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.

Mantic is an interesting case. 3 aspects to consider if you're looking at Kings of War, their flagship game.
...

My perspective has pretty much always been that GW is the most expensive brand in a fairly cheap hobby. Certainly I'd love GW product to be cheaper, and if it was I'd probably spend more overall dollars on it, but price tag has never been a serious issue for me, and I'm not pulling in an above average working adult wage.

The majority of my purchasing restraint with GW product is the ability to actually motivate myself to paint it, not the cost in dollars.

steelhead177th wrote:

Mantic is an interesting case. 3 aspects to consider if you're looking at Kings of War, their flagship game.
...

What about the Sci-Fi? Warpath, Firefight and their skirmish sized (Vanguard)?

I don't know much about them honestly. If any of them have a following near you, I'd check them out.

Most of what was said about KOW probably applies to Warpath/Firefight. I've heard good things about the Vanguard and Deadzone, but I've never actually seen those 4 games being played and I'm in a major city.

I do think the sci Fi range of miniatures looks quite good. I've got a few Forgefathers and some Rebs. However, KOW is the only Mantic game I've heard of folks playing, the only one I could get my club interested in, and we're mostly treating it as a WHFB rules replacement for gaming in the Old World.

The biggest value gw provides for their high price (for gamers) is ease of finding opponents. Their edition and expansion churn are a subscription fee for people who either want to play their games OR have to play GW because their local players won’t lower themselves to play anything but.

They make nice, detailed models. And they charge Coca Cola prices because, as the king, they can.

Cyel wrote:
Physical product is physical product and it should dictate the price. The things like game size or points costs are arbitrarily decided by the company that produces the game and I hate when people say they are legitimate ways of determining the price of the product in $$$. It's just a free pass for the company to introduce predatory pricing strategies. "Hey, designers, let's make this model cost more points so that we can ask more money for it!" etc.

This I wholeheartedly agree with.

There is no good reason to charge $60 for 5 dudes or $35 for 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

steelhead177th wrote:
Have people looked at Mantic as a comparison vs GW? If I was to buy from a company I would buy from them. I haven't seen the models in person, but the prices are much better, aswell as the bundles. Their rules I like and they have different scales of battle, with different rules for each size. I just have never seen anyone locally play it.

Mantic minis are like marmite; people either like or loathe them. I like them. But there are other options, too, such as Wargames Atlantic, Frostgrave/Stargrave/Oathmark, and to a lesser extent, Medge and Gates of Antares. And Mantic themselves have had to raise prices, though not to crazy GW levels.

There are plenty of cheap or free mini-agnostic rule books out there for anyone who isn’t comfortable proxying cheap models into their big spender games. You can absolutely have a wonderful gaming experience for a fraction of the cost. The only thing you need are friends willing to play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 privateer4hire wrote:
The biggest value gw provides for their high price (for gamers) is ease of finding opponents. Their edition and expansion churn are a subscription fee for people who either want to play their games OR have to play GW because their local players won’t lower themselves to play anything but.

They make nice, detailed models. And they charge Coca Cola prices because, as the king, they can.

This is something I still don’t understand.

Why is it so important to find players already playing the game?

Perhaps it’s my age, the fact that I grew up in boardgame culture, or late entry into wargaming, but I’ve always found it preferable to have friends I’d want to take with and introduce them to the new game and say, “let’s try this one today”.

Perhaps because you have been lucky enough to have friends who would play what you suggested? I spent 20 plus years moving every 2-3 years and finding a pool of players was important to getting ANY gaming in. (And GW was the core everywhere I lived) And multiple years and multiple systems proved game evangelism to be a waste of time and money.

We retired to rural Oregon and for the first couple of years it was play 40k or don’t game. I lucked into finding one other guy who’d play off brand stuff. In nearly seven years that number has increased by two more for a stable of three other players.

So that’s why having a turnkey game community is valuable to me and to probably a few others who like playing.

Why is it so important to find players already playing the game?

Perhaps it’s my age, the fact that I grew up in boardgame culture, or late entry into wargaming, but I’ve always found it preferable to have friends I’d want to take with and introduce them to the new game and say, “let’s try this one today”.

Expense and time taken to learn it. Difficulty finding models. The smaller the group, the more akin to herding cats arranging games becomes.

