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.

 RatBot wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Yes...because anthropomorphic rats is an original GW idea...

Of course. Just ask Kingsley to find some examples and he'll conveniently ignore Master Splinter and Roland Rat.

Also the entire series of Redwall novels. I haven't read since middle school, but IIRC the primary antagonists in many of them were rats. Who walked on two legs and talked.

Don't forget Mickey Mouse, Rats of Nimh, D&D Rat-men/Wererats, etc et al ad nauseum.

As well as various rat worshiping ancient religions who added rat heads to human bodies in their artwork and statuary.

GW hasn't introduced anything truly original, merely added a few spinkles and some icing to the same old doughnut.

 Kingsley wrote:
The "Veer-myn," however, have many of the exact same æsthetic elements as GW's Skaven. .

That's because anthropomorphic rats in fantasy in general tend to share many of the same aesthetic elements.

Don't forget Brushfire!



Oh wait they came after GW... Oh no! We better make a game to protect our models!

Uh oh, they've got spears and shields, too. GW probably owns those, too, just like how they own halberds. LAWSUIT!

 Alfndrate wrote:
Don't forget Brushfire!



Oh wait they came after GW... Oh no! We better make a game to protect our models!

These are great examples of anthropomorphic rats that are not derivative of GW's Skaven. Mantic's "Veer-myn," on the other hand, are very different.

I think many of you are too quickly dismissing Kingsley's point about GW products being more easy to customize and personalize.

I got back into wargaming after leaving highschool and moving out. Because I wanted to spend the least amount of money on the largest amount of gaming (also I'm a huge history nerd) I dove straight into historicals. I had (and still have) a blast with Flames of War, Napoleonics and Impetus and other ancient rule sets. The tactics were engaging and challenging and the scale of 15mm soldiers was great for the medium. However, as someone who really enjoys writing, modelling and unique paint schemes, I felt a little restrained by constantly having to adhere to historically accurate uniforms and regimental histories. I still love those things, but I wanted minis that felt uniquely mine.

When I started up again, I swore I wouldn't do the GW thing. I had been introduced to the concept of wargaming through 40k as a preteen, loved it and subsequently grew out of it. But after reading a few Abnett novels and rediscovering just how great the setting was, I couldnt help but start an IG army in order to satisfy my modelling, painting and fluff writing cravings. The game itself, while not as tactical as any given historical set, is still a blast and is a nice light way to wargame with those excellent, 28mm, choppable, glue-able sci-fi-fantasy models.

IMO GW offers the most in the way of personalized armies. WM/Hordes are mostly metal (plus if you ask me the gameworld is bland and un-engaging) and things like Kings of War, while a cool concept, just don't have the same scope. Y'all need to check yo selves.

 Las wrote:
I think many of you are too quickly dismissing Kingsley's point about GW products being more easy to customize and personalize.

We're dismissing it because it isn't relevant, not because it isn't true.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Las wrote:
I think many of you are too quickly dismissing Kingsley's point about GW products being more easy to customize and personalize.

We're dismissing it because it isn't relevant, not because it isn't true.

Well, many in the thread have attacked him for it. I just felt the need to step in and offer a few cents of mine.

 Las wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Las wrote:
I think many of you are too quickly dismissing Kingsley's point about GW products being more easy to customize and personalize.

We're dismissing it because it isn't relevant, not because it isn't true.

Well, many in the thread have attacked him for it. I just felt the need to step in and offer a few cents of mine.

You mean this bit?

 Kingsley wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
That situation couldn't possibly last forever, and it didn't. Serious challengers began to rise, such as West End Games and White Wolf publishing, who were producing fun and successful RPGs that started to bite into the D&D pie.

Substitute WEG and White Wolf with PP and Corvus Belli easily enough...or Wyrd...or any number of other companies who are making inroads on the miniature gaming front.

There is no company currently producing a game with Warhammer 40k or Warhammer Fantasy's number of miniatures on the field at once and level of customizability of one's forces, though Dream Forge might be positioned to potentially do so in the future. The fundamental experience of collecting and playing 40k is fairly different from that of most other miniatures games on the market today, unlike the fundamental experience involved with playing D&D versus other roleplaying games.

