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.

 NAVARRO wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

It already looks as if they were too ambitious and have launched too soon, and/or want to start recouping some of the investment already, not sure it will bring in many new subscribers over this week if they were sitting on the fence.

Given I still think it is good value for the year with the miniature, voucher (snip)
Not sure GW will be able to keep Warhammer TV running if they have around 10-20k subscribers, with a core number of that who jump in and out of subscriptions.

Well 1 animation, 1 battle report, 1 tut will not fill me with a weeks worth of content or persuade me that this channel will ever have enough to justify its existence.

I think the voucher and mini are artificial ways to mitigate the price and are not asked for.
If I pay for a streaming channel I want a good streaming channel. Not minis.

The thing is, you're not paying for a streaming channel. You may only be interested in the streamed content, and there's nothing wrong with evaluating value for money based on that. But you need to be aware that GW only sells the complete package of apps, streams, fluff and ancillary materials, and the promo miniature. If you're only interested in part of Warhammer+, you won't get as much out of it or see updates as frequently as someone who's in it for everything.

There's is nothing more artificial about the voucher and the model than about app access, or the White Dwarf back catalogue, or whatever. It's all there to raise the attractiveness of handing over a certain sum of money to GW each month or year. You get a variety thrown at you in the hopes that enough of it appeals to make it worth your while.

Since GW is now committed to running their games with subscription based companion apps, and the Warhammer+ subscription is a far more economic way of of subscribing to them than doing so individually, especially if you play more than one game, I'd say we should at least hold off on judging the long term viability of the service until the world has gone back to normal and most people can actually go out and play again. That part of the subscription isn't worth much to a lot of people at the moment. I hate to be the guy who says wait and see, but since Warhammer+ is either subscribed to in full or not at all, having parts that are currently not relevant distorts the potential attractiveness of the service. This may not have been the best time to launch it, but it is definitely not the time to evaluate it.

What I don't expect to change anytime soon is the update pace of the streaming part. I'm sure we're all hoping for more, but I'm confident that yesterday's announcement is indicative of what we can expect in the coming weeks and months. If you're only in it for the streams, that's what you'll get, and as noted, it isn't all that much.

 Jammer87 wrote:


Sidenote - are manicures not a thing in GB or maybe they are all shut down due to the pandemic? My one production complaint about the masterclass video is her hands were gnarly. If I'm producing a video guide and long scenes are focused on my hands/fingers I'm making sure that individual has at least clean-looking hands. The guys seem to do this much better than the women at GW. Duncan always had super clean-looking hands, but the first lady and this woman do not.

WHAT?!
Manicures are a thing but its more a case of lack of personal hygiene than anything, by the sounds.
Dont get it either, you would think if your going to film something to be displayed for thousands and representing a big company you would at least go to the effort to wash/clean your hands....right?

The first couple of weekly updates was something I was paying attention to before possibly subbing to see what the ongoing experience would be like. The initial offering was too small for me to get onboard and the first update does note bode well if that's the way things will continue.

It also seems pretty minimal effort with adding a couple of issues of WD a week and some random extra lore-related written material. I think GW said they had 11 different animated series in production but so far it looks like we're getting H&B and AoD only for the foreseeable future. I'd have liked to have seen more volume and variety.

 Geifer wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

It already looks as if they were too ambitious and have launched too soon, and/or want to start recouping some of the investment already, not sure it will bring in many new subscribers over this week if they were sitting on the fence.

Given I still think it is good value for the year with the miniature, voucher (snip)
Not sure GW will be able to keep Warhammer TV running if they have around 10-20k subscribers, with a core number of that who jump in and out of subscriptions.

Well 1 animation, 1 battle report, 1 tut will not fill me with a weeks worth of content or persuade me that this channel will ever have enough to justify its existence.

I think the voucher and mini are artificial ways to mitigate the price and are not asked for.
If I pay for a streaming channel I want a good streaming channel. Not minis.

The thing is, you're not paying for a streaming channel. You may only be interested in the streamed content, and there's nothing wrong with evaluating value for money based on that. But you need to be aware that GW only sells the complete package of apps, streams, fluff and ancillary materials, and the promo miniature. If you're only interested in part of Warhammer+, you won't get as much out of it or see updates as frequently as someone who's in it for everything.

