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.

Kilkrazy wrote:Please report comments that break the site rules.

Alpharius wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@KK - Why? It's not like anything comes of it. Swasty is still constantly stirring the pot, for example.

Aside from the fact that many posts in this thread are derailing...this thread...

Most times you will not know if something happened in terms of Moderation as most Moderation, outside of in thread warning and such, is conducted in private.

So again, if you see a post that breaks the rules of the site - report it.

I GUARANTEE that EVERY one gets looked at by a Moderator.

You say that, but it sure looks like nothing happens. I flag comments all the time and no action is taken. Take my 50-50 win/lose thread, there is an inflammatory and off topic post by Davidian that I flagged up.

Nothing happened.

 Bottle wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Please report comments that break the site rules.

Alpharius wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@KK - Why? It's not like anything comes of it. Swasty is still constantly stirring the pot, for example.

Aside from the fact that many posts in this thread are derailing...this thread...

Most times you will not know if something happened in terms of Moderation as most Moderation, outside of in thread warning and such, is conducted in private.

So again, if you see a post that breaks the rules of the site - report it.

I GUARANTEE that EVERY one gets looked at by a Moderator.

You say that, but it sure looks like nothing happens. I flag comments all the time and no action is taken. Take my 50-50 win/lose thread, there is an inflammatory and off topic post by Davidian that I flagged up.

Nothing happened.

How do you know? When was their last post? Maybe they've taken an "involuntary holiday" from Dakka for all you know.

Like I said, sure looks like nothing happens.

Stuff might be happening behind the scene, but as most mods place warning lines inside posts that break the rules, I'm guessing nothing did happen.

 Bottle wrote:
, but as most mods place warning lines inside posts that break the rules,...

That's not actually the case. Some of us post in thread, some don't. Even for those of us who do, it often depends on the situation, as does whether or not we edit or remove the offending post.

All of which is completely off-topic for this thread. If anyone has further issues to bring up regarding moderation, please PM one of the moderators rather than further de-railing this thread.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
I'm a little lost. What is the inherent design flaw of 40k and why is it the only one left?

Sorry Bottle, I should've provided context:

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/10/warhammer-40000-open-day-in-detail.html

Emphasis on this little bit of the Citadel Design Seminar::

"We start when a new model is presented to Design Team, and we’re told to come up with some rules and background for it”. This sounds exaggerated, like someone from the miniatures side of the building produces a KV128 Stormsurge (built and painted to ‘Eavy Metal standard) and says “We made this, make rules and background so we can sell it!” – but this is literally the example we were given! I know!"

Fethin' top notch rule design process, ain't it?

Wow, that's one of the most depressing reads ever. I am having lots of fun with AoS, but I lament the lose of heart in White Dwarf as much as anyone and this event being described as a living White Dwarf sounds like hell.

At least the Age of Sigmar events at Warhammer World seem to have been fun so far, as I plan to go to some.

Voicing opinions isn't against forum rules and I dont have to explain my motivations to you.
End of that conversation.
Let's get back on track before people that dont like differing opinions close yet another thread.

A lack of understanding isn't the reason I don't like the game. I haven't played it but nothing about the game makes me want to try. Its the game's job to be interesting enough to buy into. And since no one around my area plays it. I cant even get a demo.

 mugginns wrote:

Do sigmarines eat or talk? Are they just statues? When a sigmarine dies, does anyone really care?

Yes & yes, no, they do/Sigmar does.

I stopped playing WHFB/AoS because it is not the game I signed up for.

I played Warriors of Chaos because I'm evil, and they are a cheap army to collect.


Many people are put off when you go. "This unit does well if you have fifty of them, we sell them in boxes of ten."

I'm sure there is plenty of fluff in the new books, but if the trailer looks bad, you don't spend money to watch the film.

 Sqorgar wrote:

Making the game affordable and better support would make existing players happy - it wouldn't bring in new players.

Why not? Considering it was the start up price and shoddy rules that drove so many away...

This just seems like confirmation bias on your part.

 Sqorgar wrote:

The miniature games market is relatively small, and absolutely dominated by Games Workshop. .

This is less and less true. More and more,com meeting people who have never plated gw games...

 Sqorgar wrote:

It's fair to say that anybody who plays miniature games already knows what WHFB is and if they aren't playing it, made the decision to not play it. Since 40k is doing well, price is obviously not the objection.

Shrinking year on year volume tells a different story for 40k though. If people aren't playing wfb, there is a reason. Maybe it's the price? The massive buy in to a reasonable level-of-play? That gw pushed the gsme where it's fans didnt want it it go? Price is a big thing for a lot of people, especially if it's in addition to an already expensive game...

