PDA

View Full Version : Why does it take so long for GW to get through Army books/codeci?



RunepriestRidcully
21-08-2010, 19:37
Why is it codex's and army books are released at about 1-2 books every 4-5 months, why can't GW at least do a basic update for each army whenever they do a new addition? is it purely because they believe each rules update needs to be accompanied by new models? It just seems when you have armies like the Dark Eldar and Tomb Kings who have been waiting at least 6 years, (about 10 in the case of the dark eldar) is there any way GW could pick up the pace?

eriochrome
21-08-2010, 19:43
Games Workshop is really Citidel Miniatures. The games are just a way to sell miniatures so no new minis means no reason to update army. They should have like a balance committee adjust points annually but then they would have to give out that info free which is against their principles.

Brother Loki
21-08-2010, 20:02
Resources - there's only about half a dozen people in the games development studio, and they all work on projects for all 3 main games as well as producing articles for White Dwarf, the website etc. It's actually a pretty busy schedule.

RunepriestRidcully
21-08-2010, 21:53
What articles for white dwarf? just curious, how long did 2nd edition 40k and it's equivilent edition in fantasy last, they seemed to be able to get all those done, plus do the the specialist game, and the 3rd main system of the time, epic/space marine, so it seems they are doing less work then then.

SilentCivilian
21-08-2010, 22:19
Back when they first released Warhammer and 40k as boxed games there where no army books. These came over time just as they do today. The main change is that there are so many more books to do now.

Armies added for warhammer since 4th edition boxed version. Lizardmen, Tombkings, Ogres, Beastmen, Demons of Chaos. Thats 6 books for that system alone. ( I have counted WoC as being Armies of Chaos for the purpose of numbers)

Armies added to 40k. Dark Eldar, Demon Hunters, Witch Hunters, Black Templars, Tau, Necrons, Blood Angels. Thats 7 extra books. ( Again i have swapped out Angels of Death for Dark Angels for the purpose of numbers)

All this extra work and share holders to keep happy. The work load has increased quite a bit. The reason for some books getting left on the back burner i think can in part at least be accredited to the share holders. If the models dont sell well then there is not the money there to replace them. Want new Dark Eldar lap up the old models. It sucks i know but thats capitilism for ya. ;)

simonr1978
21-08-2010, 23:15
Armies added to 40k. Dark Eldar, Demon Hunters, Witch Hunters, Black Templars, Tau, Necrons, Blood Angels. Thats 7 extra books. ( Again i have swapped out Angels of Death for Dark Angels for the purpose of numbers)

It's not quite that straightforward though, Chaos stretched over two thick hardbacked books back then (Admittedly which covered both WHFB and WHFRP) but also included the Grey Knights/Ordo Maleus and the Sensei too, Orks took three books IIRC. Squats have gone as have Genestealer Cults and Chaos Genestealer Cults, Dark Eldar haven't been updated at all in about the last decade so including them in the mix is a bit misleading, I'm sure there are other types not listed so far that deserve equal mention though (Witch Hunters (Ordo Maleus?), Sisters of Battle, to name but two).

Realistically though, what's the alternative? As far as 40K goes at any rate, the time-line is static, it's stuck at a vaguely defined fixed point, anything that happens (Necrons, Tau, Tyranids, new unit types, the absence of Squats) hasn't just happened, when it happens, it's suddenly always been that way. Within that setting you can't have a progressive development because there is no progression to the storyline.

Similarly as far as the developers go, whilst they could do a splash release of everything for a given system at once (which would mean developing everything in secret, simultaneously) can you honestly imagine the practicalities of that? Not to mention the difficulty of publicising it all once every 5 years (Give or take) in one big splash release, then what do you do to generate interest in that system whilst it languishes for the next half a decade (And the player base floods internet forums with "My favourite system is being robbed of development time/new releases because GW favours ---...")

I'm seriously interested, what would you do differently?

Spyral
21-08-2010, 23:29
Care?

People will eventually leave. Warmahordes has a tighter ruleset (but plays like mtg admittedly) and has sprung from nothing to being quite popular. Mini's aren't the only selling point. If the game sucks no one will play, no play = no sold minis.
That said the games DON'T suck... it's just that I think the community is getting sick of marine variant flavour 'dex while some others could do with a tweaking. New minis do not have to accompany every new dex.
That siad I don't think that many people play or will play DE unless they make them insane. Which might be sensible... tempt people with a new army (look at necrons when they were released...) then forget about it for ages... not slick..

Tarax
22-08-2010, 10:19
Games Workshop is really Citidel Miniatures. The games are just a way to sell miniatures so no new minis means no reason to update army.

I disagree with you there. The current (old) models do not sell at all because there is no new Codex. If there was one, sales would go up again. And if you want to sell more miniatures, keeping up with the books is a way to keep selling them. There is no need to have new miniatures, though it would help, as long as there are miniatures to sell.

stahly
22-08-2010, 13:03
You've got a very narrow point of view, because Warhammer ist not only about the game. It's about the experience, from building to painting and collecting, gaming is only one facet.

RunepriestRidcully
22-08-2010, 18:07
I am more of a painter and converter myself, but several of my friends play armys like ogre kindoms, tomb kings whilst my favourite army is Grey knights, and a problem with converting/painting an army that has not had much support is that it can sometimes be difficult to find people who do a similer army to get their opinions on wherever or not your latest conversion fits the theme of the army, (I know it can be done by people who do different armies, but it is nice to know others who play the same armie think it fits the theme as well.) Also, look at the Dark Eldar range, if they did some of (many) space marine releases without half a dozen new models, the Dark Eldar could have been redone sooner. Also look at one of the new codexs, most decent artwork and fluff will be copied from earlier, then you have the new stuff like "wolfwolf, wolfwolf" and "Blood, glorius blood", that must have taken five min at most.

Tarax
23-08-2010, 07:33
You've got a very narrow point of view, because Warhammer ist not only about the game. It's about the experience, from building to painting and collecting, gaming is only one facet.

Are you saying that the models (all those models from all those armies) are ugly and you don't see a reason to paint them?
You may or may not like a model, but if you like a model, you buy it and paint it, even if you don't play the game or that army, and if you don't like the model, you do not buy it. It's as simple as that.

Occulto
23-08-2010, 08:08
Are you saying that the models (all those models from all those armies) are ugly and you don't see a reason to paint them?
You may or may not like a model, but if you like a model, you buy it and paint it, even if you don't play the game or that army, and if you don't like the model, you do not buy it. It's as simple as that.

I suspect Stahly is disagreeing with your point that a new codex/book is required to sell models.

