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.

GW not in the wargaming market? Wait...huh? But they make and sell a war game...I'm confused.

 MWHistorian wrote:
GW not in the wargaming market? Wait...huh? But they make and sell a war game...I'm confused.

They are making and selling miniatures (most of all) and games (as a means to promote the former). They are in the miniatures market and in the games market.

Make your comparisons in one or the other, or give me a definition of "wargaming market".

And I'm very much anticipating the next round of financial report.

Guys, I'm going to say this. This may be based not on reality but on fantasy but.... I'm still hoping that GW will turn around, fix their prices and rules and acknowledge the comumnity and stop alienating it. This decrease should be a wake up call!

 Zweischneid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
GW not in the wargaming market? Wait...huh? But they make and sell a war game...I'm confused.

They are making and selling miniatures (most of all) and games (as a means to promote the former). They are in the miniatures market and in the games market.

Make your comparisons in one or the other, or give me a definition of "wargaming market".

No... they CLAIM they are in the miniatures market, yet I'd wager that the vast majority of people only buy their miniatures due to the games. I don't know much about just painting/modeling but I'd have to imagine if you weren't interested in the game you'd buy figures that actually A) Look different (what are you going to do with 10 Space Marines that look almost identical?) or B) Aren't going to cost you an arm and a leg except maybe the really big looking models. And, if they aren't a game company then remind me again why the rules alone is $75 and the book to use the figures that they sell is $50?

So yeah. They might say they sell miniatures and make a game to facilitate the figures, but that just proves how out of touch and clueless they are. In reality they make a game and produce figures to support said game. Their name is GAMES Workshop, not Hobby Workshop or Miniatures Workshop. They can tell us any line of BS they want, but the truth is always there.

Made of:
2 boxes of plastic infantry (£40) 24 archers and 6 bill left over.
1 blister metal men at arms (£8)
2 blister metal scurrers (£16)
1 blister metal command (£8) 5 minis left over.
1 metal cannon (£8)

So that's £80, with a LOAD of stuff left over.
Quality is extremely high- actually the same sculptors as GW (Perry) Empire. So... someone wanna do the math for a similar build from GW?

WayneTheGame wrote:


No... they CLAIM they are in the miniatures market, yet I'd wager that the vast majority of people only buy their miniatures due to the games. .

Again, personal bias. You claim their entire published business-strategy is a fraud, only so your apples-and-oranges comparsion cherry-picked to put GW into a bad light holds.


I am not saying GW's priorities are smart or what I'd want to see. But they are what they are. You cannot simply base your comparisons on something totally different from what they, explicitly, want to do, just because you personally disagree with that direction. Why? Because you're once again bringing your personal bias into it.

 Zweischneid wrote:


They are making and selling miniatures (most of all) and games (as a means to promote the former). They are in the miniatures market and in the games market.

Make your comparisons in one or the other, or give me a definition of "wargaming market".

We did, you did not. Please follow your own advice. You are the one comparing metal minis to plastic ones and saying that you compared miniatures and not game systems?! Look honestly be coherent or stfu!

If you make wargames and sell them, you're in the wargaming market.

Why do I have to clarify that?

My head hurts.

 MWHistorian wrote:
If you make wargames and sell them, you're in the wargaming market.

Why do I have to clarify that?

My head hurts.

If you make miniatures and sell them, you're in the miniatures market.

Why do I have to clarify that?

My head hurts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

HairySticks wrote:


We did, you did not. Please follow your own advice. You are the one comparing metal minis to plastic ones and saying that you compared miniatures and not game systems?! Look honestly be coherent or stfu!

Yes. And I said GW makes the superior miniatures from a better material for a higher price, while Mantic makes inferior miniatures from inferior materials for a lesser (but still high) price, benefiting from the acclimatization of GW customers to high prices. What's wrong with that?

 Zweischneid wrote:

Yes. And I said GW makes the superior miniatures from a better material for a higher price, while Mantic makes inferior miniatures for a lesser (but still high) price, benefiting from the acclimatization of GW customers to high prices. What's wrong with that?

Superiour and better material are subjective, your opinions and not fact. Anyone is entitled to prefer one or the other based upon any reason they choose.

