On Scale Creep (in all senses)

[killersquid]

I love big models, they look really cool! My verminlord is the biggest model I own, and he's my favourite model in my Skaven army.

[Master Sheol]

I don't like so much the scale Creep of GW games (size of models and size of armies)

Armies are more expensive, more difficult to transport and games of 40k are Simply too long to play

 

This is why even if i like to Paint some cool big models from time to time i am now a KillTeam only player

[Ishagu]

I've played against a Tau Manta and there was still plenty of table space lol

[Servant of Dante]

The comment was about the space an army takes up to transport, not the board space it covers. My 20 blood angels tactical marines would take up twice the space in a case as 20 metal Sisters, for example (and they aren’t even very bulky or spindly compared to some of the newer models). Not only have centerpiece models gotten harder to transport, so have your basic infantry.

[MegaVolt87]

I still don't know how to feel about the base size changes. 25's were good for melee, 32's for taking up space to make enemy deep strikes more difficult. 32mm look ok, re-based 100+ guys a while back its over. I guess I would be mad if I already had enough foam storage + bag for new 40k stuff. I got my old 1750pts of SM in a GW carry case, everything else is boxed up. 

[Vermintide]

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

[sockwithaticket]

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

Base size wasn't stopping from doing anything about that, in fact the squat pose took up more base space so on the basis you're suggesting more of that and fewer non-upright or dynamic, one-legged poses would make sense for an increased base size.

[Robbienw]

Also most of the Primaris marines are in the classic knees braced (‘squat’) position anyway.

[ERJAK]

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

That's not even remotely true. Even accounting for paint sales, people who play the game make up far more of their sales. Pure collectors/painters are a minority.

 

There's a reason the 8 out of 10 of the top selling kits at any given time are also the ones with the best rules.

[FlamingDeth]

 

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

That's not even remotely true. Even accounting for paint sales, people who play the game make up far more of their sales. Pure collectors/painters are a minority.

 

There's a reason the 8 out of 10 of the top selling kits at any given time are also the ones with the best rules.

I don't disagree that it's probably the case, but do you have a source for that information, beyond anecdotal evidence of what you see selling at your local store?

[ERJAK]

 

 

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

That's not even remotely true. Even accounting for paint sales, people who play the game make up far more of their sales. Pure collectors/painters are a minority.

 

There's a reason the 8 out of 10 of the top selling kits at any given time are also the ones with the best rules.

I don't disagree that it's probably the case, but do you have a source for that information, beyond anecdotal evidence of what you see selling at your local store?

There's the greater financials. GW posted losses or very anemic growth for several years as 7th dragged on and during the launch of AoS. If you look at their annual report for 2015-2016 they just about broke even with their previous year. Compare that versus their half year report for 2016-2017, the difference is MASSIVE and the only thing that really changed in that time period (May through November) was that the General's handbook came out for AoS, they were already on their rapid fire release schedule, models weren't particularly worse than they are now and even the 'New GW' community initiative was just getting started during that time.

 

With just this data the best we can do is draw correlation, not causation, but when GW released the general's handbook for AoS, which they themselves stated at adepticon 2017 was their best selling RULES supplement PERIOD, a supplement that brought quite a lot of people in the GAME, while making very few other major changes, that same time period saw a 13% increase in revenue at constant currency. The previous year during the same time period they saw a gain of less than a tenth of a percent.

 

You could go on to include the release of 8th being so lucrative a buddy of mine bought a new house with his GW stock, but by that point it's even more debatable about what factors were pushing the growth the most. The May-Nov 2015 V. May-Nov 2016 financials are more like-for-like.

 

Anecdotally? GW was so desperate for a turn around they brought in podcasters and TOs to help write a rule book, continued that philosophy into 40k, and are now making 'golden cocaine' money.

 

Rules sell models(Provided the setting is already established.) Oh yeah, the 8 out of 10 kits thing. When I used to pay attention to the GW webstore more, I noticed at the time that their recommended list was basically just top sellers. For 40k it was just a competitive eldar list followed by the rhinos/devastators you needed for gladius strike force.

[FlamingDeth]

Okie dokie. I still agree with the opinion on competitive models selling more, but you could also infer that the gains were from ramped up interest after reversing a decade or more of a clear, hostile attitude towards their own consumers.

[Ishagu]

They were never hostile towards anyone. They've always had an excellent customer service attitude.

 

Their new focus on community involvement, encouraging competitive gaming and tighter rules has led to their huge growth and success.

 

The most competitive models do indeed sell the best. It's why the Forgeworld Caladius tank is currently sold out following it's domination in multiple lists during the highly piblicized BAO tournament.

[Closet Skeleton]

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

 

I think the 32s just look better. Even small early 3rd ed models look good on 32s, 3rd ed nobs were on 40mm which was just a massive leap from the 25mm their squad mates barely fit on, putting them all on 32s from the start would have made good sense. Loads of old models like the first/second ed terminators over-hung 25mm bases. People were putting heroes on large scenic bases back in 2nd ed, its nothing new.

 

Base size is essentially just a question of should the base be small as possible to not be in the way or should it be a 'picture frame' that gives the model some aesthetic space.

