My big issue with the upcoming MTO is trying to figure out how many War Wagons to buy. I want to do a Nuln army but haven't figure out the list yet... thinking 3 is reasonable?

 Prometheum5 wrote:
My big issue with the upcoming MTO is trying to figure out how many War Wagons to buy. I want to do a Nuln army but haven't figure out the list yet... thinking 3 is reasonable?

My general rule-of-thumb is 3 is a magic wargame number. at least for standard 28-32mm games.

In most wargames you can take 3 of something (that might be squads or individual) fairly comfortably. It's got a skew to the army, but there's still room to fit other things in as well as.

Beyond 3 and in many cases you are now committing yourself to a full on skew list with one singular focus. You're starting to lock out a lot more options.


OF course the other consideration isn't just how many can you take; its do you want spares for conversions; do you want to consider running "epic" games that og way beyond normal point values - eg for old world a 5K game

 Overread wrote:
Those are the made-to-order specials released alongside new armies. And yes those are 100% bubbled releases. However the important thing is that the core of each army is staying in regular production.

That regular production army is the longer bubble that's just going to steadily grow and wait for new models.

Now I will agree there's a good chances totally brand new gamers are drawn into AoS and I could see that AoS might end up with a higher percentage of younger games VS Old World.

However I still think GW are looking beyond season 1. Edition 2 of Old World is very likely to come with loads of updated models as a core focus along with the brand new armies they teased right at the start. In fact I'd argue if a 2.0 edition comes along and Cathay and/or Kisleve aren't in the boxed set starter then that might damage its sales.

At the 2.0 mark should be where GW goes "ok the old stuff sold well now we invest more into it like any other regular game we make"

and I have heard that before, already during 7th, 8th and before TOW was released
the next Edition will be the one where everything will be fine, and we finally get new core Khemri models

of course, there isn't anything for Cathay to be re-released so there must be new models if they come, but there is a much higher chance GW is going with all new armies for new models in a 2nd Edition rathern re-doing everything for an old faction (and they would need to re-do everything as just making 1 new unit doesn't help selling old stuff, we have already seen that in the past, or boost an army if the core doesn't fit the new models)

I think people need to stop talking about and wishlisting stuff for 2.0 as though its imminent or around the cornnr.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think people need to stop talking about and wishlisting stuff for 2.0 as though its imminent or around the cornnr.

They have some sort of Pavlovian conditioning due to the churn and burn of other editions...

 Just Tony wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think people need to stop talking about and wishlisting stuff for 2.0 as though its imminent or around the cornnr.

They have some sort of Pavlovian conditioning due to the churn and burn of other editions...

New editions have been a thing at GW for -- well -- 40 odd years.
I'm just presuming it will enter the same rotational pattern of editions that GW favours for other games. Of course nothing stops GW sticking with a rules system LONGER (indeed I and many others, would welcome GW sticking with rules longer!) and releasing updates to existing armies.

Of course this is all in the future - GW still has to get the rest of the armies out for Old World.

With Old World being by the specialist design studio it should be more akin to Horus Heresy than the main studio games, which got a second edition after about 10 years rather than 3.

It is of course possible that it may become a victim of its own success and they feel the need to push out editions more frequently, but I hope not.

Once the rest of the 9 arcane journals are out I'd much rather see new content such as new armies (and revamped legacy armies) and campaign supplements, rather than rehashing everything for a second edition.

Was the MTO showcase the "Special something" they promised in the warhammer preview on Sunday?

If so, very underwhelming but nothing else has been posted today

Where's muh Galrauch MTO?

Still waiting on Galrauch and the Chainmaker too!

The Chainmaker has already been previewed a few weeks back.

Galrauch is fine, but where are my sir Cecil an Thorgrim!?

pgmason wrote:
With Old World being by the specialist design studio it should be more akin to Horus Heresy than the main studio games, which got a second edition after about 10 years rather than 3.

just that this FW studio doesn't exist any more and other specialist systems are on a "more books" trip. I guess we'll see if the rumours of a new HH Edition this year are true or not if a longer Edition cycle is still possible.

I really hope so. I like the rules for the Old World. Some tweaks should go a long way in making infantry better and monsters less good. I hate for them to write new rules and we end up with another 8th edition.

 kodos wrote:
I guess we'll see if the rumours of a new HH Edition this year are true or not if a longer Edition cycle is still possible.

I've fully confident we won't see a new edition of HH this year.

I think the expectation here should be that the specialist games team is not in as desolate a state as the main game teams and if a new edition comes every three years, like we expect for Horus Heresy next year because we're still talking about GW, it will be a cleanup of the current edition with maybe the odd addition rather than a complete rewrite.

 GaroRobe wrote:
Was the MTO showcase the "Special something" they promised in the warhammer preview on Sunday?

If so, very underwhelming but nothing else has been posted today

It's either that or they released the Imperial hymn early because they're too stoned to know what day it is.

Has this guy popped up in the thread yet?

I don't think so - that said GW has been making a bunch of these "one time hero" models and some get out by leaks and some get released and GW doesn't seem to announce it.

There's a Vampire leader kicking around here and there that's been "released" I think but isn't official out or hasn't been announced

Empire up for pre-order next week:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/4enniuzu/sunday-preview-the-empire-of-man-and-ironhead-squat-prospectors-prepare-for-battle/?utm_source=CUSTOMERS&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WH_22nd_December_Preview_&utm_content=&utm_term=

Transfer sheet looks great!

Are those Sylvania and Stirland decals I see on that sheet?

Price list as it already went out last week

Transfer sheet is great! Banners were always my weakness because Empire didn't have any transfers in 6-8th edition and I couldn't free hand a squat.

Will drop lots of money on this release.

Im really sold on the whole Empire range in a way I never was back in the short period I played Fantasy.
The transfers look great and usefull.

GrosseSax wrote:
Are those Sylvania and Stirland decals I see on that sheet?

Yes, I think you do, I can also see Westerland, Osterlund, Sudenland, Reikland, Wissenland, Ostermark and Talabec among the big "banner-transfers" at the top.

Most excited about Knights of the Blazing Sun though!

Dang and like a few weeks before LVO too. Gonna be an expensive January.

jullevi wrote:
Transfer sheet is great! Banners were always my weakness because Empire didn't have any transfers in 6-8th edition and I couldn't free hand a squat.

Well, of course not. Squats are in Necromunda not Old World.

I was just checking out the Warriors of Chaos box for Christmas and it seems a bit of a weird collection?
I thought marauders were the basis of any Chaos army but the box has none!
Also two regiments of Chaos knights when my understanding is that even 1 is a heavy points sink in a 1500 point army?

Amazing transfer sheet indeed

Yeah Arcane Journal is defiantly a buy. I'd need to see closer pics of that transfer sheet as I just stripped my old BSB and any excuse I can use to not have to paint another banner I will take.

I do want more Pistoliers but even after a year I'm still not done refreshing my Empire army so Im probably going to hold off on new units for the time being.

 Kroem wrote:

I thought marauders were the basis of any Chaos army but the box has none!

It's always been players choice whether they wanted to concentrate on Warriors or Marauders.

Personally, I've never used Marauders until the Sea Wolves list.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Kroem wrote:

I thought marauders were the basis of any Chaos army but the box has none!

It's always been players choice whether they wanted to concentrate on Warriors or Marauders.

Personally, I've never used Marauders until the Sea Wolves list.

To me, basing the army around Marauders takes away what makes Chaos, Chaos. Marauders are more of a side dish in my opinion.

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Kroem wrote:

I thought marauders were the basis of any Chaos army but the box has none!

It's always been players choice whether they wanted to concentrate on Warriors or Marauders.

Personally, I've never used Marauders until the Sea Wolves list.

To me, basing the army around Marauders takes away what makes Chaos, Chaos. Marauders are more of a side dish in my opinion.

Hmm OK fair enough, I thought the basic armies would be a mix of warriors and marauders. Of course there is always a way to field an all warrior army, but this is the starter box!

Why do you say the marauders take away from the theme of Chaos? The fact that these are tribesmen from the north seems quite important in the story?

Marauders are just dudes without much chaos, they are a side dish as another pointed out and would be better served being in a dedicated Norscan marauders army, etc. The real thematic core of a Warriors of Chaos army is, perhaps unsurprisingly given the name, Chaos Warriors.

 Kroem wrote:
Why do you say the marauders take away from the theme of Chaos? The fact that these are tribesmen from the north seems quite important in the story?

I should've been more specific, in that by 'Chaos' I meant 'Warriors of Chaos'. Because they're not, y'know, Chaos Warriors. They're not on the Path to Glory yet. The real backbone of the army is the actual Chaos Warriors, who are supposed to be pound-for-pound the best infantry in the game. Marauders are just spiky humans - nothing special about them.

That's a very one note interpretation of the theme But I guess I can agree that they are the core of the army.

I see a theme in Warriors of Chaos of that personal path to glory in the eyes of the Gods, so the marauders are important as the start of that path to go along with the warriors, champion and maybe even a spawn! Now that would make a great starter box.

Apologies I didn't realise this was the news and rumours thread rather than discussion, I'll stop derailing the news!

Traditionally the chaos warriors were the space marines of Fantasy. Simply better and stronger than any other core units, you didnt need any mortal blocks of infantry. This was the theme of the army.

Ofcourse, in The Old World chaos is somewhat dormant and marauders should play a bigger part.

To get back on topic, I love that Cecil Gastonne model. Problem with him is that he is a monster slayer...on foot....in a bretonnia army. He's good for his points, but won't ever do what he is supposed to do. Also in a Bretonnia army i can make a better and faster monster slayer quite easily.

I hope he is revealed soon though, the model looks great!

Only Thorgrim and Kiknik to go! (And please don't say the new aos guy can double for him).

chaos0xomega wrote:
Marauders are just dudes without much chaos, they are a side dish as another pointed out and would be better served being in a dedicated Norscan marauders army, etc. The real thematic core of a Warriors of Chaos army is, perhaps unsurprisingly given the name, Chaos Warriors.

But then, without tribesmen and marauders the army needs other, more common troops like traitors, cultists, slaves, beastmen and mutants. Chaos Warriors are rare, each of them a champion of the Dark Gods, and while they fight together in the battles in the Chaos wastes and are resurrected to fight again by the gods, a full army of them is very uncommon in the Old World. Nothing wrong with playing such an army but it's not the norm backgroundwise. And no, I never accepted Teclis summoning Khorne daemons as background.

 nathan2004 wrote:
The game will live or die by sales and nothing will be redone if people stop buying (I haven't because I want the game to be successful and I like some of the older stuff).

3d print all you want but if enough people do it, we will have a dead game again and be back to playing the fan made crap or Kings.

??
So you buy stuff that you don't necessarily want?

??
So if you're willing to play fancrap or Kings.... Why don't you just play whichever version of WHFB you prefer. Or Old World?

 Dryaktylus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Marauders are just dudes without much chaos, they are a side dish as another pointed out and would be better served being in a dedicated Norscan marauders army, etc. The real thematic core of a Warriors of Chaos army is, perhaps unsurprisingly given the name, Chaos Warriors.

But then, without tribesmen and marauders the army needs other, more common troops like traitors, cultists, slaves, beastmen and mutants. Chaos Warriors are rare, each of them a champion of the Dark Gods, and while they fight together in the battles in the Chaos wastes and are resurrected to fight again by the gods, a full army of them is very uncommon in the Old World. Nothing wrong with playing such an army but it's not the norm backgroundwise. And no, I never accepted Teclis summoning Khorne daemons as background.

Sure, space marines are rare too, doesnt mean that i need to field a bunch of chapter serfs.

The "chaos warriors are rare" argument is meaningless. A players army exists only in the context of the lore, not the meta. If my army is 100 chaos warriors, well dont you know thats every chaos warrior in existence at that point in time and their path to glory has taken them on an invasion of the empire? The fact that theres another 100 players with 100 chaos warriors in each of their armies is meaningless.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Dryaktylus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Marauders are just dudes without much chaos, they are a side dish as another pointed out and would be better served being in a dedicated Norscan marauders army, etc. The real thematic core of a Warriors of Chaos army is, perhaps unsurprisingly given the name, Chaos Warriors.

But then, without tribesmen and marauders the army needs other, more common troops like traitors, cultists, slaves, beastmen and mutants. Chaos Warriors are rare, each of them a champion of the Dark Gods, and while they fight together in the battles in the Chaos wastes and are resurrected to fight again by the gods, a full army of them is very uncommon in the Old World. Nothing wrong with playing such an army but it's not the norm backgroundwise. And no, I never accepted Teclis summoning Khorne daemons as background.

Sure, space marines are rare too, doesnt mean that i need to field a bunch of chapter serfs.

The "chaos warriors are rare" argument is meaningless. A players army exists only in the context of the lore, not the meta. If my army is 100 chaos warriors, well dont you know thats every chaos warrior in existence at that point in time and their path to glory has taken them on an invasion of the empire? The fact that theres another 100 players with 100 chaos warriors in each of their armies is meaningless.

Space Marines are a mobile attack force that could strike anywhere in the Imperium. And they don't use chapters servants or anything else to do so. Chaos Warriors not so much.

As I said, there's nothing wrong to play an army full of Chaos Warriors (they were plastic before the marauders - so Space Marine like), but they're not the usual army you have in the Old World. When going south they always had huge recruitments or already brought other forces from the north.

As though chaos warriors arent a seaborn raiding force that sail and invade across the entire length and breadth of the world.



And yes, space marines are highly reliant on chapter serfs to go anywhere, who do you think crews and operates space marine starships? If theres only 1000 space marines in a chapter, who do you think makes up the thousands of crew needed to operate a single strike cruiser? Let alone the tebs of thousands of crew needed to operate an entire chapter fleet?

 KidCthulhu wrote:
Has this guy popped up in the thread yet?

Spoiler:

Oh, nice! I was wondering what he would look like. So who is left that we haven't seen miniatures for? Just Thorgrim and Kiknik Toofsnatcha, right?

Empire stuff is up for pre-order - for some reason I thought the War Wagon MTO wave was up today as well, but it isn't.

Thought the Ogres were MTO, but seemingly not.

Must remember to pick some up in due course.

 Dysartes wrote:
Empire stuff is up for pre-order - for some reason I thought the War Wagon MTO wave was up today as well, but it isn't.

Made to Order are usually 2-3 weeks behind first wave of releases.

Point of interest: there are new transfer sheets for both Infantry and Knightly orders. We hadn't seen the former and didn't even know about the latter previously.

The website was fine at 10am but seems to be slogging now.

Has the Empire pre order borked the GW website? Luckily got my Ogres and transfers at 9.55 am. £37 for the Ogres seemed pretty fair to me. Secondary market prices were near that per figure.

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Has the Empire pre order borked the GW website?

Looks like it - I'm getting a 504 CloudFront error.

jullevi wrote:
Made to Order are usually 2-3 weeks behind first wave of releases.

