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.

 RunicFIN wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
But it is in the process of falling as evidenced by retailers turning their back and the dramatic decline of revenue.

Firstly, the decline of revenue isn´t really dramatic in the scale GW is at.

As pointed out earlier, they're making 50% less revenue adjusted for inflation than they were 10 years ago. Their revenue has been largely flat the last few years, but adjusted for inflation again, it's been declining in real terms. Coupled with *vastly* higher prices over the even a couple editions ago, the stark truth is that they're moving less product. They simply are not selling as much stuff as they were and have been on a declining real revenue path for a decade.

My own personal observations, beyond my own local club is that there's still a large number of players where I live, split between about 4 or 5 FLGS, and the sole GW. However, there's a distinct shortage of *new* players. There's a fair number in 6th who started playing again after not since 3rd or 4th, one or two for 7th that I know of, but for the most part, it's a stagnant community, and more importantly for GW, it's a stagnant community which doesn't want to buy anything more, at least not from GW. Even the used armies aren't selling as quickly as they once did. When I got into the game, stuff would sell off Craigslist in hours, maybe a handful of days, now the section is bloated, with offers lingering for weeks or months. The only thing that sells are special interest stuff; OOP models and the like.

The hobby survives, but there's a distinct aura of melancholy over the whole affair, people playing more and more out of a desire to use their investment of time and money, rather than genuine enthusiasm. There's a reasonably large charity tournament around here at the end of November, and I know everyone on the list, either first or secondhand. There's not much fresh blood out there, there's too many barriers from a business and game standpoint. Without fresh blood, the only way to go is down.

As a sidenote, I guess on the other hand there will always be people who like complex rules and big battles ( which almost directly translates to more money spent, most of the time. ) I guess there is also the other end to what a person finds fun, too simplistic isn´t that great either ( for me anyways, this is why I don´t bother with really simple board/tabletop games. I like the fiddling and the complexity. )

While other games are allround easier to get into, which is a fact, GW´s starter kits do get you started on it pretty good ( even if it doesn´t offer you everything you need to play "actual" 40K. ) I have a few mates who just started with DV and after learning the ropes it only really took them like a month ( = 4 games ) to get into full speed. Someone could argue other games starter kit gives you everything you need to play, and in a principal level its true, but let´s not kid ourselves. 2 Warjacks and a Warcaster are an equally small part of the entire WM/H experience than a few squads, vehicle and a hero are of 40K. The big difference here is that not all 40K armies are included in a starter kit ( which, as we can see, is seemingly about to change ) and 40K is way more clunkier on such a small scale than skirmish games. Then again, not all competitors offer that either.

Lastly, I wonder how much the continous bashing of GW affects new players who would like to enter the hobby through GW and would actually go ahead and do so without the angry mob with pitchforks meeting them halfway, changing their mind. Perhaps these people are infact affecting the playerbase negatively themselves, while simultaneously hoping for "new blood."

In the end, it doesn´t matter to me that a game I like is/isn´t the most popular around. I always wondered about the sheeple to whom it seems to matter. But, currently I play the two most popular ones so I´m good on that front for the duration of my entire hobby lifespan.

 MajorStoffer wrote:
Even the used armies aren't selling as quickly as they once did. When I got into the game, stuff would sell off Craigslist in hours, maybe a handful of days, now the section is bloated, with offers lingering for weeks or months. The only thing that sells are special interest stuff; OOP models and the like.

This also has to do with the playerbase most likely owning more miniatures as time goes on, which causes less overall need to buy a lot of them ( which is obviously one reason for GW´s declined sales. ). Afterall, rarely people just throw their armies into the trash, so the aftermarket inevitably bloats over time.

 RunicFIN wrote:
Lastly, I wonder how much the continous bashing of GW affects new players who would like to enter the hobby through GW and would actually go ahead and do so without the angry mob with pitchforks meeting them halfway, changing their mind. Perhaps these people are infact affecting the playerbase negatively themselves, while simultaneously hoping for "new blood."

That does not happen. Nobody yells at newbies to dissuade them from 40k, they are upfront and tell them that it will cost a few hundred dollars to get started, and then mention that alternative games require a lot less to get started, if not a lot less period.

