Getting Priced Out

[sandlemad]

49 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Hinterlands is great indeed. 
I’m jumping into Warcry in the new box. And I had some of the same concerns. 
the injuries and upgrades are in the champions mode. Or at least they are more pronounced. As I understand it 
what I do love the idea of, that hinterlands lacks, the ‘play your own campaign’ set up. 

Hinterlands and Warcry are surprisingly different, with Warcry being a pretty weird little game that tries a lot of new stuff for GW. It's its own beast and not everything lands but I have to give kudos to Sam James for not resting on his laurels. Hinterlands was considerably better than GW's own Skirmish ruleset but fair play, he went and pushed for something new for Warcry.

[Beastmaster]

What I also like with Hinterlands is that you still keep in touch with the larger AoS developments. You can directly use almost any unit/warscroll that will come in the future (as long as it’s not a behemoth or a warmachine, and even those could be used as centerpiece of a scenario. Imagine an Aleguzzler rampaging through a village, with two warbands trying to stop him... or a siege cannon threatening a city wall, with one of the warbands sneaking out to destroy it before it breaches the wall), and you use and learn the basic AoS rules that could later be used in bigger games.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Beastmaster

[Kramer]

14 minutes ago, Beastmaster said:

What I also like with Hinterlands is that you still keep in touch with the larger AoS developments. You can directly use almost any unit/warscroll that will come in the future (as long as it’s not a behemoth or a warmachine, and even those could be used as centerpiece of a scenario. Imagine an Aleguzzler rampaging through a village, with two warbands trying to stop him... or a siege cannon threatening a city wall, with one of the warbands sneaking out to destroy it before it breaches the wall), and you use and learn the basic AoS rules that could later be used in bigger games.

Yeah the connection is bigger. That’s true. But as hinterlands requires quite a bit of house ruling I wouldn’t be above doing the same for Warcry if I wanted to play that siege weapon assassination for example. 

 

41 minutes ago, sandlemad said:

Hinterlands and Warcry are surprisingly different, with Warcry being a pretty weird little game that tries a lot of new stuff for GW. It's its own beast and not everything lands but I have to give kudos to Sam James for not resting on his laurels. Hinterlands was considerably better than GW's own Skirmish ruleset but fair play, he went and pushed for something new for Warcry.

Fully agree

[Sleboda]

17 hours ago, Beastmaster said:

Looked at the Warcry rules and yes, they are tidy.

Great game. The rules really are mostly good, with the exception of a few abilities that are beyond OTT if you apply them correctly.

 

Still, really solid game.

[Nos]

On 10/15/2020 at 9:16 AM, Joseph Mackay said:

Warcry is a great system. It has some flaws with the randomly generated objectives that can result in a non-game or instant victory for one side but in those cases you can just draw a new card. I think the campaign system is a bit light in regards to gaining xp, upgrades, injuries and fighters dying, but they can always add that later. The instructions for building the terrain was botched in the starter box, in that if you followed the instruction book then the terrain cards were useless.

Where I think Warcry falls apart, is the AoS Warbands. The game was initially announced as just the chaos Warbands, and people complained. I don’t know what actually went down in gw HQ, but in my opinion, the chaos Warbands were all playtested and balanced against each other, but the AoS Warbands feel like they were rushed out to kill the complaints. The AoS Warbands generally have more choices and a lot of things are at a much higher ‘power level’ for their points vs the original chaos Warbands and it feels unfair. The Stormcast shooting models are the worst offenders. I also feel like they could have used Warcry to buff certain models (while paying appropriate points for it) so they actually matched their lore a bit better than they do in regular AoS, but it is what it is. My regular group didn’t get into it because they watched a few of us playing the game and got put off by the apparent imbalance between the chaos Warbands and the AoS ones. My Stormcast friend has no interest in the game because his Stormcast felt op and he didn’t enjoy the experience.

Back on the subject of pricing though, what’s the justification for Warhammer Underworlds Warbands vs regular AoS models. Eg Beastclaw Raiders, Icebrow Hunter (resin) is $73nz whereas the Underworlds warband consisting of an Icebrow Hunter, a Frost Sabre and 3 Gnoblers (all plastic + cards for the game) for $67nz. This kinda proves the whole “price is determined by how many you’d buy” is false because someone might want more than one Icebrow Hunter, but theoretically you’d only want one warband, unless you were buying multiples because they’re better models than the existing resin ones

The price is determined by people who are incredibly talented at selling things, is the bottom line.

At heart, GW makes the things it does because it believes they will sell and it prices them in accordance with this, and their year on profit proves they get it right more often than not. I know it's a boring answer but its the answer nonetheless. 

