Starting Warhammer- Dispelling the Myths

[Wildeybeast]

There's been a lot of talk lately about why more people don't play Warhammer and barriers to entry and so on an do forth. As a long time player, I think there are quite a few misconceptions that put people off and frankly, they're bunkum. So, this is the first in a (probably short) series aimed to dispel some of the myths that put people off and hopefully encourage a few more people to start playing this most excellent of games. Lets start of with a biggie that quite a few people have mentioned of late:

Warhammer needs too many models

If this is true, it means Warhammer is more daunting from a collecting and modelling perspective (especially for first time wargamers) and should be more expensive. Well, I suppose that all depends on what you are comparing it to. So, lets have a look at 40k, as the colossus of the wargaming world. How does a 500 point starting army from that system compare with one from Warhammer?

40K
Let's go with Space Marines, the ubiquitous army and fairly model light. We need a HQ and two troop choices. Shadow Captain Shrike (because Raven Guard are the best) and two ten man tactical squads makes it legal and a Rhino rounds us out to 500 points.
No. of models: 22
Cost: £83.50

Warhammer
So, how does a Warhammer army compare? Lets go with Empire, a staple of the game, up-to-date with the current rules and with some cheap troops point wise. So we need a hero and three other units, least 125 points worth of which have to be core.
A captain with shield and full plate armour fills our hero slot. Then we'll go for 20 halberdiers with shields. We can field them as a block of 20, or two of ten, depending on how many other units we fit in. Either way, at 140 points we've filled our core allowance. Now at this point, we can go a number of different ways, as we've still got nearly 300 points to play with. If you want lots of models in your army, keep going with those infantry choices, you can fit plenty of them in still and get several big or plenty of small units. But we don't need to do that. If I wanted to skew this exercise, I could be sneaky and just chuck a couple of cannons in or one of those fancy wizard chariots. Perfectly legal, keeps my model count low and cost down. However, I'm going for balance. 8 Inner Circle Knights gives me a pretty killy unit and a decent number of models. Three command groups or some magic items rounds me out to 500 points.
No. of models: 29
Cost: £61


Wow. So, my starting Warhammer army comes out over 25% cheaper than my starting 40K one and only has 7 models more. I could have got that figure lower. Are those 7 models really more daunting to assemble and paint than that Rhino we got for 40K? I'd argue not. Furthermore, when I was doing this, I realised I actually had much more flexibility in my army choice with my Empire than my Raven Guard. Yes, I could have fielded those tac squads in units of 5 and taken something else, but I'm still going to have to buy more models. My only other option for my two troops choices were scouts or a bike squad if I took a bike captain, whereas with my Empire, I had 8 different unit types to choose from to make up that core allowance.

The only other question to answer is 'does Warhammer work with just 500 points'? Well, yes. Or at least, as well as 40K does with 500 points. We've got three units in both games and legal armies. Small ones, yes. Both games are really designed to work with larger armies and are better with larger armies, but there is no reason why you can't play them with smaller ones. Most people who are starting out aren't going to be able to afford to buy much more than 500 points worth of stuff a month, so it's a good place to start. The following month you have 1000 points of stuff and so on. In just 5 months you have 2500 points, which seems to be standard game size for Warhammer, but 1000 point games are great fun if you've only got a couple of hours. When your armies start getting really big then yes, you do have more models in Warhammer as you tend to go for vehicles in 40K, but that isn't a barrier to entry as virtually no one has enough money to buy a fully formed army in one go. And that horde of 30 swordsmen may take a bit longer to assemble and paint that that landraider, but they both cost the same to buy.

So, Warhammer doesn't need more models and is actually cheaper* than 40K.

http://lautering.com/files/2012/04/MythBusted.gif

*Depending on what you buy.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Totally agree, I've got large armies of both and unless you horde-spam (which can still be cost effective £ to points) in fantasy you can easily get a decent army on the same budget as 40k.

[MMM]

You´re making a good point, but compare it to the entry costs of Malifaux (30 pounds), Warmachine/Hordes (35 pounds), Infinity (30 pounds), Kings of War (30 pounds) or Warpath (30 pounds).

So to start at the same or higher level in a game, often with rules, a non-GW game costs half the GW price.

