Man Battlestations Forum
Warcradle Naval Games => Dystopian Wars => Topic started by: Sebenko on May 02, 2018, 04:56:17 am
-
Warcradle has an upcoming live Q&A on Friday. I though it might be worth discussing some questions to ask that might actually get answered ("Why are you ruining everything I like about the CoA?" is a good question, but I don't think they'll answer it.).
Potential Questions:
-Are you following discussion in the unofficial channels?, as some interesting conversations have come up.
-Why do you feel that moving towards a fantasy setting in an already crowded market is a good idea? It certaintly didn't work for Spartan with Uncharted Seas and the cannibalisation of their market with Firestorm/Halo.
-
Here is some I plan on trying to ask:
-Can you tell us anything more about the plans for Uncharted Seas?
-How does Warcradle plan to handle distribution in terms of SKUs? Will we see a 2-player starter set, fleet boxes, etc?
-Although Halo Fleet Battles is definitely dead, due to licensing issues, are there any mechanics from that game that might make it into new versions of DW and/or FSA?
-Has Warcradle considered using a service such as Shapeways as a way to allow players to buy needed "onsies-twosies" like another Frigate, etc? The idea is that Warcradle could have a storefront on Shapeways to buy official US/DW/FSA models, sort of like how Brigade Miniatures does it.
-
There was some great info put out today, along with some cool new renders for DW. Here is my summary:
http://www.manbattlestations.com/blog/2018/05/04/summary-from-the-4-may-warcradle-qa/
-
Seriously good report Ruckdog. Interesting to see the update on the moulds, if I want to complete my collection. Surprising to see rockets on the KoB.
-
Might be repeating myself but - Well, then, there's a lot more to be positive about for original players in this I feel than otherwise. I will say some negative things at the end, and that will be all :)
Good to hear all the progress on the various rules - Feel that FSA is getting the short end of the stick however that's to be expected; A lot of remedial work does need to be done around that game. The love for USeas is heartwarming to hear.
Details on DW - I'm ambivalent on plastic ships as I've never found anything resembling "resin rot" in my collections and they span something like 40 years now, and resin seems a lot less liable to breakage IME when dropped, however no strong opinion really. Exploding Dice i feel make DW, so glad to hear that along with all the rest. Factions specialist weapons seem pretty much as they are now, and the rest seems quite logical. Feedback being welcome . . . I'm sure positive feedback will be welcomed. I'm on the Facebook pages though. Enough said.
The ships renders. I'm rather liking the new Borodino - missing the Victorian smokestacks, though that's minor, as overall it's a wonderful look. Prussian ship is . . .Interesting, as about the only feature it retains is the smokestacks, though the modular weapons and disappearing guns are a nice touch and as I don't run Prussians, that's all I can say. The Crown battleship I feel is a slight backwards step from the previous render; Though it now shares a lot more features with original designs, those new cannon turrets just don't feel right for reasons that I can't explain any more than someone can explain why, say, they are allergic to gluten., though the other weapon turrets look rather good ( Have to disagree with rulebritannia here, those rockets look good, and there's a lot of conversions out there that suggest it might be a popular move :) ) All told, a lot of good feeling here and I'm looking forward to more :D .
Now to be negative, though I must HASTEN to point out this is not aimed at persons it's merely an observation on business cultures ( I pray that was clear enough for everyone to understand, comprehend and take on board ); The idea of "limited release" of older style models is positive in most aspects, however I can't help but feel that this is a self-fulfilling prophecy as one day down the line, Warcradle will halt production and say something like " We cannot justify selling unpopular miniatures any more - And we KNOW they are unpopular, look at how our sales figures show that the new ones sell more volume than the older ones did!" Apples and oranges, in other words. Still, as long as certain items come back ( KoB Dominions, Monarchs and Dynastys, CoA Praxillas and Menedalus, and RC Azovs, Pakhtusovs and Chanys ) I and a lot of others will be happy.
Warcradle "believes that gamers can't get excited about more than one thing at a time". I'd disagree strongly, and point at the number of gamers who work on two or three projects at a time, while playing two or three systems at the same time - At present, I know of players who have Wrath Of Kings, DW, Shadespire and Warmahordes games all during one week! Mind you if by "excited" Warcradle means "solely focused in buying" then they are slightly less mistaken there but only barely; However, and much as I take pains not to undermine people's religions and "beliefs" ( I define a belief as " A faith in something unprovable and resistant to factual or logical rebuttal" for my purposes ) I suspect that this "belief" about all gamers might be as valid as that recently more high profile group the Flat Earthers. I might be being harsh, however, that's how it seems.
