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.

As a start-up Infinity player and making it my primary game I started thinking about the prevalence of non-GW games. While there may be a plethora of obscure games out there.......how many have actually gained traction and are making headways? For example, I love Infinity and I love the setting, but idk if it is really making headway. Same with Malifaux, Warmahordes, etc. And do you think any of these games have the potential of becoming "Games Workshop scale games"? Or are all of these rendered to a niche corners? Your thoughts/opinions?

Infinity has a healthy scene in my area, as does wm/h and both Flames and Bolt action for WW2.

They still don't challenge GW for popularity, but a large factor in the 'popularity' for the other games is GW burnout.

A lot of the WM/H players shifted during the 3rd ed 40k years and never went back. Some might have even had *redacted* armies.

Infinity players we get are a mix.
Old school who played 40k up until 2nd ed, switched to necromunda and then just wanted another SF skirmish game (we like them - they bring their terrain over).
40k refugees.
Other old school types who will play pretty much any SF game (like me) but were just tired of GWs constant shafting of their wallets.

WM/Hordes is making a serious run in the states.

By GW scale games, I seriously hope you don't mean large scale army games. All three of the "major" players that you named are skirmish games. They are meant to be a squad of grunts with some characters thrown in. I'm going to assume that you mean a company that can operate on a scale of GW PLC.

Warmachine and Hordes is making a huge run in the US, honestly I think it might be because it's more of an "American"-esque game. While it certainly has the wide appeal that a game company wants their product to have, Privateer Press has created a game focused on competition and made it enjoyable from the casual gamer to the hard core tournament player. Which I think is what is drawing people in left and right. The store I used to play at has switched from just gaming with WM/H to focusing on tournament quality gaming. So no one bitches about a list someone brings, there are very few caster kill games anymore since they're focusing on scenario points, etc... I can still go in and have a fun game with them because I'm able to throw down as it were, but still have fun.

Out of those three, WM/H has the best chance at toppling the Gee Dubs here in 'MURICA. Infinity would need some rules rewriting (to make it clearer) and to solve their distribution issues, because I've wanted to rage quit the few game(s) I've played because I don't understand some of the wording of the rules, but it's a fun game. Malifaux... idk about Malifaux anymore honestly :-\. Wyrd seems to be spreading themselves into as many niche gaming areas as they can to cover their asses.

I don't see warmachine topping GW, mostly because the majority of their fanbase is old 40k players, which is why I find it very odd they aren't complaining about colossals and other warmachine problems. Warmachine is called a skirmish game, yet I see people spend far more on that then GW stuff.

We also have other wargames going on in my local area, dropzone commander has a good following.

While it's by no means scientific, I find it interesting how prevalent posts/threads are for non-GW games on forums like this one, which is primarily GW itself. It speaks to the appeal that those games might have to even carve out a niche even when the primary chatter is about GW, good, bad or otherwise as it might be.

Obviously there's some merging of topics going on, and it in no way separates out good healthy discussion from complaining/moaning about poor mechanics or whatever else might attract ire. Again, thoroughly unscientific.

But then you get little things, like the X-Wing subforum just opening up and already having roughly 1/10th the threads but 1/3 the posts of the Malifaux subforum (longer conversations rather than the 'one-offs' that seem to show up in the latter's section, things like that.

Not sure about who'll put a challenge to the throne as it were, but it's always interesting watching people/companies vie for market share, especially as a (mostly) outsider.

At times....I miss Ral Partha.....and the Battletech universe...

In my area, other games are roughly as prevalent as GW games. Most people here play WM/H, many play FoW, some play Infinity. People who only play GW are very few and far between, while many stopped playing GW altogether.

And then there is also a lot of newer, less well-known games around that are actually being played quite a lot, sometimes only for a while before they go down into obscurity, though.

So overall, I'd say if GW vanished suddenly, people would find enough to do with their hobby time around here.