And for a plus, some game miniatures (Kings of War/Warpath) are usuable for Warhammer or 40k as well. :)

[Necron_Lord]

You make good points, but it also depends on the army you want to play. If you're running a horde army in Fantasy, the model count can get quite high when one gets to 1500+ for points. Grots are the only unit that is as cheap as some of the core units in Fantasy, but between game systems there probably isn't much price difference. For my Skaven, HPA is cheaper than most MCs in 40K and the Screaming Bell isn't too ridiculous. Depending on your army, there may be a unit which costs a lot of money(Blood Knights for VC or the Stormraven for BA and GK), but viewed as a whole the systems are similar.

[m3g4tr0n]

Thanks for clearing that up. I've been interested in WFB, but wasn't sure how it compared to 40K as far as initial investment.

[DarkLink]

The most recent list I'm considering for the Las Vegas Open (1750) consists of:

Draigo
Coteaz
10 Paladins
5 Acolytes (e.g. guardsmen)
Spiritseer
5 Dire Avengers
Wave Serpent
5 Dire Avengers
Wave Serpent
3 Hornets

I acquired this over the last few years for roughly $400, give or take a little. MSRP is probably 550-600, though I'd have to check that.

[dirtycrabcakes]

I disagree. I would almost never play a game of warhammer thats less than 2k points. A 500 point game of warhammer is generally very boring, the scenarios don't work as intended, and (IMO) does not allow the type of play and strategy intended. Honestly, you won't see me playing a game of warhammer less than around 1600 points, unless I'm playing someone who doesn't have that many points or just wants a quicker game. My preferred point level is 2000-3000 points

40k, I can have much more fun playing at all point-levels. In some ways I feel that fantasy becomes better/more fun as you increase point values, while in 40k, it starts to get unwieldy beyond 2000 points (especially under 6th edition). You can have a lot of fun in 40 with a single unit and an HQ. Fantasy, not so much (IMO). In 40k, I used to like 3k point games, but I feel that takes way too much time under 6th edition.

The number of models is certainly an issue, as points per model are generally lower in fantasy, meaning (in general) in fantasy you are fielding more models per game when compared to 40k. That can seem daunting from a painting/modeling perspective.

[Erik Setzer]

I just picked up a 500 point force for Warhammer to use in a 500 points per player Triumph and Treachery match. It cost me (after 7% sales tax) $150, and was 34 models, one of which is a large model (Khemrian Warsphinx). It easily could have cost more depending on what I went with.

But when you get to the size of army people normally play - more like 2000 points - it starts turning south for Warhammer. A 2000 point Marine list I ran recently had two Tactical Squads, two Devastator Squads, a Terminator Squad, two Terminator characters, a Predator, a Dreadnought, and two Scout Squads, which at current retail would be ~$445 (with some leftover models, and considering that the characters were built from plastic Terminators with bits added on, so I tacked on a second Terminator Squad box to cover them, making the whole set cheaper overall). The army had 55 models (not all squads were 10 guys).

The smallest Warhammer army I have, and not a particularly viable one at the moment, is Daemons of Chaos, which at 2000 points can have a Daemon Prince, 20 Bloodletters, 20 Horrors, Khorne Herald, Tzeentch Herald on Chariot, 5 Flesh Hounds, Skullcannon, and Soulgrinder. Given that the Khorne Herald is just the guy from the Blood Throne kit stuck on a base, he doesn't cost extra, so that's $354. Advantage to 40K in that matchup, sure, but how many 2000 point Warhammer armies are actually just 49 models? (And certainly VIABLE armies.)

No, a more viable list is a 2000 point Empire army done for a tournament a while back: Wizard, Captain, Engineer, 30 Swordsmen, 20 Halberdiers (two detachments), 25 Spearmen, 16 Handgunners, 20 Archers, 8 Pistoliers, 10 Knights, Cannon, Mortar, and Helblaster. That'll run at $578 and with 145 models. Luckily, there's no monsters or monstrous cav in that army.

Sure, Orks and Tyranids will be expensive 40K armies, as will Imperial Guard (because of tanks). But Warhammer armies are typically pretty large, even when nasty big models are involved.

[Gold Snake]

A 500 point game of warhammer is generally very boring, the scenarios don't work as intended, and (IMO) does not allow the type of play and strategy intended.

