Would /tg/ support a line of GW historical minis? Just think:

>>55274713

They published both Warhammer Historical Battles AND Warmaster Historical (Ancients and Medieval).

So between those books and, for example, Perry Miniatures (GW sculptor) you're basically covered.

>>55274764
I realize that, but given some of the stuff GW has been putting out lately I think they could really blow the lid off the Historical genre. Perry makes some really nice stuff, especially War of the Roses, but they don't make everything.

>>55274786
You want GW to destroy Perry is that it?

If so purchase a shotgun and destroy your brain.

>>55274786
>I am a gigantic faggot, please give me aids
FTFY

>>55274786
>but given some of the stuff GW has been putting out lately
Do you realise that historicals require good sculptors (not just CAD), good proportions and that the competitors sell multi-part plastic kits at 1/10th of GW's price per mini?

The black powder starter box holds 150 minis for 70 pounds, with full rules inside.

GW just don't have the inhouse skills and business model to compete in historicals anymore. It could have in the early 00s, but now they can't.

>>55274786
GW can't even compete in the fantasy genre anymore, what makes you think they can do historicals ?

>>55274946
90% of the historical minis I've seen are shit with muddy details.

>>55275087
Perry's multi-parts have crisper details than GW's.

Plus, GW doesn't sculpt minis, they do everything by CAD, so it would look pretty shit on realistic humans.

There are enough historical wargames out there for GW to be able to penetrate. They aren't going to bother with anything that isn't Warhammer anymore.

>>55275115
Because they don't know how to use CAD then. CB uses CAD too but their miniatures look realistic (for a sci-fi game) and well proportioned imo

>>55275301
>CB uses CAD
Judging from wips I saw, I'd guess they use ZBrush.

>>55275013
>can't compete.
>largest profit in the companies history this year.
yeah, please stop being a faggot.

>>55275013
>I am too poor to play
go back to your shitty f2p mobas and digital ccgs

>>55274713
No.

>>55275115
You obviously know fuck all about CAD if you think that. Warhammer has a certain exaggerated style, and they sculpt things to match.
I have no idea how you come to the conclusion that it must be because they can't.

I mean, one look at the Hobbit miniature range, which uses realistic proportions is proof enough there.

>>55276896
someone doesn't realize the profit is coming from the whoring of their IP and not from per unit sales. Their per unit sales are crap

>>55274786
GW hasn't been putting out anything good lately.

They've just been cheapening and slashing the prices on the remnants of their once great IPs.
So basically what I'm saying is GW should do a modern setting wargame.

>>55276896
Yeah, from the fucking huge success that was Sega's Warhammer Fantasy video game.

>>55277127
>>55277030

Is this the deluded Island the WHFBG faggots sit upon?

Tell me, how did GW show record profits over Creative Assembly?

Did GW somehow make more out of Warhammer Total War over CA ?

>>55277236
>Huge boom in profits coincides with release of massively popular video game in the same IP.
>"NOPE, MUST BE OUR SUPERIOR MODELS!"

Fucking contrarians. I'll bet you spend your spare time on /co/ arguing Man Of Steel was good.

>>55277407
>>Huge boom in profits coincides with release of massively popular video game in the same IP.

That didn't happen though.
GW's boom is more recent.

File: Smug Laugh.jpg (78KB, 669x696px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 669x696px

>>55277407

>first two quarters of current year are incredibly successful

>without factoring in 8th or the campaign

>obviously this was caused by a game which released in the third quarter of 2015

the absolute state of this board

>>55276995
>I mean, one look at the Hobbit miniature range, which uses realistic proportions is proof enough there.
The LotR minis were 99% done by the Perry bros, dude.

>>55274764
this had to be the first post
it is.
something is right with the world.

>>55277959
It's sickening.

File: GBP01_Plastic_Viking_Hirdmen_77404.gif (126KB, 611x324px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 611x324px

The fuck is wrong with you OP, do GW tell you when to take a shite as well?

They'd rather go bust and live off video game royalties than sell plastic Vikings for less than 50p each.

>>55274713
>GW historical minis?
GW could sell their minis wrapped in twenty dollar bills, and I'd still have reservations about giving them my money.

>>55274713

Nah, I don't want to give GW a chance to start acting like they invented history and have sole rights to it.

