How do GW improve sales?

[Lathe Biosas]

Huh. I gues

10 minutes ago, Griefbringer said:

As for the described agreement to limit yourself to X number of figures, even that would have been a house rule. Going straight by the rules, you were allowed to keep plonking on models to your deployment zone as long as you felt like it, regardless of what your opponent thought. Another early house rule was for the players to agree to bring models up to a certain combined wounds value (which might at least give some indication of the quality of the units ... maybe).

 

Huh. Guess I misremembered that. It's amazing I remembered so much about early Age of Sigmar as I did...

 

I was just happy I could continue to play with my Brettonians...

 

...while it lasted. 

[Griefbringer]

I am afraid that I remember way too much about the July 2015 AoS launch and its immediate aftermath than I really care for. Sometimes having a good memory can be more of a curse than a blessing.

 

The AoS shooting rules were quite permissive (*), so you could shoot at units in close combat (and without a risk of hitting your own models). Actually, units that were engaged in close combat could freely use their ranged weapons in the shooting phase (there was nothing preventing it), and then fight in close combat. Combine the two, and you can have an Aelf (**) in close combat with an Orruk (**) pausing to fight, drawing a bow, firing an arrow at another Orruk (**) fighting a Duardin (**), and then resume fighting as normal in close combat (***). Or if you had actually bought some of the separately released Stormcast Eternals (****), you could have them pulling the same trick with their brand new Bolt Stormers (*****).

 

Then there was the Skaven Screaming Bell, which had a 2D6 table of interesting special effects; on the roll of 13+ the Skaven would effectively win the game. Bringing in another friendly model what would be able to apply (positive) modifiers to that 2D6 provided quite strong synergy effect.

 

 

(*) Absolutely nothing to do with the rules writers being in hurry and needing to fit everything in four pages.

(**) Names of various races in AoS setting, presumably invented to provide strong trademarks. Absolutely not related to elves, orcs, dwarves or other generic fantasy races.

(***) Assuming that the close combat striking order system could have been described as normal in the first place.

(****) Absolutely not space marines in a fantasy setting.

(*****) Absolutely not related to a storm bolter.

[Griefbringer]

2 hours ago, Lathe Biosas said:

I was just happy I could continue to play with my Brettonians...

 

...while it lasted. 

 

Frater Biosas is probably referring to the legacy support for the Bretonnians getting axed after a while. As happened to some other factions (Tomb Kings), who got ignored rather than being "re-imagined" into the new AoS setting. There are some Bretonnian fans who are actually happy that their proud and brave knights did not get such treatment.

 

Essentially, the re-imagining process involved re-naming the faction into something "original" that would provide a strong trademark (*). Plus a visual re-imagining into a new style to fit the new setting (**). Initially, this visual re-imagining tended to involve the brave warriors being depicted half-naked, clad in loinclothes and all sorts of SM-bondage gear (***).

 

Logically, one would think that Slaanesh followers would be an excellent fit for such visual look. However, when AoS was released it was made clear that the Dark Prince (Slaanesh) was missing for some reason, and presumably did not have active followers around. Thus, followers of the other chaos deities had to compensate, with the initial 2015 starter box containing 20 Khorne Bloodreavers, running around half-naked in loinclothes and all-sorts of SM-bondage gear. Though on contrast, the included Stormcast Eternal models were fully armoured, presumably so that they could be easily painted with the brand new gold spray paint.

 

Another faction to get released in the re-imagined AoS style were Duardin Fireslayers. These were short, rotund creatures, with big fiery beards and outrageous hairstyles. They also had to go around half-naked, clad in loinclothes and various SM-bondage gear. They also had some big weapons to swing around.

 

(*) Like an Aelf. Not to be confused with 1980's TV character Alf.

(**) There is absolutely no evidence that any illicit substances were used to aid the naming or visual re-imagining processes.

(***) Not that there is anything wrong in being half-naked with loincloth and SM-bondage gear. Even if you are politician running on a family values platform.