There is no "angry mob with pitchforks" meeting interested newbies, it's more like a new player asks and a veteran is like "Well yeah, but the game isn't balanced and you'll have to spend hundreds to get started, and if you pick the wrong units you'll lose every game you play because it's not balanced" with the newbie saying "No thanks"

There's a huge difference between a situation like this:

Newbie: Hey I'm interested in starting 40k, does that go on here?
Veteran: Lol 40k? That game is terrible garbage. Don't be stupid, come and play Warmachine/X-Wing/Infinity/etc. instead. Only idiot still play 40k, and Games Workshop is the devil. Let me tell you how awful they are.. did you know the Chairman laughs about the fact they don't do market research?
Newbie: O...kay...

and this, which is what generally happens:

Newbie: Hey I'm interested in starting 40k, does that go on here?
Veteran: Well, there's a few of us who still play. The game is really expensive though. It's almost $150 just for the rules, and a starter army is going to cost you a couple of hundred dollars. The rules aren't really balanced either, so if you pick units that you think look cool but aren't good in the game, you're going to probably lose a lot just for picking the wrong units.
Newbie: Oh.. that's a lot of money.
Veteran: Yeah. But if you want a miniatures game there's also Warmachine, which you can start for $50 and play small games, and while units cost around the same you don't need as many, so you can buy a $50 unit and it's a big chunk of your army. Or there's X-Wing which... (I don't know about X-Wing so pretend there's info here). Those games are pretty well balanced.
Newbie: Hmm, I like the sound of that.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Store owner: Hey, can I help you?
Customer: Just looking around. I kinda want to do something, but don't know what.
Store owner: Well, we got Warhammer, 40k, Warmachine, Infinity, FOW and Maliefaux.
Customer: Cool. What do I need to play 40k?
Store owner: Well, the rule book is $90, the codex is $60 and a 1,000 army will cost you about $400.
Customer: Whoa...um...that's a little steep.
Store ownder: Well, you can play X-Wing, Infinity has free rules and you'll only need about $150 for a full sized 300pt force.
Customer: That sounds good. Tell me more about that.

Future GW customer lost. It's pretty simple. Repeat that a bunch of times and soon 40k is no longer the dominant game and will then have little reason to play it.

Actually thats not how you get into Warhammer 40k. It goes more like this:


Customer: Just looking around. I kinda want to do something, but don't know what.
Store owner: Well, we got Warhammer, 40k, Warmachine, Infinity, FOW and Maliefaux.
Customer: Cool. What do I need to play 40k?
Store owner: Well, the dark vengeance kit is made for starters, giving you the full rulebook and an abridged booklet needed to play simple missions the game comes with, and 2 small armies perfect for 2 people to play against each other to get to know the game. one of them are good guys, the other are bad guys, two sides of the coin basically. you get all this for $110.
Customer: okay, I'm not too sold on the two army concept yet. I mean I can only ever play half at a time, right?
Store owner: not necessarily. You can play them as allies and thus double the amount of points you have. In fact, the contents of the DV box put together make for a force that is larger than 1000 points. You just need to keep the two forces 12" away from each other while deploying, and roll a D6 each time a squad gets within that distance of another during the game and on a 1, that squad cant do anything for that turn.
Customer: Sounds ...good. What else you got?
Store ownder: Well, you can play X-Wing, Infinity has free rules and you'll need about $150 for a full sized 300pt force.
Customer: Okay, I think I'll try my hand at 40k since I can experiment with two different factions and also have everything I need in the box to introduce the game to my friend as well.

Future GW customer won.

 Sir Arun wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
Store owner: Hey, can I help you?
Customer: Just looking around. I kinda want to do something, but don't know what.
Store owner: Well, we got Warhammer, 40k, Warmachine, Infinity, FOW and Maliefaux.
Customer: Cool. What do I need to play 40k?
Store owner: Well, the rule book is $90, the codex is $60 and a 1,000 army will cost you about $400.
Customer: Whoa...um...that's a little steep.
Store ownder: Well, you can play X-Wing, Infinity has free rules and you'll only need about $150 for a full sized 300pt force.
Customer: That sounds good. Tell me more about that.

