RE: [Epic] Couple Questions

From: Brett Hollindale <agro_at_...>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 06:10:49 +0200 (MET DST)

At 01:35 PM 15/9/97 +0100, you wrote:
>I am sorry but I have to disagree with you over the pricing point.

You don't need to be sorry about disagreeing with me - I don't take it
personally or anything. You are certainly entitled to an opinion which
differs from mine...

> I don't know what the export pricing is like, but in the UK the newly
released Tyranid's actually show a significant drop in price per model.
>Carnifexes/Zoanthropes: 3.00 GBpounds for 1 model before, now 4.00 GBpounds
for 4 models.
>Assault Spawn (all types) 4.00 GBpounds for 1 model before, now 5.00
GBpounds for 3 models.
>Overall the new blister cost more than the old ones, but they contain more
models overall.

I pressume that you are correct in this assertion, I haven't checked, but if
it is correct then these would be among the only models which have gone down
in price - infantry sprues are certainly 50% more expensive for 50% less
infantry... Tanks are more like 300% more expensive because plastics are no
longer available... The list goes on...

>I know that GW models are not cheap, but bear in mind it is a hobby and few
hobbies are. Compared to computer games where the life expectancy is on
average 1 month, the 'bangs for bucks' value of GW minis is significantly
better in the long term. I for one would love the models to be cheaper, heck
who wouldn't :) but I am realistic. To say that 40K is just an exercise in
extorting money out of the gaming community is like saying Hollywood makes
movies for the purpose of extorting money out of the movie-going
public...both cases are of course true. Games Workshop Ltd is a business,
not a charity. They produce games and models that I for one enjoy
collecting. In order to be able to do so they have to make money out of
it...that is not corrupt or unfair, that is commerce. Without profit, there
is no growth and without growth there is no Games Workshop.
>I don't intend this to be a personal attack and I hope that you take it in
the spirit that it is given. My intention is not to harass or offend and I
apologise if you feel that way.

It's great that (almost) everyone on this list is so polite. I only
subscribe to two lists and haven't any problems with either of them,
although from the comments of others on this list, this level of politeness
appears to be unusual.

Rest assured that I have taken no offence, and perceive no harassment...

>It is just that I feel your comments are a little harsh on GW and I get the
impression that you feel you are being either ripped off or exploited in
some way because the hobby you chose is not a cheap one and GW are unfairly
making money out of it...correct me if I am mistaken?.

Yes, you are slightly mistaken, and I will take the opportunity to (try to)
be a little clearer.

You are most certainly correct that my comments ARE "a little harsh"
(although they accurately reflect my views, which are admittedly extreme... :-)

I don't actually think that EPIC is an expensive hobby. For a thousand
bucks or so, (probably less if the truth be known) I have all of the rules
and figures paints and brushes that I could possibly NEED, and that isn't
really very much compared to any hobby really... (My computer cost more
than that and will cerrtainly be obsolete sooner, I spend more than that
each year travelling to SCA (Medieval) events and so on.)

GW are not "unfairly making money out of it" - they invented and own the
copyrite on a great game system and its miniatures - they actually have some
"rights" to their intellectual property - BUT...

...with those rights should come responsibilities. Folks who buy a product
expect (and deserve, IMO) some after sales service from the manufacturer.
In the case of SM/TL, the after sales service would take the form of
answering questions and providing "spare parts" (more miniatures).

What GW has done with E40K is (IMO) immoral in the extreme (and may very
well be illegal in some places). If Ford Motor Company sent their sales
reps around to remove all spare parts for their '95 models prior to the
release of their functionally compatible '97 models and hiked the price of
spare parts 100% it would be compatible to what GW has done with E40K
pricing. (In Australia we have a Federal Government dept that would forbid
this practice.) Of course Ford would also have to suggest that there were
serious design faults in their previous models and refuse to make any
attempt to fix those faults to be on a par with what GW has done... (I
think we know how that would go over with Federal authorities...)

That's how I see E40K.

I will never spend a cent on E40K because I am morally opposed to doing so.

For the record, it wouldn't matter if it was a better wargame or not - I
would still refuse to play it on moral grounds. (If enough of us did this,
GW would probably get the point...)

From my reading of the rules, E40K actually simulates 20th century warfare
more accurately than SM/TL but if I wanted a modern simulation, I would
certainly be looking elsewhere... For the gritty gothic combat of the 400th
century, my vote still goes to SM/TL (like there was anyone on the list who
didn't know that? :-)

Received on Thu Jan 01 1970 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:52 UTC