The Rumour Thread

[Beastmaster]

43 minutes ago, Athrawes said:

Calling a 2000 point army and its high cost a point of entry is crazy mate. When I got into warhammer point of entry was a box of infantry, a hero and a rulebook, and the same for my pals. Even now, I doubt a majority of people new to the hobby gets in and immediately plans a 2000 point list to build towards. Most likely they buy a starter set. In fact, a large segment of the community (myself included) enjoy building to 1000 points or less to try things out and only then expanding if we enjoy it. People who are willing to drop $800 on a new thing in one go are not the kind people who will be pinching pennies or be priced out of warhammer altogether so the point seems moot. 

But even assuming your case of 800 as a point of entry is accurate (it isn't, look at my comparisons and you'll see a full 2000 point army costs around $700) That's not so dissimilar from other leisure hobbies like warhammer. I tend to build 1 x 2k list a year, and yeah it costs be around 1000USD factoring in paint and glue and the like, while my brother in law golfs, a club membership and clothes/fees/equipment costs him 2500 a year. My father fixes old cars as his hobby which costs his a few 1000 as well  each year or more. Buying a new video game system and TV, plus 3 or 4 games to last the year costs 1kUSD easy. MY best friend spends 1000USD  easily to build his new MtG deck each year.

Every hobby you listed costs similar to or more than most warhammer armies, so I'm confused what point your trying to make. Internally, warhammer armies cost about the same. Externally, the warhammer hobby isn't so dissimilar in cost to other leisure hobbies. And the point of entry cost for warhammer is way cheaper than the point of entry cost of any of these pass times. Of course there are cheaper hobbies, bird watching and stamp collecting a cool. But compared to many hobbies warhammer is priced just fine for what I get out of it.

Ok, for comparison, let’s say the golf club of your brother charges not 2500, but 3000 next year and 4000 the year after, without changing anything else. Don’t you think some members will complain? Let’s also say other (granted, less nice) golf clubs in the area stay at 2000. When will the members of your brother’s club begin to consider changing to one of the other clubs? To which club is a new player more likely to turn?

Yes, GW is on the pricy side in the miniature market. We all know that, and are ok with it. But this seems to slowly be getting out of hand. Which WILL ultimately mean fewer people will start playing GW games.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Beastmaster

[Icarion]

The only way I'd buy an argument that GW prices are getting out of hand is to compare the cost of similar kits over time compared against inflation. 

For example, According to the bureau of Labor statistics, the purchasing power of 1 USD in 2001 is equivalent to 1.51USD in 2020. To compare, a box of High elf archers back then was about 35USD, which would be about 52.5USD today. The price of the new Lumineth Sentinels is 60USD. You get less models and the box costs 10% more after inflation, but the models are larger, and significantly prettier/more detailed.

Not a bad deal at all.

Some people will look at the price of warhammer and say no thanks, but the same could be said 20 years ago. Judging by GW market share and earnings, I'd say the player base is larger now than back then despite price rises slightly outpacing inflation. 

Furthermore, considering the prices have risen following inflation + over the years, and that there are more people playing now than back then, I'd say concerns about the current pricing trend scaring people off is akin to baseless sky is falling gripes.

[Chikout]

The problem is that gw sells these things globally. Here in Japan we haven't had inflation for the last 20 years, so a price increase hurts us more, and that's in a country were gw stuff is already incredibly expensive. Archaon costs more than a switch lite and the new gargants will be even worse. 

[sandlemad]

Thank you for putting together that list. It's good to see it all written down, even if it's a slightly unpleasant reminder that ultimately this aspect of the hobby, the whole building a sizeable AoS/40k force,  just isn't for me. I was fundamentally priced out of it years ago. Managed to keep at it a bit longer because BCR are a weird outlier but it couldn't last.

