10th Edition: GW's Target Demographic

[gideon stargreave]

2 hours ago, MegaVolt87 said:

The target audience is technically a younger one, kinda always has been. One issue for me is CSM being blurred so much with warriors of chaos/slaves to darkness AOS. The recent CSM Dex cover art is pretty much fantasy chaos warriors at this point in my eyes for instance. 

 CSM being blurred with slaves to darkness has my nostalgia meter on full. Bring tech weapons back to fantasy and Minotaurs back to 40k!

[Xenith]

=][= Let's keep on topic of GW's demographic please - not the merits of different versions of the HH game, unless relating to specific audiences - plenty of scope in the HH section for that! =][= 

[Helias_Tancred]

On 7/25/2023 at 4:02 AM, appiah4 said:

This is not correct. There is no edition of D&D that is easier to play for a couple of hours every few weeks than OD&D.  5e is still a convoluted mess compared to the Basic Set D&D or even AD&D2e. 

 

 

Agree. The old Basic/Expert is the easiest to play imo. It is still perfect for people new to the hobby.  I run an AD&D campaign, most of my friends prefer it,  and I prefer "1st edition" over everything else. Nostalgia? Sure. Best cover art and book art? Yep.  But a great set of rules that sort of floats into the background and lets you play the game. Easily adaptable to any situation on the fly too. I'm also a class/race archetype fan and that is AD&D lol.

 

lol just saw my post right after Xenith's reminder. Doh!

 

The U.S. side of Games Workshop is a mess imo, but I still remember them telling me that GW products are for people with a decent to considerable amount of money. And of course the focus was on small actions such as a quick painting class or quick small game to get the kid or adult hooked, which leads into the boxed set that covers what you just did with them. There was definitely a schtick they wanted you to use in order to sell GW products. But the target audience was for those with a higher level of income. 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by Eilio Tiberius

[LittlePlasticHomies]

Not sure if this is outside the scope; mods please zap if irrelevant.

 

I did find the tangent about wet palettes to  be fascinating as someone who lives in Salt Lake City - a famously dry area.

 

 The hobby product design process sounds very anglocentric. I can understand that; for them, a wet palette adds little value, especially with unlimited paint.

 

For me, paint becomes unworkable in minutes (especially in the dead of winter)!

 

As a newer hobbyist I would have leapt for their version of a wet palette if the guy at the store had suggested it.

 

I wonder if they’re cognizant that they have blinders by having their design staff sourced from one region.

[Karhedron]

I find that balance is more important than the precise mechanics of the rules. I want rules that allow me and my friends to play with our lovingly painted models and that capture some of the feeling of the army conveyed by the fluff.

 

I am not too fussed about armour facings or whether vehicles have a different mechanism for being wounded than monsters. To me, that stuff is just window dressing. What matters most is that we can build varied armies with a decent chance of winning. This is why 10th edition has disappointed me so far. Faction win rates vary from 67% right down to 30%. At the end of the day it isn't fun for anyone if one army is roughly twice as powerful as another despite notionally having the same points.

 

I don't mind the mechanics changes in 10th edition but I think it needed a lot better playtesting and balancing. 9th edition was getting messy by the end but at least the winrates were a lot closer than seems to be the case in 10th.

 

GW's primary market has always been teenagers (and mostly boys). Once people hit 18 and discover wine, women and song, the competition for their cash becomes much more intense. Those who stick with the game into adulthood are veterans and probably make up the majority of tournament players but I suspect that they not the main target demographic as there are fewer of them and they often have less time and disposable income as both have to be divided between house, family, car etc.

 

You could argue that 1st edition was the most tactically detailed as you had things like targeting templates for vehicles and you could line up each and every shot. I am not convinced if that made it more intellectually challenging or just slower.