PDA

View Full Version : Fantasy Falls to Fourth Place in A Strong year for Hobby Game Growth (2012 USA)



JWhex
29-03-2013, 12:01
http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/25373.html

2012 was the fourth consecutive year of substantial growth in the hobby game market, according to a recently released report in ICv2’s Internal Correspondence #81 (see "ICv2 Releases 'Internal Correspondence' #81"), with roughly 15% growth in the hobby game store channel over 2011 sales. The last year hobby game sales shrank was the crash year of 2008.

This chart of the Top 5 Non-Collectible Miniature Lines (hobby channel) reflects sales in Fall 2012. The charts are based on interviews with retailers, distributors, and manufacturers.

1 Warhammer 40k Games Workshop

2 Star Wars X-Wing Miniatures Fantasy Flight Games

3 Warmachine Privateer Press

4 Warhammer Fantasy Games Workshop

5 Hordes Privateer Press

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/25378.html

Make of this what you will. I find it strange that they count warmachine separate from hordes at this time since it is really one game system that allows factions from either to fight one another as a regular game.

Fear Ghoul
29-03-2013, 12:15
Aren't these reports only for the US?

Lordcypress
29-03-2013, 12:20
Doesn't the title say its for the USA.

IcedCrow
29-03-2013, 12:23
XWing is a great game but also new and has had an initial surge. I'd be interested to see where it falls this time next year after everyone already owns ships.

Fear Ghoul
29-03-2013, 12:26
Doesn't the title say its for the USA.

It wasn't obvious to me from the article itself. If so then I don't understand why this is newsworthy. Who cares if Fantasy is the fourth most popular seller amongst some independent retailers on one part of Earth. It's almost a meaningless statistic.

IcedCrow
29-03-2013, 12:30
It wasn't obvious to me from the article itself. If so then I don't understand why this is newsworthy. Who cares if Fantasy is the fourth most popular seller amongst some independent retailers on one part of Earth. It's almost a meaningless statistic.

Its a psychological thing. The same with MMO players. They want to play what is considered #1. If a game falls below a certain rank, those people abandon it. Its like a point of contention to say "see, your game fell to #4 that means its a bad game people are abandoning it!"

Really what I see here is that the ranks are as they have been for years (40k, warmachine, fantasy) and a new game that is totally unrelated to any of those (starship combat) has arrived and people have surged to get ships so sales are off the chart short-term. As you don't need many ships and there are only two factions, once you do your initial buy-in there is no more incentive to get anything else, so we shall see where xwing stands financially in a year and if it can keep its surge. Its a fun game and I hope it succeeds but I don't think the fact that it is doing massively well (its rolling off of the star wars license and is a game involving starships which is very different than most out there, as most space battle games typically involve big capital ships that move like big capital ships, not starships) is any indication that warhammer fantasy is somehow failing.

underscore
29-03-2013, 12:41
It's basically the same list as the past few years with added Star Wars, isn't it? Adding in the growth doesn't this mean that everything is pretty much the same for Fantasy in Americaland?

JWhex
29-03-2013, 12:46
It wasn't obvious to me from the article itself. If so then I don't understand why this is newsworthy. Who cares if Fantasy is the fourth most popular seller amongst some independent retailers on one part of Earth. It's almost a meaningless statistic.

LOL That's why I said "make of this what you will". You cared enough to post twice though.

Paladin21
29-03-2013, 13:56
That's interesting data; I guess Warmahordes must be big in other regions, because it has zero traction where I'm at. We've got ~20ish regular 40k players, and ~8 Fantasy, but 0 Warmahordes. A couple of guys proxied up some games, but no one was interested enough to buy anything. There's a couple of guys doing X-Wing, but all their stuff is Ebay, so it isn't directly contributing to sales, and they only have a few things each.

herbtarkel
29-03-2013, 16:06
That's interesting data; I guess Warmahordes must be big in other regions, because it has zero traction where I'm at. We've got ~20ish regular 40k players, and ~8 Fantasy, but 0 Warmahordes. A couple of guys proxied up some games, but no one was interested enough to buy anything. There's a couple of guys doing X-Wing, but all their stuff is Ebay, so it isn't directly contributing to sales, and they only have a few things each.


Yeah, Warmachine is a non-starter where I am too. Just a horrid game; ugly minis, rules that blatantly encourage defying Wheaton's Law. I moved from a town where Warmachine killed an entire gaming community. They just turned into a collective group of nobs. People left the local club in droves, and they were left with about 8 people, incestuously trying to out-move the other. It was awful, but the group that was left definitely deserved their fate. Tools, every one of them.

Thank heavens when I moved that the new town is about Fantasy foremost, with some 40k, but Infinity is kind of big. And Star Wars - the big local shop sold out in HOURS. It was insane. They couldn't keep it in on the shelves. I barely got all the minis myself because I reserved them in advance.

The other thing that is turning out to be huge is Bolt Action by Warlord Games. It's effectively killed off the Flames of War market. That's impressive.

Again, all local anecdotes, but they count. Well, to me. :angel:

Scammel
29-03-2013, 16:15
This also doesn't take into account GW stores as far as I can tell. I'm inclined to go along with what IcedCrow said, though that Star Wars game does sound cool. The fact hat Warmahordes was split up is interesting, gives us a bit more insight into all the standings.

Moss
29-03-2013, 16:27
It wasn't obvious to me from the article itself. If so then I don't understand why this is newsworthy. Who cares if Fantasy is the fourth most popular seller amongst some independent retailers on one part of Earth. It's almost a meaningless statistic.

Sales statistics about a part of earth where society is based on consumption and selling crap to one another doesn't seem meaningless to me. thanks for the interesting article.

Zoolander
09-04-2013, 01:39
It's not surprising. 8th edition killed the hobby in my area, and from what I'm been able to gather from the local game stores and other stores they've spoken to across the US, it's the same story. Where they once sold 30 copies of a new army book, they now sell only 10. Reasons for this are myriad, but not the least of which is the constant price gouging. Warmachine/Hordes is a great game, and costs half as much or less to start up. Between those two points and a lack of enjoyment from 8th edition rules, it is hardly a surprise at all.

But from what I've heard, Fantasy is more popular in Europe, and 40k is here in the US. We love our guns here, apparently. Even our minis have to have some.

Knifeparty
09-04-2013, 02:07
How is this even possible. Fantasy is a better game than all these systems combined.

Liber
09-04-2013, 02:08
It's not surprising. 8th edition killed the hobby in my area


This report has nothing to do with the success or failings of 8th edition (which was released 3 years ago :eek: ).

It has everything to do with the fact there is a brand new shiny Star Wars game out.

Other than that the rankings are the same as they have been in the US for years.


...Also 8th edition revived Fantasy in my area. As much as I don't want to go there: anecdotal evidence is as anecdotal evidence does.


Out of curiosity are there reports like this for European markets? I am interested in how popular PP games are over the Atlantic. I know they are popular here but I can't get a feel for what Europe thinks of them.

Zoolander
09-04-2013, 02:22
This report has nothing to do with the success or failings of 8th edition (which was released 3 years ago :eek: ).

It has everything to do with the fact there is a brand new shiny Star Wars game out.

Other than that the rankings are the same as they have been in the US for years.


...Also 8th edition revived Fantasy in my area. As much as I don't want to go there: anecdotal evidence is as anecdotal evidence does.


Out of curiosity are there reports like this for European markets? I am interested in how popular PP games are over the Atlantic. I know they are popular here but I can't get a feel for what Europe thinks of them.


You're wrong. Sorry. It has a lot to do with both of those points. And no, it has not been like this for years. The top two games were always 40k then Fantasy. But due to the points I mentioned, as well as a new star wars game, Fantasy has gradually fallen from 2nd to 4th. Sadly, your area is the minority, not the norm.

