Altruizine wrote: It's super funny to insist that GW has releases planned out on a 10 year horizon when the death of WHFB/debut of AoS occurred 9 years ago.
Mainly because he's wrong (except with regard to the speed at which GW usually develops things) because he's extrapolating based on a narrow view from his experience. Another poster already pointed that out many pages ago, businesses exist that operate with far more capability to react and follow emergent strategies in shorter time frames.
I'm not wrong though. The presence of a 10 year roadmap doesn't preclude any flexibility or lock GW into a plan of action, but generally speaking if it's not in your 10 year plan and was determined to be out of scope for your project when you were boundary-setting, then something extraordinary needs to happen for you to double back on that decision. You set it out of bounds for a reason, whereas if it was a "nice to have" that you didn't have budget for but wanted to get to eventually it'd be sitting in the lower end of your long term product backlog and your communication to your customers would probably be more open-ended rather than consistent statements trying to quash any hope.
AoS definitely had a 10 year roadmap when it launched, it certainly had a 5 year plan and a 3 year backlog. The development of idoneth deepkin and fyreslayers would have begun before AoS ever released in order to meet the release timeline, which means that financial planning needed to be done before any associated revenuevstreams were established. AoS was being worked on as early as 2011, so you're looking at around 7 years worth of planning and execution to get there. Then you look at all the stuff that was basically foreshadowed from the get-go - when the game launched slaanesh was nowhere to be seen and didn't appear until 2021. Did the design studio have that planned out somewhere around 2011? Most probably, yes. Maybe not in super exact detail but they probably had a pretty solid initial roadmap that included making a big deal about returning skaanesh to the setting. They certainly didn't cut slaanesh from the setting with no plan or intention to bring them back.
That's not to say that things didn't change - I very much doubt that it was their original plan to split up ogors into like 5 distinct factions only to merge them together later, but cutting and merging scope is a lot easier than adding scope.
I wouldn't call oblique references to something hitting like a rampaging carnosaur from the jungles of lustria or references to the vampire wars to be "all over the narrative". They are window dressing. They aren't part of the narrative, they are background detail to flesh out the world. Same as things like the Interex, Megarachnids, Hrud, Laer, Jorgall, rak'gol, etc. or hell even orks and eldar are in Horus Heresy. How many of those have rules in HH again? None? Yeah.
Oh dear...
Chaos Ogres - you know Ogres - the legacy army - they have Rules in Warriors of Chaos armies..... is that window dressing?
Hellcannon - now what is its crew - oh yeah Chaos Dwarfs....they seem to have rules in Warriors of Chaos
That's not the same thing. You do know that's not the same thing, right? I'm talking about factions, you're talking about races.
Hellebore wrote: oof, ethereal BSB general Slann is going to be rough.
Only really as rough as they've ever been. Although in TOW they have the advantage of being able to shunt wounds into nearby Temple Guards - couldn't do that before as they couldn't join the unit for protection.
what previous edition did they allow a slann to become ethereal?
EDIT: Ok i see the 'immune to non magic' rule in the 7th ed army book, released in 2009. 8th was released in 2010 and it killed my interest in WFB, so I pretty much never encountered that ability.
Once the supported factions all have their initial (re)release of models with Arcane Journals, which is unlikely to take more than a couple of years at most, what’s next?
Potential options:
Campaign / narrative releases: with a limited selection of new and/or updated models.
Upgrading Arcane Journals to full Army books: seems unlikely for a specialist game.
Expansions: e.g. Kislev / Cathay / Chaos Demons.
2nd edition: restart the cycle of releases with more updated models. Potential for additional factions to be added, and/or scope to be changed
Dropping support: no more active development.
Even if there was a firm “10 year plan” (there obviously isn’t) so many factors can change, not least both the people involved in design, and the people in leadership roles making high level decisions. We can only guess what this game will look like in a decade, it’s delusional to pretend otherwise.
Checked out the pdfs, generally happy- they haven’t gutted too many rosters (a bit sad about the lack of doomrocket and master moulder)
But I wonder if chaos daemons not having any allies is a “typo”? I was hoping to take Slaanesh daemons as allies for my slaaneshy warriors of chaos - am I out of luck?
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: Checked out the pdfs, generally happy- they haven’t gutted too many rosters (a bit sad about the lack of doomrocket and master moulder)
But I wonder if chaos daemons not having any allies is a “typo”? I was hoping to take Slaanesh daemons as allies for my slaaneshy warriors of chaos - am I out of luck?
Given that every core faction has 3 allies and every legacy faction only has 1 (and Daemons none) this could be an avenue where they intentionally made Legacy less appealing.
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: Checked out the pdfs, generally happy- they haven’t gutted too many rosters (a bit sad about the lack of doomrocket and master moulder)
But I wonder if chaos daemons not having any allies is a “typo”? I was hoping to take Slaanesh daemons as allies for my slaaneshy warriors of chaos - am I out of luck?
I feel like there are two really obvious typos - the ally/mercenary box for Deamons got accidentally missed off and the base size for the Black Coach doesn't cover the newer model.
That's not bad for a GW release! But it will be a shame if the try and stick to this "never updating" line and don't fix them.
Upgrading Arcane Journals to full Army books: seems unlikely for a specialist game.
And yet Necromunda did it.
Granted its somewhat messy because they've also done a bunch of expansion books and things like hired help get scatter shot between all the books, but they have done it there.
I figure if Old World sells well enough then Arcane Journals becoming full army books is very likely. Right now Old World is in a growth phase so, within GW's structure, they want to pull down barriers of entry. Hence single combined volumes for a bunch of armies at once. They did the same thing when they had a huge reboot of 40K a few editions ago with compendiums and they did the same thing with the start of AoS with the Grand Alliance books.
It's basically one of GW's go-to methods for a new game to bundle armies into fewer books. Once the game is out, established and people have armies and collections then they are in the system. At that point for GW it becomes more profitable and even an asked thing by many to have separate books for each army "I don't want to lug thus massive book to every game, I just want one for the army I'm playing."
It also means that there's potentially more room in a single book for GW to:
Expand armies with more options
Add new layers of rules such as campaign rules
Add more lore/artwork/hobby content specific to one army.
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: Checked out the pdfs, generally happy- they haven’t gutted too many rosters (a bit sad about the lack of doomrocket and master moulder)
But I wonder if chaos daemons not having any allies is a “typo”? I was hoping to take Slaanesh daemons as allies for my slaaneshy warriors of chaos - am I out of luck?
I feel like there are two really obvious typos - the ally/mercenary box for Deamons got accidentally missed off and the base size for the Black Coach doesn't cover the newer model.
That's not bad for a GW release! But it will be a shame if the try and stick to this "never updating" line and don't fix them.
Hmm, hope it’s just a gw style mistake then and not the case of what lord_blackfang has suspected.
Would be quite dumb for all things chaos not to have super bff symbiosis (especially when chaos is in the name).
Are there any mentions of legacy armies in the allies sections of supported factions?
Otherwise I’ll have to use daemonettes as marauders, seekers as marauder horsemen and fiends as spawn or something.. I don’t mind that, as I like those models far better, than their proper representation, but It would be even better for variety if I could just have them as appropriate allied units. And less confusing for opponents, I suppose.
At least the rumour of a last minute Legacy nerf was horsegak. Mountain published his Lizardmen review the second the pdfs went up and the only difference between his preview version and the final was the Slann and Temple Guard went from 0-1 per 2000 pts to 0-1 ever.
Hmm, hope it’s just a gw style mistake then and not the case of what lord_blackfang has suspected.
Would be quite dumb for all things chaos not to have super bff symbiosis (especially when chaos is in the name).
Are there any mentions of legacy armies in the allies sections of supported factions?
the legacy faction allies look more like to cover certain theme lists of the old days rather than any bff situation in general
like Khemri and Vampires make no sense unless it is for Arkhans special force, DE and Daemons for the Slaanesh Cult of old times etc.
Really should have gotten a Allies chart ala MESBG / HH rather than doing it piecemeal like this but I suspect they didn't want any mention of Legacy factions in Core army books.
So every grand army list has the 20% points for mercenaries options, but don't list any allowed mercenaries. Some of the armies of infamy shown so far list mercenaries, but it's at most one or two units.
Are the grand armies allowing 20% mercs but deliberately not allowing units to say something like "this is where you could take mercs, but you don't have any options to do so" or are we waiting for some separate document to tell us who can take what mercs?
I'm not wrong though. The presence of a 10 year roadmap doesn't preclude any flexibility or lock GW into a plan of action, but generally speaking if it's not in your 10 year plan and was determined to be out of scope for your project when you were boundary-setting, then something extraordinary needs to happen for you to double back on that decision. You set it out of bounds for a reason, whereas if it was a "nice to have" that you didn't have budget for but wanted to get to eventually it'd be sitting in the lower end of your long term product backlog and your communication to your customers would probably be more open-ended rather than consistent statements trying to quash any hope.
So. You say they have 10 year roadmap.
At was releatea 2018.
So according to you safe to say they had legions mapped out then.
They said then no plan to return game with infantry.
You keep proving they haven't said anything yet that actually denies return of say skaven in 2029.
Anybody who claims to know for sure what gw will or will not is a) extremely arrogant b) extremely wrong.
Gw doesn't tell far what they come and will deny plans to release something if asked up to moment they announce it.
From previous patterns we can tell 40k 11th likely coming 2026 but anybody claiming to know for sure is lying.
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: Checked out the pdfs, generally happy- they haven’t gutted too many rosters (a bit sad about the lack of doomrocket and master moulder)
But I wonder if chaos daemons not having any allies is a “typo”? I was hoping to take Slaanesh daemons as allies for my slaaneshy warriors of chaos - am I out of luck?
Given that every core faction has 3 allies and every legacy faction only has 1 (and Daemons none) this could be an avenue where they intentionally made Legacy less appealing.
I feel like most people is gonna straight up ignore that.
Darkial wrote: Are the Skavens missing the slaves or how was it in 8th?
No Slaves in TOW.
Tbh, they seem to have gone mega heavy on NMNR for Legacy Factions. There’s rules for nearly everything that used to have a model, but loads of things that used to be options but didn’t have a model have been removed. Frustrating, and a very different approach from the core factions.
Though daemons do seem to have gained their AoS herald variants which is interesting.
I always felt that with Old World things that had options but not models were things GW wanted to make at some point. As these Legacy armies aren't going to get invested in (and if they are its 5-10 years away for Old World investment) it makes sense to cut down a bunch of things that GW can't even put on "Made to Order" let alone never produced for people to get hold of.
Then again, if GW won't produce minis for the legacy armies at all, why not retain the options? Besides, weren't the clanrats (the most recent ones, which are still available for AoS) also meant to be used for the slaves anyway? I seem to recall several of the models have shackles or somesuch. The only thing missing from the box are slings, which I think were a metal (?) upgrade available online for a while. But then, isn't the same true for Chaos warrior halberds, which are still an option?
Besides, weren't the clanrats (the most recent ones, which are still available for AoS) also meant to be used for the slaves anyway? I seem to recall several of the models have shackles or somesuch.
I no longer have the kit but remember that exactly two of them had shackles. Still I think you are correct, and the box was meant to be used by both.
MaxT wrote: It’ll be future proofing I expect for when they do bring out some mercs.
Yep agree most likely future proofing since it doesn't force them into a timeline this way, they can release when able. And if sales for TOW make sense to do so.
Besides, weren't the clanrats (the most recent ones, which are still available for AoS) also meant to be used for the slaves anyway? I seem to recall several of the models have shackles or somesuch.
I no longer have the kit but remember that exactly two of them had shackles. Still I think you are correct, and the box was meant to be used by both.
About half of the models had light or no armor, and they other half had slightly heavier armor. You could use the non-armored as slaves & armored as clanrats. Or you could just lump them all together as clanrats. I've still got 40 or 50 of them around somewhere.
There wasn't (isn't) any slings option, but IIRC the last army book I had slaves came with hand weapons, and slings were extra cost add-on. So just build them with hand weapons and say you bought slings.
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Then again, if GW won't produce minis for the legacy armies at all, why not retain the options?
Because if those options don't exist in the back catalogue, their existence in the rules just encourages third party model makers to produce and profit from them. And that's money people could be spending on MTO kits instead...
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Then again, if GW won't produce minis for the legacy armies at all, why not retain the options?
Because if those options don't exist in the back catalogue, their existence in the rules just encourages third party model makers to produce and profit from them. And that's money people could be spending on MTO kits instead...
GW produce most of the Skaven army barring the slave slings - so you don't have to go 3rd party you can get them right now.
Honestly I think Slaves were a neat idea; but visually as you used Clan Rat models they weren't adding anything to the table; and they added a LOT of bulk to just starting a Skaven army with models that were 100% chaff to die. I know they are thematic to have, but I just don't think they ever really worked great in a practical real world sense (which doesn't mean people didn't use them of course)
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Then again, if GW won't produce minis for the legacy armies at all, why not retain the options?
Because if those options don't exist in the back catalogue, their existence in the rules just encourages third party model makers to produce and profit from them. And that's money people could be spending on MTO kits instead...
That ship has sailed the moment they published rules without selling models tho... in which Core factions are actually far worse offenders than Legacy... ToW Facebook groups are absolutely flooded with pictures of 3d prints.
Overread wrote: GW produce most of the Skaven army barring the slave slings - so you don't have to go 3rd party you can get them right now.
Honestly I think Slaves were a neat idea; but visually as you used Clan Rat models they weren't adding anything to the table; and they added a LOT of bulk to just starting a Skaven army with models that were 100% chaff to die. I know they are thematic to have, but I just don't think they ever really worked great in a practical real world sense (which doesn't mean people didn't use them of course)
I once knew a guy whose Skaven Slaves units were composed of models from various armies. All sorts of captured slaves.
Overread wrote: GW produce most of the Skaven army barring the slave slings - so you don't have to go 3rd party you can get them right now.
I suspect if they do get the rumoured make over this summer with AoS 4th Ed, then they will probably retire some of the more 'TOW useful' units for the bigger and more dynamic minis to stop people picking them up for TOW.
I'd not be surprised if plague monks, clan rats and the last of the metals will go.
I've picked up everything baring about two more units worth of plastics at this point just to be sure I dont have to chase down 2nd stuff this time next year. At worst I've just double my skaven army
Overread wrote: GW produce most of the Skaven army barring the slave slings - so you don't have to go 3rd party you can get them right now.
I suspect if they do get the rumoured make over this summer with AoS 4th Ed, then they will probably retire some of the more 'TOW useful' units for the bigger and more dynamic minis to stop people picking them up for TOW.
I'd not be surprised if plague monks, clan rats and the last of the metals will go.
I've picked up everything baring about two more units worth of plastics at this point just to be sure I dont have to chase down 2nd stuff this time next year. At worst I've just double my skaven army
+
I can't see them outright retiring clan rats - replacing perhaps but not retiring. Same for Plague Monks and to remove both would remove all the infantry from the army!
It will be interesting to see what GW does do with an eventual skaven update. I could see weapon teams either vanish (since there are stormvermin) or get replaced with a multipart kit that you just change a few parts on for each weapon.
