NEWS: GW repackages infantry boxes and increases prices

Lord Hurin · **Posted:** Tue Feb 07, 2012 8:02 pm

Jamros wrote:

Is that in US dollars? Its $22.25 per boxed set, or $44.50 for 24 warriors. Next, percent increase is calculated with the formula ((new amount-original amount)/original amount). If we are calculating the percent increase for the cost of 24 warriors, then (44.50-20)/(20)=1.225, or around 123%. So over around ten years, the cost of purchasing 24 plastic infantry soldiers has increased by about 123%, which, while not 265%, is still rather ridiculously high.

It's actually in Canadian dollars. My Warriors of Middle-Earth boxed set (12 Goblins, 8 High Elves and 4 Numenoreans) was $20 when it was brand new in 2001. Now, in 2012, a box of Goblins and a box of Elves/Numenoreans are $26.50 each according to the GW website, or $53. 20x2.65 is 53, so they've gone up by almost triple, or 265%

Draugluin · **Posted:** Tue Feb 07, 2012 8:32 pm

Jamros wrote:

Draugluin wrote:

Lord Hurin wrote:

Yeah, it really shafts WoTR. When I started back in 2001 it was $20 for 24 models, now it's $26.50 for 12. I know inflation and all that, but nearly 150% in 10 years? Seems too high to me... Luckily, like I said, I have (probably more than) enough plastics. Future releases and the current finecast and metals I still want will hurt enough.

A 200% rise in prices would be paying $40 for 24, so paying $53 for 24 now is actually a 265% rise in prices in the last 10 years.

Is that in US dollars? Its $22.25 per boxed set, or $44.50 for 24 warriors. Next, percent increase is calculated with the formula ((new amount-original amount)/original amount). If we are calculating the percent increase for the cost of 24 warriors, then (44.50-20)/(20)=1.225, or around 123%. So over around ten years, the cost of purchasing 24 plastic infantry soldiers has increased by about 123%, which, while not 265%, is still rather ridiculously high.

I was just using his example (which I guess is Canadian or something). Haha, it depends on how you say it, prices now are 223% higher then 10 years ago, but the prices have only increased by 123%. I actually said what I said the wrong way. :oops:

Lord Hurin · **Posted:** Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:47 pm

Regardless of how you want to say it, the prices have gone up far quicker than warranted.

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:24 pm

Spodulike wrote:

Load of orcs riding on the back of a dinosaur, I mean really.

That dinosaur is a Rhino-like beast that pulled Grond IN THE FILM, they are not Warhammerish. If you wanted to describe something as Warhamerish you should have said Groblug the new goblin king, or Ashrak the new goblin shaman, maybe the dweller o the fact that the Warg Marauders, Amdur and Dragon Knigh should fall of their mounts, but not the Great Beast.

Spodulike · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 7:37 am

Ever since the Cone Knights, the range has become increasingly Warhammerish. Fanciful extrapolations from Jackson are not necessarily any more credible than GW's own cartoon-like view of ME. Gimmicks for children, that's all they are. Still, GW shrewdly realised long ago that a Fool and his money...

It's a pity, there is some really good stuff in the range. They did some good work on Gondor's fiefdoms, for instance. Even now, the odd gem turns up - overpriced - but of good quality design and sculpting. The problem is that there is no real integrity overall - you've only got to read the psuedo-historical rubbish they've been packing the supplements with for years to know that they don't give a fig for Tolkien - and unfortunately this tendency rather cheapens the currency of the whole range for me. Nothing GW puts out has any credibility any more.

Sticky Fingersss · **Joined:** Sat Oct 09, 2010 11:20 am **Posts:** 1776

I really dont get why people dont like the Great Beast. THEY WERE IN THE FILMS. If a bunch of haradrim could ride a mumak 3x the size of the beast, i'm sure orcs have the same capability!

CaptainOfTheWhiteTower · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:19 am

Spodulike wrote:

Why have I stopped buying GW? Well, partly it's because, as the years go by, I find less and less in the range to interest me. I seldom look at new releases, when I do it simply confirms that the march towards Warhammerish Twaddle has continued unabated. Load of orcs riding on the back of a dinosaur, I mean really.