 Sqorgar wrote:

Even then, GW does have stuff like Island of Blood which has small skirmishes for a (more) reasonable price, but my guess is that it wasn't selling as well as Dark Vengeance or it wasn't causing players to further invest after the starter box.

Wfb isn't a 'small skirmish game' though. The buy in was all front loaded and user unfriendly as well. There not what a lot of people wanted out of it.Telling people 'so what if you like game x, gw produces different game y instead, and you should be happy for it' doesn't get you many gamer points....

As to why it wasn't selling - well, there are other reasons...

 Sqorgar wrote:

And get rid of the existing fanbase who did like the '30 years of baggage' as well as the way the game was played.

But they didn't get rid of the baggage. It's all there and the way the AoS universe is set up, almost all of it could potentially come back at some point. It's just not relevant to the initial release of the game.

So they didn't nuke the old world??

You are someone who never grew up with wfb. You've not lost what theyve lost. It's easy for you to so casually dismiss people's genuine issues, and you are quite wrong for doing it. As for baggage - Mate, they chucked the baby out with the bath water in favour of a thing that, while I can see value in, is something so many fsns just see as an insult. Keeping the fans on board is a clever move. It generates a thing called 'goodwill'. In a 'word of mouth' based hobby, this is key to future success. You know - responding to people's concerns and issues, Rather than nuke and reset from zero.

 Sqorgar wrote:

For instance, it appears that AoS will get another release window in December, which some people are saying will be two new factions for Order and Chaos. If they introduce the Dwarves, for example, it will undoubtedly come with the backstory of what happened between End Times and Age of Sigmar. And then, part of the Old World mythology will be connected with the AoS mythology, bridging the two. If it feels like everything from the Old World is gone, it's only because they are taking their time introducing the new factions and explaining where they went.

Two new factions, to be fair. After hoe long? Almost a year, right? And limited fluff. WMH came out with four factions from day1, and this was on top of solid fluff and an already impressive rpg roster. Basic fluff for two factions with an undeveloped IP does not compare. Especially for a company on the scale of gw, and especially on A company of the scale of gw with a focus on 'the narrative'.

If it feels like everything from the old world is gone, maybe it's because they nuked the old world and people are actually annoyed about it?

 Sqorgar wrote:

To someone like me, not having the backstory for the Dwarves initially allows me to focus on the world and main conflict of the AoS time period. Introducing each race slowly gives me time to acclimate to their own individual heroes, stories, and purpose without overwhelming me with 30 years of history all at once. And I get that it must seem frustrating to feel like you've lose that universe - but you haven't. Just learn a little patience and at least make it to the next release window and see what happens.

But yes, yes they have. And for a lot of people, this coupled with overpriced rules books and source books is frankly, more than thry can bear. Put yourself in their shoes. You didn't have to lose the old world. Imagine if you did. I'm personally ok with more limited fluff for s starting game, it Jesus Christ, if you are talking about four factions of numerous races that have survived Armageddon from the old world, I want to read about the four factions and numerous, not just sigmarines and khorne bloody berserkers. I don't want to have to wait years for the faction I peotentially spent years collecting to make a bloody cameo.

MongooseMatt wrote:
Age of Sigmar is failing
No one (except a few at GW HQ) knows anything about how the game has been selling. One store, or even a bunch of Internet forums, do not a firm basis make for this conclusion. The first clue we will get will be next year in GW’s financial reports, and we may not really know for 2-3 years.

It really is okay to wait and reserve judgement for later. There is no requirement to make a decision on this immediately!

It's certainly OK to reserve judgement - but this is obviously not true, at least on local / regional levels. Stores know whether they're selling copies or not (and many store owners on Dakka have mentioned that they are NOT). Distributors also know. Sure, GW sells directly - but in the US, that is not the bulk of the market, and with one-man stores with less capacity, even their own recruiting is not as high here.

I do have a friend that just moved to the UK and got pulled into a GW shop and given a demo or all things Warhammer (40k and AoS), but in the US it's just not the primary driver anymore. So, lots of people will have a very good idea of how AoS is selling in their areas before GW's official reports - and if anything, their official reports will do all they can to obscure poor performance, so a better way to determine how it is doing would be to take data from several sources... not just the first party source with a vested interest in it succeeding.

