PDA

View Full Version : Is PP getting to GW?



Pages : [1] 2

Night Bearer
22-05-2011, 23:47
Just curious, as between this new resin-plastic hybrid, full-color hardcover armybooks, and what appears to be a somewhat stepped-up book release schedule of late, it's kinda like GW is taking a page from PP's last year (i.e. P.P. releasing 12ish books in a year plus intro'ing a new mini material for certain models).

I've no idea if GW honestly considers PP a threat - my suspicion is they don't, I don't think GW really considers any company a threat - but I guess I'm just curious if anyone else has wondered if some of these latest changes in the GW hobby are more than just a coincidence?

Not really meaning to engage in a debate over GW vs PP popularity, btw. All I do know is that a lot of local GW players have kinda been griping about why PP is able to basically relaunch two full ranges of books in roughly a year - full-color books at that - when GW maybe gets out 2-3 books for their system a year, books which have typically not been full-color.

Hellfury
23-05-2011, 00:29
PP has been outselling the GW stock at my local shops for the last couple years now. By a wide margin in fact. I know it is anecdotal and therefore hardly empirical data, but from a local perspective, GW may as well be dead.

bluemage
23-05-2011, 00:38
I only really have anecdotal information to share. But my FLGS stopped holding special nights for 40K and WFB as their popularity has dropped. But they do have special nights for most of the other major systems FOW, Malefaux, Warmachine and 15mm historical. They are also selling more hordes/warmachine models and rules than GW merchandise.

rabblerouser
23-05-2011, 00:53
Flames of War and Warmachine have really picked up at my FLGS. I don't think they are more popular than 40k, but they seem to be more popular than Fantasy and are picking up speed.
There is also a small group that plays Firestorm armada.

Kalandros
23-05-2011, 03:12
You know, the quality difference IS there.
Games Workshop's product quality is, so far, incredibly better than anything Privateer Press has managed to produce.

There's no contest for quality of miniatures.

The problem lies with the Quantity required for Fantasy or WotR and the continuous bad moves such as cutting the Orc box in half and leaving it as expensive, not enough shields for warriors in the DE Battalion, another increase in prices across the board and still no balancing out the obvious problems with Canadian vs USA prices.

And then there's the rules system. Warma-hordes is smoother and also just the fact that you can play one system against another is incredibly good.

GWShop has quality of product
PP has a better gaming system

Inquisitor Kallus
23-05-2011, 03:52
Cool, thanks for that insight Mechanicalhorizon. Good to know some of the details

Bylak
23-05-2011, 04:52
While it may not be "better quality", I sure do prefer working with and being able to customize GW's plastic models over working with PP's pewter. Sure PP models have dynamic poses, but you can't DO much more than the standard poses. It's a lot easier to make a GW plastic army your own by customization or mixing and matching different pieces, even within the same kit!

The Orange
23-05-2011, 07:45
Didn't think about the Hard back books, that's deff. something to think about. But I did have quite a chuckle over 40k adding "run" to their rules. IMO PP are indeed innovating with GW following their foot steps. (GW do have an advantage with the plastic kits though)

Regarding quality, GW makes good stuff no doubt, but IMO there not in a league of their own nor have they been for quite a while. PP makes some amazing mini's IMO (not that they don't have their bad one's too), Infinity IMO has some superb mini's, and so did Confrontation when they had there metals.

xxRavenxx
23-05-2011, 09:15
I also have to say that PP models are sculpted with more dynamic poses and can be very difficult to make a mold of and cast properly.

I think *some* of their models have more dynamic poses, but overall they are a lot flatter than GW models. The very reason GW models come in many more bits (something you criticize) is to allow more posability, and "3Dness" for the figure.


Having many years experience with both companies moldmaking and casting departments I have considerably more info on the process involved than most and have to say GW's process is much more "basic" because of standardization designed to make the production of models faster, not "better".

So far as I'm aware, about 10% of PPs metals are made in the uk by a 3rd party, with the rest being shipped over. There are some TERRIBLE quality control issues coming out there.

Incidently, in terms of quality control, GW have PP licked. I've never had so many missing parts claims to make with a company. (They seem better lately though.) On the upside PPs customer service is pretty good. Ive never had a problem getting hold of the missing parts for my customers.

Thanatos_elNyx
23-05-2011, 09:22
I've noticed a shift in preference in my local store to PP as well.
I'll probably never completely give up on GW, but aside from the relaunch of Necrons, nothing GW are doing even remotely excites me.

I may have to start collecting some Warmachine or Hordes.
And what I really like is that the two systems are compatible so that should help to get a few games.

Hendarion
23-05-2011, 09:39
The players in our LGS are shifting too. The three major reasons:
1) GW is too expensive
2) GW rules are unbalanced
3) Warmachine/Hordes is more strategic than GW-games

Still, most agree that GW still does the more impressive minis.

I won't be mad if GW starts to learn from these examples and overtakes some things.
I don't need hardcover Codex Books though.

frozenwastes
23-05-2011, 09:48
What GW really needs to copy from PP is PP's focus on game design. They consider themselves primarily a game design company and have always wanted their customers to experience the game as often and as early as possible. This is why the introductory boxes are $50 and come with the rules and stats. So you can get playing ASAP and experience what is effectively a full game experience right away. While the game changes at 35 and 50 points, the battle boxes still give you the core guts of the experience.

Also, PP's games require a number of models similar to what 40k required during it's periods of greatest percentage growth. When GW went from a small UK importer of D&D to a global company selling it's own games. Now GW has inflated the size of the normal armies and PP moved in to the space GW vacated.

Complete game experience in a $50 starter.

Less than 40 models aside for a full game.

Thanatos_elNyx
23-05-2011, 10:00
Yes the smaller scale battles are the biggest attraction for me and the overall balance of the system as well.

But I do concede GW has the edge on models.

Hendarion
23-05-2011, 10:03
Well, we here in my area play 750 to 1500 points 40k max. If you are used to these sizes, you'll see the game to be different than the typical 2000 to 2500 points. It is up to you guys to chose the point-limit, not GW. Although less than 750 seriously does not work and that would in numbers of minis probably equal a Warmachine/Hordes game.

Spyral
23-05-2011, 10:37
PP games are more like MtG than a 'game' though. It's more 'I do my uber thing and ... I win or loose' whereas with GW games they are more 'fun'/more of a game. PP is more like a CCG with toy soliders

frozenwastes
23-05-2011, 10:45
I have an old White Dwarf from 1997 (I think) which featured the UK Grand Tournament top placing armies. I still remember a chaos one that had 13 models. I think an IG one had a touch over 40 and a space marine one with 25 or so. Oh, and an eldar one that was in the high teens.

My cryx army: 27 models in a 35 point army.
My cygnar army: 17 models in a 35 point army.


PP games are more like MtG than a 'game' though. It's more 'I do my uber thing and ... I win or loose' whereas with GW games they are more 'fun'/more of a game. PP is more like a CCG with toy soliders

That's just what people who don't actually play them say about them when they want to denigrate them. In my last game of Warmachine, my units moved forward and took objectives, but I couldn't delay my opponents counter attack long enough to hold them to score enough control points and lost. I don't know what part of that qualified the experience as being like MtG.

The whole CCG thing is just a caricature. And a tired and old one at that.

eldargal
23-05-2011, 10:47
Competition is good, I'm sure PP is influencing GW and vice versa.

The Orange
23-05-2011, 11:30
PP games are more like MtG than a 'game' though. It's more 'I do my uber thing and ... I win or loose' whereas with GW games they are more 'fun'/more of a game. PP is more like a CCG with toy soliders

I've found it far more tactical then 40k ever was with a lot more planning required. And no it's not all about weather or not your "Uber thing" worked or not.

Thanatos_elNyx
23-05-2011, 11:40
I don't necessarily think the MtG comparison is insulting. If GW's games had as tight a ruleset as MtG it would be a much better game.

While admittedly I haven't played Magic in years, things like GK whose abilities affect Plasma Weapons.
If this was Magic all the cards that used Plasma would have a keyword called Plasma so you know it affects it.

Max_Killfactor
23-05-2011, 11:41
I tried for years to get my nerdy (mtg players, wow players, d&d players) workmates into 40k or WFB, only one made the leap. After about 1 month of trying Warmachine, I got 5 of them to start up.

We play regularly after work. The smaller army size and battleboxes were a key factor in getting them into it.

Volchek
23-05-2011, 13:14
PP is having an effect on GW.

At the LFGS WFB, 40K, and WarmaHordes have dedicated nights scheduled. On the WFB and 40K nights you might get a handful of players. On the Warmahordes night it's standing room only with all of the table space being used. I've gone in on the 40K nights and not been able to scrounge up a single game while at the same time there might be 2-3 WarmaHordes games going...on the 40K night!

Llew
23-05-2011, 13:50
I don't think it's unfair to compare PP to MtG. Both are designed with tight rule sets and a big part of the game is playing to those rules and looking for combinations and synergies. Personally, I think that's a strength of the game for people who want a very tactical, intense game. The downside is that synergistic games require a lot higher learning curve to really play well, and player experience does factor into it quite a bit.

It's still very tactical and requires more ability to think on-the-fly than GW games. It's aimed at competitive gamers who don't want to argue about badly-worded rules and broken, untested combos.

GW may or may not be affected by PP, but they sure should be. Right now, other companies are putting out far better games than GW does and that's going to hurt them. A good rule set, that's focused on being a good game not just a marketing tool, will help sell the minis too.

Okuto
23-05-2011, 14:06
Warmachine was exploded at my store...but we still have a healthy does of fantasy and 40k players....easier to get a game of warmachine in though......I've let to get in as I wanna finish my jerries in Flames of war first

xxRavenxx
23-05-2011, 14:18
GW's miscast rate is far higher than PP's

The difference being that while GW may create more miscast models, they do an amazing job of finding them, and stopping them getting out. (99% accuracy or higher, I'd say).

PP in europe, I'd say they'd be lucky to claim that 90% of their models coming out were full and correct.

Three people did a warmachine army in my store last year, for each of them:

A titan gladiator came in a titan canoneer's box.

A praetorian had a head missing.

A box of cataphracts came without banners.

A demo corp model had no hand on his maul, due to miscast.

Draigo had half a leg.

Two men at arms had no faces.

A cygnar jack had no arm.

Six nyss came with only 3 pairs of arms.

A squad of trenchers came without bases.

Half the boxed sets came with missing cards.



Its a hefty list. Our supplyer got so fed up of phonecalls asking for parts, as he gave us a phonenumber and email address for the company who assembles the boxed sets, and told us to bug them instead.

I like the game. I like the models. (Well, some of them... some are butt ugly). But the quality control is disastrous in places...

Kalandros
23-05-2011, 15:44
I have to disagree on this point. GW's models for metal are sculpted relatively flat with far more parts than PP models. They are designed with quick and easy moldmaking in mind so the moldmakers don't have to spend too much time sorting out the layup. Everything is standardized so the process goes quickly.

GW's parting lines where two halves meet have much wider gaps as well, the parts just don't go together as well as PP parts.

The reason behind this is the initial layup in the molds. GW only has one mastering process where the model goes into the master mold in one orientation, then get pressed into the production mold in the same orientation so there is considerable "flattening" of the parts.

I can't tell you how PP does it, NDA and all that, but they take those things into account and compensate for the part dis-figuration.

I also have to say that PP models are sculpted with more dynamic poses and can be very difficult to make a mold of and cast properly.


Okay, I'm sorry but there is no dynamic in PP models, sure there are capes in the wind and some stances, but overall, they are too static and too few difference poses - so the same infantry unit will have many duplicates, while with Plastic kits from GWshop, you can customize with ease, each model in a unit of 30 to look entirely different.

The quality of Games Workshop far surpasses that of Privateer Press, even in their metal models. There's really no contest.

Also I quite enjoy the irony of this PP model I have "Monk of the Order of the Fist" doing a high Kick move.

Just compare the 1 year old River Troll plastic kit to anything PP makes and yeah... GWShop is leagues ahead.
Look at Gorbad Ironclaw's model - that is an awesome piece of art, compared to any of the PP characters, Gorbad is also many years ahead and that model is quite a few years old.

Picklechu
23-05-2011, 15:45
So you mean variation in poses, not necessarily dynamism of each pose?

Kalandros
23-05-2011, 15:50
So you mean variation in poses, not necessarily dynamism of each pose?

You can easily make more dynamic poses when you have a easier time converting them. And honestly, dynamism also requires coherence.

http://privateerpress.com/files/products/the-protectorate-of-menoth/units/idrian-skirmisher-unit.png

That unit, that boxed set, already has a repeating model and it just doesn't go together to make a coherent unit, they're all doing different things, 2 are all "YAY LOOK AT US" 2 are being Sneaky and 2 are firing their weapons.

That's just not really smart.

None of them are being dynamic at all - they're not ready with their swords to strike, they're not in mid-swing, etc.

All the Jacks and most Beasts are also not very dynamic at all.

Thanatos_elNyx
23-05-2011, 16:05
I really don't like the Warjacks, but the Beasties in Hordes look awesome.

ashc
23-05-2011, 17:53
Horses for courses. Whatever suits you. What I don't like with Warmachine is the 'high and mightier than thou' attitude that comes with some who have moved from GW to Warmachine (no idea why but it does seem more prevalent with that game system).

Asensur
23-05-2011, 18:19
It's a shame that the official distributor of PP in Spain (Edge Entertaiment) ended support in my country a couple of years ago. Can't play as good with english material against other spanish players (too many complaints and "traduction" issues).

Well, at least we have Infinity and Anima Tactics (2 national products :)), aswell as Hell Dorado (French maybe?).

Damien 1427
23-05-2011, 18:50
Maybe it's because they realize what fools they've been and how great things are on the other side of the fence so they are trying to help the rest of you take the red pill. :D

I tried the red pill. It looks nice, don't get me wrong, and if red pills are your thing you won't find a better red pill going. But I don't like red pills, myself.

What I mean to say is that whilst the game is a great and tight system, it's everything I don't want in a wargame. If I was a competitive gamer, I'd be all over it. But I'm not. And since the background leaves me cold, I found it very hard to get into. Tried, two, three times now? Just isn't for me.

Will say the fanboyism over particular wargames manufacturers is pretty tiresome. Not as bad as the slap-fights over 4th Edition D&D/Pathfinder, but still, pretty boring all said and done.

SunTzu
23-05-2011, 18:56
What I mean to say is that whilst the game is a great and tight system, it's everything I don't want in a wargame. ... And since the background leaves me cold, I found it very hard to get into.

Will say the fanboyism over particular wargames manufacturers is pretty tiresome.

This, for me too. I'm sure Warmahordes is lovely, and everything. I'm not claiming that any particular other wargame is necessarily "better" than Warmahordes. I don't feel remotely inclined to start any arguments over who produces better models, or better rulebooks; it's just that personally, for me, entirely speaking about matters of opinion, Warmahordes doesn't appeal to me at all. There are a handful of models I quite like, but not a single faction, and I don't find the fluff remotely appealling.

Yet the local indy wargaming store is full of people who can't wait to tell you how evil GW are and how PP are like so much better. And I'm like... really? That's nice. I'm actually not that keen on GW any more, I won't be spending any more money on GW models for the forseeable future, but I really don't give a crap about PP or Warmahordes, either, thanks, no mater how much you bang on about it. Can't we all just do our thing and enjoy it, and leave the inferiority/superiority complexes at the door?

Hellfury
23-05-2011, 19:11
It looks like PP are not foolish enough to let a great opportunity pass them by:

Bah look at PP's post below mine for the link.

Ronin[XiC]
23-05-2011, 19:20
Still amazing :)
I might get one.

Hellfury
23-05-2011, 19:26
Our 10 year anniversary promotions were thought of and developed long before we heard of GW's move towards resin. The announcement has nothing to do with GW.

I understand that. But you still have to admire the timing though.

Tlotsqi
23-05-2011, 19:38
It's a shame that the official distributor of PP in Spain (Edge Entertaiment) ended support in my country a couple of years ago. Can't play as good with english material against other spanish players (too many complaints and "traduction" issues).

Well, at least we have Infinity and Anima Tactics (2 national products ), aswell as Hell Dorado (French maybe?).

It's another great difference between PP and GW, PP hasn't a great interest in the foreign markets, GW translate its products and that's why it has reached so many people. PP loose a lot of opportunities, Matt Wilson already said that translation is too expensive, and even multilingual people not necessarily speak english as second(or more) tongue. Add to this that people prefer to read in their own tongue, and you'll know why it's hard to convert players in my country.

Hell Dorado is no more completly french, only the designers, game conceptors and sculptors are french, the company has been sold to the guys who makes Anima tactics (Cipher studio).

Night Bearer
23-05-2011, 19:43
Horses for courses. Whatever suits you. What I don't like with Warmachine is the 'high and mightier than thou' attitude that comes with some who have moved from GW to Warmachine (no idea why but it does seem more prevalent with that game system).
That's the religious convert syndrome typical of any fanboi-ism. :shifty:

I didn't mean to start any kind of "which is better" thread with my OP. What I was really getting on is if GW is actually responding to what someone else is doing.

What I mean is, I still feel like GW fundamentally doesn't respect its competition in the sense of seeing anyone as much of a genuine threat. Call it a combination of market share, IP awesomeness, decades of previous failures at competition against them, and simple arrogance. I know many speculate PP is a real threat now, and I've heard ex-GW studio staff state that GW is or was genuinely concerned about the popularity of Flames of War, but I honestly don't think they truly are worried about anyone.

Having said that, this past year was a bit novel in what I've heard GW being compared over. Usually it's prices and rules balance issues. But as I mentioned in my first post, there were a lot of people - even people wholly in the GW camp - who on their own initiative would bring up or comment on the fact that PP was able to update two whole systems of rules (core rules and armybooks), do so in a relatively open testing manner (players got to give feedback), and then release these new books in roughly a year's time, and on top of that release books that were full-color, nicely designed, and even with hardback editions.

It really seemed like even the local GW fans were a bit annoyed that the "wave" style release GW does drags down how fast they can release the books - or at least that being the perception.

Anyhoo, rambling aside, I guess I'm still puzzled by the hardcover-only approach GW's taken with the 8th edition WHFB armybooks, and coupled with how relatively faster recent book output has been, I guess it kinda feels like GW's almost trying to "imitate" PP with full-color books and a slightly faster output. *shrugs*

Lars Porsenna
23-05-2011, 19:56
I would hesitate to say they are trying to "imitate" PP, but responding to the competition may be on-key.

As a model builder, I recall when Tamiya (who had been a dominant player in the 1/35 scale armor market since its inception -- they "invented" the scale) started to feel the pinch from Italeri, and really kicked up their game, releasing much better and higher quality models. Were they trying to "imitiate" Italeri, or merely responding to market competition?

Damon.

Hellfury
23-05-2011, 20:06
Timing? It's a 10 year anniversary. We knew this day was coming for a long time, what we didn't know was what GW was going to announce.

Some people will find coincidences and conspiracies everywhere.:confused:

Dude, you I think you are reading far more into what I wrote than intended.

I will calmly apologize for any disruption to your company, your person, and anyone else you may or may have not come into contact with in the past 3 decades that I may have caused ill will towards with my post.

See? Not cool to get so reactive over such things.

There is no conspiracy there is no coincidence, there is just a happenstance timeliness to the anniversary sale that PP planned 85 years ago after GW made fools of themselves.

Does this describe it better, or am I going to be accused of baby rape now?

TimLeeson
23-05-2011, 20:11
Heh, I do like PP as a company - I think they run the business far better, but like GW, they just dont have any models I like. Nothing non-humanoid/weird/squiggly - if they did I would likely jump in headfirst and not look back. I would love to see them bring out a faction that has a "steampunk dalek" feel to it. Hovering steampunk machines and stuff..

loveless
23-05-2011, 20:46
Frankly I'd like to see a lot more of GW's competitors taking advantage of this "Finecast Weekend *cough*with added price increase*cough*"

I noticed some of my web retailer newsletters were putting a bit heavier advertising on non-GW products right alongside the GW ones. There's a good portion of me that expects other sales/deals to show up before the weekend.

Now's the ideal time to lasso in new customers for GW's competitors. GW's pricing schemes continue to be puzzling at best. I think GW may have the highest required cost-of-entry into the game right now...the beast is wounded, time for the lions to go in for the kill :p

Wintermute
23-05-2011, 21:22
I've deleted a number of post which were at best, off-topic, and at worst bordering on becoming a flame war.

If I have to remove any similar posts from this thread, I will do more than just delete the posts, I'll issue warnings as well.

Wintermute

Asensur
23-05-2011, 22:25
PP hasn't a great interest in the foreign markets

QFT, outside USA/Canada there is no real interest for Privateer Press to expand frontiers (Legends was the last book they launched in Spanish, for example).

Not wanting to get to Europe is a big mistake for PP. Now there is a great chance to get many followers due to GW's decisions these days.

Nubl0
23-05-2011, 22:36
Dunno about the US but over here in engalnd PP might aswell not exist. Sure you can find clubs that play it often, there is one near me with about 6 regular players but to be honest theres some 60 odd gw gamers in that same area with no real interest because of the (mostly) inferior minis and almost equal starting costs. People that say warmachine is cheaper should really look at the prices. Over here atleast a 35pt list would cost me around about the same as a 2k wfb army (while being much smaller).

The game honestly appeal to different types of people I guess. I really don't understand that try and spread the gospel of warmachine or warhammer, they insist of converting players like the company they buy fromm is a religion.

I myself play both and enjoy both equally btw ;P

golembane
23-05-2011, 23:27
Any company that doesn't pay attention to it's competition will eventually get bested, so I don't think it's unfair to say that it's in GWs best interest to watch their enemies, else they eventually get toppled. Each company has some form of drawback: PP isn't as focused on international sales, Mantic is new and miniature line if still growing, GW... well GW is GW. On the flip side each has a strength the others can draw on to make themselves stronger as well.

PP has a good ruleset, and just like either of the Warhammer rulesets, you will find the most vocal people are those who take the rules far to hardcore or far to casual. The silent majority for any game will be those that just play to play. WarmaHordes gets a bad rep for being overly competitive due to the more hardcore religiously bring 'Page 5' into any conversation.

Right now I don't play Warhammer from burnout and the lack of local opponents, I have my Lizardmen force and my wife has her Vampire Counts, but for the time being we're trying out Kings of War for something a bit different and with a lot less rule bloat. Both of us also have a Warmachine force we break out if we want a more action based battle. We even have Anima Tactics and AT-43 if we really feel 'adventurous'.

In the end, this is still a hobby, and the more alternatives there are, can only end up being a good thing for the customer. You want steampunk then Warmachine is there. Malifaux has your Gothic horror. Mantic and WFB for your fantasy army fixes, ect.

The Custodian
23-05-2011, 23:32
Over here atleast a 35pt list would cost me around about the same as a 2k wfb army (while being much smaller).

Wait, where are you buying your GW models from? Do tell, id really love to know so i can get a cheap WFB army :p

Tlotsqi
23-05-2011, 23:48
The game honestly appeal to different types of people I guess. I really don't understand that try and spread the gospel of warmachine or warhammer, they insist of converting players like the company they buy fromm is a religion.

Personally I play the both (and many other minis games), the pleasure is different, but I must say that enlarge the horizons of some GW's players is really a convertion as they have really a religious relationship with GW.
I mean even when other minis makers have more beautifull and cheaper models, most of the GW's players still buy GW's products even when they're complaining about the age of some ranges or the price increases......
In my VC army there're no GW's giant bats, zombies, specters, banshee, wraith riders, skeletton riders as the minis suck!
But most of the players still buy them as if they had no choice! If it's not religous ardor...

e2055261
24-05-2011, 00:18
Well with what GW's been up to lately with online buying outside Europe and upping prices I wouldn't be the least surprised if they bought out PP and shut the whole thing down. I guess that's how you'll know if PP are getting to GW...

tezdal
24-05-2011, 00:32
I wish more historical companies were "getting to" Games Workshop rather then PP, PP might inspire them to make more overpriced models, while the whole slew of new amazing cheap plastic miniatures out there might inspire them to pull out of the nose dive of ever increasing prices.

Reinholt
24-05-2011, 00:58
Well with what GW's been up to lately with online buying outside Europe and upping prices I wouldn't be the least surprised if they bought out PP and shut the whole thing down. I guess that's how you'll know if PP are getting to GW...

As an aside, on this topic, Privateer Press is a relatively closely held private company. You can't buy them out unless their owners want them to be sold; there are no publicly trades shares, there are no rules about who is allowed to own what % enforced by regulators, and so on.

In short, this can't happen unless PP wants it to, so I don't think this is a real problem. GW has the reverse issue; being public, the company very well could be picked off, especially with as small as their market cap is.

Night Bearer
24-05-2011, 02:16
I would hesitate to say they are trying to "imitate" PP, but responding to the competition may be on-key.

As a model builder, I recall when Tamiya (who had been a dominant player in the 1/35 scale armor market since its inception -- they "invented" the scale) started to feel the pinch from Italeri, and really kicked up their game, releasing much better and higher quality models. Were they trying to "imitiate" Italeri, or merely responding to market competition?

Damon.
"Imitate" was a poor word-choice, you're right.

I'd love to know what GW honestly thought about the other 'big' minis games at the moment. PP is clearly big in a big market - North America (or at least the USA) - but obviously isn't much of a threat yet to Europe. No idea if they consider a historicals game like FOW to be a true competitor (although I'd love to see them take the hint and do Early/Middle/Late War 40k! :D), although an ex-Studio staffer said at some point GW had actually considered doing a ww2 game in response.

