GW Announces WH40K 8th edition

[Lars Porsenna]

On line in the GW community there has been a lot of discussion about the new direction GW has taken. This is a tilt towards those discussions. So best seen as a larf at their own expense...

 

Damon.

[TheAuldGrump]

40 minutes ago, Pingo said:

 

 

Post-Kirby GW.

 

Is it a sad thing when within a year of ousting their old CEO their sales (not just profits) have almost doubled?

 

Kirby focused on minimizing costs, which did not address their core problem, which was diminishing sales.

 

Still not interested - I really do not like Age of Sigmar, and both Megan and I play Kings of War instead of Warhammer. (For the record - Kings of War is a heck of a lot easier to teach a new player than Warhammer Fantasy Battle ever was - and Mantic did a lot of work on balance, which GW never really paid any attention to.)

 

The Auld Grump - even in the glory days of 3rd edition Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

[Dai-Mongar]

Yeah, I thought it was funny of course but also kind of encouraging to see them acknowledging that they've goofed in the past and that there's a new direction.

[TheAuldGrump]

26 minutes ago, Dai-Mongar said:

Yeah, I thought it was funny of course but also kind of encouraging to see them acknowledging that they've goofed in the past and that there's a new direction.

I'd be less worried, if I really didn't hate Age of Sigmar as much as I do.

 

Yes, I know that GW is addressing many of the problems that so irritated me in the original edition of Age of Sigmar - but I can't help but feel that that original version of AoS should never have been released - a feeling of 'What the Hell were they thinking?!'

 

A perfect example of why community feedback, and adequate playtesting, are so important.

 

But,  I can acknowledge that they are fixing many of those problems... just a few years late. (And, again, post-Kirby. He came close to killing the company, I think.)

 

The Auld Grump - believe it or not, Kirby wrote a couple of D&D adventures, back in the day....

Edited April 24, 2017 by TheAuldGrump

[Mehman]

I'm as excited as a shook-up burlap sack full of weasels !

 

Listen, I've got more health complications than a wildebeest hopped up on ephedra so large-scale skirmish gaming is right out for me. I think most of you know this by now but I figure a reminder is in order every once-in-a-while. I should wear a sign at ReaperCon that says "Disabled Gamer" but the cane and cursing usually give it away before you could read a poster board.

 

Anyway, I like this idea of change and hope it will invigorate me as much as Age of Sigmar did. That game took some getting used to but I'm glad I tried it instead of being mad at GW for forever. (So many fantasy armies acquired...) I'm now unable to play either AoS or 40k because of said health but I like keeping up with what's going on. The only thing I'll probably be able to play once a year will be Shadow War: Armageddon but, still, new fluff for the fluff god! Although, I could always update Kill-Team to work with the new rules...

[Chaoswolf]

5 hours ago, Lars Porsenna said:

Summary from the live FAQ GW did today:

 

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=451728

 

Damon.

Some interesting tid-bits there...

[Club]

I'm seriously unlikely to get back into 40k. bloodbowl, some of their skirmish stuff, certainly.

 

But a large army? not a chance. Not at the cost of some of their 'pay to win' units. I dropped GW during the finecast debacle. Telling us how much they'd save, then asking us to eat a 30-50% price increase just went down the wrong way.

 

I understand fixed costs, and that low-sales items will be more expensive than high-sales basic troops. I understand that they have to be modeled, the molds made, and that the people casting them deserve a decent wage. no complaints. (Although GW apparently doesn't think the people selling them deserve above minimum wage, but that's another story)

 

But I cannot make myself believe that the prices for some of the things out there are what they should be. that the light titans should be well over $100. That aircraft should be barely cheaper when I see a dozen or more of them on a table at the monthly gaming get together. When the players I talk to say that they need them to stand a chance of winning at a casual level.