I am personally part of the group that wanted AoS to be absolutely awesome and were eagerly awaiting it, unfortunately when we saw it, at first thought it was a joke, GW is just kidding. Other than that I think the sigmarines are completely ridiculous, Sigmar himself is IMO extremely uninteresting, even in his own trilogy (which I thought was great in spite of Sigmar) This was a massive letdown. We (me and my group who were looking forward to it) were hoping for something simpler than fantasy (but more so than chutes and ladders) but could get big fights or skirmishes. IF not a completely new setting with new chars and story, then at least something more interesting. I play AoS when I can, but it is extremely unpopular around here, 1 store..thats it, in a major metro area, and its a GW (go figure) Its not terrible, its not very good either, and when you consider the talent pool GW has to draw from its almost insulting that this is what they came up with. I am hoping as it ages, GW will do to it what they do to all their games, make another edition. Take it seriously this time and flesh this thing out. I dont expect prices to lower. but they can do better there too. The competition is not sitting back, kickstarter is churning out high quality competition and the more established companies are rising as well. GW could easily be the next FASA, WHITE WOLF, or TSR if its not careful.

Deadnight wrote:

Why not? Considering it was the start up price and shoddy rules that drove so many away...

Miniatures are an expensive hobby, especially when starting out. Buying a starter box, at the very minimum, you need to get the polystyrene glue and clippers/hobby knife (or both, ideally). It took me about 9 hours to put together my Age of Sigmar box of 48 models. That's before you can even play the game. If you want to paint your figures (and unless you are a Warmachine player, you probably do), that's going to be about $100 in paints and tools, and possibly a hundred hours or more or painting.

Basically, before you've ever bought a second box of figures, you've had to decide whether it is worth the time and money investment to commit fully to the hobby. So I'm guessing that the starter boxes for WHFB don't do a real great job of selling the hobby to a new player. I don't think many of the starter boxes do, actually, so it is more likely that a new mini player is coming in with an existing peer group to show them how to play/give hobby tips.

However, it is considerably easier to poach players of other miniature games, as they don't have that learning curve and likely already have many of the tools and skills required. I went to AoS from Warmachine pretty easily, as I only needed the plastic glue due to the change in material of the miniatures (though I did end up getting some Citadel paints - that Retributor gold is amazing). So, it could be said that the WHFB starter set, if it managed to get other mini game players interested, didn't keep their interest.

Long story short (too late), the price is the last thing a new player (or old player) really looks at when deciding to play a new game. I think GW knows this too, which explains their prices for AoS units.

Shrinking year on year volume tells a different story for 40k though. If people aren't playing wfb, there is a reason. Maybe it's the price? The massive buy in to a reasonable level-of-play? That gw pushed the gsme where it's fans didnt want it it go? Price is a big thing for a lot of people, especially if it's in addition to an already expensive game...

GW is expensive. I don't think anybody could argue otherwise. And with the price of petroleum products going up, one day, plastic miniatures may be more expensive than metal ones. WHFB, which is best played with hundreds of models, isn't cost effective for the players... or GW. With the rising cost per figure, it's very likely that the prospect of a game with many hundreds of models as its base line would become too expensive to maintain or sell to players. So, GW would have to reduce the number of figures needed for the game in order to reduce the price... which they did with Age of Sigmar.

You are someone who never grew up with wfb. You've not lost what theyve lost. It's easy for you to so casually dismiss people's genuine issues, and you are quite wrong for doing it. As for baggage - Mate, they chucked the baby out with the bath water in favour of a thing that, while I can see value in, is something so many fsns just see as an insult. Keeping the fans on board is a clever move. It generates a thing called 'goodwill'. In a 'word of mouth' based hobby, this is key to future success. You know - responding to people's concerns and issues, Rather than nuke and reset from zero.

I didn't grow up with WHFB, but I did grow up with other things that have gone through similar things. For instance, I was a launch day fan of Star Wars Galaxies and watched as it went through a combat upgrade and then the dreaded "New Game Experience", before ultimately getting gak canned in favor of the disaster that was Old Republic. I also played Dust Tactics before it was sold to Battlefront who has mismanaged it from here to eternity. I watched BattleLore die a slow, meandering death over years due to no support, only to be reborn in a second edition that took away a lot of what I liked about the first edition. And don't even get me started on video games... I was a Shenmue fan...

So, I've been there and gone through it... but I've also come out the other side and I've realized that change is inevitable. Nothing lasts forever. So it is better to appreciate what you have than spend you life in bitter resentment over something you never had any control of in the first place.

Two new factions, to be fair. After hoe long? Almost a year, right? And limited fluff. WMH came out with four factions from day1, and this was on top of solid fluff and an already impressive rpg roster. Basic fluff for two factions with an undeveloped IP does not compare. Especially for a company on the scale of gw, and especially on A company of the scale of gw with a focus on 'the narrative'.

I was there with Warmachine on day 1 and yes, there were four factions. With about 4 models each. It took them a while to get up to speed, and early on, there was a lack of releases. Eventually, they managed to fill out the first book with about a dozen models for each faction - of which, all the light and heavy warjacks were variations on the same body with different arms. It had solid fluff because the Warmachine setting was worked on as a D&D 3.5 module for a DECADE before they started the miniature game. Right now, Warmachine is trying to figure out the whole plastic model thing (and not doing so great at it, so their quality has taken a huge hit).

