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.

That's my bad; was remembering the old prices.

I can't think of why they would bump the price up by $8 on Aegis Defense Lines.

No, I specifically remember because I made a tit of myself in the thread about its release because I got muddled between currencies and got a bit ranty, when, in reality, the price difference was pretty insignificant.

In British currency GW has upped its paints from 3 pounds to 4 pounds per pot here in Australia and in have been told that many GW products are going up by 30% to 40%. Go figure.

Define "many products"?

 Azreal13 wrote:
The new Tac Squad was a massive $2.75 more than the old one when released, not quite the same as $8 on a $30 kit.

Considering the additional bits you got I would say it actually decreased in price lol

 Leth wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
The new Tac Squad was a massive $2.75 more than the old one when released, not quite the same as $8 on a $30 kit.

Considering the additional bits you got I would say it actually decreased in price lol

Because those bits alone let you build extra models right? SO if a kit is supplied with the options to build 200 different variants but only enough to have one full model how is it cheaper then buying one stock model for 200£ cheaper?
Your paying for options you do not require.

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Leth wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
The new Tac Squad was a massive $2.75 more than the old one when released, not quite the same as $8 on a $30 kit.

Considering the additional bits you got I would say it actually decreased in price lol

Because those bits alone let you build extra models right? SO if a kit is supplied with the options to build 200 different variants but only enough to have one full model how is it cheaper then buying one stock model for 200£ cheaper?
Your paying for options you do not require.

Except I have marines from before this kit so the extra options, bits and arms enable me to equip other models as well.

Then again I am sure there are people who build the exact models and then throw the rest of the bits out. That must be who is constantly complaining when something changes in efficiency!!!

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Leth wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
The new Tac Squad was a massive $2.75 more than the old one when released, not quite the same as $8 on a $30 kit.

Considering the additional bits you got I would say it actually decreased in price lol

Because those bits alone let you build extra models right? SO if a kit is supplied with the options to build 200 different variants but only enough to have one full model how is it cheaper then buying one stock model for 200£ cheaper?
Your paying for options you do not require.

This. Someone once tried telling me what a good deal I was getting on a deathwing terminator box "because it can easily make 4 different squads of 5 with all the options!" The guy had a hard time understanding that I would then have to locate spare backpacks, pauldrons and legs to use even half the arm options. Theres probably around 25-30 arms in that kit alone.

Dropbear Victim wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Leth wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
The new Tac Squad was a massive $2.75 more than the old one when released, not quite the same as $8 on a $30 kit.

Considering the additional bits you got I would say it actually decreased in price lol

Because those bits alone let you build extra models right? SO if a kit is supplied with the options to build 200 different variants but only enough to have one full model how is it cheaper then buying one stock model for 200£ cheaper?
Your paying for options you do not require.

This. Someone once tried telling me what a good deal I was getting on a deathwing terminator box "because it can easily make 4 different squads of 5 with all the options!" The guy had a hard time understanding that I would then have to locate spare backpacks, pauldrons and legs to use even half the arm options. Theres probably around 25-30 arms in that kit alone.

Yeah. You get all these options in the kit but then there's a limiting factor (tends to be legs) which means you end up with loads of stuff left over. And it's great, having a huge bits box, but then to use those bits you have to buy more kits and end up with even more useless stuff left over, or you have to buy more of the limiting factor from somewhere which can be a proper pita. There's a point where getting loads of cool bits in a kit becomes paying for useless stuff really.

It's all in what you enjoy doing. If you want game pieces and don't care for the modeling, the bits are a hindrance and just junk. If modeling is integral to your hobby, bits are the best thing ever.

For instance, my latest storm raven is both a hobby piece and a game piece; the fella hanging out the door would not have been possible (easily) without a left arm from a command squad paired with a left hand cut off a devastator squad, originally intended to hold a missile launcher, converted to hold a door.



If that sort of thing doesn't appeal to you, why invest in a game where most of the models are anywhere from 10-200 pieces? There are plenty of game systems where the models are much simpler to construct, and cost less too.

