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.

On the agenda for the next annual meeting is a request to the board for the option to buy back 4 million shares or so of stock. I'm not saying it'll be Kirby's stock. Or that they'll even exercise this right. But they are asking their general share holders to vote for them to be able to do it if they want.

So it's possible when Kirby decides to sell, the board will buy his shares directly rather than have 7% of the shares go onto the exchange and tank the share price.

If you want to get into tinfoil hat conspiracy land, it's also possible that the new CEO position will be filled by someone with the right attitude to assure Kirby gets out with as much in his pockets as possible. Someone they can hire for being a good fit with the buyback plan who will vote Kirby's way on the matter. But that's crazy conspiracy talk.

---

 frozenwastes wrote:
On the agenda for the next annual meeting is a request to the board for the option to buy back 4 million shares or so of stock.

Really? That is very curious. Usually stock buyback is limited to companies who have loads of cash and don't know what to do with it (like Apple), so they buy back stock to drive stock price up. Doesn't feel like GW is in a position for such excess.

Backfire wrote:
Yeah, but that was only after the game was already in terminal decline. In fact even today LOTR is much cheaper to play than WHFB.

That's what happens when you take a system where it is written in a way that encourages units of 50+, then all units are released in expensive boxes of 10, then the points cost are dropped so people need to buy 4-5 of said units. Then compare it to a skirmish game.

Slightly OT, but in the spirit of what has been mentioned. Corvis Bell have announced a, what appears to be, a intro box set for Infinity.

http://www.infinitythegame.com/infinity/en/2014/portada/pre-order-operationicestorm/

Hows that for an intro game?

I'm all over that Infinity starter pack - now just need to convince my mates to play...

 slowthar wrote:
[
Have you not noticed that the price of the core rules jumped $10 (which makes it a $35 increase in about 2 years time from 5th), codices are being split into multiple ones and sold for the same price, and DLC that could've been part of books that have just been released is instead being posted at nearly the same time to fleece buyers for even more money?

Rulebook price jumped, but at least the new 3-book format is much more convenient than the old, huge, tome. Codices are not really being split: you can still play Iyanden or Iron Hands with basic Eldar or Space Marine codex, just like in the past. Supplements are just (quite overpriced) additions to the main codex.

 insaniak wrote:

 Inquisitor Bob wrote:
"We have no intention to acquire other companies, nor dispose of any of those we own."
** um... The decision to cease production of, and yet threaten litigation to any who attempt to resume the use of specialist games such as Space hulk, blood bowl, and very soon LotR/Hobbit can be directly defined as "disposing"***

That quote says that they're not intending to dispose of any subsidiary companies, not games.

I would hope not, because the only 2 subsidiaries they have (Black Library and Forge World) are the only parts of the company actually doing well. Them not wishing to acquire other companies is unfortunate though, there's plenty of skill they could inherit, admittedly a lot of it from ex-GW staff in the first place.

 Wayshuba wrote:

Considering they are mainly selling to a declining veteran customer base, they have in fact been consistently increasing prices on newer releases.

Scions were a 70% price increase over the previous Kaskrin boxed set.

True, OTOH the new kit has weapons and other options which you would have to buy as separate models previously. Also, not everything increased: new plastic Ogryns are much cheaper than the old ones.

Lots of people, myself included, welcome a smaller, more convenient rulebook without the unnecessary baggage of the fluff and artwork.

To get it though we are expected to pay a lot more than before, and essentially throw away two books that are useless to us. So we haven't bought it.

There is part of GW's problem.

Yup the Ogryns dropped by 30% going from metal -> plastic, even though they are now in packs of 3. As I don't have the new book I don't know what the squad sizes were, but I used to run 5 of them, so I'd have to have bought a spare one.

I wonder how much the transition saved GW? ignoring design costs (since the old metals will have already been paid off), a plastic sprue much cost under 10% of a metal mini to produce?


Edit: I'd love a mini rulebook, but until I can get it on it's own for a reasonable price, I'm not going to bother.

 Wolfstan wrote:
Slightly OT, but in the spirit of what has been mentioned. Corvis Bell have announced a, what appears to be, a intro box set for Infinity.