The price point however is FACT, Mantic is cheaper than GW across the board. the only exceptions might actually be Twighlight kin vs Dark Elves? (metal vs plastics again)

Yes, they are in the miniatures market, but they are also in the wargame market.

Am I alone in not having any idea what Zwies is even arguing anymore? I think he's just arguing to argue.

"What? MacDonalds doesn't sell hamburgers! They sell what they CALL hamburgers!"

HairySticks wrote:


Superiour and better material are subjective, your opinions and not fact. Anyone is entitled to prefer one or the other based upon any reason they choose.

The price point however is FACT, Mantic is cheaper than GW across the board. the only exceptions might actually be Twighlight kin vs Dark Elves? (metal vs plastics again)

Again, I never contested the fact that Mantic was cheaper than GW. I contested the fact that Mantic was cheap, in absolute terms, outside of the "GW-comparison" that Mantic has build their business on.

winterdyne wrote:

Made of:
2 boxes of plastic infantry (£40) 24 archers and 6 bill left over.
1 blister metal men at arms (£8)
2 blister metal scurrers (£16)
1 blister metal command (£8) 5 minis left over.
1 metal cannon (£8)

So that's £80, with a LOAD of stuff left over.
Quality is extremely high- actually the same sculptors as GW (Perry) Empire. So... someone wanna do the math for a similar build from GW?

Let's see. Going off the assumption that you are a regular joe who buys things at a GW store or FLGS without using ebay or whatnot (all prices USD):

Archers: $70.00 ($35.00 x2) - 2 boxes of Bretonnian (Empire doesn't have Archers that I can tell) Peasant Bowman; 16 models each so you have 8 archers left over
Men at Arms: $49.50 ($24.75 x2) - 2 boxes of Empire State Troops w/Halberds; 10 models each so 2 left over (I counted 18 in the picture); could actually use Bretonnian Men at Arms which look closer to the figures you have above, but this would be $35.00 for 16 so you would need two boxes again and it would cost you $70.00 so let's assume you don't care about historical accuracy.
Scurrers: $24.50 ($12.25 x2) - Two packs of Bretonnian Mounted Yeomen (no standard bearer) which are likely going OOP soon as they are metal.
Cannon: $25.00 - One box Empire Great Cannon
Command: $59.50 ($29.75 x2) - 2 Empire General boxes (one for a commander on foot, one for a standard bearer)
Heavy Infantry: $41.25 - One box of Reiksguard Knights

Again, that's assuming somebody who isn't going to scour eBay or online retailers for deals or to get extra bitz. Came to ~$269.75, or just around 2x the price (80 pounds converts to about $133)

 Zweischneid wrote:

HairySticks wrote:


Superiour and better material are subjective, your opinions and not fact. Anyone is entitled to prefer one or the other based upon any reason they choose.

The price point however is FACT, Mantic is cheaper than GW across the board. the only exceptions might actually be Twighlight kin vs Dark Elves? (metal vs plastics again)

Again, I never contested the fact that Mantic was cheaper than GW. I contested the fact that Mantic was cheap, in absolute terms, outside of the "GW-comparison" that Mantic has build their business on.

Where are the cheaper products? based on whichever you like game vs game or mini vs mini - but be consistent throughout please.
I'm specifically talking tabletop miniatures wargames here. These are not card games, board games or any other toy/game. Both kings of war and Warhammer Fantasy are fantasy wargames based on tabletops using minatures. It doesnt get much more similar than this without actually being the same thing.

Which is fine.

Unlike Mantic Games, Perry Miniatures probably have a decent claim to actually producing "cheap/keen/lean-priced" miniatures, including considerations of quality, materials, options, etc.. ,

winterdyne wrote:

Made of:
2 boxes of plastic infantry (£40) 24 archers and 6 bill left over.
1 blister metal men at arms (£8)
2 blister metal scurrers (£16)
1 blister metal command (£8) 5 minis left over.
1 metal cannon (£8)

So that's £80, with a LOAD of stuff left over.
Quality is extremely high- actually the same sculptors as GW (Perry) Empire. So... someone wanna do the math for a similar build from GW?