And that's ok, I like e.g. Underworlds both because I think it's a better game and because I can afford it but ultimately I think that if you look at those costs and think "yes, this is good", we're not going to meet in the middle. The idea of building multiple 2000pt armies in a year is utterly alien to me, so wildly out of reach that it might as well be a joke, but then so are golf club memberships, restoring old cars, buying a new console every year, and dropping a grand on a MtG deck. I cannot reasonably consider these accessible hobbies and that they are being used as a comparison here speaks of a pretty basic mismatch of socioeconomic understanding.

This is useful to show to new players though when they ask if they should get into 40k or AoS. The cost barrier makes this (or at least this aspect of the hobby, the return of skirmish games over the last few years is good) very, very exclusionary already and dismissing people's concerns only makes it feel more so, both in general and specifically re: GW's particular practices. This isn't on the level of other parts of the internet/AoSphere where raising these concerns would get you actively mocked as a 'poor' or a 'pleb' but it comes off as out of touch and in the same ballpark.

Edited October 6, 2020 by sandlemad

[Beastmaster]

If I remember correctly, the price for a standard 10 model basic infantry box was roughly at 20-30 € shortly before AoS. The first AoS armies (just 3 years ago) went to about 35. Now with Lumineth we are at 44. Same goes for cavalry, monstrous infantry, centerpieces, named heroes etc. It’s actually comparable to my golf club example.

Now let’s say they are redoing Skaven next year. 20 Nightrunners or 20 Plague Monks cost 29 € at the moment. Redone, with new shiny models, there is no reason to think that GW, considering where we are at the moment, would charge less than 45 for 10 of them. Which is a price hike of 210%. Yes, they are new. But I’m out at that point, and am no longer looking forward to this. They’re just not worth THAT much more.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Beastmaster

[Joseph Mackay]

Setting the ‘entry point’ to the game as a 2000pts army is one big reason why fantasy died.

the ‘old guard’ who never bought anything new in years anyway would constantly complain that they couldn’t get new people to play, but whenever a new guy came into the store, those same people refused to play anything less than +2000pts. The Old Guard are why the barrier to entry was so high (this is what my store manager witnessed over the years, and I too experienced it when I tried to get into fantasy around 2007)

[SunStorm]

I'll be picking one up to go with my Ironjawz, but from looking at the kit, there doesn't seem to be any options for customizing it beyond picking your variant. So without heavy conversion, all Warstompers will look the same?

[Still-young]

42 minutes ago, SunStorm said:

I'll be picking one up to go with my Ironjawz, but from looking at the kit, there doesn't seem to be any options for customizing it beyond picking your variant. So without heavy conversion, all Warstompers will look the same?

Looks that way, yeah. They even have a photo with multiples on the site, and the only difference is paint jobs. 
 

Edited October 6, 2020 by Still-young

[Overread]

Don't forget Old World rules also weren't as good at lower point values, plus you often wound up running insufficient models to make some armies work and were quite open to being highly skewed (because you couldn't bring well rounded options) so your matchups could be far more auto win-loss situations. AoS not only has a system that works better at lower point values; but also has underworld and warcry and meeting engagements - means to play with fewer models. 

 

The issue with the Old World 2K barrier wasn't just that it was what everyone used; it was that that was where the game really "worked" its best. 1.5K worked well too, but that's still a lot of models. 

[EMMachine]

49 minutes ago, Beastmaster said:

If I remember correctly, the price for a standard 10 model basic infantry box was roughly at 20-30 € shortly before AoS. The first AoS armies (just 3 years ago) went to about 35. Now with Lumineth we are at 44. Same goes for cavalry, monstrous infantry, centerpieces, named heroes etc. It’s actually comparable to my golf club example.

The old models yeah, but the witch aelf models were basicly from 8. Edition and already costed 45,-€ there (and those costed the same as 10 Metal/Finecast Models of them before). The realmlords were unlucky to get the same (or partly higher) pricing the Daughters of Khaine and Fyreslayers since the beginning of AoS.