There's is nothing more artificial about the voucher and the model than about app access, or the White Dwarf back catalogue, or whatever. It's all there to raise the attractiveness of handing over a certain sum of money to GW each month or year. You get a variety thrown at you in the hopes that enough of it appeals to make it worth your while.

Since GW is now committed to running their games with subscription based companion apps, and the Warhammer+ subscription is a far more economic way of of subscribing to them than doing so individually, especially if you play more than one game, I'd say we should at least hold off on judging the long term viability of the service until the world has gone back to normal and most people can actually go out and play again. That part of the subscription isn't worth much to a lot of people at the moment. I hate to be the guy who says wait and see, but since Warhammer+ is either subscribed to in full or not at all, having parts that are currently not relevant distorts the potential attractiveness of the service. This may not have been the best time to launch it, but it is definitely not the time to evaluate it.

What I don't expect to change anytime soon is the update pace of the streaming part. I'm sure we're all hoping for more, but I'm confident that yesterday's announcement is indicative of what we can expect in the coming weeks and months. If you're only in it for the streams, that's what you'll get, and as noted, it isn't all that much.

Yes I agree with the majority of what you said and for me, at this time, I would welcome a stronger streaming hobby content ( and I believe GW has the means and money to deliver that). The fact that they are agglomerating loads of things into the service to make it more appealing its actually working against them.

Silly inverted example: but lets say I want to buy a hero miniature for 25£, I just go and do so and have my mini to paint. Although if I go to the store and the guy tells me the mini costs 25£ + 5£ because it has a streaming service attached then I would probably walk away.

In the case of a paying for a streaming channel I just want that a streaming channel, the other bits attached to "add" or "justify" value I really don't need since I have it already.
In short I get why brands do this sometimes, they are selling the brand rather than the service itself. Unfortunately If I contract a a service I just want that delivered and then the brand fidelity comes after that good service is provided. Failing that you have neither.

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Jammer87 wrote:


Sidenote - are manicures not a thing in GB or maybe they are all shut down due to the pandemic? My one production complaint about the masterclass video is her hands were gnarly. If I'm producing a video guide and long scenes are focused on my hands/fingers I'm making sure that individual has at least clean-looking hands. The guys seem to do this much better than the women at GW. Duncan always had super clean-looking hands, but the first lady and this woman do not.

WHAT?!
Manicures are a thing but its more a case of lack of personal hygiene than anything, by the sounds.
Dont get it either, you would think if your going to film something to be displayed for thousands and representing a big company you would at least go to the effort to wash/clean your hands....right?

For some reason, that area of personal hygiene gets overlooked quite often. People will take care to have their hair neatly cut, their faces etc clean shaven, their clothes clean - and then BOOM, gnarly fingers and long ratty nails with dirt under them.

This is quite rude, team. Focus on the content for god's sake and don't ridicule someone's appearance.

 Gert wrote:
This is quite rude, team. Focus on the content for god's sake and don't ridicule someone's appearance.

Should have added: there's always someone who takes offense when you bring up the nails thing, as if reminding someone to trim and clean their nails is a grave personal attack. Like clockwork. That particular topic triggers a certain kind of person like no other.

Thank you for your service, Gert.

Maybe I just think people should focus on the content and not people's appearance.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Louise is the only female/woman presenter and people don't seem to have complained about Nick Bayton or Chris Peach in the same way.

 phandaal wrote:

 Gert wrote:
This is quite rude, team. Focus on the content for god's sake and don't ridicule someone's appearance.

Should have added: there's always someone who takes offense when you bring up the nails thing, as if reminding someone to trim and clean their nails is a grave personal attack. Like clockwork. That particular topic triggers a certain kind of person like no other.

Thank you for your service, Gert.

Or maybe they take offence in such rude comments behind face. Got guts to say that to her straight up? Or only here where she isn't reading?

Slipspace wrote:
The first couple of weekly updates was something I was paying attention to before possibly subbing to see what the ongoing experience would be like. The initial offering was too small for me to get onboard and the first update does note bode well if that's the way things will continue.

It also seems pretty minimal effort with adding a couple of issues of WD a week and some random extra lore-related written material. I think GW said they had 11 different animated series in production but so far it looks like we're getting H&B and AoD only for the foreseeable future. I'd have liked to have seen more volume and variety.