Also remember a popular game like 40K also comes with folk able to teach others, making ongoing recruitment a lot easier than a bunch of people trying to figure a rules set out by themselves.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:



Mantic minis are like marmite; people either like or loathe them. I like them. But there are other options, too, such as Wargames Atlantic, Frostgrave/Stargrave/Oathmark, and to a lesser extent, Medge and Gates of Antares. And Mantic themselves have had to raise prices, though not to crazy GW levels.

There are plenty of cheap or free mini-agnostic rule books out there for anyone who isn’t comfortable proxying cheap models into their big spender games. You can absolutely have a wonderful gaming experience for a fraction of the cost. The only thing you need are friends willing to play.

.

I may have come across slightly harsh when I said Mantic minis are not as good as GW. They aren't, but that's not to say they're bad. They increasingly have a more unified style and that style will not appeal too all. There are also some oddball issues such as very tall hobbits that may turn some folks off.

If the used and lower-cost plastic minis market wasn't so robust, there are several Mantic factions I'd consider. However, it just happens that none of the given Mantic choices appeal to me as much as the minis I've been sourcing elsewhere.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

This is something I still don’t understand.

Why is it so important to find players already playing the game?

Perhaps it’s my age, the fact that I grew up in boardgame culture, or late entry into wargaming, but I’ve always found it preferable to have friends I’d want to take with and introduce them to the new game and say, “let’s try this one today”.

Having an established group of friends who game (regardless of the game chosen) would likely be the preference of most players. I've had that for over a decade now and they are a treasure. However, I remember the days of 4th and 5th edition when I was recently out-of-college and didn't have that group. Being able to go on a game shop or other website -or even just show up at a shop- and easily find someone who wanted to play 40k made gaming so much easier and more accessible. It was also easier to find groups of players to visit and game with. Being who I am, I was buying most of my 40k second hand, but I was happy to buy some new rulebooks and some kits at FLGS's because I knew they'd get used and I appreciated the service that the FLGS offered via game space.

I've left that behind, but I completely understand respect the value of ubiquity when it comes to deciding what game to choose. My feelings about GW are pretty well stated, but if I wind up in a small town where 40k is the only game in town, I'll likely be playing 40k until I can build a group to play something else.

I am not sure if it is better or worse to live in a small town?

In a small town you can build the gaming scene to what you want to play.

Or worse, because..... no one plays. Even 40K requires game evangelism!

That has been my experience, as most of my gaming life I have lived in rural towns in the US.

 privateer4hire wrote:
Perhaps because you have been lucky enough to have friends who would play what you suggested? I spent 20 plus years moving every 2-3 years and finding a pool of players was important to getting ANY gaming in. (And GW was the core everywhere I lived) And multiple years and multiple systems proved game evangelism to be a waste of time and money.

We retired to rural Oregon and for the first couple of years it was play 40k or don’t game. I lucked into finding one other guy who’d play off brand stuff. In nearly seven years that number has increased by two more for a stable of three other players.

So that’s why having a turnkey game community is valuable to me and to probably a few others who like playing.

I see. I hadn’t considered having to move into a new community. In hindsight, pretty foolish of me.

I will admit I spend most of my opponent's turn talking them into other games to the point where when I refer to 40k games as recruiting drives.

 LunarSol wrote:
I will admit I spend most of my opponent's turn talking them into other games to the point where when I refer to 40k games as recruiting drives.

That's pretty rude of you.

If we were playing & you did this?
The 1st turn this happened I would politely point out to you that while ____ might be a great game, I'd come to play 40k.
If you continued for a 2nd turn I'd be more blunt about it.
A 3rd turn & I'd just take the hint that you're not really interested in the game being played and begin packing up.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 privateer4hire wrote:
Perhaps because you have been lucky enough to have friends who would play what you suggested? I spent 20 plus years moving every 2-3 years and finding a pool of players was important to getting ANY gaming in. (And GW was the core everywhere I lived) And multiple years and multiple systems proved game evangelism to be a waste of time and money.

We retired to rural Oregon and for the first couple of years it was play 40k or don’t game. I lucked into finding one other guy who’d play off brand stuff. In nearly seven years that number has increased by two more for a stable of three other players.

So that’s why having a turnkey game community is valuable to me and to probably a few others who like playing.

I see. I hadn’t considered having to move into a new community. In hindsight, pretty foolish of me.

Not foolish at all.

Even having lived in one place for nearly seven years, it’s taken all that time to find only three others in the area willing to play something other than 40k. Not just GW, but only 40k. Necrominda lasted about 90 days, as did original warcry and bb2020. The locals just won’t venture outside that bubble.

