Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 108

Thread: Will WFB ever come back?

  1. #81

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Galadrin View Post
    And some of us love "Herohammer," don't forget! Worts and all... we figured out how to play around those supposed problems and had a great time back then, and there's nothing stopping us from doing the same today!

    Of course it's not for everybody (what is in this world?), but for those who have never seen Warhammer Fantasy 5th Edition in action, I highly recommend giving it a shot.
    I was thinking of you as I wrote that, of course.

    You also made my point perfectly. I have yet to encounter anyone on these boards who is really dedicated to 3/4th edition 40k. By contrast, there are a number of deluded souls who profess to adore 5th ed. WHFB.

    Anyway, will Warhammer ever come back? Whadya mean? I am looking at my beautiful bookshelf laden with 5e books, boxes, cards, templates, paper buildings and piles and piles of 90's lead and all I can think is "did Warhammer ever really go?"
    I have no intention of re-igniting our previous flame war and thus I will content myself with remarking that 5th ed does have the virtue of taking less models than the later incarnations. It is also arguably more compatible with a DnD-type game where heroes can kill low-level characters en masse with impunity. It's actually true to 80s RPG source material.

    Still, I like a little more tactical edge to my games, which I why I designed Conqueror.

    By the by, have you looked at the new lists? I made it more 5th-ed friendly than it was. I'm working on adding more magic (both spells and items) as well. I'm curious what you think.

    And yes, my cover art stinks. I get it. I'm working on it.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  2. #82
    Chapter Master Kakapo42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Over the hills and far away
    Posts
    1,730

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    I have yet to encounter anyone on these boards who is really dedicated to 3/4th edition 40k.
    I am, for what it's worth. As well as 6th/early 7th edition Fantasy of course.
    Death to Metaplots!!

    Currently wishing it were still 2004-6

    Naked Metal- my new hobby blog. Go on, visit it, don't be shy

  3. #83
    Brother Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    I am as well, and I have three to four opponents in my area that I can game against in that edition. I have less that I can play 6th WFB with, but they are still there. There are also two stores in the local area so far that would support a retrogaming night with either system.

  4. #84

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kakapo42 View Post
    I am, for what it's worth. As well as 6th/early 7th edition Fantasy of course.
    Takes all kinds, I suppose.

    But are you exclusively a fan of those versions? Are those the definitive ones you play, or are you simply a GW generalist who owns lots of books and editions and is willing to dabble?

    I'm sure a lot of those people are out there, which makes it hard for the sprawling multi-decade community to coalesce around a single edition.

    40k's battle lines seem brighter, perhaps because the animosity over the break between 2nd and what came after was so great. (It didn't help when GW began slamming its own product.)

    I guess the proof would be if someone started a "3/4 edition 40k memories" thread so we could see what people had to say.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  5. #85
    Chapter Master Kakapo42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Over the hills and far away
    Posts
    1,730

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post

    But are you exclusively a fan of those versions? Are those the definitive ones you play, or are you simply a GW generalist who owns lots of books and editions and is willing to dabble?
    The answers respectively are 'kind of' and 'yes'. I'm reasonably fond enough of 6th edition 40k to settle for games using it, but 3.5/very early 4th is definitely where my heart is with 40k and the gold standard for what I want 40k to be like. Likewise, I'm open to very early 8th edition Warhammer Fantasy (7th and 6th edition army books, you see), but consider late 6th/early 7th my definitive version of what Warhammer should look and feel like.

    It's notable that I'm looking at writing my own set of army rules for factions in 6th edition 40k, but not for 3.5/early 4th edition because I already consider the army rules in those editions perfect as they are and see no need to modify them. Likewise, I never recognised the 8th edition Wood Elf army book as legitimate and continue to use the 6th edition one to this day for any games of Warhammer 6th and onwards.
    Death to Metaplots!!

    Currently wishing it were still 2004-6

    Naked Metal- my new hobby blog. Go on, visit it, don't be shy

  6. #86

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kakapo42 View Post
    It's notable that I'm looking at writing my own set of army rules for factions in 6th edition 40k, but not for 3.5/early 4th edition because I already consider the army rules in those editions perfect as they are and see no need to modify them. Likewise, I never recognised the 8th edition Wood Elf army book as legitimate and continue to use the 6th edition one to this day for any games of Warhammer 6th and onwards.
    I have similar feelings.