By the way, dakka basically is THE GW forum. Few people here don't play GW, because there'd be no reason to stick around, other games have boards where they are better represented. So I'd expect people here to tend towards a GW-weighted opinion on this question.

 juraigamer wrote:
I don't see warmachine topping GW, mostly because the majority of their fanbase is old 40k players, which is why I find it very odd they aren't complaining about colossals and other warmachine problems. Warmachine is called a skirmish game, yet I see people spend far more on that then GW stuff.

We also have other wargames going on in my local area, dropzone commander has a good following.

Spending far more on Warmachine isn't an issue of scale. I can go out and spend 600 dollars and easily have 3 armies of average game size with pieces to spare because I like the aesthetic, the playstyle, or w/e reason. Unbound was released as a way for players with large collections to field and play those collections in a manner that wasn't super clunky. The next natural progression is to build large pieces that are made for an Unbound game (Colossals, Gargantuans, Battle Engines, Santa's Little Helper Lylth3). These pieces can be played in regular games, but they will definitely be the lions share of points.

And there were definitely complaints about the battle engines and colossals that were voiced when these things were announced, but players got over it because they're fun pieces and you don't need a special game type to use them. I can use my 120 dollar Mountain King as long as I have points for it, I don't need my opponent's permission to field it like I might need for them to let me play my Baneblade.

 Easy E wrote:
WM/Hordes is making a serious run in the states.

This. Few of my friend play 40K anymore...mostly due to cost. Warmachine is just so affordable, and it's so much faster to set up, play, and tear down.

 Alfndrate wrote:
but they will definitely be the lions share of points.

Except Lylyth3/Sevy3, who are negative points.

Overall, though, I think your point is a good one. Yes, there are some people that spend more on Warmahordes than some one might on GW, but they're buying either multiple armies or they're buying every option that a faction gives them, which gives an insane amount of list options that the same amount spent on GW never could. And while, yes, they both have alternate ways to play with larger collections, only one of them is producing pieces and books that ONLY cover that alternate way to play, making it more a separate investment rather than simply an alternate play style that's included in a book many people would probably pick up for other reasons.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
but they will definitely be the lions share of points.

Except Lylyth3/Sevy3, who are negative points.

Overall, though, I think your point is a good one. Yes, there are some people that spend more on Warmahordes than some one might on GW, but they're buying either multiple armies or they're buying every option that a faction gives them, which gives an insane amount of list options that the same amount spent on GW never could. And while, yes, they both have alternate ways to play with larger collections, only one of them is producing pieces and books that ONLY cover that alternate way to play, making it more a separate investment rather than simply an alternate play style that's included in a book many people would probably pick up for other reasons.

Hey! It's been awhile since I've played, don't be so mean D: I hate you! You're not my real mom! Everything else I agree with.

In Toronto you could probably find a gaming group for even the most obscure table top game.

Here it seems that GW products by far are the most well know and played. WM is popular and doing well. This is then followed by flames of war (which for the most part completely dominate the historical gaming market).

After that all the other gaming systems: infinity, firestorm armada, battletech, x-wing, etc. only hold a relatively small share of the market. This is not to be confused with an active community - there is lots of buzz, but the player base is simply not large enough to guarantee their longevity. Some will rise, some will fade.

Magic the Gathering also seems to cut into many player's budgets that otherwise might be used to experiment with some of the newer game systems (just something to also factor in)

Personally I think infinity has the potential to rise up as it is a great skirmish game that manages to keep both players engaged at all times - the models are also superb. It is just having a hard time convincing people that it isn't just another fad.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
I don't see warmachine topping GW, mostly because the majority of their fanbase is old 40k players, which is why I find it very odd they aren't complaining about colossals and other warmachine problems. Warmachine is called a skirmish game, yet I see people spend far more on that then GW stuff.

We also have other wargames going on in my local area, dropzone commander has a good following.