GW prices are more or less reasonable IMO. FW prices is where we start getting into questionable value. But still, many of my synths and music equipment cost so much more than any miniatures game playing "pieces", so I dont really consider wargaming to be an expensive hobby. A bloody time sink yes, but not too costly.

Anyone into modular synths will laugh at the petty outlay required for a 2000pt 40K army.. while the rest of the world laughs at them

Yes, compared to other hobbies, this one is pretty cheap. However, compared to other hobbies this one is pretty expensive.

That said, I get a lot of value for my wargaming dollar. I buy a box of minis, spend time assembling it, spend time painting it, spend time photographing them, and spend time actually using them on the table.

Once I own them, no one can take them away from me and I can use them as much as I want. I still have 1st Edition Rogue Trader minis that regularly hit my table in various wargames.

Historicals are an even better deal, as a Roman Republican soldier is a Roman Republican soldier. I can use it Wars of the Republic, Saga, L'Art de Guerre, Warhammer Ancient Battles, Broken Legions, Warhammer Fantasy Battle, Oathmark, etc.

Yep. If you think Warhammer is expensive, look at the cost of golf sometime. Or SCUBA diving. Or big game hunting. Or high-end photography. Or rebuilding cars.

Of course, there are cheaper hobbies, as well.

I agree GW prices, FOR A WHOLE ARMY, can get pretty pricey for the wargaming hobby. But you're also getting the ability to find a pick-up game in virtually every game store in the country, which is nice.

ccs wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I will admit I spend most of my opponent's turn talking them into other games to the point where when I refer to 40k games as recruiting drives.

That's pretty rude of you.

If we were playing & you did this?
The 1st turn this happened I would politely point out to you that while ____ might be a great game, I'd come to play 40k.
If you continued for a 2nd turn I'd be more blunt about it.
A 3rd turn & I'd just take the hint that you're not really interested in the game being played and begin packing up.

Do you not chat about other things during a game? Most of the time people are chatting about movies or shows or games or whatever. Other games I play is a pretty natural topic of conversation. And you don't continue conversations people aren't interested in. That's just like... basic social skills.

If you have to compare GW prices to some completely other hobby, and usually another out-of-reach-for-most hobby like scuba diving or flying lessons, then you are admitting GW are too damn expensive. Compare their prices to others in the same field or hobby, and they don’t look so hot.

If finding a thriving community of people to play against is important to you, you should want GW prices not to be a barrier to entry that makes them game almost-but-not-quite as inaccessible as scuba. Mini golf prices get you more players than real golf prices.

You can find data to support whatever narrative you want to about GW's price, cost, value, and worth. The reality is that GW prices their stuff in a pretty dynamic way, so that some GW stuff is some of the cheapest available, while some is eye bleedingly expensive. generally, GW's starter boxes are incredible value, their bundles are high value, their base boxes vary widely, and a handful of low point, high cost models are shockingly expensive. In other words, the cost to build an army can vary dramatically.

Pretty much all other wargames with strong IP (pretty much all licensed) cost roughly what GW stuff costs. Historical tend to be cheaper, and can look great, while increasingly fantasy models are also available pretty cheaply. The biggest difference is that other games tend to use far fewer figs.

The super important thing to remember when people talk about value with GW is that for many people, diminishing returns has long since kicked in. Once you own a couple of armies, how much more value are you going to get out of another one? It's easy for my to say I'd never buy an Admech army new, due to the cost, but I don't need an Admech army, and I have a half dozen more armies to play.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
If you have to compare GW prices to some completely other hobby, and usually another out-of-reach-for-most hobby like scuba diving or flying lessons, then you are admitting GW are too damn expensive. Compare their prices to others in the same field or hobby, and they don’t look so hot.

That sounds fine in theory, but I dont play wargames from other manufacturers. In fact, they dont interest me, like, at all. So why would I compare prices of those games to something like 40K or Kill Team? It's just as pointless for me to compare prices of other wargames vs GWs as it for you to compare prices of other hobbies to wargaming in general.

What I mean is, perceived value of things is very subjective, and therefore night on impossible to reach any real consensus on.

