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.

MaxT wrote:
It'll simply be a volume of work problem. Not enough time to rework and repoint every 40k unit and every 30k unit - so focusing on 40k and getting round to 30k in a year makes perfect sense.

Hopefully FW's rules guys have been busy getting IA16, 8th ed compatible.

Yeah, but no. It'll be as MaxT says. A 'large section of the community' rejected AoS and they still increased sales. This will be a success and they know it. Better rules (can't be worse) plus the kind of knocking-it-out-of-the-park sculpts they've produced of late will bring a wedge of cash. New Marine models will sell like hot cakes.

Let's not pretend that AOS is some huge succes. They needed two years to get where WHFB was historically in the ICV2 sales chart (before the last few disastreous years of its existence), and that was only done because of some major tweaking (to their credit) and extreme release schedule.

But to be honest, rules doesn't mean much when it comes to GW. They are so in advance when it comes to plastic minis compared to their competitors, that even if they release a turd of a ruleset, people will still buy the minis. Hell, as much as a despise the rules for AOS, ithe last few releases are so good that I'm actuallly thinking about buildging an army.

Lord Kragan wrote:


Like yours?

Look, you wanna do the same period? Do the period of 7th edition's launch until the 1.75 years mark or whatever you want. That way you're not really doing apples and oranges.

Otherwise I think we don't really have much to say.

OK whatever I want, hmm how about between 13th March 1911 and 24th Jan 1986? Can you come back when you have this information?

 streetsamurai wrote:
Let's not pretend that AOS is some huge succes. They needed two years to get where WHFB was historically in the ICV2 sales chart (before the last few disastreous years of its existence), and that was only done because of some extreme tweaking (to their credit) and release schedule

Let's not also forget that during the period they covered there was no major release (no release at all actually) And that we have had this argument before so we aren't really going to bring anything productive on this, so I think it's time to drop this because ICV2 isn't reliable, it's used as political ammo and yada yada. Frankly we bring AoS too much often

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Whirlwind wrote:

Lord Kragan wrote:


Like yours?

Look, you wanna do the same period? Do the period of 7th edition's launch until the 1.75 years mark or whatever you want. That way you're not really doing apples and oranges.

Otherwise I think we don't really have much to say.

OK whatever I want, hmm how about between 13th March 1911 and 24th Jan 1986? Can you come back when you have this information?

Man, you know, you didn't make a single point but the attempt was funny.

 streetsamurai wrote:
Let's not pretend that AOS is some huge succes. They needed two years to get where WHFB was historically in the ICV2 sales chart (before the last few disastreous years of its existence), and that was only done because of some major tweaking (to their credit) and extreme release schedule.

GW has stated that AoS is selling quite better that WHFB in many years. Those charts aren't base on hard data, and they don't provide even sales number, just relatively relation between sales of different lines. They can be lower in that ranking and selling more because this is an expansive market.

But, as I said many times, the only that should be concerned about the sales of GW's game lines should be GW's themselves. When we fans discuss about it to me seems more like "Oh look hoooow bigger my games sales are, hmmm yeah! Suck it luzers! LOL!" or "Lol nobody play your game omg lol zucker!" I'm just happy to play the games I like and buy the miniatures I like. Nothing stays forever, so I just enjoy it when I can.

NuMarines will sell like Ice-creams in a hot summer day.

If someone wan't to believe otherwise is ok. Still exist people that defend the earth is flat.

 Whirlwind wrote:
Quite possibly, but there are other possibilities too. It could be a hedging of bets thing that *if* a large section of the community do reject the new rules then they may just switch to HH and hence they keep the expenditure. HH could then quietly include aliens and all may be well for GW. Alternatively there could be a massive hand bag fight internally over the issue and this is the way GW are saying we're in round 3 and there are no knockouts yet, please come back later.

Hedge their bets? If the last 30 years have proved nothing, it is that 40K players will put up with bad rules just to push their cool space fantasy miniatures around. You make it sound like 7th Ed was the pinnacle of wargaming rules. It was just the last (and to most, familiar) set of rules.*

Haven't played since 3rd and haven't played regularly since Rogue Trader. Have a table full of stuff prepping for SWA. Bought a Start Collecting Tau box and numerous other 'cool' stuff from GW in the decades since I last played a game. 8th looks to be the version that sucks me (and people like me) back in.