There are other reasons to grab said models outside of their performance on the table.

violenceha
23-08-2010, 08:22
I suspect Stahly is disagreeing with your point that a new codex/book is required to sell models.

There are other reasons to grab said models outside of their performance on the table.

Yeah, like when White Dwarf says they're NEW and AWESOME!!
I miss the days when new books weren't required to release new miniatures.

Occulto
23-08-2010, 08:47
I miss the days when new books weren't required to release new miniatures.

You mean like those new daemon models that have been released? :eyebrows:

violenceha
23-08-2010, 09:15
You mean like those new daemon models that have been released? :eyebrows:
yes, yes i do;)

Occulto
23-08-2010, 09:17
yes, yes i do;)

I think you just got me hook, line and sinker. :p

Grimstonefire
23-08-2010, 11:06
You have to consider that there are 3 sorts of updates for a book:

#1 Updating a book to take into account the internal balance issues that arose from the last update.

#2 Updating to take into account system wide changes by a new edition, for example changing the cost of war machines in 8th to reflect power potential.

#3 Updating to take into account the new 'cool' things, and how they impact on the balance/playability of the list.

GW considers it easier simply to do all 3 in one go, instead of doing #2 only immediately after a new edition.

AndrewGPaul
24-08-2010, 01:23
I am more of a painter and converter myself, but several of my friends play armys like ogre kindoms, tomb kings whilst my favourite army is Grey knights, and a problem with converting/painting an army that has not had much support is that it can sometimes be difficult to find people who do a similer army to get their opinions on wherever or not your latest conversion fits the theme of the army ...

So? If you're happy with how it looks, and you don't get too much hassle from your friends, why should it matter what anyone else thinks?

sliganian
24-08-2010, 20:25
Whether one chooses to "believe" what are facts or not is not in my ability to change. However, for many many years GW's operating model is to have big mini releases with the books as tag-alongs. No new minis, no new books.

As someone else said (but always seems to need repeating for a new crop of gamers), GW see themselves as a MINUATURES COMPANY. The fact that they happen to have game rules for the minis is a convenient bonus.

Whether one believes the above attitude is 'correct' is a different debate. It is how the company sees themselves.

Venkh
24-08-2010, 20:33
Well they are moving to even more miniature releases without AB updates (Skaven and HE stuff upcoming without a new book) so we can look forward to even more releases.

I'm not keen to see new books for the sake of it.

A few armies need new books for 8th (TK, WE, Perhaps Brets) but the vast majority play extremely well as they are. GW's apparent new policy is a sound decision as far as Im concerned.

yabbadabba
24-08-2010, 22:23
Well they are moving to even more miniature releases without AB updates (Skaven and HE stuff upcoming without a new book) so we can look forward to even more releases. The "Wave" style release pattern has been around for at least 4 years. It appears GW is nailing its comments to the mast over it now.

Venkh
24-08-2010, 22:56
The "Wave" style release pattern has been around for at least 4 years. It appears GW is nailing its comments to the mast over it now.

Whatever you call it it looks like there is going to be more of it than before. Which is nice.

yabbadabba
24-08-2010, 22:57
Whatever you call it it looks like there is going to be more of it than before. Which is nice. Yup, expect models but no army books - do not expect army books without major model releases.

scarletsquig
25-08-2010, 01:09
On the plus side, it is resulting in more stuff being released.

This year, there's been enough space to fit in the release of a fantasy wave during the LotR release months.

Inquisitor Engel
25-08-2010, 03:43
As someone who once helped write and playtest some books and has done more than my fair share of studio visits, I can tell you a few things:


The tail doesn't wag the dog, nor does the dog wag the tail. The miniatures get produced as and when they're needed for the books, but books can be pushed back if the miniatures are significantly behind schedule. Neither is more important than the other.
Miniatures take as long, if not longer, to produce than the book. The Tau Codex was finished and ready to go to the printers for a month or so before the minis were ready.
There really are only a handful of people in the studio. If you compared it to say, a video game studio, GW employs a single person to write all the code for an expansion pack or patch.
Playtesting does occur and it does take a while - the books I worked on had at least eight months to a year of playtesting.
Layout and artwork. Neither of which can be rushed and have to be consistent and carefully done, checked, edited, rechecked and reedited, proofs done and finally sent to the printers. (Jokes aside, anyone who's worked in publishing will testify that this is important and comparatively slow work compared to writing). There were Five PEOPLE that did this for ALL the books when I was involved. Five. Most magazines and newspapers have two to three people PER SECTION doing layout.

Pacorko
25-08-2010, 05:53
I didn't see if anyone corrected the OP, but the plural of codex is codices...

Now I'll leave you to you discussion about why the "bookses" do not come out like pancakes.

Still, I agree, one would think a game studio that only focuses on THREE games would actually be a wee bit faster working on improving the rules in the books. Maybe all that playtesting they do is really thorough... and then, it's the unyielding proofreading, editing and copy work.

Yep, right! :p

RunepriestRidcully
25-08-2010, 08:47
All this extra work and share holders to keep happy. The work load has increased quite a bit. The reason for some books getting left on the back burner i think can in part at least be accredited to the share holders. If the models dont sell well then there is not the money there to replace them. Want new Dark Eldar lap up the old models. It sucks i know but thats capitilism for ya. ;)

And yet they have effectively ceased to support the specialist games, and some like Man Of War have been entirly dropped,and Epic/Space marine used to be on of the main 3, so that means if any thing there workload has decreased or is at the same level it used to be.

IJW
25-08-2010, 09:12
Their (not there) workload has definitely not decreased. Look back to the times of Man O' War and the like and there was no LotR and considerably fewer active factions in 40k & WFB.

For example, 2nd ed 40k had only nine codices plus the Assassins pamphlet. We've already had six for 5th edition if you include Daemons (several rules that don't exist in 4th ed.).

Brother Loki
25-08-2010, 09:37
Engel's point about how small the studio is can't be stressed enough. The new Space Marine video game from Relic has 97 developers working on it full time. That's around 90 more than GW's entire games development department.

marv335
25-08-2010, 10:06
And yet they have effectively ceased to support the specialist games, and some like Man Of War have been entirly dropped,and Epic/Space marine used to be on of the main 3, so that means if any thing there workload has decreased or is at the same level it used to be.

Workload decreased?
Rubbish.
there are more core systems than there were, and the two from the time period you talk about have more factions.
Off the top of my head.
WFB
Lizardmen
Tomb Kings
Ogre Kingdoms
Daemons

40k
Necrons
Tau
Witchhunters
Daemonhunters
Black templars
Daemons.