I found there was less in the range that interested me too, which was one reason why I stopped collecting for a while. As for the Rhino thing, I won't be buying one and if you're playing people who think similarly to you then they probably wouldn't choose to field one against you either. That said I don't have a problem with it being released as strictly speaking it was in the film and there is a demand for it, as the posts above me show.

In the future I can see most new releases dividing opinion like this model does, because I think virtually all film and book characters must be covered by now. Plus 10 years on from the first film coupled with high prices I can't see the hobby being an easy sell to would be new players. That said we have our perfectly adequate rules manuals and the models that we've already amassed so whatever happens it doesn't need to die out.

Pindergorn · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 1:41 pm

CaptainOfTheWhiteTower wrote:

Spodulike wrote:

Why have I stopped buying GW? Well, partly it's because, as the years go by, I find less and less in the range to interest me. I seldom look at new releases, when I do it simply confirms that the march towards Warhammerish Twaddle has continued unabated. Load of orcs riding on the back of a dinosaur, I mean really.

I found there was less in the range that interested me too, which was one reason why I stopped collecting for a while. As for the Rhino thing, I won't be buying one and if you're playing people who think similarly to you then they probably wouldn't choose to field one against you either. That said I don't have a problem with it being released as strictly speaking it was in the film and there is a demand for it, as the posts above me show.

In the future I can see most new releases dividing opinion like this model does, because I think virtually all film and book characters must be covered by now. Plus 10 years on from the first film coupled with high prices I can't see the hobby being an easy sell to would be new players. That said we have our perfectly adequate rules manuals and the models that we've already amassed so whatever happens it doesn't need to die out.

I went down to my local GW today to have a look at the new books for myself, and I really had intended to buy one (Kingdoms of Men). But in the end I just couldn't bring myself to do it - the books seem slimmer than my current sourcebooks (Mordor, Arnor/Angmar, Gondor), and they're more expensive (than when I bought the sourcebooks).

BUT when flicking through the new Mordor book, I saw a picture of a model I've always liked, one of the faiirly new Mordor Orc Captains (the one in a looted Gondor breastplate). I decided there and then, that I wanted to get it, and I would even have been willing to get it in the overpriced finecast, but lo and behold...they're no longer available.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1290114

Why the hell did they pick the oldest Mordor Orc captain model to go in the new finecast (sorry, I just can't bring myself to call it by its official, pretentious name) Mordor Orc Commanders set? I've had that model for 9 years, and I think its Devlan Mud in comparison to the newer versions and poses brought out in recent years. I would have been willing to get the finecast commander set if it had included one of the new Captains.

Draugluin · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 5:23 pm

That captain is still available online. In metal.

Pindergorn · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 5:37 pm

Draugluin wrote:

That captain is still available online. In metal.

No, its not. Not on the British site at least - the purchase button has been removed and the page can only be accessed through a direct URL. I had to google it to find it as it didn't show up in a search on the GW site or in the Mordor Catalogue list.

Just to be clear, I'm talking about GW's website here, not ebay and other third party retailers.

Draugluin · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:02 pm

I'm talking about America's GW website, not Ebay or Amazon. You can only get to it via direct link, but it's still available to buy.

Pindergorn · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 7:16 pm

Well its not available on the British site.

Spodulike · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:16 pm

I freely admit that the Kiddies Beach-Ride Rhino is not the best example of Mad Things GW Have Foisted On Us.

It is not for me, though. I have the disadvantage, I know, of having grown up on the books and caring a damn about them.

There were beasts hauling Grond and I credit the Jackson films with a very good visualisation of them. It does not follow that I want a version ridden by little green men. That was in neither book nor film. That's just the sort of thing you would get in Warhammer.

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:28 pm

No no no, the Great Beast is not Warhammerish, you seen a Mumak recently. And they're Orcs not aliens.