On the other hand, when I buy model sets, I think of them more AS boxes of bits. The first thing I do when I open up a box is sort, group, de-sprue all the bits. I have boxes, for instance, for Mk 7 torsos, Mk 6, Mk 4, etc, and legs and helmets sorted by armor mark, plus left/right arm pairs all matched into sorters. If a piece doesn't have a distinguishing mark (like some death company), they go into the general parts sorter, and eventually (maybe years later) I run into a situation where they are perfect.

I didn't say I don't enjoy the modelling side, I do very much. And yeah their are those bits that crop up that are just perfect for something. I just think there's a fine balance between getting loads of cool bits in a set, and paying more for bits that you probably don't need that many of ever. I'm not sure where GW are on that scale, but probably closer to the latter.

Extra options are only useful if you actually buy more boxes to unlock you the ability to build one full model... consequence, you end up with a ridiculous amount of bits and you actually pay for them too.

So yeah don't come here and say that a box with 200 bits that allows you to build 5 models is cheaper than a box that allows you to build 5 models with less bits at a better price, thats just not true.

Also Talys you keep putting people inside your little boxes with the same type of comment " why invest on 40k if you dont like exactly the things I like." or " my way is how 40k should be enjoyed" Guess what people enjoy 40k for all tons of different reasons so live with it.

For the record Im a sculpter modeler first so I love bits and extra stuff because I have the capacity of sculpting all that I need from scratch, but I know Im not the norm and I also know that all those extra bits are NOT freebies and in order to use them I need to buy another kit or sculpt the rest.

Part of why GW has the best* plastic kits in the wargame industry is because they have all the extra bits.
Compare to, eg, Warmachine. Sculpts are pretty much the same quality* in terms of level of detail, but where a 10-man Warmachine squad contains 4 unique poses, your 10-man Space Marine squad comes with 999999999 possible unique poses. All the criticisms levelled at other games for being too static, not encouraging conversion, not enabling you to personalize your army... that is what the extra bits do. While YOU may not use Left arm With Hammer # 5, someone else does, and that makes your forces unique and different.

I'm not going to pretend that all the extra bits are 'free'... but I sure as hell would pay an extra $10 for my Kriel Warriors to come with a few spare variant arms.

Personally I would have preferred GW to go down the path that PP has chosen with their dual kits - one sprue for the shared parts, and a separate sprue for the the parts unique to that kit. But I guess it is just normal everyday marketing done by every company ever: the 'bundles' contain bits that you don't really want yet feel you should pay more for because you're getting them.

Trasvi wrote:
your 10-man Space Marine squad comes with 999999999 possible unique poses.

Whereas in the real world, you can only achieve a handful of poses and only a couple of those don't look like a broken marionette.

 Leth wrote:
Except I have marines from before this kit so the extra options, bits and arms enable me to equip other models as well.

Then again I am sure there are people who build the exact models and then throw the rest of the bits out. That must be who is constantly complaining when something changes in efficiency!!!

You managed to miss the point completely.

Twice.

I'm impressed.

 Vermis wrote:

Trasvi wrote:
your 10-man Space Marine squad comes with 999999999 possible unique poses.

Whereas in the real world, you can only achieve a handful of poses and only a couple of those don't look like a broken marionette.

That is utter rubbish. One of the few things GW has over other companies is the ability to make genuine multipose plastics. If PP or Mantic could do this it'd be brilliant but at the moment, GW is the king.

With some kits yes, but exactly how many variations of "Space Marine advancing with Bolter" can you really make that don't look, and I quote, "like a broken marionette?"

Most GW kits are decent, but it is true that the number of realistic poses is limited in most kits and large numbers of essentially superfluous bits are included to promote the illusion of value.

That said, I'm sure some of the alternative builds would never have justified a kit of their own, so I'm not going to be too worried by that, but people shouldn't try and kid themselves that lots of pieces = great value, GW kits are still expensive for what they offer and no amount of extra hats really changes that.