If there are 6 people in the studio,
they have 11,520 manhours available per year (assuming a 40hr week less holidays)
we have 3 core rule sets. They have;
15 WFB factions
14 40k factions
10 LotR factions
There is only so much time in a day.
If they all get equal attention over a year, they can spend 295 hrs a year on each one. That's one guy working for 7 weeks per year on each book.
If they work on core rules as well, that's less time on the books.
Meetings? Less time on the books,
Lunch? less time on the books.
Sick day? less time on the books
Games day visits? less time on the books.
I'm amazed they get through them so fast.

IJW
25-08-2010, 10:22
If they work on core rules as well, that's less time on the books.
Meetings? Less time on the books,
Lunch? less time on the books.
Sick day? less time on the books
Games day visits? less time on the books.
Expansion books? (Apoc, Apoc Reloaded, Planetstrike etc.) Less time on the books.

marv335
25-08-2010, 10:34
Expansion books? (Apoc, Apoc Reloaded, Planetstrike etc.) Less time on the books.

exactly.
With all the expansions, and all the other distractions that come from working in an office, they probably only get 2-3 weeks per person, per book, per year.

Tarax
25-08-2010, 11:06
If there are 6 people in the studio,
they have 11,520 manhours available per year (assuming a 40hr week less holidays)
we have 3 core rule sets. They have;
15 WFB factions
14 40k factions
10 LotR factions

Yes, 10 factions for LotR/WotR, but they have no seperate books. They are all listed in the WotR rulebook and they only do scenario booklets for LotR.


There is only so much time in a day.
If they all get equal attention over a year, they can spend 295 hrs a year on each one. That's one guy working for 7 weeks per year on each book.

295 hrs/40 hrs per week is more like 7,5 weeks.


I'm amazed they get through them so fast.

Well, you also haven't taken into consideration that they do not release each army every year. You state that there are 39 factions (including LotR), yet they won't release more than 1 book per month. This gives you just over 3 years to rotate each book.
If you do not take into account the LotR factions, but include new editions of the rules, you get 16 (WFB factions + rules) + 15 (40K factions + rules) + 1 (LotR/WotR rules) = 32, which is less than 3 years.

yabbadabba
25-08-2010, 16:21
295 hrs/40 hrs per week is more like 7,5 weeks A touch pedantic I feel.

If they only have 6-7 designers, keep everything in house, do no external playtesting (something which has not worked for GW for a variety of reasons and opinions), have to contribute to other projects, attend events etc etc then it is a very big workload. Obviously not impossible but very big.

@Runepriest Ridcully - you need to back off the SG soap box a bit. We have all been there, done that for years and nothing has changed. People far closer than us to JJ and GW have made very strenuous efforts to get SGs going again and to no avail. It doesn't make GW the money it needs to warrant the attention us fans want, so thats it. End of, over to the community to keep the flame alive.

marv335
25-08-2010, 16:58
Working on any project in an office environment, time slips away very quickly.
8hr day,
1hr for lunch
say two 15min tea breaks (very conservative)
we're down to 6 1/2hrs.
expect to lose at least a couple of hours per week for progress meetings
Another couple of hours for briefings from managment on trends and direction
5 1/2hrs now.
first half hour of the day getting in and setting up for the day
5 hrs.
last 15 mins of the day packing up.

from an 8hr day we're now at 4 3/4hrs of actual work

so from a 40hr week, you're looking at 23 3/4hrs of actual work on rules.

This is a very optimistic estimate. Anyone who has worked on any kind of developmental project will be able to testify to that


SG used to be supported well.
Unfortunately, it was a money pit. More went in than came out.
And that is not a tenable position.
Despite having their own magazine and WD support, they just didn't do well enough.

Erwos
25-08-2010, 17:09
GW's 2010 report lists _82_ people in design and dev. That's not 6-7 people. Which is it? Or are 75 of those dev people really in business dev?

In any event, they underinvest in the studio, so things take forever.

sycopat
25-08-2010, 17:28
Honestly, I think GW do very well in supporting their specialist games, especially compared to other games companies that make games that prove to be unprofitable.

Case in point; The CCG Hecatomb by WoTC. Anyone remember that? I loved that game, still have all the cards I bought for it, and it seemed to be getting along well, at least it was popular amongst my group of friends and we were impatient for the expansions to make it across the sea. They never did though. The game died a sudden and violent death because the cards were too expensive to make (Allegedly.)

I can't still buy cards or download the rules from Wizards of the coast. I can buy some models and download rules from GW.

Really though I would think that the idea of investing a bit more in the studio would have occured to the GW head honcho's by now, as it's crying out for it and more development would surely only please the fanbase and encourage more purchases.

IJW
25-08-2010, 17:45
GW's 2010 report lists _82_ people in design and dev. That's not 6-7 people. Which is it? Or are 75 of those dev people really in business dev?
6-7 games developers. Design & dev will include sculptors, 'Eavy Metal team, the other painters ('EM don't do the hundreds of army models), scenery/tables team, White Dwarf team, packaging designers/graphic designers/Photoshop operators/logo designers, web team, studio manager, admin team etc. etc.

The games development team is only a small part of the Design Studio.

Anyone know if Forgeworld are counted separately?

yabbadabba
25-08-2010, 18:17
Anyone know if Forgeworld are counted separately? Should be. I have seen no evidence to suggest anything else than FW being a seperate business in the GW portfolio. If it says its central design studio or similar that would underline FW's serperation.

Erwos
25-08-2010, 20:03
6-7 games developers. Design & dev will include sculptors, 'Eavy Metal team, the other painters ('EM don't do the hundreds of army models), scenery/tables team, White Dwarf team, packaging designers/graphic designers/Photoshop operators/logo designers, web team, studio manager, admin team etc. etc.

The games development team is only a small part of the Design Studio.
Well, that clears it up. But the fact remains that they're grossly under-investing in the studio if the current rate of releases is the best they can maintain.

IJW
25-08-2010, 20:25
Oops, I forgot illustrators and photography.

Anyway, what would people regard as fast enough, if they aren't happy with the current speed? Would Tarax's three year cycle be acceptable? At what point might it get too fast? A new rulebook and a dozen codices every three years for the different armies I use or play against frequently is more books than I want to learn for one game...

To phrase things a different way - is it the overall speed or the uneven speed of army updates that you don't like?

Erwos
25-08-2010, 22:51
Ideally, I'd like them to put the army lists online and update them frequently as issues come up. Fluff and paint schemes can be in their own books. The main rulesbook could be its own book, too.

So, maybe have all the army lists updated _when the new edition comes out_. Shocking!

yabbadabba
25-08-2010, 23:19
Ideally, I'd like them to put the army lists online and update them frequently as issues come up. So they would get no sales from army books then? Also, as we have already talked about the Studio's limited resource, who would be updating all this stuff?


