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.
So! I've been browsing one of the online retailers here and I saw the new Khorne Bloodreavers multi-part kit. At 165zł. For those not accustomed with polish currency that equals about 43$. For twenty models. That means it's 22$ for 10. Now that's a price for 10 models I haven't seen since Gor Herd years ago. For models that are of vastly superior quality and detail when it comes to sculpt (even though I personally love beastmen far more than any other army!). Same goes for the Blood Warriors - 10 for what I can assume to be 47 dollars as there aren't any retailer prices yet, but they're usually 10-15zł lower than GW store prices. Granted, that's still more than what they charged for a box of Chaos Warriors as far as I remember (although these are kind of "Chosen" grade models rather than Warriors), this is still a huge step forward (or back?) towards the old, lower prices.
Yes, the Stormcast prices are similar to those of gold on the market, but I assume they're just like Grey Knights or Deathwing with only fraction of the models other armies using due to their more elite status.
GW stated in their annual report, that they are going to test a larger price range. I think we can see both extremes on the Bloodreavers and the Chaos Fort.
They're $58 for 20 on the GW USA store. That's what, $3 a figure? That's about the same as the price of Orc Boys. Not a bad deal if you're only looking at the GW ecosystem. I assume they're a core troop, they look like a marauder replacement. Probably why they're cheap.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/24 08:52:21
argonak wrote: They're $58 for 20 on the GW USA store. That's what, $3 a figure? That's about the same as the price of Orc Boys. Not a bad deal if you're only looking at the GW ecosystem. I assume they're a core troop, they look like a marauder replacement. Probably why they're cheap.
Well, even with GW ecosystem I find it difficult to find 20 good quality, well-sculpted models for 40-45$ price range in other games. Do the retailers in your area not offer discounts from the official GW prices like ours do? Yes, obviously you need more miniatures for WFB, but AoS... AoS is pretty skirmishy, so the scale of battle is smaller, and thus the value kinda rises as there's no "but you need billions of them!" argument anymore.
Wonder if GW will stick to the pricing policy. If we'll get back to the point with 17-20$ per 10 human-sized (state troops-grade price) kit I could even start getting excited, to be honest. We've seen GW raising it's prices for years, which drove players away, but now they seem to be going the opposite way, which is quite nice.
argonak wrote: They're $58 for 20 on the GW USA store. That's what, $3 a figure? That's about the same as the price of Orc Boys. Not a bad deal if you're only looking at the GW ecosystem. I assume they're a core troop, they look like a marauder replacement. Probably why they're cheap.
Well, even with GW ecosystem I find it difficult to find 20 good quality, well-sculpted models for 40-45$ price range in other games. Do the retailers in your area not offer discounts from the official GW prices like ours do? Yes, obviously you need more miniatures for WFB, but AoS... AoS is pretty skirmishy, so the scale of battle is smaller, and thus the value kinda rises as there's no "but you need billions of them!" argument anymore.
Wonder if GW will stick to the pricing policy. If we'll get back to the point with 17-20$ per 10 human-sized (state troops-grade price) kit I could even start getting excited, to be honest. We've seen GW raising it's prices for years, which drove players away, but now they seem to be going the opposite way, which is quite nice.
Only retailers I've ever seen offering deals on GW were the online ones, and they're just cutting into their proffit margin to do so. It doesn't seem to be common in America anyway.
I don't think AoS does anything particularly different that makes it a small game, so I don't think its really relevant. 40k is skirmish too, and look how people play that. There was nothing stopping people playing 500 point WFB games either.
Plenty of other manufacturers offer way better model per miniature prices than that. Warlord, for example, beats it by miles. Their miniatures are also detailed multi part kits as well, similiar in size to IG guardsman.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2015/08/24 10:28:37
argonak wrote: They're $58 for 20 on the GW USA store. That's what, $3 a figure? That's about the same as the price of Orc Boys. Not a bad deal if you're only looking at the GW ecosystem. I assume they're a core troop, they look like a marauder replacement. Probably why they're cheap.
Well, even with GW ecosystem I find it difficult to find 20 good quality, well-sculpted models for 40-45$ price range in other games. Do the retailers in your area not offer discounts from the official GW prices like ours do? Yes, obviously you need more miniatures for WFB, but AoS... AoS is pretty skirmishy, so the scale of battle is smaller, and thus the value kinda rises as there's no "but you need billions of them!" argument anymore.