Note that this not include the extra figures that weren't in the photo. And it should be cheaper because I substituted plastics for metals.

20 Empire Archers (40 euros) compared to 24 archers
20 Empire State Troops (40 Euros) compared to 18 Men at Arms
6 Empire Pistoliers (23 Euros) compared to 6 metal scurrers
Empire Plastic Captain (11.5 Euros) compared to metal command blister
Empire Hellblaster (20 euros) compared to 1 metal cannon

Total: 134.5 Euros (or roughly £111.5). So £31 more expensive in plastic, with less bodies (didn't count the extras).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

WayneTheGame wrote:

winterdyne wrote:

Made of:
2 boxes of plastic infantry (£40) 24 archers and 6 bill left over.
1 blister metal men at arms (£8)
2 blister metal scurrers (£16)
1 blister metal command (£8) 5 minis left over.
1 metal cannon (£8)

So that's £80, with a LOAD of stuff left over.
Quality is extremely high- actually the same sculptors as GW (Perry) Empire. So... someone wanna do the math for a similar build from GW?

Let's see. Going off the assumption that you are a regular joe who buys things at a GW store or FLGS without using ebay or whatnot (all prices USD):

Archers: $70.00 ($35.00 x2) - 2 boxes of Bretonnian (Empire doesn't have Archers that I can tell) Peasant Bowman; 16 models each so you have 8 archers left over
Men at Arms: $49.50 ($24.75 x2) - 2 boxes of Empire State Troops w/Halberds; 10 models each so 2 left over (I counted 18 in the picture); could actually use Bretonnian Men at Arms which look closer to the figures you have above, but this would be $35.00 for 16 so you would need two boxes again and it would cost you $70.00 so let's assume you don't care about historical accuracy.
Scurrers: $24.50 ($12.25 x2) - Two packs of Bretonnian Mounted Yeomen (no standard bearer) which are likely going OOP soon as they are metal.
Cannon: $25.00 - One box Empire Great Cannon
Command: $59.50 ($29.75 x2) - 2 Empire General boxes (one for a commander on foot, one for a standard bearer)
Heavy Infantry: $41.25 - One box of Reiksguard Knights

Again, that's assuming somebody who isn't going to scour eBay or online retailers for deals or to get extra bitz. Came to ~$269.75, or just around 2x the price (80 pounds converts to about $133)

Wow.

I went for the conservative route just to give GW aslight advantage but if you compute it like that, that's.. whew.

HairySticks wrote:


Where are the cheaper products? based on whichever you like game vs game or mini vs mini - but be consistent throughout please.
I'm specifically talking tabletop miniatures wargames here. These are not card games, board games or any other toy/game. Both kings of war and Warhammer Fantasy are fantasy wargames based on tabletops using minatures. It doesnt get much more similar than this without actually being the same thing.

Warlord Games? Perry Miniatures? Etc..

But that is the problem. The focus you have there is so incredibly narrow, it is a) not a market and b) virtually identical with comparing just these two companies, where, again, I specifically said that Mantic's business model is to "shadow" GW prices, benefiting from the high prices GW introduced.

To be more objective, you need to widen the scope.. get to the point where you get at least 100, better 1000 games, even better 10.000 games and see in which ... dunno ... quintile or decile Mantic Games ends up to see if they are truly cheap "in absolute terms" (and not just in the relative GW comparison).

I think it's easier to get a large enough "comparison sample" by comparing miniatures vs. miniatures, rather than "games vs. games" (though there are always imperfections, of course).

 heartserenade wrote:
Wow.

I went for the conservative route just to give GW aslight advantage but if you compute it like that, that's.. whew.

That was my intent; to match it as closely as possible from the perspective of somebody who saw that pic somewhere and was like "Oh that'd look cool for my Empire army" and wanted to buy it without knowing how to scrounge around for deals (not even sure if you can legally field all those options, but let's assume you could).

There's no such thing as "absolute terms." Everything is relative.
A candy bar can be expensive compared to another candybar of the same kind. What's your definition of cheap and expensive?
Relative to GW, Mantic is cheaper. Relative to a candybar, its expensive.
GW is cheap compared to my other hobby, buy a long ways too. So, how about you define "Absolute terms" (which I don't think even exists) and we'll go from there.