Perry miniatures also come with loads of bits and multi-pose capability and still come in at around 50p/mini. They do fall foul of the "broken marionette" thing after a while but since there's usually more armour variety it's after more mini's than a generic tactical marine box.

We're a long way from the IG boxes where there was really only 1 or 2 poses available for each arm/leg combo so it's was almost multi-part mono-pose minis.

Ah, but while Perry miniatures may come in at 50p a mini, GW models are cheaper than a Ferrari!

(#amidoingitright?)

Well, yes GW is Porsche remember (so I guess marginally cheaper than a Ferrari, depending on model and options).

The Division Of Joy wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

Trasvi wrote:
your 10-man Space Marine squad comes with 999999999 possible unique poses.

Whereas in the real world, you can only achieve a handful of poses and only a couple of those don't look like a broken marionette.

That is utter rubbish. One of the few things GW has over other companies is the ability to make genuine multipose plastics. If PP or Mantic could do this it'd be brilliant but at the moment, GW is the king.

The new Perry men-at-arms War of the Roses/100 year war sets knock the GW stuff into a cocked-hat, both in terms of sculpt detail and the amount of posing possibilities (bits from different sets are cross-compatible).

They are also about 300 times cheaper, not to exaggerate.

I remember someone using a similar argument as this to explain the high price for the Orc Warboss for fantasy, that the £15 for one plastic character miniature was acceptable because you got a sprue of bits and accessories. The problem is, ultimately you are only plonking one of those miniatures down on the tabletop - the extra bits are a nice bonus, but they shouldn't make you accept the high basic price per miniature.

If you're referring to this Orc Warboss kit, it builds two models.

Not defending the price, simply saying that it's two models not one. It's the same thing they did with the Empire Captain, High Elf Prince and High Elf Archmage kits. They have one model mounted and one on foot.
Empire Wizards were two models on foot.

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you're referring to this Orc Warboss kit, it builds two models.

Not defending the price, simply saying that it's two models not one. It's the same thing they did with the Empire Captain, High Elf Prince and High Elf Archmage kits. They have one model mounted and one on foot.
Empire Wizards were two models on foot.

Yeah. Although that was £12 when it was released, now it's £18. That's a 50% price increase...

 Pacific wrote:

The new Perry men-at-arms War of the Roses/100 year war sets knock the GW stuff into a cocked-hat, both in terms of sculpt detail and the amount of posing possibilities (bits from different sets are cross-compatible).

They are also about 300 times cheaper, not to exaggerate.

I remember someone using a similar argument as this to explain the high price for the Orc Warboss for fantasy, that the £15 for one plastic character miniature was acceptable because you got a sprue of bits and accessories. The problem is, ultimately you are only plonking one of those miniatures down on the tabletop - the extra bits are a nice bonus, but they shouldn't make you accept the high basic price per miniature.

The Perry models are really cool if you like to model things after the War of Roses or the 100 year war.

If you have zero interest in something that is real, that exists or has ever existed in this world, then they are of no value at all. As an example, I wouldn't spend my time modelling anything that has ever existed on this world, even if someone gave me the entire collection for free. The more futuristic or alien, or magical and fantastic, the more value that model has to me. Yes, aesthetic has a dollar value *to me*. I am willing to pay more money for a model I think looks cool, and less money for a model that I think looks boring, regardless of the detail level or sculpt quality of the model. It doesn't matter how technically awesome, or what price it is, if it's not awesome, why would I spend my time on it? I want to see things that are not possible and of the imagination, not things that I have seen in history books and that we live in every day life.

That's not to counter your argument that GW is not a good value, or to counter it, and say that GW IS a good value. It's just a statement of preference, and also that there are many SciFi/Fantasy hobbyists are like me, and don't care if historical miniatures or scale models cost ten times more or are given away at the local hobby shop. When companies like Mantic have proper, multi-purpose offerings that allow SciFi hobbyists like me to express my creativity for a significantly cheaper price than GW, and when they have decent sized collections, I will give them bucketloads of my money, and spend thousands of hours modelling their stuff, and maybe hundreds of hours playing their games. In the meantime, I'll continue giving GW my money, for exactly those reasons.