Wonder if GW will stick to the pricing policy. If we'll get back to the point with 17-20$ per 10 human-sized (state troops-grade price) kit I could even start getting excited, to be honest. We've seen GW raising it's prices for years, which drove players away, but now they seem to be going the opposite way, which is quite nice.
Skirmishy is not the same as small number of models. If it was like Warmahordes or infinity, where you need to have a list or lists ready before a game, then yes it is less models then old warhammer or pseudo apocalyps w40k. But when the rules have almost no list limitations, you more or less need to own a huge collection to counter what ever opponent can bring. The only way for that not to happen is, if someone has a realy strong skew list. So while you may not need billions of one unit, you do require to own multiple milions of different units across different factions. A huge plus in favor of AoS is that one does not need to buy army books for each one of the factions you could potentialy need to use.
argonak wrote:Plenty of other manufacturers offer way better model per miniature prices than that. Warlord, for example, beats it by miles. Their miniatures are also detailed multi part kits as well, similiar in size to IG guardsman.
I don't know, I think that Bolt Action infantry has low quality of sculpts compared to recent GW products - the faces are deformed and ugly, the proportions even worse than with 40k's heroic scale guardsmen... only the details are better than on guardsmen, but then again we're looking at almost ancient models for IG. When were the current Cadians released? In 5th ed? 4th?
You can even straight-up see how bad those models look on their own official photos. That's almost scale model kit level of figures rather than wargaming standard.
Spoiler:
I'm not saying this to ruin anyone's fun with Bolt Action, but everyone I know (that's an anecdote, not argument), even BA players admit that the infantry is ugly. So, yeah, you get more for the same price, but they, in my opinion, are much lower quality models than the recent GW releases.
As for 500pts games... WFB was terrible as a small-scale game as the 8th ed rules were obviously designed for horded-up units of 30+ models, multiple war machines and monsters. It scaled down badly and you could see it in combat resolution mechanics, movement, army building system (with the percentages you were far too limited at such low point levels) and other aspects of the game. Just like WarmaHordes scale down badly. Every experienced WM/H player can tell you that the game is unbalanced and skewed badly at 25pts and only 35 (arguably) and 50 point brackets are balanced.
Makumba wrote:
Skirmishy is not the same as small number of models. If it was like Warmahordes or infinity, where you need to have a list or lists ready before a game, then yes it is less models then old warhammer or pseudo apocalyps w40k. But when the rules have almost no list limitations, you more or less need to own a huge collection to counter what ever opponent can bring. The only way for that not to happen is, if someone has a realy strong skew list. So while you may not need billions of one unit, you do require to own multiple milions of different units across different factions. A huge plus in favor of AoS is that one does not need to buy army books for each one of the factions you could potentialy need to use.
Well, first of all I think you're only exaggerating that to the point of ridiculousness for the sake of, well, ridiculing it. With how it all works you can clearly tell that AoS is most suitable for games that use forces up to about twice as big as the AoS starter set as beyond that it's getting cumbersome with so many models (like playing orks vs orks in 40k, but without all the pie plate templates to clear them out quickly).
Secondly if you agree with your opponent to some particular size of battle you don't need to bring all those miniatures and you know that, but you choose to exaggerate nonetheless. Even if he brings a billion miniatures you can just tell him that you won't play with him if he doesn't agree with you on some more reasonable level and, frankly, if he refuses you clearly can tell what kind of person he is and you would never want to play against him anyway. If he brings 10 000 points of models against your 2000 points in 8th ed then, guess what, you're going to play 2000pts game. Or some scenario, and it's exactly the same in AoS, you just have to (gasp!) TALK to the opponent, the horror!
You can both arrive to wherever you're going to play with what would make 1000 or 2000pts of armies back then AND THEN start deciding on the size of your game using your two collections. So, yeah, stupid exaggeration aside, you're perfectly fine if you go to the store/your friend's place with only a couple models and ask the opponent to play a game suitable for your amount of minis and, again, if he refuses, you don't play with him. This only is an issue if one of the participants is an a-hole or utter idiot, so make sure to be the other one instead.