 

PS. Getting back to the communications issues in July 2015, one big problem was that there was no clear idea of what kind of game(s) were to be released. After the initial shock reaction to the four page rules, there started circulating a rumour that there might another "more advanced" ruleset released in near future. Presumably even some GW store worker (as poorly informed as everyone else) had to resort to calming down irate customers by claiming that the "real game" was yet to be released. On retrospect, assuming that the rules in the big July 2015 starter set were not the "real deal" may sound naive, but it should give some impression of the disbelief that the release caused.

[Captain Idaho]

Ahem. Attempt to bring it back on topic and away from AoS, there was a 40K tie in.

 

When Primaris were released, there were players worried their Space Marines would be removed. There were defenders of Primaris/GW who said this wasn't going to happen and it was doom-saying. Those same people are still here and they usually disagree reaction with my posts the moment it uses the "P" word. Check it... 

 

Anyway, GW had history doing it to Fantasy, so sure why not get rid of my Marines? Took them longer but actually not really. Because how many new Firstborn were there for 40K since 8th?

 

The only thing they did was provide legacy rules in the main Codex books whilst they not so slowly brought out more and more Primaris models.

 

Did this have an impact on the long term player base? I'm betting it did, but the real question is the whether reduction in long term player base was outstripped by new purchases.

 

A 3rd variable is the increased release schedule. Those who remained had more to buy than ever before, so they did.

 

A 4th variable in sales is GW selling products in places you wouldn't expect. AoS in Game (video game store) or Sports Direct no less. Things like that provided more short term purchases to inflate sales.

 

Sooner or later the bubble bursts. I don't agree with the constant growth model for economics, I think it is fundamentally flawed especially on a long term basis. Nonetheless that is what GW operates for. Sooner or later GW will reach their top number of customers per capita, their retention of customers becomes an issue, the economics of the country slows and price does matter.

 

Even social narratives for popularity can wane and if that happens it can have a big effect too.

 

A combination of factors in place here. It started with mistrust of GW due to Fantasy and cynical release of Primaris to replace Space Marines. That hurt the customer retention and meant the resilience to the above problems I suggested is much less.

[SvenIronhand]

2 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Sooner or later the bubble bursts. I don't agree with the constant growth model for economics, I think it is fundamentally flawed especially on a long term basis. Nonetheless that is what GW operates for. Sooner or later GW will reach their top number of customers per capita, their retention of customers becomes an issue, the economics of the country slows and price does matter.

 

This is where we agree. Tendency of the rate of profit to fall and allat.

[Adeptekon]

To broaden the audience GW just needs to be the first to capitalize off future tech. If they can make ordering your space marines as simple as creating and customizing your character in Space Marine 2 they'll have a win. No painting, no asembly required, just fire up character creation tool and then check your mail. 

[Marshal Rohr]

Breaking News:

 

I have changed my opinion. 
 

After letting YouTube shuffle while painting (walls not minis) for several hours over the last few the last few nights, I now believe we are in an unprecedented time where the rules are causing sales to lag. Not necessarily individual rules, like Brutal or Reactions in HH 2.0 or ye old Tau/Eldar plasma spam - but core rules. 
 

There was a time when enthusiasm waned online and in person because the models weren’t inspiring right after Indomitus dropped but then Krieg, Templars, Sisters, all started coming hot and heavy. We know how Covid created a weird GW boom in spite of the slow down in product releases due to shipping costs, etc. 

 

This is the first time I can remember since maybe… 7th Edition? That sentiment about models and rules is simultaneously depressed. 
 

The danger I see is GW not recognizing that it’s the rules keeping people from buying Legiones Imperialis, Heresy 3.0, 40K, etc, etc. I’m not sure how Necromunda was received, I stopped paying attention mid-Covid. I know the most common things I see about old world are the absolute dread the idea of a new edition instilled in people. 
 

The sad part is we’re stuck like this. They’ve already sent Heresy 4.0 to the printers if we are 18 months out. There’s no fix coming to 40K beyond points adjustments and some wording ghost edited on the app, those codexes and rules are done and dusted for 2027 and most of 2028. 
 

GW has hit a stall that will take years to correct. No plastic Primarchs and Legion Special Units will get people to play a game they find tedious. Russ could be the best model you’ve ever seen and no one is going to get excited to play their new Russ once every six months because everyone else kinda gave up on 11th. 

