PDA

View Full Version : Disgust with Current 40k Design



pililuk
03-02-2009, 16:55
Ive Recently become disgusted with 40k after reading all the guard rumours and reading the ork Dex, I think with them lowering points of almost everything the games are starting to become rediculous, My gaming group used to play 1500 point games, but after the ork dex came out several of our ork players lost the ability to make all the way up to 1500. My Guard horde will deffinatly not hit this number.
I just think the Core units going down in points and up in price is slowly but shorely driving me out of 40k and back to purely fantasy.

Lord Inquisitor
03-02-2009, 16:58
Same trend in Fantasy, where actually it's worse as you need more models.

Personally, I'd say Guard and Orks should be Horde armies? You can always buy lots of tanks, stormtroopers or ogryns in the former or battlewaggons, nob bikers and dreadnoughts in the former to bring your model count down. Or play Space Marines!

Kurisu313
03-02-2009, 16:58
I'm enjoying it personally, but hey, i have 10k of guard.

Maybe you should play less points? Playing at 1200 would give you a similar effect to the games you used to play wouldn't it?

Buddha777
03-02-2009, 16:58
So your angry that basic troops, the core of any army in both 40k and real life, are becoming useful and cheap to use?

incarna
03-02-2009, 17:12
I think the drop in point cost brings the units more in line with they capability on the tabletop. I donít see an issue. If I head to my local gaming club and can only field 1000 points Iíll just ask if anyone wants to play a 1000 point game Ė no reason to get bent out of shape.

The_Outsider
03-02-2009, 17:19
post

Would you rather pay 10 points per ork boy or guardsmen when they are clearly not worht that much? The trend is to massively cut down troops in cost (or for SM give them gear) because they are so valuable to the army, as well as being very common.

Guard, orks and nids can easily hit nearly 200 models at 1500 points because that is how they work - it is akin to complaining deathwing doesn't have enough models or dark eldar don't get a decent armour save, they are racial traits that the army is more or less designed around.

To solve your problem: go play deathwing.

Refyougee
03-02-2009, 17:22
Well I don't think you're not the only one who sees a problem with the Ork Codex, although probably for the opposite reasons that the majority of us have. :p

Lord Damocles
03-02-2009, 17:22
Warseerites: 'Stuff is overcosted. I hate you GW!'

GW: 'We'll correct the points costs'

Warseerites: 'I hate you GW!'

:rolleyes:

KGreen1021
03-02-2009, 17:25
I like the idea of actually being able to field an "Army" for the Imperial Guard or a "Waaaagh" for the Orks. As long as they don't make it possible for Space Marines to field a company on the board Im fine with it. Certain armies need to be large and others small, it just fits the fluff. I also believe they are trying to get more people to buy their larger kits such as the new Ork Stompa and Imperial Guard Baneblade and hopefully a plastic Thunderhawk for the Space Marines.

Laser guided fanatic
03-02-2009, 17:27
Warseerites: 'Stuff is overcosted. I hate you GW!'

GW: 'We'll correct the points costs'

Warseerites: 'I hate you GW!'

:rolleyes:

GW is up to it again? Arrgh! Anyway I learned in nursery that if evil GW divides the units point cost by x then dividing the points cost of the game will make things go back to normal.

So @OP, work out average unit point reduction over last 4 (maybe) codexes. then divide that number by 1500 or whatever you normally play at and you have the magic number to play games at. Ofc round it of to 3 SF otherwise it would be silly.

Hicks
03-02-2009, 17:38
Personally I don't mind that trend too much, but I'd like to see things balanced out a bit more. For 6pts you can get either a boy, a guardsmen or a termagaunt... and I really don't feel like I'm getting my points worth when using my guards or nids. Unless these units get a buff to reach the level of the ork boy, I'm all for them getting a point drop.

If anything, it means that troop heavy lists can finally afford to take some of the more exotic units or truly drown the enemy under a sea of bodies..

TheLionReturns
03-02-2009, 17:40
I wouldn't go as far as disgust but I can see where the OP is coming from. Having started with 2nd edition, there just seems so many models on the tabletop now compared to back then (and this is the case for all armies). Of course the idea of playing with more and more models does have its appeal, both in terms of the variety that can be fielded in one go as well as from a visual perspective. A green horde does look quite dramatic, particularly up against a smaller elite enemy.

However, I feel that now things get a bit crowded on the tabletop and it detracts from the movement and use of cover. Simple solutions of course are to play smaller battles or play on a larger table.

SPYDER68
03-02-2009, 17:42
I can't wait for the point drop myself, ive been painting about a box of gaurd per 2 weeks with other projects on the side getting ready for the dex.

is it bad i like to paint tons of the same guy ?

Did 192 guants in 7 days for my nids.. i painted from 8am - midnight for those 7 days to do it.

ReveredChaplainDrake
03-02-2009, 17:44
The problem isn't the Orks isolated. Their theme is great, and supposedly they're good fun to play. (Incidentally, Tyranids don't have a true horde. We have to waste our points on those annoying little things called Synapse Creatures first.) The problem is that they're so massively OTT compared to the current army books coming out. So either Orks are going to reign supreme until their new codex nerfs them to 3rd edition degrees, or until something even more terrifying than Orks comes out (like Guard, or more realistically DE or Necrons).

May GW write future codecies more like Space Marines and Lizardmen, and less like Orks and Fantasy Daemons.

Edit:

Did 192 guants in 7 days for my nids.. i painted from 8am - midnight for those 7 days to do it.
What a trooper! Now get cracking on those 92 Tyranid Warriors, 17 Carnifexes, 11 Hive Tyrants, and 128 Genestealers. ;)

AngryAngel
03-02-2009, 17:49
I know I'll inevitably be shouted down by the masses wether right or wrong, but, perhaps the guardsman while not being equal to an orkboy for the straight up cost breakdown. Would become more worth it taking into account changes to costs or set ups in their new codex.

As well aren't they supposed to be going down in points anyways ? That taken with swarms of large blasting tough tanks. Would push the guard more in my favor of that pt breakdown then. As those large squads would end up pretty small before too long with those many pie plates landing atop them.

That is however off topic but on topic. The pts reduction so far have been good. A bit too good for Orks perhaps but overall its better. Yeah if ya have a small collection, then that will burn ya. However GW doesn't live on the people with small collections, it lives on the people who keep expanding and get new armies as well. Those people more then likely have plenty of troops to bring to the field.

Which if ya spend that much money, you normally want to field more of them as opposed to less. Getting the bare minimum doesn't keep the hobby alive, or the FLGS or LGS of choice you go to alive either. So I see and agree with their buisness plan on that matter. I'd rather my hobby survive then die.

Edit: and incidently if ya want small model counts go to an elite army. Like marines or the like. I assure you 1000 pts or 1500 can still be quite small indeed. I do like more units on the field personally, as it feels more war like. Which is in fact why I play warhammer. Wether or not it started as a small skirmish game is irrelevant at this point. If it had stayed small scale completely, I never would have played. For instance I never played kill teams, or combat patrols as I just couldn't stand a game that tiny.

Rydmend
03-02-2009, 17:54
It is so they can sell more models, paints and other supplies but you can't blame them, it is a side effect of the growth of the model range.

As a model range gets bigger and more diverse they NEED to create a system that can accomdate those models. If they do not have a system that can accomodate the large variety of models they produced it would be hard to keep a buyer interested..... you buy more models not because they are available but because you have a system that supports them.

That is why 2nd ed and RT focused on skirmishes because they simply didn't have the models available to host larger games but games started being progressivly larger as the range expanded.

The same thing is happening with systems like warmachine, where you see people playing larger and larger games as they release new models.

laudarkul
03-02-2009, 17:56
Lowering the point cost of a standard IG trooper it is going to bring more variations to army lists. From the money point of view yap it could be a problem if somebody intends to make an IG horde army, but also with those rumors about tanks/other posibilities instead of doctrines the point cost of a trooper could be 6-7.

KGreen1021
03-02-2009, 18:03
Well most people who choose to do IG have to realize before they do it that its going to be expensive compared to SM or CSM. If money is really the issue just buy a little bit a month put it together, paint and save. By next month you should be able to get another box or something and do the same. After a few months you should have a big enough force to play with.

sigur
03-02-2009, 18:21
Well most people who choose to do IG have to realize before they do it that its going to be expensive compared to SM or CSM. If money is really the issue just buy a little bit a month put it together, paint and save. By next month you should be able to get another box or something and do the same. After a few months you should have a big enough force to play with.

I wholeheartedly agree. It's weird how some people just seem to neglect the fact that armies are ALWAYS expensive and IG is more on the expensive side I guess.

Getting a whole army at once is also a faulty approach. You sit there, hoarding miniatures and all of a sudden you have 50,000 pts of stuff and at some point have to start painting it. If you get one or two squads a month you'll also have an army within a relatively short time and on top of that, you'll also have it painted. It's this mentality of rushing everything which leads to tons of half-painted models in a box, no emotional bond with one's army and bandwagonism.

Lord Raneus
03-02-2009, 18:22
You really shouldn't have a problem hitting 1500 with guard, you can run up the costs on tanks and infantry squads to the max.

Besides guardsmen can't exactly increase in points, there's no way to justify that.

Wotansspawn
03-02-2009, 18:41
You really shouldn't have a problem hitting 1500 with guard, you can run up the costs on tanks and infantry squads to the max.

Besides guardsmen can't exactly increase in points, there's no way to justify that.

I'm hoping the new codex will provide options to upgrade your troops (unlikely but an upgrade for lasguns would be good)

I like elite armies but I like elite armies which dont rely on powered body armour and enhanced genetics.

Colonial Rifle
03-02-2009, 18:50
There is nothing actually wrong with a 4pt guardsman in the current environment - 20 naked guardsmen at 80pts still flat-out suck on the battlefield. It's the cost of the special and heavy weapons that needs careful balancing.

The real problem is that at 6pts, Orks with FC are too cheap and Guants and Guard are overcosted.

ZOMGBBQ
03-02-2009, 18:53
The funny thing is that the basic marine actually went up in price over the last few years (17 points rather than the 15 of 3rd ed) so the OP is tallking utter rubbish

sigur
03-02-2009, 18:54
I'm hoping the new codex will provide options to upgrade your troops (unlikely but an upgrade for lasguns would be good)

I like elite armies but I like elite armies which dont rely on powered body armour and enhanced genetics.

Yerch. IG isn't supposed to be an "Elite army" no matter what these pesky BL novels want to make you believe. You're asking for a paradox.

AmBlam
03-02-2009, 18:58
Can you lower the points that you play your games for? That way you will more or less have the same result with basically a more powerful army.