As a good example, the new vehicles on the Mantic thread look awesome. They don't look to be much kittable (configurable with different options), but it's a wonderful start. I often buy such models to support these companies, but 95% of them go unpainted, because not enough models exist to make a cohesive army (company-sized) of them. However, I expect that at some point that will probably change -- and I'll be happy about it. But, posable, multi-part plastic (science fiction) kits are pretty much a requirement, before I dump the kind of cash I spend on GW into another company.

As another, real-world example, it's like telling me that a 4-door sedan, station wagon, or minivan is much more practical and a better price than a sports car, convertible or SUV. Yes, of course it is. But if I don't want a minivan, it doesn't help if it's technically superior in almost every meaningful way and is one third the price of the SUV that I do want -- right? Because what I get out of the SUV is more enjoyment than the minivan, and that is of value to me, even though it is of no practical purpose.

Your personal taste is personal and not quantifiable, but thats not what we are debating here. But speaking of mantic I find it hard to get my interest spiked on their products, all seems either rushed in sculpting or casting.

This is about multipart plastic crack prices and Pacific posted a comparison with the same type/volume of sprues per box. Would I at this point get into war of the roses? nope, but thats not his point.

Back on topic I really need some GW paints and would get some for my next month project... but since I have hundreds of pots from all kinds of manufacturers I decided to go with that instead. I know its a small increase but little by little people are not giving them money because the gap between GW and competitors is becoming to big.

Also when shopping for colours I tend to get in batches of 10+ which means that the increase is quite visible.

@Navaro - but this is exactly the point. Historicals are to SciFi as Apples are to Oranges and Station Wagons are to SUVs.

Apples and oranges are both fruits, yet oranges may be much more expensive. If you want an orange, you just have to pay more. If you don't want a station wagon and want an SUV, it doesn't matter that the station wagon and SUV cost the same to produce, and the SUV is priced higher. Of you want what you want, suck it up.

In the same way, not every miniature on a sprue is comparable. You can compare an Infinity metal miniature with a PP metal miniature, but it's much harder to directly compare with a multipart GW kit. Likewise, comparing a SciFi model with a historical model is like telling the vegetarian that a steak has more protein, or a meat lover to forego the burger because a salad is healthier and cheaper.

In other words: Paying more for a multipart SciFi miniature is not overpaying for anything at all, if there are no reasonable alternatives, and what you want are (a) plastic multipart miniatures that are (b) Science Fiction themed.

If there are alternatives that would satisfy a buyer in those criteria, then yes, an argument can be made that one is a bad deal (in he way that you can compare 2 pizzas or 2 SUVs). But even then, very often, a person is better off buying what they want, than settling for something they love less, simply because it's cheaper. Because maybe you like the pizza from the more expensive place better.

Likewise with the paint: If you settle for something you like less on principle, and save $30 over a year, the only person that's really taking a hit is you. Now, if you're indifferent to the paint and figure it's all the same, then of course, you should buy the least expensive commodity.

Talys, there are multi-part plastic sci-fi minis on the market currently that are the fraction of the price of GW.

Paying for GW is overpaying according to you, because there are reasonable alternatives that are multi-part plastic and sci-fi themed. The perry minis example was to illustrate that there are companies producing higher quality multi-part plastic kits than GW for cheaper.

 Blacksails wrote:
Talys, there are multi-part plastic sci-fi minis on the market currently that are the fraction of the price of GW.

Paying for GW is overpaying according to you, because there are reasonable alternatives that are multi-part plastic and sci-fi themed. The perry minis example was to illustrate that there are companies producing higher quality multi-part plastic kits than GW for cheaper.

There are a very limited number of SciFi plastic kits available, and on a one-to-one basis, it's fair to say this kit is q better value than that kit. As a whole, however, there are no companies that produce collections that can give the type of completeness, flexibility, or versatility as GW. To me, that has (very high) value, because to me, modeling is an expression of creativity, and bots allow me to choose what I want to build.

