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.

 Ketara wrote:

JWBS wrote:
They are having trouble churning out stock items, is the point being made.

That may be the case, but his point was that it doesn't require much in the way of dedication from the design studio or first step of production..

People were saying they're having production issues. "This is an existing product" (as with all the partwork products) doesn't really impact that fact, in the same way "They don't have to give away a pint of milk with each issue, which is good" or "It's good that global maize futures are at an annual low during the planned launch window" doesn't make a difference either. "They're having trouble keeping up" isn't solved by "At least this isn't newly designed stuff", is what I was saying.

JWBS wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

JWBS wrote:
They are having trouble churning out stock items, is the point being made.

That may be the case, but his point was that it doesn't require much in the way of dedication from the design studio or first step of production..

People were saying they're having production issues. "This is an existing product" (as with all the partwork products) doesn't really impact that fact, in the same way "They don't have to give away a pint of milk with each issue, which is good" or "It's good that global maize futures are at an annual low during the planned launch window" doesn't make a difference either. "They're having trouble keeping up" isn't solved by "At least this isn't newly designed stuff", is what I was saying.

Firstly, making molds IS part of production, and therefore part of 'production issues'. The delays GW has had aren't restricted entirely to old stock, with new stuff having unlimited facilities and manufacturing capacity. If this magazine had huge amounts of new stuff, it would be further susceptible to other issues in the GW manufacturing chain. The fact that a large chunk is old designs, and therefore gets to skip part of the process, is consequently relevant to reducing vulnerability to production delays.

Secondly, such issues as we are discussing can (as already said) be further reduced by appropriate organisation; aka reducing time spent swapping molds and retooling by matching magazine production schedules to regular stock production schedules. That's something which wouldn't be an option for normal stock manufacture (you can't magically transform one kit into another).

Which is the main reason I think it’s unlikely to ever see these magazines in North America. I doubt GW has the production capacity to supply likely demand. People seem to forget they were having trouble keeping stuff in stock pre-COVID.

When Conquest first debuted, and before that the Black Library collection, it seemed US posters weren’t familiar with part works at all?

I should note that delivery of this product doesn't just affect GW's bottom line, but Hachette's too. GW might not "want" the additional production burden at this stage, but Hachette might well not be able to cancel the release so easily without it financially impacting them.

Plus they likely have a schedule like GW and might not have the flexibility to just move things around. Heck even GW couldn't really move 9th edition nor the Christmas bundles etc...

 Ketara wrote:


Firstly, making molds IS part of production, and therefore part of 'production issues'. The delays GW has had aren't restricted entirely to old stock, with new stuff having unlimited facilities and manufacturing capacity. If this magazine had huge amounts of new stuff, it would be further susceptible to other issues in the GW manufacturing chain. The fact that a large chunk is old designs, and therefore gets to skip part of the process, is consequently relevant to reducing vulnerability to production delays.

Yeah, just as having to include a pint of milk with each magazine would complicate things a lot. Of course you could say "But they don't sell Hachette partworks with a free drink", but they also don't sell Hachette partworks with brand new exclusive designs either, so pointing out that they use old sprues, which is easier than making new sprues and so is good for production, is irrelevant. If you want a different analogy, you could say "At least they haven't chosen to include twice as many sprues than they did with Conquest, so that should save them some production " but it amounts to the same thing. Yes, they aren't creating brand new sprues for Imperium. This will ease their current production bottleneck in the same way that not doubling the sprue count will widen their current production bottleneck. Theoretically quite a lot, but since it's a thing that wasn't happening anyway, in reality not at all. If the discussion was "GW are having production problems, they seem to have chosen to produce many more Indomitus sprues in lieu of designing and producing new miniatures" then it would be relevant that they're using old sprues, but again this is not happening, so the statement "Using old sprue designs is good for reducing the production shortfall" is literally as relevant as saying "The factory workers won't have to work blindfolded whilst making these sprues, which will substantially ameliorate production problems".

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
When Conquest first debuted, and before that the Black Library collection, it seemed US posters weren’t familiar with part works at all?

Partworks? Not as such.

DeAgostini? You bet. I've got a buddy who subscribes to pretty much all of their products...Star Trek, Thunderbirds, Iron Man. Oddly enough, I don't think he did the Millennium Falcon. I've got a bunch of their 1/72 WWII aircraft.

But you are most likely correct for the vast majority of the US...partworks or build a model/collection via subscription is still a somewhat foreign concept (pun intended) here.

Mind you, should GW want to offer the 40k/Aos and maybe a Middle Earth Partworks in the US, I would be one of those to subscribe to any/all.

JWBS wrote:

 Ketara wrote:


Firstly, making molds IS part of production, and therefore part of 'production issues'. The delays GW has had aren't restricted entirely to old stock, with new stuff having unlimited facilities and manufacturing capacity. If this magazine had huge amounts of new stuff, it would be further susceptible to other issues in the GW manufacturing chain. The fact that a large chunk is old designs, and therefore gets to skip part of the process, is consequently relevant to reducing vulnerability to production delays.

Yeah, just as having to include a pint of milk with each magazine would complicate things a lot. Of course you could say "But they don't sell Hachette partworks with a free drink", but they also don't sell Hachette partworks with brand new exclusive designs either, so pointing out that they use old sprues, which is easier than making new sprues and so is good for production, is irrelevant. If you want a different analogy, you could say "At least they haven't chosen to include twice as many sprues than they did with Conquest, so that should save them some production " but it amounts to the same thing. Yes, they aren't creating brand new sprues for Imperium. This will ease their current production bottleneck in the same way that not doubling the sprue count will widen their current production bottleneck. Theoretically quite a lot, but since it's a thing that wasn't happening anyway, in reality not at all. If the discussion was "GW are having production problems, they seem to have chosen to produce many more Indomitus sprues in lieu of designing and producing new miniatures" then it would be relevant that they're using old sprues, but again this is not happening, so the statement "Using old sprue designs is good for reducing the production shortfall" is literally as relevant as saying "The factory workers won't have to work blindfolded whilst making these sprues, which will substantially ameliorate production problems".

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or not, but I think we're done here. I can't be bothered to write the same thing three times when it doesn't seem to penetrate. Whatever you like guv.

 Ketara wrote:

JWBS wrote:

 Ketara wrote:


Firstly, making molds IS part of production, and therefore part of 'production issues'. The delays GW has had aren't restricted entirely to old stock, with new stuff having unlimited facilities and manufacturing capacity. If this magazine had huge amounts of new stuff, it would be further susceptible to other issues in the GW manufacturing chain. The fact that a large chunk is old designs, and therefore gets to skip part of the process, is consequently relevant to reducing vulnerability to production delays.

Yeah, just as having to include a pint of milk with each magazine would complicate things a lot. Of course you could say "But they don't sell Hachette partworks with a free drink", but they also don't sell Hachette partworks with brand new exclusive designs either, so pointing out that they use old sprues, which is easier than making new sprues and so is good for production, is irrelevant. If you want a different analogy, you could say "At least they haven't chosen to include twice as many sprues than they did with Conquest, so that should save them some production " but it amounts to the same thing. Yes, they aren't creating brand new sprues for Imperium. This will ease their current production bottleneck in the same way that not doubling the sprue count will widen their current production bottleneck. Theoretically quite a lot, but since it's a thing that wasn't happening anyway, in reality not at all. If the discussion was "GW are having production problems, they seem to have chosen to produce many more Indomitus sprues in lieu of designing and producing new miniatures" then it would be relevant that they're using old sprues, but again this is not happening, so the statement "Using old sprue designs is good for reducing the production shortfall" is literally as relevant as saying "The factory workers won't have to work blindfolded whilst making these sprues, which will substantially ameliorate production problems".

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or not, but I think we're done here. I can't be bothered to write the same thing three times when it doesn't seem to penetrate. Whatever you like guv.

If you're saying I'm being purposefully thick and unable to understand the basic points you're making (as I think you are), I'm actually thinking exactly the same thing about you, so a nice coincidence there, and I'm also willing to disregard this characteristic in you. Everything turned out quite nicely then.

If it is a new partwork miniature series i think it might be Space Marines and Sisters of Battle VS Necrons. They're all featured heavily in the newest 40k Cinematic trailer and i could definitely see GW using Sisters to try and get more women interested in the hobby.

GW also still has those ETB Sister of battle models from last years army box which i don't think ever had a regular release, that box had 25 models spread out over 4 self-contained sprues so it would fit in well with the 1 sprue per issue cycle.

I can’t see them selling sisters in it personally.
Not just based on one animation they’re doing.
Arguably Guard could be as well if so.

There’s a lot of sprues I think are wasted in not being reused.
Starter sets and such. But I don’t think they’d mix armies as such.

It would actually be a better way of doing it.
4 part armies for people that they then have to buy more to complete, as opposed to two complete ones.

I can see them using Sisters.