I assume (!) that Malifaux is still off their radar. I can't think of anything else really big enough to include in this list.

dancingmonkey
24-05-2011, 07:43
Dunno about the US but over here in engalnd PP might aswell not exist. Sure you can find clubs that play it often, there is one near me with about 6 regular players but to be honest theres some 60 odd gw gamers in that same area with no real interest because of the (mostly) inferior minis and almost equal starting costs.

I respectfully disagree sir.
The UK has a fantastic and booming WM scene. I have three clubs on my doorstep, all of whom provide a fantastic wealth of PP gaming. We have two stores that stock it, we get to go to one and two day tourneys every month (if our better halves let us :( ), we have three podcasts based in the UK devoted to solely PP, I know gamers across the country who play and we have an amazing network, close knit and enjoyable to socialise with. We evn do well abroad, winning the European masters and Irish masters this year (we lost the ETC in the UK).

Look at the UK masters. 100 tickets went on sale and sold out in 18 hours. They have added more spaces to deal with demand. Each year the UK masters has got bigger and bigger.

Where are you based? It might be you have not many local players, but I really think the UK is blooming with PP, and its only getting better as a lot of the "Old Guard" fantasty and 40K players make the switch over.

On the sculpt front, that's subjective. Horses for courses and all that. I think GWs models have advanced technically on a massive scale, but they are souless now. I enjoyed the 90's era of GW for is humour and style.

PP takes a stylised look and runs with it. IF you ever get the chance to meet Bob from Cerberus, get him to give you the back story about how it all came about, its great. There is a reason everything looks the way it does in the IK. The massive shoulder pads and America football player jacks are all intentional! I prefer the look of PP stuff because it has a style and a charm that I find lacking in GW these days. But others will have other opinions. THat;s the wonder of the human species, we're all different.

mulkers
24-05-2011, 08:33
PP Have a special on starter sets on their website, and Mantic are speeding up their release of their sci-fi miniatures.

Myself and a mate just ordered some PP, i can't wait.

I don't think it is just PP that are getting to GW.

e2055261
24-05-2011, 12:05
As an aside, on this topic, Privateer Press is a relatively closely held private company. You can't buy them out unless their owners want them to be sold; there are no publicly trades shares, there are no rules about who is allowed to own what % enforced by regulators, and so on.

In short, this can't happen unless PP wants it to, so I don't think this is a real problem. GW has the reverse issue; being public, the company very well could be picked off, especially with as small as their market cap is.

So maybe PP will buy GW? I hope they raise the southern hemisphere embargo if they do.

eldargal
24-05-2011, 12:28
GW has a revenue of 128 million pounds, PP has a (rumoured) revenue in the low millions of USD. GW are still running a profit and have little debt. They won't be in a position to buy GW out for a very, very long time, if ever.

loveless
24-05-2011, 13:43
GW has a revenue of 128 million pounds, PP has a (rumoured) revenue in the low millions of USD. GW are still running a profit and have little debt. They won't be in a position to buy GW out for a very, very long time, if ever.

Following on this thought, why would they want to buy GW? The stylings of the different IP would clash - not from a content standpoint (that's irrelevant), but from a conceptual standpoint. PP background and gaming is typically character-focused, with bits of fluff supporting interactions between a (relatively) few larger-than-life characters. GW background is more akin to faction-based battles with a few cameos by characters of reknown.

Given that several GW gamers latch onto their "customizable character options" like there's no tomorrow (though the majority of "tournament" lists seem to contain named characters in lieu of custom characters), they likely wouldn't want to adapt to a PP-style of "HQ" choice. Also on that note, the addition of (at least) two games that support customizable characters would reawaken the call for customizable warcasters/warlocks - something I doubt the PP Staff want to have to sit and explain away once again.

Short version: the games themselves would clash under one roof, with one having unwanted effects on another.

eldargal
24-05-2011, 13:49
Yup, it seems quite an absurd proposition. I don't really see this hobby market as a zero-sum competition anyway, people act like GW and PP are in a fight to the death or something.

Bodysnatcher
24-05-2011, 18:56
Does anyone else get a Microsoft versus Apple vibe off all the GW vs PP stuff?

Llew
24-05-2011, 18:58
No, because in Microsoft vs. Apple, they were both easy to dislike. ;)

loveless
24-05-2011, 19:04
Does anyone else get a Microsoft versus Apple vibe off all the GW vs PP stuff?

Nah. Both Microsoft and Apple acknowledged that competition existed. GW does not.

Also, neither company's marketing campaign is based on bashing the competition while stating none of their own positives.

Privateer seems to call out how awesome their stuff is in relation to their other products - stuff like "we've never done this in Warmachine before"

GW seems to call out how awesome their stuff is in relation to everything else that existed, does exist, or will exist, ever - stuff like "10 plastic elves for $42 is an awesome deal! LOOK AT THE DETAIL! LOOK AT IT! GIVE US YOUR MONEY!"

Okay, that was a bit much :p

scarletsquig
24-05-2011, 19:34
PP games are more like MtG than a 'game' though. It's more 'I do my uber thing and ... I win or loose' whereas with GW games they are more 'fun'/more of a game. PP is more like a CCG with toy soliders

Agreed, it's the main reason I don't play it... I can't keep up with learning how X model must use X buff on X model to create X combo while keeping in mind that that enemy model over there might use X rule to counter X part of my plan and coming up with my own counter-plan to prepare for that eventuality.

I've seen it being played and get the impression that you practically need an encyclopaedia of all the special rules for all the models in your head before you can start to play well.

It's definitely CCG-style play, and I don't really like CCGs. There is a whole load of people who do though, and PP has successfully converted a massive amount of that crowd over to gaming with miniatures. It's not just ex-GW gamers that play, I think warmachine appeals to a lot of people who just want a good, solid game.

The miniatures are just eye candy on top of the quality of PP's games, which are the company's main selling point, and something which they get absolutely perfect.

GW takes the opposite approach, considering the models to be their main selling point, and the rules merely something that enables you to buy more models.

I think PP are on to the smart money there. Game > models.

Wargaming is ultimately about creating an experience, playing the game with your friends. If the models are a bit pants, you can still have that experience... if the game is bad, then you can't.

The *game* is the core. That's the primary thing that GW are getting wrong.

Sectux
24-05-2011, 19:38
Does anyone else get a Microsoft versus Apple vibe off all the GW vs PP stuff?

Nope, because bill gates owns 30% of apple shares...

Anarnaxe
24-05-2011, 19:39
GW seems to call out how awesome their stuff is in relation to everything else that existed, does exist, or will exist, ever - stuff like "10 plastic elves for $42 is an awesome deal! LOOK AT THE DETAIL! LOOK AT IT! GIVE US YOUR MONEY!"

Okay, that was a bit much :p

No, no, that seems about right.

Voss
24-05-2011, 20:01
Its odd, though, my experience with PP games has always been a 'get models on the table and have fun' vibe, while the warhammers have always had serious peaks and troughs of enjoyment. Sometimes its fun, other times, its gritting teeth through the latest backwards rules and unbalanced books.

Or worse, the inexplicable background changes, which I have yet to even vaguely comprehend. Whether its Dark Angels retcons or making Slann servants of the Old Ones instead of their degenerate descendents, I can't begin to grasp how changing little (or big) things in the background draws more people into the game or keeps them playing.

grimkeeper
24-05-2011, 21:03
GW has moved away from the customizable character options towards the Super Uber Special Character with their bolt on army changes,which seem to suck much of the individuality out of list building.

Rated_lexxx
27-05-2011, 17:56
I have watched a lot of warmahorde games. The game doesn't interest me for a couple of reason, but I still think it can be a good for a faction of wargammers.

The thing I have noticed most about warmahordes is both armies charge up the middle and that is where the game pretty much stops moving. You have a little dancing but it seems most play stops in the middle. Is this true for other people or is the way my local gamers play.

Competition is great and I hope GW gets there act in gear and streamline there rules, and make the rules more concise and clear, because of warmahordes.

I see PP at there top right now. The questions is can they keep it going or get better or have the peaked?

ForgottenLore
27-05-2011, 18:34
The thing I have noticed most about warmahordes is both armies charge up the middle and that is where the game pretty much stops moving. You have a little dancing but it seems most play stops in the middle. Is this true for other people or is the way my local gamers play.

See, that is what I have noticed about 40K.

Don't play Warmahordes myself so I don't know about that.

frozenwastes
27-05-2011, 20:10
In both games, the poor players rush towards the middle and then go pretty static.

Anarnaxe
27-05-2011, 21:18
I got into WarmaHordes after speaking to several veteran players and having a couple of games. The biggest draw is that no one knows who is going to win until either the Caster/Lock is dead, or the objectives have been met at the end of the game. But when was the last game of 40k or Fantasy anyone played that they didn't know who was going to win going into turn 3?

Because you have smaller forces and units, you have to be more strategic with what you have. WarmaHordes has a certain surprise factor to it that GW's games lost a long time ago, if someone said that they were bringing an Empire army, for example, you might be able to guess what most of the army will be made up of before it hits the table. Someone says they're bringing a Trollblood army, then you might have a hard time no matter what list you might be able to come up with.

Unless you've played a couple of games, you can't really compare it or judge it against anything else.

loveless
27-05-2011, 21:24
See...the whole "Oh, I can predict the winner!" aspect of 40K/Fantasy is due to people playing "Kill all the other guys" instead of scenarios. I've pulled wins and draws from deepest despair in 40K when it was an objective mission. (Mind, I've pulled far more miraculous wins from Hordes due to some well-aimed archery :p).

Aeron
28-05-2011, 20:38
I think it's an American vs British thing!

Alot of people have an attitude of GW as the faceless Imperialist corp and PP is the friendly neighborhood rebel sticking it to the man!! PP is the underdog!

It doesnt help that most players are American (ive heard Austrailia is doing okay also) The rest of the gamers under GW umbrella cannot say one way or the other due to it being a relative unkown in Europe....why dont they target abroad more??

...okay a few tournys in the uk :) When I was working in a factory a few months back I was talking to some of the guys rather randomly and 6-7 out of the 9 around the table said they knew off or used to play Warhammer. A crappy factory in a bloody poor area of the UK and it's a known brand. Alot of people have played it or crossed paths with warhammer at some time if their life here - at least until they discover alcohol :evilgrin:

It'll take years for PP to get that market awarness.

Also I wish you could customise your warcasters/warjacks but I know PP is very much against this idea...seems a shame as although the rules to look complex (so much to remember) they do look really really well thought out and refreshingly different - Ive been watching youtube videos about the mechanics of the game all day and must admit the rules are a shining becon of light and seem it's strongest selling point (imo) :cool:

Nate.

Jack Spratt
28-05-2011, 22:24
You know, the quality difference IS there.
Games Workshop's product quality is, so far, incredibly better than anything Privateer Press has managed to produce.
PP has a better gaming system

This could not be more wrong imo. Not only are the quality of the models better at PP, the design is much much more original. If you know anything about Tolkiens world then you know WFB is one big rip off (with a few minor exeptions). When it comes to 40 k, then yes Space Marines are an original design when they were conceived in the late 80'ies - 30 + years ago. I repeat 30 + years ago.

Jack Spratt
28-05-2011, 22:35
PP games are more like MtG than a 'game' though. It's more 'I do my uber thing and ... I win or loose' whereas with GW games they are more 'fun'/more of a game. PP is more like a CCG with toy soliders

THAT is open to serious debate.

The difference imo is that in PP the better gamer is more likely to win. It is a game (Warmahorde) of finesse and presicion. If the other guy is better than you or just has a better plan, then you loose fast. In WFB/40k the outcome of the battel depends more (as in more than when you play warmahorde) on other factors like match-up and it is a slower game with more dicerolls and a much larger number of models.

Jack Spratt
28-05-2011, 22:47
Nah. Both Microsoft and Apple acknowledged that competition existed. GW does not.

Also, neither company's marketing campaign is based on bashing the competition while stating none of their own positives.

Privateer seems to call out how awesome their stuff is in relation to their other products - stuff like "we've never done this in Warmachine before"

GW seems to call out how awesome their stuff is in relation to everything else that existed, does exist, or will exist, ever - stuff like "10 plastic elves for $42 is an awesome deal! LOOK AT THE DETAIL! LOOK AT IT! GIVE US YOUR MONEY!"

Okay, that was a bit much :p

This man speaks the truth.

Lewis
28-05-2011, 23:33
I think it's an American vs British thing!
It doesnt help that most players are American (ive heard Austrailia is doing okay also) The rest of the gamers under GW umbrella cannot say one way or the other due to it being a relative unkown in Europe....why dont they target abroad more??
Nate.

I don't know man, judging by your location there's a major PP stockist about 9 miles from your house. Firestorm Games has a comprehensive range of PP and runs some seriously major tournaments. This is increasingly true of most people in reach of a major city.

Also games companies don't really "target" anywhere. it's not like they have billboard or TV adverts. It's all word of mouth if you don't go fro the GW "a store in every shopping centre" approach" and PP's got the word of mouth going on pretty well over here. Two of the five major PP podcasts are British for example with a third (from Wales as it goes) on its way.

MagosHereticus
29-05-2011, 04:06
Competition is good, I'm sure PP is influencing GW and vice versa.

you mean PP saw GW and went "GW created a gap in the market for small skirmish battles by canning necro and mord"

Lewis
29-05-2011, 10:08
As someone pointed out recently 50 pt WM/H armies are actually similar in size to second ed 40k armies. The gap is bigger than just Necromunda and Mordheim, its where their whole futuristic line used to be!

Aladin_sane
29-05-2011, 13:48
I hope GW's recent changes haven't been because of some sort of PP pressure, the recent price jumps means I cannot realistically afford a 40k or Fantasy army which deeply saddens and annoys me. Although, price jumps aren't the only reason, since picking up PP about 3 years ago, it's the only thing I play now and that's mainly based on a much more enjoyable game mechanic.

Aesthetically, I think GW pitch PP to the post overall. Yet PP have some of the best models I've ever seen: Drago, 2010 Nemo sculpt, Testament of Menoth, eMorghoul and eLylyth to name a few.

I wish I still had the urge to play Fantasy/40k since I'm always reading BL novels and love the models, but the price and dull game mechanics are keeping me away.

Lewis
29-05-2011, 21:45
I always compare PP to the attractive nice girl who finally convinces you to leave that nightmare girlfriend who you've been with for ages but who you couldn't imagine leaving for anyone else until the new girl turns up.

I found GW games a bit turgid but I only really noticed this after I tried Warmachine.

Demonborger
30-05-2011, 14:41
PP is better than GW in every way except IP - the Warhammer and 40K IP will be solid across a range of genres and mediums but the gaming side will likely decline and be replaced by companies such as PP who focus on fun affordable games.

Anarnaxe
30-05-2011, 14:46
Except Games Workshop has had about 35 years to build up its IP, compared to PP's 10. So in that respect, you can forgive Privateer Press.

_L_
30-05-2011, 15:19
I don't understand all this 'PP is affordable' nonsense. The models are just as, IF NOT MORE expensive than GW models. The fact you use less models (even though nothing is stopping you from playing small point games in Fantasy and 40k) is the most ridiculous justification for "cheaper" that I've ever heard!

PS- I actually really like the look of PP and am considering starting a force, this isn't a one or the other debate, both can be good and both being good is only good for the hobby at large.

But don't claim it's cheaper, because it's just not true. The fact that PP is coming out with "unleashed" and so forth show that they are heading towards bigger games anyway.

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 15:32
35 is a full game i nWarmachine

1000 points is not a full game of 40k.

People play 1500 or rather 1850. You can also play with sticks and stones. You can only compare costs for what is normal/common.

_L_
30-05-2011, 15:52
It makes no sense though. Nothing is stopping you from playing smaller games of 40k or fantasy. Saying "It's what everyone plays, therefore I have to" is silly.

My local store frequently runs 500/750 battles and it would have to be a pretty sad bunch of players to refuse to play someone if they turned up with a smaller list and it's not something I have ever seen happen. The idea that the game is more balanced at higher point levels has alsoo NEVER been proven. It's another internet "FACT" and something I have not personally experienced or seen over the hundreds of games I've played and watched.

It just doesn't stand with me. The models are the same price. THE PLAYERS decide on how many to use, nobody else. If you don't think you have that power you need to take a good long look at yourself in the mirror.

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 16:21
"opponents" stop me from playing 10 point games in GW Land.
Sure, you CAN play 500/750 battles, but tournaments and the majority of normal games are 1500-2000 points. Thus one has to compare the price of a typical army.

I can demand a 1 point game! I'm that strong. Unfortunately noone will play me then.

_L_
30-05-2011, 16:29
;5546876']I can demand a 1 point game! I'm that strong. Unfortunately noone will play me then.

That's a valid point. :rolleyes: Taking something to its most extreme doesn't invalidate the point that was made. You can play smaller points that would cost you the same, if not much less than a PP game.

Tournaments are completely optional and almost entirely player created, they are not "normal" as you call it, therefore by the very limits you have placed they are irrelevant when it comes to comparions.

The simple fact remains (and it is a fact) PP Models generally cost the same, if not more than GW models.

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 16:36
I can play fully legal 6 point warmachine games that cost £10. Try that with 40k...
Tournaments are normal for thousends of players. Most games in Germany follow the restrictions of one or another tournament (point size, units etc.)

PP Models are usually a bit cheaper and you need less models. Thus the hobby is much cheaper.

10 Cygnar Trenchers = £36
2x5 Space Marine Veterans = £44

GW has the advantage of plastic boxes thus some troops are cheaper. Compare the metal miniatures and PP is a lot cheaper.

_L_
30-05-2011, 16:45
You could put a Necromunder or Mordhiem gang together for not much nore than that.

Why do you need to compare materials? Those 10 marines will cost you £23.00. You are picking and choosing the terms.

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 16:48
Necromunda and Mordheim are cheaper than Warmachine.
So? That's not an argument supporting fantasy/40k vs warmachine, does it?

I already said that plastic is a bit better for GW, but for many people material IS a reason to buy a certain miniature.


Again: Typical costs for warmachine is A LOT less than typical costs for 40k/fantasy.

_L_
30-05-2011, 17:04
;5546916']That's not an argument supporting fantasy/40k vs warmachine, does it?

This isn't about 40k Fantasy V Warmachine. It's about PP v GW.

Again: PP models are not cheaper than GW models.

sirspen
30-05-2011, 17:05
I dont know if I would call GW cheaper at all:

Lich Lord Asph (http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/cryx/warcasters/lich-lord-asphyxious): $24.99
vs.
Hive Guard (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=&prodId=prod1160043a): $24.75

Epic Skaare (http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/cryx/warcasters/skarre-queen-of-the-broken-coast): 16.99
vs.
Dante (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=&prodId=prod1160021a): $18.25

Goreshade the Cursed (http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/cryx/warcasters/goreshade-the-cursed): $22.99
vs.
Broodlord (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=&prodId=prod1160046a): $24.74

Exemplar Cinerators (http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/the-protectorate-of-menoth/units/exemplar-cinerators): $44.99
vs.
Terminators (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440272a&prodId=prod1060028): $50.00

With all of these examples, I think PP gives you a bit more for your money. Even when we compare the 2 plastic boxes (Exemplar and Terminators), even though the Exemplar are larger and have a greater degree of detail, they are still $5 cheaper.

I do think though, that PP will end up being more expensive overall (if you want to worn the whole range of an army), as they will continue to release new models for each army with each new book. This will equate to a much larger range than GW has. Hell, as of right now, Cryx has 13 casters, 20 'jacks, 15 units, 6 unit attachments, 12 solos, and 1 battle engine, for a total range of 67 while Orcs and Goblins, one of the largest ranges GW produces, has 31 lords/heros, 11 core, 10 special, 7 Rare for a total range of 59 (I'm trying to leave out re-sculpts/alternate sculpts of the same model, though I am counting Epic casters as they are so different from the basic caster).

frozenwastes
30-05-2011, 17:05
My local store frequently runs 500/750 battles and it would have to be a pretty sad bunch of players to refuse to play someone if they turned up with a smaller list and it's not something I have ever seen happen. The idea that the game is more balanced at higher point levels has alsoo NEVER been proven. It's another internet "FACT" and something I have not personally experienced or seen over the hundreds of games I've played and watched.

But you actually do need less models for the full game experience. Why is this so hard to understand? Model cost X number of models = total cost of miniatures.

You can say until you're blue in the face that 40k and WFB don't actually require more models than Warmachine, but the rulebook disagrees. The very first time it mentions points sizes:

"A limit of 1,500 or 2,000 points per side produces a well·balanced game that can be concluded in a few hours."
-- wh40k 5th ed rulebook, p86

It goes on to say that 500 point games are also fun, as are 3000 ones if you have all day. But it does present 1500 and 2000 as the norm. And even talks about it as well balanced.

So while you can play tiny games and claim that therefore warmachine is as expensive, you would be playing the game in a way other than what the designers intended for points size for a balanced game. And if you disagree with the balance thing, you're not disagreeing with me, but with the 40k designers.

That said, what's going on at your local store is the right way to do things. One of GW's issues is that the model count has grown so high for the full game (as per the rulebook's recommendations). Simply playing with less and accepting that you're not getting the full/balanced experience and still having fun is definitely the way to go.

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 17:07
This isn't about 40k Fantasy V Warmachine. It's about PP v GW.

Again: PP models are not cheaper than GW models.


*facepalm*

Grind is cheaper than Mordheim or Necromunda.

lol this is pointless. See the post above please.

_L_
30-05-2011, 17:22
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that when it comes to the price the respective companies charge for their minis PP isn't cheaper? If those companies hand out a piece of paper that says "You need to buy a million of these guys to make a unit" is beside the point.

When I walk into a shop, then walk out of that shop with 5 detailed minis from each company, I've spent roughly the same amount of cash.

PP 5 minis = £20
GW 5 minis = £20

^ Is this not simple enough to understand?

Reinholt
30-05-2011, 17:23
I think if you are going to compare GW and PP you have to take the games into account, beyond just the models. After all, don't both companies produce both games and models?

Thus, with that in mind, I would say it shakes out like this:

1. GW and PP models are about the same cost.

2. PP games, in your average gaming environment or tournament, require significantly less models than GW games.

3. Therefore, on a company to company comparison under standard conditions considering the entire product, PP is cheaper than GW overall.

I don't think any of those are debatable. You can argue that there are exceptions (ranging from the basic like "play smaller 40k / larger warmachine games" to the ridiculous "my 40k army was free because I stole the entire thing") that people will raise, but that's the thing - they are exceptions, not rules. If you look at the average experience instead of corner cases, it's a pretty clear comparison.

This is definitely a factor. I think the other factor is the dramatic difference in the way the two companies relate to their customers; GW is almost adversarial in tone, whereas PP does communicate pretty broadly and goes out of their way to include customers at times.

larabic
30-05-2011, 17:24
I think PP greatest strength is GW's greatest weakness, books. PP releases a WM or Hordes book and each faction gets a new caster, beast/jack unit and solo. Also they follow a pattern this one is cavalry based this one is named units, GW makes people wait for so long to get a new book or units that they usually fall out of favor because they can't play a competitive game, even a game just for fun.

I have 2 factions for Hordes and 2 armies for fantasy and my Hordes armies by far keep me busier then my fantasy, i play Skaven and Dwarves, well i finished all the new skaven stuff for the most parts and my Dwarf's haven't seen any attention from GW in what is probably close to a decade, the last models i bought for my GW army was AoW Slayers for petes sake!

Gw needs to get everyone involved and avoid power creep by releasing books faster or several in one bunch, or give campaign settings that introduce new units, items, characters that are legal all the time not just for the campaign! And what ever you do don't change the format of the books like they have with the last few books! The orcs and TK books have been completely different from books published in this new edition like Skaven and DE, the TK / Orc books have had the magic item stripped away down to 2 pages and given most of the items to special characters, if you want to do that fine, i like the idea, but do it across the board please!

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 17:26
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that when it comes to the price the respective companies charge for their minis PP isn't cheaper? If those companies hand out a piece of paper that says "You need to buy a million of these guys to make a unit" is beside the point.

When I walk into a shop, then walk out of that shop with 5 detailed minis from each company, I've spent roughly the same amount of cash.

PP 5 minis = £20
GW 5 minis = £20

^ Is this not simple enough to understand?

And do that a couple of times until you have a standard sized army.

You need 50 blistesr/boxes for 40k and 20 blisters/boxes for Warmachine.

Thus Warmachine is cheaper.

Is is that hard to understand?

_L_
30-05-2011, 17:42
I suppose people just look at things in different ways.

I'm in the wargaming hobby. I buy miniatures of various material, quality and cost from a range of manufacturers. I play games with these various miniatures that are again, provided by a range of manufacturers.

When I look at a webstore, I see the model and the price. The value of that miniature is determined by the quality of that miniature, not the abstract rules written for that miniature by a company. I'm not a slave to the written word (that has no real material value) the same way as some people obviously are.

When I go onto the GW or PP website to look at the models, I think "Hey that's cool and it costs 'x' for 'y'. The point is that x and y are pretty much the same regardless of what site I go on.

In my view, written rules do not provide monetary value to a miniautre. They provide in-game value, that is it.

So when a person claims that PP is a cheaper alternative to GW I find it strange. Especially because the only way PP is cheaper is because the abstract rules and game mechanic which have no real world value deem the models to be stonger in-game.

These people have obviously bought into whatever line, whatever company has decided to give them. :rolleyes: Buy the models for what they are, models. If you're buying them for rules, your better off just using rocks, then all games cost the same.

frozenwastes
30-05-2011, 17:43
I'm willing to accept that on an individual model basis, PP's metals are more expensive than GW's plastics. That much is pretty much straight math. Now compare PP's metals to GW's metals (or Finecast now) and PP is half the price.

