Games Workshop Pricing – Stepping Back From the Ledge

money-rolls

Don’t look now, but GW’s new Adeptus Mechanicus range is a step in the right direction – for pricing!

It took some hindsight to see all the kits lined up, but take a look at some of these prices, then consider them in context of the overall size, complexity and number of models included in these kits:

 

60030116001_CodexSkitarii01

 

Skitarii Rangers/Vanguard (10 Models) $39

Sicarian Infiltrators/Ruststalkers (5 models) $46 ~these guys are on 40mm bases

Sydonian Dragoon/Balistarius $49

Onager Dunecrawler $66

Codex Skitarii $33 ~And hardcover no less

SkitariiRangersBox

Now while I would never call anything from GW “Cheap”, take a look at those prices and and compare them to what is generally considered the high watermark for GW pricing, the WFB Dark Elves:

 

Cauldron of Blood $75

Witch Elves/Sisters of Slaughter (10 models) $60

Black Guard/Har Ganeth Executioners (10 models) $50

Warhammer: Dark Elves $49.50

 

de-witches

I think we are seeing GW starting to back away form their bleeding edge pricing and coming back to something in the premium-high range, but not the crazy ultra-luxury pricepoint.  More the BMW area of the market, instead of Ferrari.  I would ballpark the prices at roughly $5-10 lower than GW would have been pricing even 1 year back.

 

In particular, the pricepoint of $33 for a new codex seems like a very smart business move for Nottingham.  With Warhammer being flooded with so many new book offerings, a nice low price point will let GW customers “keep up with the Jonses”, pick up any army books they are interested in, and be the cheap entry point into starting new armies.

 

What do you think is going on?

 

 

 

 

  • Robomummy

    I like the fact that the prices are getting lower but keep in mind that model for model when looking at the squads (not necessarily the blister packs) GW models can be fairly competitively priced.

    • An_Enemy

      This argument is still BS. The reasons have been covered numerous times.

      Bottom line: the low end cost for a GW army will still be around $500 with rules.

      Whereas you can have a playable army in other systems for less than $150.

      Quit trying to rationalize your purchases. Just play the game you want to play.

      • Robomummy

        I’m not rationalizing anything, the game has nothing to do with it. Of you look at prices on a model by model basis it is fairly priced. If you look at it in context of the game that changes but since GW says they are a miniatures company that happens to have a game that argument becomes irrelevant.

        • Auswin

          While I think people get too up in arms about “OMG GW IS TOO EXPENSIVE” it’s not really on parity.

          If you look purely at MSRP’s it appears that GW products or on par mini-to-mini, but the reality is that independent retailers have other systems at 20-30% off as their regular stock price, with sales going far deeper.

          Whether the additional bitz and extra quality is worth that 20-30% is another discussion, but the reality is that someone can go on a site and get a PP army box for $85 (MSRP $130) and that means we’re looking at 20-30 models at the price of 8 terminators.

          • Robomummy

            Yes the pricing is not on par with every other miniatures company out there but based on quality, bitz, and individual price of model it is fairly priced. Also there are places that sell GW products at similar 20% discounts but if you look at models of similar quality and don’t factor in independent retailers the pricing balances out.

            In fact nothing says you cant make a skirmish game for 40k (something like kill team but a better rule set than the current one) and GW products become no different than games like Infinity or Warmahordes.

          • Auswin

            It’s a different discussion, but I actually lament how big 40k has gotten. The game is fun, but in simplifying for large games and moving to USRs it’s hard to say 40k really works as a skirmish game anymore.

            It’s just not compelling enough at a small scale because of how the ruleset has been balanced to 1500 pt games and above. At smaller levels WarmaHordes, Infinity and Malifaux are much better games.

            Heralds of Ruin are doing great work to try and make kill team more compelling, but 3rd party rulesets are always tough to get ingrained in a meta.

          • Robomummy

            Agreed, 40k at a low point level would definitely be more entertaining. I’m all for large games but i don’t usually have time for them so at my LGS we are writing a kill team rule set that should be somewhat balanced (no major differences just tweaks to special rules, the elimination of allies and special characters, limits of vehicles, and the elimination of Independent characters joining units).

            First, this allows for people to collect an army that they wouldn’t normally be able to collect as long as they keep it a small force (how I started my dream Night Lords Army).

            Second, it allows us to play more games with more people over the weekly 6 hour period that we get to play, instead of playing 2 large games we get 6-10 small games.

            Third, since we are writing the system we can control the balance of the game and make it so that there are no overly broken units while still keeping the rules fairly similar to 40k.

            Fourth, it allows us to give easier intro games and get more people involved in the hobby.

          • Gary Morrison

            Zone mortalis. Not exactly the same as necromunda style, or the closer smaller battles of 2nd ed but far more skirmish based than the madness of 40k right now…… 30k is great though

          • Elderpy

            Assuming that one wants to play Warmachine…

          • Rich_B

            A deeply discounted, limited run army box, deliberately designed to tempt GW players over to PP? I don’t see that as a fair comparison either, and that’s as a player of both systems plus others…

          • Samuel Sanchez

            I order most of my gw stuff 20-25% off. No idea how that’s supposedly different for any game system.

          • Muninwing

            …or 20+ tactical marines with a couple extras.

            … or 42 cultists/cadians (box of 5 is $10).

            … or 50+ gretchin.

      • Matthew Manall

        These other games are ones based on smaller model counts though…So a model v model basis is totally acceptable

        • Muninwing

          it’s actually more important. people who claim that skirmish games are cheaper because GW is greedy are woefully stupid (i’ve seen it a few times now) because you’re comparing apples to apple trees and wondering why the price is different.

          i like force-based and unit-based games. the others are alright, but not what i’m really looking for.

          keep in mind, too, that if you compare by model, you also have to compare extra bitz, as well as quality of the model. add in all the factors, and GW is actually a pretty good deal.

          especially since, though they raise their prices yearly, they don’t do it on everything, and they usually are just keeping up with inflation from when the kit debuted… meaning that in every year between, the kit cost less.

          when i was a redshirt, all regiment boxes (standard-sized troops, usually 10 models each) were $35. now, some are $40. but that was nine years ago, and adjusting from even then (i have no idea how long before that those boxes stayed at that price), they’re actually a little cheaper (cpi adjusted, that’s $40.75). and some kits (like my favorite example, terminators) are still about the same price ($50) as they were that year when they came out (meaning that they should be over $58 just to stay at the same price).

          can people finally stop whining now?

          • Robomummy

            We are tabletop wargamers, if we stop whining the balance is broken and the end will be upon us.

          • Muninwing

            i have 2 armies with less than 50 models in 2500 points. does that count?

            one is Deathwing, so my old tournament list was 2LRs, 3Dreads, 25 termiantors, and 2 HQs (32 models).

            the other was an old Armored Company… 3 iron fists (chimera and 10x vostroyans), 2 basilisks, 3 sentinels, laser destroyer, 6x leman russ variants, and a hellhound.

            i’ve been pondering taking a Knight and the AC, revitalizing the army with some shenanigans. or maybe i’ll finally field the Baneblade that goes with them…

            now that’s something to whine about.

          • An_Enemy

            OK. Let’s compare apples to apples then straw man.

            A $15 blister vs GW’s $30+ blisters.

            Skip the minis this month and buy some common sense.

          • Muninwing

            someone needs a nap — wow, that was cranky.

            how about we do compare apples, then. but let’s look at the apples instead of reading the sign on the basket.

            a GW blister (the actual range is $11-30, and the $30s are large, impressive, or intricate like the warpsmith or the like) has more detail, better quality of sculpt (warmachine, for instance, looks like the “heroic scale” was done by someone with missing fingers, since the face-shapes are so exaggerated) and since the game caters to people who like to do more than play, finecast is actually an asset to someone who sculpts and converts.

            so…

            1. you accuse me of using a strawman, then you set up one yourself to try to prove me wrong

            2. you’re being aggressive and obnoxious about it because i don’t agree with you

            3. your argument ignores reason for cost, which is a pretty big deal

            4. you (like most people who try to use the phrase “common sense” in an argument against opinions) look foolish for presenting your argument this way.

            anything else? or are we done here? because i have to go to work, but i need a good laugh.