IcedCrow
09-04-2013, 02:25
My area fantasy is the top game right now followed by 40k followed by warmachine. Our tournaments have a strong pull and our campaign events have a strong pull.

Unless there is a way to poll every city in America to see what its hobby health is, making overall statements that fantasy is dying is cretinous at best. It is no more invalid for one to say that it is dying because in their area they and their buddies hate it than it is for someone to say that its obviously booming because in their area it is strong.

When someone can come back with actual factual numbers, then there is basis for a discussion. Until then it is trying to backup an opinion about how random charge distance killed your tournament game. No one here can factually talk about what the state of fantasy and 40k and warmachine are for all fifty US states and cities unless they work for GW and have the actual sales numbers in front of them, regardless of how in the minority in your area it is.

The numbers as they stand right now are the same as they've been for years with the addition that a new game made it to the top of the pile and bumped things down a bit. We'll see where XWING stands this time next year. It may stay atop, it may not. I'm still betting fantasy is still at the top of the vast majority of attempts though.

Liber
09-04-2013, 02:39
You're wrong. Sorry.

No. I'm not. But I will accept your apology nonetheless.

If 8th edition had never happened, do you really think that Warmachine and Hordes wouldn't still be enjoying the huge breakout success they have today? Of course they would.

This is about other games and other companies providing GW with increasing competition year after year...which is something GW didn't have to deal with for its decades of prior dominance. If you want to turn the success of Star Wars (big surprise that a Star Wars game is popular?) and Privateer Press into a narrative about 8th edition 'failing' that's your business, but it holds no place in reality and reeks of an agenda and emotional bias.


If my own illustrious reputation is not enough to convince...how about some data:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/15716.html

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/14724.html

yah, data always helps.


EDIT: holy balls, http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/12294.html Fantasy isn't even in the top 5 at all in this 07 report...

m1acca1551
09-04-2013, 02:53
Im not surprised, new games especially with a name like Star wars will always be a big mover, it's nice to see them going well and i wish them all the best.

As for fantasy falling to fourth well, i can go into why but the simple reason can be found in the pricing thread :)

Grey Seer Kwokka
09-04-2013, 03:18
As for fantasy falling to fourth well, i can go into why but the simple reason can be found in the pricing thread :)

The funny thing about this comment (and others like it made by several posters) is that this somehow suggests that 40K isn't "over-priced".

Voss
09-04-2013, 03:33
As for fantasy falling to fourth well, i can go into why but the simple reason can be found in the pricing thread :)
That doesn't mesh with the data at hand, however. As Liber points out with the past reports of the same annual chart, the placement of the GW/PP games is pretty consistent, with another line* pushing into the chart for a period of time. If it was a simple price issue, 40k would ALSO fall. If anything, Fantasy appears to be doing better (by ranking) than it did in 2007 or the winter of 08/09.

As it is, fantasy often falling to 5th in these rankings (specific to the US market) doesn't surprise me, especially prior to 8th edition. In games stores where I played (particularly in the Mid-Atlantic states), a lot of shops saw fantasy fall away during 7th edition, well before 8th was on the radar.

As for Xwing, I'm leaning toward IcedCrow's analysis. Its something new and different, with a popular license and a relatively low cost. It is going to have initial appeal, but its staying power is unclear.


Of course there is also the caveat that the chart is based off interviews, and not hard numbers, which I find a little strange. They should be able to get real numbers from the distribution houses.


*Reaper's Dark Heaven is a miniature line, but not a game as I understand it- that would be Warlord. But DH is pretty popular for RPG minis, and most game stores I've been to across the country regularly stock the line

m1acca1551
09-04-2013, 03:57
That doesn't mesh with the data at hand, however. As Liber points out with the past reports of the same annual chart, the placement of the GW/PP games is pretty consistent, with another line* pushing into the chart for a period of time. If it was a simple price issue, 40k would ALSO fall. If anything, Fantasy appears to be doing better (by ranking) than it did in 2007 or the winter of 08/09.

As it is, fantasy often falling to 5th in these rankings (specific to the US market) doesn't surprise me, especially prior to 8th edition. In games stores where I played (particularly in the Mid-Atlantic states), a lot of shops saw fantasy fall away during 7th edition, well before 8th was on the radar.

As for Xwing, I'm leaning toward IcedCrow's analysis. Its something new and different, with a popular license and a relatively low cost. It is going to have initial appeal, but its staying power is unclear.


Of course there is also the caveat that the chart is based off interviews, and not hard numbers, which I find a little strange. They should be able to get real numbers from the distribution houses.


*Reaper's Dark Heaven is a miniature line, but not a game as I understand it- that would be Warlord. But DH is pretty popular for RPG minis, and most game stores I've been to across the country regularly stock the line

Anything with the star wars IP in my experience tends to lack staying power, due to the restrictions being placed by the IP. Once the Imperial and Rebel fleets are are done, well where does a collector go to from there? that based on the Data provided will constitute why WFB has fallen, my price comment is more based on the trend of WFB falling behind PP (based on what i have seen). But you are correct :)

TheDungen
09-04-2013, 04:23
while its somewhat intresting the US isnt thta big of a country (europe has nearly twice as much people, and that's only counting the eu members), and games should be judged agaisnt games of the same genre. fantasy against fantays and sci-fi against sci fi. especially when in an specific area. we know that sci fi is more prominent in america so of course a couple of sci fi games are going to be on top there.

Voss
09-04-2013, 04:27
Yeah, I was being nice. I fully expect any star wars product to be a flash in the pan. Though... that said, it will likely get a fresh influx when the '7th movie' comes out, so FFG might have stumbled across a tasty timing bonus, and Disney might be willing to license all sorts of crazy stuff.


while its somewhat intresting the US isnt thta big of a country (europe has nearly twice as much people, and that's only counting the eu members), and games should be judged agaisnt games of the same genre. fantasy against fantays and sci-fi against sci fi. especially when in an specific area. we know that sci fi is more prominent in america so of course a couple of sci fi games are going to be on top there.

I...what?
Actually. Hmm. Honestly, trying to figure out how to explain this to someone who isn't familiar with the US market is difficult, because it is a bit weird.
But first, it is worth pointing out how rare it is for a second sci-fi game to be on this chart (only AT-43 has in the past, as far as I know).

But when it comes down to it, most American businesses treat sci-fi and fantasy as the same marketing category, with the same audience. It can be weird, because it isn't really the case as far as the audience is concerned, but if an American company does a ranking of sales or marketing and treats sci-fi and fantasy as two separate concepts, they'd be up to something very suspicious.

To illustrate this point, check the RPG category, it is:
Pathfinder (a D&D clone)
Star Wars
D&D
Dark Heresy etc
Iron Kingdoms.

once again a sci-fi/fantasy mix (with fantasy on top), and star wars. Also notably, the same companies are involved with several product lines. From a US perspective, the market is pretty limited, and the small fish don't really count (I'm actually fairly surprised the Iron Kingdoms are on the RPG chart, but the RPG industry is in a really terrible state of late. Wizards of the Coast is doing more selling reprints of old D&D editions while it botches the development of 5th edition D&D. They killed 4th edition two years too early, or put everyone out of their misery, depending on how you view that).


And finally... neither 40k NOR star wars are really sci-fi in any meaningful sense of the term. Space Fantasy, swords and sorcery.

DrMooreFlava
09-04-2013, 04:35
No. I'm not. But I will accept your apology nonetheless.

If 8th edition had never happened, do you really think that Warmachine and Hordes wouldn't still be enjoying the huge breakout success they have today? Of course they would.

This is about other games and other companies providing GW with increasing competition year after year...which is something GW didn't have to deal with for its decades of prior dominance. If you want to turn the success of Star Wars (big surprise that a Star Wars game is popular?) and Privateer Press into a narrative about 8th edition 'failing' that's your business, but it holds no place in reality and reeks of an agenda and emotional bias.


