|
Post by beardmonk on Mar 15, 2019 9:09:08 GMT
I keep seeing this described as a binary GW vs PP comparison, when from what I can tell the pecking order is definitely FFG>GW>PP. Its because GW are seen as the market leaders and everyone can relate to their product and probably knows, even if its only in a general sense, what's going on with the company. I can look at it another way. My "other game", maybe soon to be my main game is M3E is good, is Malifaux. While many people here will have heard of Malifaux, its not a game that is seen to have the coverage or large player base when compared to GW and a few years ago WM/H. Every one of the stores that I mentioned in my last post stocked Malifaux and WM/H 4-5 years ago. Now, many of those have dropped or cut back on WM/H. But they all still stock Malifaux at the same levels they did 4-5 years ago. What is it about Malifaux that makes it still attractive to sellers and the community that WM/H has lost? I have to say that I'm positive about the new CEO and the moves he is making. One of the things that WM/H and PP needs to do to recover is to make themselves attractive to sellers via price point, discounts for sellers, bringing back the PressGang to help build local communities in shops and games clubs etc so this game can get back onto a better footing.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 15, 2019 14:19:25 GMT
Not mine. Malifaux coverage has dropped a little, but then, it was never very large to begin with.
The biggest issue to our LGS' here is not PP practices (one of the owners actually used to work with some of the crew way back in the day), but a lack of product movement. The tournament atmosphere is drowning out any new players, and many of the old players. Without new players, no one is buying older stock, and only new stock is moving. So, as a result, only new stock is ordered and stocked, which leads to their coverage being reduced. It's a justifiable financial concern. Especially since most do not work with PP directly, and go through other suppliers.
|
|
petef
Read Page 5
Posts: 24
|
Post by petef on Mar 15, 2019 15:41:41 GMT
My LFGS 1 – B&M store with 4 tables. Use to have regular WM/H nights as well as Malifaux and other games. About 7 months into Mk3 had a fire sale of all their PP products and ebayed what didn’t go. Now has a very poor opinion of PP as a company and wants nothing to do with their games. Still carries GW, Malifaux and other historical games. To be fair, I think I know this store you are referring to, and that particular owner was already half way out of the door with PP during Mk2, let alone Mk3. It became essentially a 'Magic shop/tournament venue' and alienated most of the people playing WMH, hence people stopped going there and buying stuff from him when you can get a better discount on-line at places such as Wayland.
But you may be talking about a different store for all I know.
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Mar 15, 2019 17:09:31 GMT
What is it about Malifaux that makes it still attractive to sellers and the community that WM/H has lost?
Malifaux is a good game.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 15, 2019 20:18:42 GMT
What is it about Malifaux that makes it still attractive to sellers and the community that WM/H has lost?
Malifaux is a good game.
Has a low and easily organized SKU count. The models are well done and produced in good plastic. Army size is small, making investment a minor concern. My biggest problem with it is that it uses cards instead of dice, and card games hate me.
|
|
Ganso
Junior Strategist
Posts: 932
|
Post by Ganso on Mar 15, 2019 22:53:37 GMT
Has a low and easily organized SKU count. The models are well done and produced in good plastic. Army size is small, making investment a minor concern. My biggest problem with it is that it uses cards instead of dice, and card games hate me. I have several problems with it, but I think game mechanics is least of them. I really don't like small skirmish games, I like to see big armies on the table. I'm also not drawn to any of Malifaux's factions, which is a bummer. That said, your first two points are what PP should really trying to do by condensing certain SKUs, discontinuing others, and issuing re-sculpts to legacy models that survive the culling (using their newer high quality resin).
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 15, 2019 23:52:54 GMT
Could you imagine if you could use the Magnus2 model for Magnus1, or Butcher3's model for all 3?
Now, this wouldn't work for all of them, such as Feora3, but it would make for condensing the sku list a little easier and just use the card to differentiate.
Add on to that and do a little more mixy-matchy with units and some of the Lights to make them multi-pack, and sku slots become less of an issue.
However, if you really want to see sku insanity, CB's Infinity is considerably bloated, but it helps that they aren't so obsessed with WYSIWYG as some games are.
|
|
Zaku
Junior Strategist
Posts: 224
|
Post by Zaku on Mar 16, 2019 6:47:09 GMT
Could you imagine if you could use the Magnus2 model for Magnus1, or Butcher3's model for all 3? Now, this wouldn't work for all of them, such as Feora3, but it would make for condensing the sku list a little easier and just use the card to differentiate. Add on to that and do a little more mixy-matchy with units and some of the Lights to make them multi-pack, and sku slots become less of an issue. However, if you really want to see sku insanity, CB's Infinity is considerably bloated, but it helps that they aren't so obsessed with WYSIWYG as some games are. I could be down with say, Sorscha1&2 being condensed down. Make the body the same, with two different sets of arms to make Sorscha1 vs Sorscha2. Winter Guard Infantry and Rifle Corps can be condensed into one box with an arm swap. Same with Steelhead Riflemen and Pikemen. There are tons of ways they can manage to cut 20-30 SKUs out without losing model options.
|
|
|
Post by gobber on Mar 16, 2019 6:48:56 GMT
Could you imagine if you could use the Magnus2 model for Magnus1, or Butcher3's model for all 3? Now, this wouldn't work for all of them, such as Feora3, but it would make for condensing the sku list a little easier and just use the card to differentiate. Add on to that and do a little more mixy-matchy with units and some of the Lights to make them multi-pack, and sku slots become less of an issue. However, if you really want to see sku insanity, CB's Infinity is considerably bloated, but it helps that they aren't so obsessed with WYSIWYG as some games are. I could be down with say, Sorscha1&2 being condensed down. Make the body the same, with two different sets of arms to make Sorscha1 vs Sorscha2. Winter Guard Infantry and Rifle Corps can be condensed into one box with an arm swap. Same with Steelhead Riflemen and Pikemen. There are tons of ways they can manage to cut 20-30 SKUs out without losing model options. That last one already exists:
|
|
Zaku
Junior Strategist
Posts: 224
|
Post by Zaku on Mar 16, 2019 14:08:56 GMT
I could be down with say, Sorscha1&2 being condensed down. Make the body the same, with two different sets of arms to make Sorscha1 vs Sorscha2. Winter Guard Infantry and Rifle Corps can be condensed into one box with an arm swap. Same with Steelhead Riflemen and Pikemen. There are tons of ways they can manage to cut 20-30 SKUs out without losing model options. That last one already exists: Cool, must have missed that one. Now, they just have to do that with other kits.
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Mar 16, 2019 15:10:28 GMT
One harsh reality could be there are simply not enough players to sustain sales. People have talked how bartertown's full of people selling their stuff. If true, why would someone use a LGS? I know why, but cheap used models + declining playerbase makes a difficult equation for LGSes.
I've been personally trying to sell a Cryx army for over two years now. I'm asking about 30% of what they would cost retail (so 70% discount). I don't have the hottest themes, so no-one is interested BUT I dare to say my army is very well painted. (Ton of compliments, I have eyes). The thing is, even other armies with more "relevant" models are not selling easily.. I can only conclude people are not playing this game much anymore. The core crowd is still very enthusiastic, but they're super small and have more models than they need.. not to mention they only seem to play "the meta".
This is nobody else's fault but PPs btw. Never was, never will be anything else. It sucks, but I'm not buying new models for a dying game while I can get the same tactical depth & strategy elsewhere with less luck based rules and better balance.. with smaller investment of both time & money.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 16, 2019 16:54:45 GMT
This is nobody else's fault but PPs btw. Never was, never will be anything else. It sucks, but I'm not buying new models for a dying game while I can get the same tactical depth & strategy elsewhere with less luck based rules and better balance.. with smaller investment of both time & money. False. Metas always make their own decisions on what and how they play. PP does play a part, but it is inconsequential to what the players decide. Case in point, GW does not make competitive games, but people often dedicate their local communities to playing the tournament scene. GW does little to support this, even going so far as being crap at balance. This does nothing to prevent the players from keeping that tournament focus centered in their community.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Mar 16, 2019 17:15:41 GMT
This just in: ignorant laymen who behave as if they are experts argue on the Internet.
Details at 11!
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Mar 16, 2019 17:21:38 GMT
This just in: ignorant laymen who behave as if they are experts argue on the Internet. Details at 11! Thanks Michael! I love the nighly news. Always good for some bubble headed know nothing to chime in and act superior! goo.gl/images/PD5niC
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Mar 16, 2019 18:33:56 GMT
False. Metas always make their own decisions on what and how they play. PP does play a part, but it is inconsequential to what the players decide. You didn't exactly say this, but both shortcomings and successes are all on the company. Any company. Sure, luck plays some part in it, but successfull companies are not magic or randomness. The beginnings might be, but managing an already established company is obviously something else.
.. and your statement about GW & competitiveness is clearly just misinformed. It's alright to have an opinion, but this is not about an opinion. The information is out there, just look for it. GW does plenty to support the competitiveness of their game. The successfulness of that is another story, and there I agree with you. Their games seem very dicey to me as well. Then again, quite a few people don't agree with this, but my theory is living in a GW bubble has a big effect.
Too bad there is WM/H bubble as well..
|
|