Argive wrote: Man I just hope they don't mess with scale. I Have a whole OOP HE army ready to be built and painted lol
lol I was just thinking that you'd be pretty over the moon with the potential return of Old World having bought all those highelf models!
I know right! I think they would be just about ready in 3 years time as well hahaa
Be ironic if they won't be usable with the new thing..
Still going to do that army and just play older edition 6th ed or something as planned or just keep for display.
I got an imrik and commander box set to supplement what I got from you I'm ready to go.
Boxes of 10 plastic infantry for £25+
And we'll need them in blocks of 50 for 1 unit.
Ah... the excitement of the old world again.
Only if you choose to shop directly from GW and from their ranges only.
As for me, I'll continue buying huge boxes of humans & skeletons from warlord games and dwarves & elves from oathmark and save a fortune. I'm more than fine with GW bringing back the old world, but I'll only be picking up campaign books & maybe the odd decent character when/if they do them and even then only from places that offer discount. I'll buy the odd direct only or made to order run if they do them, but as for everything thing else cheaper alternatives already exist.
I've continued play WFB and the warlord starter armies have been insanely cheap to start an empire army. I brought the warlord starter army, a hurricanum, a war alter, two boxes of flagellants and the two made to order heroes GW put out last year. Spent less than €200 and have a pretty sizeable army with enough troops to do a few 50+ units. The two heroes were the most expensive at something like €60 for the pair, which could have easily been left off. I did get lucky and get a box of wolf knights for a tenner and have a whole bunch of left over battlemaster minis that will make a fantastic knightly unit, but I didn't count them towards the army as they were a rare and cheap find and not going to be easy to source. But my point is you can pay what you want to pay to enjoy warhammer. I just got to force myself to get the units of 50 troops painted now!
I love GW models and have brought a ton of AoS bits too add to my armies, but even then I've picked up mostly the two player sets and battleforces, so still not sunk huge amounts of money into the new stuff, but have enough to keep me painting the next ten years, easily.
AegisGrimm wrote: Just design a game where they are plugged into unit bases like War of the Ring or Game of Thrones. Simple.
This would work. Would also keep the model count down, as ~25 on movement trays would take up the same physical space as the giant blocks of 50 models required in 8th edition (which I felt was the downfall of the game as it raised the bar of entry into the game way too high. If you go back and look at armies featured in battle reports in White Dwarfs in the 90's the model counts were about a third of 8th edition).
Eldarain wrote: I'm hoping for a Warmaster type game. Works great to capture the Old World's battles.
Invalidating everyone's legacy armies by changing the scale of WHFB would undo all of the goodwill and hype this announcement has had in a single gesture. I fully expect it to be 28mm 'heroic' scale in keeping with AOS, legacy WHFB and 40k.
Despite being a former WHFB player, I'd welcome a smaller scale, too. I feel the same way about KoW. Joan of Arc minis, as another poster mentioned, have shown what's possible now.
I have 3d and 4th edition. Thanks for the.... "good" news. Just what I wanted to hear, figure creep to uselessness in trying to add oversized figures to undersized ones.
2d hand market keeps me happy.
Mordhiem, Warhammer Skirmish Rules, Albion, Pirate Coast, Lustria….. the list goes on and on.
Remember the days of modular figures, where a box or two was enough to do you for a campaign, then you could add them to your regiment?
Pepperidge Farms Remembers...
Something tells me that GWs powers that be power-creeped themselves into a corner, and this is how they are going to try to recoup the loss.
I guess 1-2,000.00 armies of 500-1,000 points didn't work after all.
And this is why announcing stuff three years in advance and when you have nothing to announce is a bad idea. Now half the people are hoping for a revamp of Warmaster, and half are hoping for, I guess just a 9th edition fantasy ruleset to use their existing armies with? And those people will be furious if it is a warmaster type game in an incompatible scale to the stuff they already own.
It's not going to be a Warmaster rehash, or they would have teased a Warmaster-style base, rather than a regular slotta base.
The fact that so far as I'm aware Warmaster was a dreadful flop the first time around would also seem to make it an unlikely choice.
It will be Warhammer Fantasy Battles with all new unit names made from Citadel Trademarkium, and the core rules streamlined in a similar fashion to current 40K.
But the people hoping for a revamp of Warmaster are being stupid in my opinion.
They showed the square base. They are bringing back the old game, seems pretty clear. Albeit new and changed rules.
Then there’s people saying they can’t bring out character models for anyone now in AoS. Ridiculous. It’s a different setting. HH did it fine.
And why are people thinking it’s FW, and worrying about price/resin, didn’t they literally say it’s an arm of theirs, they never mention FW..
Also, I think people saying I guess we will see in 3 years, I think you’ll be waiting longer.. they say at least.
(But also in that respect whoever said “they decided this last week, and haven’t decided what it’s gonna be” I assume you’re just trolling, they know what they are doing several years out in rough plans, they don’t Just drop a new system with no idea, that’s bad business.)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh I think I also saw something about maybe this will help bring back BB? It’s already here? And that’s a different (third!) setting technically anyway..
I mean for sure I think it’s gonna be vastly different.
If they do rank the round bases, everything is bigger as some have said, so yeah all 20mm stuff may be 25m square.
Not sure this will work easily for older armies, I held off swapping To round, but may just have to swap to bigger square anyway - who knows.
Albino Squirrel wrote: And this is why announcing stuff three years in advance and when you have nothing to announce is a bad idea. Now half the people are hoping for a revamp of Warmaster, and half are hoping for, I guess just a 9th edition fantasy ruleset to use their existing armies with? And those people will be furious if it is a warmaster type game in an incompatible scale to the stuff they already own.
Mantic seems to have caught on with that line of thinking. Why announce something that's possibly half a decade away? When you have nothing to show?
As an old world lover, this is great. However, let me say if they do this right I'm all on board 100,000%.
That said, how far away its to be sounded a little tongue in cheek, dry humor. I'd be willing to bet we will see it much sooner than 3 years from now. Just my hunch. Makes no sense to announce it so far out, and say how far away it is in great detail, feel like a touch of the english wit on display.
AngryAngel80 wrote: As an old world lover, this is great. However, let me say if they do this right I'm all on board 100,000%.
That said, how far away its to be sounded a little tongue in cheek, dry humor. I'd be willing to bet we will see it much sooner than 3 years from now. Just my hunch. Makes no sense to announce it so far out, and say how far away it is in great detail, feel like a touch of the english wit on display.
No, this is not the kind of thing a company makes jokes about. If anything they are lowballing that number. When gw said Sisters of Battle in 2019 emperor willing, they meant just a taste in 2019 but most stuff in 2020.
I think summer 2023 is a likely date.
I think the early announcement is so they can do a slow drip of news as they have done for the sisters.
AngryAngel80 wrote: As an old world lover, this is great. However, let me say if they do this right I'm all on board 100,000%.
That said, how far away its to be sounded a little tongue in cheek, dry humor. I'd be willing to bet we will see it much sooner than 3 years from now. Just my hunch. Makes no sense to announce it so far out, and say how far away it is in great detail, feel like a touch of the english wit on display.
No, this is not the kind of thing a company makes jokes about. If anything they are lowballing that number. When gw said Sisters of Battle in 2019 emperor willing, they meant just a taste in 2019 but most stuff in 2020.
I think summer 2023 is a likely date.
I think the early announcement is so they can do a slow drip of news as they have done for the sisters.
Hey, we live in rumors, but it just doesn't make any sense to announce it so far in advance.
I really doubt the slow drip of news, 3 years is way too long a time table to build hype, if it was a year, I'd say probably, but 3 or 4 ? No way, so my money is on it being further along than the statement and them being all like " Ha ha fooled you ! See we were full of sneaky schemes ! "
They love their jokes in GW. Just my opinion however, could be wrong but I guess we'll see in time.
Albino Squirrel wrote: And this is why announcing stuff three years in advance and when you have nothing to announce is a bad idea. Now half the people are hoping for a revamp of Warmaster, and half are hoping for, I guess just a 9th edition fantasy ruleset to use their existing armies with? And those people will be furious if it is a warmaster type game in an incompatible scale to the stuff they already own.
Mantic seems to have caught on with that line of thinking. Why announce something that's possibly half a decade away? When you have nothing to show?
Spoiler:
Mantic use Kickstarter, a lot of folks don't even consider them a legitimate business or worth spending any money let alone a viable alternative to anything GW
If they are to bring it back, all of it, a largely unchanged version of it... why get rid of it in the first place?
Different market circumstances, different production circumstances (they supposedly had a bottleneck problem due to the local power grid and/or their infrastructure), different business strategies.
Sometimes what seems a great idea on paper to one management team seems like a mistake to another one. If they feel there is a market for Oldhammer that they can meet for less production/costs, then why not do it? Especially if they can spin it as listening to customers and make gold and good will out of straw?
I think this is precisely what is going on. They are bringing back a lot of old games and making new ones, so square base unit warhammer fits with what seems to be the strategy, as well.
Returning a setting or even a game style doesn't mean they'll just run off fantasy 8th with some tweaks.
Given a 3 year lead time and that they must already have done some of the work, it's safe to assume it will come with hefty model support and I'd be shocked if they didn't provide totally revised ranges rather than letting people double dip on their collections.
They repeatedly mention about it being large scale in the post, so I cant help but feel it might not be a 28mm game, or if it is blocked units ala old fantasy battles, I hope they're producing unit sized boxes rather than relying on people buying multiples just to get started, a bit like sigmar has good sized core boxes.
From the info in the post, it looks like The Old World is envisaged as an AoS version of 30K/Horus Heresy.
So basically a game based set in the deep past with units and characters from the time. If there is a return to square bases, we might also dare to presume the rulebook will be more like WHFB than AoS.
Just Tony wrote: I'm really wanting to get my hopes up, guess I have no choice but to be patient until we get a substantive press release...
Gimgamgoo wrote:Oh... joy...
Boxes of 10 plastic infantry for £25+
And we'll need them in blocks of 50 for 1 unit.
Ah... the excitement of the old world again.
That's IF they went back to 8th. In 6th and 7th you mostly saw blocks of 10-20.
Exactly.
Minis came in boxes of 16 or 20. Unit sizes were the same.
1 purchase = 1 unit.
If only they'd stuck with that instead of going down the greed route of making those sized units useless. Forcing 3 box purchases = 1 unit. Ultimately killing off their own game before they made it official.
If they are to bring it back, all of it, a largely unchanged version of it... why get rid of it in the first place?
.
Let's see. Boss 1 decides to kill of top 3 selling miniature game hoping for new space marine success story. Boss 2 comes along and thinks maybe getting completely rid of game just because it doesn't sell as well as space marines might not optimize profits.
Gw isn't infallible. And boss changes generally change things to some way. Decision to kill fb and bring back were under different boss
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Casbyness 782431 10630798 885a21eef3f602bebe3e211ac242c6b0.jp wrote:
This implies that you think people don't own 28mm scale armies that fairly represent the scale of Old World battles
Sure somebody might have 10000 model per size. Less people have 20'16' board and then need different ruleset. You don't get believable battle with 10000+ warrior per side with ruleset designed for fb sized battles.
Hope they manage to do a 2nd edition of Chaos in the Old World too! Especially if they can do a deal to get Lang on board again with the rebalanced game design -- he's come from strength to strength as a designer since.
Minis came in boxes of 16 or 20. Unit sizes were the same.
1 purchase = 1 unit.
If only they'd stuck with that instead of going down the greed route of making those sized units useless. Forcing 3 box purchases = 1 unit. Ultimately killing off their own game before they made it official.
16 was used in 5th but even then it was rare, 1 dead, rank goes. 6th-7th 20 was standard for combat block with cheaper guys on 25-30.
I really like the new stuff that come with AoS, but really miss the more realistic old school fantasy setting.
Im mostly hoping for some nice scenery like the old chapel and tower.
I remember the original skullvane manse at the time feeling over the top outrageous and ridiccolous, but these days it feels realistic and cozy because AoS happened.
If they are to bring it back, all of it, a largely unchanged version of it... why get rid of it in the first place?
.
Let's see. Boss 1 decides to kill of top 3 selling miniature game hoping for new space marine success story. Boss 2 comes along and thinks maybe getting completely rid of game just because it doesn't sell as well as space marines might not optimize profits.
Gw isn't infallible. And boss changes generally change things to some way. Decision to kill fb and bring back were under different boss
It's obvious that there has been a significant change in direction with the change in directors. Granted, the charm offensive of self-deprecating jokes combined with price hikes and customer-unfriendly releases and packaging methods does make me wonder if the culture is much different than before, just with better PR... But anyway, admittedly without having any knowledge of how GW is run, I just find it difficult to see how the company made such a dramatic decision just on the whims of one bloke at the top. There must have been reasons for people to even consider going down this path. If generic fantasy (if the IP disputes are relevant) was a bad idea then, what changed? Yes, other companies have flooded in to fill the gap. What a surprise. Does GW want to go back and compete with them now, while having a near-monopoly before wasn't working out for them?
Post-Kirby GW is certainly happier to bank in on nostalgia, but that seems to work much better with the other systems so far, than it would for WHFB. Necromunda has a reasonable shift in aesthetics, and new multipart plastics are obviously inviting. Titanicus and Aeronautica are in a different scale, meaning people can't easily use their old kits. Blood Bowl has a little bit of both of these. Most importantly, all of these were just phased out over time, rather than literally destroyed in a narrative event, then replaced with a new game and setting. To get old players to return will be much more difficult if they change something about it that makes old collections difficult to use - especially given the much larger costs of a new WHFB army compared to a little Aeronautica fleet or Blood Bowl team.
Finally, I wonder how the decision makes sense from the perspective of production capacities. If, as hypothesized, they will bring back plastic kits for which they already have the costly moulds (perhaps more feasible when they have their new facilities up and running), are they going to invest the money and hours into creating plastic for all the metal and resin options too? It would make sense with they way GW's releases work now. But why not first do this for the significant chunks of their flagship 40k line? And instead of focussing on bringing back WHFB, why not make something out of the game and setting that was supposed to replace it? AoS has seen a few significant releases of sometimes entirely new factions, but so much is lacking. We have yet to see more than glimpse of the light or shadow elves. Nothing new for the likes of the Lizardmen. Barely anything for the Ogres, or the (I believe fairly popular) Skaven.
Something I'm very curious about, is whether Games Workshop will take the chance to delve into more areas of the Warhammer World. Albion, Vampire Coast or Cathay, for instance.
Nippon in the 1980s, not seen in miniature form ever since.
This could be especially doable if the new Warhammer Fantasy take is more limited in scope than the vast army books of the past, with all their demands for miniature kits. The army book format in and of itself became a creative straitjacket for the GW studio. In the 1980s, they were free to release a handful of new figures whenever they felt like it, and thus explore Nippon, Halflings, Norsca, Fimir or a plethora of monsters with small investment of resources. In the 1990s-2000s, they were increasingly bound up in the demands of the army book threadmill. If they wanted to release something new, it had to either be a complete new army, or just something small on the spin-off side such as specialist games and Dreadfleet (for which the market wasn't good in those days, or at least marketing under Kirby wasn't up to the task) or summer campaign miniatures such as the Hellcannon, Middenheim and Albion miniatures delving into niche concepts.
Kislev during 6th edition: A mini-army, later unsupported.
We did see Dogs of War and Chaos Dwarfs as a small new army in the 1990s (unsupported after 5th edition up to 8th), and a small army for Kislev in 6th edition, unsupported thereafter. Warmaster sported Araby, but Warmaster was not a great hit. Ogre Kingdoms was the one new big army, or one of two if you count the Daemons of Chaos' expanded range, and it needed an entire miniature range.
Chaos Dwarfs: 1990s army, yet left out in the cold for most of Warhammer Fantasy.
Then there were fun thematic armies in White Dwarf, such as Kemmler's Barrow legion, Vampire Coast, Clan Moulder and the Gnoblar Horde. Building on existing modelling ranges and often requiring conversions: Which was part of the fun, for sure, but ensured it stayed a tiny niche and opened up for small companies to produce models GW weren't. This problem of inviting in the small competition to open new niches was much exacerbated when studio designers during 7th edition introduced new units in army lists which did not yet sport official models, such as Forsaken.
Dreadfleet: One last exploratory hurrah before the End Times.
This commercial bind ultimately put dampeners on Warhammer's creative potential: It is huge, and can be explored to much greater extent with a more limited setup than army book-threadmill WHFB of old. But ultimately GW would want to produce models for anything peripheral they delve into, and that mean they may well shy away from introducing more things on the periphery of the background, to not give competitors possible bones to snatch.
Fimir: A weird 1980s creation because the CEO wanted Warhammer to have its very own fantasy race. Resurrected lately by Forgeworld after decades of hibernation.
So there may be little in the way of brand new additions to the glorious setting, such as Inca Dwarfs in Lustria, fantasy Songhai and so on. And there may potentially also be little in the way of covering already existing periphery stuff such as Khureshi Nagas, Albion, Ind, Norsca and so on; this obviously depends on commercial success, how limited in scope the new game and miniature ranges will be, and on budget or will within the studio.
This is a long-standing limit to driving the creative potential of Games Workshop's own grimdark, historically based, classic fantasy smörgåsbord setting to the hilt. It remains to be seen if and how GW will tackle this obstacle.
overtyrant wrote: No idea how they are going to handle this. Where will they store and sell what will have to be a large range?
Remember they're in the process of a big expansion of manufacturing and warehousing, so by the time this is out the new spaces will have come online, and if it's run like 30K they'll be selling direct only (with the odd starter like Calth/Prospero in store)
Boxes of 10 plastic infantry for £25+
And we'll need them in blocks of 50 for 1 unit.
Ah... the excitement of the old world again.
I think this is one the reasons why WHFB died in the first place. GW got greedy and put infantry in boxes of 10 and wrote rules that benefitted large units. Battallion boxes had been discontinued and Start Collecting! boxes had not been introduced yet. There was no affordable way to start the hobby for new players and and they made new models that no-one asked for instead of updating older models that were showing their age. By killing the sales they killed the game.
I'm cautiously optimistic about Warhammer: Old World, but one thing is for sure. They are not advancing it three years in advance if they do not expect it to generate massive sales. Writing rules that allow players to use their old collections does not make much of a profit nor take three years. There will be metric ton of new models, big boxed sets and I will be shoveling money at their general direction. I expect the game to be focused in Old World and armies that are most likely to fight there and several old units will be dropped.
Interesting times are ahead. Warhammer: Old World can be massive success or massive failure and for the sake of hobby, I hope it will be successful even if it means a massive black hole in my wallet.
As much as it pains me to say this, this is not a game I need.
Warhammer Fantasy is the game that drug me into wargaming over 20 years ago. I'd dabbled with 40K, as it was more popular at the FLGS, but I finally gave in and traded in my Eldar for the old 4th-5th edition Undead army box. I've had a rank and file Undead army, updated as needed, ever since.
But it works in KoW just fine and, while it took some adjustment, I just like that ruleset better than any WHFB except maype 5th. And I'm pretty sure that's the nostalgia goggles, because 5th was when I started and helped kick off a return of WHFB at the store. Those were the days you could just show up on a Saturday afternoon with your fantasy army and get in 1-2 games, no pre-scheduling required.
I think there's also going to be an undead faction in Oathmark, too. And anything buy the guy who wrote Frostgrave is something I'm going to check out. Plus, out there in the non-GW world, boxes of rank and file plastics tend to cost $1 - $1.50 a miniature, and they don't have giant heads and hands like GW minis.
I'm sorry, Warhammer Fantasy Battles. You were my first love. But when GW forced me out during the worst of the Kirby years, I discovered other games, and I can't trust GW to do well enough by you now to overcome my new loves. Time marches on.
*sigh* Maybe I should pick up two last boxes of GW skeletons and a box of wraiths before all their undead turn into the faction that look like guys wearing bone suits.
Karak Norn Clansman wrote: Something I'm very curious about, is whether Games Workshop will take the chance to delve into more areas of the Warhammer World. Albion, Vampire Coast or Cathay, for instance.
Nippon in the 1980s, not seen in miniature form ever since.
This could be especially doable if the new Warhammer Fantasy take is more limited in scope than the vast army books of the past, with all their demands for miniature kits. The army book format in and of itself became a creative straitjacket for the GW studio. In the 1980s, they were free to release a handful of new figures whenever they felt like it, and thus explore Nippon, Halflings, Norsca, Fimir or a plethora of monsters with small investment of resources. In the 1990s-2000s, they were increasingly bound up in the demands of the army book threadmill. If they wanted to release something new, it had to either be a complete new army, or just something small on the spin-off side such as specialist games and Dreadfleet (for which the market wasn't good in those days, or at least marketing under Kirby wasn't up to the task) or summer campaign miniatures such as the Hellcannon, Middenheim and Albion miniatures delving into niche concepts.
Kislev during 6th edition: A mini-army, later unsupported.
We did see Dogs of War and Chaos Dwarfs as a small new army in the 1990s (unsupported after 5th edition up to 8th), and a small army for Kislev in 6th edition, unsupported thereafter. Warmaster sported Araby, but Warmaster was not a great hit. Ogre Kingdoms was the one new big army, or one of two if you count the Daemons of Chaos' expanded range, and it needed an entire miniature range.
Chaos Dwarfs: 1990s army, yet left out in the cold for most of Warhammer Fantasy.
Then there were fun thematic armies in White Dwarf, such as Kemmler's Barrow legion, Vampire Coast, Clan Moulder and the Gnoblar Horde. Building on existing modelling ranges and often requiring conversions: Which was part of the fun, for sure, but ensured it stayed a tiny niche and opened up for small companies to produce models GW weren't. This problem of inviting in the small competition to open new niches was much exacerbated when studio designers during 7th edition introduced new units in army lists which did not yet sport official models, such as Forsaken.
Dreadfleet: One last exploratory hurrah before the End Times.
This commercial bind ultimately put dampeners on Warhammer's creative potential: It is huge, and can be explored to much greater extent with a more limited setup than army book-threadmill WHFB of old. But ultimately GW would want to produce models for anything peripheral they delve into, and that mean they may well shy away from introducing more things on the periphery of the background, to not give competitors possible bones to snatch.
Fimir: A weird 1980s creation because the CEO wanted Warhammer to have its very own fantasy race. Resurrected lately by Forgeworld after decades of hibernation.
So there may be little in the way of brand new additions to the glorious setting, such as Inca Dwarfs in Lustria, fantasy Songhai and so on. And there may potentially also be little in the way of covering already existing periphery stuff such as Khureshi Nagas, Albion, Ind, Norsca and so on; this obviously depends on commercial success, how limited in scope the new game and miniature ranges will be, and on budget or will within the studio.
This is a long-standing limit to driving the creative potential of Games Workshop's own grimdark, historically based, classic fantasy smörgåsbord setting to the hilt. It remains to be seen if and how GW will tackle this obstacle.
Cheers
As this seems to be purely a nostalgia moneygrab, I doubt it. You will get a bunch of "iconic" units and heroes for each army, and that'll be it.
Karak Norn Clansman wrote: Something I'm very curious about, is whether Games Workshop will take the chance to delve into more areas of the Warhammer World. Albion, Vampire Coast or Cathay, for instance.
Nippon in the 1980s, not seen in miniature form ever since.
This could be especially doable if the new Warhammer Fantasy take is more limited in scope than the vast army books of the past, with all their demands for miniature kits. The army book format in and of itself became a creative straitjacket for the GW studio. In the 1980s, they were free to release a handful of new figures whenever they felt like it, and thus explore Nippon, Halflings, Norsca, Fimir or a plethora of monsters with small investment of resources. In the 1990s-2000s, they were increasingly bound up in the demands of the army book threadmill. If they wanted to release something new, it had to either be a complete new army, or just something small on the spin-off side such as specialist games and Dreadfleet (for which the market wasn't good in those days, or at least marketing under Kirby wasn't up to the task) or summer campaign miniatures such as the Hellcannon, Middenheim and Albion miniatures delving into niche concepts.
Kislev during 6th edition: A mini-army, later unsupported.
We did see Dogs of War and Chaos Dwarfs as a small new army in the 1990s (unsupported after 5th edition up to 8th), and a small army for Kislev in 6th edition, unsupported thereafter. Warmaster sported Araby, but Warmaster was not a great hit. Ogre Kingdoms was the one new big army, or one of two if you count the Daemons of Chaos' expanded range, and it needed an entire miniature range.
Chaos Dwarfs: 1990s army, yet left out in the cold for most of Warhammer Fantasy.