Hows that for an intro game?

And that is a great example of why it price per model is not the be all- end all for wargames. £66 with discount for 15 models (one being a pre order special) isnt cheap, however, those 14 models make up two, 200 point forces (with a few options) in a game where the tournament standard is 300 points. For an extra £30 per force you can have two , tournament ready forces for a total outlay of around £120. All rules are free, no extra expense.

If I buy Dark Vengeance, it costs me an extra £60 just for the rules to play the included models in a game of 40K, and that is before the several hundred pounds needed to expand them to sizable forces.

That is the cost differential right there, not the per model price comparisons.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Lots of people, myself included, welcome a smaller, more convenient rulebook without the unnecessary baggage of the fluff and artwork.

To get it though we are expected to pay a lot more than before, and essentially throw away two books that are useless to us. So we haven't bought it.

There is part of GW's problem.

There was "Gamers edition" rulebook in 6th edition, which was (slightly) cheaper than the core rulebook. I expect that eventually, GW will release one for 7th edition as well. Just not yet - if they release it now, it will eat sales of big rulebook. and also potentially starter sets, since the small rulebook is big motivation for many people to buy those. Gotta squeeze everything out.

Herzlos wrote:
Yup the Ogryns dropped by 30% going from metal -> plastic, even though they are now in packs of 3. As I don't have the new book I don't know what the squad sizes were, but I used to run 5 of them, so I'd have to have bought a spare one.

I wonder how much the transition saved GW? ignoring design costs (since the old metals will have already been paid off), a plastic sprue much cost under 10% of a metal mini to produce?


Edit: I'd love a mini rulebook, but until I can get it on it's own for a reasonable price, I'm not going to bother.

The set up cost for plastic is a lot more than for metal. It is the run on costs that are reduced. Consequently injection plastic works for large numbers of production.

Part of GW's problem now is that with sales volume dropping, their fixed cost base for their factory is in danger of becoming a liability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Backfire wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Lots of people, myself included, welcome a smaller, more convenient rulebook without the unnecessary baggage of the fluff and artwork.

To get it though we are expected to pay a lot more than before, and essentially throw away two books that are useless to us. So we haven't bought it.

There is part of GW's problem.

There was "Gamers edition" rulebook in 6th edition, which was (slightly) cheaper than the core rulebook. I expect that eventually, GW will release one for 7th edition as well. Just not yet - if they release it now, it will eat sales of big rulebook. and also potentially starter sets, since the small rulebook is big motivation for many people to buy those. Gotta squeeze everything out.

The "Gamer's Edition" was £30, compared to £30 for the complete 5th edition or £45 for the complete 6th edition.

Personally I thought that was a bit of a gouge. However by the time it was released I already had a softback out of Dark Vengeance so I did not need it. I don't know if I would have paid £30 for it if it had been available from day 1 of 6th edition. I feel that £20 would be a fairer price.

I believe it is a serious mistake to make the rules so expensive. Inevitably it reduces the number of people who will pick up the game, and this must have a knock-on effect to the Codex and model kit sales.

If GW is so focused on the churn rate and always needing to get new customers, a mini rulebook is the obvious way to go. Or in fact a free rule booklet, that has a very basic set of rules. Kinda like the quick play with X Wing.

It would mean little Johnny has models and he can game with them. If little Johnny or Janie stick with it it they can upgrade to a nice big fluff filled rulebook.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

The set up cost for plastic is a lot more than for metal. It is the run on costs that are reduced. Consequently injection plastic works for large numbers of production.

Part of GW's problem now is that with sales volume dropping, their fixed cost base for their factory is in danger of becoming a liability.

Definitely, but the cost of the injection mould is rapidly reducing; what used to cost £100k to do would now be under £10k, it's still a lot of money if they aren't expecting the volume though.

The "Gamer's Edition" was £30, compared to £30 for the complete 5th edition or £45 for the complete 6th edition.

Personally I thought that was a bit of a gouge. However by the time it was released I already had a softback out of Dark Vengeance so I did not need it. I don't know if I would have paid £30 for it if it had been available from day 1 of 6th edition. I feel that £20 would be a fairer price.