          • pipboy

            This incredible and big (bigger than the Warpsmith I’m sure) metal is 15’75€ around 17$.

            http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QK0qfnQnOEs/VRcG1-fP7gI/AAAAAAAABm4/9J9ofB6BD2k/s1600/Azrail.jpg

            This costs 39$ http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/catalog/product/600×620/99810102015_WarpsmithNEW_01.jpg

            Which is expensive? GW is off the grid expensive. And their prices only go up.

          • Muninwing

            wow… so we need a lesson on false equivalence now?

            how about i start with this:

            1. the existence of one cherry-picked example does not an argument make

            2. that i know what a warpsmith is, what 40k is, and what CSM are counts for something… that i have no idea what you posted a pic of further reinforces this. with some research, i found it. but part of that includes the clout that each game has, which may or may not factor into the price or value of the models as more than just their individual value.

            3. that you used two photos (when others exist) that show the warpsmith as smaller when it is indeed bulkier (azrail are about the size of terminators, a tiny bit taller, but with less bulk in other places) is indicative of either a lack of research or of misrepresentation

            4. are we also going to compare “my game is better than your game” or “hurr durr my army is best” or “skirmish games are better than squad games” too?

            5. have you studied price-point analyses? or market indicators? you make some spurious claims about how you are somehow being taken advantage of, based on… what? do you know how their prices are assessed?

            i didn’t think so.

            this is a complicated issue. don’t try to reduce it to one single example, particularly one that isn’t a full parallel.

          • pipboy

            1) Not cherry picked, Azra’il looks to me like a space marine should.
            2)You need 1 Azra’il to play or none, same as the Warpsmith, hence the comparison, individual value of both is clear one is less than half the other.
            3)Pictures were taken randomly, one is a crappy shot from a video, the other is the official picture on GW’s page
            4) We are talking about prices, not games, those rely on personal preferences, prices don’t. You play the game you like, but we are talking PRICES, GW is expensive, we HAVE to compare with other alternatives on the market.
            5) Use your technical economical lingo all you want, a 100$ turd is still a turd, don’t sprinkle over it fancy terms because it won’t change the fact that it is what it is. I don’t need to assess anything to see that 39$ for a single resin miniature is a god damn ripoff, specially when you still have other 450$ to go (minimum) in order to play. That is not assess the market that is a reality. If they “Assessed” the market they’ll see how bad their company is going and how well are other smaller enterprises faring.

          • Muninwing

            ah, so it’s more armchair economist ranting again, yes?

            economics is slow, immense, and barely understood by those who try. as much as that’s a “yo mama” joke in setup, it’s also a reason why the “GW is tanking!” idiocy on the internet is so foolish.

            if what i said was “technical economic lingo” to you, then you’re as much admitting that you know less than i do about an immensely complicated field, and i’m aware enough to know how little i know.

            why don’t we cut this short. you don’t like it, don’t play. simple as that. you don’t see value in it, then don’t bother with it. nobody is forcing you to. but don’t grumble about price and whine about how terrible GW is, then flock to them for your plastic crack. it’s old, tired, and quite honestly decidedly childish. i’m not judging you, but really, it’s beneath anyone worth talking to, and i’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for now.

          • pipboy

            So I must know about economy to complain about prices? If I don’t understand why they charge so much for a mini and complain about it without having a degree on the subject I’m childish? Gee! I wonder how regular people could dare complaining when gass or electricity bills go up! Next time I’ll pay someone who knows to teach me how to complain about 39$ minis propperly.

            You know what is really childish? Telling other people to not discuss on a subject because they don’t have knowledge about a “varely understood and inmensely complicated field” don’t be so patronising man, your economy knowledge may be of use, but please don’t brag about it when talking about little toy soldiers. I don’t play GW btw, but I did for a lot of time and I’ve seen their prices go up and up and up, and theor players disappear, you don’t have to be a genious to tell that their failure is the cost of their armies, specially for newbies.

          • Muninwing

            do you know how often people complain about prices of things? i heard some lady angry about cucumbers last night. they have been the same price for months. it’s a mark of frustration, not of truth. but you don’t even play, so you have no reason to complain.

            i’m trying really hard to not be condescending — it’s not my goal. but you do realize that you are talking about a complicated idea without actual relevant necessary knowledge. it’s as bad as someone giving you the terrible utterly wrong version of carbon-dating they learned in church as evidence against evolution.

            basics you need to know (some of which i’ve mentioned on here elsewhere):

            1. force-based games are different from skirmish games. they require more models. that being said, some people like them more. but they are more expensive to get started

            2. hobby items are categorized as “luxury goods” and thus size, materials, and supply and demand are less involved in their pricing, and apparent value is more important. what’s more, miniatures are more anchored in that category since they are double-use: painting and playing. thus, they are more expensive. and GW products have a combination of easy to convert, high-quality plastic (and while there are issues with finecast, the resin is really easy to work with), lots of bitz, varied pieces, interchangability/poseability, strong background, and varied product. that means that the product is not only of good quality but desired within its market. thus prices are justifiably high.

            3. new companies often start with lower prices to get into the market. warmachine tried that. now their plastics are on par with GW and of much less quality/detail. that does not mean it is sustainable

            4. GW’s price increases actually don’t keep up with inflation. to do that, they’d need to redo boxes every year and yank old product (because their model requires prices to remain constant, and thus on the box). if you look at most kits, the price from when the kit was introduced to the price increase when it hits will usually only take it up to where it would be if inflation was added yearly. that means every year they don’t increase is a year of de facto cheaper models for everyone.

            need i go on?

            i should also mention that new players do far better getting an ebay army than buying everything new outright. or buying one unit at a time. this is what many veteran players did back in the day, so why is there an insistence to buy a whole starter army outright now?

        • An_Enemy

          Nope. You need a certain number of models to play a game. Comparing one model from infinity to one model from 40k makes zero sense to anyone, but insane people.

          For starters, you’re comparing the price of a ten man box to the price of a blister.

          Why not compare one blister to one blister? $15 versus $30. Oh wait…that doesn’t help your argument so we can just ignore that right?

          Cost to play. GW is not comparable to any other game.

          • Robomummy

            it seems apparent you are unable to separate the game from the models. Try to think about it in that context and you may be able to understand the argument. You don’t need 40k figures to play 40k, contrary to that 40k models can be used in other systems instead because they may well be cheaper (buying a box of 5 for $35 vs buying a single model for $10).

      • You have a funny idea of “low end”.

        I’ve put about $600 into my Ogres, but that’s a 4,000 point army; bigger than I’ll probably ever actually play. Hardly “low end”.

        So how about this: I just built another Fantasy army, a complete, playable 1,000 point force, and I did it for $100, rules included. If “bottom line” it is impossible for the “low end” cost of a new GW army to be less than $500, how did I do it?

        • Crispy

          Do tell of this 1000pt force for $100 🙂

          • ctFallen

            Probably end times, 400pt general, 300pt hero and 300pts of troops. Tho with a 50$ army book thats still prob more than a C-note.

          • Thawn

            If you buy everything second hand and are willing to trade off old armies its really easy. I built a 2500 point (without upgrades included) nid list along with 2 codices for 250 bucks (CDN). All I did was look on kijiji and talk with some of local gamers at the BM store I go too.

          • Muninwing

            i paid
            -$30 for 100 DE warriors on sprue (3rd ed starter set)
            -$100 for 4x raiders and a ton of metals, including HQ and most options, plenty of special weapons, a codex, and 3 reaver bikes (a friend won an ebay auction for 2 armies, and had no use for them, so i recouped him half of what he paid)
            -whatever a Raider was going for back then (i needed one more)

            i had a huge army, and only paid about $150 for it.

            it’s completely doable, if you watch auctions…

          • Thawn

            wow that is a nice haul!

            yep couldn’t agree more. Auctions and second hand deals are where i get most of my 40k stuff now a days, especially for larger models like tanks, aircraft and MC’s. I average about $25 off of retail is always nice. 😛

          • An_Enemy

            Wtf…you’re so desperate you’re bringing out used twenty year old models to try to prove a semblance of a point?

