I think this argument is going to different ways - one is way off target in saying that if they go down the route of a table top game option they will flop which really is an assumption and not really what the thread is about. I didn't want to argue whether they should or shouldn't, rather that it has been mentioned that they 'will' and wanted to shed more light on it.

As for the having to have a totally new set of rules - I reckon you could fit a conversion set of rules on 1 or 2 A4 sheets.

Like I said, there is an argument here that shouldn't be. Several areas have been gone over several times with people ignoring parts of them. I don't really want to get into that because it will end up getting nasty! It's just gone seriously off topic.

McFonz said:

Maybe so.  The general rule of forums regardless of subject matter is that the topic of a thread is pretty much resolved in the first 2 or 3 posts and everything after that is just banter and differing points of view.  It's just the nature of conversation.   People do the same thing when conversing face to face in a group, they'll do it on a forum too. 

Shooter said:

acually it does , if FFG told you this then it means the after developemnet guys are looking for a short term cash cow to bet the bank on .

as some one who started in the hobby over 20 years ago playing battle tech , and quickly was drawn into 40k first edition , i have watched as numerous companies have come and gone .

i spent alot of money on my WH40K armies . first ed was great , i had a couple sizable armies , second ed came out , and i had to let go of alot of my stuff , and buy new items and units to stay competative . at my high point i had 60,000 points of painted chaos , which to explain it to some one like you who has never been in the game , its A LOT . third ed came out and 20,000 points of my army dissappeared over night , and thats when i got out . the GMW idea is to make things bigger and stronger so that in order to stay in a game , you HAVE to buy new units . it is the ultimate game for rules lawyers and broken armies . i watched a game a while back just after the newest space wolf codex was released where a guy dumped a unit of 20 troopers out of a tank into close combat and rolled 80 dice to attack a unit of 5 troopers , and every codex released has to have just a rediculously over powered units and rules to beat the last broken one . thats what the game has become .

there is a ver TINY core of hard core 40k players that have suck with it , but each week i have gone to the game store , the faces have changed . i dont think i have seen more than 5 or 6 people stay with it more than a year , and most dissappear after about 6 months .

a number of the people i have talked to about the game , and several of the demos , were to people who started out against the idea , because of their experiences with games like WH40k . if you think i am the only gamer who doesnt like GMW , go to BGG and and ask around , they are generaly seen as the nazi's of the game world , and there are endless stories of people like me that got out because they got tired of all the crud GMW does .

GMW's model isnt based on keeping gamers , their key demographic is younger new gamers . they believe that it doesnt matter that they lost X # of gamers this week , they will get new gamers to replace them . they dont care about laoyalty

my FLGS is a remnant of what was once the largest retailer of games west of the missippi (wargames west ) . so they have had plenty of games pass through their doors .

and you are KINDA right , when enough people dont buy , the prices do go down , cause the game line is killed or sold to another company to remake and people are dumping their stock . you said you have worked in a game store , so name any other minis game that has lasted as long as WH40k , and name an example of a game that got cheaper because people didnt buy it and didnt die as a result .

GrandInquisitorKris said:

What version of rules is Dungeons and Dragons on now?  I had a set that was in a red book labled "basic rules" and a blue book labeled "expert rules" somewhere around 1981.  That's gotta be about seven or eight generations of D&D ago.  People are still playing.  I played all the way until 2003, buying new rules and books all along, because I wanted to.  I didn't get upset becaue they evolved the game and it was no longer the same thing I bought five years ago.  Many are even using "miniatures" just like we did back in 1981.

How many variants of Axis & Allies have there been over the years?  7?  8?  People are still playing.  I have like four different A&A games here.  Still playing.

To be accurate the first edition of WH40K was really a game called "Space Marine" and it was a much smaller scale. It came complete with orcs and eldar.  I know because I had the game and the rule book even laid out the whole history of Horus.  Five man squads were mounted on 1 inch squares and a  land raider was about half the size of a matchbox car.  So yes, I know what a 60,000 point army is.   28mm miniature WH40K actually grew out of a game called Space Hulk, a variant of the Space Marine universe.  Space Marine was circa 1989 / 1990.  People are still playing, it's just 40K now.

People play a game and then move on to other things.  It's not because of some failure on the part of the company or the product but more often because they just move on to other things.  We sold a lot of RC cars and trucks and guess what, most of the guys that got into it didn't stay with it for more than six months to a year. It's just the way it is. 

Games evolve over time. If they don't, people get bored with it and they'll find something else to entertain themselves.  There's a number of reasons why guys don't stick with WH40k for a long time and they certainly aren't all just because GW changed the rules or the armies or the prices.  Some guys quit because they find a game they like better.  Some quit because they get married, have kids and need their expendable cash for other things.  Some quit because they couldn't find enough guys to game with often enough and didn't want to play just once a month or once every six weeks.  There's probably a thousand different reasons why guys move on to other things, it's not all GW's fault.  In fact most to the time it's not GW's fault.  I think the same will be true for Dust Tactics. 

I don't see how changing this game from being board based to 'open' based would change any of that?

The expansions are designed to be 'must haves' as well. Who knows, in the future new tough units may well come out for the various forces that people will 'have to have'.

The only difference at the moment is that there is no need for an army book. This doesn't stop any sort of points creep etc - it just means that rather than have to release new editions of the game they can just go on releasing new units and miniatures - surely the best plan for success? A good sound basic rule system and from that point on additional boxed sets that have everything you need to include them in a game from now until whenever.

As for marketing stratergy - GW hasn't always got it right (and it is GW by the way, unless someone can please tell me why an M keeps cropping up into it) but the main reason it has been successful is the network of stores in the UK. It is pretty much impossible now due to cost of production etc for smaller companies to pass on much of a retail discount for metal miniatures so it means independant stores are trying to cut a living from small profit margins.

The reason this game is so clever is that it strikes a perfect ballance between wargame and boardgame to the point that many shops that specialise or carry boardgames will carry it. However this was also a GW tactic back in the day.

But I don't really see why this argument is coming into play. Simply put it is 'I don't want Dust to become a tabletop wargame because then it will go all GW and epic fail!' We have just had the first boxed set, why not give it a while first and if they decide to release a open version then just play the one you prefer . . . .

Shooter said:

Shooter said:

buying a new series of books , for an RPG , isnt the same thing . yes the editions do come out , but your initial investment and follow up investments are much smaller . players only need a very small amount of material to play , so even buying over multiple editions , that investment is low . as for the miniatures , since you stopped playing in 2003 , you wouldnt be aware that they ended the minis game as a stand alone game , and just started doing the figs for the role playing game .  marketing a sales models for RPG' dont apply to minis games , its apples and oranges .

Shooter said:

and many of those games are stand alone expansions , marketed to a smaller audience . the original ed was put out by MB which offered it to big and small stores alike , now its and avalon hill game which is their smaller expansion . yes people still play it , but its small core group , and still marketed as a board game , apples and oranges

Shooter said:

no , actually it wasnt , WH40K began as WH40k (in 1987) prior to that it was mostly a collection of rules from theri white dwarf magazine , it was codified in "rogue trader" with their first collection of actual armies lists being put out in "chapter approved" , and later the "red book" which was the army lists for the major races from white dwarf collected into one volume , and , and , it was a futuristic companion to their fantasy battles game that became warhammer fantasy .

"space marine " was an expansion of "adeptu titanicus" (released in 1988) , which was their "epic scale" games beginning , had ONLY rules , 6 plastic titans and buildings in the box ( i know because i saved up a long while to buy it when it first came out ) , then epic came out which was rules to expand it , then "space marine" (which my cousin got when it first came out ) came out (in 1989) which was essentially the new edition , and is still being played today as "epic armageddon " supported mostly by their black library subsidiary . the points values are drasticaly different .

space hulk was actulally a box game , their rip off of the aliens movie idea . it was put out first in 1989 (2 years after WH40kwas first released ) . its was a limited release game in that it was intended to be released , generate new sales , and be supported by new rules or missions periodicaly , but would not be supported as a standard game with continuous support like their table top games . it wuold have a "campaigns book" and 2 more expansions , which introduced a limited amount of new rules and figures , but again would only see limited support through new missions in the magazine . 2 more editions of the game have been released , niether had expansions , and only saw a very limited number reules or missions in the white dwarf magazine .

Shooter said:

and yet if i go down to my FLGS , i see gamers who have been into the hobby for longer than i have , playing alot of the same games that they have for most of those years . alot of the peopel i know have the same bad experiences with GMW , ask around BGG , i'm not alone , or even in a minority . yes , some do move on , but i'm not talking about the people who have moved on from gaming , i'm talking about gamers who have dropped it like the plague , and sold their stuff to try and recoup some of their money for games they hope wont burn them .

Shooter said:

evolving is one thing , screwing the players is another . based just on what was in the original WH40k material , they could have kept the original game and expanded it exponentialy . they were a leader from the start , and they could have simply built on it . instead , they crush their customers in a vise . the game hasnt really evolved as it has been dumbed down from a game that HAD tactics beyond spending enough to buy  20 man units so i can roll my 80 dice . in first ed , i NEVER would have rolled 80 dice for one units CC attack , and none of my squads would have been more than 10 men strong .

and just to give the most blatant example of the kinds of things GMW has done , they changed the vehicle rules in between first ed and second ed . durring the intermediary period . they went ahead and released a vehicles manual that had all the new rules and info players would need , to play the game with vehicles , you had to buy it , and it sold well . without warning , less than 6 months later , they completely changed the vehicle rules AGAIN , so that every one who had been buying and using the vehicle rules for that entire time suddenly finds out they wasted their money and they have to buy  more rules and books . at that point in time their materials had to be imported from outside the country , so the book cost $25 , which with a minimum wage of 3.15/HR or 3.25/HR at the time  , its was a chunk of money to waste on a book for the people who were their key customers .

as it stands now , the games are so drasticaly different that they have more that makes them different , than anything that makes them similar , even the story lines have been tweakd from edition to edition and game line to game line , thats its only about 25% the same material , every thing else is in flux to make a figure or unit fit .

my experience , and the experience of those i have spoken with are the reasons why we all got out , GMW has a bad reputation , not just here , but in alot of game groups in alot of cities . its not the gamers faults , it really does boil down to GMW and the strategy they have used to stay on top and crush competition .

McFonz said:

actually , marketing as a board game allows you to buy what you want , and leave out what you dont . as an example , there are plenty of people who play settelrs of catan , but they dont have to have any or all the expansions to play any or all the other expansions . minis games require the inclusion of all rules sets to play as units created in each expanison or edition take advantage of or are built on the existence of all the rules in the system before it .

GMW is game makers workshop , they produced tons of games in a bunch of gere , board games , RPGs , minis games , etc . their main venue for rules and support was white dwarf . later thay dropped the M from theri official logos , though many of us from the beginnig times still refer to them by GMW . sadly with their dropping of the M , they also dropped alot of those great old games , and focused on their minsi lines .

"back in the day " ....................... and now ?

as history in games has shown , one system or the other generaly falls to the wayside , and evetually dies . i have yet to see a company be able to develope and continue multiple lines for the same universe without screwing one or all up . and the only company that has been able to stay dominant in the minis market is WH40k , all the others that have tried to compete in the market , have died in a fraction of the time , so which one are we willing to risk ?

this game being marketed and developed as a board game gives it several advantages , entering the minis game race puts it all at risk .

Did I miss something?  Did someone say that Dust Tactics was converting to tabletop?  I see it has a great board game (though it could use a few touch ups IMHO) but if somebody would like to use the minis for a tabletop game with more advanced rules, then fine by me. 

If I had to guess, we will see the tabletop rules after we have a wider selection of minis available.  I imagine they would release a rule book first and see how well Dust does in the tabletop community.  If down the line the tabletop version does so well it overshadows the board game version we might see a swing in marketing/products, but I doubt before then. 

In the end, how much control of the future of DT is in the hands of the FFG?  They are (one of?) the publisher(s) but not the developer.  Dust must make money to exist and the developers WILL make it fun within that guideline, let's just hope we think it's fun too.

-Jeff

I have to say this GMW thing really shocked me. I mean I have worked for Games Workshop in the past and part of their training was the history of the company. From its birth it has been known as Games Workshop.

In further support of this Games Workshop is so named because it started off making classic boardgames like backgammon. It then started Whit Dwarf in '77 and again, if you look up the front cover on the net it isnt GMW that is on the front. They then developed on to create miniatures and supporting material for d&d. And then to distribute American rpg's etc.

It is possible that you are confusing Games Workshop with 'Game Designers Workshop' - but one thing is for sure, they have not been known as GMW for at least 25 years. And I think you would be hard pressed to tell a lot of people that Bloodbowl, Space Hulk, Talisman, Space Crusade, Necromunda, Mordheim amongst just some as being poor games and they were all Games Workshop creations.

I still don't see how turning out a tabletop wargame means it will fail.

One of the single biggest reasons that companies have failed and fallen by the wayside is that they are not patient. GW took the best part of ten years to establish itself as a company and more to develop its own identity. Some companies see GW and want to 'compete' with them. The problem with this is two fold.

Firstly making miniatures is a risky buisiness - especially if you are pushing hard to grow as fast as possible. I say that because there has to be an initial investment in making the miniatures and everything it entails. Those miniatures then have to make enough money to repay the investment (loans in some cases) and make enough money to fund another batch of miniatures and to pay wages etc. Eventually over time their popularity and customer base increases and they are able to invest in more miniatures knowing that the custom is there to sell them to. Many companies have failed because they have invested too much too soon and their popularity not grown as quickly as they predicted.

The other factor is the rules. Some sets of rules that have been released have just been too complicated or less appealing although the miniatures are good.

GW hit the scene at the right time in the '80's when many companies were folding and when there really wasn't a wargaming culture in the terms of what we have now. It's always hard for games companies to establish now because there are so many people trying to do it and that they have to compete with an industry giant. And to be honest this doesn't matter whether it is a board game or a table top game. What a board game does do is allow a company to grow slowly and to establish a customer base. But the interesting thing is that the miniatures are wargaming miniatures, they compare with miniatures from tabletop wargames, the only thing that makes it a board game is literally the squares on the board. Take those away and all the board is is a gaming mat.

Agreed, love em or hate em, GW has taken it's time to establish itself as the leader and it took a lot of time.  Privateer Press has also taken ten years to mold itself into basically the 2nd place spot for the most part.  PP has also found the pitfalls of trying to make everyone happy and irking more than a few by redesigning it's system, though it was badly needed.  You have to make sacrifices and not worry about making every gamer happy to be successful in the long run.  You also need regular, punctual releases and most of the games that have faded recently have fallen victim to either distribution or overextended dead periods.  As long as this game doesn't follow suit with the dead periods, I think it will survive well.  This game seems like it's going to be somewhat dependant on the appeal of future releases after all.

I tend to agree with McFonz and Hamomag.  Kris if you want to get all on your soap box about how awful GW is and how they just ruined your life or something, go ahead buddy.  There are still a lot of guys playing the game and will continue to play it for years to come. And frankly if you think it's cheap to buy new sets of books everytime they released a new version of D&D you must never have played the game.  lol  I bet I spent an easy 600 to 800 bucks on that stuff everytime they changed to a new edition. 

We all understand that you are adamantly opposed to Dust Tactics being converted in any way to a tabletop miniatures game like WH40K.  All I can tell you is get set for disappointment because it's going to happen at some point and like McFonz said, it just means there will be two versions of the game.  One on the board and one on the tabletop.  Frankly I think that is just cool and it will give Dust Tactics a unique aspect that WH40K doesn't have.  Some guys will prefer the grid system and some will prefer the open tabletop but McFonz is right, take away the squares and it's already just a miniatures game.  So we can back and forth until the cows come home about the pros and cons of what will happen when Dust Tactics finally gets a set of tabletop rules.  But one thing is certain, it will get those rules.  Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if someone figures out a way to put it on a hex system as well.  Heck it could be the first miniatures game that uses three sets of playing surface.  Grid, hex and free style.  Who else can say that?

I always love the bashing of GW, now I personally am a bit of a GW fan. As they paved the way for miniature gaming as we know it.

ALSO they are by far the most sucessful miniatures company in the biz.

i notice no one has yet shown my statements wrong , infact many of your points support what i have said regarding the path a table top minis game goes as opposed to just continueing on as a board game .  

dust will either follow in the foot steps of WH40k with HUGE swathes of people getting burned and dropping it , or in the footsteps of at-43 which is .........dead . either way , the board game will be the first to go/get shafted .

GrandInquisitorKris said:

But Dust isn't really your traditional board game is it? And there are even fewer successful long term stories involving board games. As has been pointed out on this thread.

The reason why this is so clever is that it is a tabletop wargame on a board. The background is far greater than most other board games - and again reflects that of  a wargame.

The intelligent thing would be to have this as a 'basic' version and as it is doing now, build up a large enough customer base. The next few releases will decide its success I would guess. And then it will dictate where and how they go on from there.

But to say that it would better survive as a boardgame rather than a tabletop game isn't accurate.

Aren't the Tabletop rules going to be a free supplement for Dust Tactics? If so, will it really have that big an impact? Truthfully, and I love tabletop minis games, but I just want more 3D terrain and more figures to play with and I'll be happy to play Dust Tactics on the boards.