-
Regarding Warcradle Classics, not all miniatures will be available as it depends on all sorts of factors. With regards to a business culture thing... We definitely won't be remastering slow-selling lines. Re moulding is more likely if we have the masters. There is simply no point in implementing a strategy for losing money on many of the models sold. The process we are following allows us to meet the demand that has been requested many times.
Packaging choice was made based on a huge number of products, some that will sell a handful at best requiring many hundreds of packaging box print runs. The financials do not make any sense down that route.
And regarding long term availability, as long as we have viable moulds we can meet the demand.
Also. the products will be individual vessels, not battlegroups etc. So customers can pick ships individually.
-
The Crown battleship I feel is a slight backwards step from the previous render; Though it now shares a lot more features with original designs, those new cannon turrets just don't feel right for reasons that I can't explain any more than someone can explain why, say, they are allergic to gluten., though the other weapon turrets look rather good.
Is it perhaps because they don't look like they have space for a functional mechanism inside the turret? The old KoB turrets (and most other nations) clearly had space for a traditional gun house and presumably ammunition transport/magazine in the depths of the hull.
-
So I've been busy with other things lately so really haven't been following too much of what was going on, but I've got a bit more time now.
I would say that overall I was a bigger fan of Spartan's aesthetic direction than what I've seen of Warcradle. It just seems like they've followed GW into the "more everything on everything and spikes on the spikes" model design. It just seems to be missing some fundamental aspects of design. When everything stands out then nothing stands out. Sometimes less is more.
And I get that some is line weighting on the concept art, but that's what we've got to judge it on so that's what we have to do. Although I would have to say it seems very weird that at this point in time we're still getting drawn sketches rather than renders. I know drawing should be faster to get a feel for an idea but if that's the case then I'm not sure why these concept drawings would be so detailed, overly detailed at that. If you're looking at getting design styles, and flows of a model they're well past that point on this art. If they're going through the time for such detailed sketches then why aren't they just doing it as renders? I've seen production designers for real products (as a contractor for a truck manufacturer) and they are working in renders from very early on in the process. It just seems like to do it otherwise is a waste in time. They've made a concept drawing that they openly admit can't match the finished product. It also doesn't seem to be that fast either... if it was we should have seen a lot more than half a dozen sketches by now. Having them done and keeping them hidden also doesn't make any sense. Draw them for "rapid prototyping" only works if you then get those out for people to see and comment on. If you're waiting until you have the drawings "perfect" you're sort of missing the entire point of drawing them first.
With that, it sounds like they've got a pretty reasonable process going on. I like that they have a few people from Spartan there to migrate to the new system. Not enough about the rules to know (noting I haven't followed that closely lately so could have easily missed additional information) what I feel about that direction.
It sounds good that they're talking about taking player feedback into the design process. But I've seen plenty of cases (in every job I've ever had) of "we're listening to you" as nothing more than "we already know what we're going to do, but acting like we're listening makes people feel better." So that's going to come down to what actually happens. They've seemed more defensive than engaged with issues from what I've seen. But I also get that this is the internet where everything is either the best thing ever or the worst thing ever.
For the Classics, did Spartan ever get any of the League of Crimson Lyceum Battleships cast and out? That is one of the few ships that I loved enough to purchase again.
-
I would say that overall I was a bigger fan of Spartan's aesthetic direction than what I've seen of Warcradle. It just seems like they've followed GW into the "more everything on everything and spikes on the spikes" model design. It just seems to be missing some fundamental aspects of design. When everything stands out then nothing stands out. Sometimes less is more.
It's missing the touch of someone with an actual interest in 1860-1945 naval warfare and naval architecture. There doesn't seem to be a sense of the designs being produced by nations still grappling with transitioning from age of sail to 'modern' naval warfare, which is what made DW so good as steampunk. These designs look like they've been drawn by someone who saw that Pearl Harbour movie once.
It sounds good that they're talking about taking player feedback into the design process. But I've seen plenty of cases (in every job I've ever had) of "we're listening to you" as nothing more than "we already know what we're going to do, but acting like we're listening makes people feel better." So that's going to come down to what actually happens. They've seemed more defensive than engaged with issues from what I've seen. But I also get that this is the internet where everything is either the best thing ever or the worst thing ever.