So, I don't think you can really compare the two. AoS had two factions with dozens of models, two campaign guides, three battletomes, six terrain elements, and five or six novels within the first two or three months of release. Granted, GW isn't a fledgling company like PP was at the time, but they have delivered plenty. You may not like what they've delivered, but the one thing you can't say is that Age of Sigmar is lacking in releases. Hell, I'm still catching up on the first stuff. Age of Sigmar came out in July and six months later, we're getting another major release window.

But yes, yes they have. And for a lot of people, this coupled with overpriced rules books and source books is frankly, more than thry can bear. Put yourself in their shoes. You didn't have to lose the old world. Imagine if you did. I'm personally ok with more limited fluff for s starting game, it Jesus Christ, if you are talking about four factions of numerous races that have survived Armageddon from the old world, I want to read about the four factions and numerous, not just sigmarines and khorne bloody berserkers. I don't want to have to wait years for the faction I peotentially spent years collecting to make a bloody cameo.

I'd like GW to have staggered releases from multiple factions as well rather than just pushing out entire, finished factions in the span of a month. But I think that with the new aesthetic, GW doesn't have finalized designs for the new races and thus can't show them yet. But that's just conjecture on my part. I don't really have any control over what GW does or how they do it.

$100 in paints and tools? What are you smoking? Yeah, maybe if you buy from GW you'll end up spending that. I've made a run down of the minimum you need to buy and paint a Warmachine starter kit. This is from the Warstore, mind you.

Starter Set: $80
Army painter Brush starter set: $11.49
Army painter super glue: $4
Army Painter clippers: $6.00
X-acto Knife: $3
Vallejo paints: (Red, Black, Gun Metal, Grey, Brown Wash, Brown, Flesh color, Burgundy, White and Gold)
Krylon Primer: $7

Spring for Agrax Earthshade and get a cream color if you want a better/easier result.

This all works out to be $141.49. Yes, for $16 more than the AoS starter set you can get the Warmachine starter set and everything you need to bring it to a TT standard. The hobby may be expensive but going the GW route ups those costs by a good margin. Besides, you want to talk about models per starter set then check out the Hail Caesar starter .

Yeah, the AoS starter set may give you more models in the box and that may justify the extra cost to you but consider that the Warmachine starter puts you on a much better footing to a complete army than the AoS set. Besides, you want to talk about models per starter set then check out the Hail Caesar starter .
http://us-store.warlordgames.com/collections/romans/products/hail-caesar-the-conquest-of-gaul-starter-set

94 models. Double that of the AoS set and you get the hard back rule set.

 Spinner wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


I'm a Dogs of War player, and literally *ALL* of my favorite characters are gone. Same with my favorite units. And my non-favorites, too. Complaining about losing "official" rules for a handful of very old characters would be like me being upset that GW isn't supporting the original Regiments of Renown from waaay back when GW used leaded pewter. If your army had been Squatted, I think you take a different tack over losing a few models versus the whole fething thing. It's really fething petty is what it is.

Coming up with good backgrounds is not easy. Tolkien spent years refining Middle Earth, much as GW spent years building up the Old World. They are rich worlds, and the average gamer simply does not have the time, ability or inclination to make something like this in their spare time. Also, the Old World is awfully full. The very richness of detail that GW has added over the years has progressively removed places for players to make their own. With the broad development of Fluff and emphasis on hordes, Fantasy had become more pseudo-historical gaming than actual "fantasy" gaming.

Being able to make stuff up allows me to play my Dogs of War without "points" cost issues. For me, that's a good thing. I don't see what's gone too far.

One could argue that all our armies have been squatted. They no longer receive any official support for Warhammer Fantasy Battles.

Dogs of War were pretty neat! I liked the concept of adding mercenaries to armies and can remember going up against them once or twice. Good games, even if they ended horribly for my wolfboyz. If you don't like points as a concept, well, I guess that's your preference, but I never had an issue with squaring off against the Dogs of War. Did they get an updated list for Age of Sigmar?

I'd think it would be obvious losing the setting overall is more important than losing special characters. Not trying to be petty, just trying to give a counter-point to Matt's first point. Sorry if that offended you.

Now, as for the rest of the post...

Warhammer's basically always been pseudo-historical, at least in the background. Apart from the obvious real-world parallels - have you looked at any of the old, OLD WHFRP stuff? Lots of interesting little bits. In fact, I'd argue that recent developments moved it closer and closer to 'fantasy' gaming, what with the focus on giant monsters and magic and people turning into demigods because of said magic and all the other things that bothered me about End Times That was it's own unique flavor, and it's sad for me to see that be swapped out for some loosely inspired Norse mythology/Warcraft hybrid.