Coenus Scaldingus wrote: Then again, if GW won't produce minis for the legacy armies at all, why not retain the options?
Because if those options don't exist in the back catalogue, their existence in the rules just encourages third party model makers to produce and profit from them. And that's money people could be spending on MTO kits instead...
Which without production will happen regardless ?
To some degree, yes. But there will always be a core of players who would prefer to use the official models, whether by sourcing them second hand or waiting for MTO or other re-releases. \
Ultimately, they've drawn a line between encouraging those with existing collections to use them, and encouraging other manufacturers to make models for GW's game. There's always going to be some crossover, but 'options we never made ourselves' is a fairly easy and understandable place to draw that line.
Given they have included a Warhammer Quest model in the Brettonian made to order I am hoping they do similar for the exclusive models from the Warhammer Quest Lair of the Orc Lord expansion as those models would make good generic leaders for a Green Skin Army.
NH Gunsmith wrote: Hmm, so kind of off topic. But if GW is bringing back the Old World for The Old World, is there any chance of them bringing back say Mordheim?
Zero.
The (main?) designer of Mordheim, was a finnish fan dude who made loads of fan edits to warhammer. Got a job offer when GW saw his work and worked in Nottingham for some years.
He's still active and around the Mordheim fb pages. He's said theres not any Mordheim coming whatsoever, and that he'd know if it did.
Also the fanbase of Mordheim is one of those rare fan communities (bc its based on 3d printing terrain I suppose) that wouldnt really care for a rerelease. Maaaaaybe if it was the old set with cardboard building and everything, but nah.
NH Gunsmith wrote: Hmm, so kind of off topic. But if GW is bringing back the Old World for The Old World, is there any chance of them bringing back say Mordheim?
Zero.
The (main?) designer of Mordheim, was a finnish fan dude who made loads of fan edits to warhammer. Got a job offer when GW saw his work and worked in Nottingham for some years.
He's still active and around the Mordheim fb pages. He's said theres not any Mordheim coming whatsoever, and that he'd know if it did.
Also the fanbase of Mordheim is one of those rare fan communities (bc its based on 3d printing terrain I suppose) that wouldnt really care for a rerelease. Maaaaaybe if it was the old set with cardboard building and everything, but nah.
He was also a key designer on WFB 6th ed as well alongside Rick.
Mordheim is a perfect size for the specialist studio though, it's WFB necromunda. But they've never made a spin off of a spin off, so it would probably be a low chance.
They could release the patrol rules they did for small WFB games. There was quite a lot of different WFB playstyle games. They have no Siege rules in TOW.
NH Gunsmith wrote: Hmm, so kind of off topic. But if GW is bringing back the Old World for The Old World, is there any chance of them bringing back say Mordheim?
Zero.
The (main?) designer of Mordheim, was a finnish fan dude who made loads of fan edits to warhammer. Got a job offer when GW saw his work and worked in Nottingham for some years.
He's still active and around the Mordheim fb pages. He's said theres not any Mordheim coming whatsoever, and that he'd know if it did.
Also the fanbase of Mordheim is one of those rare fan communities (bc its based on 3d printing terrain I suppose) that wouldnt really care for a rerelease. Maaaaaybe if it was the old set with cardboard building and everything, but nah.
They didn't have the original designer of Necromunda when they re-did that game either, so I don't see how Mr Pirinen no longer working for GW prevents them from working that IP.
Hellebore wrote: Mordheim is a perfect size for the specialist studio though, it's WFB necromunda. But they've never made a spin off of a spin off, so it would probably be a low chance.
GW currently markets three games that begin with "Horus Heresy:"
I think Mordheim has a decent chance of coming back. GW have clearly discovered the benefits of selling their back catalogue - and its sitting right there.
From GW's perspective, if you just do a few basic factions, its not exactly a huge release.
Arguably the core demographic is probably already catered to by Underworlds and Warcry (I assume someone somewhere plays this) and a range of other games. But it would be a big box for people at Christmas/Summer etc.
Overread wrote: GW produce most of the Skaven army barring the slave slings - so you don't have to go 3rd party you can get them right now.
I suspect if they do get the rumoured make over this summer with AoS 4th Ed, then they will probably retire some of the more 'TOW useful' units for the bigger and more dynamic minis to stop people picking them up for TOW.
I'd not be surprised if plague monks, clan rats and the last of the metals will go.
Yeah there 0% chance they do that. Just rn now Pestilence (Plague monks, Censer bearer and Priest) and Eshin (Gutter runners) just got a Underworld warband.
The metal units + Clan rats is like almost all the skaven model range so there no chance they'll gut 75% of the faction and alter it to something radically different for a legacy faction. Like if they did why wasn't a core faction from the start?
Hellebore wrote: Mordheim is a perfect size for the specialist studio though, it's WFB necromunda. But they've never made a spin off of a spin off, so it would probably be a low chance.
GW currently markets three games that begin with "Horus Heresy:"
I considered that, but they are distinctly different from each other, from the game rules to the miniatures.
Mordheim as it was, was just a WFB game using only characters - the empire militia box is just the plastic mordheim models. Mordheim reused WFB army units for most of its warband unit types. They kept necromunda gangs completely separate from 40k, it was only in the campaigns you found standard 40k models like eldar rangers, marines and genestealers.
I actually played a lot of mordheim with just my WFB models - my dwarf warband especially.
Hellebore wrote: Mordheim as it was, was just a WFB game using only characters - the empire militia box is just the plastic mordheim models. Mordheim reused WFB army units for most of its warband unit types. They kept necromunda gangs completely separate from 40k, it was only in the campaigns you found standard 40k models like eldar rangers, marines and genestealers.
Warcry uses custom warbands like Necromunda. A re-booted Mordheim could follow more in the Kill Team direction, Old World units fighting skirmishes, with their units serving as a dual release for two systems.
Hellebore wrote: Mordheim as it was, was just a WFB game using only characters - the empire militia box is just the plastic mordheim models. Mordheim reused WFB army units for most of its warband unit types. They kept necromunda gangs completely separate from 40k, it was only in the campaigns you found standard 40k models like eldar rangers, marines and genestealers.
Warcry uses custom warbands like Necromunda. A re-booted Mordheim could follow more in the Kill Team direction, Old World units fighting skirmishes, with their units serving as a dual release for two systems.
Absolutely, I'm just worried that the killteam treatment is not something a specialist game is going to get. That was my initial apprehension.
Unless WFB ends up so big it brings in AoS/40k money. Which would be nice.
Altruizine wrote: Were Sisters of Sigmar and Witch Hunters WHFB units?
Sisters were one of the few truly unique units in Mordheim. The core 6 from the rulebook - mercenaries, skaven, sisters, witch hunters, possessed, undead, were mostly standard WFB with the sisters being the most unique. The possessed were just chaos, with some cool mutations, the undead had I think 1 model that was not in WFB, the Dreg character which was basically the Igor.
My undead warband was 1 vampire, 2 dregs, 3 ghouls and 1 zombie. Because I like to be different.
As they began releasing new warbands, they started getting more original. Carnival of chaos for example.
But the elf, dwarf and orc warbands were just WFB models really.
Hellebore, I would argue Possessed warbands were unique to Morhdeim. The cultists were Empire humans, not Marauders and the Possessed units themselves were completely absent from Warhammer rules-wise. There were the fantasy equivalent of Inquisitorial Daemonhosts.
KidCthulhu wrote: Hellebore, I would argue Possessed warbands were unique to Morhdeim. The cultists were Empire humans, not Marauders and the Possessed units themselves were completely absent from Warhammer rules-wise. There were the fantasy equivalent of Inquisitorial Daemonhosts.
I'm ambivalent on them. Gifts of the gods for chaos characters gave them all sorts of mutations. Archaon himself was a Sigmarite templar and came to chaos late in life. Chaos being purely feral nordic barbarians is a new and reductive/flanderised version of what chaos is supposed to be.
The possessed warband just looks like the beginnings of chaos warband insurgency, led by chosen warriors bearing the gifts of the gods.
These warbands and the brayherds should be the most common chaos army the old world encounters, no the far north barbarian tribes that spend all their time fighting each other and only have one way to come south.
Overread wrote: GW produce most of the Skaven army barring the slave slings - so you don't have to go 3rd party you can get them right now.
I suspect if they do get the rumoured make over this summer with AoS 4th Ed, then they will probably retire some of the more 'TOW useful' units for the bigger and more dynamic minis to stop people picking them up for TOW.
I'd not be surprised if plague monks, clan rats and the last of the metals will go.
Yeah there 0% chance they do that. Just rn now Pestilence (Plague monks, Censer bearer and Priest) and Eshin (Gutter runners) just got a Underworld warband.
The metal units + Clan rats is like almost all the skaven model range so there no chance they'll gut 75% of the faction and alter it to something radically different for a legacy faction. Like if they did why wasn't a core faction from the start?
Those Underworld warbands are not really suited for mass units though. These are the sort of thing they are likely to replace plague monks and clan rats with. Larger dynamic models with smoke effects etc that over hang the rim of a 25mm round base.
ie models not really suited for TOW units. (Yes, with some work you can make any of the AoS models work in a unit, but they are clearly not designed with that in mind)
Only GW really know why they decided not to make them a core TOW faction. Probably because Skaven are popular in AoS. But no one outside of GW really knows.
Altruizine wrote: Were Sisters of Sigmar and Witch Hunters WHFB units?
Witch hunters were characters. The sisters of sigmas were not.
Even Witch Hunters were added as a character option much later on (8th Edition Empire). Prior to that, it was just Warrior Priests (if we don't count the Witch Hunter from WH:Quest). They were relatively unique to Mordheim for quite a while in game terms, even if they'd been in the setting forever.
Altruizine wrote: Were Sisters of Sigmar and Witch Hunters WHFB units?
Witch hunters were characters. The sisters of sigmas were not.
Even Witch Hunters were added as a character option much later on (8th Edition Empire). Prior to that, it was just Warrior Priests (if we don't count the Witch Hunter from WH:Quest). They were relatively unique to Mordheim for quite a while in game terms, even if they'd been in the setting forever.
I think even warrior priests might have featured in the art and fiction (and WFRP) for quite a well ahead of finding their way into the army book. I think 6th ed was the first we saw of them.
The main TOW facebook group already has 2/3 of the member count of the main AoS group. I except it easily could bring in AoS money if you could actually buy it.
lord_blackfang wrote: The main TOW facebook group already has 2/3 of the member count of the main AoS group. I except it easily could bring in AoS money if you could actually buy it.
Or is that because the oldies still on Facebook are the ones old enough to still have their armies from before...?
This is the real crux when it comes to TOW becoming a better supported main game. Much like LI it seems to have swept through stores on a wave of hype (a good thing) but with no support seemingly beyond day one in terms of stock. I've gone to totally ambivalent to TOW, due to joining the hobby after WHFB had already been cancelled, to really getting into the game thanks to the work of GW and their influencers (and I'm not normally one to get swept up in such). I'd love to dive into the game but as I couldn't get to my local store on release day they have now run out of all stock and have no estimation of a second run. Now will my interest hold out until new stock appears? If it's a couple of weeks and it fits in the same credit card bill then it likely will, beyond that however it's highly probable it will drop out of my hobby budget. It doesn't need to be much either if I could just buy a unit to start while I wait for the big box that would be enough. I've worked in retail, I know about shelf space, opportunity costs on stock, etc 40K and AoS rightly get the lions share of the store. However GW need to stop pushing out games if they can't allocate enough product for it to be visible in a store. Stock sitting around forever is bad but constantly being out of stock can in many cases be worse.
Hellebore wrote: Unless WFB ends up so big it brings in AoS/40k money. Which would be nice.
Those are (probably) two quite different targets to go for...
You just have to present it right. It is said the Tactical Squad kit outsold all of Warhammer Fantasy near the end. I have a feeling that classic Tomb King skeletons will outsell the Tactical Squad before long. Take that as your metric and The Old World will soar.
lord_blackfang wrote: The main TOW facebook group already has 2/3 of the member count of the main AoS group. I except it easily could bring in AoS money if you could actually buy it.
The main TOW group was previously a WHFB group IIRC, so it started with a pretty big following and hasn't actually grown much over the past couple years. Also I think the main TOW group is larger? 48k vs 29k for AoS?
Reddit might be a more useful comparison though - main AoS group - 213k members, main TOW/WHFB group - 89k members (and surprising hasn't really increased at all over the last few months). AoS is clearly much bigger than TOW is, and likely will remain that way.
Hellebore wrote: Unless WFB ends up so big it brings in AoS/40k money. Which would be nice.
Those are (probably) two quite different targets to go for...
You just have to present it right. It is said the Tactical Squad kit outsold all of Warhammer Fantasy near the end. I have a feeling that classic Tomb King skeletons will outsell the Tactical Squad before long. Take that as your metric and The Old World will soar.
Thats classic hyperbole unsubstantiated by any available data. There is some relevant data associated with the filings for the chapterhouse lawsuit that shows that over a 4 year period from 2006-2009 GW had $1.266M in sales from BfSP vs $968k in sales from tactical squad sets. Its possible, but not plausible, that WHFB declined so drastically and SM sales spiked so hard that tac squads eventually outsold the entirety of the WHFB range, but... that seems unlikely.
Space Marines as a faction almost definitely did outsell WHFB as a whole, as various GW insiders have confirmed that the space marine model range made up about 30% of GWs annual revenue on their own, but thats different from just tac squads....
To be fair I'd expect TOW growth right now to be more established gamers and old fans coming back - so seeing FB or Reddit groups not expand is predictable. Those groups are already full of the fans to start with.
The real test is in a few years time, when the game has been out in the wild and we see if its gathering in new fresh players or if its remaining mostly with the "old guard".
A BIG thing here is not just how much GW releases for it; not just how much they update once its out; but also how much they just talk about and market it compared to how much they market AoS.
If one gets way more marketing it will likely always remain ahead of the other.
I think we'll see initial growth off the old kits; but yes big growth will happen when we start seeing big releases of fresh plastics. Perhaps not until Kislev and Cathay appear
chaos0xomega wrote: I expect TOW won't really start growing until they get to releasing new plastic kits for the game on a steady basis.
I don't expect it to start growing as a result. It'll be largely gorgnards with existing armies they get to dust off and add to a little. The TK skellies put me off 10 years ago, they put me off now. The WHFB armies I was interested in largely got updated in Sigmar and look great, so why would I not just stick with that where the model counts (thus cost) are far lower and it gets more attention overall.
I disagree - I'm with Overread. I think Kislev and Cathay will bring a big influx of players in, as will whatever else they come up with later on down the line (I'm still hoping for zombie pirates).
chaos0xomega wrote: I expect TOW won't really start growing until they get to releasing new plastic kits for the game on a steady basis.
I don't expect it to start growing as a result. It'll be largely gorgnards with existing armies they get to dust off and add to a little. The TK skellies put me off 10 years ago, they put me off now. The WHFB armies I was interested in largely got updated in Sigmar and look great, so why would I not just stick with that where the model counts (thus cost) are far lower and it gets more attention overall.