I go back to my previous example that nobody really responded to. This is something I just finished and would not be possible using SciFi kits if other companies without having to do a lot of sculpting:



If that isn't your hobby, no problem. But it's my hobby, and there aren't any real alternatives to GW to do that kind of thing, especially when your hobby output is a couple of projects like that a month. Kitbashing is a wonderful thing, that most SciFi miniature companies don't support or emphasize. If I'm wrong, please tell me so, and let me know what companies produce the kind of kits that let me do the type of models I like to build, at any price.

If not, my point stands: GW may be expensive, but it's not MORE expensive than something that just doesn't do what I want it for. I don't speak for everyone. Just myself, though I am certain that like-minded hobbyists exist (especially since I game in a group of 6 of them).

On the issue of quality and aesthetic, I choose to disagree with you, in that I do not feel GW models are inferior to any other company. Buy that is a subjective measure, and I hope that jot everyone will agree with your opinion that there are companies that make models that are better, by whatever metric you choose.

You're moving goal posts now.

The simple fact is that other companies can produce multi-part plastic kits with as much technical skill as GW for roughly half the cost or even cheaper.

Which means that GW's products are overcosted.

Also, given your example, what do you mean by you wouldn't be able to what you did? If you mean a large, blocky flying craft with specific aesthetics of the 40k universe, then sure, but if you simply mean a large plastic kit of sci-fi origin with plenty of options, then you'd be mistaken.

You can disagree with anyone on taste. That's not the issue or matter at hand. Quality is something more objective, and many companies produce plastic at the same technical level. Beyond that, sculpt quality gets into a weirder realm, where some elements are more objective, while others are subjective matters of taste.

For the record, I am not saying that GW produces poor quality products; quite the opposite. Their kits are generally well made, easy to assemble, and many look quite good. The issue is price, in which you earlier said that paying more (what GW is charging) is not overpaying if no reasonable alternatives exist. I'm pointing out that those alternatives exist, and therefore show that GW models are overcosted. You're now moving the goal posts, or at the very least specifying your argument such that it applies only to you, in which case there's no point in discussing this further.

*Edit* I should also add that, in the spirit of ensuring we all remain friends, that once again Talys, your painting is top notch. I am quite envious of your skill with a brush and your motivation.

Behold the Rhode Island Thud Cluck. (Bonus points to the first person to remember the game that actually had a craft nicknamed the Thud Cluck.... )

That vehicle falls very much into 'do not want' category - making no sense as a war machine. (Can't fly, can't target, can't land....)

That model is inferior to a great many kits on the market or scratch built - at least the ones that do not belong to the flying brick school of aerodynamics.

It makes the Thunderhawk look streamlined. (Call it an unwilling suspension of disbelief if you must, but I personally would not want to be in that puppy when it tries to leave the ground.)

Nice paint job, though.

The Auld Grump

@Blacksails - to create what I wanted, I modelled the kit with a side door swung down (not a position supported by the kit) and then took parts from 3 separate space marine kits to put a passenger in the sponson/door location, leaning forward, with a gun in the right hand and left hand grabbing onto the door frame. It isn't a huge customization, but it is a modest amount of work that allows me to make a game piece my own and express my creativity. Many of my game pieces are thus. The idea, to me, is just as fun as anything else to realize. It might just as easily have been a genestealer crawling onto a land raider.

Without worrying about the 40k universe, please tell me which company produces SciFi kits that would let me do that kind of kitbashing, using accumulated plastic parts that aren't specifically meant for that purpose but that are numerous and flexible enough that I can express what is in my mind's eye using premade components.

Also, I have never moved goalposts. I'm very consistent in defending my aspect of the hobby and game in all of my posts, and I try to be very understanding and respectful of everyone who chooses other brands, hobbies, and games for their different reasons.

Like I said, GW is expensive, yeah. I'm sure the price is a price barrier to some as is the time required. I'm not disputing any of that, only that comparable offerings exist from other companies. Those offerings can be a much smaller catalog than GW, but it still has to be a large enough catalog to (a) model an army and (b) keep me busy for years, not weeks.