Future GW customer lost. It's pretty simple. Repeat that a bunch of times and soon 40k is no longer the dominant game and will then have little reason to play it.

Actually thats not how you get into Warhammer 40k. It goes more like this:


Customer: Just looking around. I kinda want to do something, but don't know what.
Store owner: Well, we got Warhammer, 40k, Warmachine, Infinity, FOW and Maliefaux.
Customer: Cool. What do I need to play 40k?
Store owner: Well, the dark vengeance kit is made for starters, giving you the full rulebook and an abridged booklet needed to play simple missions the game comes with, and 2 small armies perfect for 2 people to play against each other to get to know the game. one of them are good guys, the other are bad guys, two sides of the coin basically. you get all this for $110.
Customer: okay, I'm not too sold on the two army concept yet. I mean I can only ever play half at a time, right?
Store owner: not necessarily. You can play them as allies and thus double the amount of points you have. In fact, the contents of the DV box put together make for a force that is larger than 1000 points. You just need to keep the two forces 12" away from each other while deploying, and roll a D6 each time a squad gets within that distance of another during the game and on a 1, that squad cant do anything for that turn.
Customer: Sounds ...good. What else you got?
Store ownder: Well, you can play X-Wing, Infinity has free rules and you'll need about $150 for a full sized 300pt force.
Customer: Okay, I think I'll try my hand at 40k since I can experiment with two different factions and also have everything I need in the box to introduce the game to my friend as well.

Future GW customer won.

Until they realize how much it will cost to buy a real army, and how bad the rules are so without a lot of research they might spend money on garbage.

But nice attempt.

I'd better consider a comparison between 40k and WM/H.
PP also offers two army starter sets at a similar price.
A basic difference between both systems that you can get a playable WH/H army for a reasonable price, impossible in 40k.

 wuestenfux wrote:
I'd better consider a comparison between 40k and WM/H.
PP also offers two army starter sets at a similar price.
A basic difference between both systems that you can get a playable WH/H army for a reasonable price, impossible in 40k.

And the fact that WM/H rules are written clear and with a mind towards balance (not perfect, but as close as possible) while 40k has almost none and handwaves it with "forge the narrative" while at the same time allowing things that disregard the fluff and narrative entirely .

WayneTheGame wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
I'd better consider a comparison between 40k and WM/H.
PP also offers two army starter sets at a similar price.
A basic difference between both systems that you can get a playable WH/H army for a reasonable price, impossible in 40k.

And the fact that WM/H rules are written clear and with a mind towards balance (not perfect, but as close as possible) while 40k has almost none and handwaves it with "forge the narrative" while at the same time allowing things that disregard the fluff and narrative entirely .

Moreover, Steamroller provides a reasonable tournament format and each area has a socalled press ganger able to give feedback to the PP headquarter.

And there is more then 1 way to play 1 faction.

It is not that long ago that I was a new player and when I was starting with a group of people, we were interested in one thing. How much a normal army costs.

I've got to say I'm not at all happy with the following things and I'm voting with my wallet, anything I want at the moment is second hand and I acquire other things whichever way I want. Which is strange for me because I used to enjoy throwing my money at a company that was doing and creating what I loved.

- Fragmentation of the HH into 10000 stories and releasing books in premium super premium and 1000 other things before just giving me the opportunity to buy an ordinary damn book, the only paperbacks I was buying I might add and happy to still do it.

- Releasing a crappy codex then a "special" thing to make it playable (orks), just mucking with the rules in a pathetic money grab and its so obvious what it is.

- I loved the DA and Chaos book in hardcover I did not mind the price increase for something beautiful. Starting to release crappy codexes with crappy photos of badly painted models is not worth a price increase, I'd expect lower prices for that crap.

- Cracking down on rumours and such like might seem like a fantastic idea and dragging releases out over a month but I'm not remotely excited anymore about the releases, just don't care anymore.

