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.

Please start another thread if you want to continue this pissing contest between Warmahordes and Warhammer, it's massively off topic and begging for a flame war.

2 things. 1) please refrain from posting entirely in colour, it is hard for many users to read when they're on certain formats, 2) don't make posts like this that are just instructions, especially in colour. You're not a mod. If you're unhappy with how a thread is going, there's a yellow triangle for you to use.

That being said, please do ensure we don't get dragged off topic by a back and forth argument about two systems, thanks. motyak

how is it off-topic???
the OP compared 40K to Magic, which is not as good a comparison as Warmachine and 40K...
they are the two biggest competitors in the world of tabletop wargames where you have to assemble and (hopefully) paint your models...
both have similar costs per mini, and require about the same amount of effort to get to the table...
seems like a pretty fair comparison...

cheers
jah

Yeah, we compared MtG to 40k for pages, and that isn't even a minis game.

I'm sorry, but if you say something is overpriced it's only natural to look at the directly competing product. For 40k, that's most likely WM/H, maybe X-wing.

I don't think it's begging a flame war. As long as you're somewhat aware of both systems and have played both, its easy to make statements about them. Some people will insult the players who prefer one system over another, but like most insults, it just signals a realization that their argument is falling apart.

I just buy all my stuff off China for 40k. Warmachine is pretty good and pricing is reasonable so I buy proper kits from my flgs for that system.

I think the problem is GW is pricing its minatures as 'collectors items' .(..Jewel like objects of wander...)
Where as gamers see them as playing pieces for a game.(Delux counters?)

So in a game where you need 20-30 minatues for a full force, the price may seem acceptable when priced as 'collectors items'.

However when you need 60 to 120 minatures for a full force the price may seem excessive for gamers.

Lanrak wrote:
I think the problem is GW is pricing its minatures as 'collectors items' .(..Jewel like objects of wander...)
Where as gamers see them as playing pieces for a game.(Delux counters?)

So in a game where you need 20-30 minatues for a full force, the price may seem acceptable when priced as 'collectors items'.

However when you need 60 to 120 minatures for a full force the price may seem excessive for gamers.

Maybe it is time for a reboot of epic scale 40k?

If the feedback from the punters is: this game isn't good enough and the counters cost too much. Then I'd be thinking oh "we are trying to sell big beautiful model kits with a funky excuse to get them out of the display cabinet that we call a "game" whereas what the punters want is an actual game with nicer than average but still cheap game counters, time to kill massive 28mm model kits and reboot epic.

I'm sure an Epic reboot would be greeted with cheers of joy from.... hundreds of people.

 adamsouza wrote:
I'm sure an Epic reboot would be greeted with cheers of joy from.... hundreds of people.

A Leman Russ squadron that costs £2, and can actually move a bit without falling off a 6' by 4' table? What's not to like?

I'd welcome a good edition of epic still have mk sw and ork armies.

Akiasura wrote:
GW is basically charging luxury costs without providing luxury quality. For how much more expensive it is, and older, it should be superior to WM/H in most ways. It's not. Fluff is probably the biggest area they dominate in, as well as appearance, though the two are subjective. The rules are much worse in 40k, the games play out with less strategy/tactics, and the PUG environment is awful currently. It used to not be this way, but lately its gone downhill while prices are going higher and higher.

Oh so true.

Talizvar wrote:It all boils down to:
I have $50 to spend on "fun".
What kind of fun can I get from GW for $50?

A 10-man tactical squad or a 5-man Assault squad.
(Oddly I notice for most armies many kits target $50)

What kind of fun can I get from somewhere else?

I could buy an Imperial Class Star Destroyer for Armada.

I could buy "Ghost" for X-wing.

Or a "Dr. Who Deluxe 12' Scarf" for that matter.

We are in a time spoiled for choice and I can easily find things more "shiny" than GW product as they keep upping the price.

You are oh so right. Thing is in a lot of cases I am just getting back to 40K, I have $50 Canadian dollars so even less than your $50 :p but it still holds. I have my $50 but I can't really do anything with it games wise in 40K. For X-wing or Armada as you suggested you only need one of to use right away, for 40K I will need 2 or maybe even 3 of these kits. If that is not the case and I only want one thing, that spare $50 will not buy me anything because in most cases everything is either about $60 or almost $100. Yes I can save it for the next time I have a spare $50 so now it will be $100. Thing is, I don't want to save, when I want to spend NOW.