I disagree. My favourite WHFB experiences have been the smaller games, where victory depends on the tactical positioning of very few units and a few choice heroes. The larger you go, then the more boring I tend to find it, as BS magic takes over and the game stretches for hours and hours. The core mechanics were developed from a skirmish game anyway, not a blocks-of-infantry-game, and playing the game gets more and more cumbersome as the points level increases because of this. Gimme a couple of 500-1000 points battles over one 2000-3000 battles any day.

[Chaeron]

Or buy second hand - it's a lot cheaper! But appreciate that you have to be set up in the hobby on the whole first before that generally happens..

[Wildeybeast]

Ok, lots of points to respond to. I compared to 40k as that's the only other system I play. I can't speak for others. Though I'd imagine most are cheaper than GW and if cost is your priority, I wouldn't advise anyone to take up GW games.
Yes if you a run a horde army you have a lot more models, but you don't have to. You can run an elite army or even ogres and have a lot less. That's why I went with empire for the example, who are a good intermediate. 500 points do work, but they aren't as much fun, I agree. 1000 points is really a good starting points level, but as I said, most people can't afford to by that much in one go. I've shown how you can start with a manageable amount of models, at reasonable(ish) price and get gaming straight away.
As I said, at higher point games, you tend to have more than in 40k, but you build those up over time, you don't buy them all in one go and the unit prices are usually comparable between the two systems.
My basic point is this: to start playing Warhammer, you don't have to have a lot of models, or spend a ton of money. No more than you would do for 40k. You can do it that way, but you don't have to. The 'you need loads of models and it costs more' line is not true and shouldn't be a reason not to start playing Warhammer and frankly people should stop saying it. That's all I'm getting at.
@m3g4tr0n Glad it helps, this article has served its purpose! I hope you decide to get into Warhammer. :)

[Eric French]

You should have used daemons as your example snurd snurd snurd. Actually I chose daemons for that reason but after watching whfb night compared to 40k night at my lgs it was the movement tray/rank and file/no bullets aspect that I didn't like about whfb. Now watching BTP on YouTube lately with Skaven and Elves it really did pique my interest from my initial observation. I will eventually make some trays to hold my round bases on my daemons and give it a go I'm sure.

[Mr Mystery]

Warhammer for my money is most definitely a team effort for getting into it, and done right there are many benefits to starting small.

Tale of Four Gamers type affairs tend to work very nicely.

To get kicked off as smoothly as possible, procure rules, army book and the relevant Batallion for your army of choice. The important thing here is that at this stage, the points matter less. Beginning a new wing to your hobby should never be about learning how to flatten your opponents in as short a time as possible. What I'm looking for (and pretentious terminology warning) is to discover the soul of the game. That element that defines it amongst others of it's genre.

Assembling, painting and playing with that little lot should eat up the first month, especially if you've got four players (to stick with my example!) doing the gaming.

Next month? Agree to add £XX worth of models. This will fairly quickly rebalance the points, though in the case of certain armies (if not just builds of certain armies) this my take a bit longer.

Rinse and repeat up to the desired points level (1,500 works nicely, as at that point you face real decisions not on what to include, but what to leave out!). Before you know it, you have four players all enjoying the game, and ready to help introduce others in the same method. After all, I'm pretty sure you'll remember which units you bought and when so you can replay the build up with even a single additional player.

Overall? I'd advocate not worrying about whether your army fits the organisation during the steps. Your first steps should be about learning the game, not worrying over how to grow your army within the usual confines. This particularly helps Skaven and Gobbo players, as they can drop in the big bad scary points intensive stuff without having to endure yonks of building and painting their numerous rank and file!

Tell you what........... Imma go start a 'Tale of' thread reet fooking noo!

[Steven Farnaby]

So, Warhammer doesn't need more models and is actually cheaper* than 40K.

http://lautering.com/files/2012/04/MythBusted.gif

*Depending on what you buy.


Haha, seriously?

A box of 10 State troops is AUS$41 and has 60 points of models in it (100 points if you take all the upgrades, but that includes giving your halberders shields and having a Sergeant/musician/standard bearer). You'd need 2 boxes to make a unit of 20, so we'll call it AUS$82 for 20 guys including a command squad and shields, for a total of 170 points. Although in reality you don't give your state troops shields because that's an awful decision (buy more troops with the points instead), so it's AUS$82 for 150 points of models.