          • Robomummy

            While i don’t think the intent was to prove a point I must agree, Ebay and third party sites should not be factored in when comparing prices of models as that only skews the results by adding too many variables.

          • Thawn

            I get what your saying but…isn’t cost per model rather trivial specifically because you can acquire the same models for different prices via different avenues of purchase. How can you compare price per model if there is no set price on it?

            Take a 5 man termi squad. GW charges me $60 before taxes, a local gaming store charges me $50, I can buy them used for $25, or I can import them from a third party vendor for $30. Naturally, I would pick the $25, as its the cheapest and hey who knows they might be assembled and base coated, which saves me additional money and time. As a consumer we all want to spend the least amount of money when we can, as such cost per model boils down to the individual and what they paid, and not the industries prices.

            So if you buy through GW yes your price per model would be higher than most other table top games, and I would agree that other games like infinity, bolt action or FoW are better purchases as their cost per models are cheaper.. But if I buy 40k used and get it for a cheaper price, my cost per model is cheaper and in some cases beats out the value of other table top games.

          • Robomummy

            You are correct but the core of this discussion is about whether or not GW models are overpriced. Thus we can’t include 3rd party sellers when comparing the base prices of the models because it adds too many variables that skew the results of the comparison.

          • Thawn

            Which in my opinion falls into the realms personal experience and preference.

            In my experience and time playing 40k I have seen a gradual increasing in costs of all models across the spectrum where at a point I couldnt afford to buy them anymore. As soon as my financial threshold was reached, GW became overpriced for me and I stopped collecting 40k all together and moved onto another game (FoW) It was only until I found stores and sellers who made purchasing GW products reasonable, that got back into collecting 40k and fantasy. As soon as it exceeds my new financial threshold it will become overpriced again, and I will search for another means of acquiring the product I desire.

            Bottom line..determine your threshold, what ratio of miniatures to cost do u think is reasonable to you, and does what GW offer meet YOUR threshold. if it doesn’t then its over priced for you and you should probably look for an alternative game that does, or a seller that can bring 40k or fantasy back to within your financial threshold.

          • Robomummy

            The purpose of this conversation is to discuss the price of the models in relation to other miniatures companies; not the potential price of models with third parties or personal experience. Any game can be cheaper if you buy from independent sellers but that doesn’t change the price that the original seller puts on the model. Personal experience and preference are all well and good but have no effect of the inherent price tag.

          • Thawn

            I follow you. I was looking at this discussion from a different angle regarding the accessibility of GW specifically as it is considered a upper tier table top game, The starting cost of a army regularly costs 500 dollars thus I pointed out the value of third party vendors, if spending 500 dollars is not really feasible. You posed the question is GW overpriced i gave you my subjective opinion that a product being overpriced depends on your financial background. But I would also agree that compared to other miniature companies GW needs a little work. There are some areas that I think GW is competitively priced (low tier points matches and skirmishes come to mind) and then their are others where its lacking pretty hard (I still can’t see the justification in price for a something like a manta lol)

            This article shows that they are trying to do right in the eyes of the consumers, even if its a small step so its refreshing to read that GW is taking a step forward kudos to them for making the effort, its better than reading “brace yourself for the next GW price hike”. Perhaps now they will start looking at what other miniature companies charge for their miniatures and create a framework that pulls GW back into the race again, but who knows how long that will take… time will tell I guess.

            for the record…the current inherent price GW has does not affect me and it probably never will concern me thanks to my financial position. But it doesn’t mean I need to be careless with my money.

          • RexScarlet

            I paid ZERO (free) for an entire 3000 point GW army, because my Mommy bought it…
            .
            Used costs are not comparable costs.

          • Thawn

            The tyranid army i built for 250 consists of most of the current tyranid models distributed for circulation by GW. Like Muninwing said, if you are patient and look for the right deals you can easily find a table ready army for a very good price.

            If you can’t afford new, buy used what is the big deal? You would buy a used car before a new one if it means saving several thousand dollars, why not do the same?

          • Muninwing

            ebay can help you with that.

            i find it interesting, also, that many players want to buy expensive things but do nto want to pay for them.

            if you aren’t a painter, then buy army parts form ebay and do some quick fixing. you can get it for half of retail if you’re patient. if GW prices are the devil, then don’t buy from them.

            it’s like someone who always buys a new car but complains how expensive they are. you could buy a used in great shape for half the price, but you choose to buy new — and at least the car comes with a warranty.

          • Crispy

            Yeah of course. Second hand auctions are the way to go if you’re building armies on the cheap, but it looks like straylight is talking about new stuff.

          • Muninwing

            my point is that it was what i did when i had little cash and was new to the game. now, i make more money so i can buy as i want… and i buy models i’ll never use just so i can paint them, as well as buying extra models for my armies that i’ll never play all at once.

            if i wanted, for instance, to add skitarii as allies, that’s really easy for me. but back then, i’d have been short on rent once i was done.

            when people complain about cost, they neglect secondhand buying. if you don’t care about painting it’s even better.

          • Think about it. It’s really, REALLY not hard to figure out.

      • Federico Pinci

        I don’t think BS is the word. All these actors are basically selling miniatures, what you buy is miniatures. So in my opinion the point is not how many minis u need to play (which by the way depends heavily on your choices independently by the system) but how much a mini costs u. And in terms of cost per model robomummy’s argument is solid enough. Then i totally agree with u, we should go for the games we like. 10$ won’t make a difference in the end. In fact it’s a long time i play WH, malifaux and infinity and an equally long time i don’t play warhammer.

      • Twinness

        “This argument is still BS. The reasons have been covered numerous times.”
        The “reasons” have not been covered even once in this discussion, so your dismissal of the argument is what is BS here. The fact is, most GW models are reasonably priced, and you’ve yet to present any case against that.

        • He doesn’t need reasons. He just likes to bash for the sake of bashing. This is nothing new.

        • An_Enemy

          $15 blister vs $30 blister. There.

          • Twinness

            What are each of these blisters? Do they represent the cheapest price/model each company offers? If not, why are you citing them as an example when they are not a fair representation of price/model?

      • Thawn

        If cost is that important to you, why not just look for alternatives to building your army. Torrents, buying models second hand/trading old armies or going to third party manufacturers can easily bring down the cost of 40k army and bring them in line with your budget if you are that desperate to save cash. In the end these miniatures are going to be painted and modified to meet your satisfaction, why does it matter what the source of acquisition was. I highly doubt any of your opponents would care either nor would they be able to tell the difference… i know I wouldn’t.

    • Federico Pinci

      You are totally right, in terms of model count/price ratio GW is quite aggressively priced compared to its competition. And also if what we are talking about is the product i don’t find any reason why we should argument that the game requires more pieces than other games (which depends by the way… try and go Cryx or Trollbloods for example… i am not sure the models on your table are gonna be less than your grey knights models). Still for the same price you can buy much more GW plastic than Malifaux plastic. No doubt about that. This said competition is growing at a very rapid pace and in my opinion there are reasons behind this that go beyond price tags. Some of the other games are very good games.

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        these are all poor comparisons. In the world of multi-part plastic miniature games at company level Bolt Action and Dust are the best comparison. I can buy a 1000 point Russian army for Bolt Action, 70x multipart 28mm minis including a tank, artillery etc, for £70 ($100). Compare GW minis to plastic historical minis, often sculpted by ex GW sculptors like the Perry twins, and you’ll see how extortionate GW minis are.

        As far as the OP is concerned, I agree that the Codex and Rangers/Vanguard boxes are appropriately priced, but both vehicles are well overpriced by 30% or so compared to similar minis in the market. A nearly identical chicken walker for Dust is £18 as opposed to £29 for GWs. The Dunecrawler should be £30 at most going by the size of it.

