Something else: I've seen a lot of glass case displays of various Game's Workshop figures, all painted and pretty. In my life, I _may_ have seen 5 games actually played. Maybe. I've long been interested in the games, but the idea of sitting down, building models, painting them, assembling various components, etc... That never interested me. Now I'm seeing a whole lot of prepainted minis games, that support some very casual "pick up and play" mindsets, with very little time investment before actually playing.

So if Game's Workshop _is_ worried, it's not going to be because their competitors are beating them at the wargames thing, but because their competitors have offered a whole new player base a whole new way to pay- and it's a business model in which Game's Workshop can't sell paint, glue, or... Whatever else they sell. That's not a problem GW can easily pivot away from.

It's less GW hate and more dissatisfaction.

If i wasn't a Gw fan on some level i wouldn't rage so much when they treat the people who play their games like money pits and pretending their the only miniature game company out there.

Yeah, totally can't deny your posts are full of valid points fellas. As someone who started gaming 40K in 1994, I have seen a few editions go by, and wish they had stopped at 5th to be honest. Heck, even 4th wasn't at all bad. I fear they may be jumping the shark with Fantasy soon too.

Oh well, as long as people find a game to get into, variety is good. I keep telling myself no more games systems, but how long does that vow ever last lol...

RoV

Yeah yeah no more new game systems i say as i'm half way thought putting together a friends 200 miniature wrath of kings kickstarter.

A few affluent neck beard nerds aren't going to grow their brand or keep them afloat the only thing keeping Gw afloat is the capital they have built up over previous years (probably from all these greed tactics that have sent even their +20 year veterans leaving them).

I am doing my part, like most of us here I think, to support FFG.

I despise gw.

Kill 'em with your vote, and you vote in this arena with $$$!

To be fair, [Wizkids] did far better work at adapting D&D than they did with Star Trek.

Seems to fit the system better the D&D 4th ed too

I'll just quote myself from upthread:

Fourth Edition was a perfectly good hybrid of roleplaying and tactical combat--in other words, a pretty good reproduction of the core conceit of D&D--that Wizards of the Coast wrecked through some frankly stupid management practices.

D&D was literally a miniatures combat game before it was a roleplaying game. Tactical combat is baked in at a fundamental level. And at launch, Fourth Edition was the best D&D has ever done at fun, fast-paced, reasonably well-balanced tactical combat.

The fact that WotC decided almost immediately, as publishing timelines go, that their core customer base didn't want that kind of game after all isn't Fourth Edition's fault. The fact that WotC might have been right implies some fairly unflattering things about D&D players, but that also isn't Fourth Edition's fault.

And at launch, Fourth Edition was the best D&D has ever done at fun, fast-paced, reasonably well-balanced tactical combat

Yeah, but the problem was that that wasn't what role players wanted out of an RPG and the people who wanted a tactical miniatures game had better, more established alternatives. 4th Ed was a very well designed game that nobody wanted. Hence why WotC walked back 5th edition to be more role play oriented.

I think they made the new coke mistake on that one. WotC rocked up and said hey guys we know you love D&D classic but we got news for you were not making that anymore and now were making this D&D new! Try it out! and the d&d nerd took one swig of this new d&d and then their faces melted like they just drank from the wrong holy grail.

Different people have different tastes you cant blame players for not liking a game. Nor can you blame the game itself its just some paper and rules and plastic. The company behind the game though is another story.

I think if a company makes a game that isn't well received that's one thing. But if they take away a much beloved game and then replace it with a very different and mediocre game. Well you cant do that and not expect to lose players. I know people who are so jaded by the whole 4th ed thing I cant even get them to touch 5th ed and these guys and girls are crazy hard core d&d players grey beards who have been playing rpg's for 30 - 40 years. Their just like screw it we'll play another system.

"That's twice you ignored the 'handful of affluent players' part, which actually qualifies the whole sentence. I don't suppose you'd care to go for a third?"

I really don't understand what your point is? They are making less money. Yes, what money they are making is coming from a "handful of affluent players". So what? The flow of money HAS been stemmed. Is it somehow significant to you that profits are "only" down 50% instead of 90% because there are still players with money supporting them?

When the preponderance of cash flow is coming from those few individuals, and those individuals continue to support the business despite flagging sales from the less invested, then I'd say the scope of GW's losses might be getting blown a bit out of proportion. In all honesty, I figured my first comment was relatively self-explanatory. I wasn't inferring that GW wasn't losing money, only that they weren't doing so through their primary source of income.

Well you cant do that and not expect to lose players. I know people who are so jaded by the whole 4th ed thing I cant even get them to touch 5th ed and these guys and girls are crazy hard core d&d players grey beards who have been playing rpg's for 30 - 40 years. Their just like screw it we'll play another system.

I don't play Fifth Edition because I'm not interested in a game that's bad by design because that's what WotC thought they needed to do to claw back some Pathfinder players. As you say, there are other systems.