Fluff and paint schemes can be in their own books. The main rulesbook could be its own book, too. Happens already?


So, maybe have all the army lists updated _when the new edition comes out_. Shocking! Like with the 8e WFB?

Tarax
26-08-2010, 07:41
A touch pedantic I feel.

Perhaps, but you can do a lot in approx. 20 hours.
Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you or anything. :angel:


Working on any project in an office environment, time slips away very quickly.
8hr day,
1hr for lunch
say two 15min tea breaks (very conservative)
we're down to 6 1/2hrs.

Really? Where you work your lunchtime is part of your workday? I have to work 8 hours every day and this does not include lunch. So if I have 1 hr for lunch and start at 8 am, my day ends at 5 pm, not 4 pm.

IJW
26-08-2010, 09:26
Office environments tend towards a 9-5 day, but a full hour for lunch isn't exactly common.

yabbadabba
26-08-2010, 09:36
To phrase things a different way - is it the overall speed or the uneven speed of army updates that you don't like? Nope, just the griping.

I like what they have done with 8e WFB. Some armies are just going to have to hang on for their points adjustments. In the end ideally we would all like a different army release system but the economics of the situation don't appear to suggest anything else.

lanrak
26-08-2010, 11:50
Hi all.
If viewed from a game balance and gameplay point of view, the GW codex-army book release method MAY seem inefficient and self defeating.

But as GW see themselves as minature manufacturer, and view the games and associated publications as PURLEY a marketing tool.
From this perspective the short term benifits of the current sytem are obvious to everyone.

However the long term detriment caused, may out way the short term benifit?

Also the development team no longer call the shots on relaeses.
They may have spent months working on updates for a 8 year old codex to be told '...can it!We need an urgent cash injection, do another marine codex first....':eek:

As other game system list army compostion along with ALL the rules in the main rule book or as free downloadable content.
(Eg AoA 23 army lists, Firefly 45 army lists.)

And seperating 'instructions to play' from 'emotive artistic content' alows both IMPORTANT elements of a game system to develop freely , without negatively impacting on each other.

I am sure left to thier own devises the game developers would deliver much more balanced support to all races across all games.

TTFN

Erwos
26-08-2010, 12:58
So they would get no sales from army books then? Also, as we have already talked about the Studio's limited resource, who would be updating all this stuff?
They could hire more people for the studio - it's not like they pay them a whole lot. They spend practically nothing on the design and dev when compared to their revenues. Arguably, the slow rate of releases compared to the breadth of their product line might actually be their biggest problem. Chaos players aren't buying new Eldar releases, for instance.


Like with the 8e WFB?
Hey, if they do that, it'll be a great step forward. The suggestion to put the lists online was so that they could update them more quickly and keep them in sync.

yabbadabba
26-08-2010, 13:21
They could hire more people for the studio - it's not like they pay them a whole lot. They spend practically nothing on the design and dev when compared to their revenues. So you would have to make economies (redundancies) elsewhere and guarantee that the increased studio output results in sales - I think maybe GW have already gone over this a few times during their recent downturns.

Arguably, the slow rate of releases compared to the breadth of their product line might actually be their biggest problem. Chaos players aren't buying new Eldar releases, for instance. Why would Chaos players buy Eldar releases when they are wanting to buy Chaos models to counter the new Eldar releases? As models are the primary release focus and not the army books, new models are being released every week so arguably GW have a very fast release schedule, its just for any one person collecting one army its not so quick.


Hey, if they do that, it'll be a great step forward. The suggestion to put the lists online was so that they could update them more quickly and keep them in sync. Again, you would lose a lot of codex sales from that, and lose the impact of a new army book's release. A company like GW can make more money from a codex release and its associated additional sales than most wargames companies make in a year - or several.

Erwos
26-08-2010, 17:14
So you would have to make economies (redundancies) elsewhere and guarantee that the increased studio output results in sales - I think maybe GW have already gone over this a few times during their recent downturns.
They could stop throwing money at an American retail strategy that doesn't work. There's your money. I have seen no evidence that they have even considered or tried any new release strategies, downturn or no. You underestimate organizational momentum...


Why would Chaos players buy Eldar releases when they are wanting to buy Chaos models to counter the new Eldar releases? As models are the primary release focus and not the army books, new models are being released every week so arguably GW have a very fast release schedule, its just for any one person collecting one army its not so quick.
If you can show me any numbers that would back up 40k sales in general spiking with new 40k releases (eg, new releases spike sales of non-new SKUs), I would be tremendously interested. What you suggest is not intuitive and doesn't seem to mesh with what I understand of the industry.


Again, you would lose a lot of codex sales from that, and lose the impact of a new army book's release. A company like GW can make more money from a codex release and its associated additional sales than most wargames companies make in a year - or several.
Some of that revenue would be made up from the fluff books I suggested, but increasing the player base through better rules and easier entry to new armies would also be good for their bottom line.

Tarax
27-08-2010, 08:07
... increasing the player base through better rules and easier entry to new armies would also be good for their bottom line.

I fully agree with this. GW may be a miniatures company, but they provide us with rules. If I go to any toy store, even specialist ones, I can not find rules with which I can use my GW models. And that is for many the main reason why they play these games, because it is an 'easy access, rules and miniature game'.
GW can not increase sales by models alone. There are way too few (current) players that will buy new models. Their only way to make (more) money is to get new customers, and the only way to get new customers is through good rules. Look at Airfix if you want to compare GW with a model making company.

yabbadabba
27-08-2010, 08:57
Their only way to make (more) money is to get new customers, and the only way to get new customers is through good rules.I disagree and indeed GW's history proves otherwise, dependent on your definition of "good".

Chaos and Evil
27-08-2010, 11:51
I disagree and indeed GW's history proves otherwise, dependent on your definition of "good".

Indeed, I'm often outspoken in saying that I think GW's rules are already very "good".

Oh, they're awful for adults who want to play a tactically complex and balanced game, but they're brilliant for kids. Really, really, really great, for kids. Pretty good for adults just wanting a brainless knockabout, too.

And, remind me who GW's target market is?

lanrak
27-08-2010, 13:24
Hi C&E.
'11 to 16 year olds who walk past a GW B&M store.'
Is aparently GWs limited target demographic.

Most other companies that produce games , tend to be less restricted and go for..' a fast and fun game for all the family...' or ' gamers wanting a tacticaly challenging game that can be completed in 2 hours..' etc.
Games manufacturers, target 'gamers' and minature manufacturers target 'collectors' , who may or may not play games.

