So, can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?

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.

**Just Tony**

Miindhaze wrote:Well, I didn't read all 27 pages so forgive me if I'm overly repetitive.

To me in order to truly be great there needs to be some sort of balance between codices. I thought this was happening during basically the entire 2014 year. Nids, AM, Orks, SW, GK, DE, BA scaled back power levels and seemed to represent a curbing of power creep. Then Crons hit with Decurion, Total buff to an already top 5 army with absurd free formations and buffs on buffs. Fast forward 1 year and the haves and have nots are so dramatically seperated that basically any pre-2015 codex is almost worthless in a competitive sense.

2016 had basically ignored updated codices in general for campaign books and supplements, which has done little to counteract 360 in design philosophy that occurred prior to 2015. I solely wish for a full codex revamp where GW can stick to a single design philosophy,but even should this happen it would still take years,

I like that GW has seemed to respond to customer feedback far more than in previous years. Given my previous optimism i would like to see more consistency before I declare the mild dysfunction that is GW good.

A 360 is a circle, meaning they didn't change directions at all. I think you meant 180.

The new rerelease of sorts of the IoB minis with squares leads me to think that maybe GW IS listening, and that in and of itself is an improvement. How much they listen, now THAT is another story. And, well, given some of the hair brained ideas coming from the player base from time to time I hope they don't listen to everything.

**jreilly89**

Sasori wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.

If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.

Regardless, they are getting my money again.

Agreed. Just picked up an IG Start Collecting box

**Herzlos**

Sasori wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.

If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.

Regardless, they are getting my money again.

Increased product range, yes. But once you factor out the royalty payments and the reduced margins on the goods sold, they are selling less actual boxes of toys. It's been a fairly consistent but gradual decline.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Herzlos wrote:
Sasori wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
They are making more money, but that doesn't mean they are moving more product. The figures seem to imply they are moving less product.

If you say so. I briefly followed the thread, and it seemed to be that t he increased products were a combination of the currency rates and movement of more product.

Regardless, they are getting my money again.

Increased product range, yes. But once you factor out the royalty payments and the reduced margins on the goods sold, they are selling less actual boxes of toys. It's been a fairly consistent but gradual decline.

I don't actually think it declined all that much the last financial report, prices were reasonably stable and even ignoring royalties revenue didn't go down all that much. The big drops in goods sold were the preceding few years where revenue was dropping significantly in the face of rising prices.

**DalinCriid**

Well, a 10 girl squad of Sisters (metal) is 50 pounds. You are damn right we are in a new "golden" age.

**AllSeeingSkink**

DalinCriid wrote:
Well, a 10 girl squad of Sisters (metal) is 50 pounds. You are damn right we are in a new "golden" age.

You referring to me? I never said anything about a "golden" age.

Simply that the last financial report - ie. 2015/16 - didn't see a major drop in revenue even if you ignore royalties and in that same period I don't believe prices were significantly higher than the previous year (except maybe closer to the start when some early AoS stuff rolled in, but then we also know the latter half was when most of the good sales numbers came in).

The SoB's are a terrible measure of anything because they're ancient metal models and I don't think much of GW's sales comes from ancient metal models (any ancient metals that have been selling have probably been converted to resin or plastic by now).

I think GW had big drops in sales volume in the years since mid 6th edition, but it seems to have stabilised last FY.

**Battlesong**

Kaiyanwang wrote:
Battlesong wrote:
Kaiyanwang wrote:
I wish to link this post in the thread about the Imperial Agents to show how Kevin Rountree is just a meme CEO.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/2400/708759.page#9077869
Let me clarify my points in that post. I do think they've gotten better and, even better, I think they are trying to get better. I look to Warhammer TV, the Facebook pages, Regimental Standard, the fact that they actually respond to rumors (in their own unique way). I, personally, like Traitor Legions; it's not a new CSM 'dex, but it gave a lot of Chaos players something good, for once. Then C:IA drops and it's like a blast from 2014, I'm hoping it's a blip on the radar rather than a sign of things. I will say, my biggest shock and the thing that worries me the most, was their reply to the questions about the plastic sisters. Like I said in that post, that kind of tone-deafness was shocking and shows just how far they still have to go. Have they gotten better? Yes, but they were so far down, that better is still bad.