Amazing how very quickly I fell out of love with the hobby thanks to GW, and yet it could be turned around so easily but until it does I'm not throwing money at it. Still love the lore and fluff so very much. Hate the company.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Store owner: Hey, can I help you?
Customer: Just looking around. I kinda want to do something, but don't know what.
Store owner: Well, we got Warhammer, 40k, Warmachine, Infinity, FOW and Maliefaux.
Customer: Cool. What do I need to play 40k?
Store owner: Well, the Dark Vengeance starter box is 93$ and includes the rulebook and starter forces for two players.
Customer: Whoa... that´s a quite affordable way to get into it.

Equally possible version of your prediction, I´d go asfar as to say that atleast in the GW stores they recommend the starter boxes for new players.

WayneTheGame wrote:

Until they realize how much it will cost to buy a real army, and how bad the rules are so without a lot of research they might spend money on garbage.

But nice attempt.

And maybe they don´t find the army costing too much, or maybe they have fun with the game even if the rules aren´t perfect. Your view of bad and garbage is factually a subjective term.

But nice attempt.

 RunicFIN wrote:
As a sidenote, I guess on the other hand there will always be people who like complex rules and big battles ( which almost directly translates to more money spent, most of the time. ) I guess there is also the other end to what a person finds fun, too simplistic isn´t that great either ( for me anyways, this is why I don´t bother with really simple board/tabletop games. I like the fiddling and the complexity. )

Part of the reason I got into 40k was because it was big enough to have a few vehicles in it. At the time, 5th at least made an attempt to streamline the rules so it function at that level, but now it works as a skirmish game with too many models. Yes, it'll always tend to be more expensive than pure skirmish games, but the current prices are nearing twice what they should be.

While other games are allround easier to get into, which is a fact, GW´s starter kits do get you started on it pretty good ( even if it doesn´t offer you everything you need to play "actual" 40K. ) I have a few mates who just started with DV and after learning the ropes it only really took them like a month ( = 4 games ) to get into full speed. Someone could argue other games starter kit gives you everything you need to play, and in a principal level its true, but let´s not kid ourselves. 2 Warjacks and a Warcaster are an equally small part of the entire WM/H experience than a few squads, vehicle and a hero are of 40K. The big difference here is that not all 40K armies are included in a starter kit ( which, as we can see, is seemingly about to change. ) Then again, not all competitors offer that either.

You illustrated the exact problem with DV. It doesn't give the full game. You still need to buy a codex (or two), plus additional models to even make 1000pts, let alone discussing the usefulness of the models you do get and the general disparity in points between the two forces. Its certainly a decent way to learn the basics of 40k, but other games do this better for cheaper.

Lastly, I wonder how much the continous bashing of GW affects new players who would like to enter the hobby and would do so without the angry mob with pitchforks meeting them halfway. Perhaps these people are infact affecting the playerbase negatively themselves, while simultaneously hoping for "new blood."

Well, first of all, its not bashing.

Second of all, if the criticism of the game keeps players away, maybe its for the better. If there's enough criticism of a product, maybe its for a reason?

But that argument attempts to blames the players, rather than the company making the game. Which is of course absurd.

In the end, it doesn´t matter to me that a game I like is/isn´t the most popular around. I always wondered about the sheeple to whom it seems to matter. But, currently I play the two most popular ones so I´m good on that front for the duration of my entire hobby lifespan.

Ah, sheeple, a surefire way to convince someone your point is worth listening to.

Maybe you could dial down comments like that? You don't need to call something bashing, or sheeple to make a point.

According to their sales, nope!

 Blacksails wrote:
I'd hardly call Maelstrom 'tactical'.

What it is, is random.

You aren't reacting to the player across from you, you're reacting to a random card drawn, of potentially wildly differing difficulties of achieving them, if at all, which is followed by a random dice roll to determine the number of VP on some of them.

If you're playing Maelstrom exactly by the book, you might as well just roll a D6 at the beginning of the game to determine who wins.

What I think Maelstrom does, and does quite well, albeit with some fairly significant flaws, is make people play the game. I've participated in, and witnessed a couple others, where someone has brought a point and click, easy mode list, Tau Gunline, Serpent Spam etc then had a torrid time because they actually have to think about what they were doing, rather than go through the motions and letting their unbalanced units win the game for them.

This is a good thing.

