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.

Dudeface wrote:
I think then the real issue is that it's obvious to us, the paying consumer base, what would be well received and seemingly, they are not aware.

We are a niche forum mostly dominated by older players that still complain about Primaris Marines.

We are not the paying consumer base as far as GW is concerned.

 Tyran wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I think then the real issue is that it's obvious to us, the paying consumer base, what would be well received and seemingly, they are not aware.

We are a niche forum mostly dominated by older players that still complain about Primaris Marines.

We are not the paying consumer base as far as GW is concerned.

We haven't moved on from the Primaris thing? I thought we were at least up to Femtodes rage?

Sheesh, I thought we were a lot further along than we are.

 Tyran wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I think then the real issue is that it's obvious to us, the paying consumer base, what would be well received and seemingly, they are not aware.

We are a niche forum mostly dominated by older players that still complain about Primaris Marines.

We are not the paying consumer base as far as GW is concerned.

I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

IF a new BFG is even coming and IF it is 30k then the reason must be something else. Perhaps they want to grow the 30k brand by supporting it with multiple games? I have no idea.

 Tyran wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I think then the real issue is that it's obvious to us, the paying consumer base, what would be well received and seemingly, they are not aware.

We are a niche forum mostly dominated by older players that still complain about Primaris Marines.

We are not the paying consumer base as far as GW is concerned.

Well that's true, it's probably why theres more support seemingly for a HH version here as that also is something that appeals to that demographic.

Dudeface wrote:


Even then if they really wanted to only make 2 factions at launch: chaos ships and imperial navy. Boom, completely time period agnostic. Quickly add in loyalist marine ships and you've still covered both systems without the limitation. The only other factor I can think of is the volume of ship battle fluff and padding for the books they can regurgitate from HH might be higher.

Bingo!

This is why releasing it as a Heresy labeled product is stupid. As soon as you slap "Heresy" on a box, you limit your options for growing the game.

Avoiding that label leaves the game free to become whatever the fans want it to be.

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

Dudeface wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I think then the real issue is that it's obvious to us, the paying consumer base, what would be well received and seemingly, they are not aware.

We are a niche forum mostly dominated by older players that still complain about Primaris Marines.

We are not the paying consumer base as far as GW is concerned.

Well that's true, it's probably why theres more support seemingly for a HH version here as that also is something that appeals to that demographic.

I think is a slightly simplistic view. As a setting HH is really a zoomer thing not a grognard thing, that was the core demo who became obsessed with those books which became their entry into 40k, grognards remember when the HH was a paragraph in the CSM codex not the sprawling Space Rome soap opera plot tumour it has become, some (The sleeper contingent of people who love narratives and the idea of Space Rome over settings and 40k) got obsessed but most didn't. As a game, HH 28mm seems to skew older but then that's partly because the core players were the FW resin guys and because specialist games have always skewed older as those are the people with the most disposable income and among whom you will find the burnt out/finished in terms of buying new product for 40k looking for something new and different. Finally you have the retention of more wargamey rules from pre-8th. But as the legions of guys in comments sections impotently saying "Hey, just play heresy" to any complaint with the post 8th changes to the setting, Primaris or the rules, it's not enough to have better rules, nobody has ever played 40k for the rules.

Another view would be older players (Always your core market for specialist games) remember BFG for the 40k version and would want that back not a HH version because of a misguided assumption of most HH 28mm players older, therefore older players really like HH setting, therefore Battlefleet: Heresy has greater market appeal than Battlefleet: Gothic.

Ultimately there is a balance between justifying a setting so you only have to make one set of miniatures and the setting having such reduced appeal that this decision costs more than it saves. It made sense with the original Adeptus Titanicus where the Horus Heresy was first mentioned and the remake game but once you get into Epic territory and GW's modern financial state and release schedule it fails for me. The appeal of Epic Warhammer is to have tiny versions (As the appeal of scale models in general) of the 28mm game and the freedom to paint them up however you like. I think GW was trying to be too clever with AI or rather they gave Specialist Games so few resources that they over-niched it, if that is even a word. I would even say the logo design and box art just didn't have so much appeal. But using art of the miniatures has been a staple of FW/Specialist Games for over 20 decades due to less resources. All this combined with the ridiculous prices didn't do the game any favours. It's a niche game (Which is the say not 40k) so it needs to feel cheaper than 40k, a bargain, to thrive.

The central dilemma for GW in using the HH setting will be to either break the lore (Which they now really take very seriously, what a time to start doing that? RIP cool Necrons, you're derpy Space Egyptians forever now) by having gothic train battleships with a Heresy setting or not have them and have the iconic element of the whole thing absent. Ultimately I think going with 40k and just not releasing ships for the more niche armies would be a lot easier in my opinion. But it's hard to guess which armies that are niche as 28mm lines will be niche as BFG ships.