Reducing your customer base by poor customer support , then claiming it to be part of a well devised buisness plan is what GW do best.:eek:

While GW have been reducing the apeal of thier core games by tailoring them to a fickel and constantly shrinking demograhphic, other companies have grown by simply targeting gamers with GOOD games for gamers.(Clear consice rules that maximise gamplay with the minimum of rules.)

GW plc corperate management belive the absolute minimum effort on game development is all that is required.And just increse prices to counter the dwindeling customer base.

This is why GW core games are in such a poor state compared to the alternatives....IMO.

TTFN

yabbadabba
27-08-2010, 13:48
Sorry Lanrak, I have to disagree. GW games have never really been much to write home about in terms of 'a tacticaly challenging game that can be completed in 2 hours..' save possibly E:A and Warmaster. There have always been wargames far more challenging and intuitive than the huge majority of GW games.
In addition GW target an audience that other wargamers have neglected - tomorrows wargamer - through their retail chain. That as much as their IP have made GW the company they grew too.
What GW have been consistently poor at is keeping veteran players. SGs are a great example of this, ideal for Vets with plenty of room for expansion and creation, they don't make the money. The Journal is another example which was dropped due to poor sales. I am sure there are more. Aside from those Vets who are just happy with GW's "Beer and Pretzel" approach, GW Vets who realy get into the wargames niche will move on, will find other games that have more intuitiveness, more complexity, more "reality" and are cheaper.
Current or ex-players who complain about the current rules are the same as those who did it 15 years ago and then just moved on. There might be a few more of them these days due to GW's success at recruiting "tomorrows hobbyists" so successfully in the late 90's and 2000's. Lots of other companies have done well in exploiting this market when GW has clearly decided not to.
The challenge to GW in the future is two-fold. The pricing strategy and whether pursuing the veteran customer is a strategy they can achieve for a change.

sliganian
27-08-2010, 15:41
Current or ex-players who complain about the current rules are the same as those who did it 15 years ago and then just moved on. There might be a few more of them these days due to GW's success at recruiting "tomorrows hobbyists" so successfully in the late 90's and 2000's. Lots of other companies have done well in exploiting this market when GW has clearly decided not to.
The challenge to GW in the future is two-fold. The pricing strategy and whether pursuing the veteran customer is a strategy they can achieve for a change.

One sad part is that GW should realize that it should be the Veteran gamers who keep the game going and talk it up for a new generation of gamers. Alienating your primary 'good news' word-of-mouth marketing tool is not smart.

yabbadabba
28-08-2010, 10:17
One sad part is that GW should realize that it should be the Veteran gamers who keep the game going and talk it up for a new generation of gamers. Alienating your primary 'good news' word-of-mouth marketing tool is not smart.Again I disagree in part because the people GW want talking up the games are the 12-16 year olds, so that they get more 12-16 year olds into the game. The only other word of mouth advertising I believe GW think about is father-to-son and this "silent majority".

Tarax
28-08-2010, 11:40
I disagree and indeed GW's history proves otherwise, dependent on your definition of "good".


Indeed, I'm often outspoken in saying that I think GW's rules are already very "good".

Maybe I was a bit unclear, but I didn't say that the current rules are 'bad' or anything. It's just that if you don't have any rules (either good or bad) or that these rules are not supported (ie Army books/Codices) then you do not have a basis to sell models to kids. Parents are not inclined to buy some models for their children just to have them, especially if you still have to put them together and paint them. Only the support of a rules system will let them continue with the hobby.

Gatsby
29-08-2010, 04:11
Working on any project in an office environment, time slips away very quickly.
8hr day,
1hr for lunch
say two 15min tea breaks (very conservative)
we're down to 6 1/2hrs.
expect to lose at least a couple of hours per week for progress meetings
Another couple of hours for briefings from managment on trends and direction
5 1/2hrs now.
first half hour of the day getting in and setting up for the day
5 hrs.
last 15 mins of the day packing up.

from an 8hr day we're now at 4 3/4hrs of actual work

so from a 40hr week, you're looking at 23 3/4hrs of actual work on rules.

This is a very optimistic estimate. Anyone who has worked on any kind of developmental project will be able to testify to that


SG used to be supported well.
Unfortunately, it was a money pit. More went in than came out.
And that is not a tenable position.
Despite having their own magazine and WD support, they just didn't do well enough.

I work a 10 hour day 4 days a week, my hour lunch is added to that not included in it, I pack up AFTER my day is over (sometimes with 4-5 hours overtime) and my "tea" breaks, HA ill get those in while writing my reports for that day. If in an 8 hour day you only get 4 3/4 hours of work done it sounds more like laziness and unprofessionalism to me.


6-7 games developers. Design & dev will include sculptors, 'Eavy Metal team, the other painters ('EM don't do the hundreds of army models), scenery/tables team, White Dwarf team, packaging designers/graphic designers/Photoshop operators/logo designers, web team, studio manager, admin team etc. etc.

The games development team is only a small part of the Design Studio.

Anyone know if Forgeworld are counted separately?

And none of the other people working there play the game and can pitch in ideas and help out with play-testing and balancing issues? As for the large troop layouts in the army books and white dwarf? Most of it is basic photoshop, I learned how to do that in high school. 6-7 on the dev team seems like an understatement, or they need to reorganize to become more efficient. The rate their going I give them 2-3 years.


Oops, I forgot illustrators and photography.

because no one else at the studio can take pictures of models?


Hi all.
If viewed from a game balance and gameplay point of view, the GW codex-army book release method MAY seem inefficient and self defeating.

But as GW see themselves as minature manufacturer, and view the games and associated publications as PURLEY a marketing tool.
From this perspective the short term benifits of the current sytem are obvious to everyone.

However the long term detriment caused, may out way the short term benifit?

see rant at end of post.


Also the development team no longer call the shots on relaeses.
They may have spent months working on updates for a 8 year old codex to be told '...can it!We need an urgent cash injection, do another marine codex first....':eek:

i disagree, marines may be their top seller but of course its going to be your top seller if its in EVERY intro box. If EVERYTIME you see somthing GW it has a marine on it, when no mater WHAT army style you play, marines can play it to. Given the EXACT same treatment, Eldar, Necrons, Orks even Tau could just as easily be top dog.

ANY release is going to inject money, Marines are just an easy button, need a new model, change the pauldron, need a new tank, slap on a new gun.


As other game system list army compostion along with ALL the rules in the main rule book or as free downloadable content.
(Eg AoA 23 army lists, Firefly 45 army lists.)