Even when you strip away personal taste, it's not that hard to define GW's market so that they don't' have any effective competitors: large scale, fully plastic fantasy and sci-fi armies with broad and deep catalogs. Sure, you have some plastics from Warlord, Mantic, and whoever makes oathmarks, but GW has individual ranges that have more plastic kits, and it's games are played at such a large model count that nobody really comes close. If you allow historicals, the Bolt Action German range probably is one of the deepest ranges outside of GW.

Look at areas where there is direct competition. Kill Team In to the DArk is $210, which is more than Mantic's Deadzone at $140, but the no frills (and really no terrain) Kill Team starter is only $99. Into the Dark is half again as much as Deadzone, but is twice as big. You can argue the merits of both if you'd like (I own a lot of mantic stuff, but their models are simply not in GW's league), but in terms of literally how many sprues of plastic you get, they punch about the same.

Now, the flip side is that nobody but GW could get away with some of the absurd pricing. Ad Mech chicken walkers at $60 each? GTFO. But gW can get away with it, because nobody else has figured out how to get people to not only buy one of those for $60, but to buy a half dozen or more because they're good in the game.

But GW so outclasses nearly all other wargames miniatures manufacturers that even when you can go apples to apples, there's always a "yeah, but GW is so much better" argument to be made.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
If you have to compare GW prices to some completely other hobby, and usually another out-of-reach-for-most hobby like scuba diving or flying lessons, then you are admitting GW are too damn expensive. Compare their prices to others in the same field or hobby, and they don’t look so hot.
.

Nah, not really.

I mean, dismissing comparisons is a bit dishonest if you ask me. They're not 'out of reach' comparisons either.

A good rig for computer gaming?

A next gen console?

A next gen console game? I mean game pass aside a new game can be £60.

Most gamers won't even blink.

Football season tickets will cost you £400 to £500 here in Scotland(never mind what folks pay down south), individual games might be £30 to £60 (plus food) for the day out. etc. And hundreds of thousands of people engage in this week in and week out. Millions do, worldwide. and at least when I'm playing wargames I'm (a) indoors, (b) dry and (c) warm. Big improvement on your average Scottish fitbaw.

How about joining a golf club like millions more do and getting some decent gear? This isn't the preserve of the world's billionaires either. The average person on the street does this.

The oft mentioned 'outing to the cinema' will cost you £30 for 2 hours and the movie might be rubbish.

How about ordinary every day things like car repayments (couple hundred quid a month) or fuel for said car (£30 a week for me at the moment). £300 for a bunch of gw war-things I can literally use until my final breath is awfully good value in comparison.

So, GW product has a very high utility, but in sort of the same way that all hobby stuff does, beacuse if you use something a lot it has more value. For people that play less, or don't see value in painting, than the utility drops.

Here's what I'll say: If you spent $50 a month on GW, that's $600 a year. Let's assume you spend $250 to start, so that's a starter box or a combat patrol, a few paints, a brush or two, and some primer, glue, and tools from a hardware store. With that initial investment and $50 a month, you'll have a playable army in a year, and be able to keep it up to date and add to your hobby bench. And then... you can play it every week! For essentially zero dollars.

So, I legit do not understand how anybody can start the hobby from a dead stop. It must be daunting. But when you break it down monthly and look at it over a year or two, it's just not that much compared to a lot of other leisure activities.

Look, it's never going to be as cheap as the cheap hobbies like trail hiking, charcoal sketcing, or streaming music/TV. But when compared to adult hobbies like golf, fishing, or collecting, it's cheaper.

I think that GW slots in with other "serious" gaming hobbies like video gaming or TCGs. Sure, you can play magic by buying a commander precon for $40, but nobody just does that. You can quibble around the margins, but they're pretty similar.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
If you have to compare GW prices to some completely other hobby, and usually another out-of-reach-for-most hobby like scuba diving or flying lessons, then you are admitting GW are too damn expensive. Compare their prices to others in the same field or hobby, and they don’t look so hot.

Why? If a burger at one drive through costs $1 and a burger at the other one costs $1.25 they're both still cheap and no amount of "expensive for a burger" is going to influence my decision about which one to buy. And for a lot of people miniatures are in the same position. Whether or not GW is expensive relative to other companies just doesn't matter, it's still a cheap hobby relative to other adult hobbies. The people who are spending five figures a year on their boat/plane/track car/etc aren't even going to notice a $1000 40k army and there are a lot of people buying those things.

If finding a thriving community of people to play against is important to you, you should want GW prices not to be a barrier to entry that makes them game almost-but-not-quite as inaccessible as scuba. Mini golf prices get you more players than real golf prices.

Sure. Of course all customers want to have cheaper prices. Even if an entire 40k army cost $10 people would still want it to cost $5. But that doesn't mean 40k is an expensive hobby, or that GW's pricing strategy is unreasonable.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
If you have to compare GW prices to some completely other hobby, and usually another out-of-reach-for-most hobby like scuba diving or flying lessons, then you are admitting GW are too damn expensive. Compare their prices to others in the same field or hobby, and they don’t look so hot.

If finding a thriving community of people to play against is important to you, you should want GW prices not to be a barrier to entry that makes them game almost-but-not-quite as inaccessible as scuba. Mini golf prices get you more players than real golf prices.

Mini-golf may get more players, but how many of them are out at the mini-golf course every weekend to play regularly?

And I'd hardly call golf or working on cars 'out of reach' for most. I worked at Wal-Mart some years back with a co-worker who golfed. Not a manager, mind you, a line employee. Granted, not with top-of-the-line equipment or at the high-end country clubs, but the point remains.

Yeah, you pay a premium for GW. For that premium you get a very good chance at finding a pick-up game pretty much anywhere you go. Is it the best value in the wargaming hobby? Probably not. It is still pretty darn widespread? Yes, yes it is.

And unless your FLGS is a GW store, you don't even need to buy GW minis to play GW games.

> That sounds fine in theory, but I dont play wargames from other manufacturers. In fact, they dont interest me, like, at all.

Has anyone brought up "lifestyle games"? Because someone who plays only one game line can certainly spend within budget as well as someone who plays a variety of games.

Magic the Gathering is another example of a lifestyle game. Someone can spend hundreds of dollars on the game every year or even few months, but if he's not spending money on other games, he may not be spending any more of his gaming budget than someone who spends less money per game system, but plays many game systems.

EDIT: And then there's golf! https://www.golflink.com/facts_6020_much-does-cost-play-golf.html

We joke that our group could easily play 40k as a lifestyles game IF we used the money we spend on $5 independent pdf’s in search of the grail game

 ced1106 wrote:
> That sounds fine in theory, but I dont play wargames from other manufacturers. In fact, they dont interest me, like, at all.

If you're not interested from the offerings of corvus beli, Privateer Press, warlord or whoever else, comparing a theoretical smaller price tag from them against what you pay is academic at best. Just be careful you don't get called a 'shill' or a 'mindless sheep'.

 ced1106 wrote:

Has anyone brought up "lifestyle games"? Because someone who plays only one game line can certainly spend within budget as well as someone who plays a variety of games.

I think any game from any manufacturer can be played with a big or a small budget. Some approaches are more appropriate for smaller budgets and at worst some expectations might need to be manages but to me that's as far as it goes.

"Cost" is an objective measure. A thing has a price, and that's easily quantifiable.

"Value" is subjective, though. Regardless of the cost of something, its value/worth/usefulness is going to be highly dependent upon the purchaser. Even a "great price" on something is of no value if it is something that will not be used by the purchaser.

So, spending the same amount of cash on, say, a single model for a game that you actually play and enjoy will have a higher value compared to spending on a box of models for a game you have no interest in.

 Polonius wrote:


Now, the flip side is that nobody but GW could get away with some of the absurd pricing. Ad Mech chicken walkers at $60 each? GTFO. But gW can get away with it, because nobody else has figured out how to get people to not only buy one of those for $60, but to buy a half dozen or more because they're good in the game.

But GW so outclasses nearly all other wargames miniatures manufacturers that even when you can go apples to apples, there's always a "yeah, but GW is so much better" argument to be made.

I asume you are talking about the Sydonian Dragoon? - https://www.games-workshop.com/en-EU/Sydonian-Dragoon-2017

First of all, it is not 60$. Especially not at the local/online store. Second, the model is simply amazing. It is huge, it looks outstanding, and you get a ton of extra bits to customize it however you want, make it a Dragoon or a Balistarii, different type of weapons, etc. I do not feel at all robbed for what I payed, in fact I'm gonna buy another one because how good it looks.
And this is my experience with GW so far - I get enough content from their boxes that I feel their prices are fair (for the hobby, at least) - both in term of quantity and quality. Maybe fair is not the right word, but I never felt cheated when buying GW, even when I bought characters - like Tigurius for example - the amount of extra bits, extra options for anything, the quality of the mini, all makes it a worthy purchase for me.