I was holding fire on a couple of the 40k scenery kits because I thought I'd get the War Wagon at the same time (subject to price, anyway) - I guess this gives me some time to think about the budget side of things, at least.

beast_gts wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Has the Empire pre order borked the GW website?

Looks like it - I'm getting a 504 CloudFront error.

At the moment the Australian site loads, at least for me, and most pages are fine, but the specific pages for "Empire (Old World)" and "New & Exclusive - Pre-orders" have no items showing under the banner.

Sometimes upon refreshing the products flicker into existence for half a second before vanishing.

Zenithfleet wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Has the Empire pre order borked the GW website?

Looks like it - I'm getting a 504 CloudFront error.

At the moment the Australian site loads, at least for me, and most pages are fine, but the specific pages for "Empire (Old World)" and "New & Exclusive - Pre-orders" have no items showing under the banner.

Sometimes upon refreshing the products flicker into existence for half a second before vanishing.

Per WarCom, Empire is delayed in Australia and New Zealand, so they shouldn't be appearing on the site just yet anyway (same with the Squats, hence the general pre-order page not working)

Selective memory must be kicking in, because damn the Teutogen Guard look rough compared to how i remember them.

The paintjob is nothing to write home about, but they are showing their age a bit (not as rough as the Warrior Priest of Ulric, at least)

Site is totally Borked for me, Ugg this is annoying. All this work to create a new site and it barely works.

 Commodus Leitdorf wrote:
Site is totally Borked for me, Ugg this is annoying. All this work to create a new site and it barely works.

Yep. I got the confirmation for transfer sheet order and the site immediately crashed. Oh well.

I was able to get an order in for all the Ogres, but any other tab or new page (while I was making the order) are borked and don't open.

Teutogen price is decent too, cheaper than other similar units from other armies.

 Skywave wrote:
I was able to get an order in for all the Ogres, but any other tab or new page (while I was making the order) are borked and don't open.

Teutogen price is decent too, cheaper than other similar units from other armies.

How do these Ogres compare sizewise to the "Badlands Ogres"?

I really like the look of the Badlands one over these, but wouldn't mind mixing in some if they'd look OK-ish...

 Alpharius wrote:

 Skywave wrote:
I was able to get an order in for all the Ogres, but any other tab or new page (while I was making the order) are borked and don't open.

Teutogen price is decent too, cheaper than other similar units from other armies.

How do these Ogres compare sizewise to the "Badlands Ogres"?

I really like the look of the Badlands one over these, but wouldn't mind mixing in some if they'd look OK-ish...

I don't have any in hands (either the Badland ones or the Imperial one), but I would guess they be pretty comparable in size, but not in style obviously. Someone with either of those models could probably gives a better assessment on that tho!

I own the badlands now and will be getting the imperial ones and will try to remember to circle back and comment on scale differences.

That Knightly Order Decalsheet is a bit of wasted space

The Panther Knights have their own Shields with sculped Details and the Knights of the Wolf don't use shields.

They missed an opportunity to provide knights of morr and fiery heart heraldry as well

RazorEdge wrote:That Knightly Order Decalsheet is a bit of wasted space

The Panther Knights have their own Shields with sculped Details and the Knights of the Wolf don't use shields.

A problem with several of the new transfer sheets. Great transfers but the models sometimes lack appropriate shields to use them. I would have liked to see some of the old shield sprues released for goblins, dwarfs, Empire etc to allow full use of the transfers. I really do like the new transfers though!

chaos0xomega wrote:They missed an opportunity to provide knights of morr and fiery heart heraldry as well

They did, but I'm very happy with the Blazing Sun.

Top 2 spots for miniature of the year...well done everyone!

 nathan2004 wrote:
Top 2 spots for miniature of the year...well done everyone!

Just because the re-releases didnt count as new releases.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/df2beqmo/chop-dragons-down-to-size-with-the-legendary-wyrm-slayer-of-bretonnia/

To be expected but the article for Cecil arrives.

Yay new model!!

Love the mini! I'm just said that his rules are weird....a footslogger that excels at killing monsters....who can all outpace him.

Getting a very Monty Python vibe for some reason.

It's only Python if his manservant is following him around with coconuts

I find the model....a bit boring and uninspired. His pose is fine i guess, but only that. Nothing about him stands out as a special character as say the Green Knight or Lady Elisse (granted, one is a legendary sculpt and the other one imo one of GW's finest sculpts in recent years, so that's a tough crowd to be measured against).

I don't like the helmet-dragon. Even for a bretonnian it feels rediculously large. Just compare the model to the drawing, on which the helmet is better proportioned. I would also have loved the stoic facial expression from his art opposed to the yelling mouth which almost every other Fantasy hero seems to have.

It's just a fine model, nothing bad, but not a model I'm in a rush to add to my collection. Which is a shame for a special character, particularly as they've been knocking them out of the park for the Old World so far.

JWh85 wrote:
I find the model....a bit boring and uninspired. His pose is fine i guess, but only that. Nothing about him stands out as a special character as say the Green Knight or Lady Elisse (granted, one is a legendary sculpt and the other one imo one of GW's finest sculpts in recent years, so that's a tough crowd to be measured against).

I don't like the helmet-dragon. Even for a bretonnian it feels rediculously large. Just compare the model to the drawing, on which the helmet is better proportioned. I would also have loved the stoic facial expression from his art opposed to the yelling mouth which almost every other Fantasy hero seems to have.

It's just a fine model, nothing bad, but not a model I'm in a rush to add to my collection. Which is a shame for a special character, particularly as they've been knocking them out of the park for the Old World so far.

I also feel its a fine enough model, nothing bad. But for the cost of forgeworld resin characters, I'm not going to rush to buy anything like this unless they crop up second hand for dirt cheap at some point or my local store has them at some ridiculous knock down price if the game/edition ever goes under.

Its a perfectly fine model but for the cost, a plastic brettonian foot knight conversion or picking up an older metal champion second hand (especially that might need some TLC) and adding a couple of the foot knight left overs is going to work just as well, if not better for a perfectly passible version.

Characters like Lady Elisse work because they are harder to proxy due to their more unique look.

I thought the same about the recent dwarf character as well. Nothing wrong with them, but they are just not unique enough to justify forgeworld resin when so many other similar models are being re-released. The brettonian MTO characters were just as nice as this sculpt and I thought they should have been part of the main range.

My problem with the Cecil mini is that he follows the same aesthetic as the new foot knights. And I don't like the new foot knights.

Give me the 5th edition foot knights any day of the week, and thrice on a day ending with "y".

Pic of the 5th edition foot knight please? It was before my time...assuming they were sculpted by the Perry twins?

Also looks like High Elves are being previewed at LVO. Which I'll get to see first hand as I'm traveling there to play Old World.

These guys?

That's three Hero models and the Warhammer Quest guy - there certainly weren't units of them at the time, as far as I can see.

The main difference seems to be a shift from chainmail to plate in the model design. The new plastics are much more sheets of plated armour whilst the old were pockmarked all over with chainmail.

 kodos wrote:

Spoiler:

Given there's a cannon there, those ain't fifth edition.

the foot knights are from 4th, they didn't have 5th edi models

They were sculpted by the Perry twins though. God, I would love for them to come back to GW and make some new Bretonnia designs using GW's current sculpting possibilities. One can dream....

 kodos wrote:
the foot knights are from 4th, they didn't have 5th edi models

They're from Warhammer 3rd edition. Other than a get-you-by army list in the white booklet in the 4th edition boxed set, Bretonnians were absent from 4th edition.

 Dysartes wrote:
These guys?

That's three Hero models and the Warhammer Quest guy - there certainly weren't units of them at the time, as far as I can see.

Yep, those, and also Ermite de Malmont. There wasn't a full unit of foot knights in 5th, but there were five different foot knight minis. You can clearly see the "look" they were going for. It's much closer to the Perry foot knights from 3rd/4th edition (which I also like) than it is to the TOW foot knights.

Yes 3rd edition seems correct. A time when the taint of chaos was felt harshly in Bretonnia, with the nobles not being so noble, the peasant population even worse off than these days and the cities diseased and filthy. A far cry from the Arthurian chivalric turn made in the 5th edition. Also, there were court wizards at that time, which i loved!

 Overread wrote:
The main difference seems to be a shift from chainmail to plate in the model design. The new plastics are much more sheets of plated armour whilst the old were pockmarked all over with chainmail.

Old designs were based on historical armors of various types. New designs seem more based on Warcraft than anything that actually existed.

Prefer the new foot knights to those, those are just historical knights in fantasy color schemes, if thats what i wanted to play id play historicals, im here for FANTASY.

The original Bretonnian line was sculpted by the Perrys when GW was thinking of making a pure historical wargame, and then inserted into Warhammer when they decided not to. That's why they look so 'normal'.

Empire Wave 2 (I think) goes on pre-order next week, alongside several of the resin character models we've seen recently.

That's a pretty chunky Old World release!

Tempted to grab wizards to throw into Brets and the new chaos character is 100% getting a round-AoS base

So much money to spend on the next release! Nooooooo

Burlok and Frydaal are a definite.
Still waiting for the war wagon though.

Still no MTO, sad

Didnt expect Empire wave 2 so soon. Good times!

Even the Flagellants get packed with transfers! There will be so many spare sheets in the wild.

Gonna hold off, waiting for that MTO

chaos0xomega wrote:
Gonna hold off, waiting for that MTO

Same. War Wagons and maybe that Amber wizard are all I need/want.

To be fair if you want to have 2 or more War Waggons on the MTO then saving a big load of cash is well worth it.

I will probably only buy 2... but i want 6 lol

JWh85 wrote:
They were sculpted by the Perry twins though. God, I would love for them to come back to GW and make some new Bretonnia designs using GW's current sculpting possibilities. One can dream....

according to what ive heard, it's precisely GW's modern techniques that are why they eft. weren't a fan of digital sculpting, and i'm sure the pipeline is more complicated now than it would have been in the 80s

Updated FAQs are out:

Rulebook
Ravening Hordes
Forces of Fantasy

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

according to what ive heard, it's precisely GW's modern techniques that are why they eft. weren't a fan of digital sculpting, and i'm sure the pipeline is more complicated now than it would1 have been in the 80s

I heard that as well; it's a shame really. I would like to see the old masters embrace modern techniques. Of course, GW rarely lets us know the sculptors anymore these days anyway.

JWh85 wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:

according to what ive heard, it's precisely GW's modern techniques that are why they eft. weren't a fan of digital sculpting, and i'm sure the pipeline is more complicated now than it would1 have been in the 80s

I heard that as well; it's a shame really. I would like to see the old masters embrace modern techniques. Of course, GW rarely lets us know the sculptors anymore these days anyway.

They are in their mid 60s and are quasi retired. They still do new stuff for their own ranges but most of it is metals, with the occasional plastic set done be Renedra (people who used to do GWs plastics way back in the day).

They did do an interview and back in the day they did sculpt in digital but didn't enjoy it as much. I think also its clear that they like doing historical models and GW was going more and more fantasy and more extreme fantasy too.

So I can see how creative staff like them with solid skills would consider moving away to work on their own or for other firms that were doing more of what they like doing best

JWh85 wrote:

Of course, GW rarely lets us know the sculptors anymore these days anyway.

It's OK. Because while there's some very nice pieces (and some misses - oh that poor IA Inquisitor :()? Most of their modern stuff just blurs together with none of the distinctive style(s) old models had. It's like it's designed by ChatGP.

Which is basically because there is no 1 designer that makes single models or a whole line but different people making different parts that are put together later
Specially for the larger models

Or they actually sat down and figured out the equivalent of a character sheet used in cartooning. That is, an actual specification for how each faction is supposed to look.
That they can then give that to, say, the Warhammer+ team for their cartoons or Amazon for their series is just extra bonus. Or maybe that’s why it was developed in the first place.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Or they actually sat down and figured out the equivalent of a character sheet used in cartooning. That is, an actual specification for how each faction is supposed to look.
That they can then give that to, say, the Warhammer+ team for their cartoons or Amazon for their series is just extra bonus. Or maybe that’s why it was developed in the first place.

This. GW has developed specific design languages for their stuff and that's a good thing for a brand/franchise.

Posted this earlier today on TGAC, but it seems that they are planning to update the Old World Map on the Website, with Estalian heraldry visible if you bug out the map.

 kodos wrote:
Which is basically because there is no 1 designer that makes single models or a whole line but different people making different parts that are put together later
Specially for the larger models

Thats not really true. Its something that they do sometimes - if youre sculpting a new unit of primaris marines equopped with bolt rifles, theres no point sculpting a new bolt rifle when you can re-use the existing asset, but the design studio as a whole doesnt generally hodge podge together kits from 5 different sculptors to make every new mini. Projects like the Bone Dragon for Tomb Kings where multiple sculptors pieced it together from several designs are the exception rather than the rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yes, saw the estalian "leak" on reddit, someine commented that they havent heard anything specific but they saw some stuff that has lead them to believe that there will be a Dogs of War re-issue in the future.

Dogs of War?

PREPARE THE CASH CANNON! TRIPLE LOAD, BOSUN!

we're most likely to hear about the things that pass through multiple hands, because there's more people to talk about it (and often because they're more high profile). if John Sculptsman makes a kit of zombies on his own, he's the only one that's going to be talking about sculpting those zombies. if he does an entire range, he might get a warcom article or a shout in white dwarf, but otherwise, there's just less to be said there

I'll have to sell a kidney if they do a reprint of dogs of war....I want them alllllll

chaos0xomega wrote:
if youre sculpting a new unit of primaris marines equopped with bolt rifles, theres no point sculpting a new bolt rifle when you can re-use the existing asset

Erm, what? You picked really bad example for it, primaris virtually never reuse assets in that way besides a few armor pieces per model. Just look at bolt rifles of Sternguard Veterans and Primaris Crusaders, none repeat with Intercessor ones (or even between Leviathan and multipart Sternguard sprues), there is always some change from minor to completely new designs (I really like 'skeletonized' bolt rifle and cylindrical mags from Leviathan, much better design than default IMO).

Funnily enough what you said was the case with older plastics, like tactical squad with frame of virtually identical (or several repeating frames of literally identical in case of older kit) bolters, most of TOW range, or virtually any metal not centrepiece character - because sculpting by hand took so much time GW sculptors took shortcuts wherever they could and put bits cut from other models into their greenstuff base, literally reusing assets. In comparison, editing bolt rifle to different furniture, decorations, mags, scopes, alongside with creating new designs for these, takes so little time GW can now afford to make every single weapon unique unlike in the past...

chaos0xomega wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Which is basically because there is no 1 designer that makes single models or a whole line but different people making different parts that are put together later
Specially for the larger models

Thats not really true. Its something that they do sometimes - if youre sculpting a new unit of primaris marines equopped with bolt rifles, theres no point sculpting a new bolt rifle when you can re-use the existing asset, but the design studio as a whole doesnt generally hodge podge together kits from 5 different sculptors to make every new mini. Projects like the Bone Dragon for Tomb Kings where multiple sculptors pieced it together from several designs are the exception rather than the rule.

well, there are 40 different Bolt Rifles for a reason and yet you have carbon copies or mirrors of the base model between factions where the very base is the same with different details bolted on top of it

that you re-use weapons that are standard issue is even done in classic hand sculpting for metal models, this isn't anything new with digital sculpting

 nathan2004 wrote:
I'll have to sell a kidney if they do a reprint of dogs of war....I want them alllllll

Just curious, how could they make a re-release of dogs of war work in the TOW timeline?
I thought they were uniqe mercenarys bands in the specific Fantasy Battle setting. Or were they legendary units from an undefined historical context?