The fullness of the Old World never stopped me from writing background. It inspired it, actually. I'd poke around the map and see what looked interesting, then see if anything had already been written for it, and bam! Incorporate that. This character's a goblin warlord living in the Border Princes who picks on caravans going to Malko. That one's a Bretonnian knight who believes himself to be the rightful lord of the Hautmont. For me, it's always easier to build interesting background with a seed to work with. And, on that subject, I know I'm not alone. I was involved for years with a series of online campaigns that did just that - picked up on bits and pieces of fluff, then really fleshed them out, made them its own, and made Warhammer magic. In, by the way, the GM team's spare time. We hit Araby (twice!), Cathay and Nippon, Estalia, and Norsca...and each time, the GM team had an enormous resource pool to draw on. From maps to concept art to fan-based speculation...and that was a massive help, not an impediment. That argument just doesn't make sense to me.

One cannot argue that the bulk of armies were Squatted in AoS, given that GW provided new lists for them, unlike Dogs of War. DoW did not get a GW official AoS list. Haven't had one from GW since WFB 6E, carryover midway into early 7E, memory holed during 7E, non-existant during 8E. I made an AoS list so I can play my DoW, and have gotten in more 8E games under AoS than all of WFB 8E.

As a DoW player, I strongly disagree with losing the setting being important. During 8E, the Old World setting was still there, but DoW Special Characters (and army) were Squatted.

I started into WFB at the very tail of 5E, and the AoS armies look a lot more like what we saw at the end of Herohammer than pre-End Times 8E - a skirmish game ruled by huge things with some small units to fill the deployment line. Pre-ET 8E is "pseudo-historical" in the sense it's about huge numbers of models on the board, elephant-equivalents not withstanding. ET was a good move, because it brought WFB back to having Fantasy things instead of boring block infantry. Aside from a Border Princes campaign early on, it's just been even points fixed list battles.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
$100 in paints and tools? What are you smoking? Yeah, maybe if you buy from GW you'll end up spending that. I've made a run down of the minimum you need to buy and paint a Warmachine starter kit. This is from the Warstore, mind you.

Starter Set: $80
Army painter Brush starter set: $11.49
Army painter super glue: $4
Army Painter clippers: $6.00
X-acto Knife: $3
Vallejo paints: (Red, Black, Gun Metal, Grey, Brown Wash, Brown, Flesh color, Burgundy, White and Gold)
Krylon Primer: $7

Spring for Agrax Earthshade and get a cream color if you want a better/easier result.

I was assuming that a new miniatures player would stick to whatever ecosystem of tools were available for their chosen game. So if they decided to start playing 40k or AoS, all the painting guides and tool recommendations would be GW, while a WMH player would stick with the P3 paint line. I would assume that they would not be familiar with the tools and thus would buy the ones recommended to them - so yeah, we're talking $20 cans of primer from your local Games Workshop. With more experience, they'll realize that the $7 can of Krylon primer is better, but the GW stuff will be their baseline for the first year or so. Again, this is assuming a first time miniature player without a social group to ease them in.

I won't get into the WM vs AoS argument, but I do find your estimate to be fairly optimistic - based on years of experience and price shopping that a virgin player won't have. I'll admit that I stuck with the GW stuff initially (for WM, but this was way before the P3 line started) just because it was easily available and required little research. When I needed a file for some metal models, I just got the GW one because I didn't have to research files and learn which grains and shapes were best for metal and resin models. For a new Warmachine player, my guess is that they'll grab a starter set, the three paint sets (kingdom colors, khador, and menoth), P3 primer, and whatever P3 tools there are. It will be considerably cheaper, but not as easily accessible. I can't get P3 stuff in my city and have to mail order it, but there's multiple places I can get citadel stuff.

Yeah, the AoS starter set may give you more models in the box and that may justify the extra cost to you but consider that the Warmachine starter puts you on a much better footing to a complete army than the AoS set.

I'm not even sure what constitutes a "complete army" for AoS...

That's a fair point to make. When I started out in the hobby I used exclusively GW tools and products. And a new player would only know about the stuff in his immediate hobby store.

 Sqorgar wrote:


Long story short (too late), the price is the last thing a new player (or old player) really looks at when deciding to play a new game. I think GW knows this too, which explains their prices for AoS units.

So, GW would have to reduce the number of figures needed for the game in order to reduce the price... which they did with Age of Sigmar.

Our shop has about five different minis games people can play. The newbs usually look around at all of them. If you think price is truly the last thing (and not even the second most important) then uh, you definitely are a GW customer.

GW did reduce the number of models in boxes, that's for sure. Instead of 10 guys for 50 bucks you now get five blood guys for 50 bucks. You don't need 100 of them now until your buddies want to play more. As always, they'll emphasize collections in their writing. Collections aren't one box of blood guys.

Re: buying only citadel kit tools, someone who drops 150 bucks on blood guys and Sigmarines would almost never buy 30 dollar clippers and 30 dollar primer and 15 dollar glue, just doesn't happen. Dudes are trying to skimp on everything to even afford starting the game.

 mugginns wrote:

Our shop has about five different minis games people can play. The newbs usually look around at all of them. If you think price is truly the last thing (and not even the second most important) then uh, you definitely are a GW customer.

I'm not a GW customer, strictly speaking. I buy way more Warmachine models. I just remember when I first started with miniatures many, many moons ago. I got a demo of Warmachine at a con, like a week or two before it was released. I'd always been enamored by miniature games (I used to buy White Dwarfs and just stare at the pictures), but I tried out WM and enjoyed it and decided to jump in - only to find out how expensive it was well after I was already mentally committed. By then, I was in.

I do think price is important, and one of the first things I had to wrestle with on AoS was the price of boxes (and especially the $30 single figures). So I wouldn't discount the price of things. I just don't think that the GW extra cost is enough to make a new player balk as opposed to the regular cost of other lines. On my WMH wishlist, I have a figure for $32 and a character jack for $42. One day, I'd like to get a colossal, but those are $100+ usually. So I think the cost of continued investment in a miniatures game is already high, and I just don't think GW's premium cost is so much higher that it would be a dealbreaker by itself.

In short, miniature games are expensive. GW games are more expensive, but for that to matter, you must have already accepted the initial expense associated with becoming a mini wargamer.

GW did reduce the number of models in boxes, that's for sure. Instead of 10 guys for 50 bucks you now get five blood guys for 50 bucks. You don't need 100 of them now until your buddies want to play more. As always, they'll emphasize collections in their writing. Collections aren't one box of blood guys.

The Stormcast Eternals are elite units and priced accordingly. I believe you get 20 Bloodreavers for $60 and 16 Dryads for $40. In general, I don't think GW charges by the model, but instead by the unit. It's roughly $50-$60 for a basic unit, regardless of the number of models, and $70-$80 for one of the big colossal type units.

Re: buying only citadel kit tools, someone who drops 150 bucks on blood guys and Sigmarines would almost never buy 30 dollar clippers and 30 dollar primer and 15 dollar glue, just doesn't happen. Dudes are trying to skimp on everything to even afford starting the game.

They will if that's the only option immediately available to them, and Warhammer stores make damn sure it is.

 Sqorgar wrote:
[
Miniatures are an expensive hobby, especially when starting out. Buying a starter box, at the very minimum, you need to get the polystyrene glue and clippers/hobby knife (or both, ideally). It took me about 9 hours to put together my Age of Sigmar box of 48 models. That's before you can even play the game. If you want to paint your figures (and unless you are a Warmachine player, you probably do), that's going to be about $100 in paints and tools, and possibly a hundred hours or more or painting.

Snide comment is snide. What do you mean 'unless you are a warmachine player, you probably do'? Hmm? I play it painted, and I spend about three of four hours per model with painting. And I'm far from the only one.

And frankly, I e seen plenty GW armies that were 'grey legions'...

Leave the snide 'we are betterer hobbyists' behind, eh?

 Sqorgar wrote:
[
GW is expensive. I don't think anybody could argue otherwise. And with the price of petroleum products going up, one day, plastic miniatures may be more expensive than metal ones. WHFB, which is best played with hundreds of models, isn't cost effective for the players... or GW. With the rising cost per figure, it's very likely that the prospect of a game with many hundreds of models as its base line would become too expensive to maintain or sell to players. So, GW would have to reduce the number of figures needed for the game in order to reduce the price... which they did with Age of Sigmar.

Fail

. The cost of raw materials (in this case - plastic) is negligible for Gw. Gw prices aren't high because crude is going up, gw prices are high because they are gouging their customers and trying to recoup Their moulds and pay for the bloody retail chain. And give kirby a golden parachute.. Why else can companies like the Perries or any of the makers of historicals make mass battle games on a model scale that dwarves gw, but can still retail their stuff for a lot less.

Deadnight wrote:
The cost of raw materials (in this case - plastic) is negligible for Gw. Gw prices aren't high because crude is going up, gw prices are high because they are gouging their customers and trying to recoup Their moulds and pay for the bloody retail chain. And give kirby a golden parachute.. Why else can companies like the Perries or any of the makers of historicals make mass battle games on a model scale that dwarves gw, but can still retail their stuff for a lot less.

