The LAF Games Workshop Discussion Thread

[Cubs]

I don't want to press the point, but the "we're special" is exactly what I mean... there are vintage Escort owners out there whose hobby is all of the things you've claimed for Warhammer Fantasy... there are probably a few more examples of the sudden end of something that was important to some group or other. 'The Escort' (WHF) is gone, how about a 'Ford Focus' instead (AoS)?

If GW just sold models, I'd probably feel the same. But they sold models, and rulesets, and hobby supplies, and very often were the venue for clubs and games. They encouraged and sold a complete wraparound product that immersed people like nothing else I can think of. Everything a devotee bought or touched or read or played with was GW.

And these poor saps have been plugging away and showing immense loyalty to the brand (and brand loyalty is something every product strives for) when other people (like me) have told them they could get better stuff cheaper elsewhere. But the reward of this loyalty is to be told that the world they have invested so much in isn't changing or evolving or transforming ... it's gone. Taken away by the people who told them to invest so much in it in the first place! And that's what I mean by those who have invested the most, feeling the most cheated.

GW has encouraged its fans to not treat their product like any other product, they have groomed them to treat it like a way of life, telling them that non-Warhammer stuff is invalid in their world ... and then nuked that world out of existence. Sure, they can can still use the models and the rules, but the universe itself that formed the whole backbone is gone (as has the official support) and they probably feel pretty stupid for remaining loyal so long.   

I feel bad for them, I'll be honest.

[Vermis]

Is it really true that the people who invested a lot of time, energy, money, and so on into Warhammer had no reason to think it would suddenly cease? I can't think of anything, really, that anyone could not reasonably expect to change over a thirty-year period. In fact, I think it's amazing - almost unbelievable, in fact - that people got to play Warhammer (albeit in different editions) for as long as they did, with really only gradual changes occurring from edition to edition.

Why the outcry?

I am genuinely puzzled.

What Beefcake and Cubs said. For years GW built up the idea of keeping up with the Joneses, especially to play in tournaments and in pickup games with relative strangers (apparently around the world, too), and also with constant shakeups and revisions making certain units more powerful than they were, or a certain army the 'winner's' choice, and so on. Older versions become 'unsupported', and 'unsupported' means 'dead'.

Believe me, it bothers me to see gamers hostage to this attitude too, and 'why don't you use another edition (or game)?' is a question I've asked plenty of times, myself. And while I've had few good answers, I've often been given the reply "because I only have the time and opportunity to play pickup games in a GW shop". That brings up more questions and suspicions, but on the face of it some people are restricted, to some extent, in where and how they play; restricted by the framework GW set up, if you like.

Speaking for myself, my earlier post - about the break not being entirely by choice - is personal experience. I was part of the group of veterans ejected from GW Belfast years ago, about the time they banned SGs in store. Some of us had no other obvious gaming venue and it did look like the end. To be honest I do like to see it as the best thing GW did for my hobby, since one of the other vets started inviting us to his home for game nights, and we started trying a lot of newer, better games. But it still leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. For people who've been pushed out by the more mercenary attitude of latter-day GW, rather than gradually moving on from early, friendly, chirpy, nudge-and-a-wink-from-Brian-Ansell-and-Rick-Priestly GW, it probably still tastes bitter.

(Yeah, I know, they were always mercenary. There are degrees, though.)

So yes, I have moved on, and would rather play any other game than touch 40K again with a barge pole etc. etc. Thing is, I still have some connection to the company and the games, or the worlds of the games. From what I see a lot of ex-GW gamers feel the same, keeping an eye on the company's goings-on. That leads to a few points:

You wonder why people thought WFB wouldn't end, but the concept and background has been pootling along for decades, and I gather the background is possibly the biggest draw of GW's two core games. You might as well wonder why Star Wars: ANH remains popular and sells merchandise. But later editions of Warhammer were like the SW prequels: waiting for the higher-ups to realise their mistake and put out a good exploration of the universe. It seemed so easy to fix if they wanted to. Maybe a pipe dream in retrospect, but there you are.
With Star Wars, we get Episode 7. Flawed, but moving in the right direction. With WFB, we had the world blown up. Fixing WFB, as a general whole, is an impossibility now. Flawed as it was, the new rules and background are puddle-deep in comparison. This is one of the main complaints I hear, that WFB's falling popularity could've been solved with judicious tweaks and less money-grubbing. As the biggest wargaming company, it seemed impossible that GW couldn't do it. Instead, they went full-bore in the other direction. It's fairly frustrating.

Okay, so, why not play older editions or different rules? Like I say, that's what I already did. Still digging into the Warhammer background with more generic rules, and buying some GW minis to do it, too. For all their faults I thought GW did some pretty good, relatively generic fantasy minis and other concepts. Problem was how much of a premium they felt they had to charge for mass-produced injection-moulded plastic - especially for building big armies. And with AoS barging onto the scene, how long are some of those older minis going to stick around? Even being forced to consider panic buying for armies you've only just started, is irritating. All because GW didn't have the interest to fix WFB or the humility to admit the price for an 8th ed army was prohibitive.

