable list for 40k is larger model-wise and more expensive than for WM/H. Warhammer FB takes even more than 40k, plus you have to paint dozens of similar models for every unit and they are not even visible when in formation. That being said, complete army with variety of units to choose from may cost about the same in all systems.

- Model-wise, I would say GW models are better. Their plastic kits are definitely the best, no question.

- Personally I like 40k general atmosphere and visual decisions more than other games (though novels and detailed fluff often make me laugh and vomit at the same time, I don't read it). Bad thing is, GW likes to change fluff and style for an army dramatically. Which means your whole army concept you invested years of work in may one day become invalid. Iron Kingdoms fluff is somewhat less appealing, but they have giant steam battle robots, that have to count for something.

- Any GW rules are written ridiculously badly, considering their experience and resources. IMO, GW does not make ANY effort to write good rules. WM/H rules does show that effort.

- GW loves its Codex Creep.

Generally, I like GW models, but not their rules or codexes or general attitude towards players. In PP, I like all these things.

 Milisim wrote:
.Right but my main point was that is how warmachine is being presented to new players. As cheaper, when in reality it is not.

Except it IS cheaper once you consider the game sizes that people actually play at most frequently, not the game sizes the rules technically allow.

I can simply play Kill team in 40k.... I can spend $50 there as well.

One tiny problem: nobody plays kill team. If you go into your FLGS on 40k night you aren't going to find a kill team game, you're going to find a bunch of people interested in playing between 1000-2000 points or not at all.

These threads suck, hard. They really do.

It boils down to about 5 categories of opinion.

1. Strong inclination for PP over GW. Extreme dislike for GW or outright hatred.

2. Slight inclination for PP over GW. Dislike for GW or neutrality towards GW.

3. No strong inclination either way. Dislike for GW and PP, or neutrality towards one or both.

4. Slight inclination for GW over PP. Rare, often boils down to dislike of models. Actual negative feelings towards PP possible, but unlikely

5. Strong Dislike of PP. Usually strong dislike of models or scale of armies. Doesn't necessarily mean like towards GW.


Does the war gaming community honestly need all the endless comparisons to GW? I'd love to jump into Dakka for once and not see a "Is GW X?" or "Is Y Better than GW?" thread. Is it so wrong to like one, or the other, or both, to the point that we need a "discussion" (which inevitably ends up being an argument) on it?

 Dais wrote:
I have to question the logic in that. They may lose more direct sales and lose some profit that way but increased sales volume from more visible product available through more channels could certainly recover the losses; and in a community-based business like gaming the more customers you have, the more opponents new customers will have.

Oh, I agree, I suspect they might be losing money in the long run, my point is just that it's a legitimate business strategy (even if it's a bad one), not some unethical system imposed by the threat of expensive lawsuits for violating it.

 frozenwastes wrote:
I started a Tyranid army around the time Macragge was replaced with Black Reach. There were tons of terms and genestealers on ebay and I got myself a proper horde. I painted them up and took 1000 points (around 80 or so models) to a local 40k night.

I'm fast at moving models. But between movement, fleet and possibly assaulting, my opponent got to sit there and wait while I did upwards of 200 model movements during a turn. Half way through I asked if we can just ignore the order of operations and let me move my fleet move right with my movement phase. We had to modify the rules to reduce his wait time.

And that was at 1000 points. What about at 1500? 1850?

I played a couple more times at 1000 points and then ebayed my army. I felt awful wasting my opponents time like that.

When I fleet/run my Tyranids, I always inform my opponent I'm doing it in my movement phase. Moving multiple 20+ model strong units once per phase is enough. Moving them twice is terrible. So I simply tell them I'm rolling for my fleet/run during movement, and move them 6" + what I rolled. I have never, ever, ever had an opponent complain about what I was doing. They actually seemed grateful.

So yeah, that's a pretty poor reason to sell an awesome army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gnawer wrote:
- Any GW rules are written ridiculously badly, considering their experience and resources. IMO, GW does not make ANY effort to write good rules. WM/H rules does show that effort.

Overstatement is over stated. Their specialist games are generally very well written. While they are no longer supported with new miniature releases, the rules and most of the existing models are still sold by GW, so I wouldn't discount them.

Actually, i'd say their specialist games being written very well is a testament to GW sales getting in and gumming up the works with the main games, rather than the designers themselves being bad at designing games (something they admitted the sales team does at the open Q&A day).

Their specialist games are generally very well written.

I actually played several years of Mordheim and some Necromunda. The games are brilliant. There's a huge modelling/converting potential, general atmosphere is very interesting. Also very low-cost. But the rules suck. There's no way to play them without house rules (we had a long list of these). Lists for different factions are not in any way balanced against each other, especially in long campaign. Tactical flexibility is also not great: in Mordheim, basically you can only stand on a building and shoot, or run with your whole mob and quickly get into melee while you haven't been shot, that's it. Because of that, playing one-on-one is boring, we only ever played for 3-4 players, this allowed for some alliances, interest in who will be attacked first and meta-game like this. Again, despite all of that, great games, we had a lot of fun.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Surtur wrote:
That's only one. Anyone remember how this was supposed to be a dual manticore/lammasu kit?

http://www.ragingheroes.com/collections/complete-collection/products/manticore

Ok, I'll agree, that one was a bad lawsuit.

