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.

retailers dislike having to stock lots and lots of SKUs so infinity and other games that have lots of regular releases have to do things to keep the numbers down

retiring stuff is unpopular with players (unless a new sculpt replaces the old and even then it's potentially iffy) and infinity does so only rarely

the other alternative is to have boxes with multiple items in and it looks like this is what they've chosen here

(hoping reduced sales because a buyer won't want both will be outweighed by those who won't mind buying the unwanted one either to just have, trade with friends or even encourage the start of a new army)

Henshini - I'm not sure there is a good reason, beyond keeping the number of stock items down.

For some reason I assumed the PanO double TAG box would be two 'frames' in different poses with enough heads/accessories that I could build two Tiks, two Uhlans or one of each in either pose. After all, they're the same class of TAG, and share most of the same armour and weapon systems, beyond some minor cosmetic differences.

This way, ASA, NCA and Vanilla players would have no gripes with the box as AVA would be filled out any which way!

My assumption must have come from the fact that this is the most blindingly obvious way of doing it...

That's how I thought it would be done, but that was just a lot of forum wishlisting. Apparently the plan was always to do a box of one of each.

Henshini wrote:
Could someone explain to me the reason why they couldn't be two boxes? Is there like a minimum volume you have to put in a box for it to be worth it? Because many infantry boxes probably have less metal in them than a single gecko-sized tag.

Someone made a choice.

They took their best estimations, based on previous trends and sales information at how well TAGs sell and then compared it the the projected sales amounts they would make if they sold the TAGs in a) 1 double pack of one variant each, b) 2 double packs holding two models of the same variant, c) 1 double packs with alternate pieces to make each variant or d) 2 single packs with 1 variant per pack.

After consulting this cost modeling they decided to go with the 2 variants 1 box method as it would be cheaper and easier to produce (less costs in creating a new box size, only commissioning art for 1 box, simpler to order as there are less boxes/sku) and go with the expectation that people would communicate and trade models they didn't want etc rather than re-inventing the wheel of packaging or going for potentially reducing the visual impact of having two pretty sweet models by having them have to be modular.

I personally would have liked a bit of modularity as my preferred choice but can totally understand why they went the way they did.

Reducing SKU creep is probably at least part of the answer. While it's more convenient from the consumer viewpoint to be able to buy the exact single figures you want, bundling simplifies the inventory management at all levels (manufacturing, distributing, and stores). It basically halves the number of decisions that need to be made regarding how many products to produce or stock.

That's what everyone are saying. Final goal is profit for CB, we're of very little importance to them. The less they need to account for consumer's input/desire the better precedent they create for themselves for future releases.

 Knight wrote:
That's what everyone are saying. Final goal is profit for CB, we're of very little importance to them. The less they need to account for consumer's input/desire the better precedent they create for themselves for future releases.

What an incredibly petulant attitude.

Every single company/business makes decisions that are better for them than for the consumer. Of course the final goal is profit. That's how these people make their living after all.

Thing is, if it was possible to make 2 different poses of each model (and really we're talking 4 heads instead of two, a couple of different shoulderpads to account for the Feuerbach and maybe a different backpack each), then I'd have definitely have bought 2 boxes so that I could have full AVA in both sectorials.

As it is, I'll buy one and never consider a second.

It would also have near-guaranteed full box sales for people who play a single sectorial; as it is I assume Cho-Konnit is going to be quite busy splitting boxes for people, or ebay will be a rich hunting ground for a while after release.

It's hard to believe that CB has managed to botch the release of a model that people have literally been calling for for years.

What an outrage! You mean this box of REMs comes with two bodies, but only parts to make one of each type? Outrage! CB is after nothing but our money, and are worse than GW!

(...boxes that were released in 2006...)

Really now, this isn't any bloody different than say, Scylla+Draikos being a box set, or the existence of package sets.

Again also, if you play vanilla, which I do and many do, there's nothing wrong with a TAG 2-pack. Hell, should CA players complain that the Xeodron comes in a 2-pack, while they're AVA1 in Vanilla?
This sort of petulant grognardry is the worst of our otherwise fine community. Even if I didn't want one of the two TAGs, congrats. You have conversion bits to make unique poses.

Honestly, more bits do cost money. And more unified bits also reduces the diversity of sculpt. Having all the parts to make 2 distinct of each TAG means we're either really making a sort of 4-pack, or both TAGs have pretty much the same pose with random gak tacked on. I for one, would prefer spending a little more to have more interesting models, which is a major reason as to why Infinity has done well. I never want to see a modular 'YuJing HI kit that builds 4 different troop classes with 10 weapons' like a space marine set, ever.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Every single company/business makes decisions that are better for them than for the consumer. Of course the final goal is profit. That's how these people make their living after all.

Exactly. I'm not faulting them for doing them what they do.

 Knight wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Every single company/business makes decisions that are better for them than for the consumer. Of course the final goal is profit. That's how these people make their living after all.

Exactly. I'm not faulting them for doing them what they do.

Then you should improve your phrasing, because what you posted was exactly that.

Yeah I'm not really seeing the big problem here...

 -Loki- wrote:
Then you should improve your phrasing, because what you posted was exactly that.

Don't get mad over nothing. There's no conflict in what I said. There's a conflict between what I'd want and what they offer, but that's market.

PLEASE TAKE THIS TOPIC DOWN TO THE INFINITY SUB-FORUM.

MEANWHILE, BACK HERE IN THE 'INFINITY NEWS & RUMORS' THREAD...

Back on Topic: based on historical trends, we should start seeing the painted releases next week.

Logically yes, Angel has already teased with a few of his traditional teaser pics.

Edit

Todays Snipershot.

That looks like a really big gun in a Yu Jing hand.

Wu Ming?

Specifically Wu Ming with Light Shotgun and Panzerfaust.

You sure that's a Panzerfaust? The dossier says HRL and the model appears to have an LRL. I just noticed that the dossier shows a completely different weapon loadout from what actually comes with the minis. The LGL/MULTI rifle, HRL, and combi rifle are missing from the minis while the Chain Rifle and HMG were not shown in the dossier. The shotty also appears to be completely different, looking almost more like a Nomad one. Weird.

There's more weapon options than would fit on the dossier. The box is LSG and Panzerfaust, Boarding Shotgun, Chain Rifle and HMG. They don't have a LRL profile so it's definitely a panzer (similar to the Nomad Jaguar one).

Love the attention to the numbers.

Love 'em. Will get a box to go with my ISS starter and Kanren that I got recently.

I am a bit surprised they did not wrote the numbers on the oval shape on the helmet.

Well those are just absolutely fething awesome. Love the guy with his helmet removed!

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I am a bit surprised they did not wrote the numbers on the oval shape on the helmet.

What are those numbers in reference to?

The Wu Ming don't have names, they just have numbers.

Looking good.

More stuff to buy.

They do look good. I just noticed the Chain Rifle guy looks to have a gun mounted on his back. Presumably that's a smg. I hadn't noticed that detail before. It looks like Giraldez painted him with glowing eyes though, which is weird.

If they were so inclined, they could totally put out a second Wu Ming box. There's enough profiles left over for it. If they didn't want to double up the boarding shotgun sculpt, they could even throe in a Yu Jing Tinbot sculpt since the shotty sculpt uses one.