|
Post by marxlives on Oct 9, 2019 16:40:45 GMT
PP already tried the dirt cheap, terrible quality models route. Roughly 2009-2013 when they were making everything in that PVC plastic/resin hybrid from China. It was absolutely the worst model material I've ever seen, assembled or painted save only for GW's Resin models. Lots of PP models are still in this material and even though a lot of the sculpts look great, the material nearly ruins them with horribly flash and mold lines and a propensity to bending and warping. I really, really love their recent kits, though. The Resin/metal hybrids look great. Assuming that PP is trying with RQ to get a piece of the booming boardgame market and have a gateway product, the PVC plastic would be perfectly fine. Note that regular boardgamers with no wargaming background who enjoy ameritrashy games with miniatures, are perfectly happy to have poor quality, rubbery figures in their games (for example Fantasy Flight Games' Descent or Mansion of Madness or Ciclades or Memoir 44' or thosands of others) and still call them "cool!" and "looking great!". Battlebox quality figures would be a lot of improvement compared to your average boardgame anyway.
Going for metal which requires both assembly and painting to be playable (instead of single piece, colour coded plastic) just eliminates swathes of potential customers from outside the wargaming circle.
Also, do I understand correctly that buying a starter box doesn't even allow you to play the game (5 models in the box and the game requires 4 per player)? Why?!?!?! Who approved that!? That's absurd. They wanted to copy WH:Underworlds success and didn't notice those things?
I really wonder what the reception of the game at Essen Spiel 2019 will be. If they present it there ofc. But nobody would decide not to go to a boardgaming fair 3 times biger than GenCon if they wanted to promote their board game, wouldn't they ... ?
I would say PP underwhelming performance in the EU in general is more due to EU trade agreements. Asia and Latin America seem to be expanding, but we have friendlier trade agreements with those areas. It just economics.
|
|
|
Post by marxlives on Oct 9, 2019 16:44:37 GMT
Also, do I understand correctly that buying a starter box doesn't even allow you to play the game (5 models in the box and the game requires 4 per player)? Why?!?!?! Who approved that!? That's absurd. ... You mean, just like all those Warmachine, Hordes, and Monsterpocalypse starter boxes that provide one player all the models they need to play the game? What monsters! Gee-effing-dee: LOOK AT THE BOX. www.miniaturemarket.com/pip63001.htmlWhat does the box say, right there on the front? Is “single player starter” somehow unclear? The General forum is a cesspit or manufactured outrage. All of you: get over it. We’ve got people who don’t be play any of these games issuing decrees from on high, we’ve got people who have pretty obviously never spoken to Matt Wilson in person detailing his egregious personality defects with their third-hand knowledge, people using Jeff’s side of the story only as vindication of their own prejudices; it’s fantastic. Just buy two boxes, its the same price. This way PP doesn't have to produce two players sets (which don't always sell). This way the product serves people who want to have a two player set and those who just want a single box.
|
|
|
Post by Soul Samurai on Oct 9, 2019 17:18:35 GMT
Boardgames are sold with everything you need to play in the box. Wargames often have "two player starter boxes" that have enough stuff for a bare-minimum game, but people often end up trading away the side they don't want, so the now common "single player starter boxes" make a lot of sense.
Monpoc and RQ have single-player starter boxes and resin/metal models that require skilled (compared to press-fit models from some GW starter boxes for example) assembly. I think we have to accept that PP sees these as wargames, not boardgames.
We can debate whether it would have been smarter for PP to design and sell them as board games, but they clearly didn't so I don't think there's much point in comparing them to boardgames since that's just not what they are.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 9, 2019 20:44:25 GMT
Just buy two boxes, its the same price. Well, two boxes (apart from the issue of doubling the same models and accessories two players playing together don't need) cost twice the price of a single comparable game, actually. You can get two (different) starters for main competitor - WH:Underworlds with 4 warbands and differing content for the price of double the RQ box.
Note that with two starter RQ boxes we're entering the price zone of really expensive, often KS games, with plenty of content. I am awaiting my Black Rose Wars kickstarter any day now, and for a price comparable to 2 RQ boxes they send tons of quality components, including ~100 miniatures up to dragon size.
As for international economics, Fantasy Flight Games is based in the US and yet their product is readily available here in EU, at affordable prices.
|
|
gupp
Junior Strategist
Posts: 134
|
Post by gupp on Oct 10, 2019 0:13:37 GMT
If I ever played riot quest, the way I’d play it I’d have all the characters in a draft pool.
I already have dungeon run and a million other beer and pretzel games,though
|
|
|
Post by marxlives on Oct 10, 2019 14:43:33 GMT
Just buy two boxes, its the same price. Well, two boxes (apart from the issue of doubling the same models and accessories two players playing together don't need) cost twice the price of a single comparable game, actually. You can get two (different) starters for main competitor - WH:Underworlds with 4 warbands and differing content for the price of double the RQ box.
Note that with two starter RQ boxes we're entering the price zone of really expensive, often KS games, with plenty of content. I am awaiting my Black Rose Wars kickstarter any day now, and for a price comparable to 2 RQ boxes they send tons of quality components, including ~100 miniatures up to dragon size.
As for international economics, Fantasy Flight Games is based in the US and yet their product is readily available here in EU, at affordable prices.
<Yawn> Things are always cheaper on KS because it is a direct to buyer system (kind of shows you the real cost of waste in game design). RQ is a couple of months old. As the miniature line expands could they use a reboxed YR 2 starter? Sure. As far as Underworlds go, you get different cards and miniatures. I guess that counts as content since you need to buy all the boxes to get the cards to play "competitive" Underworlds. You could also buy a starter and then over time buy 5 singles and make the other team whatever you want it to be. The sales structure makes sense for the type of game RQ is, which isn't Underworlds, or even competitive. Can you tell me what the "faction" for RQ is?
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 10, 2019 17:44:32 GMT
Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if RQ becomes this roaring success and takes one of the top spots among skirmish games, despite my concerns.
|
|
|
Post by hypnotoad on Oct 10, 2019 20:23:55 GMT
Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if RQ becomes this roaring success and takes one of the top spots among skirmish games, despite my concerns. Considering how those models look so far, I'll be surprised.
|
|
privvy
Junior Strategist
Formerly The Nomad on PP's forums
Posts: 317
|
Post by privvy on Oct 10, 2019 20:55:29 GMT
top spots among skirmish games I don't think it will. It's a weird "skirmish/mini's based board game" hybrid, more akin to a tactics based game like Fire Emblem than anything. That's definitely going to confuse the ratings, no matter how well it sells.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 10, 2019 22:35:06 GMT
You mean like several of GW's latest offerings?
|
|
gupp
Junior Strategist
Posts: 134
|
Post by gupp on Oct 11, 2019 3:56:25 GMT
While we’re on the topic of other games, I was wondering, had anyone seen or heard of a dune miniatures adaptation?
It seems odd that I can’t find much, you think there’s be something
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 11, 2019 4:31:04 GMT
Copyright would be the first question.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Oct 11, 2019 8:36:46 GMT
top spots among skirmish games I don't think it will. It's a weird "skirmish/mini's based board game" hybrid, more akin to a tactics based game like Fire Emblem than anything. That's definitely going to confuse the ratings, no matter how well it sells. Yeah, I actually meant skirmish board games such as Aristeia, WH:Underworlds, The Edge:Downfall (by designers of Neuroshima:Hex!!!) or Super Fantasy Brawl, not skirmish wargames.
|
|
|
Post by beardmonk on Oct 11, 2019 9:08:28 GMT
While I have absolutely no supporting evidence for this it wouldn’t surprise me if Neo Mechanica ends up being a game more along the line of Underworlds/Killteam. Sadly, people seem to be moving away from detailed, mass battle games. The average table top player and “the youth” now wants something that can be picked up and played, all done within an hour. If PP is trying to make another mass battle game, there may be issues I think.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Oct 11, 2019 21:35:33 GMT
From what has been presented so far, the only way for WC:NM to match WMH standard model count is to be fielding a large number of units. The model count in a unit is to average between 3 and 5.
I doubt it will be as skirmish focused as Kill Team or WarCry, but far more than Mk 3 is, and closer to what Mk 1 had. It may be closer to Infinity's model count, but it could be a bit higher, too. No where near enough details on it to tell at this point.
|
|