Spending far more on Warmachine isn't an issue of scale. I can go out and spend 600 dollars and easily have 3 armies of average game size with pieces to spare because I like the aesthetic, the playstyle, or w/e reason. Unbound was released as a way for players with large collections to field and play those collections in a manner that wasn't super clunky. The next natural progression is to build large pieces that are made for an Unbound game (Colossals, Gargantuans, Battle Engines, Santa's Little Helper Lylth3). These pieces can be played in regular games, but they will definitely be the lions share of points.

And there were definitely complaints about the battle engines and colossals that were voiced when these things were announced, but players got over it because they're fun pieces and you don't need a special game type to use them. I can use my 120 dollar Mountain King as long as I have points for it, I don't need my opponent's permission to field it like I might need for them to let me play my Baneblade.

I think you missed the point. The fact that you have a 120 dollar model in a skirmish game is the problem.

Infantry are as well. While a heavy warjack tends to be 9 points and around 30-40 USD, infantry units are far worse, and don't get me started on the $100 5 man box cavalry units.

The fact that you can just take a colossal and a warcaster at 15 points is just bad.

But these don't make it a bad game, its just not the shining light it's fanbase wants to make it seem (at least, in comparison to GW stuffs)

 juraigamer wrote:

I think you missed the point. The fact that you have a 120 dollar model in a skirmish game is the problem.

Infantry are as well. While a heavy warjack tends to be 9 points and around 30-40 USD, infantry units are far worse, and don't get me started on the $100 5 man box cavalry units.

The fact that you can just take a colossal and a warcaster at 15 points is just bad.

But these don't make it a bad game, its just not the shining light it's fanbase wants to make it seem (at least, in comparison to GW stuffs)

I didn't miss the point at all... the price of the model doesn't matter, skirmish is size of the game on the table. Price is dictated by the company that makes the game based on production costs + profit. I'm assuming you've seen a Colossal, they're fething huge, their 120USD price tag is completely justified considering that a Contemptor with a pair of arms is 71 dollars. Now that is FW vs PP, but I'm using it as a comparison of Resin vs Resin. Again though, that 115 dollar Wraith Knight is a plastic kit and is roughly the same size. And again, a Colossal is 20 points, if you're using it in a 35 point game, then most of your points are already taken up by that.

Infantry are roughly on cost with Games workshop. 10 man infantry box? 50 bucks. New 10 man Tactical Squad? 40 bucks. Character Blisters? 15 to 25 bucks in both games regardless of material. But your dollar gets stretched farther as you need less to play Warmachine and Hordes.

Note: It should be made aware that I played Trollbloods and my Champions box is 5 40mm based metal models for 45 dollars, they're 10 points of my list. Trollkin Fennblades? 10 40mm based PVC models for 50 bucks, that makes them a better buy than Terminators.

And what Colossal is so over powered that a 15 point list can't handle it? I've never been scared by Colossals/Gargantuans. I'm more afraid of character jacks and warcasters. Have you fought against a Colossal? They're just 2 heavy jacks on a single that can only take 3 Focus a turn and are easier to hit. Without support, 2 Heavies will fare much better.

Warmachine/Hordes is really the only game my playgroup does. Me and one other guy have small Infinity forces, but that's about it. I like 40k fluff & models enough that I would put up with the wonky rules, and degenerate game balance if other people in my group would. They won't though.

There's a shop in my relative area that when I arrived in from Germany, GW was his main item moved. Last time I was there, a couple months ago, 3/4ths of the GW "wall" was converted and now carrying other brands and other systems of games. At the time of my arrival, his second largest carrier was that Dystopia Wars... the steampunk/cyberpunk/ historical naval wargame? Anyway, that game is STILL his number 2 or maybe 3, but now his prime mover is Malifaux, quite possibly his historical and "off brand" miniatures as well.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
There's a shop in my relative area that when I arrived in from Germany, GW was his main item moved. Last time I was there, a couple months ago, 3/4ths of the GW "wall" was converted and now carrying other brands and other systems of games. At the time of my arrival, his second largest carrier was that Dystopia Wars... the steampunk/cyberpunk/ historical naval wargame? Anyway, that game is STILL his number 2 or maybe 3, but now his prime mover is Malifaux, quite possibly his historical and "off brand" miniatures as well.