[Dark Shepherd]

Am with you on L.I, lots of people love the tiny tanks and aircraft but they staggered the unit rules wayyyy too much. Its a major feels bad if you have to buy a campaign book/expansion just to field 2 or 3 cool new tanks you wanted to buy

 

To go back to a previous post L.I units make a great impulse buy/fun little projecr

[ZeroWolf]

9 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Breaking News:

 

I have changed my opinion. 
 

After letting YouTube shuffle while painting (walls not minis) for several hours over the last few the last few nights, I now believe we are in an unprecedented time where the rules are causing sales to lag. Not necessarily individual rules, like Brutal or Reactions in HH 2.0 or ye old Tau/Eldar plasma spam - but core rules. 
 

There was a time when enthusiasm waned online and in person because the models weren’t inspiring right after Indomitus dropped but then Krieg, Templars, Sisters, all started coming hot and heavy. We know how Covid created a weird GW boom in spite of the slow down in product releases due to shipping costs, etc. 

 

This is the first time I can remember since maybe… 7th Edition? That sentiment about models and rules is simultaneously depressed. 
 

The danger I see is GW not recognizing that it’s the rules keeping people from buying Legiones Imperialis, Heresy 3.0, 40K, etc, etc. I’m not sure how Necromunda was received, I stopped paying attention mid-Covid. I know the most common things I see about old world are the absolute dread the idea of a new edition instilled in people. 
 

The sad part is we’re stuck like this. They’ve already sent Heresy 4.0 to the printers if we are 18 months out. There’s no fix coming to 40K beyond points adjustments and some wording ghost edited on the app, those codexes and rules are done and dusted for 2027 and most of 2028. 
 

GW has hit a stall that will take years to correct. No plastic Primarchs and Legion Special Units will get people to play a game they find tedious. Russ could be the best model you’ve ever seen and no one is going to get excited to play their new Russ once every six months because everyone else kinda gave up on 11th. 

Minor correction but HH 4.0 won't be at the printers yet as AoS 5 is there (and that will be interesting to see reactions if the reboot rumours are all true). Hersey 4.0 will be there this time next year. Though this doesn't preclude major changes happening as apparently occurred in 40k 10th and 11th (again, if rumours are to be believed).

 

The three year cycle has sadly been ingrained into the company through out now, even down to factory allocation. Essentially GW itself is on a three year cycle.

[Antarius]

I think one has to say that communications have improved vastly compared to "back in the day", in the sense that there actually is communication now, even if it is not always what we might want (and let's face it, nobody is really crazy about corporate statements like the Necromunda RP one, because they always leave you guessing what the actual reasons are). Warhammer community, as much as it might be annoying in its "every article is a thinly veiled commercial"-ness is still quite a step up from earlier times, where there would just be white dwarf (which, incidentally was increasingly shallow and pointless up until the time when it was canned in favour of "Warhammer Visions" which I don't know if anyone ever bought more than one issue of. The current incarnation of White Dwarf is a massive step up from that time, although it may perhaps be declining again).

Ruleswise, I think the game is actually in a better place than it was during 7th-9th (8th seemed okay, albeit not without its problems). I hate the appification, but the core rules and a codex gets you there, whereas late 7th edition was a complete mess and many people had to carry around an entire library to play their army. I also think the core rules themselves are broadly speaking better than the last couple of editions, even though they are not what I would consider ideal. To me, the main problem is that tournament play is so obviously not just the default but explicitly what the rules are written for (nor am I convinced that they are actually particularly good as a tournament wargame).
Casual and/or narrative play is still possible, of course, but they do require some tinkering, which I think is a shame for purely "ideological" reasons as well as because it may mean a generation of players are unaware that there even is an alternative to "competitive" mode. It's a sad fact that even otherwise creative people tend to go with the "official" baked in mode of play.

In that sense, I think the game itself is a bit of a mixed bag at present. But I don't think I could honestly say it is worse than before.

What the average player wants, I do not claim to know. But GW must be convinced that they want this type of ruleset or they would produce something else. I do think there may be a tendency towards burnout with the 3-year cycle and the endless updates, but that is speculation on my part.