So, yeah, you don't need as many models as you needed for 8th ed and with lower prices for minis the entry cost* is much lower, which is a step forward.
*- reasonable game entry cost - I know you can play Warmachine with one unit, one caster and one warjack, but that's not representative of how a "real" game of it looks like just like the core set of X-Wing is not full X-Wing experience. Just had to put it out here before someone makes a clever comment like that.
Yeah agree, that is the problem part I think. And it is not about someone deploying 200models vs someones 20. It is that to totaly counter opponent units you need a very large collection. You will want different stuff vs a cavalery army , different vs a flying army and something else vs summoning lizards. And because there is no rules limitations to just one faction, you will offten have to find out that to counter this army you have to play beasts and to counter the other one you need more destruction. In fact I wouldn't be suprised, if to have an effective army one would need most models from most of the factions. And that could be well more then someone needed for a 2550 dark elf army.
Makumba wrote: Yeah agree, that is the problem part I think. And it is not about someone deploying 200models vs someones 20. It is that to totaly counter opponent units you need a very large collection. You will want different stuff vs a cavalery army , different vs a flying army and something else vs summoning lizards. And because there is no rules limitations to just one faction, you will offten have to find out that to counter this army you have to play beasts and to counter the other one you need more destruction. In fact I wouldn't be suprised, if to have an effective army one would need most models from most of the factions. And that could be well more then someone needed for a 2550 dark elf army.
That just proves only one thing - AoS is not for min-maxed overpowered netlists. Yes, you can just cherry pick all the single best models from all ranges, but then who will pick you as an opponent?
I must admit I personally prefer building my army with a theme, based on decided wounds count per the leaked store comp and fortunately that works perfectly fine with my friends who also play it, so we tend to equally enjoy our games. Of course the wound limitation has it's own issues (famous clanrat/slave vs stormvermin example), but then we're trying to make thematic and efficient armies using those rules. Yes, I will rather take 50 greatswords than 50 swordsmen or free company militia and so will my friend rather take questing knights over knights of the realm, but it was exactly like that in WFB - you always took the best units. There's a reason why you saw Phoenix Guard and Executioners being maxed rather than spearmen. Best units are always taken first, and with the comp it really limits the most op stuff fairly well, making for fairly balanced and definetely fun games for us.
We go 75 wounds, I bring Thundertusk, Golgfag, Butcher, two units of three ironguts and two mournfangs, he brings two trebuchets, fay enchantress, king Louen and as many questing knights as he can fit. The game is never close to being "decided" before the last model dies, it's never "oh, my mage miscasted, my cannons exploded and enemy cannon single-handedly demolished my altar of sigmar while my tank blew up on it's own due to steam engine, gee, I can just as well give up". Also AoS somehow managed to get fairly good inter-faction balance. Beastmen are playable. So is the Empire. Sure, people can argue that both those factions can be played decently, but if ETC gave Beastmen 300 additional points on their tournaments and not even single player was in top 10 over a couple of years that's saying something.
So, yeah, with the old style pre-built armies it's really simple for me and my friends. We may try making 25 wounds "sideboard" unit list to put on the table instead of the stuff we brought mainly for some little AoS-style "if you field this then I field this!" shenanigans, but it is good as it is, and I'm sure that there are going to be more comps like that and we'll find one perfect for us. Or we'll adjust this one to our needs.
Makumba wrote: Yeah agree, that is the problem part I think. And it is not about someone deploying 200models vs someones 20. It is that to totaly counter opponent units you need a very large collection. You will want different stuff vs a cavalery army , different vs a flying army and something else vs summoning lizards. And because there is no rules limitations to just one faction, you will offten have to find out that to counter this army you have to play beasts and to counter the other one you need more destruction. In fact I wouldn't be suprised, if to have an effective army one would need most models from most of the factions. And that could be well more then someone needed for a 2550 dark elf army.
I don't think the rock-paper-scissorness of AoS is quite as overpowering as it is in other games. In some games, if you don't have a counter, the game is effectively over before it begins. In this one, it's a small disadvantage that is easily made up through superior tactics.