[JackStreicher]

Here we go again:

The new Warcry set costs 160€ (120-125GBP - that‘s about one billion AUD by GW‘s conversion rate 🤣

Edited October 19, 2020 by JackStreicher

[Groomy]

3 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Here we go again:

The new Warcry set costs 160€ (129-125GBP - that‘s about one billion AUD by GW‘s conversion rate 🤣

In a very non-complainy tone I must admit that this might be where I start painting my backlog and playing using the Core Book, Tome of Champions and my 2 or 3 beloved warbands without buying more. I think the game is nearly perfect the way it is. I was looking forward to more narrative content and I have tremendous love for the game designer. No "but". Just gonna enjoy it until you guys all say that Catacombs is a masterpiece and everyone should absolutely have it. 

[Grim Beasties]

27 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Here we go again:

🤣

Nooooo please I can't take another 10 pages

[Mcthew]

41 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Here we go again:

The new Warcry set costs 160€ (120-125GBP - that‘s about one billion AUD by GW‘s conversion rate 🤣

How much was the first starter set last year? Are we looking at a 25% price hike? If so I think this spells trouble for GW. Something in their 'modelling' feels a bit wrong there.

Edited October 19, 2020 by Mcthew

[MarkK]

1 hour ago, Mcthew said:

How much was the first starter set last year? Are we looking at a 25% price hike? If so I think this spells trouble for GW. Something in their 'modelling' feels a bit wrong there.

£100, I believe

I bought the starter last year, and it felt like great value; two warbands, monsters and enough terrain to fill the board. 

To make this set comparable to last year's, I would like to have seen more chaos beasts (new subterranean types?) and underground terrain (actual walls and walkways). Then no need to include old terrain set to bulk out the contents.

Even compared to the very expensive Necromunda Dark Uprising box, this looks like bad value.

As I said in the Rumour thread, an actual starter at a cheaper price point of 60-80€ with 2 warbands, some terrain, rulebook and extras might have been a better option. 

I'm surprised really after the good job they done with the 40k starters that GW would release a €160 starter for a low model count skirmish game. 

Anyway, looking forward to see what the rest of the new warbands look like

Edited October 19, 2020 by MarkK
Added Pictures

[Brakh]

Enough for me.

Its time to work on backlog and in the meantime I am starting to support lesser companies. Recently I have reviewed existing options on market and there are at least four games worth of trying instead of pretending I still care for AoS/Warcry. Ofc with lesser population but thankfully I am living in area where its not an issue.

[zilberfrid]

It's just GW caring about distancing. By pricing starter sets ever higher, fewer people enter the game and you can keep your 6 ft distance, because the other side of the table is empty.

[JackStreicher]

7 hours ago, Mcthew said:

How much was the first starter set last year? Are we looking at a 25% price hike? If so I think this spells trouble for GW. Something in their 'modelling' feels a bit wrong there.

People claim it’s 50% because the price increased and the model count halved.

[zilberfrid]

5 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

People claim it’s 50% because the price increased and the model count halved.

That's a fair approximation.

[JackStreicher]

120€ to 160€ Is a 33% increase already which puts Europeans at a 66% price increase.

 

I‘ll finally get an Air Brush and tackle my big models for that money

Edited October 20, 2020 by JackStreicher

[Mcthew]

3 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

People claim it’s 50% because the price increased and the model count halved.

Wow. That's not good. It would be helpful to learn why those rises are outstripping wage inflation. This is not like buying a house. You don't need plastic soldiers to live. And you can buy them cheaper elsewhere.

The Financial Times assessment of GW recently has everyone still amazed about this 'plastic' bubble of success the company has formed but also warned investors against GW:

"The quality of growth is another concern. Analysis from research house Stockviews shows that since 2016, Games Workshop has become increasingly reliant on trade channels, whereas retail and online sales per hobby centre have stalled. A pause on shop openings since the start of the pandemic suggests that trend is unlikely to reverse any time soon.

Greater reliance on independently operated stores increases the risk of disappointment. Not only are profit margins lower, but the reseller network suffers more during disruption than the core. Games Workshop’s full-year earnings showed trade-channel revenue down 16 per cent in the six months to the end of May versus the previous six months, compared with an 11 per cent decline in sales made through owned stores and online."

This coupled with above inflation price rises will make GW games a higher tier of premium and force their players into a lower tier and away from GW games. Or, it will almost certainly turn them to the eBay market where GW will not make a penny and lose further revenue. There might be reasons for the constant price rises but not being transparent about them will hurt the business. 