Thanks for the intervention, I felt a bit bad to link like that. Next time, I will PM the author. Bad, bad Kaiyanwang.

It's all good, I thought it was kinda cool that someone would link to one of my posts. I did want to clarify though, as that post was in the context of the other thread, and I thought it would be a good idea to bring my thoughts into the context of this thread.

**DarkBlack**

This thread is still going? To summarize:

A few people: Yea, they have been doing some good things and addressing some problems.
Someone: a step in the right direction, but they still have a long way to go...
Someone else: BUT THIS THING!
*argue about that thing*
*end up arguing about how GW runs their business and the success thereof*

Repeat several times and here we are.

**Azreal13**

Sasori wrote:
I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.

Something you're neglecting to mention there is that many players lay the blame for the game dying firmly at GW's feet. It wasn't a natural death, but one caused, or at the very least hastened, by chronic mishandling over several editions. The negative reaction to AOS wasn't simply a reaction to change, but a reaction to change that people hadnt wanted and frustration that it need never have happened. End Times was largely well received, it seemed, but then nobody knew what was coming.

**jreilly89**

Azreal13 wrote:
Sasori wrote:
I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.

Something you're neglecting to mention there is that many players lay the blame for the game dying firmly at GW's feet. It wasn't a natural death, but one caused, or at the very least hastened, by chronic mishandling over several editions. The negative reaction to AOS wasn't simply a reaction to change, but a reaction to change that people hadnt wanted and frustration that it need never have happened. End Times was largely well received, it seemed, but then nobody knew what was coming.

For the most part, End Times was well received, although some of the magic was crazy powerful, as were new units like Nagash.

**AllSeeingSkink**

jreilly89 wrote:
Azreal13 wrote:
Sasori wrote:
I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.

Something you're neglecting to mention there is that many players lay the blame for the game dying firmly at GW's feet. It wasn't a natural death, but one caused, or at the very least hastened, by chronic mishandling over several editions. The negative reaction to AOS wasn't simply a reaction to change, but a reaction to change that people hadnt wanted and frustration that it need never have happened. End Times was largely well received, it seemed, but then nobody knew what was coming.

For the most part, End Times was well received, although some of the magic was crazy powerful, as were new units like Nagash.

I think many people were happy WHFB was finally getting some attention even if much of it was a departure from WHFB's previous style... but when it started to be revealed the End Times might REALLY be the end, a lot of people just got really hesitant. Then the 6 month silence before AoS... GW handled it so incredibly poorly.

**Kaiyanwang**

Sasori wrote:
I

I can understand why people are upset at GW for killing WHFB. Change is tough, but the game was dying. They made one last massive push, in 2013 (I think it was) with a ton of army books and releases, but it didn't do enough.

People are mad at the mishandling.

5th edition WHFB was herohammer. Fun, with some problem.
6th edition was redone, more focus on units, perhaps too strong cavalry, magic with dice and out of control if tournament restrictions were not enforced. probably the best period, shame some Army got a bad book.
7th edition started a power game escalation and the game broke finally, bleeding players, with Daemons, Vampires and Dark Elves
8th edition was a soft reboot containing all sort of randumb, huge infantry units that skyrocketed the entry level, even less focus on tactics and more focus on big things and broken spells. More bleeding.
End of times was rushed and mishandled (plus awful writing, really awful).

People are mad at GW incompetence (and greed - their game designers are hacks, but the big infantry units was greed) and I frankly see a similar, albeit not that bad pattern in 40k.

As a former WHFB player, I will never spend one dime in AoS. Is forbidden for me, it would be rewarding GW for their greed and stupidity.