A box of 10 Space marines is AUS$65 and has 190 points of models in it (if you give them a Missile launcher, Plasmagun, and a Powersword/Meltabombs).

So AUS$82 for 150 points of your 2500 point game is somehow cheaper than AUS$65 for 190 points of your 1500 point game? Someone needs to go back to school ;)

[David A Jukes]

I think if we are discussing entry pint to with 40K or Fantasy, a good starting point should be the starter boxes as two guys can go in together on it and get two somewhat playable Aries with the rule book and go from there.

N
While I own the Dark Vengence boxed set, I don't play either Dark Angels or Chaos, I don't own isle of blood so I would ask anyone with more knowledge to compare the two as an entry pint.

Thanks!

[Mr Mystery]

Isle of Blood is a good little set.

No the points are exactly fair, and no the armies aren't 'game legal'. But what it does do is introduce multiple unit types, and demonstrate their strengths. It's a microcosm of the Warhammer experience, showing off a low-rent but quite resilient army, and a high-rent but quite fragile army.

[Baneblade]

Many people also over look that the price of heroes and lords are much higher in WFB than their 40k equivalents. It is not uncommon to have 300 or 400 point generals and wizards. My WoC Khorne lord is well north of 450 points. Look at balekor for both systems. I think the 40k point cost us around 250 while WFB is around 450.

[Ben_S]

Thanks for this. It pretty much confirms my thinking; assuming it scales, then 1,500 points of Fantasy needn't require more models, and certainly not more cost (£/$), than 1,500 points of 40k. I'd always thought that dedicated transports really skew things, since they are generally poor value (£/$) for their points, whereas Fantasy is often cheaper per model, even if you need more models.

I guess it will vary somewhat between armies. I'm building a WoC army, which is probably the most elite Fantasy army so may well skew my perceptions, but if anything I'd say that Empire are a high model count army - less so than Skaven or most O&G builds, but more than any Elves or Dwarfs - and I notice you didn't tool the character up with magic items and so forth.

So, the main (purported) advantage of 40k is that it's a better game at lower point levels. Well, I'd agree to an extent, but not entirely. I think Fantasy works in the 1,000-1,500 range. While 40k might work even below this - at just 500 points for example - I think it's even less balanced at those levels.

Also, I think it's worth adding that the 40k 'meta' is currently evolving much more quickly. Even if you're not a tournament player, but just want to be competitive in pick-up games, you may need to add allies, fortifications, perhaps even superheavies to your army. Even just keeping up with these new rules is an expense (time and money), whereas a Fantasy army that you'd had since the start of 8th edition wouldn't have needed much tinkering in that time, other than perhaps a new unit or two with the new army book (e.g. Demigryphs for your Empire example).

[xNickBaranx]

I disagree. I would almost never play a game of warhammer thats less than 2k points. A 500 point game of warhammer is generally very boring, the scenarios don't work as intended, and (IMO) does not allow the type of play and strategy intended. Honestly, you won't see me playing a game of warhammer less than around 1600 points, unless I'm playing someone who doesn't have that many points or just wants a quicker game. My preferred point level is 2000-3000 points

40k, I can have much more fun playing at all point-levels. In some ways I feel that fantasy becomes better/more fun as you increase point values, while in 40k, it starts to get unwieldy beyond 2000 points (especially under 6th edition). You can have a lot of fun in 40 with a single unit and an HQ. Fantasy, not so much (IMO). In 40k, I used to like 3k point games, but I feel that takes way too much time under 6th edition.

The number of models is certainly an issue, as points per model are generally lower in fantasy, meaning (in general) in fantasy you are fielding more models per game when compared to 40k. That can seem daunting from a painting/modeling perspective.

Personal preference doesn't make it a "truth" however. Two Adepticon's ago I played in the 'Its How You Use It' 1000 point WFB Tournament and it was the most fun I had all weekend. I thought playing 1000 points was great.

Of course my favorite point range for 40K is 1000-1500 points as well. Lower points force you to make hard choices and limits uber combos. I'm way into it and have been for years.

[Theblackprince]

If you use "unit fillers" in fantasy it can cut the cost down even more. Something that is not really possible in 40k.

[Capn Gus BloodbeRD]

I don't see that the 'myth' has been busted at all.

As others have pointed out, you've limited it to 2 very specific games. I don't know of anybody who got into WH because it's cheaper/has fewer models than 40K (especially as there are more 40K 2nd hand models on the market).

