Subscribe Us

header ads

The Fate of Warhammer Fantasy


There are many ideas around Warhammer Fantasy that have a lot of people worked up, which I believe in the end will be minor issues, like bases (most likely you will be able to use both), skirmish level games (a good idea in my books), and being able to use existing armies. I think in the end, GW will come back to any army that is popular, after all money talks, and well...... lack of it makes a game go away.


Here is Hastings discussing just those ideas and concepts, and where the game could be going. Please remember that most of these topics are still rumors, but Hastings has for years been very much on top of what is going on.

via 75hastings69 on Warseer
You know I'm not actually sure it is that depressing, as it is WFB doesn't sell well enough to be supported in its current format, that much is proven by the need to change it, so the options are, they keep WFB as is and run it into the ground and it dies, every army is squatted as well as future support/releases etc.

OR we change it in the chance of keeping it alive, even if it's not how people recognise it now, it might work, it might be great, but it buys WFB time, time to turn itself around, perhaps start a new fan base, perhaps grow into something better, but it's a chance. So what if army X or Y doesn't get new models for a while, they might do in the future if things work out. I'm not sure how WFB will pan out, I'm really not, but I truly don't believe it's as bad as everyone thinks.

I'll be honest and tell you I know VERY little about new WFB, but what I've heard is that you'll still be able to play massed battles, you'll also be able to play skirmish level games, you'll still be able to use your existing models, the basing probably wont matter that much, you'll also get a load of new models, and probably a bunch of other stuff too, compared to the DEATH of WFB I think it's the best option.

Post a Comment

115 Comments

  1. So basically confirmed. Warhammer fantasy with lord of the rings rules. Sounds like win to me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not quite sure it's confirmed. ;) however I agree. I'm not buying currently as I want to see where it goes but honestly I'm more excited than worried.

      Delete
    2. WAR of the Ring or just the Skirmish game? Because if it's skirmish I'm out.

      I love my big units all ranked up and looking cool.

      Delete
    3. well they might have the rules for both, big games use trays and small games use skirmish rules..

      Delete
    4. Lotr did so not well. But at least that had a great IP behind it. I can see WFB going really bad if true

      Delete
    5. LotR did AMAZING for 3.5 years, and set GW up with the finances to develop the cad and production technology they have now. Warhammer Fantasy has a long-standing history in the genre, and with that (much better) rules set from lotr (or similar), it would be better than the last 5 editions combined.

      @McBlobbicus: It will have options for both. With that being the case, are you still out if skirmish is an option? If so, I'll give you $10 for your obviously worthless army.

      Delete
    6. I love the End Times with 8th Ed rules. If 9th ed is a bust or something I don't like, I'll continue to play End Times 8th I can choose which edition I play. It's not like tournament play is that big a factor for any of GW products. I still have the original Mordheim rules also. If I want to play GW fantasy skirmish. I can use that also. what got me into the Warhammer hobby was the ability to field huge massive armies. That's what liked about it and always have. The art work depicts huge armies in grand battles. How can a skirmish game live up to that art or idea?

      Delete
    7. LotR is an IP that people either want to play or not. For me the game put me off BECAUSE it was LotR a world I have very little interest in.
      Didn't matter if the games were good or not.

      Delete
    8. @Brian W: Skirmish game is a way to attract new players. One of the reasons of why I'm not collecting any WFB models is how many I would have to buy and paint at once to have any playable army. If skirmish is an entertaining option, new players can start small and just grow the army.
      If a game can't attract new players, it will die.

      Delete
    9. Skirmish games take less time and need less painted models they are a great way to keep hobby enthusiasm going between the bigger games.
      Much better than having a horde of 40 models on your painting desk staring at you accusingly for one unit. Being able to paint up 5 guys and play then add to that with another 5 ect ect. before you know it you have a painted army you can use in bigger games.
      Having the option to play skirmish games like mordheim but compatable with my army books will be what gets me and our group playing again.

      Delete
    10. Guys - Hastings is saying you can play both skirmish AND large format. Why is that so hard to grasp? You don't have to make a choice. Skirmish size may just be fun, and if you have a large army the you're already set up for that. Basically, what we're being told is that WFB has to change or die. Conspiracy theories aside, that seems to marry with what we have heard about the sales figures for WFB for years. Either this works or we'll have GW just pumping out 40k. I am a 40k fan, but I want WFB to work and sell and flourish, and this may even be the time to re-enter fantasy for me. Hopefully unsupported armies will be more of an hiatus thing as Hastings is suggesting.

      Delete
    11. Lotr didn't so well beacuse they never had new models.

      Delete
    12. If WHFB can be played at the Skirmish and Larger Battle levels that would be a Huge Win Win in my book. If round bases where optional then I wouldn't have an issue at all. If all the current armies will still be supported in some form after 9th is released then cool, bring it on.

      But the way the rumors where coming out this was not how it was worded and that freaked all of us WHFB players becuase of our large investment we have put into our armies in both terms of money and time.

