Switch Theme:

Why did Warhammer Fantasy die? Help me understand...  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in de
Regular Dakkanaut





To boil it down, what killed WHFB was Kirby's mismanagement of the company. WHFB had issues that needed to be addressed, but they never were, so the issues kept compounding until it seemed easier just to scrap it.

auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.


It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.




   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

dyndraig wrote:
To boil it down, what killed WHFB was Kirby's mismanagement of the company. WHFB had issues that needed to be addressed, but they never were, so the issues kept compounding until it seemed easier just to scrap it.

auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.


It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.






Yeah, but there were still casualties taken during the fight, especially if they were attacked with ranged weapons beforehand. I get the abstraction, but I'd prefer it if blocks took losses.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/21 14:20:06


What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in at
Second Story Man





Austria

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
dyndraig wrote:
To boil it down, what killed WHFB was Kirby's mismanagement of the company. WHFB had issues that needed to be addressed, but they never were, so the issues kept compounding until it seemed easier just to scrap it.

auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.


It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.


Yeah, but there were still casualties taken during the fight, especially if they were attacked with ranged weapons beforehand. I get the abstraction, but I'd prefer it if blocks took losses.


The problem is the scaling, 1 model = 1 wound = 100s of warriors (as written in previous rulebooks) does not work out (even a scaling of 1:10)
If the game is not about battles but skirmishes, with 1 model = 1-2 warriors than it is something different

and the block in KoW takes losses, it just doesn't remove models, as 1 lost wound =/= 1 lost model, so for a game about battles, this is much more "realistic"
Warhammer wanted to be game about battles but just mechanics appropriate for Skirmish games

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Lord of Change





Albany, NY

dyndraig wrote:
auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.
It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.
Popping in to say how much I enjoy KOW, after 20 years of WHFB. Playing a balanced game is mind-blowing after all the GW games, and I don't know that I've ever been so inspired as a hobbyist, with how friendly Mantic has been to the use of whatever models we want. I am always interested in hearing what people have to say against the game, although complaints often most confirm that I'm quite securely in the target market for KOW (veteran wargamer + hobbyist who attends tournaments for fun + camaraderie).

Coincidentally enough, a friend of mine is reviving Oldhammer in his neck of the woods (Eastern PA), and we had a discussion about what edition to use.* In the end I think he opted for 7E, which seems like an ok choice (less random them 8E but still decent levels of carnage), even if towards the end of that edition the army balance issues were pretty horrific. Dark Elves were obnoxiously great, High Elves pretty painful (read: ASF FTW), and Daemons so good that your dog could steer them to victory. And his Vamps are far from toothless, fear outnumbering + invoke + danse was a hard steamroller to stop if you weren't ITP. He's tasked me with helping to tweak the edition ... and frankly thinking about tournament play, all I can remember is all the caps put onto army creation, since GeeDub did such an appalling job of balancing the books. I've got some ideas (BSB provides army reroll, fear outnumber != autobreak) but not sure the problems all lie with the core.

Anyway, he eventually asked me what army I wanted to play, and I had to admit I don't want to play Oldhammer. Kings is too good for me to find even more time to play a mess like Warhammer

- Salvage

*For the curious, I suggested 6E using Ravening Hordes if the purpose was to play a fairly balanced rank-n-flank fantasy wargame, but I'm guessing there wasn't close to enough magic bang or hero "customization" (Admit it, everybody just took the same kit in 7E/8E anyway )

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/05/21 14:50:35


KOW BATREPS: BLOODFIRE
INSTAGRAM: @boss_salvage 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




With GW games yes... the vast majority of armies fielded are all samey going for the most "efficient and optimized".
   
Made in us
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife






After skimming the original post but none of the responses, AoS was just a natural progression of the story after End Times. GW is just progressing the story in both WHFB and 40K.