And thta's the second part of my post. Once the old armies are out of the gate and GW moves onto Kislev, Cathay and having more options to add new/updated models to existing armies - then we will see the shift in gaining new people. When GW updates pegasus riders to the standard of the newly added one and so forth.
Of course its going to take a few years just to get out of the gate with the release. So right now I'm expecting a 2-3 year wait at least before we are past the old armies going out and things settling down some.
chaos0xomega wrote: I disagree - I'm with Overread. I think Kislev and Cathay will bring a big influx of players in, as will whatever else they come up with later on down the line (I'm still hoping for zombie pirates).
Yup, probably how all the new stuff for AoS helped it grow - I don’t think it was doing too well straight out of the gate, but new factions definitely boosted the success.
Just by looking at W:TW we can get quite a few potential projects, that will be new for everyone/the vast majority:
Kislev, Cathay, Vampirates, like mentioned above + Norsca, Clan Moulder, Wood elves minus elves, the new baba yaga army(can’t remember their proper name), chaos dwarfs (kinda, if they get Solar A treatment)
Plus they should really really try hard and make/rerelease minis for all the leader characters in W:TW.
I’m sure people would love them just for painting/collecting dust on a shelf sake.
chaos0xomega wrote: I expect TOW won't really start growing until they get to releasing new plastic kits for the game on a steady basis.
I don't expect it to start growing as a result. It'll be largely gorgnards with existing armies they get to dust off and add to a little. The TK skellies put me off 10 years ago, they put me off now. The WHFB armies I was interested in largely got updated in Sigmar and look great, so why would I not just stick with that where the model counts (thus cost) are far lower and it gets more attention overall.
And thta's the second part of my post. Once the old armies are out of the gate and GW moves onto Kislev, Cathay and having more options to add new/updated models to existing armies - then we will see the shift in gaining new people. When GW updates pegasus riders to the standard of the newly added one and so forth.
Of course its going to take a few years just to get out of the gate with the release. So right now I'm expecting a 2-3 year wait at least before we are past the old armies going out and things settling down some.
I just suspect that those 2-3 years will be painful in honestly, much akin to how HH had a good launch followed by "but where's the new stuff/infantry" for 2 years to the point it feels it's dropped off most peoples radar. But that has the stigma of almost needing a 3d printer somewhere in your group to be properly viable since the rest of the options either don't exist or are locked in expensive FW resin. ToW has that AND 20+ year old kits to contend with for 2-3 years.
chaos0xomega wrote: I disagree - I'm with Overread. I think Kislev and Cathay will bring a big influx of players in, as will whatever else they come up with later on down the line (I'm still hoping for zombie pirates).
Yup, probably how all the new stuff for AoS helped it grow - I don’t think it was doing too well straight out of the gate, but new factions definitely boosted the success.
AoS Launched with 2 new armies. It had sylvaneth, fyreslayers, ironjawz, disciples, kharadron and Idoneth all in the first 3 years with mini releases alongside all the drip fed sigmarines and blades of khorne.
Given TOW is getting 0-1 kit and a couple of FW characters per army over 18 months-ish, I'm not sure it's comparable.
I just suspect that those 2-3 years will be painful in honestly, much akin to how HH had a good launch followed by "but where's the new stuff/infantry" for 2 years to the point it feels it's dropped off most peoples radar. But that has the stigma of almost needing a 3d printer somewhere in your group to be properly viable since the rest of the options either don't exist or are locked in expensive FW resin. ToW has that AND 20+ year old kits to contend with for 2-3 years.
I suspect you're right, but with the benefit that much, much more people already have old Fantasy armies they can use than people had FWHH armies, so it's going to have a significantly easier time surviving the doldrums.
Thats classic hyperbole unsubstantiated by any available data. There is some relevant data associated with the filings for the chapterhouse lawsuit that shows that over a 4 year period from 2006-2009 GW had $1.266M in sales from BfSP vs $968k in sales from tactical squad sets. Its possible, but not plausible, that WHFB declined so drastically and SM sales spiked so hard that tac squads eventually outsold the entirety of the WHFB range, but... that seems unlikely.
Space Marines as a faction almost definitely did outsell WHFB as a whole, as various GW insiders have confirmed that the space marine model range made up about 30% of GWs annual revenue on their own, but thats different from just tac squads....
So in the early 2000's, when GW had a factory in the US that strictly made things like the rhino, tac squads, and starters, and before BfSP it was widely known, in the US at least, that Tactical Squads and Rhinos combined outsold the entire Fantasy range. This was back when all the US trade guys worked in a just a few locations, it was an incredibly small team, that spent regular time with us Store Managers and we talked a lot. Their numbers, again at least in the US, were pretty accurate given that they saw all the stock going to independents and to our physical stores back then. Most of us could walk into the back where they worked and SEE their numbers whenever we stopped by that store (most of these were in the "Bunker" locations back in the day in Los Angeles, Chicago, and if I remember right they had a Nashville one just because they had the factory there).
It may have been, and probably was, different at the global level but I doubt it was very far off. Maybe add a third marine kit to get the same results.
Regardless, I find it interesting that Fantasy may be on of GW cheapest large scale games to get into for a variety of factions compared to AoS, 40k, HH, and LI. You can reasonable build a 2k for less than $400 BEFORE discounts. Try doing that in the other games. I think that also bodes well for the life of the game.
Thats classic hyperbole unsubstantiated by any available data. There is some relevant data associated with the filings for the chapterhouse lawsuit that shows that over a 4 year period from 2006-2009 GW had $1.266M in sales from BfSP vs $968k in sales from tactical squad sets. Its possible, but not plausible, that WHFB declined so drastically and SM sales spiked so hard that tac squads eventually outsold the entirety of the WHFB range, but... that seems unlikely.
Space Marines as a faction almost definitely did outsell WHFB as a whole, as various GW insiders have confirmed that the space marine model range made up about 30% of GWs annual revenue on their own, but thats different from just tac squads....
So in the early 2000's, when GW had a factory in the US that strictly made things like the rhino, tac squads, and starters, and before BfSP it was widely known, in the US at least, that Tactical Squads and Rhinos combined outsold the entire Fantasy range. This was back when all the US trade guys worked in a just a few locations, it was an incredibly small team, that spent regular time with us Store Managers and we talked a lot. Their numbers, again at least in the US, were pretty accurate given that they saw all the stock going to independents and to our physical stores back then. Most of us could walk into the back where they worked and SEE their numbers whenever we stopped by that store (most of these were in the "Bunker" locations back in the day in Los Angeles, Chicago, and if I remember right they had a Nashville one just because they had the factory there).
It may have been, and probably was, different at the global level but I doubt it was very far off. Maybe add a third marine kit to get the same results.
Regardless, I find it interesting that Fantasy may be on of GW cheapest large scale games to get into for a variety of factions compared to AoS, 40k, HH, and LI. You can reasonable build a 2k for less than $400 BEFORE discounts. Try doing that in the other games. I think that also bodes well for the life of the game.
Until they replace/update the kits and if you're happy with the old sculpts ofc.
chaos0xomega wrote: I disagree - I'm with Overread. I think Kislev and Cathay will bring a big influx of players in, as will whatever else they come up with later on down the line (I'm still hoping for zombie pirates).
I'd have thought any re-imagining of the Vampire Coast/Zom-pirates would be on the AoS side of things. Pirates feel much more of a skirmish style force than a full rank and file army.
Thats classic hyperbole unsubstantiated by any available data. There is some relevant data associated with the filings for the chapterhouse lawsuit that shows that over a 4 year period from 2006-2009 GW had $1.266M in sales from BfSP vs $968k in sales from tactical squad sets. Its possible, but not plausible, that WHFB declined so drastically and SM sales spiked so hard that tac squads eventually outsold the entirety of the WHFB range, but... that seems unlikely.
Space Marines as a faction almost definitely did outsell WHFB as a whole, as various GW insiders have confirmed that the space marine model range made up about 30% of GWs annual revenue on their own, but thats different from just tac squads....
So in the early 2000's, when GW had a factory in the US that strictly made things like the rhino, tac squads, and starters, and before BfSP it was widely known, in the US at least, that Tactical Squads and Rhinos combined outsold the entire Fantasy range. This was back when all the US trade guys worked in a just a few locations, it was an incredibly small team, that spent regular time with us Store Managers and we talked a lot. Their numbers, again at least in the US, were pretty accurate given that they saw all the stock going to independents and to our physical stores back then. Most of us could walk into the back where they worked and SEE their numbers whenever we stopped by that store (most of these were in the "Bunker" locations back in the day in Los Angeles, Chicago, and if I remember right they had a Nashville one just because they had the factory there).
It may have been, and probably was, different at the global level but I doubt it was very far off. Maybe add a third marine kit to get the same results.
Regardless, I find it interesting that Fantasy may be on of GW cheapest large scale games to get into for a variety of factions compared to AoS, 40k, HH, and LI. You can reasonable build a 2k for less than $400 BEFORE discounts. Try doing that in the other games. I think that also bodes well for the life of the game.
Until they replace/update the kits and if you're happy with the old sculpts ofc.
I mean, for Beastmen you can build an army for under $400 with good models that I doubt are being replaced anytime soon. The Bretonia models (maybe outside of the pegasus knights but I don't hate them like most people seem to) still look good even today. The orc and goblin stuff that's coming and that you can still get are pretty decent with a few outliers (like the boars on the chariots) but that won't be a cheap army simply because Orcs & Goblins. Yes, the TK skellies are old and derpy so sure, on that one you may be right. Warriors of Chaos has some pretty great models that can be used in WFB to build a relatively cheap force.
I'm just saying out of the armies available and based on the armies released currently WFB is oddly GW's cheapest mass battle system.
Dudeface wrote: The WHFB armies I was interested in largely got updated in Sigmar and look great, so why would I not just stick with that where the model counts (thus cost) are far lower and it gets more attention overall.
There is a large group of people who have zero interest in playing AoS but are interested in the classic Warhammer fantasy lore and setting. How big that group is will go a long way to determine the long term success of the Old World.
I recall one of the explanations for blowing up WF was although there were many fans of the setting, most didn’t actually play the game or buy models. I’d like to think modern new plastic sculpts would help attract both old and new fans.
Dudeface wrote: The WHFB armies I was interested in largely got updated in Sigmar and look great, so why would I not just stick with that where the model counts (thus cost) are far lower and it gets more attention overall.
There is a large group of people who have zero interest in playing AoS but are interested in the classic Warhammer fantasy lore and setting. How big that group is will go a long way to determine the long term success of the Old World.
I recall one of the explanations for blowing up WF was although there were many fans of the setting, most didn’t actually play the game or buy models. I’d like to think modern new plastic sculpts would help attract both old and new fans.
There is also the fact that TOW is a different style of game to AoS. Despite loving the minis I've been reluctant to get into AoS as it's a similar style of game to 40K. I've already invested a lot into two 40K armies so to pull me away a game needs to be something different. TOW fulfils that brief it's not just fantasy but also Rank and Flank so a very different proposition. AoS may have more modern (and indeed fantastic looking) models but TOW scratches a different game itch.
What Tallon said above, having games that play so differently is great since once you get tired of one, you can just flip to the other.
AoS and 40K are too similar in play style imo, one is just set in the mortal realms and the other in the 41st millennium. But game play wise they are very similar from what I remember.
The 40k and AoS are too similar argument has never made much sense to me, aside from rolling to hit/wound and opponent rolling an armor save (which is also true of TOW/WHFB), the two games play very differently.
chaos0xomega wrote: The 40k and AoS are too similar argument has never made much sense to me, aside from rolling to hit/wound and opponent rolling an armor save (which is also true of TOW/WHFB), the two games play very differently.
Agreed, they play significantly differently now. They are both fairly large squad based combat offerings; from there the differences begin.
Thankfully some of our AOS players, myself included, are picking up Old World too.
chaos0xomega wrote: The 40k and AoS are too similar argument has never made much sense to me, aside from rolling to hit/wound and opponent rolling an armor save (which is also true of TOW/WHFB), the two games play very differently.
Agreed, they play significantly differently now. They are both fairly large squad based combat offerings; from there the differences begin.
That's the key similarity though, they're both large squad based 32mm scale skirmish games.
I played 40k because it was a large squad based skirmish game, and I played WHFB because it was a rank and flank game. I didn't (and still don't) want another large squad based 32mm scale game. I never particularly liked moving squads of loose formations around the battlefield, I endured it in 40k because it was a popular game with armies I liked.
I do wonder how well AoS actually does compared to 40k, around these parts it still seems pretty small, or maybe I just don't go down on the nights the AoS crowd come in to play, and the Dominion boxed set sat around stores for absolutely ages, to the point some stores bumped their discount up on it to finally get rid of it and the FLGS opened their boxes and sold the sprues separately. There's some nice looking models though, and if nothing else GW fans will buy nice looking models.
Plus they should really really try hard and make/rerelease minis for all the leader characters in W:TW.
I’m sure people would love them just for painting/collecting dust on a shelf sake.
I doubt that's going to be part of the plan considering a fair majority of those characters aren't alive (or even un-alive) at the point The Old World is set.
Plus they should really really try hard and make/rerelease minis for all the leader characters in W:TW.
I’m sure people would love them just for painting/collecting dust on a shelf sake.
I doubt that's going to be part of the plan considering a fair majority of those characters aren't alive (or even un-alive) at the point The Old World is set.
Eh in fairness they can just give them new names or even have them as generic characters. Many Old World leaders were not stand-out different to regular ones. Even Karl Franze doesn't stand out as they had a regular version of "guy on big griffin". They just add rules for "two headed generic griffin rare" and boom you've got yourself a generic hero. Ok that might be a bad choice since his name is plastered all over the armour on the model; but by and large they could get away with a good many Old World heroes that way.
Since the only thing for which The Old World seems to have a normal budget is resin characters, I would think GW's strategy should be to release resin models for era appropriate new characters (as they also hinted at) rather than awkwardly justifying old named characters that they can just as easily keep selling as generic characters for the most part.
True, however it all depends on the budget and speed. I could certainly see them release some named character old models as generic ones. Either as main models or in the made-to-order waves that they are doing.
Heck Skaven have several old named heroes in AoS that are now just generic characters or which can easily count as generic warriors now.
I fully agree that in the fullness of time Old World will see them release brand new named characters. They might come later since GW might be focusing the budget they have on new core army models, so we might see named heroes as part of a second wave of updates/solo releases after they get past the main bulk of armies.
I think that's when things will get really exciting - when the bulk of the proposed main armies are out and in the wild. Even with old models they will still be in the wild and selling and that means a big chance for GW to then focus fully on made to order re-runs and new stuff
NH Gunsmith wrote: Hmm, so kind of off topic. But if GW is bringing back the Old World for The Old World, is there any chance of them bringing back say Mordheim?
Zero.
The (main?) designer of Mordheim, was a finnish fan dude who made loads of fan edits to warhammer. Got a job offer when GW saw his work and worked in Nottingham for some years.