I've noticed that any critical discussion is allowed a few posts then is declared to be repeating itself, then deleted/locked. Warcradle's attitude has been pretty negative, and is another aspect putting me off new DW- there's definintely a vibe of "Yeah m8, we're listing, just shut up already" from them. Sometimes you just want a long discussion to hammer out what your opinions and the reasoning is.
Overall, my feelings are thus:
Rules- Feeling good here. Knowing what's in so far, and that some familiar names are on it, I'm sure the rules will be fine.
Models- They're alright at best. Especially after that disatrous initial render of the 'Celestial' battleship, I do get a sense that Warcradle doesn't 'get' DW.
Background- I've made my feelings on the state of the CoA quite clear in other threads.
-
Is it perhaps because they don't look like they have space for a functional mechanism inside the turret? The old KoB turrets (and most other nations) clearly had space for a traditional gun house and presumably ammunition transport/magazine in the depths of the hull.
You know. . . . That's it. That's the very thing that I'm sensing. The barrels look too long for the turrets and don't seem to have space for the action and breech, do they?
-
Once again, Richard, thank you for the prompt reply.
Regarding Warcradle Classics, not all miniatures will be available as it depends on all sorts of factors. With regards to a business culture thing... We definitely won't be remastering slow-selling lines. Re moulding is more likely if we have the masters. There is simply no point in implementing a strategy for losing money on many of the models sold. The process we are following allows us to meet the demand that has been requested many times.
Well, no personal criticism was intended. however, you seemed to have underlined my point - A limited run is always going to be a slower or poorer seller than a continuous line, surely to logic? :) But yes, you aremeeting a demand at present; It will be interesting to see if customer preference in design makes that demand larger.
Packaging choice was made based on a huge number of products, some that will sell a handful at best requiring many hundreds of packaging box print runs. The financials do not make any sense down that route.
I never raised that issue - For good reason; 85% of my wargaming miniatures have come in plastic ziplock baggies,and I have no qualms about that. For me, it was the design, quality and appearance of the product rather than the packaging that influened my decision.
Write me off as an outlier if you will, however when it comes to purchasing things, to put it crudely, a turd in a gold case is still a turd :D
And regarding long term availability, as long as we have viable moulds we can meet the demand.
Again perfectly reasonable - I just hope you have someone like the fabled Nic at Eureka Miniatures or similar who can keep a mold going for a good decade or more with the same consistent quality :)
Also. the products will be individual vessels, not battlegroups etc. So customers can pick ships individually.
Great news indeed! Given the "bitsy" way most fleets are being assembled by dedicated players, due to trading and second-hand markets, it's perfect option. I cannot be unhappy at that decision :)
Thanks for the feedback :)
-
CW,
You may like to buy unpackaged minis, but we want the game to be available in stores. That means they will be competing for shelf space, so a Ziploc bag isn't going to make you go ooooh as you walk past.
Selling the products in generic packaging is something we didn't take likely, and selling items directly without making them available to retailers and alienating the stores that are investing in our games isn't how we want to operate. So we have a bunch of conflicting requirements that we have found a solution to.
When the new game comes out, we expect demand for older models to drop, however, if a model sells really really well, economics would dictate that we would keep workable moulds available. It is difficult to explain the demand we expect for new stuff versus old but if a new product has significant demand in the X00's then an old product might only appeal to a few players. The sales footprint and appeal of the game must be much higher than was experienced previously. Though you might not like all the changes we are determined to make sure the products are available far more widely, that will help you have opponents and ensures releases and support for years to come.
-
Again, thank you for the rapid reply here Richard.
That means they will be competing for shelf space, so a Ziploc bag isn't going to make you go ooooh as you walk past.
Well, while I take your point that many customers are arttracted by colors and pretty pictures, I'm one of those outliers as I said who is impressed by the contents, and with a plastic bag, as with the old Auirfix kits, and a few items from Warlord and Bolt action in our local stores even today . . . I am much more likely to go oooh if I can see what I'm buying. :)
That does sound like the "focus group" and market research response of corporate groupthink TBH :) I'm tempted to respectfully think that lowest common denominator marketing isn't going to work in a niche market though I'd gladly be proved wrong.
Selling the products in generic packaging is something we didn't take likely, and selling items directly without making them available to retailers and alienating the stores that are investing in our games isn't how we want to operate.