The biggest difference:

In PP's games, the rules give the models value. In GW games, they reduce the value. I can get 10 grunts for a PP game and they're going to be an important part of the game experience no matter what they are. In WFB, those 10 guys are likely going to be pretty meaningless. Infact, they're probably not even going to make up a single maneuver element in the game-- maybe half of one.

In my last game of Warmachine, I fielded Mechanithralls. They're literally the cheapest combat infantry unit in the game. I had 10 of them:
http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/cryx/units/mechanithralls-unit
http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/cryx/units/mechanithralls

Less than $5 per metal miniature. A solid half of them died before they got close to an enemy (that's their job) but they were instramental in protecting what was behind them and they actually tore a heavy warbeast apart once the few that made it got there.

The last time I played 40k, I had these guys:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440079a&prodId=prod900162a

A bit cheaper per model than the mechanithralls, but I had 20 in my regiment rather than 10, so more money for one maneuver element.

They moved up a bit but didn't really accomplish much. The individual models were largely irrelevant. The big group of 20 was hardly relevent.

Then I took the same 20 models and used them as orc monsters in D&D4e. It was an absolute horde in terms of game play. They felt like a dynamic horde.

PP has realized it's about the gaming experience. GW keeps devaluing the experiencing of their models. Every codex and army book rewrite reduces points costs and encourages bigger units. It's gotten to the point where I can spend $70 on a single orc regiment and have it feel like a tiny and insignificant part of my army.

Scammel
30-05-2011, 17:48
PP has realized it's about the gaming experience.

GW has realised it's about the modelling/painting experience. Strokes and folks, but I'm going to have a much better time playing a game if the models I'm having to look at constantly look lovely. PP doesn't really have anything that stuns me as much as GW's stuff has.

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 17:49
GW charges 10x as much for a single character than a same sized infantery model.
GW clearly charges you money for rules.

frozenwastes
30-05-2011, 17:50
In my view, written rules do not provide monetary value to a miniautre. They provide in-game value, that is it.

So when a person claims that PP is a cheaper alternative to GW I find it strange. Especially because the only way PP is cheaper is because the abstract rules and game mechanic which have no real world value deem the models to be stonger in-game.


I actually agree with you here. Except when I actually sit down and play the games.

This thread is about PP getting to GW. One way they have, is that they realized from the word go that the overall experience of the models in the game is what matters. People want their miniatures they bought to feel important in the game.

GW makes miniatures less and less important with each new release and edition. PP doesn't.

scruffyryan
30-05-2011, 17:55
;5547031']GW charges 10x as much for a single character than a same sized infantery model.
GW clearly charges you money for rules.

No, they charge you for time spent sculpting and modeling as well as a premium for the fact that not everyone is going to want that character model so they're going to sell fewer of them despite the fact that the sculpt time and detail is greater than on joe infantry dude from a regiment box.

frozenwastes
30-05-2011, 17:56
GW has realised it's about the modelling/painting experience. Strokes and folks, but I'm going to have a much better time playing a game if the models I'm having to look at constantly look lovely.

Yep.

But when you stick those lovely painted models down on the field and they hardly contribute anything to the game, you'll notice if you then take those same models and play them with a rules set that makes them more important to the outcome of the game. For example, I took some glade riders I had (they were going to be a second unit in my Wood Elf army before I sold it) and rebased them on on 50mm round bases, painted them up like winter elves and used them as Nyss Raptors in hordes. Wow! I never loved those GW models more than when I played them in a Privateer game.

It doesn't matter what our individual preferences are-- GW has decided to go after "craft hobbyists" (as Jervis calls the two thirds of their customers who never play their games). Privateer is interested in gamers being their target market.

In the markets GW is currently struggling in, there seems to be a lot more interest in game playing than model collecting/painting. You can read all sorts of articles about games of every type becoming more socially acceptable and considered less geeky. From euro style board games, to video games to even D&D breaking heavily into the female market. To little facebook games to the Wii to video game parties. Playing games is on the rise.

I think we can see which company is interested in tapping into that macro trend and which is not.

_L_
30-05-2011, 18:02
;5547031']GW charges 10x as much for a single character than a same sized infantery model.
GW clearly charges you money for rules.

:wtf: I never said they didn't. GW are free to do whatever they like, as am I... and when it comes to buying a mini from them I decide on the mini itself, not the rules, even if the company has. That means I buy some and not others. Don't see the point in this.

Just a side note, this isn't completely directed at you, but just because I say PP isn't cheap doesn't mean I'm justifying GW prices and practices. when I comment critically about one company doesn't mean I'm a "fanboy" of the other.

frozen.. I do agree with you on some points but I also tend to think that a lot of PP's so called "gamer centric" practices are merely a by-product of being a newer company. You can't just magic up a line as vast as GW's, but as PP gets more successful and their line increases, so will the game size. Mark my words, it's already happening.

Just one last point to Ronin - If I created a game that only needed one infantry sized mini a side, that mini was worth 10000points and you could add various wargear to him up to a total of 20000points, but that mini cost £100, would you class that as cheaper than GW?

Ronin[XiC]
30-05-2011, 18:02
No, they charge you for time spent sculpting and modeling as well as a premium for the fact that not everyone is going to want that character model so they're going to sell fewer of them despite the fact that the sculpt time and detail is greater than on joe infantry dude from a regiment box.

Just because something is a SC does not mean the miniature has got more detail.

Reinholt
30-05-2011, 18:14
I can't tell if people are trolling or being deliberately obtuse at this point to try to be an internet tough guy.

I think it should be self-evident that some people play mostly for the game rules, some people are mostly interested in the models, and some people like both. If you want to make a narrow argument about one specific aspect of a company's goods, then do so, but understand you are making a narrow and limited argument that is not generally applicable and probably has no real explanatory power. If we are addressing the question of the interaction between PP and GW, you necessarily have to give value to all of the following (and this list is not exhaustive): models, rules, prices (both on a per model and per typical force basis), and company behavior.

After all, there will be segments of the customer base that care about each. If commentary is either "I care about rules only ergo company x is better" or "I care about models only ergo company y is better", you are missing the point; neither of those statements addresses the key issue. What proportion of people are like you? What evidence do you have to back this? What about the people who aren't?

To that end:

For the models drive everything crowd, are you arguing PP cannot impact GW through their gameplay and design?

For the prices crowd, are you are arguing the typical size of games played in the average community and tournament does not differentiate between GW and PP? Are you arguing that average price per comparable model has no impact?

For the gameplay crowd, are you arguing that levels of detail, aesthetics, and non-gaming concerns are irrelevant to both companies and that PP (or GW) could produce lumps of clay as game pieces and it would not impact sales?

The bottom line is that you know the two companies are impacting each other, as people quit games to play other games, expand into new games, and impact the financial statements, recruitment rate, and online dialogue that people have. Strangely enough, the fact that this is even a viable thread tells you that, yes, PP is impacting GW.

_L_
30-05-2011, 18:20
^ I don't think anyone would argue that PP is impacting GW.

Thread closed. :P

Lewis
30-05-2011, 23:22
Just one last point to Ronin - If I created a game that only needed one infantry sized mini a side, that mini was worth 10000points and you could add various wargear to him up to a total of 20000points, but that mini cost £100, would you class that as cheaper than GW?

Is the game any good? If the game was more fulfilling than a game you played with £100 worth of GW models then it would be better value for money.

I think that's the concept that should be advanced here and which you are missing: better value for money. The value of a model is based, I would argue, on the quality of the sculpt and the pleasure that can be derived from its use in the game, which is then set against the cost. Considering models in this way describes the two basic ways in which gamers approach their models and might explain to you why people feel the way they do about their models.

You can say "Oh well you might as well play with rocks" but the simple fact is, if you take the merest glance around this forum, that the experience people have of models is this weird alchemical blend of the aesthetic and the strategic. You have your view but it does not seem to be a widely shared one to me.

sliganian
31-05-2011, 00:23
Okay, I'm sorry but there is no dynamic in PP models, sure there are capes in the wind and some stances, but overall, they are too static and too few difference poses

Have you LOOKED at Yuri the Axe or the Wardog for Khador?
More smooth and natural 'action' in the models that any big-handed GW I YELL ALL THE TIME models.

sliganian
31-05-2011, 00:28
In PP's games, the rules give the models value. In GW games, they reduce the value. I can get 10 grunts for a PP game and they're going to be an important part of the game experience no matter what they are. In WFB, those 10 guys are likely going to be pretty meaningless. Infact, they're probably not even going to make up a single maneuver element in the game-- maybe half of one.
....
PP has realized it's about the gaming experience. GW keeps devaluing the experiencing of their models. Every codex and army book rewrite reduces points costs and encourages bigger units. It's gotten to the point where I can spend $70 on a single orc regiment and have it feel like a tiny and insignificant part of my army.

This is what I found most liberating in the switch over to Warmachine from 40K. EACH model actually MATTERS. In GW games, the models were mostly like anonymous 'wound counters' that were numeric fodder for the melee mechanics.

MagosHereticus
31-05-2011, 06:26
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that when it comes to the price the respective companies charge for their minis PP isn't cheaper? If those companies hand out a piece of paper that says "You need to buy a million of these guys to make a unit" is beside the point.

When I walk into a shop, then walk out of that shop with 5 detailed minis from each company, I've spent roughly the same amount of cash.

PP 5 minis = £20
GW 5 minis = £20

^ Is this not simple enough to understand?

oh im sorry, you pay £20 do you for the privilege of 5 games workshop models, i wish i could but you know what? i would pay £33, guess what i would pay for PP models? HMMMMMMMMMMM?

frozenwastes
31-05-2011, 06:30
This is what I found most liberating in the switch over to Warmachine from 40K. EACH model actually MATTERS. In GW games, the models were mostly like anonymous 'wound counters' that were numeric fodder for the melee mechanics.

You put that really well. In GW games, models usually do feel like anonymous wound counters. Only the characters/lords/heroes usually feel like they matter as much as almost every model in a PP game.

frozenwastes
31-05-2011, 06:45
oh im sorry, you pay £20 do you for the privilege of 5 games workshop models, i wish i could but you know what? i would pay £33, guess what i would pay for PP models? HMMMMMMMMMMM?

With "Screw Canada" pricing (similar to Screw Australia pricing, but not as severe), GW is more expensive on a per model basis on a lot of miniatures. PP ends up competing quite nicely on price.

And because the Canadian dollar has strengthened so much, the cost of PP miniatures (as they're in USD exchanged into CAD) have not gone up very much. There's a local store who has a cygnar chain gun crew that they got when it first came out and it's still the same price as current ones because our currency gains totally covered Privateers two price increases.

GW prices are sometimes better for plastics than Privateers, but not universally. In the UK and Europe, it's universal that GW's models are cheaper than PP's on a per model basis.

_L_
31-05-2011, 07:19
oh im sorry, you pay £20 do you for the privilege of 5 games workshop models, i wish i could but you know what? i would pay £33, guess what i would pay for PP models? HMMMMMMMMMMM?

Meh... and I pay more for things like food, property and clothing than people in N. America. I agree that GW prices are too high for places like N. America and Aus but that is a problem with the system rather than GW alone.

Frankly
31-05-2011, 09:46
PP has been outselling the GW stock at my local shops for the last couple years now. By a wide margin in fact. I know it is anecdotal and therefore hardly empirical data, but from a local perspective, GW may as well be dead.

We're in the same boat, PP is outselling GW atm in all the 3 modelling stores around my area. One owner is in my gaming proup, another turns up every once and a while and the third has contacts with our club and is part of our tournament gaming support network. All want PP pushed alittle bit more at tournaments or at clubs which is a move away from wanting their stores to be known for stocking GW product.

PP gaming has certainly picked up. Partly to do with 4 things. The price of GW atm, game rules, hype and people not getting behind 8th edition WHFB.

MagosHereticus
31-05-2011, 11:45
Meh... and I pay more for things like food, property and clothing than people in N. America. I agree that GW prices are too high for places like N. America and Aus but that is a problem with the system rather than GW alone.

maybe you should import cheaper land, oh wait, that is a completely different and incomparable situation

MagosHereticus
31-05-2011, 11:50
With "Screw Canada" pricing (similar to Screw Australia pricing, but not as severe), GW is more expensive on a per model basis on a lot of miniatures. PP ends up competing quite nicely on price.

And because the Canadian dollar has strengthened so much, the cost of PP miniatures (as they're in USD exchanged into CAD) have not gone up very much. There's a local store who has a cygnar chain gun crew that they got when it first came out and it's still the same price as current ones because our currency gains totally covered Privateers two price increases.

GW prices are sometimes better for plastics than Privateers, but not universally. In the UK and Europe, it's universal that GW's models are cheaper than PP's on a per model basis.

back off i say! chinas economic boom is ours :cheese: seriously im glad canada didnt sink with the usa, it's fun buying usa stuff on the cheap now, i need to get my gaming group together to explore the idea of PP stuff, for the first time im looking outside of GWs produce

Aluinn
31-05-2011, 12:52
I think if you are going to compare GW and PP you have to take the games into account, beyond just the models. After all, don't both companies produce both games and models?

Thus, with that in mind, I would say it shakes out like this:

1. GW and PP models are about the same cost.

2. PP games, in your average gaming environment or tournament, require significantly less models than GW games.

3. Therefore, on a company to company comparison under standard conditions considering the entire product, PP is cheaper than GW overall.

I don't think any of those are debatable. You can argue that there are exceptions (ranging from the basic like "play smaller 40k / larger warmachine games" to the ridiculous "my 40k army was free because I stole the entire thing") that people will raise, but that's the thing - they are exceptions, not rules. If you look at the average experience instead of corner cases, it's a pretty clear comparison.

This is definitely a factor. I think the other factor is the dramatic difference in the way the two companies relate to their customers; GW is almost adversarial in tone, whereas PP does communicate pretty broadly and goes out of their way to include customers at times.

They do not cost anywhere near the same on a per model basis, though, at least not in the U.S. (which, being where PP is from, should be a fair place to make comparison with regards to them). Let's take a quick jaunt over to PP's website, shall we?

I'll just go with the Cygnar models for WM here:

-10 "basic" infantry (i.e. Trenchers, Trencher Commandos) at US $50-55. GW basic infantry units for either FB or 40K are half that or less.

-6 elite/specialized infantry models for between $35 and $43. GW's are $41 for 10 models.

-3 (!) cavalry for $60. GW sell 5 cavalry models for $30.

-Huge monster thing (battle engine) for $85. GW sell things of comparable size (and with many more parts and options) for $50.

So no, you really can't say that PP models are "about the same price". In truth they're around twice as expensive, sometimes a bit more, sometimes a bit less.

Now after you account for the fact that PP games "require" fewer models to play (though GW games do not require that you play at high points values, i.e. a 1,500-point Fantasy battle or a 1,000-point 40K battle are giving you the "complete experience", and if you happen to want to play larger games, that's your deal, not theirs), then maybe the two game systems are of roughly equal cost, or PP may be ever so slightly cheaper, but not by much.

I'm not jumping in here to say that GW can do no wrong: I'm just tired of hearing blatant lies about the costs of these models. PP's models are, frankly, really expensive, and the fact that you may need less should not give them a complete pass--i.e. paying the same price to play the game but getting fewer models is not an equally good deal. GW are actually offering you a better deal with regard to price per model, by a good margin.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying GW are a better company, just to be clear, nor that PP are "gouging" anyone, nor do I make an judgment with regard to which game system anyone should or shouldn't play. If you like PP better, cool. It's just that you pay more for your models.

ashc
31-05-2011, 12:57
but now the question is, are PP models intrinsically 'worth' more in their relevant game system than GW ones?

Aluinn
31-05-2011, 13:08
but now the question is, are PP models intrinsically 'worth' more in their relevant game system than GW ones?

That's again just a question of how many models you need to play the game, albeit differently phrased.

If GW models are about half the cost of PP models (in the U.S., I'm not sure how things may be elsewhere), and you need half as many models to play a PP game, that doesn't make PP models a better deal. It means you're paying roughly the same price to play the game, if you go with PP, but getting half as many models. I understand why this wouldn't bother some people at all; it's half as many models to assemble and paint, after all. But in any estimation of the value of your purchase, you would probably consider getting more models for the same price, all else being equal, a better deal.

If you want to say that GW rules systems make models feel like "wound counters", that's an issue with the system, not the models, and makes no difference in the quality or quantity of model you get for the price you pay. Besides that, it's a hugely subjective statement, and I'm sure if there were any PP-haters around they could argue that basic models in Warmahordes "feel lame" to them, or something.

The idea that you can't separate models from rules is odd, anyway. It's relevant to a discussion of value only in terms of, again, how many models you need to buy in order to play the game, and we've been over that.

Reinholt
31-05-2011, 14:03
You are cherry picking some of the comparisons above...

10 trenchers vs 10 sternguard? 10 wracks?

I have never stated PP models are cheaper. On average, the PP models are the same price as GW metals were and now incrementally cheaper than f-cast.

I have stated that getting to the typically played game levels is cheaper for PP, as that is a simple factual matter. GW could fix that easily, but they haven't.

Anarnaxe
31-05-2011, 14:37
Not to mention that the PP rulebooks contain decent sized army books, allowing you to play proper, equal value games without having to buy the main army book for a given faction (Handy if you're on a budget). And the fact that both their main games are cross compatible means that everyone who plays PP in a given area/club can still have fun, rather than someone having to buy a fantasy army because everyone is playing 40K.

Thats value for money in my book, and makes up for the seemingly higher prices.

loveless
31-05-2011, 14:45
I have stated that getting to the typically played game levels is cheaper for PP, as that is a simple factual matter. GW could fix that easily, but they haven't.

This is pretty much what it breaks down to being.

PP games are set up to work best with single 'caster/'lock games, and still be functional at double 'caster/'lock games. Anything beyond that is a strain on the system, limiting army size if you want it to keep "working" (Note: Unbound is something else entirely, which was my biggest :wtf: for PP since some of the reactions during the Field Tests).

You still get the "cool stuff" factor at low point PP games - Lord Commander Stryker can still do his crazy overboost, Vassals of Menoth can still create massive headaches with Ancilliary Attack and Enliven, and Mage Hunter Assassins can be spinny angels of death at any points level. You don't get that with GW games - you don't get the awesome spells on low level mages (well, if you do, you can't reliably cast them), you can't fit the awesome magic items on your low-point characters, you might not even be able to field a "cool" unit due to FOC requirements and "rules requisite" unit sizes (Yeah, the unit might say 5+ in the Army Book, but you're most likely looking at 20+ before it does anything beyond dying miserably).

It usually takes a 2000 point list in WHFB before I can start taking things that make me go "Hey, check this out!" - which is something I adore doing in games, I love the cool factor. It takes me choosing a Warcaster/Warlock in WM/H to do that same thing. I've got 35 point Reznik, Butcher, and Lylyth lists that ooze ridicu-awesome. I can't manage to do that with a 1000 point WHFB list. (Mind you, I can with 40K, but then I prefer that to WHFB half the time anyway :p)

_L_
31-05-2011, 15:08
For me there is nothing cooler than seeing the massed ranks fantasy provides!

loveless
31-05-2011, 15:26
For me there is nothing cooler than seeing the massed ranks fantasy provides!

I agree that it looks cool. Unfortunately, after the first 2 ranks (i.e., after the first box (or maybe 2 if you're running a horde)), you're just buying wound counters.

I take issue at spending $29-$42 on 10 models that don't do anything other than mark the boundaries of my unit and act as wound counters. To make that affordable, I have to do one of the following:
1) Play Skaven (Island of Blood Skaven half FTW!)
2) Buy Mantic models
3) Find some incredible deals on eBay/bartertown/etc.

With Privateer Press and Warhammer 40K, if I buy a box, every model in that box has the potential to do something. Each one of those Knights Exemplar is going to be able to swing his sword if he gets into combat, every Kabalite Warrior is going to be able to fire their weapon once their squad is in range, and every Grey Knight is going to contribute to the offensive power of the unit.

In Warhammer Fantasy, my second box of White Lions or Grave Guard or what-have-you is just marking out the size of my unit. Even if the 20-man unit gets to melee unscathed, those back 10 aren't doing anything other than adding to SCR and getting taken off as wounds get dealt. This wouldn't be nearly as annoying if they weren't so bloody expensive.

Sorry - just sort of my rant against Fantasy. If you're going to be doing rank-and-file, you have to have inexpensive models. If you're going to have expensive models, you need to be sure that every model is taking an active role in battle.

It's much easier for me to spend $50 on 10 PP Hex Hunters (Elves with Hand Weapon) than it is for me to spend $41.25 on 10 GW White Lions (Elves with Great Weapon) simply due to the fact that all 10 Hex Hunters will be effective and active on the field, while the 10 White Lions will need reinforced to be effective and will have a less active role the deeper the unit is built.

Anarnaxe
31-05-2011, 15:28
For me there is nothing cooler than seeing the massed ranks fantasy provides!

Is it cooler? Or is it ignoring the fact that in order to see a regiment of we'll say 40 swordsmen, someone has to spend €80 buying four boxes? The coolness is relative to how much GW thinks they can get from the consumer, I mean, before 8th edition how many people would have considered using more than 30 infantry in a regiment? Does it matter anymore if it gets too unwieldy to field regiments, as long as it looks cool?

++Edit++ Loveless beat me to it.

frozenwastes
31-05-2011, 15:33
For me there is nothing cooler than seeing the massed ranks fantasy provides!

Have you considered historicals?

http://meeples.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/p9090032.jpg

But that's kind of neither here nor there as the largest seller GW has is 40k not WFB. And Warmachine/Hordes is a non-ranked game like 40k. So PP's impact on GW's player base and sales is more likely going to be on the 40k side of things.

While you can get some impressive troop blocks in warmachine like Iron Fang Pikemen, it'll never give someone what they want when they are looking for 15+ model regiments. If it's about visuals, it's going to be the 40k players that go for the alternative.

_L_
31-05-2011, 15:34
^ I think that tends to be horses for courses. The more games the better in my opinion, as it allows for people to play something that better suits their tastes. I'd love for GW to lose some market share to other companies.

Infact, I would love to create my own game and miniature line.

Skirmish based games are great and PP does a good job of it, however, I like my Warhammer on a grander scale.

Aluinn
31-05-2011, 16:07
You are cherry picking some of the comparisons above...

10 trenchers vs 10 sternguard? 10 wracks?

I have never stated PP models are cheaper. On average, the PP models are the same price as GW metals were and now incrementally cheaper than f-cast.

I have stated that getting to the typically played game levels is cheaper for PP, as that is a simple factual matter. GW could fix that easily, but they haven't.

It's not cherry-picking when what I quoted applies to the vast majority of all GW Core/Troops infantry. Rather, it would be cherry-picking for you to bring up Sternguard or Wracks. Actually, it's not a proper comparison in the case of Sternguard; they're Elites and then we should be comparing them to the PP models that are ~$40 for 6. Wracks are one of a tiny handful of Troops units not done in plastic.

So, yeah, you can find exceptions, but ... they're exceptions.

Saying PP metals are the same price as GW metals is almost irrelevant when most of GW's range is plastic, whereas about all of PP's is still metal. You have to buy metal from PP, while you can build almost any army in FB or 40K entirely from plastic GW kits with minor conversions for characters. Thus, we should compare GW plastics to PP metals. This is not unfair as there's no good concrete reason for metals to cost more; GW marks them up apparently because the models and kits which remain metal in their ranges (or, now, resin) don't sell in nearly such high volume as the plastics.

I'll say it again: PP models cost, on average, about double what GW models cost. Singling out GW metals alone for comparison tilts the scale, but it doesn't represent the reality of the situation, which is that when Average Joe McCustomer wants Trenchers (or any other basic infantry unit from PP), he pays $55 for metal miniatures, and when he wants Imperial Guardsmen (or virtually any other basic infantry unit from GW), he pays $25 for plastic miniatures.

So, please, stop being misleading and suggesting that these companies are charging similar prices for miniatures. They are not, at all.

Anarnaxe
31-05-2011, 16:37
Thing is, most PP units are pretty much a fixed size, from what I've seen the Infantry units are usually 6 or 10, those are the standard sizes. Ok, so the boxed set might only have 6 Trenchers, if you're starting off, thats perfect. But what about the Imperial Guard where you have just 10 lasgun armed guys in the box. Oh, sure the Catachans have a flamer, as do the Cadians who also have a Grenade Launcher.

How many Imperial Guard armies have just 10 Guardsmen making up a single troop choice? The fact is, you can't just buy 1 box per FOC choice, or Core/Special/Rare. The only ones who can do that are Space Marines, Chaos Marines and Eldar. Every other army across 40k and Fantasy means you have to a core boxed set, then buy another boxed set to build on that one, possibly a vehicle or supporting monster.

So for your example about the Guardsmen, you have the 10 Guardsmen, then you have to buy another box of Guardsmen, not to mention the heavy weapons teams and the Command Squad, meaning that the example you gave has jumped from $29 (GW site) to $121.75 to have a halfway functional Troop choice. Its the same with every other GW army, while PP means you usually have to buy one boxed set/blister for a unit thats effective by itself. And lets not forget the fact that PP is now switching over to a hard resin for their Warjacks, while adding a choice of weapon payloads, effectively giving their customers a choice of three different Warjacks in one box.

Reinholt
31-05-2011, 16:52
Well, if those are exceptions, how about vanguard, Terminators, plague marines, noise marines, thousand sons, plaguebearers, flamers, swooping hawks, banshees, scorpions, incubi, ogryns, immortals, honor guard, death company, or tau battle suits? Shall I go on?