Another thing to remember is finishing up with the Primaris line, their current business model is "the new stuff must flow" and they're run out of Primaris stuff (Space Marine releases are the most profitable releases, thus why they nuked the old marines and went in with the Primaris thing, something that wouldn't have done for other lines in a weird paradoxical these guys sell so much and are so iconic we're going to overwrite them) so I fully expect them to surprise with all kinds of new offerings including stuff like Space Hulk and BFG. The new stuff must flow, always...

For anyone who knows the whole putting epic in HH feels like the Sullivan and Gold scheme to take the London Olympic stadium as West Ham's new ground for cheap. Too clever and it backfired. I fear the same will be true for BFG.

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That's only the case if you think they'd go for releasing every 40k faction at once, rather than starting with a few and working towards the rest.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That's only the case if you think they'd go for releasing every 40k faction at once, rather than starting with a few and working towards the rest.

First time around, GW went for Imperials and Chaos in plastic, and then drip-fed the other factions. The game didn't stick around for long.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That's only the case if you think they'd go for releasing every 40k faction at once, rather than starting with a few and working towards the rest.

First time around, GW went for Imperials and Chaos in plastic, and then drip-fed the other factions. The game didn't stick around for long.

1999 to 2013 isn't very long to you?

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That's only the case if you think they'd go for releasing every 40k faction at once, rather than starting with a few and working towards the rest.

First time around, GW went for Imperials and Chaos in plastic, and then drip-fed the other factions. The game didn't stick around for long.

1999 to 2013 isn't very long to you?

BFG was in stores until 2013?

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That's only the case if you think they'd go for releasing every 40k faction at once, rather than starting with a few and working towards the rest.

First time around, GW went for Imperials and Chaos in plastic, and then drip-fed the other factions. The game didn't stick around for long.

So to clarify you feel that only releasing imperial alone and targeting a smaller audience of their fanbase will... do better?

BFG had a short store-life span but then had a fairly long life on mail-order with Forgeworld - but honestly some of those releases are janky as heck - the original Tyranid models for BFG were very much nor up to GW's normal standard. Honestly I'd even argue some of the Necron ones were not all that great a model design - though they were very iconic once released.


It's like how Epic 40K died in a year but then came back now and then under the same mail-order only system.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That's only the case if you think they'd go for releasing every 40k faction at once, rather than starting with a few and working towards the rest.

First time around, GW went for Imperials and Chaos in plastic, and then drip-fed the other factions. The game didn't stick around for long.

1999 to 2013 isn't very long to you?

BFG was in stores until 2013?

You could still buy BFG ships until they were discontinued in 2013, when the specialist games division on the whole was shut down.

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That might be true for Epic but I'm not sure it's as big of a deal for BFG. How many different boxes would we really need?

Something like this could probably work for most fleets:

1x Battleship box
1x Cruiser box
1x Frigate/destroyers box
1x Fighters box

So 24 boxes should cover the basics for 6 fleets. 24 boxes would not be a huge commitment for GW. 50 boxes could probably cover all 40k factions and that would be less than the 60+ boxes they've released for Legions Imperialis so far.

That assumes GW goes for highly modular models. They could bloat that number if each variation of cruiser and larger is its own box/sprue.

Look at LI - they have 3 boxes of Leman Russ variations and the only difference is the turret. Plus since the turret is part of a whole larger sprue and not its own sprue that means having 3 different moulds for 1 model.


Also if they go to fewer factions they can go wider on the faction offerings. So they can easily bloat the range to just include more options.









In the end many of us want 40K as the setting because we aren't die-hard marine fans and the idea of marine vs marine is dull. Esp at LI/Gothic scales where the variations between factions as GW does them; are often minor to invisible.

Many of us are also Xenos fans directly, so we want to be able to take the fleets in space for the armies we already play on the ground. I want Tyranid and Eldar ships way more than I want 10 different flavours of marine ship (esp since in BFG the Marines are one of the smaller factions on model range anyway)

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
Someone collecting Loyalist Space Marines can't just casually use a Dark Mechanicum Seperos construct

Embarassing. If you're not going to read my post then why reply.

 Overread wrote:

Look at LI - they have 3 boxes of Leman Russ variations and the only difference is the turret. Plus since the turret is part of a whole larger sprue and not its own sprue that means having 3 different moulds for 1 model.

I'm not sure if GW do this, but it is possible to have injection molds with swap-out sections. The Leman Russ sprues have weapons in the same positions, so it's possible they only made one or two 'master' molds for the three products.

I can see that same technology being very useful for BFG.

 Ohman wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That might be true for Epic but I'm not sure it's as big of a deal for BFG. How many different boxes would we really need?

Something like this could probably work for most fleets:

1x Battleship box
1x Cruiser box
1x Frigate/destroyers box
1x Fighters box

So 24 boxes should cover the basics for 6 fleets. 24 boxes would not be a huge commitment for GW. 50 boxes could probably cover all 40k factions and that would be less than the 60+ boxes they've released for Legions Imperialis so far.

Light cruisers and grand cruisers. Battlecruisers can probably come out of the normal cruiser box.