As an aside, I havent bought anything from GW or Warhammer beyond the occasional paint pot, in over a year. And in the last 4 months I've only bought from eBay. For example, my last purchases had an rrp of £130 but I bought these new at £70 from an eBay reseller (one where GW will see nothing from that sale). This is not anti-GW, more a fiscal choice. The hobby is overpriced and when it interferes with essential living costs, it becomes an unhelpful distraction more than a hobby.

I fear this will apply to most gamers in the months to come. So GW aren't helping themselves.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Mcthew
Edited for accuracy

[zilberfrid]

16 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

Wow. That's not good. It would be helpful to learn why those rises are outstripping wage inflation. This is not like buying a house. You don't need plastic soldiers to live. And you can buy them cheaper elsewhere.

The Financial Times assessment of GW recently has everyone still amazed about this 'plastic' bubble of success the company has formed but also warned investors against GW:

"The quality of growth is another concern. Analysis from research house Stockviews shows that since 2016, Games Workshop has become increasingly reliant on trade channels, whereas retail and online sales per hobby centre have stalled. A pause on shop openings since the start of the pandemic suggests that trend is unlikely to reverse any time soon.

Greater reliance on independently operated stores increases the risk of disappointment. Not only are profit margins lower, but the reseller network suffers more during disruption than the core. Games Workshop’s full-year earnings showed trade-channel revenue down 16 per cent in the six months to the end of May versus the previous six months, compared with an 11 per cent decline in sales made through owned stores and online."

This coupled with above inflation price rises will make GW games a higher tier of premium and force their players into a lower tier and away from GW games. Or, it will almost certainly turn them to the eBay market where GW will not make a penny and lose further revenue. There might be reasons for the constant price rises but not being transparent about them will hurt the business. 

As an aside, I havent bought anything from GW or Warhammer beyond the occasional paint pot, in over a year. And in the last 4 months I've only bought from eBay. For example, my last purchases had an rrp of £130 but I bought these new at £70 from an eBay reseller (one where GW will see nothing from that sale). This is not a philosophical standpoint, more a fiscal one. The hobby is overpriced and when it interferes with essential living costs, it becomes an unhelpful distraction more than a hobby.

I fear this will apply to most gamers in the months to come. So GW aren't helping themselves.

I, for one, welcome GW's initiative to help other miniature artists and rulemakers. They'd be happy to take their market share.

[Beastmaster]

Currently writing my house rules as a combination of Hinterlands and Shardsfall. Hobby time and money go into terrain pieces. 
I, for one, have fun. 😃

[Kramer]

3 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

120€ to 160€ Is a 33% increase already which puts Europeans at a 66% price increase.

 

I‘ll finally get an Air Brush and tackle my big models for that money

And that's roughly the same percentage that the last few kits have been raised compared to similar and previous kits. And then you add the conversion to it like you said. The exchange rate is £1 = €1,10. Although that doesn't take into account transport etc. I'm genuinely thinking of getting a UK friend to buy the box and then sending it. 😂

But the rise stings nonetheless. For example all the greater deamons are €110. The Gargants, roughly same size, €150. I can understand and defend a slight price diffrence due to it being different kits, or even €130 like archaon. But slightly over 130% compared to similar boxes is so too much. Same with the first starter set being more than 30% less expensive than the new one.

[Icegoat]

I think the price rises certaintly for Aos are happening because the system seems to have lost a lot of popularity this year rather than gained. 

40k is being kept alive by lore great new models  and memes  

But AoS has nowhere near the same level of media/cultural impact/fame. With the only big releases in 2020 being an overpriced giant and some very expensive elves I just think AOS is now a niche brand and has lost a lot of the steam it had built up in the last few years. 

Thusly AoS now commands premium prices. That the new monolith andvoid dragon are both cheaper than the mega gargant basically proves this. 

[Jymmy]

Monolith and Void Dragon are also a robbery, I don’t think that 40k is in a better place in that aspect.

[Beastmaster]

34 minutes ago, Icegoat said:

I think the price rises certaintly for Aos are happening because the system seems to have lost a lot of popularity this year rather than gained. 

40k is being kept alive by lore great new models  and memes  

But AoS has nowhere near the same level of media/cultural impact/fame. With the only big releases in 2020 being an overpriced giant and some very expensive elves I just think AOS is now a niche brand and has lost a lot of the steam it had built up in the last few years. 

Thusly AoS now commands premium prices. That the new monolith andvoid dragon are both cheaper than the mega gargant basically proves this. 

Guess what: Every hobby that needs to have several people of different households in a single room for a few hours has lost a lot of steam this year. I wonder why that is. Must be the prices. 😄

Though price increases may not exactly help, of course.

[Overread]

1 hour ago, Beastmaster said:

Guess what: Every hobby that needs to have several people of different households in a single room for a few hours has lost a lot of steam this year. I wonder why that is. 

