PDA

View Full Version : Lord of the rings: dead?



Stormtrooper Clark
27-12-2006, 18:49
I was wondering, is Lord of the Rings practicly well, dead?

In the War of the Ring i managed to get a total of 3 games.
I went to my local store the other week and had a look at the Winter war sing up sheet.

40k: First sheet was full, about 25% of the Second one was full.

Fantasy: First sheet was just over half full.

Lord of the Rings: No one, i am not exagerating, no one had signed up at all.

Ok 'dead' is a little stupid but it seems no one plays it any more (Since the Movies have stopped been made the hype has died down) i remember when LotR was beating Fantasy. Do you think with "The Hobbit" we'll see a increase?

erion
27-12-2006, 18:59
A game is only as popular in a store as that location is willing to make it. My FLGS is notorious for having attention deficit disorder when it comes to promoting game systems. This week they might be all gung-ho about warmachine, but go in next week and you'll hear a pitch about their upcoming BFG campaign, and the week after they'll have forgotten all about BFG and be on to mordheim. The end result is that nobody finishes anything for Tournaments or Leagues.

I wouldn't guess it was intentional in a GW store, but I'd bet they're still steering new customers into 40k or Warhammer primarily and LotR only if they show a fervent interest.

Neldoreth
27-12-2006, 19:44
Well, all of the people that were into it because of the movie hype have faded away. But you will start to notice that now the hype is gone, a lot of players are picking it up because it is actually a really good system with excellent figs.

There has been a lull, but I think it will pick up again. You should probably look for a new place to find players though :/

n.

slaughteredbull
27-12-2006, 23:08
Here we ago another thread about the death of LotR.:p

LotR is the second most played system at my local club, if we ran a 40k campaign on the other hand we'd get about 2 people sign up to it.

A sais above, the system is only 'dead' in areas where its not being played/promoted.

Catferret
27-12-2006, 23:24
I'm guessing you don't go into GW stores often. If the staff aren't promoting it then Head Office will be coming down on them very hard...

I'm a fairly recent convert to the game. I had a bunch of stuff from when the first film was released but never played. When the new £50 Battle Hosts were released I grabbed the Easterling one and made a 500pt army from it with spare models for expansion. Cheapest GW game by far so no way it's gonna die out!

lorelorn
28-12-2006, 09:14
It's not dead by a long shot, but it is less visible generally than either Fantasy or 40k.

If I recall correctly the last time I saw a sales split, 40k was 40% of GWs sales, with Fantasy 28% and LotR 22%. There are plenty of players out there, but I think in a lot of cases the game is played at home rather than at clubs or in tournaments.

In my area it is possible to run a Lord of the Rings tournament, but not on the same week-end as Fantasy, 40k or Flames of War, as players will choose those games over LotR for tournaments.

scarletsquig
28-12-2006, 09:33
A lot of the LoTR interest is from the fan-collector's side of things, too.

I actually met someone that had one of each of GW's models as part of a massive LoTR merchandise collection, and just kept them assembled but unpainted on a shelf.

Gondorian
28-12-2006, 15:05
When I go down to gw, I usually see as many people playing lotr as 40K or Fantasy.

Mars
28-12-2006, 15:10
In my local gaming store there are four of use LotR gamers, plus a collection of young ones trying to get into the game.

That's about 8 people, and we make up 75 % of the store's table top gaming activity, and 98 % of it's web site forum.

Brandir
28-12-2006, 15:29
Each GW I have been into has different games granted the 'most favoured' status.

Until I moved house earlier this year, the focus at my local GW was Warhammer and Warmaster with LOTR a close third. My 'new' shop is about 99% 40K and 1% LOTR. There does not seem to be one Warhammer player in the area; according to the manager his GW sold the least number of Skull Pass box sets on launch day in the UK and in the run-up to Xmas he sold more Mines of Moria than Skull Pass.

I am a member of the Tolkien Society and I would say about 96.34% of my fellow members order their stuff via the net as they don't want to go in shops!

Stormtrooper Clark
28-12-2006, 17:09
Well theres 3 stores in my area (Leeds, White Rose and Wakefield) and LotR seems dead all in of them, although from time to time i see a LotR battle in wakefield.

Pertinax
28-12-2006, 18:58
I get the impression that the LOTR players tend to order from the net around here too. Same case as Mr. Brandir there.

In a way, the LOTR players are a bit more "underground".

erion
28-12-2006, 19:16
And why don't people who like LotR want to go into the shops?

Probably in large part due to the abuse spewn at them by people who play GW's 'real' games. :rolleyes:

slaughteredbull
28-12-2006, 19:34
[QUOTE=Catferret;1174498]I'm guessing you don't go into GW stores often. If the staff aren't promoting it then Head Office will be coming down on them very hard...[QUOTE]

Only about once a month, maybe twice if something new has come out that I want, which is wuite often with LotR products. So I have a fairly good overview of how well they are promoting the game instore, mind after as I've said elsewhere I no longer go in there after being treated extremly badly by the manager when I was looking for some LotR models, but I have a feeling things haven't changed much, especially according to others that I've spoken to about it.

