Is GW a gaming Company or collector's item Company?

[Orange Knight]

Unfortunately, the more focused on the competitive aspect GW become, the less flavour and flair the rules will have.

 

Mission design was the 1st victim. The general army and unit rules have followed since. The game is better for an event, but often far less enjoyable in a casual environment between friends.

 

But that's a different topic entirely!

Edited April 8 by Orange Knight

[Rain]

57 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Unfortunately, the more focused on the competitive aspect GW become, the less flavour and flair the rules will have.

 

Mission design was the 1st victim. The general army and unit rules have followed since. The game is better for an event, but often far less enjoyable in a casual environment between friends.

 

But that's a different topic entirely!

I think it’s actually highly related, as it serves to show what *kind* of gaming company GW is, to the extent that it is one. I think that some of the confusion and tension in this thread is from the fact that when WH longbeards say “gaming company” they mean “tabletop hobby wargame company. But when a business exec says “gaming company” they mean Activision.

 

This is partly at the root of things, I think. GW is very clearly attempting to ape modern video game conventions such as “seasons”, constant balance “patches”, a hard focus on balance and tourney results in general, as well as more lean unit rules, more in line with RTS than with tabletop games.

 

Every Zealot in Starcraft 2 has the same weapons as every other one. The main difference is if they have weapon and shield upgrade level 1, 2, or 3, (not really applicable to 40k) and if they have the charge upgrade. Well, now 40k units are mostly the same as every other unit of their type, but each has a special rule, similar to Zealot charge, Stalker blink, etc. it’s a very RTS style design.

[phandaal]

23 minutes ago, Rain said:

This is partly at the root of things, I think. GW is very clearly attempting to ape modern video game conventions such as “seasons”, constant balance “patches”, a hard focus on balance and tourney results in general, as well as more lean unit rules, more in line with RTS than with tabletop games.

 

It does feel this way, although the fact that we play tabletop games with physical objects makes me think this approach will never really work. The only place where you can really swap units at the same pace you can with video games is Tabletop Simulator, and as GW is a miniatures company I do not think they want to push people away from buying their miniatures.

[Rain]

3 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

It does feel this way, although the fact that we play tabletop games with physical objects makes me think this approach will never really work. The only place where you can really swap units at the same pace you can with video games is Tabletop Simulator, and as GW is a miniatures company I do not think they want to push people away from buying their miniatures.

Modern business culture is a mess of tropes, mindless copying, and quasi-religious beliefs which are adhered to proudly in the face of contrary evidence.

 

But, most of all, it is the cult of the short term. If they can get you to buy a box this quarter because they nerfed your Heldoomers but buffed Inceptors or whatever, all is well.

[Dr. Clock]

5 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

By the logic of "GW did it so must be profitable", why are so many profitable Stormcast being withdrawn then? I thought they were profitable?

I think this is a critical point, perhaps the critical point: lack of transparency.

 

The market really is unforgiving, but GW has long been locked into a kind of corporate positivism and wilful denial of vulnerability that makes the whole thing taste pretty sour from time to time. They rarely own their mistakes, except perhaps when they badly under-produce something and figure they can make more money by offering it again. I suppose any time they change points or rules they are also admitting a mistake, in a certain way... Though it's definitely arguable whether we can hold them accountable for not getting the points and stats 'right' on several hundred interlocking unit entries lol.

 

Still - I'm not sure I prefer a world where we can all see that sales are down for our preferred faction or game so we 'have to buy more or risk losing it'. If you had told me that I had to buy a couple hundred bucks' worth of Beasts of Chaos in the last edition to keep them on into the next I might have done it, but I would have held my nose and they'd probably still be in my painting queue. Worse still would be the dynamic where they say 'the success of this one thing will determine if we commit to expanding xyz army/game'. I guess I just figure in general it's easier and healthier as a hobbyist to be good at letting go than always holding on ...

 

I understand that alot of the consternation from consumers is that it feels like big changes 'just happen without notice', when in fact the writing's been on the wall internally for quite some time. This then comes off as most deceptive these days when we KNOW edition changes are coming but they sling along some 'endgame' books for 6 months which really just bloat the game weirdly before the next edition even starts up.

