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.

@RazorEdge: The best thing about those Sate Troops was that they were the exact same scale as the Mordheim mercenaries.

I had a box of 20 that I mixed with the Mordheim sprue that I used to make so many varied Marienburgers, Reiklanders, and Middenheimers.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
A few months ago the warhammer Facebook page replied to me saying that they hadnt heard anything about plans to update the Daemon Prince but to keep an eye out in the future. A month later they announced the new Daemon Prince kit. The people that run the social media teams know basically nothing about long term plans and always frame everything in the context of "who knows what might happen woooo anything is possible ahhhh".

Wait, you think they didn't know about the new Daemon Prince and, that if they'd just been pre-informed about a new DP prior to your question that they would have told you and revealed it to the world via Facebook answering some random person's question? Really?

If they knew they would have likely excluded the part about "haven't heard anything" and left it more vague. It's marketing 101, you don't want your community outreach and marketing arm to be seen as lying or am unreliable partner to your community.

GW's social media team don't even have to be at the GW HQ. They just need to manage the FB and be fed information as they are required to have it.

Even if they are at the HQ if they aren't in the design or other teams they might well not even hear about things. Remember AoS was kept very secret for a very long time and some key staff didn't know it was a thing almost until we knew.


Plus even if they do know something, if they are not allowed to talk about it they won't even hint at it. This isn't a small 3-10 man gaming team; its a large company operating as large companies do. Information is compartmentalised and the marketing is company style.



This is not totally a bad thing. Anyone who recalls Spartan Games would recall many times they'd openly show previews or concepts or hint at things coming which would sound like they were weeks/months off but would sometimes take years or never come. Teasing things too early has issues; its why GW rarely does it (Old World is perhaps the only example of them really doing a long term tease).

Long term forecasting is hard. Finances change; projects get unforeseen delays or problems; concepts that sounded good turn out to not work (maybe its an unfun idea or the mechanics of the model don't stand up to mass production in the chosen material). Maybe finances are hard and the superlarge resin model is too much an investment. Perhaps Steve who designed 50% of it leaves the company and no one left can pick up the leftover parts; or perhaps he leaves it in some folder on the computer that no one else recalls how to find etc...

There are lots of ways that long term forecasting can fail. Heck anyone who regularly backs Kickstarters knows to never expect delivery date to be real unless its pretty much a pre-order for something already designed, made and just needing a bulk order; and even then it can still backfire for a few weeks/month or two.

The FB page team isn't marketing though, at least not in the normal way.
Their job is to post links to stuff and answer some questions all of which will be replied to with pre-determined answers.
Is it smart? Not really but considering how leaky the GW boat seems to be already, paranoia isn't paranoia when it's actually happening.

Kinda dropped off the whole news thing again, haven't we?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXfYHJweaE8&t=71s


The start set rumor is doing the rounds again. Who knows. I feel the whole game now seems like vaporware and wont appear until 2025; I seem to have time to paint my remaining Empire metals up.

Should I assume its 50% Special units, with no unit count limit? Hence I can run 3 cannons and 3 Greatswords units at 2500 points?

These are the questions that haunts me as I plot and plan how and what to paint.

As far as commenting on the rumors that the setting is one where Chaos is at a low point/ebb and there are no hordes of daemons around, that suits me fine. We're getting enough daemons in the other 2-3 games they are releasing. A more grounded Empire Centric game suits me well.

 triplegrim wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXfYHJweaE8&t=71s


The start set rumor is doing the rounds again. Who knows. I feel the whole game now seems like vaporware and wont appear until 2025; I seem to have time to paint my remaining Empire metals up.

Should I assume its 50% Special units, with no unit count limit? Hence I can run 3 cannons and 3 Greatswords units at 2500 points?

These are the questions that haunts me as I plot and plan how and what to paint.

As far as commenting on the rumors that the setting is one where Chaos is at a low point/ebb and there are no hordes of daemons around, that suits me fine. We're getting enough daemons in the other 2-3 games they are releasing. A more grounded Empire Centric game suits me well.

It's unclear what system of army selection this game will use, it has not been stated that unit slots or even percentages will be used. From what we've seen from 'mood shots' and such so far, the game feels a bit smaller than WHFB, although that may be a personal impression, subject to change nearer to release date etc. I'd not bank on multiple 'Special' units and warmachines in a typical game though. My impression (again, personal impression, not based on any facts whatsoever) seems to be that this game is aimed at being somewhere between 1000 and 1500 points in 'classic' WHFB.