I think that, right now, without a lot of experience in the game, players need to play each other with the same armies, making small changes each time. If the cavalry were too effective and the ranged not effective enough, take a few models from one and add models to the other. Think of it like a physical balance - just keep adding/removing weight from one tray or the other until they become equal (I would probably start with warscroll minimums and build up). It may take a few tries, but you'll come up with two equivalent forces fairly quickly (that are based on each player's talent in playing them). Perhaps create a "control army" which you balance everyone else's forces again. Over time, you'll have more practical experience with the game and can eyeball the balance better.
Another suggestion is to do it the way asymmetrical board games work, where players switch armies and play a second game. If the game favors one side, it will come out to a draw, but if a player wins both matches, it is likely due to superior skill.
In this one, it's a small disadvantage that is easily made up through superior tactics.
How do you superior tactics someone with a flying army or cavalery army, when your is a dwarf army that is not an artilery car park. And before you say "then play car park" I would like to point out that there are a few armies that run flying or cavalery armies and only one that runs car parks, so you will always be in a postion where your veto will be one person vs many.
It may take a few tries, but you'll come up with two equivalent forces fairly quickly
And what if your army doesn't haev any magic or cavalery, so when others agree on a system of limiting those vs armies that have those, you will always end up with the shorter stick. As you would have no buffs from having those models, but all the debuffs , plus the silent agreement of all cavalery or magic focused army players, that if your army happens to be good against those they don't want to see it on the table. And there is a big difference between a chaos or elg army being limited to 0-3 units of cavalery and dwarfs being limited to 1 cannon , because it is "too good" at killing their stuff.
Another suggestion is to do it the way asymmetrical board games work, where players switch armies and play a second game. If the game favors one side, it will come out to a draw, but if a player wins both matches, it is likely due to superior skill.
I would never trust anyone anywhere near my models.
I think you're overestimating what flying units actually do now. They just move over terrain and other units - that's it. I think that most of them are really fast (like 10+ inches), but that is not a characteristic that is exclusively tied to fly (check seekers of slaanesh for example). They're not faster just because they fly, can't forward deploy, pursue at longer distance and all the other bonuses that were part of WHFB. Shooting is overall better than before and the fact that you can fire even if in melee range makes the assault locking mechanism somewhat irrelevant. I understand that you were looking for a suitable example to back up your statement about specific need of units countering others (as in Malifaux for example, where you need a pool of models as some factions just can't deal with something on their own), but I also think that the difference in power and abilities in AoS isn't that marginal. Could you give an example of units in an army that can't be dealt at all with units from another army in AoS?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/24 15:11:15
Usually you indeed can assume that if you fight a cavalry army with a foot one you will have to take the charge, same with flyers. There's no way for you to charge first unless he botches his charge and you roll two sixes.
You gave an example, that's good. Let's work with it.
First of all - grab as many cannons as you can. If there's a limit, fill it. If you can't, skip this point. If you have limited cannon allowance, they should have limited flyers allowance. No 100% flying armies allowed. Refer to the store comp.
You have no magic or cavalry... latter, yes, former... let's see. You have runelords. They don't cast spells on 5+ that can be dispelled, they cast their prayers on 2+ with no chance for enemy to unbind them. Grab one or two of those. Sure, they don't have fancy magic bolts, but their +1 rend prayer on 2+ is ridiculously good and they unbind enemy spells with +2 to your roll, hard to fail, really!
Now let's talk about the Forgefire they cast. +1 to Rend. Imagine it on Hammerers. Two 3+/3+ Rend 2 attacks. Heavily armoured knights roll for saves against those on 6+ thanks to Rend. Field them with the High King, put him behind them. Pop his command ability, watch anyone stupid enough to get into combat with you melt like the icebergs thanks to global warming.
Hell, if you don't want to spam Hammerers, grab a unit of Warriors or two, bubble wrap your army with them, use their defensive ability when you know you'll be charged and they hit even better in enemy turn, so those flyers will think twice before they charge you, which they have to do, because even a single cannon set in the middle of your formation will be a huge danger for them.
Put Hammerers behind them. Have them as second-wave chargers that will break whoever engages your Warriors.
God, that sounds exactly like Madrak's brick in Warmahordes, and it plays the same, although you replace a buffing stone with a cannon.
Hell, now that you made me come up with that idea I want to play it against my friend and see how it works. Especially that it will look cool, the formation will be thematic (a dwarven brick formation) and overall the list will be fluffy!