Yes, head office would come down on them hard if they weren't promoting it at all, but nowhere near as hard as they would if they weren't promoting 40k.

erion
28-12-2006, 19:46
It's a sad state of affairs for lots of game shops. There are times when we swear the owner of our FLGS is actually allergic to money and does everything he can to prevent receiving any more of it from us because of the way customers are treated.

Stormtrooper Clark
28-12-2006, 22:24
[QUOTE=Catferret;1174498]I'm guessing you don't go into GW stores often. If the staff aren't promoting it then Head Office will be coming down on them very hard...

Emmm...there are 3 stores in my local area as i've mentiond and i usally end up going to a Games Workshop every week since i go to Leeds city centre rather alot since there is not a massive amount of indipendant stockists (Hobbyworld, Wakefield Hobby and Craft and the Royal Armories are the only ones i've visited)

slaughteredbull
28-12-2006, 23:04
Bottom line is LotR despite all its haters is not dead, dying, flogging a dead horse, repeating itself, blah blah blah.

It is still the 3rd best selling wargame on the market, period, and will stay that way for a long time, unless another company steps up with some amazing new game or even an older game that they sell as widely as GW products are sold.

Prophaniti
28-12-2006, 23:55
I think you might find it's the 2nd best selling...

...but I'm not certain it still is. It was definately ahead of warhammer at its peak. LotR sells well to younger gamers and they don't tend to find forums like Warseer until they are older, so we don't notice them.

Catferret
29-12-2006, 01:48
@Slaughteredbull

Here is the address for any complaints about GW staff members. If you have a problem and don't complain then nothing will be done to remedy the situation.

Customer Services
Games Workshop
Willow Road
Lenton
Nottingham
NG7 2WS
United Kingdom

Hope this helps you.

Brandir
29-12-2006, 09:19
May I suggest that one writes directly to Mr Kirby if you want to praise staff at your local GW.

Calgacus
29-12-2006, 10:43
Its alive & well in my home, where I play it a lot with my kids. On my visits to my local GW, I've noticed 40k is by far the most common game, though there is often at least one LOTR game running. I've never seen anyone play WHFB. Completly unscientific basis for an opinion I know!

slaughteredbull
30-12-2006, 09:48
@catferret

That was the first thing I did when I got home, then the next day I had the luck to meet with a GW rep. Nothing has been done about the state of LotR in my local store as I went by there yesterday and I dont see that changing, not that it matters as I will no longer be buying anything from that store anyhoo.

Catferret
30-12-2006, 13:07
That's a real shame. Usually GW act on customer complaints very quickly.

Regarding the lack of LotR, do you have a club nearby where people could play it? I have found a few people with models who want to play but didn't realise anybody else collected Rings because they always saw 40K armies. Might be worth asking around because you may be surprised.

Stormtrooper Clark
30-12-2006, 16:39
When LotR was still in Cinema's i would probably say yes it was the second most popular game (At one point THE most popular)

I have been pondering doing a Dunadain 'army' since the BotPF suppliment came out (When it was still 'popular') now with the Plastics coming out i was "omfg" but i am not sure if i should invest in a Army that chances are is just gonna get stuck on a self and accumilate dust...

Gotreksbrother
30-12-2006, 19:47
I have played all of Games Workshops games for about 16 years now, and I have to admit that Lotr is actually a very good game, the most tactical of all the games made by Games Workshop by far. I enjoy all games alike, but Lotr is extremely tactical and very flexible in every aspect. The reason it might seem to fade in popularity is because many veteran gamers feel it is taking away resources from the other games, and that is just not true.
I can really recommend the game, so give it a try and you´ll see how rewarding it is!

Cheers, GB

hiveminion
30-12-2006, 20:25
Tactical? I'd think Warhammer with all it's fancy "rear/flank-charge" rules was far more tactical.

Stormtrooper Clark
30-12-2006, 22:07
I have to agree with Hiveminion i always thought LotR was the more 'dumb down' game of the 3 (Not saying it is dum just THE MOST dumbed) so that any younger gamers getting into it would understand it better (Well a 10 year old could easily understand 40k, just saying)

Gondorian
30-12-2006, 22:16
You would think so but, despite lotr's lack of rules for official flanks I find it represents real combat more accurately than warhammer, this is my opinion.

In LOTR every model moves individually. Most players use this by making formations of troops which effectively have flanks ie. the centre is strong, the sides can be vulnerable. If an opponent leaves his flank vulnerable against my Rohan army then chances are he's offered half his army to me on a plate. You can do a lot in lotr involving some very complex and tactical moves. I've even read a tactica that took real life tactics such as those used by Attila the hun and Alexander the great and found ways to apply them in LOTR.

I'm not saying lotr is more tactical than any other system, but it is very tactical when played by veterans. Don't let anyone tell you different.

Me and my mates go down to game at my local GW for all of the three main systems when we have the time. We usually play lotr because we have usually have completely fully painted armies to hand for that system. The staff are all really good and while lotr may not be the favourite of all of them, they appreciate the system and enjoy it. If other players give us stick for playing lotr we counter argue with them and enjoy our game regardless of other people's opinions.

hiveminion
31-12-2006, 12:51
Yes, yes. LotR offers tactical options, but as you said these require some "Veteran Skills".