Point is the cost per model is very similar across entire lists. Do the math! Yes, you can arb it here or there, but if you took 500 lists for each game and crunched cost per model I would bet it comes in surprisingly close.

Much closer than the othe vector, which we could call cost per standard sized army. In this case, PP is materially cheaper than GW. I don't see people saying PP models are cheaper than GW. I see them saying the big two PP games are cheaper than the big two GW games. Are you claiming that is false?

xxRavenxx
31-05-2011, 17:47
I find it refreshing to see some people posting in this thread that they like both systems.

Posts by PP fans often reek of strange logic, specificly: "I like warmachine, thusly I dislike all other games."

Often, it follows up with: "Thusly they are inferior games systems, and anyone who plays them is wrong, and foolish, and should know better.", but this is not always the case. (I wouldn't want to offend those who don't do this.)

I'll also take the time to just point out that I'm fully aware of people who hold this stance in other games, but that I feel I see it much more often from PP players online.

Its a very odd mentality though, that you can only enjoy one game, and not many, for their different merits and play styles.

loveless
31-05-2011, 18:19
Its a very odd mentality though, that you can only enjoy one game, and not many, for their different merits and play styles.

I enjoy so many games that my friends often have to intervene lest I bury myself in miniatures once again :shifty:

My recent sample of Mantic elves was almost a Mantic elf army before sanity set back in for a product I haven't tried yet.

I've got 2 Hordes armies and 2 (going on 3) Warmachine armies.

Everytime I try to start Fantasy, it just ends in disaster, though I've got a decent collection of Skaven this time around.

40K has Marines, Grey Knights, and fledgling Dark Eldar for a bit of variety.

I've got one friend trying to talk us into Dystopian Wars and some others who ooh and aah over Malifaux. Then you have my various Anima figures and...well...I've got a decent enough variety that I can usually find some positives and negatives about any system :p

I've found that the more I avoid Rules forums for a particular system, the more I end up liking that system - in case any rules-lawyer-wannabes out there are finding your gaming drive a bit low lately.

Deadnight
31-05-2011, 18:22
Chiming in on the issue of cost.

Privateer Press games can be cheaper. I do a lot of demos but i never sell it on the fact that it can be cheaper. Now, what do i mean by that? Well, lets say you're a big 40k gamer. you've got your 2-3 armies and whathave you and you enjoy the game. So you, like a lot of my mates decide tp spread out and try other games. you've heard great things about warmachine, so you decide to build a small little 25pt list. just for in between games of 40k, and quick skirmishes and that. nothing too serious. So, a list. Nothing fancy. you can build an army for a fair bit less than £100 if you want, and its perfectly playable.

In this scenario, with a budget list, then yeah, warmachine is cheaper.

But...

You can make it as expensive as you want it to be.

Try having a full roster (ie full squads of each type of unit and warjack, all warcasters etc) of your faction, added to each of the forces of... books (hey, some of us love the fluff) as well as the rulebooks, and in some cases, multiple armies... then yeah, it can become very expensive.

Its not necessarily an expensive game, but you can make it as expensive as you wish. Just like GWs games.

Ivellis
31-05-2011, 18:31
You can make anything as expensive as you wish, I think the point is that your standard size list for WM/H is generally cheaper than your standard list in warhammer.

Not everyone has to go all out and buy everything, but most people will at least want a standard size list.

sliganian
31-05-2011, 23:18
The other issue is that the points per dollar value is easier to do with GW. I know at one time I tried to figure the "Points per dollar" of a unit before I decided if it was 'worth it'. For example, boxes of metal units could be a horrid buy if you were paying $50 for a unit only worth 100 points (for example, I think Tzeentch Horrors before the Daemons book). The 'value' isn't just a function of Points, but it is much more stable variable than in Warmachine.

What I mean is, I know fairly well what I can expect my SM Tac Squads to do in a game. Their base statistical in-game capability is a 'known' quantity. I can see the cost per model, know about what it will do, and decide if it seems a reasonable exchange. In game, I would pick their targets or mission based on reasonable expectation of performance.

Take Khador Widowmakers. C$20 for 4 models, $5 per model. But, what is their in-game value? The unit's 'in-game' value depends mostly on the Warcaster, and somewhat moreso on the opponent than perhaps GW games. Offensively, Widowmakers vs a mostly Stealth Cryx force may not do much. But they may do great vs. a Cygnar list.

But the Warcaster can make them a crazy tough unit to dislodge. Imagine an army trying to deal with the Widowmakers at range with direct fire. Consider:

DEF 14 Widowmakers, in Cover (+4 DEF), with their Camoflage rule (+2 DEF) under the spell Iron Flesh (+3 DEF) = DEF 23 Widowmakers.

A Warmachine unit would need a RAT stat of 11 just to touch the Widowmakers. I don't think ANYONE has RAT 11 in the game.

TheMav80
01-06-2011, 00:17
Well, if those are exceptions, how about vanguard, Terminators, plague marines, noise marines, thousand sons, plaguebearers, flamers, swooping hawks, banshees, scorpions, incubi, ogryns, immortals, honor guard, death company, or tau battle suits? Shall I go on?

Point is the cost per model is very similar across entire lists. Do the math! Yes, you can arb it here or there, but if you took 500 lists for each game and crunched cost per model I would bet it comes in surprisingly close.

Much closer than the othe vector, which we could call cost per standard sized army. In this case, PP is materially cheaper than GW. I don't see people saying PP models are cheaper than GW. I see them saying the big two PP games are cheaper than the big two GW games. Are you claiming that is false?

Plus you have hidden costs. A Tac squad will cost $37.25.

But it does not come with everything you may want. You don't get a lascannon or a multimelta in there, for example.

Ten Cadians will "only" cost you $29. Unless you want a heavy weapon for your squad. Then you need the Heavy Weapon Team Box. That is $15 for one or $38.75 for three.

Anarnaxe
01-06-2011, 00:21
Plus you have hidden costs. A Tac squad will cost $37.25.

But it does not come with everything you may want. You don't get a lascannon or a multimelta in there, for example.

Ten Cadians will "only" cost you $29. Unless you want a heavy weapon for your squad. Then you need the Heavy Weapon Team Box. That is $15 for one or $38.75 for three.



So for your example about the Guardsmen, you have the 10 Guardsmen, then you have to buy another box of Guardsmen, not to mention the heavy weapons teams and the Command Squad, meaning that the example you gave has jumped from $29 (GW site) to $121.75 to have a halfway functional Troop choice.

Already got there before you :p

Aluinn
01-06-2011, 13:47
Well, if those are exceptions, how about vanguard, Terminators, plague marines, noise marines, thousand sons, plaguebearers, flamers, swooping hawks, banshees, scorpions, incubi, ogryns, immortals, honor guard, death company, or tau battle suits? Shall I go on?

Point is the cost per model is very similar across entire lists. Do the math! Yes, you can arb it here or there, but if you took 500 lists for each game and crunched cost per model I would bet it comes in surprisingly close.

Much closer than the othe vector, which we could call cost per standard sized army. In this case, PP is materially cheaper than GW. I don't see people saying PP models are cheaper than GW. I see them saying the big two PP games are cheaper than the big two GW games. Are you claiming that is false?

Several things about those examples:

-An army composed of Terminators, which is quite viable and possible with multiple codexes, will probably not contain any more models than a Warmahordes army. Terminators are expensive, but no one needs 50 of them. If this is a defense of PP models being expensive, it must also work both ways.

-The same can be said of many of the other things you mention. They're either very expensive (in points) elites, of which no one will ever buy a very large number, or if taken as the foundation of an army will result in the army not actually being composed of many more models than an army in the PP system (for example, a CSM army with all Troops being Plague Marines).

-Most of them are metal. Again, comparing the products a company which produces everything in metal to a select few (and yes, those are a small number of products against everything available from GW) metals from a company which produces most models in plastic is flawed. The only people that pay the marked-up GW metal model prices across entire armies, or even a significant portion of an army, are, ah ... SoB players, and I guess IG players who want to use something like Vostroyans, but that is highly optional. SoB will probably be getting plastics which are much cheaper fairly soon, too.

But I realize that the above doesn't address your general point, which is apparently that PP games are cheaper (though in the original post I replied to, you did say that the models were about the same cost, which is why I felt obliged to respond in the first place). Am I denying that? Well, yes, conditionally.

The reason I say this is that what you probably regard as the "standard" sizes for GW games are far higher than anyone has to play in order to enjoy them fully. This is caused by many issues, but mostly it's driven by players who just want to buy tons of models and be able to use them all in their games. In other words, it has little enough to do with GW policy.

The fact is that playing 1,000-point games of 40K or perhaps 1,500-point games of Fantasy allows you to take every sort of unit that you'd take in larger games. Larger games often just amount to taking multiples of units that you'd have in these levels, or making the same units larger. So, in assessing the cost of GW games, I think it's perfectly reasonable to judge according to these sizes. They're roughly the respective minimums which will allow you to take a wide variety of units and individual models, and where balance between armies is fairly good.

To say that a player has to play Fantasy at 2,500 points or 40K at 2,000 because that's what a lot of other players may want to do is fallacious. It's fairly easy to convince people to play smaller games; after all, if they're capable of fielding a 2,000-point army, they're capable of fielding a 1,000-point army. It may not be their preference, but if a larger game is not your preference (or if you flat out can't play one because you don't have that many models), their preference does not somehow supercede yours because they have more plastic (or metal, or resin) manz.

So then, by this standard, no, PP games are probably not cheaper, permitting that one buys mostly plastic kits from GW and converts character models from said kits, which is what most players do IME. Cost does vary across armies, of course, so there will be exceptions (i.e. the most expensive GW army is probably more expensive than the cheapest PP army, even at low points levels in GW games), but overall I don't think you can make a strong point in PP's favor that their games are significantly cheaper to play. Note this is to play, period, not to play teh epik huge Armageddon Ragnarok game of DOOM across three tables.

Of course, again, there are certainly other reasons why people may prefer PP games, such as liking the rules better, and that's fine with me. I can't really debate that because I'm not supremely familiar with them (though I have read the Warmachine rulebook).

As to "hidden costs" of GW models, by the way, one could also argue "hidden savings": As they consist mostly of multi-part plastic kits, it's very easy to convert or simply kitbash things that GW might want to sell you a $15 Finecast mini for. A Marine Captain/Force Commander, for example, can be easily built from a Tac Squad box, and look quite nice at that (if you think Marines look nice :)).

Reinholt
01-06-2011, 14:24
You are seriously stretching to make an argument here and you know it. In short:

1 - Typical armies are a mix of troops, elites, vehicles, etc. Again, take many lists and compute the average cost per model. It is very close.

2 - Play smaller games is not a sound argument. First, taking this to the logical extreme leaves us playing one model games, which is silly. Second, good luck convincing tournaments, large campaigns, and so on to change their rules and sizes just for you. Social norms matter if you play outside of a local group or club. Even at 1500pts 40k and fantasy are more expensive. Again, go price the lists you see around here; it's just basic math to figure out which costs more.

3 - Even with those two points considered your argument does not hold. My 1500 point marine force is hundreds of dollars more expensive than my warmachine force, or the hordes Trollbloods band I am putting together, and I can think of only one of my friends where this is not true... his army is nothing but several boxes of AoB marines.

Bottom line: it is cheaper, on average, to play PP games at standard sizes. You can try to dance around this all you want, but just like GW, you cannot defeat basic math. Yes, there are weird exceptions, but they are just that: weird exceptions.

I say this as someone who plays both games, also. Facts are facts.

silks
01-06-2011, 15:01
I just bought my first battle box of Warmachine and the army book.
The models are gorgeous, easy to put together and generally blew me away.
The fluff is brilliant and I actually want to read more of it.
The army book is excellent and actually tells you how to paint each main element you will need in your army.
Quite frankly I'm now looking at my GW armies and wondering why I bothered and I still haven't played a game yet.

frozenwastes
01-06-2011, 15:49
If you don't have the MK2 rulebook yet, the quickstart rules that came in your battle box will explain enough to play.

Another thing PP does differently than GW. The quick start rules are also available for free, here:

http://privateerpress.com/files/WarmachineQuickStartRulesFront.pdf
http://privateerpress.com/files/WarmachineQuickStartRulesBack.pdf

crandall87
01-06-2011, 16:02
I wouldn't go as far as saying PP are getting to GW but the better the competitors of GW get the better GW will get themselves to keep ahead of the competition. Which for us hobbyists is great!

Llew
01-06-2011, 16:06
I wouldn't go as far as saying PP are getting to GW but the better the competitors of GW get the better GW will get themselves to keep ahead of the competition. Which for us hobbyists is great!

Upon what do you base this hope?

Megad00mer
01-06-2011, 16:07
I play both game systems. Tyranids for 40k, Cryx and Trollbloods for WM/H and I'm eyeing a Skorne battlebox.

That's one of the strengths of WM/H over 40k. I can spend $40-50 on a starter box and get everything I need to start playing some fun and exciting games right off the bat. Also, all those models in the starter box can continue to be useful to me no matter how big my force gets.

You cant do that with GW. If I go out and spend $100 on a battlebox it gives me maybe...maybe 500pts to play with and it's not even a legal army most of the time. You can also be sure they'll be some crap in that box that you'll never use again. I'd start a second army for 40k, but considering that to do it properly costs around $500, I just can't afford/justify it.

Maybe the new Necron Codex will get me to dig those guys outta storage and slowly add to them. I have about 1500pts but most likely the new codex will require me to completely change my army and I still won't be able to afford it. Not while I still require things like food and shelter.

Recently with all of GW's "how can we get our customers to hate us more?" shenanigans and playing an army that's pretty much considered dead for competitive play (thanks Robin Cruddace) I've definitely been preferring PP over GW.

Night Bearer
01-06-2011, 16:13
Just some cost comparisons:


Warmachine

My current Khador 35pt force ($240):

Strakhov ($10)
Beast-09 ($55)
Torch ($35 + $10)
War Dog ($10)
Man-O-War Kovnik ($20)
Berserker ($30)
3x Iron Fang Uhlans ($60)
Eiryss, Mage Hunter of Ios ($10)


My current Mercenary 35pt force ($176):

Magnus the Traitor
Mule ($35)
Renegade ($16)
Thor Steinhammer ($12)
Ghordson Avalancher ($35)
Eiryss, Mage Hunter of Ios ($10)
Gorman Di Wulfe ($8)
Master Gunner Dougal Macneille ($10)
10 Steelhead Riflemen ($50)


My current Pirates 35pt force ($220):

Bartolo Montador ($10)
2x Buccaneers ($20 + $20)
Mariner ($35)
Mule ($35)
Dirty Meg ($10)
Doc Killingsworth ($10)
First Mate Hawk ($10)
Master Gunner Dougal Macneille ($10)
10x Sea Dogs ($30 + $10 + $10)
Mr. Walls ($10)


My current Menoth 15pt Mangled Metal force ($69)

1x Menoth Battlebox - Kreoss, Crusader, Revenger, Repenter ($50)
Vigilant ($19)


My in-progress High Elf Army - I believe roughly 1500pts ($237 so far)

2x HE half of Island of Blood (e.g. bought one and swapped plastics with friend) ($90)
High Elf Battalion ($100)
High Elf Repeater Bolt Thrower ($25)
High Elf Prince and Noble ($22)

My experience has been that WHFB is more expensive overall than Warmahordes, mostly for the following reasons:

1) Yes, you can play any pts-level, but WHFB is clearly geared towards a 2500pt level as 'standard', whereas WM/Hordes much more actively supports multiple points level, including the relatively low-cost 15pt mangled metal format. Friendly games are open, but if I want to take these armies to tournaments, at a WM tourney I could still take my cheapest army and play in the Mangled Metal events, whereas I still need more stuff for my HE because any tourney is going to be at 2500pts.

2) In WM/Hordes, units (rather than jacks) tend to be the most expensive elements of an armylist. In my $240 Khador force, 3 Uhlan cav models alone cost $60 - a quarter of the $$$. They're 7pts - 1/5th of the army size, and the same points cost as the cheaper Khador 'jacks. A Berserker, fex, is 6pts and half the cost. In other words, you can reduce your costs but still run good lists by simply using more jacks and solos than the expensive unit boxes. For me, WHFB doesn't do this as effectively. YMMV of course.

3) Similarly, switching things out and the use of Mercs means you can use the same model or models for multiple armies. Fex, the aforementioned Uhlans and the Beast-09 jack are basically half the $$$ cost of my Khador force. I could make up the points and build a cheaper (and just as good list) by using cheaper units and/or jacks and solos. And because I play Mercs, I have a number of models that get used in multiple lists, further reducing some of the costs for each individual army.

Again, YMMV of course.

jack da greenskin
01-06-2011, 16:43
You are seriously stretching to make an argument here and you know it. In short:

1 - Typical armies are a mix of troops, elites, vehicles, etc. Again, take many lists and compute the average cost per model. It is very close.

2 - Play smaller games is not a sound argument. First, taking this to the logical extreme leaves us playing one model games, which is silly. Second, good luck convincing tournaments, large campaigns, and so on to change their rules and sizes just for you. Social norms matter if you play outside of a local group or club. Even at 1500pts 40k and fantasy are more expensive. Again, go price the lists you see around here; it's just basic math to figure out which costs more.

3 - Even with those two points considered your argument does not hold. My 1500 point marine force is hundreds of dollars more expensive than my warmachine force, or the hordes Trollbloods band I am putting together, and I can think of only one of my friends where this is not true... his army is nothing but several boxes of AoB marines.

Bottom line: it is cheaper, on average, to play PP games at standard sizes. You can try to dance around this all you want, but just like GW, you cannot defeat basic math. Yes, there are weird exceptions, but they are just that: weird exceptions.

I say this as someone who plays both games, also. Facts are facts.

Your logic is sound. I'd love to buy you a pint.

Personally, I think if PP are getting to GW, its a very good thing. Competition can only be healthy, dropping price, increasing quality, and making more rules available for free.

Scammel
01-06-2011, 17:02
It's a shame this devolved into PP vs GW, it was interesting earlier on. I'm also surprised no-one seems to have pointed out that you're comparing skirmish games to mass-combat (well, to a lesser extent with 40k) games. Why not skirmish to skirmish? Though I've only ever lightly dabbled in the specialist games, it seems for most you can get the necessary models for £50 or less.

loveless
01-06-2011, 17:07
Why not skirmish to skirmish? Though I've only ever lightly dabbled in the specialist games, it seems for most you can get the necessary models for £50 or less.

Mainly because they aren't that similar.

I seem to recall in games like Mordheim that each model is roughly an individual, purchased and outfitted seperately.

In WM/H, while the battles are typically smaller in model count, you still deal with units of variable sizes in addition to solos and characters.

WM/H has Mangled Metal/Tooth and Claw, which is just battlegroup v. battlegroup and would be a bit closer to a pure skirmish and can slip under the $50 mark for a force depending on your choices.

Reinholt
01-06-2011, 17:08
I think it is more comparing most popular to most popular. For my part, the most fun for the money lately has been Malifaux...

Which is neither PP or GW.

Easy E
01-06-2011, 17:24
Rampant speculation ahead!

I bet PP is beating the pants off GW in the U.S. The attitude and design of PP just radiates American culture.

Full disclosure, I am a U.S. citizen.

Aluinn
02-06-2011, 07:28
You are seriously stretching to make an argument here and you know it. In short:

1 - Typical armies are a mix of troops, elites, vehicles, etc. Again, take many lists and compute the average cost per model. It is very close.

2 - Play smaller games is not a sound argument. First, taking this to the logical extreme leaves us playing one model games, which is silly. Second, good luck convincing tournaments, large campaigns, and so on to change their rules and sizes just for you. Social norms matter if you play outside of a local group or club. Even at 1500pts 40k and fantasy are more expensive. Again, go price the lists you see around here; it's just basic math to figure out which costs more.

3 - Even with those two points considered your argument does not hold. My 1500 point marine force is hundreds of dollars more expensive than my warmachine force, or the hordes Trollbloods band I am putting together, and I can think of only one of my friends where this is not true... his army is nothing but several boxes of AoB marines.

Bottom line: it is cheaper, on average, to play PP games at standard sizes. You can try to dance around this all you want, but just like GW, you cannot defeat basic math. Yes, there are weird exceptions, but they are just that: weird exceptions.

I say this as someone who plays both games, also. Facts are facts.

You seem to be just ignoring my argument re. smaller games.

I'm not telling anyone to play smaller games. They can play at whatever the heck points limit they please, obviously. I'm saying that they can play smaller games if they do feel like spending less money on GW models, and thus that the cost to play a GW game is not the cost of a 2,500-point FB army or a 2,000-point 40K army.

I made it clear in my post that I wasn't considering taking things down the smallest possible level. I was accounting for the fact that you need to play at a certain minimal points level in order to: A) Field the full variety of unit types and such; and B) have a balanced match. It's just that many people play GW games at points levels far higher than is necessary to meet these criteria, and then complain that GW is making them spend too much money. In truth, they are simply deciding to spend more money entirely of their own volition.

And when the majority of a group of players do this, it does create pressure on other members of the group to do the same, no doubt. Is that an issue of what GW is charging for miniatures, though? No, it's still an issue of the players making their own decisions based on personal preference.

Even accounting for this, no one has to play large games. Social norms, as you put it, are not binding and don't tend to literally force anyone into anything. For example, social norms suggest that women should have long hair whilst men should have short hair (at least, in most modern Western countries). Is this actually stopping a man from growing their hair long or a woman from cutting thiers short? Not at all. People may give them a hard time about it, but whether they care about that enough to change their hairstyle is still up to them at the end of the day.

Similarly, if people in a gaming group are favoring large games, you can still ask them for a smaller game, and they'll probably still agree (especially when you explain that you simply don't have the models for a larger one), and probably still enjoy it, unless they're complete jerks--but then you probably wouldn't want to be in such a gaming group anyway. They may grumble that they'd rather have played a larger one, certainly. It's up to you whether to go out and buy more minis in response to said grumbling.

To address your other point, that the final cost is similar at ~1,500 points in GW games and, say, 35 points in Warmahordes:

I'll concede the point that a lot of people, in practice, pay about as much for either game--I've never been saying anything to the contrary. (In my lost post I only suggested that PP games are not substantially cheaper, not that they cost more.) What I've been saying this whole time is that PP charges more for miniatures. Since plainly you admit that, I'm not even sure why we're still arguing.

But this brings me back to the point that if you pay about the same amount (for example, look at Night Bearer's post above, which gives ~$230 as the cost for the GW army and the PP armies, except one) for armies in either game, but got a TON more models from GW for this price, GW is probably still giving you the better deal. How much anyone may value having those additional miniatures is up to personal preference, not company policy, rules, or prices. For myself, I do actually value getting more miniatures, quite a bit, provided that they look good :).

What I'm getting at here is the fact that PP will "save you money" or that their prices are somehow more fair, and on the other side that GW is a faceless evil megacorp to the friendly mom-and-pop shop that is PP, is a myth propogated primarily by fanboys, people who just like to root for the underdog, and by PP itself. And I'm a bit tired of hearing it, because it is false and so oft repeated. If GW is "gouging", then PP is gouging far harder, although I honestly would not accuse either one of doing so any more than any other corporation gouges people all the time for any good that may be sold.

EDIT: @Night Bearer: That would easily be a 2,000-point army, if not more, if you spent more on characters, for example by actually using either one of those Princes on Griffons that you paid for, which come out to about 450 points. Add in a Level 2 Mage, BSB, and Hero and you're probably above 2,000 easily. You can convert the other Griffon to use as a Great Eagle by removing the rider. Alternatively, you could use both as Great Eagles and take a Level 4 Archmage.

mulkers
02-06-2011, 07:53
The problem with playing 40k in 40 minutes, 500pts etc is that it is not the norm, the meta or the standard.

It is rare for tourneys to be south of 1500 points, and the mechanics of the game dont scale that well (there are exceptions; IG is good in small and large games, but Necron 500pt? )

The minimum buy in to play 40k or fantasy is a battleforce, often at least one more unit/character, codex as well as rule book, dice, etc.

This is equivalent $$ wise to purchasing a house and block of land in some parts around here.

OR for $62 you can get a PP starter box, with tokens, and rulebook; You are ready to go.


AFAIK, malifaux is in the exact same boat.


competition is the healthiest thing for any business/industry/economy.

It drives efficiency, growth, and innovation

mulkers
02-06-2011, 08:18
GW has some other big competition problems to deal with too, not just PP.

Due for free download this weekend, the new rules will allow the (unofficial) use of your current mini's, until they release their own armies.

http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=91282

iamfanboy
02-06-2011, 10:42
*sigh* Aluinn, I just went and priced out a starting 1500 point Warhammer 40k Space Marine force, and a starting 35 point Warmachine Cygnar force - in pounds, mind you, so the rate would be as favorable to GW as possible.

Even you have to admit that 1500 points is the Games Workshop-recommended starting point, and that Space Marines have to be one of the cheapest points. 35 points is the recommended starting point for Warmachine from what I've heard for interesting games with varied forces.

The Space marine force was:

Space Marine Codex
2 space marines battleforces
space marines chaplain
space marines devastator squad
space marines terminator squad

Making two Devastator Squads with the extra Dev bits in the Dev box and one of the Combat Squads from the Battleforce, you get:

1 Chaplain w/ Jumppack (with the Assault Marines)
5 Terminators
2x 10 Space Marines in a Rhino
2x 5 Scouts
1x 10 Assault Marines
2x 7 and 8 Devastators

The total? 199 pounds. Simple tactics, too; shoot them to pieces as they close in, use the assault marines with the chaplain to crush in CC any forces that get that close, the Termies are your linchpin unit, and to claim objectives Rhino Rush in the last few turns.