        • Federico Pinci

          Knight trust me I LOVE Dust. But the quality of dust models is not comparable to that of GW’s. I am sorry to say but i am just trying not to be biased. I love the design work in dust don’t get me wrong and some heroes are also well cast (in pvc which i suppose is cheaper than GW’s plastic) but again these accurately sculpted heros (e.g.. toten meister? red yana? are like 18 dollars for 3 models so it’s really not that that cheap.) This said in absolute terms yes u picked the cheaper examples (also mantic and so on if u want) while i picked the ones that costed more than GW’s but the point i guess is the same: the game. DUST is an incredible game and it makes sense even in fluff terms. It does while warhammer (end times?) arguably doesn’t.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I prefer the design of most Dust minis, GW’s vehicles have been hit or miss lately. Plus they come primed which is great. Of course tastes vary though, I was just looking for predominantly plastic company sized games to compare, as comparing a skirmish game with 40K isn’t a good comparison.

            I think most of GW’s minis are about 30% more than comparable ones. GW justify this by adding lots of bits, but really these just pile up as the kits are generally carefully designed to stop you using them to build whole miniatures as certain parts (eg space marine rear torsos) are carefully rationed. I would rather just buy a kit for the unit I want at 30% less than buy a kit that makes two units one of which I can’t use.

          • Federico Pinci

            yes i do prefer dust sculpts myself so… what i was trying to say is that GW is not in the high end of price tags but it is in fact mid priced between the competitively priced mantic, dust, bolt action whatever and the higher priced ones like malifaux or hordes, wild west exodus… up to the boutique (which is obviously a different niche) like kingdom death etc… i don’t own any ww exodus (i quite dislike it) so i don’t even know whether it’s plastic.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            that isn’t really mid priced though is it, its significantly higher than all the comparable games but slightly lower than a few boutique games with low model counts.

            It really makes a difference because I see players leaving and few new players. There are friends of mine I’d love to start playing 40K, but none of them can justify the cost of starting from scratch which is higher than ever. So we play other systems.

          • Federico Pinci

            The point i was trying to make tho is that many are moving towards the higher end not the cheaper games. For instance this year Infinity was tremendously successful. So is the price the reason why they are moving away from GW? I personally have some doubts.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            for Infinity the minis might be more expensive individually but an army as a whole is very cheap, the army boxes are a good deal, the rules are free online as are all the army books and army builder software. Plus you can always proxy minis. This means you can get an army together and play for maybe under $40/£30. Infinity is a much cheaper game to start than 40k, a whole Infinity army costs less than some 40k units.

          • Federico Pinci

            True yes but we are simply talking price per model here so on average the price of infinity models is higher. Not so much but higher i would say.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            it is the price of the whole system that stops people getting into 40k.

          • Federico Pinci

            Yep that’s my whole point: in my view it is not. Price is not really the point. Also this hobby is not just expensive because of the models.. just think about paints… brushes… airbrushes… tokens… scenic bases… scenery… Attracting new costumers is also in my opinion not the big problem for GW, keeping the old ones is. For infinity u are right but i may also tell u that i there’s a game out there where the one list fits all is not applicable that’s infinity. Which translates most of the times in u buying all models available for your faction (i have 3 so i’m the first culprit here).

          • Muninwing

            but it’s (1) a misunderstanding, and (2) an elitism that create that reaction.

            the misunderstanding is that it’s just a game.
            the elitism is that when you are getting started, you don’t need new things.

            firstoff, if you look at models as if they are just pieces to a game, they really aren’t worth anything more than other collectibles are. but they are sold taking into account assembly, painting, and even conversions (a la finecast’s more expenisve nature) as assets instead of liabilities. thus, prices are higher.

            second, there’s this automatic assumption by many who claim that “kids can’t start playing” based off of our own realization that we cannot justify buying a new army. but we already know we like the game. and we already know our painting skill level etc. if i were some kid, wouldn’t start with buying boxed sets — i’d start by trying to pick up the rules for free on the internet and then snag someone’s leftovers via ebay.

            i love the comparison to golf. if you really want to get into golf, you are going to pay a lot more than if you really want to get into a minis game (or the next three you’ll buy after you’re into the first one, and then a kickstarter you never actually play, and then starting this new warband/army/faction/crew/etc).

            with golf, if you’re not making enough money to really afford it (like, let’s say, a college student or even high-schooler), you’ll start by finding public courses to play, and you’ll buy used clubs. then, if you don’t like it, you won’t keep them and you haven’t lost too much money.

            when people talk about the price of starting in 40k, they’re doing it wrong. unless they have the money to do it like that, which some people do… in which case, they can do as they wish.

          • Robomummy

            You are quite correct, GW products are in no way cheap and this is an important conversation that we as wargamers need to consider. Considering the quality of the models I don’t think anyone can dispute that GW sells high end detailed models that (aesthetic preference aside) can be considered some of the best in the industry. Now GW adjusts the prices based on the model’s roll on the tabletop and thus single models are often more expensive than single models from other systems.

            If we look at the boxed sets we can see the value. we will use the new Skittari models as an example The average price of the set (excluding the independent retailers) is $40; that comes out to $4 a model in the set. Now we take a look at similar quality models. For the similar quality models I have chosen to compare them to infinity. In Infinity we can see the average price is $9 for a set of 3 models which comes out to $3 per model.

            Looking at this comparison we can see two similar quality models with only a $1 difference when comparing individual models. The only difference between these systems is the model count needed to play the game.

        • Avensis Astari

          Knight, I love Bolt Action and love my Soviets – the T34 kit goes together like a dream.

          Still, I can see the difference in quality between the infantry models. We were laughing at some of the sculpts due to them looking like moaning zombies.

          The ruleset and lore keeps me playing though. That’s a game aesthetics are less essential to me for that.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I agree the infantry aren’t quite up to Gw standards, but they are quite characterful, multi part, with all the options for 1/3rd the price.

        • Warlord minis are garbage I put together 80 infantry. Spindly and tiny. In the end you get what you pay for and the value is in the eye of the purchaser. I always advise against buying from warlord, the rules are great though, love the rule system.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            they are a different style, though actually they are chunkier than most historical minis, which tend towards true scale rather than GW’s ‘heroic scale’. Takes some getting used to a different aesthetic. Don’t go buying any Infinity minis!

          • Yeah I knew they were more true scale, hence the size, I just didnt like the lack of poses and the guns…good lord the teeny spindly sunuvabitchin guns …

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            tweezers are your friend! At least they are plastic, Infinity weapons are the same but made of lead. Oh, the humanity…

      • Robomummy

        yes the industry is getting more competitive and this is where GW is falling behind. They have stated that they are first and foremost a miniatures company and thus in the game industry they are falling behind. However the core of this discussion is pricing so though the game itself does play a role, it is not a primary point of comparison.

    • Malthrak

      This only holds true for some units.

      The new plastic Tempestus Scions that are less than a year old are more expensive than Forgeworld’s equivalent Death Korps of Krieg Grenadiers model for model, and are nearly double what the old Kasrkin used to cost. Dire Avengers got repackaged from 10 to 5, nearly doubling the cost of the unit.

      • Robomummy

        And I do admit that GW pricing isn’t competitively priced across the board. For example Blister packs and vehicles are very heavily priced in comparison to other similarly sized models from other game systems. But taking the company as a whole the range is reasonably priced.

        Warning: the following contains math probably riddled with errors.

        Lets look at the tempestus scions for a moment. the price of the box (for ease of use for my math we will be using USD) it comes out to $35. In the Box you get 5 models for what seems like a total of $7 per model. However when you factor in that at least 40% of the sprue are additional bits and options you come to a grand total value of $4.20 per model which means that you are actually paying $21 for the models themselves and $14 for the extra bitz.

        Lets compare those to the FW Death Korps Grenadiers, a squad of 10 of those comes to around $57-$58 (not including shipping depending on where you are located). This leads to a total value of approximately $5.70-$5.80 per model.

