• It's time once again to ferret out those murderous vampires in a new VAU - Vampires Amongst Us. A cross between Cluedo and a roleplay, sometimes gory and often hilarious! Find out more and sign-up! here.

Sception

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Sep 23, 2009
2,714
If it doesn't go over well - and I have little reason to expect it will, I absolutely expect GW to drop fantasy altogether, if the rumors of it's terrible sales (only 8% of their revenue) are accurate. There will be no going back from this, and I doubt they'll be giving the new game very long to find its feet before passing judgment.
 

Emicrania

Wight King
Mar 3, 2014
486
Gothenburg, Sweden
The reason start up costs have escalated so much is two fold.

1) As said army points values have increased and signficant numbers of units have had their points costs reduced, meaning more models in a startup army.

2) Price of figures. Without getting into an anti GW thing this is an important element in startup cost. Over the last 20 years uk figure prices from GW have increased around 300%, while inflation has only incresed around 50%. That means if you had £100 to spend on figures 20 years ago, it would now need to be £400, but through inflation is only £150. Or to put another way, relative to income it now costs 3 times as much for the same number of figres today as it did 20 years ago.

I totally agree with u, aside the fact that is more 600% increased price,rather than 300%,just check Wikipedia.

I belive the trouble are that nowadays the only reason to keep on buy GW new models is that you are an old player with a "certain idea of economics" (tryn to avoid flame and troll)

For a new player,for example VC, which is one or the most played army in whfb (warseer poll), for basically half the price you get the DOUBLE of the miniatures from Mantic. Plus the countless alternatives.

IMO,anyway, even if I HATE the fluff of ET, I looking forward for this new edition. We are in need of changes. All of us. The fluff is not enough anymore to keep people playn warhammer.

So,as long Matt Ward or any of his fucktards fanboy ain't touching the new rulebook, I still wanna give GW some credit. A
 

Emicrania

Wight King
Mar 3, 2014
486
Gothenburg, Sweden
If it doesn't go over well - and I have little reason to expect it will, I absolutely expect GW to drop fantasy altogether, if the rumors of it's terrible sales (only 8% of their revenue) are accurate. There will be no going back from this, and I doubt they'll be giving the new game very long to find its feet before passing judgment.


If that happens, which I think it doesn't (based on a personal feeling that LoTR sells much less but is still around), there is still about to come KoW 2.0, which can be a worthy alternative
 

Sception

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Sep 23, 2009
2,714
Hopefully. KoW 1.0 was... well, it was a paper thin excuse to sell cheap warhammer models, and it really didn't try to be anything more than that. If GW is going to abandon support for its existing fantasy game and player base, then there would definitely be room for a rival like KoW to shift strategies from selling models for GW's game to selling a game for GW's models.

Again, though, KoW 2.0 would need to be a much, much better game than its forbear.
 
Last edited:

GhoulKing505

Grave Guard
Mar 21, 2011
211
The new verminlords are on square bases. If end times stuff is supposed to be 9th edition compatible than why keep the square bases? I can't imagine them switching all their stock once 9th comes out. We've only seen two models on round bases. I'm calling this one as false. I'll willingly admit that I'm wrong when 9th comes out though if that is the case.
 

Emicrania

Wight King
Mar 3, 2014
486
Gothenburg, Sweden
what makes me really *UCKIN* angry is the shitty 40k looks of the new minies,i mean, when i saw the new rat ogre i was just
c3e.jpg
 

Infernal Skull

Wight King
Apr 21, 2012
442
I totally agree with u, aside the fact that is more 600% increased price,rather than 300%,just check Wikipedia.


I'm really skeptical of that 600%. Tried looking on Wikipedia, but couldn't find a breakdown of their pricing increases over the years.

dwarfbox.png

But if we look at the previous generation of regiments (early 2000s) when they were either 16 or 20 models for around $25-$30, I believe the above multi-part Dwarf kit had 16 men for, lets say $25 when it first came out.

Now the newest Dwarf box has 10 men for $50. The price per model has gone from $1.56 to $5. That's only an increase of 320% not 600%. And that's just looking at one of the more expensive infantry kits. The Skaven still have a relatively new regiment box of 20 rat men for $35, which is practically 2003 pricing!