The Warmachine stuff was:
cygnar arcane tempest gun mage officer
cygnar arcane tempest gun mages unit
cygnar battlegroup
cygnar female journeyman warcaster
cygnar field mechaniks
cygnar hunter
cygnar sentinel

The total? 108.65. Note you don't have to buy the Cygnar army book, as the boxes themselves include the unit stats.

Not having played Warmachine, I'm not sure of the tactics, but assign either the Hunter (if facing lots of Warjacks) or the Sentinel (if facing infantry hordes) to the gun mage officer so he can use his special ability, give the Charger to your journeyman, and shoot them to pieces as they close, then go in with your Defender, Charger, and Lancer to finish them off. Use the mechaniks to fix damage to your jacks from ranged fire.

Note, too, that for a beginner the 14 human-sized and 5 warjacks is a lot less intimidating to paint than the 55+ of the Space Marine force, and easier to transport too.

For another, oh, 50 pounds or so you could add a Trencher unit, a unit of Sword Knights, and be at 50 points which is the upper limit of playability from what I understand - along the lines of a 2500 point force.

Reinholt
02-06-2011, 13:52
For reference, my 1500pt marine army tops out at about $475 USD retail, and my mercenaries force for warmachine, which is very similar to the one above is about $185.

Hefty difference of $300. With that said, my cost per model is off by only $1 between the two lists or so...

However, new players starting each game would see a very different number for a typical game, and that is my point. Bottom line is that price per model was very similar, but models per typical game was not.

Thus, if you want to be very precise, I don't see a difference in value offered for the cost on a per model basis between PP and GW, but I see a huge difference in value offered for the cost by game.

Can I change this by totally altering the kind of GW games I play? In a limited fashion. But not completely, especially not for events, in GW stores, or outside my typical playing group. And most importantly, why would I pay for a game I have to materially redevelop myself?

the_corvus
02-06-2011, 14:34
However, new players starting each game would see a very different number for a typical game, and that is my point. Bottom line is that price per model was very similar, but models per typical game was not.

That is GWs problem IMO. A lot of new players see the price tag for the size of armies that people at the local GW/club play and then walk away. People can say "play 500-1000 point games then" but honestly the rules are not written for that size, it generally isn't very fun, and people want to do what everyone else is doing.

GW needed to write and support a skirmish system using the regular model line but based on the kinds of ideas in Necromunda and Mordheim. With the new 3D modelling workflow they could even produce a boxset with mixed troop types for a small warband pretty easily.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 14:40
You are seriously stretching to make an argument here and you know it. In short:

1 - Typical armies are a mix of troops, elites, vehicles, etc. Again, take many lists and compute the average cost per model. It is very close.

2 - Play smaller games is not a sound argument. First, taking this to the logical extreme leaves us playing one model games, which is silly. Second, good luck convincing tournaments, large campaigns, and so on to change their rules and sizes just for you. Social norms matter if you play outside of a local group or club. Even at 1500pts 40k and fantasy are more expensive. Again, go price the lists you see around here; it's just basic math to figure out which costs more.

3 - Even with those two points considered your argument does not hold. My 1500 point marine force is hundreds of dollars more expensive than my warmachine force, or the hordes Trollbloods band I am putting together, and I can think of only one of my friends where this is not true... his army is nothing but several boxes of AoB marines.

Bottom line: it is cheaper, on average, to play PP games at standard sizes. You can try to dance around this all you want, but just like GW, you cannot defeat basic math. Yes, there are weird exceptions, but they are just that: weird exceptions.

I say this as someone who plays both games, also. Facts are facts.

But I don't want a skirmish game... I like having large units and larger games. What I care about is the cost model for model. What I've gather from what I've read is that, model wise, PP may actually be more expensive in that respect.

Saying PP games are marginally cheaper because I only need 10 models compared to 100 isn't encourageing to me. Especially if by the time I by 100 models I've actually spent 1/3 (or whatever) more...

Let's be honest, if GW downsized the games to make the average model count 10 to 20 models then raised the cost per model by a 3rd the outrage would be palpable.

frozenwastes
02-06-2011, 15:07
That Cygnar army is actually really solid. It's very similar to what I play. Good job picking stuff that works well together for never having played the game.

The biggest way PP has gotten to GW locally is supplanting 40k as the regularly played game. People still buy a bit of GW stuff, but they buy it to build it and not play with it. Jervis has said that over two thirds of their customers never actually play their games and I believe him. With the expectation of what a full army looks like, it must take forever for people who are new to the hobby to get an HQ, troop choices and other stuff to make it feel like a full/unique force. Black Reach used to be an affordable starter, but now the price is such that it's actually a detriment to get two different armies in there. You need to find someone to trade/off load the other force on or you feel like you're wasting half your money.

I hope GW just figured out the simple formula PP is using and copies them. After all, it was GW's formula first. PP is doing all the things GW did during the years GW transformed themselves from a UK based retailer of D&D to a world spanning hobby games company.

frozenwastes
02-06-2011, 15:19
But I don't want a skirmish game... I like having large units and larger games.

But this thread isn't about our personal preferences. It's about how PP is having record growth in units sold, new customers and cash coming in while GW is constantly having to raise prices and cut costs to be profitable while their gamer base shrinks. It's about how PP has influenced GW and how they have not.

You may like having large units and larger games, but during GW times of greatest year over year growth, their lead game (40k) had a model count like Privateer's games.

GW got to be what they are by doing what PP is doing now. Since they got big, GW totally shifted gears and quadrupled the model count and started a plan to raise prices every year regardless of other factors to compensate for their churn and burn approach to new customers and their expended lack of customer retention.


What I care about is the cost model for model. What I've gather from what I've read is that, model wise, PP may actually be more expensive in that respect.

Why do you care about the cost of each individual model when you're more interested in having large games with large forces? Shouldn't you be more concerned with total cost or at the very least, cost of your large units? What compare one empire halbardier to one sword knight if you plan on having 100 of them?


Saying PP games are marginally cheaper because I only need 10 models compared to 100 isn't encourageing to me. Especially if by the time I by 100 models I've actually spent 1/3 (or whatever) more...

What does you being encouraged by it have anything to do with PP having an influence on GW?


Let's be honest, if GW downsized the games to make the average model count 10 to 20 models then raised the cost per model by a 3rd the outrage would be palpable.

Only by those used to builidng huge armies. Many people would see the new rules and the new starters and be like "Wow, getting into this game is easy!" The prices are already going up and this time next year they will be a third higher than what they were a month ago. GW is going to raise prices by 10-20% every year. Every year. The outrage is still palpable, but if they released a quality rules set where you play with the number of models the game supported during GW's greatest global growth, people would at least be able to afford a full game experience.

So yeah, you get the worst of both worlds. Big armies as the norm and big price increases.

Aluinn
02-06-2011, 15:20
The problem with playing 40k in 40 minutes, 500pts etc is that it is not the norm, the meta or the standard.

It is rare for tourneys to be south of 1500 points, and the mechanics of the game dont scale that well (there are exceptions; IG is good in small and large games, but Necron 500pt? )

The minimum buy in to play 40k or fantasy is a battleforce, often at least one more unit/character, codex as well as rule book, dice, etc.

This is equivalent $$ wise to purchasing a house and block of land in some parts around here.

OR for $62 you can get a PP starter box, with tokens, and rulebook; You are ready to go.


AFAIK, malifaux is in the exact same boat.


competition is the healthiest thing for any business/industry/economy.

It drives efficiency, growth, and innovation

Well GW does have starters that will run about $50 per person if split between two, and contain the necessaries.

However, it's also true that PP has a starter for each army, whereas GW's would "force" some people into collecting armies they might not really want. You can trade the models or eBay them but at some point that defeats the purpose of buying the thing in the first place. So I agree that GW makes the game harder to get into, but it should be said that they do offer a "cheap" option even if it is more limited.

They ought to offer something like Battalions but throw in the main rules, the army's codex, and special dice/templates, though, it's true. And I agree about competition--I am glad that PP is there to compete with GW, as it probably makes both of them better. I'm not here to hate on PP, I'm just here to combat irrational hate of GW when, as I see it, PP is not just a blatantly better company in all ways, and specifically not when it comes to pricing.

As to low-point games: I was basing my arguments on roughly 1,000 for 40K rather than 500, and about 1,500 for Fantasy. I agree that less than that (i.e. 500 or even 750 points in 40K) is not really the "full game", and so you can't say the price to play 40K, in full, is the price is a 500-point army. Balance can be pretty bad at less than 1,000, and the types of units you can take are genuinely restricted, if not by hard limits then by practicality. For example, you could take a Land Raider and two 5-man Scout Squads as your Troops for 500-point Marine army, but that wouldn't be very fun to play with or against.

But 1,000 I think is quite alright. You certainly can't (practically) take two Land Raiders, to continue with that example, but then is two Land Raiders more fun? I'm not so sure. It's the same model again. Anyway, you can get anything from an army list that you really want to have in 1,000, in most cases, just not multiples of it--or you can take multiples, but sacrifice variety in the rest of the list. So in that sense I think this level, which again corresponds roughly to 1,500 points in Fantasy, is a good minimum, or entry point.

(I realize that there are a couple armies in either system that are still slightly wonky even at these levels, such as Necrons in 40K, who are still pretty limited in what they can take at 1,000, but those are exceptional, generally cases of bad design, and likely to be fixed--Necrons should be going down in points per model by a good deal when they get their new codex. And, even so, I have a 1,000-point Necron army that includes Warriors, Scarabs, Destroyers, and Immortals, which is at least a bit of variety.)

Depending on where you may play, it could be either surpassingly easy to find games at those levels, including tournaments, or surpassingly hard, or somewhere inbetween, but my point about that issue was really that it has little to do with GW themselves unless you want to go into how they run tournaments in their own stores. And, honestly, I can't comment on that as I live in a city with no GW stores and have never even been inside one of them. If they were smart they would accommodate small games in order to be friendly to newer players, though.

+++


*sigh* Aluinn, I just went and priced out a starting 1500 point Warhammer 40k Space Marine force, and a starting 35 point Warmachine Cygnar force - in pounds, mind you, so the rate would be as favorable to GW as possible.

Even you have to admit that 1500 points is the Games Workshop-recommended starting point, and that Space Marines have to be one of the cheapest points. 35 points is the recommended starting point for Warmachine from what I've heard for interesting games with varied forces.

The Space marine force was:

Space Marine Codex
2 space marines battleforces
space marines chaplain
space marines devastator squad
space marines terminator squad

Making two Devastator Squads with the extra Dev bits in the Dev box and one of the Combat Squads from the Battleforce, you get:

1 Chaplain w/ Jumppack (with the Assault Marines)
5 Terminators
2x 10 Space Marines in a Rhino
2x 5 Scouts
1x 10 Assault Marines
2x 7 and 8 Devastators

The total? 199 pounds. Simple tactics, too; shoot them to pieces as they close in, use the assault marines with the chaplain to crush in CC any forces that get that close, the Termies are your linchpin unit, and to claim objectives Rhino Rush in the last few turns.

The Warmachine stuff was:
cygnar arcane tempest gun mage officer
cygnar arcane tempest gun mages unit
cygnar battlegroup
cygnar female journeyman warcaster
cygnar field mechaniks
cygnar hunter
cygnar sentinel

The total? 108.65. Note you don't have to buy the Cygnar army book, as the boxes themselves include the unit stats.

Point taken. However:

-You could compare that to a 1,000-point Marine army instead, in which case the prices would be very close by my rough estimation. (You might have to make a few changes such as taking more Tac Marines rather than Scouts to get it at the same cost as the PP army, though.) 40K and Warmahordes are after all different game systems and so there is no direct, objective correlation between X points in Warmahordes and X points in 40K/FB, but there's probably a case to be made that 35 points is a small WM game as is 1,000 a small 40K game, so that's an adequate comparison as well. GW themselves (well, Jervis, speaking in semi-official capacity) say that 1,500 is intended to be an average 40K game, and 2,000 an average FB game. As I understand it PP basically pushes two game sizes, 35 and 50, so you only get a "small" game and a "large" game. It makes comparisons difficult because there is no "average" between that is actually a limit people often play at. I don't think there's anything definitive to be said on this: Is 35 points equivalent to 750, 1,000, 1,250? There is no real answer, but the difference in cost there could make the GW army less, about the same, or more costly than the PP game, depending on where you draw the parallel.

-You got 63 GW models and 19 PP models. Granted, several of the PP models are Warjacks, which are big-ish, but then again the GW models include two vehicles. Even if it's a fair comparison in terms of the army sizes across systems, which is more than a little uncertain and vague, it does nothing to refute anything I've said about price per model, which is that PP models cost about twice as much on an individual basis.

frozenwastes
02-06-2011, 15:35
I think GW's stagnant player base and PP's second year of record growth beyond all of PP's expectations says a lot about price per model being less important than price for the full experience.

PP is not pushing only 35 and 50 points. "Small" and "Large" are not the only two options. They explitictly made the game so you get the full experience at any points value from the starter boxes (11), to 15, 25, 35, 50 and 75. At 100 the game changes as you can now get a second warcaster/warlock.

35 is the full game. It'll take a bit under an hour and a half. 50 should take about 2 hours. In tournaments with timed turns, 50 gets done in about an hour and 45 minutes.

The reason people keep comparing 1500 points of 40k to 35 points of Warmachine is that they are the standard game size. Check your 40k rulebook. It's right in the rules as being the point when you can expect a balanced but not overly long game.

Price per model is important when you're buying one model. When you're buying the miniatures needed to play the standard game size, price for the full experience is really the only thing that matters.

And when you're just starting out, price of entry is what matters. And for GW, you either play the not full game with the Black Reach and Isle of Blood starters and then get your army book and then start building your *real* army or you start with a super expensive hardcover rulebook, an army book and then you get miniatures. If you went with the starter set approach, hopefully you'll have someone you can sell or trade the miniatures off from another army.

With PP, you buy a starter and then you play the full game with the models in there. Then when you want to expand you buy anything off the shelf that works with your faction and it comes with it's rules. Eventually you should probably grab the rulebook (half the cost of GW's rulebooks). If you want to get a book about your faction you can, but it's optional.

Cost of full experience? Lower with PP.
Cost of entering? Lower with PP.
Who's going through massive growth? PP.
Who's stagnating and losing unit sales and having a shrinking player base year over year? GW.

You better believe PP is getting to GW. And the faster GW wakes up and realizes PP is just doing what GW did back when GW had their biggest periods of growth, they can return to their roots and offer the kind of product they did to make themselves into a miniatures giant.

ashc
02-06-2011, 15:39
If you want to build huge armies and don't care for price I suppose you are an ideal GW customer.

There aren't many of you either ;)

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 15:40
But this thread isn't about our personal preferences. It's about how PP is having record growth in units sold, new customers and cash coming in while GW is constantly having to raise prices and cut costs to be profitable while their gamer base shrinks. It's about how PP has influenced GW and how they have not.

You may like having large units and larger games, but during GW times of greatest year over year growth, their lead game (40k) had a model count like Privateer's games.

GW got to be what they are by doing what PP is doing now. Since they got big, GW totally shifted gears and quadrupled the model count and started a plan to raise prices every year regardless of other factors to compensate for their churn and burn approach to new customers and their expended lack of customer retention.

Why do you care about the cost of each individual model when you're more interested in having large games with large forces? Shouldn't you be more concerned with total cost or at the very least, cost of your large units? What compare one empire halbardier to one sword knight if you plan on having 100 of them?

What does you being encouraged by it have anything to do with PP having an influence on GW?

Only by those used to builidng huge armies. Many people would see the new rules and the new starters and be like "Wow, getting into this game is easy!" The prices are already going up and this time next year they will be a third higher than what they were a month ago. GW is going to raise prices by 10-20% every year. Every year. The outrage is still palpable, but if they released a quality rules set where you play with the number of models the game supported during GW's greatest global growth, people would at least be able to afford a full game experience.

So yeah, you get the worst of both worlds. Big armies as the norm and big price increases.

My point is how you make this comparison depends on what you expect. There is no "right" way to view it.

I have $300 to spend... One way I spend it all and get rules and enough miniature to play a minimal game. Alltogether that equals 10 models of various types.

On the other hand, with another system I have some rules in a solid book and 20 to 25 models of various types... Because those models for me are the attraction, the second game is much more attractive, especially if thos models are also better looking.

I'm, of course, talking in absatracts here... Which system is going to give you more depends on how you define more, how much the models appeal to you, even how much the rules appeal to you.

For me, flipping through the WFB rule book and seeing huge armies versus the Hordes book and seeing only a hand full makes a big difference. I understand if I'm playing a game with 150 modesl versus 10 I'm gonna pay more. It stands to reason. So at that point, to compare the two systems I'm not concerned with what it costs to play, I'm concerned with the value I get for that cost. The way to evaluate that fairly is to compare models and their cost.

Which cost more, which looks better? Is the higher cost justified? For me, the fact that the start up cost may be less is meaningless if I don't like the models and they cost more one to one and I don't like the rules. I'm willing to pay more for something I enjoy...

The question is, for me then, how much more? I like GW's rules better, mostly I like the models better... But I'm not sure I like them as much as they want to charge for them at this point. GW has priced me out of their market, 40k 5th and WFB 8th are my last rulesets from them. I'll finish my WFB army as I don't need that much.

But if my problem with GW is the price of their models, why move to PP when they charge as much or more?

loveless
02-06-2011, 15:41
What I care about is the cost model for model. What I've gather from what I've read is that, model wise, PP may actually be more expensive in that respect.

Regardless, that point is irrelevant when you look at army size. If you use Warmachine minis to build a Warhammer army, you're going to spend more. Good luck getting them to rank up :p

I also want to note that outside of a few extremes (Black 13th, Kell Bailoch, Classic Warwitch Deneghra, etc.), Privateer minis tend to be a bit larger than your average GW mini. Skorne tend to tower over Space Marines, Dark Elves looks like runts compared to Nyss (especially Striders, good Lord...), and I'm not sure the cavalry would fit properly on GW cavalry bases (they likely wouldn't rank up, at least).

As for price comparisons:

$18.25 (was $15.00 in metal) for a resin Lelith Hesperax (25mm female, billowy hair, 2x hand weapons)
$14.99 for a metal Thyra, Flame of Sorrow (30mm female, billowy skirt, 2x hand weapons)

$44.50 for a plastic Furioso Dreadnought (60mm based machine, 3x build options)
$34.99 for a "restic" Menite Warjack (50mm based machine, 3x build options)

$44.00 for 10 metal Executioners (20mm Elves, heavy armor, 2H weapon, no command)
$54.97 for 10 metal Legionnaires (30mm Elves, heavy armor, 2H weapon, 1 Leader model)

$66.00 for 10 metal Chosen (25mm Humans, plate armor, 2H weapon, no command)
$49.99 for 10 metal Sentinels (30mm Elves, plate armor, 2H weapon, 1 Leader model)

$44.50 for 3 plastic Minotaurs (40mm based, light armor, weapon options, full command options)
$44.99 for 5 "restic" Warspears (40mm based, light armor, spears/ammo, 1 Leader model)

In other words...it varies.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 16:07
Regardless, that point is irrelevant when you look at army size. If you use Warmachine minis to build a Warhammer army, you're going to spend more. Good luck getting them to rank up :p

I also want to note that outside of a few extremes (Black 13th, Kell Bailoch, Classic Warwitch Deneghra, etc.), Privateer minis tend to be a bit larger than your average GW mini. Skorne tend to tower over Space Marines, Dark Elves looks like runts compared to Nyss (especially Striders, good Lord...), and I'm not sure the cavalry would fit properly on GW cavalry bases (they likely wouldn't rank up, at least).

As for price comparisons:

$18.25 (was $15.00 in metal) for a resin Lelith Hesperax (25mm female, billowy hair, 2x hand weapons)
$14.99 for a metal Thyra, Flame of Sorrow (30mm female, billowy skirt, 2x hand weapons)

$44.50 for a plastic Furioso Dreadnought (60mm based machine, 3x build options)
$34.99 for a "restic" Menite Warjack (50mm based machine, 3x build options)

$44.00 for 10 metal Executioners (20mm Elves, heavy armor, 2H weapon, no command)
$54.97 for 10 metal Legionnaires (30mm Elves, heavy armor, 2H weapon, 1 Leader model)

$66.00 for 10 metal Chosen (25mm Humans, plate armor, 2H weapon, no command)
$49.99 for 10 metal Sentinels (30mm Elves, plate armor, 2H weapon, 1 Leader model)

$44.50 for 3 plastic Minotaurs (40mm based, light armor, weapon options, full command options)
$44.99 for 5 "restic" Warspears (40mm based, light armor, spears/ammo, 1 Leader model)

In other words...it varies.

I wouldn't try using Warmachine minis in either WFB or 40k for a variety of reasons, but that's neither here nor there...

This does pretty much confirm my suspision though. PP isn't cheaper, it's just cheaper to get started playing...

I just see miniature wargaming as becoming a rich person's past time, and there's a reason more of us don't play Polo. The more this stuff costs the more attractive other hobbies become.

the_corvus
02-06-2011, 16:23
I just see miniature wargaming as becoming a rich person's past time, and there's a reason more of us don't play Polo.

Because they don't let you use the severed head of your enemies as a ball any more?

Anarnaxe
02-06-2011, 16:33
Well GW does have starters that will run about $50 per person if split between two, and contain the necessaries.

Except that those starters only appeal to a limited number of players, how many actually want to start a Skaven army? Or Orks? Not to mention the fact that between two friends you effectively need to buy two sets, why? Because there may be two armies, but only one set of rules.


However, it's also true that PP has a starter for each army, whereas GW's would "force" some people into collecting armies they might not really want. You can trade the models or eBay them but at some point that defeats the purpose of buying the thing in the first place. So I agree that GW makes the game harder to get into, but it should be said that they do offer a "cheap" option even if it is more limited.

Again, limited niches in a limited niche market. Not everyone plays High Elves and some refuse to play certain armies because they see them everywhere. While PP gives you a taste of what each faction is about. Granted, the Retribution doesn't have a starter boxed set, but then again, they were released in 09 with much of the range now available. The GW starters aren't a "cheap" option, just a slightly cheaper version of the battalions. It's not the same thing.


They ought to offer something like Battalions but throw in the main rules, the army's codex, and special dice/templates, though, it's true. And I agree about competition--I am glad that PP is there to compete with GW, as it probably makes both of them better. I'm not here to hate on PP, I'm just here to combat irrational hate of GW when, as I see it, PP is not just a blatantly better company in all ways, and specifically not when it comes to pricing.

The thing is, GW just isn't noticing the competition. PP is adapting itself to an increasing marketbase and is bending over backwards to accomadate its customers because of this increased demand, the trouble with GW is that its asking its customers to bend...well, you know. It isn't irrational hate, its justified and people have had enough of it.


As to low-point games: I was basing my arguments on roughly 1,000 for 40K rather than 500, and about 1,500 for Fantasy. I agree that less than that (i.e. 500 or even 750 points in 40K) is not really the "full game", and so you can't say the price to play 40K, in full, is the price is a 500-point army. Balance can be pretty bad at less than 1,000, and the types of units you can take are genuinely restricted, if not by hard limits then by practicality. For example, you could take a Land Raider and two 5-man Scout Squads as your Troops for 500-point Marine army, but that wouldn't be very fun to play with or against.

Exactly how many players do you know play 1000pt games in 40k? Or 1500pt in Fantasy? The games are geared to be played at 1500pts and 2000pts, respectively, at least. Any less and the rules just aren't effective. Not to mention that Force Organisation has led to the decline of 40K, while Min-Maxing is playing havoc with the balance. While the balance is designed into PP games at any level of game. It could be easy to build up a large force of Warjacks, but is it going to be effective? Probably not. Same with infantry heavy forces. The balance is there, and from what I can see you can't Min-Max that much.


Depending on where you may play, it could be either surpassingly easy to find games at those levels, including tournaments, or surpassingly hard, or somewhere inbetween, but my point about that issue was really that it has little to do with GW themselves unless you want to go into how they run tournaments in their own stores. And, honestly, I can't comment on that as I live in a city with no GW stores and have never even been inside one of them. If they were smart they would accommodate small games in order to be friendly to newer players, though.

You know how many people drop out of the hobby because they realise how much they need to get before they can play a basic game? My guess is its a lot more than those who stay with it. The nearest offical GW store to me is in Dublin, and I am not making a 300km round trip to have a couple of hours gaming. Local groups are dropping GW faster and faster because they're mainly made up of students who just can't afford to build up those armies for a couple of games. Thats why PP is picking up so much momentum, you need one box to play a decent force. You can use that one box to have a few games in the same amount of time to set and play a GW game. You're also forgetting something, its not the games that make people friendly, its the people who are themselves friendly, any good group will welcome new players with a variety of games, not just ineffective games of Fantasy or 40K.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 16:36
Because they don't let you use the severed head of your enemies as a ball any more?

:evilgrin:

You may be on to something here!

I'm thinking about some new house rules for our next campaign... :cool:

loveless
02-06-2011, 16:38
This does pretty much confirm my suspision though. PP isn't cheaper, it's just cheaper to get started playing...


What? 4 out of 5 of my PP comparisons were cheaper than GW "counterparts" so I'm not sure what you're reading :p

Overall, some of it's cheaper, some of it's the same, and some of it's more expensive. If you start getting into cost/unit as opposed to cost/model, the pricing favors PP more often than GW. That said, the comparison is ultimately pointless due to the differences in list construction.

I've read over your posts and I don't really see what you're trying to conclude. The evidence doesn't point towards any of your conclusions, so I don't know what to respond to really. I'm pretty much just going to stop after this post as it seems futile on my side :p

Closing thoughts on the topic (long):
Cost of an army in both a GW core system (WHFB, W40K) and a PP core system (WM, H) are dependant on force choice and composition choice.