Now GW money is just going to X-wing or Star Trek Attack wing or what not.

hobojebus wrote:
I'd welcome a good edition of epic still have mk sw and ork armies.

I thought we had that?
http://www.netepic.org/
That is a great point to make that with many GW games, players just change the scale of play.
I am pretty sure near the end of the "Inquisitor" larger skirmish game they started doing reports with 28mm miniatures.

There is nothing wrong with looking at alternative rules or scales to get the games in you like provided you find enough "like minded" people to play.

 SolarCross wrote:

A Leman Russ squadron that costs £2, and can actually move a bit without falling off a 6' by 4' table? What's not to like?

The miniatures.

 insaniak wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:

A Leman Russ squadron that costs £2, and can actually move a bit without falling off a 6' by 4' table? What's not to like?

The miniatures.

This. Epic would be ok if the miniatures were at the same level as the FW Epic stuff (but with more consistent casting quality please!), but the scale still has its limits and the non-FW Epic stuff was almost all garbage.

 Peregrine wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:

A Leman Russ squadron that costs £2, and can actually move a bit without falling off a 6' by 4' table? What's not to like?

The miniatures.

This. Epic would be ok if the miniatures were at the same level as the FW Epic stuff (but with more consistent casting quality please!), but the scale still has its limits and the non-FW Epic stuff was almost all garbage.

It's just wound counters as long as you can tell tell what something is that's all I need.

But then I'm a gamer not a collector.

hobojebus wrote:

It's just wound counters as long as you can tell tell what something is that's all I need.

But then I'm a gamer not a collector.

Yes, this ^

We need to face facts. 28mm is a scale nice for hobby model kits where you can happily spend hours painting each individual freckle on Captain Herodude's face but it is a terrible, terrible scale for gaming. It is okay only for squad vs squad level games like Necromunda or Space Hulk but utterly absurd for anything larger. ABSURD! GW knows this and they keep telling you, it's a hobby, it's a hobby, the game is not important. The game exists only so you can put your big pretty miniatures on display for someone else to admire. 40k is about collecting, crafting, storytelling, displaying and spending quality social time with fellow hobbyists.

If you are a gamer first, 40k is a slowed hyper-expensive monstrosity. If you are a hobbyist it is really fun!

In a sane world, tournaments in 40k should not exist unless you win by having the best paint job or the fluffiest back story.

If 40k is to be an actual real game it MUST be on a scale appropriate for gaming which for companies of infantry, artillery, fliers, giant mecha and tank squadrons armies must be 6mm or 10mm tops to be even remotely feasible.

6mm means you can:
- Play apocalypse size games comfortably on a 6' by 4' table.
- You can transport / store your entire 10,000pt army in a shoe box instead of a friggin freight container.
- You can paint your entire army in a single weekend instead of the 1000 weekends.
- Your entire army won't cost more to buy than a single night in a hotel would cost instead of the cost of brand new real car.

Every single one of you complaining of the cost of gaming in 40k you should just realise that epic is the game you want not 40k. That or try Dropzone Commander.



Apocalypse the right way.

I find that argument to be pretty shallow. The true test of any game is whether or not people play it. Whether it's a board game, a video game, or a miniwar game, whatever. If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't. And 40k has nothing to prove. The last 30 years of 40k gaming demonstrate that people like the format and want that scale of play.

Qlanth wrote:
I find that argument to be pretty shallow. The true test of any game is whether or not people play it. Whether it's a board game, a video game, or a miniwar game, whatever. If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't. And 40k has nothing to prove. The last 30 years of 40k gaming demonstrate that people like the format and want that scale of play.

lol, I made a shallow argument? Did I say something inanely vacuous like this:

"The true test of any game is whether or not people play it." or something stupidly specious like:

"If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't."?

DERP

What an incisive rebuttal.

Bravo.

 SolarCross wrote:

Qlanth wrote:
I find that argument to be pretty shallow. The true test of any game is whether or not people play it. Whether it's a board game, a video game, or a miniwar game, whatever. If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't. And 40k has nothing to prove. The last 30 years of 40k gaming demonstrate that people like the format and want that scale of play.

lol, I made a shallow argument? Did I say something inanely vacuous like this:

"The true test of any game is whether or not people play it." or something stupidly specious like:

"If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't."

DERP

You're really opening a lot of eyes in this thread. I can feel it now. I really did want to play Epic this whole time after all. I never really was interested in 40k and it's all because of 28mm scale.