      Attracting new players is what it is all about, but burning the current player base would be bad for both the old and new players. So when I saw an earlier thread here where the guy Natfka quoted saying that GW doesn't care about its old player base becuase they don't spend the money I was confused and mad. We have spent LOTS of money building our armies and take pride when we have them fully painted and ready for an event. We just don't army jump from one army to the next everytime a new book comes out like 40K players do.

      Infact here in the Pacific NW at events that have 40K and WHFB running there are more WHFB players at those events than 40K players. But the WHFB players tend to be more laid back and less concerned with bringing the latest hot item. That is why there is confussion about WHFB not being popular. That and GW has always thrown more of their production and releases into 40K to begin with.

      It is not just a black and white situation here. And if this where to happen to 40K the response would be the same.

      Delete
    13. Also if GW would have been giving WHFB more attention before instead of milking their cash cow at every chance they may have made WHFB more popular a LONG time ago, but They let it sit on the sideline far too long.

      They screwed up as a company by not giving their other games the proper attention and focused on 40K. Now they realized that they can not just make it on 40K alone and are scrambling to change that. (GW can't remain the biggest miniature game company on 40K alone in the direction they were going in. 40K might be popular but it has lost lots of its players to other games becuase of bad choices they have made.

      Just hope they used level heads to do it.

      Delete
    14. @Pdzikus - How do we know that changing WHFB into a skirmish game will attract new players? What if by changing the core of what WHFB is makes veteran players leave? There is much more strategy involved in WHFB maneuvering large units on the battlefield and setting up flanking maneuvers and surprise attacks. Those who have only played 40k will never understand. There's a huge difference in what WHFB is and isn't. Skirmish game is not the core of WHFB. Why did GW lose new players for both their Warhammer products? First is their desire to claim and establish their product as a collectible product. They do not believe they are game makers, but collectible miniatures producers. The problem with this mentality is that in order for your product to be considered a collectible, the product needs to increase in value for collectors to see a value in the product. The only value of GW miniatures is to those who play their games. And a small number of artists who model and paint for competition. I do not see their product ever increasing over time. Certainly not an amount to warrant the collectible name. Secondly, they have counted on the fact that they're product will be in fact the only that miniature hobbyist will desire. The increase of competition in the miniature gaming industry has caused GW to fall from the top of the industry. With games and quality miniatures from other companies, Hordes/Warmachine, Dropzone Cmdr, Infinity etc. These companies have put the emphasis on the game and also provides quality miniatures. GW still has a wonderful product and I love the miniatures and the games. However, WHFB is the he only fantasy game on the market that incorporates massed troop formations and huge fantasy armies. I say that to lose site on what sets your product apart is to lose the share of the market you currently own. The excuse that new players are turned off to WHFB because it costs too much to "buy in" is ridiculous. Like WH40k there are escalation leagues and small skirmish games that already are incorporated in the current rule set to accommodate new players. To grow your army to the size to have huge battles IS part of the hobby and is what makes the game what it is and always has been. What GW sees is that it's market share is dwindling to skirmish games like hordes/ Warmachine and to me, is trying to lure those players back. I'm afraid it's not going to work and they will yet again isolate the fans of WHFB that are left. The downfall of GWs fan base has everything to do with the ridiculous price increase and failure to listen to its fan base about the game. Recently however, I do believe that GW has made strides to listen to its gamers especially in 40k and EndTimes. However, it may be too late in some cases. I may be wrong about the direction of WHFB, but I for one do not think making the core of it a skirmish game is going to help.

      Delete
  2. Sorry to rain on the positivity parade but it's the background, lore and rich factions of WFB that got me playing. If that goes (and the rumours point to that being the case) then I'm not going to be investing any more money into the system. If other people want to get excited, that's fine, but equally, those of us who are apprehensive have every right to be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's either lose Warhammer Fantasy soon, or attempt to change it for the better, if it flops it was goig to happen anyways.

      Delete
    2. Warhammer Fantasy doesn't offer much to differentiate itself from every other fantasy world out there. Pretty much every setting has something like the border princes, something like the chaos gods, some orcs, some undead, a war between several factions of Elves. If you liked Warhammer Fantasy just the way it was, congratulations: you'll like pretty much every fantasy setting ever.

      Fantasy needs to be as unique as 40k is if it's going to be worth looking at.

      Delete
    3. Scifi is more populare than fantasy. You can see that on any con or even any Comic store.
      Nothing they can do will change that. Unless they start adding walkers & aliens to WFB!

      Delete
    4. I beg to differ. example.... World of Warcraft. Not even close

      Delete
    5. Halo, Mass Effect, Half-life, Gears of war, even call of duty.

      Delete
    6. Skyrim, Dragon Age, Zelda. Two can play this game, :)

      Delete
    7. People didn't play World of Warcraft for the story mode, rich history, etc. They played it because it had better graphics than EverQuest, and a better system (backed by Blizzard) than Guild Wars. People play video games online like that solely to exploit farming, looting, proc rules, etc. It has virtually NOTHING to do with lore, history, or a hobby attached to it.

      Oh, and Each version of Halo has outsold WoW, Dragon Age, Zelda, etc. One is viewed as "serious" and "cool" (Halo), while the other is viewed as campy and nerdy (WoW).

      That said, in the realm of miniatures gaming, SciFi is ALL THERE IS anymore. Warhammer Fantasy was it, but it was still a very generic fantasy setting. That idea is dying, and just feels like a lame ripoff of all things Tolkien whenever it's attempted.

      Warhammer Fantasy does NOT have rich history, lore, and factions. They are stale, generic, and tired. The borders hadn't changed in decades, and it had no identity.

      Warhammer Fantasy was also absolutely dying. I'm sorry for those 12 of you, like Thomas Gardiner, who wanted it to remain in a stasis bubble forever, but there was no way GW could financially pull that off. Their allegedly poor financials had nothing to do with 40k, or marketing, or business policies, and everything to do with the CH suit, and Warhammer Fantasy.

      So do you keep it going as-is and watch the game go under, potentially taking GW with it?

      Or do you take the risk to reinvent it after 25 years and see if it can't grab a spot in the market again? Either way, you're risking a flop, but only with the latter option are you potentially finding success.

      It had to happen. If Fantasy were booming and GW decided to upend it like this, then sure, be apprehensive. You have NO RIGHT to be apprehensive as-is, however, as the game would have been completely gone in less than 12 months.

      Delete
    8. I love the lore too, and it isn't going away, those stories will still exist. And ultimately this 'new' lore is still an extension of the old, otherwise they wouldn't have done a massive series of 5 big books and a bunch of novels to set it up.

      Delete
    9. LOL I can't believe Doog didn't mentiom Game of Thrones... I can only imagine beacause it would make his point a non point.

      Delete
    10. I'm not seeing the sci-fi dominance over fantasy in miniature wargaming. Most of the games out there are fusion products that combine elements of both like science fantasy, steampunk or supernatural.

      I don't believe 9th edition will be that far removed from the current game. In terms of business WFB will have to shed a ton of fine cast and metal from the line in the near future and ET has been a useful story vehicle to explain the cull.

      Delete
  3. I'm optimistic. I think paring down is what WFB needs to do in order to stay focused and become a great game again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you seen the direction 40K is going? Paring down is not GW's way. I expect something similar will happen to WHFB. I just hope it doesn't become a huge clustered nightmare like 40K with so many releases no one can keep up with the changes.

      Delete
  4. It pretty clear to me that GW dosen't know how to solve problems via the fan base. they act like they are selling light bulbs or something.

    Florescent are selling better then the incandescents, so we will sell incandescents only in the watts that sell the most. Fans of the 65 watt and 85 watt, will buy the 75 watts. Having any option of incandescents in this day and age of florescents is good thing.

    GW as a business, so I expect this kind of non-sense logic. Doesn't mean I like it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even lightbulb company are not that stupid to put all their eggs in 1 basket.

      Delete
  5. Have a few thousand dollars invested in existing armies? That's ok, stand over here with Sisters of Battle players. We're not "squatting" your army per se, we're just not going to support it any longer.

    Yes, that's a much better option than just fixing the rules and creating a skirmish option for existing armies...maybe even creating fairly cost-efficient box-sets to help new players get into the game...nah, that makes too much sense, much better to throw everything out and start over!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 8th ed fantasy is the best edition so far with regards to core mechanics, fix some op spells and tidy up how steadfast works maybe but it's a long way from unplayable.
      Still the reason I play 40k over fantasy is simple, 40k background is a lot more unique and interesting so I find the races capture my imagination better and model count, Fantasy has been pushing up the model count for ages and even though I have a 4k chaos army I just can get excited about painting regiments.

      Both 40k and Fantasy would benefit from a skirmish game that is compatible with the main game and all source book from them.
      Then you just need setting books for the skirmish, want your hero from Mordhime to lead a unit on the battle field go ahead
      all equipment and stat line valid, want your necromunda gang to join with a guard patrol in a 500pt 40k game feel free.

      Delete
    2. Mcdoogle what professional sports cut teams, sometimes they move cities and change names but i don't think any pro sport team has been "cut" in a long long time. Sorry but once again your a idiot. Teams that perform badly change players and coaches but the team and the game remain the same. Its not like the NEw York Giants are going to start playing baseball because they had a bad season.

      Delete
    3. Kill team is the half arsed retarded ginger child of what I'm suggesting.
      A good start but there is so much more potential
      If it was me I would have a few extra components to the skirmish that are assumed to be irrelevant on the greater scale of a full battle, such as a wound systems from Necromunda and Mordhime, and individual activation of models is another one that could be done in the skirmish scale. Most of the model progression would be down to skills that don't come into play in the larger scale wars and you get the feel of the specialist games but the crossover potential meaning the upkeep of support is minor as long as they talk about the skirmish games in WD, have starter sets and unlike the old specialist games allow Blanchitsu to name the setting the models are made for.

      Supplements can then add more rules and setting info such as a necromunda one with an economy and gangs.
      Model support could take the multi kit to a new level, Mechanicum and Cawdor gangs are basically head swaps with a few iconography changes for instance, pit fighters/skitarii, Skavies/chaos zombies
      By doing that they can support a specialist setting with kits that will also sell to the wider 40k community.

      Delete
    4. Actually Dan that's a great idea!

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. I know, and If they had actually had any interviews for the CEO position it was one of my main pitches going forward to show how you can keep the big model count stuff yet use smaller quicker games to get new players excited and help old players keep their enthusiasm.

      Delete
  6. The problem isn't WFB, its the trade policy of GW.
    WFB need more models than W40k, and with the increase of the price, many players stopped to play, and for the new player, the price to start is very high.
    Since 2000, the price of the plastic box went from 15€/16 models to 33€/10 models.

    GW is wrong, and it's his fault if WFB has not been sold.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Might I suggest you take your own advise? The inflation rate doesn't match, nor does it correlate to other similar luxury items. GW is very expensive, and just saying "inflation" is asinine.

      Delete
    2. My problem with Fantasy is that everyone plays at very high point levels which means you need to buy gazillion models(feels like Tyranid collecting tbh) which is also not that friendly on the wallet. In fact, even if the Fantasy line was cheaper it wouldn't change much because you still had to buy the boxes in bulk.

      I also wouldn't be surprised if that was an issue. If the model prices were lowered even more I fear it would just mean even higher point levels to be honest. The points of armies often feel like an arm race towards the median point of affordability.

      Delete
    3. @Andrew Webb

      Haha kid nice try, YOU should read about it, go one an show me how plastic price doubled for ikea plastic chairs, plastic mug ect.... there is no such things as 300% inflation in the plastic industry. It's GW marketing, that's all.

      Delete
    4. Alright McDoogle, you make a good point, but keep it clean. No reason to start throwing insults (goes for everybody). We are talking about plastic soldiers here, not something fundamental.

      Delete
    5. what people fail (Mcdoofus) to understand that they may have released cheaper kits, most people would have bought at max x2 of them. then you must also consider the fact that rules expanded way out of control for both whfb/40k, this in itself caused many a non business savvy gamer to take their ignorant money elsewhere. if you release kits people NEED and are cheaper then they WILL SELL. since they only released cheaper kits most people would RARELY need if ever, then of course they lost money. it's obvious. since other companies and games offer more it seems those ignorant of business took theirs elsewhere. that is the fact.

      Delete
    6. also another thing is luxury goods companies like other companies rely on consumers to buy into their product. the consumer base market for GW product is low. you do the math.

      Delete
    7. "Even when GW lowered prices by releasing things like Dark Elves Cold One Riders for $22" which goes to show how bad GW's understanding of the price issue is, Selling odd models for an army at a good price is never going to help.

      It's the core of the army that is where the start up cost is and when the rules push for bigger units (steadfast is a prime example) then not only do you need to buy those 2 to 3 30 man units but assemble and paint them. For a lot of people that task alone is enough to put them off especially if on the face of it the background isn't getting you excited it no surprise that Warhammer isn't doing as well as they would like.

      Selling a unit that I will only ever need 1 box of maybe 2 at a good price completely fails to address any of these issues and is simply bound to failure and only goes to prove that GW have the business sence of a dead louse propped up by a brilliant product. GW has never been successfully because of it's business capabilities but despite of them.

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  7. Bottom line.. WHFB is over 20years old.. it has weathered many storms and is in its 8th incarnation. Fantasy wargaming isn't going anywhere! As long as people still want to fight miniature elves against miniature dragons alongside dwarves and knights on horseback this game will retain a foothold in the tabletop gaming hobby. Yes diminished sales due to several apparent and not so obvious factors sone bew life had to be injected into WHFB.. BUT ITS NOT GOING ANYWHERE! Its not going to be run into the ground or have armies "squatted" Just the amount of revenue generated from the first EndTimes "Nagash chapter" alone is enough to keep it alive for another 20 years.. so that's that. Expect some changes in the future as any progressive "gaming system" is sure to experience, some changes may seem more dramatic than others but the basic foundations of the game that remain as true today as they were 20 years ago will remain largely unaltered. Fantasy wargamin' ain't goin nowheres and that's a fact

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fantasy didn't just have diminished sales...

      It was flat out losing GW money. Fantasy was completely in the red the last few years.

      Consider that the 40k Eldar release in 6th edition outsold the previous 5 Fantasy army releases combined. The End Times releases have been good, and successful, but Harlequins outsold Nagash. No joke.

      40k is a monster, while Fantasy is hindering GW's ability to milk that monster. There are only 3 possibilities remaining:

      1. It remains largely the same, and probably dies in less than 18 months.
      2. It changes, and maybe doesn't take. It dies in 2-3 years.
      3. It changes, gains some ground and attracts new players, and thrives.

      Keeping the veteran players happy will lose GW money, as evidenced by the fact that the last 3 editions have steadily lost money. That isn't worth the risk of maintaining the same old, same old.

      Refreshing the game may draw in potentially huge new crowds of players at the expense of a few old-timers (who won't quit because the new game is no good, mind you, but on stubborn, short-sighted principle). That is a risk worth taking.

      Delete
    2. I'd love to know where you got the information on Harlequin sales

      Delete
    3. large crowds? where. i mean where would these be in the real world?.....you won't find large crowds now. what with all those consumers being poor and all. their money is not worth spending on GW stuff right?

      Delete
    4. "It was flat out losing GW money. Fantasy was completely in the red the last few years."

      I'm intrigued to see you're evidence for that statement (and the other unsubstantiated claims your making here.) since GW aren't known for a full product breakdown sales figures, and they definitely don't go into that much detail on the annual accounts.

      Delete
    5. WHFB is coming back STRONG actually... I just went to a tournament last week that had a 40k tourney and a WHFB tourney. Most the WHFB armies were End Times, and we had a larger turnout than the 40k tournament (this was Ghenghis Con in Denver, CO)

      I definitely agree that adding a way to play low point games would bring in more players, but telling people the game is sinking wont. Ever seen a 750pt Warriors of Chaos army? It's laughable.

      And McDoogle, if you think trash talking WHFB is going to make your beloved 40k do better, you're dead wrong.

      I think I smell a river troll.

      Delete
  8. I just don't get where this guy gets the idea that WHFB would ever die. This isn't a new game without an established market. his entire statement sounded more dire and dramatic than the 6'oclock news. the status of fantasy is nowhere near as bad as this guy makes it sound. Its actually not in a bad spot at all.. end times has put up some inspiring numbers and while WHFB has NEVER been the cashcow 40k is, just the fact that its starting to pick up a larger market share will do nothing less than open the door for a larger % of new releases and expansions than have been seen in the past. WHFB isn't dying, its growing and will only be that much better in the future than it was 10,15....20 years ago... nuff said

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was steadily losing money. Not just shrinking, but actually costing GW more than it was making. The game can and would have died if it kept going as it had for 20+ years.

      That's what he's talking about.

      End Times sold well, but didn't change the player base any. It was a few folks happy to have some pretty books and huge showpiece models. That isn't a long-term effort, however, and the game is still largely in the red from the last 5-6 years of tanking.

      It needs an overhaul to attract and sustain a new market of players. It does NOT have an established market anymore. It did, but that was no longer making money. For the sake of the hobby, we want Fantasy to make money.

      Delete
    2. @mcdoogle Just curious, where do you get your specific financials for fantasy? Or are you just making educated guesses? No sarcasm, honest question, as I didn't think GW separated by system, much less by release.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  9. Enough cash from the first end times book to run for another 20 years? What the hell are you smoking?
    It generated so much cash, that they'll keep releasing new models and rules for all the factions? I know this is going to upset some people, but GW is a business, and if they can make 20 pence in the pound from 40k, 40 pence in the pound from 30k, or they can spend twenty years making minor losses in WHFB, we all know what's going to happen. MOAR SPACE MARINES! :/ Even if they fixed the boxes to give you more models for your money, it won't suddenly turn WHFB around. It's not going to pull heaps of players out of warmachine. GW will lower the barrier to entry, in a way that pays them in-line with the returns from 40k/30k. They'll give it a go, and they don't care if they burn old players. Remember, they did it with 2nd ed and they did it again with 3rd ed.

    They will attempt to rebuild a more "active" purchasing WHFB community, or it will get put out to pasture. I personally think it's going to be hard for them to attract players, once they burn the existing WHFB community. But what I wouldn't expect, is GW to suddenly realise that it's them killing FB, and it's them pissing off customers with their contracts and prohibitions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People that quit fantasy dont Auto Start 40k.
      Nore does killing the game get people to switch.

      If you kill of a low Profit product....you are just loseing that profit...Not getting it magically on other products.

      Delete
    2. Also i don't know where you're getting your numbers but WHFB has not been a "loss" for GW... ever... if it was it wouldn't have lasted as long as it has and would have gone the way of bloodbowl or BFG... the overhead involved in keeping WHFB on the shelves %wise is about the same as you keeping your lights on. the naysayers will continue to ride their wooden ponies but WHFB is here to stay

      Delete
    3. @nightfury: You clearly are completely in the dark about the whole thing. Warhammer Fantasy steadily declined for almost a decade, and yes, was in the red in recent years. It didn't get axed because GW thought they could save it. Hence The End Times and the system overhaul.

      @seb12: It wasn't a low profit product: it was a debt incurring product in it's most recent form.

      Delete
    4. It would kinda help your position if you had some mention of how you know what you know, McD. So far it sounds like supposition coupled with educated guesswork.

      Delete
    5. @McDoogle - you can't possibly have the hardcore facts and stats to support your position that Fantasy is a loss maker. The idea is quite frankly ridiculous. The sales of Dark Elves, Wood Elves, and End Times. The sell outs. The huge investment in new models. The visible uptake in stores. Sure Fantasy could do with something new but apart from 40K selling more, which we all already accept you just don't know what you're talking about.