I did a whole bunch of comparisons between Infinity, Mantic, Dropzone Commander and GW in the last page. Several others have done comparisons earlier in the thread with War Machine.

But yes, the Perry miniatures are truly remarkable and are no doubt the reason why Mantic goes out and says, "we're not going to be making a Kingdoms of Men army." They probably even point you towards the Perry Miniatures models too.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
If you make wargames and sell them, you're in the wargaming market.

Why do I have to clarify that?

My head hurts.

If you make miniatures and sell them, you're in the miniatures market.

Why do I have to clarify that?

My head hurts.

Do Games Workshop also make rules for wargames and sell them and are the miniatures they sell all used in those self same wargames?

Do Games Workshop make and release miniatures to a schedule reflected in their release of their wargames rules or just release miniatures as it suits them, without consideration to the wargames they make?

After answering these two questions, are you still prepared to say that Games Workshop are not in the 'wargames market'?

 MWHistorian wrote:
There's no such thing as "absolute terms." Everything is relative.
A candy bar can be expensive compared to another candybar of the same kind. What's your definition of cheap and expensive?
Relative to GW, Mantic is cheaper. Relative to a candybar, its expensive.
GW is cheap compared to my other hobby, buy a long ways too. So, how about you define "Absolute terms" (which I don't think even exists) and we'll go from there.

I would approximate absolute by a sufficiently large sample of comparable products. Just 2, maybe 3, 4 or 5 comparison products is a very small number, but in that small sample (which many people default to), Mantic Games is relatively cheap, and that is the core of their business. And it's a proven business-strategy, similar to "shadowing" Starbucks with not-quite-as-expensive coffee.

The further you throw the net (whether it be "games" or "miniatures" or even "´hobby supplies" or whatever else they are selling), the more expensive Mantic games becomes (relative to an ever-larger control group).

 Zweischneid wrote:

HairySticks wrote:


Where are the cheaper products? based on whichever you like game vs game or mini vs mini - but be consistent throughout please.
I'm specifically talking tabletop miniatures wargames here. These are not card games, board games or any other toy/game. Both kings of war and Warhammer Fantasy are fantasy wargames based on tabletops using minatures. It doesnt get much more similar than this without actually being the same thing.

Warlord Games? Perry Miniatures? Etc..

But that is the problem. The focus you have there is so incredibly narrow, it is a) not a market and b) virtually identical with comparing just these two companies, where, again, I specifically said that Mantic's business model is to "shadow" GW prices, benefiting from the high prices GW introduced.

To be more objective, you need to widen the scope.. get to the point where you get at least 100, better 1000 games, even better 10.000 games and see in which ... dunno ... quintile or decile Mantic Games ends up to see if they are truly cheap "in absolute terms" (and not just in the relative GW comparison).

I think it's easier to get a large enough "comparison sample" by comparing miniatures vs. miniatures, rather than "games vs. games" (though there are always imperfections, of course).

Thats all well and good, but this thread is about GW financials first and formost :/ so excluding GW from the comparison seems a bit strange...... I only ever brought up Mantic in the first place (if you go back and look i also mentioned Warmachine and Hordes and left it open to others)

You are the only person here attempting to de-rail the thread from talking about GW, I will however go and look into warlord games, Perry miniatures, while nice mini's arent the Fantasy genre I'm after atm


Edit; oh that didnt take long, warlord games arent Fantasy either. Not up my street. So your telling me that I have to look for people not producing Fantasy for my Fantasy figures ? hehe

 Zweischneid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
There's no such thing as "absolute terms." Everything is relative.
A candy bar can be expensive compared to another candybar of the same kind. What's your definition of cheap and expensive?
Relative to GW, Mantic is cheaper. Relative to a candybar, its expensive.
GW is cheap compared to my other hobby, buy a long ways too. So, how about you define "Absolute terms" (which I don't think even exists) and we'll go from there.

I would approximate absolute by a sufficiently large sample of comparable products. Just 2, maybe 3, 4 or 5 comparison products is a very small number, but in that small sample (which many people default to), Mantic Games is relatively cheap, and that is the core of their business. And it's a proven business-strategy, similar to "shadowing" Starbucks with not-quite-as-expensive coffee.