I'm not convinced that way is not a workable business model myself, as it seems to function for some companies I deal with but it's your decision and all due respect, fair enough. :)
As for sales figures expectations; IIRC a certain game company set a minimum sales figure for one of their games at 30 units/week in Europe and UK. That game was one of the most critically acclaimed item they made and well received by players . . . However it was canned after a year or so as sales averaged only 28 units/week. It never dropped in sales and even up till being pulled did so, but the "expectations" were not met. Now, it's one of the most missed games around. That figure might have been arrived at by some arcane process of profit/loss and such That my brain ( Which only managed a science degree rather than the lofty heights of accountancy :D :P ) can fathom, but 28 out of 30 seems . . . Relatively successful.
Anyway, my point is- expectations are often erroneous.
Though you might not like all the changes we are determined to make sure the products are available far more widely, that will help you have opponents and ensures releases and support for years to come.
Possibly, though with new rules, miniatures and suchlike comes the problem older GW players have; Newer players won't stoop to play against "Grandpa versions" of those same items - and by "Grandpa versions" I have witnessed an army become rejected in a time period of a month or less. ( then again, I've seen people playing Battletech, at FLGS, so maybe I'm not a reliable witness, m'lud :D )
Maybe that won't happen as much or as often with DW, however encouraging the "New Is Best" mindset will create something similar I feel. Still, there's the "OldHammer" solution there though I would rather not see the system polarised in that fashion.
And again with all respect to you, in order to have them widely available in my neck of the woods ( Australasia) you will have to seriously restructure distributors hereabouts. Less so in some parts, but overall it's a case of "You will buy what we bring in, and nothing else, no matter what. We know what you want"
Apologies if this sounded negative; I really do struggle to put a spin on the way I see reality, but it takes a toll. And to reiterate - I am overall optimistic about the future of DW under Warcradle.
-
I'm not sure if packaging has every really meant anything to me. Maybe in so far as its the only way to generally see what is in the box, but seeing the model itself is all that really matters to me.
I will say that the look of the game is primarily what brought me into DW, but it wasn't seeing it on a shelf, it was seeing the models online. As it is, I don't think I've even been in a game shop in... 3 years, some time after my brother closed his shop.
What sells a game isn't a box on a shelf, it is active players. Active players is the only reason I played 40k (and even that wasn't enough, didn't like the game but played because it was my only option for quite a while, decided I would rather not play anything than continue to play 40k... that was probably 6-8 years ago at this point).
And now more than ever that is the case. Even if I wanted to support a local game shop (which I will probably do, I have moved to a place where it should be an option) I'm still going to do the majority of my looking over units and deciding what looks best while online.
Having helped my brother when he was running his shop I know how limited they are. There were good games he found that he still couldn't justify bringing in. Plenty of people would have him order stuff for them but "having things on the shelf" was inevitably a loosing battle. Even for a very big and popular game like 40k they can't hope to stock the whole range (even the GW stores themselves that I've been in didn't stock the full range). If you can get one or two 2-player starter boxes actually on a shelf that would be a pretty good accomplishment, especially with the plethora of choices in miniatures games.
I guess the short version is that worrying about what something looks like on the shelf is at least 10 years out of date thinking. A very simple package with a QR code to a multi-media rich page for the item seems like a better option, especially since that means you've got a good multi-media rich page for the item that people can find other ways too.
Blister packs where you can actually see the models I think are the best option, at least for resin/metal models, doesn't work as well for plastics.
It just seems a fools errand to try to beat a dozen well entrenched companies in a limited space by doing the same thing they are doing. A different approach is needed.
-
I say starter set with cardboard cutouts so it can be played like a board game. These sets can be in toy stores or bookstores.
Have model sets starter fleets available for local hobby shops; every thing else online.
-
I'm not sure if packaging has every really meant anything to me. Maybe in so far as its the only way to generally see what is in the box, but seeing the model itself is all that really matters to me.
I will say that the look of the game is primarily what brought me into DW, but it wasn't seeing it on a shelf, it was seeing the models online. As it is, I don't think I've even been in a game shop in... 3 years, some time after my brother closed his shop.
What sells a game isn't a box on a shelf, it is active players. Active players is the only reason I played 40k (and even that wasn't enough, didn't like the game but played because it was my only option for quite a while, decided I would rather not play anything than continue to play 40k... that was probably 6-8 years ago at this point).
And now more than ever that is the case. Even if I wanted to support a local game shop (which I will probably do, I have moved to a place where it should be an option) I'm still going to do the majority of my looking over units and deciding what looks best while online.