Then there were fun thematic armies in White Dwarf, such as Kemmler's Barrow legion, Vampire Coast, Clan Moulder and the Gnoblar Horde. Building on existing modelling ranges and often requiring conversions: Which was part of the fun, for sure, but ensured it stayed a tiny niche and opened up for small companies to produce models GW weren't. This problem of inviting in the small competition to open new niches was much exacerbated when studio designers during 7th edition introduced new units in army lists which did not yet sport official models, such as Forsaken.
Dreadfleet: One last exploratory hurrah before the End Times.
This commercial bind ultimately put dampeners on Warhammer's creative potential: It is huge, and can be explored to much greater extent with a more limited setup than army book-threadmill WHFB of old. But ultimately GW would want to produce models for anything peripheral they delve into, and that mean they may well shy away from introducing more things on the periphery of the background, to not give competitors possible bones to snatch.
Fimir: A weird 1980s creation because the CEO wanted Warhammer to have its very own fantasy race. Resurrected lately by Forgeworld after decades of hibernation.
So there may be little in the way of brand new additions to the glorious setting, such as Inca Dwarfs in Lustria, fantasy Songhai and so on. And there may potentially also be little in the way of covering already existing periphery stuff such as Khureshi Nagas, Albion, Ind, Norsca and so on; this obviously depends on commercial success, how limited in scope the new game and miniature ranges will be, and on budget or will within the studio.
This is a long-standing limit to driving the creative potential of Games Workshop's own grimdark, historically based, classic fantasy smörgåsbord setting to the hilt. It remains to be seen if and how GW will tackle this obstacle.
Cheers
As this seems to be purely a nostalgia moneygrab, I doubt it. You will get a bunch of "iconic" units and heroes for each army, and that'll be it.
Every business ever only does something because its a money grab. Its not particularly insightful to point out that a company in capitalist economics is making a business decision that is a money grab. They all are, it is the entire point of business.
Galas wrote: The real reason behind this is the success of WoW Classic.
... what?
His point is that WoW Classic was not meant to be a major success and was more done as a financially viable fan-service. However the nostalgia is powerful and its become very profitable for Bliz. Thus Old World might have the same reasoning behind it. I think that that is part of it; nostalgia is a major seller of products (just look how many ancient computer games are getting re-released and remastered); however I think for the Old World its also because of two key things:
1) GW Staff WANT to make it. Yes its got to turn a profit, but at the same time GW has always been very creative led in what comes out (to a degree); so with 30 years and a good chance many of the GW staff grew up with Old World; there's likely a good body of staff that would argue the case to bring it back.
2) GW can see that rank and file as a game concept has a viable market that can turn a decent profit. Thus they are re-creating their own game to bring it back to feed that segment of the market. Likely because "new GW" is happier to chase smaller profit projects; whilst "Old GW" kept looking for quick fixes (Dreadfleet) and golden goose egg returns on investments. Of course with the right marketing many of GW's niche projects have turned very healthy profits and often exceeded GW's production and supply levels.
In the end it can likely turn a healthy profit on the investment GW will put into it; even more so now that GW is really getting to grips with effective marketing and sales tactics to help drive sales.
As an aside I kinda hope that all this renewed AoS and Old World energy and focus might mean we see Warmaster and Dreadfleet/ManOWar return. Even if they are for AoS, the concepts of both games are fantastic (and I always think the Dreadfleet ships looked really great and wished they'd done full fleets not one ship per faction).
Every business ever only does something because its a money grab. Its not particularly insightful to point out that a company in capitalist economics is making a business decision that is a money grab. They all are, it is the entire point of business.
Every business wants to make a profit off their product. That is however not the same as every business only releasing "money grabs" aka poorly thought out trend-chasing products. In wargaming, take Infinity for example. It's clearly a product, designed to make money, but there is coherent artistic vision behind it, and the company cares about the IP. Compare it to this announcement of "we heard you love Old World, well, we're here to capitalize on it! seeya in 2-3 years!". There is clearly no overarching vision for the product, nor any deep love, at least so far. It's just being squirted out because TW:W sold real well, and nostalgic 90s things are in.
Either that, or everyone at GW loves WFB, and despises AoS secretly, and we can expect all their passion to go into Old World.
EnTyme wrote: Or maybe, just maybe, it's possible to like both settings?
Not sure. Everyone I hear talk about the WHFB/Sigmar divide seems intent on promoting one side by dumping poo on the other side.
Most people just get on with it. You only really hear from people who feel strongly either way, but that doesn’t mean they represent the majority.
There was a majority like that right when AoS launched and GW killed off the Old World.
Today its far less the case and is more the minorities making a lot of noise. Those that disliked AoS have moved onto other games or just play old editions of Old World; meanwhile others have moved on and tried and liked AoS and started playing it. The big turn around was, I think, when AoS 2.0 launched and the game started to get organised and have a structure to it in terms of rules.
Right now the hate and anger is either trolls; people with websites who want traffic; a group who express their displeasure at GW badly when talking to other gamers and a very tiny minority who are just bitter/angry at everyone about it.
Karak Norn Clansman wrote:Something I'm very curious about, is whether Games Workshop will take the chance to delve into more areas of the Warhammer World. Albion, Vampire Coast or Cathay, for instance.
Nippon in the 1980s, not seen in miniature form ever since.
This could be especially doable if the new Warhammer Fantasy take is more limited in scope than the vast army books of the past, with all their demands for miniature kits. The army book format in and of itself became a creative straitjacket for the GW studio. In the 1980s, they were free to release a handful of new figures whenever they felt like it, and thus explore Nippon, Halflings, Norsca, Fimir or a plethora of monsters with small investment of resources. In the 1990s-2000s, they were increasingly bound up in the demands of the army book threadmill. If they wanted to release something new, it had to either be a complete new army, or just something small on the spin-off side such as specialist games and Dreadfleet (for which the market wasn't good in those days, or at least marketing under Kirby wasn't up to the task) or summer campaign miniatures such as the Hellcannon, Middenheim and Albion miniatures delving into niche concepts.
Kislev during 6th edition: A mini-army, later unsupported.
We did see Dogs of War and Chaos Dwarfs as a small new army in the 1990s (unsupported after 5th edition up to 8th), and a small army for Kislev in 6th edition, unsupported thereafter. Warmaster sported Araby, but Warmaster was not a great hit. Ogre Kingdoms was the one new big army, or one of two if you count the Daemons of Chaos' expanded range, and it needed an entire miniature range.
Chaos Dwarfs: 1990s army, yet left out in the cold for most of Warhammer Fantasy.
Then there were fun thematic armies in White Dwarf, such as Kemmler's Barrow legion, Vampire Coast, Clan Moulder and the Gnoblar Horde. Building on existing modelling ranges and often requiring conversions: Which was part of the fun, for sure, but ensured it stayed a tiny niche and opened up for small companies to produce models GW weren't. This problem of inviting in the small competition to open new niches was much exacerbated when studio designers during 7th edition introduced new units in army lists which did not yet sport official models, such as Forsaken.
Dreadfleet: One last exploratory hurrah before the End Times.
This commercial bind ultimately put dampeners on Warhammer's creative potential: It is huge, and can be explored to much greater extent with a more limited setup than army book-threadmill WHFB of old. But ultimately GW would want to produce models for anything peripheral they delve into, and that mean they may well shy away from introducing more things on the periphery of the background, to not give competitors possible bones to snatch.
Fimir: A weird 1980s creation because the CEO wanted Warhammer to have its very own fantasy race. Resurrected lately by Forgeworld after decades of hibernation.
So there may be little in the way of brand new additions to the glorious setting, such as Inca Dwarfs in Lustria, fantasy Songhai and so on. And there may potentially also be little in the way of covering already existing periphery stuff such as Khureshi Nagas, Albion, Ind, Norsca and so on; this obviously depends on commercial success, how limited in scope the new game and miniature ranges will be, and on budget or will within the studio.
This is a long-standing limit to driving the creative potential of Games Workshop's own grimdark, historically based, classic fantasy smörgåsbord setting to the hilt. It remains to be seen if and how GW will tackle this obstacle.
Cheers
I don't think we will see much of things like Nippon. Vampire coast would be a great hit I'm sure, what with total war giving it a huge spot in the limelight recently, plus the models (would/could) work in both settings easily. I think the problem with things like Nippon is that some of the ideas are grounded too much in reality and some use a little too much stereotyping. I'd love too see both halflings come back and then later on (when ever they work on lustria) see pygmies work as their tropical counterparts, but I think those sort of models will never be seen again due to how sensitive people like to act nowadays. I don't think there is a copyright issue, otherwise there'd be a hundred and one historical companies in trouble. Albion maybe. I don't see anyone getting to knotted up over Celtic legends.
Psychopomp wrote:As much as it pains me to say this, this is not a game I need.
Warhammer Fantasy is the game that drug me into wargaming over 20 years ago. I'd dabbled with 40K, as it was more popular at the FLGS, but I finally gave in and traded in my Eldar for the old 4th-5th edition Undead army box. I've had a rank and file Undead army, updated as needed, ever since.
But it works in KoW just fine and, while it took some adjustment, I just like that ruleset better than any WHFB except maype 5th. And I'm pretty sure that's the nostalgia goggles, because 5th was when I started and helped kick off a return of WHFB at the store. Those were the days you could just show up on a Saturday afternoon with your fantasy army and get in 1-2 games, no pre-scheduling required.
I think there's also going to be an undead faction in Oathmark, too. And anything buy the guy who wrote Frostgrave is something I'm going to check out. Plus, out there in the non-GW world, boxes of rank and file plastics tend to cost $1 - $1.50 a miniature, and they don't have giant heads and hands like GW minis.
I'm sorry, Warhammer Fantasy Battles. You were my first love. But when GW forced me out during the worst of the Kirby years, I discovered other games, and I can't trust GW to do well enough by you now to overcome my new loves. Time marches on.
*sigh* Maybe I should pick up two last boxes of GW skeletons and a box of wraiths before all their undead turn into the faction that look like guys wearing bone suits.
yeap, this is pretty much my feeling on the whole thing. I'd love to have WFB back but I don't need it, I've made do without it for long enough now and I certainly don't need it to be brought back overpriced. I'm really looking forward to oathmark. The kits they have already are smashing, their dwarves are some of the best things I've painted. Oathmark has already gotten good reviews from people who have play tested it- it really sounds like the game works well both as a starter game (of like 30 models) up to huge games of hundreds of models. You can mix and match units from armies as you want and apparently the game remains balanced (if that is your thing). The first expansion is already being worked on and the main rules are not out yet! (yes, the undead will be in it but not until the first xpac is out, but I don't think that will be long after the main game!)
At less than a €1 per model, their kits are a bargain. Coupled with warlord games, fantasy already has a huge selection of models to play as old world substitutes. They are not overly designed like GW stuff either. I like a lot of AoS models, but damn if most of them are still on my desk, party finished as there are just so many details to do. I knocked up a couple of oathmark dwarves in one evening and I'm a super slow painter (Like, really, really slow!)
I don't need another WFB ruleset. I'd certainly be up for new books & models, so won't say no to it. But I won't be buying into the game like I would have done 10 years ago. I'll take anything with nice maps & art and I'd certainly take nice models. But most of my WFB armies will continue to be made from warlords & oathmark/frostgrave kits. My advantage is that I only play at home and not with an outside group, so I don't have to bend to anyone else's hobby, But I do see why this might be a factor for some people.
AnomanderRake wrote:
EnTyme wrote: Or maybe, just maybe, it's possible to like both settings?
Not sure. Everyone I hear talk about the WHFB/Sigmar divide seems intent on promoting one side by dumping poo on the other side.
From what I've seen on facebook in the last 24 hours, it feels like these people are only pooping on the other game as to reinforce their own opinion of their chosen game, as if they have to convince themselves that their game is the best and won't be removed. I don't blame them though. AoS-only people must be a little on edge, seeing as they have already seen that GW are happy to get rid of main line game as they see fit.
Psychopomp wrote: As much as it pains me to say this, this is not a game I need.
Warhammer Fantasy is the game that drug me into wargaming over 20 years ago. I'd dabbled with 40K, as it was more popular at the FLGS, but I finally gave in and traded in my Eldar for the old 4th-5th edition Undead army box. I've had a rank and file Undead army, updated as needed, ever since.
But it works in KoW just fine and, while it took some adjustment, I just like that ruleset better than any WHFB except maype 5th. And I'm pretty sure that's the nostalgia goggles, because 5th was when I started and helped kick off a return of WHFB at the store. Those were the days you could just show up on a Saturday afternoon with your fantasy army and get in 1-2 games, no pre-scheduling required.
I'm sorry, Warhammer Fantasy Battles. You were my first love. But when GW forced me out during the worst of the Kirby years, I discovered other games, and I can't trust GW to do well enough by you now to overcome my new loves. Time marches on.
*sigh* Maybe I should pick up two last boxes of GW skeletons and a box of wraiths before all their undead turn into the faction that look like guys wearing bone suits.
I agree. I like Kings of War, and I am not going to ride this GW roller-coaster anymore.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aesthete wrote: Sources on the internet (i.e. one post I made on my blog with exactly 0% basis in anything) predict that the new game will be in 15-18 mm.
Because that would totally make sense.
This I would love, I wanted a re-launch of Warmaster. Even 10mm again. The company could really crack into the smalle scale market as a supplement to AoS. But it will piss off fans who are (not realistically) thinking GW is going to return to square basing and let theme use all their old figs exclusively.
EnTyme wrote: Or maybe, just maybe, it's possible to like both settings?
Not sure. Everyone I hear talk about the WHFB/Sigmar divide seems intent on promoting one side by dumping poo on the other side.
Most people just get on with it. You only really hear from people who feel strongly either way, but that doesn’t mean they represent the majority.
There was a majority like that right when AoS launched and GW killed off the Old World.
Today its far less the case and is more the minorities making a lot of noise. Those that disliked AoS have moved onto other games or just play old editions of Old World; meanwhile others have moved on and tried and liked AoS and started playing it. The big turn around was, I think, when AoS 2.0 launched and the game started to get organised and have a structure to it in terms of rules.
Right now the hate and anger is either trolls; people with websites who want traffic; a group who express their displeasure at GW badly when talking to other gamers and a very tiny minority who are just bitter/angry at everyone about it.
Yeah, 2.0 was a pretty big turning point. I was pretty mad when the Old World got killed off at the time, and I had zero intention of starting AoS. It doesn't help that AoS should be the textbook example of how not to launch a new product line as well.
Once it found it's footing, it seemed to explode in popularity. I now much prefer AoS then I would a rank and file game.
EnTyme wrote: Or maybe, just maybe, it's possible to like both settings?
Not sure. Everyone I hear talk about the WHFB/Sigmar divide seems intent on promoting one side by dumping poo on the other side.
Meh. I don't have a problem with the AoS setting... what I've seen of it looks kind of cool, and so many of the models are bonkers in just the right way. I just have no interest in a fantasy skirmish game... and by 'skirmish' in this case, I'm referring to units running about in blobs, rather than ranked infantry. I have various sci fi games to scratch that itch, as sci fi (IMO) does that style of game better.
What I want from a fantasy game is a generic high fantasy setting with elves and dwarfs and all those familiar fantasy tropes, and ranked blocks of infantry butting heads up close and personal. So while I have no particular reason to look down on AoS, it was never going to be a game that I was remotely interested in playing, as it just doesn't fill the gaming niche that WHFB did.
Thinking about this I hope they go down the warhammer forge route before they were gak canned. I.E. have a campaign book and a bunch of armies introduced through the campaign. We had Tamurkan released with Battle for Skull Pass in the works before it was cancelled.
I would love to see a 10-15mm release for the old world. I don't think I could contain my joy at plastics in that size range. Warmaster release would be amazing. The only downside would be no "warmaster" style release in AoS which would be epic give that it feels even more suited to mass apoc sized battles than wfb.
It actually makes financial sense to do WFB in the 10-15mm and not AoS. That way it wouldn't in theory cannibalize sales from AoS but they could use the old world.
I feel like it was widely accepted that Fantasy was prohibitively expensive and time consuming to play as opposed to 40k, getting even more expensive during the latter years around the release of Witch Elves, the new Dwarfs, ect..., where ten model boxes went for $50.
Since then prices have only increased. I just looked at a getting started box of Dwarfs that was $100 for 10 men, a gyrocopter, and 2 characters. I can't even imagine what prices will look like 3 years from now.
I'm happy it's coming back, and I will certainly keep an eye out for new models to add (The new goblin wolf riders from Beastgrave are amazing), but I don't feel like GW will address the problems that likely ushered in its demise in the first place.
I'm happy to be wrong, but rank and file games need lots of models. At current pricing that is going to turn away a lot of people.
Even though I'm bitter about the world being blown up, I'm just as happy playing AOS with Old World models on an Old World table. I feel like a circle based "skirmish" game was really what they needed in the first place.
10 to 15mm is a bit too small in my opinion. 18mm would be the best compromise between the ability to field large blocks of troops and big monsters in a reasonable gaming space and still keep the detail that GW is known for on their minis.
But that's the problem, it's a compromise and so doesn't really please anybody.
28-32mm is the sweet spot for highly detailed miniatures that still get put on the table in enough numbers to at least pretend you're fighting a battle rather than having a pub brawl.
6-10mm is the sweet spot for having big impressive forces that still have sufficient detail that you can tell different types of unit apart.
Going right in the middle results in armies that don't look that much bigger than 32mm, while also not approaching them in detail.
I'm unconvinced by the idea they'll be going for a smaller scale. It removes any cross-compatibility with their other main ranges, it removes any potential to cross-sell people on a new version of Mordheim if they eventually choose to do that, and it makes the whole thing reek of a cynical desire to invalidate existing collections of WHFB models. But, if they did decide to go smaller, I'd rather they go whole hog and do 6-10mm.
IMHO: There is no way GW would change the scale for Fantasy. The whole point of bringing something back is to flirt with retro feelings.
Also Scale Creep at GW is going in the opposite direction as they love to show off their designs (on big minis) using plastic injection tech that crushes the competition. No other miniature wargaming company is even close.
This said I do not think they will bring back mass battle in 28+ mm either as this would be too expensive - and the paint process would kill the hype.
What I do think we will see is boxed releases (New games, Mordheim, Warhammer Quest, etc.) set in the Old World - as well as reprinted BL books.
Strombones wrote: I feel like it was widely accepted that Fantasy was prohibitively expensive and time consuming to play as opposed to 40k, getting even more expensive during the latter years around the release of Witch Elves, the new Dwarfs, ect..., where ten model boxes went for $50.
Since then prices have only increased. I just looked at a getting started box of Dwarfs that was $100 for 10 men, a gyrocopter, and 2 characters. I can't even imagine what prices will look like 3 years from now.
I'm happy it's coming back, and I will certainly keep an eye out for new models to add (The new goblin wolf riders from Beastgrave are amazing), but I don't feel like GW will address the problems that likely ushered in its demise in the first place.
I'm happy to be wrong, but rank and file games need lots of models. At current pricing that is going to turn away a lot of people.
Even though I'm bitter about the world being blown up, I'm just as happy playing AOS with Old World models on an Old World table. I feel like a circle based "skirmish" game was really what they needed in the first place.
This is, in a nutshell, why I don't care at all about this announcement. Despite being interested in WFB...I could never afford or stomach buying an army back in the day. With GW's current prices? Absolutely out of the question. Within 2-3 years we'll be looking at $60 as a standard price for 10 models. A "regiment" of 30 Empire spearmen? That could be a $180 purchase which is fething insane for a wargame. Even more so considering there are more and more plastic fantasy alternatives which are still $35 for 25-40 miniatures. I don't see how GW can support a mass rank and file game with their current pricing. That means we'd either see cheaper prices (which would immediately make more people question the other GW lines) or...some alternative will have to exist.
I simply cannot fathom GW thinking the market exists to support this and AoS at current GW boxed prices, etc.
I certainly don't see them messing with the scale, but they will enlarge it enough to bring the old WFB scale inline with the new models. If it's true WFB they bring back, they will probably stick with 5th/6th edition sized units. 20 man units will be the norm.
No way will they want smaller models or sets of 20+ models on sale against AoS models, as people will start proxying in those cheaper & smaller models for AoS units. Whilst there is nothing wrong with this as a hobbyist (I use a lot of proxies & cheap alternatives myself quite happily) it will knock sales of AoS and have a lot of AoS purists or even tournament players getting annoyed that people are using these cheaper/smaller 'alternatives'. Much like people don't really accept the use of lord of the rings models in AoS or WFB.
What I do think we will see is boxed releases (New games, Mordheim, Warhammer Quest, etc.) set in the Old World - as well as reprinted BL books.
If it's not true WFB coming back, then this would be the best thing we could hope for. That would be enough old world models for characters and terrain to still be able to get a real old world feel from our games, even if we are stuck using alternative models (not a bad thing at all)
kendoka wrote: IMHO: There is no way GW would change the scale for Fantasy. The whole point of bringing something back is to flirt with retro feelings.
There's no indication that this is WHFB. All we know is that it is based in the Old World and will use square bases. We don't have enough information to say what this game is, or if it will even be the same game as GW currently envisions it when it is finally released 3+ years from now.
WHFB fared poorly because it was neglected and mostly ignored by GW at that time. Had it received this kind of monstrous attention Sigmar currently has, I've zero doubts it would've been as successful if not even more, because of the well established setting everyone knew and loved.
Before Adeptus Titanicus I would have said that there's no way they would change the scale by anything significant. Now, I'm less sure they won't do so to force people to buy the new models and corresponding newly scaled terrain.
Aesthete wrote: Sources on the internet (i.e. one post I made on my blog with exactly 0% basis in anything) predict that the new game will be in 15-18 mm.
Because that would totally make sense.
Every game around that scale that GW has tried has died, it simply doesn't allow for much in the way of hobby activities such as conversions and interesting paint jobs, beyond the truly huge units and we now have Adeptus Titanicus for that. Plus the miniatures look god awful.
If WHFB isn't in standard GW scale, I'll eat my hat. The rules could be anything from WHFB 9e to AoS with Old World factions (I'd err more towards the former, as GW needs to differentiate it's games) but the scale will be the usual. It totally undermines the nostalgia pitch if you make it Warmaster 2.0, which frankly is something only internet nerds could come to, given the heavy emphasis on square bases in the marketing and what a commercial non-entity the original Warmaster was.
Simple way to solve the financial aspect of it, is to make 9e use the same kind of model numbers as 6e. Still likely expensive but not the ridiculous money sink that 8th was.
Aesthete wrote: Sources on the internet (i.e. one post I made on my blog with exactly 0% basis in anything) predict that the new game will be in 15-18 mm.
Because that would totally make sense.
Every game around that scale that GW has tried has died, it slightly doesn't allow for much in the way of hobby activities. Plus the miniatures look god awful.
If WHFB isn't in standard GW scale, I'll eat my hat. The rules could be anything from WHFB 9e to AoS with Old World factions (I'd err more towards the former, as GW needs to differentiate it's games) but the scale will be the usual. It totally undermines the nostalgia pitch if you make it Warmaster 2.0, which frankly is something only internet nerds could come to, given what a commercial non-entity the original Warmaster was.
Simple way to solve the financial aspect of it, is to make 9e use the same kind of model numbers as 6e. Still likely expensive but not the ridiculous money sink that 8th was.
We are at a different time than we were back in the day when smaller scale mass battle games died. GW has shown the detail they can get on 8mm models in plastic. GW has also shown they're supporting their mainline games now. We see regular releases for anything they do in plastic (LotR, AoS, 40k, Titanicus, Necromunda, Shadespire, etc). with all of those being over a year old with consistent releases. I think part of this is to build it up properly, it'll also diffuse a lot of the damage of a fresh drop if they take 3 years to introduce and show what they're doing. That's the main reason I see why it's taking 3 years.
I'd argue Kings of War is a terrible 28mm game even with model minimums closer to 6th ed fantasy. It shines at 10mm too. Bear in mind that even with 6th ed numbers for models we'd still be looking at crazy pricing by the time this drops.
Hulksmash wrote: I would love to see a 10-15mm release for the old world. I don't think I could contain my joy at plastics in that size range. Warmaster release would be amazing. The only downside would be no "warmaster" style release in AoS which would be epic give that it feels even more suited to mass apoc sized battles than wfb.
It actually makes financial sense to do WFB in the 10-15mm and not AoS. That way it wouldn't in theory cannibalize sales from AoS but they could use the old world.
I'd love this so much!! As others have noted, games like KoW also would benefit from this.
For folks commenting on detail, look at the Joan of Arc models to see what's possible at a smaller scale in plastic now. And GW is the best in the business - they'd do it even better.
I'd argue Kings of War is a terrible 28mm game even with model minimums closer to 6th ed fantasy. It shines at 10mm too. Bear in mind that even with 6th ed numbers for models we'd still be looking at crazy pricing by the time this drops.
The problem with KoW for me isn't the number of models so much as the fact that the individual models don't actually matter. It does feel like it was designed more as a mass-battles game that was inexplicably produced in 28mm instead.
I'd hate to see WHFB go down that road, both from a rules perspective, and because I have no interest in painting smaller scale models.
insaniak wrote:Before Adeptus Titanicus I would have said that there's no way they would change the scale by anything significant. Now, I'm less sure they won't do so to force people to buy the new models and corresponding newly scaled terrain.
Thats an odd sort of beast though. The original AT was that scale as the plastic tech at the time wasn't like what we have now. They couldn't make the type of kits they do now, the old titans are tiny because that is all they could make at the time. They were 1:500 scale, where as the rest of the range was between 1:285 and 1:300 scale. The new titans and terrain are the correct scale for Epic models and work brilliantly with the old stuff. While the 'new' scale does force people to buy new models, this time I don't really think that it was the driving force between this decision. They went with the larger scale as they future proofed the game in case the brought marines out for Epic later on so we could use the titans.
That and some people have played the new rules with old models and the game runs fine. (I also think the new terrain only seems big because people build the kits big)
Londinium wrote:
Spoiler:
Aesthete wrote: Sources on the internet (i.e. one post I made on my blog with exactly 0% basis in anything) predict that the new game will be in 15-18 mm.
Because that would totally make sense.
Every game around that scale that GW has tried has died, it simply doesn't allow for much in the way of hobby activities such as conversions and interesting paint jobs, beyond the truly huge units and we now have Adeptus Titanicus for that. Plus the miniatures look god awful.
If WHFB isn't in standard GW scale, I'll eat my hat. The rules could be anything from WHFB 9e to AoS with Old World factions (I'd err more towards the former, as GW needs to differentiate it's games) but the scale will be the usual. It totally undermines the nostalgia pitch if you make it Warmaster 2.0, which frankly is something only internet nerds could come to, given the heavy emphasis on square bases in the marketing and what a commercial non-entity the original Warmaster was.
Simple way to solve the financial aspect of it, is to make 9e use the same kind of model numbers as 6e. Still likely expensive but not the ridiculous money sink that 8th was.
Whilst I agree that that the larger scale is more GWs thing and certainly appeals to a larger fan base due to conversions & paint jobs, if GW wanted to they could make a 6mm scale WFB and it would outshine old WFB by miles. 6mm scale fantasy has some fantastic fantasy lines from garage companies and they don't have thousands of £$€ to chuck at moulds. 6mm sci-fi is in a golden age, the quality of the models is insane compared to what we had 15 or even 10 years ago.
Not every game has died. GW has done some pretty poor management of the small scale games, but Epic has remained strong enough without support that there are whole companies based around making models to use with the various editions. I'm sure that GW bringing AT back is in some way to do with Epic keeping such a large fan base, even after support was totally wiped out.
I very much doubt this is going to be warmaster, I think they they would have dropped a hint that it was going to be a small scale game if so, simple to avoid people getting fired up. But with the quality we have with 6mm scale, 10mm scale warmaster being redone would be amazing.
I would prefer they do Old World in 28-32mm, and look into reviving Warmaster in 10-12mm scale. I would like a 15mm official version of fantasy, but I am likely in the minority there.
Frankly a moot point. I have about 12,000 points of Skaven I have never rebased since my friends don’t care about base styles, so if the Rank and File comes back, I’m good. If not, I still have a massive Skaven horde usable in whatever system. I’ll just happily wait for new models.
15mm?
At GW's ability to giant size everything, it would mean the figures might fit nicely with everyone elses 25-28mm models.
All I see in reality is GW making a few collectable ltd edition models and a rulebook for the older gamers to keep the IP alive and their possesion.
That way, they keep the IP and licence it out to make phone apps, pc games and rpgs.
Put me down for 28mm models, apocalpyse scale armies and based off Warmaster's system of command roles, but with unit specific roles to hit and resist damage.
Though I'd love a return to 6th edition, where my Dark Elves could play the psychology rules like a fiddle to take on mortal armies much larger than them.
A greenskin rout is a fundamental part of old warhammer for me (though if it were countered against a chance that they'd just get angry and surge forward - that might make the game more fun for both people).
AngryAngel80 wrote: As an old world lover, this is great. However, let me say if they do this right I'm all on board 100,000%.
That said, how far away its to be sounded a little tongue in cheek, dry humor. I'd be willing to bet we will see it much sooner than 3 years from now. Just my hunch. Makes no sense to announce it so far out, and say how far away it is in great detail, feel like a touch of the english wit on display.
No, this is not the kind of thing a company makes jokes about. If anything they are lowballing that number. When gw said Sisters of Battle in 2019 emperor willing, they meant just a taste in 2019 but most stuff in 2020.
I think summer 2023 is a likely date.
I think the early announcement is so they can do a slow drip of news as they have done for the sisters.
Hey, we live in rumors, but it just doesn't make any sense to announce it so far in advance.
I really doubt the slow drip of news, 3 years is way too long a time table to build hype, if it was a year, I'd say probably, but 3 or 4 ? No way, so my money is on it being further along than the statement and them being all like " Ha ha fooled you ! See we were full of sneaky schemes ! "
They love their jokes in GW. Just my opinion however, could be wrong but I guess we'll see in time.
The drip feed of news will start 18 months out or so.
So we may not hear anything else for ages now. It’s just the announcement.
A change in scale and not making it play near enough to older editions would make this game DOA. Doing so would only serve to kill the nostalgia sales and split the already heavily fractured vet community even further. You'll draw in people coming in from Total War and die hards that need a supported system sure, but it will also drive away the core base of players/buyers they're looking to bring back into the fold.
Platuan4th wrote: A change in scale and not making it play near enough to older editions would make this game DOA. Doing so would only serve to kill the nostalgia sales and split the already heavily fractured vet community even further. You'll draw in people coming in from Total War and die hards that need a supported system sure, but it will also drive away the core base of players/buyers they're looking to bring back into the fold.
The same could have been said about Adeptus Titanicus, but that seems to have not been the case.
Platuan4th wrote: A change in scale and not making it play near enough to older editions would make this game DOA. Doing so would only serve to kill the nostalgia sales and split the already heavily fractured vet community even further. You'll draw in people coming in from Total War and die hards that need a supported system sure, but it will also drive away the core base of players/buyers they're looking to bring back into the fold.
The same could have been said about Adeptus Titanicus, but that seems to have not been the case.
Yes and no, since Titanicus wasn't ever hyped by GW themselves as a return of Epic.
Strombones wrote: I feel like it was widely accepted that Fantasy was prohibitively expensive and time consuming to play as opposed to 40k, getting even more expensive during the latter years around the release of Witch Elves, the new Dwarfs, ect..., where ten model boxes went for $50.
Since then prices have only increased. I just looked at a getting started box of Dwarfs that was $100 for 10 men, a gyrocopter, and 2 characters. I can't even imagine what prices will look like 3 years from now.
I'm happy it's coming back, and I will certainly keep an eye out for new models to add (The new goblin wolf riders from Beastgrave are amazing), but I don't feel like GW will address the problems that likely ushered in its demise in the first place.
I'm happy to be wrong, but rank and file games need lots of models. At current pricing that is going to turn away a lot of people.
Even though I'm bitter about the world being blown up, I'm just as happy playing AOS with Old World models on an Old World table. I feel like a circle based "skirmish" game was really what they needed in the first place.
IIRCMESBG units went down in price with the new edition. So having cheaper rank and file while rakingbin with popula characters is not outside the realm of possibility and in fact the apparent success of MESBG might be another reason for this, especially as both AOS and MESBG are skirmish games...
I think a new fantasy would be good if it was made with the intent a small unit was a box, and a large was 2 and no bigger.
With the rules being deep enough that you do not end up with any one unit being the only real important one.
If they did it at a scale other than 28 I would ignore it if it was not amazing probably.
It could be, and I could very easily be wrong but sometimes I like the far off guess sometimes they actually turn out to be right.
Though if this is just a different scale old world based thing, it's a hard pass for me and I'd be sad. So still wishing it would be a rebuild of WHFB for my old armies that I still have kicking about.
kendoka wrote:IMHO: There is no way GW would change the scale for Fantasy. The whole point of bringing something back is to flirt with retro feelings.
Also Scale Creep at GW is going in the opposite direction as they love to show off their designs (on big minis) using plastic injection tech that crushes the competition. No other miniature wargaming company is even close.
This said I do not think they will bring back mass battle in 28+ mm either as this would be too expensive - and the paint process would kill the hype.
What I do think we will see is boxed releases (New games, Mordheim, Warhammer Quest, etc.) set in the Old World - as well as reprinted BL books.
I can't see GW switching the scale for Warhammer Fantasy. Then again, I also couldn't see them getting rid of Warhammer Fantasy, or bringing Warhammer Fantasy back, so.. who the heck knows.
In theory, applying their excellent figure sculpting and casting technology to a smaller scale could also be quite novel. Upon entry, they could easily start to dominate the far less crowded market of 10-15mm Fantasy. With good sculpts and nice paintjobs, a table full of those is an incredibly impressive sight, and far more viable to get on the table in terms of effort and especially money.
That said, I like your last idea. The current market is one of many skirmish games, and this could scratch the itch of old Warhammer quite well. No need for large armies, no need for GW to keep enormous amount of stock, limited overlap with AoS, and making full use of the strong pull of narrative moments in the setting, one of the greatest strengths of Warhammer Fantasy. One downside is that these are typically quite limited in scope, and people will no doubt want to see their favourite faction and favourite character return as soon as possible. And of course, it doesn't hold the same nostalgia as blocks of infantry.. nor indeed does it really require square bases. Square bases are to rank up blocks of infantry.
Londinium wrote:
Aesthete wrote: Sources on the internet (i.e. one post I made on my blog with exactly 0% basis in anything) predict that the new game will be in 15-18 mm.
Because that would totally make sense.
Every game around that scale that GW has tried has died, it simply doesn't allow for much in the way of hobby activities such as conversions and interesting paint jobs, beyond the truly huge units and we now have Adeptus Titanicus for that. Plus the miniatures look god awful.
I'd contest that point. While there is less space for effects than in 28mm, models half that size can hold plenty of detail and obviously allow for variant colour schemes - besides which, many people like to use prescribed standard uniform colours anyway, if they don't see painting as a chore rather than a joy anyway. As it happens, I've heard those Contrast paints seem to work very well at 10-15mm. At any rate, the effect is one of scale rather than individual detail.
Anyway, here are some figures I painted a couple of years ago (yes, they are historical figures now in the service of Kislev. Gotta scratch that itch somehow!). I am by no means a world-class painter, and the miniatures are among the better, but probably not quite strictly the very best ones out there - and these are only 10mm scale. Looks pretty decent as far as I'm concerned; I've seen worse in 28mm... Now, imagine a table full of them. Those bases are just 1.25cm wide, so you can fit rather a few on a table! I struggle to see how it wouldn't appeal. Though again, I don't think GW would go for it.. but at some level, it wouldn't necessarily be a terrible idea.
They didn't say its the return of Warhammer Fantasy Battle, just the return of the Old World.
I think its very unlikely that this will be coming back as WFB 9th edition with rank-and-file square bases. Firstly, even more of the WFB old world ranges will have gone last-chance-to-buy and disappeared by then. I can't imagine them re-releasing old 7th edition kits in a couple of years time and I can't see them having the capacity to update all the required ranges as new multi-part kits.
Could it be AoS with an old-world setting for whatever kits are left by then? Yes, maybe. That's probably the easiest thing for them to do. But that doesn't seem like it would take that long for them to do.
Could it be a re-scale? If they do a smaller scale they don't need to do multi-part kits which should lead to quicker design. Something Warmaster-y, but obviously not in the Warmaster scale so people have to buy it all again.
Yes and no, since Titanicus wasn't ever hyped by GW themselves as a return of Epic.
This isn't being hyped as a return of Warhammer Fantasy Battles, either... Just a return of the Old World. They've very carefully not called it 'Warhammer Fantasy Battles'...
Yes and no, since Titanicus wasn't ever hyped by GW themselves as a return of Epic.
This isn't being hyped as a return of Warhammer Fantasy Battles, either... Just a return of the Old World. They've very carefully not called it 'Warhammer Fantasy Battles'...
Perception is reality though. From talking at my FLGS yesterday that is what a lot of people presume it is going to be, and it is entirely possible a lot of those people are going to be disappointed.
Warmaster, unfortunately, doesn't have the winning combo that Epic had. Everything you could run in Warmaster you could already run in WFB proper, you just had a harder to paint micro sized version of it. Epic at least benefitted from the fact that you didn't really have a bunch of the heavier stuff in 40K proper without going Armorcast at the time. Forgeworld as helped that ship sail, and now we basically have NOTHING except the playstyle to draw people to either Warmaster or Epic.
plessiez wrote:They didn't say its the return of Warhammer Fantasy Battle, just the return of the Old World.
I think its very unlikely that this will be coming back as WFB 9th edition with rank-and-file square bases. Firstly, even more of the WFB old world ranges will have gone last-chance-to-buy and disappeared by then. I can't imagine them re-releasing old 7th edition kits in a couple of years time and I can't see them having the capacity to update all the required ranges as new multi-part kits.
Could it be AoS with an old-world setting for whatever kits are left by then? Yes, maybe. That's probably the easiest thing for them to do. But that doesn't seem like it would take that long for them to do.
Could it be a re-scale? If they do a smaller scale they don't need to do multi-part kits which should lead to quicker design. Something Warmaster-y, but obviously not in the Warmaster scale so people have to buy it all again.
You assume that they simply carried out their old molds and slagged them. Look at those Revell kits that were released recently, They dug out some 2nd Ed. to 5th Ed. 40K plastic molds to make stuff to be released through Europe by Revell. If they still have THOSE molds floating around, it isn't unreasonable at all to think that their other plastics aren't floating around as well.
Which reminds me: Dear GW, run off more Talisman/Warhammer Quest plastics. I need the Wizards and characters again, as well as tons of the swarm animals and those monopose MInotaurs please.
It's amazing how people can take a vague blog post by a company and make, in at least one case, a 1hr + video from it!?! You've got nothing but that blog post people, and it's not even at all detailed!!
I know everyone’s saying, they never said return of WHFB so it could be Warmaster.
But the whole thing is the marketing of the return of the square base.
Not a tray of figures.
They even showed a base along with it.
That’s was a 20/25mm Base.
Old World and square bases is enough info. Its clearly classic 25mm scale bases they talk about, and the squares are only good for getting the models in old school rank and file units.
GW has proved they still can do 25mm models with the new take of Lord of the Rings -and that game is probably a good hint of what the future old world game wll be like.
I wonder, seeing as they probably will design the game to please the biggest possible group interested in Old World, that being Total War players who never played the original, wouldn't it make more sense to make it strategic-scale game, instead of tactical skirmish like WFB was?
Hmm. At around 3 years out it's nothing to get excited about yet.
GW: "In about 3 years we're going to make a new game!"
Me: "Duh, you're GW."
Meanwhile, in the here & now, I've got existing games to play using my fantasy stuff - some AoS, an occasional game of WHFB 3rd - 8th ed (depending upon players), KoW....
CragHack wrote: WHFB fared poorly because it was neglected and mostly ignored by GW at that time. Had it received this kind of monstrous attention Sigmar currently has, I've zero doubts it would've been as successful if not even more, because of the well established setting everyone knew and loved.
Please, FW, don't feth it up.
Can we please not indulge in this myth?
Fantasy had about the same amount of support as 40k had. During the period of WHF 6th to 8th, that system received the exact same amount of army books as 40k had codexii for 3rd and 5th, its contemporanies (and more supplements).
In the matter of kits (with my source being warseer's track of warhammer releases) it also got a very similar support. 40k got more but the difference isn't that big: during the period of 2010-2013 fantasy got 106 out of the 220 kits that gw released for the warhammer games (40k and fantasy), or 48% of the warhammer releases. The rate would actually keep a similar pace across time (for example in 2008, they released 23 40k kits vs 20 fantasy kits, but fantasy got more released stuff back in 2009)
And it certainly did not neglect armies that hard.
Bretonnia was left abandoned, lacking an update since 6th... but that was a span of 10 years up until the game's demise. Both blood angels and Dark eldar spent the same time without a codex update, sororitas spent longer.
The following armies, tomb kings and wood elves spent 8 years. For 40k that would be dark angels, space wolves *and* necrons, which would take 9 years to get a codex update.
Fantasy *got* supported the same way the other main system did. To claim otherwise is just utter bad faith.
It is not about Codex updates, talking about that, Warhammer had more Factions that did not got a Codex at all and not just "not a new Codex" and were left with semi-official lists from a previous edition.
It was about model updates in the Core. Dark Angels, Space Wolves, Necrons and so on, had all nice models to fill a minimum Core Tax.
Khemri had early 90ies models with an early 00ies upgrade frame to fill the necessary huge core
Everyone waited for new core models to start that army.
Design changes for the armies without updating all the units was another problem.
than, started with 7th, another reason was that there was no rules support outside of the army books.
Just imagine how well 40k would be received if the Codex FAQ/Errata would just say "we don't make mistakes, everything is intended" (the shitstorm after the Iron Hands Codex would have been big after such a statement, back than it was "at least we got one")
And, GW tried to make more profit by increasing amounts of models needed and reduced the amount of them in a Box.
They tried the same with Lord of the Rings, but here people playing that game were not identical with the Warhammer crowed and most of the historical players, the community collapsed the day after the price change (not only did the stopped buying stuff, they stopped playing the game at all)
The core of the Warhammer community lasted a little bit longer but most people left already at the beginning of 8th as they saw were the game was going and the left overs were not enough to keep up the profit even with higher margin.
Endtimes was a big push in popularity of the game, in sales and playtime, showing what a little more support can do and because of that people hoped for a new Warhammer and instead got AoS.
If GW would have treated Fantasy like 40k, and revamp 8th after 2 years (as they did with 6th 40k) or 1 year (like with AoS), tried to balance the game (like with 40k and AoS) would have updated factions with models and rules like they do now with AoS The game would have never died
But instead they decided to make AoS soon after 8th release (3-4 years are needed for new plastic models with new designs, so 8th and the Warhammer community was left to die)
I think people are reading the square base post a bit too literally. I think its just that the Warhammer Community team - who probably have about as much information as us at this point - had to run with something so they went with something iconic from the old world that they could make a pun out of.
than, started with 7th, another reason was that there was no rules support outside of the army books.
Just imagine how well 40k would be received if the Codex FAQ/Errata would just say "we don't make mistakes, everything is intended" (the shitstorm after the Iron Hands Codex would have been big after such a statement, back than it was "at least we got one")
40k went through the same FAQ dry spell.
There were multiple factors in WHFBs demise, but ultimately from what I saw it was more a rules issue than a rules support issue that killed it. People just didn't like the game that it had become.
plessiez wrote: They didn't say its the return of Warhammer Fantasy Battle, just the return of the Old World.
I think its very unlikely that this will be coming back as WFB 9th edition with rank-and-file square bases. Firstly, even more of the WFB old world ranges will have gone last-chance-to-buy and disappeared by then. I can't imagine them re-releasing old 7th edition kits in a couple of years time and I can't see them having the capacity to update all the required ranges as new multi-part kits.
Could it be AoS with an old-world setting for whatever kits are left by then? Yes, maybe. That's probably the easiest thing for them to do. But that doesn't seem like it would take that long for them to do.
Could it be a re-scale? If they do a smaller scale they don't need to do multi-part kits which should lead to quicker design. Something Warmaster-y, but obviously not in the Warmaster scale so people have to buy it all again.
GW have even recently massively expanded their production capacity, also the Horus Heresy is arguably going to end in some fashion in the next few years, they simply have no content left unless they go into weirdness like creating Interex armies. I wouldn't be surprised if they did have the capacity now - question is whether it'll be Forge World or plastics, the wording in the article seems to suggest it'll be done by the central studio, which is a massive indication of their commitment, but it's not clear enough to confirm that.
They've already confirmed on FB that we should expect plenty of new models:
than, started with 7th, another reason was that there was no rules support outside of the army books.
Just imagine how well 40k would be received if the Codex FAQ/Errata would just say "we don't make mistakes, everything is intended" (the shitstorm after the Iron Hands Codex would have been big after such a statement, back than it was "at least we got one")
40k went through the same FAQ dry spell.
There were multiple factors in WHFBs demise, but ultimately from what I saw it was more a rules issue than a rules support issue that killed it. People just didn't like the game that it had become.
40k had the same issues, but the also the better rules by that time.
Having 3 different profiles for same weapons was less of an issue then Beastman need to rank up 4 wide after the minimum width was changed to 5.
and 40k got some changes after the new game was not well received, while Fantasy did not
and yes I agree that the game became something people did not like, this is why I can see them still fail here.
If they take 8th Edition as a base to move on, they are only targeting the small group that liked that game, and most of those play 9th Age now
Hulksmash wrote: I would love to see a 10-15mm release for the old world. I don't think I could contain my joy at plastics in that size range. Warmaster release would be amazing. The only downside would be no "warmaster" style release in AoS which would be epic give that it feels even more suited to mass apoc sized battles than wfb.
It actually makes financial sense to do WFB in the 10-15mm and not AoS. That way it wouldn't in theory cannibalize sales from AoS but they could use the old world.
Ten again AOS groups don't really look like organized armies going to war. More like individual gung ho warriors fighting so for them skirmish battles is appropriate. Old world armies looked like...well organized armies rather than ninja wannabes on 1 on 1 duel
What turned me off on fantasy was the amount of miniatures you needed for effective units, the associated cost to purchase and paint those units and the complexity of the rules, in that order.
One core unit in WHFB could be 30-50% of an entire 40k army in some instances.
Aesthete wrote: Sources on the internet (i.e. one post I made on my blog with exactly 0% basis in anything) predict that the new game will be in 15-18 mm.
Because that would totally make sense.
Every game around that scale that GW has tried has died, it simply doesn't allow for much in the way of hobby activities such as conversions and interesting paint jobs, beyond the truly huge units and we now have Adeptus Titanicus for that. Plus the miniatures look god awful.
If WHFB isn't in standard GW scale, I'll eat my hat. The rules could be anything from WHFB 9e to AoS with Old World factions (I'd err more towards the former, as GW needs to differentiate it's games) but the scale will be the usual. It totally undermines the nostalgia pitch if you make it Warmaster 2.0, which frankly is something only internet nerds could come to, given the heavy emphasis on square bases in the marketing and what a commercial non-entity the original Warmaster was.
Simple way to solve the financial aspect of it, is to make 9e use the same kind of model numbers as 6e. Still likely expensive but not the ridiculous money sink that 8th was.
So go for smaller. 6mm has been succesfull with GW before until GW either screws with rules(Epic40000) or kills off non sales related(epic armageddon that outsold GW's own expectations by 400%).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gimgamgoo wrote: 15mm?
At GW's ability to giant size everything, it would mean the figures might fit nicely with everyone elses 25-28mm models.
All I see in reality is GW making a few collectable ltd edition models and a rulebook for the older gamers to keep the IP alive and their possesion.
That way, they keep the IP and licence it out to make phone apps, pc games and rpgs.
If that was the case why waste time thwidling thumbs just for fun of it? Because if they went what you say no way it would take 3+ years.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
N3p3nth3 wrote: IIRCMESBG units went down in price with the new edition. So having cheaper rank and file while rakingbin with popula characters is not outside the realm of possibility and in fact the apparent success of MESBG might be another reason for this, especially as both AOS and MESBG are skirmish games...
Correct. And they have been making things actually CHEAPER there recently bundling stuff together and slapping in hefty discounts(like with the ringwraiths). MSGB is rare beast in GW games that it actually is getting cheaper rather than more expensive to collect it...
If they take 8th Edition as a base to move on, they are only targeting the small group that liked that game, and most of those play 9th Age now
starting with 6th again and this can be huge
I very much doubt it will be based on a previous WHFB system. Far more likely for it to be a revised version of the AoS rules with unit formation rules bolted on.
Sounds great and pretty obvious - they have the molds for pretty much everything and a lot of the elite model kits would be pretty recent and good so they can just concentrate on the parts they want to without having to redo full ranges all at once. Plus they would be cross over between some AoS stuff- the new Slaves to Darkness start collecting would fit in well with the old chaos warriors. They could do campaign books like War Of the Beard etc as well- makes a lot of sense as there will still be a lot of demand for it and it can sit beside AoS asa compliment rather than in competition.
Pretty pleased my Dwarfs might have a place again while I still have my Kharadrons for AoS.
If it does wind up being a ranked unit game, and if it does stay the same scale, there will be minimal model crossover from AoS, for the simple reason that AoS models haven't been designed to rank up.
That was one of the design constraints from WHFB that moving to loose formations was able to address.
If they take 8th Edition as a base to move on, they are only targeting the small group that liked that game, and most of those play 9th Age now
starting with 6th again and this can be huge
I very much doubt it will be based on a previous WHFB system. Far more likely for it to be a revised version of the AoS rules with unit formation rules bolted on.
It would be less work to start from a previous edition of whfb or even from scratch than to try and make AoS a fully featured wargame.
If they take 8th Edition as a base to move on, they are only targeting the small group that liked that game, and most of those play 9th Age now
starting with 6th again and this can be huge
I very much doubt it will be based on a previous WHFB system. Far more likely for it to be a revised version of the AoS rules with unit formation rules bolted on.
They have used old rules for the re-release of other Specialist Games as well
And going the retro-route with new rules but old background does not really make sense.
CragHack wrote: WHFB fared poorly because it was neglected and mostly ignored by GW at that time. Had it received this kind of monstrous attention Sigmar currently has, I've zero doubts it would've been as successful if not even more, because of the well established setting everyone knew and loved.
Please, FW, don't feth it up.
Can we please not indulge in this myth?
Fantasy had about the same amount of support as 40k had. During the period of WHF 6th to 8th, that system received the exact same amount of army books as 40k had codexii for 3rd and 5th, its contemporanies (and more supplements).
In the matter of kits (with my source being warseer's track of warhammer releases) it also got a very similar support. 40k got more but the difference isn't that big: during the period of 2010-2013 fantasy got 106 out of the 220 kits that gw released for the warhammer games (40k and fantasy), or 48% of the warhammer releases. The rate would actually keep a similar pace across time (for example in 2008, they released 23 40k kits vs 20 fantasy kits, but fantasy got more released stuff back in 2009)
And it certainly did not neglect armies that hard.
Bretonnia was left abandoned, lacking an update since 6th... but that was a span of 10 years up until the game's demise. Both blood angels and Dark eldar spent the same time without a codex update, sororitas spent longer.
The following armies, tomb kings and wood elves spent 8 years. For 40k that would be dark angels, space wolves *and* necrons, which would take 9 years to get a codex update.
Fantasy *got* supported the same way the other main system did. To claim otherwise is just utter bad faith.
You mean the 40k that GW nearly killed with their greed, bad rules and mismanagment, the largest difference being the buy in for fantasy was huge by design.
I am with Kragan on this, the Fantasy IP is much much better than AOS and I like the newer AOS stuff, had it had the marketing that GW uses now it would be at least as popular as AOS.
N3p3nth3 wrote: IIRCMESBG units went down in price with the new edition. So having cheaper rank and file while rakingbin with popula characters is not outside the realm of possibility and in fact the apparent success of MESBG might be another reason for this, especially as both AOS and MESBG are skirmish games...
Correct. And they have been making things actually CHEAPER there recently bundling stuff together and slapping in hefty discounts(like with the ringwraiths). MSGB is rare beast in GW games that it actually is getting cheaper rather than more expensive to collect it...
It also happens to be run by run by a semi-independent small team of people who are fully immersed in the community. Their plans for future releases appear to be based on a combination of stuff that they happen to be very excited about themselves, and things they know the community would like. A big gripe some time ago was the unavailability of many miniatures, making playing some armies very difficult. Within a year or two, they brought a pile of figures back into production, and as they struggled with stock and production, released another bunch in what may well be the largest Made-to-Order wave GW has done so far.
Same ruleswise; the latest edition and profile revision included pretty much everything fans have been asking for for years.
It's almost as if knowing what people want and being passionate about it yourself can actually be pretty darn efficient for a business.
1. I trust FW far, far more to do the Fantasy World justice than I do 'GW prime'. They do lore really well. They honor the past, they don't steamroller it.
2. FW, or more specifically, Specialist Games, which I'd imagine this would fall under, does plastics, so all of those crying out that it will be entire resin armies are unlikely to be correct.
3. The FW crowd love the obscure stuff, so zoats and fimir and Nippon ninja mercs ahoy!
4. I'm very curious as to how certain units would be handled, such as say Witch Elves, where they now have a strong showing in AoS. Duel boxes featuring both bases seems unlikely as GW doesn't seem to like crossing the streams between their various games.
5. For all of those saying 'I rebased now what do I do?' You get a new army for WHFB. I sold all my old armies off a while back, I'm totally ready to return to a brand new army, I have so many ideas rattling around in my head.
6. GW, for all it's faults, does seem damned, 'they never tell us what they're doing' vs 'why are they telling us what they're doing in 3 years time?', I prefer to know and wait (and start saving some cash towards my army, whatever it will be...).
7. I don't play the Mantic game, but since it was designed to pick up disgruntled WHFB players, there should be nothing stopping an easy reverse engineering to armies to make them viable in both games.
8. I cannot tell you how totally over the moon(s) I am that the world I loved so much will live again. Skarsnik, Settra, Vlad and Isobella, Thrott, Kemmler, Marius Lietdorf, The Ice Queen, Genevieve, Valkia, Brunner and a vast host of others will be back.
I know there is a wait ahead, but I'm so bloody happy. I tried and tried to get into AoS and it just never clicked with me, I certainly don't begrudge others really enjoying it, but it wasn't for me. I'm totally ready for WHFB to come back.
insaniak wrote: If it does wind up being a ranked unit game, and if it does stay the same scale, there will be minimal model crossover from AoS, for the simple reason that AoS models haven't been designed to rank up.
That was one of the design constraints from WHFB that moving up loose formations was able to address.
For the last decade half the bloody WHFB models didn’t rank up either.
At this point, isn't it safer to just start basing models on square bases, if you prefer WHF to AOS? Since you're allowed to use any base in AOS, and we don't know whether we'll have LOTR movement trays to use AOS models in the eventually WHF
insaniak wrote: If it does wind up being a ranked unit game, and if it does stay the same scale, there will be minimal model crossover from AoS, for the simple reason that AoS models haven't been designed to rank up.
That was one of the design constraints from WHFB that moving up loose formations was able to address.
For the last decade half the bloody WHFB models didn’t rank up either.
Just look at the new Slaves to Darkness models. There’s no way they’re going back to static models like the old chaos warriors. And if they did who would buy them over the new ones? GW are too proud of their quality. This isn’t the same as pushing old stuff out through toy shops to kids. I just can’t see them proudly re-releasing a bunch of 7 year old kits in 3 years time.
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, old kits are not coming back. GW won't re-launch a major IP with a bunch of decade old plastic.
Square bases aren't coming back either. If ranked formations do make a comeback, it's going to be in the form of LotR style movement trays.
I can only agree with that! Looking how they do mouvement tray for 40K Apocalypse... i won't ben suprised they do the kind of same format for R&F units for Old World battle. I made some in 3D print which allow me to play 9th Age as much as AOS... I allow GW to steal my idea loll
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, old kits are not coming back. GW won't re-launch a major IP with a bunch of decade old plastic.
It's not just that; in 3 years time or so AoS will have had a load of new kits released. Both new armies and also updates to existing ones. So those dated kits would start to look really dated. Plus a 3 year development window fits ideally with the concept of GW making new models from the ground up. If it were just rules and some movement trays and such GW could achieve that in far less time.
Of course we might get some one-week legacy releases alongside it; though whenever GW does them they tend to be metal only.
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, old kits are not coming back. GW won't re-launch a major IP with a bunch of decade old plastic.
Square bases aren't coming back either. If ranked formations do make a comeback, it's going to be in the form of LotR style movement trays.
The preview to the news literally focussed on a square base. Whatever the re-release will entail, that only makes sense if it included, well, things on square bases.
insaniak wrote: If it does wind up being a ranked unit game, and if it does stay the same scale, there will be minimal model crossover from AoS, for the simple reason that AoS models haven't been designed to rank up.
That was one of the design constraints from WHFB that moving up loose formations was able to address.
For the last decade half the bloody WHFB models didn’t rank up either.
Just look at the new Slaves to Darkness models. There’s no way they’re going back to static models like the old chaos warriors. And if they did who would buy them over the new ones? GW are too proud of their quality. This isn’t the same as pushing old stuff out through toy shops to kids. I just can’t see them proudly re-releasing a bunch of 7 year old kits in 3 years time.
You say that like nobody prefers a coherent, uniform block of infantry to a bunch of leaping ACTION POSE MOTHAF***A numpties balanced on a toe or a gigantic Tactical Rock or huge streamers of cloth/paper/etc.
Obviously that's a bit facetious(for one, I like the new Warriors - as Chosen), but you're saying "quality" as if the modern style is objectively superior, and that's simply nonsense. Regardless, not producing things in leapy action poses doesn't necessary mean they have to re-release the old kits - they have the CAD files for those new Warriors now, they can repose them to rank up properly on squares in a couple of days of work, though I'm not convinced they would where the old kit molds are still viable.
This is, in a nutshell, why I don't care at all about this announcement. Despite being interested in WFB...I could never afford or stomach buying an army back in the day. With GW's current prices? Absolutely out of the question. Within 2-3 years we'll be looking at $60 as a standard price for 10 models. A "regiment" of 30 Empire spearmen? That could be a $180 purchase which is fething insane for a wargame.
I honestly believe that if Warhammer: Old World is a game with units of ranked infantry, the models will be sold in boxes of 20 or more this time. Selling infantry in boxes of 10 for inflated price was one of the stupidest decisions in history of WHFB and certainly played a big part in its doom. I don't think that GW is going to make the same mistake again (though it is almost certain that they will make new, different mistakes).
AoS has had some new models in units of 20 (Bloodreavers, Kairic Acolytes and Mortek Guard) and none of them are stupidly overpriced.
The preview to the news literally focussed on a square base. Whatever the re-release will entail, that only makes sense if it included, well, things on square bases.
Because historically, WFB and square bases were synonymous in the GW ecosystem.
Look, GW did not remove the base difference between fantasy Warhammer and every other game they support only to bring it back for the sake of nostalgia while simultaneously splitting what they clearly want to be a shared model line. Trays let them have their cake and eat it.
This is, in a nutshell, why I don't care at all about this announcement. Despite being interested in WFB...I could never afford or stomach buying an army back in the day. With GW's current prices? Absolutely out of the question. Within 2-3 years we'll be looking at $60 as a standard price for 10 models. A "regiment" of 30 Empire spearmen? That could be a $180 purchase which is fething insane for a wargame.
I honestly believe that if Warhammer: Old World is a game with units of ranked infantry, the models will be sold in boxes of 20 or more this time. Selling infantry in boxes of 10 for inflated price was one of the stupidest decisions in history of WHFB and certainly played a big part in its doom. I don't think that GW is going to make the same mistake again (though it is almost certain that they will make new, different mistakes).
AoS has had some new models in units of 20 (Bloodreavers, Kairic Acolytes and Mortek Guard) and none of them are stupidly overpriced.
Also depends entirely on how they scale the game in terms of what a desirable army/unit size is.
Waaaaay back, it was pretty small. But as time went on, and collections grew, so did the scope and minimum size of the game.
This is a real opportunity to redress (pun!).
Hell, I can potentially see them expanding the R&F appeal with specific ‘rear rank models’. Sell those as say, sets of 15, and command sets of 5/10, and you’re laughing. After all, once everyone is ranked up, you don’t really see the filler models.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Have started a feedback/brain tank thread in the WHFB Legacy board. Aim is to gather feedback on previous editions (likes and dislikes), so if peeps find stuff they agree with they can feed it back to GW.
Dunno if it’ll bare fruit, but if we don’t ask we defo don’t get!
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, old kits are not coming back. GW won't re-launch a major IP with a bunch of decade old plastic.
Square bases aren't coming back either. If ranked formations do make a comeback, it's going to be in the form of LotR style movement trays.
Yeah because making square bases an integral part of their marketing effort shouts 'NO SQUARE BASES!'
I think you are dead wrong.
They use ”square bases” to make a point about a retro brand/setting coming back.
You probably wont see neither WFB nor square bases.
It’s so over the top to think it will be movement trays over the square bases they’ve already (The only thing) shown.
And again, yes it may be a new game and not WHFB itself sure, but it’s going to be 28mm. For sure.
There is no way it won’t be.
This is something for an existing fan base, as well as any new etc,
I mean that’s GW all over anyway, look at nearly every game system, that’s their thing.
(Imagine the fallout of finally bringing the Old World back and then not doing it in a way anyone who is already interested can’t partake unless from scratch.
A lot worse than upsetting a few random “oh I thought it would be 15mm for no reason” people etc).
Though I can’t remember where but regarding the comment of this won’t work unless they make models for use in both settings, dual use as it were.
There’s no need for that, and half of the stuff coming out for AoS just wouldn’t make sense.
If anything, this can make GW move further away from the older stuff for AoS, as it won’t upset people as much as OW may get those instead etc
What does GW mean by "square bases and the Old World is back!"? AoS it the best it has ever been since its debut, and many people think it's actually superior to 40K now. Will GW really make another fantasy miniatures game to directly compete with AoS? It will be interesting to see how this develops.
A Rank & File old-World themed Game is not in direct competition with a Mass-Skirmish Low-Fantasy/Steampunk game
Same as Kill Team is not in competition with Necromunda
Why should there be dual use models?
Because Necromunda and Blood Bowl have dual-use models for 40k/AoS?
Why should it be the original scale?
Because Necromunda and Blood Bowl kept the original scale with the re-release?
GW/FW is yet starting with it, so we cannot know what they are planning to do.
But we know what they have done with other games that were re-released.
So we will see a slightly different scale, with slightly different but all new designed models and following old rules with minor adjustments
Yeah it will be in direct competition with things like KoW, and the free community made versions.
(Look at BB coming back. Had a huge following and the LRB free etc..
If they can make money from something they will)
kodos wrote: A Rank & File old-World themed Game is not in direct competition with a Mass-Skirmish Low-Fantasy/Steampunk game
Same as Kill Team is not in competition with Necromunda
Why should there be dual use models?
Because Necromunda and Blood Bowl have dual-use models for 40k/AoS?
Why should it be the original scale?
Because Necromunda and Blood Bowl kept the original scale with the re-release?
GW/FW is yet starting with it, so we cannot know what they are planning to do.
But we know what they have done with other games that were re-released.
So we will see a slightly different scale, with slightly different but all new designed models and following old rules with minor adjustments
Hits the nail squarely on the head for me, the company seem quite keen to investigate in as many money making opportunities as possible and aren't shy of rummaging around the vaults for the ol' IPs. And why not? AoS is successful and established now. Even I like it and hated how the 'End Times' transitioned into AoS. That said, I LOVE the 'Old World' and I can't be the only one.
Lenton allegedly has more capacity nowadays so let's chase a different/new/nostalgic audience. Creative Assembly/Warhammer: Total War will have helped brand recognition loads in the past few years to boot, as well as other, probably not quite so good tie-ins.
That Goblin Underworld band shows that they've still got it when it comes to gorgeous ol' world aesthetic. Bring it on!
kodos wrote: So we will see a slightly different scale, with slightly different but all new designed models and following old rules with minor adjustments
The reveal blurb makes it pretty clear that neWFB is meant to be the Horus Heresy of AoS, which implies consistent scaling and roughly compatible, or at least similar, rules sets.
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, old kits are not coming back. GW won't re-launch a major IP with a bunch of decade old plastic.
Square bases aren't coming back either. If ranked formations do make a comeback, it's going to be in the form of LotR style movement trays.
Aren't they using the old molds for the Middle Earth Battle game and then just adding extras on top? A lot of the kits where still pretty decent.- its more likely they would use the old range. as a basis and add to it rather than bring out entirely new ranges for each factions. Unless you want to wait forever to get all the factions out. It gives them a freer range to replace the kits that really need replacing/added too without having to cover everything in a relatively short period of time.
His Master's Voice wrote: Yeah, old kits are not coming back. GW won't re-launch a major IP with a bunch of decade old plastic.
Square bases aren't coming back either. If ranked formations do make a comeback, it's going to be in the form of LotR style movement trays.
Aren't they using the old molds for the Middle Earth Battle game and then just adding extras on top? A lot of the kits where still pretty decent.- its more likely they would use the old range. as a basis and add to it rather than bring out entirely new ranges for each factions. Unless you want to wait forever to get all the factions out. It gives them a freer range to replace the kits that really need replacing/added too without having to cover everything in a relatively short period of time.
It may be why it’s some time off, getting new kits up and ready as a base to start from. Done right and starting each faction off with one troop one elite and one hero in a starter box for everyone, with a couple of things each month from there would be a great way to build it up.
First book could be border skirmish type missions for 250 to 750 points.
Second book is 750 to 1500 and then a 3rd at 1500 to 3000. Get interest, and give everyone a chance to jump on board. Since getting a new game started in a group is super tough. When you have players sitting on the fence waiting for a race they previously loved to even get a thought.
If it’s something like mordheim, make sure warbands can truly be custom. Fill in some of the ballance gaps and weirdness. And it’s good !
I don't think LotR is a particularly good gauge of what GW want to do with WFB. Regardless of its recent revival, it will always be the least loved child, which means being dead last in line for new plastics.
It would be interesting if they created "Unit models" Large square bases 150mm x100mm + in size, with multiple models on it that you would only need to buy one of. Similar to that "KATAKROS, MORTARCH OF THE NECROPOLIS" model they have just released and an extension of what we saw in 8th when people wanted to bulk out their units without buying 10 of the same box.
They would be built like mini dioramas with a larger "leader", bannerman etc and several "troops" on it but the entire thing would act as a single model. Would take damage in a tiered manner similar to the large models currently. Would allow for incredibly dynamic modelling opportunities.
His Master's Voice wrote: The reveal blurb makes it pretty clear that neWFB is meant to be the Horus Heresy of AoS, which implies consistent scaling and roughly compatible, or at least similar, rules sets.
I think that's reading a bit much into it. The Horus Heresy comparison is to do with the link between the backgrounds of HH and 40K, WHFB and AoS. It implies nothing about the actual miniatures or rules. Particularly since HH no longer uses the same ruleset as 40K.
Hollow wrote: It would be interesting if they created "Unit models" Large square bases 150mm x100mm + in size, with multiple models on it that you would only need to buy one of. Similar to that "KATAKROS, MORTARCH OF THE NECROPOLIS" model they have just released and an extension of what we saw in 8th when people wanted to bulk out their units without buying 10 of the same box.
They would be built like mini dioramas with a larger "leader", bannerman etc and several "troops" on it but the entire thing would act as a single model. Would take damage in a tiered manner similar to the large models currently. Would allow for incredibly dynamic modelling opportunities.
Which is possible and would follow the approach of CMON's SoIaF game. You buy the unit box, it has the models for the unit, with champion/banner. Paint up the 10 models, and off you go. SoIaF seems to be doing ok.
This approach, I think, would directly challenge that and Kings of War, not that either seems particularly huge atm.
Of course, three years out will have me forgetting about it until then. My Bretonnians have been waiting patiently, participating in Legacy battles since AoS, and they will continue to do so until we see how this shakes out.
Hollow wrote: It would be interesting if they created "Unit models" Large square bases 150mm x100mm + in size, with multiple models on it that you would only need to buy one of. Similar to that "KATAKROS, MORTARCH OF THE NECROPOLIS" model they have just released and an extension of what we saw in 8th when people wanted to bulk out their units without buying 10 of the same box
So basically using the one feature from Kings of War, a lot of former Warhammer players give as a reason why they don't like that game
Alternatively, we could try not dismissing opinions different to our own as 'people crying on the internet'.
For me, WHFB retaining the idea that the individual models matter is key. Going down the KoW route with units being a set size and never taking casualties would be a non-starter.
insaniak wrote: Alternatively, we could try not dismissing opinions different to our own as 'people crying on the internet'.
For me, WHFB retaining the idea that the individual models matter is key. Going down the KoW route with units being a set size and never taking casualties would be a non-starter.
Yeah, its why I never got into KoW. I didn't like how you didn't have soldiers, you just had big squares banging into other squares.
I've been thinking about this a lot and here's a few of my ideas.
It's called Warhammer: The Old World. It mentions the mighty battles that shaped the old world. I think the new game will focus solely on the Old World and it's safe to assume we can rule out Nippon and Albion. The article makes parallels to HH...maybe we can expect a focus on historic, pivotal, MASSED battles that shaped the Old World and it's history. So just a few off the top of my head: Hel Fenn, Blackfire Pass, The Siege of Prauge, that sort of battle. So I expect Battle Set/Game Sets that feature two or more armies paired up to represent a historic battle between two powers. A rule book will also accompany all this so if you can battle the different army groups against each other. I'm betting on a 'Ravening Hoards' type army book.
This raises some interesting ideas. Like a siege of Prauge army set might include Empire, dwarven, and elven elements. The chaos side might would include Slaves, beasts ,and daemons. It wouldn't matter if you wanted to battle the Elves from the Sundering against the Empire from Hel Fenn in a later timeline as fashion and wargear are pretty static across the Warhammer Fantasy Battle Timeline. Unless it's Ancient Empire battling Nagash, but this is doubtful in my mind as Nagash plays such a big role in AoS. As to the models themselves, I'm hoping 28 mm but mono pose with only basic decoration and little variation. So basically 4th edition plastic kits with commands and a bit more variation. I'm not expecting many new huge character kits. We have Karl F, Malekith, and the whole gang. Not sure what to expect as far as new kits beyond the battle games themselves.
I'm hoping the boxes are huge. Basicly a 2000 pt game in one box. Or maybe they release three boxes for each epic battle. So the Siege of Prauge would be a dwarves vs beastman boxed game, an elves vs daemons boxed game, and an empire vs warriors boxed game. They could all include nifty scenery bits. Then they release a limited run, super special Magnus the Pious model to accompany them. Something for the other side obviously. To supplement we have the existing models in the AoS ranges and whatever else they release or they come up with. I'm hoping/betting against new concepts for the armies. No Woodelven Bear Riders or Empire Steam War bikes. I am hoping for heritage model lines to be reimagined or reproduced. Like Kislev for example.
On a personal note, I hope when Vampire Counts are redone this time around they give them some conventional war machines. Why does everything have to be powered by a damned soul or made of bones? Would it not be reasonable to expect zombie crewed warmachines? Maybe not black powder ones but at least medieval level war machines. Not just: 1.) nothing, and, 2.) a cart full of dead bodies pulled by a necromancer. Also skeleton crossbow men. yeah.
Anyway thanks for reading.
Long live the grassy fields of Averland!
tl;dr- Pure Speculation. New Warhammer, Old World Only. Battle sets representing massed historical battles. Empire Vs. Vampires for the Battle of Hel Fenn etc. New line models simple and monopose. Few new conceptual sets or models. New mega characters like Magnus the Pious. Zombie Trebuchets*, hopefully.
*so my idea was that a huge trebuchet crewed by skeles hurled a ball of zombies at the enemy. It landed, splashed, reassembled, and stumbled forward. It could then be enlarged by necromancers. Also I liked the idea of the trebuchet crew leader to be a ghost maybe, or a wight.
I think that's reading a bit much into it. The Horus Heresy comparison is to do with the link between the backgrounds of HH and 40K, WHFB and AoS. It implies nothing about the actual miniatures or rules. Particularly since HH no longer uses the same ruleset as 40K.
And like the Horus Heresy, seeing those mythic heroes in action has an undeniable appeal, as does re-creating the glorious armies of a previous epoch
GW wants you to buy that swanky new Karl Franz on Deathwing model for your new Empire army, just like you bought Russ for your Heresy era Space Wolves.
Even if you disagree with my read on that sentence, consistent scaling and rules systems make sense in general. This isn't really an extrapolation of anything GW said, just what feels like common sense. You'd have to have some pretty strong arguments to convince me GW would spend a couple years on a product, only for the end result to not be compatible with AoS in any aspect beside background.
And let's face it, HH uses the old rules because Forge World a) doesn't have the resources to rebuild the system in line with the current 40K rules before the heat death of the universe ends it all, and b) they don't want to piss off people that bought expensive, faux leather bound bric... rule books.
Lotus Corgi wrote: I've been thinking about this a lot and here's a few of my ideas.
It's called Warhammer: The Old World. It mentions the mighty battles that shaped the old world. I think the new game will focus solely on the Old World and it's safe to assume we can rule out Nippon and Albion. The article makes parallels to HH...maybe we can expect a focus on historic, pivotal, MASSED battles that shaped the Old World and it's history. So just a few off the top of my head: Hel Fenn, Blackfire Pass, The Siege of Prauge, that sort of battle. So I expect Battle Set/Game Sets that feature two or more armies paired up to represent a historic battle between two powers. A rule book will also accompany all this so if you can battle the different army groups against each other. I'm betting on a 'Ravening Hoards' type army book.
Going back to square basis tells me the rule set won't be consistent/compatible with AoS. Round vs square changes how measurements work, and if measurement is different, the whole system has to be adjusted.
It's called Warhammer: The Old World. It mentions the mighty battles that shaped the old world. I think the new game will focus solely on the Old World and it's safe to assume we can rule out Nippon and Albion. The article makes parallels to HH...maybe we can expect a focus on historic, pivotal, MASSED battles that shaped the Old World and it's history. So just a few off the top of my head: Hel Fenn, Blackfire Pass, The Siege of Prauge, that sort of battle. So I expect Battle Set/Game Sets that feature two or more armies paired up to represent a historic battle between two powers. A rule book will also accompany all this so if you can battle the different army groups against each other. I'm betting on a 'Ravening Hoards' type army book.
I expect the same, a Rulebook and a Ravening Hordes style book first.
than campaign/scenario books with the focus on a famous battle and the armies/faction that fought there, additional unit releases and maybe a themed boxed set.
Voss wrote: Going back to square basis tells me the rule set won't be consistent/compatible with AoS. Round vs square changes how measurements work, and if measurement is different, the whole system has to be adjusted.
My guess is that they will make it so you can use round bases in it, especially if they want to retain cross-compatibility of old WHFB models that are now in AoS(like Dark Elf and Dispossessed stuff). I would guess that they release movement trays that you can put the round based models into a la War of the Ring movement trays.
That way they can get old players back while keeping AoS people in both pools.
If they do that, then the game they come out with will have to differ quite a bit from WHFB given the difference in footprint & frontage between an equivalent number of square based and round based models.
People forget that if you're making a rank & flank game where movement and maneuver are important, that sort of thing can matter a lot more than it seems.
TBH it just seems like people keep trying to come up with ways GW could design the game so that it's less appealing to what one assumes is the intended audience. I can only speak for myself of course, but as someone squarely(aha) within what appears to be that intended audience - what I want is a new WHFB. If it's a tweaked AoS, I'm not interested. If it's a LotR clone, I'm not interested. If it's a new ruleset entirely, then it better play in a substantially similar way to WHFB, or I'm not interested.
GW are surely aware that sentiment isn't exactly uncommon, and Orctober aside their modern marketing machine hasn't done anything to make me think they'd explicitly appeal to WHFB fans with the teaser and announcement only to then turn around and pull the rug out by making something that has basically nothing to do with square bases or WHFB.
Yodhrin wrote: If they do that, then the game they come out with will have to differ quite a bit from WHFB given the difference in footprint & frontage between an equivalent number of square based and round based models.
People forget that if you're making a rank & flank game where movement and maneuver are important, that sort of thing can matter a lot more than it seems.
TBH it just seems like people keep trying to come up with ways GW could design the game so that it's less appealing to what one assumes is the intended audience. I can only speak for myself of course, but as someone squarely(aha) within what appears to be that intended audience - what I want is a new WHFB. If it's a tweaked AoS, I'm not interested. If it's a LotR clone, I'm not interested. If it's a new ruleset entirely, then it better play in a substantially similar way to WHFB, or I'm not interested.
GW are surely aware that sentiment isn't exactly uncommon, and Orctober aside their modern marketing machine hasn't done anything to make me think they'd explicitly appeal to WHFB fans with the teaser and announcement only to then turn around and pull the rug out by making something that has basically nothing to do with square bases or WHFB.
Why would it need to differ? All they have to do is take into account the changes they made with AoS base sizes and release rectangular "crossover" trays of the appropriate width. So a goblin sized "crossover" unit tray would have slots for 5 25mm round bases in X rows and they'd ship the new Old World goblin units with 25mm squares (crossover units would have 25mm squares and rounds). A unit of Orc Boys would ship with 32mm squares (or a combo of round and square) and the new trays would hold 5x32mm rounds. No issue from a rules standpoint, it could run exactly as whatever edition of WHFB they decide to use as a base (assuming they even go this route).
The only problem is people with old armies having to rebase, but we know they don't really care about that (either the annoyance, or actually enforcing the changes). If you want to be super legal, all you'd have to do is put your 20mm models on a slightly wider 125 square tray (just add a little decoration/grassy border) and you're golden. And its not like anyone was playing without trays, anyway.
Yodhrin wrote: GW are surely aware that sentiment isn't exactly uncommon, and Orctober aside their modern marketing machine hasn't done anything to make me think they'd explicitly appeal to WHFB fans with the teaser and announcement only to then turn around and pull the rug out by making something that has basically nothing to do with square bases or WHFB.
Serious question - do you consider square bases to be an integral, indispensable element of WFB?
Yodhrin wrote: GW are surely aware that sentiment isn't exactly uncommon, and Orctober aside their modern marketing machine hasn't done anything to make me think they'd explicitly appeal to WHFB fans with the teaser and announcement only to then turn around and pull the rug out by making something that has basically nothing to do with square bases or WHFB.
Serious question - do you consider square bases to be an integral, indispensable element of WFB?
Can you rank up with round bases? Was the first thing that got changed by the move from WHFB to AoS the bases?
Except no? Not really? You can't really determine facing all that well, and they don't really stay in formation if you move them around. Can you name a rank and file wargame that uses round bases, that don't require trays or similar objects to get that square frontage? Because Hail Caesar, Pike and Shotte and Black Powder uses square bases. Conquest is an interesting case in that the models are on round bases, but in-game you place them in square bases that have an indentation. It would seem that you do need some sort of square base for a wargame that revolves around rank and files.
You can play Fantasy with all units that use 25mm in AoS using 25mm squares and 32mm using hyphotetical 32mm squares, etc... and it would change nothing.
This "goblins in fantasy used 20mm so if they use 25mm in the new game it cant work" dont make much sense to me.
Remember all the wild speculation after the End Times, before AOS? I have to laugh at how comically wrong a lot of people were with their predictions about the new game. So I'm going to go on record with my first predictions for "TOW", and look forward to be amused when none of this turns out to be accurate at all. Without further ado:
Since "square bases" is basically the only thing they're telling us at this point, bases are obviously going to be square. Which means rank and file regiments, wheeling, flank charges, all that good stuff. Warhammer as we've always known it, essentially. Though obviously with all-new rules to make the game less clunky than it used to be. With all the emphasis on this being a time of legends ("the Horus Heresy of AOS"), I can see this new game becoming quite hero-centric, allowing GW to revisit classic characters with a bunch of epic new centerpiece models.
Unit sizes are going to be smaller than they were in Warhammer 8th. Obviously. Nobody can be expected to paint 100 miniatures simply to get started, let alone when you consider the prices and detail levels of citadel miniatures these days. Smaller regiments of 5-20 minis will be the norm.
The miniature range will initially be a combination of brand new and pre-existing models. Not all of the original Fantasy-line will be critically dated in three years' time. Stuff like Empire Greatswords, Dwarf Longbeards, Witch Elves etc. will still hold up fairly well and will be carried over.
As with previous editions of Warhammer, the updating of the miniature range will simply have to start somewhere. A starter box of new minis will contain two factions to get the ball rolling, and if I let my heart do the predicting, those two factions are going to be Bretonnia and Tomb Kings. Just imagine what a statement it would be to reintroduce the Old World setting with those two armies. ("This is what you wanted!! / This is the Old World, where non-original IP remains king!")
As implied above, the miniature scale will remain the same as before. Now that they've let the cat out of the bag and promised a return to the Old World, Warhammer veterans all over the world are tearfully rejoicing at the prospect of finally being able field their cherished Old World armies again. In that regard, changing the scale and forcing everyone to buy new minis (of a size that might not be of interest to many) would disappoint a lot of the people this news looks meant to appeal to.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Can you name a rank and file wargame that uses round bases, that don't require trays or similar objects to get that square frontage? Because Hail Caesar, Pike and Shotte and Black Powder uses square bases.
I can't, but I don't have to. Trays exist for a reason and that reason is that moving large blocks of ranked models without them is pure torture and everyone who played WFB or historicals would use them anyway.
You don't need square bases to rank up models. Trays do that for you.
I can't, but I don't have to. Trays exist for a reason and that reason is that moving large blocks of ranked models without them is pure torture and everyone who played WFB or historicals would use them anyway.
You don't need square bases to rank up models. Trays do that for you.
That's over exaggerating the problem a bit. I never used movement trays, and never saw a need for them. Unless you're playing on a rough surface or moving through terrain, moving units was generally as simple as just pushing the rear rank. Trays were a convenience, nothing more, and they were only a convenience if you never wanted to change the formation of your unit.
Movement trays for round bases are a nice workaround when you find yourself with round bases that need to rank up... but are a horrible way to design a system from the ground up, both aesthetically and (unless you go the KoW 'fixed unit size and shape' approach (Ugh)) practically.
What I like about FW's HH rules is how free they are in the sense they push you to convert and try things, like the Brutes entry in the militia or somethig like that, it even says "You can use this to represent all kind of strong figthers, not only ogryns, maybe tamed alien lizards, robots, etc..."
I hope the same philosophy comes back here. A little of fresh air with the No model No rules
I can't, but I don't have to. Trays exist for a reason and that reason is that moving large blocks of ranked models without them is pure torture and everyone who played WFB or historicals would use them anyway.
You don't need square bases to rank up models. Trays do that for you.
That's over exaggerating the problem a bit. I never used movement trays, and never saw a need for them. Unless you're playing on a rough surface or moving through terrain, moving units was generally as simple as just pushing the rear rank. Trays were a convenience, nothing more, and they were only a convenience if you never wanted to change the formation of your unit.
Movement trays for round bases are a nice workaround when you find yourself with round bases that need to rank up... but are a horrible way to design a system from the ground up, both aesthetically and (unless you go the KoW 'fixed unit size and shape' approach (Ugh)) practically.
Trying to put two units of 20 models in 20mm in combat in fantasy without movement traits was an effort in futility.
Also, what is the problem for movement traits for round bases? It works perfectly fine both aesthetically and gaming wise for the game of Parabellum and ASoFaI
I can't, but I don't have to. Trays exist for a reason and that reason is that moving large blocks of ranked models without them is pure torture and everyone who played WFB or historicals would use them anyway.
You don't need square bases to rank up models. Trays do that for you.
That's over exaggerating the problem a bit. I never used movement trays, and never saw a need for them. Unless you're playing on a rough surface or moving through terrain, moving units was generally as simple as just pushing the rear rank. Trays were a convenience, nothing more, and they were only a convenience if you never wanted to change the formation of your unit.
Movement trays for round bases are a nice workaround when you find yourself with round bases that need to rank up... but are a horrible way to design a system from the ground up, both aesthetically and (unless you go the KoW 'fixed unit size and shape' approach (Ugh)) practically.
I only ever played on fully textured tables. Trays were mandatory.
And I'm not sure what's objectively horrible about a system that requires trays.
Well its either going to be trays, or boxes of extra square bases. I cant see GW repacking all the WHFB compatible models that now come with rounds.
Basing aside I wonder how this new project will effect any updates of the AoS factions that are still largely made of legacy models? Might GW hold back for example new Skaven or Seraphon/Lizardmen until its release? Or could they allow AoS to do the heavy lifting on those army's and instead concentrate on things that are undeniably WHFB like Brets and Tomb Kings?
It will also be interesting to see if there is any crossover with the newer AoS models based on WHF factions(like the Gloomspite or Sylvaneth) bleeding into the Old world.
They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
A lot of 30k models are not compatible / usable in 40k, so I don't know if that's really what they're after. They want you to have to buy More models, after all.
Too far out for me to really guess, but I'm just glad they're doing it
Tyel wrote: They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
It's not three years away, that's just a ruse, before the end of 2020
And I'm not sure what's objectively horrible about a system that requires trays.
I never said it was objectively horrible. It was a statement of opinion. Trays for round bases generally look awful, and trays of any kind are awkward for formation changes. Your experience and opinion may well be different.
Tyel wrote: They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Not to mention new model releases between now and then.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
I doubt that cross-compatibility will be a primary focus even if the two games do wind up being the same scale. The only reason that old units still exist is AoS is that they couldn't replace the entire model range at once. The aesthetic differences between units from the two settings will become more pronounced as new models are released for each.
It's called Warhammer: The Old World. It mentions the mighty battles that shaped the old world. I think the new game will focus solely on the Old World and it's safe to assume we can rule out Nippon and Albion. The article makes parallels to HH...maybe we can expect a focus on historic, pivotal, MASSED battles that shaped the Old World and it's history. So just a few off the top of my head: Hel Fenn, Blackfire Pass, The Siege of Prauge, that sort of battle. So I expect Battle Set/Game Sets that feature two or more armies paired up to represent a historic battle between two powers. A rule book will also accompany all this so if you can battle the different army groups against each other. I'm betting on a 'Ravening Hoards' type army book.
I expect the same, a Rulebook and a Ravening Hordes style book first.
than campaign/scenario books with the focus on a famous battle and the armies/faction that fought there, additional unit releases and maybe a themed boxed set.
I agree with this line of thinking.
Besides, it will let GW sell out in 30 minutes or less, more of those HOT Limited Edition One Run Only Boxed Games!
Yodhrin wrote: GW are surely aware that sentiment isn't exactly uncommon, and Orctober aside their modern marketing machine hasn't done anything to make me think they'd explicitly appeal to WHFB fans with the teaser and announcement only to then turn around and pull the rug out by making something that has basically nothing to do with square bases or WHFB.
Serious question - do you consider square bases to be an integral, indispensable element of WFB?
Actually I once argued that AoS was dumb and unnecessary because if GW wanted to shake things up they could have followed the LotR model and made the base Warhammer Fantasy game into a roundbase skirmish and then used roundbase movement trays with a War of the Ring style expansion.
But they didn't do that, they made AoS and canned WHFB, and so now for a lot of people yes, square bases are an integral part of WHFB, because they represent the game as it was prior to GW's act of vandalism and serve as a statement of intent when making an army that it's for WHFB and not AoS. Heck, I've even gone back to using squares for Mordheim to maintain consistency and so I stop getting "oh cool AoS models dude" remarks.
This product exists because of nostalgia. People at GW want to make it because of their nostalgia, and the moneymen are letting them do it because they know that appealing to ours will probably earn them a big ol' wadge of money. Kicking the whole thing off with "hey you guise, 'member square bases?" and then doing a roundbase game - movement trays or not - would be the kind of headdesk idiocy that modern GW's marketing rarely indulges in.
And to the folks saying it doesn't matter if they mix stuff - it really kinda does. The footprint of the regiments affects how many you can physically fit on the board. It affects how they move, how they turn. A 5x4 block of 20mm bases is not interchangeable with a 5x4 block of 25mm bases. Not if they expect it to play like WHFB and, again, why bother making a product specifically designed to appeal to WHFB diehards and then make it nothing like WHFB?
My expectation is movement trays for their current lineup, and a game very similar to AOS that is built around CCG elements, buffs, and very very basic rules that will not really do it for me.
auticus wrote: My expectation is movement trays for their current lineup, and a game very similar to AOS that is built around CCG elements, buffs, and very very basic rules that will not really do it for me.
Set in the old world.
There's always the risk that they could make something you enjoy
I wouldn't call making Fantasy but changing 20mm to 25mm as a completely different experience. Or that it would play different.
I understand the sentiment of wanting a company to respect the feeling of a beloved product when they relaunch it. But being so extreme with something as little, is the kind of thing horrible sit coms use to make fun of us nerds.
auticus wrote: My expectation is movement trays for their current lineup, and a game very similar to AOS that is built around CCG elements, buffs, and very very basic rules that will not really do it for me.
Set in the old world.
There's always the risk that they could make something you enjoy
There will be 3 years of buildup. Nothing that GW will release will come close to the ideal game that will be in the fans' minds. It will have cheap, 20-model boxed sets, it will come with all the Old World armies and new, like Nippon, and it will be on the same bases as WFB, and it will even let you use the old models you have. Oh, and the lore will ignore End-Times and become a divergent, separate reality where ET and AoS never happened. All of this because GW loves Old World and wants to Do Right By The Loyal Fans.
There is absolutely no way whatever GW will eventually produce will match this wishlist, and every major divergence (let's say, no charge redirecting), will be seen as a personal slight against the Loyal Fans.
I have no clue why they advertised it so early, it goes against every basic marketing idea.
auticus wrote: My expectation is movement trays for their current lineup, and a game very similar to AOS that is built around CCG elements, buffs, and very very basic rules that will not really do it for me.
Set in the old world.
There's always the risk that they could make something you enjoy
There will be 3 years of buildup. Nothing that GW will release will come close to the ideal game that will be in the fans' minds. It will have cheap, 20-model boxed sets, it will come with all the Old World armies and new, like Nippon, and it will be on the same bases as WFB, and it will even let you use the old models you have. All of this because GW loves Old World and wants to Do Right By The Loyal Fans.
There is absolutely no way whatever GW will eventually produce will match this wishlist, and every major divergence (let's say, no charge redirecting), will be seen as a personal slight against the Loyal Fans.
I have no clue why they advertised it so early, it goes against every basic marketing idea.
Considering its been less than 3 days and people have already imagined the game in about half a dozen different scales (despite the fact that GW already showed a 28mm base and also said it was going to be to AoS what Horus Heresy is to 40K - which means SAME SCALE); I'm going to go out on a limb and say that when GW announced it wouldn't matter for those who will theory craft what it could be. Unless GW launched their first marketing release with the full game details people were always going to guess. Asides for which even if GW did release full details people would still argue that another approach is better (With variations of GW is doing ok with their idea all the way to "OMG its the worst idea ever I'm burning everything I own")
In the end GW has given this bit of news early to generate interest and hype as well as a warning shot to 9thage; Kings of War and all the rest. It's also a warning shot to Old World fans who might yet still have their old armies to hold onto them because in a few years something good might happen.
In the end most people seem pretty happy about it. Those who are negative are either those who are miss interpreting it as "It's the End of AoS" or "I hate GW Rules" which in fairness to GW if you hate GW rules then a new GW rules system doesn't really affect you as you're already not the target market.
One thing over the years that GW have proven is people are willing to drop £££ on things that they love. No one would have even considered a full resin FW40k army (apart from the hardcore DKoK players) and yet 30k took off very well.
This has proven that people will pay £40 for a unit and as a lot of the old WHFB players did not start AoS there is certainly a market to get those people paying GW.
auticus wrote: My expectation is movement trays for their current lineup, and a game very similar to AOS that is built around CCG elements, buffs, and very very basic rules that will not really do it for me.
Set in the old world.
There's always the risk that they could make something you enjoy
There will be 3 years of buildup. Nothing that GW will release will come close to the ideal game that will be in the fans' minds. It will have cheap, 20-model boxed sets, it will come with all the Old World armies and new, like Nippon, and it will be on the same bases as WFB, and it will even let you use the old models you have. All of this because GW loves Old World and wants to Do Right By The Loyal Fans.
There is absolutely no way whatever GW will eventually produce will match this wishlist, and every major divergence (let's say, no charge redirecting), will be seen as a personal slight against the Loyal Fans.
I have no clue why they advertised it so early, it goes against every basic marketing idea.
Considering its been less than 3 days and people have already imagined the game in about half a dozen different scales (despite the fact that GW already showed a 28mm base and also said it was going to be to AoS what Horus Heresy is to 40K - which means SAME SCALE); I'm going to go out on a limb and say that when GW announced it wouldn't matter for those who will theory craft what it could be. Unless GW launched their first marketing release with the full game details people were always going to guess. Asides for which even if GW did release full details people would still argue that another approach is better (With variations of GW is doing ok with their idea all the way to "OMG its the worst idea ever I'm burning everything I own")
In the end GW has given this bit of news early to generate interest and hype as well as a warning shot to 9thage; Kings of War and all the rest. It's also a warning shot to Old World fans who might yet still have their old armies to hold onto them because in a few years something good might happen.
In the end most people seem pretty happy about it. Those who are negative are either those who are miss interpreting it as "It's the End of AoS" or "I hate GW Rules" which in fairness to GW if you hate GW rules then a new GW rules system doesn't really affect you as you're already not the target market.
Exactly this. They gave us next to nothing and some of us have spent the whole weekend speculating what this imaginary game might be. I just wish I could see as well into the lotterys future as I do with GW!
It's to keep people interested in the company. They have probably pushed AoS as far as they can with the audience they have. They know how well all the off shoot games have done/are doing. They know they have an untapped market of people that want to play classic WFB and are not spending money on their other games. For every person that is hating on the return of WFB right now, there is probably ten people about to blow a lot of money on KoW, because its the most logical choice of game to play for your WFB fix right now. Now instead of buying each new model release from mantic, people are going to be more weary about blowing large money until they know what this new WFB will bring.
They probably also hope some people get enticed with other new products they see as they refresh the news page repeatedly for the next 12 months.
I am actually surprised that this news hasn't taken over more of the groups tbh.
As for it being set in the old world exclusively, it would make sense to keep the new game small, at least while they do a 'test run' to see if its worth keeping it around. But that would cut out the lizardmen and dark elves, two ranges that already have a full range of minis, most of which are still new enough to still be in service one this gets here and has cross compatibility. I'd almost put money on ( If I wasn't saving all my money for this new game that is! ) that one of these two armies will the first thing they suggest collecting once they put a proper article out in some months time! Either army would tease well and they can encourage people to start painting a force now to get a head start on release, and oh, look! You can use them to get some AoS games in the meantime! Just pick up this selection of books and a couple of *AoS specific products* and you have an army that will keep you busy until WFBart 2 gets here!
It's almost set in stone they will start the game with Empire Vs Chaos, at some point of the timeline though. It just kind of makes sense. It's the classic match up and gives them the chance to remake a bunch of classic models and characters to really catch peoples eye.
IIRC, in KoW (which is the most popular FB replacement) the bases do not really matter, only the unit footprints. If they write the rules that way, then you can use whatever bases you like.
I don't think AoS has gone as far as it can go - its only really just getting steam under it. Early next year it will be all running 2.0 which basically means that for the first time in its life its a functional game. It's equivalent to a proper 1.0 release at launch - rules and structure wise.
AoS has had a bumpy, rocky stalled start but come next year when everything is running 2.0 it really should start to get even more steam behind it. No more "oh yeah you like the look of the game - ok but over half the armies you can't actually play right now" or "Oh that army looks neat but they could be squatted at any moment when GW updates the game."
Plus there's at least 3 years more AoS before we can even think of this new Old World game even appearing. That's 3 years in which GW will likely update several armies; add new models to others and introduce new armies into the game. It's even far enough that they might start playing with AoS 3.0 and adding new mechanics.
By that point in time we should have a very solid Warcry game; a very solid set of "apoc style rules". We might even see GW revive Skirmish as a proper full side game (though I think Warcry has stolen this). Heck by that stage I'd wager most armies would have one Underworld Warband and many might be heading toward a second warband (without being stormcast).
That's 3 more years of exclusive minis (that's at least 3 more non-stormcast minis potentially).
So yeah there's a LOT of AoS goodness in those 3 years. And that's just speculating on what GW has already shown us they are likely to do.
RiTides wrote: I wouldn't rebase anything lol. GW really likes selling new models... most other recently resurrected games haven't been compatible with older models.
Whats funny is that they got rid of a ton of the older fantasy stuff recently. Not like entire ranges, but basic core units. Orc boys, dwarf warriors and quarrelers, high elf core units, etc. DE aren't doing too badly though. Honestly, I'd buy new dwarf warriors, if GW releases some in a couple years
auticus wrote: My expectation is movement trays for their current lineup, and a game very similar to AOS that is built around CCG elements, buffs, and very very basic rules that will not really do it for me.
Set in the old world.
There's always the risk that they could make something you enjoy
I'm just saying thats my expectation. I don't think they have anyone on staff that knows how (or really wants to) to make a game that caters to anything other than the current gen of board game style gamers and a heavy pull from Magic: The gathering (in aesthetics as well as game mechanics)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I have no clue why they advertised it so early, it goes against every basic marketing idea.
Its actually a brilliant idea because I have found though there are those that exist that will play multiple systems, those people are not common. At all.
People tend to want to stick to one game for a genre. (ie fantasy... one fantasy game... thats it). Thats hugely how it is in my region.
What this has done is made those people rethink getting into Kings of War or Conquest because they won't want to spend time or money or emotional investment in a system when they know they may just go back to a GW system (because the GW system will pull a larger player base, which is the #1 desire for many people... rules be damned).
I mean it seems odd the mention this so early in the development cycle with nothing to show or preview. I mean I get GW is probably trying to stuck it to Mantic. After all KoW 2nd edition dropped just as AoS started and they did make a push to steal all the old WHFB players.
Anyway, whatever happens don't expect it to be anything like the old WHFB, that's for darn sure.
So here is the great thing about the fact there's everything left. You see we can tell gw what we want with warhammer: the old world. This is actually probably the best course of events because we tell em what we want and they give it and get money. They can change literally anything with the game at this point. It's a win/win as far as I'm concerned.
flamingkillamajig wrote: So here is the great thing about the fact there's everything left. You see we can tell gw what we want with warhammer: the old world. This is actually probably the best course of events because we tell em what we want and they give it and get money. They can change literally anything with the game at this point. It's a win/win as far as I'm concerned.
Hopefully that was the intent, get it out so we can read what people think of a return to a square based game.
Tyel wrote: They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
It's not three years away, that's just a ruse, before the end of 2020
I agree on this one. It will be faster than three years.
Tyel wrote: They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
It's not three years away, that's just a ruse, before the end of 2020
I agree on this one. It will be faster than three years.
It fascinates me that people think that gw would deliberately lie in a post that is currently pinned to the top of the community site and is being shared by sites that don’t usually cover warhammer, not to mention that lying to share holders really isn’t something that a publicly traded company should be doing.
When they say not soon, they aren’t kidding. If anything it will go the other way. The quote from the post is ‘three or more’
I would put money on a summer 2023 release date.
Look at the sisters announcement. It was 2019 emperor willing, and now here we are with the majority of the release coming in 2020.
It's just a guess it won't be three years. As they could have just said, we have a planned game, with square bases in the old world it's coming down the road, years from now but we wanted you to hear it from us.
They didn't say that, they said, " Oh my it won't be soon ! Will be at least, 2, 3 or even 4 ! years away, yeap, really not soon at all, nope nope nope. "
One is clear and to the point, the other sounds a bit like an over promised statement of time. " It's really far away I swear ! " statement.
As is, they I don't think they pulled sisters in 2019 outta the rear at all, they did say emperor willing. I think they always planned it to drop at the end of the year, to build up hype for the new year to reap in that post christmas cash. As well as drop the first parts towards end of the year like a..dare I say.." Miracle ! or Prayer fulfilled ! " Makes sense with the army involved.
I don't think they are grand masterminds but for model releases I think they are pretty on the ball with their planning. I doubt they dropped this announcement without a pretty clear idea of time frame and I doubt they said it like they did just to keep our expectations low. It feels more like a joke to me.
Now no one should think its just around the corner but I'd not be surprised if we hear it's not nearly as far away as they proclaimed either.
You'd have to have some pretty strong arguments to convince me GW would spend a couple years on a product, only for the end result to not be compatible with AoS in any aspect beside background
Same as Blood Bowl, Necromunda, Warcry, Shadespire, and the Horus Heresy
All kind of compatible with the main game, using same models for both.
But using the same Marines for Horus Heresy and 40k does not really work except for the very basic units.
Same for Shadespire or Warcry and AoS.
You can, up to a point, use the models from the smaller games in the main game, but not the other way around and no reason to expect it to be different with that game.
Tyel wrote: They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
It's not three years away, that's just a ruse, before the end of 2020
I agree on this one. It will be faster than three years.
Yeah, maybe we see Beta-Test rules or some Teaser/Promo models early on to keep up the hype
But no chance that a full game is there earlier, not if GW want to make a starter Box for it (and looking for what price they can sell SG Boxes they want to make one for sure).
Just look at Sisters how long it took them doing it
This will be a new game with new models
There is no reason to use old Warhammer stuff or even current AoS models and make it easy to recycle your old collection.
This is still GW, they will do everything possible that you buy the shiny new models dedicated to the game (and of course buy similar but different ones for AoS).
Even if you disagree with my read on that sentence, consistent scaling and rules systems make sense in general. This isn't really an extrapolation of anything GW said, just what feels like common sense. You'd have to have some pretty strong arguments to convince me GW would spend a couple years on a product, only for the end result to not be compatible with AoS in any aspect beside background.
The 2 don't fit aesthatically well together as it is. One is more grounded fantasy, other is over the top tuned up to 15(on scale of 1-12).
Tyel wrote: They've said its 3 years away. They can surely do whatever they like in terms of repackaging.
Trays seems the most likely way to go if the minis are going to be cross-compatible but in that case stoking square base nostalgia seems like something that will bite them later on.
It's not three years away, that's just a ruse, before the end of 2020
I agree on this one. It will be faster than three years.
That would mean they have been working it already year or two. If so why not actually show something? They showed with SOB way earlier in the development cycle then.
Just some theorising based on the very little we all have to go off and adding my 2 cents to the opinions already here.
First of all 28-32mm scale. Not sure why we're even debating a smaller scale. I'll eat an army rather than burn one if this is a smaller scale thing. :
They're cashing in on feels and nostalgia it would seem. (If I'm wrong about that all these theories go out the window).
So why would they appease the AoS demographic who already have a game? AoS is making GW money so it will continue. To me it seems like GW's way of bringing back lost gamers (income) who will buy nice looking new kits from a setting they know and love. 30k and 40k both exist in relative harmony. From the way they leaked it GW seem to want to have similar harmony between the two systems. Make no mistake AoS is GW's headliner at the moment and I don't see that changing. Just like 40k is more prominent than 30k. That doesn't mean that this new WFB nostalgia project/foray can't be as successful and as great as 30k is. Or hopefully better.
Would have to say if it's targeting nostalgia (which it seems to be for me) it would be silly for the game, minis and how it plays not to resemble in some solid way what it once was. Ranked infantry square bases and what not. I would not put it past GW to re hash AoS rules (which will be 3.0 at that point) to factor in ranked units with the odd old world rules flair. 3 years is a long time and play testing is a thing. If GW do it right like I think they did releasing 8th Ed 40K after 6th and 7th, I can see it working out well for all involved. Except those that choose to be unhappy whatever the outcome.
There is also the case for the whole bringing the Total War crowd in, which yeah they can do that with appeasing the old players pretty easily imo and by then I''m thinking a lot of the hype would have died down anyway. I think it's the cool looking models that hooks you more than anything.
Bottom line is it won't be AoS, it won't be the same as it was, but hey GW make good looking miniatures. Those not happy with what the new rules might be will get cool new minis from the old world. That is a certainty. They are a mini company and bottom line is that's what they will try to do; sell minis.
GW is expanding and they have money to work on projects like this now, this could be pretty big, but with what little we have now all we can do is theorise.
Now this is wishlisting but in my opinion this would make business sense.
Not that they will but I'd say there's a strong case for GW to bring back some of the old kits, especially the ones that are fairly new and GW have sunk substantial investment in. Ones that still look good. People will buy them, they still have the moulds why not sell them? Storage space is a problem as is production but they're expanding and in 3 years with the right prep this may not be an issue.
with a new/old system people will want minis to play it with, costs GW little (in design that is) to just make do with what they have/had. Then slowly drip feed new cooler stuff and replace the older stuff as things progress.
Although that is moot if they go for a different flair of the old world than what once was WHFB.
Big wishlist stuff but I actually think likely...
MORDHEIM
Hopefully before the three years or whatever the timeline is. Just to tease the old world and get all the nostalgia flowing freely.
Cautiously optimistic, but all we can do is make wild suggestions at this point.
Nothing is really set in stone yet.
From the way they leaked it GW seem to want to have similar harmony between the two systems
Well, they sure managed that. Pretty much every message board and social media platform this weekend looked like the deepest depths of 2015, with "hurr durr age of shitmar" posts or some variation thereof being in half the posts. WFB grogs hate AoS and everything that it represents to them, and will not let it rest. The reaction wasn't "oh yay, it's back" to many of them, it's "OH YAY EAT gak AOS".
So yeah, don't expect those two to exist in harmony, because one side of this equation spent near 5 years just marinading in gamer-hate.
tneva82 wrote: The 2 don't fit aesthatically well together as it is. One is more grounded fantasy, other is over the top tuned up to 15(on scale of 1-12).
WFB was never grounded outside of the human factions. Sylvaneth, pretty much all of Chaos, orcs, goblins, most of the undead, new DoK units, Idoneth infantry - all those AoS releases would be right at home in WFB. And then there's the cover to Free Cities book that depicts a straight up Empire Greatsword.
People vastly overstate the aesthetic differences between WFB and AoS.
From the way they leaked it GW seem to want to have similar harmony between the two systems
Well, they sure managed that. Pretty much every message board and social media platform this weekend looked like the deepest depths of 2015, with "hurr durr age of mar" posts or some variation thereof being in half the posts. WFB grogs hate AoS and everything that it represents to them, and will not let it rest. The reaction wasn't "oh yay, it's back" to many of them, it's "OH YAY EAT gak AOS".
So yeah, don't expect those two to exist in harmony, because one side of this equation spent near 5 years just marinading in gamer-hate.
I was more talking about GW keeping that harmony. Like the harmony between 40k and 30k, both existing as their own thing under GW.
I would never expect the same Harmony from the gamers. Hopefully it is a loud minority and the silent majority can be at peace with others who don't share their opinions...
Wait... this is the internet, and we're gamers, never mind.
Agreed, outside of some new stuff I'd say at the very least least half is transferable. Take some of the new 'chaos' stuff, for example. While it looks different, it would not be too far out of place in the old world. Bar a few wacky new additions maybe. Or stuff that didn't exist in old world lore to begin with but that still doesn't mean they're not transferable...
From the way they leaked it GW seem to want to have similar harmony between the two systems
Well, they sure managed that. Pretty much every message board and social media platform this weekend looked like the deepest depths of 2015, with "hurr durr age of shitmar" posts or some variation thereof being in half the posts. WFB grogs hate AoS and everything that it represents to them, and will not let it rest. The reaction wasn't "oh yay, it's back" to many of them, it's "OH YAY EAT gak AOS".
So yeah, don't expect those two to exist in harmony, because one side of this equation spent near 5 years just marinading in gamer-hate.
I saw a ton of making fun of WHFB and its players, so its pretty much an equal opportunity knife-fest in that regard.
WFB players that hate AoS largely hate it because they invested thousands of dollars into a game and had it ripped out from under their feet in the middle of the night and replaced with a different game that had nothing to do with the game that drew them in the first place.
You'd get the same reaction from AOS players if AOS just stopped being AOS one day out of nowhere and became something else entirely. All that money and time on those models pretty much gone unless you happen to like the new game that came out.
And both sides are full of plenty of idiotic posts over the weekend.
"AOS is obviously dying thats why they are doing this" is as stupid as "WHFB couldn't sell and died, why are they bringing it back? Obviously no one wanted that game!" when there was a whole list of bullet points as to why GW wasn't making any money off of it (and hint: it wasn't because nobody was playing the game...)
If they repeat what they did for Middle Earth, they will re-release some old plastics, in new quantities in new boxes (with maybe a slight price reduction). Then they will produce a few character models in plastic. A new rulebook and a series of themed books, possibly centred around famous battles. I don't know much about design and production but that does not sound like a multi year commitment. So to my mind they must be thinking a bit more ambitiously. Boxed games with small forces are essentially skirmish, and they really seem to be hinting that this is mass battle.
My best guess would be a redone WHFB rulebook, they have always loved to release those. Maybe removing the "buy more figures" design that was built into 8th and ultimately killed it off. Perhaps returning to the unit sizes of earlier editions, when 20 was about the norm, 30 was big. That still sells lots of boxes of figures, which are pretty much 10 to a box these days. Perhaps starter sets for major battles, with some core stuff to get you going, with all the characters, artillery and other more specialised stuff released alongside. I would guess Empire and orcs would be a no-brainer, so maybe they will concentrate efforts on replacing some of the really old plastic kits, like orc boyz and Empire knights. Repeat for the other races and they have at least six books and twelve ranges they can repackage/extend the ranges.
I don' think there will be any crossover with AoS. The new steampunk dwarfs and the older more traditional beardy armoured guys just don't mix. The fish elves are just so different to High Elves. It's not just base shape that keeps them apart, so both sets of fans can be happy.
It's purely guesswork. I reckon we will get more news before the end of the year.
I would never expect the same Harmony from the gamers. Hopefully it is a loud minority and the silent majority can be at peace with others who don't share their opinions...
Wait... this is the internet, and we're gamers, never mind.
It's a load of nonsense. 90% of the "hate" is feigned smugness as a bit of a pisstake, with some genuine sense of vindication in there. The other 10% are trolls and nutters, who're always there, and who're just as if not more prevalent among the AoS contingent.
Some folk are just desperate for their "zomg dumb grog crusty old boomer die already ded gaem" etc shtick to have some justification outside their own noggin, so they invent the Boogeygrog terrorising poor innocent AoS players
I don' think there will be any crossover with AoS. The new steampunk dwarfs and the older more traditional beardy armoured guys just don't mix.
Really, cause they'd fit in pretty well with the Engineer Guilds' younger members who are responsible for the wackier contraptions that the Ol' Grumblers disliked.
The fish elves are just so different to High Elves.
Once again, they're not "fish elves". There's also literally nothing preventing them from having existed, seeing as how Mathlaan(the Idoneth's deity) was around in The World That Was as well.
All that aside, maybe just maybe this is why a bunch of the old/outdated-ish plastics went away? Glade Guard desperately needed a refresher, as did the Glade Riders.
I don' think there will be any crossover with AoS. The new steampunk dwarfs and the older more traditional beardy armoured guys just don't mix.
Really, cause they'd fit in pretty well with the Engineer Guilds' younger members who are responsible for the wackier contraptions that the Ol' Grumblers disliked.
Maybe a couple of the units, but I don't see how armored plated, steampunk tophats fit in with the overall dwarf aesthetic. The Dwarfs did have zeppelins though in the game already (FW only), and there are gyrocopters, so there is some precedence at least.
Once again, they're not "fish elves". There's also literally nothing preventing them from having existed, seeing as how Mathlaan(the Idoneth's deity) was around in The World That Was as well.
They kind of are though? Isn't the lore behind the Iodeth that they are an attempt by Malekith to bring back the elves, but it went horribly wrong and they turned into those Falmer like things instead? Chronologically speaking, they wouldn't exist in the Old World because they were created after the destuction of the old world. We're more likely to see Vampire Coast get a full army release, to cash in on Total Warhammer's success.
Dwarves in the Old World could have gone full steam punk in a few years IF they wanted too. However their society basically kept a massive hand on technological advance and blocked them. That was one of the big parts of the Spirit of Grungni (big airship from Gotrek and Felix stories) in that it was a massive middle finger by the engineer to the Dwarven Engineer Guild of the time.
Also don't forget that Dwarves were already sailing the high seas in solid iron dreadnought battleships and steam paddle ships.
In that regard they are not actually that far behind the Dwarves of the Realms - granted the KO have some new fancy air lifting bubbles, though I'd sort of argue that that's just a fluffy way to have airships without requiring massive air sacs above the model (which would be unfun to field, impossible to transport and costly)
Idoneth's main curse is that their souls wither and die leaving them as blank-ilke husks. Alive but not "alive" with the spark of life. They are basically soul vampires who feast on souls of others. They fled to the seas and used powerful magics to live under the sea; however they aren't "fish aelves" and are not of the sea. I also suspect that without magic their undersea civilisation would crumble.
Once again, they're not "fish elves". There's also literally nothing preventing them from having existed, seeing as how Mathlaan(the Idoneth's deity) was around in The World That Was as well.
They kind of are though? Isn't the lore behind the Iodeth that they are an attempt by Malekith to bring back the elves, but it went horribly wrong and they turned into those Falmer like things instead?
You literally could not get anything more wrong than you did. They were an attempt by Teclis to create a new race of Aelves. It went well, for a time, until his creation went a bit nutsy thanks to having been slowly digested by Slaanesh for time unknowable and having been brought back into Hysh(Realm of Light), they got sensory overload flashbacks.
They retreated to the depths of the seas in Hysh, and started effectively isolating themselves even from each other. Blah,blah, blah cut to 'the now'(as they were created, retreated, colonized the other Realms via the 'Whirlways'[submerged Realmgates from lost/destroyed civilizations or created by them] and then existed long enough to pass into myths and legends to the other races) and they've got an issue where a large chunk of the population(Namarti[which means 'Half-Soul']) are born with weak souls and it's affected them in the ways we've seen(the lack of eyes, some lack nostrils, some can't breathe oxygen, some have brittle bones--but the big one is lack of eyes) in the fluff. Cut to the raiding, blah blah blah.
TLDR: Not fish elves. They're just elves who live in the seas.
Chronologically speaking, they wouldn't exist in the Old World because they were created after the destuction of the old world.
Cool, then neither would Archaon's "full throttle" Dorghar, the Varanguard, anything Sylvaneth that aren't Dryads or Treemen, and probably quite a few other things too.
Considering how the new Dorghar looks like crap compared to horse Dorghar, I don't think that's a bad thing.
Also a few units =/= entire faction. You can get away with keeping a big beetle in the wood elves army, and Varanguard can be passed off as fancier looking chosen. An entire race of sea elves? That's just pushing it, and does screw with continuity a little.
Idoneth's main curse is that their souls wither and die leaving them as blank-ilke husks. Alive but not "alive" with the spark of life. They are basically soul vampires who feast on souls of others. They fled to the seas and used powerful magics to live under the sea; however they aren't "fish aelves" and are not of the sea. I also suspect that without magic their undersea civilisation would crumble.
Wait, but then why would they hang out in the sea if they need magic? Isn't that a liability? Like, what happens if that magic gets dispelled, wouldn't that be a one hit ko?
Considering how the new Dorghar looks like crap compared to horse Dorghar, I don't think that's a bad thing.
Sure.
Also a few units =/= entire faction.
Tell that to Ogre Kingdoms.
You can get away with keeping a big beetle in the wood elves army.
No, you really can't.
Because you know who's riding that "big beetle"?
The High Elf Everqueen. It was a whoooooooooooole plot thread for The End Times, where Ariel(the Wood Elf Queen/Avatar of Isha) was dying and the twins Naestra and Arahan brought Alarielle to Athel Loren to save her, Isha's power went into Alarielle and she became the Avatar of Life.
An entire race of not-elves? That's just pushing it.
If only there were massive chunks of some liquid material and a deity that had followers and was worshiped by all of the 'Big Three' Elf factions...and even some human factions(Marienburg!) to boot.
Mathlaan was an Old World deity. He's dead in Age of Sigmar but very much was a mysterious bit in the Old World. The biggest moment we got with Mathlaan was in End Times Khaine, where Sea Lord Aislinn was tortured nearly to death by Lokhir Felheart, threw a curse on the Dark Elves and then threw his body overboard to get Mathlaan to bring his wrath down on the Black Fleet.
Wait, but then why would they hang out in the sea if they need magic? Isn't that a liability? Like, what happens if that magic gets dispelled, wouldn't that be a one hit ko?
In order for 'that magic' to get dispelled, people need to:
-Know where they are
-Know how to get there
-Know how the spells work
-Know that the Idoneth even exist
Even with the Idoneth fighting alongside the forces of Sigmar, people still think that they are a myth or a fairy tale.
The whole reason why they 'hang out in the sea', is literally because they like the darkness and the lack of sound. They're still traumatized from having been effectively tortured while their souls were being digested by Slaanesh itself for time unknowable.
Going on a simple raid is a Big Deal for any Idoneth. The Akhelians(warrior caste) and Namarti(the 'lesser' caste) are the ones who mainly go on these raids, with the Isharaan(mage/scholar caste) coming alongside to help muffle emotions, sound, etc.
I know who Mathlaan is, I just don't see how a race that was created after the destruction of the old world is somehow present in the old world serving a sea god that was dead by the time of their creation.
I'm just curious, but how do we know anything will really come out of this, couldn't they just be gauging interest? A lot of things can change in three years time.
The High Elf Everqueen. It was a whoooooooooooole plot thread for The End Times, where Ariel(the Wood Elf Queen/Avatar of Isha) was dying and the twins Naestra and Arahan brought Alarielle to Athel Loren to save her, Isha's power went into Alarielle and she became the Avatar of Life.
Fair enough. One could just say its not Alarielle riding it, but that would be odd, yes.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I know who Mathlaan is, I just don't see how a race that was created after the destruction of the old world is somehow present in the old world serving a sea god that was dead by the time of their creation.
Simply put, you're not actually trying to see then. You just want to keep your blinders on.
There's ruined civilizations in the seas of the World That Was. That was always a big plot point for Lokhir Felheart, whose squid mask came from ruins guarded by the 'devolved descendants of the Lizardmen'.
The oceans of the World That Was, much like our own, aren't exactly 100% explored.
The High Elf Everqueen. It was a whoooooooooooole plot thread for The End Times, where Ariel(the Wood Elf Queen/Avatar of Isha) was dying and the twins Naestra and Arahan brought Alarielle to Athel Loren to save her, Isha's power went into Alarielle and she became the Avatar of Life.
Fair enough. One could just say its not Alarielle riding it, but that would be odd, yes.
And then let's talk about the Spite and Tree Revenants.
Both of them came about because Alarielle told stories of the Elves to the Sylvaneth. Tree Revenants fight and look like the 'guardians' of old(read: Wood Elves).
Spite Revenants are supposed to be twisted echoes of them.
And Durthu would be back to being the only Treelord wielding a sword.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I know who Mathlaan is, I just don't see how a race that was created after the destruction of the old world is somehow present in the old world serving a sea god that was dead by the time of their creation.
Simply put, you're not actually trying to see then. You just want to keep your blinders on.
There's ruined civilizations in the seas of the World That Was. That was always a big plot point for Lokhir Felheart, whose squid mask came from ruins guarded by the 'devolved descendants of the Lizardmen'.
The oceans of the World That Was, much like our own, aren't exactly 100% explored.
Yes, I acknowledge that is quite possible that there's a deep sea race of something in the old world, its just that having a faction of models that look like idoneth but aren't really idoneth is kind of...odd, I guess? It would be like if GW suddenly decided to introduce Tau as they are in 40k to the Horus Heresy, even though they shouldn't be around at that point. Even if they were named something other than Tau, they'd still be Tau.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I know who Mathlaan is, I just don't see how a race that was created after the destruction of the old world is somehow present in the old world serving a sea god that was dead by the time of their creation.
Togusa wrote: I'm just curious, but how do we know anything will really come out of this, couldn't they just be gauging interest? A lot of things can change in three years time.
Just occurred to me that I marked on plastic sisters in the community survey and then GW released plastic sisters. In the Iast community survey I put down WFB in a number of places and here we have this announcement.
I'm not claiming any special powers - but if others did the same as I did... I do wonder to what degree this announcement was driven by feedback in the last survey?
Togusa wrote: I'm just curious, but how do we know anything will really come out of this, couldn't they just be gauging interest? A lot of things can change in three years time.
because gw has said its coming
To be fair, it wouldn't be the first time GW announced something then dropped it.
Aesthete wrote: Just occurred to me that I marked on plastic sisters in the community survey and then GW released plastic sisters. In the Iast community survey I put down WFB in a number of places and here we have this announcement.
I'm not claiming any special powers - but if others did the same as I did... I do wonder to what degree this announcement was driven by feedback in the last survey?
I wonder how much they had to wade through before they realised enough people wanted this. I love the survey thing GW have going, it seems like they really want to sell us things enough of us say we want to buy.
I just hope enough people are talking about Mordheim.
Yodhrin wrote: And to the folks saying it doesn't matter if they mix stuff - it really kinda does. The footprint of the regiments affects how many you can physically fit on the board. It affects how they move, how they turn. A 5x4 block of 20mm bases is not interchangeable with a 5x4 block of 25mm bases. Not if they expect it to play like WHFB and, again, why bother making a product specifically designed to appeal to WHFB diehards and then make it nothing like WHFB?
Square bases and base sizes are pretty integral to the way the game worked. It determined how many figures could fight in a combat. When directing strikes at specific targets, only those figures touching those models (including corner-to-corner) could fight. Depending on the edition (I think), it was also possible to have heroes of different base sizes join a unit, actually within the unit if that worked out with base sizes (Slann in Temple Guard being a good example). Creating movement trays for all those eventualities for round and oval bases should be fun, and then give those little markings to show where the theoretical corners would be for each base?
Kanluwen wrote:All that aside, maybe just maybe this is why a bunch of the old/outdated-ish plastics went away? Glade Guard desperately needed a refresher, as did the Glade Riders.
Seeing how the plastic Zombies are still available...
Flying Pooo wrote:
Aesthete wrote: Just occurred to me that I marked on plastic sisters in the community survey and then GW released plastic sisters. In the Iast community survey I put down WFB in a number of places and here we have this announcement.
I'm not claiming any special powers - but if others did the same as I did... I do wonder to what degree this announcement was driven by feedback in the last survey?
I wonder how much they had to wade through before they realised enough people wanted this.
I love the survey thing GW have going, it seems like they really want to sell us things enough of us say we want to buy.
I just hope enough people are talking about Mordheim.
Wonder if the success of some Made-to-Order waves could have been an additional factor in the decision.
Sotahullu wrote: My bet on new things coming are Tomb Kings and Bretonnia. Mostly because those have disappeared in AoS.
Totally agree that Bretonnians are a pretty sure fire bet at this point, after all they're bog standard, regular humans (when was the last time we saw any of those?) that enjoy a bit of pomp and ceremony and massed cavalry charges. Add to that some fantastically nostalgic but well loved miniatures such as the Green Knight and you're on to a winner.
Just need a little addition of a gobbo wolf rider army, full of dynamic new sculpts, to face off and we're off to the races with my dream box set
That or Empire... I wouldn't mind a plastic steam tank!
Stick it all on the list for me during the next survey, Aesthete please!
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Wonder if the success of some Made-to-Order waves could have been an additional factor in the decision.
I actually put in my last community survey that it was hard to imagine how the most profitable thing to do with Tomb Kings and the rest of the Old World assets was...nothing. I said that while Made to Order likely wasn't the most profitable endeavor, the case of especially Tomb Kings, most of the desirable kits are "modern plastics" which means the actual "cost" is pretty much already sunk in and the manufacture is almost literally peanuts.
Now, I'm not pretending that I somehow inspired them, I'm just saying that there were likely lots of comments like that, because it's kind of obvious. Also, I tend to believe that the survey results are only useful, insofar as they can be used to justify GW already existent internal impetus.
I'd be willing to bet that there were/are people in the company who were not/are not happy with AoS's style. Which means any "excuse" to go back to a style they likely are happier to design for is going to get seized on. If the survey and our responses were that, well, good. But I don't think the survey "caused" GW to move in this direction. Rather, some amount of people there already wanted to and once there was "sufficient reason" that could justify it to higher-ups, it was something that could have a business case made for it.
Personally, I'm happy about this. I know it won't be some fair-tale return, but I'm a fan of the "realistic" Fantasy of the Old World, compared to the hyper-realism of AoS. I also like the RnF playstyle and it seems likely that I'm not at all unique and there are probably designers in GW that feel about the same.
Cool, then neither would Archaon's "full throttle" Dorghar, the Varanguard, anything Sylvaneth that aren't Dryads or Treemen, and probably quite a few other things too.
Erm, good? That's kinda like saying to a kid "Well, fine then, if you don't eat your broccoli, you won't be allowed to eat your brussels sprouts OR your pickled artichokes!"
I have seen it now on a lot of different places, where does the whole "AoS is dying" or "AoS makes less profit than Warhammer in the past" thing comes from?
kodos wrote: I have seen it now on a lot of different places, where does the whole "AoS is dying" or "AoS makes less profit than Warhammer in the past" thing comes from?
People's imagination? "Wishful" thinking?
We just had a financial report and it showed no evidence of that as far as I remember.
I know, but that is declined as 40k is earning more money than AoS is losing
I have not seen anything that would indicate a failing AoS but still people coming up that the "Old World is to AoS what HH is to 40k" as the new game replaces AoS because it is dying.
kodos wrote: I know, but that is declined as 40k is earning more money than AoS is losing
I have not seen anything that would indicate a failing AoS but still people coming up that the "Old World is to AoS what HH is to 40k" as the new game replaces AoS because it is dying.
People are saying that because that's what the initial teaser video said. And HH isn't meant to replace 40k, so I don't know what that has to do with anything.
kodos wrote: I know, but that is declined as 40k is earning more money than AoS is losing
I have not seen anything that would indicate a failing AoS but still people coming up that the "Old World is to AoS what HH is to 40k" as the new game replaces AoS because it is dying.
I don't see how that logically follows, so it's sure seems like wishful thinking on people's part. Or, just straight trolling.
HH was/isn't a replacement for 40K. It's been how many years they have both existed? The Old World will not replace AoS in all likelihood. That is like saying that apples will replace oranges, just because they are both fruits.
kodos wrote: I have seen it now on a lot of different places, where does the whole "AoS is dying" or "AoS makes less profit than Warhammer in the past" thing comes from?
People's imagination? "Wishful" thinking?
We just had a financial report and it showed no evidence of that as far as I remember.
It would be also good to know how WHFB minis do against AOS minis. Maybe GW sees that WHFB "armies" are still selling good and they want to sqeez a more out of them. Man what I would do for those numbers.
Man.... a lot of reaction to a little announcement. I think a greatest hits type line of major campaigns from the history of the Old World would be pretty intriguing to me, eg a War of Vengeance style boxed set with brand new Dwarf and High Elf sculpts for classic units that includes Heroes from that particular conflict ala what we saw with Betrayal at Calth and Burning of Prospero for HH. A bunch of those style boxes would be really interesting. I struggle to see how they could be priced in a way that wouldn’t leave most folks out in the cold tho.
Even so, I’m interested in more info.
Dread Master wrote: Man.... a lot of reaction to a little announcement. I think a greatest hits type line of major campaigns from the history of the Old World would be pretty intriguing to me, eg a War of Vengeance style boxed set with brand new Dwarf and High Elf sculpts for classic units that includes Heroes from that particular conflict ala what we saw with Betrayal at Calth and Burning of Prospero for HH. A bunch of those style boxes would be really interesting. I struggle to see how they could be priced in a way that wouldn’t leave most folks out in the cold tho.
Even so, I’m interested in more info.
This I'd be down for. Though last time FW tried this, we got Tamurkhan and an unreleased Battle for Blackfire Pass
herjan1987 wrote: It would be also good to know how WHFB minis do against AOS minis. Maybe GW sees that WHFB "armies" are still selling good and they want to sqeez a more out of them. Man what I would do for those numbers.
Yeah, unfortunately, there is no way we can or will ever know that.
My hypothesis would be that GW has noticed (it's hard to not) that the "generic" fantasy business is still alive and kicking, even growing, despite their up and abandoning it. In other words, that market has displayed a certain stability. We can only read the circumstantial evidence, but I really don't think the aim is to "compete" with each other, rather, they are related, but different games. HH has likely "taught" them that the two things really don't cannibalize each other.
I think broadly, you've got people that would only play AoS, people that would only play WHFB and people that would play both. In only making AoS, you literally lose 2/3rd of sales in the potential markets. Not exactly good business sense. I think the biggest key though is that there are likely people in GW who just like the old RnF, "realism" of the Old World and just would rather work on that.
herjan1987 wrote: It would be also good to know how WHFB minis do against AOS minis. Maybe GW sees that WHFB "armies" are still selling good and they want to sqeez a more out of them. Man what I would do for those numbers.
Yeah, unfortunately, there is no way we can or will ever know that.
My hypothesis would be that GW has noticed (it's hard to not) that the "generic" fantasy business is still alive and kicking, even growing, despite their up and abandoning it. In other words, that market has displayed a certain stability. We can only read the circumstantial evidence, but I really don't think the aim is to "compete" with each other, rather, they are related, but different games. HH has likely "taught" them that the two things really don't cannibalize each other.
I think broadly, you've got people that would only play AoS, people that would only play WHFB and people that would play both. In only making AoS, you literally lose 2/3rd of sales in the potential markets. Not exactly good business sense. I think the biggest key though is that there are likely people in GW who just like the old RnF, "realism" of the Old World and just would rather work on that.
Yeah, but there's a strong probability that this new game ends up stealing a lot of sales from AOS (market cannibalism). As I said before, I'm not sure the fantasy market is big enough to support two main games by GW (though I'd like to be wrong). And while it's true that HH didn't cannibalize 40k, the 2 games are a lot more similar, aesthetically speaking, than WHFB and AOS are. The last thing AOS need is more units that are cross compatible with the OW, since it would really hinder it ever becoming its own thing
But personally, I don't think it will be as supported as the 2 main games, and will mostly be a side game (a la Epic and Necromunda). GW put way too much effort in AOS, so I don't think it is in any danger, unless this new game simply dwarfs it in sales.
Yeah, but there's a strong probability that this new game ends up stealing a lot of sales from AOS (market cannibalism). As I said before, I'm not sure the fantasy market is big enough to support two main games by GW (though I'd like to be wrong). .
Given that there were quite a few fantasy skirmish games on the market before AoS came along, I think it is. If a returned WHFB steals sales from AoS, it will only be those players who were unhappy with the system change and adopted AoS due to lack of options. Ultimately, giving those players back the system that they actually want to be playing rather than having them settle for the game that's never going to be what they're looking for.
But really, AoS has more in common with 40K than with WHFB. There's room for both of them.
streetsamurai wrote: Yeah, but there's a strong probability that this new game ends up stealing a lot of sales from AOS (market cannibalism). As I said before, I'm not sure the fantasy market is big enough to support two main games by GW (though I'd like to be wrong). But still, maybe this won't be as supported as the 2 main games.
Well, maybe? Still, even if you leave AoS for The Old World, you are still in the "GW sphere." I still think that actual number ends up being relatively low. People who play AoS tend to be people who like that sort of game, I mean, it's tautological, that's why they are playing it. Are there really people who prefer RnF and are playing AoS, sort of, under protest? Just so they can stay in the GW sphere? Again, plausibly, but I don't think this is a large market segment in the grand scheme of things.
I think it is pretty likely this gets about as much support as HH does. Which, I think, is a steady, relatively small amount.
Are there really people who prefer RnF and are playing AoS, sort of, under protest? Just so they can stay in the GW sphere? Again, plausibly, but I don't think this is a large market segment in the grand scheme of things.
That would account for a sizable chunk of my city's AOS crowd yes.
streetsamurai wrote: Yeah, but there's a strong probability that this new game ends up stealing a lot of sales from AOS (market cannibalism). As I said before, I'm not sure the fantasy market is big enough to support two main games by GW (though I'd like to be wrong). But still, maybe this won't be as supported as the 2 main games.
Well, maybe? Still, even if you leave AoS for The Old World, you are still in the "GW sphere." I still think that actual number ends up being relatively low. People who play AoS tend to be people who like that sort of game, I mean, it's tautological, that's why they are playing it. Are there really people who prefer RnF and are playing AoS, sort of, under protest? Just so they can stay in the GW sphere? [b]Again, plausibly, but I don't think this is a large market segment in the grand scheme of things.[u]
I think it is pretty likely this gets about as much support as HH does. Which, I think, is a steady, relatively small amount.
1-Of course. But for GW, it's twice the production cost for the same number of sales. So it's a net negative
2-I think it's much higher than most here think. I might be wrong, but I think that we tend to over-estimate the number of players that are willing to go beyond GW offering. Even in a big city like Montreal, it is fairly hard to find players for non-GW games (bar warmahorde when it was popular)
Are there really people who prefer RnF and are playing AoS, sort of, under protest? Just so they can stay in the GW sphere? Again, plausibly, but I don't think this is a large market segment in the grand scheme of things.
That would account for a sizable chunk of my city's AOS crowd yes.
Out of curiosity why is your city not playing KoW, 9th age or Asoiaf?
Also a question for the most ardent Warhammer fantasy fans, would you be happy with Asoiaf style basing or does it have to be squares?
Also a question for the most ardent Warhammer fantasy fans, would you be happy with Asoiaf style basing or does it have to be squares?
I wouldn't be happy with the ASOIAF style. It looks ugly, and the miniatures are too spread out to look like a coherent formation. I also don't understand the point of it. If your game is designed for miniatures to rank up, then square bases make more sense.
Also a question for the most ardent Warhammer fantasy fans, would you be happy with Asoiaf style basing or does it have to be squares?
I wouldn't be happy with the ASOIAF style. It looks ugly, and the miniatures are too spread out to look like a coherent formation. I also don't understand the point of it. If your game is designed for miniatures to rank up, then square bases make more sense.
The point would be to let people use their collections in both games without having to rebase everything again.
Think of a chaos demon army. Right now they can be used pretty much unchanged in AOS and 40k. Having to buy a whole new army or do some funky stuff with magnets would be a major impediment to getting into RAF fantasy.
I was putting my WHFB minis on round bases long before the End Times, so I’d be happy. However, I wasn’t actually playing the game so much as supplementing my Black Library habit with models, lots and lots of models.
Do I think GW should use round bases? No. Give the players the square bases they crave and the rest of us will find some round bases somewhere. Or better yet, both. Then GW can put together all kinds of skirmish or board game supplements to sell the same minis.
I dont care if its round or square bases so long as there are rules to rank up, there are flanks and rear, and maneuver is more important than figuring out that maximizing on mortal wounds is the key to victory.
Are there really people who prefer RnF and are playing AoS, sort of, under protest? Just so they can stay in the GW sphere? Again, plausibly, but I don't think this is a large market segment in the grand scheme of things.
That would account for a sizable chunk of my city's AOS crowd yes.
Out of curiosity why is your city not playing KoW, 9th age or Asoiaf?
Honestly, why would they? I haven't gone looking for the last one, but I've never seen Kings or '9th' in the wild. Ever. Not played, and not (in the case of Kings) sold.
The point would be to let people use their collections in both games without having to rebase everything again.
Can you not use square bases in AoS?
Regardless, though, I very much doubt that cross-compatibility will be much of a thing. There is an even bigger divide, background wise, between the Old World and the Mortal Realms than there is between HH and 'modern' 40K. The only reason that classic WHFB units still exist in AoS is that they couldn't replace everything all at once, and that will become less of a thing over the years. There may be some units that can be used in both games, but it's not going to be a driving principle behind model design.
Think of a chaos demon army. Right now they can be used pretty much unchanged in AOS and 40k. Having to buy a whole new army or do some funky stuff with magnets would be a major impediment to getting into RAF fantasy.
Back when Daemons only came with square bases, they were also used unchanged in both WHFB and 40K. Some 40K players switched them to round bases, some didn't bother. And even when GW started packaging them with both, it was still not at all uncommon for people to use the square bases so they would be usable in both games.
Although it would also make some amount of sense for Daemons in WHFB to be skirmishers, and having skirmishers on round bases would be a nice way of differentiating them from other units...
Chaos daemons, Skaven, ogors, Seraphon, legions of Nagash, flesh eater courts, slaves to darkness and some versions of cities of sigmar could all be converted back to the old world with minimal changes. That's more cross compatibility than 40k and 30k have.
Technically you can use squares in AOS, but nobody does.
A lot of gw's modern fantasy scuplts have improved thanks to freedom that being on a round base gives the designers.
Honestly from an ease of entry standpoint doing two types of regiment bases would be a great solution.
They could do regiment bases with either square or round holes.
That way gw gets to continue to produce the kind of dynamic sculpts they have been doing so far.
It is cheaper for the player as a big regiment base might only need 25 minis rather than the 50 we had before.
It would reduce the issue of the division of the community as two players could play both AOS and old world back to simply by adding the regiment bases and changing a character or two.
If they did it this way, whether you are a 9th age player with square bases or an AOS player on rounds, you could get up and running in the new game simply by buying the rulebook and a handful of the new bases.
The more I think about it, the more I think this is the best way to go.
Some of the new armies designed specifically for AOS could fit really well into the OW (nighthaunt, the new orcs, Tzeentch cutltist and even the all the new elves bar the deepkin).
Chikout wrote: Chaos daemons, Skaven, ogors, Seraphon, legions of Nagash, flesh eater courts, slaves to darkness and some versions of cities of sigmar could all be converted back to the old world with minimal changes. That's more cross compatibility than 40k and 30k have.
It won't be, though. I would expect that Daemons and (maybe) Slaves to Darkness are the only things out of that list that will wind up looking the same, or using the same units in both games. Other armies may exist in both, but they'll look different, or be equipped differently, in the same way as Horus Heresy has different squad options to 40K, even though they both use Space Marines.
A lot of gw's modern fantasy scuplts have improved thanks to freedom that being on a round base gives the designers.
GW's modern fantasy sculpts have improved thanks to better equipment for creating them. Not having to rank up wasn't a factor in improving the sculpting, it just gave them more freedom with posing... which is irrelevant, really. The fact that rank and file models tend to be in boring poses isn't a sign of poor quality, it's a reflection of their purpose. They're supposed to rank up, so they should be designed to rank up.
The thing I didn't like about WHFB is that the units aren't individuals like they are in 40k. They're basically just a big square/rectangle monster with 20-40 wound counters sitting on top.
@Insaniak, you make a pretty good argument for round bases. I didn't remember how boring the old ranking minis were until you reminded me. Even worse than overly-expensive minis are overly-expensive, boring minis, especially when they are all in nearly the same boring pose.
I hope we get some kind of round base skirmish game or Shadespire knockoff.
Personally, I would love if the return of the old world is basically just a big "F-you" to Kirby and those who supported his choice to kill off fantasy because it didn't sell enough.
Because the massive turn around in GW finances wasn't enough already.
Yeah, but there's a strong probability that this new game ends up stealing a lot of sales from AOS (market cannibalism). As I said before, I'm not sure the fantasy market is big enough to support two main games by GW (though I'd like to be wrong). And while it's true that HH didn't cannibalize 40k, the 2 games are a lot more similar, aesthetically speaking, than WHFB and AOS are. The last thing AOS need is more units that are cross compatible with the OW, since it would really hinder it ever becoming its own thing
But personally, I don't think it will be as supported as the 2 main games, and will mostly be a side game (a la Epic and Necromunda). GW put way too much effort in AOS, so I don't think it is in any danger, unless this new game simply dwarfs it in sales.
It's similarity that steals sales. If you have 2 different aesthetically then it's appealing to different group. There are people who will buy aesthetic A but not B and vice versa. If GW only provides to A it loses sales from B and vice versa.
And OW and AOS cross compability is actually less than 40k and 30k. Lots of 30k stuff can be ported over to 40k no problem. Good luck with AOS and OW where aesthetics for new models is different and the AOS stuff don't even rank up that well so are pretty much literally unplayable in OW.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
insaniak wrote: GW's modern fantasy sculpts have improved thanks to better equipment for creating them. Not having to rank up wasn't a factor in improving the sculpting, it just gave them more freedom with posing... which is irrelevant, really. The fact that rank and file models tend to be in boring poses isn't a sign of poor quality, it's a reflection of their purpose. They're supposed to rank up, so they should be designed to rank up.
And as a result of ranking up they actually look like armies in war rather than ninja wannabe's in solo duels. AOS models don't create feel of army at all.
If you're thinking the Old World and AOS will be in competition with each other, that's wishful thinking as to how big this will be and how much support this will get. I think it's certain AOS will still be GW's headline fantasy game, make no mistake.
I think we can only expect a small specialist game type of support with the New Old world stuff. like HH/30k has seen in comparison to 40k.
I do think they will move AOS more fully away from the aesthetics of the old world until eventually it becomes wholly its own thing.
Maybe this is even GW's method of damage control to the backlash they'd face from taking even more of the old world aesthetic away from AOS...
But yeah I think separation is more likely than cross compatibility. Although as someone who more enjoys the converting and painting side of the hobby more variation to work with is a win for me and there is no reason why you couldn't convert something from either mini line to play an army in either game. although yeah bases and ranking place some limitations.
Are there really people who prefer RnF and are playing AoS, sort of, under protest? Just so they can stay in the GW sphere? Again, plausibly, but I don't think this is a large market segment in the grand scheme of things.
That would account for a sizable chunk of my city's AOS crowd yes.
Out of curiosity why is your city not playing KoW, 9th age or Asoiaf?
Also a question for the most ardent Warhammer fantasy fans, would you be happy with Asoiaf style basing or does it have to be squares?
KoW and 9th have no soul and don't feel like Warhammer. KoW has the added negative of that stupid "models don't matter, only the area they occupy" multibase garbage.
I really don't like how the ASoIaF bases look, too much blank space in the unit. It's the same reason I never use unit fillers like a lot of other Warhammer players did/do.
Carlovonsexron wrote: Personally, I would love if the return of the old world is basically just a big "F-you" to Kirby and those who supported his choice to kill off fantasy because it didn't sell enough.
Because the massive turn around in GW finances wasn't enough already.
Kirby is still there in GW, still making money off every single "f-u Kirby" purchase you will make of the "Return to Old World" line. I doubt he will weep hot tears of rage because he gets paid more per share if TOW turns up to be a huge seller.
Yeah, but there's a strong probability that this new game ends up stealing a lot of sales from AOS (market cannibalism). As I said before, I'm not sure the fantasy market is big enough to support two main games by GW (though I'd like to be wrong). And while it's true that HH didn't cannibalize 40k, the 2 games are a lot more similar, aesthetically speaking, than WHFB and AOS are. The last thing AOS need is more units that are cross compatible with the OW, since it would really hinder it ever becoming its own thing
But personally, I don't think it will be as supported as the 2 main games, and will mostly be a side game (a la Epic and Necromunda). GW put way too much effort in AOS, so I don't think it is in any danger, unless this new game simply dwarfs it in sales.
It's similarity that steals sales. If you have 2 different aesthetically then it's appealing to different group. There are people who will buy aesthetic A but not B and vice versa. If GW only provides to A it loses sales from B and vice versa.
And OW and AOS cross compability is actually less than 40k and 30k. Lots of 30k stuff can be ported over to 40k no problem. Good luck with AOS and OW where aesthetics for new models is different and the AOS stuff don't even rank up that well so are pretty much literally unplayable in OW.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
insaniak wrote: GW's modern fantasy sculpts have improved thanks to better equipment for creating them. Not having to rank up wasn't a factor in improving the sculpting, it just gave them more freedom with posing... which is irrelevant, really. The fact that rank and file models tend to be in boring poses isn't a sign of poor quality, it's a reflection of their purpose. They're supposed to rank up, so they should be designed to rank up.
And as a result of ranking up they actually look like armies in war rather than ninja wannabe's in solo duels. AOS models don't create feel of army at all.
I dont really agree with your first point. I think that for most new gw players, the big first decision is to either play a fantasy game or a sci-fi game. Im not so sure that having two different fantasy aesthetic will really bring a lot of new blood in. Will probably bring back the old timer who still haven't accepted the ow death though (like me ).
As for your second point, yeah i fully agree that 30k and 40k is more similar than aos and whfb. That actually what i said in my post
I dont really agree with your first point. I think that for most new gw players, the big first decision is to either play a fantasy game or a sci-fi game. Im not so sure that having two different fantasy aesthetic will really bring a lot of new blood in. Will probably bring back the old timer who still haven't accepted the ow death though (like me ).
Having the two games with different aesthetics serves to differentiate them. What helps increase the number of players buying in is them being two very different styles of game.
I don't get why people want to be so quick to poop on each others parade.
AoS is not going anywhere and that is fine.
If WHFB is coming back, that would be awesome too doesn't bother the AoS crowd but does give some life to the WHFB crowd.
Honestly, if all the support this game got was new rules, to refresh WHFB with some minor model support and square bases and such, I'd be very happy.
If this is a new game entirely to make our old armies unusable but still sell us on the old world, I'm right out again. I'm not paying them tons for more off shoot systems I'm not already invested in.
Though really why not let people be happy for the dream of what it might be ? I don't see how people being hopeful with a GW release being a bad thing, lord knows GW do plenty to make us bash them on their own. Notice how I'm being a voice of praise on this, if its what I hope it to be. For as long as that hope can remain let it live and it doesn't bring anyone else down for WHFB players to maybe, maybe, be given a bone.
KoW and 9th have no soul and don't feel like Warhammer. KoW has the added negative of that stupid "models don't matter, only the area they occupy" multibase garbage.
In the exact same way that warhammer was until you'd removed enough wound counters (figures) from all the ranks till the front row was reduced.
KoW just puts a dice/counter to keep track... whfb removed figures.
KoW and 9th have no soul and don't feel like Warhammer. KoW has the added negative of that stupid "models don't matter, only the area they occupy" multibase garbage.
In the exact same way that warhammer was until you'd removed enough wound counters (figures) from all the ranks till the front row was reduced.
KoW just puts a dice/counter to keep track... whfb removed figures.
It is more like that Warhammer was (design wise) a Mass-Skirmish game with square bases and fixed formations for grunts to support the Heros on the table
KoW, is designed as a Rank & File game, same as the non-skirmish historical games
Problem is just now that GW told them that it is a R&F game, and if they are now looking for other games they will find something different and don't like it, while they game type they actually searching for would be big/mass-skirmish
Same if the new game is more like Warmaster in 28mm, it would be a real R&F game not liked by the old Warhamer crowed
So the fantasy version of SAGA is more like the game people are searching for if they want a Warhammer replacemant than any R&F game out there
Problem is that the classic R&F barrier of entry for 12-year olds randomly walking into a GW store getting told "go buy and paint 50 mono-pose spearman" is just not sustainable.
KoW avoids this in and by itself by not caring as much for the individual spearmen that make up that basic block, letting you design cinematic regiment bases and focus on the heroes, etc.. Other recent R&F games such as the CMON Game of Thrones one or the FFG one with the weird click-bases all had much more "spaced out" miniatures taking up more space on the bases.
Also, the basic premise of AoS (and 40K starters such as First Strike) allowing those super-new-to-the-hobby-people to just pick up a box of Orks/Elves/Whatever and a Hero and start throwing down is still viable for the "main game".
Selling a Warhammer Rank & File game not as a "this is a main-game-foundational-pillar-for-our-retail-business" but more along the line of Adeptus Titanicus or Necromunda or so, marketed almost exclusively to people already in the hobby and possibly with some airbrushing, contrast-paint, etc.. experience before going into such a hobby project is IMO an entirely different beast from the business perspective.
And even than, assuming some AoS miniatures might be usable for the new-old-Warhammer, perhaps the new Chaos Warriors, it's easy to see how those would take up maybe the space of 4 of the old Chaos Warriors with more varied, dynamic and "cinematic" poses, but less miniatures for the equivalent regimental base size.
They probably should have rules for really old-school mass-spearmen on 25mm squares, both for people that still have those old armies and perhaps as one flavour of new-old-Warhammer for people who really love that style, but I doubt it willl be necessary to play that style in the new R&F Warhammer nor will it be something the average GW store manager will have to worry about at all for 99.9% of their customers.
KoW and 9th have no soul and don't feel like Warhammer. KoW has the added negative of that stupid "models don't matter, only the area they occupy" multibase garbage.
In the exact same way that warhammer was until you'd removed enough wound counters (figures) from all the ranks till the front row was reduced.
KoW just puts a dice/counter to keep track... whfb removed figures.
And those are not the same thing.
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
As to the "boring" figures - I'll take a "boring" figure designed to be ranked up and look good in its block over most of the ridiculously over-designed "exciting" models you see these days posed mid-backflip attached to the base by a single toe or ridiculously large streamers of fabric/paper/mystical jujumagumbo.
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
I can understand that, but for me Warhammer never felt like commanding an army.
Individual model mechanics, strong heroes and some hints in the rulebook about immersion that 1 model represents a lot of soldiers never really felt right.
For me the game feels more like a small skirmish battle with 2 groups of soldiers clashing together, and never like I command an army
(specially if refered to historcal warfare, were the amount of casualties was less important the bigger the fight was and if armies clasehd it did not matter if single soldiers died)
for me, Kings of War feels more like fighting with armies than Warhammer ever did
GW had one game that tried simulated commanding an army. Warmaster is the only time they tried incorporating (fairly decently) the fog of war mechanics that plagued IRL commanders till radio was invented. So naturally the game died, largely because people hated that aspect of not having 100% god-like control of your army.
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
WFB was one of the only block games I've ever seen that had individual casualty removal. It is nearly unknown in any other system both historical and fantasy.
Again GW doesn't understand scale so their mass fantasy block game introduced elements of skirmish style casualty removal to complicate their system. Players also don't understand the scale they are playing at. Instead of viewing each block as units of 500/1000/10000 fighters or whatever as in most block systems they viewed each miniature on a 1 to 1 basis. That turned the 'large armies' they were supposedly playing with into little more than small scale skirmish forces using block formations.
Scale and not defining scale properly and using rules that fit the defined scale is an issue that dogs all of GWs 28mm systems.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cronch wrote: GW had one game that tried simulated commanding an army. Warmaster is the only time they tried incorporating (fairly decently) the fog of war mechanics that plagued IRL commanders till radio was invented. So naturally the game died, largely because people hated that aspect of not having 100% god-like control of your army.
The first few editions of Epic also got scaling right. Imagine playing epic and removing tiny space marines from their multibases for casualty removal. Sounds mad but that is effectively what happened in WFB.
KoW and 9th have no soul and don't feel like Warhammer. KoW has the added negative of that stupid "models don't matter, only the area they occupy" multibase garbage.
In the exact same way that warhammer was until you'd removed enough wound counters (figures) from all the ranks till the front row was reduced.
KoW just puts a dice/counter to keep track... whfb removed figures.
And those are not the same thing.
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
As to the "boring" figures - I'll take a "boring" figure designed to be ranked up and look good in its block over most of the ridiculously over-designed "exciting" models you see these days posed mid-backflip attached to the base by a single toe or ridiculously large streamers of fabric/paper/mystical jujumagumbo.
I dont understand how fiddling with individual miniatures helps to facilitate the experience of commanding an army, that sounds more like a skirmish game mechanic to me.
Also, Having a die or wound marker next to a unit is not exactly "swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits"
Again GW doesn't understand scale so their mass fantasy block game introduced elements of skirmish style casualty removal to complicate their system.
To my understanding, WFB evolved out of skirmish/RPG-like rules, and "gained weight" in models as editions grew, so they introduced army mechanics to a skirmish game, not the other way round.
I am personally fine with them using models like wounds, and even still having little wound markers for the units with multiple. We had to do that for old fantasy anyway.
And I think fantasy did fine at a representation of the rank combat. Even liked the scale it was at for it for the most part.
The issue mostly come down to rules, hero’s and lord a bit too heroic and take to much away from the units themselves far to often.
Again GW doesn't understand scale so their mass fantasy block game introduced elements of skirmish style casualty removal to complicate their system.
To my understanding, WFB evolved out of skirmish/RPG-like rules, and "gained weight" in models as editions grew, so they introduced army mechanics to a skirmish game, not the other way round.
Reaper if I remember was the skirmish game for fantasy - it came out a year or two before WFB - which was always a mass battle system since its inception - only the number of miniatures needed for each block changed with editions.
The issue mostly come down to rules, hero’s and lord a bit too heroic and take to much away from the units themselves far to often.
That is again a scaling issue. If the blocks represent a 1v1 miniature to fighter ratio character rules make good sense. If blocks represent any other ratio (which in a mass combat game they do) they make very little sense.
In other block games such leader characters might have no utility outside command and control (which is a vital part of gameplay) - see Hail Caesar or Black Powder for recent generation block game examples.
GW have spent decades stripping command and control and morale out of their games. This means there's little for characters to do but be powerful fighting units themselves. Their core function on the battlefield is redundant.
Out of curiosity why is your city not playing KoW, 9th age or Asoiaf?
Also a question for the most ardent Warhammer fantasy fans, would you be happy with Asoiaf style basing or does it have to be squares?
Thats a great question! I would love a whole topic dedicated to that to be honest.
9th Age is a fan system. Can't get people to touch fan systems. Not "official". Kings of War - no idea why we can't get that started. We've tried three times. WHFB - people come out of the woodwork.
Its a very very frustrating thing, but really as far as my city goes, people cannot be assed to play anything that is not GW for whatever reason that may be to them. Often times its the self dooming cycle of "i want to play a game with a lot of players, but kings of war only has a few players, so I won't play it even though if I did it would have more players".
The caveat has been Conquest. We have 9 players for that right now and we have another 9 or 10 waiting on the nords and dweghom or the full lineup to be released.
Potentially roughly 20 people. Our AOS crowd is 12-15, so Conquest having 20 people would be major.
Our WHFB crowd had 55 up until 2015 when it was killed, for reference.
Sunny Side Up wrote:Problem is that the classic R&F barrier of entry for 12-year olds randomly walking into a GW store getting told "go buy and paint 50 mono-pose spearman" is just not sustainable.
KoW avoids this in and by itself by not caring as much for the individual spearmen that make up that basic block, letting you design cinematic regiment bases and focus on the heroes, etc.. Other recent R&F games such as the CMON Game of Thrones one or the FFG one with the weird click-bases all had much more "spaced out" miniatures taking up more space on the bases.
Also, the basic premise of AoS (and 40K starters such as First Strike) allowing those super-new-to-the-hobby-people to just pick up a box of Orks/Elves/Whatever and a Hero and start throwing down is still viable for the "main game".
Selling a Warhammer Rank & File game not as a "this is a main-game-foundational-pillar-for-our-retail-business" but more along the line of Adeptus Titanicus or Necromunda or so, marketed almost exclusively to people already in the hobby and possibly with some airbrushing, contrast-paint, etc.. experience before going into such a hobby project is IMO an entirely different beast from the business perspective.
And even than, assuming some AoS miniatures might be usable for the new-old-Warhammer, perhaps the new Chaos Warriors, it's easy to see how those would take up maybe the space of 4 of the old Chaos Warriors with more varied, dynamic and "cinematic" poses, but less miniatures for the equivalent regimental base size.
They probably should have rules for really old-school mass-spearmen on 25mm squares, both for people that still have those old armies and perhaps as one flavour of new-old-Warhammer for people who really love that style, but I doubt it willl be necessary to play that style in the new R&F Warhammer nor will it be something the average GW store manager will have to worry about at all for 99.9% of their customers.
Battalion box sets.
Remember those? $90 US got you three core regiments and a war machine which typically booked in at somewhere beetween 600 and 700 points. That's IF you didn't decide to do a character model up from those kits. It wouldn't take much to get to the same level currently, and it would give fierce competition for GW's current rivals in the market.
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
Double emphasis this and exalted!! Thats exactly my primary issue with AOS. Its board gamey. It feels like playing a board game. It is not immersive to me at all or what I want, which is to feel like I'm commanding a fantasy army. Not min/maxing mortal wounds and forking out $800 more in models to summon so I can beat you because I have 4000 points to your 2000.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cronch wrote: GW had one game that tried simulated commanding an army. Warmaster is the only time they tried incorporating (fairly decently) the fog of war mechanics that plagued IRL commanders till radio was invented. So naturally the game died, largely because people hated that aspect of not having 100% god-like control of your army.
Warmaster died for a couple reasons. The command phase you speak of was for sure one of them. The other was the scale. People didn't want to dick around with that tiny scale and didn't want to have to make special terrain just for warmaster when they already had a bunch of terrain for warhammer.
It was also not marketed well at all, and suffered the same fate as any game like kings of war in my area... "not enough people to play with, so not bothering". Especially when you have 40k running amuk where we have like 250 registered players, so you can get a game any day of the week practically any time of day. Warmaster had no official tournament scene either. People love them some professional tournament scenes. You have none of that, you will likely have a game on life support. All of those factors wrapped up into why it failed.
The command phase just being one of them, I'll point out that every week I am down at the shop there are 3-4 tables of 40k minimum playing, and there is always bitching about how the rules suck, but they play anyway. I think if warmaster had been marketed properly and supported with ESPN Ocho tournament endorsements, that it would have lasted a lot longer than it did.
Overall, I'm hoping they don't tinker too much with it.
The genuine changes needed to 8th aren't particularly large. And the base mechanics, including Static Combat Res (ranks, banner etc) are key to knowing how to win a game.
For instance. Someone mentioned earlier that shooty units felt a bit underwhelming. It's true few were properly killy. And it was often a struggle to inflict a Panic Test through 25% casualties.
But, their true use (so far as I'm concerned) was to trim off ranks here and there. For instance, a 25 strong unit, deployed 5x5 had an 'ablative' rank. It never fought, but it did maintain your Static Combat Res until it'd suffered 6 casualties.
Bowfire etc was the very dab for bagging said casualties - giving you combat units an easier time when the time came. Slot an additional five, and suddenly the hypothetical unit's combat prowess is severely hampered.
So I feel the game needs to retain that. And if you want to wipe stuff out at range, that's where your Magic Missiles and Artillery come in.
The main trick they need to get right? As others have said, it's scaling. They need to tackle the perception that a game, bare minimum, needs to be 2,000 points or more, and involved 100+ models that, ultimately, don't do anything in the game than look pretty before being removed. To take the following quote out of context (apologies to the poster)
A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
The rear ranks were essentially exactly that. Wound Counters, Markers and Doodads and Wotsits. At least in later incarnation.
Part of that could be changing up how a regiment can be deployed. Consider Napoleonic warfare. Three basic fomations. Line, Square and Column. Each had benefits and drawbacks, depending on the situation and what was attacking.
Something like that could easily be adapted into WHFB. And would make reforming your units an actual tactic, instead of something you did when you'd managed to stuff up your deployment.
Heck, tie it into characters and Initiative. If there's a Hero/Lord (non-Wizard*) in the regiment, you can issue reform orders, and do so.
No such Hero/Lord (non-Wizard), roll initiative before you can do it.
Having such a reform count as your unit's movement for the turn
This is of course just me throwing ideas out there - but it would add even more depth and challenge to getting properly good at the game.
I would rather prefer a remake of 6th/7th edition than 8th edition. Magic, random charge distances, pre-measuring, terrain not slowing down units etc. just sucked in 8th.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Otherwise I am super hyped about a new edition of WHFB!
I played a lot of tournaments in 6th and 7th.
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
I can understand that, but for me Warhammer never felt like commanding an army.
Individual model mechanics, strong heroes and some hints in the rulebook about immersion that 1 model represents a lot of soldiers never really felt right.
For me the game feels more like a small skirmish battle with 2 groups of soldiers clashing together, and never like I command an army
(specially if refered to historcal warfare, were the amount of casualties was less important the bigger the fight was and if armies clasehd it did not matter if single soldiers died)
for me, Kings of War feels more like fighting with armies than Warhammer ever did
So the problem you have is a ludicrous self-imposed semantic one, gotcha.
Replace the word "army" with the phrase "several groups of soldiers fighting in formation".
The size of the forces has no bearing on whether or not it's a rank & flank game, and for the size of forces depicted in this particular rank & flank game individual casualty removal feels more "real" than littering the board with counters and markers and wound dice.
To me, Kings of War feels much less "real" because the scale of the models suggests the forces are of the same size as WHFB, but the gameplay mechanics treat them as if you're playing a ~6mm historical system. If I wanted that experience, I'd be playing a ~6mm historical system.
6th-7th edition is also my favourite. If only they could make cavalry a little less powerfull and infantry a little more usefull without the absurdity of 8th.
5th and herohammer was something I greatly dislike. I know Fantasy has always had a ton of very powerfull heroes but... I prefer an equilibrium between all parts of an army. Greenskins can't really play hero hammer. Your slow orcs die before hitting and goblins are goblins.
I have to agree that they need to review editions before releasing it.
The three things I felt help kill WHFB was..
The best units where the most expensive of a army. - Example, the witch elves box set at the time was one of the highest unit boxes they released and you needed multiples to make a strong unit.
Model count was crazy high - To get into the game you needed to drop hundreds of dollars and hope you selected a good force. But the next new shiny unit would be released and need to go back to the store.
GW started making every army the same - Not every army needs cavalry or a cannon type war machine, I liked how skaven had giant units that would run off at their first chance.
Don't get me wrong I am very happy with the announcement, but they need to consider what was the good and bad of the previous editions.
I am glad I held out and never converted bases..
GW started making every army the same - Not every army needs cavalry or a cannon type war machine, I liked how skaven had giant units that would run off at their first chance.
This is a good point. As much as I love the design of Demigrypth knights or things like that, they clearly made factions less charactefull.
At the same time, a Faction is more defined by what it doesn't has (Dwarfs without monsters or cavalry or magic) than by what they have (Nothing dwarfs had was unique to them). The problem is... you can't sustain a game keeping armies like that. Unless you release new armies all the time, and even then, you'll end up without design space for making armies with their unique feel. But you can't keep releasing new units and heroes for an army without making old units redundant or filling voids in the army line up.
The other problem is players HATE being negated options. Yeah maybe in this forum we are all happy with having less options because is better for the gameplay but go ask regular players (Not now of course, years ago, in 2012 for example). Everybody wanted things for their army they didn'd had. Dwarf goat cavalry, Vampire Counts or Chaos Warriors shooting, etc...
I don't get why this is hard for counter-fans to understand - people who like the WHFB style like the experience to feel as much as possible like you're commanding an army, not playing a game. A unit taking casualties and losing models fits that desire, swarming the board with wound counters and markers and doodads and wotsits does not.
I can understand that, but for me Warhammer never felt like commanding an army.
Individual model mechanics, strong heroes and some hints in the rulebook about immersion that 1 model represents a lot of soldiers never really felt right.
For me the game feels more like a small skirmish battle with 2 groups of soldiers clashing together, and never like I command an army
(specially if refered to historcal warfare, were the amount of casualties was less important the bigger the fight was and if armies clasehd it did not matter if single soldiers died)
for me, Kings of War feels more like fighting with armies than Warhammer ever did
So the problem you have is a ludicrous self-imposed semantic one, gotcha.
Replace the word "army" with the phrase "several groups of soldiers fighting in formation".
The size of the forces has no bearing on whether or not it's a rank & flank game, and for the size of forces depicted in this particular rank & flank game individual casualty removal feels more "real" than littering the board with counters and markers and wound dice.
To me, Kings of War feels much less "real" because the scale of the models suggests the forces are of the same size as WHFB, but the gameplay mechanics treat them as if you're playing a ~6mm historical system. If I wanted that experience, I'd be playing a ~6mm historical system.
Casualty removal is unknown in most rank and flank (block) games. What is been tracked by a 'casualty' marker is a mix of casualties and morale factors. In many Rn'F games 'casualties' can be gained back by a unit using the games morale system. Huge units of untrained fighters can have a low 'casualty' rating due to low morale. 'Casualties' then effect stuff like ability to charge or shoot effectively because it is in effect tracking morale rather then fighters lost.
Like I said above WFB is a block game that uses a skirmish mechanic for tracking casualties. In the main over the last few editions (not as bad as 40K) it dumbed down morale to nearly nothing - one of the major factors in any kind of Rn'F game.
What size are the forces in WFB? 1v1 ratio? If so it was always a skirmish game with formations like Saga.
It is in fact a mass combat block game where one miniature at 28mm could represent dozens if not hundreds of fighters. See historicals where this scaling is actually described at the start of most rule books as it is more important for recreating real historical battles.
Cronch wrote: GW had one game that tried simulated commanding an army. Warmaster is the only time they tried incorporating (fairly decently) the fog of war mechanics that plagued IRL commanders till radio was invented. So naturally the game died, largely because people hated that aspect of not having 100% god-like control of your army.
It was a really good game, though. It evolved into the historical game Hail Caesar https://us-store.warlordgames.com/collections/hail-caesar by Warlord Games. That game doesn't have an official Fantasy version or fantasy army lists, though some people have come up with their own.
It also heavily (I mean, very heavily) inspired the Blitzkrieg/FutureWar/etc. Commander series of games, not sure if they're still in publication but they were also very solid.
Cronch wrote: It also heavily (I mean, very heavily) inspired the Blitzkrieg/FutureWar/etc. Commander series of games, not sure if they're still in publication but they were also very solid.
Not surprising. It was developed by top game design talent that had decades of experience and knew how to scale their games and how to simulate command and control and morale factors properly.
The main GW systems since they lost a lot of the named talent seem to be throwing stuff on top of old systems designed by these guys in a haphazard manner with no real design philosophy tying the whole lot together.
So the problem you have is a ludicrous self-imposed semantic one, gotcha.
Replace the word "army" with the phrase "several groups of soldiers fighting in formation".
If I want a game with "Armies" fighting each others, using a system with 50 models per side is not what I am looking for
It represents a Skirmish not a Battle
Just because the models moves in Blocks does not make it an Army
To me, Kings of War feels much less "real" because the scale of the models suggests the forces are of the same size as WHFB, but the gameplay mechanics treat them as if you're playing a ~6mm historical system. If I wanted that experience, I'd be playing a ~6mm historical system.
the number of the models suggest it be the same size as Warhammer was, but the look on the table (more blocks of Infanterie/Cavalry then single Heroes or Monsters) and the mechanics of the game make it feel more of an army
If 15 or 6mm is your preferred size for battles with armies, it is fine, but if searching for Rank&File Battles with Army sized forces, you will always get similar as KoW outside the main GW games (and the most similar non-GW game to Warhammer is SAGA)
We use circular bases and movement trays for playing 4th and 5th edition and it works just fine. You just use dice to mark number of wounds on the unit. If you want to change formation you grab a new tray. Even for wrap around and templates you just need to do a tiny bit of math to figure out how many attacks you would have. Once you have played a game or two it all becomes second nature and it actually is way faster than doodling around with individual models. So those that are worried about losing something or circlular bases with movement trays not work -- I encourage you to try it out because it works really really well.
The main benefit is then you can base for AoS but play with the same models for KoW or any of the old warhammer editions and also SAGA age of magic. Its a fantastic compromise.
Astmeister wrote: I never understood the problem with square bases.
You do not have to move them individually. Instead you can have regiment trays and magnet bases.
Magnetic flat bases with movement trays are almost a must with older armies. Absolute quality of life change
Stevefamine wrote: Magnetic flat bases with movement trays are almost a must with older armies. Absolute quality of life change
Yeah, definitely was a game-changer for me. I was rather upset, when I pulled my stuff out from storage a couple years ago, to discover the GF9 had quit making their magnetic bases. The price was reasonable to me and the ease of use was perfect for me.
Cronch wrote: GW had one game that tried simulated commanding an army. Warmaster is the only time they tried incorporating (fairly decently) the fog of war mechanics that plagued IRL commanders till radio was invented. So naturally the game died, largely because people hated that aspect of not having 100% god-like control of your army.
It was a really good game, though. It evolved into the historical game Hail Caesar https://us-store.warlordgames.com/collections/hail-caesar by Warlord Games. That game doesn't have an official Fantasy version or fantasy army lists, though some people have come up with their own.
There's currently an updated fan version that's helping to bring some new life into the game: Warmaster Revolution. It includes some rules from Warmaster Ancients that help restrict some of the gamebreaking elements that were in the original version of the Fantasy rules, like units only getting orders three times in a turn, only a single round of pursuit allowed after the initial combat, and half moves for the first failed order given by a command unit.
overtyrant wrote: I always felt KoW would've been more suitable at Warmaster scale, then the not removal of individual 'bases' wouldn't of been as bad
You would have the same complaint about every other Rn'F 28mm game in the market as well then.
Are smaller scales more suitable for Rn'F? Undoubtedly yes.
Do players care? No.
28mm provides the spectacle many players want.
Scale of miniatures is a complete non-issue in a Rn'F game in most cases. The block holds the stats. The scale decides the size of the block on the field. Hence 'block' games. Wargames have been played with painted blocks of wood decades before minis were thought of.
The big drawback to large scale rank and flank is the size of the board needed. The blocks are bigger so the ground scale increases as well. What works great on a 6x4 in 6mm needs three times that in 20/28mm - even then you are compressing the ground scale. It's less of an issue with fantasy/science fiction than with historicals.
I play American War of Independence at 28mm. Small scale stuff compared to Napoleonics or American Civil War and the table sizes are already getting out of hand. So hats off to the players who can play Rn'F at big scale. It takes some commitment.
I'm ready to go.
art 2 gets here!
mar" posts or some variation thereof being in half the posts. WFB grogs hate 
they had to wade through before they realised enough people wanted this. 
