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.

Barfolomew wrote:
I've played Warmachine and 40K quite a bit. Let's assume the cost between the games is the same because people have debated that enough. Here is the primary reasons I would recommend Warmachine over 40K:

- Takes less models and thus less models to paint and keep up with in the game.
- Switching the warcaster model can cause the army to play very differently. Basically, you can have multiple styles of army with a couple different warcasters. In 40K, you need to usually swap out large sections of the army to get it to play differently.
- The rules are well written. See the "you make the call" forums for Warmachine and 40K and the difference is mind blowing.
- PP interacts with the customers. They actually host forums and are fairly active on them.

Heard lots of good things about warmachine and I was tempted to play it. The only thing barring me is that I don't like the aesthetics of the models. I like the setting and the rules and everything, it's just that I think I'm forever turned off by the heroic scale. Which is funny because before I played 40k I absolutely hated the proportion of GW's models but it kinda grew on me. Now it shrunk back to hate.

Now I'm playing Infinity and historicals. If only Perry would work for Kings of War and remove the fugly figures in Mantic's range. That will be heaven for me.

Silver_skates wrote:
I may be one of the few people but I'd be irritated by a move away from large units in Warhammer. I like the feel of bigger battles with lots of men on the battlefied marching into combat. I suppose I could start playing 10,000 point games but if the rules changes what am I going to do with:

40 Dwarf Hammerers
40 Dwarf warriors with two handed weapons
40 Dwarf warriors with shield and hand weapon
40 Empire Halberdiers

Also, when people compare warmahordes with Warhammer although the cost of playing a game is lower, collecting is not. No PP fan complains about paying £50-ish on ten banes but will say that GW are priced too highly when a unit of 10 Dark Elf witches cost £30. I think the scale of the game means that you shouldn't compare.

To be fair though I think that's more because Warmahordes tends to give you everything you need in a box, and you tend to need less boxes in most cases unless you're doubling up on certain units; Warhammer you tend to need at least 2 boxes to make a good unit (as the boxes are 10 and you tend to need at least 20) so right off the bat you're basically paying twice for one unit in Warhammer; in your example you need at least 20 Witch Elves, and from what I've read more like 30 so you're actually paying 60 pounds minimum for the unit to be of any use at all.

Cost per figure might be more, but value per figure is a lot better.

This thread seems to have got too far off topic.

There is a good thread on "What would bring you back to GW games" in the Discussion forum, in case people want to continue the comparisons of different games.

Seems GW stocks have dropped down to 515.

I wonder when they'll finally level off?

 azreal13 wrote:
There's a way to go before they hit a 5 year low (disregarding the odd spike) but I'm surprised we haven't seen some more bullish investors picking up some stock and causing the price to rally at least a bit by now.

In the last 10 years they've been as low as ~270p, and IIRC in the late 90s they went down to maybe ~220p. If I was looking to make an investment I'd certainly be looking to see if they go below 400p.

Whats the lowest they have been in the last 5 years?

Somewhere around 3.50, which also seems to be, again, short term spikes and troughs aside, their lowest price ever.

 silent25 wrote:
There are some good things in this rumor that GW is apparently trying to address the entry level cost issue.

If this is so apparent, why is GW forcing hardcover Codices and Apocalypse units down every customer's throat?
If there are new editions for 40k and Fantasy this year, it is just a desperate measure to force everyone to buy it, not to rebbot or fix the game.

He has been traveling non-stop for new training and meetings, so it was easy to see something was coming down the pipe.

With most staff outside Nottingham HQ fired, the non-stop travelling must have been between first and second storey

BTW here tha share development from today and from tha last few days:

GW is looking to improve the customer experience in their stores and they are hiring someone to do so (see http://careers.games-workshop.com/2014/01/15/customer-experience-interim-2-years-nottingham-uk/). I can certainly say that the excitement level with the GW hobby appears to be down worldwide given their slipping sales numbers last year. I can also definitely see it in my own little corner of the GW universe, excitement level overall and the rate of gaining new hobby recruits is way down from just a few years ago.

Of course, GW could learn a lot about what's wrong free of charge from paying attention to the more cogent remarks they get from their customers through letters and online. Here's my own recent take on the situation at this link:

Utter Chaos: GW Past, Present & Future?
http://blog.spikeybits.com/2014/01/utter-chaos-gw-past-present-future.htm

 BrassScorpion wrote:
GW is looking to improve the customer experience in their stores and they are hiring someone to do so (see http://careers.games-workshop.com/2014/01/15/customer-experience-interim-2-years-nottingham-uk/).