>>55278101
>The LotR minis
Speaking of, was I the only one who thought that all the faces in that line were hideous? Like they'd been squashed from top and bottom? The general proportions were okay, but the faces, ugh.

>>55274786

Perry make generally from late Medieval period onwards. They're good but they're certainly not the be all and end all of Historical wargaming.

Gripping Beast, Fire Forge and Conquest make some nice plastics of earlier stuff, and metals are generally inexpensive too.

File: 1435368826074.jpg (33KB, 691x499px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 691x499px

>>55274713
>GW historical minis
So just like historicals, but more expensive to pay for a stronger marketing machine?

>>55274713
No. I assume people would just glue bolters to them and use them in 40K.

Fantasy failed, what makes you think GW could run a historical line with success

>>55274713
Only if 28mm heroic scale

>>55278317
Who makes the best ancient world miniatures. I'm specifically looking for Macedonian/Alexander The Great stuff, but also interested in Egypt and Rome.

>>55278886
Victrix is your best bet.

File: consider the following.png (131KB, 520x351px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 520x351px

Because other companies already do all of those better than GW could. It's hard for GW's business model of pushing huge overpriced overpowered centerpiece models or infantry blobs to work with historical settings and the historical crowd in general. The rules for GW's games exist to push their models, which is often the opposite of the purpose of historical wargaming rulesets.

>>55279558
Forgot to add, Warlord does good imperial Romans, and Gripping Beast has late Romans if either interest you.

>Post-Perry GW
>able to make historical models

>GW releases a WWII line
>issues a DCMA takedown to the Holocaust Museum for infringement

>>55279558
Wow! These are great, thank you very much.

>>55277236
TW:WH and other vidyas kake up one quarter of total GW profits for Q1 2017.

>>55282110
Source?

>>55274713
GW couldn't compete, historicals are sold under 1$ a pop.

>>55282127
Their financiel report, faggot.

>>55277959
Well all we now is that it's not caused by AoS, since the game sunk in sales.

File: bayonets.jpg (28KB, 600x255px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 600x255px

>>55274713
GW would get annihilated in the historicals market, they just have no hope of competing with the massive amount of competitors there.

They have no brand to stand on seeing as how many historicals are jaded ex 40k players, they have no real pedigree of mini design considering their biggest asset in that field (Perry Bros) is a direct competitor now, and they have no leg up on rules. Throw in their "premium" price point and they would be torn to shreds. Many companies out there sell a platoon of infantry for the cost of a single squad of space marines, and in pretty good quality. If you go the cheap route, you can sometimes get upwards of 40-50 infantry for around $40.

The industry has just changed too much, and they really need something to stand out in order to complete with the big boys in the industry. Warlord and Battlefront would smash anything GW could offer just on price alone and many smaller companies would crush GW when it comes to model quality or options.

Not to mention GW would be in for a rude awakening the moment they tried to copyright a Sherman tank or Napoleonic uniforms.

Plus they would inevitably fuck it up like they did their other lines and they've got their hands full unfucking 40k and whatever the hell they're calling fantasy these days anyways. They need to work on their core lines and prip them up before they start adding random shit onto their list of things to do.

>>55274786
> Wants to replace realistically scaled, fine detailed and characterful models with over designed, messy, bloated CAD action figures with weapons the size of motorbikes.
Actually kill yourself, millennial.

>>55275087
You're looking in the wrong place and/or don't know what detail actually means, which puts you in the same bracket at GWs current CAD designers

GW just can't compete. Perrys sell 40 guys for 30 bucks with better sculpts than GW was able to push out lately.

>>55276995
The pre cad stuff was done by the Perrys. Which is why everything since looks like it was left too close to a fire. Try again.

>>55277959
>Not understanding sales vs profits
I agree anon, you are fucking sickening

>>55274713
A napoleon themed army for sigmar woulda be cool

>>55274713
GW's target audience is kids and young adults, not old farts and military veterans.

>>55274713
The hell it's with the GW shills of late?

>>55284176
I hope you get cancer. Sincerely.

>>55274713

>ancient world massed battles
>War of of the Roses
>Napoleon

All of this exists in both, plastic and metal from a large number of different companies in good or even great sculpting quality for prices GW would never consider.

>>55275087
A statement without any value as long as you don't tell us which minis you looked at or provide pictures.
Maybe there is something wrong with your eyes?

