The Red King
-
Posts
1,096 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by The Red King
-
-
3 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
It is easy. Is it a fantasy mini that is not a big piece from the End Times like Nagash? Then it is going to go. And even those big minis I still have my doubts about them. Maybe they just disappear without replacement.
Or if they "aren't selling well" by some invisible metric they don't show us. How safe are FS? I don't personally know any players. Or maybe they'll release a new unit that has "rules overlap" despite the fact they literally make up the rules themselves.
I'm obviously exaggerating for emphasis. No they're probably not going to get rid of newer kits without warning, but how many people said "there's no way beasts get squatted" and who called 6 year old minis from one edition ago as the next big cut?
Yes things get cut in warhammer. But it's getting faster and faster as they push this card game business model. If the pace keeps up who knows where we'll be at the end of 4th and why should we trust that it won't?
-
3 minutes ago, bethebee said:
but i think once Cities gets cleaned out that'll really be it.
Will it? Are you sure? How much time/money/effort should I bet on that?
-
1 hour ago, chosen_of_khaine said:
"We"? "Supposed to be"? Where is this narrative coming from? Or are you talking about TGA moderation?
Oh to be fair I guess that's my opinion. I think we should be happy for everyone when they get a new model even when it isn't ours. The only times I wasn't was things like Ogroids and Kragnos that felt like they should have been beasts.
I'm just miffed that so many people seem to object to the idea of this news being upsetting to people.
-
4
-
-
Man it just occurred to me that we're all supposed to be happy when someone gets a new mini even if it isn't for us (and we generally are)
But we aren't all supposed to be upset when someone loses a mini? Should I complain about how every miniature they release affects the number of kits they can support?
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Mungrun said:
Am I the only one who finds it odd that they showed the beastmen in the 4th edition teaser trailer and now they've removed them? 🤔
This is why I was so angrily adamant that those were tzaangor NOT beastmen.
@Ejecutor not if you just keep selling them as AoS kits like Gloomspite mangler squigs that also have ToW rules.
-
6 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:
If I understand correctly its not about the money exactly, but about tracking the metrics properly. Don't want to overinvest in old world based on AoS sales or vice versa.
Splitting up the ownership of the range between the teams is another factor.
They would probably actually make more money if they didn't split up the range, but this also forces players who play both systems to own 2 armies I guess.
For all this doom and gloom stuff over investors and profits I don't actually believe it. I think its just poor planning. Well run companies understand keeping customers happy is important over the long term. I can't remember the name, but there is a type of investor that will go hard into a company, push them to effectively burn through all their customer goodwill for short term profits, then bail before things blow up. I don't think GW is in that situation though, just mismanagement and planning issues.
A huge amount of their schedule is built around these new edition starter boxes, but I'm not sure they even really need to change much of the rules to make these things successful. Its a box, featuring completely new models for two armies, at a steep discount relative to the rest of their products, but they're unwilling to gamble on something this lucrative.I know it's called corporate raiding but I don't know the investor names I don't think they're there yet.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Aphotic said:
Having been a workshop player since 1994, I can say the change from a games company to a publicly traded manufacturing company, has changed the way the company looks at it's products.
For the better right? Changing over to a system that prioritizes churn and burn profits over everything else made things better of course... right?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Aphotic said:
IIRC there was a rumor about the design teams and sales teams bickering about understanding product support from a sales angle because the company couldn't determine IF TOW was why someone bought a kit, or if it was bought for AOS.
Just give me a button to press at checkout saying which system I'm buying it for. I'd much rather deal with an extra page at checkout than whatever this BS was lol
-
2
-
-
7 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
Customers confidence works different within GW. After AoS 4th, the removal will not be visible in the financial numbers.
Yes, and by moving it to TOW it will generate a much higher income that just let the BoC mini's linger in AoS. In the end it's simple. A decision like this isn't taken in a wimp. With minimal investment Arcane journal (2 new armies of infamy), a couple of resin miniatures and maybe a plastic kit, it will generate a higher profit that letting BoC stay more or less unsupported in AoS.
It's salty for AoS BoC players, but I do believe this is the case.
I don't understand how only selling the miniatures in ToW could possibly generate more income than selling them in both when they're already going to keep producing the miniatures. Like again they gain the cost of one book in exchange for every BoC sale that might have gone to AoS as well as people like me (who are probably a minority) who are mad enough to stop buying from them entirely.
Like maybe you're just saying the AoS sales are so small it doesn't matter but again it's free money when you're already producing them.
-
4
-
-
Just now, The Lost Sigmarite said:
Speaking of, my gaming group's Discord one has had some interesting responses about the squatting. They think the free Legends BT are a cool move from GW. As we are mostly casual gamers (the tryhard tourney people have left a few years back), I think I'll still see BoC and BS hitting the table if I manage to find our old BS player.
"If the DLC sales don't double" they won't. TWW feels really complete now, already has tons of DLC, and following the shadows of change debacle (which was 100% Sega's fault) and the very delayed release of thrones of decay (alongside the layoffs because once again Sega is making mistakes and paying them by ruining people's jobs and lives), I don't see them selling as much as let's say WH2 DLCs like TK or vampirates. Only big names missing from the game are Nagash, Thanquol and Neferata anyways.
Ironically I have a different beasts related complaint for TWWH. I used to buy all the DLC but then the price went up because of the way God marked gors are getting split up I'd have to spend hundred+ dollars to get 4 DLC's for 12 factions I don't play in order to get the 4 units I need to make my actual faction complete? Maybe in the end they'll make a Beastmen DLC.
-
2 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
You can't expect GW to expand without removing older mini's/factions.
Except they aren't removing BoC since they'll continue to sell the entire range for ToW meaning they have cleared up exactly one book worth of design capacity with this asinine move and they bought that sliver of design space with a whole ton of bad will and lost consumer confidence. But hey you can't put that on a spreadsheet so who cares right?
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Luperci said:
Universes beyond WH40k? Now with rules for MESBG minis (this is a joke)
Serious note, mtg standard is a format that's heavily fallen out of favour compared to commander and its associated variants, as well as modern to some degree I think? largely because players don't appreciate their decks being invalidated after a year of play and want to use their full collections.
Not to mention that Magic decks, while costing very nearly the same as an army for insane reasons, does not require you to spend countless hours, planning, building, painting, tucking into bed at night or any of the other things that everyone does with their favorite army.
@Gaz Taylor oh yeah it's not meant to be a comparable example of the level of betrayal. Just the most direct example I can think of for when "just telling us the truth like we asked" does not in any way lessen the impact of the action.
-
Just now, Ogregut said:
My guess is that's when the replacement faction will be released.
Even in my anger I can appreciate that they gave a year of rules before they go extinct and the fact that that MIGHT be enough time to give them a proper reimagining has crossed my mind but at this point in time it feels like pure Copium, especially with resident rumor mongers giving no credence to the idea.
We'll also see what happens with Cubicle 7's champions of chaos. I suspected it had gone radio silent specifically because they were changing something big (same happened before the death book and the release of SBGL if I recall) so if the book has no mention of the beasts I think it's safe to say GW isn't planning on replacing the faction any time soon.
Actually that's safest to say anyway considering this mortal wound to consumer confidence and trust has us questioning if Ogors are going to stay in the game.
Assume all purchases are good for 3 years or less (if you want them for rules rather than painting/collecting) and factor that into whether they're worth the cost. My answer is going to be no every time.
-
44 minutes ago, BarakUrbaz said:
Real talk, back when the squatting of Beastmen was only a rumor people were saying "why doesn't GW just go out and honestly say this stuff instead of leaving us to speculate? If they have bad news just tell us openly."
And then they told the bad news openly, and everyone's having a ragevomit about now.
Imagine you stole money from your partner and they adamantly tell you they want you to come clean if you did it.
So then you tell them and they get mad you stole from them.
Do you tell them they can't be mad because they asked you to tell them? We're not raging at the communication (which needs MORE communication) we're raging at the act which is always wrong.
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
Want to know what @The Red King and the rest of BoC owners think.
What if the new Chorfs, that would be released during the next 3 years, are the ones that have a mix of duardins and something like beasts/ goats/ bulls? Would you like that as a replacement?
We know that all the armies getting refreshes would, in more or less degree, be Aosified. It could be their approach, IMO.It's not about the aesthetic for me really. I play khorne painted beasts. If I want I'll rebase them and have a reasonable home for most of them in blades of khorne. It's more about the blatant disregard for the passion their fans have for their setting.
I read every scrap of lore I can find. Build, convert, paint, freehand dark tongue sigil GW has forgotten they even have and meanwhile GW can't be bothered to give us a battletome when they're already going to keep selling the minis for unclear reasons. Without communication (of the why) we're left with something that just looks a lot like disrespect for their loyal fans and customers.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Chikout said:
Ok. Genuine question. Anger at GW is warranted but is there another game company that keeps their minis and rules buyable and useable for longer?
To be fair my final statement was worded to avoid another filter word so may not be very clear.
But to answer your question to my knowledge there is not a bigger mini company than the biggest mini company so no? I also don't support WotC any longer after... 20+ years of D&D being at least 40% of my personality lol.
Big companies ruin good things is my stance. Ruining it better than the competition (due to their near stranglehold on the market) doesn't really bear softening the blow imo.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:
Just a thought…
Anybody who is feeling really angry they want to burn their army - don’t.
If you feel that strongly and have 100% decided you have had enough, donate your army or models to an after school club. Let children have chance to use the models as part of a club.
I'll never burn by army but I do feel the need to cynically ask what they kids are supposed to do with them? D&D I guess? Plus I don't want to encourage anyone to get into a game run by such a... company.
-
To those saying it had to happen due to production capacity, that is entirely untrue for BoC who are still being sold. Which is somehow worse because it's just a flat out middle finger from GW to AoS players.
It may be true for the others but it feels like that isn't their reasoning when the biggest cull is based purely on their desire to... not print a battletome? Separate ToW and AoS but not when it comes to most of the StD and GSG and also cities dwarves? (Literally what is their reasoning cause that's 3 out of 9 armies that are in both but Beasts being in both is UNACCEPTABLE!)
-
5
-
-
4 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
Be mad and post insults at GW on TGA about it ? Very uncool, you shouldn't do that.
It's always cool to insult a company. They'll be okay.
-
6
-
6
-
-
1 minute ago, Gaz Taylor said:
+++ Mod Hat On +++
Just a reminder about the rules, so can we not swear!
The swearing filter is in overload at the moment and I've been tweaking things which have crept through.
Totally understand peoples feelings, but less swearing please. We want this forum for everybody!
Sorry I didn't know that word would get through. I usually asterisk myself but I'm heated.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:
Oh, sorry, I didn't mean you personally. Was literally a broadband comms.
Really sorry your army got crushed. Been there for armies and systems many times prior. It always sucks.
I'm not super across BoC or StD but is it possible to proxy as StD (darkoath) units at all if you like the rules system and want to keep your existing stuff?
Oh no sorry that wasn't an attack on you. I meant to agree with you I just have angry energy right now lol. Sorry
-
1 minute ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
Tbf GW has a backup for BoC with is TOW. Same for Bonesplitters. You're just not willing to use the backup because you don't care about TOW is that it ?
Oh let me just pop on down to my local gaming store oh whats that nobody is playing ToW? Guess I hate the game.
-
3 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
It's up to GW and both game's community to make that happen.
And your friends in the suits are doing a ****** job of that. Pardon my having an opinion you disagree with.
-
10 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:
⚠️ OBVIOUS JOKE ALERT! ⚠️
⚠️ OBVIOUS JOKE ALERT! ⚠️
Yeah, let's not do the uno reverse card of misplaced anger. Be upset all you need to, but let's not start that kind of stuff, please.Nah. If I hated AOS I wouldn't be mad. Nor am I angry that ToW took beasts out of Aos because it didn't. GW did. Age of sigmar is a fine game owned by a ****** company.
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
I really wish you could just say that Beasts are going to come back as more mutated monsters further down the line. I know you can't but I wish you could.