Iain.

* When John Lennon was asked if Ringo was the best drummer ever, Lennon responded he wasn't even the best drummer in the Beatles. Even on this thread there are many people calling 7th Ed a dumpster fire, not that it is. There was 6 versions of 40K before the current one. This too has happened before, six times.

The thing is that GW have shown that they are learning from their mistakes and are showing that they understand the communities concerns.

Anyform of new marines will sell, so be happy.

This means that they death guard may be in the bigger size. that makes me happy, they will be more fun to paint.

So I was looking at the half Death guard, half loyalist Marine artwork on the GW site. The helm looks a lot like MK4 but some of the details are different, and it has a raised collar. New Marines/MK X armour or artistic licence?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 warpcrafter wrote:
How many of you remember 3rd edition? It was brutally streamlined, but by 7th ed they were back to a bloated mess again. I'm very much on the fence about this.

Yeah, I remember amost 20 years ago.

Not sure what the point you're making is?

This
I was 13 when third Ed came out. Ffs it was over 20 years ago. What's the point! Things changed in 20yrs! Ffs even monopoly changed from 20yrs ago! Thimble you will be missed...

 Galas wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
Let's not pretend that AOS is some huge succes. They needed two years to get where WHFB was historically in the ICV2 sales chart (before the last few disastreous years of its existence), and that was only done because of some major tweaking (to their credit) and extreme release schedule.

GW has stated that AoS is selling quite better that WHFB in many years. Those charts aren't base on hard data, and they don't provide even sales number, just relatively relation between sales of different lines. They can be lower in that ranking and selling more because this is an expansive market.

But, as I said many times, the only that should be concerned about the sales of GW's game lines should be GW's themselves. When we fans discuss about it to me seems more like "Oh look hoooow bigger my games sales are, hmmm yeah! Suck it luzers! LOL!" or "Lol nobody play your game omg lol zucker!" I'm just happy to play the games I like and buy the miniatures I like. Nothing stays forever, so I just enjoy it when I can.

NuMarines will sell like Ice-creams in a hot summer day.

If someone wan't to believe otherwise is ok. Still exist people that defend the earth is flat.

Yeah, but as I said before, that doesnt means much since they releases 2 main boxes (AOS starter set and WHQ) and these are always great sellers.

Anyway, back on topic. yes I do think that these numarines will selle very well

That's not even the topic...

Lord Kragan wrote:


Man, you know, you didn't make a single point but the attempt was funny.

Maybe I did? Anyway I've already provided reasons and the period you should consider and why in previous posts, barring the argument was derailing the whole topic (which wasn't really the point) and it was being deemed an attack on AoS which it wasn't really. Rather just highlighting that for some people (those interested in more than the match play) that comparisons would indicate there will be a glut of additional books whether that be Codexs/campaign books/background books and that this is likely to cost the average person more overall (which is not a surprise as GW are a business after all and they are in the business of increasing sales in monetary terms). However it does appear to have rattled bone cages.

 Azreal13 wrote:
That's not even the topic...

It is, since it is a thread about 8th edition and it is now obvious that 8th edition will introduce these guys.

I hope we don't have to wait too long to see the starter set.

Chairman Aeon wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:
Quite possibly, but there are other possibilities too. It could be a hedging of bets thing that *if* a large section of the community do reject the new rules then they may just switch to HH and hence they keep the expenditure. HH could then quietly include aliens and all may be well for GW. Alternatively there could be a massive hand bag fight internally over the issue and this is the way GW are saying we're in round 3 and there are no knockouts yet, please come back later.

Hedge their bets? If the last 30 years have proved nothing, it is that 40K players will put up with bad rules just to push their cool space fantasy miniatures around. You make it sound like 7th Ed was the pinnacle of wargaming rules. It was just the last (and to most, familiar) set of rules.*

Haven't played since 3rd and haven't played regularly since Rogue Trader. Have a table full of stuff prepping for SWA. Bought a Start Collecting Tau box and numerous other 'cool' stuff from GW in the decades since I last played a game. 8th looks to be the version that sucks me (and people like me) back in.