Same situation at my FLGS...At their old location they had an entire wall devoted to GW models. Now that they've moved, the GW has been relegated to a corner and is rapidly disappearing under a tidal wave of Malifaux, Dust Warfare, Dust Tactics, Warmachine, and Hordes. Sadly they don't support Infinity, though there are a handful of players locally.

~Tim?

Around here, the stores have three walls and a front area. OThe two long walls on each side are GW and Warmachine/Hordes respectively. The back wall will be a mix of other stuff such as RPGs, board games, and other miniature games (Dystopian Wars, Infinty, Flames of War, Old Glory, etc).

The Warmachine/Hordes wall will often also hav ethe cash register (hence making the wall smaller), and the register is surrounded by all the CCG stuff.

Based ont his GW still seems to barely be holdign on to the largest selling area, but Warmachine/Hordes is closing in.

Hm. I'm pretty surprised Infinity isn't taking more bites out of 40k players thanks to its Scifi (and more hard science) setting. At the least it should be getting more 2nd edition 40k and Necromunda converts. I always imagined the order (if there is any such thing) of how well the games are doing are:

1. GW games
2. Warmahordes
3. Infinity
4. Malifaux
5. Dropzone Commander/Flames of War

Am I wrong?

Also, one person posted that Infinity's rules are frustrating. How so? I've had a good read over the rulebook several times and it seems to be a very tight and well put together system. As nicely put together as Warmahordes actually and pretty intuitive once you get the flow of everything.

Grndhog89 wrote:
How so? I've had a good read over the rulebook several times and it seems to be a very tight and well put together system. As nicely put together as Warmahordes actually and pretty intuitive once you get the flow of everything.

Infinity is extraordinarily sensitive to terrain setup and gets un-fun for one party or another very quickly if it's even off by just a little bit for the match up. Some terms and situations are left a bit vague, and the English translation still feels a bit spotty. Finally the spread on rolls is a tad chaotic compared to other games, the "Crits Trump Everything" kind of puts a damper on getting really interesting game states.

I really felt like when reading the rules there was going to be all this cool tactical movement, maneuvering and guessing where mines were.

What it turned to out be was just to be a series of static firefights with his infiltrators/mechanized deployment while standing in my deployment zone. Moving at all was basically suicide. It really felt like the only thing that mattered were how many HMGs you brought and how lucky your crits were. Now I'll grant some of this probably had to do with our terrain, as there were definitely a few "too good" sniper perches in our limited collection terrain. However, per my first point needing "Just So" terrain is part of what makes it frustrating to play in practice.

Grndhog89 wrote:


Am I wrong?

According to how well things sell in the US: yes and no.

The top 5 games in the US as of Spring 2013:

1. 40K
2. Warmachine
3. X-wing
4. Fantasy
5. Hordes

I strike out Hordes because most people would consider Warmachine and Hordes as one game(and with good reason), but the lines are still separate for sale reasons. Since ICv2 only covers the top 5 sellers, there's speculation as to which would be #6(and thus the #5 top most popular game). Looking back at late 2010 until summer 2012, Malifaux was the one nipping at Hordes' heels, so I'd reason that it's doing better than Infinity.

I disagree with your lumping of GW games into a single thing, as well, since then we're talking about how well companies are doing, not how well certain games are doing.

Chongara wrote:

Grndhog89 wrote:
How so? I've had a good read over the rulebook several times and it seems to be a very tight and well put together system. As nicely put together as Warmahordes actually and pretty intuitive once you get the flow of everything.

Infinity is extraordinarily sensitive to terrain setup and gets un-fun for one party or another very quickly if it's even off by just a little bit for the match up. Some terms and situations are left a bit vague, and the English translation still feels a bit spotty. Finally the spread on rolls is a tad chaotic compared to other games, the "Crits Trump Everything" kind of puts a damper on getting really interesting game states.

I really felt like when reading the rules there was going to be all this cool tactical movement, maneuvering and guessing where mines were.