He's still active and around the Mordheim fb pages. He's said theres not any Mordheim coming whatsoever, and that he'd know if it did.
Also the fanbase of Mordheim is one of those rare fan communities (bc its based on 3d printing terrain I suppose) that wouldnt really care for a rerelease. Maaaaaybe if it was the old set with cardboard building and everything, but nah.
That's if he would be allowed to share the info.
If he's not willing to withold that info until announcement ready he wouldn't be told in the first place.
He's not some random fan but actual professional game designer so not really likely to leak info in the first place.
And of course there's always future. Anybody claiming to know what GW decides to do in 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 15, 20 years from now on is just lying.
Tuomas left GW what 15 years ago? More? I’m sure he keeps in touch with some of the old guard but there’s been a hell of a lot of turnover in the studio since he left. I very much doubt he has intimate knowledge what GW are working on nowadays. And even if he did, announcing anything about it would a) get himself sued and b) massively curtail his ability to work in the industry ever again. He’s a professional games designer, not a fan.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To add I don’t think Mordheim will come out anytime soon, Specialist games have more than enough on their plate and it overlaps too much with Warcry for the main studio to touch it.
Overread wrote: True, however it all depends on the budget and speed. I could certainly see them release some named character old models as generic ones. Either as main models or in the made-to-order waves that they are doing.
Heck Skaven have several old named heroes in AoS that are now just generic characters or which can easily count as generic warriors now.
I fully agree that in the fullness of time Old World will see them release brand new named characters. They might come later since GW might be focusing the budget they have on new core army models, so we might see named heroes as part of a second wave of updates/solo releases after they get past the main bulk of armies.
I think that's when things will get really exciting - when the bulk of the proposed main armies are out and in the wild. Even with old models they will still be in the wild and selling and that means a big chance for GW to then focus fully on made to order re-runs and new stuff
Agree on the point that they could treat prior named characters as generics and just release the models. Skaven are possibly a bad example mind, considering they aren't getting a single model release for TOW unless the GW stance changes (which it obviously could).
'In the fullness of time'? There are quite literally brand new named characters already. The Bret/TK Arcane Journals have new special character rules and the new model releases for them have already been shown off. The releases should be fairly imminent (probably when the Foot Knights etc. are up for sale), not once they've worked through all 9 core army releases.
So I am reading here that common gobbo plastics are bad because of their proportions. Could someone who owns them post some scale comparison with other warhammer fantasy models?
MaxT wrote: To add I don’t think Mordheim will come out anytime soon, Specialist games have more than enough on their plate and it overlaps too much with Warcry for the main studio to touch it.
Nor should it. A modern Mordheim would be nothing like the original game. Mordheim was about making your dudes (or dudettes), personalizing warbands to the nth level and seeing how they turn out after a campaign's worth of games. Nothing about modern GW allows customization to that degree. Warcry is the modern Mordheim. No thanks.
Nothing about modern GW allows customization to that degree.
Normally I'd agree, but so far this isn't true for The Old World, with units existing ahead of available models and recommendations for how to convert/represent units that don't exist in the Arcane Journals. I don't think we're getting a Mordheim anytime soon but I don't think it'd be as grim if we did. I'm planning on trying to apply 6E Warhammer Skirmish framework with Old World rules and profiles and see how that goes.
NH Gunsmith wrote: Hmm, so kind of off topic. But if GW is bringing back the Old World for The Old World, is there any chance of them bringing back say Mordheim?
Zero.
The (main?) designer of Mordheim, was a finnish fan dude who made loads of fan edits to warhammer. Got a job offer when GW saw his work and worked in Nottingham for some years.
He's still active and around the Mordheim fb pages. He's said theres not any Mordheim coming whatsoever, and that he'd know if it did.
Also the fanbase of Mordheim is one of those rare fan communities (bc its based on 3d printing terrain I suppose) that wouldnt really care for a rerelease. Maaaaaybe if it was the old set with cardboard building and everything, but nah.
That's if he would be allowed to share the info.
If he's not willing to withold that info until announcement ready he wouldn't be told in the first place.
He's not some random fan but actual professional game designer so not really likely to leak info in the first place.
And of course there's always future. Anybody claiming to know what GW decides to do in 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 15, 20 years from now on is just lying.
If that was the case, I'm pretty sure he just wouldn't comment on it. I blatantly lying would just make him look bad
MaxT wrote: To add I don’t think Mordheim will come out anytime soon, Specialist games have more than enough on their plate and it overlaps too much with Warcry for the main studio to touch it.
Nor should it. A modern Mordheim would be nothing like the original game. Mordheim was about making your dudes (or dudettes), personalizing warbands to the nth level and seeing how they turn out after a campaign's worth of games. Nothing about modern GW allows customization to that degree. Warcry is the modern Mordheim. No thanks.
MaxT wrote: To add I don’t think Mordheim will come out anytime soon, Specialist games have more than enough on their plate and it overlaps too much with Warcry for the main studio to touch it.
Nor should it. A modern Mordheim would be nothing like the original game. Mordheim was about making your dudes (or dudettes), personalizing warbands to the nth level and seeing how they turn out after a campaign's worth of games. Nothing about modern GW allows customization to that degree. Warcry is the modern Mordheim. No thanks.
Oh. Can't have made it clearer you haven't even slightly checked tow there...
Funny in tow thread without having paid slightest attention to tow.
Mordheim would be the fantasy alternative to Necromunda, which seems as complete as its going to be now that it covers outdoor games.
The TOW model range is unique in that it uses square bases, and new players will probably question what other Warhammer games they can use the models in. Also, Mordheim would be an ideal opportunity for new ye'olde town scenery that could be used in both The Old World and AoS, whereas terrain for AoS is Gryph-Hound statues and floating waterfalls and maybe a bit too fantastic for TOW.
But one thing is for sure is that TOW will not just be only one game, while Horus Heresy has had two boardgame and three epic-scale game spinoffs. And skirmish games are ever popular these days...
Shadow Walker wrote: So I am reading here that common gobbo plastics are bad because of their proportions. Could someone who owns them post some scale comparison with other warhammer fantasy models?
Shadow Walker wrote: So I am reading here that common gobbo plastics are bad because of their proportions. Could someone who owns them post some scale comparison with other warhammer fantasy models?
Orcs and Goblins were a reasonably popular army at my local store back in the day, but I can't say I've seen anyone field common goblins during 7th and 8th ed. People went with the better forest and night goblin models even back then.
Do common goblins have rules that set them apart enough from the other goblins to give them a distinct role in Old World?
Geifer wrote: Orcs and Goblins were a reasonably popular army at my local store back in the day, but I can't say I've seen anyone field common goblins during 7th and 8th ed. People went with the better forest and night goblin models even back then.
Do common goblins have rules that set them apart enough from the other goblins to give them a distinct role in Old World?
Light armor and nasty skulkers (who add some killing power to the unit, rather than flinging out fanatics and keeping your fingers crossed)
Shadow Walker wrote: So I am reading here that common gobbo plastics are bad because of their proportions. Could someone who owns them post some scale comparison with other warhammer fantasy models?
Night goblins are a different unit to common goblins and still available in an AoS box.
I know (I own that kit). I was simply commenting common gobbos models, who were new to me (never got them), and possibly interesting (I like goblins). I will stick to my night gobbos.
FYI for US players, a Louisiana GW location announced yesterday that the stuff we didn't get(paladin on foot, sorceress, battle standard bearers) are going up tomorrow.
Geifer wrote: Orcs and Goblins were a reasonably popular army at my local store back in the day, but I can't say I've seen anyone field common goblins during 7th and 8th ed. People went with the better forest and night goblin models even back then.
Do common goblins have rules that set them apart enough from the other goblins to give them a distinct role in Old World?
Light armor and nasty skulkers (who add some killing power to the unit, rather than flinging out fanatics and keeping your fingers crossed)
What are nasty skulkers...are they like assassins for O&G but not as good as the Skaven or Dark Elf equivalents?
yep, but unlike fanatics which could be absolutely devastating on top of being conceptually off-the-wall flying rodent gak insane, nasty skulkers were not as exciting mechanically or thematically.
How are our Aus and NZ friends finding the prices on the MTO stuff on pre order today. Dare I say that it looks like the UK prices *may* not be that bad?
Aussie MTO webstore price examples (with conversions from xe.com):
$84 for the two damsels (about 44 GBP)
$50 for the two pair of foot knights (about 26 GBP)
$25 for an individual foot knight (about 13 GBP)
$50 for a mounted knight (about 26 GBP)
... so the going rate is $25 AUD per bloke on foot. IIRC that's half what some recent outrageous MTOs charged for a single Space Marine mini.
I wonder what the Marauder Giant is going to clock in at...
Edit: Obnoxiously the damsels are $1 shy of free shipping! IT'S A PLOT I TELL YOU.
Zenithfleet wrote: Aussie MTO webstore price examples (with conversions from xe.com):
$84 for the two damsels (about 44 GBP)
$50 for the two pair of foot knights (about 26 GBP)
$25 for an individual foot knight (about 13 GBP)
$50 for a mounted knight (about 26 GBP)
... so the going rate is $25 AUD per bloke on foot. IIRC that's half what some recent outrageous MTOs charged for a single Space Marine mini.
I wonder what the Marauder Giant is going to clock in at...
Edit: Obnoxiously the damsels are $1 shy of free shipping! IT'S A PLOT I TELL YOU.
The prices are weird. The mounted and foot combos cost three times a single foot model, so the plastic horse supposedly has the same value as the metal rider? Except for the damsel, who has a little extra thrown on top even though she has less metal to her. And two foot knights are available singly, and the other two as a pair? Why?
£66 to get the two damsels and two of the mounted warriors (one with the lance and one with the axe).
Still tempted but I'm shunting that into a February choice (as MTO ends first week of FEB).
I'm surprised at GW's lack of images on them, considering they've clearly painted those models up new and fresh they didn't put anything more than a single angle for each one, which is really strange because if you've got your lights and model setup then adding a few more shots for marketing should be a tiny cost (esp as GW's photography is all in-house). I would have liked a few more angles, esp since models like the Pegasus don't seem to have their most flattering/easy to read angle used.
I'm surprised at GW's lack of images on them, considering they've clearly painted those models up new and fresh they didn't put anything more than a single angle for each one, which is really strange because if you've got your lights and model setup then adding a few more shots for marketing should be a tiny cost (esp as GW's photography is all in-house). I would have liked a few more angles, esp since models like the Pegasus don't seem to have their most flattering/easy to read angle used.
It may be the trick of only painting the half of the model which is visible. Apparently (per The Painting Phase) this was sometimes done to get pictures published in a hurry.
tneva82 wrote: You DO know they don't price by the weight don't you?
Well yeah, but there's slim justification for jacking up the price on the wizzards - the Tomb King equivalent maintains the same price as the BSB, so is there some 'woman tax' applied to the damsels?
rollthebones wrote: For those with previous experience, how long are you expecting it to take before we see the wave 1 Old World miniatures currently out of stock return?
Do you think the Forge World resins will return faster or slower than the plastic / plastic and metal miniatures?
Are there any precedents we can use to make assumptions?
So the wave 1 resin models haven't released in US & Canada yet so I'd say slower. I've been waiting for other, older, out of stock resin stuff for a while now.
The damsel pricing seems way off, the other double model sets are €35 but she just happens to be €40.
Annoying as I needed three sets of her as I want a couple of the foot models for conversions for another game. So now I'll have to find something interesting to do with the spare mounted versions I've gotten.
Was surprised that the BSB knight was the same price as the others, as that is a big hunk of metal. Same with the metal pegasus, expected him to be much closer to the plastic price than he was.
Overall the cost is a little high, but no more than I was expecting and def better than the 2nd hand prices.
rollthebones wrote: For those with previous experience, how long are you expecting it to take before we see the wave 1 Old World miniatures currently out of stock return?
There isn't really anything we can use to judge how long. It varies and it also varies country by country as well.
All I can say is that Element Games in the UK have a bunch of things saying they'll get fresh stock on Feb 9th or so. That MIGHT be a restock or them expecting a restock or a guesswork or an actual date.
So we'll just have to wait and see really. It can sometimes help to use a few reminder emails on different sites. GW ones as well as others so that when things do come back in you get notified.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Basically, much like Fanatics they'd be hidden in a unit. You'd reveal them in combat to give your unit some extra hidden killing power
Kanluwen wrote: FYI for US players, a Louisiana GW location announced yesterday that the stuff we didn't get(paladin on foot, sorceress, battle standard bearers) are going up tomorrow.
Still not on the website. This doesn't seem to be true.
I am pleasantly surprised that the Tomb Kings on foot are so inoffensively priced, I vaguely recall the Lizardmen MTO in June 2023 had Skink Chieftains at AUD$40 a pop.
Everything else is about what I would have expected from MTO, but AUD$25 foot heroes sits well enough with me
The missing Bretonnian resin models went up for sale in US an Canadian today. By 1:13 pm had the items in my cart... put my credit card info in... hit "pay"...
... and I get an error. Items already out of stock.
zombie_sky_diver wrote: The missing Bretonnian resin models went up for sale in US an Canadian today. By 1:13 pm had the items in my cart... put my credit card info in... hit "pay"...
... and I get an error. Items already out of stock.
I went through that 3 times. Put my cart together, entered my payment info, hit place order...and got a refresh of my cart because one item was now out of stock. Went through that process again, and another item out of stock. Final attempt went through, at least. So, I got the Bretonnian dice and the MTO stuff I wanted, but not the new maiden or BSB. Got my Stormhammer tank, at least, as that was back in stock. The release date is 2/10/2024 here in the US, so I'll hit up the Warhammer Cafe when they open to see what they have on the shelf. Was able to do that for the previous new releases I couldn't preorder online in time (Grail Knights, etc.).
I'm curious if the MTO BSB will be shipped before there's a restock of the all new BSB.
That might well mean that its just sharing the current metal mould with the mounted version. I know GW went through a phase in fantasy at one stage of doing mounted and unmounted characters. I even have some dim recollection they might even have allowed dismounting during the game or that your mount could be killed out from under you
Wait, why is the MTO mounted damsel with a 25x50mm base? Shouldn't this sculpt be on the new base size to fit in movement trays with the knights in the army box and all the other cavalry in the army?
chaos0xomega wrote: I remember dismounting being a thing, though I can't tell if that's because MESBG has influenced my WHFB memories or not.
I vaguely remember it as a thing for characters on monsters, to cover the situations where the monster got killed out from under you. Not so sure I remember it being a thing for normal cavalry characters, though.
chaos0xomega wrote: I remember dismounting being a thing, though I can't tell if that's because MESBG has influenced my WHFB memories or not.
I vaguely remember it as a thing for characters on monsters, to cover the situations where the monster got killed out from under you. Not so sure I remember it being a thing for normal cavalry characters, though.
It wasn't for normal horses, just dragons and griffins and the like.
chaos0xomega wrote: I remember dismounting being a thing, though I can't tell if that's because MESBG has influenced my WHFB memories or not.