        Since the FW kits include little to no extra bitz this skews the factor somewhat in favor of the Militarum Tempestus squad However we will revise the figure to $7 for a militarum tempestus model since you are forced to buy the extra bitz with the box.

        We see a total result of $7/model vs $5.8 per model which is really only a $1.2 difference. However if we factor in the model itself and not the bits like I originally pointed out the difference increases similarly in the opposite direction with FW being the more expensive option.

        Thus we can see that by adding more options with the kit GW’s models are fairly priced for highly detailed models (any one of which can rival the detail of some of the more top quality models out there). The only thing that makes the pricing difficult is the number of models needed to play but as has already been mentioned the system and rules of the game has no bearing on price comparison.

  • Hari Turner

    It’s a step in the right direction if you live in the Northern Hemisphere. As it stands, Australians have to fork out $66 for the Rangers, $78 for the Ruststalkers, $83 for the Dragoons, $48 for the codex and $112 for the Dunecrawler.

    So personally, until the prices start lowering here, I’ll not regard this release as progress.

    • Cameron Karge

      It has to do with the insane shipping cost of sending almost anything to Australia. Remember GW is based in the UK so that means Europe and North America are their prime customers because of ease of shipping. Maybe if they made a manufacturing branch down there it would be better.

      • Trollzor

        GW does manufacture some items in Australia. Those products have white rectangular stickers on them saying they have been manufactured there.

        • Stratos Tsiavis

          Wrong, they say “Produced in Australia”, which means they are boxed up and shrinkwrapped in NSW by Work for the Dole folks.

          • Trollzor

            Sorry to hear you work for the dole. Must be hard to buy them GW miniatures yes?do you get foodstamps there? What is a NSW?
            Site source on the definition of ‘produced.’ We all know consumer wording is different from country to country.

          • I think you can safely ignore anyone named “trollzor”.

        • Michael Szarek

          They repack them here.
          They send the sprues and then box them here. That way they save space.

          Honestly I don’t buy the shipping excuse. It doesn’t cost $30 more (after exchange) per box.
          There is no way in hell that shipping accounts for a 25% mark up.
          Plenty of other companies get products here for a few % extra cost.

          And we’re talking about fairly light plastic with an already huge markup.

          • I think you can safely ignore anyone named “trollzor”…

          • RexScarlet

            Is not Australia closer to CHINA than the UK is?
            So, shipping directly from China to AU would be less expensive than shipping from China to UK, then from UK to AU, sounds like poor business practice.
            .
            GW loaded up on sprues from China.
            GW “pack” the sprues in boxes as close as possible to the area, just like Coke makes cola locally, to save on costs.

      • Vomkrieg

        It really doesn’t work that way, because I can buy stuff from the US/UK, pay normal postage costs, and still get it cheaper over here than walking into the GW Shops.

        The mark up is far more than just the shipping costs, unless GW is completely being robbed for shipping costs.

        Its why they “banned” stores from mail-ordering to Australia and New Zealand from the UK. If you got enough to get free shipping, you were basically getting 40% discount off the local store here.

        PS. They banned it, but NZ post offers a US/UK postal address to anyone in NZ who wants one. So i just get it sent there

    • disqus_dEnnpioOz0

      isn’t Australian minimum wage around 15$? because in the united states the federal minimum wage is around 7-8$, so i think its less about shipping and importing costs and more about them indexing it to what is affordable when compared to the average wages. I know here in Canada we usually pay an extra 10-20$ on bigger kits, but our minimum wage is also about 3-4$ more , with Ontario being 11$.

      • RexScarlet

        Minimum wage is the least likely comparison you could give, as GW sells Luxury Goods, and can minimum wage earners really afford that?
        .
        Maybe try the Big Mac Index; http://www.economist.com/content/big-mac-index
        Or a basket of goods, or average household Income?

    • Tim Currey

      It’s not just Warhammer tho. All forms of entertainment ie DVDs games movies etc cost more in Australia. It’s commonly known as the australia tax.

      Tho I do like the $48 codex cost. The imperial knight codex is like $65 and that only has 2 things in it

      I remember the days when you could buy a box of 20 imperial guard or berserkers for $50 and tactical marines where $40 for 10.

  • demondriven

    It may seem that the pricing is being reduced, but look at how “skinny” the sprues are. The infiltrator sprues are damn near flat.

    • ShasOFish

      3D modeling is good for that sort of thing; if you compare the old sprues to the newer ones, there’s far less extra stuff per square inch than there used to be. If this sort of thing cuts the price, then it’s nice to see technology march on.

    • Cameron Karge

      Is it really an issue that they are tiny?

      • Master Avoghai

        It can be when it looks like they put 5 eldar guardians on 40mm bases and sell you them for the price of 5 deathwing terminators…

        Doesn’t seem to be worth the cost… And their profile doesn’t help either… T3 W2 4+ they’ll die like an imperial guard… Not what I call a big elite unit…

  • TheCaptain

    Still waiting for reasonable prices in Australia…..

    • Cameron Karge

      You do know all the manufacturing done for GW is in the UK region right? You do understand that Australia is on the other side of the world right? With no direct land connections to ease the cost of shipping. Look in perspective for a moment.

      • TheCaptain

        I can see that, and I understand shipping costs do come into it, but near double the price still seem a bit excessive don’t you think?

      • crevab

        GW prints books in China but that’s not the reason for their price

        • Muninwing

          no, the hardback full-color edition with lots of extra info and pictures is why…

          • Psyfer

            Given that plenty can do books of comparable quality and up to twice the page count for the same price or less, That’s not a valid argument.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            Roleplaying games regularly make full color books with better binding and they are regularly 300-500 pages long for 40-50 bucks.

          • Muninwing

            i played a lot of World of Darkness and Exalted, so i know that “better binding” is often not so. i’ve had zero problems with any of the books i’ve gotten from GW, whereas most of my WW books cracked from a couple readthroughs.

            in addition, those books (not full-color, poorly bound, and hardcover) were $30 back in the days of 1st ed (which was the early 00s), and stayed close after moving to 2nd (late 00s, $32-35)… but then the company tanked.

            on the other end of the spectrum, back when i was an engineering student (one year before i changed major due to utter misery at the prospect of life in a cubicle farm), my textbooks were routinely $75-100 for better bindings, four times the length, and full color with smaller images.

            my point is that it’s actually a lot more complicated than people who make these comparisons know. are there right issues? how much do the artists and photographers get paid? what about other contributors? how much did the rules take to playtest (probably not much in their case, but it is a factor), or the other issues in the writing? what about materials cost — was there a glitch, or a choice for better materials? what do they need to recoup from sales lost due to piracy (yes, that does factor in even if some argue that it shouldn’t, so everyone who has a digital copy they got from a friend is partially responsible for the high prices), or other miscellaneous factors?

            unless we had a specific breakdown of all costs, advance layout, and profits, we don’t know. so this ends up being “i want it cheaper and big meanie company won’t give it to me for free!”

            which is just entitled whining.

      • Michael Szarek

        The books are some of the highest mark ups and they are printed in China….

        It’s really no excuse. If I can buy a single box from Europe, including shipping for 45% less than here, there’s no excuse why a large company with shipping contracts and a supply chain can’t get it here for a similar cost.
        Especially when shipping in bulk like they would be.

      • Some markup is expected, but not as much as GW has historically inflicted on Australia.

        A box of Tacticals is £25 in the UK.

        That converts to about US$36, but the US actually pays US$40 for it, about a 10% markup.

        That £25 is about Au$48, but Australia actually pays Au$65 for it, over a 35% markup.

        It does NOT cost GW £9 to ship a box of Tacticals to Australia, so at least some part of that markup is simple “F you, Oz”.

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        Let’s say you bought a shirt from an online retailer who is located in the USA.

        That shirt originally started as a bale of cotton in either in the US, Brazil, India or Africa. It was shipped by train or truck to a port, then across the seas to China so that it could be woven into a blank shirt. The crate of shirts was then shipped by train or truck to a port, then sent back across the seas to a port in the USA. Then the shirt is shipped by rail or truck to a silk screening facility. Only then will the finished shirt be shipped by air and truck to your house.

