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.

Lammia wrote:
New Sister tanks models sold well on launch, Phobos Marines sold well on launch.

Like it or not, Kirby was right to think GW was a model company first and foremost. That's what makes their money.

Game rules just keep casual modelers interested.

Except that the sales of the game started picking up once they focused on the game part.

It was one part of many, but yes when GW started treating the game they sell more seriously the sales did pick up.

I think they (managers) also finally realised that many customers, from gamers to artists to collectors, often only focus on a few armies or one army. So when an army didn't get a new codex/battletome and didn't get any new models, marketing or attention. All the customers for that force didn't just go buying other GW stuff. They stopped buying GW stuff. They might get the odd thing here or there, but they were just as likely to start another game from another company and not remain within the GW ecosystem.

However when GW started giving all armies much more equal attention and sped up the update of rules for them and marketing it made a huge difference.



Heck you want another - look at Forgewrold for AoS, the only models there that are for AoS (ergo not the chaos demons) in any number are the Gloomspite models. They are also the only ones that got any marketing on the community pages.
Many others were dropped, loads of awesome dragons who were hidden in destruction grand alliance and others that got no marketing; just vanished. Likely in part due to lack of effective sales volume.


When GW markets something it helps sell it; when GW ignores something it dwindles.


So faster battletome/codex turn around; new models even if its just 1 leader model. These things all help gain interest and keep fans buying that army. Which keeps them in the GW system and thus prime for marketing other GW products too.

 RaptorusRex wrote:

Lammia wrote:
New Sister tanks models sold well on launch, Phobos Marines sold well on launch.

Like it or not, Kirby was right to think GW was a model company first and foremost. That's what makes their money.

Game rules just keep casual modelers interested.

No, he wasn’t. The game is what gives the models context and what not.

For most of the market, this is true. And one of the reasons he failed as a manager of a company, is because - like another CEO in the media atm - he decided to define the whole company by one skill set. (And then failed to make the most of that one)

it is the combined factor of both, bad rules with bad models on release that has the big impact and "kills" a GW game, that happend to Warhammer Fantasy and nearly happend to 40k with Kirby

to Game drive the sales no matter if people play it or not, but if the game is considered "bad" and not fun by the community even those who would have never played it hesitate to buy an army because if there is the possibility is missing to play a game at all they feel their investment won't be worth it, even if the army would forever be on display only on a shelf
in combination if the models are "bad", as in too expensive for what you get or not all models in the army are on the same level (like an outdated core that does not match the new elites/heroes in design but is a must for an army) than only the meta chasers buy into it, if the rules are good

and having a social media department and influencers on contracts that only allow positive messages without mentioning anything non-GW makes a big difference here as those that never play only get the information that "everyone plays this game" combined with "it is the best possible game and lot of fun"
and this alone now drive sales

this was also a reason why GW reacted so fast on Votaan while other factions that need a nerf were not touched for a long time
unrest on social media that you cannot play that army, even with the english speaking community got the reason why it was banned wrong, and it would not have been a problem if there would have never been a pre-release Errata at all
yet GW needed to react as simply the rumour before release was enough that it might affect sales for all groups as without the "illusion" to maybe play them once, people won't buy into an army at all


there are several surveys on Reddit and Youtube were it looks like that 50% of the people who have an 40k army never played a game (for different reasons)

while others show that the reason why people go with Age of Sigmar or 40k is that they know they game will be there and supported "forever" rather than being killed off after a short time
which is ironic because by now GW is the only company in the hobby that killed of their own games and removed them from sale and a lot of other games are around for a very long time as well (OPR is there for about 10-15 years now, Dirtside/Stargrunt for ~20 years, Battletech is as old as 40k etc) and compared to those games 40k is just an old brand with the "game" lasting 6 years at best and are replaced by something different with the same name (but people who don't play will never realise this, so it does not matter, they just know it is still around)

and this is also a reason why a lot of people are still angry for the dead games (with some of them being back the hype for the others is real, even though none of those were ever dead-games), they bought into GWs promise that their games will be always there and therefore people accepted bad rules and higher prices as the necessary trade of compared to other games
and than GW removes the only reason you paid the high prices and played with rules you never really liked, of course you are angry and than of course the community splits up (as you rather go and play the game you because there is no reason any more not to do so)

Yeah, player hype is important.