But back to the Dwarfs– A 600% increase would mean that the 10-man regiment box (currently $50) was once available for $8.00 (.80 per model). Not out of the realm of possibility, but what are they tracking– GW prices back to the beginning of time? Are they comparing the current models to the cost of the first single-piece plastic Dwarf? Those models don't even likely compare to the size, quality, and versatility of the models now. It's like comparing the price of an iPhone to an old flip phone.

If we want to make comparisons like that, then the price of a Big Mac has gone up 1066% since its debut, so what are we really comparing here? I mean, are there internet forums where customers complain about how much Micky-Ds is screwing them and driving away business with their outrageous price increases? A THOUSAND PERCENT?!!! REALLY???!!!

Now don't get me wrong, $50 for 10 troopers is pushing it, so is $60 (poor Dark Elf players). And I count myself very fortunate to be playing two armies with some of the least expensive infantry in the game. But let's at least be realistic about how much the prices have gone up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: najo

Sanguinus

Ghoul
Nov 21, 2013
171
The inflation of model prices isn't the problem (most everything has suffered from inflation), the problem is that the living wage has barely increased with it.
---
On the round bases: note that it's only warmachines that have the round bases, while the monsters and monstrous infantry are still on square. They could be getting rules changes to not allow them to be contained inside units, or as GhoulKing said, the bases could be for show (maybe the modeller just preferred round bases for them) or a host of any other reasons.

What do you guys think?
I think many a Dark Eldar player will be proxying and converting them for use as Grotesques.

I don't know if they're entirely 40K-ish
The tubing and vials are very reminiscent of the Dark Eldar Coven models.
 

Yorga

Vampire Count
True Blood
Apr 7, 2011
1,844
If it doesn't go over well - and I have little reason to expect it will, I absolutely expect GW to drop fantasy altogether, if the rumors of it's terrible sales (only 8% of their revenue) are accurate. There will be no going back from this, and I doubt they'll be giving the new game very long to find its feet before passing judgment.


8%? Holy Hell! :o
 

Yorga

Vampire Count
True Blood
Apr 7, 2011
1,844
Fantasy has always done worse than 40K; that's not news. But if it's THAT insignificant then GW practically has nothing to lose by dropping or severely cutting back the game.


I agree. That's pathetic. I was telling my friends months ago when Nagash came out that I thought this "Ends of Times" was kind of a not so subtle joke from GW and it was going to be the end of Fantasy. o_o
 

Seneschal

Liche
True Blood
May 15, 2008
5,520
Hey I'm on my phone so I can't get the link working but over at Druchii.net they have some info from the new ET book. Apparently there are battlescrolls which allow certain armies to ignore minimum core if they take the units listed in the scrolls. Skaven have a few, empire has one, Lizzie's have one and dwarfs have one or two.
It's very 40k-esque.
 

Melle

Sir Larpsalot, champion of larpers
True Blood
Apr 7, 2012
1,141
Sweden
This is what @Seneschal talks about:

From druchii.net:
Essentially, you take a specific set of units. Those units do not count toward your allowances for your army (as in, they aren't core, special, rare, heroes or lords for your point limits, though they count against your total points). For taking those units you get a couple free special rules. Finally, you can theoretically take as many formations as you can afford, though in this case you are limited by the special characters.

In this case, one of the special rules for these formations is that if you take them you aren't forced to take 25% of your total points in core units, as it would be the case normally.

For example, let's say you take the dwarven battlescroll. Thorgrim, Ungrim, Josef, 10 Hammerers, 10 Rangers, 10 Irondrakes and 3 x 10 Slayers are 2030 pts. If you are playing at 2500, you can still take it, as you are not forced to take any core as long as this battlescroll is in your army, and you could spend the remaining 470 pts however you wanted, as long as you meet the normal percentages, barring core.

Quote:
First, all of them allow you to avoid taking any core if you take them in your army (they are effectively the core).

Skavens:
Thanquol's uprising: Thanquol & boneripper, Verminking, clanrats, stormfiends, gutter runners and giant rats, and a unit made of warlock engineers, only one of which can be upgraded to wizard or take magic items. Units in the formation close to Thanquol are unbreakable, and the warlock unit has some advantages when casting Warp Lighting.

Clawpack of Mors: Queek, Stormvermins, 2 units of clanrats, jezzails and globadiers. Units in the formation close to Queek reroll charges, and once per battle shooting units may shoot twice.

Dwarf Throng: Thorgrim, Ungrim Incarnate of fire, Bugman, Hammerers, Rangers, Irondrakes and 3 units of slayers. Slayers reroll to hit with deathblow attacks, and can reroll 1s to wound and armor saves with core units in the whole army.

Red Host: Tehenhauin, Skink Chief, Skink Cohort, Salamanders, Chameleons, 2 Bastiladons, Riperdactyls. Hatred (Skavens), arcs on bastiladons deal 3D6 instead of 2D6, the skink and the skink cohort have +1WS

Defenders of Middenheim

Defenders of Middenheim: Valten, Battle Wizard Lord, Grand Master, Knigtly order, Halberdiers with 2 crossbowmen units as detachments, free company, swordsmen. The wizard knows a new spell, valten and units close to him are unbreakable, and as long as he is alive everyone in the empire list is stubborn.
 

Wolfrahm

Ghoul
Nov 7, 2011
189
Texas
If they remove a lot of the models from the game, I'll just stick with 8th. I own way to many armies for them to not mean anything because of that. Been thru it to many times in the past with GW but not again. EoT, no prob...End of these good rules, no way! Been round and round with 40k for over 21 years now and with fantasy since 5th ed. I like 8th as well as my group. It use to be the models for me but I own soooo much now and really can't afford to anymore, sorry GW.
 

Emicrania

Wight King
Mar 3, 2014
486
Gothenburg, Sweden
I'm really skeptical of that 600%. Tried looking on Wikipedia, but couldn't find a breakdown of their pricing increases over the years.

dwarfbox.png

But if we look at the previous generation of regiments (early 2000s) when they were either 16 or 20 models for around $25-$30, I believe the above multi-part Dwarf kit had 16 men for, lets say $25 when it first came out.

Now the newest Dwarf box has 10 men for $50. The price per model has gone from $1.56 to $5. That's only an increase of 320% not 600%. And that's just looking at one of the more expensive infantry kits. The Skaven still have a relatively new regiment box of 20 rat men for $35, which is practically 2003 pricing!

But back to the Dwarfs– A 600% increase would mean that the 10-man regiment box (currently $50) was once available for $8.00 (.80 per model). Not out of the realm of possibility, but what are they tracking– GW prices back to the beginning of time? Are they comparing the current models to the cost of the first single-piece plastic Dwarf? Those models don't even likely compare to the size, quality, and versatility of the models now. It's like comparing the price of an iPhone to an old flip phone.

If we want to make comparisons like that, then the price of a Big Mac has gone up 1066% since its debut, so what are we really comparing here? I mean, are there internet forums where customers complain about how much Micky-Ds is screwing them and driving away business with their outrageous price increases? A THOUSAND PERCENT?!!! REALLY???!!!

Now don't get me wrong, $50 for 10 troopers is pushing it, so is $60 (poor Dark Elf players). And I count myself very fortunate to be playing two armies with some of the least expensive infantry in the game. But let's at least be realistic about how much the prices have gone up.



In the 25 years since the first edition of their flagship game Warhammer Fantasy Battle, the cost of some like-for-like game components have risen steeply. For example, a metal "Goblin Fanatic" miniature has increased from 40p[12] to £2.67,[13] an increase of 567.5%. In early 2008, Playthings magazine reported that retailers selling Games Workshop's products had seen a reduction in sales due to market saturation and "more importantly...the price increases."[14]


is not the first time i post this, and is not the first time someone belive i'm exagerating. This is a FACT. Love or hate for the GW , 567% price increase is a fact. End of story.
 

Dakaar

Zombie
Jan 14, 2013
49
The inflation of model prices isn't the problem (most everything has suffered from inflation), the problem is that the living wage has barely increased with it.

Its not a problem that they have increased, its how much they have increased. For every £1 give or take most things, including wages have increased (at 50%), games workshop prices have increased by £6 (300% increases are 6 times inflation) or more. Thats what has led to the current huge start up cost and is a major factor in fantasy decline. If they 'only' increased at twice the rate of inflation, even 3 times, that wouldnt be so bad, but 6 times or more is too much to be absorbed in the long term, which is what we are seeing.
 

Tiberius5000

Zombie
Jan 9, 2015
30
From what I see, nothing huge has EVER happened. I don't see it happening now. I don't think ANY armies are being taken away. IF the "6 factions" thing happens, I have a feeling it would be like this:

A United Empire [Bretonnia, and Dwarfs join the Empire. Bretonnia seems to be in a rough spot right now, so the Empire offering stability makes sense. Also Dwarfs and Empire has always been tight, at least from what I know. So I see the Empire welcoming Dwarfs in a heart beat. New Fantasy Marine faction goes here too]
Undead Scourge [obviously Tomb Kings and Vampires. Fluff will some how let Tomb Kings be all Egyptian still, keeping previous models still usable]
Forces of Chaos [Obvious again. Daemons, Warriors, Beastmen. All models can be used as per fluff]
Kingdom of Elvenkind [Dark Elves, High Elves, Wood Elves. All models are still usable, variety with armies is the key to interest. This counts for all of the armies listed, not just Elves. We will most likely see more bits in future box sets to make High/Dark/Wood Elf units. Like Shields and helmets as they are honestly the most notable things]
Forces For Hire [This is a neat one, at least to me. Orcs, Goblins, Ogres. Now, you may be thinking "OGRES? BUT WHY?!" Well, why not? Orcs will accept them due to their size, after challenging them to combat numerous times. Ogres stay due to that fact and have Goblins to eat whenever they want! I am not sure how Orcs and Goblins feel about gold or being hired muscle but I don't see why not as long as they get to fight things, no? I think this will be the new Dogs of War like army.]
Skaven [because they are cool]

Now, that leaves Lizardmen as the odd man out, but who is to say that they don't come back?

OR

It is a new game, using characters from Fantasy [as per fluff of End Times]. Which has 6 new factions to choose from with smaller games, less models, and less shelf time for units. I'll call it Bubble Battles.


I also did a quick wiki on discontinued Warhammer armies.
  • Dogs of War (Mercenaries. This army was released in 5th edition and updated online for 6th. The rules were taken down during 7th, and the army listing was deleted on the website, though many models remained listed as part of various armies and under miscellaneous until the purge of metal models in early 2014.)
  • Kislev (Units were part of the Empire in 4th/5th edition. Had a White Dwarf rules pamphlet in 6th edition that could be fielded as an allied force with the Empire. Models have since been discontinued from Games Workshop at the end of 7th edition. Kislev also had a full Warmaster Force until the discontinuation of that game.)
  • Araby (Araby was a fully playable Warmaster Force until the discontinuation of that game.)
  • Beasts of Chaos (Replaced by Beastmen during 7th edition.)
  • Hordes of Chaos (Split into Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos during 7th edition.)
  • Realm of Chaos (Split into Hordes of Chaos and Beasts of Chaos at the start of 6th edition.)
  • Undead (Split into Tomb Kings and Vampire Counts at the end of 5th edition.)
  • Slann (Discontinued at the end of 3rd edition and replaced by Lizardmen at the start of 5th edition)

 

Emicrania

Wight King
Mar 3, 2014
486
Gothenburg, Sweden
Nonetheless I understand the GW, is all an economical matter. They need to do something new. They have still the biggest customer base and still the best fluff,well before end times at least. So unite the factions ain't too bad. The bubble theory thought is repulsing. Bubblehammer is ridiculous.
Scaling down the size of the army (more powerful heroes and smaller unit) MIGHT be a solution for new players and older players.
Still it shouldn't be too hard to create a system to manage small and big army at the same time.
Round bases and skirmish is a moronic way to solve things, there are hundreds of skirmish game out there and they are all better and cheaper than GW.
I wouldn't mind play on a lesser scale,if this wouldn't destroy te possibilities of huge army (see 40k apocAlypse rules)
The most frightening scenario is, for me, a copy of the 40k in a fantasy world: ridiculous gameplay of people checking with laser (is happening in my meta) the line of sight, and brining. Everything down to deploy and roll dices for a couple of hrs, patting yourself on the back because u bought the biggest,newest,most expensive,cheesy toy in the shop.
 