        You get all of that for a shirt that costs 5-15 bucks. All of that!

        Shipping costs no where near as much as you’d think. The real cost of a product now-a-days is all in the time it took to design, market and sell you stuff.

        • RexScarlet

          GREAT POINTS!
          Or the cotton came from Thailand then to China, or the plastic, I mean cotton was grown in CHINA.

    • Me

      This is an honest question,as I don’t really know… However, doesn’t Australia have both an import duty and an import tax (which is applied toward the total cost including duty and insurance)? They may not apply in this case, and even if they do, they may not amount to much. I am just curious.

      EDIT: I was talking about the differences in prices to someone here in the States, and they menioned this stuff.

  • The real question is how these things compare point-for-point with prices. This is why Space Marines have always been a better ‘starter’ faction – they have one of the best $$$-per-point ratio.

    • Thariinye

      Yeah, in terms of Points for $$, the Skitarii release isn’t quite as good — most of the units are pretty cheap, unless you spring for special weapons and upgrades.

      In particular, the Dunecrawler is about $1 for every 2 points even if you use the most expensive option, and the cheaper Ironstrider variants are way down to less than a point per $1 spent. The infantry are better on this — the Sicarians are between 3-4 points per dollar spent, and the Troops are above 2 points per dollar even before upgrades.

      So, cautious optimism is probably the most warranted thing.

    • RexScarlet

      Why there are so many Terminator “first” armies, or Ogre Kingdoms WHFB “first” armies…

  • crevab

    C’mon two data points don’t make a trend. Yes, the Dark Elves were ridiculously expensive and these are less so. But I could point at the Harlequin and Necron releases and note the rising clampack prices to space marine levels.
    I WANT them to be sprinting away from that precipice, but I don’t think we’re there yet.

  • Erik Setzer

    Hm. So a $50 light walker that you need five of to make a squadron (which is a small portion of your points0 is a good deal? A $66 tank that’s pretty much standard-price? $46 for five guys who are about the size of Tempestus Scions is good because their spindly legs are spread out so far they need bigger bases? $39 for a squad of ten is a new lower price? (Space Marines say “hi!” Also, the $29 Dark Eldar infantry also say “hi!” As do the $25 Empire soldiers.)

    The codex is the only price point that is actually lower, and I do commend them for that one. It’d be nice if they’d go through and lower other books similarly, i.e. making the same-page-count Waaagh! Ghazghkull *supplement* (which you need another book to use) the same price.

    It’s convenient to pick the worst offenders and use them as a comparison. It would have made a bit more sense to go with the $50 unit boxes from Warhammer like Dwarf Ironbreakers/Irondrakes, rather than the most anomalous box set in terms of price. The $50 boxes are pretty recent, and top even the $42 boxes of ten infantry.

    Chaos Maulerfiend/Forgefiend is $68, comparable to the Onager. Predator and Vindicator are $58, less than the Onager. Defiler is $66, same price. Ork Battlewagon is $66, same price. Tau Hammerhead is $60, so less than the Onager. Soul Grinder is $66. New SM anti-air tanks are $65. IG tanks are $50-$56. Eldar tanks are $50. So basically, the Onager is more expensive than a lot of vehicles, about the same price as a number of others, and only cheaper than something like a Land Raider or a super-heavy.

    Meanwhile, the chicken walkers are $50 EACH. Eldar War Walkers are $30, or $75 for three. Killa Kans, three for $47. Penitent Engine, $35. Deff Dreads, $50 (or $85 for two). SM Dreads, $47, except the newer Helbrute and SW Dreads, which are $54. Triach Stalker, $50. Sentinel, $30. So yeah, lots of similar-priced models that are heftier, and other light walkers are up to $20 cheaper.

    But yes, do go on and tell me how all of those prices mean that GW is getting cheaper.

    The codex is cheaper, yes. Step in the right direction. The rest? Not even remotely. And shame on you for trying to suggest things are getting better by purposely going to the worst case scenarios.

    Hey, let’s build a Skitarii army, 1500 points!

    10 Vanguard + options 150
    10 Vanguard + options 150
    10 Rangers + options 170
    10 Rangers + options 170

    5 Ruststalkers + options 200
    3 Dragoons 145
    3 Baillistarii w/lascannon 225
    3 Onagers w/options 290

    There’s some wiggle room in there for optional gear and all, has a nice selection of all the goodies. What’ll that set you back?

    Codex $33
    4 units of 10 infantry $160
    1 unit of elite infantry $46
    6 walkers $294
    3 Onagers $198

    This handy basic game sized army will only set you back $731 (plus tax).

    What a steal!

    • RexScarlet

      From five days ago on BOLS;
      “Onager Dunecrawler $66 (not too bad…)”
      .
      Compared to what?
      Same cost;
      A Defiler? A Valkyrie?
      .
      Or lesser cost;
      A Triarch Stalker?
      A Rhino/Predator/Vindicator/Whirlwind/Hunter?
      A LeMan Russ/Demolisher/
      A Chimera/Hydra/Wyvern/Manticore/Basilisk/Deathstrike/Hellhound?
      ?
      .
      What is it “not too bad” compared to? What?

  • Michael Szarek

    I think the big issue here is that GW has realized that if they make a low point cost unit, that works well in larger numbers, they’ll sell more kits.
    The walker and the tank are both low points cost, have great rules and do great in units.

    Individually the price is fine (except in Australia) but having a single dragoon is pretty much useless. For a combat squad you’re going to want at least 3 but more like 4-6.

    The tanks’ stacking invul save is just too good to pass up, and they are awesome weapon platforms for 140pts (or less).

    So the kits are good, and the models are good, but to be effective game wise, you need to hand over some serious cash.

    Same goes for only providing 1 of each special weapon in the troops box. They’ve never been overly great at this but most other units can’t take 3 of the same weapon.

    The same happened with the Skaven Stormfiends. Here’s a pretty good unit that has 6 weapon options which can be mix’n’matched but you can also build the whole unit with one weapon (which makes the most sense in fantasy anyway). Except that they only give you one of each weapon in the box, and each body only fits two of the weapons. Centurions on the other hand are very similar in size and design and yet come with all the options.

    I hope this sort of design philosophy doesn’t become the norm.

  • Coolwala the Ugly Dog

    This is great news! Let’s hope it keeps up. Dire Avenger prices are B*llsh*t.

  • Shi Guy

    Sigh, another inane article from the BoLS crew that attempts to peddle it’s sensationalist hyperbole by beating a dead horse… and doing it poorly .

    Comparing an 80 page book to several, more expensive, books that average 110+ pages, and calling the 80 page book a harbinger of cheaper prices is asinine.

    Your claim that the $39 Ranger box is an indicator of falling prices is equally empty, as indicated by the $10 cheaper DE Warrior and Wych boxes. $39 is the average troop box price when you look across the 40k lines (Tau, CSM, Eldar, etc.).

    In terms of the Infiltrators/Ruststalkers, base size is irrelevant when the model standing on said base is skinny and lacking material substance. Would you really expect GW to charge Terminator prices for models that are a fraction of the mass?

    GW prices are simply a result of factors such as volume and material mass, in addition to a variety of other markups. Their prices will fluctuate accordingly.

    • So how do you explain the price difference between the two 10-man units in this example; the Rangers/Vanguard versus the Witch Elves? The models in both units are comparably sized and both build two unit options, but the Rangers/Vanguard box comes with about twice as many components (124 versus 67).

      • vonDietdrich

        Witch Elves have always been insanely badly priced. They’re a joke among Dark Elf players (I was one).

        It feeds into Blood Knight syndrome, in some cases GW charges more for units with really good rules.

    • Talys

      On the other hand, Imperial Knights has 7 pages of real content, and is “full priced”.

  • Malthrak

    Sure, the Skitarii infantry prices are pretty reasonable.

    The walkers are not, $50 for a ~50pt model no larger than many models that are $35.

    GW still has some very insane pricing.

    • What $35 model are you looking at? Have you seen how big they actually are?