    I created Conqueror because I wanted to fix WHFB and also create a single "definitive" rules set under my control. I like the way it plays and I enjoy the flexibility of building lists for it from the various eras of WHFB or even outside that genre.

    I debated doing the same thing for 40k but quickly abandoned the project because I don't think 2nd ed. can be improved upon. Sure, it has a few flaws but they are easily fixed with a single page of corrections/clarifications.

    One point that does separate the 40k vs Fantasy comparison is the fundamental change in the stat lines that took place on the 40k side. The loss of the movement stat really impacted game play. There's a sharp divide between games with it and without it.

    Fantasy doesn't really have the same break in it, which is why allegiances can be more fluid between the editions.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  7. #87
    Brother Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    I think the changes from 2nd to 3rd were necessary, and better for the game. I think pulling all of that back into 40K is what tainted 5th, and made 6th and 7th 40K the dumpster fire that it was. 8th isn't impressing me at all as an answer to that.

    I'm kind of curious what version of WFB GW would lean on if they brought it back. I'm sure I'd not like the answer in the end.

  8. #88
    Chapter Master Lars Porsenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Easton, PA, USA
    Posts
    2,953

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    I'm kind of curious what version of WFB GW would lean on if they brought it back. I'm sure I'd not like the answer in the end.
    Fairly certain it woild be a version of AoS with ranks n flanks if they were to do that. YMMV.

    Damon.
    "Nicht kleckern, klotzen!"

    A Mtlhd of Wrsr

    My Minis Blog: minislikedust.blogspot.com
    My Book Blog: bookslikedust.blogspot.com

  9. #89

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lars Porsenna View Post
    Fairly certain it woild be a version of AoS with ranks n flanks if they were to do that. YMMV.
    I agree. WHFB had a number of advantages that no longer apply.

    For one thing, it was created in an environment where fantasy-themed miniatures games were few and far between. TSR's offering - Battlesystem - was awful. I keep a copy to remind myself how bad it was.

    The historical rules out there were also not really attractive. They were often very detailed and their physical appearance was bland in the extreme.

    GW had rules that were fairly simple to grasp and came in brightly-colored, professionally finished books. The closest competitor was probably FASA which was not only sci-fi but in the mecha genre.

    Now there are a number of alternatives to ranked army games, which also likely seem dated to a lot of the new kids. I'll say this for AoS, it does have more 'heroic' appeal.

    Plus, GW seems really into total IP control so the days of fairly generic armies like Dwarves and High Elves are long gone.

    Its hard to see it coming back and equally difficult to imagine a unified fan movement around a single prior edition.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  10. #90
    Chapter Master
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    8,295

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    I would presume that a "ranks-and-flanks" version of AoS might end up looking something like the War of the Ring game, that is rectangular movement trays with pre-cut circles on them for placing models mounted on round bases.
    Who is Griefbringer? Read his poem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenyu
    Since World of Warcraft players manage to get themselves killed due to exhaustion, why should Griefbringer not manage to get himself killed with a regiment of table top miniatures. Youd be a pioneer.

  11. #91

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Griefbringer View Post
    I would presume that a "ranks-and-flanks" version of AoS might end up looking something like the War of the Ring game, that is rectangular movement trays with pre-cut circles on them for placing models mounted on round bases.
    In which case GW would be competing with itself.

    This, by the way, is what I think ultimately doomed WHFB. LotR had better models at better prices and better IP.

    For a while the boom of LotR disguised the weaknesses of the other lines, but when the movies faded, the deterioration was clear to those who wanted to see it.

    The suits who run GW are often mistaken about why their product sells. I think one thing they've missed is that it isn't the background that sells the fantasy stuff, it's the lack of background. It's generic and people who like fantasy default to them because of the variety.

    Yes, there are people really into the Old World and I get that, but I don't actually know any of those people personally. GW hit upon the idea of using existing fantasy genres and that allowed people who wanted to use the system for mass combat in an RPG environment (or who just liked fantastic battles) do to so.

    That's not surprising given that GW's early days were spent as TSR's UK licensee (I still own a dungeon designed by Tom Kirby). So of course their armies paralleled the main factions in DnD.

    But now they're kind of out there, which means that other, less specific games have more appeal.