Adam_Barrow

Sleepless Knight
True Blood
Dec 25, 2010
3,068
Nashville, TN
Looks like Skaven will be folded into Chaos. There's a pic of Archaon and a Verminlord about to sally forth. Can't say I'm very happy with that marriage, myself.
 

Sception

Master Necromancer
True Blood
Sep 23, 2009
2,714
Skaven aren't being folded into chaos, they're joining team chaos for the purpose of the campaign, which fits fine.

As for who's being folded into what into 9th, if rumors are to be believed (not at all saying they are, mind), then the 9e factions are:

- chaos (warriors, gors, daemons - no marauders, no ungors/centigors/etc)
- humans (not empire or brets, though, more like fantasy space marines)
- undead (skeletons, ghouls, ghosts, no TK stuff)
- skaven (separate from chaos, not significantly changed in style)
- elves (not high, dark, or wood elves, but a new more IPable elven race)
- orcs & goblins (not significantly changed in style)

TK and lizardmen just gone, Dwarves and Ogres gone with maybe one or two units rolled into humans.


9e is supposedly a skirmish game that allows units to rank up for some benefits. Supposedly stat and point costs are compatible enough to allow use of 8e army books w/ 9e rules, though they'll feel more and more obsolete as time goes on. I personally view this as unlikely however, the changes mentioned seem too extreme for previous books to be compatible, and unless the units in the new factions are dramatically more powerful there'd be no reason to play a new faction with few units and options when you could stick to your old faction with many.

Even the factions that remain largely unchanged, however, are supposedly cut down to a handful of units, monsters, and characters, so even vamp counts, skaven, or orcs are likely to see much of their armies disappear.

New units outside of that minimal core will supposedly appear frequently, but only as limited production runs with their rules in the box, gone forever once they sell out. Think like warmachine, only where the units introduced by a given expansion stop being available once the next expansion is released, and are never spoken of again.
 

Infernal Skull

Wight King
Apr 21, 2012
442
In the 25 years since the first edition of their flagship game Warhammer Fantasy Battle, the cost of some like-for-like game components have risen steeply. For example, a metal "Goblin Fanatic" miniature has increased from 40p[12] to £2.67,[13] an increase of 567.5%. In early 2008, Playthings magazine reported that retailers selling Games Workshop's products had seen a reduction in sales due to market saturation and "more importantly...the price increases."[14]


is not the first time i post this, and is not the first time someone belive i'm exagerating. This is a FACT. Love or hate for the GW , 567% price increase is a fact. End of story.

So is it just that one model type that's gone up 567%? And which versions of fanatics are being compared, over what time frame? The start of that paragraph says it's over 25 years. Are they comparing the price of a single, probably lead Goblin Fanatic in 1983 to a current, plastic Night Goblin Fanatic?

If I want to pull a single, anecdotal product over an unspecified time frame, I'd cite the Skaven Clanrat regiment:

$25 for the 2002 kit, 20 plastic models with weapon options & command
$35 for the 2014 kit, 20 plastic models with weapon options & command
That's an increase of only 40% over 12 years. Outrageous.

(And my Dwarf comparison above would only be 220%. I was counting the initial 100% as part of the increase.)

Either way, it seems like some products have gone up more then others, and comparing an overall average might be more accurate than taking one of the highest items as "how much" their prices have gone up.
 

Patrunkenphat7

Grave Guard
Mar 4, 2014
226
I'm not crazy about GW combining armies and potentially cutting some (granted I'd be pissed if I played the armies they were going to cut), but right now all I have my fingers crossed for is no round bases... That will solely determine whether or not I will be able to play this game (unless people continue playing 8th).
 

About us

  • Our community has been around for many years and pride ourselves on offering unbiased, critical discussion among people of all different backgrounds. We are working every day to make sure our community is one of the best.

Quick Navigation

User Menu