|
Terrible Opinions posted:Again this is anecdotal but for most women who make that sort of request it isn't because of pop culture horror stories about a specific hobby. Usually it's due to unpleasant experiences they have personally had in male dominated hobbies/environments. Yeah, I've been navigating the hobby world for years and I will still tend to grab a friend or two or make sure of a safe space before going into a new hobby environment. There's also stuff that isn't quite at the horror story level, but more like, a new player comes in and does stuff that is completely not within the system's expectations--like one friend of mine was confronted with a goblin camp, and had the non-weapon proficiency 'fire-building' on her sheet. To her, this was a match made in heaven--she tried to use it to set fire to the camp. Some members of the hobby would react to such a 'failure' to understand the rules with derision, especially if the player was female, say. It's even worse if the female player wants to spend some time on her wardrobe to look less like a scruffy murderhobo or otherwise doing anything stereotypically feminine.
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Today I was checking out at Wal-Mart and saw that the D&D 5E starter set or whatever was on sale right up there with the Magic cards. Didn't expect to see that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Company want money. Sure, but not every attempt to do so is equally sensible. It's cool if your business plan involves regularly burning bridges so long as it also accounts for regularly building new ones (like, say, Magic). At one point this was Games Workshop's MO...hook'em young as they pass by a 40K diorama of chainsaw warriors versus space bugs, get mom and dad to pay a few hundred bucks for Little Timmy's army, and then when Little Timmy gets older and sticks all his stuff in the attic to gather dust move on to the next batch of young, wide-eyed customers. The thing is that GW has been steadily raising the prices on all their stuff to the point where it's questionable whether they can as easily hook the Little Timmies of the world on a regular basis, and yet they're still happy to keep burning those bridges behind them. Age of Sigmar is explicitly GW's attempt to make a big push into the casual gamer market, but the starter set alone is $125 which is way more expensive than most casual gamer targeted fare out there and still has the barrier to entry of having to assemble and paint all your stuff prior to playing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Serf posted:Today I was checking out at Wal-Mart and saw that the D&D 5E starter set or whatever was on sale right up there with the Magic cards. Didn't expect to see that. This happened in 4e, too. I believe that the MtG distributors who rent bigboxstore checkout space have a deal with WotC. Target and Walmart aren't actually stocking D&D - it's space sublet to the card vendor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
Yeah, last time I was in a Wal-Mart I saw this weird little "nerdy stuff" space near the checkouts- there have always been Magic and other CCG products there, but they had Clix and other gaming stuff, can't recall if there was any D&D.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Any good summaries of this Age of Sigmar poo poo show?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 12:09
|
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:Any good summaries of this Age of Sigmar poo poo show? Sigmar ran away to Valhalla and made Ground Marines. Slaanesh may have died. Orcs are now orruks. Goblins are now grots. Ogres are now ogors. Elves are aelfs, dwarves are duardin, lizardmen are seraphon, skeletons are deathrattles. Khorne's Goretide includes a Bloodstoker and a Bloodsecrator. The rules are tiny, broken beyond belief, and lacking in any sort of points or balancing system. You get bonuses for pretending to ride horses, having models talk back to you, dancing, and shouting. A legal army can consist of a single building, which automatically wins the game if your opponent deploys two or more models. It is possible for two models in direct base contact to be out of melee range of one another. GW took down the space marine statue in front of their HQ and stashed it under the stairs, replacing it with a giant golden Stormcast Eternal. That's what the ground marines are called. For more information, see the Death Pool thread. If a post seems like a joke, it's probably true. Edit: This post is not a joke and everything in it is true. 90s Cringe Rock fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Jul 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 12:29
|
|
|
chrisoya posted:dwarves are duardin Steamhead Duradin. Do we know what they're calling the flame dwarves? Pyrehead Duradins? Edit: poo poo, i thought this was the Warhammer thread. Durr. But yeah, the setting of Warhammer fantasy was gutted to give fantasy Spess Mehrines and the game systems were gutted to make it "more accessible" and to "lower the cost of entry", neither of which actually ended up being the case unless you like to play your miniature games with a miniature on each side. Singular. Cynic Jester fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Jul 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 12:42
|
|
|