A good number of them they can just rename into new named models. Dogs of War as a concept would work in almost any age they did it so the concept of the army can certainly work in the current timeline.

 Fayric wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
I'll have to sell a kidney if they do a reprint of dogs of war....I want them alllllll

Just curious, how could they make a re-release of dogs of war work in the TOW timeline?
I thought they were uniqe mercenarys bands in the specific Fantasy Battle setting. Or were they legendary units from an undefined historical context?

There are a few that would still be ok but most would need some new lore for a similar regiment

They could always leave the special commander out and say that the unit has always existed but the 2500 commander just lied about its history

Honestly I would love them to just offer them as unnamed units - instead generic Estalian pikes and crossbows.

 Irbis wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
if youre sculpting a new unit of primaris marines equopped with bolt rifles, theres no point sculpting a new bolt rifle when you can re-use the existing asset

Erm, what? You picked really bad example for it, primaris virtually never reuse assets in that way besides a few armor pieces per model. Just look at bolt rifles of Sternguard Veterans and Primaris Crusaders, none repeat with Intercessor ones (or even between Leviathan and multipart Sternguard sprues), there is always some change from minor to completely new designs (I really like 'skeletonized' bolt rifle and cylindrical mags from Leviathan, much better design than default IMO).

Funnily enough what you said was the case with older plastics, like tactical squad with frame of virtually identical (or several repeating frames of literally identical in case of older kit) bolters, most of TOW range, or virtually any metal not centrepiece character - because sculpting by hand took so much time GW sculptors took shortcuts wherever they could and put bits cut from other models into their greenstuff base, literally reusing assets. In comparison, editing bolt rifle to different furniture, decorations, mags, scopes, alongside with creating new designs for these, takes so little time GW can now afford to make every single weapon unique unlike in the past...

Oh mu glob, it was just a hypothetical example, not a literal one




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fayric wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
I'll have to sell a kidney if they do a reprint of dogs of war....I want them alllllll

Just curious, how could they make a re-release of dogs of war work in the TOW timeline?
I thought they were uniqe mercenarys bands in the specific Fantasy Battle setting. Or were they legendary units from an undefined historical context?

Remove the characters, release them as generic units. Braganzas besiegers are just crossbowmen with pavises, Alcatani Fellowship are just pikemen in heavy armor, Leopolds Leopard Company is pikemen w heavy armor, etc.

High elves revealed and sneak peak at Beastmen. Love everything I see, they say more is to be revealed beyond high elves, wood elves, and beastmen (remaining core).

High on hopium for Cathay and Kislev, not gonna lie, and maybe they bringing more support to Legends armies

Soulblight gravelords new sculpts mean 100% vampires are coming to old world as a core faction imo

The High Elves are so far the first faction where the amount of ‘new’ kits (I.E 8th edition or so) and the quality of the old kits holds up just enough that I could feasibly see myself actually buying the stupidly old models for this game.

Why are they releasing Korhil and then feel the need to release second Korhil?

 nathan2004 wrote:
Soulblight gravelords new sculpts mean 100% vampires are coming to old world as a core faction imo

That was my thought too! It looks like they are only missing the necromancer and the wight king on foot to have an entirely separate line, right?

 Segersgia wrote:


Posted this earlier today on TGAC, but it seems that they are planning to update the Old World Map on the Website, with Estalian heraldry visible if you bug out the map.

Bit odd but it could be tied to a narrative campaign book or something. Or they're gradually filling out the map in general. Can't imagine that Estalia itself would be getting its own faction before Kislev/Cathay/Tilea.

High Elves as expected really. New(ish) Reavers look decent and much of the rest of the range holds up relatively well (outside of the spearmen and archers).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Why are they releasing Korhil and then feel the need to release second Korhil?

Given there's an entire army list in the Journal themed around Chrace, there wasn't currently a Chracian themed lord model and (pre-Captain of the White Lions) Korhil will presumably be a special character it's hardly egregious

Very excited to see the game getting a 9th faction, it does look like Cathay will be it.

Overall, the game has been handled quite well, we've had so much in the first year of release and it looks like the game is here to stay.

High elf range is really great, seems like one of the few armies which got a 100% hard plastic release, with mostly new kits too.

Really solid choice to get into the game, especially for new players. The low model count helps too.

Wouldnt cathay be the 10th faction?

Is it a faction or are people jumping at what could possibly be a supplement? If it is a new faction, it's going to have to be sculpted retroactively. because if it's to modern standards , it's going to make an outright mockery of all the armies released before it.

The little blank box on the road map has Cathay artwork on it - I think we're on a pretty high probability it's Cathay now

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Is it a faction or are people jumping at what could possibly be a supplement? If it is a new faction, it's going to have to be sculpted retroactively. because if it's to modern standards , it's going to make an outright mockery of all the armies released before it.

I can just see the design meeting where someone actively suggests that they make a new faction look a bit rubbish so that it doesn't outshine the older sculpts. Behave.

That's even taking it at face value that the modern standards are actually better (obviously production value has improved but sculpt quality is wildly subjective, especially given TOW has been bringing back stuff that spans about 20 years).

At some point, new faction will have to come out with new kits. It's inevitable. Hopefully, at least one existing faction would get a refresh along with the new stuff.

The only thing I'm curious about is how will GW contort itself into justifying adding Cathay to a game called The Old World, when Skaven, DE and VC are not in it, supposedly because of thematic constraints.

Skaven DE and Vamps aren't in it because most of their kits, at the time, were still in AoS. Now that it looks like official AoS kits are all coming out the old models will be shifted over to Old World.

Honestly thats pretty much the main reason they weren't included in the beginning. despite what GW has said.

Ah, thats better. In AOS we get friggin cows of all things, but at least in TOW we have Lions.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
At some point, new faction will have to come out with new kits. It's inevitable. Hopefully, at least one existing faction would get a refresh along with the new stuff.

The only thing I'm curious about is how will GW contort itself into justify adding Cathay to a game called The Old World, when Skaven, DE and VC are not in it, supposedly because of thematic constraints.

Long speculation that there was an ongoing internal conflict over the scope of the game and the more focused, limited launch was to test the waters (presumably the bean counters can now justify adding in properly 'new' stuff now). The devs have suggested that broadening that focus in an ongoing narrative is the intent. Skaven/VC seemingly aren't in purely due to them having (increasingly less) crossover with AoS and GW's weird internal politics and accounting. The TOW team may well have set the game when they did because there was ample existing lore justification to avoid having a major Skaven, DE or VC presence.

In lore terms, Cathay trading caravans seem the most obvious way of getting their forces in and around the current setting. Hard to justify things like the dragons themselves showing up but with the breadth needed for a full new faction, I wouldn't mind them just handwaving the narrative to an extent and releasing an expansion that's just 'meanwhile, in Cathay'.

I'm aware of the speculation on behind the scenes jousting at GW, I just can't help but poke at the lame excuse for not including core WFB factions in the new game.

I know Cathay will be big with a lot of fans, but I'd be rather disappointed if the first "new" force/campaign/expansion for the old world was Cathay focused.

After they ditched the armies they did in favour of keeping the game set in 'the old world' and then spending two years talking about how it was focused on the empire civil war, just for this rumour to be of the first expansion which has nothing to do with that area of the old world at all!

I would have thought Kislev would have been the ideal choice for the first of the non 'core' 9 forces. Its still tied to the empire & old world areas. It has a very small, but 'classic' model range which can be brought back or ran on MTO for those that just want to expand classic collections, but isn't large enough to interfere with bringing a whole new plastic range out. It would open the 'story' up for inclusion of further chaos/daemon models/campaigns later on.

Whilst Cathay would make for an interesting expansion, finally giving some new ground to WFB as a whole, I feel as the first new force it doesn't sit right.

Cathay being first is also a very big show of GW doing something utterly new and never before done with Old World. Kisleve have had models armies and so forth in the past; but Cathay is something that was only ever hinted at in the lore and a few stories. It was never somewhere that GW grew into models or an army - heck did they even have a token Mordheim model or such?

I think if they did Cathay first it really shows that GW are putting their all behind Old World in a serious way to fans; plus being utterly new its potential interest in the market is huge.

I’d be a bit disappointed, if Cathay is truly next. It would make more sense, if it was part of campaign release, that’s dedicated to the east (packaged with ogres, daemons and Eshin).
The only thing going for it is the “never seen before on tabletop” quality. But if they follow TW aesthetics, which they most likely will.. meh. It’s just generic Chinese fantasy look, with no warhammer spice added to it.
Besides, having yet another human faction, when there are already 2 out 9 is a bit dull. Skaven, Chorfs or undead would be more way more welcome imho.

 Overread wrote:
Cathay being first is also a very big show of GW doing something utterly new and never before done with Old World. Kisleve have had models armies and so forth in the past; but Cathay is something that was only ever hinted at in the lore and a few stories. It was never somewhere that GW grew into models or an army - heck did they even have a token Mordheim model or such?

I think if they did Cathay first it really shows that GW are putting their all behind Old World in a serious way to fans; plus being utterly new its potential interest in the market is huge.

Indeed. It's a sign of confidence in the product line beyond almost anything else they could have done. If you'd told someone 6 years ago that WHFB would be back and there would be a brand new Cathay army for it (first brand new army since Ogres in 2006!), people would have packed you off to the loonie bin. This shows that TOW is doing well and GW have faith in it.

I agree there's been pretty poor communication around the whole scope of the game and it's clear they're just spouting vague in universe explanations to cover up internal politics. It's also weird to set the game during the period of the Three Emperors/lead up to the war in Chaos and barely focus on it and whizz off to Cathay but I'll accept that in exchange for a whole new army. I wonder what really happened with this Cathay stuff, as they featured in the hype articles, then completely disappeared and now they're back, it speaks of some kind of internal nonsense going on at GW.

 Londinium wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Cathay being first is also a very big show of GW doing something utterly new and never before done with Old World. Kisleve have had models armies and so forth in the past; but Cathay is something that was only ever hinted at in the lore and a few stories. It was never somewhere that GW grew into models or an army - heck did they even have a token Mordheim model or such?

I think if they did Cathay first it really shows that GW are putting their all behind Old World in a serious way to fans; plus being utterly new its potential interest in the market is huge.

Indeed. It's a sign of confidence in the product line beyond almost anything else they could have done. If you'd told someone 6 years ago that WHFB would be back and there would be a brand new Cathay army for it (first brand new army since Ogres in 2006!), people would have packed you off to the loonie bin. This shows that TOW is doing well and GW have faith in it.

I agree there's been pretty poor communication around the whole scope of the game and it's clear they're just spouting vague in universe explanations to cover up internal politics. It's also weird to set the game during the period of the Three Emperors/lead up to the war in Chaos and barely focus on it and whizz off to Cathay but I'll accept that in exchange for a whole new army. I wonder what really happened with this Cathay stuff, as they featured in the hype articles, then completely disappeared and now they're back, it speaks of some kind of internal nonsense going on at GW.

At some point GW realised that there was such consumer demand for Original Old World models that they decided to gamble on re-releasing old models and heavily tap into the Nostalgia buttons when doing so and release even some stuff that never got a release and do Made-to-Order releases as well. I think that not only let them tap into the Nostalgia; but I think its also allowed them to grow the game super-fast. It's also a smart move because it means that lots of people get to dust off their old models and use them again.
So it lets the game grow REALLY fast because each army you add isn't just new people buying models; but people getting 2K armies on the table that very week because they got their old models out on the battlefield again. This lets them REALLY speed up growth of a new product line very quickly. Otherwise totally new armies you've got to go through a long period of growth to get people on board and playing, esp in a rank and file game which honestly tend to not work all that well at lower point levels.

Once GW made that choice I think it was sensible that they put the old armies out first. Get the people who have models playing and engaging and also because they were older models it meant that GW would get the old stuff out first. Older stuff has its own charm, but its also quirky and not "as good" as modern stuff. So if they'd gone with a totally new army right out of the gate chances are releasing Bretonnia with loads of old models right after would have felt like a kick in the teeth for Brets fans and every army that came after.

So instead they did it the other way around - get the old out first and steadily build up to totally new armies. And honestly the plan has clearly 100% Worked

The reality is that its probably less about sales crossover and more about IP generation and protection. Theres minimal value to GW in putting Skaven and VC and Ogres, etc in both AoS and TOW because the AoS interpretations of those things are very similar to the TOW interpretations - and in the case of VC and Skaven (for example) some of the charactsrs are identical. The ROI for GW is therefore minimal, because they dont create additional marketable IP or new branding opportunities. The other core factions, with the sole exception of chaos warriors, are all otherwise distinct from AOS interpretations - sylvaneth have basically foregone wood elves to focus on trees, cities of sigmar are aesthetically distinct from the Empires "weird Renaissance" vibe, Beastmen are seemingly cut from AoS entirely with hints they may reappear with a different thematic concept underlying them, TOWs dwarves are more grounded than Kharadron or Fyreslayers, etc.

Cathay (and Kislev, and other possible new factions) are therefore all basically fresh ground for GW to tread from a miniatures stanpoint, and with that comes growth of brand and IP, and corresponding licensing opportunities and revenue.

why are people speculating that VC/skaven/etc are going to become real armies in TOW? GW was very clear about their intent here; there's no secret messages to read about this

anyway Cathay would make a lot of sense for TOW, considering that's been hyped as a new faction since the game was announced. maybe a supplement or two first would make sense, tho. probably gonna go down the Heresy route of new campaign books every six months or so, and then released scattered between that

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
why are people speculating that VC/skaven/etc are going to become real armies in TOW? GW was very clear about their intent here; there's no secret messages to read about this

Hopium.

The thought is that if GW have different kits for, say, Clanrats that they can track separately, then they might be more inclined to support more armies.

Its really all just wishful thinking and hopium/copium.

I think that it's possible (even likely) that as the "legends" armies get reworks in AoS that they'll find a way to bring the older kits into Old World.

That said they still have a bit of a ways to go before Skaven, Ogres, Lizardmen, and Vampire counts have little to no crossover.

Vampire counts for example still have their ghoul line all over AoS along with a solid number of night haunts and even a few vampire units.

Ogres are so far off it's not even funny unless they just drop the ogre line. Skaven I don't know well enough but it feels like they may have almost gotten there but at the same time their AoS aesthetic is the same as their Old World one so I'm not sure they'd make the crossover.

Lizardmen are also right there but share to many of their monsters and we need an AoS skink unit. Also again, like Skaven, their aesthetic isn't to disimilar.