    Basically with AoS they've gained a hammerlock on a much smaller audience. It's hard for me to envision them going big all over again.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  12. #92
    Brother Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    IF they thought for a minute they could reap large profits for the shareholders, they'd go big again in a heartbeat. Them going whole hog on AOS is because they think that's where the money is. I'm not so certain that's working out like they wanted, but what they make is selling, or else it'd be squatted by now.

  13. #93

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    In which case GW would be competing with itself.

    This, by the way, is what I think ultimately doomed WHFB. LotR had better models at better prices and better IP.

    For a while the boom of LotR disguised the weaknesses of the other lines, but when the movies faded, the deterioration was clear to those who wanted to see it.
    LotR had better prices and the game was quite fun, fast paced and precisely everything they want WH to become nowadays... but very little people played it. They sold a lot of boxes to casual 10-year-olds when the films were popular, but I don't know anyone who has played it regularly or who can say "I am a GW LotR player".

    It was a bubble, but it didn't "doom WHFB".

    The suits who run GW are often mistaken about why their product sells. I think one thing they've missed is that it isn't the background that sells the fantasy stuff, it's the lack of background. It's generic and people who like fantasy default to them because of the variety.

    Yes, there are people really into the Old World and I get that, but I don't actually know any of those people personally. GW hit upon the idea of using existing fantasy genres and that allowed people who wanted to use the system for mass combat in an RPG environment (or who just liked fantastic battles) do to so.
    You do now, I am one of those, the Old World was my playground as a child. But I agree, it was the vagueness of the setting, but not just any vagueness; a vagueness with strong foundations in the real 15th Century history of Europe and popular culture in general. It was easy to make something into the "WH style", the flavour of the setting was very subtle: anything goes, but it has to be darker, grittier and remember the Endtimes are coming. Make it pulpy and tongue-in-cheek, remember to not take it too seriously, but take it seriously enough that it makes sense within its own context.

    Want ninjas? They are an ancient order of assassins in Nippon hell-bent on fighting the Tzeentchian Triads and the Empire newly arrived ships, trying to convert the nippons to Sigmar's faith.
    Want Chandragupta-era Indians? They are beset by Khornate cults of Kali worshippers.
    Want Romans in Egypt? Why not imagine the time before the Empire, when Nehekhara was still "alive" and Remas was Rome? Also, a chance to use your Warlord minis.
    Want Conquistadors? Empire fortune-seekers and the Aztecs are dinosaurs. Want Wild West-like adventures?
    Does "Wild East" count? Imagine the Empire sending settlers into the Darklands, complete with lone rangers, sheriffs (call them Constables), "reward: dead or alive" posters and guns. Want Crusades? Bretonnians in Araby fighting Sultan Jaffar (I didn't make this up, that's actually in the lore, and it's histerical).

    That, I think, was the appeal of the Fantasy setting, just like it's the appeal of the 40k setting: anything goes, as long as you set it vaguely into the general rules of the universe we've built. The more pulpy, the better.

  14. #94

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    IF they thought for a minute they could reap large profits for the shareholders, they'd go big again in a heartbeat. Them going whole hog on AOS is because they think that's where the money is. I'm not so certain that's working out like they wanted, but what they make is selling, or else it'd be squatted by now.
    Gotta disagree with you there. For years people (like me) have said that if GW simply updated and streamlined the 2nd ed. book, called it "40k Tactical" or some such thing, copies would have sold. I'm not saying it would have unleashed a renaissance, but they would have made a lot of money for very little cost.

    Not only that, but people (again like me) who were out of "the hobby" would have a reason to get back in. The fact that they went out of the way to trash the game cost them business.

    It didn't have to be either/or, they could have gone with "and," which would have made them more money.

    We like to imagine that businesses make rational decisions, but history teaches that they don't.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  15. #95

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Csar de Quart View Post
    LotR had better prices and the game was quite fun, fast paced and precisely everything they want WH to become nowadays... but very little people played it. They sold a lot of boxes to casual 10-year-olds when the films were popular, but I don't know anyone who has played it regularly or who can say "I am a GW LotR player".
    LotR cut into GW's core business, which is selling models. They've said that many times that their rules are a vehicle to sell models.

    So then they come out with better, cheaper models that make their older lines look like overpriced crap and guess what? People take advantage of that.

    The problem was that GW seemed to actually think that people were in fact embracing the LotR game and would be committed long-term players. They weren't and GW's finances took a big hit when the bubble burst.

