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.

Agree. That model is a chubby mess.

Huh, I love it. It feels perfectly orky and intimidating. Each their own.

Yeah I love the cabbage too. My only wish is it were more posable as when you're playing a game against two cabbages they both look the same even with the head swap, (an open mouthed maw would have been awesome.)

@Davor, I suppose that's possible on GW keeping their productions smaller though the fact that the "out of stock" is not an uncommon sign across the model lines at least means their sale rates are good.

As for my opinion on bigger models, eh maybe it might just be my glue. I've just been luckier with big model falls than small models I guess.

Funny. Bigger models have more mass than small ones. and bgi models also have a lot of thin parts. As small and big models are made of the same material i dont see why bigger ones should be in a better situation as small ones

Baron Klatz wrote:
@Davor, I suppose that's possible on GW keeping their productions smaller though the fact that the "out of stock" is not an uncommon sign across the model lines at least means their sale rates are good.

Not necessarily. Inventory management is a thing and some firms are better at it than others. The thing is that GW has a constantly changing field of SKUs resulting in a mess of fulfilled/unfulfilled orders, warehousing, storage, etc. Several years ago they touted a new inventory management system and it was shortly afterwards that we started to see random outages. As small as GW is, as small as their manufacturing capacity is, they have to choose what to run each day/week/month. It takes time to change out casting runs and if somebody underestimates demand for something based upon previous experience, instant shortage. They don't have a dedicated machine for each spru.

Does this mean something is selling like hotcakes? Maybe, or it could mean that they planned to sell X number (10,100,1000) of a model until it's up for another production run in X number of days/weeks/months and they actually sold one more than that. Manufacturing runs are usually mapped-out well in advance so if something gets shorted, they have to put something on the backburner to run the old product again or just ignore it til its slot comes up.

Rofl AoS outselling 40k worldwide, yeah I doubt it. AoS could not even out sell 40k in the 4-6 month period when no new 40k product was released.

It certainly is not outselling DW or GsC and the local GW and Indies sold more prospero on launch day than they have AoS starters in the last 12 months.
Small sample size but the fact the local GW manager has not been fired after AoS finshed the last one off shows GW still know that generals or not aos is a lemon.
AoS real health or status should show soon as they will have burned thorough all the product planned and pre produced before the launch and subsequent tanking. The next AoS/fantasy releases would have been commisioned during the panic and purge that happened in the first 6 months post release.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Sure, WFB6 was cheaper, but just look at this magnificent beast!

Spoiler:

I don't even play Orks, but I want one!

No, it's not so much the price of 6E vs 8E - it's the rules disaster that's 8E.

That thing could have worked in WHFB too (that game also had orc characters on monsters), just put it on a square base :/

The same goes for Sigmar Dudes. If GW wanted they could have made them a WHFB army (as an antithesis to Chaos Warriors). There's no real need to change the whole game for magnificent models (they could have made a new WHFB edition that needs bigger square bases (30mm/32mm/35mm?) for all infantry).

Yes, these new, huge minis could have worked in WFB. Except WFB had reached the point that each of those minis would have had a mass of overcomplicated rules and special rules that cross-reference other special rules, all of which get in the way of them simply being monsters. It is a real pity that AoS didn't do just a bit more to standardize Monster profiles and how they degrade as they take wounds.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Except WFB had reached the point that each of those minis would have had a mass of overcomplicated rules and special rules that cross-reference other special rules, all of which get in the way of them simply being monsters.

Why's that?

GW do have a bit of "special rules creep", but it's not really a necessity. They have in the past had editions where they simplified rules instead of complicating them.

Baron Klatz wrote:
@Davor, I suppose that's possible on GW keeping their productions smaller though the fact that the "out of stock" is not an uncommon sign across the model lines at least means their sale rates are good.

Or that they misjudged demand again, which they seem to be terrible for.

GW have been making an effort to keep inventory low for a long time (you can see the trend in the annual reports) because it's cheaper. Ideally they'd produce demand -1 units*, or restock quickly, but they seem to err on the low side and re-release later. Doing this also keeps fans on their toes and the artificial scarcity forces people to buy stuff immediately even if they don't need it.

Lots of stores only get a single 1 of each item, and then sell out. Without any real idea of numbers, we've no way of telling how well stuff is selling, just that it's sold slightly more than they accounted for.


*So they don't have any left over stock.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yes, these new, huge minis could have worked in WFB. Except WFB had reached the point that each of those minis would have had a mass of overcomplicated rules and special rules that cross-reference other special rules, all of which get in the way of them simply being monsters. It is a real pity that AoS didn't do just a bit more to standardize Monster profiles and how they degrade as they take wounds.