If my own illustrious reputation is not enough to convince...how about some data:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/15716.html

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/14724.html

yah, data always helps.


EDIT: holy balls, http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/12294.html Fantasy isn't even in the top 5 at all in this 07 report...

Thank you for your effort here. Especially in dispelling that horrendously biased argument.

8th edition is the best edition of fantasy yet. The results are due to people gyrating from one miniature war game to another and the other games have been cashing in on demographics that GW hasn't captured/recaptured yet.

My condolences to the fellow whose game store has taken a hit in the fantasy department but that assumption is not true for all game stores and gamer groups. I remember seeing a youtube video of a guy who did a review of the 8th ed rule book and said he wouldn't play till 9th edition came out due to the random charging, winds of magic etc. I feel bad for that fellow too because he has probably quit 40k now because of the similarities in the new 40k rules to 8th ed.

Zoolander
09-04-2013, 06:49
No. I'm not. But I will accept your apology nonetheless.

If 8th edition had never happened, do you really think that Warmachine and Hordes wouldn't still be enjoying the huge breakout success they have today? Of course they would.

This is about other games and other companies providing GW with increasing competition year after year...which is something GW didn't have to deal with for its decades of prior dominance. If you want to turn the success of Star Wars (big surprise that a Star Wars game is popular?) and Privateer Press into a narrative about 8th edition 'failing' that's your business, but it holds no place in reality and reeks of an agenda and emotional bias.


If my own illustrious reputation is not enough to convince...how about some data:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/15716.html

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/14724.html

yah, data always helps.


EDIT: holy balls, http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/12294.html Fantasy isn't even in the top 5 at all in this 07 report...

You'll be waiting a long time. Your data fails to disprove any of my points, but does point out that Fantasy was on the downward slope before 8th hit, which is not really news to anyone. It started way before that. Sadly, when 8th hit, it only continued to slide. This is not my "emotional bias", though I always enjoy it when 8th ed fanbois get their feathers ruffled if you even hint there could be anything wrong with their precious baby. Your other point lacks merit as well. Hordes would continue to climb in popularity because it's a good game. But that isn't relevant. As I said, which your blind love has completely missed, was that there was a myriad (meaning MANY) different reasons for Fantasy's decline, not the least of which was 8th ed. You can say 8th wasn't the sole cause, and we'd agree. But it sure hasn't helped, and sales figures don't lie. I know it's easy to dismiss my claim as some sort of anti-8th bias, but you'd be wrong and too quick to judge. I play 8th. I like 8th. I do prefer some things of 7th better, but will readily admit the 8th ed books they've released so far (barring daemons /headslap) have been well written and more balanced, which is a nice change from 7th ed books.

Anyway, if you don't think it's pricing, rules changes, or competition, then my curiosity is peaked. What do you think it could be?

Cheers.

P.S. - for those of you pondering, 40k costs about half as much as Fantasy to start an army, and so does Warmahordes, hence the pricing factor.

Zoolander
09-04-2013, 07:12
Thank you for your effort here. Especially in dispelling that horrendously biased argument.

8th edition is the best edition of fantasy yet. The results are due to people gyrating from one miniature war game to another and the other games have been cashing in on demographics that GW hasn't captured/recaptured yet.

My condolences to the fellow whose game store has taken a hit in the fantasy department but that assumption is not true for all game stores and gamer groups. I remember seeing a youtube video of a guy who did a review of the 8th ed rule book and said he wouldn't play till 9th edition came out due to the random charging, winds of magic etc. I feel bad for that fellow too because he has probably quit 40k now because of the similarities in the new 40k rules to 8th ed.

I'd recommend you talk to some store owners before making that assessment. If it's "the best yet", then there should be sales figures to back that up. Sadly, sales are very low. Many stores I've spoken to used to have a strong following of players, with monthly tournaments of 20 to 40 people. Now they're lucky to have 5 players and no tournaments are run. Everyone has switched to 40k or War Machine. There are a ton of reasons for this, but it's possible some of the rules changes had some effect. But don't listen to me, I only live with 12 million people, have spoken with 10 store owners personally, and have the largest gaming community on the west coast with one of the only Battle Bunkers in the nation - oops used to have, apparently it's closing due to low sales. Awesome. But hey, what do I know? I'd like to play 8th, but nobody likes it down here in SoCal so it died. But yeah, it's just my horrendous evil bias, I'm sure.

Lord Solar Plexus
09-04-2013, 07:48
It wasn't obvious to me from the article itself. If so then I don't understand why this is newsworthy. Who cares if Fantasy is the fourth most popular seller amongst some independent retailers on one part of Earth. It's almost a meaningless statistic.

It's not "some place on earth". It's the most or second-most important market on Earth. It could show a trend, or it could have economic repercussions, or it could mean something I cannot even think of right now. I'm pretty sure you knew all that before so you made even more of a fool of yourself.


while its somewhat intresting the US isnt thta big of a country (europe has nearly twice as much people, and that's only counting the eu members), and games should be judged agaisnt games of the same genre.

Europe isn't a country, and the US market is still vast (the size of the country is irrelevant to start with). If the biggest single market is not important, which one is? France? Germany? Perhaps Europe is only "somewhat interesting, let's move on" because China has more people?

If people followed that view, what's the point in making any national or regional economic analysis? You don't have to read this if you live anywhere else that may or may not be unaffected.


Your data fails to disprove any of my points, but does point out that Fantasy was on the downward slope before 8th hit, which is not really news to anyone.

It is a) news to me and b) his data shows a different trend: 07: Not in top 5. 08-09: 5, 09: 04, now: 4. Very steady, no decline in sight.

If you have any other data, share it with us or shut up the nonsense.

Grey Seer Kwokka
09-04-2013, 08:32
You'll be waiting a long time. Your data fails to disprove any of my points, but does point out that Fantasy was on the downward slope before 8th hit, which is not really news to anyone. It started way before that. Sadly, when 8th hit, it only continued to slide. This is not my "emotional bias", though I always enjoy it when 8th ed fanbois get their feathers ruffled if you even hint there could be anything wrong with their precious baby. Your other point lacks merit as well. Hordes would continue to climb in popularity because it's a good game. But that isn't relevant. As I said, which your blind love has completely missed, was that there was a myriad (meaning MANY) different reasons for Fantasy's decline, not the least of which was 8th ed. You can say 8th wasn't the sole cause, and we'd agree. But it sure hasn't helped, and sales figures don't lie. I know it's easy to dismiss my claim as some sort of anti-8th bias, but you'd be wrong and too quick to judge. I play 8th. I like 8th. I do prefer some things of 7th better, but will readily admit the 8th ed books they've released so far (barring daemons /headslap) have been well written and more balanced, which is a nice change from 7th ed books.

That entire post basically amounted to...

- You're right.
- I/we're wrong.
- Green text adds credence to my argument otherwise devoid of any tangible data or justification behind your thoughts (why, etc.).


40k costs about half as much as Fantasy to start an army, and so does Warmahordes, hence the pricing factor.

It's not a surprise for Warmahordes players, granted.

However, a Skaven army is probably not the best example for your 40K vs. Fantasy comparison. ;)

The bearded one
09-04-2013, 09:15
That sales-data top 5 doesnt really support that 'steady decline' thing. Fantasy is higher now than it was in '07, and for as long as I have seen that chart float around the ranking has alwas been similar. Considering GW has been botching and mindlessly flailing about the US market I dont care too much for what the scene is like there anyway, as it's a very different one from the one over here across the atlantic. Over here 8th edition revived the scene, including here in the netherlands where gaming is a pretty small community. The main tournament organisor just sold out of tickets for the next large tournament in may, 1-2 days afer opening registration, ending at about a 50/50 split over the 182 players.

Jim
09-04-2013, 11:59
Very interesting post - Thanks to the OP.

I honestly can't understand why people bother to post 'this is pointless and boring' - Just don't read and comment then!!!

Also sad to hear Mr Green Type's local WHFB group disbanded when 8th hit - I personally found it to re-invigorate my local Fantasy scene - No one can really tell one way or the other and claiming otherwise makes you look silly.

Jim

Graeme
09-04-2013, 12:39
The funny thing about this comment (and others like it made by several posters) is that this somehow suggests that 40K isn't "over-priced".

I guess the difference is that even though the price per model between the two systems might be the same, your 18 40k pounds buy you a unit who will do fun and exciting things on the field of battle, while those same 18 Fantasy pounds buy you 10 wound markers out of a unit of 50.

IcedCrow
09-04-2013, 12:52
I guess the difference is that even though the price per model between the two systems might be the same, your 18 40k pounds buy you a unit who will do fun and exciting things on the field of battle, while those same 18 Fantasy pounds buy you 10 wound markers out of a unit of 50.

All perspective. People that enjoy fantasy enjoy it for different reasons than they would enjoy 40k. I like both games, but for completely different reasons.

Graeme
09-04-2013, 13:02
All perspective. People that enjoy fantasy enjoy it for different reasons than they would enjoy 40k. I like both games, but for completely different reasons.

Don't get me wrong, I play and enjoy both myself.

To add to the anecdotal evidence flying around the thread, Fantasy games are considerably harder to come by at my gaming club than 40k. Warmahordes are nonexistant and X-wing is currently ruling the roost in a big way. Agree with those who can't see that lasting though. What next? Yuuzhan Vong?

eldargal
09-04-2013, 13:03
The charts are based on interviews with retailers, distributors, and manufacturers.
So, not actual sales data but interviews? So interesting but hardly the same as compiling sales data.

Not surprised to see X-Wing doing so well, it's a brilliant game.

Malagor
09-04-2013, 13:32
However, a Skaven army is probably not the best example for your 40K vs. Fantasy comparison. ;)
Indeed. You can look at Ogre Kingdoms and you can build a 2500 point army there for cheaper then a 40k army

IcedCrow
09-04-2013, 13:37
My demon army that I built can be used in both systems for the same cost.

How about reversing it and comparing the cost of say ogre kingdoms with an Imperial Guard army?

Blinder
09-04-2013, 13:52
All perspective. People that enjoy fantasy enjoy it for different reasons than they would enjoy 40k. I like both games, but for completely different reasons.

Partly perspective, but partly the oft-repeated spectre of "startup cost." With the trend towards "standalone" units in the newer books (monsters, MC, expensive + effective chariots) Fantasy is getting some more widespread options for adding "single purchase" chunks to an army but people looking to get in still see a much bigger outlay to put some basics together even if the total cost of "normal size" forces ends up about the same.

Overall I'm not terribly surprised and as someone who likes WFB not terribly concerned by rankings such as this, I'm more worried about trends in the market as a whole (i.e. people stop buying *everything* and more stores go under). People get plenty frustrated with GW but still seem to like the games (really, it's just a revolving-door of issues to moan about from edition to edition it seems), and as "less expensive" as other systems are often claimed to be I find my overall rate of spend to be pretty much the same (assuming they manage to stick around), they're just easier to dabble in (which, admittedly, is an advantage IMO).

Graeme
09-04-2013, 14:00
Dunno really. I imagine you could do a relatively cheap IG army if you wanted to. Couple of Cadian Shock boxes to use as 2 vet squads, Commissar Lord for your commander and then a bunch of pts-expensive/£s-cheap vehicles and units. Stormtroopers, Russ and chimera-chassis tanks would soon get you up to 1500. For an expensive 40k army, I think Sisters of Battle must be the dearest?

I think I might dip my toe into Warmachine this summer when PP release the new Art Deco cyberman faction. The models look amazing and at least one friend is also getting into it.

Liber
09-04-2013, 16:20
Your data fails to disprove any of my points


Whatever you say brochacho.

Keep banging that drum. Just remember there is a good reason you're doing it alone.

TheDungen
09-04-2013, 16:40
It's not "some place on earth". It's the most or second-most important market on Earth. It could show a trend, or it could have economic repercussions, or it could mean something I cannot even think of right now. I'm pretty sure you knew all that before so you made even more of a fool of yourself.



Europe isn't a country, and the US market is still vast (the size of the country is irrelevant to start with). If the biggest single market is not important, which one is? France? Germany? Perhaps Europe is only "somewhat interesting, let's move on" because China has more people?

If people followed that view, what's the point in making any national or regional economic analysis? You don't have to read this if you live anywhere else that may or may not be unaffected.



It is a) news to me and b) his data shows a different trend: 07: Not in top 5. 08-09: 5, 09: 04, now: 4. Very steady, no decline in sight.

If you have any other data, share it with us or shut up the nonsense.


Oh I had no idea europe wasn't a country thank you so much for telling me that its not like I live in europe. What I meant that if the us is a smaller market than europe 8whihc in itself isn't all that big) then its a lot smaller than the world. yeah i know market size doesn't relate directly to population but i think europe is at least as big a market per capita as the US.

But hey sure you go on thinking warhammer is about to die if that works out for you I prefer to be realist, and I can say that where I come from there has always been far more fantasy players than 40k players (like 4:1 ratio or something). Warhammer inst going anywhere.

Voss
09-04-2013, 16:49
He wasn't arguing that it was. In fact he was using the data from the US to show the opposite- that it is steady, not in decline.

As for market sizes- you'd be hard pressed to find larger markets for these types of games anywhere in the world. In fact, you won't.

Liber
09-04-2013, 16:54
the largest gaming community on the west coast with one of the only Battle Bunkers in the nation - oops used to have, apparently it's closing due to low sales. Awesome.


About the battle bunker in SoCal closing. My friend went there too pick up a copy of 40k's Dark Vengeance. A real bargain at only $99 with some absolutely drop dead gorgeous minis all involving the Most Popular mini game in the world: Warhammer 40,000 - AND GUESS WHAT? He said there was a stack of like 15 boxes in there. And this was not even close to the release date, he wasn't sure if there would even be any copies left. Yah, def blame this on 8th ed Fantasy :angel:

DrMooreFlava
10-04-2013, 03:42
Liber, you make me laugh and you make a good point.

If fantasy is crashing and burning, you'd see less of it stocked on the shelves.

To Mr. "I live in SoCal; therefore, I'm global", must suck to live in SoCal...

I take it as a personal obligation to talk to people about fantasy, explain why it is different from 40k, pros cons etc. A lot of people think it is interesting or they at least care to humor me. Maybe you should try the same if you haven't already, you might just end up casting an irresistible force Invocation of nehek and revive fantasy in your club too! 2d6 + caster level of gamer zombies isn't a bad starting force :D

Lord Solar Plexus
10-04-2013, 05:05
I guess the difference is that even though the price per model between the two systems might be the same, your 18 40k pounds buy you a unit who will do fun and exciting things on the field of battle, while those same 18 Fantasy pounds buy you 10 wound markers out of a unit of 50.

That's mostly a myth.

Graeme
10-04-2013, 10:05
That's mostly a myth.

How so? Sure there are some 10-boxes that give you a reasonable unit, but (especially in 8th) for the vast majority of armies you will want to be fielding some number of large units of core troops... in which case you're absolutely paying for a box of wound markers. Halberdiers 25-35, Ungors 18-28, and so on. Maybe it's just me, but I find it terribly hard to get excited about these guys.

On the 40k side this is more unusual. I mean, there's things like gaunts, cultists and boyz that are more usually fielded en masse, but they're more of an exception than a rule.