While we're on the topic of brick units, here's mine. A nice long line of temple guard with 2-3 hidden skink priests in them and a Slann mage hanging waay back. 2+ rerollable save by means of a single shield and one successful celestial rites. Next turn Slann mage gives units hanging back flying and they over the temple guard to charge.
While we're on the topic of brick units, here's mine. A nice long line of temple guard with 2-3 hidden skink priests in them and a Slann mage hanging waay back. 2+ rerollable save by means of a single shield and one successful celestial rites. Next turn Slann mage gives units hanging back flying and they over the temple guard to charge.
Haha, that sounds kinda cool, reminds me of the elves jumping over dwarf spear line in the last Hobbit movie! Stupid move, sure, but boy, did it look fancy! Just remember to use several units of temple guard so your line doesn't start to fold when someone charges far end. You only pile-in in a straight line, 3" at a time!
I may pile in, the rules don't force me to do so if I don't want to ruin my line . With a good save and 10 bravery lizardmen are quite hardy + I can guard my flanks with other units. It really depends on the situation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/24 16:19:15
Taking the charge from cavalry armies is just no big deal. The big thing about fast moving troops is getting a chance to outmaneuver your opponent and put two units into one unit, gaining a combat advantage.
Cavalry usually have some special rule for charging. Maybe wounding on 3+ not 4+ with a lance, or getting 1 better armor save. Nice, but not game breaking.
With alternating activation of units in combat phase, charging doesn't mean you go first, so some of that cav army is going to charge, and then lose half the unit if the enemy attacks first.
If you are fighting all cav with all infantry, the infantry army needs to have units very close so they can pile in during close combat.
....and lo!.....The Age of Sigmar came to an end when Saint Veetock and his hamster legions smote the false Sigmar and destroyed the bubbleverse and lead the true believers back to the Old World.
argonak wrote:Plenty of other manufacturers offer way better model per miniature prices than that. Warlord, for example, beats it by miles. Their miniatures are also detailed multi part kits as well, similiar in size to IG guardsman.
I don't know, I think that Bolt Action infantry has low quality of sculpts compared to recent GW products - the faces are deformed and ugly, the proportions even worse than with 40k's heroic scale guardsmen... only the details are better than on guardsmen, but then again we're looking at almost ancient models for IG. When were the current Cadians released? In 5th ed? 4th?
You can even straight-up see how bad those models look on their own official photos. That's almost scale model kit level of figures rather than wargaming standard.
Spoiler:
I'm not saying this to ruin anyone's fun with Bolt Action, but everyone I know (that's an anecdote, not argument), even BA players admit that the infantry is ugly. So, yeah, you get more for the same price, but they, in my opinion, are much lower quality models than the recent GW releases.
As for 500pts games... WFB was terrible as a small-scale game as the 8th ed rules were obviously designed for horded-up units of 30+ models, multiple war machines and monsters. It scaled down badly and you could see it in combat resolution mechanics, movement, army building system (with the percentages you were far too limited at such low point levels) and other aspects of the game. Just like WarmaHordes scale down badly. Every experienced WM/H player can tell you that the game is unbalanced and skewed badly at 25pts and only 35 (arguably) and 50 point brackets are balanced.
Makumba wrote:
Skirmishy is not the same as small number of models. If it was like Warmahordes or infinity, where you need to have a list or lists ready before a game, then yes it is less models then old warhammer or pseudo apocalyps w40k. But when the rules have almost no list limitations, you more or less need to own a huge collection to counter what ever opponent can bring. The only way for that not to happen is, if someone has a realy strong skew list. So while you may not need billions of one unit, you do require to own multiple milions of different units across different factions. A huge plus in favor of AoS is that one does not need to buy army books for each one of the factions you could potentialy need to use.
Well, first of all I think you're only exaggerating that to the point of ridiculousness for the sake of, well, ridiculing it. With how it all works you can clearly tell that AoS is most suitable for games that use forces up to about twice as big as the AoS starter set as beyond that it's getting cumbersome with so many models (like playing orks vs orks in 40k, but without all the pie plate templates to clear them out quickly).