[zilberfrid]

Meanwhile, Frostgrave gets you on the table for €50 per person*

 

*Assuming scratch built terrain, 1 box of Wizards per four players, Perry War of the Roses infantry, some Nolzur's/wizkids/warlord monsters. And if you share a rulebook, €30 is feasable.

[Enoby]

I think another big thing for Old World's failure wasn't just you needed 2000 points to play in most areas, but you needed to read and understand the rulebook (expensive), and your army book. To add to this, a 2000 point army could include loads of infantry models that would feel like a slog to paint through - I can't imagine it's attractive to an new player to be told "yeah, you can play with us, just buy and paint 200 clanrats first". 

Age of Sigmar is expensive, but the rules are free (new players don't need a battletome to test out an army as the app has the warscrolls) and much easier to understand, and as Overread said they work better at low points. In addition to this, even with the mega expensive Sons of Behemat, you can still have a lot of fun painting a 2000pt army after the pain of buying it.

[sandlemad]

1 hour ago, SunStorm said:

I'll be picking one up to go with my Ironjawz, but from looking at the kit, there doesn't seem to be any options for customizing it beyond picking your variant. So without heavy conversion, all Warstompers will look the same?

I mean what makes a Warstomper, really? The weapon is the main distinguishing feature to my mind: big club for the warstomper, flail for the gatebreaker, club-and-net for the krakeneater. Beyond that I think you're free to mix and match with the heads, clothes, back-thing, other assorted gubbins. Have your warstomper wear a hood and a risqué net thing around the belly, it'll still be clear what warscroll he is.

It's actually even easier if you've only got one giant in your force, you just need to say "oh, this dude's X" and there's no scope for the opponent to get confused because hey, there's one big lad and they're not liable to mix up his rules with those of his neighbour. Customise as you like, I suspect.

'Eavy metal just painted up the stock models without any changes because that's typically what they do for battletomes and codices.

48 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

Meanwhile, Frostgrave gets you on the table for €50 per person*

*Assuming scratch built terrain, 1 box of Wizards per four players, Perry War of the Roses infantry, some Nolzur's/wizkids/warlord monsters. And if you share a rulebook, €30 is feasable.

Very true. When we compare GW games to other pastimes and/or look at the price, it's worth remembering that it is in fact one of the most expensive TT wargames around. Warmahordes comes close, as do the Star Wars games, but stuff like Frostgrave absolutely kicks ass and is far from comparable to golf club membership or renovating antique cars. It shows that there's nothing inherent to the hobby that demands the prices GW charges or the amount of buy-in 2000pt AoS asks for.

In fact I think there's a larger cultural issue where we use what is really a very specific sort of approach to one game as emblematic of the whole hobby, to the exclusion of everything else. Going from broad to particular, you have:

• tabletop wargames (many of which are more affordable than some GW stuff)
• GW tabletop wargames (which come in a variety of costs and sizes, requiring very different levels of buy-in, e.g. WHU is c.€60 for two forces and the core stuff, boom, instant gaming)
• GW's flagship tabletop wargames: AoS and 40k
• a specific way of playing those flagship tabletop wargames, namely matched play battles between large (2000pt-ish for AoS) armies
• matched play battles between large armies in competitive tournament settings, requiring the regular updating/replacement of a hobbyist's armies

And that's specifically looking at gaming and more or less leaving out folks who collect to paint or whatever. So when the fandom/hobbyist collective/folks on forums like TGA talk about 'the hobby' and discuss costs and investment and support, I often find we often talk about the most narrow, specific version or aspect of that hobby and unconsciously act as though the statements we make about it apply to a wider range of games and ways of playing.

Building on what Overread said above, this is clearly an issue that GW identified with WHFB and has sought to ameliorate with stuff like Kill Team, Warcry, WHU, Necromunda, Blood Bowl, AoS's rules, etc. because otherwise you're driving off players, leaving their money on the table, and liable to drive your flagship game into a death spiral. But I still think it's worth bearing in mind when we talk about the hobby.