      • Malthrak

        Yeah, they’re tall, but don’t really have much more “mass” to them than something like a Pirhana which is similar in overall size and is $20 cheaper and around the same points cost.

    • Aezeal

      No you can’t expect them to make such big models 5 dollars. I think you should look at the plastic and the quality of the scultping when you look at the price.

      Having said that.. I’d not quickly invest 50 dollar in a model worth only 50 points. But if it doesn’t sell that is GW’s problem (and the problem is then more in the rules of the model and not in the price or the model quality).

      • Malthrak

        Nobody said anything about making them $5, I did mention $35 however.

        But, we seem to agree, for the relative value of the unit and the number you’d need for an army, $50 is too expensive.

  • rrooster1977

    GW is scaling back pricing back pricing because now you can get this new model kit that has 10 guys for $39 as opposed to that $39 you have been spending on a box of 11 Orks for quite some time.

  • Andrew

    Great, can we lower that high water mark so I can get some more witch elves?

  • Josiah

    Onager Dunecrawler $112 AUD…

  • Master Sheol

    If you look at skitarii prices they seems lower but instead they are higher…
    First the codex is just 80 pages while a 39€/50$ codex is often 100/120 pages…
    Second the main box of the skitarii range, the rangers/vanguard box, contains only 1 special weapon of each type that means you don’t have enough plasma calivers or arc rifles or arquebuses to equip Your squads (you can have 3 special weapons per Squad and we all know that mixing the types is Always the worst solution)…
    Third the walkers in particolar the light ones are meant to be used in squadrons and the price For a full squadron is insane…

    So NO, GW is not lowering their prices but just hiding the fact that they are still Too high…

  • Matty Peeps

    yeah well I don’t live in America and the pricing for Australians is stupid; rangers/vanguard 66$, infiltrators/ruststalkers 78$, iron strider/dragoon 83$ and the onager is 112$ and New Zealand pricing is worse than Australia’s…..plus postage of course

    • Talys

      This phenomenon, however, is not unique to GW product. Many things in Australia are (way) more expensive when compared to the USA.

  • Federico Pinci

    Whenever i read about price i personally always ask myself what we are talking about. If what we are talking about is the model count/price ratio then Robomummy is absolutely right: GW is normally cheaper than its competitors. And it’s a long time i am focusing on other games so I am not biased here. If u look at malifaux, infinity, war machine… you will soon realise that those minis is far less aggressively priced. Still these games are selling more and more. They are great games so no wonder…

    • vonDietdrich

      Money makes a difference when getting people into a game.

      Convincing someone to start Infinity is a pretty easy sell because the rules are free and a starter box for a faction is $40. A crew box in Malifaux is similarly priced, and so is a Warmachine starter, and you can get a feel for the game without dropping hundreds of dollars. Their rulebooks are also less than half the price of Warhammer’s and you only need the one.

      Let’s say three guys want to play Infinity. Each of them buys a faction starter and maybe an extra clampack of a model he likes. $150 for three functional armies, and they can all play against each other almost right away. Malifaux and Warmachine cost about the same to get started, plus an extra $30 for a core rulebook.

      Three guys want to start 40k. Each of them needs a hardback codex, one of ’em needs to pick up a mini rulebook, and each army is going to be about $200 for a decent ‘starter’ force. Works out to around $780, almost six times more than the ‘competitively priced’ games that are popular in LGSes.

      It’s much easier to build a community out of a $40 starter box than a $100+ starter box*.

      *More models and a codex may be required.

      • Aezeal

        I wonder if the makers of malifaux are making enough profit atm.. anyone know about that?

        • Federico Pinci

          Obviously malifaux is not a game that can be compared to warhammer. I used it as an example merely because the price of their minis is outrageous. A single gremlin (=goblin) can cost u 15$. Still i buy them and you know why? Because it is a fun game and it is very strategic, the level of variables and interaction between models is quite staggering considering you are playing with less than 10 minis on the table. On the contrary in my opinion 40k is progressively going for an approach probably more based around lists and luck than synergy and teamwork. But again it is a long time i don’t play it so i may be totally wrong here and i guess it heavily depends on your army.

          • Aezeal

            No I was just wondering.. if a team/army/band etc is only 50 dollars.. can they make enough money to stay around. GW wants to sell much more models to each player to stay in business. If I would buy a malifaux team.. and only like 1 addition each year.. would they keep in business?

      • Federico Pinci

        Totally true! But you see, this is why i suspect price is more of a problem for competitors than not for GW. GW’s problem is keeping its community more than building it. GW has a network of shops that is much more pervasive than its competition so it has a huge advantage in terms of attracting new players. If GW’s community is progressively slipping away towards products that are even pricier when u consider the price per model it means in my opinion that it is not just about the money. Don’t get me wrong, price is a piece of the puzzle but if they want to outsell the competition they should probably think about their games first. If I don’t buy 40k is because in my opinion it’s becoming more and more of a meander, while other systems are progressively improving, are at times innovative, fun, consistent, complex and interesting. Also it is easier and easier to find other players around you that are into those games. Same applies to the minis, there are more and more products out there that can stand a comparison to GW’s.

  • Yarrmageddon

    Still too expensive. It’s still only plastic. LOWER!

    • Jake Nolan

      Thank you sir, I agree. 🙂

  • THAT GUY

    I do not want to be THAT GUY, but, the kits that showed just before A.M. were the harlequin ones.

    And the codex, which is pretty thin in fluff and overuse the colour scheme drawings rather than illustrations of harlequins or actual test, is prized as 49.5$

    The harlies themselves were 6x models for 40$

    Shadowseer, solitaire or death jester clam packs were at 26$

    So, that point may apply in future releases. Or maybe not, as harlies.

    EDIT: And the models are awesome at all, I’m not denying that and I, myself, bought some squads to complete my harlequin collection and now, demi-standalone army (shame no HQ Great Harlequin).

  • Too little too late.

  • Crit

    You should take more notice that the rangers/vanguard are half the price of Tempestus Scions and are on paper superior to them as well on TT.

  • ted1138

    They’re still pricing everything on the basis of how many they think they will sell, not on how much it costs to make. They know that Skitarii will out sell witches 50-1 so can price them at £23.50 a box.

  • Theik

    I didn’t realize 40 mm bases were worth 5 bucks for half the miniatures.

    • Muninwing

      1. when was the kit released?
      2. what, based on its price then (and in this case, do it by model), is its cost today via inflation?
      3. has its price increased at all since then?

      if it’s about the same per-model, that only means you’ve stopped getting it for cheaper each year like you were.

      • Theik

        I was actually just comparing the 10 rangers for 39 and the 5 infiltrators for 46. As far as I am aware, they contain the same amount of sprues and the only difference is the base size.

        • Muninwing

          the infiltrators are larger models, though spindly, and have lots of fiddly bits on them. they spread to fit the larger bases pretty well.

          still, you know that the kits are not necessarily priced according to cost, yes? else, 5 terminators and 10 tactical marines would be the same price.

          being that it is a luxury good, the price is dependent upon use and usage, not just to overhead.

          i know wtih WHF units, the regiment/core boxes were all $35 for 10 (and sometimes more… some had 12, or up to 20). but the (often metal) special or rare units were $50/10, or $30/5. and it wasn’t necessarily due to the models costing more to make, but fewer of them selling due to their non-main role, so certain costs defrayed among multiple boxes would require eating a larger chunk of those costs per unit.

          • Theik

            Don’t look at me, I didn’t write the article. It quite literally says, to justify the price:

            Sicarian Infiltrators/Ruststalkers (5 models) $46 ~these guys are on 40mm bases

            Apparently the fact that they’re on 40mm bases makes them worth more, regardless of the fact that in terms of sprue space they are identical if not smaller than the 10 guy set.

          • Muninwing

            they look more spread out — skinnier, but with more range and bitz. just me, i suppose?

            it’s also, as i said, a matter of role and usefulness. not size. that it’s mentioned there might not be a price justification, but a notation, or an observation. we’re talking a bols article, not shakespeare — i doubt their classical rhetoric is up to par, so reading into their subtext might be looking at the wrong idea.