You might be able to do fighters/bombers/ordnance as space filler on ship sprues so not need a dedicated box. Or keep them core/generic included in the main boxset so you don’t need them per faction.

Might also want some generic stuff like minefields, defense turrets, starbases, cargo haulers, etc.

While they certainly could do more with bespoke ships and new classes, I agree that you could get a fleet to the table with very few boxes per faction.

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
Someone collecting Loyalist Space Marines can't just casually use a Dark Mechanicum Seperos construct

Embarassing. If you're not going to read my post then why reply.

.

I did read your post. Your original point is invalidated by those exceptions, because you've had to change your point from "Any product can be used by any player" to "Any product can be used by any player, except the ones that can't be".

 Ohman wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Ohman wrote:


I honestly don't think GW belives that a 30k BFG would sell better than a 40k BFG.

It isn't that it would sell better, but that it would be cheaper (and faster) to produce.

That might be true for Epic but I'm not sure it's as big of a deal for BFG. How many different boxes would we really need?

Something like this could probably work for most fleets:

1x Battleship box
1x Cruiser box
1x Frigate/destroyers box
1x Fighters box

So 24 boxes should cover the basics for 6 fleets. 24 boxes would not be a huge commitment for GW. 50 boxes could probably cover all 40k factions and that would be less than the 60+ boxes they've released for Legions Imperialis so far.

24 boxes could also have covered all 40k factions in Epic. GW chose not to do that and actively waste sprue space and SKUs instead to sell you less for more. They're not chasing "cheaper and faster".

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

you've had to change your point

I've edited my original post to account for the solitary exception of the resin psi-titan. Please continue to keep contributing valuable* insights to this thread!

*lol

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

you've had to change your point

I've edited my original post to account for the solitary exception of the resin psi-titan. Please continue to keep contributing valuable* insights to this thread!

*lol

It isn't about the Psi-Titan, because that isn't the "solitary exception"

Someone collecting Loyalist Space Marines can't just casually use a Dark Mechanicum Seperos construct

Dark Mechanicum units like the Stalker Constructs can't be used. Those are traitor exclusive.

The hypocrisy of claiming I didn't read your posts, only for you to show you clearly didn't read mine.

Guys do we have to get the Thunder Dome out for you both?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
24 boxes could also have covered all 40k factions in Epic. GW chose not to do that and actively waste sprue space and SKUs instead to sell you less for more. They're not chasing "cheaper and faster".

So perhaps their strategy is to build the 30k brand by releasing more games under the same umbrella? Trying to make 30k a bigger deal than it currently is? If that's the case they might look beyond actual sales in the hope of building something bigger for the future.

To me it feels like a missed oppurtunity. I can only imagine the great minis that 60+ plastic kits for Epic 40k would have brought us.

It is a shame... look at what Mantic have done, launching their Epic sci-fi with 8 factions out of the gate with just 1 sprue per faction.... a faction starter is 6 copies of one sprue but builds a full army with troops, elites, HQs, APCs and tanks...

But GW chose to have a tank come in 20 pieces, 2-3 per sprue, necessitating a massive amount of kits, so they went with a setting that can get by on just the 3 factions.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
It is a shame... look at what Mantic have done, launching their Epic sci-fi with 8 factions out of the gate with just 1 sprue per faction.... a faction starter is 6 copies of one sprue but builds a full army with troops, elites, HQs, APCs and tanks...

But GW chose to have a tank come in 20 pieces, 2-3 per sprue, necessitating a massive amount of kits, so they went with a setting that can get by on just the 3 factions.

Honestly though - GW's tanks are VASTLY superior models in style. I'll take GW's models over Mantic any day in that scale.

 Overread wrote:
Honestly though - GW's tanks are VASTLY superior models in style. I'll take GW's models over Mantic any day in that scale.

Than there's Warcradle, who eschewed crowdfunding but also churned through 8 factions in about a year, with unit variety comparable to LI with just 2 sprues of mixed units per faction and I'd say a comparable quality of vehicles... while both Warcradle and Mantic easily beat GW on infantry.

Dudeface wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:
First time around, GW went for Imperials and Chaos in plastic, and then drip-fed the other factions. The game didn't stick around for long.

So to clarify you feel that only releasing imperial alone and targeting a smaller audience of their fanbase will... do better?

I make no claim as to what approach i think will be more successful, nor what perception GW will have of the various options; just, they tried the slow expansion last time. I clearly misremember BFG's presence, filtering reality through my own experience (I played it when it came out, but stopped before the factions beyond the base book released).

For Necromunda, GW's release mirrored its original release schedule (a gang a month or so) albeit drip-feeding the rules at the same time they did the models. I'd say it's likely that any Battlefleet release will go that route, and we'd be waiting 12 months + before any non-Imperial/Chaos ships enter the system.

The name Battlefleet Gothic may not be used; has GW maintained the registered trademark of 'Space·Fleet'? (the interpunct is important) They could go true old school and resurrect that name for the new game.