Which is why the profession circuit have such influence. Because if they say the game is busted it feeds down to the rest. Even if 99%, probably more, have never seen 9 Voidweavers etc in real life.

But in turn - I don't think social media or influencers is the key to new GW. Its fixing (or at least changing) the rules. I don't think at their core there were problems with WHFB or 6th/7th 40k. The problem was just leaving the rules largely unchanged (beyond some DLC in 7th) for years. People who were enjoying the game eventually ran out of patience. Guard players have experienced something like that these last few years - but that's one faction, not the majority of them.

agree, changing from "we don't make mistakes" to "we try to fix it" is a big part of keeping things going and one of the big changes from 7th/8th Fantasy and 6th/7th 40k
but just saying that you try without actually fixing something would not work without having a social media presence behind that says well done now it is fixed

and staying positive about the game and not mentioning any flaw is a big part of a lot of GW communities, no matter if "the fix" did not help at all or did not fix it but just shifted the balance in the opposite direction

and that people would rather like to se a reset with 10th instead of just an update, says a lot about how well GW fixed the flaws that came with 8th, which was already the reset to fix all flaws
this is also possible a reason why we see some tension between the different groups, as those that actual play the game and not having much fun any more, and those that don't play but want to believe everything is (for whatever reason) have a growing gap between them

Tome_Keeper wrote:
They have done this in pretty much every system they have since the 90's so it just follows that if they want to sell more.. Drukari, Tau, Votann, Vampires, CSM, etc., that they would write advantageous rules for them. 80 Dollar characters wont sell themselves.

This is laughably wrong. Not only these are cherrypicked examples from like 20 years, there are way more counterexamples. Deathwatch, shiny new SM range, terrible rules, which were then nerfed 5 (!) times in a row. Primaris, really mediocre rules, took three buffs to get to merely okay status, then ruined again by idiotic, unfluffy decision to give old, ugly, cheap squat models W2 for no reason. Genestealer Cults, another shiny new range, spent big percent of its existence as one of the worst armies in game. Necrons, big shiny update, bad rules. New Black Templars, really meh (but people bought them anyway to use them as Primaris veteran conversions). In fact, Votann are really the only new army with strong rules, and funnily enough, broken gak there was copy pasted from Tau and Eldar rules, two of the armies with incompetent writers always giving them ultra busted rules.

According to you, broken Eldar rules in 8th (specifically, aspect warriors, especially reapers, old, ugly, cheap, resin minis close to 20 years old) were supposed to sell what? Old resin gak with close to no profit made on them instead of new, shiny, expensive Eldar models? Gee, maybe, just maybe, it's Phil Kelly's incompetence, not a conspiracy. Ditto with Ynnari, utterly broken, all for the sake of (checks notes) all of three 7th edition models. And in 9th, the most broken army, Harlequins, is supposed to sell what? The new models they didn't get in 8th and 9th editions? Why not make Necrons/GSC/BT or Phobos OP to sell new plastic, but it's always the same old ugly gak people bought already ages ago?

It's almost as if cheese being always some kind of Eldar (who, totally by accident, are pet army of one of the most incompetent GW writers, Phil Kelly) would give people a clue why this is happening. But no, it's GW conspiracy to sell new models, only they give the OP cheese to oldest crap possible and it's virtually never the new models, but who cares about the facts, conspiracy it is!

 Irbis wrote:

Tome_Keeper wrote:
They have done this in pretty much every system they have since the 90's so it just follows that if they want to sell more.. Drukari, Tau, Votann, Vampires, CSM, etc., that they would write advantageous rules for them. 80 Dollar characters wont sell themselves.