I'd be surprised if the points is low for much the same reason the points tended to rise last time round. GW will presumably be bringing back the big monsters - and if so, games will need to be at a certain points so they are playable.

Admittedly, I know a section of the playerbase would perhaps like GW to go "the big centre piece kits we tried to sell through 8th were a mistake (also monstrous cavalry, what was that all about?) and they won't be in TOW" - but I can't see it.

Tyel wrote:
I'd be surprised if the points is low for much the same reason the points tended to rise last time round. GW will presumably be bringing back the big monsters - and if so, games will need to be at a certain points so they are playable.

Admittedly, I know a section of the playerbase would perhaps like GW to go "the big centre piece kits we tried to sell through 8th were a mistake (also monstrous cavalry, what was that all about?) and they won't be in TOW" - but I can't see it.

AFAIK they already said that there is no intention to bring back the FW resin monsters, and iirc the only monster we have seen so far in a photograph was the old Treeman. We also know that the Necrosphinx will return, as that was specifically called out at Warhammerfest.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/06/01/celebrate-the-40th-anniversary-of-warhammer-with-new-collectible-stamps-from-royal-mail/

So have we just had a sneaky confirmation of things to come? One of the artwork stamps says „Warhammer the Old World / Battle for Skull Pass“. In line with the Rogue Trader artwork they could just have said WHFB but chose to mention their upcoming game. Does that mean they will redo that box?

And also, can anyone see if the two ToW stamps with photos (dwarfs & high elves) show us anything new? I was in hobby hiatus during WHFB‘s last years.

because this is the name of that artwork

would be the same to say that the we are going to see a Rouge Trade release in 40k because of the stamp

 kodos wrote:
because this is the name of that artwork

would be the same to say that the we are going to see a Rouge Trade release in 40k because of the stamp

I didn't realize women's make-up was such a hot commodity in the 41st Millenium...

 Just Tony wrote:

 kodos wrote:
because this is the name of that artwork

would be the same to say that the we are going to see a Rouge Trade release in 40k because of the stamp

I didn't realize women's make-up was such a hot commodity in the 41st Millenium...

Aspirations to vanity are a path to Slaanesh worship, and thus heresy. Naturally that makes it rare, even for the elites.

For you, dear poster: an exalt...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/06/21/40-years-of-warhammer-a-rotten-lord-raises-his-axe-for-nurgle/

Nurgle lord & Glottkin celebrated in pictures in the 40th year celebration. End Times mentioned too.

Perhaos of some small interest, the grey 90s illustration style from the tomb king and brets 2023 releases are also used, which is always good looking imo.

Does anyone have an estimate for when we could expect the next article to drop?

I was under the impression that we've entered monthly updates territory but there's been nada in June so far...

There was said to be something in June, so maybe this week

while people expect major news to drop in October when the article series is done

Online preview on Saturday, promising to reveal one whole* model:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/06/26/the-not-warhammer-40000-preview-drops-on-the-1st-of-july/


* whole is an inference on my part

 Geifer wrote:
Online preview on Saturday, promising to reveal one whole* model:

It will surely deserve a full trailer of 5 minutes and a powerpoint with artworks !

* The sad part is that I totally believes that will be the entire preview of The Old World on that day

Sarouan wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
Online preview on Saturday, promising to reveal one whole* model:

It will surely deserve a full trailer of 5 minutes and a powerpoint with artworks !

* The sad part is that I totally believes that will be the entire preview of The Old World on that day

Maybe it will be a lady of the lake, one of those sorceresses for bretonnia. I just got a vibe for a female model this month.

My first guess would be an Empire dude. GW showed a Tomb King and Bretonnian already. If they're going to drip feed us new models, I'd expect to see one of each of the core or whatever it was factions before a focus on a single faction.

Could go either way, of course. Not like we actually have much of a clue yet what GW is doing with The Old World.

 Geifer wrote:
My first guess would be an Empire dude. GW showed a Tomb King and Bretonnian already. If they're going to drip feed us new models, I'd expect to see one of each of the core or whatever it was factions before a focus on a single faction.

Could go either way, of course. Not like we actually have much of a clue yet what GW is doing with The Old World.