Maelstrom also serves to offer greater utility to some units which wouldn't necessarily get a look in were one to be building a list for conventional missions.

This is also a good thing.

What Maelstrom does which isn't a good thing is add in yet another layer of random into a game which already uses too much random and divorces the player's actions too much from the eventual outcome. In fact, is there anything in the game in it's current state that is not subject to at least one random determinant other than moving units over open ground (or a few that can ignore terrain?)

Jaq Draco lives wrote:


- Releasing a crappy codex then a "special" thing to make it playable (orks), just mucking with the rules in a pathetic money grab and its so obvious what it is.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 ChazSexington wrote:
According to their sales, nope!

You mean the sales that are steadily declining DESPITE releasing a new edition of their flagship game and, before that, a new codex for their most popular army? What, pray tell, do those sales show then? Growth?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:


- Releasing a crappy codex then a "special" thing to make it playable (orks), just mucking with the rules in a pathetic money grab and its so obvious what it is.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Is that so? Then what would you call removing options from a $50 codex and putting them in a $50 supplement?

It's far from dead. For a small rather fringe hobby, GW like it or not have made a pretty good business out of it. They are milking their success and I think are in danger of making it into a hobby for the rich but thats the world we live in today and 40k reflects that. I hate that kids growing up in households with limited disposable income will never get the chance to play but the same kids are limited in so many choices that engaging in tabletop wargaming probably shouldn't be top of the agenda. It's not dead or dying it's just becoming more exclusive.

WayneTheGame wrote:

Is that so? Then what would you call removing options from a $50 codex and putting them in a $50 supplement?

Releasing a great codex and adding even more awesome possibilities. What options have been removed, name them please.

I can tell you my experience. I came from another game that was discontinued. I needed to find something new. I chose Warhammer 40k for ONE reason. The reason i pick Warhammer 40k is because it is BY FAR the easiest game for me to find other players to play against. If I picked other games I would be stuck trying to get 1 or 2 friends to buy in with me and I would be stuck with just a few opponents. Warhammer 40k is pretty easy for me to get a game at any time I want one. So perhaps 40k is dying, but it still has the largest and most easily accessed player base. So if someone is considering starting a game and does not want to spend a bunch of cycles simply looking for someone to play with, it the THE choice to make.

What good is a game that is cheaper to get into, has better rules, is better balanced, etc... if you can never find anyone to play against?

That is how it breaks down for me and I want to think other people come to the same conclusions, so the rumors of GW death are overstated at best. (At least on this particular internet forum.)

And ancedotally, I have recently seen many more 40k players in my area for what that is worth.

 Azreal13 wrote:

What I think Maelstrom does, and does quite well, albeit with some fairly significant flaws, is make people play the game. I've participated in, and witnessed a couple others, where someone has brought a point and click, easy mode list, Tau Gunline, Serpent Spam etc then had a torrid time because they actually have to think about what they were doing, rather than go through the motions and letting their unbalanced units win the game for them.

This is a good thing.

Maelstrom also serves to offer greater utility to some units which wouldn't necessarily get a look in were one to be building a list for conventional missions.

This is also a good thing.

What Maelstrom does which isn't a good thing is add in yet another layer of random into a game which already uses too much random and divorces the player's actions too much from the eventual outcome. In fact, is there anything in the game in it's current state that is not subject to at least one random determinant other than moving units over open ground (or a few that can ignore terrain?)

I've gone on record as stating that Maelstrom is a good concept, but like I constantly repeat, its flawed in its execution. As you said, the assymetric/fluid nature of it is more engaging in a fashion, but (personally) marred beyond hope with random nonsense that creates a divide between player input and game output, beyond what already exists.

Assymetric missions are an excellent idea, but a player should at least be presented with a choice, or know sufficiently in advance to create a plan to deal with the situation. In that way, you're playing with the game and against your opponent, rather than just against the game.

Honestly though, who though random VP was a good idea?

 koooaei wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

Is that so? Then what would you call removing options from a $50 codex and putting them in a $50 supplement?

Releasing a great codex and adding even more awesome possibilities. What options have been removed, name them please.