So while I wouldn't call it hopium/copium as I do think that they are going to be shifting over eventually. I think it's way to early for any of them to make the switch. Dark Elves are actually the most likely given that their entire line is an after thought in Cities and could easily be cut from the next book when Malfurion's forces come out in the next edition. But even that is what, 3 years likely away?

All that and I'm actually kinda excited for high elves. I never had the paint skill back in the day for them but I'm excited for the majority of this release. Getting the propertly scaled Swordmasters out of the IoB set is just awesome.

Honestly I think there's value in GW not copying all the armies over in the long term. Making two lines of Skaven, Lizardmen and all isn't just creative death for the team but its also a huge risk that people just gravitate toward one game over the other and proxy in the rest.

Having very distinct model lines means each game stands a LOT more on its own as its own thing. Sure you'll likely have that one exception in Slaves to Darkness and some of those High Elf and Luminieth models might swap over okish between the two here and there. But honestly I think the most healthy thing is for the two games to diverge.

That's the most healthy for giving each game its own identity. I 100% know that any long term lizardman player will NOT like that idea and wants their army back in Old World. At the same time I feel like its the best and most healthy long term direction to take the game.


Really the only surprise is Dark Elves. They aren't in Old World and they aren't really in AoS - or at least they are there and the army is almost entirely complete and they have had lore recently; but they don't have an army book; they don't have much if any marketing focus and no one REALLY knows if they are going to stay there; go to Old world; get replaced and updated or just vanish one day.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
why are people speculating that VC/skaven/etc are going to become real armies in TOW? GW was very clear about their intent here; there's no secret messages to read about this

The same "this is it for the foreseeable future" marketing speak that ruled out legacy factions also ruled out Cathay. If it's true that Cathay (and therefore Kislev too) are coming then this is strong evidence that Old World is a success and will see continued support. For GW this normally means a new edition to facilitate new books to sell and related models.

Add in that VC, skaven and lizardmen AoS equivalents have seen recent model refreshes, and it makes it even more likely that a second edition will see more additional content. The real question should be, with the legacy factions being right there with many models not in AoS anymore, why wouldn't GW introduce them in the future?

 ImAGeek wrote:
The High Elves are so far the first faction where the amount of ‘new’ kits (I.E 8th edition or so) and the quality of the old kits holds up just enough that I could feasibly see myself actually buying the stupidly old models for this game.

You gotta avoid the spearmen, archers and silver helms (of which I would say some are not as nice as even the 4th ed versions), but that's easy with this release thanks to the IoB Lothern Sea Guard and new Reavers.

The real question is will the mystery next book be another multi-faction book like forces of fantasy and ravening hordes, or another Arcane Journal covering a single faction?

 Mr_Rose wrote:
The real question is will the mystery next book be another multi-faction book like forces of fantasy and ravening hordes, or another Arcane Journal covering a single faction?

Could it be a “adventures in Cathay” campaign book as a way to introduce the new army? That’d be an interesting way to expand without disrupting any ongoing narrative.

Would there be more (returning) factions to go in as well?

Cathay’s main antagonists are chaos (and daemons in particular because their Great Wall is far enough north for them to manifest even in these parlous low magic times) and Ogres so a refreshed daemon list and the return of the Ogre Kingdoms could fit in a “Wars of the east” tome. Technically the Skaven have outposts over there, mainly Eshin, but they’re unlikely. There’s also the mythical isle of Nippon to explore too.
Might be a good idea to stick to just three armies and give Cathay plenty of lore space since they don’t have much published outside of TWW yet.

 Overread wrote:
Honestly I think there's value in GW not copying all the armies over in the long term. Making two lines of Skaven, Lizardmen and all isn't just creative death for the team but its also a huge risk that people just gravitate toward one game over the other and proxy in the rest.

Not only will the studio that made shuffling existing ideas into new products an Olympic sport not have a problem with making a slightly different flavour of Skinks for TWO, the whole buy-for-one-system-play-in-another is a rather unconvincing concern, when GW is fine with releasing 70% of a Votann army in Necromunda, or the Solar Auxilla range you can port into an IG force without any real issues.

Great to see these guys made it. I was sceptical because of the shared sprues of the original. I was never very fond of the now returning multipart spearmen, I much prefer these or the old 4:th edition spearmen. I wonder the sprue will look like? There are 29 troopers and 6 command I think.

Looks like a solid release over all.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Honestly I think there's value in GW not copying all the armies over in the long term. Making two lines of Skaven, Lizardmen and all isn't just creative death for the team but its also a huge risk that people just gravitate toward one game over the other and proxy in the rest.

Not only will the studio that made shuffling existing ideas into new products an Olympic sport not have a problem with making a slightly different flavour of Skinks for TWO, the whole buy-for-one-system-play-in-another is a rather unconvincing concern, when GW is fine with releasing 70% of a Votann army in Necromunda, or the Solar Auxilla range you can port into an IG force without any real issues.

Yeah, this is why I think everything will EVENTUALLY come over. They don't care about multiple lines elsehwere and the different skus will be enough to offset. However it's going to be a long trek for Lizards and Ogres as most of their ranges are fully still in use. I don't know if Demons ever come over because they're strictly in the 40k sku area now and NO ONE TOUCHES 40K STUFF!

Soonest would likely be Dark Elves. Skaven I just don't know how much of their stuff is still in AoS after the newest release but it feels like a lot of it. We're probably 1-2 iterations of FEC, SB, and NH away from having everything out of AoS that started in WFB.

Wait, where did this reveal come from?

I really hope one of the MTO figures for High Elves is the older Imrik model. I love that kit and I've always wanted to own one.

 Just Tony wrote:
Wait, where did this reveal come from?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/1jgcyjq6/the-lvo-preview-2025-all-the-reveals/

LVO

I've said it before so why not say it again.

What to integrate Cathay? Reverse Hong Kong!

In the 1300s China was the world's greatest maritime power and the great Admiral Muslim and Eunuch Zheng He/Cheng Ho sailed as far as Africa.

So on Planet Warhammer, have Cathay treasure ships sail to the Olde Worlde and set up a colony, call it Kong Hong. Somewhere between TOW and the End Times it was abandoned as Cathay realized the Olde Worlde had nothing they wanted.

The new lord of Chrace is an elegant if somewhat unexciting model. Thst Ishaya Vess model however is the first new Old World model that i find absolutely hideous.

That new Bray Shaman special character is not bad, but also not something to get really excited about. It's just fine, which is not a place where you want one of the two new models we get for each army to be. The familiar, as has been the case with all the old world familiars so far, is excellent.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I've said it before so why not say it again.

What to integrate Cathay? Reverse Hong Kong!

In the 1300s China was the world's greatest maritime power and the great Admiral Muslim and Eunuch Zheng He/Cheng Ho sailed as far as Africa.

So on Planet Warhammer, have Cathay treasure ships sail to the Olde Worlde and set up a colony, call it Kong Hong. Somewhere between TOW and the End Times it was abandoned as Cathay realized the Olde Worlde had nothing they wanted.

They signed a deal to return it to the control of Marienburg after a fifty year transition period?

It really wouldn't take much for GW to return Dark Elves to the Old World. Most of the army range is buried in Cities of Sigmar and does 't seem terribly popular there.

The stuff in Daughter of Khaine is just the Cauldron kit, the Witch Elves/Sisters of Slaughter kit, and the Doomfire Warlocks/Dark Riders right?

I would be happy to lose the Sisters of Slaughter profile from their Old World roster if they gave us the previous generation of wonderful metal Witch Elves and Cauldron back.

Interested to see what the Made to Order for High Elves will look like, probably the only faction I will be potentially doing MTO items for.

The TOW/AoS separation isnt about model lines, its about IP and brand. Skaven, Seraphon, and VC will not cross back over, the AoS versions are basically shot-for-shot remakes of their WHFB incarnations, whereas if you compare say Cities of Sigmar to Empire, or Lumineth to High Elves, they are thematically and conceptually different.

Amd no, there wasnt any "forseeable future" marketing speak underlying it - the messagibg was pretty damned clear:

"A few of the factions from the previous Warhammer Fantasy Battle game will not feature in Warhammer: The Old World – this is in terms of game rules, model ranges, and the ongoing background narrative....

...If you want to come on this long-term journey with us, the factions in the Forces of Fantasy and Ravening Hordes books are the ones to collect and play – and we want to be pretty clear about that"

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-us/articles/A80kNT0L/old-world-almanack-designer-round-table-on-the-past-and-future-of-a-stone-cold-classic/

INB4 GW surprises us and is actually Vampire Coast or Dogs of War

I got what I needed from the article. It looks like there'll be 20 man Swordmaster units available. I can finally do my blind Eltharion justice by doing his version of the army.

 CMLR wrote:
INB4 GW surprises us and is actually Vampire Coast or Dogs of War

"Arcane Journal: Mercenaries and Raiders" perhaps? I can dig it.

chaos0xomega wrote:
The TOW/AoS separation isnt about model lines, its about IP and brand. Skaven, Seraphon, and VC will not cross back over, the AoS versions are basically shot-for-shot remakes of their WHFB incarnations, whereas if you compare say Cities of Sigmar to Empire, or Lumineth to High Elves, they are thematically and conceptually different.

Amd no, there wasnt any "forseeable future" marketing speak underlying it - the messagibg was pretty damned clear:

"A few of the factions from the previous Warhammer Fantasy Battle game will not feature in Warhammer: The Old World – this is in terms of game rules, model ranges, and the ongoing background narrative....

...If you want to come on this long-term journey with us, the factions in the Forces of Fantasy and Ravening Hordes books are the ones to collect and play – and we want to be pretty clear about that"

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-us/articles/A80kNT0L/old-world-almanack-designer-round-table-on-the-past-and-future-of-a-stone-cold-classic/

I'm unsure why you get so worked up about this. GW has said a bunch of stuff about a lot of things that were correct in the moment and then direction changed. The popularity of this caught them off guard. Things could change.

Also your statement about the separation being about IP is completely incorrect. Or perhaps overly simplistic if you consider sales channels an IP thing. Either way it's been made evident by statements from people in the know that lack of specific armies is because of sales channels and people protecting their sandbox. And that it was fought right up until release (hence the extremely comprehensive "legend" forces).

The amount of fighting and issues just Demons cause the 40k and AoS studios was bad enough and that's when you dealing with a small faction that makes up a small part of forces in both systems. No consider how complicated the core of ENTIRE armies are for figuring out who gets credit for which sales and therefore money for development and bonus structures. Also Lumineth are almost a shot for shot remake of High Elves with some minor changes (hammers instead of axes, dancing great sword dudes, bows with pulleys, replacing a horse with a kangaroo, etc) which the only really NEW NEW thing being the walking cow mountain and some other animal spirit things.

Long story short, it's not about IP. It's about trackable sales numbers the board to make decision supported by actual information and for shareholders to be able to see correct decisions being made. So do us all a favor and stop scolding people for discussing things that, while contradictory to statements made over a year ago, may be possible.

Bear in mind I'm in the camp that if it does it'll happen it'll be at least 2 more years before we see anything and could be 5-8 because the only pull outs will be done when editions change for AoS and new battle tomes are released for AoS. I think getting excited about them any time soon is pointless. To be fair I'm also expecting ToW to be similar to Heresy/LOTR in only get a "new" edition every decade or so which is mostly a cleaning up and reprint of any rule amendments made over the last period of time.

The arcane journal have an interresting mage on the cover. The staff and the book is a good match with art of Belannaer the wise, the oldest loremaster of old fantasy battle and mentor of both Teclis and Eltharion.
Apparently he accompanied King Finubar the seafarer in his travels to the old world.
I smell a named character!

I'll be disappointed if Prince Althran won't get a re-release. One of the best high elf sculpts, since he was made for Island of Blood

 Ohman wrote:
Great to see these guys made it. I was sceptical because of the shared sprues of the original.

A recut sprue with just the 5 non-command Elves from Isle of Blood already existed, it was a webstore exclusive back in the day, so this was an easy product for them.

Guess that confirms its Cathay

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I've said it before so why not say it again.

What to integrate Cathay? Reverse Hong Kong!

In the 1300s China was the world's greatest maritime power and the great Admiral Muslim and Eunuch Zheng He/Cheng Ho sailed as far as Africa.

So on Planet Warhammer, have Cathay treasure ships sail to the Olde Worlde and set up a colony, call it Kong Hong. Somewhere between TOW and the End Times it was abandoned as Cathay realized the Olde Worlde had nothing they wanted.

Cathay is already easily integrated with: Chaos (all types), Dark Elves, Orcs & Goblins, Ogres, Vampire Counts (Lahmians and Jade Blooded), Skaven, High Elves

Lizardmen are fairly easy - Southlands, Dragon Isles, relic populations in Khuresh area, lost isles of Elithis, Lumbria if you want to be particularly saucy. You could easily invent a new Wood Elf faction somewhere near Cathay.

It's really only Tomb Kings, Empire, Bretonnia and Dwarfs that pose a problem. If you move your hypothetical Kong Hong to the Southlands somewhere near Sudenberg, then that's the Empire sorted without being too lore breakingly weird.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Either way it's been made evident by statements from people in the know

No, it hasnt. Its been said by complete randos on the internet who "know someone". Even then, the original source statements made on the topic were sprculative ratger than revelatory, they also were highly misconstrued and morphed from "GW wants to maintain product separation for accounting purposes" to "theres internal politics and infighting causing the AoS team to try to screw over the TOW team".

Also Lumineth are almost a shot for shot remake of High Elves with some minor changes (hammers instead of axes, dancing great sword dudes, bows with pulleys, replacing a horse with a kangaroo, etc) which the only really NEW NEW thing being the walking cow mountain and some other animal spirit things.

So, absolutely nothing alike, then?

Oh wait, kharadron and fyreslayers are short guys with beards and runic designs - these are identical to dwarves. Cities of sigmar are humans with helmets, swords, and shiekds - totally indistinguishable from empire. Stormcast wear magic heavy armor and srrve a god - they are clearly chaos warriors.

Long story short, it's not about IP. It's about trackable sales numbers the board to make decision supported by actual information and for shareholders to be able to see correct decisions being made.

Its 100% about the IP. Sales channels are only a small piece of that broader puzzle, the potential value of the IP and brand to the business from merchamdizing and licensing is much much greater than what can or will be achieved by slinging pladtic. Look at how much a major IP like GoT or Star Wars is worth and how much money that can make - its more than what all of GW combined has grossed over the padt decade. If you cross the streams by pollinating the same stuff into multiple brands? Its a lot harder to extract that value because exclusivity issues come into play. And its a lot harder to gauge the value of the ip when youre sales channels arent atrictly delineating so you can see where the cash flows are going.

Saying its only about minis sales is missing the forest for the trees and grossly oversimplifying the scenario.

So do us all a favor and stop scolding people for discussing things that, while contradictory to statements made over a year ago, may be possible.

"Do us all a favor and stop reminding me that my made up cope is purely fictitipus nonsense directly contradictory to the effective word of God and completely disconnected from anything we know to be factually relevant to the discussion."