Or how Ronin miniatures who made not primarchs were shut down?

Oh, the poor not-primarch manufacturers. Perhaps if they had real talent they should make their own product and stop making thinly-veiled ripoffs of GW's ideas? GW has every right to stop a competing company from making use of their IP and selling models that GW intend to produce themselves.

How GW uses legal wrangling to prevent online sales by 3rd parties of Warhammer models, going so far as to disallow not only pictures but shopping cart usage.

There's no legal wrangling at all involved there. You can sell online with a shopping cart as much as you'd like, GW just won't ship you new inventory at the discounted price. It's entirely sane and reasonable for GW to want to avoid another company setting up an online store that makes their own store redundant, and they have no obligation to help you do it.

Non-primarchs can have other purposes. GW hasn't made primarchs since rogue trader. That's a pretty big gap there. In many cases their IP is broad and unoriginal (see lammasu) and draws from many other influences. Not stepping on "their toes" in the first place is pretty hard.

Preventing sales of their own product is a new strategy they implemented, that nobody has ever heard, of called, intentionally shooting yourself in the foot.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Ok, This is something i keep seeing at my FLGS and sometimes here on the site.
Privateer Press vs. Games Workshop.
And this is something I quite frankly don't understand. I see people argue quite a bit that Privateer Press is less expensive. When it is not. Sure books are not, and you don't need their army books. But a Battle Engine will cost you 84$ not including tax, In the same ball park as a Land Raider. While a Gargantuan/ Colossal is 100$ or more.
Now i'm not saying GW is perfect, far from it, They have expensive models as well and cruddy business practices. I have Seen some GW snobs. But i have also seen WM/H Snobs as well, sometimes passive aggressively insulting me for liking 40k.
I am not trying to say one system or company is better then the other, I'm just trying to figure out the rivalry we have here.

I want to stay locked onto this.

People are arguing symantics. On the whole, BOTH games are expensive. I got into the game with 1 starter pack of Cryx. When I picked it up, I instantly knew it was going to become a hit.

At the time, they touted the game as the old page 5 mentality, the cheaper prices.... "FOR METAL!!!" and the old, "We don't just sit back and pew pew each other, we get in and "Play like we got a pair..."

then in the space of a year, you began to see the price creep, the expansions, and the laughable overfhypes of the "New guys". as they continued, the issue became even more when some of the older stuff became unplayable.

As PP evolved, they have grown into what they touted that they were not. NOW we see a corperate PP getting into the same exact "GW mentality".

One basic box started out at around 30 bucks. I picked mine up on release day, and payed a little extra, based on mall price. War Witch, a couple of cryx jacks, and three chickens. around $31.00.

the extra guys came out later, and that is where you saw the insanity begin. they started out around 20 bucks on Jack blisters, and the basic troop extras were around 10-15 bucks for 2-4 guy blisters.

As with most games, they start low with a cheap price to get players, then increase the price over the space of 2-3 years. Increase the price, increase the market value.

NOW?

PP is on par with GW's brand of monkey spank. Look over the way in which they have even evolved their website. It is even as tight as GW. Not to the point of "We co0ntrol everything you need to knowe....." but to the point that they crank out whatever, put a PP tag on it, and instantly, it is supposed to be "Cool". They do not even have to put a figure in it, and you are supposed to blindly follw the pack.

Thier on par unit prices are about the same. You are still paying fifty bucks a unit, sometimes more.

FRP- 49.99, but you can get them at 39.98.

"Contents: This starter box (PIP 34067) contains quick start rules and a complete battlegroup of five plastic models, each model featuring a completely new sculpt for Mark II, and corresponding stat cards for WARMACHINE including:
o Warcaster Warwitch Deneghra
o Slayer Helljack
o 2 Deathripper Bonejacks
o Defiler Bonejack "- FRP


Plastics at a little over the same price as I bought my metals.

Add in a boxed set of Bane Thralls, and 2 more defilers, and even an extra caster?

15.98 for a set of two plastic Defilers.
39.98 for a set of six Bane Thralls
27.18 for 2 sets of Bane thralls- (Gives you a unit of ten.)

All told for this basic unit? $220.14 US AND- the guys are evolving into plastics...

We didn't even add in the extra snacks, such as the scarlock, the pistol wraths, the Mech thralls..... etc.etc.etc.

THEN we didn't even discuss the books.

On par? both games cost some seriuous chedder, it is just a matter of how much and how much you want to get into to play.


These companies are all going to do the same thing, though, and it just boils down to your personal perspective and preference.

FOW? uh... I'll break your heart with that one as well.

The units ruin around 25-40 bucks. Then you can get down into the blister packs, books, dice, etc. scenery.....

On par? Same prices, different games.


Don't pick games on price. Pick a game on durability, your local interest, and outright fun.


And for the record? I like them both. It is just that GW has peed in my face a little too much for me to bear in the recent past that I care to take.

PP is just on the verge of peeing in my shoes, so some of thier chicanery I can still put up with....