That is not intrinsic of the nature of WHFB, but just of the bad quality of the new GW designers.

I hate AoS guts, but I hate 8th edition too. Is what made me quit WHFB. Is one of the dumbest thing GW ever made, and was something directionless, stupid, and probably aimed at forcing people to buy 4 boxes for 1 unit.

There wer quite some "basic" big monsters in WHF 8th edition with only very few rules. Even the giant lost most of it's rules down to a single page. That's totally fine. Big centermodels are free to have some nice rules to make them more interesting.
AoS or WHF it doesnt really matter in that case.

Well, because I was an idiot and ran out of flock for a Christmas project, I ended up having to go to the local GW store.

While there, I had a nice chat with the manager/sole employee.

No gaming space, so no idea what is actually being played, just what is being sold.

In the half hour plus that I was there, I was the only customer. (6:30 on a Tuesday night - not all that surprising.)

At that store, the top seller is, as it has been, Warhammer 40K - the Space Marines alone are outselling everything for AoS. After the Marines come the Orks.

The top sellers in most lines are the boxed starters - with AoS as an exception. (The box just is not moving that well, but... I will get back to that....)

Second is Betrayal at Caith - more Space Marines!

Third was the surprise - Silver Tower is also outselling the AoS box, but I am not certain if Silver Tower counted separately from AoS, or if they are added together. Silver Tower is doing quite well for the store. Much, much better than the AoS box, in spite of price.

Knights for 40K are outselling the cabbage (thanks for that term) - but for AoS the bigger characters in general are doing better than the units. The Fyrie Fire Headed Fire Slayers are selling very poorly indeed.

Sales are up from the early months - they will likely stay open for at least the full year.

Last time I was there they were already talking about closing this store - which at that point had been open for only a couple of months - and were having that discussion while there was a customer (me) in the store. But since they have not found anyone to buy the lease from them, and since they signed a three year lease...?

So, that is how it looks from the local GW store, with all the usual caveats.

The Auld Grump

Did you get any indication of who was buying Silver Tower? There's a lot of nostalgia for Warhammer Quest over here, so I suspect it's that rather than any other factor.

Herzlos wrote:
Did you get any indication of who was buying Silver Tower? There's a lot of nostalgia for Warhammer Quest over here, so I suspect it's that rather than any other factor.

Like I said - no gaming in the store, so all we had to talk about were sales and modelling.

It may be worth noting that their best customer is a commission painter, not really a player. (But I doubt he is the one buying up all the Silver Tower.)

Customers, aside from Glen (the commission painter - turns out to be somebody that I know) seem to be adults buying for their offspring.

The folks that are buying for themselves seem to be going for paints, brushes, basing supplies, and liquid green stuff. (Those last two have been the only reasons that I have gone to the shop.)

The store is not meeting expectations - but without a buyer for the lease it will be almost as expensive to close as to keep open. (The manager seems like a nice guy - this is his first job after getting out of college. He is already putting out apps elsewhere - even if the shop stays open, it does not seem to be a stable working environment.

I think that having a gaming table might have helped - get actual players to come in and buy. But....

The Auld Grump

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Except WFB had reached the point that each of those minis would have had a mass of overcomplicated rules and special rules that cross-reference other special rules, all of which get in the way of them simply being monsters.

Why's that?

GW do have a bit of "special rules creep", but it's not really a necessity. They have in the past had editions where they simplified rules instead of complicating them.

Some editions of WFB were good (i.e. 6E); however, we are talking about a release for the then-current version of WFB - 8E. 8E had unnecessary complexity on a level not seen since 5E.

wfb 4th and 5th where great

I liked most editions for different reasons except 8th which just killed it for me.

I started in 5th but quite liked the start of 6th.

GW are silly with their complexity these days, they either go stupid complex or stupid simple.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I liked most editions for different reasons except 8th which just killed it for me.

I started in 5th but quite liked the start of 6th.

GW are silly with their complexity these days, they either go stupid complex or stupid simple.

Yup, preferably dead simple. At least the game itself plays with a minimum of fuss and hassle. Considering how GW keeps saying they're a models company (and they absolutely are), not going to AoS simple rules earlier is kinda crazy. Now, with the boardgames, they're cranking out tiny rulesets, and one can only hope that these are all alpha testing mechanics that will inform 40k 8E.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I liked most editions for different reasons except 8th which just killed it for me.

I started in 5th but quite liked the start of 6th.

GW are silly with their complexity these days, they either go stupid complex or stupid simple.