 

The answer as always is just to take ownership of your own game. Play the games and paint the things that you love, in the way you love. Find others with similar values, and pay attention to what corporations do, not what they say.

 

30 minutes ago, Rain said:

ape modern video game conventions such as “seasons”, constant balance “patches”, a hard focus on balance and tourney results in general, as well as more lean unit rules, more in line with RTS than with tabletop games.

 

Honestly I think there's plenty of denial on the consumer/community end where we fail to really see or give credit to GW's 'less competitive' offerings. The 10th codexes still have Crusade stuff which seems pretty interesting, but it just doesn't seem to connect with most of the community in the same way, because most people's mental model of the game is a simple zero sum, with no connections game to game. I know I like the idea of campaigns more than I like actually running them lol.

 

For rpgs the goal is for the game to continue beyond each session; we set aside our desire for total victory so that the story can unfold. We can do the same with wargames, and indeed GW equips us to do so, but our cultural expectations of having winners and losers too often get in our way and narrow our focus on meta-game concerns. Heck, anyone who's played an RPG knows that some people simply can't let themselves take anything but the most tuned and efficient option in their characters even though that's kind of abusing the intent of the game. 

 

So it's a definite bind: we have high expectations of rigour for the rules, but also high expectations that the rules will support our own personal vision of our models and their capabilities and stories. I am comfortable with the current focus on rigour because I know that a relatively level playing field is a key starting point, and I can only rely on myself to realize my personal vision.

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor

 

[Bradeh]

This applies to both 40K and MtG and UK only. When I was growing up both companies were actively trying to grow and fund the gaming side of the hobby, it's very clear now that not only are they not doing that they are doing the opposite. They probably believe putting a focus on the gaming is a negative. Outside of a few tournaments here and there GW are doing absolutely nothing to grow the gaming side compared to what used to exist, and they have more resources now. 

 

I don't think it's rocket science either, these small growing passionate companies become growth driven monoliths. You have examples in every aspect of life. Wargaming, gaming, movies, professional wrestling. Its all the same story. 

Edited April 8 by Bradeh

[Gamiel]

4 hours ago, Tokugawa said:

The reason for a customer to buy the second or more box of the same unit: 95% chance it's gaming, especially competitive gaming. 

Why do you think that? 

Edited April 8 by Gamiel

[terminator ultra]

3 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

go out of my way now to tell people to NOT join the hobby. 

yeah same here.

[Gamiel]

3 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

 

You're not alone. I only bought and painted the overpriced plastic to play the game, and the game is not great right now (mine and my whole gaming group's opinion that quit). I got a coworker into the game shortly after 8th. Now I feel bad because I quit and I was the only person he knows that played. I go out of my way now to tell people to NOT join the hobby. 

 

GW better not see themselves as a gaming company. Their models are usually top tier. Their game is not. Bad rules, lack of balance, slow codex churn, codex creep, short editions, drastic rule changes, not having the option for going fully digital, etc. For a billion dollar company, and wh40k being their main product, the game could be so much better.

Do I understand you right that you think that only the gaming part of everything GW offer is "the hobby"?

[phandaal]

54 minutes ago, Dr. Clock said:

Honestly I think there's plenty of denial on the consumer/community end where we fail to really see or give credit to GW's 'less competitive' offerings. The 10th codexes still have Crusade stuff which seems pretty interesting, but it just doesn't seem to connect with most of the community in the same way, because most people's mental model of the game is a simple zero sum, with no connections game to game. I know I like the idea of campaigns more than I like actually running them lol.

 

Said this a few times before, but one area where I really could get behind the "seasonal" thing is more mission card packs and booklets. Open War, Tempest of War, Leviathan, I really like all of those. The Amidst the Ashes spiral-bound mission pack is one of my favorite mission sets that GW has released in a long time, just for how cool and thematic the missions are and how easy it is to pick them up without having to play a full campaign.