FTFY.

 GaroRobe wrote:


Guess that confirms its Cathay

As much as I would love the unrevealed army to be Cathay, I am going to assume that it will be a "ravening hordes" army due to the fact that right now they only have 4 armies vs 5 for the "good guys". Could be it will be the long-awaited return of Chaos Dwarves which would be amazing.

CD are already confirmed as a new AoS force.

I wonder why the Swordmasters were given a slightly tweaked command squad, but the Seaguard didn't. Seaguard have a chariot, a new resin character, etc. Seems like the more obvious choice for some command squad variation

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
CD are already confirmed as a new AoS force.

Wait? What?

I entirely missed that one!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
CD are already confirmed as a new AoS force.

Wait? What?

I entirely missed that one!

Lots of teases, especially in the new core rulebook. Lots of chaos dwarf strong holds showing up on maps, lore snippets, etc.

Nothing "official" yet, but they're coming

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
CD are already confirmed as a new AoS force.

Wait? What?

I entirely missed that one!

Not officially - just through the very reliable rumour person on the AoS forum.

they do appear in the lore of AoS so they are part of the fabric of that setting and they've been "hinted at" for a long while. That said the Shadow Aelves have also been in lore and in the story since the very first days of AoS and they've had perhaps 1 model appear that "might" have been a shadow Aelf and since then nothing; only the odd mention in DoK stories when Morathi speaks to her son

They're also in today's preview video. You can see the screenshot in the other thread.

I did a quick and dirty unit list (not lords and heroes) for Cathay in TTW3 if anyone doesn't know them -

Not gonna lie, I'm very tempted to start a High Elf army, in spite of the fact that I'm already swamped with unfinished army projects. I love the look of the High Elves, and the Lion Chariots are especially neat!

 ZergSmasher wrote:
Not gonna lie, I'm very tempted to start a High Elf army, in spite of the fact that I'm already swamped with unfinished army projects. I love the look of the High Elves, and the Lion Chariots are especially neat!

High Elves were my secondary army after Empire from WFB days. Looking forward to actually being able to fill out the units from the Island of Blood set, especially the Sea Guard and the all plastic Reavers. I don't even remember those elite units such as Dragon Princes, Phoenix Guard and White Lions ever being released in plastic. Must have been a late 8th ed release. All of mine are 100% metal (except for horses of course) and I was collecting High Elves right up to about the end of WFB.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
CD are already confirmed as a new AoS force.

Wait? What?

I entirely missed that one!

Chorfs are a legacy faction, which means they wont be supported in TOW - and no, its not because of mini overlap, the current line of Chorf minis dont have rules in AoS4, theyre also 100% resin so we know they arent going to be used in the rumored upcoming AoS release. GW could have very easily added them to TOW as a core faction from the getgo (and IMO should have, but as someone who owns almost 6k points of them I may be biased), but didnt. Why? Because its not a minis thing, its a brand/IP thing - all indications are that the AoS range will be referencing the Legion of Azgorh range aesthetically, so they dont want the visual overlap even if the kits would be distinct.

It's a "they do not have infinite capacity to produce full lines of models" thing as well any other factors.

Even bringing back 9 armies worth over a year has been a huge undertaking and was quite a major investment for something they obviously weren't 100% sure would do well.

They were never bringing back CDs who don't even have plastic kits to rerelease.

This is why we’re seeing “low hanging fruit”.

We’ve had relatively few entirely new plastic kits for TOW. Some recut kits, but it’s mostly been “dust off the existing moulds”.

Given this is a somewhat risky product line, not only offering a form of competition to AoS, but picking up on a legacy somewhat soured by the dawn of AoS, it wasn’t guaranteed to succeed.

But, by going the route they went? Costs have likely been kept comparatively modest. Compare to HH and LI. With a mass plasticisation for both? They weren’t cheap.

You’ve got the cost of sculpting and setting out the sprue, then creating presumably multiple steel moulds for each kit so you can churn them out in volume.

By largely reusing existing moulds, TOW has kept its setup costs as modest as possible, giving the game as much of a chance at financially pulling its own weight in the early days as possible.

If it continues to sell comfortably (no I don’t know what that might look like, only GW does) we may see ever greater investment, in both new kits and hopefully, new armies.

Vorian wrote:
It's a "they do not have infinite capacity to produce full lines of models" thing as well any other factors.

Even bringing back 9 armies worth over a year has been a huge undertaking and was quite a major investment for something they obviously weren't 100% sure would do well.

They were never bringing back CDs who don't even have plastic kits to rerelease.

Thats just it though, Chorfs already have a full line of very modern *resin* models ready to go, maybe they needed to do a new set of production molds off the masters, but thats no different than what theyve done for a lot of the other resin and metal minis in the range and is a relatively quick and simple process with minimal cost (i know because ive dine it before myself). Its certainly easier than going dumpster diving for old kits that they need to remaster and make new molds for like the field trebuchet or tomb giant.

There is absolutely no way they would have brought back a full resin range into the game where every other faction has a fully plastic core lineup ready for re-release. That's all there is to it.

Not 100% impossible. Middle-Earth (which is the closest comparison right now) has a couple of FW exclusive armies in the Iron Hills and Beornings. There's always the possibility if there is a brand new force, it could end up 90% or more resin.

See also: Horus Heresy which was resin only for quite some time.

In other news, its going around that GW pulled support from the TOW LVO tournament because the organizers refused to ban the legacy armies from the event. Seems like GW is stull pretty adamant in its stance that they will not support those armies.

I can understand it from GW's point of view of marketing. They want a 100% as clear as they can make it stance on which armies they are and are not supporting. They don't want that Lizardman or Skaven player "waiting for their army to appear". They want them either going into AoS or joining OW with another of the armies that they are supporting

Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

Arguably its worked out for GW as theyve likely made more money than they wouldve otherwise this way, but theres a lot of folks who either dont know how to read or are bad actors who have encouraged noobies to buy inti these armies on the false premise that they will be fully supported in the future. The great irony is that as of late GW has made clear its willingness to straight up eliminate countless units and even whole armies (RIP Far Harad and Variags of Khand) during edition turnovers, so its actually more likely than not that a hypothetical TOW 2.0 has zero rules support for legacy armies than it is for them to provide those factions rules and model support.

chaos0xomega wrote:

In other news, its going around that GW pulled support from the TOW LVO tournament because the organizers refused to ban the legacy armies from the event. Seems like GW is stull pretty adamant in its stance that they will not support those armies.

Then mad props to the organizers for not bowing down, we need more like them.

So fully back to the old days
Next step, not waiting for GW fixing the rules and adding house rules to tournament combs

Vorian wrote:
It's a "they do not have infinite capacity to produce full lines of models" thing as well any other factors.

Even bringing back 9 armies worth over a year has been a huge undertaking and was quite a major investment for something they obviously weren't 100% sure would do well.

They were never bringing back CDs who don't even have plastic kits to rerelease.

If that were true they woukdnt have just teased that they are investing into creating a whole new faction amd model range in the form of cathay as a 10th faction. The obvious "low capacity impact" move would have been to continue with the legacy factions.

Not sure how that follows.

Committing to releasing a further 7 factions of old models vs releasing a new army are two very different things.

Both in terms of having to manufacture and stock all those things and the amount of time tied up in the release schedule

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

 RustyNumber wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

GW has been pretty explicit on their stance regarding the legacy armies. Anyone who hasn't caught that message is living in delusion. Sure, I'd love to see Dark Elves get official support, but I'm not expecting it.

 BorderCountess wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

GW has been pretty explicit on their stance regarding the legacy armies. Anyone who hasn't caught that message is living in delusion. Sure, I'd love to see Dark Elves get official support, but I'm not expecting it.

Honestly I wish GW would just say what their plans are for the DE range. It's just sat in AoS for ever - a whole army that's basically been untouched save for 1 expansion book where they could pair up with DoK for even more Dark Elf goodness. However I think everyone is still on the fence with them because they really don't feel like GW is going to do anything with them and one day we'll wake up and BOOM they'll be gone.

 BorderCountess wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

GW has been pretty explicit on their stance regarding the legacy armies. Anyone who hasn't caught that message is living in delusion. Sure, I'd love to see Dark Elves get official support, but I'm not expecting it.

GW have been explicit about many things in the past and then gone back on it. It's standard corporate communications.

I wish this topic would just bloody die, the people who are adamant the legacy armies will never return even if TOW becomes a raging success, are so tiresome as those that read every GW decision as fuel for 'legacy armies will return'.

Let's wait and see.

Vorian wrote:
Not sure how that follows.

Committing to releasing a further 7 factions of old models vs releasing a new army are two very different things.

Both in terms of having to manufacture and stock all those things and the amount of time tied up in the release schedule

Youre right, the 7 legacy factions are easier to do than one new faction. It takes years of art, sculpting, writing, toolmaking, and manufacturing to produce a new faction. The hardest part of putting legacy factions out is resurfacing the steel molds and dumpster diving and mold remastering for old resin/metal kits, which is done by an entirely different team of folks that havent been particularly busy for quite some time until recently.

Its not much different than the codex/battletome releases GW does like 16 times a year already for 40k/AoS. Every one of those basically involves them putting the entire model range for that faction back into production (no, they arent all in constant production, they get rotated in and out constantly, we just dint see it - thats why thubgs go out of stock) at the same time, packaging them into new boxes, and shipping them around the world. Most 40k/AoS factions have a larger model range and more skus than TOW factions, so thats another point in TOWs favor. And those 40k/AoS releases? Theyre doing a handful of major refreshes/expansions for each of those games in parallel to that schedule, including up to a dozen or so all new kits for any guven faction that have to go through the complete design, toolmaking, and manifacturing proceess, whereas for TOW so far the most any one faction got was 2 new plastic kits, and several got none whatsoever.

Another point in legacy/TOWs favor - generally smaller production lots, more use of MTO, and the releases are broken up into waves over several weeks (whereas product reboxings for 40k/AoS are all released at once). Overall, its easier to launch a legacy TOW faction than it is to update a 40k/AoS faction or launch a new faction for any game system.

As for commitment? Thats just it - GW didnt need to say anything. They could have just given us a vague roadmap civering the first handful of factions, like they do for all their other games, and said nothing about legacy at all until the time came. They told us up-front what legacy status meant for a reason, and its not because they might change their minds down the line. They didnt need tk commit to anything up front, yet they did.

And lets not pretend that the release schedule ends with faction 10 (ie cathay, probably). Theyve already committed to continued releases, even if they havent quite told us yet. Theres definitely another 6 legacy faction releases worth of models in development for TOW to be released after Cathay, they arent just going to stop one day and say "thats it, thats the game, k thnx bai". Whether those are fkr the legacy factions, or kislev, fishmen, halflings, araby, estalia, and tilea is irrelevant. The legacy factions are lower cost, lower risk, and have better margins than anything new. Its clear given that, that there is no justification to argue that doing the legacy factions was a bigger challenge or a greater burdej to GW than developing a whole new model range from the ground up.

Yes, adding a faction release, any faction release, to a packed schedule just makes it more packed, but thats why GW hired hundreds of new staff and built new factories and warehouses - so that they wouldnt have the capavity cinstraints that woukd otherwise make doing this difficult.

 Overread wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

GW has been pretty explicit on their stance regarding the legacy armies. Anyone who hasn't caught that message is living in delusion. Sure, I'd love to see Dark Elves get official support, but I'm not expecting it.

Honestly I wish GW would just say what their plans are for the DE range. It's just sat in AoS for ever - a whole army that's basically been untouched save for 1 expansion book where they could pair up with DoK for even more Dark Elf goodness. However I think everyone is still on the fence with them because they really don't feel like GW is going to do anything with them and one day we'll wake up and BOOM they'll be gone.

It's likely that entire range will immediately be retired (for 5.0) once Malekith skulks out of Ulgu with a couple of new units. That said, if GW was inclined to bring an army out from Legends, DE would be the best candidate along with Ogres. Given how little attention Ogres have gotten since AoS launch, I think they'll be getting the Beastmen treatment. The longer we go without a plastic Butcher, Slaughtermaster or named character, the more convinced I am.

 Overread wrote:
I can understand it from GW's point of view of marketing. They want a 100% as clear as they can make it stance on which armies they are and are not supporting. They don't want that Lizardman or Skaven player "waiting for their army to appear". They want them either going into AoS or joining OW with another of the armies that they are supporting

Of course, it backfires in some cases. Combine the lack of DE, Lizardmen, or Skaven in TOW with the change in base size and my interest in TOW died.

Some of the minis are cool, though, so I keep an eye on things. May pick up some more Seaguard to bulk out my own units.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

I think that a lot of Oldhammer players would simply have refused to even consider switching from whatever edition of WHFB they were playing to TOW if that is what GW had done. For a game like this to be successful, it needs to have a critical mass of players. Let's not pretend that tournament games are the only ones that matter for GW's sales.

GrosseSax wrote:

 Overread wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

GW has been pretty explicit on their stance regarding the legacy armies. Anyone who hasn't caught that message is living in delusion. Sure, I'd love to see Dark Elves get official support, but I'm not expecting it.

Honestly I wish GW would just say what their plans are for the DE range. It's just sat in AoS for ever - a whole army that's basically been untouched save for 1 expansion book where they could pair up with DoK for even more Dark Elf goodness. However I think everyone is still on the fence with them because they really don't feel like GW is going to do anything with them and one day we'll wake up and BOOM they'll be gone.

It's likely that entire range will immediately be retired (for 5.0) once Malekith skulks out of Ulgu with a couple of new units. That said, if GW was inclined to bring an army out from Legends, DE would be the best candidate along with Ogres. Given how little attention Ogres have gotten since AoS launch, I think they'll be getting the Beastmen treatment. The longer we go without a plastic Butcher, Slaughtermaster or named character, the more convinced I am.

Ogres were once amongst the top selling factions in AoS and have been a fan favorite. They arent going anywhere.

 Londinium wrote:
GW have been explicit about many things in the past and then gone back on it. It's standard corporate communications.

See, for example, the previous 40k roadmap, which had Imperial Knights in the same group of books to be released as the Guard and the Eldar - and who have, going by this LVO update, gotten lost in the Warp somewhere, given there are four Chaos 'dexes in their place, and they don't even seem to feature in the black & white teaser art...

chaos0xomega wrote:

Vorian wrote:
Not sure how that follows.

Committing to releasing a further 7 factions of old models vs releasing a new army are two very different things.

Both in terms of having to manufacture and stock all those things and the amount of time tied up in the release schedule

Youre right, the 7 legacy factions are easier to do than one new faction. It takes years of art, sculpting, writing, toolmaking, and manufacturing to produce a new faction. The hardest part of putting legacy factions out is resurfacing the steel molds and dumpster diving and mold remastering for old resin/metal kits, which is done by an entirely different team of folks that havent been particularly busy for quite some time until recently.