When I see someone enquire about getting into the 'hams, I suggest Kill Team or Warcry or WHU. Not because I think it's less likely to scare folks off (and I'm not interested in recruitment, particularly) but because I know how dispiriting it is to be told "ok, here are the competitive armies, here are the only reasonable builds, you're going to want to drop about half a grand on this and expect it to be worthless in a year or so when the meta changes", as though that's the be-all and end-all of how you engage with the hobby.

Edited October 6, 2020 by sandlemad

[zilberfrid]

I also always advise Underworlds sets when people are debating which army to get. You get something on the table quickly, and they are (mostly) alternate sculpts at just about the price of the hero inside.

If they just want to play wargames, I advise Frostgrave.

Even though I have about 6000 points of CoS, I don't really feel like purchasing all the extras required, like Malign Sorcery, yearly GHB's, white dwarves, the core book, and somewhere along the line a realmbreaker book, which would account for some €150+yearly GHB's in mostly paper.

Games Workshop isn't that bad at infantry model prices (Blood Bowl, Necromunda and the more versatile unit boxes are about 150%-200% the price per model of things like Frostgrave and 300%-400% of Perry historical, but they do have good detailing and can have good selection in bits), it's the heroes and rules where they get you.

Now the newer sets come out more expensive, which is a concerning trend, but I think it's because they keep the price per army similar.

[Joseph Mackay]

Also keep in mind that ALL gw plastics, resin and metal kits* are all made in the Uk so all costs involved in the production/manufacturing of models is higher for them than all the other companies who manufacture in China. Though this point is only relevant to the standard UK price of their kits and is unrelated to the international price issues, just thought it was something people might want to remember when comparing prices to other games.

*terrain and endless spells are printed in China (or at least they were) as well as books, any card products and dice

[a74xhx]

For anyone comparing the price of Archaon and others against the Mega Gargants:

Archaon is three large sprues for £100. That's £33 a sprue.

Nagash is two sprues for £75. That's £42.50 a sprue.

Alarielle is two sprues for £85. That's £37.50 a sprue.

Gordrakk is three sprues for £70. That's £23.33 a sprue.

Mega Gargant is four large sprues for £120. That's £30 a sprue.

 

Conclusion:

Archaon, Nagash, Alarielle are all more expense than a Mega Gargant

 

[JackStreicher]

4 hours ago, Beastmaster said:

Then mega-Gargants somewhere between, say, Nagash or Archaon (maybe 110€) and I think no one would complain.  

That‘s at least true for me.

[Beliman]

6 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

That‘s at least true for me.

Me too. I really want one of them but...

[JackStreicher]

31 minutes ago, a74xhx said:

For anyone comparing the price of Archaon and others against the Mega Gargants:

Archaon is three large sprues for £100. That's £33 a sprue.

Nagash is two sprues for £75. That's £42.50 a sprue.

Alarielle is two sprues for £85. That's £37.50 a sprue.

Gordrakk is three sprues for £70. That's £23.33 a sprue.

Mega Gargant is four large sprues for £120. That's £30 a sprue.

 

Conclusion:

Archaon, Nagash, Alarielle are all more expense than a Mega Gargant

 

Except you do not pay per sprue, even size is irrelevant.

The S2D Start Collecting has 4-7+ Sprues, costs 85€ and all models stacked on top of each other are as tall as 4 Megagargants.

 

Again: The price has no justification: It‘s not the production costs, the shipping, the taxes. All it truly is, is GW knowing that the „stupid“ consumers can be sucked dry a little further, they‘ve never revolted before, why should they now?

 

Just a small example: I helped a Store a few years back (10 years? GamesDay in Cologne was still a thing back then) and went to the GW convention/meeting. There we received brochures meant for store owners. To my surprise Store owners paid around 50%-60% less for each box (back then) which means that GW still makes a profit if they sell a box of whatever for half its price and less. Mind you, profit means they’ve covered all their costs and they can pay their managers a handsome bonus at the end of the year. 
 