Until you read the job description and realize it revolves around the experience of buying GW products.

The Job has nothing to do with the game or the hobby (unless you accept Kirby's assertion that our hobby is to buy GW products), all it revolves around is costumer experience between entering the store and paying at the registry...

It's a bit of a weird idea. This guy -- it almost certainly will be a guy -- will "travel the world" for two years seeking wisdom and enlightenment. Then the strategic projects team will take over and put things into action.

Why not just commission a good market research company to do some surveys, then commission a good user experience agency to do some ideas about how to rework the shops? They could get the whole thing wrapped up much quicker.

But then you might hear that "One Man Shops" are the problem and that doesn't sound anything like "Yes!", so...

 Galorian wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:
GW is looking to improve the customer experience in their stores and they are hiring someone to do so (see http://careers.games-workshop.com/2014/01/15/customer-experience-interim-2-years-nottingham-uk/).

Until you read the job description and realize it revolves around the experience of buying GW products.

The Job has nothing to do with the game or the hobby (unless you accept Kirby's assertion that our hobby is to buy GW products), all it revolves around is costumer experience between entering the store and paying at the registry...

Games Workshop wrote:
We are looking for someone to spend the next two years turning over every – and we mean every – stone to find opportunities for how we can improve the customer experience in our stores and recommend the ones that will work. We aren’t talking about incremental improvements; we want to completely re-imagine what it is like for people coming into our stores, engaging with and buying our wonderful miniatures.

Emphasis mine.

The temptation is to bash GW blindly, but your statement is objectively untrue. Equally, the "buying GW products" line is nothing to do with Kirby. In order to avoid sounding like a frothing hater, criticism needs to maintain accuracy, else it is no better than those who claim people who criticise the rules are playing the game wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
But then you might hear that "One Man Shops" are the problem and that doesn't sound anything like "Yes!", so...

Agreed, but if its a two year contract on a two year project, one has demonstrably less to lose by telling Kirby he's a gakker than of one has aspirations of a long term career in the studio or HO.

it revolves around is costumer experience between entering the store and paying at the registry...

I don't see that as a problem, they are a business and that experience in the store has a lot to do with getting people to buy something. The stores exist ultimately to make sales, stores of any kind without sufficient sales close.

One basic of any sales training is that people buy something when they are happy. People do not open their wallets if they are unhappy with their experience talking to a salesperson or with other aspects of a retail establishment. They don't buy and they don't come back. A few years ago the stores in my own area seemed a lot more exciting and sales were better. People were happy to patronize the GW stores because they loved them and loved being in them for hobby and game time with people they liked in a place they really liked. That seems to have dropped off a lot. I'd hate to see all their shops close, too many have closed already. I hope GW finds the solution they are seeking before it's too late for them and their customers. A primary rule of serving your customers is to stay in business so that you have an opportunity to do so. Closed shops serve no one.

The one man store system they use now is terrible. Part time stores with one harried employee do little to generate community excitement or create a fun environment with good support for new customers.

 azreal13 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
But then you might hear that "One Man Shops" are the problem and that doesn't sound anything like "Yes!", so...

Agreed, but if its a two year contract on a two year project, one has demonstrably less to lose by telling Kirby he's a gakker than of one has aspirations of a long term career in the studio or HO.

That's true, however the wording of the application procedure is the same as the rest of the jobs they put out, wanting people who fit in with the company culture. (feth CVs and skills, tell us why you want the job but it's got to be on our terms in effect.)

This is a role in which fitting the company culture is not what they need. They already have the customer experience that the company culture can develop -- they've spent years on it.

If they really want a fresh look they need someone who will be iconoclastic. (Though they would be best off with an objective report from an external agency.)

 BrassScorpion wrote:
GW is looking to improve the customer experience in their stores and they are hiring someone to do so (see http://careers.games-workshop.com/2014/01/15/customer-experience-interim-2-years-nottingham-uk/).