 

Show me the breakdown of the cost of the showpieces, and you might get me back into 40k, as opposed to a low-model-count skirmish game. I can't make myself believe that a centurian or bloodcrusher unit should be so absurdly expensive. That I'm not being painfully gouged for everything but my troops choices. The models are beautiful, but so is ma'al Drakar; ma'al is probably going to sell a lot less (and therefore have a much higher fixed per model), is just as big, but still manages to have a comparable price. and I didn't *have* to buy it to *not lose*

 

-----

 

I know a guy who says that end of times has made age of sigmar what it always should have been.

[Reaperbryan]

For my part, I have been witness this past few years of GW introducing more Box Sets with old models, repackaged in different quantities, but through the new packaging, cheaper per unit than they were before. for a variety of reasons, it can be hard to lower the cost on an exiting SKU, but it can be easy to repackage the items in a new SKU and lower that cost - and they have done this many times. The recent (December? January?) releases of 1 unit of troops and one transport (for Tyranids it was the Tervigon instead) which was a $30 box of infantry, plus a $55 "transport" in one box for $58. 

 

this is but one example of what they refer to as the "new GW"™, and it is a direction as a consumer I have enjoyed witnessing.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

Regarding per model price, I've got the starter box for the Battle of Vedros on order through the FLGS.  It won't be enough to start a full-sized force, but I get a good start on one at about $2 per figure...and it includes a Dreadnought.  It's basically a repackaging of models from the Assault on Black Reach set.

[Lars Porsenna]

A lot of repackaging has been going on in the AoS line as well, FWIW. usually they double the model count & throw in a discount as well. I don't remember any hard figures, but if a kit was $33 for 5 models, they'll rebox 10 for $50 or something along those lines. As much as I dislike AoS I still buy figures for WHFB 8th & game that when I can, so it benefits me (except for the dead Bretonnians line, which I buy Black Tree figures for, or Tomb Kings which has fewer substitute options...)

 

Damon.

[Chaoswolf]

7 minutes ago, Sergeant_Crunch said:

Regarding per model price, I've got the starter box for the Battle of Vedros on order through the FLGS.  It won't be enough to start a full-sized force, but I get a good start on one at about $2 per figure...and it includes a Dreadnought.  It's basically a repackaging of models from the Assault on Black Reach set.

I've seen that box at my FLGS; it's a pretty solid deal for what you get, IMO.

[TheAuldGrump]

26 minutes ago, Reaperbryan said:

For my part, I have been witness this past few years of GW introducing more Box Sets with old models, repackaged in different quantities, but through the new packaging, cheaper per unit than they were before. for a variety of reasons, it can be hard to lower the cost on an exiting SKU, but it can be easy to repackage the items in a new SKU and lower that cost - and they have done this many times. The recent (December? January?) releases of 1 unit of troops and one transport (for Tyranids it was the Tervigon instead) which was a $30 box of infantry, plus a $55 "transport" in one box for $58. 

 

this is but one example of what they refer to as the "new GW"™, and it is a direction as a consumer I have enjoyed witnessing.

An excellent and accurate observation - Rountree, as CEO has been reversing many of the cost cutting and profit increasing practices that came at the cost of diminishing sales.

 

Heck, for all my distaste for Age of Sigmar, I am tempted by the repackaged figures from Island of Blood - and the fact that the figures are less expensive in their new packaging makes them all the more attractive.

 

Which leaves me in the odd position of liking the direction that the company is going, while having no direct interest in their current games. (The elves and skaven in the repackaged IoB will be used in Kings of War.)

 

I will at least look at the new WH40K - but... after so long, and being disgruntled with the game so thoroughly... not likely to change. (I liked 3rd ed... for some reason, in regards to games, the 3rd editions seem to be my sweet spot - D&D, Warhammer Fantasy Battle, WH40K, Runequest....)

 

The Auld Grump

[Reaperbryan]

Ultimately, I'll keep on playing everything I can get my hands on that looks to me like it will be helpful to understand, and I'll most likely continue to be abysmally bad at miniatures strategy games. My track record is so bad that I have only twice ever beat an adult (I've beaten my kids as teenagers), and one of those I am fully aware that my opponent was using poor tactics to teach me the rules for those situations. Rather like when you win the demo game at convention...