 

Warhammer fantasy always had larger base sizes for some armies.

[Robbienw]

Competitive rules can increase model sales.  That doesn't mean the most competitive models sell the best though.  The quality of the model and popularity of the faction also influence what sells best.

 

Remember, many people are in this hobby primarily for the models.

[Ishagu]

Competitive rules can increase model sales. That doesn't mean the most competitive models sell the best though. The quality of the model and popularity of the faction also influence what sells best.

 

Remember, many people are in this hobby primarily for the models.

Sure, but the best preforming models are bought in multiples. If I'm a hobbyist I'll buy one Caladius tank. If I'm a competitive player I'll buy 3 of them.

[Robbienw]

Hobbyists buy in multiples too, some of us like big armies 

[Yodhrin]

The issue with discussions like these is we're really talking about three individual things which are all connected but still distinct.

 

1. "scale creep" in the sense of regular models getting larger.

2. "scale creep" in the sense of centrepiece models becoming both larger and more common.

3. "scale creep" in the sense of the overall size of actual armies increasing.

 

In the first sense, we seem to have stabilised for the moment. Ignoring "legacy" models, basic humans are around 32mm tall, Marines 38-42mm depending on type, Orks remain either Boy size or Nob size, etc etc. The main issue is the biggest and most commonplace basic humans - Guardsmen - are stuck as "legacy" models.

 

The second and third senses are more closely tied together, and if you'll forgive me for a bit while I torture a metaphor; big centrepiece models are sugary treats, and 40K is now a big fat b*****d. Sugary treats are nice, most people enjoy them, and in moderation they do no harm. Combine them with capitalism and the typically poor impulse control of human beings, however, and you get obesity. Big centrepieces as something special that you bust out for a multiplayer or Apocalypse game were an unequivocally positive addition to 40K, whether that was via Forgeworld or the earliest versions of Apocalypse, but as soon as GW realised they were popular 40K as a "reinforced platoon" size skirmish wargame was dead and gone, even if it took a few years to shuffle off.

 

Big plastic kits are catnip to GW; they don't cost any appreciable amount more to design or manufacture(things which to GW, remember, are entirely predictable and comparatively low costs since they have salaried artists and manufacture kits in-house) than any other kit with the same number of sprues, but they can charge double or more the amount for the resulting kit because it's big and impressive. So we get stage one, with GW moving FW kits to plastic. They sell really well, so we get further development of Apocalypse, and GW start coming up with entirely new Big Damn Models to make in plastic.  Those sell even better than GW expected, so we enter stage three where GW begin including BDM kits as part of regular armies with more modest rules than "real" superheavies. Then stage four, they begin reworking the core rules to accommodate the "real" superheavies, but this causes a problem; traditional armies are becoming ineffective. The only solution is to further distort the rules to give regular armies a fighting chance; lower point costs, more access to HUEG weaponry, new "medium size"(by trad standards, large) models designed explicitly to counter the BDMs, detachments, formations, etc etc. Then the crisis point, where the whole thing is in danger of collapsing under its own weight, and so we get 8th - radical surgery, a complete reframing of what 40K "is", a system designed from the ground up around the inclusion of several BDMs in an army, and in which traditional armies(ie, infantry and a few vehicles) become ineffective, or unfeasibly large and unwieldy, not to mention expensive.

 

I think people trying to "fix" 8th by playing smaller size games or restricting units are on something of a hiding to nothing, because the whole point of 8th was to be a game of large armies with lots of big models, and the core mechanics reflect that; cutting back to 1k points might get you an army size more in line with an earlier edition of 40K, but the mechanics of the game are still designed around killing giant models with dozens of wounds and wiping out giant hordes of mooks, and if you reduce the size of the game too much it becomes extremely "swingy" and dice-dependent, even moreso than prior versions of 40K. It's all very well to say "play it your way", but the fact is 8th 40K is no more suited mechanically to small games than 3rd-5th was suited to modern HUEG games - playing 8th small is a square peg, round hole scenario.

 

And the thing is, GW aren't going to fix it. They are, as they keep insisting, a model company. The lore, the gameplay, the hobby, all are subordinate to one thing above all others; selling models. Which is, you know, fine, it's their company, but what people who're fans of the lore or the gameplay or the hobby need to get up to speed on is GW doesn't care about you beyond the extent to which your fandom of those other things leads you to buy models. If someone at the studio was a big and enthusiastic enough My Little Pony fan, and the board of the company believed they would sell, then they would put out a book series about Ponysarius Cawl creating new geneseed for the Pony Marines, with accompanying model line including titan-scale Pony Voltron, in a heartbeat.

 

They're going to keep selling us those sugary treats so long as people keep buying them, and people being people, they're going to keep buying them.

 

Personally, I recommend going back to older editions. You can cobble together a really fun game using the 4th Edition rules with a few tweaks from later versions and a mix of 3rd and 4th edition codices. Sure, you can't walk into a store or a club and get a pickup game, but A; what's the point of getting a pickup game if it's not that fun for you, and B; let's be real, beyond our teens most of us don't get to game all that often anyway, so arranging things in advance is doable even if it's less convenient.