    And yes, we agree about the applicability of the Old World. I have to admit that one thing they did that was unique was incorporate gunpowder. Not a lot of fantasy settings do that. I was immediately attracted to the Empire because of that.

    Still, if you liked traditional "high fantasy" that was there for you as well. There was a certain level of goofiness to it, but the lists were broad enough that you could push that out of you wanted to. There was nothing keeping you from taking a "serious" orc army without all the crazy crap.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  16. #96
    Brother Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    Gotta disagree with you there. For years people (like me) have said that if GW simply updated and streamlined the 2nd ed. book, called it "40k Tactical" or some such thing, copies would have sold. I'm not saying it would have unleashed a renaissance, but they would have made a lot of money for very little cost.
    Definitely disagree here. The game of 2nd Ed. 40k had grown to the point that the scalability problem became readily apparent, as well as the issues with the OP/imbalanced wargear and books. They could have tried to tweak, but it would have torn the spirit of the 2nd Ed. rules to Hell. That they chose a costlier version of updating the rules (ie. replacing the rules) is pretty telling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    Not only that, but people (again like me) who were out of "the hobby" would have a reason to get back in. The fact that they went out of the way to trash the game cost them business.
    Did it? 3rd was a runaway success, and was pretty much the start of GW's market share heyday. That was probably the closest moment in time to 40K becoming mainstream, and their lack of trying to gain media presence or leyman customer awareness is the only thing that stopped it from going mainstream. Sure, there were some grognards who refused to move on with the update, but that's true of every edition, and I certainly don't remember the bleed from 2nd to 3rd being REMOTELY as bad as the 6th and 7th bleeds.

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    It didn't have to be either/or, they could have gone with "and," which would have made them more money..
    They did, in a way. Necromunda stayed very rooted in its 2nd Ed. 40K origins as far as the rules go. So your answer would have been squad based Necromunda, and that would have eliminated the scalability issues with 2nd.

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar von Toussaint View Post
    We like to imagine that businesses make rational decisions, but history teaches that they don't.
    The only time I question their business decisions is when it causes a legitimate reduction of customers to the point that something along the lines of AOS is viewed as "necessary" in their eyes. 40K just hit that point, and I'm not so sure the response from GW is a good one. They aren't bleeding customers like some edition changes, but the sour is more evident now than ever before.

  17. #97

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    Definitely disagree here. The game of 2nd Ed. 40k had grown to the point that the scalability problem became readily apparent, as well as the issues with the OP/imbalanced wargear and books. They could have tried to tweak, but it would have torn the spirit of the 2nd Ed. rules to Hell. That they chose a costlier version of updating the rules (ie. replacing the rules) is pretty telling.
    A single page of updates solves almost all the problems of 2nd.


    Did it? 3rd was a runaway success, and was pretty much the start of GW's market share heyday. That was probably the closest moment in time to 40K becoming mainstream, and their lack of trying to gain media presence or leyman customer awareness is the only thing that stopped it from going mainstream. Sure, there were some grognards who refused to move on with the update, but that's true of every edition, and I certainly don't remember the bleed from 2nd to 3rd being REMOTELY as bad as the 6th and 7th bleeds.
    On what basis do you claim this? I'm being serious. GW made a lot of money when they changed versions but they should have given:

    1. Players had to buy entirely new sets of books for a game they already owned,
    2. Armies doubled in size, and
    3. The models to fill those armies out tripled in price.

    On one of the other threads where people do the deep dives on GW financials, informed folks have sliced and diced the numbers to prove that GW actually lost customers but gained far higher profits because of the three factors given above.

    Given the lack of anything other than anecdotal data, I don't think we can credibly prove either case, though.

    They did, in a way. Necromunda stayed very rooted in its 2nd Ed. 40K origins as far as the rules go. So your answer would have been squad based Necromunda, and that would have eliminated the scalability issues with 2nd.
    When you say "scalability" what do you mean? I usually play 1500-2000 point games and they run just fine thanks to a few minor rules fixes/clarifications. Going beyond that slows the game down, but is still fun.

    The only time I question their business decisions is when it causes a legitimate reduction of customers to the point that something along the lines of AOS is viewed as "necessary" in their eyes. 40K just hit that point, and I'm not so sure the response from GW is a good one. They aren't bleeding customers like some edition changes, but the sour is more evident now than ever before.
    I'm not referring to GW, but all businesses. If CEOs really were the hyper-rational smart guys they claim to be, New Coke would never have happened.