Draugluin · **Posted:** Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:36 pm

Well, as has been said, if men can ride something that's 3 stories tall, why can't orcs ride something that's 2 stories tall? If I recall, the ballista weren't in the books, but no one complained about them being in the movie or in the game. Amdur wasn't in either book or movies, yet the only thing I've ever heard of him is that he looks awesome.

Spodulike · **Posted:** Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:07 am

Yeah, lots of people did complain about the semi-automatic ballista. A ballista or bolt thrower is one thing; besides, we know that Saruman's army had the technology to launch grappling hooks. The Gondor repeater version was silly, however. Very Warhammer.

With the "why can't orcs ride it" comment we are back to the old argument that says "well, Tolkien didn't say there couldn't be Haradrim assasins, repeating bolt throwers or a Fell Beast Olympic Formation Aerobatic Team" so we can have them if we like. The point is, Tolkien did not specifically envisage it and it's up to you how far you are prepared to extrapolate from what he did envisage. For me, for instance, I can cope with orc shamens (if not necessarily with their "powers"), because it seems reasonably consistent with what little we know about orc culture. I cannot be dragged too much further into the Land of Sensationalist Surmise. Most of the "improvements" GW have made to ME are very much in the spirit of Warhammer and are, frankly, rather childish.

GW have been eroding my confidence in their ability to interpret ME for years. All those strange made up characters and all that ridiculous fluff in the supplements. Every so often, however, they would still come up with something great such as the lovely Arnor warrior models. The point at which they really lost the plot and fell off the map was with the Ghost Army of Angmar. I laughed for weeks about that one and haven't really bothered with keeping up to date with their releases since.

Don't know who the Hell Amdur is. Don't care. My new rule of thumb will be, however, that anything described as looking "awesome" is likely to make me cringe.

As for orcs as aliens (Orks?), please try not to take everything absolutely and completely literally.

It just depresses me how easily and uncritically some people swallow the latest rubbish GW dream up - at at those prices too; it should make people more, not less, discriminating.

ScarpeIron · **Posted:** Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:18 pm

Spod, I'm with you...whole heartedly!

My worst decision since starting this venture into this hobby was being talked into buying 4 of the 5 new supplement books. 109$ lost because I had a moment of stupidity.

Also agree that GW has taken their creative license to the extreme and left the reservation a long time ago. They are ..."filling"... in histories/lore of ME with their own thoughts in hopes that in return it will sell and make them a profit. Even if it means introducing new fluff to parts of Tokiens ME.

I've always hated the introduction of the Goblin Blackshields with their shaman with Shatter. Now the wording on the new Shaman...Spidermans...ability to paralyze from a wound (be it from a melee attack, missile attack or a magical attack); shows to me that they rushed aspects of these releases.

ah well. If only I had a bigger community for SBG in my area. Just means I'll go back to GW Specialist Games. Never can sink Man O'War

...or Warmaster ...or Necro/Mord.!!

Draugluin · **Posted:** Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:36 pm

I don't mind the Blackshields, they're just representing the Uruk-hai that Boromir saw in the FotR. The Shaman on the other hand, I don't like. I just use him as a normal shaman, more thematic, realistic, and imo more effective.

theavenger001 · **Posted:** Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:02 pm

I guess for me it comes down to the fact that this is the game, not the books. We mostly play points matches, so I don't care too much if there is non-tolkien stuff in our skirmishes. If I want Tolkien I'll read the books. Or play the journeybook scenario's. Otherwise I'm fine to have some made up stuff thrown in, as, on the whole it's still lotr.

Draugluin · **Posted:** Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:31 pm

theavenger001 wrote:

I guess for me it comes down to the fact that this is the game, not the books. We mostly play points matches, so I don't care too much if there is non-tolkien stuff in our skirmishes. If I want Tolkien I'll read the books. Or play the journeybook scenario's. Otherwise I'm fine to have some made up stuff thrown in, as, on the whole it's still lotr.

Yes, though it always pains me to have Isengard fight Erebor.

NEWS: GW repackages infantry boxes and increases prices

Who is online