      Delete
    6. do i have to make a graph? i can tell you why fantasy slumped. you obviously know why it did. it did because prices went one way and players went another. basically if someone is priced out of course you won't magically gain new playerbase when you screw the long term ones over. those long term gamers are the ones that help spread the good word of our good lord and savior the "dice god" and "GW hobby" if not for them then sales plummet. if this is not evident with the daily forum articles and posts then idk what will get through. basically prices go up and those that are middle class that can't afford it, which more or less support the sales figures or sustain it, take the money elsewhere, then it's only obvious that those previously supporting the hobby won't be propping sales figures up and then they drop. do you think rich kids or people magically spring up to be consumers of a luxury good? if you do then your not living in reality/real world. if money overall is going down and luxury item is going up....the math is simple.

      Delete
    7. The reason for WFBs declines are many,
      Only providing 10 models for a unit in a game that is designed to be played with double that. Multiple options that nobody asked for to justify increased prices leading to bloated army books.
      Not remaking enough old units (some of the main factions core choices just look laughable)
      Having a system that encourages large units and then having you need to buy 2-3 boxes to use that system. There is no need to have such elaborate models for rank and file troops. It just makes everything too expensive

      Thankfully the End Times has regalvanised it a little though i do not think it is sutainable and i look forward to seeing what 9th brings. From what i have been seeing thus far i think it quite possible a Warmahordes approach could be taken at least with models and unit arrangements. On the assumption that they DO proceed with massed ranked units one can only hope they find some way of making them affordable.

      Delete
    8. i'll second mauler, every comment mcdooge ever writes is about how 40k is balanced and fantasy is 'unplayable' which tbh is absolutely laughable!

      But the main thing is he writes a comment then never replies to anyone so absolutely nobody takes anything he says seriously.
      If only he was competent enough to tick that little box that states he will be notified and then reply with a comment that actually makes sense with facts and evidence for the drivel he tries to put across.

      from an outside view, he's a tit :)

      Delete
    9. Nightfury - bullshit, for a period of time GW lost money on everything they sold. So don't tell me WHFB never lost money, or that GW never covers losses. No release, at sll, 40K or Fantasy has made enough money to justify another twenty years support in it's own right.

      Delete
    10. Sorry boys.. but i wake up evefy morning next to somebody that knows more about the numbers GW does than you could ever fathom.. and without pulling out pages you'll never see ill just point to the fact that every End Times book has sold out in less than 24 hours.. the new wood elves kits were out of stock in the first week.. there is virtually zero overhead involved in keeping WHFB alive due to the revenue 40k generates they could roll that over to fantasy and still retain a profit. You can keep making suppositions but it doesn't change the facts

      Delete
    11. ha ha ha, you wake up every morning next to someone who tells you that the End Times could fund WHFB for 20 years?

      Delete
  10. The only thing that kept me out of Fantasy was the silly looking cartoon models with the giant gorilla hands. GW never replaced the High Elf core plastics so I never got around to starting, and probably never will.

    GW should have learned a lesson from the rubbish Epic 40k titans sculpted by Tim Adcock. Horrible models kill their games. The High Elf archers and spearmen are truly horrible and are a factor with me staying away from WFB.

    The brand new End Times models are brilliant but, too little, too late, and... why the hell didn't they sculpt a new Malekith as Phoenix King and a new Tyrion as Avatar of Khaine?!? They probably lost thousands of pounds of potential sales right there. Beautiful End Times elf characters would have sold in droves. Alas...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are other armys you know?

      Delete
    2. And your point is Seb? He wanted to play pointy eared tree huggers. The models however did not appeal. And it is "armies"

      Delete
    3. I miss the old Imperial designs, much nicer than the newer blocky type. FW's work is decent though, I hope they base a Warlord on the old type with the large carapace rather than the walking tower-block.

      Delete
    4. Very difficult to charge 70 quid for a Tyrion or Malekith sadly.

      And i STILL maintain that GW plastics are not good enough to do justice to Special characters.

      Delete
  11. Lol
    Yeah...becaus the reason fantasy is not selling well is lack of round bases & to many Armys.

    Reality is, GW has nothing to offer in fantasy that competitors dont do cheaper and in some case better.
    Maybe do market research before blind changeing the core rules in order to sell the same models at the same old price?
    The vehicle nerfs in 40k didnt help to sell flyers but you sold no more Tanks. GJ!
    ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can someone banhammer Seb? It's like he is a warmawhore paid shill or Something ;)

      Delete
    2. No but i just cast hammerhand on my keyboard giving my letters +2 STR... CARE TO DENY THE WITCH... LOOKOUT SEB12!!

      Delete
    3. No more tanks? Mechanized lists is the major meta in my area. I just don't get seb.

      Delete
    4. Yeah... the competitive lists I see are all tanks as well. Tanks are weaker, but still better than walking :P

      Delete
  12. If anything they need to adjust the prices on things. I think the biggest example is the newer kits that make 2/3 units, or hell... the Forsaken. Why does "all options in box" mean "double the price" exactly?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What I mean is, you can still only really make one unit with the box as is, unless they are deathly afraid of people getting on ebay to buy more bodies to make two units. Or to sell their extra bits. Still...

      Delete
    2. I agree 100%! For the life of me, this whole infatuation with putting two units in one box and doubling the price is the dumbest thing. If I want two units, then I will buy two $25 boxes. I don't want 10 guys for $50 with extra heads and shoulders so I can hunt on eBay to buy 10 more torsos for another $30. It's ridiculous really. I get the notion behind it but from a customer perspective it really is absurd. You can't make both units without all of the bodies and it's not like GW nust sells bodies/bits do you can kitbash easily. I doubt GW really wants folks to sell/trade product so they lose on sales but who knows. I just never really understood why this 2 in 1 box was ever thought of as a good thing. It's one thing for big kits like Mortarchs where you can magnetize riders and such but hammerers vs longbeards? Just give me one unit for half the price please.

      Delete
    3. It saves the consumer money to do it this way guys - what costs more money to design, create molds for, and manufacture...6 sprues and 2 boxes for 2 units, or 4 sprues and 1 box for 2 units? And what takes up more shelf space, truck space, and warehouse space? 1 box or 2?

      The high price of models isn't because "all options are included", it's because it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to design and cast molds for models. As the quality of the miniatures and intricacy of the designs increases, and as printed products from China become more expensive (for boxes and codexes), the cost of models goes up.

      My point is your price wouldn't go down if they didn't combine units, you just wouldn't get extra bits on top of the ones you wanted, and quite honestly probably pay more since there would be more cost to recoup for each boxed set.

      Delete
    4. ^^^ What Nick Powell said. Spot on sir.

      Delete
    5. Not sure why anyone would think more options are bad. I am also with Nick.

      Delete
    6. That's all well and good, EXCEPT for where GW are inventing new units for the purposes of this dual box malarkey. Are you honestly saying you welcome the Sisters of Slaughter option when they could have crammed another 5 Witch Elves in on top of the paltry 10 you get for your 35 quid? A unit like that has a HIGH mortality rate. Its obscene the amount of money that you would need to spend to get a usable unit. I couldnt give a monkeys about masked witches with whips, id want a usable unit for a not insane price.

      Delete
    7. Allen has hit the nail on the head, once apon a time a special unit of 10 models would be enough for 1000/1500 pt games but now with blocks getting bigger the only answer is to increase the size of your own units, meaning either less variety or more points.

      Delete
  13. Something that Warhammer fantasy had that no other fantasy game I know has is massed army battles. Which is what makes Warhammer what it is. There was a game for skirmish in fantasy that GW did. It was called Mordheim. I loved the game. But it didn't get much support. How many Warhammer pieces of art do you see in a skirmish setting??? I see huge massed warfare in almost all the Warhammer and Warhammer 40k settings. Why??? Because it's warhammer!!!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Who is this guy? Is he listening in at GW HQ and able to say for a fact that this is a thing, or is he just blowing steam up everyone's butt? Because sometimes I really wonder where these rumors are based out of.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. I completely agree, rumours are rumours but aimless conjecture is simply nonsense, I live very close to the heart of GW I have three stores in my patch as well as Warhammer world I can honestly tell you WFB in NOT in as bad a state as people make out, in fact it's been doing as well if not better then 40k and one hell of a lot better then LoTR/Hobbit, It seem's to be wishful thinking that it will fail by certain groups of people (Troll campaign anyone). Round bases are not coming, Skirmish game maybe, the likely hood of "squatted" armies is nil, and End Times is a campaign as one top level GW bloke said "It's 30k for fantasy, just a time period to play in not an END in itself" I personally love WFB it's the thing that got me into the hobby and all I can say is take these rumours with a lot of salt and collect paint and game but above all have FUN!
      :)

      Delete
  15. I wonder if it would've come to this if not for 8th ed where GW tipped the power balance back into infantry, but made sure that you need to go with huge blocks of models to really get the benefits. As a result, GW made the threshold for new players to get into the game even higher. I think that's what triggered the decrease of sales.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The problem that WFB has is that the people that play it atm are the players that have been in awhile, they have their armies and have no incentive to buy new models. With WFB those dwarves you bought 20 years ago can still be used on the table top today so you never have to buy that unit again. The only way for GW to turn it around is to, essentially, bin off the older players for the risk that new players come in and spend money. It does suck I agree but if people simply arent buying the models then GW arent making any money. I have no idea if that made sense but if did in my head :D

    ReplyDelete
  17. Welcome to Warhammer 9th edition. Where the points are made up and the bases don't matter.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I agree that fantasy wasn't in that bad of shape...end times alone even was in demand supposedly... 40kers thk fantasy is weak and fantasy thinks 40k is for Lil boys who like lasers...however thru this time we have seen more transition from 40k to fantasy. 40k u can do in a back alley if u just want throw dice all day with no real strategy other than the wood elf run around and shoot.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Woah!