Secondly if you agree with your opponent to some particular size of battle you don't need to bring all those miniatures and you know that, but you choose to exaggerate nonetheless. Even if he brings a billion miniatures you can just tell him that you won't play with him if he doesn't agree with you on some more reasonable level and, frankly, if he refuses you clearly can tell what kind of person he is and you would never want to play against him anyway. If he brings 10 000 points of models against your 2000 points in 8th ed then, guess what, you're going to play 2000pts game. Or some scenario, and it's exactly the same in AoS, you just have to (gasp!) TALK to the opponent, the horror!
You can both arrive to wherever you're going to play with what would make 1000 or 2000pts of armies back then AND THEN start deciding on the size of your game using your two collections. So, yeah, stupid exaggeration aside, you're perfectly fine if you go to the store/your friend's place with only a couple models and ask the opponent to play a game suitable for your amount of minis and, again, if he refuses, you don't play with him. This only is an issue if one of the participants is an a-hole or utter idiot, so make sure to be the other one instead.
So, yeah, you don't need as many models as you needed for 8th ed and with lower prices for minis the entry cost* is much lower, which is a step forward.
*- reasonable game entry cost - I know you can play Warmachine with one unit, one caster and one warjack, but that's not representative of how a "real" game of it looks like just like the core set of X-Wing is not full X-Wing experience. Just had to put it out here before someone makes a clever comment like that.
I disagree with just about everything you said, and all of it was subjective, so there's no point in continuing the conversation.
argonak wrote: They're $58 for 20 on the GW USA store. That's what, $3 a figure? That's about the same as the price of Orc Boys. Not a bad deal if you're only looking at the GW ecosystem. I assume they're a core troop, they look like a marauder replacement. Probably why they're cheap.
Well, even with GW ecosystem I find it difficult to find 20 good quality, well-sculpted models for 40-45$ price range in other games. Do the retailers in your area not offer discounts from the official GW prices like ours do? Yes, obviously you need more miniatures for WFB, but AoS... AoS is pretty skirmishy, so the scale of battle is smaller, and thus the value kinda rises as there's no "but you need billions of them!" argument anymore.
...
Take a look at the Perry Brothers plastic kits for ACW, 100 Years War and so on. Typically they are £20 for 36 models. That is under $1 US per model, for 28mm infantry figures.
The historical detail and accuracy of the figures is among the best on the market.
Take a look at the Perry Brothers plastic kits for ACW, 100 Years War and so on. Typically they are £20 for 36 models. That is under $1 US per model, for 28mm infantry figures.
The historical detail and accuracy of the figures is among the best on the market.
Oh, I agree - recently I made a pretty big order on a lot of war of the roses/hundred years war models to test our upcoming tabletop wargame and I must admit that those are the best bang for the buck kits with about 40 infantrymen for around 32$, but I still think they're not even close to the amount of fancy detail and the fidelity of GW's hard plastic moulds - some of the details get blurred and sometimes their moulds must've shifted 1/5th of a milimeter (can be seen with sallet helmets' visors being slightly shifted between each half). Don't get me wrong - I really appreciate the enormous quality they managed to achieve without having all the hardware GW has, but if someone looks more at the definition of the details and casting quality I would say that GW's Greatswords beat those Perry miniatures on that field and they're not even one of the latest kits. Huge trade-off with the price and in a vacuum it's better to pay much less for a little less detail and much more models, but it's all a matter of preferences in this case as we're talking about an already expensive, niche hobby. I mean... there are people who deliberately buy more expensive independent manufacturers' models to substitute for their GW minis even though they don't have to!
I remember what I paid for citadel minis 16 years ago... the inflated prices have been ridiculous from gw. As a long time gamer and fan of GW's stuff, the prices in the past four years have slowed my purchases down and got me to invest in other games (wwx, infinity, miniature based board games, etc). However I don't regret investing in other games as it's nice to have a variety so game systems don't go stale.
I have also noticed that GW has finally started making some 'good deals' again. Some of their combo sets actually give savings again and the price per model seems to be reduced a tad with troop sets. HQ and elite model prices are still up, but I understand how their HQ vs troop price model works.
Even at $3 per model, that is actually a pretty good deal for what one gets these days.
Even at $3 per model, that is actually a pretty good deal for what one gets these days.
Has anyone done a per model comparison between the different lines?