Yup, preferably dead simple. At least the game itself plays with a minimum of fuss and hassle. Considering how GW keeps saying they're a models company (and they absolutely are), not going to AoS simple rules earlier is kinda crazy. Now, with the boardgames, they're cranking out tiny rulesets, and one can only hope that these are all alpha testing mechanics that will inform 40k 8E.

For me is different, I can handle complexity when is not unnecessarily clunky and is balanced.

40k, sadly, is full of useless rolls and re-rolls, and is unbalanced. Is really amateurish.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yes, these new, huge minis could have worked in WFB. Except WFB had reached the point that each of those minis would have had a mass of overcomplicated rules and special rules that cross-reference other special rules, all of which get in the way of them simply being monsters. It is a real pity that AoS didn't do just a bit more to standardize Monster profiles and how they degrade as they take wounds.

I always thought they could have done the best of both worlds, by simplifying the rules (not necessarily even as far as they did with AoS- just a middleground of the two), and give the Old World setting all the new pretty models.

Orks could have gotten big new badasses and monsters, the forest of Lorien could enter the fight 'herself' with the new Sylvaneth, and Sigmar could be sending his Asguardians, er...Stormcast, down from the skies in lightning just like in the new Mortal Realms.

I think we can all handle rules compexity, but why should we, when it's really just an exercise to shoot the gak, have a beer, eat some pretzels, and make "pew-pew" (or "FREEEEEM!") noises? 40k 7E's rules get in the way of that.

GW did the right thing to strip the rules to the bone; WFB 8E needed it almost as much as 40k 7E needs it. Advancing the timeline was a surprise, but not a dealbeaker, as it doesn't affect the tabletop. Changing the names was a major irritant (I still play "Imperial Guard"!). All of that, people could have accepted, in time. But pulling points and asking players to control themselves, to play a gentlemanly game? That was the straw that broke the camel's back. Had GW started by publishing GHB as 9E, it would have been far better received.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW did the right thing to strip the rules to the bone

Except they didn't strip the rules to the bone, they threw them out and replaced them with a game that bears almost no resemblance to what came before it.

If all they'd done was strip WHFB back to basics I would have been cheering for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Had GW started by publishing GHB as 9E, it would have been far better received.

Yeah I doubt that, points values for AoS is a long way from what was wanted by traditional WHFB fans who didn't like AoS.

That's an ignorant thing to say when AoS clearly plays like 40k/WFB. Have you even played AoS?

I played a few games of AoS before deciding I had no interest in it.

WHFB's biggest defining feature was that it was a ranked combat game that revolved around stacking combat resolution/leadership in your favour to break the enemy, capture standards, etc. That AoS has roughly the same turn structure and a similar hit/wound/save structure does not mean it plays the same as WHFB in my mind.

But then I guess it's just perspective, I think WHFB and 40k have very different defining features but you obviously think they're similar enough to lump all 3 games together.

Maybe that's where GW went wrong, thinking people would see AoS as being like a stripped down WHFB and just change over happily instead of something completely different that may not appeal to them in the slightest.

OK, fair enough.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I played a few games of AoS before deciding I had no interest in it.

WHFB's biggest defining feature was that it was a ranked combat game that revolved around stacking combat resolution/leadership in your favour to break the enemy, capture standards, etc. That AoS has roughly the same turn structure and a similar hit/wound/save structure does not mean it plays the same as WHFB in my mind.

But then I guess it's just perspective, I think WHFB and 40k have very different defining features but you obviously think they're similar enough to lump all 3 games together.

Maybe that's where GW went wrong, thinking people would see AoS as being like a stripped down WHFB and just change over happily instead of something completely different that may not appeal to them in the slightest.

Exactly. AOS is very different from WHFB. If it wasnt made by GW, nobody would say they are similar. The distinctive part of warhamer was maneuvering blocks and flanking ennemy units, and both of these things are absent in AOS. And having fixed to hit and to wound rolls also removed the rock-paper-scissor part of WHFB. It's a bit similar to 40k though


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Sure, WFB6 was cheaper, but just look at this magnificent beast!

I don't even play Orks, but I want one!

No, it's not so much the price of 6E vs 8E - it's the rules disaster that's 8E.

As much as I hate AOS, most of the models released have been magnificient, including this one. Some are bad though (most stormcast, the regular fyreslayers)

I probably would have liked Maw Krusha if it weren't for the wings.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I probably would have liked Maw Krusha if it weren't for the wings.

It's not a typical dragon, but I actually like it more. It's more cumbersome, bulky, and gruff, all Orky things