Edited to add: Thinking about it, this is even more noticeable in ‘Special’ slots – how many small units of Greatswords, Temple Guard, Stormvermin, Chosen etc etc have you seen? I think it’s fair to say that in the grim darkness of the far future, a single box of elite, heavy or fast attack is vastly more likely to be fielded by itself.

Ratarsed
10-04-2013, 10:23
How so? Sure there are some 10-boxes that give you a reasonable unit, but (especially in 8th) for the vast majority of armies you will want to be fielding some number of large units of core troops... in which case you're absolutely paying for a box of wound markers. Halberdiers 25-35, Ungors 18-28, and so on. Maybe it's just me, but I find it terribly hard to get excited about these guys. .
I admit I find it tedious to paint up rank upon rank of core troops. I think that is why all my armies tend to have one unit of each type. I've painted up 36 savage orcs and now I don't want to paint any more, but I am excited about my boar boyz currently on the work station. However once they are painted and fielded in a ranked up unit I never think of them as just wound markers. Even if the back ranks are not lending their attacks they are still pressing forward with their numbers filling the gaps of their fallen comrades.
There is no doubt in my mind that of all the hobby games WFB requires the most dedication and commitment from its players. To build and assemble and paint a reasonable army can be daunting. But for me the rewards of the hard work and effort put in are paid back many fold. I think the instant gratification of modern living that younger generations are used to does make WFB a harder game to get into, but I would hope and believe that once into it there is a longevity that the other hobbies don't have.

Graeme
10-04-2013, 10:56
There is no doubt in my mind that of all the hobby games WFB requires the most dedication and commitment from its players. To build and assemble and paint a reasonable army can be daunting. But for me the rewards of the hard work and effort put in are paid back many fold. I think the instant gratification of modern living that younger generations are used to does make WFB a harder game to get into, but I would hope and believe that once into it there is a longevity that the other hobbies don't have.

This is the thing, I reckon. The problem for WFB comes when you're stood in the FLGS with a crisp twenty in your hand and you need to exercise that dedication, rather than buy some Terminators or TIE-Advanceds or a Warjack or M:tG event deck... Although WFB ansolutely has it's share of cool one-offs, it also has the almost unavoidable drag of the multiple-required core stuff.

pippin_nl
10-04-2013, 11:40
Do sales really tell all there is to know about popularity though? Some games have been played for decades and even if no one would buy new models, the game could be played for a few more decades. It could be possible that a game would have a million players and another just 100.000, but that the latter would buy more because the games was newer or maybe old models can be used in one game, but not in the other.

Lord Solar Plexus
10-04-2013, 12:04
Oh I had no idea europe wasn't a country thank you so much for telling me

You have no reason to become all uppity. You are the one who demands to compare like with like in that very same post, and then have the cheek to either make such a basic mistake or purposefully compare like with unlike. Your whole argument falls apart at the seems when you compare country to continent. Just acknowledge the fact and your mistake that the US is not a small meaningless country in any way, shape or form.



What I meant that if the us is a smaller market than europe 8whihc in itself isn't all that big) then its a lot smaller than the world.


Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

I seriously suggest you read your posts again before you hit the button because re-phrasing what you did not write makes it even worse. Is the US market smaller than the European one? Facts, please, or leave it out. Secondly, the US market is not at all smaller than the world (market?) if it is smaller than Europe. That's a ridiculous claim. The US market - each and every market - is smaller than the world since it's a part, so per definition. Thirdly, being "smaller than the world" (where did that kind of expression even come from?) doesn't mean it's not important.

Conclusion? Lots of sidetracking and hot air. Carry on to claim that Warhammer is about to die.


How so?

Internet wisdom, I suppose. I can get a starting Empire force (Captain, Wizard, 30 State troops, 10 GS, 3 DGK, 8 Knights, a cannon) for a bit more than 100 Euros + postage. A simple box of Militia, a WP, and then either another battallion or simply one more box of State Troops + a warmachine, and you've got a well rounded 2k force that already offers some flexibility. How much noticeably cheaper is a similar IG army? Remember mobilizing them costs close to or more than 40 Euros per MOT INF squad, and drastically more if you wish to include heavy weapons.

Graeme
10-04-2013, 12:39
Internet wisdom, I suppose. I can get a starting Empire force (Captain, Wizard, 30 State troops, 10 GS, 3 DGK, 8 Knights, a cannon) for a bit more than 100 Euros + postage. A simple box of Militia, a WP, and then either another battallion or simply one more box of State Troops + a warmachine, and you've got a well rounded 2k force that already offers some flexibility. How much noticeably cheaper is a similar IG army? Remember mobilizing them costs close to or more than 40 Euros per MOT INF squad, and drastically more if you wish to include heavy weapons.

I don't necessarily disagree that the total price for an army in each system might be quite similar (although I would say that the Empire, Skaven , Necron and Space Marine army boxes they realeased this Christmas are considerably better value than most GW bundles). As I said above, my point is more what each small purchase actually buys you in game terms, rather than the final product. The "halberdiers 18-28 vs Tactical Squad [I]Invictus" problem, if you will.

Lord Solar Plexus
10-04-2013, 13:11
I totally see where you're coming from but I believe that to be a misconception. *Of course* everyone should think twice or thrice before getting into a Skaven or Night Goblin force. A small purchase in WFB can however buy you quite a lot. Those crisp twenty can get you a character who decides games and has stories sung about him at campfires and micro CHP's all over the world, a powerful warmachine, or 12 Warriors of Chaos - that's a pretty good approximation to Squad Invictus.

I don't believe for a second that I spent less on my IG or SW armies than on my Empire, nor that price was what drew me to tanks and autocannon over Heroes of Might & Magic Fantasy used to at the time I started 40k. Of course, now we're back to subjective anecdotes, so disregard that if you like.

EmperorNorton
10-04-2013, 13:15
Internet wisdom, I suppose. I can get a starting Empire force (Captain, Wizard, 30 State troops, 10 GS, 3 DGK, 8 Knights, a cannon) for a bit more than 100 Euros + postage.
Where?
New from GW that's more than 180€. From an online store on the continent you'd be lucky to get 10% discount, ordering from the UK you will maybe save 25%.

Graeme
10-04-2013, 13:30
I assumed he was referring to the 'Christmas' bundle (inverted commas cos it's still available at my local GW). That seems like roughly the contents and roughly the price, I think.

Ratarsed
10-04-2013, 13:32
This is the thing, I reckon. The problem for WFB comes when you're stood in the FLGS with a crisp twenty in your hand and you need to exercise that dedication, rather than buy some Terminators or TIE-Advanceds or a Warjack or M:tG event deck... Although WFB ansolutely has it's share of cool one-offs, it also has the almost unavoidable drag of the multiple-required core stuff.
whilst this may be an initial barrier once you have your core you are more or less sorted. With all my armies my core selection dictates how big a game I can play. My specials, rares and characters are always in excess of what my core allows.

Voss
10-04-2013, 13:35
Do sales really tell all there is to know about popularity though? Some games have been played for decades and even if no one would buy new models, the game could be played for a few more decades. It could be possible that a game would have a million players and another just 100.000, but that the latter would buy more because the games was newer or maybe old models can be used in one game, but not in the other.
Popularity in that sense doesn't matter much. It can be nice when people play old rules or old games, but in general, it doesn't happen that way (particularly not more players by a factor of 10). And when it comes to a game continuing that sort of popularity doesn't matter at all. No matter how many people still play Confrontation, the game is still dead, the company defunct, and its nigh-inaccessible for anyone who didn't buy into when it was alive.

Lord Solar Plexus
10-04-2013, 14:22
Where?
New from GW that's more than 180€. From an online store on the continent you'd be lucky to get 10% discount, ordering from the UK you will maybe save 25%.