GW dangles this interesting world in front of your nose but doesn't seem to want to make it easy or rewarding to play in their sandbox. Is that a TL;DR? I think that can be a TL;DR.

Dunno what else to say. I feel there's more grist for the mill. In the meantime, if anyone wants to buy me a set of WFB books from third ed to sixth ed to peruse, I'd be much obliged.

I won't ask for 1st-2nd ed.

I'm not greedy.

[Modhail]

Part of the feeling of betrayal from a section of people seems to come from the massive bait-and-switch GW pulled in their eyes with the whole End-Times arc: Drawing gamers in with an epic story line and a break-neck rate of releases for all armies, whipping people into a gaming and buying frenzy as the storyline finally advanced in a dramatic way. Only to pull the plug on the very last day and effectively saying: everything you did and bought the last few months, all the money and time you spent is now immediately and irrevocably meaningless.
And then for the replacement product line to be, really, rather lacklustre. People felt exploited in a rather cynical way.

GW just handled it all really, really poorly from a PR/marketing standpoint. They could have drawn out the End Times arc over several years, instead of jamming it all through in a couple of months. Having people go through the End Times for a few years and stare at the inevitable for a few months before the killing stroke would have made the transition and acceptance gone much smoother that cramming a load of Ex-Machinas in a book and dropping the mic.
Or just introduce Age of Sigmar as a new game, set millennia after Chaos overruns the Old World, next to WFB as a third/fourth core game and then let WFB quietly fade away once most people had transitioned to AoS anyway would be a gentler way to do things.

[Arlequín]

I could believe the 'bait and switch' was actually more like the executive knife being wielded to avert a snafu... and that consideration for the customer wasn't even a consideration versus "how much will it cost us if we carry on against how much will it cost us if we ditch it?"... ditching it obviously won. If there was a betrayal it was that the customer wasn't even a factor in the decision.

Changes in staff, executives and all that stuff, makes continuity virtually impossible. If the guy who has the storyline in his head, that he's developed over a period of time, gets told "Don't bother coming in Monday", then those ideas and the continuity are gone. I gather the last few years of GW have been a whole series of "Don't come in Monday" for various people that were key to GW from pretty much day one. So perhaps rather than pay someone a lot of man-hours to go over all the lore, they just thought 'can it we'll start again'.

I probably have all the above wrong, I've not been in the scene (such as I could said to be 'in') for decades... but if you had a 'living' setting developed over decades, what else would make you scrap it, if not a profit issue or a complete absence of people who 'know' the storyline?

The other aspect is that long-term customers don't buy enough new product, they typically play with what they have, with the occasional new purchase. Short-term customers play for a few years and then put their stuff on e-bay, which either gets snapped-up by new players (lost sales of new product), or 'oldies' who wouldn't have bought them new in the shop anyway. New 'world' - new market and all that.

[Cubs]

The other aspect is that long-term customers don't buy enough new product, they typically play with what they have, with the occasional new purchase. Short-term customers play for a few years and then put their stuff on e-bay, which either gets snapped-up by new players (lost sales of new product), or 'oldies' who wouldn't have bought them new in the shop anyway. New 'world' - new market and all that.

This is a real issue, and one that I have sympathy with. Without changing things with new rules, new releases, new mins, the sales for WFB would plateau into a steady trickle.

But is that worse than killing it? If they can't afford to print huge batches of old rules, why not do them as a 'print on demand' thing? That's what Osprey do with with Lion Rampant and that doesn't see to be suffering!

If they can't afford to support miniatures in their stores, why not keep them as an internet sales only gig? If they can't afford to keep them in warehouses, why not do them as a 'cast on demand' thing?

It seems like rather than just leave it alone, let it stay mummified based on the work of previous generations, they couldn't help but fiddle and killed the goose that lay the golden eggs, even if those eggs were smaller than they used to be.

[Arlequín]

All of that would require a dynamic and holistic approach by the company's management; which I gather they don't have. Instead they have switchblade-wielding cost-cutters. Likewise 'if' what I hear is true, having 'cheap labour interns' doing the heavy-lifting instead of folk who have grown with the company, then their 'immersion' in the 'World of Warhammer' is going to to be akin to dipping a toe into the pool before deciding not to swim.

[grant]

It was really stunning when Warhammer died. They've already killed Lord of the Rings too.

If they sigmarize 40k, it's the end.

And they only have themselves to blame.

[Vladimir Raukov]

Just putting it out there, there's a "last chance to buy" section on their website now. Really wish they'd done that before they nixed the lizardmens.

[Redmao]

I don't think people should be threatened by the upcoming simplified version of 40K.

GW needs new blood.
Without trying to sound like an old fart, I think that today's kids want it easy. I'm not calling them lazy, but instead of using imagination games, most seem to prefer video games and smart phones where everything is already perfectly laid out for them instead of pretend games like we used to play as kids.
In that optic, GW produced simpler rules for younger players to enjoy without feeling like they are doing homework just to have a squad of plastic soldiers move behind cover. More like a board game set of rules where you only have to roll over a precise number to succeed. Knowing GW, they won't stop producing the more expansive version of 40K in favor of this.