The further you throw the net (whether it be "games" or "miniatures" or even "´hobby supplies" or whatever else they are selling), the more expensive Mantic games becomes (relative to an ever-larger control group).

Soo....its relative and not absolute. You wanted an absolute and by mine and now your definition, there is no such thing. Okay, so we have to deal with relative. We've proven that relative to Mantic, GW is more expensive. Others have posted about other companies such as Warmachine.

HairySticks wrote:


Thats all well and good, but this thread is about GW financials first and formost :/ so excluding GW from the comparison seems a bit strange...... I only ever brought up Mantic in the first place (if you go back and look i also mentioned Warmachine and Hordes and left it open to others)

Well, the whole thing matters for the GW thread, because Mantic is benefiting from the market that GW created in the first place.

To go back to the (of course always imperfect) example I used before, Starbucks pretty much created the market for US$ 5+ cups of coffee. Nobody in their right mind would've paid that kind of money for a cup of coffee and foamed milk before Starbucks. The competitors coming after Starbucks benefit from the market Starbucks created.

The same is true for the GW-Mantic relationship. Mantic can only charge what they charge, because the customers they target, are acclimatized to GW prices. Thus pointing to Mantic as a "how GW should do it" is a bit problematic, because Mantic can only exist (in its current form) in a world where GW acts and prices stuff as they do now (though Mantic sure knows this and tries to diversify out of it).

Mantic can charge "premium-B" prices for their miniatures, because GW charges "premium-A" prices.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:

Soo....its relative and not absolute. You wanted an absolute and by mine and now your definition, there is no such thing. Okay, so we have to deal with relative. We've proven that relative to Mantic, GW is more expensive. Others have posted about other companies such as Warmachine.

And all I said is that Mantic's business model is to be relatively cheaper than GW, exploiting fat margins on their product thanks to an customer base nursed on GW prices. That business model would be impossible without GW.

Again, here's the original post that people found so offensive as to spend half-a-dozen "derailed" pages trying to prove it wrong.

 Zweischneid wrote:

weeble1000 wrote:


But in reality Mantic is selling a customer experience that GW has utterly failed to deliver. Mantic has a trim, fast playing, tournament friendly rule set and well supported 'specialist' games. Mantic is even putting out e rule books that work on any platform, can be run locally or streamed, include robust game tracking functionality, AND a lean price point. .

There is nothing lean about Mantic's prices.

They shadow GW to be just under them and relatively cheaper, but a company that charges you 15 GBP / 25 USD for a box of 8 no-options, restic, several-repeat sculpts DreadBall miniatures isn't doing any "lean". pricing.

I agree on the customer experience though.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I know a best selling author who wanted to get into wargaming but was put off by GW's business and legal decisions and started Warmachine. He posted on their forums and because Warmachine actually talks to their fans said, "Hey, isn't this New York Times best selling author? And he likes our games?" So they asked Mr. Correia if he would write something for them and Correia said "Heck yes! I love your games" So, PP got themselves a best selling author just from not being douche bags.

GW's, I love ya bro, but you gotta get in touch with the real world, yo. There's this thing called "PR," you may have heard of it. The basic premise is; you kind of have to be liked or at least tolerated to be successful...or put out a product so freaking awesome people don't care. One or the other, bro.

Bingo. GW's relationship with its customers is simply antagonistic, its relationship with independent retailers is abusive, exploitative, and antagonistic, and its relationship with the market is antagonistic.

The financial cost of that antagonism is hidden, but staggering. GW's decision to attack M C A Hogarth got Privateer Press a best selling author. If that was the only fallout, it would be an extreme net loss for the company, but it surely wasn't the only fallout. Just imagine what might happen if GW gets slapped down in the GW v CHS appeal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

winterdyne wrote:

Made of:
2 boxes of plastic infantry (£40) 24 archers and 6 bill left over.
1 blister metal men at arms (£8)
2 blister metal scurrers (£16)
1 blister metal command (£8) 5 minis left over.
1 metal cannon (£8)

So that's £80, with a LOAD of stuff left over.
Quality is extremely high- actually the same sculptors as GW (Perry) Empire. So... someone wanna do the math for a similar build from GW?