  • #define_Foo

    If you can’t afford it don’t play it.

    • Jake Nolan

      The same ole jerk comment, the kind of comment that only an arrogant person would make.

      If I can’t afford a bunch of tiny plastic miniatures, they’re way over priced. Fact.

      • Theik

        That only holds true if you take nothing in account but the price of plastic. Somebody has to design those miniatures, you have costs to produce them, store cost overheads, salaries, etc.

        There are plenty of other luxury products that are far more expensive than their base materials.

  • RexScarlet

    From only five days ago on BOLS;
    .
    “Onager Dunecrawler $66 (not too bad…)”
    .
    Compared to what?
    Same cost;
    A Defiler? A Valkyrie?
    .
    Or lesser cost;
    A Triarch Stalker?
    A Rhino/Predator/Vindicator/Whirlwind/Hunter?
    A LeMan Russ/Demolisher/
    A Chimera/Hydra/Wyvern/Manticore/Basilisk/Deathstrike/Hellhound?
    .
    What is it “not too bad” compared to? What?

  • TweetleBeetle

    New CEO and other front office personnel are probably trying some things out. Also, 40k sales continue to improve, despite the internet rage about everything GW, so the company probably has the freedom to scale it back a bit as volume grows.

  • TweetleBeetle

    Despite the good trends as of late from GW, the internet will ALWAYS look for the “Yeah, but…” Most notably, the old, “I remember when [insert product] was [insert price]…” which is not only irrelevant, but also disqualifies a person from taking part in an intelligent conversation on the subject.

    I mean, I remember when a can of soda was $0.25 and gas was $0.72 per gallon, but that doesn’t mean it’s logical to assume it should still be.

  • Matt

    I play GW games for the breadth and variety of models. No other game comes close at the moment. If I wanted cheap I would play Risk. I don’t. I want a rich, immersive gaming experience and I’m willing to pay for that. If I want a quick skirmish game, I pick up one of my other games (WM/H, Dystopian Legions, Malifaux, etc.) All cool. All fun. But different experiences.

  • vyrago

    too little, too late. Maybe GW is trying to stop the mass defections to other games. Between X-wing, Warmachine and Flames of War/Bolt Action, theres just too many other, BETTER choices out there.

    • Theik

      Better is a completely subjective term that doesn’t work when you’re comparing apples and oranges.

      • Muninwing

        but this apple is less able to make orange juice than this orange — utterly useless!

    • Muninwing

      none of the games you mentioned is in the same specific category as 40k, except perhaps bolt action.

      28mm force/squad based strategy games are not skirmish games. they are not airforce/dogfight games. they are not 10mm one-squad-on-a-base games. and they don’t read like someone’s bad high school d&d game.

      as far as “mass defections” — the ones i saw were actually in 5th ed, in the Ward era, due to codex creep. i’ve seen more players come back to the game over the last few years than ragequit.

      • vyrago

        Where I live, its been like rats from a sinking ship. 40k tournaments cancelled or combined because of lack of players. The rule seems to be “Anything but GW” and for those who still need the 40k fix its been a shift to Conquest LCG. The largest tournament in my area, has gone from 36 players in 2012 to just 16 last year and there hasnt been announcement of one for this year. It usually happens in April. There was a 40k event scheduled for last night and it was cancelled due to “Game of Thrones” being on TV. soooo yeah.

        • Muninwing

          yeah, but regional isn’t national. and anecdotal isn’t actual.

          my local club has had various swings and changes. WHF 8th dominated for about 6 months, then everyone started playin Malifaux… then Dystopian Wars… then 40k again. now, x-wing has a small but regular group, and 40k has three stores within an hour of my house where i can get a regular game.

  • Until prices drop down to 1995 levels, people are going to complain.

  • OhMyGosh

    Perry, Warlord and Gripping Beast, 30$ for ~40 miniatures. Cut them in half, replace with lots of bits and options, same quality (it is as high as GW).

    Yo know, 30$ for 20 miniatures. That’s the double and for the same amount of $.

  • msgellar

    Real question is whatever the cost of your GW, PP, Infinity or pick your game system army. Did you get value out of it in terms of painting playing, etc. Doesn’t matter what it really costs. All this stuff is perceived value.

    • Muninwing

      ive actually noticed that there’s a bit of a cascade here form the old gamers to the new…

      gamers who came into WHF/40k early have a certain appreciation for, or at least opinion on, the hobby aspects of the game. the more artistic might be into that only, or that as a primary motivator. some of them might have been gamers in the pewter minis days, and have gotten into it early.

      some (by no means all) of the people coming into the hobby more recently — especially those who have come via other games such as CCGs or clix or RPGs with prepainted minis — do not include the hobbyist value as actual value. some even think of it as detriment: “you mean it costs that much and it’s not even painted?!”

      when min/maxing armies becomes an imperative, such as in highly competitive clubs or tournament arenas, the need for the optimized army is all that matters to some, and painting is something you either have to do or you pay someone else to do for you.

      the perceived value is complicated becuase it’s not merely a subjective thing. even if you look at painting and assembly as a burden, it’s still priced as an asset.

      • msgellar

        That is my point is value is subjective so cost isn’t the only factor but if you are a gamer first, then cost is more important then someone who likes the hobby. Articles that talk about cost of army never factor in things like enjoyment, collecting, etc. I own more X-Wing then I use because I like Star Wars so on cost alone it would be a waste of money since I don’t get to use everything.

        • Thawn

          well said both of you msgellar & muniwing, I couldn’t agree more. Like both of you I am a collector and a gamer. I got into 40k back in the early 2000s, My first army was daemon hunters with a sisters of battle contingent. From day one and to this very day I still have no regrets over the amount of time and money I have spent building, modifying painting and expanding that army. Msgellar, I too have more models than I actually need but like you I continued to collect them because I like the fluff of the demon hunters and grey knights.

  • Lewismauler

    The only pricing differences are um, NOTHING. The codex at first glance appears cheaper but for the content size it’s priced equally with others of its size. The vanguard/rangers 10-$39 higher than cadian but equal to tacticals. The ironstriders… Those way overpriced. Scout or Armored sentinel $29 IRONSTRIDER $49!?!?!?!? It has less weapon options and it’s only perk is cognis special rule. I’d pay $39 for it for the cool factor but it’s not worth $20 more than a sentinel. Then the sicarians, priced at 5-$46 a termi “equivalent” at slightly cheaper than vanilla termi squad and probably cuz they would still lose to a termi squad. So again another not cheaper unit. And lastly the dune walker. I will say this is appropriately priced as well. So NOTHING IS CHEAPER HERE. In fact we have 1 unit that is drastically overpriced! NOW THAT I RANTED LOL. I love GW and I think their prices are fair I really dislike all the naysayers whose one problem is their prices and say other games are cheaper because I have yet to see one company that has cheaper armies. The only way I see other games with cheaper armies is because you need only half the amount. That’s cheaper yes BECAUSE YOU BOUGHT LESS PRODUCTS NOT BECAUSE THE PRODUCTS WERE CHEAPER.

  • Ben_S

    I think it was clear when Wood Elves were cheaper than Dark Elves.

  • euansmith

    I really feel for the folks who play 40k.

    Playing Inq28, One Page Kill Team or In The Emperor’s Name you can buy a couple of boxes of troops (preferably a box each from two completely different armies) and have hours of fun converting up a dozen figures to form your entire force.

    The box of Blight Kings I bought have given me hours of fun, pain and swearing and I’m only on my 4th mini.

  • Justin Pettett

    I still think they’re over priced. Hence why I purchase my stuff at a discount from elsewhere.

  • Robomummy

    Yes 40k is built for larger games but many people don’t have the time or money for that. There are those of us who love the lore and models and would like to find a way to keep playing, when i talk about changing the game to make it more skirmish-friendly I am not talking about a complete overhaul. What we do is we streamline the rules and eliminate certain special rules that are overly exploited.