I feel like all these new names for stuff are missing a TM at the end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:I feel like all these new names for stuff are missing a TM at the end. It's all a response to them not being allowed to trademark "space marines," so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:I feel like all these new names for stuff are missing a TM at the end. It is pretty much the only reason the names were changed. The best one is skeletons. They're now Deathrattlers. Of course, nobody making counterfeit GW models actually used their trademarked names to describe them in any case, so I'm not sure what this'll do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
chrisoya posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 13:26
|
|
|
Ranges are measured from the model, so it's possible for two models to be in base to base contact and yet not be within 1/2" to complete a charge, or within 1" for unit coherency. It's also possible that a figure with an extended pike won't have the movement to spin180°.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 13:35
|
|
|
Can someone explain the whole "win the battle with only a single building in your army" thing because while I've heard a variety of awful things about AoS, that one is new to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:Can someone explain the whole "win the battle with only a single building in your army" thing because while I've heard a variety of awful things about AoS, that one is new to me. You are not able to damage buildings or scenery. However, it still counts as a model that you can play. One of the rules in AoS is that if your opponent places down 33% more models than you, you can declare a sudden death victory condition. One of these victory conditions is something like surviving for <x> amount of turns. Since buildings and scenery can't be damaged or destroyed, the opponent has no way to destroy your model so you win.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:Can someone explain the whole "win the battle with only a single building in your army" thing because while I've heard a variety of awful things about AoS, that one is new to me. Buildings are described as models in the Warscroll that details their rules. The rules themselves only reference models and as there are no army building restrictions, you can plop down a building and say you're done deploying models. If your opponent then deploys 2 or more models, you get to choose a sudden death rule and pick the one where you just have to have a model on the table at the end of the game to win. No units or abilities interact with buildings in such a way as to be able to remove it. Edit: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Buildings are described as models in the Warscroll that details their rules. The rules themselves only reference models and as there are no army building restrictions, you can plop down a building and say you're done deploying models. If your opponent then deploys 2 or more models, you get to choose a sudden death rule and pick the one where you just have to have a model on the table at the end of the game to win. No units or abilities interact with buildings in such a way as to be able to remove it. Your explanation is better, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Buildings are described as models in the Warscroll that details their rules. The rules themselves only reference models and as there are no army building restrictions, you can plop down a building and say you're done deploying models. If your opponent then deploys 2 or more models, you get to choose a sudden death rule and pick the one where you just have to have a model on the table at the end of the game to win. No units or abilities interact with buildings in such a way as to be able to remove it.  Did they not playtest this or what? Actually I'm starting to thing that his may be a deliberate troll
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:
They very probably didn't. There's a rule in the game that no model can be more than 1" away from another model in its unit. The combat rules mandate that you move models up to 3" towards the enemy each turn, which can break this coherency rule. Models out of coherency must "reform" into their unit, but the rules don't explain what "reform" means and gives no other penalty. So as written, it's impossible to stay within the restrictions you have to stay in, but it's okay because no one knows what happens if you break them. To top it off, the coherency rule being so restrictive means that every single promotional shot of armies "in action" is breaking the coherency rule. And I don't blame them, because I've seen AoS played with coherency and it's just a giant messy pile. Like, the rules of the game legitimately make it look ugly to see played. Seeing as how armies being played on tables is a huge draw for new players (see: X-wing and every single model being pre-painted so every single battle looks good to anyone watching,) that's kind of an issue!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:Did they not playtest this or what? Actually I'm starting to thing that his may be a deliberate troll They do internal-only testing, they're petrified of leaks and obsessively control their messaging. Given how much they're investing in AoS (replacing the space marine statue and aquilla!) the corporate culture almost certainly didn't want to hear that it's dogshit, start over people are going to hate this. This is somebody's baby, and it's amazing and awful at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:
It's hard to believe it's not some kind of joke, but they've gone to a lot of effort to push this game. They replaced the giant statue in front of their building; they're pressuring stores to buy high volumes of this overpriced horseshit. The refrain when it comes to the quality of their rules is that it's "beer & pretzels fun." Don't take your huge $$$$purchase so seriously! Ignore the fact that, however poorly, they used to actually give the appearance of attempting to balance things and support competitive tournaments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