What it turned to out be was just to be a series of static firefights with his infiltrators/mechanized deployment while standing in my deployment zone. Moving at all was basically suicide. It really felt like the only thing that mattered were how many HMGs you brought and how lucky your crits were. Now I'll grant some of this probably had to do with our terrain, as there were definitely a few "too good" sniper perches in our limited collection terrain. However, per my first point needing "Just So" terrain is part of what makes it frustrating to play in practice.

If that is what the guy used for your "demo game", then he was a toolbag.

With that said:

Grndhog89 wrote:Hm. I'm pretty surprised Infinity isn't taking more bites out of 40k players thanks to its Scifi (and more hard science) setting.

According to the two local shops which both stock Infinity, the distribution is horrendous here in the US. They are having to use three different distributors to maintain just the starter boxes.

There has always been a raft of other wargames in similar settings to GW but few have moved on to massed battle games in 25-28mm like 40k/WHFB or survived all of the last 25 years.

I think that technology has moved on and allowed others to step up to the same sort of quality as GW in products other than metal.. The metal gap (if there was one) closed sometime ago.

 Jihadin wrote:
At times....I miss Ral Partha.....and the Battletech universe...

Open your eyes soldier!

 Kanluwen wrote:

If that is what the guy used for your "demo game", then he was a toolbag.

I should clarify. I spotted the game online and really liked the minis for the most part, particularly the nomad remotes. My playgroup decided to have a "Try new games phase" and I picked up a couple starters to share with the group.

Per community guidelines we did our first couple demo games with 3 LI & 1 HI on each side. It was for the most part pretty interesting, we moved around a little ducked behind cover etc... Went prone to crawl out of LOS. It was cool. It wasn't quite as fully dynamic as I'd hoped, but I assumed that was just a lack of advanced gear and stuff. We had some fun with it, and me and another guy decided to buy in.

We build up little by little, first 100pts for a few games, then 150 and so on. This is when the game state I described started to creep up. In contrast to what I read in the rules and the demo games with a few pieces, things just started boiling down to "Stand and shoot, first to crit wins". The higher the points went, the more it felt like "HMGs: The Game".

I'll grant we only got in maybe ~10 games total, before I think my opponent started to sense my frustration and kind of backed off trying it in favor of Warmahordes again. I love the idea of infinity and I'm still open to playing it. I just don't see it as something I could really get into the way I've gotten into Warmahordes without finding a good solution to how static it felt. There isn't anything wrong with "Stand and shoot" the game, but that's not want out of a small-scale sci-fi skirmish game.

Warmachine/Hordes doesn't have half the rules aimed at movement modes and positioning that infinity does. Yet I felt like I get more dynamic action out of 1 activation of my warpwolf stalker than I did out of all my infinity games combined.

Fair enough.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Fair enough.

Do you think my experiences are broadly reflective of what the game actually is? I'm assuming from your avatar you play a fair amount. Like I said, I like a lot of what the game appears to offer on the surface. We've just had a very hard time bringing that out. I'd really be all over it if there was a good way to get more than standing in my DZ shooting HMGs.

I don't play a huge amount, but from what I've had as experiences?

No, that is not. That is reflective of someone going overboard with HMGs and infiltrators.

If I knew what armies you both had been using I could make a better statement, but I would say to ask on the official Infinity forums for some ideas as they are way more experienced than I am.

The best thing about all the rival skirmish systems is that changing faction/gang/team is a lot cheaper and quicker. You start with one force, play with it, get used to it, then something else catches your eye. You can build up multiple forces very quickly, which help keeps things fresh. Getting a GW army up to speed, takes a lot longer and costs a lot more. If you decide to put together another force, it's the same thing over again. Before I dropped out of gaming I had 3 forces for Rules of Engagement, two for Confrontation, 2 for Warmachine / Hordes and 2 for Urban War.

I keep seeing people talking about Infinity...but I've never seen it in my area

Guess I'll look into it and see what this game is all about.