"To improve customer experience, we are closing all our HQs outside UK. So if you have any problems, come to us in Nottingham. We speak English only by the way "
BTW customer service hours in Germany were reduced to 5 hours per day (1-3 and 4-7 pm, and often not even then)

The signs about the HQ closings have been apparent for a while. For example, GW US executives have been reporting directly to Nottingham since last year. Manufacturing in the huge US HQ in Memphis was discontinued within the past two years and that part of the facility now sits empty. They just keep winding down the business in their non-UK HQs and closing them would seem to be a likely ulterior motive.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

That's true, however the wording of the application procedure is the same as the rest of the jobs they put out, wanting people who fit in with the company culture. (feth CVs and skills, tell us why you want the job but it's got to be on our terms in effect.)

This is a role in which fitting the company culture is not what they need. They already have the customer experience that the company culture can develop -- they've spent years on it.

If they really want a fresh look they need someone who will be iconoclastic. (Though they would be best off with an objective report from an external agency.)

It is likely they directed their HR department to place the add and in typical HR fashion, don't know what to put in requirement wise. Having done the job search role recently, there are a lot of adds with people asking for something and not knowing how to express it. This is typical of small companies, not something the size of GW, but again, nothing is typical about GW

Silver_skates wrote:

Also, when people compare warmahordes with Warhammer although the cost of playing a game is lower, collecting is not. No PP fan complains about paying £50-ish on ten banes but will say that GW are priced too highly when a unit of 10 Dark Elf witches cost £30. I think the scale of the game means that you shouldn't compare.

Well, now its more like $50 for 10 bane thralls compared to $60 for 10 Dark Elf Witches. PP actually dropped the cost when they moved to plastic.

 azreal13 wrote:
Emphasis mine.

The temptation is to bash GW blindly, but your statement is objectively untrue. Equally, the "buying GW products" line is nothing to do with Kirby. In order to avoid sounding like a frothing hater, criticism needs to maintain accuracy, else it is no better than those who claim people who criticise the rules are playing the game wrong.

Here's the parts of the posting I have issue wtih:

You will need to agree your plans directly with the CEO and provide regular updates on your progress. Your final report to the CEO will need to include workable proposals for how we can transform the customer experience in our stores so that the chosen initiatives can be handed over to our strategic projects team ...

At Games Workshop we are looking for people who will do their best to understand the needs of the company and to put those needs first when they are at work. Because of this we believe that what you are like, hence the attitude you show to work and the way you choose to behave is even more important than your skills or experience.

The person will report directly to the CEO, who will then thumbs up or down the idea and allows the person to try it.

Then we have the statement which is completely counter to just above every company on the face of the planet, needs of the company come first. First of all, it's obvious that a company is in business to make money, but the company should always be customer focused, not internally focused, especially in retail for a luxury.

So..you need to ok what you're doing to justify your salary with your boss, and should put the company first?

Far from being counter to every company on the planet, that's so regulation as to be boiler plate.

Why do you think its good practice to focus on the customer? Simply because it is the most efficient way of getting as much money out of that customer for the company

You're taking issue with perfectly normal stuff purely because it's an ad for a GW job.

I think they're reading into the job to mean that you have to tow the company line no matter what you find; e.g. they can't say "Hey Mr. Kirby we need to cut prices by 50%, people seem to be turned off by the cost" because it wouldn't be listened to, and therefore make the role useless.

That's what I gathered, anyways. The underlying assumption is that the correct answer to this 2-year position is "Everything's fine" instead of actually finding out what's wrong and letting Kirby and co. know how they should fix it.

Yeah, I get that, and I'm not entirely sure they're wrong, but I'm all for balanced criticism, and tearing apart a job ad for using fairly standard job ad language just because it's GW undermines all the perfectly valid and justifiable points levelled at them.

It's absolutely standard job ad language for GW, but not for other companies.

Most employers draw up a job description that includes a required set of skills and experience, plus desirable/advantageous additional skills. There is often also some stuff about following company values such as customer focus, integrity and that kind of stuff.

GW's ad says, "At Games Workshop we are looking for people who will do their best to understand the needs of the company and to put those needs first when they are at work. Because of this we believe that what you are like, hence the attitude you show to work and the way you choose to behave is even more important than your skills or experience."

All that tells us is that GW are looking for some mysterious quality they can't describe themselves.

I reiterate my point against that GW already have spent years designing what their company culture is capable of producing in customer experience.

When they ask for someone to take a look at improving their customer experience, it means either that they need someone completely outside the company culture, or else that they want another "yes" man to validate what they have already done.