I dunno man, can't speak for anyone else, but that codex was so bad it made me bail on the entire game. Didn't really add much (mek guns, painboss from IA8, giant walker, derp table) and was ugly as sin with the replacement of art with model photographs. The whole think just reeked of a lazy effort by someone who didn't care for the faction in question one bit

You might not agree that its terrible, but its certainly not a "great codex" by any stretch of the imagination

 Blacksails wrote:

Spoiler:

 Azreal13 wrote:

What I think Maelstrom does, and does quite well, albeit with some fairly significant flaws, is make people play the game. I've participated in, and witnessed a couple others, where someone has brought a point and click, easy mode list, Tau Gunline, Serpent Spam etc then had a torrid time because they actually have to think about what they were doing, rather than go through the motions and letting their unbalanced units win the game for them.

This is a good thing.

Maelstrom also serves to offer greater utility to some units which wouldn't necessarily get a look in were one to be building a list for conventional missions.

This is also a good thing.

What Maelstrom does which isn't a good thing is add in yet another layer of random into a game which already uses too much random and divorces the player's actions too much from the eventual outcome. In fact, is there anything in the game in it's current state that is not subject to at least one random determinant other than moving units over open ground (or a few that can ignore terrain?)

I've gone on record as stating that Maelstrom is a good concept, but like I constantly repeat, its flawed in its execution. As you said, the assymetric/fluid nature of it is more engaging in a fashion, but (personally) marred beyond hope with random nonsense that creates a divide between player input and game output, beyond what already exists.

Assymetric missions are an excellent idea, but a player should at least be presented with a choice, or know sufficiently in advance to create a plan to deal with the situation. In that way, you're playing with the game and against your opponent, rather than just against the game.

Honestly though, who though random VP was a good idea?

The same people who apparently thought SM Chaplains were OP?

 Dakkamite wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

Is that so? Then what would you call removing options from a $50 codex and putting them in a $50 supplement?

Releasing a great codex and adding even more awesome possibilities. What options have been removed, name them please.

I dunno man, can't speak for anyone else, but that codex was so bad it made me bail on the entire game. Didn't really add much (mek guns, painboss from IA8, giant walker, derp table) and was ugly as sin with the replacement of art with model photographs. The whole think just reeked of a lazy effort by someone who didn't care for the faction in question one bit

You might not agree that its terrible, but its certainly not a "great codex" by any stretch of the imagination

I constantly pull wins with footslogging boyz + grots + stormboyz. That's telling something. The lack of arts is not a great thing, yep. Mob rule is mostly fine except for random wound allocation. But 'ere we go and the return of old WAAAAGH! have been a straight buff.

 Azreal13 wrote:


The same people who apparently thought SM Chaplains were OP?

I almost forgot about that.

A good codex =/= the number of buffs it got man.

Its like, the removal of fluff for the SAG. Thats just sad =(

 Dakkamite wrote:
A good codex =/= the number of buffs it got man.

Its like, the removal of fluff for the SAG. Thats just sad =(

I'm happy with the variety we can field effectively right now.
I'm not really happy with the new fluff. It's a bit boring compared to 4-th book fluff. Lacks the amount of ork hilarity.

 Dakkamite wrote:
A good codex =/= the number of buffs it got man.

Its like, the removal of fluff for the SAG. Thats just sad =(

I can't emphasize this enough.

The power level of a codex does not determine how good it is.

The layout, fluff, artwork, and internal balance are as equally important as how it stands in a best case scenario against other codices.

 Blacksails wrote:


I've gone on record as stating that Maelstrom is a good concept, but like I constantly repeat, its flawed in its execution. As you said, the assymetric/fluid nature of it is more engaging in a fashion, but (personally) marred beyond hope with random nonsense that creates a divide between player input and game output, beyond what already exists.

Assymetric missions are an excellent idea, but a player should at least be presented with a choice, or know sufficiently in advance to create a plan to deal with the situation. In that way, you're playing with the game and against your opponent, rather than just against the game.

Honestly though, who though random VP was a good idea?

Random VP isnt good. Which is why in most competitive formats we comp it to a flat 2

Which is what it should have been along. Any fixed number. It could have been 69 for all I care, but at least I as the player can make an informed choice about the value of completing a particular objective.