Obviously, it will be different. Bloodreavers are 20 models for $58 ($3 ea), while Liberators are 5 models for $50 ($10 ea) and Blood Warriors are 10 models for $62 ($6 ea). And the Celestant Prime is 1 model for $80 (hell no, ea). GW seems to charge based on its worth to the army instead of the materials it uses. It's like the pick a price they want you to pay for a basic army, then charge accordingly. Units you might buy more of are cheaper, and showpiece units are considerably more expensive.
Warmachine, the only other mini game I'm familiar with, depends on whether it is metal or resin. Resin models, like the Houseguard Halberdiers are 10 models for $10 ($2 ea), but PP's resin models are awful. Flash everywhere, including faces, with a lot of lost detail and even bubbles of missing material. I would pay an extra dollar or two per figure to not have to deal with that crap. Metal Assault Kommados Unit is 6 figs for $35 ($6 ea), while the resin ones are 10 for $50 ($2 ea). Resin Man-o-War Shocktroopers are probably the closest to the Stormcast's paladin models (slightly more than $10 ea) with 5 models for $45 ($9 ea). Celestant Prime is probably closest to the battle engines or colossals (mix of resin and metal), which go for $85 and $135 respectively.
Based on that small sampling, Privateer Press offers slightly better prices, but not as much as I thought. I think the biggest difference is that I know where I can reliably get PP models for 20% off, and don't know where I can get GW models at that sort of discount, so they seem more expensive.
I could try to do more for Malifaux or Infinity, but I'm less familiar with the units, so I don't know that I could fairly compare their size and quality against the others.
GW seems to charge based on its worth to the army instead of the materials it uses.
According to a reddit thread waay back from a former GW employee (i think he even said his name) the company indeed used to price models (he was talking for 40k) at least partially on its point cost or what position it takes in the arym. Players are used to base their purchases on a "points for money" base anyway. With AoS this may be less apparent (no points). I'll try and dig up the whole conversation - it's was an interesting read and if true shed some light into the GW cave. EDIT: I found the thread but most of the answers appear to be deleted and it seems nearly impossible to find something... Pity, it was interesting :(. Anyway here it is https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ppwzq/iama_former_games_workshop_employee_ama/?sort=old
As for GW's prices I'll re-post a somewhat old opinion of mine, concerning entry costs for a couple of systems and some thoughts on model quality.
Spoiler:
I no longer find GW's prices so prohibitive when comparing them to the amounts that I've seen spent on other systems in reality. During the past year I have bought into and collected models from a number of different systems and I have been surprised to find (at least for me) that the grass isn't that much greener on the other side, as a large number of resources I have stumbled onto, have claimed to be.
First, the different systems I have had observations onto:
1. I own a somewhat large sized Dropzone Commander army. I know what my army cost me and also what the other players have invested.
2. I have a medium sized Warmachine force and have also noted the money thrown by other players in order to construct viable lists.
3. I have some (around 12 I think) Malifaux models and have observed the popularity it got during the last 6 months in my area.
4. I don't own any infinity models, but I've watched some games, spoken with the players and have done a rough estimation on the entry (and subsequent) costs associated with the game.
5. I own 2 WHFB armies - Lizardmen and Daemons (which I also include in the 40k armies)
6. I also have three 40k armies, 2 of which are quite large.
All these are quite popular games on their own and have had some time to settle on the market, the youngest being DZC which is about 2 years old.
Now, my opinion on the matter (which may seem heretical to many of you) is ...:
By far, Warhammer (FB+40k) is the most cost effective model range of them all, in terms of what you get for your money MODEL WISE. Overall it beats its competition in every category I can think of - amount of miniatures, conversion options, ease of assembly, miniatures detail (this is a very tricky category to talk about as it is highly subjective) etc.
In short let me tell you what other systems pretend ( my opinion ) to offer and have fallen short of (again, my opinion):
1. Dropzone Commander - This is the system I have the least complaints about. You get what you pay for, although all miniatures, except infantry, are still cast in resin and quite expensive. Models have a good amount of detail to them BUT the amount of toys you're getting is quite small, their physical size is also quite small and lastly - the detail, although good looking and in tone with the setting isn't of the same class as the one I'm used to when dealing with GW miniatures.