Privateer:
A Warjack-heavy list is going to be cheaper than an Infantry-heavy list.
A Legion list is probably going to be cheaper than a Trollblood list.
Looking at it, I'm pretty sure that my Reznik 35pt list is cheaper than my Grand Exemplar Kreoss 35pt list (I'm not going to do the math right now, so that's just a quick eyeballing).

Games Workshop:
A cavalry-heavy list is probably going to be cheaper than an Infantry-heavy list (especially in the age of $41.25/10 Special Infantry)
A Space Marine list is probably going to be cheaper than a Sisters of Battle list.
A 1500 point Paladin Grey Knight list is likely to be cheaper than a 1500 point Purifier Grey Knight list.

It's a bit like comparing Rise of Legends to Valkyria Chronicles. One game's going to have a ton of units on the field (gunners, shock troops, steam tanks, clockwork soldiers, air carriers, etc.) while the other is going to have a handful of units on the field (scouts, snipers, a couple of tanks, etc.). Both require strategy and force management to play effectively, but if you try to do a straight comparison or even try to utilize similar tactics in the two games, you're going to fail at one of them. Warhammer and Warmachine aren't the same game, either. The army building, strategies, and even missions are so different between the two that I often wonder why we even bother comparing them.

Of course, I play/collect multiple factions from both companies, so I have my own set of positives and negatives for each game. I don't see them as substitutes for each other, as they don't offer the same thing - they just exist in the same genre of entertainment.

ashc
02-06-2011, 16:41
One of the things that tempts me with PP over GW is the perceived value in-game of a model; practically everything comes with funky rules and really feels like its pulling its weight for a force, whether its an initial purchase or adding something to an army.

This, as opposed to models being ranked up wound-markers or gun-fodder that i have lovingly painted just to throw in the 'dead' bucket.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 16:57
What? 4 out of 5 of my PP comparisons were cheaper than GW "counterparts" so I'm not sure what you're reading :p

Overall, some of it's cheaper, some of it's the same, and some of it's more expensive. If you start getting into cost/unit as opposed to cost/model, the pricing favors PP more often than GW. That said, the comparison is ultimately pointless due to the differences in list construction.

I've read over your posts and I don't really see what you're trying to conclude. The evidence doesn't point towards any of your conclusions, so I don't know what to respond to really. I'm pretty much just going to stop after this post as it seems futile on my side :p

Closing thoughts on the topic (long):
Cost of an army in both a GW core system (WHFB, W40K) and a PP core system (WM, H) are dependant on force choice and composition choice.

Privateer:
A Warjack-heavy list is going to be cheaper than an Infantry-heavy list.
A Legion list is probably going to be cheaper than a Trollblood list.
Looking at it, I'm pretty sure that my Reznik 35pt list is cheaper than my Grand Exemplar Kreoss 35pt list (I'm not going to do the math right now, so that's just a quick eyeballing).

Games Workshop:
A cavalry-heavy list is probably going to be cheaper than an Infantry-heavy list (especially in the age of $41.25/10 Special Infantry)
A Space Marine list is probably going to be cheaper than a Sisters of Battle list.
A 1500 point Paladin Grey Knight list is likely to be cheaper than a 1500 point Purifier Grey Knight list.

It's a bit like comparing Rise of Legends to Valkyria Chronicles. One game's going to have a ton of units on the field (gunners, shock troops, steam tanks, clockwork soldiers, air carriers, etc.) while the other is going to have a handful of units on the field (scouts, snipers, a couple of tanks, etc.). Both require strategy and force management to play effectively, but if you try to do a straight comparison or even try to utilize similar tactics in the two games, you're going to fail at one of them. Warhammer and Warmachine aren't the same game, either. The army building, strategies, and even missions are so different between the two that I often wonder why we even bother comparing them.

Of course, I play/collect multiple factions from both companies, so I have my own set of positives and negatives for each game. I don't see them as substitutes for each other, as they don't offer the same thing - they just exist in the same genre of entertainment.

Perhaps it's because I'm not really disagreeing with you. The argument was made elsewhere that PP is cheaper because you have to buy fewer models. In looking at your comparisons, to me, PP isn't that much cheaper and if I buy 100 models of both then which models I choose is going to make a big difference in the overall cost of either. I see the cost, per model, as comparable.

So for me, which system I choose is going to fall something other than cost. I prefer GW's rules but I can't really afford the investment anymore so I'm sticking with what I already have.

Converting to PP doesn't work for me because I want a game with more than a handful of models and the rules just don't inspire me. So cost is important but so are other factors that lay into it.

The argument that PP is better simply because it's cheaper is oversimplifying things way to much.

iamfanboy
02-06-2011, 18:19
ok, is this clear enough for you?

Privateer Press is cheaper than Games Workshop because you have to spend less money to get a fully working army as per the rules guidelines published by each company; also, the rules for Privateer Press miniatures are included with the miniature itself.


Now, I'm not saying I don't have my issues with WM/H myself; the inability to customizable heroes irks me (Yes, I KNOW there are legit, game-balance reasons why this isn't allowed), and the power level difference between some warcasters shows there isn't an internally consistent A=B=C system for designing said warcasters, but it definitely IS cheaper to start, IS cheaper to build to absurd levels of game size, and is a much tighter rules-set.

ashc
02-06-2011, 18:28
ok, is this clear enough for you?

Privateer Press is cheaper than Games Workshop because you have to spend less money to get a fully working army as per the rules guidelines published by each company; also, the rules for Privateer Press miniatures are included with the miniature itself.


Now, I'm not saying I don't have my issues with WM/H myself; the inability to customizable heroes irks me (Yes, I KNOW there are legit, game-balance reasons why this isn't allowed), and the power level difference between some warcasters shows there isn't an internally consistent A=B=C system for designing said warcasters, but it definitely IS cheaper to start, IS cheaper to build to absurd levels of game size, and is a much tighter rules-set.

Except with having to define 'absurd levels of game size', I agree with everything said here.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 18:44
ok, is this clear enough for you?

Privateer Press is cheaper than Games Workshop because you have to spend less money to get a fully working army as per the rules guidelines published by each company; also, the rules for Privateer Press miniatures are included with the miniature itself.
Was this ever in debate by anyone?
If that's the only thing important to you, great. Neither mean much to me for reasons I've given.




Now, I'm not saying I don't have my issues with WM/H myself; the inability to customizable heroes irks me (Yes, I KNOW there are legit, game-balance reasons why this isn't allowed), and the power level difference between some warcasters shows there isn't an internally consistent A=B=C system for designing said warcasters, but it definitely IS cheaper to start, IS cheaper to build to absurd levels of game size, and is a much tighter rules-set.

Again, the reasons I don't like Warmachine have nothing to do with any of this.

It's only cheaper from this one singular point of view. I understand your view, I simply don't share it.... and hence the reason I don't plan to convert.

Bloodknight
02-06-2011, 18:58
Privateer Press is cheaper than Games Workshop because you have to spend less money to get a fully working army as per the rules guidelines published by each company; also, the rules for Privateer Press miniatures are included with the miniature itself.


Now, I'm not saying I don't have my issues with WM/H myself; the inability to customizable heroes irks me (Yes, I KNOW there are legit, game-balance reasons why this isn't allowed), and the power level difference between some warcasters shows there isn't an internally consistent A=B=C system for designing said warcasters, but it definitely IS cheaper to start, IS cheaper to build to absurd levels of game size, and is a much tighter rules-set.

It's still hella expensive compared to other games.

Disregarding the 50€ starter box that comes with enough models for up to 24 people to play (;)), I'd always go for Classic Battletech for a skirmish game with a tight, tournament oriented ruleset. I mean, 20 Euros practically buy you an army for a game that takes about 2 hours (4 Mechs, about 4000 BV).

iamfanboy
02-06-2011, 19:42
It's still hella expensive compared to other games.

Disregarding the 50€ starter box that comes with enough models for up to 24 people to play (;)), I'd always go for Classic Battletech for a skirmish game with a tight, tournament oriented ruleset. I mean, 20 Euros practically buy you an army for a game that takes about 2 hours (4 Mechs, about 4000 BV).
Ah, Battletech. I have around 90 'Mechs and it's still not enough for me! NEED MOAR!

(well, I have them split into four different opfors so I kinda need the variety, plus I have almost no 'Mechs of post 3050-vintage...)


But going back to absurd levels of play, I'd say that'd be 4000+ points of Warhammer 40k, or 200+ points of Warmachine - in other words, what a 'veteran' will usually have on-hand so they have a broad variety to play with in their main army, or to have a really big battle if they want to while away an entire afternoon.

I toted up my five grand of Eldar on the GW website, and it came to an absurd 637 pounds! That's using two battleforce boxes as well; if I hadn't done that it would have been close to 700!

With three warcasters (one epic), 6 solos, 5 units (including command options where available), and 11 warjacks, (and the book), my total was 380 pounds. And that's a respectable-sized army even by 40k standards, at close to 60 models, and nearly 230 points - so comparable to a 5k army.

Blah. I still have no idea what Warmachine faction I'd want to play, though... *sigh*

SunTzu
02-06-2011, 19:49
Again, the reasons I don't like Warmachine have nothing to do with any of this.

It's only cheaper from this one singular point of view. I understand your view, I simply don't share it.... and hence the reason I don't plan to convert.

The problem is you're mixing up the two separate questions here.

I don't like Warmahordes either. The game doesn't appeal to me, just like it doesn't appeal to you. But it's obviously cheaper than for example Warhammer to build an army for Warmahordes, even if not per-model, because you need less models. Saying, "ah, but I like a game with more models, and if it needed more models it wouldn't be cheaper" is completely meaningless.

It's OK, y'know. You can say you prefer GW games while admitting they're more expensive to play. In fact I'll say it for you, because I agree: "I prefer GW games even though they are more expensive to play". (The expense has grown too large for me personally, so I won't buy from GW any more, but I'll still play the games with what I have, and I won't convert to Warmahordes).

If you prefer to drive than walk, there's no point trying to prove how walking would be just as expensive as driving if only you had to buy petrol. You don't need petrol to walk, and don't need 200 models to play Warmahordes. But driving is quicker, and big games of Warhammer look cooler. That doesn't change the price issue.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 20:15
The problem is you're mixing up the two separate questions here.

I don't like Warmahordes either. The game doesn't appeal to me, just like it doesn't appeal to you. But it's obviously cheaper than for example Warhammer to build an army for Warmahordes, even if not per-model, because you need less models. Saying, "ah, but I like a game with more models, and if it needed more models it wouldn't be cheaper" is completely meaningless.

It's OK, y'know. You can say you prefer GW games while admitting they're more expensive to play. In fact I'll say it for you, because I agree: "I prefer GW games even though they are more expensive to play". (The expense has grown too large for me personally, so I won't buy from GW any more, but I'll still play the games with what I have, and I won't convert to Warmahordes).

If you prefer to drive than walk, there's no point trying to prove how walking would be just as expensive as driving if only you had to buy petrol. You don't need petrol to walk, and don't need 200 models to play Warmahordes. But driving is quicker, and big games of Warhammer look cooler. That doesn't change the price issue.

I get it. Warmachines uses fewer models. 10 models is likely to cost less than 100. Yes, I get that.

My gaming group plays 40k at 750 to 850 pts on the average. With Space Marines and some other factions, depending on how you build your force that's not a lot of models. For us, that's a normal game. That is the game size that works best for us and we all feel they work better. Units have room to manuever, heavier units are more valuable because there are fewer weapons on the board that are a threat to them, but they make up a larger percentage of your force, so if they fail...

When you say I need a pile of models for 40k and only a few for Warmachine, that's simply not true, so it becomes an argument that doesn't hold much meaning for me when making my comparison. For me, that argument is comparing apples and oranges. There is nothing in 40k that says you need or have to play 1500 points... That is a simple convention.

This question has more meaning to me... In a game of 25 models which system is cheaper? The answer is that it depends on which models I choose. To me, there simply isn't enough difference in cost to matter. Both are overpriced.

The point I'm failing to make is that just because you say I need fewer models to play Warmachine doesn't make it more appealing when the number of models I use in 40 is about the same... (My DE force only has about 38 models in it, most of the time and sometimes fewer.)

My point is, and always was, everybody's perspective is going to be different. It depends on what you expect from the game.

;)

Easy E
02-06-2011, 20:30
Really, who cares which one is cheaper! Why is this a debate? Oh, because this is the INTERNET! Let people buy what they perceive as value for the money. These perceptions will be just that... perceptions.

On Topic: If GW is being influenced by fear of PP, it could be argued that this influence is having a negative impact on GW game design IF it is what is driving the "Mat Ward" era of the game.

Of course, that is a big IF and you have to perceive the "Mat Ward" era as bad.

sposada4
02-06-2011, 20:36
You all guys always complaining, find something better to do. Instead of rambling and crying and holding so much pain and sadness in ur chests, stop freaking talking **** about GW, simply dedicate urselves to other games and thats it.

Yeah GW charges more, yeah GW has better minsi and yeah they wanna make profit.....not a big deal, if you wanna play their games work and make some money and then buy them games, but stop whinning that does not help.

SunTzu
02-06-2011, 20:37
My point is, and always was, everybody's perspective is going to be different. It depends on what you expect from the game.

;)


Sure. But most people's expectations match what the manufacturer's promise is. Warmahordes is supposed to be a skirmish game. 40K is supposed to be a mass battle game. Sure, you can play much smaller games than normal, but it's exactly that - abnormal, and only worth mentioning as an outlier.

When a prospective new hobbyist is looking into a new game, it's unlikely he'll already be starting to think about how he can modify the core rules to play it his way (that will come later). He'll look at one game which "needs" 25 models and another which "needs" 100 (even if "needs" really isn't a need) and that will inform his decision. What the occasional statistical anomaly of a gaming group chooses to do isn't going to be at all relevant in that decision... and that after all is what this thread is about: is the perceived lower cost of a normal Warmahordes army affecting the success of the perceived higher costs of a normal 40K/Warhammer army? I find it hard to imagine that it is not, even though I personally wouldn't play Warmahordes if you paid me.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 20:39
Really, who cares which one is cheaper! Why is this a debate?
I dunno... But it seemed important at the moment... :p




Of course, that is a big IF and you have to perceive the "Mat Ward" era as bad.

This is what I find frustrating... The current edition of both WFB and 40k are, hands down, my favorites. The current models are superb for the most part, at least the 40k stuff.

I really want to support the company, but it's really hard to do when they seem to slap their client base in the face so often.

sposada4
02-06-2011, 20:40
And Yes, to build an "army" of warmahordes is cheaper because their games are skirmish games, and you don't actually build an army is just a little force. In GW games you really play with big armies and at a huge scale.

The problem is that many gamers just cry because they want their army now and cheap, this is hobby takes time, and you wont have a big army after a few years unless you are very moneyfulll. I have been collection wood elves for 2 years, and Im almost at 3000 points, is not a competitive army but I enjoy playing with them and having fun painting.

Good things take time.

I don't think PP is taking on GW, it is to soon to say that, plus PP is only rising in the US.

Voss
02-06-2011, 20:40
Sure. But most people's expectations match what the manufacturer's promise is. Warmahordes is supposed to be a skirmish game. 40K is supposed to be a mass battle game. Sure, you can play much smaller games than normal, but it's exactly that - abnormal, and only worth mentioning as an outlier.
Eh. 40K started out as a skirmish game, and was for most of the time I played it. Epic is mass battle game. To me 40K is a skirmish game that has become overly bloated.

Ben
02-06-2011, 20:43
To be fair if all armies in 40k featured fistfuls of space marine dreadnoughts, the average price would come down quick. And dreadnoughts are the obvious thing to compare warjacks to.

PP is cheaper to start, I think that's been done to death.

And every model in a PP game is actually worth something. Solos, unit attachments, etc are cheap purchases but add a lot of tactical flexibility. Buying a different warcaster completely changes how your army works.

Warmahordes is a far more flexible system. For 40k and Fantasy you pick a theme for your army and run with it, for Warmahordes your caster defines your theme and changes how the units you already have work.

I play a lot of GW games, and the rules have stagnated in the last ten years or so.

If you want to play giant massed rank games I would recommend historicals. There are lots of things available in plastic now, and significantly cheaper than GW while using the familiar 4th edition rules set that forms the basis of warhammer now.

Deadnight
02-06-2011, 20:52
So chameleon, oddly enough, you play 40k almost at a "skirmishy-type" level, with a game that is not fully balanced at that level, and yet you dislike a game that is essentially a large scale skirmish. odd, neh? :P

Dont worry man, im just teasing.

I dont think anyone here is really arguing about price. i think the fairest point on price is both games are as expensive as you want them to be. if you want a cheap 40k or warmachine list, you can get it for less than £100. if you want multiple factions, all the bling, and all the rulebooks/codices/Forces of... books, say goodbye to a lot of your paycheques.


This is what I find frustrating... The current edition of both WFB and 40k are, hands down, my favorites. The current models are superb for the most part, at least the 40k stuff.

no complaints on the models. Personally, i was hoping 5th would bring me back into thefold, but it didnt. just like third, and fourth, i see metas, and specific builds. some things work, too many things dont. and there is a similar amount of complaints across all three editions, whether is was rhino rush/screening in third, or mechspam in fifth.... I cant honestly say i have a "favourite" edition. possibly early-pre burnout fourth ed. when fish of fury had just been unleashed.


I really want to support the company, but it's really hard to do when they seem to slap their client base in the face so often.

yup, i can agree with this. Id like it if GW was a likeable company. I like their models, and their IP, but their business decisions and game writing for me is a huge turnoff.

the_corvus
02-06-2011, 20:53
In GW games you really play with big armies and at a huge scale.

The problem is that many gamers just cry because they want their army now and cheap, this is hobby takes time, and you wont have a big army after a few years unless you are very moneyfulll.

*alarms go off*
GW ONLY GAMER DETECTED!
GW ONLY GAMER DETECTED!

Okay now that I have calmed down. 40k. Big armies? 40k is a company scale game at best. For pretty much every wargame out there that is minimum size. I am currently getting into microarmor/Napoleonics which easily scales through divisional to army corps scale.

Even at 28mm GW are hellishly expensive. I just bought ~50 quality British peninsular troops for $40. War of the Roses (comparable to Empire) from the Perrys are available for similar prices. GW prices aren't high because of the cost of sculpting and casting the miniatures. They are high because miniature sales are supporting the salaries of a whole bunch of slackers and generating huge profit.

Golly mate. Get out there and see what is available. The major GW games are bloated skirmish games that don't work well as skirmish games and are a joke to properly scaled wargames.

loveless
02-06-2011, 20:58
Eh. 40K started out as a skirmish game, and was for most of the time I played it. Epic is mass battle game. To me 40K is a skirmish game that has become overly bloated.

Fantasy was a battle simulation that got overly bloated. As much as I like 8th, that Horde rule crap annoys me almost as much as the "5 man ranks" of 7th did.

40K was a large skirmish game that still is a large skirmish game. Some bigger kits have been introduced in the core game (Valkyries, Stormravens, Trygons, Razorwings, etc.), but they don't really feel out of place to me. The size still looks pretty small on the table, and a mechanized 40K force looks great.

WM/H doesn't work at large levels. It's not designed or advertised for it and, outside of whatever that crazy Unbound thing was, Privateer doesn't push ever-bigger armies (ever-diverse, maybe - new units and new characters are bound to shake up a player's usual options). Keep it at or under 100 points. You can still get some pretty large units in large quantities (Mechanithralls. Winterguard.), but it's a much more "zoomed-in" version of battle - what a warcaster/warlock is doing with his/her personal forces at that time. Put 3-4 WM/H battles on adjacent tables and that's probably closer to the size of some of the bloodier background encounters.

I'd say (and please, everyone chime in with some categorization here), we typically have:
1) Warbands (Necromunda, Malifaux, Anima: Tactics)
2) Skirmishes (Warmachine, Hordes, 40K at sub-1000 points)
3) Battles (40K at > 1000 points, WHFB, Kings of War)
4) "Naval" Combat (Uncharted Seas, Firestorm Armada, Battlefleet Gothic, Aeronautica Imperialis)
5) Large Scale Combat (Epic, Warmaster, Dystopian Wars, Flames of War)

Number 5 isn't necessarily a massive battle, but it looks somewhat more imposing given the scale.

ashc
02-06-2011, 21:03
Probably about right Loveless; and depending on the sort of game you want, the tactics that brings, and whether you like the miniatures available are all factors to be considered by individuals.

the_corvus
02-06-2011, 21:05
I would swap 1 and 2. Though it is really more like "squad skirmish" vs "platoon+support skirmish".

ashc
02-06-2011, 21:11
Something that hasn't been mentioned is tactical engagement/depth to the various games; Although Warmahordes uses less models, I found when i played it it was far less 'beer and pretzels' kick back and turn off as the Warhammers have become for me. Instead, I felt like I had gone a heavy night with Dita Von Teese; Absolutely shattered, but exhilarated ;)

So another thing is whether you want to have to really work for your game, or if you prefer to turn off and kick back. Nothing wrong with either, but its different games for different people.

loveless
02-06-2011, 21:21
I would swap 1 and 2. Though it is really more like "squad skirmish" vs "platoon+support skirmish".

Well, "Warband" I tend to think of as a group of relatively unique individuals who operate independently for the most part.

"Skirmish" I tend to think of as needing squads + support.

There might be better names, but that's the breakdown I'm looking for.

Now, you can play WM/H like that - Mangled Metal and Tooth & Claw are effectively Warbands - but the standard game is going to have units that have to stay within coherence, receive orders, etc. etc.

A typical game of Anima, for instance, might have my force comprised of 5 or 6 models who might help each other out, but tend to have little in common in terms of abilities and stats.

ashc
02-06-2011, 21:24
Mordheim etc. uses terms like warbands and gangs, and so I think of them as such. Skirmish as used I can view as a skirmish of scouting, vanguard, or patrol forces of larger armies, which 40k and warmahordes generally falls in to.

the_corvus
02-06-2011, 21:30
Mordheim etc. uses terms like warbands and gangs, and so I think of them as such. Skirmish as used I can view as a skirmish of scouting, vanguard, or patrol forces of larger armies, which 40k and warmahordes generally falls in to.

Warband was used for 40k and Warhammer in the 1st/2nd edition eras.

chamelion 6
02-06-2011, 21:59
So chameleon, oddly enough, you play 40k almost at a "skirmishy-type" level, with a game that is not fully balanced at that level, and yet you dislike a game that is essentially a large scale skirmish. odd, neh? :P

Dont worry man, im just teasing.
Actually you're right... But it happened by accident. We were playing 1500pts and larger, but because of time we rarely finished a game. We decided to cut back on the game size and most of us liked the results so much it just stuck. The game and the rules just seem to work really well at that level...




I dont think anyone here is really arguing about price. i think the fairest point on price is both games are as expensive as you want them to be. if you want a cheap 40k or warmachine list, you can get it for less than £100. if you want multiple factions, all the bling, and all the rulebooks/codices/Forces of... books, say goodbye to a lot of your paycheques.

no complaints on the models. Personally, i was hoping 5th would bring me back into thefold, but it didnt. just like third, and fourth, i see metas, and specific builds. some things work, too many things dont. and there is a similar amount of complaints across all three editions, whether is was rhino rush/screening in third, or mechspam in fifth.... I cant honestly say i have a "favourite" edition. possibly early-pre burnout fourth ed. when fish of fury had just been unleashed.
The real reson I jumped into this thread is I'm really looking at alternatives at this point. Much as I love the rules, and you know I've defended them often, but I'm just fed up with the corporate attitude and especially the pricing. DE for example was just released and already they've had a price jump... And it's not even that they hike the price often, but the rate they do it at. I just feel gouged.




yup, i can agree with this. Id like it if GW was a likeable company. I like their models, and their IP, but their business decisions and game writing for me is a huge turnoff.

I even like the rules, but there is a point you reach where no matter how much you like it, the BS you put up with just sours the whole thing.

Somebody mentioned historicals. We actually started as a historical gaming group and I'm trying to re-spark that interest and looking for rules.

SunTzu
02-06-2011, 22:23
Somebody mentioned historicals. We actually started as a historical gaming group and I'm trying to re-spark that interest and looking for rules.

WAB. You know it makes sense. The best incarnation of the Warhammer rules yet (well... actually if it was up to me, I'd mix up the rules from WAB, Fantasy 7th Ed and Fantasy 8th Ed, but there's no single product with that mix) without the price gouging you suffer from buying GW models.

sposada4
02-06-2011, 22:59
I think we have gone far from the point of this discussion that is if PP is getting to GW. For now and with the information I have I do not think PP is getting to GW, for an instance the logistics of GW are by far better than those of PP, and the quality of the miniatures too.

Now regarding which one people prefer, well thats very subjective to be discussed, is like discussin if green or yellow is a better or worst color. It depends on the eyes that see it.

TheMav80
02-06-2011, 23:13
I think we have gone far from the point of this discussion that is if PP is getting to GW. For now and with the information I have I do not think PP is getting to GW, for an instance the logistics of GW are by far better than those of PP, and the quality of the miniatures too.

Now regarding which one people prefer, well thats very subjective to be discussed, is like discussin if green or yellow is a better or worst color. It depends on the eyes that see it.

As a wise man once said, "That's just like, your opinion, man."

I find the quality of PP miniatures (and Mantic and Perry) to be excellent. All on par with GW products. In some cases (Mantic's Orcs) I think GWs aesthetics falls far behind.

frozenwastes
02-06-2011, 23:46
When you say I need a pile of models for 40k and only a few for Warmachine, that's simply not true, so it becomes an argument that doesn't hold much meaning for me when making my comparison.