**hobojebus**

Yeah when 10 guys cost £25 and you need 50 of them that's just not reasonable.

The multi unit sets are a massive bugbear of mine I hate that a troop unit of immortals costs me twice what a unit of space marines does.

**DalinCriid**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
DalinCriid wrote:
Well, a 10 girl squad of Sisters (metal) is 50 pounds. You are damn right we are in a new "golden" age.
You referring to me? I never said anything about a "golden" age.

Simply that the last financial report - ie. 2015/16 - didn't see a major drop in revenue even if you ignore royalties and in that same period I don't believe prices were significantly higher than the previous year (except maybe closer to the start when some early AoS stuff rolled in, but then we also know the latter half was when most of the good sales numbers came in).

The SoB's are a terrible measure of anything because they're ancient metal models and I don't think much of GW's sales comes from ancient metal models (any ancient metals that have been selling have probably been converted to resin or plastic by now).

I think GW had big drops in sales volume in the years since mid 6th edition, but it seems to have stabilised last FY.

I was referring to none in particular. It was more like of an analysis of mine. I don't mind spending 50 bucks on sisters, but I would like them to be plastic with SM quality at least...

**hobojebus**

I would mind given the mould hasn't changed and the metal they use now is left over stuff from yonks ago, there's no good reason they shot up in price so dramatically.

**herjan1987**

shinros wrote:

Companies don't do all this social media out of the good of their heart it's about money. GW is doing this for money but now they are actually being smart about it. The bundles, Getting input to improve a product for the consumer, bringing back certain armies etc.

Malecowshirt!

Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:

"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."

Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.

Herzlos wrote:
Most people were put off enough by the free stuff to want to pay anything to see if it's not as bad as they thought.

On release, gw portrayed them as shallow space marine clones, snd that furst impression will last a long time.

But lets be fair; everyone loves space marines

Herzlos! I like your comments, but I dont like Space Marines. Guard and Sisters for the win!

**ZebioLizard2**

Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:

"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."

Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.

Well considering he's not the CEO anymore.. What relative nature should I take this quote to now?

**herjan1987**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:

"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."

Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.

Well considering he's not the CEO anymore.. What relative nature should I take this quote to now?

The simple fact that they are doing the same stuff, just with a sugarcoated aproach. Which is still shows that they throw mud on the wall and see what does stick.

**shinros**

herjan1987 wrote:
ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute:

"We have a simple strategy at Games Workshop.
We make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit and we intend to do this forever.
[...] We know that [...] people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared to pay what they are worth. [...]
We don’t spend money on things we don’t need, like [...] advertising that speaks to the mass market and not our small band of loyal followers."

Where is the reason here that I should buy in to Games Workshops products? This just shows that, how the mentioned companys fail to understand how to operate a business and engage with customers. So they need to use manipulative price tactics ( Fex: battleforces ) to ensure purchases.

Well considering he's not the CEO anymore.. What relative nature should I take this quote to now?

The simple fact that they are doing the same stuff, just with a sugarcoated aproach. Which is still shows that they throw mud on the wall and see what does stick.

Still does not change they are largely(looks at imperial agents) doing what the community wants bundles, community interaction (new general handbook looking for idea's and feedback) and their warhammer community website. It's baby steps but they are going in the right direction if you want your wargame/minature hobby to survive you need to invest in the community which also helps gain new blood. Which the new CEO understands and it seems to be working, for example the very first AOS book it's not the greatest book in the world hell I don't even like it much but they are offering the ebook for free.

People seem to be enjoying on the grand allaince community but small things make a difference. As I said they are not doing this out of the good of their heart it's a business they need to make money but I as a consumer am confident to invest in the product because they are supporting the community aspect which I feel is the most important in a miniature hobby.

**Davor**

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/711405.page

Has GW changed? Nuff said. In the end this is all that matters. The rules. I don't care how well dressed you are. I don't care how well spoken you are. If the rules are still crap, we still have random on random and it still seems the rules are not for fun but to get the most money out of your customers, is what matters in the end.