My point was that Warhammer, with it's use of regiments, Panic/Morale, Flank/Rear charges, and combat resolution, offers more tactical depth. The movement fase isn't the most important fase for nothing. It's like chess, but with dice, and therefore not the same certainty.

I believe WD has published articles named "the art of Warhammer", but never articles like "the art of 40k", or "the art of LotR". Just simple tacticas.

@Gondorian: this wasn't really a reply to you as I believe you understand my point already;)

Catferret
31-12-2006, 13:15
I find the tactical element of LotR is less in the movement and more of the use of Might points on your heroes. OK, it helps to get your models in the right place to start with but it involves more thought as to when you use your might and whether to take heroic actions or modify dice rolls.

This is the element of LotR that I find most interesting because it throws in a whole new mechanism that core game (40K, WFB) players haven't experienced before.

slaughteredbull
31-12-2006, 15:42
That's a real shame. Usually GW act on customer complaints very quickly.

Regarding the lack of LotR, do you have a club nearby where people could play it? I have found a few people with models who want to play but didn't realise anybody else collected Rings because they always saw 40K armies. Might be worth asking around because you may be surprised.

I actually run my local club funnily enough and everyone at the club plays both Fantasy & LotR but only about a third play 40k, most weeks we get someone come in with 40k models just to leave within half an hour cause he cant get a game.

Catferret
31-12-2006, 22:17
Cool. You should be sorted then. Good luck with the club!

Wolf Scout Ewan
31-12-2006, 23:18
You can promote however much you want but if people arent willing then... forget it.

Thats the way reality works sorry.

Mad Makz
01-01-2007, 02:11
Yes, yes. LotR offers tactical options, but as you said these require some "Veteran Skills".

My point was that Warhammer, with it's use of regiments, Panic/Morale, Flank/Rear charges, and combat resolution, offers more tactical depth. The movement fase isn't the most important fase for nothing. It's like chess, but with dice, and therefore not the same certainty.

I believe WD has published articles named "the art of Warhammer", but never articles like "the art of 40k", or "the art of LotR". Just simple tacticas.

Actually, Warhammer offers considerably less tactical depth than LOTR, as the results of any activity is generally a lot more binary than in LOTR.

I.e you will either break a formation, or you won't. You will either route a unit, or you won't. A unit will either Panic, or it won't.

In LOTR a 'formation' or 'unit' can be half broken, it can start to collapse and then with a change in priority (or the use of a heroic move) can be re arranged to become strong again.

Individual models don't Panic due to shooting, but you as a general may be forced to send your troops into terrain or move them back out of range of any shooting.

Size and shape of formations is often determined by leadership (How many models you can fit in the Stand Fast range of a character) and the formations need to to be constantly re adjusted so that you can hopefully gang up on the enemy (superior numbers of models are vital in LOTR, how achieve the tipping point of numeric superiority in any given combat is achieved through a mix of army selection, movement and terrain, troop formation, shooting and magic, might points for heroic moves or for gaining and additional kill, and the use of weaponry rules - be it spears, shields, or whatever)

Playing warhammer is very representative of being a general assessing a map and moving units around - the strategies are much more inherent in the unit types and forced formations so are admittedly more obvious, and also more decisive - it's very easy to tell if your tactics failed or worked and assess where and when things went wrong/right in warhammer - this allows people to make fairly clear decisions about what was a right or wrong move (again, the decisions are quite binary). But this obviousness also means the strategic depth of warhammer isn't as great as many think BECAUSE of the lack of subtlety. It's a lot harder to assess where exactly things went wrong in LOTR because while their is a 'tipping' point when armies start to break, there are many more turns involved and so an end result is usually the culmination of a LOT of decisions - as such you get a very strong feeling for the 'flow' of the game but it's also very easy to miss your mistakes and make the same mistake twice, because the mistakes you make aren't as obviously correllated to the end result, and seeming unimportant moves can have drastic effect 6 or 7 turns later that were unforseen at the time.

Combined with the need to micro manage your characters to a far greater extent than Warhammer I would say LOTR offers an equal if not greater level of tactical depth even to a beginning player - it's often just a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees because you don't get to take stock of the battle in the sort of sweeping 6 turn over view that Warhammer provides. (It would be very interesting to watch a sped up, animated representation of a LOTR game because it would probably be the best way to show just how much tactical jockeying for positioning really occurs compared to the much more general movements of warhammer)

cronin
01-01-2007, 03:05
i agree with mad makz. warhammer strikes me as a game on the army- or unit-level, while LOTR is an individual warrior-skirmish game. besides the heroes, it seems to me that it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to view each individual soldier in warhammer as representative of an entire squad or unit, while in LOTR, each soldier clearly represents one man.

so basically, in WFB you could only be moving 6 goblins, but they could actually be tokens for 60 goblins, a bit like civilization of rise of nations.

sorry if that's worded a bit weirdly, and please point out if there's something i missed and i'm completely wrong :D

edit: more on topic, my local store (oxford) doesn't really get a lot of LOTR players, though the employees definetely try to promote it. i can only remember one game of LOTR i've actually played at the store.

hiveminion
01-01-2007, 17:20
@Mad Makz: I realize my choice of words was a bad one. "Tactical depth" was the wrong way to say it. What I should have said was that Warhammer has rules of thumb when it comes to tactics. That is due to the binary results, as you said.