I vaguely remember it as a thing for characters on monsters, to cover the situations where the monster got killed out from under you. Not so sure I remember it being a thing for normal cavalry characters, though.
It wasn't for normal horses, just dragons and griffins and the like.
I've got a distinct memory of there being at least one or two sets with a mounted and on foot for horses. I think they might have been elf kits.
It might be GW used them to release two in one sets for a while rather than it being bound to rules.
Overread wrote: £66 to get the two damsels and two of the mounted warriors (one with the lance and one with the axe).
Still tempted but I'm shunting that into a February choice (as MTO ends first week of FEB).
I'm surprised at GW's lack of images on them, considering they've clearly painted those models up new and fresh they didn't put anything more than a single angle for each one, which is really strange because if you've got your lights and model setup then adding a few more shots for marketing should be a tiny cost (esp as GW's photography is all in-house). I would have liked a few more angles, esp since models like the Pegasus don't seem to have their most flattering/easy to read angle used.
Made-to-order models are only on sale for a couple of weeks and then removed from the webstore; with the amount of photography required for regular releases, even the extra shot or two may have been deemed simply not worth it.
I've got a distinct memory of there being at least one or two sets with a mounted and on foot for horses. I think they might have been elf kits.
It might be GW used them to release two in one sets for a while rather than it being bound to rules.
They did it for every VC bloodline in 6th. 2 sculpts for each (Blood Dragons might have been 3), with a foot and mounted version of each sculpt.
As far as I can remember from at least 4th edition 1 wound mounts have been treated as stuck to the rider, and not a thing in themselves. I.E. you can't direct attacks into them, and they cease to exist when their rider is slain.
This was different for things like monsters and chariots.
I've got a distinct memory of there being at least one or two sets with a mounted and on foot for horses. I think they might have been elf kits.
It might be GW used them to release two in one sets for a while rather than it being bound to rules.
They did it for every VC bloodline in 6th. 2 sculpts for each (Blood Dragons might have been 3), with a foot and mounted version of each sculpt.
A number of Empire wizards had the same deal, too.
Tyel wrote: As far as I can remember from at least 4th edition 1 wound mounts have been treated as stuck to the rider, and not a thing in themselves. I.E. you can't direct attacks into them, and they cease to exist when their rider is slain.
This was different for things like monsters and chariots.
yep a regular mount gave you a +1 or 2 for the save, but no wounds
chaos0xomega wrote: I remember dismounting being a thing, though I can't tell if that's because MESBG has influenced my WHFB memories or not.
My memory is horrible, but I think you might be thinking of LotR perhaps?
As far as I can remember, they were treated as one model in WHFB, it's just GW at some point (6th edition maybe?) decided to start bundling the mounted and unmounted versions together. I remember when I first started (5th edition) I could buy the damsel on foot by herself, but later on when I rebooted my Brets (6th edition I think) I had to buy the foot and mounted ones together.
I just got my dragon ogres in the mail and they came with round bases for sigmar and the correct square bases for Old World. Which I wasn’t expecting since I bought squares just for them. Fortunately these extra bases will just go towards rebasing.
chaos0xomega wrote: I remember dismounting being a thing, though I can't tell if that's because MESBG has influenced my WHFB memories or not.
I vaguely remember it as a thing for characters on monsters, to cover the situations where the monster got killed out from under you. Not so sure I remember it being a thing for normal cavalry characters, though.
It wasn't for normal horses, just dragons and griffins and the like.
I've got a distinct memory of there being at least one or two sets with a mounted and on foot for horses. I think they might have been elf kits.
It might be GW used them to release two in one sets for a while rather than it being bound to rules.
Yea but that had nothing to do with rules. And especially for plastic models having both food and mounted together saved expense for gw.
Less issue with metal but would reduce sku bloat still.
Oh and as suggested above lotr had option for rider or mount be killed separately. Some mounts might even stay if rider died(wargs for example)
Yeah, you couldn’t be dismounted from a horse back in the day. I do recall that a lot of the monstrous mounts contrived to have the same basic saddle shape as a horse so you could have used the paired minis for a *gasp* kitbashed monster rider.
Of course that’s not a thing in TOW now, which is great because resurrection items bring back the mount too (and fire heart phoenixes print back their riders).
Question to WHF veterans - what GWTOW supported army, based on the existing models, would be good = playable/able to win, for someone with hard plastic only model policy?
Shadow Walker wrote: Question to WHF veterans - what GWTOW supported army, based on the existing models, would be good = playable/able to win, for someone with hard plastic only model policy?
Probably Empire and Dwarfs, as everyone else would be without their warmachines?
Shadow Walker wrote: Question to WHF veterans - what GWTOW supported army, based on the existing models, would be good = playable/able to win, for someone with hard plastic only model policy?
Probably Empire and Dwarfs, as everyone else would be without their warmachines?
Shadow Walker wrote: Question to WHF veterans - what GWTOW supported army, based on the existing models, would be good = playable/able to win, for someone with hard plastic only model policy?
High Elves for certain - at the end of TOW before AOS they were one of the factions that were pretty well updated. They lost a few models in the Island of Blood set that they didn't get updated (light archery cavalry as I recall and a new Seaguard unit)
But yeah everything else for them was in plastic.
Just keep in mind though that GW is likely to add new things to them such as heroes or such which might well be in Forgeworld Resin.
Do keep in mind that a portion of the new plastic High Elves came in the starter box on mixed sprues. We have no idea yet how GW is going to handle these models. So while High Elves have been well supported with plastic models, a few options might not be available.
No idea how Warriors of Chaos are going to do in The Old World, but they had a lot of plastic models as well.
In the BRB photo for High Elves I "think" I can see SeaGuard in the bottom left corner almost just out of shot.
I don't see the cavalry though.
Now it might be GW has taken the masters and made new moulds or that they are going to do a print run of Island of Blood. Or perhaps they just blanked out the Rat half of the mould and will cast up the High Elves on their own. Esp since in theory the Skaven are both not appearing in Old World and they are also rumoured to get a big AoS update with 4th edition.
Indeed the more I think of it the more I think GW could have just taken Island of Blood and blanked out the Skaven parts to cast up the High Elf only
Given we know they're already had to remake various masters, I certainly wouldn't be shocked if we get a recut version of the Isle of Blood Elves, especially if it's just Sea Guard since they'd only really need to recut the command (since they also released a separate set of pushfit Sea Guard alongside IoB)
Overread wrote: In the BRB photo for High Elves I "think" I can see SeaGuard in the bottom left corner almost just out of shot.
I don't see the cavalry though.
Now it might be GW has taken the masters and made new moulds or that they are going to do a print run of Island of Blood. Or perhaps they just blanked out the Rat half of the mould and will cast up the High Elves on their own. Esp since in theory the Skaven are both not appearing in Old World and they are also rumoured to get a big AoS update with 4th edition.
Indeed the more I think of it the more I think GW could have just taken Island of Blood and blanked out the Skaven parts to cast up the High Elf only
The Seaguard was also available in a paintset. Perhaps that mould (if it was a seperate mould) could come in handy?
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Given we know they're already had to remake various masters, I certainly wouldn't be shocked if we get a recut version of the Isle of Blood Elves, especially if it's just Sea Guard since they'd only really need to recut the command (since they also released a separate set of pushfit Sea Guard alongside IoB)
Though masters they have redone is metal/resin.
Plastic is more expensive. At that point might just as well do new models entirely doing modern sprues. For same cost more efficient casting.
That's why I said they'd blank off the Skaven parts. I'd assume they could metal fill the gates that lead into the skaven parts to simply shut them off, leaving behind a larger than normal mould, but one that would only fill for the High Elf Parts.
Or it could be as said, that they've taken the sprue from the paint set and are going to just print a LOT of that one to bulk them up and then perhaps give them a resin command group or such.
Overread wrote: That's why I said they'd blank off the Skaven parts. I'd assume they could metal fill the gates that lead into the skaven parts to simply shut them off, leaving behind a larger than normal mould, but one that would only fill for the High Elf Parts.
Or it could be as said, that they've taken the sprue from the paint set and are going to just print a LOT of that one to bulk them up and then perhaps give them a resin command group or such.
This is possible to do, but it's destructive (the filled areas of detail are destroyed) and it can require that additional feeds be cut, since some neighbouring models may share feeds, and so on. I don't know that GW would consider it feasible or cost-effective ahead of the other options; if those models are from the age of digital design, cutting a new mould may be simpler and cheaper overall. A Made to Order – and just living with the slight weirdness of the sprues having some Skaven models on – might also still be a contender.
Thank you all for the recommendations. And what do you guys think about the pure night gobbos list? Plenty of AOS kits = plastics to use as replacements for non plastic TOW ones. Would it be just for fun or viable?
I would hope that if they rerelease island of blood/spire of dawn minis that they wouldn't permanently alter or eliminate the skaven components.
They could market and sell it as a two-fer "Start a High Elf army for TOW and a Skaven army for AoS!"
There would be plenty of demand for it regardless, considering how driven the community is to try to pretend the legacy factions aren't just going to be abandoned in due course by GW.
Like it abandoned epic and adeptus titanicus? And squats? 3 things everybody "knews wouldn't ever come back because gw kept denying they have plans to bring them back
I have very nice island to sell to anybody believing gw at face value.
Overread wrote: In the BRB photo for High Elves I "think" I can see SeaGuard in the bottom left corner almost just out of shot.
I don't see the cavalry though.
Now it might be GW has taken the masters and made new moulds or that they are going to do a print run of Island of Blood. Or perhaps they just blanked out the Rat half of the mould and will cast up the High Elves on their own. Esp since in theory the Skaven are both not appearing in Old World and they are also rumoured to get a big AoS update with 4th edition.
Indeed the more I think of it the more I think GW could have just taken Island of Blood and blanked out the Skaven parts to cast up the High Elf only
The Seaguard was also available in a paintset. Perhaps that mould (if it was a seperate mould) could come in handy?
That would be fantastic news. I really want to get a bunch of Seaguard and was worried how I would need to juggle things to get a round number of them.
lord_blackfang wrote: Thoughts of recutting old sprues are pure delusion. And Isle of Blood reprint with parts of a legacy faction not close behind.
I am not so sure. All of the photos of the High Elf forces in the books include the Swordmasters and Seaguard from IoB, as well as the Reavers and the mage. The only model I haven't seen in official photos is the Griffon. Given GW's meticulous nature about these things, I think it would be fair to assume IoB will reappear in some form.
chaos0xomega wrote: I would hope that if they rerelease island of blood/spire of dawn minis that they wouldn't permanently alter or eliminate the skaven components.
Thing is GW are playing the marketing safe, they don't want to confuse people or give false offerings that might suggest a "legacy" Old World army might appear in the future. I think Island of Blood if released would be nothing but the High Elf part. As noted others have recalled other models in that set which are also appearing in the image, not just the sea guard. So yeah seems like the HE part is coming.
Also if Skaven are getting an AoS edition 4 make-over then that would likely include a lot of new models any way. Unless GW is going to use some of those plastics again.
lord_blackfang wrote: Well if Vampire Counts get tournament legal rules in 2058 boy will chaos0xomega feel silly
One of my posts said something about seeing it possibly happening 15-20 years down the line, but there's no room for that kind of nuance on the internet.
chaos0xomega wrote: I would hope that if they rerelease island of blood/spire of dawn minis that they wouldn't permanently alter or eliminate the skaven components.
Thing is GW are playing the marketing safe, they don't want to confuse people or give false offerings that might suggest a "legacy" Old World army might appear in the future. I think Island of Blood if released would be nothing but the High Elf part. As noted others have recalled other models in that set which are also appearing in the image, not just the sea guard. So yeah seems like the HE part is coming.
Also if Skaven are getting an AoS edition 4 make-over then that would likely include a lot of new models any way. Unless GW is going to use some of those plastics again.
Well that's the thing, the only way to bring the high Elves is to basically permanently eliminate the skaven component, as they share sprues. There were some good skaven sculpts in that kit, be a shame to lose them.
Well that's the thing, the only way to bring the high Elves is to basically permanently eliminate the skaven component, as they share sprues. There were some good skaven sculpts in that kit, be a shame to lose them.
Infantry from both have seen stand alone releases, so this is already there,
chaos0xomega wrote: I would hope that if they rerelease island of blood/spire of dawn minis that they wouldn't permanently alter or eliminate the skaven components.
They could market and sell it as a two-fer "Start a High Elf army for TOW and a Skaven army for AoS!"
There would be plenty of demand for it regardless, considering how driven the community is to try to pretend the legacy factions aren't just going to be abandoned in due course by GW.
And honestly? It wouldn't be that hard for them to cut mold plates from a weaker material with the intention of rearranging the model layout to leave a High Elf only sprue and a Skaven only sprue. It's probably a little impractical to do it that way, but with as little overhead as it would take to do that coupled with the obscene prices they'd be able to ask, I'm leaning toward them being willing to take that risk.
chaos0xomega wrote: I would hope that if they rerelease island of blood/spire of dawn minis that they wouldn't permanently alter or eliminate the skaven components.
They could market and sell it as a two-fer "Start a High Elf army for TOW and a Skaven army for AoS!"
There would be plenty of demand for it regardless, considering how driven the community is to try to pretend the legacy factions aren't just going to be abandoned in due course by GW.
And honestly? It wouldn't be that hard for them to cut mold plates from a weaker material with the intention of rearranging the model layout to leave a High Elf only sprue and a Skaven only sprue. It's probably a little impractical to do it that way, but with as little overhead as it would take to do that coupled with the obscene prices they'd be able to ask, I'm leaning toward them being willing to take that risk.
Moulds can be cut in materials like aluminium instead of steel, which is cheaper but reduces their lifetime. But it's still a new mould. The layout of a sprue can't be re-arranged directly from or onto a mould; that means returning to the masters (physical or digital, the latter being much easier to do). It's still a fairly big overhead. If GW are going to do it, it may well be they just make a new steel mould anyway, since they're set up to do so.
Overread wrote: High Elves for certain - at the end of TOW before AOS they were one of the factions that were pretty well updated. They lost a few models in the Island of Blood set that they didn't get updated (light archery cavalry as I recall and a new Seaguard unit)
But yeah everything else for them was in plastic.
Just keep in mind though that GW is likely to add new things to them such as heroes or such which might well be in Forgeworld Resin.
Problem with HE, is that their core units were horribles and older than Methuselah, bar the seaguard who were locked in the island of blood sprues. Considering that TOW seems to be a pretty low ressources investment for GW, i don't expect them to replace them.
Problem with HE, is that their core units were horribles and older than Methuselah, bar the seaguard who were locked in the island of blood sprues. Considering that TOW seems to be a pretty low ressources investment for GW, i don't expect them to replace them.
Dwarf were in a bette position IIRC
Yeah and it looks like the army photo in the BRB has the IoB models and the old High Elf spearmen
nathan2004 wrote:Anyone know if TOW is in the warhammer app? Can we build lists?
I don't know as I've not checked, but this was posted a few days ago and is pretty darn good already https://old-world-builder.com
Not unless its an official GW Abacus, and notepad and pen, no.
Which you can instantly recognise because it uses skulls instead of beads
Fun thing I noticed is that if you look closely, the rods the skull-beads slide on are also stacks of tiny skulls. Good attention to detail there GW.
I was so sure you were talking about the one the plague marine uses and was impressed they’d be able to have the rod skulls be detailed since they’re so small. I am very disappointed
RazorEdge wrote: There is a rumor, that after Orcs & Goblins, Dwarfs will be next.
Does someone knows more? There was a leaked Dwarf product on reddit.
Would make sense in a sort of “ancient enemies” kind of way. Still there’s 5-4 “good” armies vs “bad” so I wonder if they’re going to split O&G into separate orc and goblin arcane journals because they are doubtless the most diverse army.
RazorEdge wrote: There is a rumor, that after Orcs & Goblins, Dwarfs will be next.
Does someone knows more? There was a leaked Dwarf product on reddit.
Would make sense in a sort of “ancient enemies” kind of way. Still there’s 5-4 “good” armies vs “bad” so I wonder if they’re going to split O&G into separate orc and goblin arcane journals because they are doubtless the most diverse army.
Its "Arcane Journal: Orc and Goblin Tribes" per the cover art that they posted on Warcom, so no.
Greenfield wrote: Moulds can be cut in materials like aluminium instead of steel, which is cheaper but reduces their lifetime. But it's still a new mould. The layout of a sprue can't be re-arranged directly from or onto a mould; that means returning to the masters (physical or digital, the latter being much easier to do). It's still a fairly big overhead. If GW are going to do it, it may well be they just make a new steel mould anyway, since they're set up to do so.
TBF you can cut the moulds to enable that sort of multi-gating where you can cast part of the sprue (Bandai do it with Gundam kits all the time nowadays) but I doubt the IOB tools were done with that in mind and I don't think GW has ever really done it.
RazorEdge wrote: There is a rumor, that after Orcs & Goblins, Dwarfs will be next.
Does someone knows more? There was a leaked Dwarf product on reddit.
Would make sense in a sort of “ancient enemies” kind of way. Still there’s 5-4 “good” armies vs “bad” so I wonder if they’re going to split O&G into separate orc and goblin arcane journals because they are doubtless the most diverse army.
We already know they're not. The most likely candidate for the standalone army is Empire, because of the civil war they will be able to represent multiple sides.
Valrak also said that the Empire are getting three plastic kits, which I guess is consistent with them being considered "two" armies worth of release slot.
RazorEdge wrote: There is a rumor, that after Orcs & Goblins, Dwarfs will be next.
Does someone knows more? There was a leaked Dwarf product on reddit.
Would make sense in a sort of “ancient enemies” kind of way. Still there’s 5-4 “good” armies vs “bad” so I wonder if they’re going to split O&G into separate orc and goblin arcane journals because they are doubtless the most diverse army.
Its "Arcane Journal: Orc and Goblin Tribes" per the cover art that they posted on Warcom, so no.
Hopefully it’s extra-chunky then and includes three or four lists. Like, any three of: Black Orc ArdBoyz, Savage Orc Raiders, Night Goblin Ambushers, Forest Goblin Trappers. Or something.
They've already confirmed several of those points:
- It's a single book covering both Orcs and Goblins
- It contains 2 Armies of Infamy and 2 Special Characters
- The armies of infamy are the Troll Horde and Nomadic Waaaagh!
RazorEdge wrote: There is a rumor, that after Orcs & Goblins, Dwarfs will be next.
Does someone knows more? There was a leaked Dwarf product on reddit.
Would make sense in a sort of “ancient enemies” kind of way. Still there’s 5-4 “good” armies vs “bad” so I wonder if they’re going to split O&G into separate orc and goblin arcane journals because they are doubtless the most diverse army.
Its "Arcane Journal: Orc and Goblin Tribes" per the cover art that they posted on Warcom, so no.
Hopefully it’s extra-chunky then and includes three or four lists. Like, any three of: Black Orc ArdBoyz, Savage Orc Raiders, Night Goblin Ambushers, Forest Goblin Trappers. Or something.
Mozzamanx wrote: They've already confirmed several of those points:
- It's a single book covering both Orcs and Goblins
- It contains 2 Armies of Infamy and 2 Special Characters
- The armies of infamy are the Troll Horde and Nomadic Waaaagh!
Nomadic Waagh hopefully being a proper Savage Orc army given how restricted they are in the GA
The classic Nomadic army referred to one dominated by cavalry. Nothing to do with Savages unfortunately, other than including the option for Savage Boar Boyz.
As per the 6E book:
I hope someone is able to convert up a good generic chariot idea
Boar boyz are great models, as are the AOS wolf riders. Bloodbowl has plastic pump wagons, and there’s an okay option for a warboss/BSB on boar. All that’s missing is replacing the dated chariots (or at least the beasts pulling them)
chaos0xomega wrote: I would hope that if they rerelease island of blood/spire of dawn minis that they wouldn't permanently alter or eliminate the skaven components.
They could market and sell it as a two-fer "Start a High Elf army for TOW and a Skaven army for AoS!"
There would be plenty of demand for it regardless, considering how driven the community is to try to pretend the legacy factions aren't just going to be abandoned in due course by GW.
And honestly? It wouldn't be that hard for them to cut mold plates from a weaker material with the intention of rearranging the model layout to leave a High Elf only sprue and a Skaven only sprue. It's probably a little impractical to do it that way, but with as little overhead as it would take to do that coupled with the obscene prices they'd be able to ask, I'm leaning toward them being willing to take that risk.
Moulds can be cut in materials like aluminium instead of steel, which is cheaper but reduces their lifetime. But it's still a new mould. The layout of a sprue can't be re-arranged directly from or onto a mould; that means returning to the masters (physical or digital, the latter being much easier to do). It's still a fairly big overhead. If GW are going to do it, it may well be they just make a new steel mould anyway, since they're set up to do so.
With CNC machines, ESPECIALLY 1 that can be fed an STL, it's far easier than you'd think. Still some overhead, but not nearly as much as you're thinking.
CNC machines don't work from the STL format, thats basically only used for 3D printing, though I suppose you could transfer STL format to a CAM package to convert it to the necessary output, but thats probably an unnecessarily complicated workflow vs alternatives that exist.
In general, what you described is also only really true if the mold was originally cut via CNC. Island of Blood was produced during the transition era, so may well have been done using the old 3-up and pantagraph, in which case its not as simple or straightforward as you think it is. As far as I have been able to find, Brian Nelson sculpted the High Elves half, he was mostly known for his hand sculpting going back to the 90s, I'm not sure if he ever transitioned to digital. Looking closely at some of the sculpts, they look as though they were sculpted in greenstuff, etc. so I'm going to guess that this approach probably isn't an immediate option without a bit of work.
chaos0xomega wrote: CNC machines don't work from the STL format, thats basically only used for 3D printing, though I suppose you could transfer STL format to a CAM package to convert it to the necessary output, but thats probably an unnecessarily complicated workflow vs alternatives that exist.
In general, what you described is also only really true if the mold was originally cut via CNC. Island of Blood was produced during the transition era, so may well have been done using the old 3-up and pantagraph, in which case its not as simple or straightforward as you think it is. As far as I have been able to find, Brian Nelson sculpted the High Elves half, he was mostly known for his hand sculpting going back to the 90s, I'm not sure if he ever transitioned to digital. Looking closely at some of the sculpts, they look as though they were sculpted in greenstuff, etc. so I'm going to guess that this approach probably isn't an immediate option without a bit of work.
I didn't say it WAS going to happen, just that it was plausible in a "worst case scenario" sort of way. The more likely version is forcing people to buy IoB and BfSP sets, possibly packaged with rulebooks.
GaroRobe wrote: I hope someone is able to convert up a good generic chariot idea
Boar boyz are great models, as are the AOS wolf riders. Bloodbowl has plastic pump wagons, and there’s an okay option for a warboss/BSB on boar. All that’s missing is replacing the dated chariots (or at least the beasts pulling them)
For the Wolf Riders, I would just use the AoS figures. They have the same options, but way better mounts and riders.
For the Boar Chariots, it's probably worth grabbing an extra box of Boar Boyz and just swapping them for the old boars. Most of the bits for the riders are cross-compatible anyway.
GaroRobe wrote: I hope someone is able to convert up a good generic chariot idea
Boar boyz are great models, as are the AOS wolf riders. Bloodbowl has plastic pump wagons, and there’s an okay option for a warboss/BSB on boar. All that’s missing is replacing the dated chariots (or at least the beasts pulling them)
For the Wolf Riders, I would just use the AoS figures. They have the same options, but way better mounts and riders.
For the Boar Chariots, it's probably worth grabbing an extra box of Boar Boyz and just swapping them for the old boars. Most of the bits for the riders are cross-compatible anyway.
They are lovely models, I intend to use them as well but the cost is going to be insane if you want a big wolf rider army. I'll be sticking to the old kits for the bulk of it, though I don't actually mind the old ones but still think the plastics look much better mixed with the 6th Ed night goblins.
Greenfield wrote: Moulds can be cut in materials like aluminium instead of steel, which is cheaper but reduces their lifetime. But it's still a new mould. The layout of a sprue can't be re-arranged directly from or onto a mould; that means returning to the masters (physical or digital, the latter being much easier to do). It's still a fairly big overhead. If GW are going to do it, it may well be they just make a new steel mould anyway, since they're set up to do so.
TBF you can cut the moulds to enable that sort of multi-gating where you can cast part of the sprue (Bandai do it with Gundam kits all the time nowadays) but I doubt the IOB tools were done with that in mind and I don't think GW has ever really done it.
Yes, moulds can be made of multiple smaller steel blocks known as inserts, which together form a single mould. I suspect this is how it's done for some of the character models from various boxed games, that first appear as a sprue of four connected character frames and then later get solo releases – but as far as I'm aware the use of inserts produces visibly distinct areas or sub-frames on the sprue, not completely mixed sprues like Island of Blood.
What greenfield is kind of describing is what in the industry is referred to as "mold cavities". A single mold which can be used to manufacture 4 kits at once would be referred to as a 4 cavity mold. In industry multi-cavity molds are often used to produce multiple duplicate parts per cycle (i.e. you have a 64- cavity mold, where all 64 cavities each produce the same exact part every time you run the mold through the press, so you're producing 64 parts per cycle instead of 1 part per cycle). If a mold has multiple cavities but each cavity is a different part, these are often referred to as family molds instead, as the different cavities are usually "related". These would more often be used for bigger kits (think something like a baneblade) where each set of sprues is basically produced independently from the other.
A family mold that makes different kits (i.e. each cavity is a separate character, sometimes for entirely different factions or games, etc.) would still be referred to as a family mold (industry doesn't really care about those distinctions, they would see it as being all part of the same product range, brand, customer, etc. and leave it at that). You would use what are called RSO's - Runner Shut Offs - to open or close sections (i.e. cavities) of the mold to plastic flow in order to limit production to just specific sections/cavities. I.E. if you had a 4-part family mold and say one cavity produced a primaris lieutenant, one produced a tau fireblade, one produced a chaos sorceror, and one produced a drukhari archon, but you only wanted to produce the chaos sorceror, you would use one or more runner shut-off devices to turn "off" the flow of plastic to the other sections of the mold. Typically this is achieved by a rotatable piece that is inserted into the mold block that might have a 2 or 3 way "intersection" of runner/sprue cut into it, by rotating it, you move the "intersection" out of alignment with the rest of the runner/sprue and thus block the flow to a section of the mold. Think of it kind of like a railroad turntable or switchtrack, basically. The runner is your railroad, the hot molten plastic is your train, and the RSO controls which section of track your train runs through.
A mold insert generally refers to when you embed a part inside another part (ex - a screwdriver - its a plastic handle formed around a metal rod with the flat/philips head at the end of it). There are base inserts (which are commonly called mold inserts as well, and sometimes referred to as MUD inserts though those refer to a specific standard non-proprietary system, whereas base inserts are proprietary and only fit the bases they were designed for) which are a mold plate that are set into a frame/base to enable rapid quickchange production of different parts, etc. There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding with regards to how they work/what they are used for. Typically, I think when you see multi-insert MUD or block systems, its being done that way so that the manufacturer can service multiple customers simultaneously rather than because its a true family mold or multi-cavity application - you usually select the option when you're cost conscious because your production run won't be large enough to justify the expense of a full set of molds.
The idea is that rather than having to produce a full set of molds for each part/kit, you can instead produce only a section of the mold (i.e. the insert) which has the actual geometry that you are trying to produce, while the rest of the mold block (with all the nozzles, gates, and injector pins necessary already engineered into it) is already built and ready to go. The mold inserts are cheaper by virtue of being significantly less material, as well as less cutting as you aren't putting in all the engineered features needed to make it work (again, ejector pins, etc.), and instead of having to remove the entire mold when you want to rotate production to a different part, you just swap out the plate/insert with the ones relevant to the part you want. To my knowledge they aren't generally used in multi-cavity/family mold applications though there are systems that allow you to run multiple plates simultaneously such as a MUD H-Frame which allows for simultaneous production of two separate molds, and double-H which allows for simultaneous production of four. To my knowledge, it isn't possible to use it with an RSO, though I could be mistaken - more commonly, you would use a blank plate to block flow to one (or more) of the cavities.
From my guess, I would imagine that if GW is using anything like any of what I discussed above, it would be a MUD U-frame (single cavity) or a proprietary block insert. From my memory, theres no indication on their sprues of the kits being produced in a multi-cavity application, as you would see the runners/sprues (or remnants thereof) linking the different kits together. Even when using an RSO I would expect to see something indicative of it, and to my recollection I can't think of any evidence I've noticed of it. All the character kits I can think of (again going from memory) seem to have fairly clean sprue perimeters with no indication of plastic flowing in from outside their perimeter - most I think tend to have their gates right dead center of the frame which suggests they are produced in a single-cavity setup, whereas a MUD H/Double-H/E (E is like a n H but side-by-side, meaningless distinction IMO) would have a single injection point/gate used to provide plastic to both plates, and you would see the indicators that the plastic flowed in from "outside" the sprue frame). Its possible they use a proprietary system that allows them to do multiple plates with center-gating that wouldn't indicate the use of a multi-cavity/family insert system, but I kinda doubt it would be worth going through the trouble for them. I can't really think of any reason why you'd bother having a multi-cavity insert system if the intent was to blank-plate or RSO a section of it off, the point is to increase throughput by allowing production on multiple products simultaneously, so blanking off sections/cavities would be somewhat defeating the point. At that point you would just switch out the plates with other kits and rotate through production (if for example you wanted 10,000 shots of kit A but only 5,000 shots of kit B, 2,500 of kit C, etc. You would keep insert A in, and switch out inserts B and C as you hit your production targets for them while continuing to produce A).
chaos0xomega wrote: CNC machines don't work from the STL format, thats basically only used for 3D printing, though I suppose you could transfer STL format to a CAM package to convert it to the necessary output, but thats probably an unnecessarily complicated workflow vs alternatives that exist.
In general, what you described is also only really true if the mold was originally cut via CNC. Island of Blood was produced during the transition era, so may well have been done using the old 3-up and pantagraph, in which case its not as simple or straightforward as you think it is. As far as I have been able to find, Brian Nelson sculpted the High Elves half, he was mostly known for his hand sculpting going back to the 90s, I'm not sure if he ever transitioned to digital. Looking closely at some of the sculpts, they look as though they were sculpted in greenstuff, etc. so I'm going to guess that this approach probably isn't an immediate option without a bit of work.
What looks like it was sculpted with greenstuff?
The opposite conclusion has been the longstanding consensus -- IoB was early digital sculpting. Telltales include the parts with elaborate "effects" and/or "motion" like the ball of magic under the Elf wizard or the flame and smoke effects on some of the Skaven models, which weren't often attempted in the same extent by-hand (and which still show up on GW models now, indicating a throughline from IoB to now). Skinny weapons are another feature. The Clanrats, overall, also look extremely digital, like an array of base poses recombined with different details, armor types, etc. reappearing in slightly modified expressions. Combined with the fact that the subsequent Clanrat standalone kit also displays those qualities and the same bases + cut-and-paste detail.
If the Perrys were convinced to learn digital sculpting I have no trouble believing most if not all of the GW sculpting stable were too.
Huh? The Perry's still sculpt everything by hand. I've never seen anything to indicate they've moved to digital. One of the main reasons they left GW in 2014 (years after IoB) was GWs push to go fully digital and their desire to continue the old ways.
As for the signs, as far as the elves are concerned, the "scales" on their armor isn't a consistent size/shape fron model to model nor even on the same model, and in some places the lines aren't quite straight, which is suggestive of those features being sculpted manually rather than using digital tools to duplicate them precisely. The stiff posing with minimal variation is also suggestive that they were partially sculpted in greenstuff, cast in metal (though in this era they had started scanning and 3d printing instead of casting) and then further over-sculpted in additional greenstuff to create those minor variations in pose and detail, as digital methods would allow for greater variety for minimal effort while retaining geometric consistency. I've also found posts from John Blanche discussing working with Brian Nelson on certain kits - Brian was still clay and greenstuff sculpting 3-ups well into 2011/2012 ish even while others on the team were transitioning to digital.
As far as the skaven are concerned, the HPA - which released around the same time as IoB - was sculpted in clay by Seb Perbert from artwork by John Blanche. Seb also sculpted a lot of the IoB Skaven. Not a clearcut indicator per se, just because one mini was hand sculpted doesn't mean another was, but it's a good indicator of what the common processes being used in the studio at the time were by certain sculptors.
How I wish GW let the Perry’s come back and sculpt by hand again provided they wanted to also. Something you can’t quite capture through digital design imo that’s there with hand design.
chaos0xomega wrote: Huh? The Perry's still sculpt everything by hand. I've never seen anything to indicate they've moved to digital. One of the main reasons they left GW in 2014 (years after IoB) was GWs push to go fully digital and their desire to continue the old ways.
You also haven't seen anyone in this thread claim that they've moved to digital.
Now, with the goalposts back on the field, here you go:
(skip ahead to 00:31:45)
....you claimed, or at least implied, that they did.
"If the Perrys were convinced to learn digital sculpting I have no trouble believing most if not all of the GW sculpting stable were too."
I wouldn't consider "4 months" of digital sculpting and "a few hours of digital work on various things", which were mixed and completed with traditional sculpting to be a strong argument to your point.
Also of note that the events being discussed here occurred 4-5 years after IOB released, which was itself 6-8 years after IoB would have been sculpted.
Island of Blood being at least made different than the boxes before was hinted back than already because it was the first box that got a different sprue layout
and the AoS clanrats currently available are the same sculpts as the IoB ones
but whatever it is, we will know when High Elves return what we get and if the old models returning are the very old ones or not
kodos wrote: Island of Blood being at least made different than the boxes before was hinted back than already because it was the first box that got a different sprue layout
and the AoS clanrats currently available are the same sculpts as the IoB ones
but whatever it is, we will know when High Elves return what we get and if the old models returning are the very old ones or not
The AoS Clanrats are a different kit to the IoB ones. Same basic design, but they got a standalone kit with the Skaven release at that time which is the kit that is still available. The IoB ones have moulded shields, which are optional in the full kit.
"If the Perrys were convinced to learn digital sculpting I have no trouble believing most if not all of the GW sculpting stable were too."
I wouldn't consider "4 months" of digital sculpting and "a few hours of digital work on various things", which were mixed and completed with traditional sculpting to be a strong argument to your point.
Also of note that the events being discussed here occurred 4-5 years after IOB released, which was itself 6-8 years after IoB would have been sculpted.
He didn't say they moved to digital sculpting. Just that they learned how to do it...
Aka to LEARN something you don't have to do something exclusively. You do know you can posses skill for both hand AND digital sculpting don't you?
kodos wrote: Island of Blood being at least made different than the boxes before was hinted back than already because it was the first box that got a different sprue layout
and the AoS clanrats currently available are the same sculpts as the IoB ones
but whatever it is, we will know when High Elves return what we get and if the old models returning are the very old ones or not
The AoS Clanrats are a different kit to the IoB ones. Same basic design, but they got a standalone kit with the Skaven release at that time which is the kit that is still available. The IoB ones have moulded shields, which are optional in the full kit.
exactly, different kits but same sculpts which does not rule out that both are made from the very same greens but could also mean those were already available digital
"If the Perrys were convinced to learn digital sculpting I have no trouble believing most if not all of the GW sculpting stable were too."
I wouldn't consider "4 months" of digital sculpting and "a few hours of digital work on various things", which were mixed and completed with traditional sculpting to be a strong argument to your point.
Also of note that the events being discussed here occurred 4-5 years after IOB released, which was itself 6-8 years after IoB would have been sculpted.
He didn't say they moved to digital sculpting. Just that they learned how to do it...
Aka to LEARN something you don't have to do something exclusively. You do know you can posses skill for both hand AND digital sculpting don't you?
I mean, in the interview they pretty much say they couldn't figure out how to do stuff and thus sculpted parts of the mini hy hard, so did they learn?
nathan2004 wrote: How I wish GW let the Perry’s come back and sculpt by hand again provided they wanted to also. Something you can’t quite capture through digital design imo that’s there with hand design.
I don't think it's the medium, I think it's the hiring of computer design graduates rather than art graduates.
Wayniac wrote: Got my TK box finally, and god these TK skeletons are awful, I had forgotten how flimsy they are to assemble.
I said screw it and bought oathmark skeletons, which look nicer, and I also bought skeleton chariot kits(2) from the Wargames atlantic. I'll probably still be buying regular TK heroes and such but I couldnt be doing with those nasty-ass skeletons.
(Also I was going for more of an "Army of Darkness" vibe than "Egypt with more skulls". Will probably also get some Tomb Guard down the line so it looks like armies of ancient celt greek egyptian etc armies. Wish there was some roman skeletons to get too
nathan2004 wrote: How I wish GW let the Perry’s come back and sculpt by hand again provided they wanted to also. Something you can’t quite capture through digital design imo that’s there with hand design.
I don't think it's the medium, I think it's the hiring of computer design graduates rather than art graduates.
Good point but some of the old world releases I really like. The Standard Bearer for Tomb Kings will be going in my army and while I don't play Orcs, the new Orc Boss and Shaman look incredible.
Maybe trying to match aesthetic is forcing them to do less instead of more which more is what they do it seems on all 40k and AoS stuff nowadays it feels like. Maybe it's just me though lol.
Wayniac wrote: Got my TK box finally, and god these TK skeletons are awful, I had forgotten how flimsy they are to assemble.
I said screw it and bought oathmark skeletons, which look nicer, and I also bought skeleton chariot kits(2) from the Wargames atlantic. I'll probably still be buying regular TK heroes and such but I couldnt be doing with those nasty-ass skeletons.
(Also I was going for more of an "Army of Darkness" vibe than "Egypt with more skulls". Will probably also get some Tomb Guard down the line so it looks like armies of ancient celt greek egyptian etc armies. Wish there was some roman skeletons to get too
Might look a bit solitary compared to normal skeletons in Roman gear, but the Bone Giant will be released with a Roman style helmet. At least that's an option to get a Roman touch to your army.
Maybe trying to match aesthetic is forcing them to do less instead of more which more is what they do it seems on all 40k and AoS stuff nowadays it feels like. Maybe it's just me though lol.
While I agree in general, they managed to do quite unspectacular new cadians of a reasonable scale and sober style.
And the new foot chaos warriors is neiter scale-creepers or over-the-top design, just basic and sober update of the classic design. And I guess the new cities of sigmar stuff is quite grounded. Even the absurd walking ogre sniper tower have ogres that look nothing like the comic book style mawtribe models.
So, even for the main systems, they can adopt a style less inspiered by "sunday cartoons". (Just for the record, I dont mind the occasional over the top sunday cartoon centerpiece unit once in a while, but some things are best left plain and grounded.)
Wayniac wrote: Got my TK box finally, and god these TK skeletons are awful, I had forgotten how flimsy they are to assemble.
I said screw it and bought oathmark skeletons, which look nicer, and I also bought skeleton chariot kits(2) from the Wargames atlantic. I'll probably still be buying regular TK heroes and such but I couldnt be doing with those nasty-ass skeletons.
(Also I was going for more of an "Army of Darkness" vibe than "Egypt with more skulls". Will probably also get some Tomb Guard down the line so it looks like armies of ancient celt greek egyptian etc armies. Wish there was some roman skeletons to get too
Dark Art Studios has you covered, but their skellies are metal and a bit pricey. Maybe something for the front rank only
Personally I wouldn't hope for Orcs and Goblins soon. Bear in mind that Tomb Kings and Bretonnia don't have their entire ranges released yet. The Orcs and Goblins article outright states that the plan is not to release everything in a single wave either. It's conceivable that February is more Tomb Kings and Bretonnia and Orcs and Goblins are spread out across March and April.
Sorry to ask this here (though it is Old World news related, kinda)!
Fellow Aussies, do you know how free shipping works on the GW webstore if some of it is Made to Order / Ships from UK?
Just went to place a smallish order with a total over $85 AUD. Part of the order was MtO Bretonnian stuff (foot knights). Roughly speaking it was $50 MtO from the UK warehouse and $50 regular stuff from the Aussie warehouse.
When I went to checkout, the 'delivery' bit said I'd be paying $7 shipping for the MtO half and $7 shipping for the other half of the order, so double shipping instead of free...
Maybe it only applies free shipping on the actual payment screen? I don't want to click through to that in case I can't back out.
Had a look through the FAQs and apparently 'Ships from UK' disqualifies free shipping if it's delivering to a GW shop in Oz. I'm doing home delivery, though, so it shouldn't be an issue as far as I can tell.
I tried sending an email to Oz GW customer support, but my webmail carked it right as I was sending and now I can't log back in due to technical difficulties, so I have no idea if I actually sent the email or not. The Made to Order is going to time out after the weekend so it might be too late by the time I finally get in touch with them.
This is very obliquely news-related (yes really) because it looks like there's going to be a fair bit of MtO stuff for Old World turning up in the near future. If MtO stuff is in its own category for shipping charge purposes in Oz, it effectively adds another surcharge on top of the already high Aussie prices unless you order several MtO items at once from the limited selection on offer.
e.g. If you want the damsels at $84, they're really $91, unless you also grab a $25 foot knight or skellie you don't really want. You couldn't chuck in something else from the wider GW store to get you over the line, like a paintbrush or a pack of bases. Hope I'm wrong about that!
I don't think GW have clearly stated how it works, but playing around with different items in the cart, it seems buying anything from the UK counts separately to stuff in Australia, but they both have the $85 threshold.
So add two items under $85, one from the UK and one from Australia, if they sum to $100, you pay $14 shipping.
If both items are from the UK, it drops to free shipping. If both items are from Australia, it also drops to free shipping.
This means it's a worse deal than it used to be prior to the new store for buying stuff from Australia, as I believe the threshold was less than $85 previously.
But it's a better deal for buying FW stuff, as the FW threshold used to be higher ($100 or $150 I think? Don't remember, been a while since I bought something from FW!).
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I don't think GW have clearly stated how it works, but playing around with different items in the cart, it seems buying anything from the UK counts separately to stuff in Australia, but they both have the $85 threshold.
So add two items under $85, one from the UK and one from Australia, if they sum to $100, you pay $14 shipping.
If both items are from the UK, it drops to free shipping. If both items are from Australia, it also drops to free shipping.
.
Thanks for checking! Didn't even occur to me to experiment with other orders. D'oh.
That makes me considerably cranky because, as far as I can tell, the website only says 'no free shipping if it goes to a GW store from the UK'. Otherwise, by the letter of the FAQs, free shipping should apply. The fine print is not matching the actual situation.
I managed to get back into my webmail and made sure I sent that email to GW Oz customer support, so I should hopefully get some official word (maybe even a phrase) about this in a few days.
As it stands I guess I'll just grab the knights and take the $7 hit. I don't want anything else except the damsels and I can't justify the lady tax on them.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: This means it's a worse deal than it used to be prior to the new store for buying stuff from Australia, as I believe the threshold was less than $85 previously.
But it's a better deal for buying FW stuff, as the FW threshold used to be higher ($100 or $150 I think? Don't remember, been a while since I bought something from FW!)
I think it's been $85 for Oz free shipping for a while now. It did drop to somewhere around $40 during the first year or so of COVID, though.
Guys, big restock of Old World stuff just hit the UKGW site, including all the card packs (not the books). Hope this is of use and you get what you need!
Just to clarify, this was for the UK site, and it's all still available on there. Sorry to hear it hasn't reached across the pond yet - but hopefully this indicates that you guys will be able to get cards and other stuff soon, too, if you don't have them already. Fingers crossed!
No, the cards just appear to be available on the UK site in the preorder list. They won’t add to the basket anymore and when I had a set in the basket earlier they disappeared the moment I went to pay with an “insufficient stock” error. If you go to the individual entries they say out of stock.
It looks like in the US, we can preorder dice (which I already got the TK dice on preorder lol) and the rest of the minis we didn't get at launch (the foot knights, TKBSB, handmaiden, etc), go on preorder a week from tomorrow.
Anyone know if there are plans to expand on the special characters available to the Tomb Kings? I was sad to see that there were only 3 in their book. I was sure that Khalida was going to be one of them, as her model is one of the best from the later Tomb King releases. But not yet anyway.
I haven't seen the Bretonnian Book, so I'm not sure how many of those special characters are coming back.
If they are being stingy on Special Characters, I can't imagine which of the MANY Dwarf, or WoCSC's they will choose to rerelease.
skullking wrote: Anyone know if there are plans to expand on the special characters available to the Tomb Kings? I was sad to see that there were only 3 in their book. I was sure that Khalida was going to be one of them, as her model is one of the best from the later Tomb King releases. But not yet anyway.
I haven't seen the Bretonnian Book, so I'm not sure how many of those special characters are coming back.
If they are being stingy on Special Characters, I can't imagine which of the MANY Dwarf, or WoCSC's they will choose to rerelease.
Unless the relaunch flops I'd be highly surprised if we didn't see 'campaign' books, like they're doing in HH and Legiones Imperialis. I'd expect to see some of the missing characters appear in those books. The Arcane Journals are rather weird publications, very basic amount of lores and seemingly missing characters present in the TOW timeline, they only seem to scratch half the itch. I can only assume it's because GW is going to try and nickel and dime the fanbase Necromunda style and slowly release characters.
skullking wrote: Anyone know if there are plans to expand on the special characters available to the Tomb Kings? I was sad to see that there were only 3 in their book. I was sure that Khalida was going to be one of them, as her model is one of the best from the later Tomb King releases. But not yet anyway.
I haven't seen the Bretonnian Book, so I'm not sure how many of those special characters are coming back.
If they are being stingy on Special Characters, I can't imagine which of the MANY Dwarf, or WoCSC's they will choose to rerelease.
Unless the relaunch flops I'd be highly surprised if we didn't see 'campaign' books, like they're doing in HH and Legiones Imperialis. I'd expect to see some of the missing characters appear in those books. The Arcane Journals are rather weird publications, very basic amount of lores and seemingly missing characters present in the TOW timeline, they only seem to scratch half the itch. I can only assume it's because GW is going to try and nickel and dime the fanbase Necromunda style and slowly release characters.
I agree and would expect everything they have been doing with HH they will do to TOW. I think we should expect to see different armies rollout with some of the campaign books though. GW said they would be doing Kislev at some point - I would expect to see their list and a Norsca list as Asavar Kul was from the Kul tribe. If they release the Archaon models, it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility he could represent Asavar as he dons the same armor and sword. He was missing Dorgorand the Eye of Sheerion. The campaign book should cover the fall of Praag. If they did a second campaign book, they could do Cathay and the Vampire Pirates. Cathay is very far away from the action in the old world. Same goes for Tilea as they could do the Strigoi vs the Tileans. The Strigoi were pushed out of the Badlands by orcs and goblins and the rest of the vampire dynasties ignored their call for help because of Neferata as she hated her brother Ushorien because he wanted to rule with her by his side. They could add various factions Legendsfactions based on their narrative and popularity. The VonCarsteins would be out as Manfred, the last known of the line was killed at Helfenn. But you could have Necrarchs and Lahmians and a story involving them.
There is so much you could do when it comes to developing a narrative and filling out the time line. On top of that, you have multiple factions with the entirety of their faction complete. With GW expanding their production, I'm hoping it means they can fully support the game. I don't want to wait 6 months to get my Bretonian MTO items.
boyd wrote: The Strigoi were pushed out of the Badlands by orcs and goblins and the rest of the vampire dynasties ignored their call for help because of Neferata as she hated her brother Ushorien because he wanted to rule with her by his side.
They didn't ignore the call for help, Neferata drove the Greenskins to destroy Strygos and the rest went along with the plan.
boyd wrote: GW said they would be doing Kislev at some point - I would expect to see their list and a Norsca list as Asavar Kul was from the Kul tribe. If they release the Archaon models, it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility he could represent Asavar as he dons the same armor and sword. He was missing Dorgorand the Eye of Sheerion. The campaign book should cover the fall of Praag.
Archaon is a great model and I wouldn't be sad to see him available again, but I certainly hope GW isn't so cheap as to just relabel old named characters.
Kul should get his own resin sculpt. Or alternate build Everchosen bits in a plastic Lord kit if Warriors of Chaos get one for their release. Provided he gets rules in the first place, of course.
Rember that a lot of special characters where not aliveor have to be born(exept undeath) in the time the game is living. i dont mind if they go easy on the special characters i will have my own charcters to lead my army's.
Archeon may be alive but not have the power he has at the time of the endtimes and will not be riding the dragon.
skeleton wrote: Rember that a lot of special characters where not aliveor have to be born(exept undeath) in the time the game is living. i dont mind if they go easy on the special characters i will have my own charcters to lead my army's.
Archeon may be alive but not have the power he has at the time of the endtimes and will not be riding the dragon.
I would greatly prefer if they go light on special characters. The generic hero options and the the magic weapons is enough to make most heroes I want.
Grown pretty tired of Warhammer games making an entire world or setting feel tiny due to the focus on named characters. Prefer to tell my own stories.
skeleton wrote: Rember that a lot of special characters where not aliveor have to be born(exept undeath) in the time the game is living. i dont mind if they go easy on the special characters i will have my own charcters to lead my army's.
Archeon may be alive but not have the power he has at the time of the endtimes and will not be riding the dragon.
Quite happy that not as many SC's although I do want to read about notable people of the time.
Lore wise quite a few are not about although even some of the Skaven like Ikit are active and would be very similar. Alarielle's mum is the Everqueen, although soon to be assassinated. The Undead are the Undead, Some of the major Dwars are active but usually less powerful. Dark Elves are unchanged apart from Shadowblade I think who has not been born
Mr_Rose wrote: On the Dwarf side it would be fun to see what the last High King was like, and maybe Gotrek* before he took the Oath.
*because, considering he survived into AoS, I don’t think they can help themselves at this point…
Have a scenario - Wee Baby Gotrek's First Axe?
Listen, I’m just saying, if a suspiciously spiky-haired Votann warrior shows up out of the Cicatrix Maledictum with his personal chronicler-bot and a tragic backstory about being the last survivor of a clan hold eaten by the Tyranids, don’t be surprised.
- Which rules version is the latest release close to?
- Are armies expected to be ranks of 4 or 5?
I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?
My MTO Bretonnian's arrived yesterday (axe Lord, BSB, foot paladin and Damsels) a lot quicker than expected. I didn't get a dispatch email either, so a genuine surprise. Happy with the cast quality as well. Hope that other people who ordered have as quick a turnaround.
Stormonu wrote: A few quick questions about the current rules...
- Which rules version is the latest release close to?
- Are armies expected to be ranks of 4 or 5?
I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?
-It’s probably closest to 7th, though with some bits from 8th and a lot of new innovations.
-Depends on the unit type. Lighter units in 5s, heavy units in 4s and monstrous units in 3s.
Stormonu wrote: I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?
Lumineth are Lumineth, the High Elves were pulled from Cities of Sigmar in stages since 2015, with the last few leaving the most recent Battletome to bring them back in to The Old World. None of them are currently sold at this time, but most should be back once High Elves receive their Arcane Journal, though when that might be is anyone's guess
Mr_Rose wrote: On the Dwarf side it would be fun to see what the last High King was like, and maybe Gotrek* before he took the Oath.
*because, considering he survived into AoS, I don’t think they can help themselves at this point…
Have a scenario - Wee Baby Gotrek's First Axe?
Listen, I’m just saying, if a suspiciously spiky-haired Votann warrior shows up out of the Cicatrix Maledictum with his personal chronicler-bot and a tragic backstory about being the last survivor of a clan hold eaten by the Tyranids, don’t be surprised.
They already did that one in Necromunda: The Vaults of Temenos.
Except there were two of them, brothers.
Having played 4 games now, with today being my first 2k game and against legacy armies - feels like the speculation about GW nerfing them before release might be right. They are missing something it feels like, almost like Warriors of Chaos.
nathan2004 wrote: Having played 4 games now, with today being my first 2k game and against legacy armies - feels like the speculation about GW nerfing them before release might be right. They are missing something it feels like, almost like Warriors of Chaos.
Here Vampire Counts are one of the most powerful, so...
nathan2004 wrote: Having played 4 games now, with today being my first 2k game and against legacy armies - feels like the speculation about GW nerfing them before release might be right. They are missing something it feels like, almost like Warriors of Chaos.
Nay, first reviews by influences who got the files ahead of time went up the second the public pdfs did, if there were last minute changes we would know.
nathan2004 wrote: Having played 4 games now, with today being my first 2k game and against legacy armies - feels like the speculation about GW nerfing them before release might be right. They are missing something it feels like, almost like Warriors of Chaos.
Nay, first reviews by influences who got the files ahead of time went up the second the public pdfs did, if there were last minute changes we would know.
Mainly seemed to be a culling of allies from what people have said?
There’s definitely been reports of influencers having to do a second version of their reviews though,
nathan2004 wrote: Having played 4 games now, with today being my first 2k game and against legacy armies - feels like the speculation about GW nerfing them before release might be right. They are missing something it feels like, almost like Warriors of Chaos.
Nay, first reviews by influences who got the files ahead of time went up the second the public pdfs did, if there were last minute changes we would know.
There were some last minute changes, that's what those influencers said. But mostly pulling allies, not that dramatic.
nathan2004 wrote: Having played 4 games now, with today being my first 2k game and against legacy armies - feels like the speculation about GW nerfing them before release might be right. They are missing something it feels like, almost like Warriors of Chaos.
Nay, first reviews by influences who got the files ahead of time went up the second the public pdfs did, if there were last minute changes we would know.
According to reddit, the idea that the PDFs were updated prior to release is a confirmed fact. I was told the following:
Daemons and Warriors originally could ally
Vampire Counts and Empire originally could ally
Daemons had smaller minimum unit sizes in the pre-release version
Likewise some Vampire Counts units had smaller minimum sizes originally (Spirit Hosts given as a specific example)
Ghouls units apparently had Dark Vitality at some point
Raise dead was originally d6+4 instead of 2d3
Skaven didn't originally have 0-1 hero limitations
"Mountain Minitatures" recorded first impression videos on the Legacy Armies on the pre-release PDFs and you can refer to those to get a sense of the changes (note - didn't watch it, no idea who that is, etc. This is just what I was told by reddit).
Stormonu wrote: A few quick questions about the current rules...
- Which rules version is the latest release close to?
- Are armies expected to be ranks of 4 or 5?
I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?
-It’s probably closest to 7th, though with some bits from 8th and a lot of new innovations.
-Depends on the unit type. Lighter units in 5s, heavy units in 4s and monstrous units in 3s.
Some of the "new innovations" aren't new and are rather from Warhammer Ancients.
Went to go pick up the TKBSB that’s on preorder right now in the US site, and every time I got to payment and hit submit it would remove it from my cart citing insufficient stock. Not showing as out of stock on the website, so of course this is just irritating. Gotta love the new web store!
lord_blackfang wrote: What's interesting about that reddit list is it doesn't even include the one change I noticed myself from Mountian's pdf reviews.
nathan2004 wrote: Anyone else house ruling and allowing DoC to ally with WoC just following the normal ally rules?
I would probably allow Warriors to take Daemon allies, but not vice versa.
Im opposite. Legacy factions taking core allies is a non-issue for me. Core factions taking legacy allies is a backdoor for legacy stuff in core games when I'd prefer to not play with legacy stuff (to clarify - I'm ok with having games against or with legacy armies on occasion, but I'd really prefer to play core-only most of the time. Allowing core factions to take legacy allies creates potentially awkward situations where myself/others of the same mindset could be taken by surprise and have to tactfully work out how to turn down the game or ask your opponent to modify their list, etc.).
lord_blackfang wrote: What's interesting about that reddit list is it doesn't even include the one change I noticed myself from Mountian's pdf reviews.
nathan2004 wrote: Anyone else house ruling and allowing DoC to ally with WoC just following the normal ally rules?
I would probably allow Warriors to take Daemon allies, but not vice versa.
Im opposite. Legacy factions taking core allies is a non-issue for me. Core factions taking legacy allies is a backdoor for legacy stuff in core games when I'd prefer to not play with legacy stuff (to clarify - I'm ok with having games against or with legacy armies on occasion, but I'd really prefer to play core-only most of the time. Allowing core factions to take legacy allies creates potentially awkward situations where myself/others of the same mindset could be taken by surprise and have to tactfully work out how to turn down the game or ask your opponent to modify their list, etc.).
Dysartes wrote: Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.
And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?
godswildcard wrote: Went to go pick up the TKBSB that’s on preorder right now in the US site, and every time I got to payment and hit submit it would remove it from my cart citing insufficient stock. Not showing as out of stock on the website, so of course this is just irritating. Gotta love the new web store!
Same exact issue, although it does list the preorder date as 2/10/24. I was able to pick up the TK dice from the website so that's a plus and not pay outrageous Ebay prices...
Dysartes wrote: Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.
And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?
Technically Nuln made some as well and they might use them for mercs if they do a book for them
Dysartes wrote: Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.
And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?
Maybe Cathay will have them? Repeating Crossbows were a legit ancient Chinese thing.
I think the Celestial Dragon Crossbows from TWW might use them.
godswildcard wrote: Went to go pick up the TKBSB that’s on preorder right now in the US site, and every time I got to payment and hit submit it would remove it from my cart citing insufficient stock. Not showing as out of stock on the website, so of course this is just irritating. Gotta love the new web store!
Obviously not TOW stuff, but I still have two outstanding orders from September and one from October. They are totally gonna ship, honest! Just need $5 for gas, then...
Im opposite. Legacy factions taking core allies is a non-issue for me. Core factions taking legacy allies is a backdoor for legacy stuff in core games when I'd prefer to not play with legacy stuff (to clarify - I'm ok with having games against or with legacy armies on occasion, but I'd really prefer to play core-only most of the time. Allowing core factions to take legacy allies creates potentially awkward situations where myself/others of the same mindset could be taken by surprise and have to tactfully work out how to turn down the game or ask your opponent to modify their list, etc.).
I take it you're a tournament player? Every game must count towards practice against a tournament worthy opponent?
And those GW diehards who just so happened to have invested years in the 'wrong' faction and have been booted out the old world now, can sod off?
Lovely way to split the community for the sake of following GW's tournament only rules. I expect in 40k you no longer play on 6' x 4' and only play on official 5' x 3'8 tables.
Sheesh.
Stormonu wrote: I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?
Lumineth are Lumineth, the High Elves were pulled from Cities of Sigmar in stages since 2015, with the last few leaving the most recent Battletome to bring them back in to The Old World. None of them are currently sold at this time, but most should be back once High Elves receive their Arcane Journal, though when that might be is anyone's guess
Lumineth are High Elves that can be copyrighted; that's literally the only difference. The aesthetic is generally the same.
Dysartes wrote: Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.
And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?
Stormonu wrote: I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?
Lumineth are Lumineth, the High Elves were pulled from Cities of Sigmar in stages since 2015, with the last few leaving the most recent Battletome to bring them back in to The Old World. None of them are currently sold at this time, but most should be back once High Elves receive their Arcane Journal, though when that might be is anyone's guess
Lumineth are High Elves that can be copyrighted; that's literally the only difference. The aesthetic is generally the same.
Actually nothing about the Lumineth is any more nor any less protected than the High Elves. About the only difference are the names are more original and GW could easily have done what they did with 40K where they changed a few to more brand controlled names.
The whole "AoS was improving GW copyright protection over what Old World did" is something people keep saying, but honestly I don't buy it. There's just nothing inherent within AoS that offers more protection save for a product name change. Heck several armies are almost 100% Old World models and even when they've been updated they are often replaced with very similar designs.