I undoubtedly agree that the "skills? We don't need no freakin skills! It's all about the attitude man" is totally bat gak crazy, but a job outlining who you would be responsible to, especially when the nature of the job probably requires lots of juicy travel and accommodation expenses, isn't that unusual, and containing an essentially redundant phrase about putting the needs of the company first isn't grounds for criticism.

I also agree that the odds of this role being any sort of catalyst for change are remote, and probably 5 years late (at least.)

Right now I think the only hope is for the instigators of this stupid, stagnant "yes man" culture to disappear, and I'm still open to the possibility that that begins beneath Kirby, albeit I suspect that's unlikely, but perhaps this job suggests that somebody, somewhere in Lenton has a clue, and perhaps, just perhaps, all hope hasn't died yet.

I foresee something akin to Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy where after many years employee [codename] Deep Thought delivers an answer to Kirby;

"What is the answer to the great question of life, love, customer experience and everything GW?"

DT - "you won't like it"

Kirby - "I will, tell me now!"

DT - "okay, the answer to the great question of life, love, customer experience and everything GW is...................................over 9000!"

Kirby - "What does that even mean?!?!?!?"

DT - "Oh that's right blame the victim".

Kirby - "You've just been reading the internet haven't you?"

 notprop wrote:
I foresee something akin to Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy where after many years

I thought you were going to go with the good Hitchhiker's reference and equate this job to Ford's work on the Earth entry. I.e. this guy ends up doing a bang up job and GW just boils it down to 'Mostly Harmless'.

I am disappoint.

I'm interested to know why they are specifically targeting their own stores as opposed FLGS or online or just about any other avenue to purchase their product.

Are the margins on the stores that high? Does most of their business now come from their one man stores? I know its how they WANT to get new people into the hobby, but does the company store actually attract those new people?

Do FLGS's really account for so few new players, or continued players? Are the revenues down from them?

Why I'm asking is, why would GW spend a ton of money on reviewing something that, unless I'm wrong, really isn't the problem.

The problem, I believe (for all thats worth), isn't the fact that a customer doesn't enjoy the atmosphere of a GW store, or that a single employee isn't properly conveying the excitement and enjoyment of the hobby. Its the fact that the minis cost an arm and a leg. Its the fact that any online research only reveals a toxic cespool of angry nerds.

Offering fancier stores or new training to the shop owners isn't going to attract new customers that will stay.

So unless I'm missing something huge, this is a massive waste of time and money.

I think you've about got it.

GW want their stores (or better yet, website) to be the primary channel for their product.

It isn't.

They can't be unaware of how their actions have affected their third party accounts, so probably aren't surprised that they've seen a tail off in business from the sector.

What I'd suggest, like yourself, is that right now it hasn't perhaps dawned on the relevant decision makers that the problem is with their product, rather than their retail approach (albeit that is likely compounding the issue) so they're looking to apply the fix in the wrong place (or at least in the wrong order of priority.)

I also agree it is likely a massive waste of time, but two years of wages of a middle management level (at best) employee will be infinitely cheaper than doing it properly.

EDIT
I just had a thought, isn't it remarkable that the phobia of actually talking to your customers seems so deeply ingrained that a simple online survey doesn't seem to have either entered their thinking, or has been rejected in favour of this? Not wanting to expose yourself in a public forum (giggety) like Facebook is one thing, but sending out a simple online survey would be infinitely more manageable and would likely get them the answers they want, assuming they had the sense to ask the right questions, for zero cost in a matter of days/weeks?

Being the paranoid cynic I am, I don't think this customer experience initiative is anything to do with re-evaluating and possibly improving their customer experience.

Having some bloke "wander the earth" for two years is just a gakky way of doing the study. Probably much cheaper than getting a professional agency to do it, though.

It would be most amusing if the report listed the following major issues and recommendations:

There aren’t enough staff. Get rid of one-man stores.
Staff are too pushy selling. Tone it down.
The shops need more of a community atmosphere. Encourage veterans to nurture recruits, and run more games and competitions.
There is serious sticker shock.
There isn’t enough variety of stock in the core games and there is nothing for casual browsers. Bring in some boxed games. (Possibly involving space corridors.)
Modern people want to engage with the brand online. Build forums and worldwide campaigns for community.
Players want to be enthused and excited about forthcoming new releases. Do more advance publicity.