Having helped my brother when he was running his shop I know how limited they are. There were good games he found that he still couldn't justify bringing in. Plenty of people would have him order stuff for them but "having things on the shelf" was inevitably a loosing battle. Even for a very big and popular game like 40k they can't hope to stock the whole range (even the GW stores themselves that I've been in didn't stock the full range). If you can get one or two 2-player starter boxes actually on a shelf that would be a pretty good accomplishment, especially with the plethora of choices in miniatures games.
I guess the short version is that worrying about what something looks like on the shelf is at least 10 years out of date thinking. A very simple package with a QR code to a multi-media rich page for the item seems like a better option, especially since that means you've got a good multi-media rich page for the item that people can find other ways too.
Blister packs where you can actually see the models I think are the best option, at least for resin/metal models, doesn't work as well for plastics.
It just seems a fools errand to try to beat a dozen well entrenched companies in a limited space by doing the same thing they are doing. A different approach is needed.
Lots of evidence suggests you are incorrect about a few things, Blisters sales across the industry are not good, fewer products than ever are sold in blisters, as a proportion of SKU's. Products with better packaging sell far better. And QR codes, we have them on some of our products, and we track the use. No one uses them.
-
And QR codes, we have them on some of our products, and we track the use. No one uses them.
This is true for pretty much all QR codes. They're a curiosity for tech geeks, and perhaps see some internal business use as 2D barcodes.
-
It is a risky strategy. Brigade works and early Spartan worked because they both had a niche product that sold in decent amounts, that works as an online business and appeals to a limited bracket of consumers with exactly what they need so they will buy a couple of fleets. Everyone who is into that line of steampunk shenanigans is connected, knows whats going on and was excited by rules and setting. To expand the market that's already pretty saturated you need to go big or go home and appeal to new markets that requires news aesthetics and a different style, but is definitely a risk as you are competing with the big boys with very different strategies. Where Spartan, imho, failed was that were a great version of a big small company, raking in large demand for great models, crunchy rules, and a really interesting steampunk setting, but could not compete as a small big company which required a higher turnover over products and ideas aimed at a different market. Certainly WC has the capacity to do that, but to do that requires a certain degree of ruthlessness and massed market appeal that disrupts some of the small business appeal of Classic Spartan. What worked for Spartan when they were in their heyday as a big small company will not work for WC which has big ambitions and dreams.
-
The official WC blog post is up:
https://blog.warcradle.com/may-4th-live-qa-video-blog
-
Q: How can the Covenant from the second edition become the Covenant of the Enlightened in the third edition. I don’t understand how Sturgeon could have changed so much?
A: The Third Edition is set in the Dystopian Age, which is a new setting for the game. Because of this, while some names and characteristics do appear that may be familiar to fans of the previous edition, it is not a continuation. The same is true for games like Wild West Exodus too - the character of Doctor Carpathian is now very different from his earlier incarnation (though, like Sturgeon, he still has aspects of his character and appearance that are familiar).
I'm out.
-
While I completely understand Sebenko, let's see what the official characterisation is before we burn anybody on the stake. There seems enough fluff gaps and work to be finished that I'm sure who is Sturgeon is yet. I do agree though making him a greedy amoral power hungry science type would be a waste considering we already have Markov and Carpathian for that.
-
Call me when something good actually happens, instead of all this "Might not be as bad as it seems", I've only ever been disappointed by that.
-
At least they have blog posts now so it's easier to access this information?
-
What annoys me most about the fluff, is that it doesn't appear as though they even entertained the idea that they could easily have merged the fluff of both games together, rather than just make one games fluff invalid.
Considering the grander scale of DW, everything that had happened up to v2.5 wouldn't have impacted WWX in any meaningful way. Sure the FSA would have to change to the union, because thats what Warcradle prefer happened, obviously. But thats a mostly cosmetic change really.
The war could have happened in the same way as it already had in DW and WWX was happening in the middle of a massive world war. Would it affect WWX? Not at all.
The Enlightened could easily have been an off shoot of Antartica that's gone rogue. While the rest of the world call then the League of Crimson, they refer to themselves as the Covenant of the Enlightened.
It is stupid how easy it is to integrate DW existing fluff into the WWX fluff without completely invalidating it all and starting from scratch in the WWX universe and now making it that the world tetters on the brink of war.....Which defeats the purpose of a wargame that doesn't have a war in its background.
-
Merlin, you make a lot of sense there from a gaming point of view. I'm sure another POV was in view however.
Sebenko, I suppose you also have a point.