SG

40K - T'au Empire
Kill Team - T'au Empire, Death Guard
Warhammer Underworlds - Garrek’s Reavers

*** I only play for fun. I do not play competitively. *** 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






dyndraig wrote:
To boil it down, what killed WHFB was Kirby's mismanagement of the company. WHFB had issues that needed to be addressed, but they never were, so the issues kept compounding until it seemed easier just to scrap it.

auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.


It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.
TBF, people aren't interested in an accurate representation of battles. When designing a game realism should be taken into account but it will always be secondary to making a fun game. Now how much that has actually been applied to Warhammer/KoW is a different story but the principle is there.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/21 21:52:06


Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




Some games put accurate representation of battles as their primary. WHFB used to be that. Their designers through years of interviews and articles said as much over and over.

AOS - definitely polarity reversal.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






auticus wrote:
Some games put accurate representation of battles as their primary. WHFB used to be that. Their designers through years of interviews and articles said as much over and over.

AOS - definitely polarity reversal.
I don't think they ever did a good or even decent job if realism was the primary goal. Hell I'd say they did a piss poor job of it. But even if they said otherwise I think it's hard to deny that making a fun game was the primary goal.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

 UnstableDominus wrote:
I attempted to play WHFB during 7th, then again during 8th. Both times I quit early on because I couldn't find opponents who would play less than 2500 points. They weren't even really that interested in playing 2,000. This from a dwindling group of players who complained constantly that they wanted new blood (and that I never saw buying anything). The fantasy section of the store literally collected dust.

It is anecdotal, but that was my experience. I started playing AoS after the release of the GHB 2017 with 500 point games. I now regularly play games at 1,000 and 1,500 point levels, but have a pool of almost 3,000 points to draw from. AoS stock flies off the shelf and we have over a dozen regular players.


That was largely the same issue I had experienced. It also didn't help that two of the armies I wanted to play (Bretonnians and Tomb Kings) only really started to be fieldable at the higher point levels, too, due to their basic requirements. I started collecting books to figure out what I wanted to field in 6th Edition, but it was still difficult to make a decision. When one considers just how much more numerous WHFB games usually were, and I was also looking at 40K as well, WHFB tends to loose out for working up a collection. 40K players tended to also allow for smaller games as well.

Oddly enough, this is a similar issue with WarmaHordes as well. Far too often most people are only playing SR games at full point list unless a JML is going on at the same time.

Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
Made in de
Regular Dakkanaut





Spoiler:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
dyndraig wrote:
To boil it down, what killed WHFB was Kirby's mismanagement of the company. WHFB had issues that needed to be addressed, but they never were, so the issues kept compounding until it seemed easier just to scrap it.

auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.


It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.



Yeah, but there were still casualties taken during the fight, especially if they were attacked with ranged weapons beforehand. I get the abstraction, but I'd prefer it if blocks took losses.


Well yeah in the end it comes down to personal preference

 ServiceGames wrote:
After skimming the original post but none of the responses, AoS was just a natural progression of the story after End Times. GW is just progressing the story in both WHFB and 40K.

SG


I'm not sure I would call it the "natural progression" from WHFB, but I get the gist of it. When the End Times was going on I was playing with the idea of making my own fantasy setting, and GW ended up doing some pretty similar things in AoS that I had in mind for my own setting.

Spoiler:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
dyndraig wrote:
To boil it down, what killed WHFB was Kirby's mismanagement of the company. WHFB had issues that needed to be addressed, but they never were, so the issues kept compounding until it seemed easier just to scrap it.

auticus wrote:
Kings of War is my region's fantasy game where most of the fantasy players went to. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Its just very very tournament streamlined to me and everything feels very samey. Also the guys not dying bothers me as well, since that breaks my immersion.


It's not that strange really. In pre-modern battles, formations didn't slam together and just slowly grinded the other side down till they where all dead, like in 8th WHFB. The vast amount of casualties in battle usually happened when one side routed and got run down by the side that hold, which is hat basically happens in KoW.
TBF, people aren't interested in an accurate representation of battles. When designing a game realism should be taken into account but it will always be secondary to making a fun game. Now how much that has actually been applied to Warhammer/KoW is a different story but the principle is there.