    Companies can and do make bad decisions in terms of direction, marketing and so on. Gaming companies are particularly liable to do this, being run by hobbyists. GW had more margin for error given its dominant position in a niche market. So far, they've survived, but that doesn't mean that it was because of stunning business acumen. It just means they survived.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

  18. #98
    Brother Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    A page? A page covers all the bad wargear, bad codices, and bad rules mechanics? There was a reason they chose to reboot it rather than patch it. I assume it took less work.


    As far as spending, rules first. You only really need a rulebook to update your rules. Most people forgot that the BRB had the grey lists in the middle. Sure, you could upgrade to the codex at a whopping $15, but you'd only be forced to in a tourney. Legitimately the only buy-in for the 2nd Ed players was that one book to start.

    Space Marines during 2nd Edition were $5.99 for a two pack blister. That's $30 for a 10 man squad. The plastic kit that was released at the start of 3rd was $20. Those price differences continued as metal kits were replaced with plastics. Can you seriously say that it was cheaper to start or expand an Ork army in 2nd than in 3rd?


    I wish I could see these financials, the thought of losing a customer base while making money is baffling, especially with the price discrepancy I just illustrated. Anecdotal evidence is pretty useless, but I saw plenty of new players when 3rd dropped. The Battleforce sets made it WAY cheaper to start than in 2nd.


    Scalability in army size. The ideal army for 2nd was 3 squads, a vehicle, and a hero for MEQ, a touch bigger for Eldar, and a little higher for Orks and Guard. Nids I couldn't tell you about. Those size armies were somewhere between 1,500 and 2,000 pts. The game mechanics were not able to efficiently handle larger forces than that, you got bogged down on the battery of oddball rules and effects. Just working out the grenade effects from a 3,000 pt army should give any 2nd Ed veteran the jitters.

    3rd played just as fast and just as tight at 1,000 as it did at 3,000 or even 4,000. There was a reason for that.


    Yeah, lots of stupid business decisions in the history of business, no argument there. The constant updating of the games are, in my mind, one of them. IF a game is done right, it shouldn't need a patch. If it DOES, get the patch right first time and move on. Add new armies. New races. New scenarios. Advertise more in mainstream outlets to expand your customer base. ALL of that makes more sense than to make people rebuy what they already have. You know what, though? Make sense or not, their tactic worked. We all rebought our stuff every time they changed things.

  19. #99
    Chapter Master
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    8,295

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Csar de Quart View Post
    Want ninjas? They are an ancient order of assassins in Nippon hell-bent on fighting the Tzeentchian Triads and the Empire newly arrived ships, trying to convert the nippons to Sigmar's faith.
    Ninjas actually made an appearance in the 3rd edition WHFB, where they had rules in the main book and an entry in the very short Nippon ally list included in the Warhammer Armies book. Not to mention that in the later background the clan Eshin is depicted as having learned a lot of their art from observing stealthy men in the eastern lands.

    Sigmarite preachers abroad do not sound very fitting with the background. Sigmar is essentially a local god, in the form of a deified founder and protector of the Empire. But there is little reason to promote him in foreign lands.

    That said, I am sure that there are plenty of Old World merchants and explorers who would be ready and willing to exploit the lands of Nippon for entirely secular purposes. And should any followers of Solkan land there they would probably prove as intolerant as anywhere else.
    Who is Griefbringer? Read his poem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cenyu
    Since World of Warcraft players manage to get themselves killed due to exhaustion, why should Griefbringer not manage to get himself killed with a regiment of table top miniatures. Youd be a pioneer.

  20. #100

    Re: Will WFB ever come back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Retrogamer View Post
    A page? A page covers all the bad wargear, bad codices, and bad rules mechanics? There was a reason they chose to reboot it rather than patch it. I assume it took less work.
    Why would you assume that? When has GW ever decided to minimize changes to their rules?

    I also stand corrected. The document I reference expanded to three pages because I wanted to restate some of the concepts (like overwatch) that people got wrong.

    As far as spending, rules first. You only really need a rulebook to update your rules. Most people forgot that the BRB had the grey lists in the middle. Sure, you could upgrade to the codex at a whopping $15, but you'd only be forced to in a tourney. Legitimately the only buy-in for the 2nd Ed players was that one book to start.
    And if you wanted to have an idea of what you were facing, you bought the other books, rules supplements etc.