And seperating 'instructions to play' from 'emotive artistic content' alows both IMPORTANT elements of a game system to develop freely , without negatively impacting on each other.

I am sure left to thier own devises the game developers would deliver much more balanced support to all races across all games.

TTFN

army list updates and balancing eratta to keep armies competitive and fun (thus keeping the models selling) would take MAYBE 1 hour a month.

e.g. Dark Angel/Black Templar: Refer to the updated point cost and stat line's in the new C:SM for the following war gear and unit selections: Storm shield, Cyclone missile launcher, dreadnought variants, bike variants, land raider variant, etc.

that took all of 30 seconds imagine the balancing I could do given an hour (by the way that right there i guarantee took less time that the excuse regarding the difference in war gear and unit selections they put into the FAQ's.)

and this is just a temporary fix until a NEW codex with new units, updates, corrections and point values come out later.

GW needs to start getting its act together or its not going to last another 2-3 years. I'd LOVE for them to do well but at this rate they're going to sink and they have only themselves to blame.

Icapica
29-08-2010, 08:47
because no one else at the studio can take pictures of models?
If you want professional quality, you will need professional photographers. I'm not sure if this is really a position they need to keep in the house, though.


i disagree, marines may be their top seller but of course its going to be your top seller if its in EVERY intro box. If EVERYTIME you see somthing GW it has a marine on it, when no mater WHAT army style you play, marines can play it to. Given the EXACT same treatment, Eldar, Necrons, Orks even Tau could just as easily be top dog.
I strongly disagree about this. There's a plenty of reasons why marines are so popular:
-They're hard as nails and thus more forgiving for a beginner
-They can be painted in almost any way you want and still be totally fluffy (unlike for example orks with blue skin)
-They're genetically enhanced superhumans and the ultimate defenders of humanity
etc

People like knights and people like superheroes. GW pushes marines so hard because they know that marines can sell a lot. Of course if GW stopped putting marines in starter boxes and overall didn't market them any more than any other faction, they'd sell less. I'm also sure that GW would sell less miniatures this way. Someone else could perhaps explain better what I'm trying to say as I'm finding it a little hard.


ANY release is going to inject money, Marines are just an easy button, need a new model, change the pauldron, need a new tank, slap on a new gun.
Yes, any release will make money, but some releases make it more than others. Also, all releases cost something for GW and this is where the bolded part comes in. Just making money isn't enough, the release should make more money than it cost.

AndrewGPaul
29-08-2010, 11:17
I work a 10 hour day 4 days a week, my hour lunch is added to that not included in it, I pack up AFTER my day is over (sometimes with 4-5 hours overtime) and my "tea" breaks, HA ill get those in while writing my reports for that day. If in an 8 hour day you only get 4 3/4 hours of work done it sounds more like laziness and unprofessionalism to me.

Or a different work ethic. My working week is only 37.5 hours, for instance. A traditional 9-5 job with an hour for lunch is 35 hours. Just because you're overworked doesn't make it the norm. :)

You'll also note that marv's post doesn't include meetings in that 4.75 hours/day total.

IJW
29-08-2010, 11:44
I work a 10 hour day 4 days a week, my hour lunch is added to that not included in it, I pack up AFTER my day is over (sometimes with 4-5 hours overtime) and my "tea" breaks, HA ill get those in while writing my reports for that day. If in an 8 hour day you only get 4 3/4 hours of work done it sounds more like laziness and unprofessionalism to me.
I'm not sure what relevance the conditions of a job on another continent have to a UK office job.
In general, in the UK, lunch time will not be included in your hours, but a typical office job here is under 40 hours per week. As far as I can remember, paid breaks are no longer a requirement under UK employment law, but most places still include them.



As for the large troop layouts in the army books and white dwarf? Most of it is basic photoshop, I learned how to do that in high school.
A small proportion of it is Photoshop work, but that seems to be decreasing lately. The fact remains that the studio as a whole paints up large quantities of armies, tanks etc. that are done by the hobby team, not by the 'Eavy Metal team, both of which are part of the Design Studio but are not games developer. Regardless, Photoshop work also takes time.


because no one else at the studio can take pictures of models?
I don't understand your point.

The level of photography in GW publications is one that requires a fairly high level of training, especially when it comes to lighting. As a rough estimate (as someone who earned his entire living from photography in the past), the number of new photos in WD, posters, packaging and new books each month is at least a full time post without including setting up the battle scenes and getting all the figures to and from storage and not including much of the post-processing/DAM.


army list updates and balancing eratta to keep armies competitive and fun (thus keeping the models selling) would take MAYBE 1 hour a month.

e.g. Dark Angel/Black Templar: Refer to the updated point cost and stat line's in the new C:SM for the following war gear and unit selections: Storm shield, Cyclone missile launcher, dreadnought variants, bike variants, land raider variant, etc.

that took all of 30 seconds imagine the balancing I could do given an hour (by the way that right there i guarantee took less time that the excuse regarding the difference in war gear and unit selections they put into the FAQ's.)
You don't work within a bureaucracy, do you. ;)

Apart from issues like Deathwing suddenly getting enhanced equipment and the ability to have every model in the unit separately equipped and Deathwing Assault. See, that only took 30s as well.

Gatsby
29-08-2010, 19:42
I'm not sure what relevance the conditions of a job on another continent have to a UK office job.
In general, in the UK, lunch time will not be included in your hours, but a typical office job here is under 40 hours per week. As far as I can remember, paid breaks are no longer a requirement under UK employment law, but most places still include them.

regardless of continent professionalism is professionalism, if in a full day of work you work for hardly half of it, THAT is unprofessional.


A small proportion of it is Photoshop work, but that seems to be decreasing lately. The fact remains that the studio as a whole paints up large quantities of armies, tanks etc. that are done by the hobby team, not by the 'Eavy Metal team, both of which are part of the Design Studio but are not games developer. Regardless, Photoshop work also takes time.

they have how many stores in the US? have those employees paint one predetermined model with a predetermines paint scheme, a week/month and ship it back with the rest of the regions models, and voila you have a full army painted OUTSIDE the hobby team, now theres time for the hobby team to playtest and help with the rules. just ideas im sure with some thought they could make this more effective.

The US stores i go to when they get their list of paint jobs and usually finish in half the time if even that long, and they look as good if not better than whats in white dwarf.


I don't understand your point.

The level of photography in GW publications is one that requires a fairly high level of training, especially when it comes to lighting. As a rough estimate (as someone who earned his entire living from photography in the past), the number of new photos in WD, posters, packaging and new books each month is at least a full time post without including setting up the battle scenes and getting all the figures to and from storage and not including much of the post-processing/DAM.

i will admit i dont know that much about it, as i said i learned it in high school.


You don't work within a bureaucracy, do you. ;)

Apart from issues like Deathwing suddenly getting enhanced equipment and the ability to have every model in the unit separately equipped and Deathwing Assault. See, that only took 30s as well.

I do work within a bureaucracy, I'm on the enforcement side of things.

and that hardly seems like a buff when compared to the recent powercreep.

IJW
29-08-2010, 20:00
regardless of continent professionalism is professionalism, if in a full day of work you work for hardly half of it, THAT is unprofessional.
That depends solely on how you are defining 'work'.

What out of:
"expect to lose at least a couple of hours per week for progress meetings
Another couple of hours for briefings from managment on trends and direction
5 1/2hrs now.
first half hour of the day getting in and setting up for the day
5 hrs.
last 15 mins of the day packing up."
Do you not consider to be work? Meetings, briefings etc. are all work.


they have how many stores in the US? have those employees paint one predetermined model with a predetermines paint scheme, a week/month and ship it back with the rest of the regions models, and voila you have a full army painted OUTSIDE the hobby team
OK, at this point I can only assume that you are trolling.

Painting individual models is the least time-efficient way of painting an army, matching the painting styles and abilities would be near-impossible, shipping individual figures back from stores and then across the Atlantic is highly inefficient, the shop staff tend to be busy enough painting up the shop armies and new releases anyway and lastly a figure from each US store per week would only get you a few units a month.


i will admit i dont know that much about it, as i said i learned it in high school.
What you learn about something in high school tends not to bear much resemblance to an actual job. ;)

Gatsby
29-08-2010, 20:17
That depends solely on how you are defining 'work'.

What out of:
"expect to lose at least a couple of hours per week for progress meetings
Another couple of hours for briefings from managment on trends and direction
5 1/2hrs now.
first half hour of the day getting in and setting up for the day
5 hrs.
last 15 mins of the day packing up."
Do you not consider to be work? Meetings, briefings etc. are all work.

really? Thats an awful lot of meetings even for a fortune 500 company, most places have a meeting once a week, maybe twice. And those meetings cover just about everything.


OK, at this point I can only assume that you are trolling.

Painting individual models is the least time-efficient way of painting an army, matching the painting styles and abilities would be near-impossible, shipping individual figures back from stores and then across the Atlantic is highly inefficient, the shop staff tend to be busy enough painting up the shop armies and new releases anyway and lastly a figure from each US store per week would only get you a few units a month.

your reading to much into it, they have access to all this untapped potential, yet they're not using it, ill go into a store during slow hours and they have literally NOTHING to do, because they aren't allowed to work on their OWN minis.


What you learn about something in high school tends not to bear much resemblance to an actual job. ;)

yea, so true.

IJW
29-08-2010, 20:23
really? Thats an awful lot of meetings even for a fortune 500 company, most places have a meeting once a week, maybe twice. And those meetings cover just about everything.
Four hours of meetings in a week for a 'creative' post isn't all that odd.

EDIT - if the store staff always have nothing to do in slow periods then someone, somewhere (whether it's the shop manager or the individual staffer) is failing at their time management skills. ;) And yes, I've been there on both sides of the equation...

Glabro
29-08-2010, 22:35
GW see themselves as a MINUATURES COMPANY. The fact that they happen to have game rules for the minis is a convenient bonus.


No, the fact that they happen to have game rules is not just a convenient bonus they could live without. The rules are required for their entire business model to work. Without the game, I approximate 80-90% of the demand wouldn't exist - not unless a third party provided the rules (and that couldn't really work without some form of co-operation). GW knows this. The fact that they consider themselves a miniature company is irrelevant (which is true - it's where the actual profit comes from) - the rules are required. It's called a vehicle.

General Veers
30-08-2010, 00:44
Not the same industry but...

I WISH I only had to attend 4 to 5 hours of meetings per week. I'm a Director of Information Technology but even back in my Network Admin days I spent a lot of time in meetings. That was for a Fortune 500 company, BTW. Now half my day can be spent going from one meeting to another. But I'm management now so that's not quite the same thing I guess. I do try to make sure my staff aren't in meetings too much. IT people generally appreciate that. :)

lanrak
31-08-2010, 17:44
HI all.
The real eater of time is chopping and changing around of priorities!

When left to my own devices I am able to service and repair 2 to 3 units* a day (8.5 to 9.5 hrs).(*Electric motors-gearboxes-fans-pumps etc.)

Today I achived practicaly nothing , as my manager had me flitting about between 12 jobs ...

I assume working on multiple artistic projects requires constant concentration , and disruptive activities from upon high can have a massive negative impact on progress.

May be thats why the studio output seemed greater pre 1998?Before corperate managment started messing with release shedules...

Just a thought...

TTFN

Erwos
31-08-2010, 18:33
No, the fact that they happen to have game rules is not just a convenient bonus they could live without. The rules are required for their entire business model to work. Without the game, I approximate 80-90% of the demand wouldn't exist - not unless a third party provided the rules (and that couldn't really work without some form of co-operation). GW knows this. The fact that they consider themselves a miniature company is irrelevant (which is true - it's where the actual profit comes from) - the rules are required. It's called a vehicle.
QFT. If the miniatures wouldn't sell without the rules, it's pretty clear that the rules form a pretty important part of the value proposition. And if this is true, wouldn't better rules give more value?

In fact, arguably, the rules would be a low-cost way of increasing the value of _all_ their miniatures.

Carlos
01-09-2010, 22:29
GW need to take a leaf out of the software industry and get the community to Beta test all codices before they go to market. This would not only prevent any FAQs as all possibly problems will have been ironed out but a pdf would only contain rules and no fluff, be illegal in tournaments and in LGSs and obviously be tweaked before copy, therefore no sales would be lost.

yabbadabba
01-09-2010, 23:16
GW need to take a leaf out of the software industry and get the community to Beta test all codices before they go to market. This would not only prevent any FAQs as all possibly problems will have been ironed out but a pdf would only contain rules and no fluff, be illegal in tournaments and in LGSs and obviously be tweaked before copy, therefore no sales would be lost. They have done it before and it didn't work for them.

Chaos and Evil
02-09-2010, 11:47
GW need to take a leaf out of the software industry and get the community to Beta test all codices before they go to market. This would not only prevent any FAQs as all possibly problems will have been ironed out but a pdf would only contain rules and no fluff, be illegal in tournaments and in LGSs and obviously be tweaked before copy, therefore no sales would be lost.

You assume GW are primarily (Or even secondarily) concerned about game balance.