I say all the good GW has done in 2016 seems to have come to a sour at the end of 2016. Way to go. Get the stench of Kirby off only to have it back at an end of a great year. That is Merry Christmas for you right there.

*edit*

That said, it may seem I am negative on GW, but I really do like what they are doing. I have spent so much money on GW this year that I haven't done in the last few years so the work they did, worked at least on me. Thing is, if the rules in the end are not awesome, no matter how great GW improves, I will stop buying. I still haven't bought anything for my 40K armies because of the rules are crap in my opinion. I collect Tyranids and Dark Angels. I did buy Genestealer cult codex but haven't bought any of the minis till I know the rules well get better for 40K. I am liking the direction of Age of Sigmar and that is where a lot of my purchases are from as well.

I am just shocked with all the "change" GW has been doing, they are taking their time in the important part that [b]needs to change[\b] and that has slowed my purchases now. Bling, flash and glitter only get you so far.

**Sasori**

Davor wrote:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/711405.page

Has GW changed? Nuff said. In the end this is all that matters. The rules. I don't care how well dressed you are. I don't care how well spoken you are. If the rules are still crap, we still have random on random and it still seems the rules are not for fun but to get the most money out of your customers, is what matters in the end.

I say all the good GW has done in 2016 seems to have come to a sour at the end of 2016. Way to go. Get the stench of Kirby off only to have it back at an end of a great year. That is Merry Christmas for you right there.

*edit*

That said, it may seem I am negative on GW, but I really do like what they are doing. I have spent so much money on GW this year that I haven't done in the last few years so the work they did, worked at least on me. Thing is, if the rules in the end are not awesome, no matter how great GW improves, I will stop buying. I still haven't bought anything for my 40K armies because of the rules are crap in my opinion. I collect Tyranids and Dark Angels. I did buy Genestealer cult codex but haven't bought any of the minis till I know the rules well get better for 40K. I am liking the direction of Age of Sigmar and that is where a lot of my purchases are from as well.

I am just shocked with all the "change" GW has been doing, they are taking their time in the important part that [b]needs to change[\b] and that has slowed my purchases now. Bling, flash and glitter only get you so far.

I wouldn't say it has come to a sour end for the Year. Maybe CIA wasn't impressive, but the Traitor Legions and WoM are a really big hit. A LOT of people are happy with that.

I think we will have to see what 40K 8th edition brings right now. Between WoM and Traitor Legions, they seem to be pretty in tune with what a lot of players have been asking for. CIA may be a mess, but I haven't really followed it. I think CIA is also in the unfortunate position of being a "Stopgap" for the moment.

**Kaiyanwang**

Sasori wrote:

I think we will have to see what 40K 8th edition brings right now. Between WoM and Traitor Legions, they seem to be pretty in tune with what a lot of players have been asking for. CIA may be a mess, but I haven't really followed it. I think CIA is also in the unfortunate position of being a "Stopgap" for the moment.

You did not get it? CIA is 8th edition. Is clear that they will fragment everything in sub-formations. They will make official what they tried with unbound. No pesky army lists to hamper our impulse buys.

**morgoth**

herjan1987 wrote:
shinros wrote:

Companies don't do all this social media out of the good of their heart it's about money. GW is doing this for money but now they are actually being smart about it. The bundles, Getting input to improve a product for the consumer, bringing back certain armies etc.

Malecowshirt!

Dell, HP and GW has all the same problems. They are quite good what they are doing and how they are doing it, but they fail to give an innotive for purchases. For this let me refer to the infamous Kirby qoute

*Comic book guy voice on*
Worst. Comparison. Ever
*Comic book guy voice off*

GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world - and they're the top seller.

HP sells utter crap, and Dell is between crap and OK.