    By your own logic if there wasn't any money in books, GW wouldn't publish so damn many of them.

    Space Marines during 2nd Edition were $5.99 for a two pack blister. That's $30 for a 10 man squad. The plastic kit that was released at the start of 3rd was $20. Those price differences continued as metal kits were replaced with plastics. Can you seriously say that it was cheaper to start or expand an Ork army in 2nd than in 3rd?
    Yes. You got 20 orks and 40 grots in the boxed set. If you and a pal go in on the game together and each buy a box (so you have your own set of rules, dice, etc. and then trade, you can get 1000 points for $40. Very affordable.

    I also don't get why you aren't comparing like with like. What were the plastic vs plastic prices? Did they remain flat or climb after 3rd came out? Wait, don't bother answering that because everyone on this site knows the answer.

    I wish I could see these financials, the thought of losing a customer base while making money is baffling, especially with the price discrepancy I just illustrated. Anecdotal evidence is pretty useless, but I saw plenty of new players when 3rd dropped. The Battleforce sets made it WAY cheaper to start than in 2nd.
    Oh, they're still kicking around on one of the GW General forums. Maybe it got locked.

    One of the reasons why anecdotal data is useless is that you can only see what you see, but there's a lot of stuff you don't see.

    Thus you can see more people playing, but you don't see the people that quit because they just vanish.

    The amount of hype is also misleading because the internet was in its infancy when 2nd came out, so seeing everyone flooding to sites like this during the boom years of 3rd made it look like the hobby was growing. The sales figures, however, were consistent with fewer people buying more stuff (and paying more for what they bought).

    We're now waaaay off topic, but the points I raised earlier still stand. The cost of a single marine model tripled during the run of 3/4th edition. I used to cite the price guides to prove this, but threw that stuff away when we moved since (as my wife pointed out) keeping a box full of junk solely for the purpose of winning online debates is kind of silly.

    Scalability in army size. The ideal army for 2nd was 3 squads, a vehicle, and a hero for MEQ, a touch bigger for Eldar, and a little higher for Orks and Guard. Nids I couldn't tell you about. Those size armies were somewhere between 1,500 and 2,000 pts. The game mechanics were not able to efficiently handle larger forces than that, you got bogged down on the battery of oddball rules and effects. Just working out the grenade effects from a 3,000 pt army should give any 2nd Ed veteran the jitters.

    3rd played just as fast and just as tight at 1,000 as it did at 3,000 or even 4,000. There was a reason for that.
    As I noted above, if you streamline a few of the effects, 2nd can move a lot faster. I did it, and it does.

    Yeah, lots of stupid business decisions in the history of business, no argument there. The constant updating of the games are, in my mind, one of them. IF a game is done right, it shouldn't need a patch. If it DOES, get the patch right first time and move on. Add new armies. New races. New scenarios. Advertise more in mainstream outlets to expand your customer base. ALL of that makes more sense than to make people rebuy what they already have. You know what, though? Make sense or not, their tactic worked. We all rebought our stuff every time they changed things.
    What do you mean, "we"?

    Turning back to the topic, what I'm trying to drive at is that GW doesn't always make rational business decisions as we define them. The same is true for most companies because they are run by people and people make mistakes.

    The issue we were debating was how big of a mistake it was and ultimately we can't know because the data is incomplete. GW has its own reasons for keeping the actual numbers secret, but I don't even think they knew what was going on. Sales went up, dividends got paid, and what did it matter of less actual people were playing the game?

    I don't think at this point it's a debatable point that the "GW Hobby" is smaller both in absolute terms (number of total players) and in relative ones (market share) than it was in the 1990s.

    Part of that is because of what GW did and part of it is the nature of other factors like the rise of online gaming, leaner competitors and so forth.

    Would it make sense for GW to support a mass-battle system in a fantasy setting? I think it would, just as GW could have supported a more detailed version of 40k in 1999. But neither of those things are going to happen and while we can try to rationalize it, it's all conjecture.
    Last edited by Commissar von Toussaint; 06-01-2018 at 14:06.
    Want a better way to fight fantasy battles? Try Conqueror: Fields of Victory!

    Do you like Star Wars but hate the prequels? Ever wish someone came up with a decent story about how a decadent galactic commonwealth descended into chaos and civil war? Look no further.

    A proud player of 2nd edition 40k.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •