Harry and Hastings Chime in on the Future of Warhammer

[TheCastigator]

I do think there is something to the barrier to entry argument, but it really depends on the army in question more than anything. Starting Empire of Vampires from scratch is going to cost more than Ogres or Warriors just based on the number of models you need. That being said, the internet is the great price equalizer.

The other thing is that fantasy does work as a skirmish game. And while a supplement to do something like that could be very nice and complimentary, playing fantasy at any level between 1000-2000 works. Generally speaking, percentages make it very good at lower points levels. The only thing that really changes as you move up is magic gets bigger/crazier.

I just think it's funny given that everything GW has done to increase the size of games through points reductions and supplements like storm of magic and we are talking about the need to make a skirmish game.

In terms of compendiums if you swapped lizards with wood elves in Order, swapped Skaven with Khemri in darkness, and put wood elves with ogres, khemri and maybe O&G in a nonaligned forces book it could work while largely respecting the fluff. But that still fails to address the balance issues that would obviously crop up from allowing elves to take empire artillery or vampire lords teaming up with just about anything else.

There is definitely something to the pop culture argument, but I think that game of thrones can be used as a guide post for where fantasy as a genre needs to go to be successful.

[eldargal]

Actually you can put together a 1500-2000 point Empire army for a couple of hundred pounds thanks to battalions and plastic characters. I don't really buy the entry barrier argument. VC isn't much worse. Some 40k armies (eldar for one) are much more expensive because of a reliance on metal/Finecast. Some WFB armies have the same issue. I don't think there is that much of a gulf between them.

Not sure what you mean about Game of Thrones, the last thing any established wargame should do is ape successful, radically different books/tv series' to try and get attention. They will just alienate the existing playerbase and probably fail to get new players anyway.

Also when it comes to how WFB is selling it is worth noting that according to a survey of US retailers WFB has been moving up in their sales. A few years ago it wan't ont the list (top 7) now it is fourth. WFB has always been less popular in the US, too. I think this rumoured revamp is much more about 'how can we make WFB into a big seller like 40k' not 'how can we save WFB?'.

[TheCastigator]

That's good to hear about sales. I know that is has always been less of a seller than 40K, but good to know it's making a climb. I actually meant to delete the GoT comment, but having said it, I think that it is a good demonstration that fantasy as a genre remains pretty strong, despite it's second fiddle statues to sci-fi. I would hope that GW would not decide to ape it, but it could be a good source of inspiration of how to fix Brets. Big lord calls banner men, each has a different style, arsenal, mounted and foot units, etc.

I think the cost issue is relative, as obviously it will depend on each persons financial situation. My 2500 vampire list ran me about $570 buying from discounted online retailers (there is not a store where I currently live). But the point is taken.

[lattd]

GOT works great on the hobbit rules, as I have found out whilst working on a GOT supplement. I would be very sad to see a complete rehash of warhammer.

[Bigred]

Eldargal said:

Also when it comes to how WFB is selling it is worth noting that according to a survey of US retailers WFB has been moving up in their sales. A few years ago it wan't ont the list (top 7) now it is fourth. WFB has always been less popular in the US, too. I think this rumoured revamp is much more about 'how can we make WFB into a big seller like 40k' not 'how can we save WFB?'.

I'm thinking its probably less about entry cost, but more about "time till playable" - if that makes sense. It still the game that requires the highest number of models to assemble, and paint before you get a good feel for what the game feels like.

For example, you can paint up probably as few as 30 models and get a feel for what a 40K game really feels like with say Space Marines. You take a couple tanks, commanders, and 2-3 small units.

But to get that level of 4-5 units for WFB (even small units), the modelcount is much higher. Ogres address this somewhat and I applaud GW for sticking with the all large-based army concept.

But the flipside of this argument is sheer economics. Pretend you run GW. In general the highest expense most manufacturers run is their manpower. Humans are expensive and only get more expensive. Now you own 2 wargame systems each of which have similar ranges in size, and about 15 army books that need updating, expansion, distribution, etc...

When both systems make the same revenue, its fine.

Now lets say that one system makes double the other. So you know that every hour you tell Phil Kelly (and all the other employees) to write and work on system A, your company makes twice what it will make for that same hour of work on system B. You can't just drop system B as you need the revenue and in total it is still a large chunk of cash. But you know you have to do something. Because at some point the board is going to say - what the heck are you doing - focus on what brings the shareholders revenue most efficiently.

So what do you do? What is the best solution to continue to support the smaller gamesystem, not alienate its fans, but acknowledge that system A is where you need to be focusing your resources?

Now lets say that those ratios are more than 2 to 1, and getting worse over time...

[Denzark]

That makes sense BR. But i have always thought of WFB is where 40K gamers go when they grow up. They still want the GW package in terms of models, scenery, etc, but want soemthing different. Like sitting there going 'my fifth landraider is cool, but I want to paint something different, and my heart is telling me BFO dragon is what will hit the spot.

I haven't based this on evidence, beyond seeing dedicated WFB players in the clubs I have randomly frequented, are older than the average 40K. Dedicated i mean by having whole painted armies. But if you'll put up with GW warts and all at that age, you must be dedicated.

So GW think - I can't keep that junkie hooked on 40K at that age - so I will make WFB his gaming retirement home (before he discovers ancients/historicals.) Now and again there will be collateral damage, when the junkie sees online or instore, a new 40K army and thinks 'I never sold my old tau - 1 or 2 units and I might be competitive again'.

So I hear what you say about effort to reward ratio for GW in terms of their production/profit but I think there are other factors about WFB that wiegh in and skew your figures. Also the fact that designers are probably doing stuff off clock at home and write on races they are into - they are self interested to not let their WFB work they do for love, interrupt with the cold hard cash cow of 40K...

Just some random musings, hey?

[eldargal]

Now lets say that those ratios are more than 2 to 1, and getting worse over time...

But that's the thing, as far as we can tell the opposite is happening, WFB is selling more, at least in the US and it has always been more popular in Britain and Europe.

[pgarfunkle]

I certainly hope that the system doesn't do away with individual army books, I started playing warhammer when 8th was released with a lizard army and have started wood elves recently and don't want to see these rolled up into other armies.

[Bigred]

Eldargal said:

But that's the thing, as far as we can tell the opposite is happening, WFB is selling more, at least in the US and it has always been more popular in Britain and Europe.

We have heard the opposite. That while there are some small regional variances for one system or the other, overall, GW has been unable to "turn it around" and the ratios are only accelerating against WFB.

[Wildeybeast]

So what do you do? What is the best solution to continue to support the smaller gamesystem, not alienate its fans, but acknowledge that system A is where you need to be focusing your resources?

See, I agree with this logic, but that doesn't lead to compendiums. In fact, quite the opposite. Compendiums would alienate your existing player base. They wouldn't cut down on the production time, since you need to have 4 armies ready to go before you release the book (GW having learned the hard way of what comes from making people wait years for the models in their book) unless you slash the number of new releases, which costs you money. You would also need to drastically reduce the page space vs the current books as there is no way people will pay 4 times the cost of a current book for three armies they don't want, which costs you yet more money.

I think where this line thought leads us is the direction they are already heading. You smarten up your production. You make sure you have an army which is already all plastic so you can simply put a bit of polish on the book, tweak it for the current edition and release 4-6 new units. That makes the 'one book every other month' system feasible, keeping your production costs down and your sales volume high, not to mention allowing for a new rule set every 2-3 years. You can release a few 'wow' models that generate plenty of demand and sell at high price and the quick turnover of books stops the 'player leakage' to other systems. If I were them, I'd leave every army in this state by the end of 8th (which requires more work with some than others), but it leaves them in an excellent position to make a healthy profit on 9th.