I believe it is a serious mistake to make the rules so expensive. Inevitably it reduces the number of people who will pick up the game, and this must have a knock-on effect to the Codex and model kit sales.

I was in the same boat; by the time the Gamers Edition came out I already had the DV book which I found preferable being a softcover. I don't think I'd have paid £30 for the hardback either, since the softback was floating about on eBay for half of that, but if it was available somewhere close to launch, I'd have happily paid £15-20 for it.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Backfire wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Lots of people, myself included, welcome a smaller, more convenient rulebook without the unnecessary baggage of the fluff and artwork.

To get it though we are expected to pay a lot more than before, and essentially throw away two books that are useless to us. So we haven't bought it.

There is part of GW's problem.

There was "Gamers edition" rulebook in 6th edition, which was (slightly) cheaper than the core rulebook. I expect that eventually, GW will release one for 7th edition as well. Just not yet - if they release it now, it will eat sales of big rulebook. and also potentially starter sets, since the small rulebook is big motivation for many people to buy those. Gotta squeeze everything out.

The "Gamer's Edition" was £30, compared to £30 for the complete 5th edition or £45 for the complete 6th edition.

Personally I thought that was a bit of a gouge. However by the time it was released I already had a softback out of Dark Vengeance so I did not need it. I don't know if I would have paid £30 for it if it had been available from day 1 of 6th edition. I feel that £20 would be a fairer price.

I believe it is a serious mistake to make the rules so expensive. Inevitably it reduces the number of people who will pick up the game, and this must have a knock-on effect to the Codex and model kit sales.

This is all too true.

If you've ever bought a 40K rulebook, you already know all the main fluff, which is never going to change to any meaningful extent (just to take the most recent example, in the recent threads on the "Enter the Citadel" event I think it was Phil Kelly who was quoted as saying that the story will never progress). Meanwhile, as for a third book containing photos of miniatures...they put pictures like that in all their books at the drop of a hat. On the one hand, being able to take the rules separately looks convenient, but that means two thirds of my purchase is going to be spending a lot of time on a shelf.

Fortunately, the paperback rulebooks should be easier to find now. But if I bought the rules as sold by GW I'd end up with two huge books which are neither use nor ornament to me. The thought that this edition might have the same lifespan of 6th makes me even more wary of buying.

The entire fluff part of any publication is entirely worthless because of the internet and online wikis containing all information you will ever need.

To touch on the cost of plastic moulds. It certainly is a lot cheaper now to make a mould than it used to be, however there is the whole infrastructure of designers, CAD technicians, a factory, moulding machinery and so on, that have to be maintained whether you press any kits or not.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The entire fluff part of any publication is entirely worthless because of the internet and online wikis containing all information you will ever need.

And I didn't even think of this. But again, it's very true, especially for this setting .

 Sigvatr wrote:
The entire fluff part of any publication is entirely worthless because of the internet and online wikis containing all information you will ever need.

And the 1/3 of a book taken up with pictures of models is worthless because there are more, better, free model pictures in the dakka gallery.

Though, I can't fault GW from promoting visuality of its games, which has always been their strong point. You have to remember the "wow!" factor new players have when they handle big, pretty book. A sterile rulebook and bunch of pictures in the internet just ain't the same.

Bigger issue than the core rulebook is IMO cost of the codices. A new player can still get a good deal with rulebook & minis from starter set, or campaign sets like Storm claw, if more come (and why would there not?). However, the cost of the codices is just too intimidating nowadays, and it's hurting both veterans and new players alike. And the supplements, whilst not necessary, are even more insanely priced, given their meagre functional content.

Maybe GW could do "Start a new army!" promotional days, where you buy a Battleforce or some other bundle, and get a Codex for free. Or put functional mini-codices in Battle forces (or Strike forces or whatever they are called now). Just something to make the starting look less indimidating. Once you hook them up, it's easier to get them pay €40 for five miniatures to complete their Elite slot...

In the good old days GW did boxed sets like this. Then there was the Battleforce sets in 00's. At one time they did make the effort, obviously the bean counters stopped this.

