Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Just a thought here...

The last time GW made a new product (not a retread of old ones but something brand new) was Lord of the Rings and apparently for a while it was a great seller.  Mostly because it was tied into a big movie of course but I would postulate it's also because they made something new that their existing fans don't already have.

Now their future plans are Eldar v4, Fantasy v7, Orcs v7, Empire v7 and Dark Angels v4.

Does anyone else see the problem?  I still have my RT era dark angels (well I will have them when I go to China, at whihc time I won't have anyone to play with, but that's not the point) and can use them.  Most people interested in Eldar, Orcs or Empire may get a few new things to round out their armies but won't really need a new army.  And for brand new fans, they don't care if these are c1999 Orcs or c2002 Orcs or c2006 orcs, it's all new to them.

So for GW I say MAKE SOMETHING NEW that we have not seen 7 times before.  You still have creative talented people, use them!  Don't make the snotling pump wagon v7!

Start a new setting, not Warhammer FB, not 40k, not even Dark Future, something new.

Or if you must make a new army for one of the exisiting games.  We got Ogres for Fantasy 2 years back, Tau for 40k 4 years back, I think they can do another one. 

Steal a page from Privatier Press and do a compatible game on a totally new world.  Or just flip the Warhammer World over and do Warhammer East with fantasy India, China and Japan. 

I've said this before, and I just have to get it out again, GW has to do something new.  Retreds kill my interest in their products.

Actually the Tau and Ogre Kingdoms were new products. The Khemri army was a fairly original retooling of the old undead units associated with it.

But yeah, I see where you're coming from.  I thought =][= was fantastic and really original when it came out but the numbers weren't there for the bean counters so we're less likely to see something like it again.

"Khemri army was a fairly original retooling "

yes many of their retreds have been pretty good, Wood Elfs and Khemri stand out. but they're still more elfs and more undead.

I'm not slighting them, I'm sure the v7 snotling pump wagon will be the best pump wagon EVAR but why spend the sculpting time on more Orcs when it could be something new!

With a retred I have to weigh not only if the product is good but is it better than the one I have and worth the time to paint. With a new product people can buy it solely on its merits.

I thought all the =I= stuff was great. For me, it's not so much as something new, but something where I get a value for my dollar. A lot of the older sculpts had more character, more life, and didn't cost an arm and a leg (at least, not when they were originally released). These days, with the focus on plastics, it's more of the same, but with less detail, less life, less customization, less "bang for the buck" and all the while costing as much or more than the metals (or, in some cases, earlier plastics) they are replacing.

The supposed eventual relase of John Blanche's "Femmes Militant" by WarpArtifacts/Black Library has kept my interest piqued, but I think the bean counters have killed them along with the rest of "Specialist Games". The possibility of "Codex: Xenos Hunters" with even more tasty =I= action, as well as the reintroduction of Rogue Traders and other RT-era fluffiness in miniature also piqued my interest. Things like Eldar Pirates (not Dark Eldar, not Craftworld Eldar, but rogue Eldar pirates), marines armed with xenos weaponry and other things of the like would also be ever so cool. Hell, they could even make it into a separate game, sort of Inquistor in 28mm meets Necromunda and could even provide the basis for building up larger armies for 40k based off those forces.

But whatever they do, prices need to get adjusted, backwards. Enough with the price hikes. And no, lowering the prices and then reducing the contents of the box (ala the new Battleforces) doesn't count. Even worse is reducing the contents while leaving the price the same. The other very important thing they need to get on top of is the Rules and errata/FAQ's for those rules. They *have* to fix them. Hire an editor, get the design team on it, whatever, but publish some errata that *fixes* the problems instead of creating more of them. If GW needs any advice on how to do this, just look at Battlefront (Flames of War). Do these two things, plus release the occasional new product, and GW might stop swirling around the drain. Until then I don't think their future looks to bright...

GW have spent the past 20 years introducing products outside the core 40K/WHFB lines and then dumping them.

Dark Future
Adeptus Titanicus
Bloodbowl
Battlefleet Gothic
Space Hulk
Epic
Warhammer Ancient Battles
etc. etc.

LoTR will be next.

"he other very important thing they need to get on top of is the Rules and errata/FAQ's for those rules. They *have* to fix them. Hire an editor, get the design team on it, whatever, but publish some errata that *fixes* the problems instead of creating more of them. "

I think that's the biggie. While a new game would be nice, I'd want to see that GW are still capable of writing competent rules before I'd go spending money on it. Fixing the shambles that is 4th edition 40K would be a good step in that direction.

So far, they've given us a ruleset that's slowly going from bad to worse, with a stated objective to not release errata until they redo the book in question. Yup, that fills me with confidence on the viability of a new game...

They still support Warhammer Ancient Battles, it's always been kind of a side publication done by a bunch of the old hands. Just a few months ago they released another "army book", this time expanding into eastern Europe around the time of the Renaissance with "Vlad the Impaler". To my knowlege, GW has never produced miniatures for any Ancients, though the Perry twins have done many a historicals on the side.

Unfortunately/fortunately (depending where you stand) I don't think LotR is going to get dropped any timesoon. While the executives continue to scapegoat LotR and make it out as the reason for their loss in revenues, I believe it's nothing but a red herring to mask what they refuse to look at: 40k and WHFB have been suffering for at least two years due to their failed business plan alongside their refusal to listen to customer wishes (namely prices, errata and rules). While most wargamers don't see LotR being played, or even purchased, a huge portion of that sales volume is outside normal wargaming revenue streams since it is (or has been) carried by mainstream retail outlets.

The thing is, GW is so focused on short term gains (despite what they say), they are incapable of doing things that are for the long-term good of the company. Like fixing errata. Lowering prices (which allows more gamers to get involved, which sells more figures, etc..). Veteran support (this includes not treating vets like trash). Etc... But they rather concentrate on a 12 year old who has no attention span and will soon loose interest after mommy & daddy spends a couple hundred dollars buying junior toys. Something that is clearly failing, yet which they refuse to acknowledge much less change.

As kilkrazy mentioned, GW has a pile of miniture lines that could go somewhere, but it has a few problems.

1. they aren't cash cows. you only need a handful of mini's for most of them
2. they take up studio space
3. in order to make them major parts of the GW lineup, they have to be BIG and promoted.

for GW to be interested, it has to be sometihng you need a lot of mini's to play and is popular enough that a lot of people will play (ie, GW is a company devoted to mass production and sales). It also needs to be something unique that will not be easily competed against or won't be competing agaisnt established companies. For isntance, Star Wars would be an excellent choice, as far as i know there is no table top game mini game for it and it is a publicly appealable concept with a lot of material to work off of. "wheel of time" could also be a series that could make for a popular setting with a large potential for diverse and expanding armies.

personally though, I don't want to see yet another "core game". 40k is in bad enough shape i'd like to see it fixed first (no idea on the state of fantasy, but with a new edition its probably not much better)

I loved to play mordheim...got me into the fantasy again, which got me into 40k...just something to think about.

Greets
Schepp himself

Games like Space Hulk and Mordheim could lead new players into the core systems. OTOH that's what Battle of Macragge is supposed to do.

I wonder what Space Hulk would cost if they published it now? The downside for GW is that it was a complete game, you didn't need to buy anything else, not even paints if you were happy with bare figures.

These days, with the focus on plastics, it's more of the same, but with less detail, less life, less customization, less "bang for the buck" and all the while costing as much or more than the metals (or, in some cases, earlier plastics) they are replacing.

Not to sideline the discussion, but did you just say that plastics give you less customization? 

While holding my posable SM Dread with custom magnet waist joint and magneted swappable stormbolter/heavy flamer, I respectfully disagree.

I have to register objections on the "less life" and "less bang for buck" comments as well.  A box of plastic troops gets me a unit faster and better-customized than metal ever could, and as side benefits the models don't chip as easily, hold up better if you drop 'em, and are easier to stand and balance on less than perfectly even terrain.

It depends on how the plastics are designed. The old Space Hulk terminators were single piece figures, all you could change was the add-on heavy weapon. It was fine for Hulk.

The contemporary "beaky" marines were very customisable. The legs, torsos, heads, backpacks, and arms were all separate. The bits were easy to chop up and rearrange. There were plenty of spare weapons and equipment to vary the look of figures. The original Imperial army figures were similar.

The modern Kroot are very uncustomisable. The arms are designed in matching pairs. The guns are moulded into the right arm, and the left forearm is also moulded onto the gun. This makes the arms very difficult to chop up and rework. The Tau FCW figures are nearly as bad. You can't mix the arms out of their pairs. (The instructions don't even show that the arms are in pairs, so the first box you make is going to go a bit wrong.)

This isn't so bad but when you get to the Battlesuit figures, they are quite disappointing. The Crisis suit arms and legs are single pieces, requiring fairly difficult surgery to change the elbow/knee bends. Considering the models cost £10 each it's pretty poor. The new Stealth suits are also fairly poor.

The plastics are better than the metals but they aren't as good as they could be or as good as they used to be for less money. (More money and more moany at the same time. Cue GW price rant no.37b.)

Posted By Mannahnin on 08/27/2006 9:44 AM

Not to sideline the discussion, but did you just say that plastics give you less customization? 

While holding my posable SM Dread with custom magnet waist joint and magneted swappable stormbolter/heavy flamer, I respectfully disagree.

I have to register objections on the "less life" and "less bang for buck" comments as well.  A box of plastic troops gets me a unit faster and better-customized than metal ever could, and as side benefits the models don't chip as easily, hold up better if you drop 'em, and are easier to stand and balance on less than perfectly even terrain.

Like Killcrazy said, for the last 4 or 5 years plastics have had very limited costumability.  Kroot, Tau, Cadian and Scout hands are all part of the gun.  Chaos Warriors and Bret men at arms have arms the join at the elbow not the shoulder.  Fantasy plastics now are 1 peice bodies.  Etc.  That's a different rant though.

Anyway I appreicate the thoughts on GW rule-writing.  So how about just putting retread codex and army books on hold and doing (let's say) 2 new armies per game first?

Kikrazy hit a lot of the points I would make. Other kits I'd like to point out are the Space Marine Scouts (clearly inferior to the metal figs they replaced), Gnoblars (great concept, terrible excecution with the single pose figs), Bret. Men-At-Arms and Chaos Warrior sets (both which suffer the arms join at the elbows), and even the OK Bulls set (which offers only two body poses and limited arm poses), just to name a few. Obviously, not all of those sets are particularly bad. The OK Bulls is, in fact, a more economical buy than the old metal Ogres (which were $15 ea, now a ridiculously high $20 each) and despite the limited poses, is a pretty good plastic kit.

What I was getting at is in many, many cases the metal castings were much more dynamic, had sharper details (and more of them), and were frequently part of large range of figures which were replaced by the plastics. The scouts are a particular glaring example of this, as the metals they replaced were some of GW's best sculpted figures ever while the plastics are arguably one of the worst sets GW has offered. That said, even relatively good plastic offerings are going to suffer as GW's plastics are often woefully underdetailed compared to what they did previously using cast metal (which allows undercuts, and more detail because of it). I highly value my old school metal termies, as I find them much better looking than and nearly as customizable as the current (ridiculously priced) ones.

Even the metal dread Ragnar mention's could (and was) able to be customized with swivling waist joint (just don't glue) and swappable arms (rare earth magnets + pinning). As far as breakage, well, I'm pretty carefull with all of my models (despite being somewhat clumsy) and it's been my experience that the thin plastic fiddly bits are much more likely to break than any of my metal pieces, including the large metal ones. That said, in a "drop off", the metal dread would not fare as well compared to a plastic dread if dropped from table height, especially if the former wasn't properly pinned, but the same goes for just about any metal multi-part kit and most large plastic kits as well.

Posted By nyarlathotep667 on 08/26/2006 5:24 PM
They still support Warhammer Ancient Battles, it's always been kind of a side publication done by a bunch of the old hands. Just a few months ago they released another "army book", this time expanding into eastern Europe around the time of the Renaissance with "Vlad the Impaler". To my knowlege, GW has never produced miniatures for any Ancients, though the Perry twins have done many a historicals on the side.

WAB has had a great reception and could have led a number of folk into LOTR and other games. There is no reason for GW to make figs for the games, however, as there is easy and direct competition with Old Glory, Foundry, Eureka, Perry, and a slew of other fine, less expensive manufacturers. In other words, why would I by GW cowboys for WAB old west when I can get Foundry, Artizan, Conquest or Black Scorpion cowboys and Indians cheaper?

I would also love to see GW give their entire stable of games a complete rethink. Clearly, they've made attempts with killteam, combat patrol/border patrol, BFSP/BFM etc, but it's not enough. I agree that there needs to be some attempt to create a game that either hones in on one aspect of their gaming worlds (e.g. Mordheim, Necromunda, Gorkamorka) or create something new and completely different (Warhammer East, Warhammer Darklands, 40k Rogue Trader, Something set in the Dark Age of Technology, whatever) that can be played on a skirmish level (i.e. 40 figures or fewer), has a fully functional campaign mechanism, and who's rules are tight and updates are available regularly (Specialist Games shows us the way).

I just don't see the political will to support a system like that, however. And, frankly, with HOTT, No Quarter/No Limits, Aetherverse (even in its current castrated form), Shockforce, Dark Future, Urban War, Warlord and other systems
with a 'generic' option, I think the need/ability for GW to follow-through on something like this is quickly receding.   

Posted By Kid_Kyoto on 08/27/2006 1:18 PM

Anyway I appreicate the thoughts on GW rule-writing.  So how about just putting retread codex and army books on hold and doing (let's say) 2 new armies per game first?

I think for 40k, Orks really, really need a new dex. They can do a good WE-style revamp, keeping the existing Boyz plastics (which are awesome and in no need of changing), introduce plastic grots, kustomizable trukks n' skorchas, and some detailed plastic "Ork conversion kit" that could be used to Ork-ify any Imperial vehicle for those scared of plasticard. Orks, more than any other 40k army, need flexible, kustomizable, mult-part kitz that help make each and every thing as unique as possible. Ork's aint much on mass productionizing stuff dat look da same.
After that, yes, 40k could use something else to breathe life into the universe. Demiurg anyone?

For WHFB, I'm not so sure. There really isn't a fantasy subject they haven't left untouched. On top of Tolkien's original races (dwarves, good elves, wood elves, halflings, orcs, goblins, trolls, evil man/elves/beasts/demons), GW has already added Skaven, Lizardmen, & Ogre Kingdoms, along with traditional fantasy subjects like the undead (be they VC or Khemri), Nordic raiders/wildmen of the north (Chaos Marauders), Mongol hordes (ala hobgoblins/Chaos Dwarves) and roaming bands of historically-themed mercenaries (DOW).

But I do like yer idea of a separate, Far Eastern themed game based in Cathay/Nippon, though I think some people might find it a bit too historical. Some sort of abhuman Nipponese army would be pretty cool. Samurai  beasts or something, replete with traditional Chinese & Japanese style dragons and demons. Hmm.. that would be a cool army to add into regular WHFB too, raiding Lustria from the west and the eastern reaches of Cathay and Khemri.

Maybe GW could buy out Clan War...ooooh...

Posted By wolf13 on 08/26/2006 5:42 PM
For isntance, Star Wars would be an excellent choice, as far as i know there is no table top game mini game for it

Wizard of the Coast have a collectible Star Wars Mini game. It's been out for 3 or 4 years now.

But even if the license were available, GW have said that they are not interested in taking on other licenses. LotR was the only outside license they were interested in.


So far as GW's secondary games go, the durability of those games I think really just depends on how GW promotes them. Historically, they've always released the game, pushed it like crazy for a year or two, and then just dropped it when sales started to slump.

I think though that in many cases, they could have kept the interest there (not at the original release level, for sure, but enough interest to keep the game viable) with a bit of thought on releases.

Expansions introduce new aspects to the game, and provide excuses for releasing more miniatures. New gangs, new scenarios, new settings, etc. Adding extra miniatures to existing ranges would also go down well... For Necromunda, for example, there are a very limited range of miniatures available for most gangs. While some people were happy to convert, I remember seeing a lot of almost identical gangs back when the game was in full swing. Releasing a couple of new gangers every new and then would help keep people updating their gangs.

And making the miniatures, wherever possible, usable in other games would be another sales helper, since it means that people have a reason to buy them beyond just collecting a gang/warband/whatever. Like they did with the Gang Militia in Codex Armageddon, or the rules they published in White Dwarf for taking Warhammer Quest characters as heroes in a Fantasy army.


I can't help thinking that restricting themselves to 3 army-based games is a large part of GW's problems. Their smaller games are a much better intro to the hobby for those concerned about the cost. So get them hooked on the games that don't require a huge outlay. Many of them will branch out afterwards.

Of course, ranging the Fanatic games would lead to another problem... namely space on shelves. GW have been at a point for a while where ranges are largely dictated by how much room there is in GW stores. Reintroducing half a dozen extra games systems would be a bit of a strain there. 

There are a few different answers to that problem...  there's the short-sighted approach that GW uses now: It won't fit, so we won't make it.
There's the obvious solution, that most businesses use when they need more room for their product range: Expand the store.
And there's the Macdonalds route (well, yeah, I know other companies do it too, they were just the example that popped into my head first) ... turn the smaller stores into 'Express' stores with a smaller core range, and just put the full inventory into the larger stores that have space for it. They've already been doing this to a certain extent with independant retailers (at least here in Oz) for some time now, where stores can carry just a core range of boxed sets and rulebooks if they have limited space, or a more complete range if they have room for it.

That all turned into a big rambling epic somewhere along the line. If you're still reading, you probably have too much free time...

Maybe GW could buy out Clan War...ooooh...

Clan war is dead. Minis are made by Ironwinds.


I got into 40k via space hulk. They need a gamer to get folks in.

I think one problem with the side games has been they compete with the main ones. It's hard to motivate myself to make an army for Warhammer Jr when I can make one for Warhammer. They're set in the same world (maybe a small corner of that world but the same world all the same) and rarely bring something totally new in. Dark Future is the only one I can think of what was not set in the main WH or 40k worlds.

So a GW superhero world or Wierd War II (my current obsessions) perhaps with compatable rules with 40k or fantasy would meet this test.

A solid skirmish game for both is also sorely needed, it can serve as test bed for new armies and factions and as an intro for new people.

I don't think they do really compete, since the scales of the games are so very different. Some people prefer gang/warband-level games. Some prefer army-level games. Some like both... but chances are they'll just buy both, sooner or later.

That's why I think that having both styles of game would be a good thing. While a lot of people are put off 40K or WHFB by the expense of starting an army, there's got to be at least as many who just don't want to have to assemble an entire army to play. A lot of the players who went over to Warmachine definitely seem to have approved of the lower model count.

So, instead of just watching these people walk back out the door, GW should be pointing those people towards the Necromunda and Mordheim racks. Or selling them Space Hulk or Warhammer Quest.

Logically games ought to compete but most people aren't satisfied with one. I've got at least two dozen different games and several armies and navies, and I sold off a lot of stuff because I never played it.

GW should capitalise on their broad retail base by putting more games in their stores. Once you get a potential customer into the shop, try and have something to sell him. Of course it would take more design effort, which isn't their strong suit. Perhaps that's why they don't do it.

GW's unique selling point is they do 40K and WHFB. It ought to be that they make the best range of games in the world.

Are GW running out of design talent? Here's a list (not complete) of the designers they've used over the years. How many are still with the company?

Alan Merrett
Alessio Cavatore
Andy Chambers
Andy Hoare
Andy Jones
Bryan Ansell
Carl Sargent
Dave Andrews
Gavin Thorpe
Graeme Davis
Ian Livingstone
Jervis Johnson
Marc Gascoigne
Pete Haines
Richard Halliwell
Rick Priestley
Simon Forrest

You forgot the immortal Tuomas Prinen.

It was only people I looked up quickly in boardgamegeek.com or in 40K books.

I think that the Specialist Games range suffers partly beacuse of its name. They just sound a bit ... specialised. Some are a bit more complex than the core (or store) games, but this is offset by the fact that they use different amounts of models. By advertising them as GW games, and not Specialist, they immediately sound more like a main stream product. It also stops to close an association between the games in the Specialist range, so that people can approach Blood Bowl as an entirely seperate entity to BFG, for example I believe the way these games are marketed has a big impact on the amount of interest.

It may be harsh, but I think by dropping Epic and Warmaster, the Specialist Games could be pushed more easily, as it eliminates two game sytems under the heading that require a large amount of expenditure. Mordheim should definitely be pushed in the stores, as you can make a few of the warbands out of a plastic regiment box. Myself and my brother each have a Skaven warband from one box of Night Runners.

So, my proposals for Specialist Games are:

- rename the umbrella administration (Specialist Games), so that it seems there is main stream, studio support
- don't continue to market these games side by side. Epic & BFG should be 40k, Mordheim & WM should be WFB, and Necromunda and BB should be seperate
- Continue =][=, pushing it as 'specialist' (as opposed to Specialist)

Here's my diatribe on the matter.

The main problem with using Necromunda and Mordheim as "lead-in" games is that they don't directly lead into 40K and WFB. As we all know, the current business plan is for the Macragge and Skull Pass sets to be the lead-ins. What's good about this strategy is the the boxed sets directly lead into the main games...heck, you get the whole rulebook included. The boxed sets intentionally don't have a lot of replay value, so if you want to play more, you gotta start buying codicies and lots of miniatures.

There's nothing really wrong with this approach, IMO. The main problem is that it let the PP and Rackhams of the world into the market at a lower price point to eat at GW's market share. So, here's another approach (that will never happen) that lets GW compete head-on with their competition.

GW should create drastically scaled-down versions of the main games...skirmish-level games with advancement/experience rules a la MH or NM. Using the 40K version as an example, you could even call it "Rogue Trader" for old times' sake. Unlike NM, RT would use certain existing 40K units. The real advantage with this approach is that stores wouldn't need any extra shelf space other than that for the basic RT rulebook.

From a game design standpoint, first sketch out a simple ruleset. This wouldn't be identical to 40K, but instead a ruleset more suitable for skirmish games that uses some of the basic 40K mechanics (such as the hit-wound-save, move-shoot-assault paradigms). Next, the designers would identify maybe 4-5 units from each existing 40K army that will be also legal for RT. This would mostly include basic units and not tanks, monstrous creatures, etc. Then use those units to playtest and finetune the ruleset. This should help game and unit balance, since they're testing the ruleset using all the units in the game up front, and avoiding the add-on, backtesting approach of 40K and WFB.

Undoubtedly, some units will be better than others, so the points system will have to be rejiggered. You don't want to recreate the codex approach, though...ideally players should be able to pick up just the basic rulebook and a boxed set and be able to start playing. The solution is easy...rip off what Rackham does for Confrontation. In each of the 40K boxed sets that are also legal for RT gaming, include a card listing the points values and special rules that unit has in the RT game. If customers want RT miniatures, they just check out the racks and look for the 40K boxed sets with the
little RT logo that lets them know the card's inside.

From a rules standpoint, the main advantage to RT is its replay value. Both fluff-loving and powergaming players would enjoy watching their units and characters gain experience and advance. And the rulebook would be chockful of both scenarios and scenario ideas, similar to the Warhammer Skirmish book they produced a while back. WD would be an excellent vehicle for introducing new RT scenarios from time to time. So here's a rough SWOT analysis of our proposed RT:

Strengths:
Still creates "lead-in" to regular 40K.
Still pushes 40K miniatures.
More replay value than Macragge box.
Requires minimal post-launch resources and support.
Limited shelf space required.
Requires no new miniature production.
Appeals more to existing customers and gamers.

Weaknesses:
Design resources needed during development.
Minor packaging changes required.
More complexity than basic Macragge scenarios.
Lack of starter box with miniatures for beginning players.
Less direct lead-in to 40K than Macragge box.

Opportunities:
Current popularity of skirmish-level games.
Chance for existing and former 40K gamers to start new armies or get back into the hobby.
Much smaller competition trying to move upmarket...is their "base" vulnerable?
Allows GW to attack competition where they are strongest.

Threats:
Could lead players away from larger, more profitable 40K.
Competition established at skirmish level.
Rackham entering sci-fi market with potentially superior sculpts.
Loss of company focus on core products.
Creates product confusion for beginners.


I know GW won't do anything this aggressive, but it'd be interesting to see them try it.

From a game design standpoint, first sketch out a simple ruleset. This wouldn't be identical to 40K, but instead a ruleset more suitable for skirmish games that uses some of the basic 40K mechanics (such as the hit-wound-save, move-shoot-assault paradigms). Next, the designers would identify maybe 4-5 units from each existing 40K army that will be also legal for RT. This would mostly include basic units and not tanks, monstrous creatures, etc. Then use those units to playtest and finetune the ruleset. This should help game and unit balance, since they're testing the ruleset using all the units in the game up front, and avoiding the add-on, backtesting approach of 40K and WFB.

The problem is the release system. If you Ravening Hordes an army, the person who starts
the hobby will get disgusted that the army they picked won't be released for two-three years
down the line (if ever).

Which is what this avoids. The whole game is essentially released at the time the rulebook is released. The miniatures are already on the shelf. The rulebook could contain all the data for the legal units in case there's older boxes on the shelf that don't have the unit card inserts yet. Down the line, GW could always add new units to the mix by enclosing unit cards in the appropriate boxed sets.

And since you're rebalancing all the units for the new game, it opens up some marketing opportunities. The choice and rejiggering of units could boost sales of your most profitable boxed sets...or the boxed sets that don't sell well, depending on what you want to do. If Repentia don't sell well, maybe Repentia get selected for the Sisters' RT list, and get enhanced rules to make them attractive. Since it's a slightly different system than 40K and you're not bound to the 40K codicies, you have some freedom to play around with things.

I guess one of the biggest problems is the already mentioned "thinking" of GW, only to attract more and more newbie kids, while ignoring the veteran gamers.
but I have to say, there are things they do right: I don't see a problem with the lacking of FAQs and stuff. I don't know, it just never bothere me. What DOES bother me, is that there won't be a new Ork Codex for a year (!). I played with these guys for over 5 years now, and I just think they should get new stuff. actually, I think that new Army Books/'Dexes are never such a bad idea, since they always seem to improve an army and add new toys.

and I also think that new Armys (like OK, Tau, and in some way the ][-armies and Necrons) is a good thing, the only problem is, that most veteran gamers I know (Veteran gamers meaning, people who played 10 yeargs ago, or so, but are still into the hobby) keep saying how dumb/ugly/weird/useless the new armies are. Ogre Kingdoms are known as one of those armies. I played Tau for a while, but it got boring. still, I think new armies are a good idea, they expand the universe, make it bigger. I would love to see a real Nippon army for Fantasy.

the idea with the new starter boxes is great, that's what brougt me into Warmachine. the thing with 40k is, if you want a small, painted battleforce and want to play with them it's already about a 150 bucks. and that does scare most of the beginers.

and actually Necromunda and Mordtheim (btw, does anybody realize what this name means?) should be a way to get beginners into the big systems, all you need are rules for Alien gangs and the like