[Vermintide]

 

I feel like the change of base size was simply to give more freedom for posing than the classic squat position. Same reason the models have gotten bigger in general- The most profitable market for GW Is painters and collectors, who want more detail, not players.

That's not even remotely true. Even accounting for paint sales, people who play the game make up far more of their sales. Pure collectors/painters are a minority.

 

There's a reason the 8 out of 10 of the top selling kits at any given time are also the ones with the best rules.

 

 

I think the majority of Warhammer hobbyists are mostly painter/collectors who occasionally play- This is true simply by logic. For most people, it takes a much greater proportion of your time to assemble and pain your armies than you ever get play time from them. I think you're correct that people who never play the game are probably in a minority. But I'm pretty sure the hardcore gamers who play more than once every week or two are probably also in a minority.

 

The models with better rules sell better because even if people only rarely play the game, they still want a competitive army. I don't think those figures are necessarily evidence that the most profitable part of their audience is the hardcore gamers. There are many more factors at play there, and sales=/= profit- For all we know, GW as a business is held up entirely by paint. I'm reasonably certain GW will have done much greater research on their market than we have access to, so we can't really go drawing conclusions from statistical data that doesn't even begin to paint a full picture.

 

From a business standpoint I think it would make sense to target the gamers rather than the collectors, simply because the collector will eventually collect a big enough amount and simply stop. Gamers always upcycle and exchange armies to buy new things. But none of that was my point in my first place- I was merely making a comment that the base sizes were probably changed for aesthetic reasons over anything else :)

[Bryan Blaire]

simply because the collector will eventually collect a big enough amount and simply stop. Gamers always upcycle and exchange armies to buy new things.

I don’t know about that - I’ve got things from 2nd Edition I’ve never sold but which are likely to not have rules in the future (Chaplain on a bike), but I will also say I’m not a hardcore gamer. In a similar vein, I own more models that I can conceivably put in my two 5.5 foot wide display cabinets and I haven’t stopped buying new models yet - but I also don’t consider myself a hardcore collector (though I only play with Kill Team sizes forces most of the time). I don’t buy everything I need for the hobby from GW, but I probably buy more tools and paints than I need to from them, as I could get better/as good quality items cheaper elsewhere.

 

I wouldn’t make assumptions on who buys they most GW stuff - if you don’t know for a fact, it’s better to not argue than argue on inference - anyone can infer and two people doing so will get you arguments about three different inferred conclusions about the same topic, and none of them are resolvable because they aren’t based on facts.

[MegaVolt87]

2k points baseline is great IMO, even in past editions I was pushing 1750 pts games when 1500 pts was seemingly the norm. I have seen lists below 2k pts battle reports they are anemic, gimmicky and really show the 8th rules are designed around 2k points plus. Game is simple enough to move through 2k pts at a reasonable pace. 

[Panzer]

Contrary, I believe there's barely any difference between something like 1750 and 2000 points matches. The lists are almost the same and are capable of the same stuff and it takes about the same time to finish a game. It's just about the amount of models you are carrying around at that point. ^^

[Closet Skeleton]

Contrary, I believe there's barely any difference between something like 1750 and 2000 points matches. The lists are almost the same and are capable of the same stuff and it takes about the same time to finish a game. It's just about the amount of models you are carrying around at that point. ^^

Depends on the army. Some lists don't work at all without those extra 250 points, some 1750 lists are just nastier more efficient versions of 2k lists.

[Pacific81]

15mm plastic HH Epic would be absolutely amazing, GW would get a lot of interest with Epic HH as you could consider it as "Historical sci-fi" game.

I'm painting up a Great Crusade-era World Eaters force for Epic 6/8mm. Having tremendous fun getting the old Epic minis second hand and also some of the new sculpts from smaller companies that can be used to represent - it's really starting to take off as a niche I think (please have a look at my thread in the Age of Darkness section if you're interested!)

 

What I will say is that the concept of large Titans and vehicles work better at small scale in terms of how they look on the tabletop, city-wide conflicts of hundrds of troops with Titans and super heavy squadrons clashing - but actually the game mechanics work much better too: Flanking units of Speeders taking out artillery emplacements at the back of the board, marine detachments coming down in drop-pods on an objectives, hordes of Orks clashing in CC. The scale fits with the concept and tactics in play in the game - amd certainly doesn't feel borderline comical as some 40k games can look now with people stacking up knights and massive vehicles, squeezed inappropriately into tiny sections of boards - and the rules don't allow for tactical nuance beyond throwing tons of dice and the opponent sadly taking away their poor bloody infantry they spent months preparing.

 

I think it's wonderful that GW is making these massive plastic kits, Just with the modelling opportunities they present, things that wouldn't have been possible some years ago. But, it's definitely been to the detriment of how 40k works conceptually, in cases where players don't moderate what they place on the tabletop.

[ERJAK]

Okie dokie. I still agree with the opinion on competitive models selling more, but you could also infer that the gains were from ramped up interest after reversing a decade or more of a clear, hostile attitude towards their own consumers.

That time period was just at the very cusp of 'new GW'intiative. It's unlikely that they had truly felt the effects yet.