Qlanth wrote:
I find that argument to be pretty shallow. The true test of any game is whether or not people play it. Whether it's a board game, a video game, or a miniwar game, whatever. If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't. And 40k has nothing to prove. The last 30 years of 40k gaming demonstrate that people like the format and want that scale of play.

But at the same time, 40k seems to be going through a significant decrease in market penetrance, what with 7th being seen as the lame duck edition and whatnot. The unit sales have continued to decrease for years on end, and at the same time the 40k experience has shifted as bigger and bigger games making up the norm. Unless there substantial changes to the game, I don't see this process being reversed any time soon.

I think the scale of 40k has gotten significantly screwed up- troops play such a minor role in the game that everything has moved to the big expensive kits.

Repeating "7th edition is a lame duck" is 40K equivalent of "Obama is a muslim". There is no proof of either, and simply saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

6th Edition was a lame duck. We know that since it was the shortest, speed bump, of an edition in 40K history.

Rumors of 8th edition being just around the corner have existed since before 7th edition was even released. It's a snarky joke that people who were butthurt about 6ths short life span started, and that critics of GW and 7th edition won't let drop.

As for EPIC scaled 40K, it requires that you love the game enough that you don't care what the miniatures really look like.
EPIC sized figures are too tiny to sculpt detail. Too tiny to paint detail. EPIC scale is 1 step away from playing with figure flats and cardboard chits. Some people eat that up, most don't.

EPIC has been through 2 incarnations, neither of them sold well enough for GW to want to keep making them long term.

So dropping profits and a14% reduction in model sales mean nothing to you?

How about the fact x-wing has dethroned 40k as the best selling miniature game?

40k is decreasing in popularity because the games imbalanced and the cost is prohibitive, people have had enough of GW and are leaving for greener pastures.

 adamsouza wrote:
Repeating "7th edition is a lame duck" is 40K equivalent of "Obama is a muslim". There is no proof of either, and simply saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

6th Edition was a lame duck. We know that since it was the shortest, speed bump, of an edition in 40K history.

Rumors of 8th edition being just around the corner have existed since before 7th edition was even released. It's a snarky joke that people who were butthurt about 6ths short life span started, and that critics of GW and 7th edition won't let drop.

As for EPIC scaled 40K, it requires that you love the game enough that you don't care what the miniatures really look like.
EPIC sized figures are too tiny to sculpt detail. Too tiny to paint detail. EPIC scale is 1 step away from playing with figure flats and cardboard chits. Some people eat that up, most don't.

EPIC has been through 2 incarnations, neither of them sold well enough for GW to want to keep making them long term.

I'm ok with 7th, if you don't take it as a serious game, it can be fun. I sort of think of 7th as 6th merged with apocalypse, which makes sense as both use the same models. The issue with 7th is that it is not a wargame, it is a game for a hobby. Playing wargames with hobby kits is nuts though, just nuts. Who has the time, the money or storage to play a wargame with 28mm kits? Where do you get a playing area big enough? You could rent a tennis court I suppose, or a football pitch.

If you are gamer more than you are hobbyist and you like to play within the 40k fluff / lore then epic is the way to go. With all these people complaining of the cost of 40k, playing with forever to be unpainted armies and then giving up and just playing something else, it may be that epic's time has come.

28mm 40k is for people who are super-rich, unemployed (so they have time enough to paint a dozen leman russes and 200 guardsmen, including their freckles) and really, really dig painting freckles.

6mm 40k is for gamers whose disposable income is not unlimited, have leisure time limited by family, jobs and normal sleeping patterns and are not that bothered about painting freckles.

 SolarCross wrote:

6mm 40k is for gamers whose disposable income is not unlimited, have leisure time limited by family, jobs and normal sleeping patterns and are not that bothered about painting freckles.

You know, sweeping assumptions just do not hold.

I didn't like Epic. I still do not like Epic. And it entirely has to do with the scale. Stating that Epic is for 'this type of person' and '40k is for that type of person' is petty tribalism at its finest. Plenty of people out there with family, jobs and sleeping patterns that don't like Epic. Plenty of people who are super rich or unemployed with enough time who do like Epic.

But assuming that if someone likes X then they must be Y?

Yeah, not on at all mate. Bit dickish if you ask me.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

You know, sweeping assumptions just do not hold.

I didn't like Epic. I still do not like Epic. And it entirely has to do with the scale. Stating that Epic is for 'this type of person' and '40k is for that type of person' is petty tribalism at its finest. Plenty of people out there with family, jobs and sleeping patterns that don't like Epic. Plenty of people who are super rich or unemployed with enough time who do like Epic.