Its not much different than the codex/battletome releases GW does like 16 times a year already for 40k/AoS. Every one of those basically involves them putting the entire model range for that faction back into production (no, they arent all in constant production, they get rotated in and out constantly, we just dint see it - thats why thubgs go out of stock) at the same time, packaging them into new boxes, and shipping them around the world. Most 40k/AoS factions have a larger model range and more skus than TOW factions, so thats another point in TOWs favor. And those 40k/AoS releases? Theyre doing a handful of major refreshes/expansions for each of those games in parallel to that schedule, including up to a dozen or so all new kits for any guven faction that have to go through the complete design, toolmaking, and manifacturing proceess, whereas for TOW so far the most any one faction got was 2 new plastic kits, and several got none whatsoever.

Another point in legacy/TOWs favor - generally smaller production lots, more use of MTO, and the releases are broken up into waves over several weeks (whereas product reboxings for 40k/AoS are all released at once). Overall, its easier to launch a legacy TOW faction than it is to update a 40k/AoS faction or launch a new faction for any game system.

As for commitment? Thats just it - GW didnt need to say anything. They could have just given us a vague roadmap civering the first handful of factions, like they do for all their other games, and said nothing about legacy at all until the time came. They told us up-front what legacy status meant for a reason, and its not because they might change their minds down the line. They didnt need tk commit to anything up front, yet they did.

And lets not pretend that the release schedule ends with faction 10 (ie cathay, probably). Theyve already committed to continued releases, even if they havent quite told us yet. Theres definitely another 6 legacy faction releases worth of models in development for TOW to be released after Cathay, they arent just going to stop one day and say "thats it, thats the game, k thnx bai". Whether those are fkr the legacy factions, or kislev, fishmen, halflings, araby, estalia, and tilea is irrelevant. The legacy factions are lower cost, lower risk, and have better margins than anything new. Its clear given that, that there is no justification to argue that doing the legacy factions was a bigger challenge or a greater burdej to GW than developing a whole new model range from the ground up.

Yes, adding a faction release, any faction release, to a packed schedule just makes it more packed, but thats why GW hired hundreds of new staff and built new factories and warehouses - so that they wouldnt have the capavity cinstraints that woukd otherwise make doing this difficult.

7 factions worth of releases is committing to nearly 2 years of further quarterly releases and god knows how many plastic kits to produce and manufacture.

1 new army is a quarter and a limited number of plastic kits.

I'm saying equating those two things when they were committing to an initial run of the old world is wrong.

They committed to bringing back 9 factions, a new army and potentially other things before the release. Before having any idea if it was going to be popular.

The risk is much higher to commit to the legacy armies rather than Cathay and you also don't get to see how a new army would perform.

If you're not committing to armies at launch, but want people with existing collections to be able to play (to help people get games in the early days of the game) then your only option is what they've done.

Could they bring back more of the legacy armies in the future? Sure, they now have sales info to make decisions and we've been told the "scope has changed". All the other factors may or may not dictate if other factions return or not, we don't know. We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay. We'll find out in time and their messaging will change based on what they decide.

I would imagine there's very little chance Chaos Dwarves come back as just a rerelease of the Forgeworld line. If they come back I would guess they'll be much closer to a brand new army.

As I said in one of the other comments - they didnt have to make any "commitment". They could have just left it open ended as to which factions were coming when. Instead they were very up front in committing to 9 factions being returned and committing to 7 factions in the dust bin. Think about that. You cant have it both ways, you cant say "nuh uh its too much to commit to because once they commit they cant change their minds" and then go "they committed to not supporting the legacy factions but they can always change their minds later".

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

chaos0xomega wrote:

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

Which baffles me, because you'd think they'd be among the first armies to be released. Because you know, that's what GW showed off to push their "new" system.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

Which baffles me, because you'd think they'd be among the first armies to be released. Because you know, that's what GW showed off to push their "new" system.

The thing is when GW made the choice to bring back multiple old armies with old models in those armies they almost had to put those armies first. Do you think Brets would sell as well as they have if just before you had two totally new armies with full model rosters of utterly new modern models? Chances are you'd still have had some nostalgia buying, but it would have felt very bitter to fans to get super-old clunky models after two big fresh armies went out. Plus those two fresh totally new armies had to kick start a whole new game on their own. They are popular yes, but at the same time they are new and one is completely untested in the market.

Put the old models first and tease people with some updates sprinkled in to tickle the nostalgia itch and also show that GW are supporting them. Plus they can launch big full armies much faster and get the game going because people are instantly able to put old model armies they've still got right back onto the table along with new purchases of some of the totally new/unreleased models coming out.


Do the old first THEN hit the market with the brand new armies full of modern designed models. Then start updating the old armies with fresh resculpts. Give Brets new knights; give TK new Skeletons etc.

 Overread wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

Which baffles me, because you'd think they'd be among the first armies to be released. Because you know, that's what GW showed off to push their "new" system.

The thing is when GW made the choice to bring back multiple old armies with old models in those armies they almost had to put those armies first. Do you think Brets would sell as well as they have if just before you had two totally new armies with full model rosters of utterly new modern models? Chances are you'd still have had some nostalgia buying, but it would have felt very bitter to fans to get super-old clunky models after two big fresh armies went out. Plus those two fresh totally new armies had to kick start a whole new game on their own. They are popular yes, but at the same time they are new and one is completely untested in the market.

Put the old models first and tease people with some updates sprinkled in to tickle the nostalgia itch and also show that GW are supporting them. Plus they can launch big full armies much faster and get the game going because people are instantly able to put old model armies they've still got right back onto the table along with new purchases of some of the totally new/unreleased models coming out.


Do the old first THEN hit the market with the brand new armies full of modern designed models. Then start updating the old armies with fresh resculpts. Give Brets new knights; give TK new Skeletons etc.

Fair enough then. I guess that is the safer route, yes. Though why Tomb Kings? I understand Empire, Bretonnia, Dwarfs and Chaos, but why TK? Aren't they a little far from the setting's focus? Is it because of memes?

not really
the main advantage GW has with TOW over any other new game be it their own or from someone else is, is having a huge playerbase with stuff in the basement and therefore can have a critical number of players day 1 of done right

hence why we saw Khemri and Bretonnia as the first 2 armies, generate hype and bringing back the old crowed
so there are 50-100 people events, game gets going and people are already invested and builded communities before there are army books with fresh new armies

Makes sense. I'm sure I'm not the only old WHFB player with an army gathering dust.
Though in my case its lizardmen, which are still using legacy rules.
They are bringing out Beastmen, High Elves and Wood Elves though, which means Dark Elves and Lizards might be next. Then it would just be Skaven and Vampire Counts (though I'm not sure they are around in this period) left, and I think that's all of the old WHFB factions?

I doubt we see legacy armies coming back

keeping their IPs apart is currently a very important thing based on what they are doing
so anything that is in AoS, one way or the other, won't be in TOW (no Skaven or Vampires)

and than we will see, as soon as they start with new factions and army books, there will be more (and more old armies moved to legacy in favour of shiny new ones)

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Makes sense. I'm sure I'm not the only old WHFB player with an army gathering dust.
Though in my case its lizardmen, which are still using legacy rules.
They are bringing out Beastmen, High Elves and Wood Elves though, which means Dark Elves and Lizards might be next. Then it would just be Skaven and Vampire Counts (though I'm not sure they are around in this period) left, and I think that's all of the old WHFB factions?

Beastmen, High Elves and Wood Elves have been in the books from the start, they’re just getting round to rereleasing their stuff now. Dark Elves and Lizardmen (and Skaven and VC) have been separated as Legacy Factions from the start too, so unless something changes/has changed, there aren’t plans to bring them back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
I doubt we see legacy armies coming back

keeping their IPs apart is currently a very important thing based on what they are doing
so anything that is in AoS, one way or the other, won't be in TOW (no Skaven or Vampires)

and than we will see, as soon as they start with new factions and army books, there will be more (and more old armies moved to legacy in favour of shiny new ones)

The biggest issue with the idea of it just being a case of ‘if it’s in AoS it won’t be in TOW’ of course being Warriors of Chaos/Slaves to Darkness.

Chaos Warriors have always been the closest thing that WHFB had to space marines (iconic to the setting, popular/high selling though not as popular as SM are in 40k, etc). SM are allowed to exist in 30k and 40k, makes sense WOC can exist in both. There will inevitably be some stylistic divergence in the two ranges over time when TOW eventually starts getting dedicated kit resculpts. AoS darkoath leaned into the conan vibes, im guessing that TOWs marauders will eventually lean into the Norsca vibes. As for the warriors/knights themselves? No clue. Frydaal (our first dedicated TOW chaos warrior mini) would look just as at-home in AoS as in TOW, if theres some stylistic divergence to occur then its not obviously clear what that is, whereas w space marines you can make the distinction based on armor patterns.

The one thing that does occur to me though is that rules wise, Frydaal wears full plate while regular chaos warriors wear heavy armor. Sometime back, prior to TOW releasing, I shared that I had heard from one of my sources that the lore they were going with was that the whole hellforged black iron armor of WOC of old was a post-GWAC thing and that in this era where the chaos gods were not yet adcendant finding chaos warriors bulked out to that degree was rarer because getting those gifts from them was much more difficult. If you squint, that kind of came about with chaos warriors being downgraded back to heavy armor, but to some extent that was true across the board for mamy units in many armies. Now, in the context of seeing Frydaal looking like an AoS warrior while decked out in full plate, im thinking that lore may end up coming through in future minis where regular warriors and knights in heavy armor will be more lightly kitted out than what were used to (less plate, more chainmail), while chosen adhere more to the classic full plate style but more decorative as befits their status.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Makes sense. I'm sure I'm not the only old WHFB player with an army gathering dust.
Though in my case its lizardmen, which are still using legacy rules.
They are bringing out Beastmen, High Elves and Wood Elves though, which means Dark Elves and Lizards might be next. Then it would just be Skaven and Vampire Counts (though I'm not sure they are around in this period) left, and I think that's all of the old WHFB factions?

Beastmen, High Elves and Wood Elves have been in the books from the start, they’re just getting round to rereleasing their stuff now. Dark Elves and Lizardmen (and Skaven and VC) have been separated as Legacy Factions from the start too, so unless something changes/has changed, there aren’t plans to bring them back.

Oh. Well that's a pity. I was hoping for my lizards to get some proper rules :/

chaos0xomega wrote:
See also: Horus Heresy which was resin only for quite some time.

In other news, its going around that GW pulled support from the TOW LVO tournament because the organizers refused to ban the legacy armies from the event. Seems like GW is stull pretty adamant in its stance that they will not support those armies.

I’m here playing in it (although I dropped the second day because I drank too much Friday night haha and got sick) and I haven’t heard that. Good time with cool people - lots of fun.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerFantasy/comments/1i4bhyr/the_old_world_at_lvo_thus_far/

 Londinium wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Tbh thats the exact situation they created By providing the pdf lists, even after multiple explicit statements that those factions will not be supported going forward. They should have just left it at the statements and not provided the rules.

For the very low cost of having to make up some rules they support all the old players (thus giving new/mini-supported players more opponents and the game scene more life) and generate some AoS mini sales as well. I think that's worth more to GW than "oh no what if mixed messaging causes a bit of angst in some players even after we clearly say they won't be supported further"

GW has been pretty explicit on their stance regarding the legacy armies. Anyone who hasn't caught that message is living in delusion. Sure, I'd love to see Dark Elves get official support, but I'm not expecting it.

GW have been explicit about many things in the past and then gone back on it. It's standard corporate communications.

I wish this topic would just bloody die, the people who are adamant the legacy armies will never return even if TOW becomes a raging success, are so tiresome as those that read every GW decision as fuel for 'legacy armies will return'.

Let's wait and see.

Look, it would surprise me not at all to see Darkling Covens get dropped from the Cities of Sigmar so that the Dark Elves can show up in Old World (including re-releasing the 6th edition metal Witch Elves so that they can keep the lines separate). But again, unless/until GW says otherwise, I'm not going to expect it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:
The biggest issue with the idea of it just being a case of ‘if it’s in AoS it won’t be in TOW’ of course being Warriors of Chaos/Slaves to Darkness.

Except the two settings have different kits even for identical units, like Chaos Warriors, Knights, and Chosen.

I feel like there's already a big chunk of things from several of the lists Sold out or unavailable online anymore - The new bret character was sold out almost immediately and the empire characters / new wizards as well. They seem to need a major restock of a wide variety of more recent and older minis.

That seems like a regional thing. They haven't moved on the UK store.

Pardon me for my continuing ignorance, but does anyone know when the Wave 1 Empire releases will show up in Australia?

Wave 2 is up for preorder on the Australian site, but I still can't find any trace of Wave 1 (which has been delayed according to a helpful person upthread).

Unless of course I'm getting it backward and Wave 2 is in fact Wave 1.

 BorderCountess wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
The biggest issue with the idea of it just being a case of ‘if it’s in AoS it won’t be in TOW’ of course being Warriors of Chaos/Slaves to Darkness.

Except the two settings have different kits even for identical units, like Chaos Warriors, Knights, and Chosen.

Skaven and Vampire Counts are also at the point where they would, too, or at least very close. Almost everything for them from WHFB has been replaced now.

Zenithfleet wrote:
Pardon me for my continuing ignorance, but does anyone know when the Wave 1 Empire releases will show up in Australia?

Wave 2 is up for preorder on the Australian site, but I still can't find any trace of Wave 1 (which has been delayed according to a helpful person upthread).

Unless of course I'm getting it backward and Wave 2 is in fact Wave 1.

Not even all of Wave 2 is on the Australian site, just the stuff that's ordered from UK
Unfortunately I haven't seen GW post an expected timeline anywhere aside from Soon™

chaos0xomega wrote:
As I said in one of the other comments - they didnt have to make any "commitment". They could have just left it open ended as to which factions were coming when. Instead they were very up front in committing to 9 factions being returned and committing to 7 factions in the dust bin. Think about that. You cant have it both ways, you cant say "nuh uh its too much to commit to because once they commit they cant change their minds" and then go "they committed to not supporting the legacy factions but they can always change their minds later".

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

They released a book with all the army lists in on day 1. They had PDFs of the armies not supported.

What exactly do you think their communication should be at that point?

What i really like about the new Old World models is the lack (mostly) of tactical rocks. Just plain warriors with feat on the ground. Apart from a few that really enhance the model (Ushoran comes to mind) I don't care for them.

JWh85 wrote:
What i really like about the new Old World models is the lack (mostly) of tactical rocks. Just plain warriors with feat on the ground. Apart from a few that really enhance the model (Ushoran comes to mind) I don't care for them.

That's because they have saved them all up for the 'high' elves!

Those are old models. The new models don't have a tactical rock between them!

(That High Elf Wizard is really really bad though )

In another note, why does Burlok only have one picture? We don't even have a picture from behind or the sides. I mean, no 360 pics on release, fine. But buying a model of just one foto from one side? It makes me (probably unjustly) suspicious about the quality of the model.

