haldir

Warhammer 40k at Revell Germany....whaaa??

67 posts in this topic

That said, there are only two things that could get me to buy a GW game again - Mordheim and Necromunda.

 

I sold off my Dark Angels, and I use my old Warhammer Fantasy armies for Kings of War.

 

The Auld Grump - the changes in scale did not help matters....

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheAuldGrump said:

That said, there are only two things that could get me to buy a GW game again - Mordheim and Necromunda.

These two, and Battlefleet Gothic, are about the only GW games that might interest me - if revived.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard rumors - dating to when Rountree started shaking things up - that Necromunda, then Mordheim, are being planned on, through Forge World.

 

Gives me some hope - but not to be expected for a few years.

 

The Auld Grump

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We played a ton of Mordheim back when and i'm actually painting some of my sisters minis right now. I'm not sure even that would get me back to GW rules. I've tried Mordheim and Warhammer with the kids and they are slow and clunky compared to Frostgrave, SOBH and Armies of Arcana which are my current games of choice. It could possibly get me back to buying GW minis as long as they are more like the older stuff and not AoS. Still on the fence about trying 40k again. Need to finish a few twenties of fantasy and historical stuff before I get seriously tempted.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, etherial said:

Yeah, I just don't buy it. That's like Hasbro selling MtG Starter Decks for $50 because they know a player only really needs one. The odds that GW will actually report a loss on their leader figures is pretty darned low, so they could just as easily spread a couple of nickels around the entire army and just let the coolness factor of the HQ minis allow for a 20% markup. 

 

Perhaps. I dunno. I am not a businessman; there are them on this board who could explain why a metal miniature costs what it does way better than I could. But I also have my own preconceived notions and beliefs, which affect what I buy and how much I will pay for it.

When a blister of three foot soldiers costs (x), but Heinrich Kemmler the Lichemaster ... a single figure using less metal than the foot soldier blister... costs (6x), I am inclined to think, "I am being played for a pigeon. Do I want this admittedly splendid figure that badly?" Particularly a couple decades later, when they want to soak me for $28 for a single poorly molded resin figure in a blister. I don't LIKE paying premium prices for styrene, but at least I understand the costs of molds and tooling and the need to amortize costs as quickly as possible. But I know what's involved in resin molding, and the same formulas don't apply. That, and paying that price for a single figure full of bubble pits I have to deal with? Mneh.

I will not quote the Grump's lengthy post, but I will offer thanks for his information, much of which I did not know; best kind of information!

I'm a tad surprised. The orks weren't THAT far off scale; they made acceptable Ork Boyz for the guy I eventually sold them to, along with the Trukkz. They did use smaller bases, but how hard is it to rebase? And I know several people who've repurposed the Genestealers from Space Hulk to start their own Tyranid armies; same with the Terminators from the same set. Then again, this was after I'd quit playing; was there some cockeyed rule against doing this in tournament games?

I'm inclined to agree about Age of Sigmar. I very much liked Warhammer, whereas rebooting the entire Warhammer World felt like "we need to make WH more grimdark, more like WH40K. Oh, and we need to change all the names into stuff we can trademark." In short, it felt like the kind of market decision I'd come to expect from GW, and is largely why I didn't buy into the Warhammer Quest reboot; I still have my old Warhammer Quest boxed game... and it was the reason I got into Warhammer in the first place. It was a delightful, serious-but-goofy gateway into wargaming for a person who was more into RPGs and boardgames.

The reboot, on the other hand... meh. The whole idea of "ditch the army point cost system and replace it with official battle scrolls published by GW" has not excited me. Still, I was glad to see Space Hulk back, and they didn't screw THAT up; it's a worthy redevelopment of the original that feels faithful; tweaked, rather than reimagined. And it's nice to see Blood Bowl back, although if you want to talk about figures you can't use in the parent game, I'd think THAT would be it... but it was a wildly popular game its first time around.

So we'll see. Perhaps if I can shake this nagging feeling that I'm being played... I might be interested. 

At some point. Once bitten, twice shy with me dollars.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on the store where the tourneys were taking place, yes, sometimes they got twitchy about repurposed GorkaMorka boyz. It varied a lot from store to store.

 

The lack of variety in the units and mobs in the base game hurt it - compare two to how many gangs are in the rules for Necromunda or how many warbands are in the rules for Mordheim.

 

But, having played a recent campaign - I can tell you that GorkaMorka is still a lot of fun, and likely always will be.

 

Age of Sigmar... sales have started improving - but were downright terrible when the game first came out - one store sold more copies of AoS to folks that wanted to use the Sigmarines as Space Marines than they did to folks that wanted to play the game itself.