But assuming that if someone likes X then they must be Y?

Yeah, not on at all mate. Bit dickish if you ask me.

It is a matter of practicalities, just this. I'm not sure why you having a malfunction over this, do you imagine that 28mm scale will die if epic gets a reboot? Hardly, the hobbyists will keep it alive. If GW wants to coax back the gamers it is losing to X-Wing, then epic would be a good fit. GW is big enough to do both epic and 28mm. You like freckles? Fine play 7th with big kits! Like a game with room to manoeuvre on a standard gaming table that won't cost a fortune? Play epic!

Qlanth wrote:
I find that argument to be pretty shallow. The true test of any game is whether or not people play it. Whether it's a board game, a video game, or a miniwar game, whatever. If it's good, people will play it. If it's not, they won't. And 40k has nothing to prove. The last 30 years of 40k gaming demonstrate that people like the format and want that scale of play.

Except for the past 30 years 40k hasn't been trying to fit superheavies in to your average game, that's a more recent phenomenon.

Personally I think with the size of games 40k tries to play (with tank squadrons, large monsters, walkers, etc), 15mm scale would be perfect. 6mm the models just become counters, which some people like but I don't think has wide appeal. 15mm the models are still clear enough to put some effort in to making individuals look nice, but also if you want to paint stuff quickly a basecoat and a wash goes a long way on 15mm models.

Of course for painting display models, 28mm (and larger) is great, but part of the problem with 40k is not knowing what it wants to be and that's driven a lot of people away in recent years.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Except for the past 30 years 40k hasn't been trying to fit superheavies in to your average game, that's a more recent phenomenon.

Personally I think with the size of games 40k tries to play (with tank squadrons, large monsters, walkers, etc), 15mm scale would be perfect. 6mm the models just become counters, which some people like but I don't think has wide appeal. 15mm the models are still clear enough to put some effort in to making individuals look nice, but also if you want to paint stuff quickly a basecoat and a wash goes a long way on 15mm models.

Of course for painting display models, 28mm (and larger) is great, but part of the problem with 40k is not knowing what it wants to be and that's driven a lot of people away in recent years.

I agree, even a drop to 15mm would make big games much more practical and affordable.
A 15mm mini is half the height, quarter the footprint and an eighth the volume. Which loosely implies minis being an 1/8th cost. Leman Russ for a £5? yes please!

Dropzone Commander is on a 10mm scale and even the infantry looks nice enough.

That's faulty logic.

Dropping scale may mean a drop in material costs, but they're a tiny part of the cost, really really tiny.

There may be a small drop in production costs due to less time to actually sculpt a smaller model with less detail and less complex sprue design, but the reality is the drop won't be anything near enough to realise prices like you're suggesting.

Given the costs of packaging, logistics and the overhead of the retail chain would be almost completely unaffected, I'd be surprised if GW would/could sell a 15mm Russ for less than £25.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, probably closer £15-20, I'd got the Russ at £40 currently in my head, and they're £31.

 Azreal13 wrote:
That's faulty logic.

Dropping scale may mean a drop in material costs, but they're a tiny part of the cost, really really tiny.

There may be a small drop in production costs due to less time to actually sculpt a smaller model with less detail and less complex sprue design, but the reality is the drop won't be anything near enough to realise prices like you're suggesting.

Given the costs of packaging, logistics and the overhead of the retail chain would be almost completely unaffected, I'd be surprised if GW would/could sell a 15mm Russ for less than £25.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, probably closer £15-20, I'd got the Russ at £40 currently in my head, and they're £31.

No your logic is wrong. Design costs (which you incorrectly call production costs) would be the same as for a 28mm russ, but those costs are tiny, tiny, tiny on large production runs. Large production runs are hardly a thing in wargaming but if there was any company that gets close to that it would be GW. All other costs are fairly proportional because a 28mm leman russ package would hold 8 15mm russes not 1 (Derp).

For a point of reference Dropzone Commander sells 10mm main battle tanks (in resin) in packs of 3 for £11.



Just found this 15mm APC (in resin).. £6 each.

If fow can do plastic tanks at £5 GW could certainly do a smaller kit for cheaper.

The idea it'd be £15 is bewildering.

GW don't set high prices because it costs them alot, they set them because their sales are abysmal and they have to keep profits up any means necessary.