[Griefbringer]

35 minutes ago, Dark Shepherd said:

Am with you on L.I, lots of people love the tiny tanks and aircraft but they staggered the unit rules wayyyy too much. Its a major feels bad if you have to buy a campaign book/expansion just to field 2 or 3 cool new tanks you wanted to buy

 

I think this was partially result of two principles at work:

 

1.) "No model, no rules" paradigm that prevents releasing rules for models that are not ready for release within the next X months. This seems to be driven by commercial issues.

2.) Legions Imperialis specific decision to try to release models for both Astartes and Solar Auxilia simultaneously.

 

The second issue might have been mitigated by initially focusing only on the Astartes (which tend to be most popular in any case). Leaving the Solar Auxilia off initially would have freed release slots for models and rulebook pages for the unit profiles. Once the Astartes models had been out, the Solar Auxilia could have then got their own book and model releases (like things worked out for Mechanicus). 

 

In case of the Solar Auxilia, situation was not helped by the decision to produce three almost identical Leman Russ kits (only differing by a couple of parts) and farm their rules over multiple books.

[phandaal]

On the topic of tiny armies and "selling more," people also were not asking for a return of Epic Horus Heresy. They were asking for a return of Epic 40k.

 

That means GW started off selling to a smaller market, unless the percentage of Horus Heresy players who wanted an Epic version of their game is just way bigger than the percentage of 40k players who wanted or would play Epic 40k.

[Evil Eye]

31 minutes ago, phandaal said:

On the topic of tiny armies and "selling more," people also were not asking for a return of Epic Horus Heresy. They were asking for a return of Epic 40k.

 

That means GW started off selling to a smaller market, unless the percentage of Horus Heresy players who wanted an Epic version of their game is just way bigger than the percentage of 40k players who wanted or would play Epic 40k.

Definitely agreed- I'd have been over the moon if we got small scale Tyranids again.

[Captain Idaho]

I've heard from a lot of people that they want to get into Legions Imperialis but with Tyranids/Necrons/Orks.

 

Whilst it is possible to use fan made rules, most people use official releases and models. The vast majority of a customer base.

 

So yes, totally agree with that. I suspect GW over played their hand regarding Hour Heresy. In fact they misunderstood their hand. Turns out HH isn't the solid foundation they thought it was, largely because of the rules being poor.

 

Reminds me of older times when GW thought the game was totally tertiary in importance and poor games and rules weren't an issue.

 

I'd argue without the games, the company wouldn't be half the size or force it currently is. Possibly less.

[ZeroWolf]

I'd just been reading an article about Valve and it's steam storefront, regarding if it was actually possible for anyone to topple it, and a certain factor that was brought up for it's success was that it remained privately owned. The belief was that not having to entertain shareholders in the pursuit of infinite growth led the company to do more to be customer focused.

 

This led me to a thought, what position would GW be in if it was never floated as a public company (happened back in the 94 i believe?). What position would they be in if they had to engage with its customer base all this time. Obviously GW can't put a cork back in that particular bottle, well, not without great expense as I believe you'd have to buy back every share in order to go private once more, but I wonder if a shift in thinking would serve them better, especially now before it really gets too late as I fear that if GW were deep in the red that they had to activate their rainy day fund that their methods of righting themselves would be to massively cut expenses rather than encouraging sales.

 

 

[DemonGSides]

28 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

Turns out HH isn't the solid foundation they thought it was, largely because of the rules being poor.

 

I don't think it has to do with the rules being poor, Horus Heresy is just boring if you don't care about super heroes or space marines.

 

If you come to Warhammer for intergalactic war between competing factions that aren't all just the same thing with a different coat of paint, Horus Heresy is NOT going to appeal to you. The complete lack of aliens is a big turn off, as well as is the "Basically every roster is the same" nature of the legions; there's some small variances but it's basically just playing green army men v tan army men.  That the Imperium is also pretty boring during this time as well is not helpful if you're interested in the "Failing empire that's dragging itself along" since that's not happened yet.

 

The whole setting is essentially one big battle, which is sorta fun but not exactly a long term way to generate interest.  It was better as a historical anecdote and a source for some stories and legends.