For myself? Well, I expect that the real world will spin on and I will be doing more and more there until the game picks up again at some point in the future. Might have a weekly game or two with the locals, though.
-
Lots of evidence suggests you are incorrect about a few things, Blisters sales across the industry are not good, fewer products than ever are sold in blisters, as a proportion of SKU's. Products with better packaging sell far better. And QR codes, we have them on some of our products, and we track the use. No one uses them.
I'm not surprised no one uses QR codes. But I think it really is because of what I'm going to next, no one uses them because they know what they're getting before they even get to the box. The important bit was really having a very good web presentation of the contents of the box. That was is on the box itself is mostly irrelevant.
For blister sales, I guess it would beg the question, are sales not good because they are in blisters or because what companies put in blisters are things people aren't going to buy. If I'm picking up something I don't know and the only thing that is going to sell me on that product in my hand is the product itself right then right in my hand, then being able to see the model is more important than seeing some pictures.
What most companies put in blisters are individual, and usually much more expensive, models. I never bought GW blisters, not because they were blisters, but because the price per model was about 3x the already high cost of their models in other boxes. I could make a pretty good "special character X" from much cheaper bits from other kits in most cases. Or they did have rank and file types in blisters, but they were also really expensive and no where near the count needed to actually use said pack. If my choice is buy a blister of one thing or buy the same thing in a bigger box for cheaper, of course I'm going to do the bigger box. Which of course was the situation with most of Spartan's blisters. All of my Battletech models came in blisters and that was just great for me. In that game one model was just as valuable on its own as with others, so having to buy a box with multiple models, several of which I don't want or need, didn't make any sense.
But it all comes down to the fact that I don't think anyone impulsively buys anything based on the box in the store. Unless of course that box is deeply discounted, which is not really what we're trying to look at. I've *never* impulsively bought a box at a store because of the box, I have impulsively bought something that I knew I wanted and already knew about, the time of the purchase was impulse, but not the content. I've seen some interesting looking models and found out more about the system, but that is much more often seeing someone playing with the models or them on display and not because of a box.
It is a great strategy for a toy isle, I've seen it work really well on kids. Of course even then, with toys, with the most impulsive group of all, very young children, they always *always* show the toy itself. They have the toy front and center with the box accenting the actual item.
Any focus on shelf presence just seems like you're trying to be Sears and K-Mart in the age of Amazon...
-
Any focus on shelf presence just seems like you're trying to be Sears and K-Mart in the age of Amazon...
But harsh there, and considering Weyland are one of the largest online retailers for gaming in the UK if not Europe, a little illogical. I don't doubt they know their market, all I'm questioning is do they know the market for DW?
At this point, for example, I don't think the majority of customers for the "classic" models will care about packaging if they can order directly; And if Warcradle are right, new customers are going to want the new models anyway.
All I know is, as long as I can get a Monarch, a Regent, three Dominions and a Dynasty ( For example)< i don't care if they are in bubble bags wrapped in copies of the Manchester Guardian. :D :P
-
The only things that really need shiny boxes are the starter sets, particularly a two fleet set with all the gubbins.
-
The only things that really need shiny boxes are the starter sets, particularly a two fleet set with all the gubbins.
Fair point. The question becomes what sort of formation would that be, given the new rules?
-
While you are right that probably most new players will want the new models, there is a considerable amount of gamers and collectors that want the older style of models as well.
I know a good few 40k players who hunted for older models for various reasons (to paint, or because they didn't like the newer models).
I for example, when I used to play 40k, looked at creating a large Praetorian Guard army and stalked eBay for any and all Praetorians I could get. Even went so far as to try and get some of the original 40k imperial guard models from the 80s just to see what they were like.
Why? I really disliked the Cadians. They were way too bland. Unfortunately until I could build a large enough Praetorian force, I was stuck with the Cadians. In the end 6th ed finished my involvement with 40k and the Praetorian project, though I've enough lying around to make a squad or two if I wanted.
So there is a market for the older class of models. Just not enough to justify the investment in them. So in the end every player is forced to use the over the top nonsense Warcradle will be releasing in time. (I really really hope the front of that Prussian battleship gets redesigned. It's a false hope, but I hope nonetheless)
-
The only things that really need shiny boxes are the starter sets, particularly a two fleet set with all the gubbins.
Fair point. The question becomes what sort of formation would that be, given the new rules?
I'd imagine something like the 2.0 boxes, with frigates, corvettes/destroyers, modular medium unit, battlecruiser, carrier and modular battleship. But depends on the scale of the new game.