As for LotR, you can move your models in all sorts of whacky formations, but if the dice don't go your way, that formation is not going to help. Warhammer grants a unit in a tactically "correct" position certain advantages, which means your tactics, or rather your use of existing tactics, wins you the game.

LotR as a game is therefore less tactical, and demands more tactical cunning of the players.

Gondorian
01-01-2007, 18:11
Ah but the dice can go the other way in any of the three games.
A solid formation in lotr can help you even with very poor dice. The worst case scenario would be something like losing all your heroic actions to the other player and having your hero leg it on his first stand fast roll. If this occurred then a good formation will still keep you around longer than if you were scattered about.
Keeping models close together often makes it harder for them to be seperated unless heroes or elite warriors are lucky enough to carve a gap between your line (which has led to the wedge formation). I have recently become interested in working on skirmish formations as opposed to my standard battle line formations. I want to try out a new way of playing with some uruk-hai scouts, no spears allowed. The idea is to develop a set of tactics for winning without consolidating the bulk of one force into one area.

I'm not experienced enough to comment on the tactical depths of warhammer as I've only just got round to playing it and while I've enjoyed my first few games I haven't explored the real tactical side of its battles. I personally think that they are equally challenging but in different ways. Both require you to adapt to your opponent's force and tactics. Luck alone cannot be relied on with the exception of beardy armies.

Adept
02-01-2007, 06:00
Tactical? I'd think Warhammer with all it's fancy "rear/flank-charge" rules was far more tactical.

Not exactly. It (WHFB) more accurately represents the movements of large bodies of troops, with the benefits of rank bonuses, flanks and such.

LOTR, on the other hand, gives us an accurate representation of individual warriors moving and fighting.

Flanking your enemy, lapping around their formations and surrounding them is a definate bonus in both games. It is just implemented differently.

Mad Makz
02-01-2007, 12:55
Warhammer also offers significantly less opportunity for adjusting your game plan mid game, due to the lower number of turns.

The game is more heavily one or lost in deployment, and is far more about coming up with a solid game plan at the beginning and sticking to it than rolling with the punches of priority that LOTR offers (and picking when to use your might points to usurp that priority).

In warhammer it's much like you build a machine and set in motion, and have some auxillary stuff to grease the wheels of how your core units perform. LOTR is much more fluid than that, with the situation having to be majorly reassessed pretty much every turn (especially once you hit combat.)

slaughteredbull
02-01-2007, 20:14
[QUOTE=hiveminion;1182125]I believe WD has published articles named "the art of Warhammer", but never articles like "the art of 40k", or "the art of LotR". Just simple tacticas.[QUOTE]

But WD does currently have a series of Tactica for all 3 core games running that are nigh on identical to the Art of Warhammer series they just haven't gotten around to the LotR articles yet. Its actually the only thing I buy the mag for now to be honest.

hiveminion
02-01-2007, 20:27
I'll try to make my point clear:

Warhammer has special rules representing the effectiveness of certain tactics.
LotR has rules that can be used as a whole to make certain tactics effective.

So, if you smash a regiment into your opponent's flank in WFB, the rules make it an effective move.
If you smash your cavalry into your opponents flank in LotR, you can combine that move with your other models to make it an effective move.

So, for LotR, players must develop tactics themselves using the rules.
In WFB, these tactics are already represented in the rules.
Therefore, I view the game system as more tactical, but the way you play it not........I believe I'm getting less clearer with every word I write...:(

Brandir
02-01-2007, 20:57
My explanation is rather more simplified:

Warhammer is a stategy game; LOTR is a tactical game.

hiveminion
02-01-2007, 21:41
My explanation is rather more simplified:

Warhammer is a stategy game; LOTR is a tactical game.

Well, actually, a strategy is on a nation size scale, for an entire campaign. Tactics is on a skirmish scale, so both 40k and LotR.

Neldoreth
02-01-2007, 23:03
Yes, the terms strategy and tactical are often misused, but Hiveminion has it right. Squad/Unit level games are certainly tactical. Warhammer is certainly tactical, and so is Lord of the Rings. The only way they could potentially be considered strategic would be if they were played in the context of a large map-based campaign. But even in that case, the games of WFB/40k and LotR themselves would still be tactical.

Why bother comparing Warhammer and LotR though? Why not just play what you like? I guess I am just tired of this discussion, as it seems to be rehashed on your various forums about once every month...

n.

DarkLord Of Naggaroth
06-01-2007, 15:41
I played LOTR every so often but I just dont think it is classed as one of the big boys. It is a bit like extreame merchandise.

Dunr II
06-01-2007, 16:37
LoTR got me back into the hobby as a whole, I admit since then I have focused more on 40K but the quick and simple rules and playability with LoTR still attracts me and I still purchase the updated sourcebooks for RP and gaming reasons

So to me and people I know LoTR's is not dead as we know it

Dunr II

Goq Gar
06-01-2007, 18:07
Good riddance. Less snotty little LOTR players kicking me in the shin and breaking my models.

Still, it's sad to see such a drop in what was a very decent game. Despite the crowd it attracted, I loved seeing mumaks crush the puny hobbits. That was the best game ever, one mumak vs every hobbit we could find, and guess what, mumak won.

Pertinax
06-01-2007, 19:35
Good riddance. Less snotty little LOTR players kicking me in the shin and breaking my models.


Christ. Do we have to do this "young snots play LOTR and ruin everything for me" routine again?

Besides, the game isn't dead. There is nothing to say "good ridance" to.

james1225
06-01-2007, 20:57
First of all I used to play LOTR, but then the price rises came but they werent improving the models. Then the lack of support in WD and in store (GW stores as well) so I decided to move on to Warmachine.

GW have totally pushed people out of the game but they say the bubble has burst. What they dont also say is they have out priced people from collecting, they dont support it and the GW staff know **** all about it.

My love of LOTR hasnt changed even after the films stopped coming out, if they charged reasonalbe prices for what they are producing i would consider buying them again but im not wasting hard earned cash on poor sculpts and crap casting (metal and plastic)

hiveminion
06-01-2007, 21:03
True. I stopped collecting LotR for a while and then I took a look at the current prices about a month ago:eek: .

They like raised with 10-20%!

I'm glad I've got the models I want, because now they're way more expensive.

slaughteredbull
06-01-2007, 21:18
I'm sorry but £15 for 24 plastic models as opposed to £18 for 10 Space Marines, how can people complain even if the LotR plastics are mostly 1 or 2 piece models.

james1225
06-01-2007, 21:29
Slaughteredbull they are a pain to clean, a paint to paint. There isnt a model which doesnt have flat detail. I dont care if their 1 or 10 piece models but they need to be detailed and cast well. Remember this is plastic prices.

Hive the basic heros used to be like 2 for £7 now they are £10-£12 for 2 25mm models. Even if they were mostly kids who used to play at least you could get 10+ people for a store tourny.

callum in hat
06-01-2007, 21:45
at mjy local store (GW portsmouth), i have not seen a game of LOTR played in about four months. this obviously excludes intro's, ImHo Gw have tried to drag it out for far too long, it is a good game but there is no dedicated fanbase roused by store managers

Stormtrooper Clark
06-01-2007, 21:46
LotR heros are extremly over priced, i mean look at the Elladan and Elhoir models (In Armour) coming out, £12 for one mounted and one on foot and you have to use them both togetehr i mean thats £24 and your only going to use 2 of the models at the same time (Since the Foot one is for if the Horse gets killed or you want it on foot)

james1225
06-01-2007, 21:53
I used to work in the biggest independant reailer in the north of england (wargamesworld), but it's closed now due to the owner being a crap business runner.

I used to try and push LOTR to kids +, yes they found the rules simple and good but then the parent goes and how much is this single small metal man, hmm hes £12 but you have to buy them both. For just this pack they would say. The kid would then go can I get it please and they would quickly go maybe next time (which is parent code for its a rip off)

slaughteredbull
06-01-2007, 23:50
Slaughteredbull they are a pain to clean, a paint to paint. There isnt a model which doesnt have flat detail. I dont care if their 1 or 10 piece models but they need to be detailed and cast well. Remember this is plastic prices.

Hive the basic heros used to be like 2 for 7 now they are 10-12 for 2 25mm models. Even if they were mostly kids who used to play at least you could get 10+ people for a store tourny.

The models are as good quality as any other models I've had from GW.

As for the heroes being 12 for 2, its because most of the time one comes mounted and one on foot, what did you expect them to give you the horse for free even the metal horses that some heroes have. Now I will admit they 10 may seem a bit much to pay for 2 heroes that aren't mounted but its still better than the 7+ that you have to pay some single models in 40K and Fantasy.

Your also not taking into account that GW also has to pay for the lisence to LotR so that should put the prices up, but considering the difference in scale in miniscule, I seriously doubt that it costs any different to cast them compared to any other model.

And by god the amount of times I've heard a 40k or Fantasy player moan about their models not having enough detail and then to read you moaning about LotR models being too detailed :wtf:.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't applies here I think.

james1225
07-01-2007, 00:09
I dont believe i said all their models are detail'less. Just the plastic ones are. and the more newer ones which are half thought out.

The fellowship releases at the beginning were great the original fellowship. The perrys do all the stuff now and even though thhey might be good they cant sculpt likeness to save their lifes.

slaughteredbull
07-01-2007, 00:38
Neither you or I said they were detail'less, you said they didn't have a single flat surface, implying they were too detailed. I was just pointing out that a lot of 40K/Fantasy players moan that the models for their respective systems dont have enough detail. Like I said, GW can't win either way.

I also checked buying 2 character models on foot in LotR is nearly always cheaper for LotR and if not then it is the same price. Where this illusion that LotR models are over-priced compared to 40K/Fantasy came from I have no idea.

I will also say this quickly as I've been accussed of defending LotR heavily in the past, I'm not defending this point because I think LotR is the greatest game, because if the tables were turned and someone was saying something completely untrue about 40K/Fantasy, I would defend either of them games equally, neither do I work for GW or agree with some of their policies, pricing especially.