Yes but we were talking about "Immersion" factor of unit-removal, and accurate battle representation plays into that. But otherwise of course I agree making a fun game is way more important then realism, and I think KoW succeeded at that
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




 ServiceGames wrote:
After skimming the original post but none of the responses, AoS was just a natural progression of the story after End Times. GW is just progressing the story in both WHFB and 40K.

SG

That's like me writing a novel about working in an office, calling the character Harry Potter and claiming it's a natural progression of that series.

AoS is not a natural progression and I'd hesitate to call it a progression at all. It's got some characters ported and that's pretty much it.

tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam  
   
Made in us
Keeper of the Flame





Monticello, IN

So we establish that for some "natural progression" means "shill for whatever GW gaks out". THIS is why GW was able to push both systems to the brink. THIS is the cult of personality that somehow keeps a company notorious for doing the exact OPPOSITE of what a company would do to maintain business and STILL manages to stay the #1 game company in the world.

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




Also have to realize that everyone has different opinions on what they like and not like. A person liking something doesn't make them part of a cult of personality any more than a person that does not like something doesn't make them a toxic neckbeard that can't handle change.
   
Made in fr
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





France

pm713 wrote:
 ServiceGames wrote:
After skimming the original post but none of the responses, AoS was just a natural progression of the story after End Times. GW is just progressing the story in both WHFB and 40K.

SG

That's like me writing a novel about working in an office, calling the character Harry Potter and claiming it's a natural progression of that series.

AoS is not a natural progression and I'd hesitate to call it a progression at all. It's got some characters ported and that's pretty much it.


You gork damn genius just killed me

auticus wrote:Also have to realize that everyone has different opinions on what they like and not like. A person liking something doesn't make them part of a cult of personality any more than a person that does not like something doesn't make them a toxic neckbeard that can't handle change.


Well the problem with that change is that they didn't leve any gateway for those who did enjoy the setting and would have liked to keep it alive. I personnaly can't stand AoS's lore, The old lore was much more appealing because of the sens of imminent disaster it had. The fantasy elements wer'nt that original I confess but let's be honest, AoS apocalypse is not as well, remember oblivion and it's portal or any zombie apocalypse? At the core it feels as dull to me.

Sure if you enjoy it well why not, that's fine, but tell a random guy that he should gak off because the game he was interested in is no longer supported to be remplaced and that is that, is questionnable, not customer friendly at all: sincerely an donkey-cave's change. Hence why so many poeple get upset about it.

40k: Necrons/Imperial Guard/ Space marines
Bolt Action: Germany/ USA
Project Z.

"The Dakka Dive Bar is the only place you'll hear what's really going on in the underhive. Sure you might not find a good amasec but they grill a mean groxburger. Just watch for ratlings being thrown through windows and you'll be alright." Ciaphas Cain, probably.  
   
Made in us
Clousseau




I get it. I really do. If you read these forums regularly then you know my opinion on AOS, and it got me banned from TGA for being critical of the game.

The game and lore that I invested thousands of dollars into went away and yeah it sucked. But at the same time there are people that really enjoy it and I don't think that makes them shills, that just means what they enjoy is different than what I enjoy.

Now I'm also a massive heavy metal fan so the art and the new lore direction don't bother me as much as the game direction went but same concept.
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Lord of Change





Albany, NY

auticus wrote:
But at the same time there are people that really enjoy it and I don't think that makes them shills, that just means what they enjoy is different than what I enjoy.
In the end I also just had to make peace with myself that AOS wasn't for me. I tried it throughout the rough first year when we didn't have much guidance and created our own balance, and it was overly simplistic but ok. I tried it through the second year, when GHB1 gave us structure but also added another layer of imbalance with faction powers, yet the game itself was still too underdeveloped for me, the options too imbalanced, the negative play experiences too galling. I don't hate that other people like it, it's just not for me. If anything, the game's success has meant some seriously awesome plastic kits have hit the market. Granted, they're often too expensive to make much army-scale use of, but Citadel has finally started pushing AOS in interesting and new places, and I'm all for it.