 

More sets like that would be awesome. No gimmicks, no special unit rules, no new separate game modes for it, just flavorful mission packs that anyone can pick up and use to generate fun scenarios for their next game.

[Interrogator Stobz]

1 hour ago, terminator ultra said:

yeah same here.

Yeah, people keep saying that GW need to cull lines for the "health of the game' and similar; well here literally every non competitive player has quit the game.

About 10% still play, and they have to travel out of town.

Edited April 8 by Interrogator Stobz

[terminator ultra]

8 minutes ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

About 10% still play, and they have to travel out of town.

I want to play but I don't want to sell my organs

[Gamiel]

16 minutes ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

well here literally every non competitive player has quit the game.

About 10% still play, and they have to travel out of town.

What do you base this on?

[Orange Knight]

It's anecdotal, but I personally know quite a few hobbyists that have completely checked out of 40k hobby.

 

One guy in particular was a very dedicated hobbyist that put together amazing armies at speed, and painted them to an immaculate standard.

 

A lot like him have lost their passion for the game due to how soulless the beer and pretzel experience has become.

[Rain]

5 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

It's anecdotal, but I personally know quite a few hobbyists that have completely checked out of 40k hobby.

 

One guy in particular was a very dedicated hobbyist that put together amazing armies at speed, and painted them to an immaculate standard.

 

A lot like him have lost their passion for the game due to how soulless the beer and pretzel experience has become.

It’s truly galling to me how GW does not seem to be able to separate gameplay bloat that adds to mental load during a game such as long lists of situational strats, a separate psychic phase, complex special rules interactions, etc. from depth of customization in listbuilding and unit choice within an army.

 

Subfactions were fun. Alternate lists like Disciples of the Red Angel were fun. Wargear, weapon choices, and Warlord Traits were fun. And none of that stuff is “bloat.” Once the models hit the table, all of that is fixed and written out on an army list that can be double checked visually. It doesn’t slow down the game, it just adds to the experience outside of the game for players that enjoy fluff and customization.

[Kallas]

4 hours ago, Rain said:

This is partly at the root of things, I think. GW is very clearly attempting to ape modern video game conventions such as “seasons”, constant balance “patches”, a hard focus on balance and tourney results in general, as well as more lean unit rules, more in line with RTS than with tabletop games.

To me this really is the crux of the matter.

 

If GW wants to portray themselves as a model company first and foremost, then they need to cut it out with the FOMO and Seasonal stuff. I appreciate the balancing stuff compared to previous decades of GW past (eg, the Dark Eldar Codex that lasted 4/5 Editions!), but if they're going to harp on that they're not a gaming company, then the simple fact that they're putting a lot of effort into the gaming side of things tells an entirely different tale.

 

To me, it comes across as thoroughly disingenuous - actions speak louder than words, as the saying goes, and GW's actions speak very clearly that they are a gaming company. The gaming side of things is prominant, it is absolutely not a secondary consideration when it comes to the customer-facing side of things (both direct interaction with staff as well as their articles and promotional materials).

[Interrogator Stobz]

3 hours ago, Gamiel said:

What do you base this on?

We had a group of about 20 a few years ago, only the 2 who travel for comps still play 40k. Math is easy.

We regularly play other games, just not 40k. We don't trust GW so we do other things.

Edited April 8 by Interrogator Stobz

[Captain Idaho]

I can confirm my local gaming scene has checked out of 40K, hard. AoS is on a knife edge, as investing into things that might be culled is off putting for grown adults with kids and families.

 

Incidentally, I don't buy the "old stuff needs to go to bring out new stuff" line. Well not quite; allow me to elaborate.

 

We had models for armies that could be played despite updates over the year, every since 2nd edition. That's substantial length of time.

 

Whilst some stuff goes away with updates, I was still able to use my favourite miniatures up until recently.

 

Whilst I do acknowledge that yes we need to have some shelf life and capacity for entirely new entities, I would commit to saying total removal and revamping isn't customer friendly to existing collections.