This is laughably wrong. Not only these are cherrypicked examples from like 20 years, there are way more counterexamples. Deathwatch, shiny new SM range, terrible rules, which were then nerfed 5 (!) times in a row. Primaris, really mediocre rules, took three buffs to get to merely okay status, then ruined again by idiotic, unfluffy decision to give old, ugly, cheap squat models W2 for no reason. Genestealer Cults, another shiny new range, spent big percent of its existence as one of the worst armies in game. Necrons, big shiny update, bad rules. New Black Templars, really meh (but people bought them anyway to use them as Primaris veteran conversions). In fact, Votann are really the only new army with strong rules, and funnily enough, broken gak there was copy pasted from Tau and Eldar rules, two of the armies with incompetent writers always giving them ultra busted rules.

According to you, broken Eldar rules in 8th (specifically, aspect warriors, especially reapers, old, ugly, cheap, resin minis close to 20 years old) were supposed to sell what? Old resin gak with close to no profit made on them instead of new, shiny, expensive Eldar models? Gee, maybe, just maybe, it's Phil Kelly's incompetence, not a conspiracy. Ditto with Ynnari, utterly broken, all for the sake of (checks notes) all of three 7th edition models. And in 9th, the most broken army, Harlequins, is supposed to sell what? The new models they didn't get in 8th and 9th editions? Why not make Necrons/GSC/BT or Phobos OP to sell new plastic, but it's always the same old ugly gak people bought already ages ago?

It's almost as if cheese being always some kind of Eldar (who, totally by accident, are pet army of one of the most incompetent GW writers, Phil Kelly) would give people a clue why this is happening. But no, it's GW conspiracy to sell new models, only they give the OP cheese to oldest crap possible and it's virtually never the new models, but who cares about the facts, conspiracy it is!

I think you're wrong on several points. Custodes were downright broken in 8th(Matches were won by pure shield troops lists just holding objectives), at the start of 9th, and in their codex drop were bonkers. Death Guard were bonkers on launch. Sisters were bonkers on release, in both 8th and 9th. 9th's releases have been a constant power creep since jump street, it's not even an argument now. The go to for most of 9th has been "SUPER SPECIAL RULES GO!". First it was Melta Primaris, then it was Sisters being able to just give themselves 6s, then there were Death guard's "unstoppable movement", then it was Special Cogni Lascannons that could do more damage than a multi-melta, then GK could cast super smite that could drop a knight, then custodes were silly broken with a 4+++ and their Martial Kataas breaking the game, then Tau showed up and said F YOUR INVULNs, and on and on. Now we have Votaan who were so obviously broken that they had to be nerfed BEFORE they launched.

I get GW is super incompetent, but we're on like round 12 of Fool me once....?

Umm, 9th Edition Codexes were a power level reset. Almost every codex released had a significant increase in power as GW updated weapons and units to the new 9th Ed paradigm.

That being said, many new unit releases were meh at best. In the Sisters release only Morvenn Vahl (a supreme commander) and Celestian Sacresants (broken bodyguard mechanic) were any good. The other units were considered bad to useless.

There's clearly codex creep - but its unclear its deliberately aimed at sales.

Its unclear for instance why GW made DE the best faction for 2021. Why do they want to sell kits from 7-10 years ago, as against the current hotness (that tends to have a high RRP?) Incubi being good makes sense perhaps - but not the whole faction. Claims GW has warehouses full of stock that just sits idle for a decade seem erroneous. In part because - possibly due to Covid - they spend 2021 running out of all sorts of stock.

Its easier to argue Ad Mech flyers were really pushed. Because they are ludicrously expensive. But then they also pushed Dakkajets which were nearly £20 cheaper. Making buggies good after making them bad through 8th - then making it so you couldn't run many of them in a list - isn't obviously a master plan to maximise profits.

There's this argument that GW rolls the pitch. So they have OP stuff to sell now - then other OP stuff to sell later. Which may be right. But its hard to see how "leave the OP stuff OP forever" is good for the game. Arguably buffing the OP stuff and nerfing the UP stuff is how you'd balance a system. "Just have a perfectly balanced game" is a reasonable argument - and I'd say they have tried in 9th. Certainly more than any previous editions. Overpowered stuff gets quickly nerfed. Which isn't obviously good for sales you hope to make on the back of that reputation.