Honestly if it weren't for Kings of War, I'd probably still be scratching at AOS and trying to make it work. But thankfully I'm in a position where I have a wargame I can devote myself to and get back the experience I personally wanted from Warhammer Fantasy and occasionally got - dice-fueled army-scale combat based around the movement phase combined with free-wheeling army-scale hobbying. Does AOS offer some of this? Sure it does, it's why I'm still paying attention and still working on my daemon armies, which can slide between 40k or AOS if the fantasy flavored one sorts itself out. However I know I'm not the market for AOS, while I absolutely am the market for KOW. So I'll stick with what fits

- Salvage

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/22 18:37:36


KOW BATREPS: BLOODFIRE
INSTAGRAM: @boss_salvage 
   
Made in de
Battlefield Tourist






Nuremberg

I'm not really a wargamer any more - I think after so many years and only 5 games, I can say I'm sort of out of the hobby. But if I was playing, it'd be KOW. If I had to play Fantasy, it'd be 6th edition, maybe even just 6th edition Ravening Hordes.

I do hope AoS does well though, because about 1 in 8 kits they produce is really nice now. Those snake-elf ladies are going in my collection.

   
Made in fr
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





France

ONLY 5 games? That's already a few isn't it? Or is it just me being very restricted?

40k: Necrons/Imperial Guard/ Space marines
Bolt Action: Germany/ USA
Project Z.

"The Dakka Dive Bar is the only place you'll hear what's really going on in the underhive. Sure you might not find a good amasec but they grill a mean groxburger. Just watch for ratlings being thrown through windows and you'll be alright." Ciaphas Cain, probably.  
   
Made in de
Battlefield Tourist






Nuremberg

5 games in 3 years is not many in my view, especially since I had 1 in the three years before that and maybe 4 in the 2 years before that. Just compared to what I used to do.

   
Made in us
Esteemed Veteran Space Marine



Ottawa

 Just Tony wrote:
So we establish that for some "natural progression" means "shill for whatever GW gaks out". THIS is why GW was able to push both systems to the brink. THIS is the cult of personality that somehow keeps a company notorious for doing the exact OPPOSITE of what a company would do to maintain business and STILL manages to stay the #1 game company in the world.


I might be off the rocker with this - but maybe the reason they succeed isn't because of a cult of personality. Maybe it's because they aren't simply happy with 'maintaining' their business and seek to instead grow it. Maybe it's because there's this massive disconnect between what you think the right decisions are and what turns out to be truly popular. GW doesn't get to remain the #1 game company in the world by appealing only to their 'cult'. They need to grow - and grow they have.

Nothing GW has done with either 40k or AoS is all that groundbreaking. They refreshed their flagship products, which is what companies the world over do on a pretty consistent basis. By addressing the barriers to entry, they've done more than just maintain business - they've grown it.

More souls for the cult.
   
Made in us
Keeper of the Flame





Monticello, IN

Lemondish wrote:
 Just Tony wrote:
So we establish that for some "natural progression" means "shill for whatever GW gaks out". THIS is why GW was able to push both systems to the brink. THIS is the cult of personality that somehow keeps a company notorious for doing the exact OPPOSITE of what a company would do to maintain business and STILL manages to stay the #1 game company in the world.


I might be off the rocker with this - but maybe the reason they succeed isn't because of a cult of personality. Maybe it's because they aren't simply happy with 'maintaining' their business and seek to instead grow it.


And up until recently, their attempt to "grow" it was to eliminate most avenues of dealing with customers, and make blatantly obvious cash grab moves that even the hardest fan could see, which is why they lost so many players while not being able to replenish up until they made direct efforts to address this.

Lemondish wrote:
Maybe it's because there's this massive disconnect between what you think the right decisions are and what turns out to be truly popular. GW doesn't get to remain the #1 game company in the world by appealing only to their 'cult'. They need to grow - and grow they have.


GW remains #1 because of familiarity. How many companies have released games that were referred to as superior by other gamers? How many are able to mass produce similar models at a fraction of the cost? It's the same reason people will still shell out more for a brand they know, regardless of product, than spend less on someone who produces similar or improved products without the Cult of Familiarity attached.

Lemondish wrote:
Nothing GW has done with either 40k or AoS is all that groundbreaking. They refreshed their flagship products, which is what companies the world over do on a pretty consistent basis.


It wasn't groundbreaking, it was an attempt at trying to figure out what it was about other systems that were sucking customers away. They still refuse to stop and look at the mirror. The fast turnaround on a second edition of AOS speaks volumes that they've learned nothing.

Lemondish wrote:
By addressing the barriers to entry, they've done more than just maintain business - they've grown it.


...

Did you type that with a straight face?

GW doubled or worse the cost of entry in less than a three year period, and there's been no attempt at bringing those prices down. Both editions require more models, so it's still a high barrier of entry without being able to convince the meta that the new players need to be weaned in at lower count games at first. In the meantime, armies that could be gotten for $2-300 US a mere decade ago now cost $600 and higher. THIS is addressing the barrier of entry?

Lemondish wrote:
More souls for the cult.


Not as many as it used to be.

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
Made in fr
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





France

I support the idea of cult of familiarity. For poeple who just get started -and many players take their first step into wargaming though GK-, or poeple who are so casual they are delighted with a single game, will likely turn out to not search other games and companies. Instead they will simply prefer to keep biying in the compagny they know and necessarely like since they know no others.

However one thing you fellows maybe don't think about that much who are from the US or the UK, is that outside those countries were most smaller manufacturers are, it is difficult to come across them, even mire difficult to get an audience for their games, and the prices from euros to pounds or with the costs for sending from america go through the roof at an alarming speed.

I know that Germany is way better provided with lesser games and companies but there are, if I'm not mistaken, almost no counterpart to a Stoessi's Heroes for instance in France. So you have to make do with what's at your disposal and what will allow you to actually play games

40k: Necrons/Imperial Guard/ Space marines
Bolt Action: Germany/ USA
Project Z.

"The Dakka Dive Bar is the only place you'll hear what's really going on in the underhive. Sure you might not find a good amasec but they grill a mean groxburger. Just watch for ratlings being thrown through windows and you'll be alright." Ciaphas Cain, probably.  
   
Made in ca
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard






Vancouver, BC

I remember hearing somewhere that the Tactical Squad kit outsold the entire Fantasy line during 8th. After all, if you built your blocks of state troops from the old models from a decade ago, what reason did you have to get the new ones, especially since a halberd was a halberd, and its not like anyone could tell once you you got past the first rank! The old models ranked up better, too!

Not to mention the price tag to get started (it was roughly $1000 Canadian for my 2500 point Empire army to get started, and that was with some second hand stuff!) its hardly a wonder it died.

Fantasy looked amazing to look at on the tabletop, but the price and rules bloat near the end was its own undoing.

 warboss wrote:
Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
 
   
Made in at
Second Story Man





Austria

A problem with the Fantasy line was that there was a huge inconsistenc in design
Fantasy Empre in 8th, heavy cavalry was smaller than light cavalry, militia better equipped than state troops etc

There were people here that liked Khemri but never got into it as they waited for GW to replace the outdated core models with new models that fit the new design.


For Space Marines, there was the time when Tactical Marines were used to build everything in 5 different armies.
If there would have been a human box in fantasy that could be used as base for 5 different armies it would have sold also well.


Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
 
Forum Index » Warhammer: Age of Sigmar
Go to: