Are you seriously comparing entry costs between a 10-model-army skirmish game and a 10-model-unit mass battle game? Go ahead, try being unable to start a Kill Team / Necromunda army for $200, I'll watch. And AoS just got their own skirmish format in White Dwarf.
The Apothecary also has two different head and "gun" arm options for the sake of customizing and comes across two sprues in a box, including a paper version of the rules for the model. And let's not pretend for a damn second that the Blackjack isn't trying to sell you two different gun options at the same price across two separate SKUs.
First I think you take @Cervantes3773 point slightly out of context. He said it was part of the impression that GW is more expensive because the point of entry costs more. He did not say that because you need to buy more models, that the models are a poor value. I don't think many people here would argue that infinity models are cheap. They certainly are more towards the premium side of costing. Two, to an extent, it is apples to apples. Yes the scale is different, but Infinity is CB's flagship game, whereas 40K/AoS are the GW flagships. GW has published many skirmish scale games in the past, argueably 40K 1st and 2nd editions, necormunda, mordheim, gorkamorka, even blood bowl was at one time a way to use fantasy models at a skirmish scale. The one thing in common with all of these games, is they have been dropped from being supported by GW, some have been taken up again, and will probably be dropped again. The flagship games remain...
Eh? So it's bad to have both variants released at $40 each with visually distinct poses rather than buying two of the same $45 box that makes two nearly identical versions? What monsters! Not even to mention that the Apothecary should be nearly half what a Cameronian costs when you figure in the material differences (for reference, I'm using Warlord Games again to make that comparison as a single plastic infantryman is ~$1.36 whilst the same size trooper in metal with no options is ~$2.40)
Comparing production between CB and GW will get you nowhere. The molds are completely different. Spin cast white metal molds are significantly cheaper than the plastic injection ones GW uses. CB packing also requires more labor due to not coming in the full sprue and checking for voids and miscasts is more important. GW's scrap is way lower than CB's but CB has the luxury of being able to toss scrap parts back in the crucible. The actual raw material is an almost negligible part of Infinity's cost though. GW can recycle scrap but not on an almost 1:1 basis like CB can. Doing an actual side by side comparison would be a lesson in frustration. The Blackjack seems to have fallen into the same trap as the new Garuda. Probably a lot of labor involved in the sorting and packing process. How many pieces is the Blackjack?
More pieces also equals more moulds which means more labour and longer casting times per miniature.reducing the number of parts per miniature isn't just to make miniatures easier to assemble.
I was perhaps overly flippant in my response, and I stand corrected, Infinity has offered a roughly 32mm? (28mm? 35mm? whatever I can't be bothered to keep up with shifting scales of multiple companies, call me lazy i guess) in excess of $35. I am wondering if there are many other infinity figures in that range, because I am fairly certain I can find a number of $35 single character GW's figures. As someone else has said, GW's prices are inconsistent. The start collecting boxes can be good value, IF you actually want all the contents. Infinity's prices are much more stable regardless of what faction you collect. It is equally important (as others have pointed out) that comparing metals and plastics is somewhat a lesson in futility. Nevertheless, as a self professed cheapskate, I feel GW has earned its reputation as being overpriced.
It’s a very inconsistent comparison. A single GW character model costs more than a single Infinity blister, but a GW 25/32 mm base size 10 infantry box usually offers a lower price per model than an Infinity 25mm 4 infantry box. And both companies have significantly more detail and generally better sculpts with newer models than old.
Apples and oranges when talking GW and Corvus, I think a better price comparison would be IWM line of battletech. Pretty sure this has been stated but entry price point is I think the big difference (outside of plastics vs metal) when talking about infinity and 40k/AoS....my 100$ will get me a more complete playable force in infinity then it will in 40k (as I don’t think there’s an army you can do that with lol) hell I’ve spent thousands on two armies for 40k and spent the same collecting almost all armies in infinity...it’s kinda a bang for your buck that 50$ for 10 models doesn’t look bad until you realize that’s maybe 1/5 of what your going to need to actually play a game. Again this is because the two games are different so apples and oranges again?!?
When the Spotbot first came out with Atalanta, you could shoot it to remove it's ability to put models into Targeted state. Then in N3 it turned into an unshootable marker. The original PanO starter had 4x Fusiliers, 3x berets and 1x helmet. ORC and Crocman were the other 2 models. Because GW stuff is expensive compared to other plastic mass armies for sale, and CBs stuff is not out of line for a single metal character model of the same size.
I think that might be a bit of an overstatement. Looking at the N3 core rules, I get what they were doing with TinBots - some special loadouts have unique skills that aren't very visually representable. The hacking deflectors have game impact, but they weren't planning on releasing unique sculpts for them, and it's not even necessarily clear what that would even be, especially across faction lines. So they get a special marker that goes in BtB with them. This makes it easier for both players to keep straight which of the otherwise identical models with rifles is special. This mostly holds in the HSN3 TinBots as well - I have no idea how a sculpt would convey neurocinetics. Atalanta's SpotBot was a unique model anyway, and making it into a TinBot just made it a little cleaner and easier to play. I think the TinBot models are fun and cute, but I definitely get why people are annoyed that they take up a spot in what would otherwise be a box of 4. I would have been ok with them just remaining as a 2d marker.
LOL...I was wondering when the massively derailed thread would come back online. Talk about tangents :)
Well March is Adepticon and we will see the new book and the mystery box. But I think that counts as the April releases. I would think we should have some pictures for March very soon.
I don't know if it has been "confirmed", but March releases will probably be something like: Zulu Cobra Hacker Haidao Sniper Rifle Perseus Brawler Box Frontovic Box