We don't get much pathfinder action either these days it makes the pc's way to powerful to the point they all end up half dragon shadow dancing paladin mages or some nonsense.

Gw hasn't lost money they lost -profits- their like the wooly mammoth who fatted up for the ice age by eating the bears who were fattening up for the winter and ate their overseas store Hq's and their store staff and a few of their stores as well.

Speaking of RPGs, has anybody mingled X-wing miniatures with Star Wars RPGs yet? Years ago, before this game came out, my brother wanted me to play a Star Wars tabletop RPG with him, and I told him quite adamantly that I wouldn't play unless I could be a pilot and use my Wings of War maneuver cards with Star Wars miniatures to have tabletop dogfights at some point in the game. He caved, and I played a Star Wars minis game years before Star Wars minis. But I liked the feel it gave of the game meaning something more than purely competitive tournament-based stuff. I think there's a lot of room for this game to grow in that direction if people want it, maybe even pairing with something like Imperial Assault.

D&D attack wing is very fun so far.

Mechanics a bit different but mostly same. Bumping is no biggie that's the main difference.

I am buying them as miniatures to play attack wing, other board games and Pathfinder/D&D with.

X wing is better overall at the moment its fully flushed out.

But DnD attack wing designers Andrew and other fellow (Sorry forget name) they seem very pro active on the boardgeek forums and are really putting in a real effort.

I collect both games at the moment.

Trying to resist Age of Sails.........

D&D attack wing is very fun so far.

Mechanics a bit different but mostly same. Bumping is no biggie that's the main difference.

I am buying them as miniatures to play attack wing, other board games and Pathfinder/D&D with.

X wing is better overall at the moment its fully flushed out.

But DnD attack wing designers Andrew and other fellow (Sorry forget name) they seem very pro active on the boardgeek forums and are really putting in a real effort.

I collect both games at the moment.

Trying to resist Age of Sails.........

I've managed to resist Age of Sails. The main reason I'm here though is that nobody plays Wings of War/Wings of Glory where I live. I love those games, and have played them for years, but X-wing is a much bigger community, and I have to admit I like the addition of the pilot and upgrade cards (though I saw that as a major turn-off, and it kept me away from X-wing for years initially, as I thought it polluted the purity of aerial combat tactics). Now, I think the pilot cards and upgrades add a lot of spice and variety, and who doesn't love collecting aces? Wings of Glory didn't even have any special pilot abilities and I still got 3 copies of Lily Litvyak (first and highest scoring female ace ever).

I just got my CSI box today.

Took like 4 hours so open, unpack and sleeve 3 boxes of most wanted, 2 Starvipers, 3 M3As , and 2 IGTs.

Yah!!!!

We looked at the new harlequin army on their website it's about 1500 points worth for £400, on top of that you need the rule book, paints, glue and tools for construction so you actually pay £500 for an army that's too small to use in a tournament.

Since the Harlequins are tailored more towards formations than full detachments, I don't suspect people will be running that many points anyways. It's a bit disingenuous to say that the army is "too small to use in a tournament" when it's almost always going to be used as an adjunct to a full-fledged Eldar / Dark Eldar CAD. In that respect it very much is large enough to be used in a tournament.

We looked at the new harlequin army on their website it's about 1500 points worth for £400, on top of that you need the rule book, paints, glue and tools for construction so you actually pay £500 for an army that's too small to use in a tournament.

Since the Harlequins are tailored more towards formations than full detachments, I don't suspect people will be running that many points anyways. It's a bit disingenuous to say that the army is "too small to use in a tournament" when it's almost always going to be used as an adjunct to a full-fledged Eldar / Dark Eldar CAD. In that respect it very much is large enough to be used in a tournament.

But it is being sold as an army, I could of as easily referenced last month's necron deal it's pretty much the same case.

£500 is a ridiculous amount to pay for an introduction to the hobby, GW turned its back on the veterans thinking they spent less than kids just entering and that tactic has backfired badly because it's not a hobby you can do with pocket money anymore.

I was the first in my group to give up on 40k when 7th came out, I see it as a cash grab edition that was put out not to fix issues with 6th but to pad out the financial report, it's taken awhile but others are coming around to the same conclusion.

They were going to switch to fantasy but now we know the new edition is turning it into a skirmish game and squating the armies they've spent years collecting their totally done with GW.

GW has made their bed now they get to sleep uncomfortably in it.

Unfortunately, I can't ever see FFG taking the #1 spot from GW. GW just has too large a fan base who will buy their minis whatever the price.

Personally I gave up playing 40K when the current edition was released. £50 for a rulebook with rules almost identical to the previous edition, with a few minor tweaks and a half-assed psychic phase and a totally broken summoning discipline did it for me.

The club I attend is mostly dominated by 40K and WFB but lately more players have started playing X-wing, but in addition to the GW stuff - not instead of.

Breaking away from a system you've played for decades is hard, I played for 20 years and have alot of good memories which is why I tried to like 6th even though it was a dull shooting biased edition.