 

I gather that after Rountree took over, they did add points to Age of Sigmar - and put them in The General's Handbook - a paid supplement for the free rules.... But fixing a lot of the problems those free rules had. (Seriously - did they bother playtesting AoS? At all?)

 

Still not buying it - I am happier with Kings of War than I had been with Warhammer for a long while.

 

And, to be fair, 8th edition Warhammer had pretty much killed their market already - Age of Sigmar was a panicked reaction to plummeting sales.

 

People complain about balance? Don't even try to balance it!

 

People think the rules are too complicated? Make them simple to the point of stupidity! (Which is a bigger mark against AoS than you might think - the core rules for Kings of War were just as short, but very well done....)

 

People complain that you need too many models? Make it so a single goblin figure can fight an army of dragons! Sure, it will get slaughtered, but you only need one!

 

I have to take other people's word that the General's Handbook fixes things - I have not bothered to even look.

 

But... I am probably going to get the repackaged Island of Blood for use in Kings of War - I am not nearly as annoyed with the company as I was during the last few years of Kirby's nonsense.

 

The Auld Grump

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2017 at 1:09 PM, Doug Sundseth said:

 

Not a huge fan of GW, either their aesthetic, their game designs, or their business practices (taste, mostly), but I wanted to address this.

 

Minimum cost to make a profit comes from variable costs, which you've addressed above, and fixed costs, which you haven't. You need to account for the costs of a new product: sculpting, mold making, creating new packaging, painting up a demo version, ....

 

If your run is short, that can significantly increase the necessary price to break even. And you need to run 5 to 10 times costs for your retail price to actually make money on a product, so even fairly small differences in actual costs can necessitate noticeable retail price differences.

 

That said, I suspect that even short run pieces from GW are not all that short run, so the difference they charge for "better" figures might be (have been?) driven more by "what the market will bear" than underlying cost considerations. But it's not quite as simple as "They're the same size, they should cost the same."

I'd like to chime in, because we see this continually in Bones.

 

For metal miniatures, the background costs are fairly cheap - the mini can cost a few hundred, each mold another hundred, and that's... about it. then we pay material and labor. So assuming a piece with low demand, $500 for creation/molds, and $1 per mini in material+labor, and we amortize the $500 across 500 minis, $2 per mini is now our cost, retail for $10 and after distributor discounts we can stay in business.  A more popular model might amortize $500 across 15,000 figures, fractions of a penny per model, we can sell it at $5 a mini and keep the lights on. But both cost $1 "to make".

 

Now with Bones, the Background costs are MUCH higher, with $20,000 per mold being not uncommon. Through kickstarter we will produce and sell 20,000 of the figure though, so now the model can be released at $2.49 a figure, because that background cost is ignorable. It was covered by the backer. But we do factor in a percentage, because not every kickstarter figure is gangbusters popular, and there are some that don't shake out the mold cost as easily. Ma'aldrakar had a $200,000 set of molds, and we didn't make 200,000 units. So your $60 on KS and $150 at MSRP is our way of covering the amortized background.

 

But you've probably seen it the other way also - take Spirit of the Forest. We factored an "average" background cost into our projected MSRPs. and then this set was so popular, we covered background and reduced ongoing background to production costs only, and suddenly we could charge $3 less than we had originally estimated. So now that figure is cheaper than it was on the kickstarter, because we *could* have upped the MSRP by 75 cents to make it cost more at retail, but that's not who we are.

 

 

Please note - some of the numbers I have used are generic numbers intended to make calculations simple, and the real spreadsheets are usually nowhere near that simple.

************

 

Now GW, assume their mold costs are similar to ours. How many space marines ya gonna sell? a zillion. 35% of their customer base buys marines, and each one of those needs 20 or more. But Character Lieutenant-Captain Jimmy Joe McWarface? well, 35% of their customers *might* want ONE, but among marines, there's 100+ possible armies, and some of them can't "legally" take Lieutenant-Captain McWarface. So instead of 35% x 20, they get only 10% that want him.  And if the board expects a 200% profit off every mold, now that figure is 20 times more expensive than Marine 1. 

 

Different corporate culture, but, where I stand, not an *evil* business model. Just one that's hard to grasp without some degree of inside knowledge

 

12 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And part of the reason that I blame GW going public for much of what has gone wrong with the company, under the former CEO - who was also Chairman of the Board! The two positions do not carry the same obligations, by trying to do both, he was doing the company no favors as CEO.

 

McWarface can be considered either as an individual figure, or as part of the Clan McWarface - which means that his cost would be amortized across the entirety of his army, rather than as a single figure.

 

But that came down more to decisions from Bryan Ansell, long before GW went public, let alone Kirby as CEO.