Wayland. I just added it all up. Postage, an armybook, brushes, paints etc. will be on top but that goes for both systems and is hardly the clincher. Of course it will be more expensive from GW direct but I cannot imagine that the relation would be drastically altered.

Of course we're just talking about a starting force but hey, people will want to expand for more choice in both systems, too.

DrMooreFlava
10-04-2013, 16:12
How so? Sure there are some 10-boxes that give you a reasonable unit, but (especially in 8th) for the vast majority of armies you will want to be fielding some number of large units of core troops... in which case you're absolutely paying for a box of wound markers. Halberdiers 25-35, Ungors 18-28, and so on. Maybe it's just me, but I find it terribly hard to get excited about these guys.

On the 40k side this is more unusual. I mean, there's things like gaunts, cultists and boyz that are more usually fielded en masse, but they're more of an exception than a rule.

Edited to add: Thinking about it, this is even more noticeable in ‘Special’ slots – how many small units of Greatswords, Temple Guard, Stormvermin, Chosen etc etc have you seen? I think it’s fair to say that in the grim darkness of the far future, a single box of elite, heavy or fast attack is vastly more likely to be fielded by itself.

In reality, isn't every mini in the game just another wound marker?

If you want to play by your line of logic here, all models are merely wound markers and you should just buy the bases for correct base size and be done with it. Maybe paint a letter on each base so you know which wound marker has the lascannon and which one has the flamer etc... The same "paying for wound markers" argument is true for 40k and any other war game. So don't pretend that you argument is valid in highlighting a difference between fantasy and 40k.

underscore
10-04-2013, 16:17
It's a fair point, really. The individual models in skirmish games are much more important as they can each be carrying different weapons and need to be targeted/positioned with that in mind. Whereas the rank and file models are just... well... that. Representative of a mass of guys who are essentially the same and are the same whether there's 50 or 5 of them.

IcedCrow
10-04-2013, 16:22
That's a key difference in skirmish games vs non skirmish games: the aesthetic.

underscore
10-04-2013, 16:29
Oh, for sure. Good to have a choice.

EmperorNorton
10-04-2013, 16:32
Wayland. I just added it all up. Postage, an armybook, brushes, paints etc. will be on top but that goes for both systems and is hardly the clincher. Of course it will be more expensive from GW direct but I cannot imagine that the relation would be drastically altered.
Just added it up myself, and it comes to 135€ (interestingly my estimate of saving 25% was spot on). I don't know if I am doing something wrong or if we simply have rather different opinions on what is "a bit more than 100".

underscore
10-04-2013, 16:42
100 what, though? It comes to £99.30, from what I can tell... One Batallion, One Demis, One Captain, One Amber Wizard.

Tupinamba
10-04-2013, 20:11
Seeing that Fantasy is not THE topdog selling game doesn´t surprise me at all, as, IMHO, the quality of a game and its popularity don´t have that much to do with each other. I´d be even elitist and say exactly the contrary, that the relation is one of inverted proportionality... Staying with GW games alone, personally I find the specialist game range better games than the mainstream ones, lotr\wotr better than whfb\40k and whfb better than 40k. But that´s of course just my personal preference.

Having said that, I think there are many other reasons for the other games to be more popular in the US, such as said price differences\starting costs, sci-fi appeal in the new world, less miniatures to paint (many people are afraid of having to paint 100+ minis for a medium sized army), Dawn of War (I know quite a bunch of players who started wargaming with 40k after having contact with the 40k universe through computer games), Star Wars IP etc.

In my area WHFB is slowly declining because of price and new alternatives, such as FOW, are slowly growing. 40k is more popular, but not by a great margin and warmahordes did not really take off.

DrMooreFlava
11-04-2013, 05:02
It's a fair point, really. The individual models in skirmish games are much more important as they can each be carrying different weapons and need to be targeted/positioned with that in mind. Whereas the rank and file models are just... well... that. Representative of a mass of guys who are essentially the same and are the same whether there's 50 or 5 of them.

Y u no read comment before responding?

To distinguish which model in a unit is which model, you paint a specific letter on the base to tell yourself and your opponent what specific model it is representing, the guy with the lascannon vs the guy with a flamer vs the guy with a bolt gun. Oh, and for your special character maybe give his wound marker base a special smiley face...

The point is that you can literally play this game with only bases and it still works. This is coming from a guy who won't put an army on the table that is less that 90% painted. But it is true, you can play warhammer with just bases, enough paint, and a brush to distinguish one base within a unit from another. The only other key is to make sure the bases are the correct size.. not difficult.

Now, I am not advocating this type of wargaming, I was refuting another person's comment. His suggestion, in para-phrase was, "40k is better and easier to collect than fantasy because in fantasy you are paying for wound counters where in 40k you are paying for individuals". My response was "all models are wound counters so take that argument and GTFO cuz it is not valid".

underscore
11-04-2013, 06:47
Err... yes. It's that need to paint on the flamer/bolter/character symbol onto the skirmish game bases which shows why they represent something more individual than a rank and file game. That's a very good way of pointing out the difference, in fact.

Graeme
11-04-2013, 08:25
Now, I am not advocating this type of wargaming, I was refuting another person's comment. His suggestion, in para-phrase was, "40k is better and easier to collect than fantasy because in fantasy you are paying for wound counters where in 40k you are paying for individuals". My response was "all models are wound counters so take that argument and GTFO cuz it is not valid".

'Take that argument and GTFO'? Grow up.

As well as being unnecessarily abrasive, you're also plainly wrong. The individual models in, for example, a space marine squad all do 'stuff'. The central models in a block of fantasy troops do literally nothing. The models at the front carry banners, magical weapons, drums and what-not. The guys at the back get removed as people die. Most units will break and leg it long before you start removing the central guys though. Look at the popularity of unit fillers - those individual R&F guys actually might as well not be there.

Do bear in mind that I like Fantasy and 40k and goodness-knows how many other games beside, I'm not having a go, so there's really no need to get all internet hard-man defensive here.

Lord Solar Plexus
11-04-2013, 09:38
Just added it up myself, and it comes to 135€ (interestingly my estimate of saving 25% was spot on). I don't know if I am doing something wrong or if we simply have rather different opinions on what is "a bit more than 100".

I come to € 106.23 once again for a Batallion, DGK, Wizard and Captain, and it's completely irrelevant. Even if it was € 150, it wouldn't necessarily be drastically more or less expensive than a similar 40k force.


100 what, though?

100 Watt?!?

Post #50, post #51, post #53, post #57 and post #62 all mention the relevant currency. In fact, every post that speaks about a concrete number always indicates the currency. It's pretty much impossible to miss, underscore.



In my area WHFB is slowly declining because of price


That's mostly a myth. ;)


Y u no read comment before responding?


I usually like to be candid and direct but almost all your posts are aggressive, highly impolite and immature. Join the other trolls on my ignore list, "Doctor GTFO".

Lord Solar Plexus
11-04-2013, 09:46
The individual models in, for example, a space marine squad all do 'stuff'. The central models in a block of fantasy troops do literally nothing.


That's not true. The third SM or Ork from the left contributes one shooting attack. The central model of that horde contributes one melee attack. Both provide a wound and both can be in range of some marker, or inside a building. Ergo, both do stuff, and mainly the same. Only when we get to a fourth rank (in horde) do models contribute somewhat less - and yet they contribute so much that they are still taken if it is at all possible.

Banville
11-04-2013, 10:05
^ This.

Completely different game mechanics such as rank bonuses and combat resoulution means that "the guys at the back do nothing" argument makes no sense.

Graeme
11-04-2013, 10:14
That's not true. The third SM or Ork from the left contributes one shooting attack. The central model of that horde contributes one melee attack. Both provide a wound and both can be in range of some marker, or inside a building. Ergo, both do stuff, and mainly the same. Only when we get to a fourth rank (in horde) do models contribute somewhat less - and yet they contribute so much that they are still taken if it is at all possible.

We’ll just have to agree to disagree here, I think, as there’s clearly a subjective amount of ‘agency per model’ that people are happy with. For me personally, the bolter marine or shoota-boy does enough stuff in his own right (being in/out of cover, being in front of the special weapon guy for casualty removal, being within/out of range for supporting attacks in CC) that he is a more appealing purchase than his Fantasy counterpart.

It would probably be bad business (perhaps not, if I’m right in my conjecture that this is also a problem for a significant number of other people) but GW could adopt something like the Hail Caesar system whereby you deploy the front two ranks of a unit and then stick a dice at the back to indicate how many more ranks there are. Would need a few rules tweaks, and admittedly doesn’t look as good as fully modelled units, but does limit the boredom factor during army collection.

Graeme
11-04-2013, 10:18
^ This.

Completely different game mechanics such as rank bonuses and combat resoulution means that "the guys at the back do nothing" argument makes no sense.

One more go, cos I'm clearly not making myself understood.

It isn't that "The guys at the back do nothing" - as you rightly say, there are any mumber of rules mechanics influenced by whether you have a unit of 20 or 40. It's that "The models in the middle do nothing (that couldn't be accomplished by a simple marker)".

As we're all agreed, there's an extent to which this also applies in 40k, but in my opinion the effect is more pronounced in Fantasy.

underscore
11-04-2013, 10:29
^ This.

Completely different game mechanics such as rank bonuses and combat resoulution means that "the guys at the back do nothing" argument makes no sense.
I think you're taking the argument too far, It's just that the guys at the back are exactly that: 'the guys at the back'. They're representing a group/mass of people rather than 'that member of the squad with the Lascannon'.

To take another angle at the point: how often do you see movement trays in 40k? The two systems are hugely different in term of how you interact with and consider your models: Fantasy focuses on these chunky units of troops, moving as one and positioning as a unit. 40k you're placing each member of the squad depending on what you need him to do.

So when you're adding guys to your 40k army, you know that you're going to be dealing with 'that guy right there' on a much closer level than adding a bulk of (say) Halberdiers who are there to soak up an extra round of damage.

Lord Solar Plexus
11-04-2013, 10:29
Well, if there actually is such a gap, 8th edition should have closed the distance, not contributed to this perception even more. Perhaps you're talking to the wrong guy since I tended to use IG blobs and see Ork mobs not a lot smaller than a medium Empire, on par with a big Elven and bigger than your usual WoC regiment when I was still actively playing 40k.

Are people even aware of what and how much a model contributes if they don't play a system? Are they influenced and disheartened by some guy removing a rank of low Ini troops when they themselves have to remove a squad or dreadnought before it ever strikes?

Furthermore, it is quite possible not to play Slaves, Goblins or the State Troop horde of Doom. If a high model count is the problem, there's the option to take 25 %, exchange infantry with cavalry, and splurge on specials, characters and rares - or start one of the more Elite armies like OK, WoC or HE.

Also, underscore has a point in that of course the systems have a different perspective but that is nothing so new as to be a plausible explanation for a drop in sales that may or may not be there.

theshoveller
11-04-2013, 10:33
It would probably be bad business (perhaps not, if I’m right in my conjecture that this is also a problem for a significant number of other people) but GW could adopt something like the Hail Caesar system whereby you deploy the front two ranks of a unit and then stick a dice at the back to indicate how many more ranks there are. Would need a few rules tweaks, and admittedly doesn’t look as good as fully modelled units, but does limit the boredom factor during army collection.
People do play like that. I don't like the aesthetic, so I don't. There are any number of alternatives (good unit fillers, for instance) and I'm not about to get "one true way" about it. I'll admit that I was leery of getting into WFB as a lad partly because of the fear of painting hundreds of individual models. As I got older, my tastes changed. I now value WFB precisely because it is a game of regiments and battles, not individuals and skirmishes.

Graeme
11-04-2013, 11:00
People do play like that. I don't like the aesthetic, so I don't.

I totally agree. I personally own massive blocks of Saurus warriors and Empire state troops and I much prefer the look of those to how ‘ten guys and a D6’ would look. No doubt.

I only got involved in this to add what I thought was the fairly uncontroversial suggestion ‘the models don’t matter as much’ into a discussion about why Fantasy may or may not be struggling in competition with other systems.

theshoveller
11-04-2013, 12:08
I totally agree. I personally own massive blocks of Saurus warriors and Empire state troops and I much prefer the look of those to how ‘ten guys and a D6’ would look. No doubt.

I only got involved in this to add what I thought was the fairly uncontroversial suggestion ‘the models don’t matter as much’ into a discussion about why Fantasy may or may not be struggling in competition with other systems.
Well the thing is, I had that reaction to WFB back in the early 90s - I don't think you can use it to account for a change in the relative fortunes of the game itself, since it's probably always been a factor.

Spiney Norman
11-04-2013, 16:47
Aren't these reports only for the US?

I should think so, Warma-hordes barely exists in the UK, even finding a guy who had played it before to give me an intro game took about 3 years, I would guess Napoleonic historicals are probably more widely played in the UK than warma-hordes (at least they are locally for me, I guess that doesn't mean its true for the whole country).

Liber
11-04-2013, 18:17
Reading these last couple pages gives me the feeling I am the only fantasy player that ever sees flank or rear charges?

Got a flank charge on a big unit of Chaos Marauders with my Ironbreakers just last battle....

Furthurmore it technically is the models in the back that are pushing forwards to the front as the models in the front die, but it would be a pain to remove minis that way so we take them from the back. You could play a game like 40k (any game really) by just using bits of circular paper too represent your troops so...what I'm trying to say is any talk about models in fantasy not doing anything is stupid. I mean if the aesthetic (armies clashing) isn't important too you then you are in the wrong hobby and you should start saving yourself alot of time and money by moving on to something else.

JWhex
11-04-2013, 23:58
It would probably be bad business (perhaps not, if I’m right in my conjecture that this is also a problem for a significant number of other people) but GW could adopt something like the Hail Caesar system whereby you deploy the front two ranks of a unit and then stick a dice at the back to indicate how many more ranks there are. Would need a few rules tweaks, and admittedly doesn’t look as good as fully modelled units, but does limit the boredom factor during army collection.

The dice representing ranks fails to account for the space those ranks take up which has a huge impact on manuevering large units

Graeme
12-04-2013, 07:50
The dice representing ranks fails to account for the space those ranks take up which has a huge impact on manuevering large units

Very true. I susppect the argument runs that as so little in the game is to any kind of sensible scale, then one more thing doesn't matter. Not sure how I feel about that though.

Havock
12-04-2013, 15:58
In here it is Fantasy/Warmahordes/Infinity-Flames of War

*most of the infinity players are building up their warmachine armies atm.

40k is one of those games that goes like.

"40k gains popularity...

...Aaaaand it's gone."


Yeah, Warmachine is a non-starter where I am too. Just a horrid game; ugly minis, rules that blatantly encourage defying Wheaton's Law. I moved from a town where Warmachine killed an entire gaming community.

Sounds like a playerbase problem to me, dicks will be dicks regardless of the miniatures they are pushing around. Of course your warmachine hate-on is well known by now ;)

Scammel
12-04-2013, 16:23
40k is one of those games that goes like.

"40k gains popularity...

...Aaaaand it's gone."


Is that really your experience? I find that quite unusual considering it's held the top spot for quite some time now.

And guys, it's probably best to just hit the 'report' button.

Hengist
12-04-2013, 17:59
So far as the relevance of the statistics go, the US is the world's largest games market, and independent retailers make up the bulk of GW's US sales the figures are likely to be to a reasonable extent representative, with the caveat that other markets naturally shouldn't be expected all to perfectly resemble the US.