 

And in the meantime, I am finding ways to get more models for cheaper, and if GW or anybody else wants to help make that easier for me, I'm ok with that.

 

Anybody rage burning their armies over this (there's a video on youtube of a guy that hated AOS so much he literally set fire to his army!) should seriously just chill. Business is cyclical, if you don't like 8th just keep playing 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 7th, and wait for 9th.

[TheAuldGrump]

4 hours ago, Reaperbryan said:

Ultimately, I'll keep on playing everything I can get my hands on that looks to me like it will be helpful to understand, and I'll most likely continue to be abysmally bad at miniatures strategy games. My track record is so bad that I have only twice ever beat an adult (I've beaten my kids as teenagers), and one of those I am fully aware that my opponent was using poor tactics to teach me the rules for those situations. Rather like when you win the demo game at convention...

 

And in the meantime, I am finding ways to get more models for cheaper, and if GW or anybody else wants to help make that easier for me, I'm ok with that.

 

Anybody rage burning their armies over this (there's a video on youtube of a guy that hated AOS so much he literally set fire to his army!) should seriously just chill. Business is cyclical, if you don't like 8th just keep playing 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 7th, and wait for 9th.

To be fair - I didn't burn my old WH40K army - I sold it.

 

I want to say that it was (of all things) the change of the size for the bases of Terminators... I looked at my old Deathwing (and I do mean old - some were the original round headed terminators from the 80s.), and realized that I just did not care enough to rebase anything. I had not played the game in years.

 

My old Warhammer Fantasy armies, on the other hand, have no problems at all, at all, when repurposed for Kings of War. (Heck, Mantic went out of their way to welcome folks from the Warhammer games over to Kings of War - giving the Brettonians, Beastmen, and Tomb Kings a new home. And it really does not hurt that those armies are better balanced in KoW than the were in WH - they can actually win battles now.)

 

That person that rage burned his army would have been much better served to either sell it off, or find another game to use it in. (I like Kings of War - a lot. I am happier with it than I have been with any edition of WH since 3rd.)

 

But, agreed, a healthy GW is better for the industry - and the company is looking healthier than it has in a long time.

 

I am frankly amazed at how quickly the turn around is happening - I was expecting it to take years, if it could have been done at all.

 

The Auld Grump - the nice thing about being a pessimist - most surprises are pleasant ones....

[Mehman]

1 hour ago, TheAuldGrump said:

To be fair - I didn't burn my old WH40K army - I sold it.

 

I want to say that it was (of all things) the change of the size for the bases of Terminators... I looked at my old Deathwing (and I do mean old - some were the original round headed terminators from the 80s.), and realized that I just did not care enough to rebase anything. I had not played the game in years.

 

My old Warhammer Fantasy armies, on the other hand, have no problems at all, at all, when repurposed for Kings of War. (Heck, Mantic went out of their way to welcome folks from the Warhammer games over to Kings of War - giving the Brettonians, Beastmen, and Tomb Kings a new home. And it really does not hurt that those armies are better balanced in KoW than the were in WH - they can actually win battles now.)

 

That person that rage burned his army would have been much better served to either sell it off, or find another game to use it in. (I like Kings of War - a lot. I am happier with it than I have been with any edition of WH since 3rd.)

 

But, agreed, a healthy GW is better for the industry - and the company is looking healthier than it has in a long time.

 

I am frankly amazed at how quickly the turn around is happening - I was expecting it to take years, if it could have been done at all.

 

The Auld Grump - the nice thing about being a pessimist - most surprises are pleasant ones....

 

My old Warhammer Fantasy army - Beastmen, no doubt - did better in AoS when I use to play than it did during all those days of WFB. Funny how things work out. I was even winning games during the old days, mind you. The great thing is that I didn't even have to repurpose them, change bases, or wait for some silly notion of "balance". In fact, I've added several armies since AoS came out that I wouldn't have been able to afford if they hadn't ended the old game; $450-$700 is too high a price for adding another army but, when all you need is a leader and some grunts, it becomes more affordable. The Chaos Faction is strong in this house !