Nowadays production costs did slightly increase, there was a slight inflation etc.. Yet the prices increased to up to 500%. Conclusion: They‘re milking us, big time.

Edit.: GW talks about itself as the "new GW". All they did was starting to use Social Media (and they've build up a very nice and charming team for that. That's it, they're still as greedy as back then with no care whatsoever for their customers. And I've had enough of it.
We should stop to see GW as one person, it's many. There are the cool and friendly people in the Design Studio or on Social Media, and then there is all of the Management material, and that's the part of the company that's problematic.
And btw: GW Staff isn't paid well at all. So all your money goes straight up to the layer of greed, called management. (Maybe it's counter-productive to real-talk about a company I've shared of XD)

Edited October 6, 2020 by JackStreicher
Spelling and added a line

[Still-young]

15 minutes ago, a74xhx said:

For anyone comparing the price of Archaon and others against the Mega Gargants:

Archaon is three large sprues for £100. That's £33 a sprue.

Nagash is two sprues for £75. That's £42.50 a sprue.

Alarielle is two sprues for £85. That's £37.50 a sprue.

Gordrakk is three sprues for £70. That's £23.33 a sprue.

Mega Gargant is four large sprues for £120. That's £30 a sprue.

 

Conclusion:

Archaon, Nagash, Alarielle are all more expense than a Mega Gargant

 

The 4th sprue looks like half the size, not that sprue count really matters. 

[KingBrodd]

My only disappointment in the Mega kit so far seems to be the lack of Johann!!

[zilberfrid]

4 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

My only disappointment in the Mega kit so far seems to be the lack of Johann!!

Johann could be seen as a CoS model, and GW isn't doing that.

[JackStreicher]

2 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

Johann could be seen as a CoS model, and GW isn't doing that.

Burned! XD

Edited October 6, 2020 by JackStreicher

[Joseph Mackay]

23 minutes ago, a74xhx said:

For anyone comparing the price of Archaon and others against the Mega Gargants:

Archaon is three large sprues for £100. That's £33 a sprue.

Nagash is two sprues for £75. That's £42.50 a sprue.

Alarielle is two sprues for £85. That's £37.50 a sprue.

Gordrakk is three sprues for £70. That's £23.33 a sprue.

Mega Gargant is four large sprues for £120. That's £30 a sprue.

 

Conclusion:

Archaon, Nagash, Alarielle are all more expense than a Mega Gargant

 

Katakros is 1 large sprue for £65 ($215NZ) Archaon is $330nz, Nagash is $201nz, Alarielle is $280nz, Gordrak is $230nz

one thing I noticed during the COVID lockdowns when I wanted Seraphon Stegadons, is the pricing on hero/hq models in NZ is higher than the price of a kit that’s the same UK price. That literally has no justification 

[sandlemad]

51 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

Also keep in mind that ALL gw plastics, resin and metal kits* are all made in the Uk so all costs involved in the production/manufacturing of models is higher for them than all the other companies who manufacture in China. Though this point is only relevant to the standard UK price of their kits and is unrelated to the international price issues, just thought it was something people might want to remember when comparing prices to other games.

*terrain and endless spells are printed in China (or at least they were) as well as books, any card products and dice

True but then Warlord games (Hail Caesar, Bolt Action, Pike & Shotte) and Northstar (Frostgrave) both manufacture their plastic and metal in the UK as well, literally down the road from GW headquarters in Nottingham, and their kits are considerably cheaper.

I've not seen much that would lead me to attribute GW's high prices to anything other than "because they can". Sprue numbers don't account for it. A given kit's role within the army doesn't account for it, at least not consistently. Materials and manufacturing don't account for it. With a few exceptions where they've tentatively felt out the boundaries of what the market will bear, GW charges what they like because they know they can.