I'm surprised both by how little content there was at launch, and how little they're currently adding per week. Unless particularly interested in the voucher or miniature, I'd certainly just wait a few months, sub in a period when you've got a few days off and can just watch through it all, then resub again a year later when there's a reasonable amount of new stuff. Subjective value can be endlessly debated, but it's objectively very light on content as far as the actual videos are concerned, certainly compared to other streaming platforms or even the output of a half-devoted hobbyist on YouTube.

So, off topic, but phandaal... Who are they? The way they are posting for someone on such a short post amount means they are certainly someone already on here, or has been in the past and was banned, or maybe wanted a clean slate (probably from all the vitriol from the outstandingly rude posts you make about other members). Take it back a couple of notches, or well 5.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Geifer wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

It already looks as if they were too ambitious and have launched too soon, and/or want to start recouping some of the investment already, not sure it will bring in many new subscribers over this week if they were sitting on the fence.

Given I still think it is good value for the year with the miniature, voucher (snip)
Not sure GW will be able to keep Warhammer TV running if they have around 10-20k subscribers, with a core number of that who jump in and out of subscriptions.

Well 1 animation, 1 battle report, 1 tut will not fill me with a weeks worth of content or persuade me that this channel will ever have enough to justify its existence.

I think the voucher and mini are artificial ways to mitigate the price and are not asked for.
If I pay for a streaming channel I want a good streaming channel. Not minis.

The thing is, you're not paying for a streaming channel. You may only be interested in the streamed content, and there's nothing wrong with evaluating value for money based on that. But you need to be aware that GW only sells the complete package of apps, streams, fluff and ancillary materials, and the promo miniature. If you're only interested in part of Warhammer+, you won't get as much out of it or see updates as frequently as someone who's in it for everything.

There's is nothing more artificial about the voucher and the model than about app access, or the White Dwarf back catalogue, or whatever. It's all there to raise the attractiveness of handing over a certain sum of money to GW each month or year. You get a variety thrown at you in the hopes that enough of it appeals to make it worth your while.

Since GW is now committed to running their games with subscription based companion apps, and the Warhammer+ subscription is a far more economic way of of subscribing to them than doing so individually, especially if you play more than one game, I'd say we should at least hold off on judging the long term viability of the service until the world has gone back to normal and most people can actually go out and play again. That part of the subscription isn't worth much to a lot of people at the moment. I hate to be the guy who says wait and see, but since Warhammer+ is either subscribed to in full or not at all, having parts that are currently not relevant distorts the potential attractiveness of the service. This may not have been the best time to launch it, but it is definitely not the time to evaluate it.

What I don't expect to change anytime soon is the update pace of the streaming part. I'm sure we're all hoping for more, but I'm confident that yesterday's announcement is indicative of what we can expect in the coming weeks and months. If you're only in it for the streams, that's what you'll get, and as noted, it isn't all that much.

But once all the past content has been consumed (or used up to the point of the persons interest) what is there other than new content, which is thin, and a past white dwarf every month, and maybe the odd novel they throw on there. Dipping back to your favourite white dwarfs may happen also, but is that alone worth £5 a month?

All the new content will be pretty much video, which is thin at the moment and doesn't look like it will increase substantially soon.

Time to get back on topic, which is Warhammer +, not insulting each other, paint MSDS or any other thing.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
So, off topic, but phandaal... Who are they? The way they are posting for someone on such a short post amount means they are certainly someone already on here, or has been in the past and was banned, or maybe wanted a clean slate

Sorry to disappoint - never been a member of this forum before. Long time listener, first time caller.

Anyway, mods don't want any more off topic posts. Keeping the comments on this thread strictly focused on Warhammer+ itself going forward.

tneva82 wrote:

 phandaal wrote:

 Gert wrote:
This is quite rude, team. Focus on the content for god's sake and don't ridicule someone's appearance.

Should have added: there's always someone who takes offense when you bring up the nails thing, as if reminding someone to trim and clean their nails is a grave personal attack. Like clockwork. That particular topic triggers a certain kind of person like no other.

Thank you for your service, Gert.

Or maybe they take offence in such rude comments behind face. Got guts to say that to her straight up? Or only here where she isn't reading?

Mighty bold to assume someone who is in the military and regularly corrects people on having bad hygiene wouldn’t do it to someone to their face. If I can tell someone who is trained to kill people for a living to cut their nasty nails you don’t think I would do it to a 90 lbs woman?.