Bearing that in mind, however, the figures are interesting - if perhaps unsurprising - and the picture they paint of WFB's travails probably should make worrisome reading for GW (that The Hobbit doesn't even appear in the top five should be a cause for significantly greater concern, given the costs of licensing the franchise in the first place). GW are, in terms of corporate value, an order of magnitude greater than anybody else in the wargames industry (indeed of any other player in the whole of the hobby games industry besides WotC and WizKids); that, with all the advantages they possess, WFB isn't doing better than the competition, invites wonder as to just what they are doing wrongly in their management of the game as a commercial property. What should be doubly worrying is that the loss of the network advantage WFB possesses (or possessed) might well exacerbate its apparent decline.

So far as WFB's actual playerbase goes, it's worth noting that GW (in their depositions in the Chapterhouse hearing) revealed that Black Library's 40k novels outsell WFB ones by a ratio of 4:1, which might point us to the game's relative popularity. It probably also doesn't help WFB's sales that, compared with 40k, the models adhere to a generic fantasy aesthetic, and it is thus vastly easier for other 28mm manufacturers (Avatars of War, Perry, Warlord etc.) to encroach upon GW's sales by offering compatible models for significantly less money. A longer-term problem is that while 40k is as a whole a fairly distinct property, there are innumerable other generic fantasy mass battle games that provide much the same experience as Warhammer (God of Battles, Kings of War, the ubiquitous DBM, etc.); it will be interesting to see whether CMON's forthcoming Confrontation revamp erodes its playerbase further.

underscore
12-04-2013, 18:18
So far as WFB's actual playerbase goes, it's worth noting that GW (in their depositions in the Chapterhouse hearing) revealed that Black Library's 40k novels outsell WFB ones by a ratio of 4:1, which might point us to the game's relative popularity.
I don't think so - the 40k IP is distinctive enough to appeal beyond the 40k gamer market whereas I don't think you can say the same about the Fantasy one. I mean, obviously 40k is more popular, but the BL ratio is certainly going to be an exaggeration of that.

Hengist
12-04-2013, 18:58
I don't think so - the 40k IP is distinctive enough to appeal beyond the 40k gamer market whereas I don't think you can say the same about the Fantasy one. I mean, obviously 40k is more popular, but the BL ratio is certainly going to be an exaggeration of that.

Though the former may well be true, it bears pointing out that in the wider world of bookselling fantasy novels as a whole outsell sci-fi by around 3:1, so it would surprise me were non-gaming BL readers really responsible for a drastic imbalance in sales statistics. It also bears pointing out that we know (thanks again to the Chapterhouse case) 40k rules and miniatures by themselves constitute c50% of GW's total sales; given that the remaining 50% has to account for BL, FW, WFB, LotR, Realm of Battle boards and paint, I suspect that a 4:1 ratio might (even if it's by coincidence, and because of any real correlation) not be a bad guess.

Again, I'm well aware that I'm only speculating with the evidence available, but on the face of it, GW should probably be worried about Warhammer.

Scammel
12-04-2013, 19:14
Again, I'm well aware that I'm only speculating with the evidence available, but on the face of it, GW should probably be worried about Warhammer.

I'm not sure this needs to be the case at all. Whilst the US may well be the largest games market generally, it's not GW's main stomping ground. If these figures were the case in the UK too, there'd be much more cause for concern. Furthermore, it's not as though the figures indicate a 'decline' in Fantasy per se. This X-Wing game has obviously seen a massive surge in popularity to come 2nd, beating out Warmachine, it doesn't appear as though Fantasy was slowly overcome by a competitor.

underscore
12-04-2013, 19:39
Though the former may well be true, it bears pointing out that in the wider world of bookselling fantasy novels as a whole outsell sci-fi by around 3:1, so it would surprise me were non-gaming BL readers really responsible for a drastic imbalance in sales statistics.
That's my point though - in 40K is something which is hugely distinctive and sets it apart from what's already out there. I'm constantly found in the fantasy/sci-fi section myself, and the visibility on the 40k novels is probably about 4 times greater than Fantasy.

That's not just in terms of stock volume either - visually they pop out whereas, at the end of the day, the Fantasy characters really do blend in with the existing sci-fi tropes and series out there. In my eyes GW have something really special in the 40k IP, compared to something that's good in Fantasy.


It also bears pointing out that we know (thanks again to the Chapterhouse case) 40k rules and miniatures by themselves constitute c50% of GW's total sales; given that the remaining 50% has to account for BL, FW, WFB, LotR, Realm of Battle boards and paint, I suspect that a 4:1 ratio might (even if it's by coincidence, and because of any real correlation) not be a bad guess.
That was US only though, no? It wouldn't surprise me over there at all, but I'd personally expect international ratios to raise that up to 60-70% share for 40k. Pure speculation on my part though, no hard data to support that so I don't feel the need to press too hard on it. :)

Hengist
12-04-2013, 22:24
That was US only though, no? It wouldn't surprise me over there at all, but I'd personally expect international ratios to raise that up to 60-70% share for 40k. Pure speculation on my part though, no hard data to support that so I don't feel the need to press too hard on it. :)

If memory serves, the 50% thing applied to worldwide sales, though the mountain of depositions has now reached so spectacular a height that I can't actually find the source.

Havock
13-04-2013, 19:02
Is that really your experience? I find that quite unusual considering it's held the top spot for quite some time now.

And guys, it's probably best to just hit the 'report' button.

Speaking of th local meta, I suppose there are still plenty of "GW bulwarks" where other systems have little to no foothold, that and many players who have Warmachine/Infinity/whatever also have a 40k army. Once more it may be different elsewhere, and my viw is strictly what is being played around here.

Which is not 40k.
Also, not the US :p

Scammel
13-04-2013, 20:17
Also, not the US

Totally knew that. Just testing you. :shifty:

gormaster
13-04-2013, 22:49
Just throwing this out there for consideration. The small circle I move in has gone back to sixth edition because we had much more fun and the game was much more strategically oriented back then. 8th edition lost it`s polish very quickly for us. Over the years the models have gotten better but the game play is lacking. We also purchased Warmahoardes armies since 8th ed. came out and have given up on GW. They do not care about the game and seem to just care about selling models at higher and higher prices. Do any of you remember Rulz Boyz? How about when White Dwarf was more than sales brochure?

lbecks
13-04-2013, 23:48
Star Wars is a good property, they have the strongest action figure line and decent video games. I wonder if GW ever thought about making Star Wars miniatures.

IcedCrow
14-04-2013, 03:15
Rulez Boyz lol.

Oh boy. Do I remember rulez boyz.

gormaster
14-04-2013, 04:40
They may not have been the perfect solution but it demonstrated the fact GW cared about the gaming experience. Now, not so much.

eldargal
14-04-2013, 05:25
So far as WFB's actual playerbase goes, it's worth noting that GW (in their depositions in the Chapterhouse hearing) revealed that Black Library's 40k novels outsell WFB ones by a ratio of 4:1, which might point us to the game's relative popularity.
There are currently 238 books in BLs 40k section to 64 books in the WFB section. Close to a 4:1 ratio (3.7 I think).

Hengist
18-04-2013, 17:39
There are currently 238 books in BLs 40k section to 64 books in the WFB section. Close to a 4:1 ratio (3.7 I think).

In which case it may be a matter of supply dictating demand, or a demonstration that GW are themselves aware for the difference in their games' respective popularity and publish accordingly. It's interesting to note the difference twenty-odd years makes: back when GW first began publishing fiction, the bulk of their list was fantasy titles.

eldargal
19-04-2013, 13:28
Or it may be a sign that GWs focus on 40k results in high sales because it gets attention and if they gave WFB more attention (which they have been doing) sales will also increase. It's all just speculation.