Lord Inquisitor
03-02-2009, 18:58
The funny thing is that the basic marine actually went up in price over the last few years (17 points rather than the 15 of 3rd ed) so the OP is tallking utter rubbish
Na. Space Marines cost the same for 5 as they always did (i.e. 15 points each assuming the Sergeant costs 15 extra). Additional Space Marines are 16 points each, but then you get a free flamer and missile launcher when you hit 10. Plus they have frag and krak and a bolt pistol for free, so you could argue they got cheaper by 4 points.

Ubermensch Commander
03-02-2009, 19:08
I enjoy lowered points cost as an oppurtunity to field more forces on the board. I also feel it is thematically appropriate for 'Nids, Guard, and Orks. Yay, an actual SWARM of the little critters. Mind you, while I feel the Ork codex is underpoints for the CAPABILITIES of most things in the Ork Codex, I do not mind the point reduction. Just...the basic Ork boy having 4 attacks ont he charge at str 4 makes me a little...apprehensive. heh.

Back to the point: I like more forces. It allows for more tactics in my opinon.
One of the reasons I was digusted with Privateer Presses junk was the low model count and the incredible tactical limitations. It played more like a CCG with 3-d cards(models) than what I was looking for in a table top game. So how bout them cav ? One unit. Oh. So how bout hordes of infantry. Nope. Best break out them magic leaders and steampunk engines, just ignore the sub leaders who, in their background, are describe as leading hundreds of men into the breach(that Khador guy...Grigorivich?).
I just enjoy the ability to potentially field more units, with more variety of units, on the board.

Laser guided fanatic
03-02-2009, 19:19
It would be 'interesting' to see GW write 2 army lists with each codex. 1 would be the normal codex and the other a skirmish list, in the skirmish list the points of units are greatly increased and some units are restricted. So you can still play a 1500 game but using less models.

p.s. i know combat patrol does this but it's terrible, i mean i could take 133 Gretchin.

Logarithm Udgaur
03-02-2009, 19:22
I think the point the OP was trying to make , and that most of you are missing, is that points costs in game are decreasing, requiring more models, while the price in currency is going up. Looking at the Guard rumors, basic guardsmen are rumored to be 4 points, meaning 33% more guardsmen if one keeps the same points mix. Looking again at the guard rumors, the plastic Cadians are rumored to be coming 10 (possibly 12 if HWs are included) to a box for $22 ($2.20 each if 10, $1.84 each if 12) instead of the 20 to a box for $35 ($1.75 each) we have now.

I think the OP feels like he is getting less for more as the game rolls on in real world terms. Whether or not this turns out to be true remains to be seen.

@Laser guided fanatic
You have 133 Gretchin? Hats (and hairpieces) off to you sir!

Rydmend
03-02-2009, 19:27
I think the point the OP was trying to make , and that most of you are missing, is that points costs in game are decreasing, requiring more models, while the price in currency is going up. Looking at the Guard rumors, basic guardsmen are rumored to be 4 points, meaning 33% more guardsmen if one keeps the same points mix. Looking again at the guard rumors, the plastic Cadians are rumored to be coming 10 (possibly 12 if HWs are included) to a box for $22 ($2.20 each if 10, $1.84 each if 12) instead of the 20 to a box for $35 ($1.75 each) we have now.

I think the OP feels like he is getting less for more as the game rolls on in real world terms. Whether or not this turns out to be true remains to be seen.

Thats why we keep you around here. This is what the OP is getting at.

Laser guided fanatic
03-02-2009, 19:29
I think the point the OP was trying to make , and that most of you are missing, is that points costs in game are decreasing, requiring more models, while the price in currency is going up. Looking at the Guard rumors, basic guardsmen are rumored to be 4 points, meaning 33% more guardsmen if one keeps the same points mix. Looking again at the guard rumors, the plastic Cadians are rumored to be coming 10 (possibly 12 if HWs are included) to a box for $22 ($2.20 each if 10, $1.84 each if 12) instead of the 20 to a box for $35 ($1.75 each) we have now.

I think the OP feels like he is getting less for more as the game rolls on in real world terms. Whether or not this turns out to be true remains to be seen.

@Laser guided fanatic
You have 133 Gretchin? Hats (and hairpieces) off to you sir!

Well that point was adressed right at the beggining of the thread just the OP paid no attention now the thread spinning of on a pointless tangent.

lanrak
03-02-2009, 19:34
Hi all.
If the OP is upset by GW PLC focusing on marketing the latest range of minatures, over gameplay-game ballance issues .
(Codexes up to 10 years/ 2 editions out of date is abysmal game/gamer support IMO.:mad:)
Then I can sympathise somewhat.

The GW dev team do what they can within very constrained time periods and limited resources.

Unfortunatley GW corperate,just want the 40k game to be minature marketing exercise.
The fact the GW dev team get the curent levels of game play in the 40k system is a minor miracle.IMO.

Other companies that prioritise 'game play' over 'short term minature sale cycles' ,tend to follow one of 2 routes.

1/Develop a games system and be fully and completley aware of how it works , and then devise a method of achiving concistant and PROVABLE levels of (im)ballance.

2 / Develop a games system and achive ballance through rigorous and extencive playtesting .
ONLY put army/force compositions ACTUALY play tested
in the public domain.

I could live with PV allocation being so 'out of whack' across Codexes/army books, if the devs didnt allow possible compositions that are just NOT fun to play-play against.:cries:

And when JJ states that the dev team give little thought to players that may have different play style/ force selection methods to the studio team .
And rather than address these issues directly , they want to ensure everyone plays the same way as they do...:rolleyes:
I can see how so many gamers become frustrated with GW.

And the problem with reducing the level of total PV used in games,( to reduce number of models used), is that the ballance between armies gets worse the futher you move
from 'optimum' PV ranges.

This is why I prefer to use my GW minis with NON GW rule sets.;)

TTFN
Lanrak.

Ubermensch Commander
03-02-2009, 19:35
Also the OP was complaining about rising costs in 40K, yet stated he/she wanted to go back to Fantasy. You need more models in Fantasy so it is going to cost more or less the same anyway, allowing for differences in certain armies. For example, a 40K Space Marine army is going to be a damn sight cheaper than certain Skaven, Orc and Goblin, and Vampire armies.

My advice to OP. Buy used models and go with a small elite army. Also, the assault on Black Reach Box is a great deal for either Space Marines or Orks.

maelstrom66669
03-02-2009, 19:46
I recently started a new army, and I had been out of the hobby for several years. I was somewhat horrified when I saw the price of things($50 for 5 plastic terminators!). Luckily im kinda piecing my army together, from black reach and my SM army(doin chaos now). I cant imagine doing a guard army, in paint time or cost. And having the poiints cut in half would be horrible money wise. My solution would have to be the same as others have already mentioned, take more tanks...

blurrymadness
03-02-2009, 19:49
You know, at those posters in here that are just whining about orks. Just shut up and learn to play the damn game. It IS a game afterall. There is one MAJOR variant that is giving people trouble, and they don't dare take the wargear to counter it. Get over it and take the wargear. Bikers gettin nids down, take implant attacks, stranglers, done. Horde gettin ya down? What'dya know, stranglers decimate them for the pts. I get that the boy is better than a guardsman but I'm not gonna say Termagaunts can't hold their own, and i'm certainly not going to say the Ork codex > all codicies. In general, it's nicely balanced. The ork boyz die in droves if you know what you're doing, so learn how to do that. I'm sick of Warseers blaming their problems on GW rather than stop plas spamming and buy a damn missile/heavy bolter.

Orks are OP if you have an imbalanced army. SHEESH.

At the OP, I think it's great. I can field tons of boyz, some Toys and really let my modelling go wild on the BWs. 20 Ard boyz look fantastic on the table, and all those shiny bits on the shootas (the painted ones...) are enjoyable. I played 500 when I started, upped to 750, yadda yadda. If you want to pay more for a guardsman, go for it, the rest of us will accept the needed buff.

Maine
03-02-2009, 19:49
Ive Recently become disgusted with 40k after reading all the guard rumours and reading the ork Dex, I think with them lowering points of almost everything the games are starting to become rediculous, My gaming group used to play 1500 point games, but after the ork dex came out several of our ork players lost the ability to make all the way up to 1500. My Guard horde will deffinatly not hit this number.
I just think the Core units going down in points and up in price is slowly but shorely driving me out of 40k and back to purely fantasy.

Orks needed the points drop for their basic trooper. Any points drop with guard is still speculation - we haven't seen the codex.

Yes, you may see your current lists suffer a points drop. However, it's not hard to make up the points differences by taking another unit or two of elite, fast, or a well equipped heavy choice. Not all Ork armies are horde Ork armies.

Consider it encouragement to diversify, especially with the Guard. The IG's core doctrine is all about combined arms. It's not necessarily about throwing as many bodies into the meatgrinder as you can - yes, that is part of the fluff, but those bodies are almost always backed up by tanks, artillery, and some heavier support.

precinctomega
03-02-2009, 19:53
Other companies that prioritise 'game play' over 'short term minature sale cycles' ,tend to follow one of 2 routes.

1/Develop a games system and be fully and completley aware of how it works , and then devise a method of achiving concistant and PROVABLE levels of (im)ballance.

2 / Develop a games system and achive ballance through rigorous and extencive playtesting .
ONLY put army/force compositions ACTUALY play tested
in the public domain.

What!? GW was founded in 1975. It's about two months older than I am. That's hardly "short term" thinking. The game has always been a marketing tool for miniature sales, because that's where the money is. And companies that have tried to focus on perfecting playability over miniature volume sales fail.

Or - to be more precise - have to keep coming up with brand new games to market alongside brand new miniature ranges, thus allowing existing miniature lines to lapse (Urban Mammoth, Mongoose Publishing, Rackham etc).

GW exists because it's spend thirty years fine-tuning two basic games and allowing its fans to keep on adding new and more miniatures to their existing collections. If a little rules-fudging is necessary to keep my favourite company in the black, then sign me up!

R.

Logarithm Udgaur
03-02-2009, 19:59
Well that point was adressed right at the beggining of the thread just the OP paid no attention now the thread spinning of on a pointless tangent.

Really? All I saw was a bunch of sarcasm laced with a few comments about playing a more expensive (in game points) army.

AdarII
03-02-2009, 20:41
I also agree that the current model inflation is a problem. My Imperial Guard just doesn't fit very well onto the table anymore :wtf:.

Easy E
03-02-2009, 20:56
I got a crazy idea. If orks and IG weren't performing for their points, instead of lowering there points raise the points of other units. Oh wait, that would mean we would sell less models. For those who argue about points cost reductions = TT effectiveness, the reverse strategy woudl have the same effect.