[Griefbringer]

31 minutes ago, ZeroWolf said:

This led me to a thought, what position would GW be in if it was never floated as a public company (happened back in the 94 i believe?). What position would they be in if they had to engage with its customer base all this time. Obviously GW can't put a cork back in that particular bottle, well, not without great expense as I believe you'd have to buy back every share in order to go private once more

 

Being private or publicly listed is not a magic recipe, one way or another. In either case the ownership can be centralised on one or few majority owner, or splintered over a great number of minority owners. In case of majority owners, a lot may depend on their approach to ownership (which can also change over time, especially as people age). As for publicly listed company going public, a company cannot simply buy itself out of the stock market (as that would result in the company becoming it's own owner). Instead, external parties that manage to acquire control of sufficient portion of shares (75-90 %) can try to take company out of the stock market. However, simply getting a majority of the shares (50 %) gives an owner very strong control of a public company (though they are not supposed to use it to detriment of minority shareholders).

 

However, if one were to assume that GW stayed private, the next question would be to ask which version of ownership would it have remained? There were several generations of owners back in the day:

 

1.) Early years (pre-1986) with Ian Livingstone and Steve Jackson as main owners, with headquarters in London and another facility (Citadel Miniatures) in Nottingham. This tends to be a rather different, more "open economy" company than what followed. Back in the day, GW bought all sorts of licences, distributed and retailed other companies products, White Dwarf covered other companies products etc.

 

2.) Transitionary years (ca. 1986-1991) with Bryan Ansell as main owner, Ian Livingstone and Steve Jackson as minority owners. This is the time when company adopted a more "closed economy" model, concentrating on product ranges that it wholly controlled and owned (giving up outside licences, third party products etc.), with the focus specifically on miniature games and associated products. Board games and role-playing games, that had been prominent earlier on, went down in priority. On the other hand, this period saw other spin-offs like Warhammer Books (novels) and Warhammer Records (heavy metal). Bryan at the time was a very active owner, and participated in the design of many games. Afterwards, Bryan went to own Wargames Foundry, which prospered in the 1990's, but started to have issues in the early 2000's with the senior sculptors leaving en masse.

 

3.) Management takeover (1991 until going public): this involved a group from the internal management (apparently headed by Tom Kirby) allied with external venture capitalists buying the company from the previous owners. The venture capitalists would have held quite significant ownership, and wanted to get money back in mid-term in some fashion; this ended up implemented by going public (other options could have involved e.g. selling GW to some bigger company, which might not have turned well in long term).

[Adeptekon]

I can tell you from my experience that private vs public CAN make a huge difference in trajectory. That said it really depends on the those calling the shots. I have a nostalgia for mom and pop shops, but these days everything is hyper competitive, and metric driven. The mom and pops have been squashed and absorbed. Appease the Top shareholders with incense and myrr, make everything look like it's hitting goals even when it isn't so more money can be brought in.

Edited Thursday at 02:11 PM by Adeptekon

[Marshal Rohr]

3 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

 

I don't think it has to do with the rules being poor, Horus Heresy is just boring if you don't care about super heroes or space marines.

 

If you come to Warhammer for intergalactic war between competing factions that aren't all just the same thing with a different coat of paint, Horus Heresy is NOT going to appeal to you. The complete lack of aliens is a big turn off, as well as is the "Basically every roster is the same" nature of the legions; there's some small variances but it's basically just playing green army men v tan army men.  That the Imperium is also pretty boring during this time as well is not helpful if you're interested in the "Failing empire that's dragging itself along" since that's not happened yet.

 

The whole setting is essentially one big battle, which is sorta fun but not exactly a long term way to generate interest.  It was better as a historical anecdote and a source for some stories and legends.

The reasons you never liked the heresy isn’t why it’s struggling. Veterans are leaving the game and new players joining is anemic. It was very successful at the end of 2.0 when 40K was shedding fans. Now there is nowhere for those refugees to go, other than outside games. Old World is successful because it’s a good approximation of old hammer. 2.0 was successful because it was more like oldhammmer. Now Heresy is nothing like oldhammer and it’s stalled. That’s all the evidence needed the rules are killing it. 

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, Marshal Rohr said:

The reasons you never liked the heresy isn’t why it’s struggling.

 

I like the heresy era, I'm just realistic about things instead of burying my head in the sand and acting like HH was ever anything but a niche of a niche.

 

1 hour ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Veterans are leaving the game and new players joining is anemic.