Yes, but none of that has anything to do with this thread. This thread is about PP's impact on GW.

One way is player base. GW's revenue is stagnant, but their prices have gone up. So they have a combination of less people playing and those people buying less. PP has record sales beyond their expectation and are scrambling to keep up with demand.

So what's different about them?

The cost of the full experience.
The cost of entrance.
The focus on being a game company first or a miniature company first.

So we've been talking about the cost of the full experience. Each rulebook talks about what that is. In 40k, the rulebook is very clear that 1500 points will give you a balanced game that's playing in a reasonably amount of time and that while smaller games might not be as balanced they're still fun.

The standard is 1500. It has been since the mid 1990s. You can try to say that the standard is actually lower, but it's just not true.

So the cost of the total experience is higher with 40k.

GW is not retaining customers (or their purchasing levels).

PP is growing beyond anything anyone ever expected.

These statements may be related.

Do you see why everyone is so baffled by you keeping on about something that is off topic to this thread? Is it clear now?

Techboss
02-06-2011, 23:49
Here is how I see the pros for each company

PP

Rule set is better thought out and works quite well
No real dude models, although there are some that do better with certain styles of play. GW has whole force org segments which are useless. Just because you have the option doesn't mean it is worth taking.
Armies are balanced better against one another
Company interacts with the player base and sponsors forums
I feel I get better value per product

GW

Better suited for those who like to customize individual models
Better global support?


I think model quality is a push. Both of the companies have some really good and really bad models. Metal vs plastic is pretty mute to me. Overall, I think it comes down to value and game experience; which I think PP is much better at than GW.

Lewis
03-06-2011, 00:43
A very fair assessment. I miss the modelling options of GW and not much else.

sliganian
03-06-2011, 00:44
Yes, but none of that has anything to do with this thread. This thread is about PP's impact on GW.

One way is player base. GW's revenue is stagnant, but their prices have gone up. So they have a combination of less people playing and those people buying less. PP has record sales beyond their expectation and are scrambling to keep up with demand.

So what's different about them?

The cost of the full experience.
The cost of entrance.
The focus on being a game company first or a miniature company first.

So we've been talking about the cost of the full experience. Each rulebook talks about what that is. In 40k, the rulebook is very clear that 1500 points will give you a balanced game that's playing in a reasonably amount of time and that while smaller games might not be as balanced they're still fun.

The standard is 1500. It has been since the mid 1990s. You can try to say that the standard is actually lower, but it's just not true.

So the cost of the total experience is higher with 40k.

GW is not retaining customers (or their purchasing levels).

PP is growing beyond anything anyone ever expected.

These statements may be related.

Do you see why everyone is so baffled by you keeping on about something that is off topic to this thread? Is it clear now?

All very well put, frozenwastes. I also think (as others have mentioned) that whether you think PP is having an 'impact' depends on whether you are in North America or in the UK. Yes, it is all 'anecdotal' I suppose but for the last year I have seen comment after comment from apparently North American based gamers saying "Yeah, 40K/WFHB has dried up, it is all WarmaHordes / Flames of War now."

I don't think the same thing has happened in the U.K. (any comments from there?) therefore, there isn't the same/as much anecdotal commentary about PP being strong. Therefore, perhaps this was GW's approach for too long, PP was dismissed as 'competition'. Or as one GW Studio games designer said back when I did playtesting and someone mentioned PP's rules and success: "Now now, don't big-up the little guy." :rolleyes:

Well, I played GW games since 1999, was a playtester from 2002-2009 (3.5 Chaos Dex to Daemons), and other members of my gaming group had similar investment of time and money. Right now, I haven't played a GW game in well over a year, and haven't bought a GW model in over three years. Yet another "little guy" company has thoroughly won me and my friends over and that company has received some of our money for their efforts.

So yes, PP has an 'impact' on GW -- whether GW knows it or not.

chamelion 6
03-06-2011, 01:58
I really feel like the evidence is being stacked to support the popular conclusion.

The rule book doesn't ever say or even suggest 1500pts is the proper size for a game, so why would a noob make that assumption. And I've played games both larger and smaller than 1500 points and personally find the smaller games more appealing. Why couldn't players start and 750 or 850 and enjoy tyhe gamer just as much? Unless someone tells them before they've tried it and established that bias, 1500 is an arbitrary number that grew out of convention... If it was ever in a rulebook, it isn't now. (The rulebook sets out two sizes only as examples... 1000pts in the intro and 1500 in the battle report.)

Unless that noob is interested in pickup games or tourneys there's no reason at all to get hung up on 1500 points....

So what's likely to attract a noob is probably going to come down to whether they like the look of the models, the cost of each individual model, and what images in the two books appeal to them most. I don't know very many people that are going to buy a whole army at one time and be done with it. Most are going to want to try it out first, and if it appeals to them then collecting the minis begins.

The other group to influence whether PP has much impact are gamers like me. Those that love GW's rules and don't really want to move to PP's stuff. For the most part, PP's games don't appeal to us, the models don't appeal to us. PP's impact is nonexistant, yet I'm looking at the game again... (I already own Hordes) But the reason is GW and not PP, they are doing it to themselves.

GW's impact on it's business and customer base is far greater than PP's at this point. Most of the arguments made here mainly appeal to people that are already inclined to follow PP anyway...

When you ask "Is PP impacting GW?" to get an honest answer you have to look at motivation. Why people choose one over the other is all important.

uona
03-06-2011, 03:43
Perhaps it's because I'm not really disagreeing with you. The argument was made elsewhere that PP is cheaper because you have to buy fewer models. In looking at your comparisons, to me, PP isn't that much cheaper and if I buy 100 models of both then which models I choose is going to make a big difference in the overall cost of either. I see the cost, per model, as comparable.

So for me, which system I choose is going to fall something other than cost. I prefer GW's rules but I can't really afford the investment anymore so I'm sticking with what I already have.

Converting to PP doesn't work for me because I want a game with more than a handful of models and the rules just don't inspire me. So cost is important but so are other factors that lay into it.

The argument that PP is better simply because it's cheaper is oversimplifying things way to much.

If you buy 100 models of GW you get what a unit or 2? Maybe 3? If you buy 100 models of PP.... that might actually be the entire faction. Per model the price may be the same but you do get more entertainment out of it. Take your standard 40 man infantry rank and file squad lets say swordmasters i guess. You need 40 pieces of gw minis to play with that one unit. Whereas buy 40 pieces of PP infantry and you will get 4-5 different units. More replayability. If one of them is a warcaster thats een more replayability.

loveless
03-06-2011, 03:45
for an instance the logistics of GW are by far better than those of PP, and the quality of the miniatures too.

Not to derail this thread, but have you been reading the Finecast reports? :p

Some of the PP "restics" are pretty bad in terms of mold lines, but at least they aren't missing massive chunks of detail. The biggest repair I've had to do on a PP plastic (and I think I'm over a dozen at this point) was a small ridge repair above the Menofix on a Repenter.

I've had to do the same thing to GW figures - Ikit Claw was a nightmare of trimming and greenstuff and my Draigo had a messed up Titan Sword (I just reshaped it a bit, didn't want to wait on the replacement :p)

frozenwastes
03-06-2011, 04:01
The rule book doesn't ever say or even suggest 1500pts is the proper size for a game, so why would a noob make that assumption.


The exact text where it does say that is quoted earlier in this thread and has already been talked about.

I can see you have fact issues. I'm done with talking to you about this subject.

chamelion 6
03-06-2011, 06:04
The exact text where it does say that is quoted earlier in this thread and has already been talked about.

I can see you have fact issues. I'm done with talking to you about this subject.

Ok... I forgot to mention Pg 86 which suggests 1500 to 2000 is a nice sized game. That's a long ways from an "OFFICIAL" point value. However if you want to interpret it that way, feel free...

One good thing about Warmachine though... It seems to have attracted most of the worst rules lawyers and nit pickers away from 40k and WFB. I don't seem to run into them nearly so often these days. :evilgrin:

In the end its just a game, and that's all it's ever gonna be. :angel:


If you buy 100 models of GW you get what a unit or 2? Maybe 3? If you buy 100 models of PP.... that might actually be the entire faction. Per model the price may be the same but you do get more entertainment out of it. Take your standard 40 man infantry rank and file squad lets say swordmasters i guess. You need 40 pieces of gw minis to play with that one unit. Whereas buy 40 pieces of PP infantry and you will get 4-5 different units. More replayability. If one of them is a warcaster thats een more replayability.

My DE varies from 3 to 4 units and a HQ at about 850pts... It's roughly 38 models or so. My space marines are at about 27 some odd models, maybe less and are at 3 unit's and an HQ. So we're comparable and I prefer the current 40k rules and my armies are pretty much built. No reason to move to 6th, I'm happy with what I've got.

The game I'd replace is WFB if I could find an alternative. I love the rules but my Empire army still needs some expansion and I like having alternate armies. Which means starting a new one from scratch... But given the latest price hike I'm not really excited about that prospect. That's why I drug out the Hordes rules again and started looking them over. For me, it's just all wrong... The setting, the scale, even the models and the whole asthetic is unattractive to me. I'm not suggesting its a bad game, just that nothing I'm looking for is in that game... and nothing that is in it really inspires me.

At this point I'll likely either just not play fantasy much or find another source for models. And possibly, if I can spark some interest, move back to playing historicals.

Thats the beauty of it, neither PP nor GW are really the only game in town.

Archaon
03-06-2011, 07:27
Does PP issue annual business reports like GW (which they are obligated to by law?)

I'd really like to know the hard numbers of PP so i can maybe shut up a guy at my LGS :p

Anyway.. trend is that people are leaving GW by quite a number. People i've gamed with since the 90s have left with me over playability/rulesset balance/pricing issues and have started up other games.. many have started up Privateer Press games too including me.

rickie8437
03-06-2011, 07:40
The game I'd replace is WFB if I could find an alternative. I love the rules but my Empire army still needs some expansion and I like having alternate armies. Which means starting a new one from scratch... But given the latest price hike I'm not really excited about that prospect. That's why I drug out the Hordes rules again and started looking them over. For me, it's just all wrong... The setting, the scale, even the models and the whole asthetic is unattractive to me. I'm not suggesting its a bad game, just that nothing I'm looking for is in that game... and nothing that is in it really inspires me.


why not try Mantics Kings of War, its just the same as WFB but with out all the silly rules, the models are far cheaper and you can download the rulebook and army lists for free from there website. Also there starting to move to resin as well, but instead of charging more there keeping the price the same but doubling the models per box, so £14 for 5 metal is now £14 for 10 resin

hope that helped

rik

mulkers
03-06-2011, 07:50
But I don't want a skirmish game... I like having large units and larger games. What I care about is the cost model for model. What I've gather from what I've read is that, model wise, PP may actually be more expensive in that respect.

Saying PP games are marginally cheaper because I only need 10 models compared to 100 isn't encourageing to me. Especially if by the time I by 100 models I've actually spent 1/3 (or whatever) more...

Let's be honest, if GW downsized the games to make the average model count 10 to 20 models then raised the cost per model by a 3rd the outrage would be palpable.

Then play Warpath.


Rules are free, and you can use your current GW models.



Well said Frozen wastes.

That is the elements that made Mordheim, Necronmunda et al so succesful and fun, cheap buy in, inclusive of all necessities to play. What GW failed to capatilize on was incorporating it in to the main systems.

Imagine if you will, being able to take a Veteran style unit in a Fantasy army that IS YOUR mordheim warband. Or your Necromunda gang in 40k?

Instead, GW acted the way they are doing with their recent policy changes, and killed the small games, hoping everyone would just automatically switch to the main systems


If you want to compare prices, use Aus RRP.

There is no comparison.

There is further solid affirmation of why PP is rising rapidly, and GW is dying

IJW
03-06-2011, 08:13
I don't think the same thing has happened in the U.K. (any comments from there?) therefore, there isn't the same/as much anecdotal commentary about PP being strong.
Apparently there are 2-3 times as many Warmahordes tournaments in the UK this year as last year.


The rule book doesn't ever say or even suggest 1500pts is the proper size for a game, so why would a noob make that assumption.
As others have pointed out, the relevant text has already been mentioned and is reinforced by the near-universal showing of 1,500 point example lists in the codices.

My anecdote - the Exeter Inquisition club up until a year ago met in the local GW store, renting it out one evening a week and playing only GW games with GW models. As you can imagine, this club was generally frequented by the most pro-GW players in the city with 80-90% of games being 40k with a bit of Warhammer & Epic on the side.

A year ago due to changes in approach by GW HQ we had to move out and find our own venue (as also happened in Bristol). Eight months ago I introduced Infinity to the group and recently a few players started Malifaux plus there's quite a bit of interest in Dystopian Wars & Warmachine. We're now at the stage where maybe half the games played on an evening are GW games and that's ever-decreasing, I've played four games of 40k in eight months (three of which were at a mini-tournament) and we're about to move into a new games store that doesn't stock GW products.

chamelion 6
03-06-2011, 08:25
why not try Mantics Kings of War, its just the same as WFB but with out all the silly rules, the models are far cheaper and you can download the rulebook and army lists for free from there website. Also there starting to move to resin as well, but instead of charging more there keeping the price the same but doubling the models per box, so £14 for 5 metal is now £14 for 10 resin

hope that helped

rik

I downloaded the rules for their website a few days ago but I've not read them completely... I'm also very interested in their orks, whether I continue with WFB or change systems.

mulkers
03-06-2011, 08:26
Chamelion6, i don't know what you are saying, but beating around the bush is an understatement,

PP is cheaper to get in to.

Based on those figures provided, it is cheaper per model.

It CAN be played on a large scale.

You don't play on a large scale anyway.

Value for money goes to PP, unquestionably.

Personal aesthetic preference on the other hand... well that is a different kettle of fish


I really hope PP are getting to GW. Mantic too. Someone has to. In my FLGS, they certainly are, and the consensus Aus wide is that there is a massive shift, people are jumping off of GW's burning ship in to the warm receiving arms of PP

kingofthesquats
03-06-2011, 08:44
In the last month I've parted ways with GW, I can safely say (aside from the paints until I find a good/better alternative) I'll never buy another GW product, unless they do something phenomenal with one of the specialist games. I'm not a GW hater (although I've had something to say about the prices for a while!) and I've played their games on and off for twenty years, from Hero Quest and Space Crusade, right through to 8th ed. fantasy.

My decision is partly down to GW, partly down to PP and partly down to where I play. I've been a long time price whiner but I've always kept going back to GW for more due to a perceived lack of hobby alternatives. Recently I discovered a great independent wargames shop in similar travelling distance to my local GW and went down to have a look at some Warmachine stuff in person. When the guy in the shop informed me that Warmachine was the game of choice on their game nights GW's monopoly on my hobbying was finally broken!

Don't get me wrong, I like GW's games, it's just got the point where PERSONALLY (if you can, then good for you!) I can't accept the prices anymore. Shelling out £61.50 for five cavalry models to me is utter nonsense.

So a response to my point might be 'PP aren't THAT much cheaper'. That's a fair point, but in my opinion you don't need as many models to have as satisfying a game of Warmachine as you do for Warhammer or 40K. I've never gone in for Apocolypse, buckets full of miniatures thrown on a table doesn't do it for me. After playing a few games of Warmachine I can say that the system has the depth and excitement I want from a wargame, and although I'm going to keep my GW collection for playing teir games when the mood takes me, they're definitely going to be taking a battle sabbatical for a while.

A few weeks in and I have 25 points of Cygnar painted and I'm going to branch out into Rhulic Mercenaries soon. The atmosphere in the game shop is definitely friendlier, I've not been made to feel awkward for not buying a product that I have absolutely no interest in (hello GW!) and in their respectful approach to me the shop has secured a long term patron.

I've never really believed that GW could be knocked from it's pedestal of hobby-world domination, but if I've turned my back on them then they're definitely not doing everything right.

chamelion 6
03-06-2011, 09:01
Chamelion6, i don't know what you are saying, but beating around the bush is an understatement,

PP is cheaper to get in to.

Based on those figures provided, it is cheaper per model.

It CAN be played on a large scale.

You don't play on a large scale anyway.

Value for money goes to PP, unquestionably.

Personal aesthetic preference on the other hand... well that is a different kettle of fish

Depends on which game system we're talking about... With 40k we tend to smaller games these days... With fantasy I prefer blocks of troops and the whole feel of WFB. As I said, the only problem I have with WFB is the cost of the models... PP's models are about the same price and I don't like them at all.

We'll just have to disagree about which is cheaper to get into... 15 to 40 dollars per model is 15 to 40 dollars per model... Neither system (40k that is) requires more than 25 to 30 models to "get into." Unless you insist on lawyering a suggestion into a rule. Which is fine... That just make it one of those rules I'll happily ignore.

Value depends on what is meaningful to the individual. It's subjective, not objective. What's the value, for me, on spending a bunch of money on minis I don't like to play a game that doesn't interest me? GW's minis are overpriced and so are PP's. Mantic's offerings I find interesting, but they aren't the topic, so I've not mentioned them.

My point is, and always was... How you answer the question(s) posed is entirely dependent on what you find is important and what you want out of the game. I'm not sure why that's a problem... that I don't share the common opinion in this thread. But it is oddly fascinating how much hostility (not from you) that it seems to generate... It really does remind me of the reactions I used to get for saying WFB 7th was awful. Though the hostility was much worse over that.

I'll give you that I agree GW is not the company they used to be, they're out of touch with their clients... PP is much better at that and most of the people that love their games love the company in general. The reasons GW's customers are generally unhappy with GW the company is because GW treats them poorly for the most part. They come off like some large uncaring corporation whose only goal is to make money at what ever cost.

You see, it's not an "either / or" thing, it's possible to play and enjoy both games. The companies may compete, but why do the gamers?

Ahhh well...
I'm just sayin' all that love and warmth for PP isn't universal. ;)

ashc
03-06-2011, 09:12
We'll just have to disagree about which is cheaper to get into... 15 to 40 dollars per model is 15 to 40 dollars per model...

*brainmelt* but you need less models to play PP games, which are tactically far more engaging...

chamelion 6
03-06-2011, 09:20
*brainmelt* but you need less models to play PP games, which are tactically far more engaging...

Really? As I said, my DE army is a whopping 38 models... Compared to?

Either game CAN be played with a small number of models... People generally choose to play 1500 point games... It isn't required and even if that's your goal you can start small and collect your way up. Collecting the models is a BIG part of the hobby isn't it? Well it is for me.

I need exactly as many as I want. As for them being more tactically engaging... All I can say is I find them uninteresting.

:eyebrows:

IJW
03-06-2011, 09:28
I suspect that some of the hostility comes from bits like...



We'll just have to disagree about which is cheaper to get into... 15 to 40 dollars per model is 15 to 40 dollars per model... Neither system (40k that is) requires more than 25 to 30 models to "get into." Unless you insist on lawyering a suggestion into a rule. Which is fine... That just make it one of those rules I'll happily ignore.

25-30 models isn't 'getting into' Warmachine, it's a sizeable force equivalent in complexity and 'normal' game size to 1000-1500 points in 40k. 'Getting into' Warmachine requires 4-6 models which is why everyone is saying that it's cheaper to get into.

Bear in mind that I don't play PP games and don't actually like the aesthetic (steampunk without really being steampunk) so I'm not saying this as a PP/Warmahordes fan.

the_corvus
03-06-2011, 09:31
*brainmelt* but you need less models to play PP games, which are tactically far more engaging...

Yes, but chamelion is thinking in terms of cost per model not cost per typical game.

It is semi-valid as large numbers of GW customers are just modellers/painters who are happy to build their force unit by unit until one day they have an average sized army. So the initial buy in for both systems will be the same if you look at it with that mindset.

For me personally I have gone to games where you can buy a decent starting force for $50.

paddyalexander
03-06-2011, 09:46
The Wargaming Hobby (not the GWplc Hobbytm) is expensive. So is Golf or model trains.

What you are focusing on is a cost per model. They are roughly equal. Congratulations the dead horse is now toroughly flogged. Well done.

If I want to play any of these games at the sizes that are officialy recomended or suggested (and by official we can assume from the rulebook, magazine, official website & official tournies) then the buy in to fully experience games like WHFB, WH40k & Flames of War is significantly greater than for games that require less minis like Infinity, Warmachine, Hoardes, Malifaux & Heavy Gear (I'm only listing games that I have recent personal experience buying into) or games that are of equal size like Kings of War & Dystopian Wars.

You choose to play these games with only one unit, model, ship or carboard cut outs and if you have lots of fun doing so then good for you. Doesn't change the fact that these rulesets are balanced (can't use that word in relation to GW without giggling) to work at a certain points/size & that the producers officialy recommend what those sizes are & that the gaming community as a whole works to those recomendations. You & your group are an exception if you choose to play lower pointed games. You aren't the only ones.

I left GW six/seven years ago because the quality of the rules, the sculpting style of the minis & the cost to play added up to me not feeling like I was getting value for money. Let alone playing rulesets that I found borring/unchallanging. This was highlighted by the fact that I was playing games like Warmachine (Hoardes was just about to be released when I started) as secondry games.

f2k
03-06-2011, 10:03
My gaming group plays 40k at 750 to 850 pts on the average. With Space Marines and some other factions, depending on how you build your force that's not a lot of models.


Either game CAN be played with a small number of models... People generally choose to play 1500 point games... It isn't required and even if that's your goal you can start small and collect your way up. Collecting the models is a BIG part of the hobby isn't it? Well it is for me.

What you're forgetting is that while WarMachine and Hordes are balanced around some 20 or so, Warhammer and 40K is balanced around 1500 points (if not 2000 points these days...).

I've played both Warhammer and 40K at small point levels (500+ points) and the rules start breaking down at such low levels. You relly need 1000+ points before things start to balance...

Wait... Did I just say "Games Workshop" and "balance" in the same post...?

Dyrnwyn
03-06-2011, 10:32
We'll just have to disagree about which is cheaper to get into... 15 to 40 dollars per model is 15 to 40 dollars per model... Neither system (40k that is) requires more than 25 to 30 models to "get into." Unless you insist on lawyering a suggestion into a rule. Which is fine... That just make it one of those rules I'll happily ignore.
I'm sorry, but no. Warmachine is objectively cheaper to get into. You can debate over the relative value of the models delivered, but to get into Warmachine as a game requires $50. To get into Warhammer requires $99. That's the cost of the respective starter sets, which come with enough in terms of models and rules to have a game. Quality of said small games notwithstanding, that's the minimum purchase needed by a single person.

Furthermore, 25-30 models is a lot for Warmahordes - that's not merely getting into the game, that's an average 35-50 point list, and that's as much as you'll need for official tournaments and events. To get into WM/H, you need 3-5 models - the contents of any Battle Box. To get into 40k, you need anywhere from 7 models (Tyranids) to 51 models (Imperial Guard) That's just the requirements for legal force - obviously some forces will require more assuming you are trying to get everyone on a standard points level - a standard game below 500 points is impossible if you have a Necron player in your group.

rickie8437
03-06-2011, 10:39
if you talking about cost to get into the hobby then id say PP are cheap as well as other games like Secrets of the Third Reich

as for Sotr this is what you need for a basic game.

rule set £22 (main rule book and doomsday book)
starter set ranges from £25-30+

and thats its, it works out at about £1.05 per model and there is no "you must use our stuff to play" westwind and gridhouse who write the rules tell you to get diffrent companys ww2 stuff to play as long as you use there rules.

but there is no way you can get into 40k for under £50 not a mission

rik

ashc
03-06-2011, 11:22
Ok then, lets drop the flogged horse as by now it is very dead.

For those who consider PP to give the most worth, or are the most worthy of your money over GW, why?

Its a better question, money-related without trundling down the 'cost per model' route; this is a question about the companies themselves.

paddyalexander
03-06-2011, 11:24
Back to the overall decline of GWplc in general, I think the following factors are responsable:

1) Many older "veteran" gamers are either leaving the brand for a variety of reasons or they continue to play but are disgruntled with the company. People who are looking at the hobby or a particular games system are going to ask experienced players, either someone they know who is in the hobby or on internet forums for advice. How many possitive comments are they going to recieve. Even just researching GWplc online outside of their own sites the general sentiment is negitivity towards the company if not their games.

2) The visibility & availability of competitors games systems. Going onto wargaming news site, blogs & independent forums & online stores there are often adverts for other games systems. GWplc does not advertise. These systems are showing up more & more in independent retailers. GWplc treats independent store like they are stealing from them by carrying their products. Often brick & mortor stores aren't even allowed to carry a lot of GWplcs' products and have to order them in for customers. This is creating space inside these independent stores for them to carry products from other games systems from companies who are a lot easier to deal with (not always, depends on who they are using as a distributer). Is the customer going to wait up to two weeks for a €30-€50 model or are they going to pick up a starter box from another games system that is there on the shelf.

3) Better produced rule & products. Most competiters have been releasing full colour rule books with a hard & soft cover option & models that are of a different style & often more dynamicly possed than GWplcs. Now this is purely astethical, eye of the beholder etc. but looking at other companies ranges GWplc can't remotely claim to product the "best" minis in the world right now. I think large multipart plactic kits are their only claim to fame as long as you ignore Hornby, Remmel & Airfix.

4) Bad public relations. The recent Finecast & RoW embargo are prime examples of this. PP switched to a new material & let the comunity know why. They had quality issues with some of those kits, again let the comunity know why, appoligised & moved to resolve the issues. Price Increases? Both of PPs price increases (over 7 years) were explained to the community & they even changed the way they made models for newer releases to make them cheeper (Epic Casters no longer coming on large metal scenic bases & larger models now with more hollow parts). The funny thing was GWplc coppied this move the same year but it came across badly because it was a much larger % increase & was in line with the annual 10%-20% price rise. Companies like PP & Mantic can make mistakes & can get away with it simply because they have fostered enough good will with their customer base.