It's like there's some great pandemic sweeping the world! 

 

Yeah every wargame, hobby, heck even a lot of sports and outdoor hobbies and activities have suffered this year. Even when you can go back a lot of people aren't because of the risk to themselves or others in their household. Until Corona is cleared as a threat Wargames and everything else will generally suffer. Dont' forget 2020 was a 40K New Edition Year; that's a huge release for 40K. Plus who knows Lumineth at the start of the year; Giants in the middle and the original plans might have seen a 3rd new faction at the end of the year - Soulblight; Shadow Aelves; something else entirely. We've no idea if GW had plans for that which would have given AoS a fantastic year of investment. Even so 2 fresh armies is a big update and one of those can be allied into any AoS army. 

 

AoS is far far far from dead, its doing very well for itself. 

[zilberfrid]

2 hours ago, Icegoat said:

I think the price rises certaintly for Aos are happening because the system seems to have lost a lot of popularity this year rather than gained. 

40k is being kept alive by lore great new models  and memes  

But AoS has nowhere near the same level of media/cultural impact/fame. With the only big releases in 2020 being an overpriced giant and some very expensive elves I just think AOS is now a niche brand and has lost a lot of the steam it had built up in the last few years. 

Thusly AoS now commands premium prices. That the new monolith andvoid dragon are both cheaper than the mega gargant basically proves this. 

I know who I'm reacting to, but that's not the case.

AoS has been played less this year, sure. Everything has. I have two wargames ready for review that came out this year but I haven't played yet (Frostgrave 2 and Oathmark) because I've been in lockdown since I received them.

That doesn't say anything about its popularity. In the shops I go to, the amount of 40k has been decreased and AoS increased, and I've also seen this on the table. There's also demand for old models from people that are activating their WHFB collections to go to AoS. I've heard from two friends that have gone to AoS from 40k, or at least have taken steps. That might even draw me back in (they could never convince me to play 40k, but AoS is better).

I'll be the first to say that I don't like the AoS lore, but the 40k lore (and what I later read from Old World lore) is a lot worse. Barely veiled fascism and xenophobia are virtues, the scale is blown up to such an extent that it's just a few kids shouting whose imaginary spaceship is bigger, writers portraying a female character do so through the eyes of a teenager and heroes have thicker plot armour than planets. All the while AoS lore is just a bit over the top for me and I don't like the religeous tones (which are worse in 40k).

Yes, Lumineth and Brodd's Buddies are overpriced, but the rulebook structure of 40k is still more predatory. And, while the point of entry has jumped for Warcry, Necromunda is still 40% higher.

[EccentricCircle]

18 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

I know who I'm reacting to, but that's not the case.

AoS has been played less this year, sure. Everything has. I have two wargames ready for review that came out this year but I haven't played yet (Frostgrave 2 and Oathmark) because I've been in lockdown since I received them.

That doesn't say anything about its popularity. In the shops I go to, the amount of 40k has been decreased and AoS increased, and I've also seen this on the table. There's also demand for old models from people that are activating their WHFB collections to go to AoS. I've heard from two friends that have gone to AoS from 40k, or at least have taken steps. That might even draw me back in (they could never convince me to play 40k, but AoS is better).

I'll be the first to say that I don't like the AoS lore, but the 40k lore (and what I later read from Old World lore) is a lot worse. Barely veiled fascism and xenophobia are virtues, the scale is blown up to such an extent that it's just a few kids shouting whose imaginary spaceship is bigger, writers portraying a female character do so through the eyes of a teenager and heroes have thicker plot armour than planets. All the while AoS lore is just a bit over the top for me and I don't like the religeous tones (which are worse in 40k).

Yes, Lumineth and Brodd's Buddies are overpriced, but the rulebook structure of 40k is still more predatory. And, while the point of entry has jumped for Warcry, Necromunda is still 40% higher.

While I don't disagree with a lot of what you're saying, it is worth pointing out that the fascism and xenophobia in 40K is satirical rather than something they're condoning.

I appreciate that the super serious style they present their world in doesn't help matters, compared to the more openly parodic stuff of yesteryear. However, the point of the setting is to take some of the most unpleasant aspects of human society and blows them up to insane levels as a critique and parody of what we see in the real world.

Certainly that involves asking the audience to empathise with unheroic heroes, which not everyone will find a pleasant experience. It's very much the Judge Dredd school of story telling, or evolved out of that at any rate. The fact that the protagonists are fanatical religious fundamentalists, and the arm of an oppressive, mass-murdering state is meant to prompt people to question authority, rather than defend its excesses.

Whether all the fanboys get that or not is a topic for another day of course...