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.

Now it's no secret that Games Workshop have been getting worse and worse recently. White Dwarf, the once excellent hobby magazine, is little more than a product catalog (in their defense, the new layout did give it a brief burst of life, but not for long) and is getting really, really dull. GW have become more and more insular, shunning any kind of contact with the outside world (remember when White Dwarf actually talked about non-GW games? Remember when they would regularly recommend household bits and bobs and other model parts for conversions? The latter was actually something that disappeared relatively recently, in my recollection), making it impossible to buy OOP models or replacement parts (whereas they used to have a mail order service selling old models, and you could buy individual components), Finecast QC, whilst it has improved, is still not great, hobby centres just ain't what they used to be (although the staff are as friendly as ever, or at least in my experience), the prcies are just getting silly, and don't get me started on the lawsuits.

So, what could be done to help reverse this? I know that they CAN be a lot better, I remember when they were (despite only starting the hobby in 2009), the question is, what would make them better?

My personal thoughts:

Get rid of Kirby. I know, loads of people say this, but he's no good for the company. He panders to the shareholders, and I don't think he even cares about GW. I reckon he will bail soon on his parachute made entirely out of £50 notes and golden thread, but I fear he will only do so when the company folds.

A buyout. This could work, depending on who takes over. I personally would rather it was a British company, out of some misplaced patriotism, but a foreign company, as long as it knows what it's doing, would be fine. Wizards of the Coast could be a good bet, or even (from a modelling point of view) Bandai. WOTC do pretty solid rules and handle their business fairly well, and Bandai...well, they're Bandai. They make excellent model kits, their prices are reasonable, they don't feth around when it comes to quality or business, and they're one of the most well known and respected model producers on the planet. Provided they kept the original sculptors and bolstered them with new arrivals rather than completely replacing the team, I think it could work.

Return of the old hands. Rick Priestly, Alan/Michael Perry, Andy Chambers, we need you! I reckon if these guys (and of course some of the others who I'm too young to remember) came back, they could do the company miracles. Andy Chambers wrote fantastic rules, Rick Priestly was a great fluff writer, and the Perry twins are brilliant sculptors.


Anyway, enough of my bright-eyed, bushy-tailed, youthful optimism. What do YOU think?

There's like 5 different 'it's the end of GW as we know it...' threads already. Do we need another?

 pretre wrote:
There's like 5 different 'it's the end of GW as we know it...' threads already. Do we need another?

This was meant to be the opposite: A "GW could get better, the question is, how?" thread.

I tried.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 pretre wrote:
There's like 5 different 'it's the end of GW as we know it...' threads already. Do we need another?

This was meant to be the opposite: A "GW could get better, the question is, how?" thread.

I tried.

Oh, I get it, but I think that point can be served by posting in one of those threads rather than starting this one and seeing it go the exact same route as the others.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Return of the old hands. Rick Priestly, Alan/Michael Perry, Andy Chambers, we need you! I reckon if these guys (and of course some of the others who I'm too young to remember) came back, they could do the company miracles. Andy Chambers wrote fantastic rules, Rick Priestly was a great fluff writer, and the Perry twins are brilliant sculptors.

I'm pretty sure all those guys are happy going off doing their own things...

Get back to supporting the hobby instead of screwing vets over and becoming a retailer instead of a hobby company.

It's a surprisingly short list tbh.

1: Have a frickin sale every now and then. The company is big enough, and whisper this, it might even make GW more money.
2: Interact with the community. It really wouldn't hurt and you'd be doing yourselves a huge favour. The miniatures are still cracking, as they have always been to be fair. Just let us when you plan on stopping a line of minis or a Game. Which brings me onto..
3: Don't, for the love all things holy, stop the Specialist line of games.
4: Lose the one man store nonsense. Have a couple of friendly hobby peeps inside who are willing to let you have a game and do some painting in store.
5: How about keeping price increases in line with inflation? Huh?
6: Be nicer to independent stockists. They are capable of reaching a whole new set of customers. Work with them, not against.

Plastic toy soldiers don't need to be $50 for a box of 10 army men. I can goto Toys R Us and buy a whole bucket of army men for like $20, although army men arn't for crap when it comes to WYSIWYG. Lower your damn prices and people can buy more product.

I no longer have strong feelings about GW "saving itself". I'm sure they'll continue to tick over doing dumb things on a biannual basis but making enough money to keep shifting the plastic.

And I'll continue to buy the stuff I like from ebay and independent retailers, while getting great hobby ideas from Dakka.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Now it's no secret that Games Workshop have been getting worse and worse recently.

If it's not a secret, why don't you have any evidence?

1. Pick a couple of "iconic" plastic kits from each army. Make them half price. Space Marines could get Tactical Squads and Rhinos; Imperial Guard, IG Squads and Command Squads; Dwarves, Warriors and Cannons. The idea would be that a new player could cheaply build a "pauper" army of basic units, then build upon that foundation by fleshing it out with less common units.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 pretre wrote:
There's like 5 different 'it's the end of GW as we know it...' threads already. Do we need another?

This was meant to be the opposite: A "GW could get better, the question is, how?" thread.

I tried.

Don't worry about it. pretre would prefer if Dakka was just one big thread spanning hundreds of thousands of pages, with all the topics inevitably leading toward one of three subjects: rumors, Matt Ward or GW's eventual downfall.

 puma713 wrote:
Don't worry about it. pretre would prefer if Dakka was just one big thread spanning hundreds of thousands of pages, with all the topics inevitably leading toward one of three subjects: rumors, Matt Ward or GW's eventual downfall.

Or perhaps one topic: rumours that Matt Ward will cause GW's eventual downfall.

 puma713 wrote:
Don't worry about it. pretre would prefer if Dakka was just one big thread spanning hundreds of thousands of pages, with all the topics inevitably leading toward one of three subjects: rumors, Matt Ward or GW's eventual downfall.

4/10. Somewhat humorous so the factual misses can somewhat be forgiven.

In actuality, I would prefer that people actually looked around and searched for topics before posting the same thing over again. I do not like that all subjects lead to Ward; I just acknowledge that it is an inevitability. I do prefer that similar topics get grouped together rather than splitting them off, but not to the extent that you are indicating.

 AlexHolker wrote:
1. Pick a couple of "iconic" plastic kits from each army. Make them half price. Space Marines could get Tactical Squads and Rhinos; Imperial Guard, IG Squads and Command Squads; Dwarves, Warriors and Cannons. The idea would be that a new player could cheaply build a "pauper" army of basic units, then build upon that foundation by fleshing it out with less common units.

They already do this, it's called " one click bundles".... oh wait nevermind, that may actually cost more ..( read with lots of sarcasm)

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:


It's a surprisingly short list tbh.

1: Have a frickin sale every now and then. The company is big enough, and whisper this, it might even make GW more money.
2: Interact with the community. It really wouldn't hurt and you'd be doing yourselves a huge favour. The miniatures are still cracking, as they have always been to be fair. Just let us when you plan on stopping a line of minis or a Game. Which brings me onto..
3: Don't, for the love all things holy, stop the Specialist line of games.
4: Lose the one man store nonsense. Have a couple of friendly hobby peeps inside who are willing to let you have a game and do some painting in store.
5: How about keeping price increases in line with inflation? Huh?
6: Be nicer to independent stockists. They are capable of reaching a whole new set of customers. Work with them, not against.

My local GW runs a Mordheim night and says you can always play Specialist Games in store.

This is a list I wrote for a similar thread a few weeks ago, I still stand by it, and with the disappearance of Spec Games is perhaps more relevant..

 azreal13 wrote:
1) Reorganise the retail operation. Close the pokey one man stores and centralise the operation into larger multi staff destination stores open 7 days a week and well into the evening. Incorporate staff bonus schemes to include community growth as well as sales growth, linked to tournament entries, game night attendances etc. The staff would be responsible for organising these. Move to stock Forge World and FFG materials in store.

2) Produce a genuine one per faction starter that included a small but balanced force and codex for an appreciable discount.

3) Instruct the studio to produce a small, squad based skirmish game, using the core rules from the main games as their inspiration, with a two step structure allowing for a very basic intro game but with a more advanced level, a la Infinity. Box it with absolutely everything needed to play, get it into non specialist retailers and advertise it in mainstream media. Use this system as both a bridging game and a means to stimulate sales on some under performing lines. Imagine how good a DE Mandrake could be at skirmish level with rules allowing it to redeploy all over the table, make sneak attacks etc, as opposed to their decidedly mediocre 40k showing.

4) Accept the internet exists

5) Acknowledge that indys, employed correctly, are a valuable asset and not an irritation

6) Give the studio more control, only intervening if their ideas were genuinely too costly.

7) Realise that the demographic I was alienating (vets) had more money and were more likely to continue to stick around and adjust the company output to at least reflect the older players interests.

well, here's my thoughts as someone who was into the hobby when i was a young teenager in 90-94 and have started again in the last year.

1. miniatures are better than ever. but soooo expensive. i didn't get a lot of pocket money as a young lad but could still afford to buy boxes of plastic miniatures with a lot more miniatures for the money - for example the old boxes of rogue trader plastic beaky marines. now it's, at best £25 for ten, more often £15-20 for five. too much. you can drop the price, sell more, and still make lots of money. similarly many single miniatures, whilst beautiful, are £30 - 50. too much. i buy all mine off ebay now.

2. more paint sets offering the chance to buy 10 pots on a theme for a reduced amount. there used to be lots of different themed sets and these worked.

uh, actually, that's it. no, wait...

3. better quality paintbrushes. GW ones are gak.

oh, and

4. prune the quality of your writers. some are ace, some are so gak it makes me angy that are paid to write even genre fiction. yuk.

i think i am happy with everything else in the hobby. except the Necrons. what a gak idea that was, ffs. bring back the squats!

Well folks,
theres alot that CAN be done, the question is WILL it be done.
Based on experience, the more a company interacts with its customers, the better they are recieved and purchased.
I worked for our FLGS in the late 90's through '07.
The most successful sales were by far when there were campaigns wrapped around the release of new lines.
And MORDHEIM!! and BATTLEFLEET GOTHIC!!

Those two games got more kids into the 40k and Fantasy lines than ANY Outrider ever did!!

And I agree with one of the former posters about the REASONABLE entry level box set. And themed paint sets were a cool way to get a bunch of paints that worked well together.

In short, more first timer customer friendlyness.

Releasing a licensed MLP wargame.

I think liberal application of fire and salt would save GW.

Firing Matt Ward?

I'm sorry, it had to be said, no-one had done so already!

On a serious note, I really think the company just needs a complete change in how it's run. A lot of people say that GW will never lower their prices, but I'm not so sure. Whether you like it or not, GW are the leading company in tabletop wargaming and, to be frank, all the other companies can't match the scale (and often, I will say it, the quality) of GW. So, how do they compete? Well, they have lower prices, that's what. Most of the tabletop wargaming industry prices are based of GW's. That means that if a company's prices are X% lower than GW's, and GW go and put up the prices, that same company can afford to put up theirs and maintain the same advantage. The same goes for independent stocklists. Would I bother buying from GiftsforGeeks or Dark Sphere if they were only 5% cheaper than GW? Probably not. If GW put their prices down, so would the rest of the industry, and, GW may indeed start making more money as more people are encouraged to start the hobby or, rather, not quit it.

Secondly, I still maintain that a GW Reward Card would be great for both the consumers and GW itself. As for the consumers, we can get a decent amount of points on our card from buying from the company, and so can therefore save money and get stuff for cheaper. GW are also able to encourage sales of new releases by offering double, or triple, points on pre-orders (and we all know how much GW love impulse buys). They'd also be able to stick double points on starter sets, battalions and battleforces and army book and codexes, to better encourage people to start the hobby. A parent is probably going to be much more inclined to buy that expensive starter set if it's got a massive "Double Points" sticker on it.

 pretre wrote:


In actuality, I would prefer that people actually looked around and searched for topics before posting the same thing over again. I do not like that all subjects lead to Ward; I just acknowledge that it is an inevitability. I do prefer that similar topics get grouped together rather than splitting them off, but not to the extent that you are indicating.

I can understand that. But I'm sure you can also understand the limits of the search capability and not wanting to sift through 19 pages of a similar topic to see if they're talking about what you're talking about, or if it has even been brought up before. Then, when you do post in that 19-page thread, you risk someone popping off, "Jeez, that was brought up 10 pages ago! Lrn2read nub!"

At the end of the day, it is a discussion forum and no one makes you read any thread.

I agree with a couple of the previous ideas. I think a skirmish game / simplified version of Warhammer would help bridge the gap and bring new players in and allow old players the opportunity to show and teach the games basics to new players before they said "here's the 40k rule book" and drop a 200 page book on the table.