If you want to compare GW product to electronics that go stale in two or three year, then compare it with the ex-IBM range from Lenovo - although they don't really hold the same position in sales rankings.

**Fenrir Kitsune**

morgoth wrote:

GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world.

In your opinion, of course.

**TheWaspinator**

Uh, they're not the top seller. X-Wing is.

**Sasori**

Kaiyanwang wrote:
Sasori wrote:

I think we will have to see what 40K 8th edition brings right now. Between WoM and Traitor Legions, they seem to be pretty in tune with what a lot of players have been asking for. CIA may be a mess, but I haven't really followed it. I think CIA is also in the unfortunate position of being a "Stopgap" for the moment.

You did not get it? CIA is 8th edition. Is clear that they will fragment everything in sub-formations. They will make official what they tried with unbound. No pesky army lists to hamper our impulse buys.

This is pure conjecture on your part, So please do not bandy it about as a fact.

**morgoth**

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
morgoth wrote:
GW produces the best and widest futuristic wargame miniature range in the world.

In your opinion, of course.

Which would change if anyone would point me to a miniature range that can compare.

But strangely enough, when it comes to proving their point, all the GW nay-sayers have to talk about is a few miniatures which are indeed better, but nothing close to a full range spanning 1-500 models armies with multiple types of vehicles, titans, super heavy flyers, ...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheWaspinator wrote:
Uh, they're not the top seller. X-Wing is.

If you believe X-Wing and GW are in the same space ... sure why not.
X-Wing seems far closer to a board game than a war game tbh, how many miniatures do you field for a regular game ?
Don't they come pre-painted ?

Because if you go to board game territory, I'm sure many things outsell X-Wing too ...

**TheWaspinator**

Since when is assembly or painting a requirement to count as a wargame? It's totally a miniatures wargame and the ICV2 charts put it ahead of 40K in sales. The model count is low in a standard game, yes, but that means that that high sales volume corresponds to a LOT of players.

If you look at Amazon sales rankings for 40K and X-Wing stuff, X-Wing is beating 40K by a huge margin. And if the marketing push from the lineup of upcoming Star Wars movies continues the way its looking, X-Wing is probably just going to continue to grow.

**Apple fox**

Honestly Since i have been doing so much in other games, I have found GW as a whole has a rather Avg line of miniatures. They seem to have so many holes to there line that i feel I need to look else ware with there games.
They do do nice miniatures, and a few are great.
But i would say Avg there line as a whole.

There specialty lines are woeful, and seems to be they only really care about one faction. And when it comes to a balanced Release and maintenance, Awful is about the only word that comes to mind.

They really are the Dell of miniature war-gaming.

**Davor**

morgoth wrote:
TheWaspinator wrote:
Uh, they're not the top seller. X-Wing is.

If you believe X-Wing and GW are in the same space ... sure why not.
X-Wing seems far closer to a board game than a war game tbh, how many miniatures do you field for a regular game ?
Don't they come pre-painted ?

Because if you go to board game territory, I'm sure many things outsell X-Wing too ...

Moving the goal posts now? They are miniatures, not sure why you are changing the facts. Oh I see where you are coming from. Just like when I was 7, my Star Wars action figures are not dolls. Also you might want to stop while you can before you make it more embarrassing. I mean after all if you are fielding less miniatures like you claim as if that is a bad thing, how come they are selling more and making more money with less to play? Or are you going to change the goal posts again to prove your point?

Yes they are pre painted. It doesn't stop them from being a miniature. One you put together, the other you don't. They are still both miniatures.

As for being a board game? No difference. 40K/AoS is played on a table just like X-wing. You don't even need to play on a "board" but just a floor or empty table if you want. Monopoly you need to play on a board. Chess you need to play on a board. So if X-wing is a board game so is 40K/Aos/Warmahordes etc as well.

And once again for funsies, to have less playing pieces but to sell more, I am sure, GW cronies are asking themselves now why are they doing more and making less. After all GW is the epitome in business of doing more with less.