>>55274713
This is some dumb shit tbqh you'd get far worse sculpts than the Perry, Victrix and other 28mm plastic minis for a huge markup

>>55284176
>Lineguard Gorerifles

Except you won't have this. Enjoy you cogfop dwarves and smegmarines.

>>55274713
considering the huuuge amout of historical of successful wargames, gw would have to make a cheaper historical wargame... Which is not bad, i would like to see some ancient empires wargame (hellenic kingdoms, roman republic and so on) or ww1 wargame with GW sculpts

>>55274713
Thankfully not. Historicals are the realm of the terminally boring and would-be Nazis.

>>55277030
>>55277407

Their accounts are in the public domain. Royalties are only 5% of their income, sales are up by more than a third in the last year.

>>55284969
>Royalties are only 5% of their income
And 22% of their profits. Because, you know, royalties don't count in the revenue.

>>55284921
like 40k?

GW couldn't compete, because they don't know how to :
>make decently-priced minis anymore
>make balanced and fun rulesets
>make realistic human faces and bodies

File: pretorian.jpg (172KB, 1024x1463px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1024x1463px

>>55274713
>>ancient world massed battles
>>War of of the Roses
>>Napoleon

There are guard regiments for that.

>>55284969

That's something of a downplaying, they're straight profit and quite a good chunk of it, because there's basically no overheads.

>>55284176
Get back to your tabletop moba, shillary supporter.

File: Smugpire.jpg (22KB, 321x217px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 321x217px

>>55283609

where has all the money come from anon?

games workshop deals in selling models, selling books and selling the IP, and all recent 40k vidya has been awful and flopped hard, which leaves books and models

where has the money come from anon?

>>55285342
>>55282156
here are games workshops revenue "highlights"

Revenue 158,114 118,069
Revenue at constant currency* 143,375
118,069
Operating profit - pre-royalties receivable
30,832 10,921
Royalties receivable 7,491 5,939
Operating profit 38,323 16,860
Profit before taxation 38,403 16,948
Cash generated from operations 49,370
26,782
Earnings per share 95.1p 42.1p
Dividends per share declared in the year**
74p 40p

add three zeroes to the end of each of the figures not displayed in pence to get the whole sum as gee dubs have rounded their profits to the lowest whole thousand.

the first results are for two thousand and seventeen, the second results are for two thousand and sixteen for contrast

as we can see their operating profits have doubled for the first two quarters over the last year without factoring in any of the recent releases including eighth edition or the primarines, also royalties only account for about one seventh of total cash generated from operations and it only accounts for that much because they don't have to worry about the overhead.

further in the document we can see that games workshop has sold thirty million pounds worth of items through mail order and a further fifty million through direct sales.

however from direct sale within stores they only made about 0.5 million pounds profit from direct store sales and that most of their actual profit from selling product came from mail order and supplying it to different stores due to the sheer overhead required for operating the stores.

this is better than last year however as at least they made money off of the stores instead of losing money.

you can see the full report here https://investor.games-workshop.com/2017/07/24/annual-report-3/

Why are historical companies able to produce high quality plastics at a much lower price? What's the deal?

>>55286134
For one, you can't copyright or trademark a Napoleonic Line soldier or a Sherman tank.

Thus, many companies can make their own version and the free market will do it's thing.

>>55286199
Are other sci-fi games as expensive as WH40K then? Or did GW bully and sue everything vaguely sci-fi looking and there's nothing left but them now?

>>55286218
>Or did GW bully and sue everything vaguely sci-fi looking and there's nothing left but them now?
Nah, only small guys

>>55286218
I can't think of plastic 28mm sci-fi that's not Warlord's Gates of Antares (which is noticeably more expensive than Warlord's historical ranges) or Mantic, which I have no experience with.

File: 99129915024_DaemonsofKhorneBloodThirster01.jpg (42KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x620px

What about pre-painted minis?Its horrible to people without any type of painting skills,like me,to get a good painted mini without buying it on amazon

>>55286218
The majority of Sci fi games are either 15mm or smallers, and thus cheaper, or 28mm skirmishing games.
There is Warzone I think, but it has lots of bad luck, and the different mantic ones than are pretty good but not that played.
28mm or whatever the new scales it's GW doing isn't that good for mass battles in my opinion anyway, the sheer price and logistics to put tanks or mechs in game and have fun are bonkers, much easier to do it so in 6mm for mass battles armies of tanks etc or battles with plattons of infantry and some tanks/mechs in 15mm.

>>55286273

>only doing half the hobby
>in an age were there's all sorts of tools, paints and washes that make entry-level painting easier than ever

why

>>55274713
Would buy for kitbashing/making RPG characters. Not sure about gaming, most armies would likely feel too samey.

File: terrible-paint-job.jpg (9KB, 264x191px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 264x191px

>>55286306
Im retarded,so GW would make me a favor by selling pre-painted minis

>>55286273
Play FFG X-wing, plenty of people plays it and it's a fun game.

>>55275087
>Oh look, 15mm miniature
>O, and 25mm one, but sculpted in '83
>Thay really can't beat crisp detail of my 32mm Chaos Megazord Knobkrusha (tm)

Problem with historicals is that you can get most detailed models in this fucking world if you simply look into the autistic realm of modelling.

File: 99120105040_JungleFightersNEW_02.jpg (64KB, 434x418px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 434x418px

>>55286351
Would they really, though?

>>55275115
> me no understand technology the post
Holy shit man. Are you so fucking stupid you think that CAD is incapable of rendering models in whatever the fuck scale or detail you want?
Can you walk and chew gum?
Do you have to wear a helmet?

>>55286273
Git gud faget
Painting decent is too fucking easy. Guides out the ass
You are just lazy

>>55275115
Pretty sure I remember some WD issue where they showed actual citadel sculpting, though that was some 7+ years back, I think. Still, have they actually transitioned fully to CAD? Is there any confirmation on this?

Warlord games, Essex miniatures, and the rest are just fine for me.

They have good models. I don't know of anyone who plays Hail, Caesar!, so I just the models for dioramas.

File: 1501455248462.gif (858KB, 240x228px) Image search: [Google]

858KB, 240x228px

>>55274713
Absolutely terrible proposition.

>>55274713
Too small a market for it

>>55274713
Isn't Warlord basically all former GW folks?

>>55286890
This 100%. The people whinging about CAD are the same technology-illiterate morons that think airbrushes are cheating. Go paint with your fingers and sculpt with playdoh you nostalgic fags.

>tfw the surgeon isnt even a barber shop anymore

File: MGS Wipe this meme.jpg (134KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1920x1080px

>>55277030
>>55277127
i'm no fan of AoS, but this is simply false. It's a matter of public record how much GW receives from royalties, that being 7,491,000 pounds. GW's profit before royalties is 30,832,000 pounds, meaning their total sales minus expenses is still greater than royalties by a magnitude of 4. Moreover, sales is responsible for GW's increase in profitability from 2016 to 2017, since GW's per-royalty profit (that is to say profit from sales) jumped almost 20 million pounds from 2016 to 2017 (from 10,921,000 to 30,832,000 pounds) while royalties only increased by less than 2 million pounds (from 5,939,000 pounds in 2016 to 7,491,000 pounds in 2017)
source: https://19485-presscdn-0-14-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Combined-document.pdf
In short, no, vidya was not at all why GW's profit increased so much, not at all. The fact that this is so easily disproven makes it embarrassing that people still spew it. Pic very much related

>>55287186
Historical Wargaming quite literally dwarfs the entirety of non-scifi wargaming combined and has so since the inception of wargaming you uninformed baboon

>>55284984
>And 22% of their profits
Wrong, it's 19.5%, and it's certainly not the cause of GW's massive increase in profit like you retards claimed, since it barely increased from 2016 to 2017 while profit from sales alone made a massive jump. shut the fuck up faggot, you are objectively wrong.

>>55287341
more or less

>>55286444
>rock elemental

>>55286218
Warzone is high-quality resin and the scupts would make GW cry. Same for all Prodos products really.
Infinity sells for cheap compared to GW characters too, 5-10 bucks a pop
Gates of Antares or the mantic games are cheap as fuck.

>>55274713

Nope.

GW would take over the market, drive bankrupt the many other countries doing historicals, harm the hobby by driving it into GW stores and bankrupting the indie game stores that aren't already driven bankrupt, and then jump back out of the market when it doesn't produce a lot in the way of profit. Thus the whole field would be killed.

I would support them buying out and doing Eclipse Phase as a specialist game. For the same reason.

>>55287892
Well it doesn't really work, fantasy wargaming has never been so lively since they fucked off the market.

>>55287892
>GW would take over the market,
Stopped reading there. They can't.

>>55286398
Yes, but then are singularily not fit for gaming. Tru-Scale rifles mean their barrels are thin as horsehair in 1/35, and 1/72 is 15mm for detailing purposes.

File: DHDM9MOWsAANe5u.jpg (31KB, 499x278px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 499x278px

>>55287892

>GW would take over the market

Thanks for the giggle mate, it's been a long day at work

If historicals are so popular then why is there hardely anyone in tg playing them, no national events, the companies' websites look like 1997 geocities sites, and I've never seen anyone playing them at any FLGS ever?

Seems to me it's vapor.

>>55288572
The most popular game at my LFGS is Saga. There's also more Saga events than AoS events.

>>55288572
Because their audience is entirely different from the usual crowd playing at an FLGS.
Men in their 40s and 50s usually have their own houses where they can meet, they don't need to gather in stores with smelly teenagers.

Thats why the websites aren't an issue too.
And Events? Warlord Games just run a summer campaign about the fictional landing of the wehrmacht in england. There are tournaments all the time too (Bolt Action as well as Flames of War). Pretty sure there are SAGA tournaments too
Other historical games are more narrative driven and don't really offer a good tournament/competitive element.

File: Queue for Salute (3).jpg (232KB, 1600x899px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1600x899px

>>55288572

Because they're mostly a different breed from your Red Bull-swilling, Beasts of War-reading neckbeards.

>>55286890
>>55287378

The point being made (not that I agree with them particularly) is that GW's CAD sculptors are bad because they were trained to make lamps out of geometric shapes, not to sculpt green stuff into people-looking people.

It's not the program's fault, it's the people they are employing to do it.

>>55288572
Grogs don't social internet.

>>55288745
I went to Salute for the first time last year.
Really enjoyed it - very pleasant event, and really interesting to see all those tiny companies I would never hear about otherwise.

>>55288874

I'm up north but I think I'm going to have to make the effort at some point.

Need to start going to wargaming shows really, pick up random blisters in person instead of paying £3 postage every time.

It's trying to work out which ones are decent though, Vapnartak at York I just missed this year but it seemed they had quite a bit there.

>historicals require good sculptors (not just CAD), good proportions
This is blatantly untrue of pretty much any of the 28mm metal historical stuff I've got aside from The Assault Group. Warlord, Crusade, Artizan and Perry were all varying degrees of wank.

>>55288916
>Vapnartak
>>55288916
Never heard of that one before.
Though to be fair, I don't know of many at all.
Are there a lot of other /tg/ cons in England I'm oblivious to?

>>55288572
You are full of shit lad

>>55287892
>I would support them buying out and doing Eclipse Phase as a specialist game. For the same reason.
Uh, what? This is like saying GW should buy out like, Burning Wheel or some shit.

>>55274713
www.warlordgames.com

File: 1504686708624.png (419KB, 720x971px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 720x971px

>>55280571

>>55286134
They don't maintain a global brick and mortar presence. That's a large expense.

What's the best line of historical minis? Show me the cream of the crop, I bet it's about on par with old GW CSM models.

>>55293119
With that much inherent bias on display, why should anyone spoonfeed you?

>>55293170
Thanks for making my point.

File: 9eb0d0a1551d30cfb0fddaf20bd23d85.jpg (127KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 800x531px

>>55293119
deprogram yourself

>>55293119
For plastics I think that Perry Miniatures and Tamiya are the best.

>>55293188
paintjobs are nice, but the models are painfully average. and they've all got downs syndrome apparently.

>>55293253
This. I'd say they are slightly less impressive than the metal bretonnians.

>>55293188

I can't see the faces or weapons in enough detail to have a definite opinion. Maybe if they were to selectively increase the size of just the hear, hands, and weapons, they'd be worthwhile miniatures, but until I can actually SEE them in full detail, I'll have to assume they're Mantic-level trash.

>>55293253
>>55293278
>models made by the same sculptors after 20 more years experience are somehow worse
Holy shit uncuck yourselves

>>55293349
If anything the Perry bros have only gotten better than GW at this point. They can actually make miniatures where everyone doesn't look fat.

>>55293349
oh no! someone has a different opinion than me! they must be wrong! you're an idiot. and stop sucking perry cock. they're alright, but the models in the pic are average.there is absolutely nothing about them that makes them stand out from 10,000 other mounted minis

File: Is this Austrian serious.jpg (31KB, 201x271px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 201x271px

>>55284176
>A napoleon themed army for sigmar woulda be cool
>For sigmar

>>55293253
>>55293170

Well that wasn't predictable at all.

Historicals must be properly copyrighted.
>Yes, this is the new codex for Napoleonic France.
> My new units include Consulstrike Soulstealer Cavalrex
> Blood Hussar Horseblasters
> Francophonic Francoflayers.
> Napelon Bonapare, Everchosen on his Dire Grognord.

>>55293681
>tfw i roll a bunch of ones on my fusiliers' Gets Hot test and half of them die.

>>55293468
The reason why I picked Perry miniatures is they are well sculpted and the Perry twins were responsible for many of the older GW ranges, including many old school CSM metals. It would be ridiculous to shit on them and so imply their skills have declined for whatever reason, either your fixation on the GW IP or a dislike of more realistic proportions.

If I am "sucking Perry cock" for preferring better sculpted, better proportioned miniatures at a very reasonable price then so be it.

>>55293737
where did anyone say they got worse fucknugget? i said the models in the pic were average, which they are. and i know they did a lot of the older range. i own all of the lord of the rings models they did. you need to learn a bit of reading comprehension.

File: 6fe551f610f6d863ddd8096fecb3acc3.jpg (605KB, 2650x1775px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 2650x1775px

>>55293779
>where did anyone say they got worse fucknugget?
They did sculpt a lot of the older CSM metals for instance which would imply no improvement for decades, but if you want something explicit than look no further than this post I replied to, you pigshit dumb motherfucker;
>>55293278
which compared recent perry sculpts to their Bretonnian range.

Anyway, if those Perry cavalry are only "average" then that's definitely one of the reasons I play historicals. I had a brief google for some of the stuff being put out recently by GW for AoS and was decidedly unimpressed, pic related.

As was clear to the other poster you were never interested in an honest discussion, you just wanted to fling around some shit to justify your continued bootlicking. I did however think you may have to concede ground when faced with clear evidence to your laughably bullshit original assumption that whatever was posted would be the equivalent to old CSM miniatures, I guess your blinkers are hard coded.

File: 99120201046_EverChosenVaranguardHammer360.jpg (127KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 600x600px

>>55294280

>>55294291
What went so wrong?

File: IMG_1077.jpg (174KB, 919x916px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 919x916px

>>55294280
>"I had a quick Google"
>stumbles on the quintessentially weakest GW recent models
>the ones that perfectly showcase the downside of GWs designs

Fuck off. You clearly aren't being honest. Everyone knows those knights are over designed, over detailed crap. Compare your historicals with Downes to something like

>Primaris marines
>Grand Master Voldus
>Putrid Blightkings
>pic related

File: Screenshot_20170909-103340.png (3MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1440x2560px

>>55294850
>y-you weren't meant to see those ones

File: claymorecasting.jpg (234KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 800x800px

>>55293188
There are better historicals than those 2bh famalam, though they are pretty nice.

>>55274946
Every single sculptor hired by GW is required to be able to sculpt with clay, Anon. So yeah, they can sculpts.

File: 20024153_1379563798807405_5606668911462930504_o.jpg (145KB, 1626x1450px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1626x1450px

>>55293119
Empress do good work.

File: FB_IMG_1504938108066.jpg (69KB, 1484x640px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1484x640px

>>55298950

File: DSC_3153.jpg (192KB, 1600x1080px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1600x1080px

>>55298990
Langton

File: maxresdefault.jpg (67KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 960x720px

>>55298993
1:285 minis for 6mm wargaming from GHQ

File: FFAB.jpg (154KB, 1380x551px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1380x551px

>>55299064
AB are well proportioned and posed 20mm miniatures, a popular scale for ww2.

>>55299064
mah nigger

>>55274713
Why the fuck would GW enter a market that's already crowded, has loads of good cheap minis available which are easy to substitute and in which they would not have defendable IP?

For a company that's done a load of dumb things over the years this would be the dumbest.

>>55294850
Am I supposed to actually be impressed by this shit ?

>>55287859
>Infinity sells for cheap compared to GW characters too
Nice deflection. Like most of the other popular systems Inifinity has a higher $$/mini average across a force.

Of course, 40K requires a shitload more minis so the total cost is way higher.

>>55299902
A GW character costs 35$, € or £. An infinity character costs 8.

>>55288572
>If historicals are so popular then why is there hardely anyone in tg playing them, no national events, the companies' websites look like 1997 geocities sites, and I've never seen anyone playing them at any FLGS ever?
Tournaments are for try-hards.
Gaming stores are for children and people that no-one would ever welcome into their homes.

Grown up can play at home with their friends.

File: briton vs saxon-113.jpg (610KB, 800x758px) Image search: [Google]

610KB, 800x758px

>>55294850

Oh cool I didn't know GW had the rights for a Plants vs Zombies wargame.

It's almost like the only people left playing GW games are the most dedicated and/or braindead. They have noticeably started aiming at their core market better, after all.

>>55299914
>reading comprehension fail
Is a 40K army made up of all characters?

Infinity models don't go any cheaper than £5 each.
GW models go as cheap as £1.35 each and there are plenty at £2 or less each.


Look at a typical force. Divide total cost by number of minis.

GW average price per mini across a force is way lower than Infinity even including big models that you don't get in Infinity.

>>55299962
Except even the shittiest and oldest models in infinity are more detailed and better designed than GWs plastic, you can't really compare them to a multi part plastic kit.

For the record, you could compare Infinity minis to the Vostroyan range.

>>55299916
You have no idea how sad this sounds.

>>55274713
They already tried and failed hard, because they are pretty uncompetitive without their IPs.

>>55299995

He's not wrong about game stores though, our local GW is literally a creche/cesspit whilst the quite secretive gaming club is full of professional types and talented grognards.

>>55299995
It's true though. Gaming stores are where you find the dregs of the hobby. Children, the worst kind of teenagers and the social rejects.

People that aren't children and don't have something wrong with them play at home or at private clubs.

I have played literally one game in a store in the last 20 years.

>>55299995
Definitely an element of truth though. The best thing I've found about tournaments is the camaraderie and partying. Stores can be hit and miss. A good club or group of friends though is really top tier. Last reasonable sized city I lived in I would go most weeks to a nice apartment where I'd play all sorts of great campaigns, asymmetric scenarios from all sorts of different eras from a vast combined collection of miniatures. If we had a big game for a campaign we couldn't finish, we could simply leave it for another evening.

>>55299995
There's nothing sad about having a group of friends to play with.

I don't want to play with random strangers, I use warhammer as a means to get together with my old pals from my hometown.

>>55299962
>GW models go as cheap as £1.35 each and there are plenty at £2 or less each.
Yeah old marines and guard troopws, whily you still need to buys shitton of the boxes.

>>55283188

>historicals
>realistically scaled

lol

>>55298950

These are awful

>>55300515

Feel free to suggest some anatomically perfect ranges then mate. I'm all ears.

>>55294850
that snail looks like a digimon

>>55294850
This is fucking awful. Who even like and buy this shit?

>>55294850
It's, Uh, creative I think. It has too many edges tough, it seem the modeler did so with a knife whitling it or something, not my cup of tea but I seen much worse in AoS.

>Giving money to GW

I'd rather not. Wizards is also working hard on being shit I don't support (registering "Players' Handbook" etc.). In general Anglo corps turn to cancer quicker than you can say "copyright trolling".

>>55300436
The old Marines go for £2.5 now and Cadians are at £1.8
Is there even any GW kit that goes for less than £1.8 MSRP per miniature now?

>>55299902
Case in point, non-skirmish games in 28-32mm are retarded

>>55294850
Literally anime-cartoonish trash

File: Screenshot_20170909-163210-01.jpg (42KB, 301x356px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 301x356px

>>55298990
War is hell

>>55293188
Fantastic horses

>>55300863
>Who even like and buy this shit?
LoL audience

>>55296370
[citation needed]

>>55300733

Compare the proportions of most 28mm wargaming minis with 1/35 miniatures and tell me they're realistically proportioned.

>>55305430
>55305430
prove it's not true.

>>55305527
The burden of proof is on you.

>>55305527
>literally retardation
Your mother gets paid for sex. Prove it's not true