Erm... I think you are missing the point. When GW swapped over from WFB to AoS there was a strong suggestion from polls, gaming clubs and such like that a significant fraction of the existing fan base of WFB largely abandoned AoS (for whatever reason) which had a big impact on GW sales by volume (which hasn't really recovered, albeit sales by value have but that's another discussion). Some of this is likely to be because those people enjoyed rank and file based games (and they probably scratched the skirmish itch with 40k). If 40k 8th is along the same lines as AoS which it appears it could be then the streamlined, mass dice rolling, more limited strategic options might not be for some people. This hence runs the risk that people that don't like the change will move elsewhere (lets say Gates of Antares). GW will want to avoid this same issue happening again. By keeping 30k they actually keep a mechanism where those that don't like the new style of gameplay have a GW outlet in 30k. This 'hedges their bets' that people won't then leave GW but just switch to 30k. If it doesn't happen then they can quietly switch 30k to the new style 40k with little angst. If large numbers switch then they keep the players and FW keeps the old 7th edition (which people are less against because FW have kept some of the bloat more under control).

Honestly, I hadn't enjoyed a single GW game since 'Warmaster' so I was generally appalled when I first heard about 'Age of Sigmar*' but then was quite pleasantly surprised at how playable and just basically more 'fun' it was than anything since 'Mordheim.'
If they take certain steps in that direction with the new '40k,' I imagine i might actually enjoy the game again (for the first time since 4th.)
.
(*To be clear, I do still hate the changes to the setting that they made but they've already stated that '40k' won't be going through a similar upheaval so I'm left being relatively optimistic.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also! there's so much irony in seeing people complain that they're MAKING 40K JUST LIKE AOS when one of the biggest criticisms of 'AoS,' in the beginning was THEY'RE MAKING AOS JUST LIKE 40K.

 joseph_curwen wrote:

Also! there's so much irony in seeing people complain that they're MAKING 40K JUST LIKE AOS when one of the biggest criticisms of 'AoS,' in the beginning was THEY'RE MAKING AOS JUST LIKE 40K.

I think the criticism was that they were making Fantasy gak.

 Whirlwind wrote:
When GW swapped over from WFB to AoS there was a strong suggestion from polls, gaming clubs and such like that a significant fraction of the existing fan base of WFB largely abandoned AoS (for whatever reason) which had a big impact on GW sales by volume (which hasn't really recovered, albeit sales by value have but that's another discussion)..

Got any sources for that claim that amount to better than "Trust me guys, I'm seriously." ?

 davou wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:
When GW swapped over from WFB to AoS there was a strong suggestion from polls, gaming clubs and such like that a significant fraction of the existing fan base of WFB largely abandoned AoS (for whatever reason) which had a big impact on GW sales by volume (which hasn't really recovered, albeit sales by value have but that's another discussion)..

Got any sources for that claim that amount to better than "Trust me guys, I'm seriously." ?

Dunno where he's getting it.

My own anecdotal evidence is that I've seen more players coming into AoS from 40k and outside the hobby than the old WHFB crew leaving. And even then, we've had a portion of them return to play, round or square bases be damned.

 joseph_curwen wrote:
Honestly, I hadn't enjoyed a single GW game since 'Warmaster' so I was generally appalled when I first heard about 'Age of Sigmar*' but then was quite pleasantly surprised at how playable and just basically more 'fun' it was than anything since 'Mordheim.'
If they take certain steps in that direction with the new '40k,' I imagine i might actually enjoy the game again (for the first time since 4th.)

Different games appeal to different people. WFB was a rank and file that was pushed to skirmish so there was always going to be a lot of blow back. There will be less for 40k because it is still a skirmish game and it is bloated to the rafters. WFB wasn't that bad and wasn't really any worse than 3rd edition because there more complicated rules in that set that got dropped later on); it was mainly scrapped because of sales and how expensive it was to build even a basic unit. 40k has much less of this issue as with fire teams and Necromunda you can still play small games that aren't too expensive to get into overall.

I too mourn the loss of Warmaster though!

The lore for WFB was getting silly way before AoS and there was a lot of "A waves an EPIC wand and casts and EPIC spell and billions of another race suddenly die but tomorrow there are more of them". I always appreciated the lore when it was a bit less individual hero epicness based (for example I still remember the a background piece in the 6th rulebook where a grizzled veteran recalled how he got some scars) and I think that added to the 'realism' of the setting and that there were 'real' people/monsters/creatures you were sending to their doom.

40k has long gone the route of epic epicness and I don't really find it engaging that much anymore (as it simply comes down to flavour of month beating last weeks flavour of the month in some spectacular style etc).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 davou wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:
When GW swapped over from WFB to AoS there was a strong suggestion from polls, gaming clubs and such like that a significant fraction of the existing fan base of WFB largely abandoned AoS (for whatever reason) which had a big impact on GW sales by volume (which hasn't really recovered, albeit sales by value have but that's another discussion)..

Got any sources for that claim that amount to better than "Trust me guys, I'm seriously." ?

Which bit?

 Whirlwind wrote:

40k has long gone the route of epic epicness and I don't really find it engaging that much anymore (as it simply comes down to flavour of month beating last weeks flavour of the month in some spectacular style etc).

This is pretty much what 6E and 7E became to me. You can see it through the art and photo's too. Look at codex photo's of mini's from 2E through 4E and they're usually fairly well spaced out, generally made to look like a unit holding a piece of ground or something, usually with some sort of setting specific hand crafted terrain, while newer photo's look like grand parades of armies clashing in tight middle ages rank combat (even with automatic weapons and blast weapons at hand) amongst exclusively GW Ruins terrain.

Indeed. I know a company won't ever shout "We're screwed" but they have shareholders and can't lie repeatedly to them, and have been saying "we grew sales" quite a lot. Even if they sold them to fewer people as everyone apparently rage quit after End Times. They seem to have built a thriving new system, and are about to bolster their sales of their top earner. Good times in Nottingham. Seems the only narrative some folk want to forge is of a dwindling, incompetent GW when the last 18 months has shown quite the reverse.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 davou wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:
When GW swapped over from WFB to AoS there was a strong suggestion from polls, gaming clubs and such like that a significant fraction of the existing fan base of WFB largely abandoned AoS (for whatever reason) which had a big impact on GW sales by volume (which hasn't really recovered, albeit sales by value have but that's another discussion)..

Got any sources for that claim that amount to better than "Trust me guys, I'm seriously." ?

Which bit?

Hows about any of it? You spouted a lot of gak, you can have your pick and backup any of it with something better than an anecdote?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Indeed. I know a company won't ever shout "We're screwed" but they have shareholders and can't lie repeatedly to them, and have been saying "we grew sales" quite a lot. Even if they sold them to fewer people as everyone apparently rage quit after End Times. They seem to have built a thriving new system, and are about to bolster their sales of their top earner. Good times in Nottingham. Seems the only narrative some folk want to forge is of a dwindling, incompetent GW when the last 18 months has shown quite the reverse.

That's not quite true when you look at relative sales by volume. For the most part sales is done by value. I did a bit of a detailed analysis of the last financial return a while ago but in summary. At constant currency at the end of AoS year there was big drop in sales and profit was largely bolstered by TW:W franchise, Vermintide and Mordheim games to name a few. IIRC correctly it was about 20-30% drop in total sales. As most other things were equal it was constant currency these are largely attributed to decline in sales by volume. The last financial forecast saw a large jump in sales by value, however once you looked at it in constant currency terms (i.e. ignoring the UKs populace's desire to trash the £) then sales were no where near as robust and showed only a modest increase (about 10% IIRC). As such by volume GW haven't recovered but sales by value have but that's largely due to exports and despite the tanking £ keeping prices the same for everyone (ergo they get more UK £'s for each $ or Euro).

It is unlikely that GW will want to see the same issues as AoS brought them (they've pretty much acknowledged the issues in the 40k FAQ) so hence it is not beyond the possibilities that they will want to protect against it some what. It may be that they are doing this keeping 30K as it is "just in case". It may be that "40k lite" is a roaring success and they can bring forward 30k into the 40k ruleset, but it could be deemed financially prudent to give existing players that don't like the changes another *GW* outlet.

 Whirlwind wrote:

Lord Kragan wrote:


Man, you know, you didn't make a single point but the attempt was funny.

Maybe I did?

Maybe you didn't...

And at which point I said it was an attack at AoS?

Anyways, this is an actual comparison:







Age of Sigmar suffered from starting books that were too expensive (yes they were). Later books were cheaper. If we went from the last year by and compared 40k with AoS then we've got a much different picture:



A year of the same period... 538 versus 338.
When people say Age of Sigmar is cheaper they are refering to THIS. The first books were very expensive but since Ironjawz they've gotten a lot cheaper and this is what people talk about mainly.

In fact, your claim of that Age of Sigmar was 50% more expensive falls flat once you factor in the warzone damocles and fenris first parts, components of the period you went and did. All clocking in at 730 euros. I didn't know that 750 was 50% more than 730.

I don't think that 30k is nearly big enough to be a safety valve in case 40k 8th edition falter.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Indeed. I know a company won't ever shout "We're screwed" but they have shareholders and can't lie repeatedly to them, and have been saying "we grew sales" quite a lot. Even if they sold them to fewer people as everyone apparently rage quit after End Times. They seem to have built a thriving new system, and are about to bolster their sales of their top earner. Good times in Nottingham. Seems the only narrative some folk want to forge is of a dwindling, incompetent GW when the last 18 months has shown quite the reverse.

That's not quite true when you look at relative sales by volume. For the most part sales is done by value. I did a bit of a detailed analysis of the last financial return a while ago but in summary. At constant currency at the end of AoS year there was big drop in sales and profit was largely bolstered by TW:W franchise, Vermintide and Mordheim games to name a few. IIRC correctly it was about 20-30% drop in total sales. As most other things were equal it was constant currency these are largely attributed to decline in sales by volume. The last financial forecast saw a large jump in sales by value, however once you looked at it in constant currency terms (i.e. ignoring the UKs populace's desire to trash the £) then sales were no where near as robust and showed only a modest increase (about 10% IIRC). As such by volume GW haven't recovered but sales by value have but that's largely due to exports and despite the tanking £ keeping prices the same for everyone (ergo they get more UK £'s for each $ or Euro).

It is unlikely that GW will want to see the same issues as AoS brought them (they've pretty much acknowledged the issues in the 40k FAQ) so hence it is not beyond the possibilities that they will want to protect against it some what. It may be that they are doing this keeping 30K as it is "just in case". It may be that "40k lite" is a roaring success and they can bring forward 30k into the 40k ruleset, but it could be deemed financially prudent to give existing players that don't like the changes another *GW* outlet.

So aside from explaining international business to an ecommerce professional (thanks), you do agree that GW are not dwindling or incompetent? Cos that was the point of my post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 streetsamurai wrote:
I don't think that 30k is nearly big enough to be a safety valve in case 40k 8th edition falter.

Totally agree, and GW is too monolithic to consider a 'back door'. You simply can't roll back an edition, so it won't be a consideration. Likely they just didn't tell the bloody FW guys in time to do anything, or they didn't fancy it.

AGAIN - RULE #1 is BE POLITE.

AGAIN - RULE #2 is STAY ON TOPIC.

The Topic Here is "Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site".

 davou wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 davou wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:
When GW swapped over from WFB to AoS there was a strong suggestion from polls, gaming clubs and such like that a significant fraction of the existing fan base of WFB largely abandoned AoS (for whatever reason) which had a big impact on GW sales by volume (which hasn't really recovered, albeit sales by value have but that's another discussion)..

Got any sources for that claim that amount to better than "Trust me guys, I'm seriously." ?

Which bit?

Hows about any of it? You spouted a lot of gak, you can have your pick and backup any of it with something better than an anecdote?

Well I've done the financial bit already, you can look up the financial reports yourself if you want.

The polls were from numerous forums like Warseer etc. Anecdotal
Posts numbers in AoS and Warhammer forums took a significant decrease in numbers after AoS's release
Gaming clubs were my own (and others I've heard about) and so on
Increases for KoW and 9th age
Most of this is anecdotal but that there were consistent changes after the introduction of AoS would imply that the effect was real.

This really isn't the topic of conversation for here though and it is not an attack on AoS though I gather it can be a touchy subject for a 'few'.

All I'm trying to highlight is that GW might be trying to protect against similar issues they had with the AoS launch in case they misjudged the mood for changes to 40k and that's why they haven't committed 30k to being converted yet.