quote:Warhams stuff How's GW handling the fan reaction?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:...wow. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Who knows? GW has ignored all online feedback (and 99% of customer and FLGS feedback) since the early 2000s at the latest after a line writer got mad at the Orc playerbase for not doing as he said during the Storm of Chaos event. Deleted their forums, maintain no Facebook or Twitter, close comments on their (unsearchable and unlisted) Youtube channel, etc. Same writer who wrote the Dark Eldar punking the Orcs in the End Times, in fact. So I guess that counts as handling the fan reaction.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Games Workshop still doesn't really believe that the internet and computers are more than a fad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:Games Workshop still doesn't really believe that the internet and computers are more than a fad. It can't be stressed enough that GW still thinks they're the biggest, nay only game in town, and that it's still the 90's in terms of how they can do business. They're an incredibly insular company that does no market research, and does not advertise their business, and does not listen to their fans in any capacity whatsoever. This whole Age of Sigmar nonsense is peak GW in terms of not knowing their intended audience.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
So there's like zero chance that there's some value to be had from this massive change to Warhammer and we're all just too dumb and/or uptight to see its wisdom?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:So there's like zero chance that there's some value to be had from this massive change to Warhammer and we're all just too dumb and/or uptight to see its wisdom? It might open up some other company to make the next Big Fantasy Wargame and take the top industry slot?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:So there's like zero chance that there's some value to be had from this massive change to Warhammer and we're all just too dumb and/or uptight to see its wisdom? I'm sorry, but you have to phrase your question in the form of riding an imaginary horse while insulting your opponent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:So there's like zero chance that there's some value to be had from this massive change to Warhammer and we're all just too dumb and/or uptight to see its wisdom? If AoS takes off, Fantasy as we knew it is dead. If it flops, Fantasy as we knew it is dead. It's a zero-sum game for long-time WHFB players, because the game and world they liked is gone and replaced with not-40k, complete with not-marines and their not-emperor. There's no longevity with the rules either, because unless they squat all the other existing factions and start anew, all the rules for existing models are out there; there's no room to bring out army/faction books, and the rules are so garbage that they'd have to apply a massive amount of fixes and rewrites to make it even halfway enjoyable. It's astounding how all-in GW is going on a game that looks like it had the bare minimum amount of effort put into it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:So there's like zero chance that there's some value to be had from this massive change to Warhammer and we're all just too dumb and/or uptight to see its wisdom? I'll answer your question with another question: Are you Mantic Games? (Y/N) e: I've been able to pick up a ton of cheap figures due to ragequitters, so it's good for me at least.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:It might open up some other company to make the next Big Fantasy Wargame and take the top industry slot? Who are GW's main rivals (that it apparently refuses to aknowledge, if I am understanding this correctly) for the top dog position? I know of Warmahordes/machine, but can it seriously take up the number one spot if GW flops?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Mantic with Kings of War is also out there. 'Top spot' would be a diminished concept if GW loses it though, Warmahordes is too different a game from Warhammer Fantasy to pick up those players and Kings of War is probably too new and won't have enough recognition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
As much as I love them, Mantic is still a smaller player in wargaming-at-large. They don't really have much penetration in the US, BUT they're currently the biggest (only) producer of ranked mass-combat fantasy game. And it's a great game, so it'll hopefully flourish with the latest influx of betrayed GW fans. FFG and Privateer Press are eating GW's lunch in most regards. FFG stuff has a minimal barrier to entry, and WMH has been a magnet for people who want a more full-hobby experience (building / painting models.) Interestingly, both X-Wing and WMH are supported by a TON of other product set in their respective same universes. Both have an fully fleshed-out RPG systems, WMH has a deckbuilder, and X-Wing has a sister game about fleet battles. WMH has a bi-monthly magazine and a fiction imprint, and while FFG doesn't produce Star Wars fiction it's not like there's a shortage of it. Age of Sigmar - doesn't have any of that. There's really nothing for it to gain traction with new people except for this one boxed set and a bunch of disappointing PDFs. The grand story is that "these immortal assholes don't like those immortal assholes."