    For a moment there I thought I was on Whingeseer with all the butthurt and crying going on.

    Here's an idea. Why don't you just wait and see what actually happens before getting all worked up about something that probably won't happen?... Oh wait, that would require COMMON SENSE!

    Also @ McDoogle: aren't your fingers tired after all your lengthy posts basically saying the same thing while discrediting everyone else while providing no proof?

    Seriously people! Get a grip!

    End of rant. I'm having a bad day. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. thank you. no apologies required. :)

      Delete
  21. They started with WFB skirmish 30 years ago as there was a limited model range...and it was a bloody good laugh! The warband rules in Slaves to Darkness and the Lost and the Damned (and the white dwarfs) were perfect for time and money restricted geeking with a role-playing element to develop your 'army' of 20 models. That was the reason my lot moved to 40K because it was easier for pick-up-and-play games which could be fitted in between real life.
    IF they bring back WFB skirmish then i'm sure a lot of greybeards will be shuffling out of the shadows...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes! Chaos warband campaigning was awesome, picking up mutations after each game. Mad fun.

      Delete
  22. All I can add is that I posted on my company forum and asked if anyone fancied playing warammrr 40k or fantasy. 1 day later I had 7 of us starting up a fantasy club most of us buying armies from scratch. Not all doom and gloom , I can't wait for 9 .... Even more fun to be had

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should add that that was a year ago ... And we all have 3k armies now ( most of us have 2)

      Delete
  23. All those asking McDoogle (or anyone else) to reveal their sources concerning GW financials are asking the impossible. We're discussing unpublished insider information of a publicly listed company here, and nobody would be stupid enough to incriminate him/herself or his/her source within GW.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True. I should clarify my question. Do they have direct sources for GW financials, have they seen real numbers, or are they basing their statements in hearsay or deductive reasoning? I'm not asking for names here, just curious if they have numbers in hand or are using 'common sense' form their arguments

      Delete
    2. Indeed, without qualification you should take statements about the finances of gw with a pinch of salt. Sadly reading the above its not to big a logical jump to see trolling rather than facts. If gw is losing bucket loads of cash then the end times model line was a bit stupid as is developing 9. Wait till may and judge the facts rather than the rumour. Was fun to read the vitriol on the train though ;)

      Delete
    3. @Snowtrooper - this is not rocket science, non incriminating specifics would do e.g Wood Elves made a loss etc. The assertions made by McDoogle are too vague to deserve a pinch of salt - more like a ruddy ocean.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    5. What your asking is difficult to enumerate. It's not just "what is a loss", it's "what is a loss" over what period of time. If you have a 13 year old model that doesn't sell well, then it doesn't make a loss against design and molding costs, but it can cost a packet in storage/logistics costs, and intangibles (the fact that the same energy that went into making it, didn't go into making something else).

      Everything in fantasy makes a loss, from the perspective that if they spent the same resources on 40k or 30k, they would make more money. That means that some people will refer to all of fantasy as "making a loss" whereas it's really just less profitable. But that said, there are WHFB products that lose money. It's complicated by the fact that GW has significant, storage, logistics and also intangibles such as using up "retail space".

      Let's leave aside the entire WHFB side of things, and think about it only from the perspective of boxed sets. If you have five boxed sets, one of them is the hobbit, one of them is fantasy, one of them is the hellbrute, one of them is the space marine tactical box and the last is a character for 30k.

      You lose money on the hobbit boxed set. As in, the net worth to the company is probably negative. They are hard to shift, they use up retail space, logistics, design, manufacturing, advertising space (space in white dwarf and on the website has value!), everything.

      You launch a fantasy product. There's a moderate risk that it will lose money like the hobbit product. It still consumes all the above resources, and the ratio of return on investment, or if you prefer the "payoff" date is further in the future. If it consumes serious storage/logistics/store space then the payoff date may actually end up being "never".

      The hellbrute is a rare example of a really bad return, potentially lossy GW product. Few shifted, they aren't well liked in the game, the model isn't super collectable, and many people had them left over for next to nothing from the starter set. And the set is kind of pricey. The number of these kind of releases for 40k, is quite low.

      The Space Marine Tactical box is a no-brainer. If you release these with enough space between them, and enough subtle changes then you'll see people replace existing models with the new kit, or buying them for parts. The pre-orders alone on the GW site (which doesn't perform that well) pays for the costs of development and manufacture, before you get to third parties or sales through GW stores. It's pushed as a good starter kit or expansion to the starters in it's own right. There's a reason that there's also various versions of this box with their own flavour - it sells.

      Now, 30k/FW/Finecast belongs in a third category. It's much cheaper to get manufacturing going, it can be cheaper to develop for, and if they are online only/direct then the logistics/storage/etc costs are much lower. So these tend to be more profitable, despite selling less than the 40k plastic kits.

      The lines that aren't profitable or are less profitable should be well known by everyone. They are plastic kits, and they are often missing from independent stockists, or the kind of kits that they have one off, but the box is discoloured.

      Delete