Apart from that its at least a 2025 release?

Presumably the unit points system/faux power level system will be implemented, going by 40k 10th. Seemed like a game philosophy choice to me.

Power Levels is on my "Automatic Non-Starter" list for the new rules.

 triplegrim wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
My first guess would be an Empire dude. GW showed a Tomb King and Bretonnian already. If they're going to drip feed us new models, I'd expect to see one of each of the core or whatever it was factions before a focus on a single faction.

Could go either way, of course. Not like we actually have much of a clue yet what GW is doing with The Old World.

Apart from that its at least a 2025 release?

Presumably the unit points system/faux power level system will be implemented, going by 40k 10th. Seemed like a game philosophy choice to me.

Does The Horus Heresy use faux power levels?

Can't see them doing that in the slightest for TOW. Fully expecting the 'classic' points and some manner of force organization chart. 10th Edition 40K game philosophy choice may well be a thing but this isn't the same studio.

Well, the' classic' points system with its 'points per model' costs was inherently flawed in WFB. You paid wildly varying costs for models in the back ranks of units, that mostly did exactly the same thing in the game - provided a static CR bonus, regardless of their stats.

As outdated as GW designs still are in many areas, I think their designers are wiser than that now.

Cyel wrote:
Well, the' classic' points system with its 'points per model' costs was inherently flawed in WFB. You paid wildly varying costs for models in the back ranks of units, that mostly did exactly the same thing in the game - provided a static CR bonus, regardless of their stats.

As outdated as GW designs still are in many areas, I think their designers are wiser than that now.

You didn't play 8th edition, did you. You don't pay for "back ranks" in a game where you can change formations that have widly different effects in game. Points can't take into account all the situations you have to face in game, and they will never be.

Besides, "point per model" cost is only a problem when you abuse the system on a hardcore competitive level. It was always a player personnality centered problem. It was never meant to be perfect, not even talking about balance...it was just a tool to build lists of somewhat "equal level". Reason it was at that level of detail is because at that time, customisation of unit equipment was deep in its core design (with unit modularity as well). Nowadays, when you look at AoS miniatures with less and less options (or even non-existent modularity with the models), it is sadly less relevant, thus the use of "Power Level" system.

It really depends on how GW will release future new kits, but I'm not optimistic about going back to the modularity of old editions of Warhammer Battle. But there are good chances they'll use "point per model", indeed. Will still not be balanced and there will still be people complaining about it, but that's the way it is.

JimmyWolf87 wrote:
Can't see them doing that in the slightest for TOW. Fully expecting the 'classic' points and some manner of force organization chart. 10th Edition 40K game philosophy choice may well be a thing but this isn't the same studio.

and AoS Team is a different studio as well yet 40k team took over the point system from them
yet TOW is for now advertised at people who played the game in the past and it makes more sense to keep the old system for that target group

yet it could also be that they want to make it easier and points are based on boxes so you buy units rather than models

Sarouan wrote:

Cyel wrote:
Well, the' classic' points system with its 'points per model' costs was inherently flawed in WFB. You paid wildly varying costs for models in the back ranks of units, that mostly did exactly the same thing in the game - provided a static CR bonus, regardless of their stats.

As outdated as GW designs still are in many areas, I think their designers are wiser than that now.

You didn't play 8th edition, did you.

You're right. It introduced random charge ranges and I had no desire to play such game so 7th is the last one I've had experience with.

Cyel wrote:
Well, the' classic' points system with its 'points per model' costs was inherently flawed in WFB. You paid wildly varying costs for models in the back ranks of units, that mostly did exactly the same thing in the game - provided a static CR bonus, regardless of their stats.

As outdated as GW designs still are in many areas, I think their designers are wiser than that now.

Apparently I was playing a very different game then because the notion that extra bodies in units did nothing more than provide a static CR bonus is pretty nonsensical to me. Even at a bare minimum it's extra wounds before you're eating into the potential for reducing that +3 CR 'ranks' result and that's only looking at bigger blocks of infantry. I'm not going to argue that there aren't flaws or balance issues but personally I much prefer the granularity of points per model. The difference between, say a 9-model unit of heavy cavalry (probably to include a character) and a 10 model unit might seem arbitrary but if that extra model is 40 or 50 points then that's a not-insubstantial factor in a 1500-2000 point game when it comes to list building and I like that level of choice.