I agree with the poster. I had a 1st edition 4,000 point army of orks. Now, it barely makes 1,850. I've heard of inflation... but come on.

Anyway. I like playing with my ork horde, but the size of armies is getting so large it can be a real pain to deploy and move them. All so SM can have more toys.

sigur
03-02-2009, 21:07
...
GW exists because it's spend thirty years fine-tuning two basic games and allowing its fans to keep on adding new and more miniatures to their existing collections. ....

I fully agree with your posting but this part confuses me a bit. 3rd edition 40k can be called many things but definately not "fine-tuned version of 2nd edition". ;)

Wotansspawn
03-02-2009, 21:08
I got a crazy idea. If orks and IG weren't performing for their points, instead of lowering there points raise the points of other units. Oh wait, that would mean we would sell less models. For those who argue about points cost reductions = TT effectiveness, the reverse strategy woudl have the same effect.

I agree with the poster. I had a 1st edition 4,000 point army of orks. Now, it barely makes 1,850. I've heard of inflation... but come on.

Anyway. I like playing with my ork horde, but the size of armies is getting so large it can be a real pain to deploy and move them. All so SM can have more toys.

I think its more about making people by more models. If they want to sell more models though the easiest way is to lower the prices. If there was a couple of quid off of each thing then many of the veteran gamers might start shopping at GW more often and may even buy more.

GW are starting to price out anyone not in charge of a business empire through its own bosses lack of business acumen.

zealot!
03-02-2009, 21:13
Ive Recently become disgusted with 40k after reading all the guard rumours and reading the ork Dex, I think with them lowering points of almost everything the games are starting to become rediculous, My gaming group used to play 1500 point games, but after the ork dex came out several of our ork players lost the ability to make all the way up to 1500. My Guard horde will deffinatly not hit this number.
I just think the Core units going down in points and up in price is slowly but shorely driving me out of 40k and back to purely fantasy.

sweet! bye!

Pokpoko
03-02-2009, 21:13
I also agree that the current model inflation is a problem. My Imperial Guard just doesn't fit very well onto the table anymore :wtf:.
Classic problem with 28mm and mass combat. When does the army get too big to offer ANY tactics beyond "move forward"or "stand and shoot the way you were deployed" baceause there's just no place to make any meaningful manouvers?

lanrak
03-02-2009, 21:38
Hi.
Just a quick post to agree with Pokpoko.

If a GW started with 40k at the current size and game play requirments , they would probably use 15mm minatures.

All the other games I am aware of pitched at this game size use 15-20mm minatures.Probably for a good reason....

GW DO put minature marketing requirements way ahead of game play requirements, unfortunatley .:(

MasterDecoy
03-02-2009, 21:57
funnily enough, Warhammer is still the most popular of TT miniture games. I like my 40mm Mini's just big enough to have tons of detail (15mm just cant do it) and still small enough that if you play on a properly sized board (I.E 6x4) it all fits just nicely.

starlight
03-02-2009, 21:59
Play on bigger tables with more LoS blocking terrain. :p


40K/WFB of the last two editions are optimised for tables four feet across and two feet wide per 500 points.


Personally I prefer five feet across with 30" between deployment zones and six feet wide plus two feet per 500 points over 1500 points. Similar, but better gameplay in my opinion. :)

Boxhead
03-02-2009, 22:03
Really? Isn't this thread about a decade too late? 3rd ed cut all mini PV down by about 50%. This was done intentially to allow people to field "armies" of miniatures. This was also why the rules were so heavily "streamlined". All of this was in the 3rd ed designer notes. Dropping newer troops by a point or two (and changing equipment options to boot) is a way to try to balance the lists and make more armies viable.

I don't know, letting me afford another unit seems like a good thing from my perspective, but to each their own.

rcal13
03-02-2009, 22:36
I like the price drop and the incress number of troops. Like some one else said playing on larger tables and larger army actual makes thought an incressed trait for 40k games. yeah my 6000 pts will drop down by alomst 1/3 but hay I still have more then enough and anyone who really plays gaurd seemed to gather hugh amounts, so what ever the points gaurd players gather large numbers and now the army can be used as it should be, 4 units to back up the one you want to do a job. Gaurd are suposed to be largely and horde of men thrown at a problem till it grinds away. out numbering your enemy 2 to 0ne does not go with the horde army ieda.

Jedi152
03-02-2009, 22:39
The last few fantasy armies have been bad for it. 4 points for a WS4 S4 chaos marauder?

Interesting way to make sure even people who already own the army will have to buy more...

Pokpoko
03-02-2009, 23:00
I don't know, letting me afford another unit seems like a good thing from my perspective, but to each their own.
Well, see you in few years then, when guardsman will cost 2pts(a logical conclusion to the current trend) and you'll need half the table just to deploy. Might as well just roll dice and see who wins, because moving anything becomes completley irrelevant and useless.

eek107
03-02-2009, 23:05
Classic problem with 28mm and mass combat. When does the army get too big to offer ANY tactics beyond "move forward"or "stand and shoot the way you were deployed" baceause there's just no place to make any meaningful manouvers?

Bigger armies -> bigger tables -> more room to move. It's not difficult.

AlphaLegionMarine
03-02-2009, 23:16
Well, see you in few years then, when guardsman will cost 2pts(a logical conclusion to the current trend) and you'll need half the table just to deploy. Might as well just roll dice and see who wins, because moving anything becomes completley irrelevant and useless.

Hey! That was 4th edition!

Pokpoko
03-02-2009, 23:25
Bigger armies -> bigger tables -> more room to move. It's not difficult.
And where do you plan to play on those bigger tables? Homes are straight out unles you happen to have a dedicated games room. Most stores don't have enough space for more than one table bigger than 6x4. That leaves clubs, and even then other players won't look kindly on 40k gamers claiming two tables just to play a game. 6x4 is streched to limits by current models number i believe,any more and it gets very,very silly.

ZOMGBBQ
03-02-2009, 23:29
How about, you just play smaller points limits?

You're all making a fuss about nothing

Lanparth
03-02-2009, 23:35
The thing is, right now I field 150 boyz roughly at 2,000 points. And its fun, and its not just "Well, lets just roll dice to see who wins." Battles can, and often are bloody. Which is awesome. :)

Occulto
04-02-2009, 00:25
How about, you just play smaller points limits?

You're all making a fuss about nothing

Precisely.

The point limit is just an arbitary number.

Take Epic. The "standard" game size is 3000 points. Sounds impressive doesn't it? Until you find out that 3000 points of Epic has about the same figures/stands as your average 1500 point 40K army.

If most people in your group struggle to make 1850 points then the obvious solution is to stop playing 1850 point games. :eyebrows:

eek107
04-02-2009, 00:32
And where do you plan to play on those bigger tables? Homes are straight out unles you happen to have a dedicated games room. Most stores don't have enough space for more than one table bigger than 6x4. That leaves clubs, and even then other players won't look kindly on 40k gamers claiming two tables just to play a game. 6x4 is streched to limits by current models number i believe,any more and it gets very,very silly.


How about, you just play smaller points limits?

You're all making a fuss about nothing

Exactly. If a new codex turns your 1850 list into 1500, nobody's forcing you to buy another 350pts of stuff. If the table's too crowded and you can't expand, play smaller games. Again, this isn't exactly a ground-breaking concept.

ShadowDeth
04-02-2009, 00:43
I know I'll inevitably be shouted down by the masses wether right or wrong, but, perhaps the guardsman while not being equal to an orkboy for the straight up cost breakdown. Would become more worth it taking into account changes to costs or set ups in their new codex.



Well yes, you're right.

Armies don't exist in vacuums where statistical numbers govern what works on the battle field. Guard soldiers (currently, and most likely will be again) are inferior to ork boyz. Their points may go down to similar levels, but I don't foresee them overtaking orks. The reason being that guard have tanks that cause actual damage on the battle field, and in their next dex their tanks will dwarf orks so badly it's not even going to be close to a few rhinos with killcannons attached.

Guard also have deep strike options, intangibles like scouting sentinels, doctrines that shape their whole line of bodies and the like. Orks have a few FOC shaping characters and a mass of green bodies.

I'm not trying to say what is a better (Orkz) or worse (Guard) army but I'd like people to keep in mind saying "8 points for a guardsman is a rip off compared to what an Ork boy does" ignoring that's what they were costed within the context of the list, and not compared to the nex dex that offers a whole different feel and set of options.

Bloodknight
04-02-2009, 00:48
Guardsmen were costed at 6 (with all the options, doctrines, yaddayadda) when Orks were roughly 9 points. Now the Ork costs the same instead of 50% more, got a better gun and more effective special rules. Most of the doctrines are just taken because playing without them lowers the Guard bar even more, ie they are not even good with deepstrike etc. And parts of that will probably not survive the codex transition.

ZOMGBBQ
04-02-2009, 00:52
There are 3 ways the Guard Codex would go imo

4 Point gurad but Vehicles a little over costed to balance
5 Point Guard with Vehicles at regular Prices
6 Point guard with Chimeras at 45 or so and cheaper tanks.

Xenobane
04-02-2009, 00:56
I think the point the OP was trying to make , and that most of you are missing, is that points costs in game are decreasing, requiring more models

Only if you play at the same points level, as several people have pointed out. The OP seems blissfully unaware of this possibility. You take the same amount of stuff, and call the battle 1250 instead of 1500. What's the difference to you, except that your army is more competitive? Since the OP apparently has a few member of his gaming group in a similar situation he won't have a problem finding opponents.

In any event, it would probably be wise for everyone to reserve judgement on the codex until it actually arrives. What we have so far is rather sketchy, really.

RichBlake
04-02-2009, 01:07
What? Points costs are comparative.

If Guardsmen were 400 points each as long as Space Marines cost 1600 each it doesn't matter.

So what if you can't play 1500? Just play 1000 or something.

Really points are just a way to make sure both armies are equal in capability, or potential capability. The idea being is if you have two armies that are "equal" the match is won by skill, yet keeping diversity of different armies and units. As long as points are comparativley fair it doesnt matter the actual number.

Logarithm Udgaur
04-02-2009, 01:46
Playing at lower point costs is all well and good, but IIRC GW sets the points limits for tourneys and such, making it kinda hard to just play smaller games if you go in for that sort of thing (tourneys).

Occulto
04-02-2009, 02:45
Playing at lower point costs is all well and good, but IIRC GW sets the points limits for tourneys and such, making it kinda hard to just play smaller games if you go in for that sort of thing (tourneys).

GW set the point limits for their own events. Everyone else is free to do whatever they want.

One of largest tournaments in the Australia (Arcanacon) is only 1200 points. If TOs see their attendances drop and get told that it's because people reckon the game size is too big, then they'll change.