 

Well new players have always been anemic; the only people getting into HH by your own standards were the weakest 40k players; those who couldn't adapt into new rulesets. That's a dying breed no matter how you slice it.

 

And as I said, HH is mostly boring to anyone who's not a civil war junkie.  We aren't at odds here; you think the game is failing cuz of a single bad rule set, I think the game has always been a bit of a failure and it's because of the design parameters of "All Imperium, all the time".

 

1 hour ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Old World is successful because it’s a good approximation of old hammer. 2.0 was successful because it was more like oldhammmer.

Idk if I'd call TOW successful, or at least any amount more meaningful than what I see our of HH. Release schedules are similar and conversation online is similar; not much and in small communities.

 

Which is fine!  Not every game they make need to be 40k or AoS levels of successful.  I'm not begrudging anyone who likes these games. But they aren't for everyone, especially people who are interested in non imperial factions.

 

The conversation wasn't bashing HH, not sure why you're so defensive. 

[Captain Idaho]

I actually think you're both right in a way. The rules are killing Heresy and in much the same way I'm done with 40K because I don't like the rules. Not everyone is unhappy, but a proportion of the customer base.

 

But also, the sandbox is quite limited for Horus Heresy era and this is also off putting in a way.

 

I have friends who dislike the rules of HH and other friends who don't mind but want specific factions that aren't Space Marines. 

[Marshal Rohr]

1 hour ago, DemonGSides said:

 

I like the heresy era, I'm just realistic about things instead of burying my head in the sand and acting like HH was ever anything but a niche of a niche.

 

 

Well new players have always been anemic; the only people getting into HH by your own standards were the weakest 40k players; those who couldn't adapt into new rulesets. That's a dying breed no matter how you slice it.

 

And as I said, HH is mostly boring to anyone who's not a civil war junkie.  We aren't at odds here; you think the game is failing cuz of a single bad rule set, I think the game has always been a bit of a failure and it's because of the design parameters of "All Imperium, all the time".

 

Idk if I'd call TOW successful, or at least any amount more meaningful than what I see our of HH. Release schedules are similar and conversation online is similar; not much and in small communities.

 

Which is fine!  Not every game they make need to be 40k or AoS levels of successful.  I'm not begrudging anyone who likes these games. But they aren't for everyone, especially people who are interested in non imperial factions.

 

The conversation wasn't bashing HH, not sure why you're so defensive. 

Because I said “hey Heresy and 40K have the same problems with people leaving because of rules” and you said “should had more xenos then”. It’s been “niche” for 13 years, if you weren’t playing it because you need aliens, you’re not who matters when it starts struggling. The people who matter to the health of the game are disengaging, and new players aren’t replacing them. It’s wargamings a version of the boomer bubbles in American and Europe and the company isn’t correcting course (shocking). 

[Marshal Rohr]

21 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

I actually think you're both right in a way. The rules are killing Heresy and in much the same way I'm done with 40K because I don't like the rules. Not everyone is unhappy, but a proportion of the customer base.

 

But also, the sandbox is quite limited for Horus Heresy era and this is also off putting in a way.

 

I have friends who dislike the rules of HH and other friends who don't mind but want specific factions that aren't Space Marines. 

I like most of the new core rules and the weapons granularity. But missions, progressive scoring, cover, army building, and flavor have to be addressed. I doubt they’ll do it an FAQ too. 

[darkhorse0607]

23 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

I actually think you're both right in a way. The rules are killing Heresy and in much the same way I'm done with 40K because I don't like the rules. Not everyone is unhappy, but a proportion of the customer base.

 

But also, the sandbox is quite limited for Horus Heresy era and this is also off putting in a way.

 

I have friends who dislike the rules of HH and other friends who don't mind but want specific factions that aren't Space Marines. 

 

I mean I also think that the current way of supporting the game and model line are off-putting as well. 

 

Will you get an update? Will GW mention you at all within a 6 month period? You could get bunch a dual 40k/30k Custodes kit or nothing for a long while.

 

People don't want to get involved in a system with super wishy washy support, especially when other games (other than Middle Earth) get more, more consistently.

[Marshal Rohr]

The Custodes stuff is annoying and there are more coming. Head scratching to do a four parter with such a narrow focus.