It never ceases to amaze me how people keep on refusing to see this.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
The cost of raw materials (in this case - plastic) is negligible for Gw. Gw prices aren't high because crude is going up, gw prices are high because they are gouging their customers and trying to recoup Their moulds and pay for the bloody retail chain. And give kirby a golden parachute.. Why else can companies like the Perries or any of the makers of historicals make mass battle games on a model scale that dwarves gw, but can still retail their stuff for a lot less.

It never ceases to amaze me how people keep on refusing to see this.

Yup, it's not like it's in their publically available financials or anything...

Why else can companies like the Perries or any of the makers of historicals make mass battle games on a model scale that dwarves gw, but can still retail their stuff for a lot less.

Well the Perry's are also not beholden to stockholders and have a much lower operating cost overall since they don't have retail store chains to pay for and all of the other expenses GW has such as payroll for employees.

Both of those things also play a significant role in the end price of product, and the Perry twins have little to none of those to deal with.

The worst thing that can happen to a company is when it goes public.

auticus wrote:

Why else can companies like the Perries or any of the makers of historicals make mass battle games on a model scale that dwarves gw, but can still retail their stuff for a lot less.

Well the Perry's are also not beholden to stockholders and have a much lower operating cost overall since they don't have retail store chains to pay for and all of the other expenses GW has such as payroll for employees.

Both of those things also play a significant role in the end price of product, and the Perry twins have little to none of those to deal with.

The worst thing that can happen to a company is when it goes public.

Funnily enough ending the retail chain altogether and working together with FLGS's all around is an action that has appeared multiples times as a possible solution to the crazy price hikes, but it would involve GW being far more open to FLGS than it actually is (or wishes to be). And it does seem quite feasible.

Yeah - if GW dropped their store chains they'd be cutting a huge cost out of their bottom line.

That requires management that allows the community to police itself and not dictate how their models get used though - which is a lot of their problem (GW)

Alternatively, GW could use their extensive retail chain to sell a wider variety of goods, such as Warhammer based RPGs and other games.

GW's big failing in my view is that they sell such a very limited range of games and they rely totally on their own retail shops to market them.

They don't even stock a full range of their own in-house stuff (Black Library is only the newest, there's tonnes of online-only minis).

I never understood why they don't also have the FFG and console stuff. Would it have killed them to stock the Space Marine console games, or have voucher cards for Total War or the shovelware releases?

Herzlos wrote:
They don't even stock a full range of their own in-house stuff (Black Library is only the newest, there's tonnes of online-only minis).

I never understood why they don't also have the FFG and console stuff. Would it have killed them to stock the Space Marine console games, or have voucher cards for Total War or the shovelware releases?

My guess is that their distribution network is vertically integrated. They can get any Games Workshop good easily, but they don't have distribution partners that could get them video games or whatever. They COULD, but it might not be worth the hassle for only one or two additional products - though FFG does make enough Warhammer stuff that you'd think they could deal with them directly.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


I'm a Dogs of War player, and literally *ALL* of my favorite characters are gone. Same with my favorite units. And my non-favorites, too. Complaining about losing "official" rules for a handful of very old characters would be like me being upset that GW isn't supporting the original Regiments of Renown from waaay back when GW used leaded pewter. If your army had been Squatted, I think you take a different tack over losing a few models versus the whole fething thing. It's really fething petty is what it is.

Coming up with good backgrounds is not easy. Tolkien spent years refining Middle Earth, much as GW spent years building up the Old World. They are rich worlds, and the average gamer simply does not have the time, ability or inclination to make something like this in their spare time. Also, the Old World is awfully full. The very richness of detail that GW has added over the years has progressively removed places for players to make their own. With the broad development of Fluff and emphasis on hordes, Fantasy had become more pseudo-historical gaming than actual "fantasy" gaming.

Being able to make stuff up allows me to play my Dogs of War without "points" cost issues. For me, that's a good thing. I don't see what's gone too far.

One could argue that all our armies have been squatted. They no longer receive any official support for Warhammer Fantasy Battles.

Dogs of War were pretty neat! I liked the concept of adding mercenaries to armies and can remember going up against them once or twice. Good games, even if they ended horribly for my wolfboyz. If you don't like points as a concept, well, I guess that's your preference, but I never had an issue with squaring off against the Dogs of War. Did they get an updated list for Age of Sigmar?

I'd think it would be obvious losing the setting overall is more important than losing special characters. Not trying to be petty, just trying to give a counter-point to Matt's first point. Sorry if that offended you.

Now, as for the rest of the post...

Warhammer's basically always been pseudo-historical, at least in the background. Apart from the obvious real-world parallels - have you looked at any of the old, OLD WHFRP stuff? Lots of interesting little bits. In fact, I'd argue that recent developments moved it closer and closer to 'fantasy' gaming, what with the focus on giant monsters and magic and people turning into demigods because of said magic and all the other things that bothered me about End Times That was it's own unique flavor, and it's sad for me to see that be swapped out for some loosely inspired Norse mythology/Warcraft hybrid.

The fullness of the Old World never stopped me from writing background. It inspired it, actually. I'd poke around the map and see what looked interesting, then see if anything had already been written for it, and bam! Incorporate that. This character's a goblin warlord living in the Border Princes who picks on caravans going to Malko. That one's a Bretonnian knight who believes himself to be the rightful lord of the Hautmont. For me, it's always easier to build interesting background with a seed to work with. And, on that subject, I know I'm not alone. I was involved for years with a series of online campaigns that did just that - picked up on bits and pieces of fluff, then really fleshed them out, made them its own, and made Warhammer magic. In, by the way, the GM team's spare time. We hit Araby (twice!), Cathay and Nippon, Estalia, and Norsca...and each time, the GM team had an enormous resource pool to draw on. From maps to concept art to fan-based speculation...and that was a massive help, not an impediment. That argument just doesn't make sense to me.

One cannot argue that the bulk of armies were Squatted in AoS, given that GW provided new lists for them, unlike Dogs of War. DoW did not get a GW official AoS list. Haven't had one from GW since WFB 6E, carryover midway into early 7E, memory holed during 7E, non-existant during 8E. I made an AoS list so I can play my DoW, and have gotten in more 8E games under AoS than all of WFB 8E.

As a DoW player, I strongly disagree with losing the setting being important. During 8E, the Old World setting was still there, but DoW Special Characters (and army) were Squatted.

I started into WFB at the very tail of 5E, and the AoS armies look a lot more like what we saw at the end of Herohammer than pre-End Times 8E - a skirmish game ruled by huge things with some small units to fill the deployment line. Pre-ET 8E is "pseudo-historical" in the sense it's about huge numbers of models on the board, elephant-equivalents not withstanding. ET was a good move, because it brought WFB back to having Fantasy things instead of boring block infantry. Aside from a Border Princes campaign early on, it's just been even points fixed list battles.

I'm sorry, I can't be reading this right. Did...did we switch positions? Last post you said it would be petty to complain about losing special characters when the setting had been done away with, and...now you're saying that the fact that your army and characters never got updated means you don't care about the setting?

See, I disagree that throwing in more 'fantasy' things was a good move - the Warhammer flavor (at least for me) is grim-and-gritty low fantasy, and if you've got giant mystical monsters and people imbued with the essence of magic itself dueling back and forth everywhere, that takes the focus off the halberdier who wasn't even equipped with shoes - but I guess we're just looking for different things here. Although I'm not sure how you pull off Dogs of War without relying on block infantry.

As for the fixed list battles thing - which I guess is all you played in eighth edition, is that what you were saying? - sounds more like an issue with a gaming group than the game itself. Eighth had plenty of scenarios, nothing stopped you from writing your own - or, in fact, updating Dogs of War to eighth edition like you have with Age of Sigmar! - and there was even less to stop people from using scenarios that had been published during earlier periods (Whee! I get to reference the General's Compendium again!)

...now I REALLY want to break that book out again and play the Siege of Nuln. Starts with goblins disguised as washerwomen sneaking past nearsighted checkpoint guards, ends with a massive setpiece battle on a giant bridge. Cinematic, narrative - all those buzzwords GW likes to throw around, and it's got points, so we should all be happy :p

 Sqorgar wrote:
They will if that's the only option immediately available to them, and Warhammer stores make damn sure it is.

There is one GW store in my state of 10 million people, and at least 15-20 independent stores. Add to that 'other hobby' shops and craft stores and it makes GW stores pretty much irrelevant, especially so when they close when the dude can't work that day, lol.

 Spinner wrote:

See, I disagree that throwing in more 'fantasy' things was a good move - the Warhammer flavor (at least for me) is grim-and-gritty low fantasy, and if you've got giant mystical monsters and people imbued with the essence of magic itself dueling back and forth everywhere, that takes the focus off the halberdier who wasn't even equipped with shoes - but I guess we're just looking for different things here.

You've got your high/low fantasy terminology wrong, but you certainly aren't an exception to the rule . Both the Old World and the Eight Realms are high fantasy settings. As for the grim and gritty - the old Warhammer Monthly stories were very good at portraying the spirit of the Old World. This appealed very much to me.