Tarax
03-09-2010, 08:12
They should be. At least it will create Goodwill with the gamers. As it is now I am not inclined to promote or persuade anyone to play the game. Because of the imbalance I have to warn people who never have seen the game. (Therefore less sales etc.)

What would you say if you were told that in Chess white has a bigger chance to win and you can only choose to play either black or white?

Yet, I agree that balance is not top-priority for GW.

yabbadabba
03-09-2010, 08:22
They should be. At least it will create Goodwill with the gamers. As it is now I am not inclined to promote or persuade anyone to play the game. Because of the imbalance I have to warn people who never have seen the game. (Therefore less sales etc.) I question your decision there, GW has created 100m+ turnover of the back of imbalanced systems, more successful than any other wargame. That suggests that balance is not what sells GW games.


What would you say if you were told that in Chess white has a bigger chance to win and you can only choose to play either black or white? I am sure there is a report that says both sides being equal, White has a better chance of winning, and a statstic that shows that in competitive Chess, White wins more than Black. If I can find it, I'll post it.

Tarax
03-09-2010, 10:31
Yabbadabba, don't you think that GW would sell more if the game was more balanced?

And in Chess there is an equalizer where both players play with both colours, that way they both have an equal chance of winning, excluding talent and such. I was trying to say that in Warhammer et all, there are far more variables/armies with far far more imbalance.

yabbadabba
03-09-2010, 10:56
Yabbadabba, don't you think that GW would sell more if the game was more balanced? Not historically, no. I doubt there is any evidence to suggest that as no other company as reached such a position, and is unlikely to. Within a certain niche, maybe, but again I point out games like E:A, warmaster and to a very lesser extent, BFG and LotR. While all are potentially far better games than 40K and WFB balance wise, none of them have sold anywhere near as well as 40K and WFB. As an extra to that for at least 3 editions of the game, the Epic series was pushed as a third core game.


And in Chess there is an equalizer where both players play with both colours, that way they both have an equal chance of winning, excluding talent and such. I was trying to say that in Warhammer et all, there are far more variables/armies with far far more imbalance. I know where you were going, but this is why we have to dismiss chess in these discussions - to make it "fair" both players have to play each side. I am sure 40K and WFB would be more "fair" if that was an intregal part of their competitive aspect too.

Tarax
04-09-2010, 09:38
All Specialist Games get less attention and coverage than the core games (Warhammer Fantasy, 40K and to a lesser extend LotR/WotR). If any of the SG-games was given more attention, in WD, more (plastic) models, etc, they would become more popular. As it is now, they do not get much.

Then again, large armies of 28mm models have more appeal than smaller models or less models.

Also, they did good with their current strategy (ie unbalanced armies), but they could do better.

yabbadabba
04-09-2010, 09:54
All Specialist Games get less attention and coverage than the core games (Warhammer Fantasy, 40K and to a lesser extend LotR/WotR). If any of the SG-games was given more attention, in WD, more (plastic) models, etc, they would become more popular. As it is now, they do not get much. Again there is no evidence of this. Way back games like Space Marine got lots of support - indeed SGs individually got their own publications unlike 40K and WFB (the journal covered everything). I don't think this whole "if GW supported SGs/Xenos/something else they would be as popular as the core games/marines/whatever is true.


Then again, large armies of 28mm models have more appeal than smaller models or less models.agreed.


Also, they did good with their current strategy (ie unbalanced armies), but they could do better.Again how? I don't think it is balance which sells GW games. I certainly agree that it would appeal to vets more, but if that was the case why didn't we have a mass exodus from 40K/WFB to E:A/Warmaster?

I can't help but feel that if GW licenced SGs to someone like Ronnie Renton at Mantic the SGs would do very well, but again just not in the volumes enough to make it commercially viable for GW. I love SGs and have kept all my stuff, but even during their heights I found players in clubs more content to play 40K and WFB than an SG.

Chaos and Evil
04-09-2010, 10:32
I don't think it is balance which sells GW games. I certainly agree that it would appeal to vets more, but if that was the case why didn't we have a mass exodus from 40K/WFB to E:A/Warmaster?
Agreed.

For all the complaining about balance that goes on here on Warseer, "Veterans" clearly don't really want to play balanced, tactically complex games, because if they did they'd step across to Epic and Warmaster.

No, what they want is tactically simple "Michael Bay" style games. That's what GW sells in its Core Games and that's what GW's customers choose to buy.

Brother Loki
04-09-2010, 11:23
Frankly as a 20 year vet it's what I want to buy, and I don't see a problem with it. I'm just not especially interested in small scale models like epic. I like 28mm and I like GW's settings (I also like PP's setting as well). Frankly for me the rules are the least important part of the equation, as they're only going to change again in a few years anyway.

Tarax
05-09-2010, 09:19
I consider myself a veteran, playing almost 20 years. I also consider myself a gamer, whereby I play a tactically complex game. But with unbalanced armies there is less tactical insight needed.

Then why do I not change to any of the smaller scale games? Well, I like the appeal of the 28mm scale. Also, if I want to play a smaller scale, I know lots of games that are more balanced and play with cardboard chips, representing units. I like the details on the models and love to play with that scale.

@Yabbadabba: I am sorry that I can't provide evidence of increasing sales if GW would produce balanced games (only looking at the core games, of course), simply because there is non. That is why I presume that it would increase sale if they did. But unless GW would go this way, we will never know if that would be.

yabbadabba
05-09-2010, 09:45
@Yabbadabba: I am sorry that I can't provide evidence of increasing sales if GW would produce balanced games (only looking at the core games, of course), simply because there is non. That is why I presume that it would increase sale if they did. But unless GW would go this way, we will never know if that would be. Its a toughy to be honest history disagrees with the idea. Circumstantial evidence disagrees with the idea. Tbh I think the mechanisms of 40K and WFB would mean that balance could only come with some blandness in the lists eg Ravening Hordes; I feel the games' mechanisms cannot produce a balance, and can only achieve an overall balance by introducing enough variety of playing environments that at some point, all amries will have their day. In addition I also believe we are not talking about a huge amount of GW's customer base here, but a vocal minority. There is nothing wrong or radical with that, but unless someone proves to GW that this vocal minority is cahs important, then there is no incentive for GW to pursue it (and sites like this have, unfortunately, given GW the impression that it is a low cash return, vocal minority that make all the complaints). So in short, GW is unlikely to pursue the idea unless there is a change of philosophy at the top. Thats even considering GW still sees itself in the wargames market.

This is why I advocate communities doing this sort of thing themselves and to stop dangling on GWs apron strings. At the least it means an alternative. At the highest hope, as shown with the 6e Dark Elf book, it might have an impact on GW to change.