In ye old world the overpowered stuff would be good for 2-10 years. Today, Votann get a crazy book? It gets nerfed before anything but the starter box is available to order. They may get another nerf in January depending on how GW is feeling. If you are rushing out to get your hands on 15-18 flamers they may be nerfed before ever get them on the table.

We have codex creep because GW like to push the envelope - and I think they broadly think meta churn is healthy. Its unclear however they have plans to sell this specific set of grey plastic - as opposed to any other. And as such whether a faction is good or bad is probably more up to the designer's bias than some corporate sales plan.

I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

Not only that but the meta-chasers I know are often buying models second hand. They aren't building an army they are meta chasing. So they often have less attachment to their meta-armies. So if they can buy a premade army that has all they need in standard colours and such they'll go for it as its the cheaper option. Some strip and repaint or pay others to repaint them for them. But in general they are focusing on the most cost effective way to chase the meta.

So chasing the meta for GW would only make sense if the meta was only the newest of the new models; otherwise they'd be generating no actual income for themselves.

From my experience, there tends to be a skew toward "new models get the best rules" within the codices. The best units in the ork codex are the ones that have been launched in the last two editions: speed freaks buggies and warbikers (bikers having been included in the SF box), beast snagga units, kommandos, and Ghazzy. It can take an edition cycle for GW to "correct" a lackluster new product release, but there's a very noticeable jump between recent releases and old kits.

20 + years of this and people still question it is happening?

 Eldarsif wrote:
I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

I think most people take pts-efficiency into account when buying models, the ones who care about that more than anything else? 10000 people. Part of why it feels like a lot more people are meta chasers than they probably are is that if someone goes and gets 2 units and one of them is pts-inefficient it'll get played less and if someone has a large collection they can choose to just use the more pts-efficient units.

I don't think GW purposefully overpowering new codexes to drive sales makes sense from real world data, but it feels like they are purposefully sticking knives into the hobby with the balance and design changes they make.

I'm not a businessman, but if I were I'd tell you that you should align your business goals with the goals of buyers. A small initial barrier to entry and incentives to upgrade to huge collections would be best for GW.

Hankovitch wrote:
From my experience, there tends to be a skew toward "new models get the best rules" within the codices. The best units in the ork codex are the ones that have been launched in the last two editions: speed freaks buggies and warbikers (bikers having been included in the SF box), beast snagga units, kommandos, and Ghazzy. It can take an edition cycle for GW to "correct" a lackluster new product release, but there's a very noticeable jump between recent releases and old kits.

Which Orks haven't been good at some point in 8th or 9th? Boyz, Lootas, Gretchin, Stormboyz, Flyers and Mek Gunz are all old right? Zodgrod and Mozrog have been unviable because of their klan the whole time right? How about Wurrboys?

Meanwhile in the Tyranid codex, the best units on release were Tyranid Warriors, Raveners, Maleceptors, Hive Tyranys and Harpies, 3 of those are as old as the faction and the newest among them (Maleceptor) is still a 7th ed/5 years old release.

I'm not seeing this "new are best" on the bug's side.

 Tyran wrote:
Meanwhile in the Tyranid codex, the best units on release were Tyranid Warriors, Raveners, Maleceptors, Hive Tyranys and Harpies, 3 of those are as old as the faction and the newest among them (Maleceptor) is still a 7th ed/5 years old release.

I'm not seeing this "new are best" on the bug's side.

Agree

Craftworld:

New Dark Reapers - Bad
New Shining Spears - Bad
New Big expensive Avatar - at best situational, but mostly meh
New Ranger jetbikes - bad
New Autarch - bad
New Maugan Ra - Situational
New Guardian Defenders - Dire Avengers are better and Rangers fill the troop tax
New Storm Guardians - Bad
New Warlocks - Bad
New Rangers - Cheap Troop tax at best

Can't say that GW was pushing those models hard in the new book. People were buying Howling Banshees(relatively newish) and Swooping Hawks(ancient) at launch.

Also,conspiracies are hard to keep and GW's employment is an interesting revolving door. If GW really had this devious agenda someone would have leaked it already as they did with a single unit - the Wraithknight. It would also mean that fans seeking employment at GW would buy the Kool Aid of a underhanded agenda completely. It would mean that every single person on the line of creation is in on it which is hard to do even for the richest of companies. Also, NDAs are not in perpetuity and eventually one would speak about their time there as we saw with the AT guy a year or so.

I find it more likely that GW has a very strict cadence that leaves little to no room to playtest, that Game Designers have favorites that they smear on stronger rules, and just general human nature rather than a larger insidious conspiracy.

Maybe some context is needed here? Citing Craftworlds: Eldar as an example of bad codex creep to drive sales is a bit of a misnomer. CW:E were and always had been slightly on the very powerful side, GW knew most people who play them weren't going to be buying lots of new sets. The margins weren't there to make a killing. I think they gambled on Clowns though?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Maybe some context is needed here? Citing Craftworlds: Eldar as an example of bad codex creep to drive sales is a bit of a misnomer. CW:E were and always had been slightly on the very powerful side, GW knew most people who play them weren't going to be buying lots of new sets. The margins weren't there to make a killing. I think they gambled on Clowns though?

Historically, the worst Eldar had it was in 5th being upper mid tier.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Maybe some context is needed here? Citing Craftworlds: Eldar as an example of bad codex creep to drive sales is a bit of a misnomer. CW:E were and always had been slightly on the very powerful side, GW knew most people who play them weren't going to be buying lots of new sets. The margins weren't there to make a killing. I think they gambled on Clowns though?

Historically, the worst Eldar had it was in 5th being upper mid tier.

I think that one reason why Eldar tend to score pretty high is because they have a wide variety of unit types, which means that there's a good chance that something is what's good at a given time. They also used to have more out there unite compared to other factions and that means that there's again a better chance at having some units be overpowered. Of course, the majority of their units usually was pretty worthless but that's only relevant for most players, not for the high end tournament crowd.

Eldar also are thematically a very magitech faction, and that means special rules on top of special rules because that is the only way GW knows how to make something feel special.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Maybe some context is needed here? Citing Craftworlds: Eldar as an example of bad codex creep to drive sales is a bit of a misnomer. CW:E were and always had been slightly on the very powerful side, GW knew most people who play them weren't going to be buying lots of new sets. The margins weren't there to make a killing. I think they gambled on Clowns though?

The point is that if GW wanted to drive sales of the new fancy models they really failed at that job in the last Aeldari codex. All the stuff people are buying is old stuff that has existed for years. They even over nerfed Dark Reapers and to a slighter extent Shining Spears from the 8th edition, both of which had spanking new models with an uptick in price.

But if we want the season winrate of Craftworlds this year it stands at 47% at r/WarhammerCompetitive. So one could argue that this is the first edition they are either somewhat balanced or Phil Kelly didn't get to treat his elves with premium gak like the editions before - or he just loves clowns now.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/zps1hl/meta_monday_122022_end_of_year_season_report/

 vict0988 wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

I think most people take pts-efficiency into account when buying models, the ones who care about that more than anything else? 10000 people. Part of why it feels like a lot more people are meta chasers than they probably are is that if someone goes and gets 2 units and one of them is pts-inefficient it'll get played less and if someone has a large collection they can choose to just use the more pts-efficient units.

I don't think GW purposefully overpowering new codexes to drive sales makes sense from real world data, but it feels like they are purposefully sticking knives into the hobby with the balance and design changes they make.

I'm not a businessman, but if I were I'd tell you that you should align your business goals with the goals of buyers. A small initial barrier to entry and incentives to upgrade to huge collections would be best for GW.

Hankovitch wrote:
From my experience, there tends to be a skew toward "new models get the best rules" within the codices. The best units in the ork codex are the ones that have been launched in the last two editions: speed freaks buggies and warbikers (bikers having been included in the SF box), beast snagga units, kommandos, and Ghazzy. It can take an edition cycle for GW to "correct" a lackluster new product release, but there's a very noticeable jump between recent releases and old kits.