AngryAngel
04-02-2009, 02:58
Really? All I saw was a bunch of sarcasm laced with a few comments about playing a more expensive (in game points) army.

People, like myself, did address the issue with logic and not sarcasm. If you don't like the answers that doesn't change the fact that it was given.



I think its more about making people by more models. If they want to sell more models though the easiest way is to lower the prices. If there was a couple of quid off of each thing then many of the veteran gamers might start shopping at GW more often and may even buy more.

GW are starting to price out anyone not in charge of a business empire through its own bosses lack of business acumen.

I'm all for cheaper prices. However it needs to be sound in buisness to make it so. With people tightening their belts because of the economy and companies like GW making ever less money how can they then slash their prices and still hope to stay alive ?



Well yes, you're right.

Armies don't exist in vacuums where statistical numbers govern what works on the battle field. Guard soldiers (currently, and most likely will be again) are inferior to ork boyz. Their points may go down to similar levels, but I don't foresee them overtaking orks. The reason being that guard have tanks that cause actual damage on the battle field, and in their next dex their tanks will dwarf orks so badly it's not even going to be close to a few rhinos with killcannons attached.

Guard also have deep strike options, intangibles like scouting sentinels, doctrines that shape their whole line of bodies and the like. Orks have a few FOC shaping characters and a mass of green bodies.

I'm not trying to say what is a better (Orkz) or worse (Guard) army but I'd like people to keep in mind saying "8 points for a guardsman is a rip off compared to what an Ork boy does" ignoring that's what they were costed within the context of the list, and not compared to the nex dex that offers a whole different feel and set of options.

Thanks at least for looking at my post to read it. You see what I was trying to say and I appreciate it. I as well agree with your viewpoint.

Gloom
04-02-2009, 02:59
The real problem with GW moving the game once again towards larger army size is they still have no change the core mechanics to reflect the transition from the "platoon" sized gameplay of 3rd edition to the "company" (or in the case of some armies larger) level of gameplay.

The turn sequence of "Player A does everything" the "Player B does everything" while time saving (which is arguable given once people learn it wont slow anything down) is too devastating given the number of avalible actions to some armies.

Pink Horror
04-02-2009, 03:06
The trouble is its tough tweaking the standard points around too much, because of the FOC. I dislike that chart. You see 3 bare-bones Heavies in 750 and 3 maxed-out heavies in 2000 points. For some reason, they never bring the fourth tank! That bugs me. The game's balance structure is based on cover-your-ass. And then with the Orks, they decided to completely change the points philosophy, and now all the other armies have to wait to catch up. It's all over the place.

Johnnyfrej
04-02-2009, 03:10
Playing at lower point costs is all well and good, but IIRC GW sets the points limits for tourneys and such, making it kinda hard to just play smaller games if you go in for that sort of thing (tourneys).
I don't see GW pointing a gun to your head to force you to go to official tournaments and thus you don't have to buy more models.

guillaume
04-02-2009, 03:36
ahaha, yeah, the drop in points is becoming an issue. Certainly, in fantasy, I have realised that my 2000pts lizardmen army only makes 1850ish points...quite a fair drop that I'll need to plug with a basic box of extra saurus.

As for 40K, well, the point drop is horrible as I play Daemonhunter, and field 25pts space marines. Last game at a 1000pts, I faced a literal tide of orks, with 60 models with battletruks, hordes of boys, warbikes, and I faced them with the ultimate footslogger versions of the daemonhunters: 1 unit of GK terminators, 3 units of 7 GK and 1 dreadnought...27 models in total. he actually drowned me in orks...so it is a bit frustrating.

Rioghan Murchadha
04-02-2009, 04:41
armies are ALWAYS expensive

Durn't used to be this way. Used to be I could get 30 plastic space marines, or 30 fantasy skeletons for $12. nowadays that cost is $75 for the skeletons, or $120 (or $135 can't remember if a tac squad is 40 or 45 canadian now) for the space marines.

There is literally no way in the fiery depths of hell you can claim that much inflation over only 20 years. According to the Bank of Canada's inflation calculator, that should cost $17.87 now. Anyone that claims the other $102.13 of the price increase is justified is completely off their rocker. The price of oil didn't spike till around '03, and plastic mini prices had been going through the roof long before that.

Also ask yourself, why are any of the newly sculpted fantasy regiments most of which contain the same amount, or more plastic than space marines, 45 dollars cheaper for the same number of figs?

Rambling aside, collecting an army never used to be nearly as big a chunk of one's disposable income as it is now.

Pokpoko
04-02-2009, 11:00
How about, you just play smaller points limits?

You're all making a fuss about nothing
Why bother with pointing the army down? Rising prices of undercosted units would have the same effect then. But of course players would scream bloody murder about it. And again,it all comes down to idiotic way codexi are handled-rather than release everything at once(remeber the 3rd ed get-you-by lists in the rulebook?) and ensure everything's balanced against eachother, we have a long,thin like of books that string through two or three Design Philosophy changes:wtf:

Bunnahabhain
04-02-2009, 11:48
we have several issues tied up altogether.

1. Model prices. Ouch. Enough said

2. Model count. Yes, tables are getting too crowded, it makes the game less fun. Try larger tables, they work, and are more fun than less points.

3. Staggered codexs. Bad idea, but it is the model GW are locked into. They do seem to be moving towards having model releases not tied so strictly to new books. Good.
In an Ideal world for game balanced, the do a big and comprehensive set of FAQs, erratas and updates for all codexs, and start work on a proper 6th ed, with major changes, and army lists written for that edition.
Splitting codexs into background and army list, so army lists can be updated easily and cheaply would also help this

4. The fixed FOC. Number of slots depending on points limit, as per fantasy, would be much better. However, that would need a 6th ed (see above)

Hellebore
04-02-2009, 11:57
Lowering points costs increases sales of models. GW could survive on small unit sales in the mid 90s when it's business plan was more like Privateer Press et al, but its own size means it must sell more and more and more to sustain itself.

Hellebore

kabum
04-02-2009, 12:16
Sometimes game points have to be adjusted... other times not. But in some armies, horde specially is the need to be able to create a HORDE of miniatures.
In fact the line troops are, or should be, the backbone of the army. These mean very present in most of the armies.
Apart from that you should play the points you have and ask the people to play to your level of points. Don't rush the growing of your army, do it slowly as need and you will enjoy it more.

Sureshot05
04-02-2009, 13:10
What? Points costs are comparative.

If Guardsmen were 400 points each as long as Space Marines cost 1600 each it doesn't matter.

So what if you can't play 1500? Just play 1000 or something.

Really points are just a way to make sure both armies are equal in capability, or potential capability. The idea being is if you have two armies that are "equal" the match is won by skill, yet keeping diversity of different armies and units. As long as points are comparatively fair it doesn't matter the actual number.

I agree with this whole heartedly -hell, i recommend playing some games without points at all. If points cost drops, then just lower the game size. Some players get the "how big is your army syndrome" but it really doesn't matter as long as every one is having a good game.

maelstrom66669
04-02-2009, 14:57
Durn't used to be this way. Used to be I could get 30 plastic space marines, or 30 fantasy skeletons for $12. nowadays that cost is $75 for the skeletons, or $120 (or $135 can't remember if a tac squad is 40 or 45 canadian now) for the space marines.

There is literally no way in the fiery depths of hell you can claim that much inflation over only 20 years.


When I was 6 years old gas was around 70 cents a gallon, two years ago it was around 4 dollars a gallon...

Bellygrub
04-02-2009, 16:48
Durn't used to be this way. Used to be I could get 30 plastic space marines, or 30 fantasy skeletons for $12. nowadays that cost is $75 for the skeletons, or $120 (or $135 can't remember if a tac squad is 40 or 45 canadian now) for the space marines.

There is literally no way in the fiery depths of hell you can claim that much inflation over only 20 years. According to the Bank of Canada's inflation calculator, that should cost $17.87 now. Anyone that claims the other $102.13 of the price increase is justified is completely off their rocker. The price of oil didn't spike till around '03, and plastic mini prices had been going through the roof long before that.

Also ask yourself, why are any of the newly sculpted fantasy regiments most of which contain the same amount, or more plastic than space marines, 45 dollars cheaper for the same number of figs?

Rambling aside, collecting an army never used to be nearly as big a chunk of one's disposable income as it is now.

And those models were one to two piece models, looked terrible for the most part, and all had the same pose.

Now you get multipose plastics that can be modeled in damn near any way you wish. It's like comparing a bike to a motorcycle.

Whitehorn
04-02-2009, 16:52
My gaming group used to play 1500 point games, but after the ork dex came out several of our ork players lost the ability to make all the way up to 1500. My Guard horde will deffinatly not hit this number.
I just think the Core units going down in points and up in price is slowly but shorely driving me out of 40k and back to purely fantasy.

Play less points?

Easy E
04-02-2009, 17:09
Exactly. If a new codex turns your 1850 list into 1500, nobody's forcing you to buy another 350pts of stuff. If the table's too crowded and you can't expand, play smaller games. Again, this isn't exactly a ground-breaking concept.

Actually, the people you play against CAN force you. If they say, let's all play 1850, and you don't have 1850 you have two choices. Point up or get out. If I walk in and say I wnat to play 1k and they want to play 1850 and a third guy says I wnat to play 1850 guess who is play9ing and who isn't.

I fully agree with the smaller game philosophy. I love 1k games. However, many, many people want to play 1850 or tourney legal lists so they can have some toys.

40K is not a solo game it requires two people (at minimum)

AngryAngel
04-02-2009, 18:07
If people are even remotely friendly with whom they normally play against. They will play against your 1000pt list. They may want to play larger, but they will accept what their friends would rather do as well.

Besides lets not be crazy, if money is the issue its not like once you got to your current army size you'll never be able to increase it again. Just pace yourself and you can point up to meet your mates in their wanted point value soon enough.

As well larger tables are a way to go, I personally hate playing on small tables. I like to the room to roam as it were. The bigger the table the better I say. Unless your playing a quite small game like 750 to 1000 ( which is downright tiny to me ) Then ya don't need that large of an area to run in.

JakeWS
04-02-2009, 18:13
I hear you buddy! I sold all of my armies (3, 1500 point armies) and switched to board games for that very reason. At least with board games I don't have to keep buying to keep my armies scaled to a size that I can play. On the up side, I found it a lot easier to find people to play boardgames than it is to find people to play 40K.


Ive Recently become disgusted with 40k after reading all the guard rumours and reading the ork Dex, I think with them lowering points of almost everything the games are starting to become rediculous, My gaming group used to play 1500 point games, but after the ork dex came out several of our ork players lost the ability to make all the way up to 1500. My Guard horde will deffinatly not hit this number.
I just think the Core units going down in points and up in price is slowly but shorely driving me out of 40k and back to purely fantasy.