 

The Auld Grump

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And in our next exciting episode, ReaperBryan shows us his tax returns and his middle school report card, because that's who he is. ::D:

Seriously, though, thanks for the numbers, even as generic as that. I DID know that metal is WAY cheaper to work around than plastic, and the example with the Lichemaster was a real example; a friend of mine picked up three Empire Gunners for, I think, three bucks, but Heinrich Kemmler was $12... as far as I could tell, simply because he was a General, and my friend's Empire gunners were mere foot soldiers.

Again, I don't mind paying to support my FLGS, my favorite company, Bryan's kids' college funds, whatEVer... but I don't like feeling ripped off, and I don't like feeling an attitude of "You want what we got, you pay our prices, or you GTFO." And if I think that's what's happening, I WILL gtfo.

I don't know corporate culture, but I know what I think and feel.

And if, at next Reapercon, Bryan yells at me for not spending enough money, tells me I can't use Darksword figures in a game in HIS convention, tells me I can ONLY use Warlord figures to play WARLORD, not an RPG, and that I can only buy Verocithrax if I also buy this bag of empty soda cans, and insists that I run game tourneys before I get my swag bag? I might just develop a bit of an attitude about Reaper, if you know what I mean.

But then, (A) the company's in better touch with its market, and (b) Bryan's smarter than that. Or just not anywhere near as much of a &^%$. 

Edited by Dr.Bedlam
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - GW telling people not to use other companies minis for Warhammer and WH40K I could sort of understand.

 

But trying to get store owners to disallow the use of GW figures for non-GW games was just plain daft - they are buying the models, why complain about why they are buying the models?!

 

Sure, my D&D paladin may be carrying a plasma cannon, but why should GW care? (The DM on the other hand... ... ... is probably running Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, so he has only himself to blame. ::P: )

 

The Auld Grump - or that Pathfinder Adventure Path with all the SF silliness.... Jacobs loves Barrier Peaks....

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever played at a store that enforced the idea that GW figs could only be used in GW games. I don't think I ever played at a store that enforced only GW figs with GW games either. Perhaps I'm lucky in that regard, but I still remember a player that used AAV7A1 models for Rhinos in-store...

 

Damon.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I can understand the idea of only wanting GW models in GW game tournaments. The idea IS to sell figures, after all. It's kinda micromanagey, but I can UNDERSTAND it, if not agree with it.

But the idea of insisting that GW figures are ONLY to be used in GW games? Particularly considering that Citadel Miniatures got its wheels under it while making figures for D&D? And insisting that independent game shops enforce this nonsense? This is across the line of My Job Has Eaten My Brain, right up there with TSR threatening to sue D&D fans for ... talking about D&D... on that new fangled interwebs thing. 

A store owner that sells me a product, and then tries to regulate what I can DO with that product is a store owner who won't have my business very long. Although it does explain why GW was so hot on establishing GW stores all over the place. It wasn't sales... it was control.

(At one point, a few years ago, I visited the GW store in Denver. I'd never actually been IN a GW store, and I was curious. They were well stocked, but the prices were prohibitive, and as expected, they had NOTHING but GW merchandise. At that point, I realized that GW brand white glue was indeed a thing. I decided not to buy anything. And while I was looking, I suddenly noticed that everyone else in the store was crowded at the front window, looking out into the parking lot. I went over and looked, too. It was a parking lot. With cars in it. I was about to ask what we were all looking at, when someone said, "Well, just because he has a Reaper sticker on his window doesn't mean he's in HERE. He might be shopping anywhere else in the strip mall. COULD just be a coincidence."

Everyone was looking at MY CAR.

I made a point of going and having lunch at the pizza place next door... to kill time... before I went back to my car to leave. They didn't SEEM so much hostile as curious... but why take chances? They might have thought I was a spy for Reaper. Or worse... a heretic.)

Edited by Dr.Bedlam
10 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This policy is especially funny when they have published campaign books that call for improbable numbers of mandatory units. I once had to build 20 paper rhinos because there was one mission in a campaign book that called for giant piles of mandatory rhinos, no one in the group had enough, and we were running 3 tables of it at the time.

 

That said my paper rhinos had better paint than my plastic rhinos.

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Werkrobotwerk said:

This policy is especially funny when they have published campaign books that call for improbable numbers of mandatory units. I once had to build 20 paper rhinos because there was one mission in a campaign book that called for giant piles of mandatory rhinos, no one in the group had enough, and we were running 3 tables of it at the time.

 

That said my paper rhinos had better paint than my plastic rhinos.

My brain went "terrestrial herbivore" but somehow I think you meant "tank".

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, etherial said:

My brain went "terrestrial herbivore" but somehow I think you meant "tank".

I meant APC. they were getting used to do a shell game thing with doomsday devices. one player has a pile of the things and has secretly assigned some to have troops, some to have bombs, and some to have doomsday devices. his goal was to get the doomsday devices past the defenders .

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now