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
It's worth segmenting the market to understand GW's position. Although they're obviously an international company, the UK represents their largest and most important market, and they still dominate it, largely due to their retail presence. In the US, Games Workshop hobby stores are greatly outnumbered by local independent game stores. This creates opportunity for other games to thrive, even in a "second place" market position. So for example, Warmachine/Hordes could be introduced and sold even while Warhammer was doing well. In the UK, Games Workshop stores still greatly outnumber independent game stores. There's a GW on the high street of most cities and large towns in the country. So most tabletop wargame hobbyists in that country are only exposed to other options in the rarer indy game stores (most of which are in the towns and villages where there's no GW - they stock GW products for the most part too), or online. So what will happen to GW as a result of Age of Sigmar? Well, they're certainly not going to go out of business. The company has no debt whatsoever: a very rare attribute for a publicly-traded company! In fact over the last ten or twenty years they've had a near-pathological aversion to borrowing. The company pays a dividend! So if revenues drop precipitously, they are not in danger of sudden insolvency like most struggling companies. Instead, GW can choose to withdraw from its least-profitable markets: most likely we'd see this first in Australia and New Zealand, but they can also close retail outlets in the US, Europe, and Asia to cut costs. They can also cut product lines, and I think Age of Sigmar should be seen in that context as well. It's not just a simplifying of the rules. While they've released "warscrolls" for all of the models they currently sell for Warhammer Fantasy 8th edition, now that they have a new game, they can gradually release new kits specifically for it, while gradually allowing the 8th edition stuff to sell out of existing stock and quietly disappear. In this way, GW cuts a product line that it has been selling since the 1980s, reducing costs along the way. If AoS is as successful as they appear to be hoping, then it turns the company's downward momentum around; if it's not, then they shrink to maintain profitability. If AoS fails miserably, they sell out the 8th edition stock, make no more new models for the game, and cut the cost of supporting Fantasy completely. They may look bad to the customers and fans, but as a public company you've got to recognize that their investors don't give a poo poo. 70% of the company is owned by a small number of big stockholders: Mostly insiders and institutional investors (think mutual funds). Those guys don't care if Warhammer Fantasy is good or bad, they care whether their tiny stake in a small-cap toy company will or will not continue to pay regular dividends. This Age of Sigmar gambit is probably not the best way GW could have gone, in terms of generating revenue - I think 8th edition Fantasy, as flawed as it is, would not have taken all that much effort to fix, and I think a change in army support strategy would not have been that difficult to implement. Doing both of those things would probably have turned the product line around... and doing some kind of Age of Sigmar-like skirmish game at the same time could certainly have provided a lower-cost entry point to the bigger more expensive game. Anyway. The point is, GW is doing OK. We'll see a financial report this month, but I don't expect to see a massive drop in revenues. Probably revenue will be flat or modestly down from six months ago. If it's down a lot, the report will probably emphasize that there's a new product line and project earnings based on the idea it'll sell well; otherwise, it'll be business as usual. Either way, GW remains a positive cash-flow zero-debt small-cap toy company that isn't even close to insolvency or bankruptcy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Yeah. It's definitely worth remembering that just because it's rank bullshit doesn't mean Age of Sigmar is a guaranteed failure. Plenty of awful products skate or even thrive for one reason or another. It's only been out a week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Part of me wonders if someone at GW actually did a half-assed market research and learned that many figures never see play. So from that perspective, money spent developing a game is almost entirely worthless. The only rules that matter (from a business angle) are the force organization charts, because they tell customers how many figures they can buy. (Which, coincidentally, all say "any number of models" now...) \ 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
GW has the most stockholm fans in the industry by far. I don't think there's any game who treats their fans with as much spite and scorn and still rakes in the big bucks. EDIT: I'm curious, what did orcs do that enraged the line writer so much? ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Jul 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
They were stuck on the side of Chaos in a battle, despite having no reason to be allied with anyone, so they threw their matches, causing Chaos, who was supposed to win, to lose. At least until GW decided to ignore the numbers and have Chaos win anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2015 22:34
|
|