I have been playing for years but I still remember trying to learn and feeling like there was a ton of information to learn before I could play a single turn. That was back in 3rd edition and the game has evolved since then. How many times have you been talking to someone who is interested in the hobby and said "it's not as bad as it looks" or "it gets easier after you play a few games." It causes a lot of people to think about if they are really willing to spend the amount of money and time that is required to get into a game they won't understand until they play a few times.

The other suggestion I liked was the price reduction on kits. I have not bought a model from GW in years. I find everything in the swap shop or on Ebay. By lowering prices it may shift my purchases from 3rd party back to GW. While personally I am a fan of price cuts across the board I somehow doubt GW would do that. Cutting the prices of some of the basic, common, required kits(HQ choices, troop choices, troop transports, etc.) would allow players to bulk up their army and new players to get in. On top of that use seasonal or annual sales to offer the specialty kits at a reasonable price would allow vets to bolster their army. Part of those sales could be price reductions or even kit bundles. Take for example selling a Terminator Assault Squad and a Land Raider for X amount of money.

The last suggestion I have is not really a long term fix but more meant to give a boost to the short/mid term. Introduce a new army. GW did this in a way by introducing allies in 40k, but a new army would bring players to something they have never seen before. People would be buying whole armies rather than a kit here and there. Again though this eventually would fall into the same place that all of their current armies are in after the novelty wears off.

 puma713 wrote:
I can understand that. But I'm sure you can also understand the limits of the search capability and not wanting to sift through 19 pages of a similar topic to see if they're talking about what you're talking about, or if it has even been brought up before. Then, when you do post in that 19-page thread, you risk someone popping off, "Jeez, that was brought up 10 pages ago! Lrn2read nub!"

At the end of the day, it is a discussion forum and no one makes you read any thread.

I generally don't even search to find the duplicates. I go to the main page of the sub-forum the person posted it in. I look. I see three threads on the same topic. I shake my head sadly and click the little triangle.

 pretre wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Don't worry about it. pretre would prefer if Dakka was just one big thread spanning hundreds of thousands of pages, with all the topics inevitably leading toward one of three subjects: rumors, Matt Ward or GW's eventual downfall.

4/10. Somewhat humorous so the factual misses can somewhat be forgiven.

In actuality, I would prefer that people actually looked around and searched for topics before posting the same thing over again. I do not like that all subjects lead to Ward; I just acknowledge that it is an inevitability. I do prefer that similar topics get grouped together rather than splitting them off, but not to the extent that you are indicating.

To be fair, the corollary to puma's statement is the admission that Dakka actually does consist almost entirely of those three topics.

For what it's worth, pretre has a valid point here.

 daedalus wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Don't worry about it. pretre would prefer if Dakka was just one big thread spanning hundreds of thousands of pages, with all the topics inevitably leading toward one of three subjects: rumors, Matt Ward or GW's eventual downfall.

4/10. Somewhat humorous so the factual misses can somewhat be forgiven.

In actuality, I would prefer that people actually looked around and searched for topics before posting the same thing over again. I do not like that all subjects lead to Ward; I just acknowledge that it is an inevitability. I do prefer that similar topics get grouped together rather than splitting them off, but not to the extent that you are indicating.

To be fair, the corollary to puma's statement is the admission that Dakka actually does consist almost entirely of those three topics.

I think one could probably refine Draigo's Law to include that idea. That all threads on Dakka inevitably head towards Rumors, Ward or GW's Downfall.

Get back to what made GW great in the first place. Orks, Orcs and stormbolters.

 pretre wrote:
There's like 5 different 'it's the end of GW as we know it...' threads already. Do we need another?

Meh, all those threads talk about what would happen if GW fell, this is about what can be done to keep it from falling, technically it would be considered off topic to discuss this subject in those threads.

Yes a sale would really help, or better yet just lower the prices all together really.

More support for the shops, with the removal of some gaming tables and the closure on certain weekdays, it hurts their image.

 unmercifulconker wrote:

 pretre wrote:
There's like 5 different 'it's the end of GW as we know it...' threads already. Do we need another?

Meh, all those threads talk about what would happen if GW fell, this is about what can be done to keep it from falling, technically it would be considered off topic to discuss this subject in those threads.

But if I were to create a thread that is "What could cause GW to fail?" under the premise that it doesn't need saving, which is technically as off-topic as your example, it would surely be locked as a duplicate.