They are sort of like marines but aren't marines and they can still pair marines with them every few releases and introduce people to the idea of allied forces.

I also think that AoS has shown that a single army marketing strategy that worked with marines was both a fluke, and also perhaps not the most healthy option for the company nor the gaming market. It's an "all eggs in one basket" situation.

I can see new GW perhaps starting to slowly push marketing on other factions, possibly through Sisters for the Imperium. Just to try and tease people off Marines. They don't want to stop selling marines, but perhaps encourage a greater portion of new gamers to consider other armies. Internally this would work well as more focus and more market buzz on other factions means less need to keep doing "faction rescue" investments.

The fact that side by side AoS and 40K have a comparable number of factions and yet AoS has VASTLY more diversity and spread of sales surely shows that Marine dominance is an oddity and as much a boon as it is a curse.

Mr Gutsy wrote:
If it is a new partwork miniature series i think it might be Space Marines and Sisters of Battle VS Necrons. They're all featured heavily in the newest 40k Cinematic trailer and i could definitely see GW using Sisters to try and get more women interested in the hobby.

GW also still has those ETB Sister of battle models from last years army box which i don't think ever had a regular release, that box had 25 models spread out over 4 self-contained sprues so it would fit in well with the 1 sprue per issue cycle.

I thought along these lines, but I wasn't sure how realistic it would be given how new this range is. I like the models but would never buy them unless they where in a deal like this.

I hope this is right, but I would prefer it was an elder force (not interested in necrons other than the void dragon) as I'd like to start some kind of force like this.

Mostly me wish listing.

To be fair they could go with something with an old model line just for clearing stuff and/or selling sprues to Hachette for pure profit at this point. IG...

And also on the sisters topic, I suppose as the magazine is called Imperium. It could be no Xenos races, and literally just various Imperium armies built up etc..


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Gutsy wrote:

GW also still has those ETB Sister of battle models from last years army box which i don't think ever had a regular release, that box had 25 models spread out over 4 self-contained sprues so it would fit in well with the 1 sprue per issue cycle.

They weren’t ETB were they? Just a monopose set like DI and other starters?

The issue still though with those sisters, is how much did that box go for? That you’d then get for £32 instead.
Not so much issue, but if they re made those sprues, they could just re do the box and sell it for whatever they sold that box for before, £100 ish?

Being curious, I've just been on the Hachette website and a third issue is now listed with a price of £8.99.

The links go to blank pages but I seem to recall that a lot of new partworks seem to start in January so the ad campaign could be prepped and ready for the new year.

£1 more expensive.
I’m surprised they didn’t up Mortal Realms after the success of Conquest, but maybe it was too late production wise..

+£1 is mildly disappointing but the miniatures, if they're Indomitus, are newer than the minis in Conquest were. I'm eager to see what they do for terrain.

Just thinking, for peeps like us with existing armies, it may now come down to what is in it.

See, Conquest gave two full armies and a decent amount of terrain for £639.20. I can’t remember the exact saving over buying everything seperately, but we can probably look into that, but I seem to recall it was pretty healthy.

Imperium is indeed seemingly £1 more per issue (seemingly as we’re working on the assumption issue 3 isn’t discounted in anyway. It’s likely the case, but let’s be cards on table honest).

Assuming it’s another 80 issue run, that comes up to £719.20.

Of course, broken down into four week chunks for subscribers, it’s not a particularly massive £38 per direct debit.

With regular paints currently at £3.70 a pot, if they stick to two per issue, that’s gonna start cutting into any potential savings over the run. Whilst Conquest had issues of limited savings (as in pennies), those were outweighed by high savings, such as £22.50 RRP character models going for £7.99, and the £50.00 RRP Repulsor being split across four issues.

So, if the contents are largely comparable in RRP? That extra £80.00 across the run might impact the number of subscriptions from existing grognards like ourselves.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Just thinking, for peeps like us with existing armies, it may now come down to what is in it.

See, Conquest gave two full armies and a decent amount of terrain for £639.20. I can’t remember the exact saving over buying everything seperately, but we can probably look into that, but I seem to recall it was pretty healthy.

I’d say double the cost was in it?

Imperium is indeed seemingly £1 more per issue (seemingly as we’re working on the assumption issue 3 isn’t discounted in anyway. It’s likely the case, but let’s be cards on table honest).

Assuming it’s another 80 issue run, that comes up to £719.20.

Of course, broken down into four week chunks for subscribers, it’s not a particularly massive £38 per direct debit.

Especially when it’s actually £36

With regular paints currently at £3.70 a pot, if they stick to two per issue, that’s gonna start cutting into any potential savings over the run. Whilst Conquest had issues of limited savings (as in pennies), those were outweighed by high savings, such as £22.50 RRP character models going for £7.99, and the £50.00 RRP Repulsor being split across four issues.

So, if the contents are largely comparable in RRP? That extra £80.00 across the run might impact the number of subscriptions from existing grognards like ourselves.

Indeed. I guess it will come down to if there’s more product value added. Or is it the same amount of product, for an extra £80 total.

Did I do my maths wrong again? Eeeeh, I’m a daft happorth!



For Conquest, I’ll have to see if I can find a complete list of issues and contents, then have a stab at adding it up. But given my earlier maths, maybe I should palm that off on A.N.Other

I’d imagine a quick google will have someone who had already done it for us, then you can pass their work of as your own

There is of course then the Premium addition.
If they do it again, and if it is more comparable to Mortal Realms, which was a vast improvement on Conquests.
That would change the value loads potentially also..

Danny76 wrote:
I’d imagine a quick google will have someone who had already done it for us, then you can pass their work of as your own

There is of course then the Premium addition.
If they do it again, and if it is more comparable to Mortal Realms, which was a vast improvement on Conquests.
That would change the value loads potentially also..

For me, if it's Primaris vs Necrons, it would be a harder choice than Primaris vs Death Guard.

I could be persuaded dependant on the terrain involved but even if I didn't subscribe, Forbidde Planet never let me down for any top up indvidual issues I wanted. Three Plagueburst Crawlers, four Rhinos and many Blight Drones not to mention four Repulsor tanks don't lie.

Now that the Repulsor flight stand issues are only £3.49 from Forbidden Planet, I may now catch up with not spending that £7.49 on them in the first place.

I'll second forbidden planet. Didn't want to subscribe to mortal realms and have been preordering specific issues. Zero interest in terrain, etc. Haven't been let down once.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Delivery takes awhile mind but, you know, Covid and whatnot.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
For Conquest, I’ll have to see if I can find a complete list of issues and contents, then have a stab at adding it up. But given my earlier maths, maybe I should palm that off on A.N.Other

Here, take this:
https://www.fauxhammer.com/news/spoiler-alert-full-warhammer-conquest-magazine-contents-leaked/



The savings are quite awesome at first look, but at least for the DG half you would end up with a lot of stuff you already had or didn't want to buy in the first place (spawn, cultists). I mainly tracked down the issues with characters in them, the difference in costs is just immense.

That said, COVID threw a massive wrench into that plan, as Hatchette mostly stopped supplying stores with magazines and only send out issues to people who had subscribed.

I think a lot of people aren’t going to click a fauxhammer link..
If you care to post the numbers on here..?


Yeah I stopped Conquest after about 20 issues (when I’d gotten the free gifts I wanted etc..)
Then I moved to cherry picking at Forbidden Planet.
I know I grabbed all the 7 or so DG character issues, the PBC ones, maybe the spawn too? Whichever hadn’t come by cancelling.
Forbidden planet was good because it was cheaper anyway, and then postage was one cost even though you’d order 9 issues that they posted you separately each release.
So worked out a good amount cheaper still.

Danny76 wrote:
I think a lot of people aren’t going to click a fauxhammer link..
If you care to post the numbers on here..?

They actually did a full breakdown on all issues and everything, but this is their summary:

Total Base Cost of Issues £629.20
(Not including Extra Binders of special items)
Total Value of all Models, Brushes & Paints £1101.18
(Not including the extras you get with a subscription)
Total Saving £471.98
(42.86%)

If they did a subscription with Necrons and Sisters of Battle I'd not be able to resist; but if its Necrons and Primaris or marines I'll likely just end up poaching issues off Forbidden Planet.

Ignore...

 Overread wrote:
If they did a subscription with Necrons and Sisters of Battle I'd not be able to resist; but if its Necrons and Primaris or marines I'll likely just end up poaching issues off Forbidden Planet.

Same here. I prefer fantasy than futuristic minis, and I'm currently happily doing the Mortal Realms partwork. I have no interest whatsoever in Marines, but I love nuns. If they released Sisters vs Necrons I would be in.

 Dysartes wrote:
...whoever did the page design for that site should never be allowed near an HTML editor again. Hideous.

An Indomitus-themed partwork could be interesting, if that's what it ends up being.

Agreed. I stopped reading after what I think(?) was the first paragraph. What in the holy hell was that?