Rioghan Murchadha
05-02-2009, 04:14
And those models were one to two piece models, looked terrible for the most part, and all had the same pose.

Now you get multipose plastics that can be modeled in damn near any way you wish. It's like comparing a bike to a motorcycle.

Erm, not as such.. the box of 30 space marines was far more than 2 parts. Buddy of mine has an entire ultramarines company made up of them.

The skeletons were poseable too, and in fact, looked far better than the ones we had just before the new batch (no giant heads / hands / feet)

Regardless of taste, model aesthetic has improved because of improvement in the sculptors (look at Jes Godwin's new stuff vs his really old stuff for example), and creation process. Yes, the initial outlay on plastic moulds is expensive. We all know this, but it in no way justifies the final cost of the models going up by as much as it did.

However, the main focus of this thread is model count, and how it impacts peoples' armies. Given the insane price increases, and the across the board decrease in points for damn near every unit in both core game systems, it's definitely reason for concern.

Personally, I think GW would be a more successful company if they sold things for a bit lower profit margin. This way, people would continue to buy more stuff rather than griping about prices and looking for discount retailers. Instead, they tend to focus on getting the big initial outlay from people, and not really caring if they remain repeat customers.

Johnnyfrej
05-02-2009, 07:11
40K is not a solo game it requires two people (at minimum)
Not if you use your imagination :D

Corrode
05-02-2009, 09:32
I keep seeing this brought up about GW running at a 'slimmer profit margin' and I wonder how much of this is down to a poor understanding of economics. This is a number of years ago now, but I remember hearing that they only actually run about a 13% profit margin - the kind of number where most other companies would be going into a panic. I dont entirely buy this argument that GW should be handing out boxes on the streets - quite often people claim 'but it doesn't cost that much to make!' without considering thing like, y'know, paying all the people involved.

Imperialis_Dominatus
05-02-2009, 13:48
Warseerites: 'Stuff is overcosted. I hate you GW!'

GW: 'We'll correct the points costs'

Warseerites: 'I hate you GW!'

:rolleyes:

Ah, Warseer.


Guardsmen were costed at 6 (with all the options, doctrines, yaddayadda) when Orks were roughly 9 points. Now the Ork costs the same instead of 50% more, got a better gun and more effective special rules. Most of the doctrines are just taken because playing without them lowers the Guard bar even more, ie they are not even good with deepstrike etc. And parts of that will probably not survive the codex transition.

QFT.

RichBlake
05-02-2009, 15:31
Actually, the people you play against CAN force you. If they say, let's all play 1850, and you don't have 1850 you have two choices. Point up or get out. If I walk in and say I wnat to play 1k and they want to play 1850 and a third guy says I wnat to play 1850 guess who is play9ing and who isn't.

I fully agree with the smaller game philosophy. I love 1k games. However, many, many people want to play 1850 or tourney legal lists so they can have some toys.

40K is not a solo game it requires two people (at minimum)

I dunno about you but my gaming club isn't full of ********s :P

If you only have a 1500 point army then people should be prepared to play 1500 points once in a while, it's only 250 points different. Personally I like 2000pt + games, but I frequently play less because people want a game and don't have a 7K army like I do :P

There are other ways around it too, I know a huy who has 500-750 points of Sisters of Battle and can't afford to expand. Instead of constantly saying we'll lower points we instead say "Hey, why don't you throw together 500 points, add it to my 2000 points and we'll have a 2500 point game" etc

If you only have 1500 points get a mate to write a 1500 point list, combine them and challenge aother pair to a 3000 point game.

Rioghan Murchadha
05-02-2009, 23:47
I keep seeing this brought up about GW running at a 'slimmer profit margin' and I wonder how much of this is down to a poor understanding of economics. This is a number of years ago now, but I remember hearing that they only actually run about a 13% profit margin - the kind of number where most other companies would be going into a panic. I dont entirely buy this argument that GW should be handing out boxes on the streets - quite often people claim 'but it doesn't cost that much to make!' without considering thing like, y'know, paying all the people involved.

Actually, in the last financial report of theirs that I looked at, (not sure where it is now), their gross profit was quite insanely high, even after taking into account production costs. As you went down the list you saw how they mismanaged the money into the ground, and came out with a very slim net profit.

ZOMGBBQ
06-02-2009, 00:04
Actually, in the last financial report of theirs that I looked at, (not sure where it is now), their gross profit was quite insanely high, even after taking into account production costs. As you went down the list you saw how they mismanaged the money into the ground, and came out with a very slim net profit.

Is this the most recent 6 month report? Because that looked rather favourable iirc. Or are you talking about 2007?

Lord_Urzin
06-02-2009, 00:46
I think that the ability to field more guardsman, orks, whatever isnt a bad thing considering that these are supposed to be massive armies from the fluffs perspective.

Grubnar
06-02-2009, 00:50
I wholeheartedly agree. It's weird how some people just seem to neglect the fact that armies are ALWAYS expensive and IG is more on the expensive side I guess.

Getting a whole army at once is also a faulty approach. You sit there, hoarding miniatures and all of a sudden you have 50,000 pts of stuff and at some point have to start painting it. If you get one or two squads a month you'll also have an army within a relatively short time and on top of that, you'll also have it painted. It's this mentality of rushing everything which leads to tons of half-painted models in a box, no emotional bond with one's army and bandwagonism.

Sigur speaks the truth. I have a little over 6.000 pts. of Ork infantry, almost all of it unpainted. When ever I sit down to paint I take a good hard look at al before me and think Im never gonna finish it.

And cry like a weedy grot. :cries:

RichBlake
06-02-2009, 01:32
Sigur speaks the truth. I have a little over 6.000 pts. of Ork infantry, almost all of it unpainted. When ever I sit down to paint I take a good hard look at al before me and think Im never gonna finish it.

And cry like a weedy grot. :cries:


Orks are easy, get a spray gun and spray 'em green :P

Pink Horror
06-02-2009, 02:33
I have no problem with a 2 Marine to 5 Ork ratio. But those Orks should only fight as well as 2 marines.

ruttman15
06-02-2009, 03:02
think of it this way. you like the game. you obviously have enough money to have gotten this far, I say stick with it. sure, i could just say "play space marines!" but that would be cheap :P
buy models over a longer amount of time. and definately buy more models.
dont let it drive you away from a game you like :|

Rioghan Murchadha
06-02-2009, 03:45
Is this the most recent 6 month report? Because that looked rather favourable iirc. Or are you talking about 2007?

Yeah.. summat like that. The newest one is indeed more favorable. I'm going to claim a moral victory and say that it's because of the price drop on the bulk of the plastic kits :p (Though it still doesn't compare to yesteryear)

noirceuil
06-02-2009, 03:50
I don't see the problem. I look forward to the publication of the new IG codex. If the per model cost goes down, then it'll just leave me more points to allocate to allies :D

JCOLL
06-02-2009, 04:11
I've been reading through this read for the last hour and am shocked with what I see. I hate to add to it's volume with more of the same "my opinion is better than yours..." but I can't help myself. I haven't been playing WFB or 40K for very long - just a few years actually, so I guess you can call me new to this in regards to you veterans out there.

I'm very confused with what I am reading here. Why so much GW hate? Some of you sound like you are completely disgusted with their business practices, market tactics, and design, but you just can't let go of them and move onto something else? If you are so unsattisfied, as many of you sound, is it worth it to contiune complaining, needing to fill this threads with hate and contempt for something that is supposed to provide recreational pleasure? Maybe I'm getting too sentimental about this, about toy soldiers, but I really can't help it.

I got into GW stuff when I was diagnosed with Chrons disease a few years ago. I was out of work off and on, sitting around at home with nothing to do, and stumbled upon this stuff haphazardly. Contstant illness and surgery left me with some down time just waiting to be filled with something more than T.V. and a computer. I had known about the games, but had never gotten into it. When I was younger my dad and I played games like Weapons and Warriors, Battlemasters, etc etc but I slowly got older and became interested in other things. I painted miniatures (if you can call it that....I was really bad) but never anything more than a Reaper miniature here and there.

Anyway, I had 50 bucks to blow for my b-day, a girlfriend I lived with who wanted nothing to do with me, so I bought my first GW product: The Battle For Macragge. It blew my world. I gobbled up every copy of White Dwarf I could find, sold off as much 'useless' crap in my closet to fund my new venture, and there I was: Waist deep in GW crack. It wasn't about rules for me, or what the other guys army had that mine didn't have - it was about an escape into something new and different that inspired me to new heights of creativity.

Now my living room is full of shelves full of my many armies, many that I probably will never field, and game bags sit ready and packed, ready to take on all comers with whatever rules I have to play with. This is a hobby - not real life. Some of you need to rethink why you are playing these games and decide if it really is for you. Just a thought.

AngryAngel
06-02-2009, 05:26
Really nice viewpoint there JColl. Sounds like a pretty dark time GW came into your life. I'm happy it made you happy at such a rough time. Sorta off topic but oh well. Wanted to comment on your words.

As for people complaining and hating yet still doing it. Yeah people on the net would mostly die if there wasn't "something" to complain about. Yet still, they give GW their money. So who is really the stupid one there hmm ?

"I hate you..everything you do..you take all my money....ooooo new models..::spends money::..Damn I hate you!!..can't wait to complain about this sweet new model when I get back on the computer! "

Rioghan Murchadha
06-02-2009, 05:28
Enough feel good stuff to win a few oscars

As a 20 year veteran that sometimes spews the odd chunk of bile GW's way, allow me to answer by saying that

a)I'm glad the hobby provided an escape, and something to do while going through a rough patch in your life.

b)If you HAD discovered it sooner, you'd likely be in the same boat, remembering the good ol' days when bread was $0.10 a loaf, and such things.

I still play warhammer, as often as I can (40k not so much, I tend to use Stargrunt when I want to field my 40k models). I still enjoy playing warhammer every time I have a game. This however, doesn't stop me from looking back and seeing things that were done better in the past, or things that could be done better now.

One of those things is pricing. I own more miniatures than I'll ever be able to do anything with, and don't need to purchase any more to game for the rest of my life. It is, however, offputting from the perspective of a guy who'd like to see so many more people get into the hobby. Whilst the production costs of video games has gone through the roof with new fangled physics engines, AI and graphical gewgaws, thereby somewhat justifying the cost of something that has ALWAYS been expensive, there is no way in hell there is any justification for someone to have to think "Hmm.. new 360/PS3 game, or a space marine tac squad?" Yes the warhammer stuff has the potential for longer term enjoyment, but that's only with substantial further investment.