At the end of the day GW have failed LotR because their staff and stores(whether told to or not) dont push it anywhere near as much as they should, it is after all suppossed to be the 3rd core system yet compare its shelf space in most stores to the other 2, GW Norwich last time I went in there didn't even have a demo table out for it.

james1225
07-01-2007, 01:01
Sorry that should have been they have flat surfaces, my mistake.

Catferret
07-01-2007, 06:42
GW are constantly expanding the background of one of the most well known Fantasy Settings. I have been a fan of Tolkien's work since the late 80s when we were told to read The Hobbit in Primary School (ages 4/5-11/12). I love the fact they have rejuvenated the setting for me and made some beautiful models. I am going to buy Burdhur the Troll Chieftain for no other reason than to paint him.

GW are slowly adding plastics to every race to make the game cheaper. These plastics may often be only one piece but they still look great on the tabletop. These cheap models make LotR the cheapest Core Game. £50 for a 500pt army with spare models for expansion. That would get you 3 Marine Tactical Squads. That's not an army!

Elladan and Elrohir are expensive. I agree. They should have been released as a £20 box set rather than as individual blisters. If you only want the guys on foot then place a mail order.

Long_Fang
07-01-2007, 12:32
I am not sure if the facts in this forum are biased, but I just moved to Europe and people mostly play 40k and LOTR. The Store manager at my old Candian GW said 40k is the most popular game in Europe followed by LOTR in close second with Fantasy in far third.

Looking at GW annual statements I got the following informaiton on sales volumes:
Continental Europe United Kingdom The Americas
£000 £000 £000
Total gross
segment sales 21,827 17,070 12,348
by operation


Total gross
segment sales 23,257 14,538 13,178
by location
of customers

Operating
profit/segment 2,595 1,890 219
result by
location of
customers

So if Europe (UK and Continental Europe) sales are so much larger than American, GW HQ will make decision on what system is dead according to what people are buying most.

Does anyone here come from Europe and can shed some more light on this?

hiveminion
07-01-2007, 13:27
I'm sorry but 15 for 24 plastic models as opposed to 18 for 10 Space Marines, how can people complain even if the LotR plastics are mostly 1 or 2 piece models.

Well, plastics aren't the problem here. It's mainly the prices on the metal boxed sets that have risen. I'm not comparing the current prices with 40k or WFB, I'm comparing it to the original prices of LotR. I think the prices have risen because now that the films are gone, all those people who collected it because LotR was "hot" are gone, too.



And by god the amount of times I've heard a 40k or Fantasy player moan about their models not having enough detail and then to read you moaning about LotR models being too detailed .

There is a difference between detailed and plain ugly. And there is no on moaning, people are expressing their opinions here

Starchild
08-01-2007, 18:59
True. I stopped collecting LotR for a while and then I took a look at the current prices about a month ago:eek: They like raised with 10-20%!You can thank Weta Workshop for that. GW has to pay royalties to the owners of the LOTR visual property, IIRC. Since the movies now only make money through DVD sales, Weta probably asked for an increase in royalty payments from all of its licensees. This also accounts for the higher prices of LOTR models compared to 40k and Warhammer models.

As for me, I've thought about playing LOTR for a long time, because I like skirmish games, but I just haven't got around to it. :( I think that GW did not get as good a return on their LOTR investment as they had hoped, but at least the game sells better in the UK and Europe than in the USA.

james1225
09-01-2007, 00:49
GW have to pay newline since they hold the LOTR rights. Do you think Weta only worked on LOTR and that was it, they make weapons, costumes and prosthetics for loads of films like the last samurai and kingdom of heaven, Weta digital do all the visual for stuff like narnia and the fantastic four.

Finnigan2004
09-01-2007, 05:03
I have to say that I love the game, love the models, but just saw that the new Elladan and Ellrohir models were 35.00 Canadian, and that Radagast the Brown is 26.25. I generally don't have problems with games workshop prices, and really love their products, but for the first time in a long time I reconsidered a purchase in both cases. I did get a Radagast through ebay in the end, but those prices are simply a little excessive (even for someone who owns forgeworld rhinoxen and drop pods, by the way).

fhelvie
09-01-2007, 06:30
First off, yay for finally getting around to join Warseer as I've been perusing these forums for quite some time . Back to topic...

I like a lot of what Mad Makz has to say on this issue. I've been playing for WHFB and WH40k for around 3+ years, and though not considering myself a veteran by any means, have done a relatively thorough job of getting into the hobby (5 Fantasy armies & 3 40k armies). A few months back I started getting interested in LOTR, and only a few weeks back, started collecting some models- some from eBay, some from GW. My initial impressions have been exceedingly favorable.

I used to be an officer in the military, and we had a saying, "strategy is what happens before you go to war, tactics are what you use when it hits the fan". Well, something along those lines. ;) The point is that WHFB is very much about having a solid battle strategy in place before your opponent picks a table's edge. That is not to say AT ALL that WHFB is without the need for tactical thought. Hardly. But I have found in the handful of LOTR games that I have played, this system is structured to focus more on the in-game tactical reactions of your army. You also need to carry a strategy into the game, but the focus is a little different as the structure of the two systems are a little different from one another- though not wholly dissimilar.

I found in my previous gaming store (an indie retailer) that LOTR was almost non-existent with little to no models being sold (WHFB & WH40k being relatively equal in standing). At the GW store that's closest to me, there is equal support provided to all three system (excellent staff!) but little fan support for LOTR. I am hoping that by my playing it, more people will see it's not only okay for non-kids to play, but upon trying it out, come to realize it is a very satisfying system.

Osbad
09-01-2007, 12:00
A figure I heard recently is that LotR accounts for 10% of GW's miniatures sales. This is down from the 28% LotR reached at its peak, but is far from "dead".

As for its profile in GW stores, that depends very much on the local staff and widely varies across the country/world. My own experience is that when the game first came out LotR were *not* made to feel very welcome in GW stores. The staff knew next to nothing about the game, and the "regulars" were a snotty unwelcoming crowd to players of this "new fangled" game. At the time I'd pop in, buy my stuff and run. LotR players learned early on to avoid the 40k crowd who were jealous/ignorant and generally antisocial.

Now please don't anyone take offence. This was my genuine experience at the time. Since then, I have met many nice people who play 40k and many other games and I would no more categorise 40k players as "not nice" than I would generalise about anyone else. It was a genuine unpleasant experience!

In recent times, the GW store staff have been more properly trained in the joys of LotR and in handling the 40k-crowd's antipathy, and many youngsters have taken up the game and aren't put off by the atmosphere in the store. Still, the older LotR players remember the early days, and now buy from alternative sources and have found other places to play (I set up my own club in my village).

Just my 2p.

Had from the start GW trained their staff properly in the game and made sure their stores were welcoming places for LotR-players (instead of the 40k infested shark-pits many of them were at the time), then the profile of in-store LotR gaming *may* have been very different.

Still, its all water under the bridge now, and LotR gaming continues, and with or without high profile GW support, will always continue to some degree...

Animatronica
12-01-2007, 17:54
How is LOTR an expensive game to play? thats rubbish! its the cheapest one by far! for ?15 you can get a box of 24 models which in LOTR terms easily counts as an army, no to mention the ?50 army boxes which unlike 40k and WFB also include command models and elite units.

Finnigan2004
14-01-2007, 16:27
I know that it is possible to play lord of the rings (sort of) inexpensively, but the character models have gotten way out of hand in terms of price (and let's face it, it's a character based game, not many people get into it and don't want to paint up the characters). Every young person who gets into the game wants to use the heroes, like it or not. Please note that I still buy some Lord of the Rings models, and have a well paying job that enables this. I should also add that I love games workshop, and I have never complained about pricing before-- for most of their products, I feel that I get good value for my money. I'm posting this because, in my opinion, the climbing prices play a huge role in what is killing Lord of the Rings-- a game I really like, but can't find opponents for in the local hobby center. Even on Lord of the Rings nights, no one comes.

I'll give you a concrete example-- I love elves, and wanted to make up an "elven fellowship" for 1000 points because the models are so cool. Here's the retail cost of doing it in Canada: Elladan and Ellrohir (new models) $35.00 each, Elrond (I get Gil Galad with him, but still...) $30.00, Legolas 30.00, the white council (Thrandruil, Galadriel, Celeborn, Glorfindel, and Galadhrim) $55.00. So, for the nine models I use, the total retail cost is $185.00. I know that there are cheaper models, and I get two additional models that I don't use, bringing the total to eleven, but this sort of cost for character models is out of hand in my opinion. Warhammer is expensive too, but the character models for lord of the rings is totally out of hand. I mean, Radagast is a solitary model on foot for $26.25. Frankly, you can't bring a kid into the store and say, "This is a really cool game, and you can play if you get these less cool models. Those ones are only for other people."

Kromando33
15-01-2007, 03:10
Blisters are always expensive, and always will be, this is no different from WHFB to LOTR to WH40K.

orangesm
15-01-2007, 04:33
I am going to start off by saying I do not play LotR and it has pushed games I much prefer off the shelves and has been trying to kill off what in my opinion our some awesome games set in Games-Workshops own universes. I also think the system exist in the Warhammer Historical Game "Legends of The Old West", which pre-dates the LotR. I have heard nothing else can use the system since it is now tied to LotR.

But since they have created the game and it is out there - it will not die.

Those other Games-Workshop games I was talking about - Specialist Games - are on life support. There is one person who is working on the six games, now that is support. But Games-Workshop is not even really keeping them on life support - that person is the nurse on call watching over them.

So where is the support coming from? The players - look around at those games to see how your game might survive.

Now the problem for you is that the initial sell of any minis made by GW has at least 4 places money has to go - Store you buy at, GW Profit, GW Manufacturing/Development/etc Cost, and lastly the owner of the intellectual property owner. The last one may be the weakness.

For those of you complaining of miniature cost - wait until you are hunting on Ebay for models last minted a decade ago. 9.5 sprue, no bases of Epic infantry for 18.65/$36.51 - this is for 'standard' Cadian infantry instead of current Steel Legion that is $20.00 for roughly the same number of troops.

So Lord of the Rings is not dead - they are pushing it and pulling their own IP off the shelves.

Brandir
15-01-2007, 07:18
According to the Financial Times on 7 Jan 07, LOTR accounts now for 10% of GW's sales. Their Warhammer IP accounts for the remaining 90%.