If those things are a concern then people look at other games - Malifaux, Infinity, WM.

Those games ARE cheaper to get into (and I'm talking about playing a game with a fairly typical points level - ie getting it to, say, the match equivalent of a 1500 point 40K army). Even just the 'starter size' armies are cheaper with fewer models

If you're attempting to address this concern around 40K, then you need to look at it's competition. Not another GW product which you already know has comparable costs and army sizes.

[Ben_S]

I don't see that the 'myth' has been busted at all.

I think you missed the point; the focus here isn't 40k but Fantasy. Fantasy is not more expensive than 40k, therefore this cannot explain why 40k is more popular. (Though I'd venture that the mistaken impression - or myth - that 40k is cheaper/needs fewer models might explain the difference between them.)

Of course there are skirmish games cheaper than either, but it's no surprise to say that Blood Bowl or Mordheim is cheaper than either Fantasy or 40k...

[MMM]

Well in some areas Warmachine and Hordes and other non-GW games are more popular than 40k or WHFB, so they should also be considered.

And if the trend in the tabletop hobby is playing skirmish games and not mass combat systems (I don´t know, it´s just a guess), than one should consider those games as well.

[Psychosplodge]

He has said he only plays 40k/WHF so why would he compare anything else? It's outside his realm of experience.
There's nothing stopping anyone making their own comparisons...

[Ben_S]

There are lots of other comparisons that *could* be made, but I don't see any reason why one *should* be rather than another.

If you look at the recent thread on barriers to entry:
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?40068-Wargames-Barrier-to-Entry

You find comments like "Here in my neck of the woods 40k is where it's at and I just cannot get anyone in my group to even look at another system ... WFB is too great an investment in time and money for me to really look at. The vast amount of models I read about needed to play a game is a huge turn off for me." (Deadlift, comment #5)

We also know from recent discussion of the state of WFB that it makes up only about 20-25% of GW profit (IIRC). Though there are regional variations, 40k is overwhelmingly more popular, so it's worth asking why this is. One commonly given answer is the high model count/entry cost of WFB (see again the comment quoted above). The OP's point is that this is something of a myth or, at least, exaggeration. The similar costs of the two suggest that the greater popularity of 40k cannot be explained simply by cost, but must be due to something else.

[Deadlift]

I think the 500 pts comparison is not quite right personally, I don't ever see 500pt games or lists talked about anywhere in WFB. It's always 2000pts minimum I see. Where as 40k, you can get a decent game of kill team for 200pts. Sure armie like Ogres and Chaos can have really low model counts that's true, but there's no denying a big game of WFB is like watching a huge game of Tetris. Not for me I'm afraid. Now X-Wing, that's got me interested.

[spaceman91]

There are lots of other comparisons that *could* be made, but I don't see any reason why one *should* be rather than another.

If you look at the recent thread on barriers to entry:
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?40068-Wargames-Barrier-to-Entry

You find comments like "Here in my neck of the woods 40k is where it's at and I just cannot get anyone in my group to even look at another system ... WFB is too great an investment in time and money for me to really look at. The vast amount of models I read about needed to play a game is a huge turn off for me." (Deadlift, comment #5)

We also know from recent discussion of the state of WFB that it makes up only about 20-25% of GW profit (IIRC). Though there are regional variations, 40k is overwhelmingly more popular, so it's worth asking why this is. One commonly given answer is the high model count/entry cost of WFB (see again the comment quoted above). The OP's point is that this is something of a myth or, at least, exaggeration. The similar costs of the two suggest that the greater popularity of 40k cannot be explained simply by cost, but must be due to something else.

I may sound like an idiot typing this but here we go. I find 40k easier to play. I find the models better in 40k. Does this mean I hate fantasy? No. Quite the opposite. They each hold a place in my heart for different reasons. Fantasy has (IMO) more to it. You can do so much more in fantasy in terms of character creation and lists. I still haven't met some one with the same dwarf lord as me but I have seen tons of sm captains just like mine. The main reason I think it struggles though is that sci fi is better for the kids. The thought of laser guns and big tanks just does something to kids(I can't blame them). I think the fantasy is for the older person in general. That's not to say kids don't play fantasy and vice versa
I'll shut up now. Sorry for rambling.

[GrauGeist]

WFB that it makes up only about 20-25% of GW profit (IIRC).