Once kids get really into the game, they'll move to the more advanced rules which offers more army/kit options and a deeper experience. So far, it seems like there will only be a single scenario: blow up the other army which is fine when you're 8 though some of the more interested players will start developing their own missions like we used to.

[eilif]

I also think we need to remember that there is an entire class of hobbyist/gamer who solely concentrates on one hobby product: 40K or Fantasy.  While a lot of people play a number of games, run a bunch of systems, have numerous projects - there is a large crowd out there who buy one game, stick to it, and are solely invested in that game.  If your entire gaming/hobby world was Warhammer Fantasy, I can understand the anger/angst/spite etc.

I know a load of folks who owned/collected 40K and absolutely nothing else...didn't even play other games (hell, they may not have known other games existed!).  Some people base their entire hobby around attending conventions/tournaments based around their chosen game.  For those types, it would have been a pretty big deal for it to all go up in smoke.

Very much agree.  I think of it this way. If you're a gamer who likes to play weekly or more and frequently attend tournaments, there are comparatively few options available to you.  If you want to really dive into one fictional universe and you enjoy painting miniatures the field shrinks even more and you're basically left with 40k, WHFB, Warmachine and maybe a couple others if you're in a large metropolitan area.

If your taste runs to big fantasy battles then WHFB is the only game in town and it's not at all surprising that those who value a built-in gaming community have flocked for years to 40k and WHFB and been more than willing to pay a high premium for it. Almost no other game offers the same.  

I'm a multi-game kind of guy, I like simple rules and I've got a few friends who do the same.  However, I've got no problem understanding both the mindset of the person who goes all in on 40k or WHFB. Further, I definitely comprehend the frustration when that relationship is severed by a massive change in the game, squat'ing of a favorite army, or any of the other changes that cause groups of folks to abandon the game.

[Arlequín]

Once kids get really into the game, they'll move to the more advanced rules which offers more army/kit options and a deeper experience. So far, it seems like there will only be a single scenario: blow up the other army which is fine when you're 8 though some of the more interested players will start developing their own missions like we used to.

They could have done that with WFB, but look how that turned out, I suspect a two-tier system is not in their plans... If I was a 40K player I would be hoping for the best but seriously expecting the worst. 

[Elbows]

The big difference is that 40K is still selling plenty.  GW's last sales report had Warhammer Fantasy Battles selling less than their hobby products line (paints/brushes etc.).  I think some blogs stated WHFB was something like 12-13% of their overall income? (while having a GIGANTIC product line...)

If GW loses more marketshare etc. I could actually see them ditching almost everything except 40K.  You could run the company on a fully supported 40K line if you re-shuffle some other finances.

Now, I do think they're going in the right direction for introducing players to 40K.  I don't see 40K dying.  Now, will they possibly slowly start to reduce SKU numbers?  Perhaps.

[Vermis]

Just putting it out there, there's a "last chance to buy" section on their website now. Really wish they'd done that before they nixed the lizardmens.

You haven't seen the 'seraphon' part of the GW site?

In that optic, GW produced simpler rules for younger players to enjoy without feeling like they are doing homework just to have a squad of plastic soldiers move behind cover. More like a board game set of rules where you only have to roll over a precise number to succeed.

Once kids get really into the game...

That's assuming kids get into the game. For all the trumpeting that GW was shedding old grognards who were killing WFB by not buying anything, AoS didn't seem to draw a swarm of paying children in to replace them.

I'd also say that GW''s core two were already pretty kid-centric, anyway! Numbers in maths homework might not inspire them, but numbers in points list, listbuilding, and mathammering seemed to be the main part of the games, and one of the favourite parts. I'd say that the things about the WFB rules that turned players off were GW messing about with those numbers: imbalanced points costs and rules churn; and some of the randomised, arguably* more tactical elements introduced to 8th ed - like the maligned random charge range - things that couldn't be overcome by fiddling with the strategic listbuilding phase.

*Not that I think it was a particularly good way to make the game more tactical. If that was their intent.

GW's last sales report had Warhammer Fantasy Battles selling less than their hobby products line (paints/brushes etc.).

I don't disagree that WFB was selling badly, but I thought GW's sales reports didn't go into that much detail?

[grant]

The big difference is that 40K is still selling plenty.  GW's last sales report had Warhammer Fantasy Battles selling less than their hobby products line (paints/brushes etc.).  I think some blogs stated WHFB was something like 12-13% of their overall income? (while having a GIGANTIC product line...)

If GW loses more marketshare etc. I could actually see them ditching almost everything except 40K.  You could run the company on a fully supported 40K line if you re-shuffle some other finances.

Now, I do think they're going in the right direction for introducing players to 40K.  I don't see 40K dying.  Now, will they possibly slowly start to reduce SKU numbers?  Perhaps.

I could see them killing everything entirely except 40k. That would make so much more sense than what they are doing now.

[beefcake]

I could see them killing everything entirely except 40kSpace marines. That would make so much more sense than what they are doing now.

Just revised what you said there
Just regress to Horus herey, nothing else.