Also when I said clean I meant manicure clean, not didn’t wash hands clean. Like no hangnails, uniform length of nails, etc. I’m not insulting her appearance she seems good looking enough. I just think GW should have sprang the money for a manicurist to do some work before they started production. It’s about the content and reducing distractions. I’m sorry if seeing dry skin and hangnails is distracting to me while I’m trying to watch a tutorial. I’m not insulting anyone and I fail to see how talking about content is off topic.

@ Jammer87
I agree its a valid comment to the content and in this case the lack of professionalism behind it.

actually manicurists/nail salons etc were one of the places of work & jobs in the UK that were under restriction longer than almost everything else being both close contact, and not essential (pretty much the only things hit worse were night clubs)

so depending on when the videos were made she might not have had access to them

 NAVARRO wrote:
Yes I agree with the majority of what you said and for me, at this time, I would welcome a stronger streaming hobby content ( and I believe GW has the means and money to deliver that). The fact that they are agglomerating loads of things into the service to make it more appealing its actually working against them.

I mean, yeah, it is working against them. It's also working for them. The relevant question, to GW really since it's their profits on the line, is how many people fall in the former category and how many in the latter.

I reckon they could have parceled out several things and allowed people to customize their subscriptions with specific services at different payment levels but decided against it for one reason or another, opting for the all in option as the only one instead. I don't know if it's going to work out for them, but they certainly positioned themselves in believing more people will bite due to the offer having a critical amount of content compared to the ones with specific interests for which there's not enough bang for their buck to subscribe, or only subscribe part time to binge.

 NAVARRO wrote:
Silly inverted example: but lets say I want to buy a hero miniature for 25£, I just go and do so and have my mini to paint. Although if I go to the store and the guy tells me the mini costs 25£ + 5£ because it has a streaming service attached then I would probably walk away.

In the case of a paying for a streaming channel I just want that a streaming channel, the other bits attached to "add" or "justify" value I really don't need since I have it already.
In short I get why brands do this sometimes, they are selling the brand rather than the service itself. Unfortunately If I contract a a service I just want that delivered and then the brand fidelity comes after that good service is provided. Failing that you have neither.

In my view it depends on how you look at it. In isolation that 25 pound plus 5 combo wouldn't be sold as 25+5 and instead just as a package for 30 with no mention of individual valuation. That's Warhammer+ right now as advertised by GW. You're only getting those 25 pounds for the model because that offer doesn't exist in isolation and you see other manufacturers and even the same manufacturer offer comparable models for that price. There are plenty of people who justified their value perception with a breakdown citing what the assassin or orc would go for if they were sold individually, which we have a pretty good idea of, how the voucher figures in, what value they place on battle reports straight from GW when there are independent battle reports freely available, and so on. It's in large part how I look at it as well.

The question for me isn't if we apply our personal biases to judge the value of the service, which of course we do because it's in our individual interest to do so, but if we can reconcile that with a measure of understanding for what GW wants to sell us. They make it clear that they want Warhammer+ to be a package deal, and that any investment into the individual sections is an update to the whole that adds value to the whole, not just that section. It's really the difference in approach between looking at what you want and asking the company to supply it, and looking at what the company offers and then deciding if that fits your needs. What GW does with Warhammer+ really only provides the latter, with no option for the former. It's how they generally operate, but after many decades in business it's less noticeable on the miniatures and even fiction side of the business that allow the customer a much greater flexibility in picking exactly what they need. That too has obvious limits. You couldn't buy plastic Sisters for the longest time, and then you sat there just like you do now with Warhammer+ wondering how you can get from GW what you want when they are simply not willing to provide it. Compared to Warhammer+, though, the miniatures side of the business is a paradise of plenty in which you have a lot of freedom of choice. I'm not sure if anything that's now under the Warhammer+ heading will be delivered differently, but at the moment it's a pretty stark contrast between these things even though the underlying business strategy is the same. GW provides what GW wants to provide, the customer decides if it's for them.

I'm not sure I'm really going anywhere with this other than if you're being realistic, it's early days for Warhammer+ and whatever the service may yet become, for now it's predictably limited and it may not be the worst idea to just take it for what it is for the time being. Right now Warhammer+ is not a streaming channel, but has streams as part of it, and GW has no idea in which way how many of its customers value the different parts of their service. It seems a bit too focused on your own interests to me to focus so much on the streaming part when GW offers a wider service because realistically they had no data to base this service on and going all in on the animations without proven payoff could put them in dire financial peril. As much as the customer should consider their own needs first, you can't really escape a business's need for prudent financial planning. And for GW that means building up the service slow, so no individual part will blow people away at first. Nor the whole, if we're being honest.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
actually manicurists/nail salons etc were one of the places of work & jobs in the UK that were under restriction longer than almost everything else being both close contact, and not essential (pretty much the only things hit worse were night clubs)

so depending on when the videos were made she might not have had access to them

That's a good point. GW may have done the best they could given the restrictions.

 Geifer wrote:

I reckon they could have parceled out several things and allowed people to customize their subscriptions with specific services at different payment levels but decided against it for one reason or another, opting for the all in option as the only one instead. I don't know if it's going to work out for them, but they certainly positioned themselves in believing more people will bite due to the offer having a critical amount of content compared to the ones with specific interests for which there's not enough bang for their buck to subscribe, or only subscribe part time to binge.

In my view it depends on how you look at it. In isolation that 25 pound plus 5 combo wouldn't be sold as 25+5 and instead just as a package for 30 with no mention of individual valuation. That's Warhammer+ right now as advertised by GW. You're only getting those 25 pounds for the model because that offer doesn't exist in isolation and you see other manufacturers and even the same manufacturer offer comparable models for that price. There are plenty of people who justified their value perception with a breakdown citing what the assassin or orc would go for if they were sold individually, which we have a pretty good idea of, how the voucher figures in, what value they place on battle reports straight from GW when there are independent battle reports freely available, and so on. It's in large part how I look at it as well.



I'm not sure I'm really going anywhere with this other than if you're being realistic, it's early days for Warhammer+ and whatever the service may yet become, for now it's predictably limited and it may not be the worst idea to just take it for what it is for the time being. Right now Warhammer+ is not a streaming channel, but has streams as part of it, and GW has no idea in which way how many of its customers value the different parts of their service. It seems a bit too focused on your own interests to me to focus so much on the streaming part when GW offers a wider service because realistically they had no data to base this service on and going all in on the animations without proven payoff could put them in dire financial peril. As much as the customer should consider their own needs first, you can't really escape a business's need for prudent financial planning. And for GW that means building up the service slow, so no individual part will blow people away at first. Nor the whole, if we're being honest.

I see where you are coming from, and again I do agree with many of your points. Mind that I can only express my own selfish interest in the channel and how I perceive it. Just having a chat on how this would suit me and how I value it. Cannot really say about others but I hope subscribers get what they want and GW continues increasing its services.
Yes GW decided to create this one pack for all. The "novelty" of this pack, should I dare to say is the Warhammer TV, a place where streaming should be covered.
Old white dwarfs, apps and minis are already a service they provide but the TV part was fragmented on YouTube, twitch and GW site. Its clever to sell that streaming service too but not bundled in like this.
Why? Because If I already have the minis, WD etc but would welcome a place for all YT and twitch content with new anims and professional exclusive content I cannot just buy that.
Thats the reason I call the value of the pack artificial because in reality I personally dont need to buy a mini or old WD...I have those.

Yes GW thinks this is the best way to sell the Warhammer TV, I would just welcome more abundance of Warhammer TV content instead.
Wait and see is what Im doing now and hopefully the reports from the subscribers here, good and bad will keep coming.

 Jammer87 wrote:

Sidenote - are manicures not a thing in GB or maybe they are all shut down due to the pandemic? My one production complaint about the masterclass video is her hands were gnarly. If I'm producing a video guide and long scenes are focused on my hands/fingers I'm making sure that individual has at least clean-looking hands. The guys seem to do this much better than the women at GW. Duncan always had super clean-looking hands, but the first lady and this woman do not.

HAHAHA! I'm happy I'm not the only one who noticed this. Once I saw it, it was difficult to watch the close up portions of the videos. I hope she does get a manicure, cuz... damn.

*looks at own fingers*

Her fingers just look normal.

 oni wrote:

 Jammer87 wrote:

Sidenote - are manicures not a thing in GB or maybe they are all shut down due to the pandemic? My one production complaint about the masterclass video is her hands were gnarly. If I'm producing a video guide and long scenes are focused on my hands/fingers I'm making sure that individual has at least clean-looking hands. The guys seem to do this much better than the women at GW. Duncan always had super clean-looking hands, but the first lady and this woman do not.

HAHAHA! I'm happy I'm not the only one who noticed this. Once I saw it, it was difficult to watch the close up portions of the videos. I hope she does get a manicure, cuz... damn.

This is also something I don't get in some painting videos, not cleaning the one thing from your body that is showing 90% of the time, while making sure that the face, hair, cloths are looking perfect for the breath seconds they are seen

PS: talking about the "content" is difficult if there is just not enough to talk about

On the whole topic of "value", I just want to point out that currently Warhammer+ is roughly the cost of a fast food meal, or perhaps even a bit less than that, per month. That seems "worth it" to me for a few hours of animation and battle reports, in addition to all the back issues of White Dwarf and whatever else you're getting. Note that this is per month - how many people who frequent this forum buy a McDonald's every weekday for lunch?

 Mr. Grey wrote:
how many people who frequent this forum buy a McDonald's every weekday for lunch?

Absolutely not!

 Mr. Grey wrote:
On the whole topic of "value", I just want to point out that currently Warhammer+ is roughly the cost of a fast food meal, or perhaps even a bit less than that, per month. That seems "worth it" to me for a few hours of animation and battle reports, in addition to all the back issues of White Dwarf and whatever else you're getting. Note that this is per month - how many people who frequent this forum buy a McDonald's every weekday for lunch?

If you aren't going to consume the W+ content, but you are going to consume the Mickey D's, then the burger is worth more to you than the W+ content.

Keep in mind, there's also a cost in "time" in addition to the cost in money. One reason why people may not be interested in the content is because it does not seem compelling enough for them to spend time watching W+ when they could be spending that time doing something else.

That seems to be the general theme with people who aren't buying W+. They aren't all that interested in what is being offered for a variety of reasons, so the price being low isn't as relevant.

A tiny health/skincare PSA:

I haven't seen the video and have nothing to say about the manicure situation anyways but some painters use their thumbnail as tiny palettes which in turn might lead to more/rough handwashing and that in turn to dry skin. And if somebody paints a lot that might exacerbate the issue. I know of a painter who used acrylics (traditional big paintings) who simply had very dry/rough skin due to the the working conditions. The only solution would have been to give up the job which is usually not a viable solution. Somebody painting minis constantly might have similar symptoms.

Another issue that causes dry skin can be washing hands with warm/hot water. Lukewarm/cold water tends to be better (cold without being freezing cold). So if any of the commenters here have dry skin then it's advisable to not use your nails as mini palettes (so you don't need to scrub the rest off after a painting session) and to try to use cooler water if possible.

Speaking from experience, it tends to take one/two weeks for your skin to adjust to the new status quo and not be as dry/sensitive as before (it depends on how bad it is when you switch). Changing from warm water to colder water really helped me with dry skin (especially in winter when it would occasionally be very sensitive around the nails an even bleed a tiny bit if irritated too much) and it also works for showers and general washing, especially for people who wash more often.

I'm confused by the warhammer+ voucher offer. You have to subscribe by the end of the 31st August, and still have a subscription at the end of the 30th September, having to stay subscribed and not being allowed to cancel it in that time - so you're basically paying for 2 months of Warhammer+, which costs £10, to get a £10 voucher?

Yes. It at best offsets the cost of the subscription IF you wanted to buy something from the GW webstore to begin with.

Please do not spam the forum - ingtær.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
I'm confused by the warhammer+ voucher offer. You have to subscribe by the end of the 31st August, and still have a subscription at the end of the 30th September, having to stay subscribed and not being allowed to cancel it in that time - so you're basically paying for 2 months of Warhammer+, which costs £10, to get a £10 voucher?

Yes you pay £10 to get a £10 voucher.

At the same time you access all the Warhammer+ content for that period. So yes its like a free 2 month period.
The idea is to get you to sign up for it and then after two months of content either forget to cancel or decide to continue subscribing. Alongside that you've got the model as well which is only valid for 12 months subscription. Again its a hook designed to help GW retain members and encourage them to sign up long term. Rather than, say, sign up for 1 month, see everything then wait 6 months and sign up again for 1 month and just binge the content in blocks.

GW would rather you sign up and remain signed up.