 

A great example of this is the new MK6 Heresy Marines, before them the MK4 Marines. Bought enmasse and with great fanfare, these were new versions of existing products that didn't make anything obsolete yet saw great success financially.

[Special Officer Doofy]

5 hours ago, Gamiel said:

Do I understand you right that you think that only the gaming part of everything GW offer is "the hobby"?

 

The person I quoted in that post and myself mentioned we only buy (and presumably build/paint) models to play the game. If the game didn't exist or is in a bad place, I'm not going to continue to buy/build/paint models. I personally see the building/painting aspect of the hobby as a means to an end. I liked painting my first Poxwalker. I found absolutely zero joy in painting Poxwalker number 40.

 

I personally know more people who don't care to build and paint their stuff than people who only build and paint them and see them as collectibles. The reason I tell people not to join the hobby now is because of how bad the game side currently is. If someone is only interested in assembling, painting and collecting plastic models I still wouldn't recommend wh40k (the hobby), I would recommend significantly cheaper alternatives or 3d printing, which can turn into a hobby itself. So I see the hobby as the arts and crafts side and the miniature wargaming side. You can be into just one of those aspects, but to get the most bang for your buck you should really enjoy both sides of it. Books and video games share the setting/IP but I don't consider those really part of miniature wargaming or building/painting models, aka "the hobby".

[crimsondave]

I love the lore.  I love the models.  The only way I'd play 40k now is HEAVILY modded.  The core rules have been dumbed down too much while scoring, strategems, ect, ect, have made the game harder to play than before.  I mean, WS vs WS was too complicated but all these detachments, stratagems, primaries, secondaries, ect aren't?  It's not the competitive players fault but GW has gone all in way too hard on competitive play.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I still have a load of fun modeling and painting.  The models are insanely good.  I just think the rules don't translate to fun, narrative gaming.  Especially if you don't have the time to play Crusade.

[Timberley]

I think GW use both gaming and collecting as ways to sell the overpriced plastic crack, with the main 'poster boy' franchises being the gateway to the habit hobby, with new editions feeling like they're appealing to the FOMO crowd, as sculpts are redone, older miniatures retired, and rules changed. 

 

As the Good Doctor points out, there's nothing to stop you using older models and older editions, provided you can find someone to play with, which can be asking a lot, depending on the player count in your area.  

 

I think the stability of things like Necromunda comes from the fact that unlike the big franchises, there's less overall rules revisions and model churn.  You buy your gang box, e.g. Van Saar, and maybe expand with some specialists or one of the really cool Forgeworld models, and that's it.  You don't need to buy multiple units, or rearrange things to apply to a new edition as much.  In the pre-Primaris era, the same applied to WH40K: you had model changes (thinking of units like the IG Stormtroopers), but it wasn't whole cloth revision.  They may update/change the sculpt but the unit was still the same and everyone understood that the old was as good as the new.

 

Part of me wonders if the seeming focus on their tournament scene has impacted things.  Those within the hobby are aware of the strength and weaknesses of particular units/factions, so tend to tread carefully, but for the newcomer, everything looks new and shiny.  It can feel somewhat chafing as a newcomer if that unit you got because you liked their models (e.g. Reivers and their skull helmets) turns out to be terrible within the game.

 

Compare the choices for the IG, from a list-building perspective, from olden days to now (using 2nd & some 5th Edition classifications throughout):

 

2nd Edition - 3x HQ squads, 2x generic characters, 2x Battleline squads, 4x Elites squads, 7x armour units, 8x named characters

5th Edition - 1x HQ Squad (including Advisors), 4x generic characters, 7x Battleline squads, 5x Elites, 20x armour units, 12x named characters

10th Edition (Index only) - 0x HQ Squad, 9x generic characters, 10x Battleline squads, 5x Elites, 29x armour units, 7x named characters

 

In the spoiler below are the names of the individual units in the Army List for each edition.  There's an argument that some of the squads I've called 'Battleline' could be in the HQ section in 10th, but I'm trying to stick to the 'rank' following across the editions. 

 

Spoiler

2nd Edition:

• HQ: Company Command HQ, Platoon Command Squad, Rough Rider Command Squad, Primaris Psyker, Commissar
• Battleline: Imperial Guard Infantry Squad, Imperial Guard Heavy Weapons Squad,
• Elites (still counted as Battleline for lists): Rough Rider Squad, Ogryns, Ratling snipers, Storm Troopers,
• Armour: Leman Russ (2 variants), Griffon, Chimera, Basilisk, Hellhound, Sentinel Squadron
• Special Characters: Lord Solar Macharius, Commissar Yarrick, Nork Deddog, Captain Al'rahem, Captain Chenkov, Colonel Shaefer's Last Chancers, Stumper Muckstart,  Captain Mogul Kamir

5th Edition:

• HQ: Company Command squad (inc. Astropath, Master of Ordnance, Officer of the Fleet), Lord Commissar, Primaris Psyker, Ministorum Priest, Techpriest Enginseer
• Battleline: Platoon Command Squad, Infantry Squad, Heavy Weapons Squad, Special Weapons Squad, Conscripts, Veteran Squad, Penal Legion Squad
• Elites: Ogryns, Ratlings, Psyker Battle Squad, Stormtroopers, Rough Riders (Fast Attack Section)
• Armour: Chimera (dedicated transport), Armoured Sentinel Squadron (FA), Scout Sentinel Squadron (FA), Hellhound Squadron (3 variants)(FA), Valkyrie Squadron (FA), Vendetta Sqn (FA), Leman Russ Sqn (7 variants), Hydra Battery, Ordnance Battery (4 variants), 
• Special Characters: Lord Creed, Colour Kell, Col. Straken, Nork Deddog, Commissar Yarrick, G/man Marbo, Cmdr. Chenkov, Capt. Al'rahem, Gunny Harker, Sgt. Bastonne, Mogul Kamir, Knight Commander Pask

 

10th Edition:

• HQ: Cadian Castellan, Tank Commander, Primaris Psyker, Regimental attaches (all 3 are one choice), Ogryn Bodyguard, Regimental Preacher, Regimental Enginseer, Munitorum Servitors, Commissar
• Battleline: Platoon Command Squad, Tempestus Command Squad, Cadian Command Squad, Infantry Squad, Cadian Shock Troops, Catachan Jungle Fighters, Death Korps of Krieg, Tempestus Scions, Heavy Weapons Squads, Field Ordnance Battery
• 'Elites': Kasrkin, Ogryn Squad, Bullgryn Squad, Ratlings, Attilan Rough Riders
• Armour: Scout Sentinels, Armoured Sentinels, Chimera, Hellhound, Rogal Dorn tank, Leman Russ (7 variants), Ordnance Battery (5 variants), Taurox, Taurox Prime, Valkyrie, Baneblade (8 variants), Aegis Defence Line
• Special Characters: Lord Solar Leontus, Ursula Creed, Col. Straken, Gaunt's Ghosts, Nork Deddog, Sly Marbo, Sgt. Harker

 

My main thrust is that by giving us more choices, they've blocked themselves into a corner with the amount of units they need to manufacture and stock, which cuts into their margins.  The one saving grace is that the majority of Imperial Guard kits are semi-modular, so you can have all of the variants stocked at the same time (except when it comes to the likes of Cadians, Catachans, etc.). 

 

However, the same cannot be said of the Marine kits, particularly in this brave new Primaris world.  I think GW have not leveraged the potential of the new kits by, say, grouping the Intercessor-type kits (Intercessor, Infernus, Hellblasters, & Desolation) in one box, or creating 'upgrade sprues' for the basic Intercessor box.  That way they could pull some of these 'upgrades' whilst still keeping the core kit going.  Surely with the 'Flavour of the Edition/Metawatch' they'd sell more as people would buy these upgrade sprues, which they could stock more of (crucially), and thus create a greater profit?

[ZeroWolf]

49 minutes ago, Timberley said:

I think GW use both gaming and collecting as ways to sell the overpriced plastic crack, with the main 'poster boy' franchises being the gateway to the habit hobby, with new editions feeling like they're appealing to the FOMO crowd, as sculpts are redone, older miniatures retired, and rules changed. 

 

As the Good Doctor points out, there's nothing to stop you using older models and older editions, provided you can find someone to play with, which can be asking a lot, depending on the player count in your area.  

 

I think the stability of things like Necromunda comes from the fact that unlike the big franchises, there's less overall rules revisions and model churn.  You buy your gang box, e.g. Van Saar, and maybe expand with some specialists or one of the really cool Forgeworld models, and that's it.  You don't need to buy multiple units, or rearrange things to apply to a new edition as much.  In the pre-Primaris era, the same applied to WH40K: you had model changes (thinking of units like the IG Stormtroopers), but it wasn't whole cloth revision.  They may update/change the sculpt but the unit was still the same and everyone understood that the old was as good as the new.

 

Part of me wonders if the seeming focus on their tournament scene has impacted things.  Those within the hobby are aware of the strength and weaknesses of particular units/factions, so tend to tread carefully, but for the newcomer, everything looks new and shiny.  It can feel somewhat chafing as a newcomer if that unit you got because you liked their models (e.g. Reivers and their skull helmets) turns out to be terrible within the game.

 

Compare the choices for the IG, from a list-building perspective, from olden days to now (using 2nd & some 5th Edition classifications throughout):

 

2nd Edition - 3x HQ squads, 2x generic characters, 2x Battleline squads, 4x Elites squads, 7x armour units, 8x named characters

5th Edition - 1x HQ Squad (including Advisors), 4x generic characters, 7x Battleline squads, 5x Elites, 20x armour units, 12x named characters

10th Edition (Index only) - 0x HQ Squad, 9x generic characters, 10x Battleline squads, 5x Elites, 29x armour units, 7x named characters

 

In the spoiler below are the names of the individual units in the Army List for each edition.  There's an argument that some of the squads I've called 'Battleline' could be in the HQ section in 10th, but I'm trying to stick to the 'rank' following across the editions. 

 

  Hide contents

2nd Edition:

• HQ: Company Command HQ, Platoon Command Squad, Rough Rider Command Squad, Primaris Psyker, Commissar
• Battleline: Imperial Guard Infantry Squad, Imperial Guard Heavy Weapons Squad,
• Elites (still counted as Battleline for lists): Rough Rider Squad, Ogryns, Ratling snipers, Storm Troopers,
• Armour: Leman Russ (2 variants), Griffon, Chimera, Basilisk, Hellhound, Sentinel Squadron
• Special Characters: Lord Solar Macharius, Commissar Yarrick, Nork Deddog, Captain Al'rahem, Captain Chenkov, Colonel Shaefer's Last Chancers, Stumper Muckstart,  Captain Mogul Kamir

5th Edition:

• HQ: Company Command squad (inc. Astropath, Master of Ordnance, Officer of the Fleet), Lord Commissar, Primaris Psyker, Ministorum Priest, Techpriest Enginseer
• Battleline: Platoon Command Squad, Infantry Squad, Heavy Weapons Squad, Special Weapons Squad, Conscripts, Veteran Squad, Penal Legion Squad
• Elites: Ogryns, Ratlings, Psyker Battle Squad, Stormtroopers, Rough Riders (Fast Attack Section)
• Armour: Chimera (dedicated transport), Armoured Sentinel Squadron (FA), Scout Sentinel Squadron (FA), Hellhound Squadron (3 variants)(FA), Valkyrie Squadron (FA), Vendetta Sqn (FA), Leman Russ Sqn (7 variants), Hydra Battery, Ordnance Battery (4 variants), 
• Special Characters: Lord Creed, Colour Kell, Col. Straken, Nork Deddog, Commissar Yarrick, G/man Marbo, Cmdr. Chenkov, Capt. Al'rahem, Gunny Harker, Sgt. Bastonne, Mogul Kamir, Knight Commander Pask

 

10th Edition:

• HQ: Cadian Castellan, Tank Commander, Primaris Psyker, Regimental attaches (all 3 are one choice), Ogryn Bodyguard, Regimental Preacher, Regimental Enginseer, Munitorum Servitors, Commissar
• Battleline: Platoon Command Squad, Tempestus Command Squad, Cadian Command Squad, Infantry Squad, Cadian Shock Troops, Catachan Jungle Fighters, Death Korps of Krieg, Tempestus Scions, Heavy Weapons Squads, Field Ordnance Battery
• 'Elites': Kasrkin, Ogryn Squad, Bullgryn Squad, Ratlings, Attilan Rough Riders
• Armour: Scout Sentinels, Armoured Sentinels, Chimera, Hellhound, Rogal Dorn tank, Leman Russ (7 variants), Ordnance Battery (5 variants), Taurox, Taurox Prime, Valkyrie, Baneblade (8 variants), Aegis Defence Line
• Special Characters: Lord Solar Leontus, Ursula Creed, Col. Straken, Gaunt's Ghosts, Nork Deddog, Sly Marbo, Sgt. Harker

 

My main thrust is that by giving us more choices, they've blocked themselves into a corner with the amount of units they need to manufacture and stock, which cuts into their margins.  The one saving grace is that the majority of Imperial Guard kits are semi-modular, so you can have all of the variants stocked at the same time (except when it comes to the likes of Cadians, Catachans, etc.). 

 

However, the same cannot be said of the Marine kits, particularly in this brave new Primaris world.  I think GW have not leveraged the potential of the new kits by, say, grouping the Intercessor-type kits (Intercessor, Infernus, Hellblasters, & Desolation) in one box, or creating 'upgrade sprues' for the basic Intercessor box.  That way they could pull some of these 'upgrades' whilst still keeping the core kit going.  Surely with the 'Flavour of the Edition/Metawatch' they'd sell more as people would buy these upgrade sprues, which they could stock more of (crucially), and thus create a greater profit?

I've actually been pondering that last part and it would also hew a bit closer to the HH release style. Release a box for each armour type with upgrade sprues getting you the unit and conversion fodder. Though pricing such a system would be the difficult part

[Timberley]

22 minutes ago, ZeroWolf said:

I've actually been pondering that last part and it would also hew a bit closer to the HH release style. Release a box for each armour type with upgrade sprues getting you the unit and conversion fodder. Though pricing such a system would be the difficult part

Yeah, it makes the most sense to me.  I'd say keeping the Intercessors box at the usual £37.50 and having the squad upgrades for £17-£20, similar to the standard chapter upgrade sprue, provided they had enough to outfit a squad completely.  

[MegaVolt87]

The minitures hold no value to me with no game behind them. If it was just the IP with no game, majority of the kits would barely sell. I would be engaging with warhammer differently with no table top game, character series models, tank/ aircraft kits and the "squad"delivered like SM heroes. Would be lighter on the wallet even haha. 

[EverythingIsGreat]

OK, then can one say that GW is a collectable wargaming miniatures company? With “collectable wargaming” being the modifiers and “miniatures” being the basis. Apart from it being obvious imo, it covers the main options.They were around before Warhammer, although WH was the first environment where the IP was fully owned, and not a derivative of somebody else’s concept, such as the LOTR miniatures, the Dredd line etc. Earlier in this thread Bob Naismith’s LE “Imperial Space Marine” was discussed. The inset posted is from Citadel’s September 1985 catalog. That is 2 full years before WH40K was officially announced, yet that pre-existing model (that kinda dropped out of the sky as far as the general public is concerned) is more interesting to me because of its similarities to the 1st ed WH40K Space Marines rather that its differences. Sure, the Star Wars franchise and its Empire were firmly entrenched by then, and that may have been an obvious starting point in the thinking of GW. But that perhaps enhances the possibility LE2 was a trial balloon, and WH40K development had already started. Perhaps all our discussions are concerned with GW’s thinking of two years ago as it manifests now, so-called “leaks” notwthstanding 

 

In any case the latest official audited GW documents show a company that is doing very well in a somewhat adverse environment. Someone must still be playing the game.