The last part is a little bit hard to explain and I want to make myself as clear as possible. The miniatures are of very good quality, but the detail on the sculptures is mostly composed of regular geometrical figures like circles, hexagons etc. This was pointed to me by a friend of mine and has remained largely unnoticed by me to this moment. This kind of detail I think, of course trickier as it is to cast on such a small scale, does not require the same amount of effort to design and produce as a hand sculpted figure (this is just a speculation - I have no professional experience in the matter) . As for the army costs - take it or leave it but I've spent over 250 quid to get to the 1500 pts standard and have some options as to make more varied lists. I'm planning to spend more on the future on the same army.
2. Warmachine - I'd like to think that everyone that has had a look on some of the other ranges can agree with me that the detail and model quality found in the Warmahordes range is "satisfactory" at best. Also I'd like to share some thoughts on the entry cost here. It is a commonly said that you can start playing Warmahordes with just a box and expand successfully upon it. The truth, from my experience, is you rarely can and if you do it you end up with the exact same list as another guy that started the same faction the same way. Many enemy units need hard counters, your own units need synergy and these two things can make you throw an amount of money for mediocre models that will make you weep for the "good old" times when you bought 5 plastic Warhammer models for 20 quid. Of course, you don't need to buy them, but you eventually will.
3. Malifaux seemed to be the least money consuming system I had encountered... until players got used to the fact that your list isn't set in stone at the beginning of a game. The more models you have the better your chances of victory as you have more options and counters to anything your opponent can come up with. The models look nice and anatomically correct, but possess large flat areas devoid of any detail. This could be considered realistic, but IMO the 3d design process has gone in a bad direction here and ultimately proved to do the game a bad favour.
4. I still can't make my mind about whether I like Infinity's miniatures or not, but I certainly know that it is not a cheap game either.
Finally, there is this statement with which many new players are strayed to some of the above systems:
"The entry fee isn't that much and in the long run you'll spend much less than on Warhammer."
This, in most of the player's cases I've seen, has proven to be false.
This is strictly subjective though and I'm not sure I'd write it again as it is, but my opinion is mostly the same.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/08/25 18:55:28
GW`s annual yearly report said that they would be doing a variety of different price points for new products. So you`ll get instances of 5 models for £30 or 20 models for £35.
Its a new scheme they are going with essentially. There will be many more weird boxed set amounts of models and price points
Motograter wrote: GW`s annual yearly report said that they would be doing a variety of different price points for new products. So you`ll get instances of 5 models for £30 or 20 models for £35.
Its a new scheme they are going with essentially. There will be many more weird boxed set amounts of models and price points
Well, that's good. If people buy into the cheaper sets and it works for GW, more cheaper sets will come out, right? It's a good wat for them to test price elasticity -- by concurrently releasing boxes of stuff for the same faction at dramatically different prices.
Sqorgar wrote: Is there a reliable place to get discounted GW stuff online in the US?
I suggest looking up the independents within driving distance to you from the GW site, and then just asking them how much AoS Starter and, say, Paladins are. You should also ask if they have any wargaming or hobby club discounts, or discounts if you buy a certain amount.
Ebay... one can consistently find new stuff or pre-order stuff for sale from online stores for 20-25% off. I only order limited edition stuff from GW now, otherwise it's ebay or through a friend who owns a store!
455_PWR wrote: Ebay... one can consistently find new stuff or pre-order stuff for sale from online stores for 20-25% off. I only order limited edition stuff from GW now, otherwise it's ebay or through a friend who owns a store!
What I hate about eBay is the price fishing. You see a kit for as little as 30$ and then there's 25$ shipping fee. The kit's value is probably just 45$ and shipping is 10$, but they use that to manipulate potential buyer. Not to mention international shipping.
In Poland basically every independent retailer (be it online or just LGS) gives you about regular 5-15% (more if you're a regular customer and even often cut a bit off the top when making bigger purchases) off the GW official price so it's much more affordable to buy at your FLGS and support your local community than to order from GW's online store, although with the constant growth of Mail Order only models there are more and more instances when people come to the store and are told that the owner can't do anything because GW wouldn't even let him stock up on that.
I think you should ask people around about some small local gaming stores, they often use to cut off a bit of their own profit to make the prices more appealing for people to buy those products.
. With a good save and 10 bravery lizardmen are quite hardy + I can guard my flanks with other units. It really depends on the situation.