Which Orks haven't been good at some point in 8th or 9th? Boyz, Lootas, Gretchin, Stormboyz, Flyers and Mek Gunz are all old right? Zodgrod and Mozrog have been unviable because of their klan the whole time right? How about Wurrboys?

That's a fair point. The most powerful unit in the ork book come 8th were a combo of grots and Lootas. The lootas came out in 4th so have almost certainly made their production cost back and then some. Once 9th came out the Killrig was admittedly the most powerful model, only to get nerfed, then buffed right back to where it was originally. I don't bloody know what goes through the minds of GW.

 Eldarsif wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Maybe some context is needed here? Citing Craftworlds: Eldar as an example of bad codex creep to drive sales is a bit of a misnomer. CW:E were and always had been slightly on the very powerful side, GW knew most people who play them weren't going to be buying lots of new sets. The margins weren't there to make a killing. I think they gambled on Clowns though?

The point is that if GW wanted to drive sales of the new fancy models they really failed at that job in the last Aeldari codex. All the stuff people are buying is old stuff that has existed for years. They even over nerfed Dark Reapers and to a slighter extent Shining Spears from the 8th edition, both of which had spanking new models with an uptick in price.

But if we want the season winrate of Craftworlds this year it stands at 47% at r/WarhammerCompetitive. So one could argue that this is the first edition they are either somewhat balanced or Phil Kelly didn't get to treat his elves with premium gak like the editions before - or he just loves clowns now.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/zps1hl/meta_monday_122022_end_of_year_season_report/

I dunno, I recall there being a good 1-2 month stretch where people where foaming at the mouth over Melta bikes, regular bikes, Dark Reapers, and Farseers MW Spam. Am I thinking of clowns?

yeah fezzik, you are thinking about clowns.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

You don't have to be majority to outspend guys who add random kit once in a while vs buying new army every couple month.

tneva82 wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

You don't have to be majority to outspend guys who add random kit once in a while vs buying new army every couple month.

If you think the majority of meta-chasers are buying their new armies from GW, or even their FLGS you are sadly mistaken. The vast majority of meta-chasers will use eBay or borrow models from friends/other meta-chasers. Their spending is usually funded by selling off previously meta armies.

Even if they did buy from retail they really are such a tiny minority that I'd be fairly sure their individually high spending would still be eclipsed by the huge number of casual gamers and hobbyists.

3D printing will probably help the Meta chasers. That or use of Recasters.

Plus hardcore painters, modellers and the like actually tend to buy more than add a new kit once in a while. They buy more than their house can hold in my experience!

Or course anyone being so hardcore to either extreme is pretty rare. But all those anecdotes of piles of unopened boxes and plastic crack. They aint Warhammer Is A Serious Business esport types.

Slipspace wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I am actually curious. The ones who answered "yes", how big do you think the meta-chasers are percentage wise in the gaming community? Because it feels like people are arguing that meta-chasers are a majority of the players, something that I have not experienced in my country. I'd argue that less than 1% of the player base here are meta-chasers and even then they are very selective about what they buy. They'll buy dozens and dozens of the same unit over and over again to spam and nothing else. That doesn't really sound like good business as GW does have a large SKU collection.

You don't have to be majority to outspend guys who add random kit once in a while vs buying new army every couple month.

If you think the majority of meta-chasers are buying their new armies from GW, or even their FLGS you are sadly mistaken. The vast majority of meta-chasers will use eBay or borrow models from friends/other meta-chasers. Their spending is usually funded by selling off previously meta armies.

Even if they did buy from retail they really are such a tiny minority that I'd be fairly sure their individually high spending would still be eclipsed by the huge number of casual gamers and hobbyists.

And very often those who win tournaments get prizes which amount to store credit or more model kits ( in addition to a trophy ). Even LVO doesn't have a cash prize. The only time that happens is end of season for the #1 player.