7th was the breaking point for me and alot of others, 9th ed of warhammer will drive even more away.

Kirby has set a course right off the cliff and even though they know he's wrong no one wants to get fired for telling him the honest stupidity of this strategy.

They had a stranglehold in the mid 00`s with a wide selection of fun games and they threw it away by focusing on the main three.

I'm not so sure Kirby is the one the blame if you look at when he took over as CEO in 2007 the share price was a lot lower then what it is right now. If anything he's managed to buy GW a few more years. But now they have Kevin in the top job do you think the accountant is going to make things better?

They had a stranglehold in the mid 00`s with a wide selection of fun games and they threw it away by focusing on the main three.

I just wish they'd license out a few of their old titles

Just think what someone like FFG could do with Space Hulk - create some real depth and expansions rather than drag it out as a cash cow that they can milk every 5 years or so and completely ignore it in the intervening years

Didn't ffg do a space hulk card game?

Privateer press does a game i find scratches my space hulk itch called Level 7 omega protocol. I'm greedily awaiting my delivery of imperial assault but between those two games GW can reprint the same old space hulk all they like.

Breaking away from a system you've played for decades is hard, I played for 20 years and have alot of good memories which is why I tried to like 6th even though it was a dull shooting biased edition.

7th was the breaking point for me and alot of others, 9th ed of warhammer will drive even more away.

Kirby has set a course right off the cliff and even though they know he's wrong no one wants to get fired for telling him the honest stupidity of this strategy.

They had a stranglehold in the mid 00`s with a wide selection of fun games and they threw it away by focusing on the main three.

Agree 100%. Played 40k since 2nd edition. Loved 5th edition, by far my favorite. You were able to fit in a 2000 point game in a couple of house. 6th edition built the coffin and 7th put the nail in it for me. Shoddy rules.

I fear for Fantasy. I enjoyed 8th edition, but if the rumors are true with 9th edition, I will soon stop playing it as well.

This is disappointing for me as my 40k/Fantasy collection is huge and put alot of TLC into building them.

I hate to see GW go down in flames, but I think within the next couple years 40k and Fantasy will be out of the picture.

When i worked in GW marketing up to about 2005, GW had a 90 per cent chunk of the 'wargames' market share.

Thats a lot.

even the least popular GW line sells more than the best seller of any other company.

GW have a massive highstreet presence and even if they have one 'bricks and mortar' store in a country its probably one more than any other company has.

Im overjoyed xwing is doing really well but I cant see it coming close to beating citadel/GW in sales for a long long time.

They had a stranglehold in the mid 00`s with a wide selection of fun games and they threw it away by focusing on the main three.

I just wish they'd license out a few of their old titles

Just think what someone like FFG could do with Space Hulk - create some real depth and expansions rather than drag it out as a cash cow that they can milk every 5 years or so and completely ignore it in the intervening years

They do licence out the old titles. But from the last figures i remember discussing (as i wanted to license doing a range of discontinued citadel minis as a 'vintage' range) you need to give GW about a million pounds in return for an IP licence, they dont mind giving it out if you have the money ( a mate in my rpg group worked in licensing at the time).

But you're right about a drop in titles.

A while back i worked out that beteen 1980 and 1989 they released about 50 different games, t -shirts, records , everything really (some were GW licenesed reprintes like runequest and call of cthulu etc)

Between 1990 and 1999 it dropped to about 15 titles.

Between 2000 and 2009 you were looking at three main titles with one or two subsiduary games (inquisitor, reprints of spacehulk, dreadfleet etc)

The problem is that GW are under pressue not just to make a profit, but to maintain or increase that level of profit as they have shareholders. If they make £100 million profit its not good if they made £110 million the year before, shareholders get less dividends and sell up.

Of course its mental as they still make a lot of money. No one is making a loss but they have to then make more of what sells... so thats more space marines and they can no longer take risks on 'fun' stuff that might bomb

(gorkamorka is a classic example, when i was in marketing we could not *give* that away, it cost GW a lot of money)

To me the downside was going shareheld in the early 90s... you can see GW just go downhill from then on. It picked up in tone and style (away from the 'everything is red' period of the early 90s) around 97 and got quite cool again but you could still see that non 'core' projects struggled for funding.

I used to work in the same office as 'specialist games/fanatic' and they were expected to support a lot of great titles (necro, blood bowl, epic etc) with the bare minimum of support and staff.

To be fair gorkamorka was fraking awful.

D&D attack wing is very fun so far.

Mechanics a bit different but mostly same. Bumping is no biggie that's the main difference.

I am buying them as miniatures to play attack wing, other board games and Pathfinder/D&D with.

X wing is better overall at the moment its fully flushed out.

But DnD attack wing designers Andrew and other fellow (Sorry forget name) they seem very pro active on the boardgeek forums and are really putting in a real effort.

I collect both games at the moment.

Trying to resist Age of Sails.........

I wiuld love to play Age of Sails but worry about finding folks to play with.