Backfire wrote:
Though, I can't fault GW from promoting visuality of its games, which has always been their strong point. You have to remember the "wow!" factor new players have when they handle big, pretty book. A sterile rulebook and bunch of pictures in the internet just ain't the same.

Bigger issue than the core rulebook is IMO cost of the codices. A new player can still get a good deal with rulebook & minis from starter set, or campaign sets like Storm claw, if more come (and why would there not?). However, the cost of the codices is just too intimidating nowadays, and it's hurting both veterans and new players alike. And the supplements, whilst not necessary, are even more insanely priced, given their meagre functional content.

Maybe GW could do "Start a new army!" promotional days, where you buy a Battleforce or some other bundle, and get a Codex for free. Or put functional mini-codices in Battle forces (or Strike forces or whatever they are called now). Just something to make the starting look less indimidating. Once you hook them up, it's easier to get them pay €40 for five miniatures to complete their Elite slot...

That is true. That is why there should be two versions -- the big full colour version (expensive) and the rules only version (cheap) for veterans who just need updated rules.

Both the core rules and codexes, and any supplementary books (Apocalypse) should be presented like this.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Complexity =\= complicated.

I'll take as much complexity in a game as can be shoe-horned into it.

40K is complicated.

Spoiler:

Anyway. I think gw needs to learn from game designers.....

Also Video Games are basically board games on a computer.

Think about it.

I think you guys (and the guy in the vid) are saying the same thing, just with different definitions of complexity.

I've heard and agreed with the 'complexity vs. complication' argument myself, with regards to Epic: Armageddon vs. 40K, via Ben Skinner of Troublemaker Games. E:A is a relatively simple game, with shorter statlines, few if any tables to look up (IIRC there's one for barrages), a couple of pages of universal special rules that satisfy most armies or list choices; but the simple rules provide a lot of complexity (what Asherian is quite rightly calling depth) in how your formations interact, manoeuvre, and set up for assaults. (Jervis' intro in the book goes into it a bit more; I wonder if it can still be read in the NetEA download) 40K is a complicated (or if you prefer, complex) game, chock full of tables, granular options, and special rules for individual unit types and characters; but once you get past the strategic listbuilding part, there's not much intuitive tactical depth or complexity to it. Sure you can apply some, but the game largely plays itself, running your painstakingly picked choices along move-shoot-assault rails. With plenty of stops every minute or so to check and resolve a special rule.

And then there's the train of thought (heard from the same guy) that it's purposely designed to be like that, to appeal to the young-to-mid teen target demographic. All them tables must seem terribly grown up, and the special rules really badass, and memorising both in order to win kinda fulfilling - at that info-absorbing life stage, and like studying Top Trumps stats, I guess... Not to mention less taxing than abstract tactical reasoning on the actual tabletop, RE: the pace of play bit in the vid.
On the flipside, Jervis has mentioned that E:A was intended for the more experienced (i.e. older) gamer, and all that implies about both games. So if you've been playing 40K for a couple of editions and the 7th ed psychic phase is making you tear your hair out, I'd say that, yeah, it's probably gotten worse (Unbound? Whut?), and the 'change is bad' thing might be in play, but also you've possibly just grown beyond the game.

7th is a really solid edition of the game, but still, like 5th (the last solid edition), it only really works between around 1500 and 2500 points, at a stretch. And you have to either bring in official rulings for balance about how many detachments/formations/etc. are allowed, or you have to use soft scores or similar.

It *needs* a half-decent skirmish game too, for those smaller games.

I do agree with other posters that GW's biggest problem right now is likely to be people not buying codices. The price jump is too huge, without a significant jump in value. Hardcover is nice but not worth twice as much as softcover. And when the default is "you need to buy two codices and a couple of dataslates and some new cards and tokens to get the most out of your army... and the same for any allied armies..." Whut? Most of us buy GW stuff because we want to model, paint, and/or play games with the minis. Anyone who only does painting or modelling doesn't need codices anyway (but will probably pick them up, if reasonably priced, for the fluff and the pics of painted minis). Anyone who wants to play, is *actively put off* at the thought of having to spend over £100 on rulebooks to stay vaguely competitive.

Well, I think that GW doesn't really understand the cost issue (rulebook + codex make 99 €) since they do no market research which would include interviewing customers (players). They obviously think that all is well here. The revenue eventually says the opposite but one may deduce that the lower revenue has other reasons such as the restructuring process.
What is positive is that they have tighened the codex re-release which is another issues they touched. But then they provide codex supplements which increase the costs even more if you want to be up-to-date.
The player basis is shrinking and players buy less now. Two serious issues they are eventually not really aware of.

Basically Games Workshop are trying to do too much in one rule set. It is falling apart under the strain, and the expense and complexity are turning players away.

The game should be divided into several sections that players can mix and match to get the level of game they want.

1. A detailed low figure count skirmish like 1st/2nd edition/ Necromunda. This will cater for lots of detail and a "Herohammer" style of play.

2. A "mass skirmish" game like 3rd/4th/5th edition 40K. This needs to be simpler than 6th/7th edition which have got too many special rules and complications (Psychic Phase, etc)

3. Optional supplements like Apocalypse, PlanetStrike and Cities of Death that introduce advanced rules for special types of battles or super large battles. The Psychic Phase could be put in here, also things like Command and Control tactics, and optional variant turn sequences, that add interest but aren't to everyone's taste.

4. There should also be a starter ruleset that introduces new players to core concepts that carry forward into both the skirmish and the mass skirmish rules.

Secondly, GW need to accept that you cannot sustain a £100 Million business indefinitely by making modest changes to one game (40K.) It is ridiculous to expect players to pay £100s every couple of years to buy revised rules when they never really get better, just different. Therefore;

1. "Fix" 40K. Get the rules and armies reasonably balanced by a combination of play testing, computer testing and beta testing by end users. We don't expect perfection, but we do expect not to see the kind of howling schoolboy errors that get put into every book at the moment.

2. Once "fixed", stop making new editions. Instead, make supplements, campaign packs, and new factions. These will allow the introduction of new models without messing up the core game.

3. I would also bring back Epic or something similar as a genuine mass battle game, and as I have said in an earlier post, I think GW need to be making some other games.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
I'm all over that Infinity starter pack - now just need to convince my mates to play...

I reckon I could sell it to non-TT gaming mates as "Oh hey, remember Mass Effect? This is that - a squad based cover shooter but with little dudes! PEW PEW"

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
7th is a really solid edition of the game, but still, like 5th (the last solid edition), it only really works between around 1500 and 2500 points, at a stretch. And you have to either bring in official rulings for balance about how many detachments/formations/etc. are allowed, or you have to use soft scores or similar.

It *needs* a half-decent skirmish game too, for those smaller games.

I do agree with other posters that GW's biggest problem right now is likely to be people not buying codices. The price jump is too huge, without a significant jump in value. Hardcover is nice but not worth twice as much as softcover. And when the default is "you need to buy two codices and a couple of dataslates and some new cards and tokens to get the most out of your army... and the same for any allied armies..." Whut? Most of us buy GW stuff because we want to model, paint, and/or play games with the minis. Anyone who only does painting or modelling doesn't need codices anyway (but will probably pick them up, if reasonably priced, for the fluff and the pics of painted minis). Anyone who wants to play, is *actively put off* at the thought of having to spend over £100 on rulebooks to stay vaguely competitive.

The codex problem becomes worse now because at that price point you can get the core rules for many game systems, or even the X-Wing starter set. It makes it a very bad comparison.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

1. A detailed low figure count skirmish like 1st/2nd edition/ Necromunda. This will cater for lots of detail and a "Herohammer" style of play.

They could simply release a "Kill Team" book with high detail for things like levelling up, and rules to use the existing 40K factions, thus having 100% compatibility with current models. If they stuck to small boards, emphasis on terrain and structures, and strict points costs and list-building rules games could easily be prevented from ballooning beyond skirmish level (i.e. no Riptides showing up). I think, though I'm not sure, that this is what the fan-made "In the Emperor's Name" is all about.

A smaller game would be appealing to old-timers and also act as a good "gateway game" while being able to support regular supplements if necessary.