I doubt that very much. From what I see, WFB might be 20-25% of GW revenue and less than 5% of GWs net profit.

WFB has development cost similar to 40k, but that low revenue is a killer.

[Psychosplodge]

Weren't the figures Ben_S is quoting quoted in another thread by Big Red, referencing documents released in the CHS trial?

[Wildeybeast]

Haha, seriously?

A box of 10 State troops is AUS$41 and has 60 points of models in it (100 points if you take all the upgrades, but that includes giving your halberders shields and having a Sergeant/musician/standard bearer). You'd need 2 boxes to make a unit of 20, so we'll call it AUS$82 for 20 guys including a command squad and shields, for a total of 170 points. Although in reality you don't give your state troops shields because that's an awful decision (buy more troops with the points instead), so it's AUS$82 for 150 points of models.

A box of 10 Space marines is AUS$65 and has 190 points of models in it (if you give them a Missile launcher, Plasmagun, and a Powersword/Meltabombs).

So AUS$82 for 150 points of your 2500 point game is somehow cheaper than AUS$65 for 190 points of your 1500 point game? Someone needs to go back to school ;)

As you may have noticed from the pound sterling signs used, I don't live in Australia so I didn't use Australian prices. Besides,you lot skew the figures since you get the penal tax on GW goods. :p


Thanks for this. It pretty much confirms my thinking; assuming it scales, then 1,500 points of Fantasy needn't require more models, and certainly not more cost (£/$), than 1,500 points of 40k. I'd always thought that dedicated transports really skew things, since they are generally poor value (£/$) for their points, whereas Fantasy is often cheaper per model, even if you need more models.

I guess it will vary somewhat between armies. I'm building a WoC army, which is probably the most elite Fantasy army so may well skew my perceptions, but if anything I'd say that Empire are a high model count army - less so than Skaven or most O&G builds, but more than any Elves or Dwarfs - and I notice you didn't tool the character up with magic items and so forth.

So, the main (purported) advantage of 40k is that it's a better game at lower point levels. Well, I'd agree to an extent, but not entirely. I think Fantasy works in the 1,000-1,500 range. While 40k might work even below this - at just 500 points for example - I think it's even less balanced at those levels.

Also, I think it's worth adding that the 40k 'meta' is currently evolving much more quickly. Even if you're not a tournament player, but just want to be competitive in pick-up games, you may need to add allies, fortifications, perhaps even superheavies to your army. Even just keeping up with these new rules is an expense (time and money), whereas a Fantasy army that you'd had since the start of 8th edition wouldn't have needed much tinkering in that time, other than perhaps a new unit or two with the new army book (e.g. Demigryphs for your Empire example).

Yeah, you've pretty much summed it up, it is cheaper per model but you usually end up having more of them. 1000-1500 point games work really well, especially if you are looking for a quick game. My group has started squeezing some in on Friday night after work when a couple of hours is all we have. If you want a 2500 point game, then you need a whole afternoon free. @Dead lift, Warhammer does work at 500 points. The rules are exactly the same whether you have 3 units or 30. Now admittedly it is best with more points as you get the complexity of moving all your units and my sample army had no magic (though it could have done), but 500 points is still a good starting point and you won't stay there for long. But if you want to go for swing, then I hope you enjoy it.


If you use "unit fillers" in fantasy it can cut the cost down even more. Something that is not really possible in 40k.

Yep unit fillers a era great idea. I have a skaven mate who regularly bulks out is endless hordes with rat ogres and swarms. Saves on the painting and looks cool. You can also do some fantastic conversions with them and providing you don't take the Mickey then most TO's accept them.

I'll say again, as others have pointed out for me, this isn't an exercise in showing that Warhammer or GW is cheaper or better than other game systems, simply that it doesn't require more models or have to cost more and that those things are not the barrier to entry that some claim them to be. Certainly not more than 40k, which is the most popular gaming system around.

[Ben_S]

I think the 500 pts comparison is not quite right personally, I don't ever see 500pt games or lists talked about anywhere in WFB. It's always 2000pts minimum I see. Where as 40k, you can get a decent game of kill team for 200pts.