His claim that the number of miniatures and the level of customizability appears to be tied mostly to options in a kit...since he points to Dream Forge as a potential competitor.

I would point to everything else. You said you didn't like being restrained by historically accurate uniforms and histories? So don't be. You want options - everything else has more options...because nothing else attempts to constrain options like GW do (barring officially sanctioned tournaments). Take your plastic figures from a company like Warlord (cheap, cheap) - Mix in 1 part pig Iron and 1 part Hasslefree and you have some interesting sci-fi troopers. Make them whatever you like.

Snag some figures from Hinterland as a change from historically accurate uniforms and regiments...unless I was doing some form of an exhibition game to show a historical battle - I wouldn't be offended if someone wanted to field a Lace-punk army against my AWI armies. Do a bit of Space 1899 gaming. Get way out into the weeds and play some of the independent rules like Defiance (which is actually able to handle more figures and vehicles on the table than GW in a shorter period of time once you get a handle on the rules). Play a bit of Tomorrow's War with an army of Grymn backed up by some Scrunt locals hammering away at a bug infestation.

If anything GW and their games constrict more than other games do.

Granted the big named companies have a strong style to them - but you still have the GOT which is well suited for Infinity...any number of pulpy figures with Wyrd...Steampunk and a good bit of Fantasy with PP. Those three also favor smaller games - but that isn't by any means true with gaming in general. I like larger miniatures, larger games and lots of vehicles. I haven't plaid a game of 40K in 5 years and I have never plaid a game of WFB. That doesn't stop me from fielding a complete combined arms army once a month or so or putting 200+ elves, griffons, dragons and other beasties on the table to smash things about with a set of fantasy rules.

 Kingsley wrote:

Lanrak wrote:
@Kingsley.
Why do Mantic need rules to stop them being sued?

They don't need them, but they provide a good cover story for getting their products distributed. People take a dim view of "we sell GW knockoffs" and a much better view of "we sell models for our own miniatures games," even if those games just so happen to be in the same scale as GW games, represent the same archetypes, and are derivative of GW designs and concepts in every respect.

When Mantic's secret original race was "Skaven in space" and their awesome new game was "Blood Bowl in space" the writing on the wall became very clear to me.

All these companies knocking off GW stuff and i never realised. There are these pink skinned guys in space that many companies sell, GW sold them first and called them humans, now everyone is selling humans and they look almost the same.

Someone kill me and donate my brain (pieces of it will work better than what they have atm) to some people on dakka.

But GW doesn't have skaven in space, so i don't understand your point.

 Las wrote:
I think many of you are too quickly dismissing Kingsley's point about GW products being more easy to customize and personalize.

Because for the vast majority of players, it really doesn't make an appreciable difference.

Based on nearly 20 years of playing 40K in a number of different areas, the majority of gamers don't convert in any significant fashion. They either assemble everything straight out of the box, or will at most tinker with a few head or weapon swaps to vary up poses a little... which can be done in pretty much any game out there. So GW's models being plastic making them better for converters is a selling point for a comparitively small part of the market... For many gamers, being plastic and multipart just means that they take longer to assemble.

Painting-wise, people are often a little more adventurous... but again, most games (or at least most scifi and fantasy games) have quite alot of scope for creative painting. Even Warmachine, with it's stricter stance on conversion, allows free reign with colour schemes.

 Las wrote:


IMO GW offers the most in the way of personalized armies. WM/Hordes are mostly metal (plus if you ask me the gameworld is bland and un-engaging) and things like Kings of War, while a cool concept, just don't have the same scope. Y'all need to check yo selves.

Not really. Or I should say, not they way they use to. I'd agure they offer less in the way of personalizing armies today then they did a decade ago or more. I had stacks of white dwarves, citadel journals, a REAL bits service back in the day. An an attitude that it was "make it your own, no matter what parts you used." Hell I recall an article back when prmoting a chaos dread that had something like 50+ parts, non-GW, including parts to car brakes.

The only thing GW offers nowadays is better plastic kits to make stuff. But they are NOT the most in the way of personailzation anymore. GW of old(over a decade ago) was much much better at that.

One only need look at their photographs in WD and on their website.

GW terrain on GW realm of battle boards. All terrain conversions are kitbashes of their own kits. I get that they want to sell their kits, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it seems to have come at the expensive of creativity (or, at least, non-GW branded creativity).

carmachu wrote:

 Las wrote:


IMO GW offers the most in the way of personalized armies. WM/Hordes are mostly metal (plus if you ask me the gameworld is bland and un-engaging) and things like Kings of War, while a cool concept, just don't have the same scope. Y'all need to check yo selves.

Not really. Or I should say, not they way they use to. I'd agure they offer less in the way of personalizing armies today then they did a decade ago or more. I had stacks of white dwarves, citadel journals, a REAL bits service back in the day. An an attitude that it was "make it your own, no matter what parts you used." Hell I recall an article back when prmoting a chaos dread that had something like 50+ parts, non-GW, including parts to car brakes.

The only thing GW offers nowadays is better plastic kits to make stuff. But they are NOT the most in the way of personailzation anymore. GW of old(over a decade ago) was much much better at that.

I'd have to agree, the idea that GW is better due to personalisation of minis is an illusion. Ive even heard someone say that 40k promotes the creation of fluff and personalised paint schemes over warmachine, i guess someone needss to tell my khador miniatures that.
That said, there is a bigger scope for modelling in 40k due to the way equipment is costed aqnd of course Orks, the shining light of humour in an increadibly angsty universe.

silent25 wrote:

carmachu wrote:

Thats all great, but the real telling is what were the number of units sold per year?

Not sure that would help. GW was switching to plastic from metal that entire time. A single 10 man box would show up as one unit where two man blisters for the same number would show up as 5 units.

That leads to an interesting theory. Not a defense of GW, but a possible cause of their downfall.

One word: PLASTIC

In almost all cases, when GW would switch from metal to plastic, there would be a price reduction. Suddenly those metal figures at $3 each cost only $2 each in plastic. When the changes first started, that 5 man units of knights that was $33 is now $20, but you don't need 8 - 9 knights, 5 still suffice. GW has lost 40% of their revenue. You may decide to get another unit or a friend starts the game and gets a unit. As long as enough additional purchases were made to make up the difference, GW would make out. But factor in inflation and not enough people buying more of the new plastic units, and GW lost money on that unit conversion. Result GW changes the rules where you now need 8 knights instead of 5 or they raise the price.

Thus the downward spiral begins. The early 2000's saw a lot of RnF units switch to plastic. So players initially saw savings and bought more and new players came in also because the game was becoming more "accessible" and GW was growing by 15 to 18% during that time. But what if that growth wasn't enough to counter act the price reduction for each kit? Eventually GW has reduced prices from switching from metal to plastic where suddenly there aren't enough new players or old players buying stuff to keep the sales increases going? They saturated their market.

Would we be seeing the regular price hikes and increasing unit counts each edition if GW had not made the savings on plastics as much?

Again, not a defense of GW, just a thought on the whole thing.

+1 to this one.

This was going along as GW was retiring blister packs and metal units almost as fast as they could with restructuring the game from 3d to 4th edition.

Bullockist wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

Lanrak wrote:
@Kingsley.
Why do Mantic need rules to stop them being sued?

They don't need them, but they provide a good cover story for getting their products distributed. People take a dim view of "we sell GW knockoffs" and a much better view of "we sell models for our own miniatures games," even if those games just so happen to be in the same scale as GW games, represent the same archetypes, and are derivative of GW designs and concepts in every respect.

When Mantic's secret original race was "Skaven in space" and their awesome new game was "Blood Bowl in space" the writing on the wall became very clear to me.

All these companies knocking off GW stuff and i never realised. There are these pink skinned guys in space that many companies sell, GW sold them first and called them humans, now everyone is selling humans and they look almost the same.

Someone kill me and donate my brain (pieces of it will work better than what they have atm) to some people on dakka.

Are you actually trying to say that the Veer-myn are no more influenced by Skaven than any line of human miniatures is influenced by any other line of human miniatures? That conclusion seems laughable.

What I am trying to say is ratmen are public domain. Ratmen are not created by GW. Ratmen made by any company are not knockoffs of GW products. they are just ratmen. I was trying to illustrate this point with a bit of faecetious humour.

The point is GW did not invent ratmen, they did not invent beastmen, they did not invent dwarves or elves or dragons or giants or whatever , these things are part of humanities shared heritige given to us by myths and stories , therefore ver-myn (however it's spelt) are not knockoffs of skaven , they are another companies version of ratmen, and they look pretty good.

Seriously, some people seem to think GW invented alot of things, they didn't. They may have appropriated the myth/fiction but they in no way hold any kind of hold over that idea. Just because you saw a miniature from GW first, that looked like a certain thing, does not mean it was the first. I'm sure it was made by ral partha or someone smaller way before GW even thought of ratmen, but that does not make skaven a wererat knockoff, it makes a skaven a GW ratman.

 Kingsley wrote:

 lord marcus wrote:
Kings of War and Warpath by Mantic games. Both mass combat wargaming, with the encouragement to make your army your own. Hell Mantic has even left space in the game world deliberately so people can make up background!

Those rules (if you can call them that) are largely made as a cover to prevent Mantic from being sued. I've never seen a single person play them and every review I've encountered has been negative.

Can I call them rules?

Let me think about that....

Why, by golly! Yes, I can call them rules! What a shock!

And I can also truthfully say that I think that they are better rules than the two most recent editions of WHFB.

Have I seen 'a single person' play these rules? No - but I have seen a room full of people play them. It kind of takes more than one person to play most games....

As I have seen a lot of positive reviews of KoW... I have to assume that you just don't read much. Or are very seelective of the reviews that you read, just in case they say something good about a non-GW company.

Oy!

There come a point when White Knighting becomes counter productive, that folks will start to take the view that the White Knight never has anything useful to say, and both blinds and deafens himself to avoid seeing the other side of the issues.

The Auld Grump - I play Undead, Dwarfs, and Kingdoms of Men in Kings of War. Twilight Kin, Orcs, Goblins, Abyssal Dwarfs, and Elves all have local players.

If GW needs a Public Relations officer, surely Kingsley should be hired on the spot.


Seriously.

 tomjoad wrote:
Let us hope or pray, then, that GW follows TSR's next series of steps: Going bankrupt and being bought by a decent gaming company that wants to grow and even *gasp* IMPROVE a product.

Well, considering their brands probably do about half Magic:The Gathering's business, they could probably be bought out by Hasbro and still remain a core product.

The bad would be if they got bought out by Mattel instead.

 Kingsley wrote:

 lord marcus wrote:
Kings of War and Warpath by Mantic games. Both mass combat wargaming, with the encouragement to make your army your own. Hell Mantic has even left space in the game world deliberately so people can make up background!

Those rules (if you can call them that) are largely made as a cover to prevent Mantic from being sued. I've never seen a single person play them and every review I've encountered has been negative.

That's strange. The first two reviews that come up on Google are pretty positive.

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/15/15753.phtml
http://minimusingofabear.wordpress.com/2012/02/17/warpath-review/

How has this thread made it to 9 full pages of Kingsley choc-nosing GW.

This whole thread now reminds me of Monty Pythons "The Life of Brian", where the lad tries to convince the people he isn't the Mesiah.

GW = Unprofessional in a business sense. Period. There is a reason the last decade has been called the "GW Decade of Dickishness".

Great models, completely dodgy business practices. They generate no good will towards the company in any way shape or form. Why else would GW pull down their HQ Facebook pages, disable comments on Youtube and generally police any other means of creating feedback where able? If they have to lock things down like that, they are obviously doing something wrong - if they were doing it right, these measures wouldn't be required.

 Morachi wrote:
How has this thread made it to 9 full pages of Kingsley choc-nosing GW.

What's really funny is we have another nine page thread that contains the exact same conversation. I can't even keep track of what was said in which thread...

There are three threads on the go with nearly identical content:

This one and,
"Has it always been this bad?" and,
"The Surge in the Games Workshop Bashing Threads"

Bullockist wrote:
What I am trying to say is ratmen are public domain. Ratmen are not created by GW. Ratmen made by any company are not knockoffs of GW products. they are just ratmen. I was trying to illustrate this point with a bit of faecetious humour.

It's not that Mantic made ratmen that makes them knockoffs. It's that Mantic-- a company with a history of making "not-GW" products-- made ratmen designed along the same lines as GW's Skaven, with a very similar visual æsthetic, tons of shared design elements, etc. The fact that Mantic's ratmen are supposed to be sci-fi and GW's Skaven are fantasy makes this even more absurd.

It makes your argument absurd. You criticise a company for making models that GW doesn't, they are 'knock offs' because they share an aesthetic. Even GW doesn't go as far as to claim their models have some 'aesthetic' that makes them unique. It's such a hopelessly nebulous statement that it could be applied to almost any range of miniatures.

Mantic can't do right according to you. If they were to make figures that fit a GW army you'd criticise them. Instead they make armies that GW specifically do not match any GW army list; SF ratmen and dwarves. Yet you still criticise them, because different as they are, they still apparently tread on the toes of GW's aesthetic and could be used as counts-as.

As for Blood Bowl, I've seen rules and figures for normal realistic football as well, there are several similar rule sets out there. And now there's a futuristic football. Yet you criticise them again for doing something similar to GW, making a similar product yes, but different to appeal to different people. But apparently that's not right because GW did a fantasy football game that they don't support.

 Kingsley wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
What I am trying to say is ratmen are public domain. Ratmen are not created by GW. Ratmen made by any company are not knockoffs of GW products. they are just ratmen. I was trying to illustrate this point with a bit of faecetious humour.

It's not that Mantic made ratmen that makes them knockoffs. It's that Mantic-- a company with a history of making "not-GW" products-- made ratmen designed along the same lines as GW's Skaven, with a very similar visual æsthetic, tons of shared design elements, etc. The fact that Mantic's ratmen are supposed to be sci-fi and GW's Skaven are fantasy makes this even more absurd.

What do you see as the aesthetic bits of Mantic's ratmen they have copied from the GW ratmen? Shared design elements, I mean.

 Kingsley wrote:


When Mantic's secret original race was "Skaven in space" and their awesome new game was "Blood Bowl in space" the writing on the wall became very clear to me.

Whilst I haven't played Dreadball so cannot judge how the game play compares to BB, it has always reminded me more of Speedball, at least in terms of aesthetics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedball_(video_game)

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
What I am trying to say is ratmen are public domain. Ratmen are not created by GW. Ratmen made by any company are not knockoffs of GW products. they are just ratmen. I was trying to illustrate this point with a bit of faecetious humour.

It's not that Mantic made ratmen that makes them knockoffs. It's that Mantic-- a company with a history of making "not-GW" products-- made ratmen designed along the same lines as GW's Skaven, with a very similar visual æsthetic, tons of shared design elements, etc. The fact that Mantic's ratmen are supposed to be sci-fi and GW's Skaven are fantasy makes this even more absurd.

What do you see as the aesthetic bits of Mantic's ratmen they have copied from the GW ratmen? Shared design elements, I mean.

KIngsley , GW do not own wargaming, it has been around longer than them. Mantic make fantasy wargaming miniatures, and sci fi and other miniatures. Heaps of companies make miniatures, go check out my best gangers thread see how many companies make gangs or possible gangs. They arent "not-necromunda' minis they are gang minis, admittedly i do mention necromunda once or twice in the thread because that's what i assume most people on dakka would be looking for (personally i'm looking for sprawl gangers).

I think kill krazy,that mantic and gw ratmen share design elements because they are both depictions of ratmen - though ratmen looking like rhinos would be cool.


Kingsley, your one eyedness in regard to GW is truly astounding. I think you should just start saying GW akbar.

oh, I was thinking the exact same thing today ford prefect, i remember playing speedball on the amiga 500, it was awesome.