Kromando33
15-01-2007, 07:33
Well LOTR is only one game, while Warhammer contains many more games, fluff etc..

slaughteredbull
15-01-2007, 16:32
According to the Financial Times on 7 Jan 07, LOTR accounts now for 10% of GW's sales. Their Warhammer IP accounts for the remaining 90%.

So according to that then, Paintbrushes, paint ect account for 0%. Not sure I believe those stats, last I heard 40k was the highest selling core game followed by LotR and the Fantasy, but that was about 6 months ago.

Wiseblood
15-01-2007, 21:23
I am going to start off by saying I do not play LotR and it has pushed games I much prefer off the shelves and has been trying to kill off what in my opinion our some awesome games set in Games-Workshops own universes. I also think the system exist in the Warhammer Historical Game "Legends of The Old West", which pre-dates the LotR. I have heard nothing else can use the system since it is now tied to LotR.



Those games don't go away because of LotR. They go away because they don't fit into GW's long term selling strategy.

GW makes its money selling "armies" not "games". And BFG, Mordheim, Necromunda, Blood Bowl and such, do not sell enough models to keep them around taking up space in the retail shops.

slaughteredbull
15-01-2007, 23:49
@ Orangesm FYI Legends of the Old West doesn't pre-date LotR as it as only released about 3-4 years ago whereas LotR is at least 5 years old now. Also those games that were pused off the shelves by LotR, I presume you mean the Specialist Games that are specificaly designed to be a quick cash boost for GW and then to be removed froom the shelves within a year or 2, the plan with all Specialist games is and has never been long term.

ice
17-01-2007, 06:57
Those games don't go away because of LotR. They go away because they don't fit into GW's long term selling strategy.

GW makes its money selling "armies" not "games". And BFG, Mordheim, Necromunda, Blood Bowl and such, do not sell enough models to keep them around taking up space in the retail shops.

i'd like to say that here you can get ahold of rules and models for all the above mentioned games at mail-order, also the local independant retailer i go has models for most of those games, and you forgot one! Inquisitor! it was a bum to play but the models were completely amazing!

liamrob
18-01-2007, 17:32
Funny to say though but 40k is about 80% at my GW store 5% fantasy and %15% LOTR. Even though LOTR is one of my fav gaming systems in the whole lot of GW's products i do prefer the action of IG and SM a lot of the time to. Some weeks it will only be LOTR gamers though and some weeks on painters and not many gamers. It is just how the first day of the week ends up as. :)

Lyinar
01-02-2007, 00:30
Every time I've been in the Games Workshop store in the Mall of Georgia up in Atlanta, I've seen a decent number of Lord of the Rings players, and indeed, most of the people I've talked with play all three systems.

Chris
01-02-2007, 18:48
I know that it is possible to play lord of the rings (sort of) inexpensively, but the character models have gotten way out of hand in terms of price (and let's face it, it's a character based game, not many people get into it and don't want to paint up the characters). Every young person who gets into the game wants to use the heroes, like it or not. Please note that I still buy some Lord of the Rings models, and have a well paying job that enables this. I should also add that I love games workshop, and I have never complained about pricing before-- for most of their products, I feel that I get good value for my money. I'm posting this because, in my opinion, the climbing prices play a huge role in what is killing Lord of the Rings-- a game I really like, but can't find opponents for in the local hobby center. Even on Lord of the Rings nights, no one comes.

I'll give you a concrete example-- I love elves, and wanted to make up an "elven fellowship" for 1000 points because the models are so cool. Here's the retail cost of doing it in Canada: Elladan and Ellrohir (new models) $35.00 each, Elrond (I get Gil Galad with him, but still...) $30.00, Legolas 30.00, the white council (Thrandruil, Galadriel, Celeborn, Glorfindel, and Galadhrim) $55.00. So, for the nine models I use, the total retail cost is $185.00. I know that there are cheaper models, and I get two additional models that I don't use, bringing the total to eleven, but this sort of cost for character models is out of hand in my opinion. Warhammer is expensive too, but the character models for lord of the rings is totally out of hand. I mean, Radagast is a solitary model on foot for $26.25. Frankly, you can't bring a kid into the store and say, "This is a really cool game, and you can play if you get these less cool models. Those ones are only for other people."

Just look at the feb. white dwarf. Box of Grey Company rangers, US $25. Blisterpack with Arathorn and Halbarad, US $22. I already have a bunch of riders of rohan, so I wanted to pick up some leadership for them. I figured i'd get Theodan, Gamling and Eowyn. They are $22 each, or combined as much as I paid for the other 50 or so Rohan model I already have.

Some guy (UK)
01-02-2007, 19:29
Just buy them off Ebay- I grabbed a painted Heroes of Helm's Deep set for only 5 with postage the other day. A quick strip and they are as good as new. The only models I would buy new completely, or unpainted from Ebay are mounted characters, but they are not too badly priced either if you are prepared to look around. My reason for that is that I have nothing that will strip plastic without destroying it.

Gondorian
01-02-2007, 23:41
Besides it is entirely possible to convert your own heroes from the plastic warriors which are still cheaper than most other system's standard units.