I don't think that's quite fair. Kill Team isn't exactly 40k, hence needing different rules to adapt it. But, if you want to go down that angle, my local GW and FLGS have both recently run 'regiments of renown' games that were like a Fantasy version of Kill Team - so you can use Fantasy rules for skirmishes too. It misses out some things, like blocks of troops, but Kill Team also excludes things like Flyers.

When it comes to full games, I very rarely see 40k proper played at less than 1500 points, and Fantasy works fine at 1,000-1,500 too. And I assume the 500 point comparison in the OP would scale to a 1,500 point comparison, though someone else will have to do that since the armies I have aren't the best for comparison.


I may sound like an idiot typing this but here we go. I find 40k easier to play. I find the models better in 40k. ... The main reason I think [Fantasy] struggles though is that sci fi is better for the kids.

That's fine. Personally, I prefer Fantasy in most respects, but no one is saying what you or anyone else has to like. Perhaps 40k is more popular just because more people prefer sci-fi to fantasy, but we shouldn't attribute its popularity to lower entry costs, because this isn't obviously true.


I doubt that very much. From what I see, WFB might be 20-25% of GW revenue and less than 5% of GWs net profit.

WFB has development cost similar to 40k, but that low revenue is a killer.

I couldn't remember exactly what the figures were (i.e. either the exact number or whether it was sales, revenue, profit, etc), hence saying IIRC. But I would expect the figure to be similar, whether it's revenue or profit. I imagine that each Army Book has similar development cost to each Codex, but since GW seem to release more 40k stuff (Codexes, Supplements, Data-thingies) its total development cost is presumably higher. All just guesswork, but anyway the point was simply that 40k vastly outsells WFB, whatever the exact figures.

I also wish I'd brought the 'unit filler' point up in my first post. In general, it's possible to cut some corners in Fantasy, since your troops will generally be in big blocks. Paint the front rank nicely, and you can skimp a bit on some of the others, since they're basically just wound markers. In 40k, there's at least the potential to make each model its own individual (albeit that this is easier for some, like Space Marines, than others, like Orks - and it probably doesn't apply to 'Nids or Necrons).

Now I can understand that this is precisely what makes 40k appeal more to some people, particularly those more interested in modelling and painting, but the original point was about barriers to entry, and the point here is that painting 20 Empire state troops is, if anything, a bit easier than painting 20 IG troops, because you needn't worry to much about the rear ranks.

[Flashman]

You´re making a good point, but compare it to the entry costs of Malifaux (30 pounds), Warmachine/Hordes (35 pounds), Infinity (30 pounds), Kings of War (30 pounds) or Warpath (30 pounds).

So to start at the same or higher level in a game, often with rules, a non-GW game costs half the GW price.

And for a plus, some game miniatures (Kings of War/Warpath) are usuable for Warhammer or 40k as well. :)

I can do a full 300pt Aleph force for £50, so you can play full sized games of Infinity for less than the cost of single Units in 40K.

[Mr Mystery]

If you're into Skirmish games.

I'm not. I like my sweeping epics :p

Which is also an odd issue.... Warmahordes, Malifaux and that have a low start up cost, on account of being skirmish based games. But how do they compare to larger scale wargames in terms of value? I'll warn you, this is an abstract one....

So. I buy a Khador Force for Warmahordes, basing it off the old Sorcha box I used to have, and drop in some Men O'War. That's me gaming right there and then. No idea on the actual points of that nowadays though (dropped WM yonks ago). However, being a skirmish game, the battles themselves are fairly small, and likely to get repetitive fairly quickly. So I buy another unit to shake it up. Rinse and repeat enough, and you'll have spent at least as much on your force as a full army for Warhammer or 40k, but with the (arguable) downside you'll rarely use it all at once, meaning some models are left on the shelf.

How does one account for that? It's something to be considered, but not something I think we can really quantify on a general scale, only a personal one.

[Overdose]

The thing with Warmahordes is that, yes you can play with just the starter box. But most games around my area are 50pts...which the battle box normally comes in around 10-12 of, if you can use every element. Warmachine players rarely use so many jacks, but Hordes will use the beasts.

And you rarely build 1 50pt list and only run it. Most tournaments require 2-3 lists, which certain things cannot be duplicated in. In the end, my Trollblood force (which sadly rarely gets play as I prefer my WFB) cost me probably just as much if not more than my "cut corners" VC army that includes Mantic models and unit filler. Just to get the stuff to be able to swap out units or run multiple lists.