It's fairly similar to gasoline. When Oil prices go up, gas prices shoot up because they tell us they're tied to crude. When crude prices drop like they've been shot, gas prices drop slightly, then climb back up to almost where they were when oil was at record highs. Why? Because we'll damn well pay it anyway. Doesn't make it right. Just makes us stupid.

Pink Horror
06-02-2009, 08:49
I own more miniatures than I'll ever be able to do anything with


It is, however, offputting from the perspective of a guy who'd like to see so many more people get into the hobby.

Anybody you actually know should not have to pay those prices, because they can borrow your stuff. It's (a) something to do with that stuff you own and (b) a way to get people into the hobby. Problem solved.

Pokpoko
06-02-2009, 11:05
Why so much GW hate? Some of you sound like you are completely disgusted with their business practices, market tactics, and design, but you just can't let go of them and move onto something else?

Why so much hate? You are aware you're on internets?;)this here is practically delicate, objective criticism compared to some other messages out there.
Anyway, i sured did move on, but sometimes there's a topic i just can't resist posting in in 40k or whb sections:p

laudarkul
06-02-2009, 13:21
I'm very confused with what I am reading here. Why so much GW hate? Some of you sound like you are completely disgusted with their business practices, market tactics, and design, but you just can't let go of them and move onto something else? If you are so unsattisfied, as many of you sound, is it worth it to contiune complaining, needing to fill this threads with hate and contempt for something that is supposed to provide recreational pleasure?

Hummmmm...You are right...
I mean you hate this game but you enter in those forums dedicated to 40k/fantasy universe and start to cry 'cause X codex is broken, GW sucks...Nothing constructive, just stupid ranting.
I know that this is internet, but if you do not like GW get a life/see a theater play/just walk in a park instead of complaining on forums.But the problems is that they do not understand what is the meaning of "hobby/happy life"

Corrode
06-02-2009, 13:28
Actually, in the last financial report of theirs that I looked at, (not sure where it is now), their gross profit was quite insanely high, even after taking into account production costs. As you went down the list you saw how they mismanaged the money into the ground, and came out with a very slim net profit.

That's interesting. I haven't read the report myself, what kind of things did you read that made you think it was being 'mismanaged' (as opposed to just 'used to pay off legitimate expenses')?

harrytheschmuck
06-02-2009, 14:05
well when they made ork boys 6 pts they changed the 40k game buy making such a pts drop it was only a matter of time till the guard was dropped also. however this makes it very hard for the army's of old codex's as their points are out of line with the new GW way of doing things. 1 necron or 3 orks? 3 orks every time for me.

i think over time we will see more and more units become cheaper and the number of models we need to buy go up and up and thus the cost of transporting said models becomes expensive. (GW have made bigger and bigger cases since 3rd ed) gone are the days when anyone could have their army in one nice case, go on line and get all sorts of bits for their army to make it look cool. now its seams to be moving toward numbers.

you can now fit in more models in your army, and you will need a bigger case to do so. all of a sudden your spending an extra £20-40 on an army and an extra £20 on a bigger case as the old ones are now to small. not to mention the extra cost of spraying and painting said models. so if everyone is spending £40-60 more in say 1500pts that results in alot of extra cash for GW.

now i don't want to sound like a GW basher as i sort of like the new direction GW are moving in, who doesn't like more models? but GW has a past and ever since they were floated on the stock market and people could buy shares but have never been into a GW store before they have not been known as the most customer friendly, so much of it is geared toward that extra sale, GW were floating on wave of success after getting the lord of the rings games and reaping the profits from such a lucrative deal, now that the Lord of the rings is fading out (well at least till the hobbit comes out, and we can be sure to see a huge milking of the cash cow again with countless releases of new books and army's over a short period as the rings has alot shorter life span than other games) share holders are demanding more and more and thats putting to much strain on GW to find away of making that money.

so what does that mean for us? well we have to fork out more money to play the game we love so those who have alot of money can enjoy even more. life sure is fun lol. what we need is some very rich GW players to start getting some shares so they can return GW back to those who care for it most

yabbadabba
06-02-2009, 15:07
i think over time we will see more and more units become cheaper and the number of models we need to buy go up and up and thus the cost of transporting said models becomes expensive. (GW have made bigger and bigger cases since 3rd ed) gone are the days when anyone could have their army in one nice case, go on line and get all sorts of bits for their army to make it look cool. now its seams to be moving toward numbers.
you can now fit in more models in your army, and you will need a bigger case to do so. all of a sudden your spending an extra £20-40 on an army and an extra £20 on a bigger case as the old ones are now to small. not to mention the extra cost of spraying and painting said models. so if everyone is spending £40-60 more in say 1500pts that results in alot of extra cash for GW.



Yeah, I think we have real problems here.
GW are a company that rely on peoples enthusiam for the hobby. This is where they have to be VERY careful with their current policy. I have been involved with the hobby for nearly twenty years and I have never seen anything like this and I becoming very disillusioned. I recently cleared out my attic and discovered my old 2nd ed. Ork army. This army, a horde army, comfortably fit into one case and was still large enough to outnumber a space marine army 3-1.
I recently attempted to recreate my ork army in 5th edition and very quickly gave up. Not only would it have cost me a fortune, but I would have probably be painting and assembling models for over a year! 6pts for an ork! Come on!

For me these two quotes illustrate a key issue for me with hobbyists (and online communities - why I currently, begrudgingly support GW's stance of not getting involved). Nobody says you have to have a 1500 point army. Only GW says so. If you have a 500 point army, then play that. If you have units too small for the book, just use them anyway. Of course GW is going to do everything to get people to spend more money - they are a business!
I have played 500 point games on 4'x4' and 6'x4' tables and they are quick, fun and very tactically challenging. Try it. As soon as you hit 1500 points 40k (or 2000 WFB) all the armies become the same, as do the tactics. And you can fit 2 armies in a case - even some scenery too.


I think part of the problem is not financial with GW. I think the problem is lazy army book writing. It is the easy option to balance the game by giving someone more of something. What about the interesting and innovative rules we used to see that made basic troops (that looked poor from a stats point of view) actually very useful on the battlefield. I'm sure they could have done something with imperial guard troops rather tha just giving you more. Its just lazy!
.

Or a corporate strategy? Make the base game simpler, quicker, making it more accessible for a wider range of people. Make more and more models plastic so that people can have bigger armies (a well established improvement request with the first, post RT rules). More customers + more models sold = more turnover = company survives.
There is nothing to stop you as a hobbyist taking the rules that step further. Anybody who sits here complaining that they don't like the rules without changing them and playtesting themselves can also be labelled just as lazy.

Pokpoko
06-02-2009, 15:17
I have played 500 point games on 4'x4' and 6'x4' tables and they are quick, fun and very tactically challenging. Try it. As soon as you hit 1500 points 40k (or 2000 WFB) all the armies become the same, as do the tactics. And you can fit 2 armies in a case - even some scenery too.

this IS actually a problem. 40k,despite being skirmish at heart of the rules, forces strict unit composition on player. 500pts game may have small number of models, but it will also have small number of units. in other skirmish games, one model is one unit, and therefore 4 models can each do different things. in 40k, 4 models in a single unit can only do the same thing and be in the same place-there is simply no way to circumvent the fact that you won't get much diversity and toys at that point level,leading to little diversity in a army list-to have really diverse units you need to play much bigger games.

Laser guided fanatic
06-02-2009, 15:19
I suppose part of the problem is that writing a codex then releasing it 3 months after the last codex release is much more challenging then re-writing all the codexes and releasing them at the same time.
What i mean here is that if GW did the latter then they could reset the game and allow 1500 point games to have less troops (which to me seems rather pointless because you want 1500 with less troops you play 1000).

yabbadabba
06-02-2009, 15:56
Ok, yes I think we all agree GW is a business that has to make money but to quote a popular film of the 90's, "there is somenthing more important than buying something for a dollar and selling it for two". GW does not sell food or something similar that has to be purchased by Human need.

I cannot think of anything more important for a shareholder owned company than making money - especially profit. And I think you will find that the vast majority of any shareholders agree.


GW has to be sustained by its hobbyists. In a strange idiolistic way it should be run by hobbyists for hobbyists and that is what I think many people are rightly upset with. The company doesn't seem to be run with hobbyists in mind anymore. GW seems to have lost touch with its players (and customers) more than ever recently. Just open a copy of white dwarf and with the exception of a couple of features it is page upon page of new releases being rammed down the readers throught. Games Workshop stores are now set up for 75% recruitment compared to 25% retention. Many stores now don't even run Games Nights.

The WD argument is immaterial and has been discussed on other threads. Of course the company is run with hobbyists in mind, it's just that the company assumes that established customers can look after themselves and not be lead by the hand. Hence WD. Am I wrong? Surely finding and supporting more new people into the business is more important than only trying to milk the same cow 5 years down the line? And would you prefer an all singing all dancing watertight rules/background system with NO allowance for deviation of any sort? How creative is that?


500 point games are also not the answer. You need a higher points limit to allow interesting and varied army choice (and there is difference between that and jsu giving someone lots of models).

You need to talk to some good tournament players. They know how to get the best bang for your buck. You don't have to spend a fortune for a good, effective and variety strewn army. But the point still stands. If you don't want the models and don't want to spend the cash, play a smaller game. Or 2nd Ed.


And over the years I have played many different sized games, play tested many armies and written army books and game rules. That is not what i'd call lazy.

So you should know better than to throw stones. In my experience it is harder to make something simple and effective than it is to make something complicated when it comes to games and rules design. It is far too easy to get carried away.

There is a simple answer to the above and your comment about Games Nights - go and play in a club. If you do already - why should playing and oversimplified game in a Games Night being run (or not) concern you?

JCOLL
06-02-2009, 18:40
I guess the point in my 'oscar' preformance was that GW produces a game that is supposed to bring enjoyment to our lives, somewhat anyway. Those of you whom are fed up with GW's current policies are akin to a person who pays good money to see a movie they are gravely dissapointed in and posting your comments online. But said person doesn't stop there. They spend more money to buy the VHS version of a movie they hated and continue to post their dissapointment. The DVD comes out, again dissapointment. BlueRay, HD-DVD, etc etc. Where does it stop? When do you decide to move onto something that would be more worth your while? For all the GW haters out there, there is surely some sort of love locked in that grimace of despise, and that's what keeps you coming back for more. At my local game store we refer to GW as plastic crack - as once you are in, there is no looking back. But I couldn't imagine it being bad enough that I would still find myself immerced in a hobby I no longer cared for.