Vorian wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
As I said in one of the other comments - they didnt have to make any "commitment". They could have just left it open ended as to which factions were coming when. Instead they were very up front in committing to 9 factions being returned and committing to 7 factions in the dust bin. Think about that. You cant have it both ways, you cant say "nuh uh its too much to commit to because once they commit they cant change their minds" and then go "they committed to not supporting the legacy factions but they can always change their minds later".

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

They released a book with all the army lists in on day 1. They had PDFs of the armies not supported.

What exactly do you think their communication should be at that point?

They could have just... not? And followed a similar release model to basically all the other games in their stable. Their choice to release everything in day 1 compilation books the way they did wasnt really necessary. They cpuld have instead did barebones pdfs for all 16 factions on day 1, said "these are get you by lists for legacy whfb players, stay tuned for official releases in the future, though note that there will be many changes as these factions make the transition into TOW, some of the units and indeed entire factions may not make the transition to TOW, but we shall see what the future holds, and left it open ended. Arcane journals then would be full-size army books with the necessary updates to the pdf lists, and if the game sold well enough - lo and behold they fund the 7 legacy factions. If it diesnt sell well enoygh they say "sorry, as we said not every faction was going to feature in TOW, you can continue playing the pdf list though".

In general, every other game follows a pretty vague release model in which we have zero advanced knowldfge of what factions are to be added or cut during any given edition cycle, etc. Units, and at times armies, are basically cut constantly with minimal notice. its rather odd and singular that GW decided to tell us what to expect upfront in this instance. When HH2.0 released they basically said "here is the astartes list, other army lists might or might not come later, by the way a lot of units and options are going to be cut, some of it might or might not appear again later" and left it vague, zero commitment, lots of uncertainty, but it worked.

(if you havent figured it out yet, im pointing these things out to highlight the fact that GW took extraordinary steps to message that the legacy factions arent happening, and because of that their position on the topic probably will not change).

JWh85 wrote:
Those are old models. The new models don't have a tactical rock between them!

Are you quite sure about that?




I'd not be surprised if they released Cathay based on the mountains from the background art work at this point!

That's more than i thought, though some of the the cavalry models have those low stone bases to fit the mount's feet into.

The dwarf has an oathstone? That doesn't count

Worst offenders are the black orc, Nekaph and Frydaal. Nekaph is just horrible. It feels like the train of thought was: 'That comically long lost isn't long enough.' and instead of draping the longer list on the ground around him they decided to just elevatie him on a rock. The orc's rock is at least serviceable to his lurching pose. Frydaal's is wierdly useless and doesn't make the model better in any way.

One of those is an oathstone which has actual rules in game I believe (I don’t play dwarves so not 100% sure).

JWh85 wrote:
That's more than you thought, though some of the the cavalry models have those low stone bases to fit the mount's feet into.

The dwarf has an oathstone? That doesn't count

The oathstone is on a rock. So GW put a rock on a rock.
I can't wait for them to release a rock golem that's standing on a tactical rock armed with a stone club that also comes with a tactical rock.

Quite a surprise to see only 1 of the new Empire Wizards is sold out on the UK store. Maybe I'm just misremembering but I thought the new stuff for the other factions were sold out very quickly.

Maybe they made more of them?

If GW is intent on keeping WFB lines virtually unchanged in AoS, I doubt it will be very long before even the legacy faction army lists will disappear from GW's pages.


Once they get the game to a certain critical mass of players, they won't need to support those old factions because the new player base will be self sustaining.

I would treat these factions like OG marines vs primaris, slowly being edged out until gone entirely.

If they can build the game base up enough in the next few years with their actual miniature releases, I expect the next edition of the game will be where we see lines like 'we are refocusing the game, streamlining for players, making it easier for new people, focusing on the core of the game' etc etc blah blah, and then just strip those legacy faction lists entirely from the game.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Makes sense. I'm sure I'm not the only old WHFB player with an army gathering dust.
Though in my case its lizardmen, which are still using legacy rules.
They are bringing out Beastmen, High Elves and Wood Elves though, which means Dark Elves and Lizards might be next. Then it would just be Skaven and Vampire Counts (though I'm not sure they are around in this period) left, and I think that's all of the old WHFB factions?

Personally i think it's a bit BS that skaven "aren't around" as per GW's excuse. The most numerous faction in the game on every continent (except maybe ulthuan) can't be bothered while high elves probably technically are still in their isolation phase or near the end of it from the "war of the beard" and the civil war excuse hits empire as hard as it does the skaven if not worse. If skaven stay a Legacy faction it's only due to AoS and being the Big Bad currently for AoS's current edition and they can't bother to see a faction split between 2 games hence why Beastmen left to go to Old World.

As for Lizardmen we only got them when Human colonies showed up in the new world or if Dark elves get in the way. Meanwhile skaven being some of the most treacherous faction have fought just about everybody: dwarfs, empire, all kinds of greenskins but esp. goblins of all types, Lizardmen, Vampire Counts and Nagash esp., bretonnia (to a lesser extent) and some battles vs chaos (The monstrous skaven in Hellpit).

Even Tomb Kings feel a bit off as the empire is in a civil war and i don't really understand why they'd treasure hunt in khemri when they have so many problems in the immediate vicinity.

Dark elves sorta make sense as legacy because they only ever really fight chaos, lizardmen and high elves which is significantly far enough away from the Old World.

Honestly couldn't say for sure about Vampire Counts. There should be vampires around at this time in the lore but i don't even know if Vlad existed yet. Would be cool to see Vampires or arkhan the black (nagash's 2nd in command) without the Von Carsteins but without the Von Carsteins we have no Vampire Counts as Von carsteins have a legit claim to elector count and can become the emperor of the empire as weird as that is hence the term "Vampire Count".

High Elves are actually quite active at this point - alot of trading and even exploring- unlike the Dark Elves - in fact in the Tyrion and Teclis novel they are speculating that the Druchii are dying out.. Alarielle's mother is Everqueen with her older sister being trained to take her place. It is implied that the Dark Elves are not even rading the Old World much in this period

Lizardmen have been known to teleport to the Old World for specific reasons.

Vampires - the Carsteins are mostly destroyed or hiding (Vlad and Izzy are long gone, Manfred was the last).

"There’s nothing more ‘’boring’’ than a gathering of elder vampires. Believe me. I’ve suffered enough of them in my centuries. All those long grey faces and ragged black cloaks. The stag-at-rut jousts as two old fools get in a squabble about some mortal morsel. You hear the same stories over and over. Mostly, yarns about how we didn’t really loose the Undead Wars blah blah blah and are just biding our time before we emerge from our mountain fastnesses and take up our rightful positions as rulers of humanity blah blah blah." ~ Melissa d'Acques to Genevieve and Detlef Sierick

Loads of active (and much older) Vampires not of that newcomer bloodline - the Necrarchs in the forests and ruins, Lahmians all over the place - but both are hidden. Genevieve is likely in the far east learning martial arts and magic. Blood Dragons might be back at Blood Keep but otherwise scattered about.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Genevieve is likely in the far east learning martial arts and magic.

Cue Genevieve as a special character - for CATHAY.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Genevieve is likely in the far east learning martial arts and magic.

Cue Genevieve as a special character - for CATHAY.

And she’s almost as strong and fast as the transformed-dragon nobles.

I think that the community will fracture if GW don't support the legends armies.

LVO apparently running their Old World tournament without GW support because GW wanted them to disallow the legends armies is interesting. I was listening to Rob and Val on their square based show this evening, Rob and Val also run their own events which include the legends armies and Rob has said they'll continue to do so. I don't know how widespread that attitude is amongst tournament organisers in general but it seems like legends will get continuing support from some sections of the community even if GW refuses to support them.

If that community support includes balance tweaks, FAQs and general army composition or victory point scoring changes across the game in general then Old World is going to start to feel like the WHFB of old, where the "rule" books GW puts out are more like "guidelines" and wherever GW abdicates responsibility the community steps it.

If we are getting Cathay later this year I can see them selling well. After they were added to Warhammer Total War I still wasn't really interested in them, but if they price them as they have with the re-released WHFB lines, and they can get the stock into shops then I can see the line selling really well. It will be the only genuinely new army and will no doubt look magnificent compared to some of the models so far released for the game. I can see new gamers giving them a serious look unless they have a particular attachment to one of the existing lines.

I just hope we don't end up with a beautiful army with peasants priced as if they were space marines, that you need to field in units that are 40+ models. If that happens, nobody buys them and GW has a wobble about supporting a game they already killed once.

What sort of support does GW normally offer to events like the LVO? Just curious about what is actually at stake here.

 Pariah Press wrote:
What sort of support does GW normally offer to events like the LVO? Just curious about what is actually at stake here.

Trophies. They offer trophies. They might also offer a grab box of random crap that every winner gets called up to to pick something out of from paint holders to some oop box sets. Overall, it's basically minimal.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Dark elves sorta make sense as legacy because they only ever really fight chaos, lizardmen and high elves which is significantly far enough away from the Old World.

Presuming you ignore their ongoing slaving expeditions to the Old World...

The advantage of being an official GW event being an official GW event

But in general TOs follow GWs rules instead of using their own except Warhammer Fantasy where the official rules were hardly ever used, especially for events

So in this case it would be following the tradition of the game to ignore everything GW is advocating.
Big question will be what happens if rules are changed and the legacy army not updated, because either they are dropped or house rules must be added
And with the later no real reason to not update the core rules with house rules as well

Given the history of legends in every other game, my expectation is that if and when TOW 2.0 comes along the legacy armies will not be updated and will get left behind, which would be peak irony given that most of the community thinks a 2nd edition is right around the corner and will come with legacy factions being made core. At that point TOs will either throw in the towel or will sanction use of homebrew rules for those factions.

I have heard from certain community folks who are plugged in with major event organizers in the US that their support for legacy factions is temporary until all the core factions are released and the game is fully accessible to new players. The general sentiment seems to be that a lot of the balance issues that the community is grappling with on the competitive circuit are due to legacy factions, and unless GW balances them the best thing for the long term health of the competitive community is to move on from them, but in the near term the player base is too small for TOs to prohibit the legacy factions as it would end up cutting like a third of their player turnout.

The irony of the whole thing is that they aren't retconning these factions out of the setting.

They're just sticking their fingers in their ears and ignoring them. It's just really funny that they are mentioned in the background and even have army lists but GW just won't let them exist there.

If I was being cynical I would say their customer market share is so high gw wants it propping up AOS rather than allowing tow to benefit from them.

Lizardman and skaven have remained virtually unchanged from tow to AOS, GW are literally just using a tow faction to sell in AOS.

I

chaos0xomega wrote:

Vorian wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
As I said in one of the other comments - they didnt have to make any "commitment". They could have just left it open ended as to which factions were coming when. Instead they were very up front in committing to 9 factions being returned and committing to 7 factions in the dust bin. Think about that. You cant have it both ways, you cant say "nuh uh its too much to commit to because once they commit they cant change their minds" and then go "they committed to not supporting the legacy factions but they can always change their minds later".

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

They released a book with all the army lists in on day 1. They had PDFs of the armies not supported.

What exactly do you think their communication should be at that point?

They could have just... not? And followed a similar release model to basically all the other games in their stable. Their choice to release everything in day 1 compilation books the way they did wasnt really necessary. They cpuld have instead did barebones pdfs for all 16 factions on day 1, said "these are get you by lists for legacy whfb players, stay tuned for official releases in the future, though note that there will be many changes as these factions make the transition into TOW, some of the units and indeed entire factions may not make the transition to TOW, but we shall see what the future holds, and left it open ended. Arcane journals then would be full-size army books with the necessary updates to the pdf lists, and if the game sold well enough - lo and behold they fund the 7 legacy factions. If it diesnt sell well enoygh they say "sorry, as we said not every faction was going to feature in TOW, you can continue playing the pdf list though".

In general, every other game follows a pretty vague release model in which we have zero advanced knowldfge of what factions are to be added or cut during any given edition cycle, etc. Units, and at times armies, are basically cut constantly with minimal notice. its rather odd and singular that GW decided to tell us what to expect upfront in this instance. When HH2.0 released they basically said "here is the astartes list, other army lists might or might not come later, by the way a lot of units and options are going to be cut, some of it might or might not appear again later" and left it vague, zero commitment, lots of uncertainty, but it worked.

(if you havent figured it out yet, im pointing these things out to highlight the fact that GW took extraordinary steps to message that the legacy factions arent happening, and because of that their position on the topic probably will not change).

Releasing the Space Marine lists for Heresy is nothing like restarting Old World with two factions. An old world with two playable armies at launch and then one more playable every quarter following would have been dead on arrival.

Its pretty disingenuous to suggest they could have released this game without having the ability for people to use their old (or 3rd party) armies on day 1. They would have had complaints many many orders of magnitude greater than people complaining about their army being a legacy army.

Your suggestion also amounts to instead of legacy armies going from being playable but not updated, to simply being unplayable until they got round to re-releasing them (ie never) and I'm not sure that's a great improvement for the people that own those armies and want to play them.

 Vulcan wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Dark elves sorta make sense as legacy because they only ever really fight chaos, lizardmen and high elves which is significantly far enough away from the Old World.

Presuming you ignore their ongoing slaving expeditions to the Old World...

Yeah, don't they often raid the Bretonnian coast? The only real isolationists are the Lizardmen, and even then they'd sail over to the Old World to retrieve an artifact that some greedy Imperial stole.

The 8E Dark Elves Army Book actually states that this was a time of unparalleled raiding, exploration and diplomacy for the Druchii. Moreso than any other time period, this is when the Dark Elf fleets were most active and seen all over the world.

The Old World interactive map has been updated: https://www.theoldworld.com/

Tilea, Estalia, Norsca and the Chaos Wastes have been updated, and Dwarf icons are now clickable. There's a Cathayan ship off the coast of Couronne, and Kislev has extended eastwards, past the Mountains of Mourn (spoilered for size):

I’ve got hand written scribbled amendments in my beautiful hard back printed legacy list compilation, the very same lists that GW explicitly and with perfect clarity said they would release and then never look at again and never, ever, for realsies never update.

People speaking with certainty that the legacy lists are never coming back are putting way more stock in GW communications than GW do themselves.

It might be a slim possibility but to say it will never happen because GW said so (and implying anyone who questions this is a hopeful imbecile) is daft. Even leaving aside the ‘the scope has increased’ comments.

GW has historically been very unreliable when it comes to making 'absolutely certain' statements.

However, i do think that after the release of the 9 main armies there are enough signals that Cathay and, perhaps, Kislev will have their armies released. After that, they've hinted more than once that they want to release campaign-like content (hinting at the scenario's that they want to zoom in on certain conflicts) and the 9 main armies will probably get a refresh.

So if the legacy armies will get a mainstream release it will probably be a long while before that happens.

JWh85 wrote:
GW has historically been very unreliable when it comes to making 'absolutely certain' statements.

However, i do think that after the release of the 9 main armies there are enough signals that Cathay and, perhaps, Kislev will have their armies released. After that, they've hinted more than once that they want to release campaign-like content (hinting at the scenario's that they want to zoom in on certain conflicts) and the 9 main armies will probably get a refresh.