Perry models beat GW like a rented mule. Most Perry plastic infantry are less than a dollar per model with a slew of options. Hands down, Perry plastic box sets are THE best plastic models I have ever put together. Clean casts, minimal mold lines, well laid out sprues, very consistent scale across all ranges (makes for very easy kitbashing and converting), excellent price, lots of extra bits. The more plastic box sets the Perrys put out the better.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
GW not in the wargaming market? Wait...huh? But they make and sell a war game...I'm confused.

They are making and selling miniatures (most of all) and games (as a means to promote the former). They are in the miniatures market and in the games market.

Make your comparisons in one or the other, or give me a definition of "wargaming market".

The wargaming market is the buying and selling of miniatures and the rules to accompany them, in relation to the hobby of miniature wargaming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_wargaming

Games Workshop, via it's selling of both miniatures and accompanying rules for tabletop wargames, falls into the definition of a company within the wargaming market.

 Zweischneid wrote:

Spoiler:

Well, the whole thing matters for the GW thread, because Mantic is benefiting from the market that GW created in the first place.

To go back to the (of course always imperfect) example I used before, Starbucks pretty much created the market for US$ 5+ cups of coffee. Nobody in their right mind would've paid that kind of money for a cup of coffee and foamed milk before Starbucks. The competitors coming after Starbucks benefit from the market Starbucks created.

The same is true for the GW-Mantic relationship. Mantic can only charge what they charge, because the customers they target, are acclimatized to GW prices. Thus pointing to Mantic as a "how GW should do it" is a bit problematic, because Mantic can only exist (in its current form) in a world where GW acts and prices stuff as they do now (though Mantic sure knows this and tries to diversify out of it).

Mantic can charge "premium-B" prices for their miniatures, because GW charges "premium-A" prices.

If that is the case, GW did it to themselves and deserve every last loss generated from it.

Its no secret that GW consider themselves a premium product, It's a little amusing that the people running the show at Mantic used to run the show at GW. I think you'l find most of the people complaining about GW and promoting Mantic were fans of GW back when the Mantic staff were there, and seemingly had influence over the way things were ran.
Now we see scores of unhappy people basically bitching about GW's policies and practises all the time, and Mantic step up and behave mostly the way everyone remembers from the GW of old.

In reality GW could kick up legal fuss about predatory pricing if Mantic were to drastically undercut - especially knowing that GW can produce cheaper than Mantic should be able to. (predatory pricing requires retail prices to be lower than cost of manufacture+distribution and all included cost and is illegal and is also often a really dumb bussiness move anyways)

Knowing that GW possess the manufacturing advantage, one must assume that Mantic are enjoying lower margins per product? And having to work harder for their £ (even more so if as people say GW is more popular)
This seemingly is leading to the lazy releases from GW, cus they can.
I'd love to see Mantic really step the game up and be real direct competition to GW because it would only end up in better products for us, the consumers. GW can only ever get away with lazy rules and reboxing of mini's if they domminate the market, if someone else can produce minis, or rules that can make GW have to work at it, only good things can happen.

The Mantic vs GW discussion could be considered more valid than any other company vs GW purely on the basis that they are made up of largely ex-GW staff. Are you suprised that theres a good similarity in the products when the same guys worked on both?

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
GW not in the wargaming market? Wait...huh? But they make and sell a war game...I'm confused.

They are making and selling miniatures (most of all) and games (as a means to promote the former). They are in the miniatures market and in the games market.

Make your comparisons in one or the other, or give me a definition of "wargaming market".

The wargaming market is the buying and selling of miniatures and the rules to accompany them, in relation to the hobby of miniature wargaming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_wargaming

Games Workshop, via it's selling of both miniatures and accompanying rules for tabletop wargames, falls into the definition of a company within the wargaming market.

Fair enough. There's even a nice list of miniature wargames: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miniature_wargames

By a casual glance, I'd guess that Mantic Games is easily in the top 20% of those price-wise.

A man can only eat so much red herring in a day, so I suggest you all stop before you get mercury poisoning.