If I had been playing the game for twenty years or so as many of you have, sure I might think fondly on older editions, but could you imagine if we had been stuck in that time frame without all the cool gubbins we've gotten since then? Again, I'm somewhat new to this, but looking at an Ork from years ago to what they are now, you can see a huge improvement in the design of the models. That's not to say that they were bad back then, they've just gotten better. Sure, maybe you feel they lack in one area (whether that be game design or whatever), but they sure make up for it in others and you have to admit it. We are a part of a constantly changing game. I don't think anyone can rightly call the game and miniature designers lazy in what they do. I'm sure they are franticly running around getting ready for releases months in advance. They know very well that if they don't deliver something good many of us gamers will grow tired and move on to better things. For what they do, I think they are pretty damn clever. They were pioneers in the industry back in the day, and contiune to be a source of inspiration to future games designers.

Sorry if this is somewhat off topic again, but I'm really trying to understand where some of you are coming from. I mean no ill will in my post - I'm just trying to dig deeper here.

I think the idea of dropping the price of some troops/choices is a good think when done in the right place. When you veterans were playing back in Rouge Trader dats and such, didn't you just dream of waves after waves of infantry, orkz, etc anihalting one another on a game board? Sure it may cost us more of our hard earned doe (or given point values) to dish out for more troops, but there are ways around that too. I constantly lend my own forces to fellow gamers so they can try something new or get that cinematic feeling one gets when faced with hordes of models.

I think Apocalypse was a good example of how GW is trying to cater to veterans and newbies alike. They understood that gamers who had been collecting for years had tons of models that could only sit and collect dust and look pretty and wanted to give a chance for you to dust them off and throw them into the fray once more. Sure, it could have been seen as a ploy to get us to buy MORE models, but we will always buy new models when they continue to come out with state of the art stuff that gives us loads of different possibilites in our gaming expierence. Who else out there has this much customability in their games? NO ONE else writes their own rules AND has as an extensive model range. Anyway, I feel like I'm rambling. I'm done with the heart to heart. I hope everyone continues to enjoy whatever they may in this hobby of ours. Cheers!

yabbadabba
06-02-2009, 18:58
this IS actually a problem. 40k,despite being skirmish at heart of the rules, forces strict unit composition on player. 500pts game may have small number of models, but it will also have small number of units. in other skirmish games, one model is one unit, and therefore 4 models can each do different things. in 40k, 4 models in a single unit can only do the same thing and be in the same place-there is simply no way to circumvent the fact that you won't get much diversity and toys at that point level,leading to little diversity in a army list-to have really diverse units you need to play much bigger games.

The Combat Patrol rules managed fine, and were a key component for the development of things like the schools league tournament that GW run. And just to expand there was also Kill Team, which was also highly popular.

Again I come back to something I go and on about (gets soapbox). GW provides you with the core, baseline of a game. If you need that game to do more then there is nothing to stop you adapting it to your needs.

Or, simply, play something else.

zealot!
06-02-2009, 20:09
Immersed is spelled with an s. :)

JCOLL
06-02-2009, 20:23
It's a forum, not a literary journal. Geez.

Laser guided fanatic
06-02-2009, 20:46
Immersed is spelled with an s. :)

Spelt is spelt with a lt.

itcamefromthedeep
06-02-2009, 21:02
Whilst the production costs of video games has gone through the roof with new fangled physics engines, AI and graphical gewgaws, thereby somewhat justifying the cost of something that has ALWAYS been expensive, there is no way in hell there is any justification for someone to have to think "Hmm.. new 360/PS3 game, or a space marine tac squad?" Yes the warhammer stuff has the potential for longer term enjoyment, but that's only with substantial further investment.
Don't forget startup costs on video games. From what I can tell, you get maybe 10 worthwhile games out of a gaming console's life. The cost of games (the ones worth getting are usually $55 or $65 here) plus console over the course of its life might then be something like $800 CDN all told, call it $550 for games and $350 for console. That's $800 over a five or six-year product cycle from what I can tell. Computers and their games aren't that much cheaper no matter how you cut it. Toy Soldiers ain't all that bad as far as time-wasters go. I won't even talk about the costs of organized sports.

As far as model inflation, well I like to play with a lot of models. Lots of models are fun. That's why I play Apocalypse whenever I can, balance be damned. Once again, I'll say that you don't have to play at 1500 or 2000 points or whatever your poison is. 1000pts still works.

As for skirmish scale games, you could just make each model its own unit and let each vehicle weapon fire at a different target. Done. Well, you could fine tune it a lot more, but it doesn't have to be difficult.

The Necromunda rules are free.

As for points inflation, I don't expect Guard to get that much cheaper, if at all. They might actually end up more expensive. GW can do this by increasing their effectiveness with, say, the ability to shoot through your own units without providing cover saves. They could let Guard shoot even when they go to ground. They could add grenades to the infantry squads. They could make Guard Infantry that don't count as Kill Points. There are a number of ways to justify those 6 points without making Guard MEQs.

Guard will compare badly one on one with Boyz, so to keep them at the same price what GW is going to have to do is make sure that Guardsmen don't have to get in a fair fight. This doesn't have to be difficult for a shooting unit.

I'm waiting with baited breath to see the creative ways GW will find to screw it up.:D

lanrak
06-02-2009, 21:03
HI
Yabba Dabba.
I agree with you assesment of what GW provide.
A basic out line of a rule set , a work in progress , under constant review.

And years ago this was re-enforced with all the cool ideas and hobby content in the WD!(We had gamers ideas and photos and bat reps of 'humble every day hobbiests' in the WD.)

The Codexes and Army books were labelled 'game supliments ' the same as the articles in the WD.('Monthly minatures catalogue and games supliment' .)

However as GW seem to sell thier rule books and Codex/Army books at a premium price.
And infer these set finite 'official ' boundaries .
And infer some sort of game ballance.

Is it any wonder a lot of people feel short changed when they wanted a 'finished balanced game suitable for tournament play'.But they end up with 'fun dice rolling game' with developers who dont want to be held responcible/ accountable for the stuff they published and charged money for....

''...its not our fault people dont play the game how we intended it to be played ....'':wtf:

''...obviously we can not play test all combinations in any given codex-army book... ...there are not any compositions that would inflict a greater win loss than 40 -60 %...''
Ahem, if you dont play test them, how the do you 'know' this ?

I dont want GW to change that much , but I would like them to be far more honest about the way they develop games and the un- suitability of them for competative play.

isidril93
06-02-2009, 21:03
I hear you buddy! I sold all of my armies (3, 1500 point armies) and switched to board games for that very reason. At least with board games I don't have to keep buying to keep my armies scaled to a size that I can play. On the up side, I found it a lot easier to find people to play boardgames than it is to find people to play 40K.

im not sure i understood you...if you sold ALL your armies howcome your on this forum
or do you just like to post?
or do you play wfb

itcamefromthedeep
06-02-2009, 21:15
Now that I think of it, you could do the FOC on a point by point basis.

For every full 500 points you take:
1-2 Troops
0-1 Elites
0-1 Fast Attack
0-1 Heavy support
And for every full 750 pts you get
0-1 HQ, with a minimum of 1 HQ in the force if you're allowed to take one.

At 1500 that looks almost exactly like the current FOC, but with one more minimum Troops (not exactly an onerous requirement).

That's not a difficult house rule to enact.

Refyougee
06-02-2009, 21:25
Now that I think of it, you could do the FOC on a point by point basis.

For every full 500 points you take:
1-2 Troops
0-1 Elites
0-1 Fast Attack
0-1 Heavy support
And for every full 750 pts you get
0-1 HQ, with a minimum of 1 HQ in the force if you're allowed to take one.

At 1500 that looks almost exactly like the current FOC, but with one more minimum Troops (not exactly an onerous requirement).

That's not a difficult house rule to enact.

Sure, but it further disadvantages armies who have crappy troops and makes those who don't even better.

itcamefromthedeep
06-02-2009, 21:32
Sure, but it further disadvantages armies who have crappy troops and makes those who don't even better.
You bring less then 3 Troops choices to a 1500pt game?:wtf:

How do you win, man!?!?!

harrytheschmuck
06-02-2009, 22:56
i don't think there is to much wrong with what GW is doing as company, on the whole its a good company with many good people working for it, all of which just want to make the whole experience more enjoyable for everyone and more power to them. GW as a business is some what more questionable.

we all know prices are going up all over the world, travel, energy, food etc and its only natural that GW put their prices. but it seams like GW are market leaders in Price increases. i get white dwarf mag every month and its like every 3 months or so theres abit in the mag thats informing us of a price increase be it paints, models or whatever. i love playing GW games and it would take alot of wrong doing for me to stop playing, but if i was a kid say about 14-16 i don't think it would be as accessible now as it would have been back in the day. if i was 14 now i don't think i could afford to get into GW.

now that I'm 26 with a job, cat, bank loan and a girlfriend who hates me can i keep up with GW.

Necromancer2
06-02-2009, 23:26
i don't think there is to much wrong with what GW is doing as company, on the whole its a good company with many good people working for it, all of which just want to make the whole experience more enjoyable for everyone and more power to them. GW as a business is some what more questionable.

we all know prices are going up all over the world, travel, energy, food etc and its only natural that GW put their prices. but it seams like GW are market leaders in Price increases. i get white dwarf mag every month and its like every 3 months or so theres abit in the mag thats informing us of a price increase be it paints, models or whatever. i love playing GW games and it would take alot of wrong doing for me to stop playing, but if i was a kid say about 14-16 i don't think it would be as accessible now as it would have been back in the day. if i was 14 now i don't think i could afford to get into GW.

now that I'm 26 with a job, cat, bank loan and a girlfriend who hates me can i keep up with GW.


Awesome post!!! I do think that the kids are whats going to keep this hobby alive. Us old folk (34) are not going to be buying all the new shiney bitz that come out... especially at these prices. Thats why I'm cutting back.

JCOLL
06-02-2009, 23:27
Agreed. GW has to increase prices every now and then because they are a company whose goal is to be proffitable. If things were cheaper, we wouldn't have the quality of models and books that we do. Quality in the regard to the books is more of an asthetic value, as many people grumble about what gets left out, how it works, and so on. If things were a lot cheaper we wouldn't have half the nice things we do. When a price increase comes along, they do tend to do price drops as well. Maybe it's not on YOUR favorite items, but they do try to balance things.

I think a good example of a price increase is with the new Assualt on Black Reach set. The cost of the starter sets did go up, but look at the crazy amount of value you get in the box! For the space marine side of things alone it would cost you well over $100. That's not even including the Ork stuff! I will gladly pay an extra ten bucks or whatever to get the quantity of models and also the quality. It's the best set they've ever produced! Unlike with battle for Macragge, the marines are in correct proportions and when they're painted up you can hardly tell the difference from the multi-part kits. Another item that has gone up in price is the White Dwarf magazine. Yeah it sucks, but if you are that heart broken about it get a subscription - I renewed mine this december for $70 (I think) and I got the new Whit Dwarf model PLUS 4 free issues (again, I think that's what it said. May have been 3).

Some of the new Guard rumours have players a little miffed, including one of a repackage of the Guardsmen that takes them from 20 models to 10 models. When you break it down your paying a little less plus they usually redo the sprue and adds a bunch of nice stuff. I don't understand what's bad about that? Sure, you end up paying something like an extra $5 bucks for 20 guardsmen, but all the new options and items are worth it.

The prices may go up on some items, but I think GW is pretty fair about trying to balance these increases with extra gubbins for all of us. If the quality went down with a price increase, then I'd me more miffed. As it is, I'm happy to accomadate them. You can always find a way to make your money back with special offers and the like.

@ harrytheschmuck: does your gf hate you because of your hobby? My ex did. I think she was just jealous though ;) My current gf loves that I have a hobby that is creative and whatnot. She likes to use my paints to paint her nails, too. Don't know how I exactly feel about that, but if that's what it takes for her to not want to hurt me for bringing a bag full of crap home once a week, then so be it. Lol.

The Inquisitor
07-02-2009, 02:03
Hate to break it to ppl, but Games workshop = business. They are interested if you buy models. Rules and books make no money. Therefore, they have an interest in increasing demand for their products. What better way than to a) sell you cool toys and b) create rules for you to play with those toys?

They have control over rules and what will be required to play their games. It would be hard to argue that such a redefinition of size of armies has happened just by "chance" and was not a purposeful action. Not that its bad at all. They need to assure that they are going to be viable as a company.

BTW- this has been a trend since 2nd edition (even RT...). Many vets complained of the change in rules with the 3rd ed, and the need for more models to play games.

/not a fan boy in the least.
//doesn't like increased prices like anyone else.
///finds it funny that ppl consider that GW does anything without the intention of making money, like any business would.

Rioghan Murchadha
07-02-2009, 03:29
That's interesting. I haven't read the report myself, what kind of things did you read that made you think it was being 'mismanaged' (as opposed to just 'used to pay off legitimate expenses')?

Probably something to do with the fact that they brought in a bunch of money, didn't service their debt at all, ended up borrowing MORE money, and in terms of reasons for loss, their storefronts rank waaaaay up there.

There's something wrong with the business model when you have all these retail locations and they're losing you money as a company.


finds it funny that ppl consider that GW does anything without the intention of making money, like any business would.

To be extremely general, there are 2 major strategies to increase the amount of money you bring in via sold goods.

1) Sell at less of a profit, encouraging higher volume of sales, and thus more profit overall.

2) Hope you have some sort of reputation for extreme quality, or are the 'in' item at the moment (handbags for hollywood celebrities being a prime example), and sell for a flipping retarded profit margin.

GW really does neither of these. Prices are too high for the first, and they are by no means ahead of the competition in terms of qualilty on 'in-ness' for the second.

Draxas
07-02-2009, 08:11
Some of the price gouging by GW is pretty outrageous, and clearly they know where the money is: 40k. The price of a pack of 10 tactical marines is $35, compare this to the Dark Elf Corsairs at $22. The dark elf corsairs have just as much if not more in terms of complexity and detail of the models, variety of customization and simple volume of plastic, yet the marines cost almost twice as much. This is because GW knows from experience that Marines are their highest selling army by far and are so popular that people will continue to pay *outrageous* prices for them.

This goes for 40k in general; I own a few army books/codices from both WFB and 40k, and it costs almost twice as much to build a 40k army of equal points value to a Fantasy army. This is not on a per-army basis either; I've compared several different ones. 40k is universally more expensive 100% of the time unless you exploit Black Reach as much as possible and happen to be collecting 1 of the included armies. Even then your choices are very restricted and there is some waste involved after the first box (unless you want to use a crapload of deffkoptas for some reason, for example). From what I hear, the ork boyz in it don't come with shootas either.

precinctomega
07-02-2009, 09:06
finds it funny that ppl consider that GW does anything without the intention of making money, like any business would.

A study of GW's business practices since the management buy-out and public listing show that "making money" is not the company's principle business objective. In fact - and this is borne out in conversation with the company's executives - their principle objectives are twofold: (1) be the dominant wargames manufacturer in the world, and (2) sustain their corporate independence.

Of course, making a profit is vital to achieving both of these objective, but it is interesting to see what they do with their profit and how they choose to make it. For example, it is no secret that some major US toy manufacturers have expressed interest in the company: interest that would make the principle shareholders and executive board some quite obscene amounts of money. Yet these approaches have been strenuously resisted, even by the shareholders who hold no executive position.

Instead, they focus on a "slow trickle" approach to developing and marketing their Intellectual Property. Early experiments with video games were of patchy success, not least because the visibility of the GW brand wasn't enough to "sell" the games on their own merits. In the last five years - especially with the success worldwide of the LotR brand and the expansion internationally of the GW hobby centre - this has changed and was a large contributor to the success of the WAR product.

Yet GW continues to make its largest investment and profit on its key product: the miniatures. Unlike many companies, they have refused to be distracted from focusing on what they do very well - manufacture and retail toy soldiers. Whether their product is or is not the best on the market or the cheapest on the market (and it isn't either of those things) it is nevertheless the best-known, most-visible and easiest to buy, thus attracting the core audience for these products: school-age children and their parents.

At the same time - unlike principle competitors, WOTC - they also have a strategy to sustain the interest of the more discriminating consumer: the continuing development and expansion of the IP through new books, the Black Library and other resources.

Because that's the other thing that people forget that new rulebooks, army books and codexes give the mature fans of the game: new conceptual content. Why else would I still have not only the new space marine codex on my shelf, but also the one before that, and the one before that and the one before that! Because what keeps me - and many others like me - in the game isn't just how many dice I roll or the eternal pursuit of the Perfect Army List, but the elaborate environment in which events take place.

R.

fattdex
07-02-2009, 10:09
It's obvious that most of their decisions are made to make you buy more models. This is why the best games, the specialist games, have been swept under the rug, as once you have bought the 9 figure box set you don't need a lot more.

40K hasn't been much fun for me, I just don't think it's a very good game and I have no clue how people with full time jobs and families can ever find the time to get a 70 model army painted.

I now play AE-WWII, Blood Bowl, Aeronautica Imperialis, Gorka Morka and (guilty of large model count only because I went insane buying up rare models on eBay) Epic, not only because they are great game systems, they have fewer models and are much easier to get built and painted. Also for the most part, the Dev's (and fanbase for the specialist games) give a crap about developing the games and regularly improve upon them.

Metaphorazine
07-02-2009, 11:51
It's obvious that most of their decisions are made to make you buy more models. This is why the best games, the specialist games, have been swept under the rug, as once you have bought the 9 figure box set you don't need a lot more.


Of course their decisions are made to make you buy more models. I still think shelving the specialist games was a poor strategy on their part, however. I think they really should increase their focus on specialist games, primarily Mordheim and a re-jigged equivalent of Inquisitor that uses all the races.

While they get less sales in terms of models needed for these games, they could bring in new players that are apprehensive about spending 4 hours per game, or $400-600 on an army, by introducing them to the fluff and the IP in a cheaper investment from those players. Of course, if those players want to field the full might of a SM company, or the whole variety of units used by a craftworld, etc, then the only option is 40k.

This strategy is already demonstrably successful. They have a rather large fanbase playing 40k, and leveraged this to sell rediculous numbers of super-heavies which only have a place in Apocalypse, a different game.

Unfortunately, if they took this strategy, it would involve gutting a lot of the complexity from the specialist games...

fattdex
07-02-2009, 13:10
Could be why we are hearing Space Hulk is coming back in sept.

Corrode
07-02-2009, 14:23
Probably something to do with the fact that they brought in a bunch of money, didn't service their debt at all, ended up borrowing MORE money, and in terms of reasons for loss, their storefronts rank waaaaay up there.

There's something wrong with the business model when you have all these retail locations and they're losing you money as a company.

You've definitely identified the key problem there - not sorting out debts you already have isn't a particularly great strategy, although it's also quite a common one in the corporate world (or at least it was at the time of the report; what with all these big chains closing because having huge unpaid loans bit them in the ass I suspect GW are starting to sweat a bit more over theirs :P) and then borrowing more money isn't particularly good.

I'm not sure storefronts losing money is actually as big of a problem as it seems. It's a well-identified trend over the last few years that brick'n'mortars aren't actually making a great deal of money as more and more online retailers open up. The GW stores don't even necessarily have to make a lot of money to be worth their weight in gold to the company - they could easily exist as a hub for people to play games, and as a visible way to draw in kids to bring into the hobby. A loss-leader style of thing (of course that depends on how much money they're losing). It might even be worth it just to make sure that GAMES WORKSHOP is visible in big bold letters - brand association is never a bad thing. The veteran gamer is likely to know about other games, but the average kid who thinks that SPASE MARINZZZ are wicked-cool probably doesn't. If their stated goal is as above (to be the dominant manufacturer of fantasy wargames) then having that kind of presence, which isn't necessarily matched by Warmachine being stocked in the more esoteric comic-book-store, might again make the stores worth it even if they don't bring in a huge amount of actual money.

Did online sales bring in a particularly high amount of money? If that's the case then the stores might well still be doing their job. Of course that presents another problem in that there's quite a few sites out there which sell for much cheaper and which anyone remotely internet-savvy (say, enough to be shopping online in the first place!) can find.

Wrt specialist games, I think they made a massive mess of that. As a kid my friends and I had far more fun playing Necromunda/Blood Bowl/Mordheim than we ever did playing the big games. It comes back to branding - you might not need to buy much more Necromunda stuff after the first box of Eschers, but if you associate having a good time with Necromunda (made by GW) and the setting (40k) there's a good chance that when you're looking for something else to do you'll think 'hey, what about that other game they make with the big armies'. They're even something that's quite marketable to the PnP roleplaying crowd whereas 40k isn't necessarily - I know DnD players who don't like the idea of a massive wargame, but would probably be cool with Mordheim which is in some ways very similar, just with models. You could sell to a whole different audience on the basis of a one-off gang purchase which maybe gets expanded with one or two models, and it's a much easier thing for the average DnD player to sell to their gaming group.

harrytheschmuck
08-02-2009, 21:09
@ harrytheschmuck: does your gf hate you because of your hobby? My ex did. I think she was just jealous though ;) My current gf loves that I have a hobby that is creative and whatnot. She likes to use my paints to paint her nails, too. Don't know how I exactly feel about that, but if that's what it takes for her to not want to hurt me for bringing a bag full of crap home once a week, then so be it. Lol.


nope, she just hates me whatever i do.