So if the legacy armies will get a mainstream release it will probably be a long while before that happens.

Agreed. After Cathay and Kisleve come out with totally new army ranges, those who are fans of classic forces will be wanting upgrades too. So it will be 100% a natural point to do those mini-campaigns and so forth or just a new edition or whatever GW decide to go alongside pushing out both big range updates (6+kits) and dripfed ones. That is a better direction than bloating the game with even more armies that need updated models all at once. GW have got away tickling the nostalgia itch with the launch of Old World, but both they and us know that you can't just keep that going long term.

Right now its 100% nostalgia mode; after that will come "Ok so now we want new brets knights and new empire soldiers and an updated steamtank and ooh a new war waggon " etc...

Or GW is going to move all old armies to legacy by replacing them with new stuff over time

There are several possibilities for GW, and all are equally possible from the current point of view

Replacing all old armies with new IP or keeping everything on minimum, more new models for old armies, or bringing back all old armies

No one knows and it might just be that Armybook Marienburg replaces Empire (which becomes legacy)

Luke82 wrote:
I’ve got hand written scribbled amendments in my beautiful hard back printed legacy list compilation, the very same lists that GW explicitly and with perfect clarity said they would release and then never look at again and never, ever, for realsies never update.

People speaking with certainty that the legacy lists are never coming back are putting way more stock in GW communications than GW do themselves.

It might be a slim possibility but to say it will never happen because GW said so (and implying anyone who questions this is a hopeful imbecile) is daft. Even leaving aside the ‘the scope has increased’ comments.

And ultimately the reasons why GW made the legacy lists are going away over time - the Vampire Counts range is almost entirely free of AoS models now after these latest reveals (and the few crossovers that remain are things like the Black Coach, where you'd have to reissue the old metal one anyway. At some point the Dark Elf range is going to get dumped from CoS.

I think there's some element in this list of not just model crossover though, and not wanting to release at the same time as a big range refresh for AOS. But once that's over, are Lizardmen back on the table if SGS were willing to sell the old models instead? Is that worth it to them if nobody in their right mind would buy the old Saurus plastics and just stick the AoS ones on square bases?

Maybe in the future, but not in the next few years I think. Of course, nobody knows and GW is nothing if not erratic and selfcontradictory.

To hope that the legacy armies will one day become mainstream might be realistic; to hope that that point will come in the next, say, two years or so is imo folley.

On a sidenote, i LOVE the udates to the map, if for nothing else than that it's now one of the most complete maps of the Old World we have.

Vorian wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Vorian wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
As I said in one of the other comments - they didnt have to make any "commitment". They could have just left it open ended as to which factions were coming when. Instead they were very up front in committing to 9 factions being returned and committing to 7 factions in the dust bin. Think about that. You cant have it both ways, you cant say "nuh uh its too much to commit to because once they commit they cant change their minds" and then go "they committed to not supporting the legacy factions but they can always change their minds later".

We don't know if they committed to Kislev ahead of launch or just Cathay

As it stands, the first two factions ever announced for TOW were actually Kislev and Cathay, before we knew anything about core factions or legacy factions we had direct statements from Warhammer Community that Kislev and Cathay would be tabletop armies in TOW.

They released a book with all the army lists in on day 1. They had PDFs of the armies not supported.

What exactly do you think their communication should be at that point?

They could have just... not? And followed a similar release model to basically all the other games in their stable. Their choice to release everything in day 1 compilation books the way they did wasnt really necessary. They cpuld have instead did barebones pdfs for all 16 factions on day 1, said "these are get you by lists for legacy whfb players, stay tuned for official releases in the future, though note that there will be many changes as these factions make the transition into TOW, some of the units and indeed entire factions may not make the transition to TOW, but we shall see what the future holds, and left it open ended. Arcane journals then would be full-size army books with the necessary updates to the pdf lists, and if the game sold well enough - lo and behold they fund the 7 legacy factions. If it diesnt sell well enoygh they say "sorry, as we said not every faction was going to feature in TOW, you can continue playing the pdf list though".

In general, every other game follows a pretty vague release model in which we have zero advanced knowldfge of what factions are to be added or cut during any given edition cycle, etc. Units, and at times armies, are basically cut constantly with minimal notice. its rather odd and singular that GW decided to tell us what to expect upfront in this instance. When HH2.0 released they basically said "here is the astartes list, other army lists might or might not come later, by the way a lot of units and options are going to be cut, some of it might or might not appear again later" and left it vague, zero commitment, lots of uncertainty, but it worked.

(if you havent figured it out yet, im pointing these things out to highlight the fact that GW took extraordinary steps to message that the legacy factions arent happening, and because of that their position on the topic probably will not change).

Releasing the Space Marine lists for Heresy is nothing like restarting Old World with two factions. An old world with two playable armies at launch and then one more playable every quarter following would have been dead on arrival.

Its pretty disingenuous to suggest they could have released this game without having the ability for people to use their old (or 3rd party) armies on day 1. They would have had complaints many many orders of magnitude greater than people complaining about their army being a legacy army.

Your suggestion also amounts to instead of legacy armies going from being playable but not updated, to simply being unplayable until they got round to re-releasing them (ie never) and I'm not sure that's a great improvement for the people that own those armies and want to play them.

They launched HH 2.0 without a significant chunk of their then-current active players being able to play it. Some were not able to play it for almost a year post release. Given that WHFB was dead for a decade - yes they 100% could have launched TOW without old WHFB having rules for their armies, there was no obligation to provide rules for folks who hadnt played the game in almost a decade.

Luke82 wrote:
I’ve got hand written scribbled amendments in my beautiful hard back printed legacy list compilation, the very same lists that GW explicitly and with perfect clarity said they would release and then never look at again and never, ever, for realsies never update.

People speaking with certainty that the legacy lists are never coming back are putting way more stock in GW communications than GW do themselves.

It might be a slim possibility but to say it will never happen because GW said so (and implying anyone who questions this is a hopeful imbecile) is daft. Even leaving aside the ‘the scope has increased’ comments.

GW made pretty clear that the one update they did to the legacy lists was because wires got crossed and the legacy documents contained unintentional errors resulting from pre-release edits. Its rather notable that subsequent FAQs (of which there have been at leadt two) have not touched them further despite their being a numver of outstanding issues.

 The Phazer wrote:

Luke82 wrote:
I’ve got hand written scribbled amendments in my beautiful hard back printed legacy list compilation, the very same lists that GW explicitly and with perfect clarity said they would release and then never look at again and never, ever, for realsies never update.

People speaking with certainty that the legacy lists are never coming back are putting way more stock in GW communications than GW do themselves.

It might be a slim possibility but to say it will never happen because GW said so (and implying anyone who questions this is a hopeful imbecile) is daft. Even leaving aside the ‘the scope has increased’ comments.

And ultimately the reasons why GW made the legacy lists are going away over time - the Vampire Counts range is almost entirely free of AoS models now after these latest reveals (and the few crossovers that remain are things like the Black Coach, where you'd have to reissue the old metal one anyway. At some point the Dark Elf range is going to get dumped from CoS.

I think there's some element in this list of not just model crossover though, and not wanting to release at the same time as a big range refresh for AOS. But once that's over, are Lizardmen back on the table if SGS were willing to sell the old models instead? Is that worth it to them if nobody in their right mind would buy the old Saurus plastics and just stick the AoS ones on square bases?

Your reminder that model crossover is not the reason (stares in Chaos Lord and Chaos Chariot), IP crossover is. Chaos Dwarves have zero crossover, daemons already crossover in other systems, concerns of lizardmen/seraphon crossover were largely gone before TOW released, concerns about skaven crossover were largely addressed within a handful of months of TOW releasing, etx. GW knew what the release schedule looked like ane where the model ranges would be today as far back as 2-3 years ago. If it was just about model ranges, then these factions would not have been legacy.

IMO the map makes pretty clear where things are going. Cathay, Kislev, probably dogs of war but also possibly estalia + tilea are the future. "Harkon" is a red herring and will be undead adjacent but not VC proper. Theres easily 2+ years of new content for them to explore, those holding out that theyd circle back to legacy once the core 9 are out shpuld be realizibg that thats not going to happen after seeing this.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...

I have heard from certain community folks who are plugged in with major event organizers in the US that their support for legacy factions is temporary until all the core factions are released and the game is fully accessible to new players. The general sentiment seems to be that a lot of the balance issues that the community is grappling with on the competitive circuit are due to legacy factions, and unless GW balances them the best thing for the long term health of the competitive community is to move on from them, but in the near term the player base is too small for TOs to prohibit the legacy factions as it would end up cutting like a third of their player turnout.

You don't play the game do you? Fact is Skaven, Lizardmen, Ogres are ranked as underpowered. Demons probably ok and Vampire Count as OP (But not the worst offender, most powerful army in the game currently is Bretonnian Exiles) CD seems to be on a winning streak currently but I have not heard any moaning about the being OP.

Also Vampire counts are only OP due to "screams" which they are allowed to take six of. It takes only light comp to nerf that particular build.

In short, claiming the legacy factions are behind a lot of balance issue is just wrong.

JWh85 wrote:
Maybe in the future, but not in the next few years I think. Of course, nobody knows and GW is nothing if not erratic and selfcontradictory.

To hope that the legacy armies will one day become mainstream might be realistic; to hope that that point will come in the next, say, two years or so is imo folley.

On a sidenote, i LOVE the udates to the map, if for nothing else than that it's now one of the most complete maps of the Old World we have.

This, all of this.

Hoffa76 wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
...

I have heard from certain community folks who are plugged in with major event organizers in the US that their support for legacy factions is temporary until all the core factions are released and the game is fully accessible to new players. The general sentiment seems to be that a lot of the balance issues that the community is grappling with on the competitive circuit are due to legacy factions, and unless GW balances them the best thing for the long term health of the competitive community is to move on from them, but in the near term the player base is too small for TOs to prohibit the legacy factions as it would end up cutting like a third of their player turnout.

You don't play the game do you? Fact is Skaven, Lizardmen, Ogres are ranked as underpowered. Demons probably ok and Vampire Count as OP (But not the worst offender, most powerful army in the game currently is Bretonnian Exiles) CD seems to be on a winning streak currently but I have not heard any moaning about the being OP.

Also Vampire counts are only OP due to "screams" which they are allowed to take six of. It takes only light comp to nerf that particular build.

In short, claiming the legacy factions are behind a lot of balance issue is just wrong.

Doesn't even get into the fact that I don't know a single TO first hand running ToW events that's even considering dropping support for legacy factions as there isn't a good reason too. GW doesn't provide enough of anything to make it worthwhile. But I'm sure I don't know as many second hand people plugged in running events as he does so maybe he's right

chaos0xomega wrote:


They launched HH 2.0 without a significant chunk of their then-current active players being able to play it. Some were not able to play it for almost a year post release. Given that WHFB was dead for a decade - yes they 100% could have launched TOW without old WHFB having rules for their armies, there was no obligation to provide rules for folks who hadnt played the game in almost a decade.

You're suggesting that they should have not provided army lists for old armies and launched with 2 armies, only and have 5 or 6 armies after a year?

And the reason to do this is so current legacy armies would just be unplayable instead?

And you've decided that is a solution that would please the legacy players and the wider old world player base?

OK then.

I would argue that Horus Heresy is not the best example to follow and that it mostly only worked because of how insanely bonkers Marine popularity is.

You basically can't compare anything in this market (from GW or anything else) to how Marine and Marine based things sell.

Hoffa76 wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
...

I have heard from certain community folks who are plugged in with major event organizers in the US that their support for legacy factions is temporary until all the core factions are released and the game is fully accessible to new players. The general sentiment seems to be that a lot of the balance issues that the community is grappling with on the competitive circuit are due to legacy factions, and unless GW balances them the best thing for the long term health of the competitive community is to move on from them, but in the near term the player base is too small for TOs to prohibit the legacy factions as it would end up cutting like a third of their player turnout.

You don't play the game do you? Fact is Skaven, Lizardmen, Ogres are ranked as underpowered. Demons probably ok and Vampire Count as OP (But not the worst offender, most powerful army in the game currently is Bretonnian Exiles) CD seems to be on a winning streak currently but I have not heard any moaning about the being OP.

Also Vampire counts are only OP due to "screams" which they are allowed to take six of. It takes only light comp to nerf that particular build.

In short, claiming the legacy factions are behind a lot of balance issue is just wrong.

Factions being underpowered absolutely means being behind balance issues. TOs making decisions about comp and houserules (which at least at the local/regional lebel in my area are common, i dont actually touch anything to do with major/national lebel tournies so dont know what theyvare doing there) are making decisions to try to help underperforming factions succeed just as much as they are trying to downplay the performance of overpowered factions. As it stands, a lot of the comp rules being imposed by TOs have to do with the fact that several of the legacy factions could not keep up with some of the core factions if those core factions were allowed to be played without restriction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vorian wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:


They launched HH 2.0 without a significant chunk of their then-current active players being able to play it. Some were not able to play it for almost a year post release. Given that WHFB was dead for a decade - yes they 100% could have launched TOW without old WHFB having rules for their armies, there was no obligation to provide rules for folks who hadnt played the game in almost a decade.

You're suggesting that they should have not provided army lists for old armies and launched with 2 armies, only and have 5 or 6 armies after a year?

And the reason to do this is so current legacy armies would just be unplayable instead?

And you've decided that is a solution that would please the legacy players and the wider old world player base?

OK then.

I think i was pretty clear saying that releasing barebones index pdf lists for all 16 factions on day 1 with a vague statement that some of the factions might not be updated in the future was the way to go if they intended to possiblly incorporate legacy factions into the game. Likewise that if there was a chance of legacy factions being included then just doing a slow launch w 2 factions on release day and the remaining factions every few months until you got to a decision point would make more sense than making explicit statements on day 0 that you were excluding those factions entirely and then later pulling suppport from the biggest competitive event on the planet over their decision to allow thisr factions.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Dark elves sorta make sense as legacy because they only ever really fight chaos, lizardmen and high elves which is significantly far enough away from the Old World.

Presuming you ignore their ongoing slaving expeditions to the Old World...

Yeah, don't they often raid the Bretonnian coast? The only real isolationists are the Lizardmen, and even then they'd sail over to the Old World to retrieve an artifact that some greedy Imperial stole.

I'm just saying i find the idea of Legacy armies kind of BS. In the case of skaven it's more because GW put skaven as the posterboys for the new bad guys of the current AoS edition. I mean even if the skaven are in the middle of a civil war the empire is in a very bad civil war too. Doesn't mean some of the various skaven clans aren't still doing things since there are so many clans and so many skaven. If nothing else Dwarfs are still aware of skaven as a threat and fight them in the Under-Way. The skaven's biggest enemies (greenskins, lizardmen and dwarfs) know skaven are a threat and they won't just forget they exist due to frequent interactions (greenskins probably would forget tho actually). It's a business decision from GW and nothing else.