In Ireland PP, Infinity & Dystopian Wars are the hot properties in Dublin & there has been an explosian in PPs' games in the last 6 months in Cork. GWplcs' games are far from dead here but they are not as popular as they once were either.

paddyalexander
03-06-2011, 11:39
Ok then, lets drop the flogged horse as by now it is very dead.

For those who consider PP to give the most worth, or are the most worthy of your money over GW, why?

Its a better question, money-related without trundling down the 'cost per model' route; this is a question about the companies themselves.

Reason I play Warmachine & Hoardes over GWplcs' games?

Much better rulesets. Balanced & toroughly playtested. Been playing for 7 years & have yet to have a rule arguement. PP rule books have a very good index so any rules quiries that arise durring a game get sorted quickly.

The cheep buy in for the game can lead to having a large collection of minis grow over time very organicly. It is a big advantage that simply by changing one or two models that the play style of the army drasticly changes. One of my first forrays into Hoardes was a 500point(mk1) army that was planned and built around a Warlock, Beasts, units & solos that I liked. Cost around €80-€100, Then I picked up new Warlocks that would work well with what I already owned & expanded out with new Warbeasts & units that worked well with them. I now own almost everything for the faction as well as 6 others.

If I'm really honest I was sick at how I as a customer & the community as a whole was being treated by GWplc. Here is this subpar product please pay us premium price for it. I left the GWplc Hobbytm & joined the Wargaming Hobby. PP just happened to be my main secondary system at the time.

Night Bearer
03-06-2011, 12:17
For those who consider PP to give the most worth, or are the most worthy of your money over GW, why?
I think if there were a hundred thousand gamers who prefer PP over GW, there are probably going to be nearly a 100k different answers.

Having said that, my guess is that PP has a lot more slack with its customers than GW has with theirs, or at least with a significant portion of them. The reasons I think being:

1) GW is a public company, which has led to the perception (right or wrong, I'm only saying it's there) that they are more concerned with the demands of non-gaming shareholders than their customers. If you go to the forums on PP's website, it's not uncommon to see people plea (seriously or light-heartedly) with PP never to go public.

2) PP is much more open and responsive in the changes it makes. For example, a lot of people complained about the mk1 rules and the surplus of special rules and one-off rules and how it was too difficult to keep things straight. So they revised the rules using an open-testing period. Similarly, they've done more to explain price increases and the introduction of their plastic-resin. It's still spinned, but at least it's more than what GW does.

3) PP seems more customer-friendly in its product releases. I've had a lot of GW fanboy friends - who normally ignore PP at best - comment, somewhat almost bitterly at times, about how PP was able to release two updated rulebooks and 10-ish updated armybooks in roughly a year, whereas GW routinely lets armies languish for one or two editions - and in some cases a decade or so. Similarly, PP announces new book and model releases and lets people see what's in store, unlike GW's increasing philosophy of tightening and reducing the amount of rumor or preview people have of their products.

4) Perhaps most importantly, PP has simply not been around as long. A lot of GW hate, IMO stems from the fact that they have been around long enough that their products have evolved enough to alienate some customers. PP has already been around for roughly a decade or so, IIRC, whereas I've been into 40k for roughly 20 years now. PP has just moved to their Second Edition, whereas 40k was just moving to 2nd ed not too long after I started, and WHFB is already up to its 8th edition. That's a lot of changes to background, rules, miniature design, and pricing. I don't know if PP has been around long enough for people to have the same memories of "how much cheaper" it was when they first got in, or "how better" the minis looked before they became standardized.

YMMV, of course. But I suspect these are the big reasons for why PP is often held in better esteem than GW.

mulkers
03-06-2011, 13:16
Really? As I said, my DE army is a whopping 38 models... Compared to?


3 models.

Khador starter set.


3 models.


I'm not sure why that's a problem... that I don't share the common opinion in this thread.

The problem is contradictory argument.

Confusing fact and opinion is also a problem.

PP's own forum has random threads praising PP, instead of GW's fan forum's random hate threads.

I 'get it' if you don't like the aesthetic or feel of the game, but its recent success, as well as GW's competitors reasons it safe enough to say that they are DEFINITELY getting to GW, whether or not GW want to know about it (*Mark Wells/Tom Kirby to middle management and marketing* lalalalallalalalallalalal! i can't hear your! lalalalallalala)


@ ashc; everything. Why choose PP over GW? Everything. Everything GW do (worth doing), PP do better



I don't know if PP has been around long enough for people to have the same memories of "how much cheaper" it was when they first got in,

They don't have to, it isn't that much more expensive

Anarnaxe
03-06-2011, 14:34
(*Mark Wells/Tom Kirby to middle management and marketing* lalalalallalalalallalalal! i can't hear your! lalalalallalala)


You forgot them shutting their eyes tight and sticking their fingers in their ears while middle management delivers their reports.

And that is pretty much what I think they're business plan is at the moment.

doomspittle
03-06-2011, 17:33
I really hope both companies continue to grow and do well to be honest.If you hate GW for whatever reason fine, but do you really need to continually ram it down everyones throats , getting a bit tedious now.

Gazak Blacktoof
03-06-2011, 18:20
What do PP supposedly do well: Tight rules and interaction with the community.

If PP are "getting to GW" and that results in a better product and more interaction with the community, that's great.

I don't have any experience with PP as a company and only limited experience with their flagship games. The move to 2nd edition for warmahordes result in some improvements that I found compelling enough to look into warmahordes again- however I still don't like the look of the majority of the models.

GW have recently started to release more FAQs and if they released more statements regarding their design choices (the Jes Goodwin blog entries and FW vids are great) and company policy decisions, there will probably be a marked upswing in how the gaming community at large views them.

As much as GW as a plc and the main design studio could learn something from PP, I think that they could also learn thing or two by looking in-house to Black Library. I've lost count of the number of interviews I've seen/ heard with their authors and editors, in stark contrast to this I can't remember the last time I a studio designer or sculptor gave an interview about their work with GW.

Dyrnwyn
03-06-2011, 20:47
Ok then, lets drop the flogged horse as by now it is very dead.

For those who consider PP to give the most worth, or are the most worthy of your money over GW, why?

Its a better question, money-related without trundling down the 'cost per model' route; this is a question about the companies themselves.

Well, for starters, I like alot of the factions in Warmahordes. If I want to collect 3 or four different armies, it's doable - I'll spend $200-300 and I'll have 4 different factions with 15 - 25 point lists that are playable and interesting. The ones I find particularly interesting I'll expand with a few solos, maybe a unit. That I like to play jack/beast heavy also helps me. $200 to $300 is starting a single army in 40k or Fantasy. I built my Wood Elves for around $270 - and that's with me using some non GW figures. Had I used all GW figures, that would have jumped to $310. Initial investment to start armies is pretty large in 40k games. Investment to expand armies is similarly large, with needing multiple blisters or boxes to add a new unit. In Warmahordes I can add a solo for $8, or a small unit for $14.

Secondly, rules. I've found the latest editions of both of GW's core games to be exceedingly bland, mostly because of TLOS, which is particularly egregious in Fantasy where you don't even get a cover save from area terrain, just a hit modifier. Warmachines and spells don't require to hit rolls, so... who let that one slip through? What about morale checks in transports? The incredible always questioned Necron rules? GW doesn't write a tight ruleset, and doesn't go out of their way to clarify when there's a problem. PP does FAQ and errata, but writes a ruleset which doesn't need it all that much because it's designed well.

Finally, customer relationship. PP interacts with the community. The free playtest of MkII? Huge. HUGE. That's a pretty bold step compared to GW and it resulted in what I feel is a much better system overall. PP builds a lot of goodwill with it's customers simply by talking with them and having that weekly insider with little previews and things. I'd rather support a company like that than one which clamps down on any leak, doesn't tell us what's coming down the pipe til a week beforehand, and who's magazine no longer contains any game or background content.

When I started 40k in 2003, I liked GW because it had that sort of relationship with it's customers, especially on the Specialist Games side of things. These days, the Specialist Games are just a faded echo of what they were, and giant swathes of good content for all games vanished in GW's site change.

Tay051173096
03-06-2011, 22:07
What I like from reading the Cryx book is the feeling of different factions and charcters with GW you just see the historic/popular themes (marbo, eldar ect).

Another is the how to paint section of the books, GW have got rid of it :( in the last ork codex there were even conversions!!! But now it just shows page upon page of model adverts and not how to paint them.

Ok so there maybe 1 page given to that but it gave a good ideal of colours and themes, hell the last IG codex had over 32 colour schemes for you troops :evilgrin:.

It just feels like less effort is being put into the GW while the prices keep on marching up...

paddyalexander
03-06-2011, 23:18
For the record I don't hate GWplcs' games systems. I started in the hobby trough Heroquest & Space Crusade. I currently still play the Warhammer 40k RPGs and I'm looking into using the rules to run small competitive squad sized games after a very successful game where a Deathwatch Squad had to clear a ruined imperial temple & then hold it from an Eldar counter attack. It was a blast to play trough/run.

But as a customer I have a choice where I spend my money. GWplc has failed to entice my interest for the last 6 years. If the next edition of 40k is a well playtested & balanced ruleset with well defined terms & clear rules I might be interested.

They would have to change their pricing policy to set in Pound Sterling with an almost straight conversion to other currencies. Right now I can buy from a British online retailer at RRP & it would equate to a 20% discount on Euro RRP. If that store is selling at a 20% dicount it can actualy end up nearly 50% cheeper. Hell I could go on a day trip to Belfast or London & the cost of tickets (~ €60 return) would still work out way cheeper than walking into a GWplc store in Dublin as long as I spend €300 odd. Lets not mention the Australia thing.

I can buy starter sets for games by PP, Sparten Game, Wyrd or Corvis Beli for the cost of a single FOC slot in 40k.

As an older gamer I can remember when plastic was the new thing and 90% of the models you got were metal. I've no problem working with metal. Most peoples view on metal is coloured by GWplcs' metal kits which have always been seen as sme of the worst in the industry. Putting together my metal killer Kanns & Carnasour were the most annoying experiences of my life. Compared to models from Helldarado, Confrontation (RIP) & Warmachine that fit together very well. Hell one of my metal Juggernaughts arms aren't glued. I dry fitted them and they pretty much stuck. In fairness Karchev (big 1/2 Warjack 1/2 man model) is sitting in a box waiting for me to give it another go. Horrible model to assemble.

Frankly
04-06-2011, 09:52
Back to the overall decline of GWplc in general, I think the following factors are responsable:

1) Many older "veteran" gamers are either leaving the brand for a variety of reasons or they continue to play but are disgruntled with the company. People who are looking at the hobby or a particular games system are going to ask experienced players, either someone they know who is in the hobby or on internet forums for advice. How many possitive comments are they going to recieve. Even just researching GWplc online outside of their own sites the general sentiment is negitivity towards the company if not their games.

2) The visibility & availability of competitors games systems. Going onto wargaming news site, blogs & independent forums & online stores there are often adverts for other games systems. GWplc does not advertise. These systems are showing up more & more in independent retailers. GWplc treats independent store like they are stealing from them by carrying their products. Often brick & mortor stores aren't even allowed to carry a lot of GWplcs' products and have to order them in for customers. This is creating space inside these independent stores for them to carry products from other games systems from companies who are a lot easier to deal with (not always, depends on who they are using as a distributer). Is the customer going to wait up to two weeks for a €30-€50 model or are they going to pick up a starter box from another games system that is there on the shelf.

3) Better produced rule & products. Most competiters have been releasing full colour rule books with a hard & soft cover option & models that are of a different style & often more dynamicly possed than GWplcs. Now this is purely astethical, eye of the beholder etc. but looking at other companies ranges GWplc can't remotely claim to product the "best" minis in the world right now. I think large multipart plactic kits are their only claim to fame as long as you ignore Hornby, Remmel & Airfix.

4) Bad public relations. The recent Finecast & RoW embargo are prime examples of this. PP switched to a new material & let the comunity know why. They had quality issues with some of those kits, again let the comunity know why, appoligised & moved to resolve the issues. Price Increases? Both of PPs price increases (over 7 years) were explained to the community & they even changed the way they made models for newer releases to make them cheeper (Epic Casters no longer coming on large metal scenic bases & larger models now with more hollow parts). The funny thing was GWplc coppied this move the same year but it came across badly because it was a much larger % increase & was in line with the annual 10%-20% price rise. Companies like PP & Mantic can make mistakes & can get away with it simply because they have fostered enough good will with their customer base.

In Ireland PP, Infinity & Dystopian Wars are the hot properties in Dublin & there has been an explosian in PPs' games in the last 6 months in Cork. GWplcs' games are far from dead here but they are not as popular as they once were either.


Perfect. 100%. QFT.

Mirbeau
04-06-2011, 10:08
It's a shame, I'd like to get into p.p but the miniatures' asthetic just doesn't sit with me, and people are just so evangelical about the whole thing, more than a bit off-putting. Dark Sphere are really into it at the moment, has anyone bumped into the company reps/'outriders' going round game shops running intros?

Deadnight
04-06-2011, 10:22
It's a shame, I'd like to get into p.p but the miniatures' asthetic just doesn't sit with me, and people are just so evangelical about the whole thing, more than a bit off-putting.

i think its just a case of people being happy. More than once i've run a demo for a 50/50 player - someone who was interested but not yet convinced. and by the end of the demo, they were sold. "its the game i always wanted 40k to be", "its the game i always thought 40k should be", "this is the game i've always wanted to play, without knowing it".
With PP, there is a sense of freedom, and honestly with their games. For a player from a GW background, the fact that its OK to be competitive all of a sudden, the fact that player skill means more than your list, and the fact that almost everything is viable, there is almost a sense of "the promised land" in PP games. you know, that "it does exist!" kind of feeling?
No, its not perfect. Some warcasters are still a tad too much, some units still need... something, and its a game that isnt for everyone (those like chamelion who like large blocks of infantry will never be convinced by a skirmish game - fair play, thats their choice). i think people are just singing out of happiness.

Now fair enough, there are the newly convinced vocal anti-gw fanboys whove jumped ship. Heh, GW has enough GW haters within the platyers of their own game now. And its not like PP have a monopoly on fanbois. GW have plenty themselves....
But most of us PP players grew up with GW. its hard to turn and hate them.Most of us will admit GW have fantastic IP and fantastic models. We just dont like their game. its not fanboyism to say that.

paddyalexander
04-06-2011, 10:46
It's a shame, I'd like to get into p.p but the miniatures' asthetic just doesn't sit with me, and people are just so evangelical about the whole thing, more than a bit off-putting. Dark Sphere are really into it at the moment, has anyone bumped into the company reps/'outriders' going round game shops running intros?

When I first started looking at other games systems, actualy while I was still playing GWplc games I found myself saying "the concept is cool but it just doesn't look right". The more & more I looked around at other companies models the more I felt something just wasn't right about them. It finaly clicked with me that there was nothing wrong with these product but rather with my own perception of them.

I had grown up with GW as my main hobby. I started with Heroquest & Space Crusade, later playing 2nd ed 40k & the edition of Warhammer that came with lizardmen & brentonians in the box. I also played D&D but used WHFB minis. By what at that point had been a decade in the hobby I'd realised that my default idea of what a mini should look like was the GW style. I slowly started to change how I judged other copmanies products, rating them on their own visual style. The more I did this the better other companies models started looking to me & the more dated the GW style of sculpting looks to me now.

PP have players known as Press Gangers who get offical support from PP to run demos, tournaments & promote the hobby in general. Anyone can become one if they meet certain criteria.

Unfortunitly converts from one system to another (not just wargames it happens with football fans, religions, PC/MAC & consoles) tend to be very passonite & vocal about their new system. Also people who are still part of the old system don't like to be reminded of the problems (real or imagined) that their system has by these converts. If I am comming across like I'm some rabid PP fanboi then I appolagise. They are one of many great systems I currently play. Or that I hate GWplc & their games. I don't. I would love for them to fix everything (both in their games systems & within their company) that drove me away.

dancingmonkey
04-06-2011, 11:20
It's a shame, I'd like to get into p.p but the miniatures' asthetic just doesn't sit with me, and people are just so evangelical about the whole thing, more than a bit off-putting. Dark Sphere are really into it at the moment, has anyone bumped into the company reps/'outriders' going round game shops running intros?

I'm the London pressganger.
I tend to do one event a month where possible at Dark Sphere.
Oli is London's other guy, he's down there a fair bit too.

Have we met? :D

KingDeath
04-06-2011, 11:54
The more competition GW gets the sooner they will learn to fail less, at least that's what i hope. It's a pity that i can't stand the aesthetics of the two PP games, otherwise i might have switched quite a while ago.

the_corvus
04-06-2011, 11:58
The more competition GW gets the sooner they will learn to fail less, at least that's what i hope.

In this scenario you will either see the group under attack realise the error of their ways and reform the leadership. Or they will become even more insular and set on their path to ruin.

GW has solidly been going for the insular route (lose customers, increase prices, lose customers, increase prices, etc).

KingDeath
04-06-2011, 12:09
In this scenario you will either see the group under attack realise the error of their ways and reform the leadership. Or they will become even more insular and set on their path to ruin.

GW has solidly been going for the insular route (lose customers, increase prices, lose customers, increase prices, etc).

Then, with a bit luck, GW will go bancrupt sooner or later, which will grant the IP a chance to get picked up by someone who actualy knows what he is doing.

frozenwastes
04-06-2011, 14:26
That's going to be way more "later" and not "soon." GW has excellent control of their debt and lots of cash. They have access to lots of financing as well. They could operate at a loss for quite some time while they figure out how to either downsize some more or turn things around. And they could probably downsize even more without having to fundamentally change anything about their product, price or customer approach if they don't want to.

Anarnaxe
04-06-2011, 14:34
Then, with a bit luck, GW will go bancrupt sooner or later, which will grant the IP a chance to get picked up by someone who actualy knows what he is doing.

Thats a foolish attitude, because A. Someone could be granted the IP and gut it for all its worth, perhaps deciding that "tabletop gaming is the past, so hey, lets just make video games". B. Whatever you might say about the managers and executives, they'll get away with a golden handshake while the guys down in the moulding rooms, the production staff, will be left without a job and possibly a token severance pay. So tell me, what did they do to deserve that?

Jetty Smurf
04-06-2011, 15:33
Recently, due to this thread, I have been looking into Warmahordes. In fact, last night, I went through and checked out just about every single picture on the PP website for the Hordes armies (they interest me more than warmachine).

As of today I have purchased the rulebook. This rulebook cost me $29.60 ($37 RRP - 20% FLGS discount) compared to the WHFB rulebook which would have cost $99.20 ($124 RRP - 20% FLGS discount).

I was even told that I don't need to buy the rulebook right now, but I wanted to, especially at that price - oh the pretty pictures :).

I am seemingly on my way to being converted (maybe already?) but, to me, it's not necessarily due to the rule-set or the price, but from the models themselves.

This may be somewhat interesting, as from what I have read on this thread, the models are one of, if not the, biggest turn off for people interested in moving to warmahordes.

How can anyone be so totally against PP minis when there are models such as this guy (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/circle-orboros/warlocks/krueger-the-stormwrath), not to mention these (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/circle-orboros/units/wolves-of-orboros-officer-totem-bearer), these (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/circle-orboros/units/tharn-bloodtrackers), and let's not forget this lovely lady (http://privateerpress.com/files/products/legion-of-everblight/warlocks/lylyth-shadow-of-everblight.png).

That's right, it IS possible to make female models look good. After spending these last couple years purely with GW, I was amazed that it was possible (ok I admit, I do like the Dark Elf Witch Elves, but honestly, that's about it for female models from GW imo).

As you can probably tell, I'm fawning over the Circle Orboros stuff. It will be my first Hordes army, whether or not the rules appeal to me. If they do, then they may not be my last army.

Now to the topic at hand (well, sort of).

Warhammer has seemingly seen a drop in player base around these parts, but the tournaments are still pretty strong. 40k seems to be doing quite well, but I don't know anything about increases/decreases.

Warmahordes seems to be picking up, and there's a regular night for the system at my local, which I will be attending next chance I get.

The thing about my local indie, is that the GW rep seems to be screwing with them. I won't go into details about this, as it's not my place to. PP seem to not be trying to actively screw over my local. In fact, they are offering them deals at the moment, and encouraging good will between them and the store.

The last thing I want to mention is price. As you may have gathered (it was hinted at earlier - rulebook vs rulebook price), I currently reside in Australia. This would not be an issue in and of itself, unless we wanted to talk prices, and GW. ;)

This is where everything falls down. You know what's worse than GW charging exorbitant amounts for their products in Australia? The fact that the independent retailers down here have grouped together, asking for GW not to ban overseas dealers, but instead to let them buy at a price on par with UK prices. This would lead to them being able to price the products equal to that of the online UK stores that are in direct competition with them. This would then lead to less online purchases, and more in-store purchases. It also would have the exact effect that GW have been trying to push onto us as the reason behind the embargo in the first place.

But you know what? This idea was presented to GW, not just by one indie, but by them all (well, a representation thereof) and their response? "No, I think we'll just do what we want to do."

Really? Really?! And you expect me, as a customer, who WANTS to support my local, to just go along with that? Well, for me, that really was the tipping point.

Prices have always been an issue. Always will be. Potentially PP will have issues with prices, but that's not what this is about. Attitude. Plain and simple. I really can't see myself giving any more money to a company with that kind of attitude.

Of course I will still play warhammer. I'm not an idiot. I already have all the models I need for the two armies that visually interest me (which was what got me into warhammer in the first place, the awesome looking models). But I don't need any more. And frankly, I don't want any more. Because that would lead to me giving my hard earned cash (mostly hard earned - some days are pretty easy :)) to GW. Which is something I really feel strongly against these days.

Is PP getting to GW? I don't know, they probably don't care. I hope there can be some sort of influence, maybe causing a change in GW's current business plans. But for now, I will just be happy that I found some new awesome mini's to paint up (when I get around to buying them :p) for a game I am eagerly waiting to try.

paddyalexander
04-06-2011, 15:50
Except for some promotional offers & a bits service like GWs' when it was good, PP do not sell trough their own webstore. They've said to retailers that carry them that they want them to make money selling their stock therefore making money for themselves aswell. GWplcs' attitude to retailers that carry them is that they are stealing from them. Not a great attitude to have when 60% of your dwindling sale comes trough those "thieves".

chamelion 6
04-06-2011, 18:54
Let me ask a question… I’m sincere too.
Why does it matter to you? What real difference does it make whether PP pounds GW into submission?

What I’m getting from all this is it’s more about proving PP’s games are better, period. The whole premise and line of logic are structured exactly to prove that point. To me, this whole thing comes off as an exercise in self-validation. Not every gamer feels like the majority of the group here, not all gamers judge games by the same criteria or standards. The “proof” offered up here is neither scientific nor universally accepted.

There are large numbers of gamers out there that you won’t see gaming in your LGS or GW shop… They usually get their stuff online. You don’t often find them here or on other forums, at least not for long, because they find the environment hostile… They’re more interested in playing their game than some dry debate over mechanics. They generally tend to play with a specific group at someone’s home where they can do what they want, how they want and not be bothered by the drama and hassles that surround most LGS’s. I know of groups that range from 20 or sothat host large complex campaigns to groups of 2 or 3. I know of them, because I’m one of them. Among this crowd 40k 5th and WFB 8th is really popular. Warmachine isn’t really detested, but it is pretty much ignored.

The point is this; because these guys are invisible to most of the people here you either see them as nonexistent or insignificant so far as this discussion is concerned… The problem is they are neither. They are a large group, probably the largest group and on the whole they devote a greater portion of their disposable income than most of the guys I know that play at the LGS’s. They represent a huge part of the equation and their opinion matters. And mostly their opinions are very different than yours. They are GW’s prime target and they are the population that was alienated during GW’s move towards the competitive and tourney crowd… That’s why I laugh every time I read about how vets are abandoning GW because of bad rules, etc… “GW will rue the day…” The reality is that most of the people in this thread, I don’t believe, were ever GW’s real target audience.

The real question is not what draws you guys to PP because it just straight up what you like, as the posts here show. The real question is what is it going to take to draw GW audience over to PP? Because as long as a population as large as this is still willing to support the company, GW is in the position to simply keep on doing what it does. Here’s the thing though… A lot of these club gamers are getting really unhappy with GW too… It has nothing to do with PP’s awesomeness at all. It’s all because they too feel GW is gouging and taking advantage of them.

So no, PP’s impact on GW, at the moment, is minimal. GW is self-destructing because they don’t have any understanding of their market. They can’t alienate everybody and stay in business.

xxRavenxx
04-06-2011, 19:03
How can anyone be so totally against PP minis when there are models such as this guy (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/circle-orboros/warlocks/krueger-the-stormwrath), not to mention these (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/circle-orboros/units/wolves-of-orboros-officer-totem-bearer), these (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/circle-orboros/units/tharn-bloodtrackers), and let's not forget this lovely lady (http://privateerpress.com/files/products/legion-of-everblight/warlocks/lylyth-shadow-of-everblight.png).

Because these (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/legion-of-everblight/units/blighted-swordsmen-unit) and these (http://privateerpress.com/warmachine/gallery/khador/units/kayazy-assassin-unit) exist.

For all warmachine has some nice models, it has some dog ugly stuff too. Much like GW (except GWs ugly stuff is a lot older, it seems.)