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.

Can there be too many new armies? WRG Ancients v6 had several hundred different armies, but they all used the same basic core rules. The problem with GW is their tendency to introduce special rules for every different army.

Posted By gorgon on 08/28/2006 12:04 PM
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.

My bad. I misread your post (and skimmed the parts I did read).

Here's a thought - maybe GW (and GW customer) needs to just accept that GW games are going to keep slipping. GW has better competition in the Wargames market than it has ever had before - and with AT-43 right around the corner, things are just going to get better for gamers and worse for GW's sales. It may be that GW has to start focusing on profitability more than sales - cut more dead weight in the studios, move manufacturing to Asia/Mexico, kill White Dwarf (or just make it a general gaming magazine with advertising like Dragon was before the WotC buyout of TSR) and so on. But in the face of Mage Knight, War Machine, Flames of War, AT-43, etc. it may just be too much for GW to hope for another big sales bump.

"The main problem with using Necromunda and Mordheim as "lead-in" games is that they don't directly lead into 40K and WFB."

Which isn't really that big a problem. What we were discussing wasn't just the smaller games leading nto others, but simply having alternatives to the big games in store.

At the moment, if someone walks into a GW store and isn't interested in a game for which they have to buy an entire army, they walk out again with nothing.

They should do their own movie or series. That would be the best they could do a sci-fi serie for adults.

Posted By supabeast on 08/28/2006 3:13 PM
Here's a thought - maybe GW (and GW customer) needs to just accept that GW games are going to keep slipping. GW has better competition in the Wargames market than it has ever had before - and with AT-43 right around the corner, things are just going to get better for gamers and worse for GW's sales. It may be that GW has to start focusing on profitability more than sales - cut more dead weight in the studios, move manufacturing to Asia/Mexico, kill White Dwarf (or just make it a general gaming magazine with advertising like Dragon was before the WotC buyout of TSR) and so on. But in the face of Mage Knight, War Machine, Flames of War, AT-43, etc. it may just be too much for GW to hope for another big sales bump.

They're a publicly traded company. If they admit to a decline they're going
to be in a whole lot of trouble.

On the flip side of the Tau all crisis wing and other uber-powerful toys of doom type armies, what about armies designed specifically for lower-points games--say, no more than 20 figures a side--and a supplement to allow for that?. I'm not talking about no 'combat patrol' jibber-jabber. I mean armies that work as tight, small, infiltration forces or skirmish forces trying to disrupt some small component of a larger fight, rather than whole brigades trying to blow each other up. Ideas include: a Tau special ops team of pathfinders, with special drones for Heavies, invisible troops etc. (I'm thinking of something like Ghost In The Shell's Section 9), a lone Aspect Temple, Blood Axe Commandos, a single Inquisitor with his investigative team, etc. The supplement would also include special scenarios for campaigns and the like, including ones with off-balanced points, and ways to integrate this game into larger 40k games.

That would resolve part of what we're discussing in the other thread Kyoto-sama started as well...

Posted By supabeast on 08/28/2006 3:13 PM
Here's a thought - maybe GW (and GW customer) needs to just accept that GW games are going to keep slipping. GW has better competition in the Wargames market than it has ever had before - and with AT-43 right around the corner, things are just going to get better for gamers and worse for GW's sales. It may be that GW has to start focusing on profitability more than sales - cut more dead weight in the studios, move manufacturing to Asia/Mexico, kill White Dwarf (or just make it a general gaming magazine with advertising like Dragon was before the WotC buyout of TSR) and so on. But in the face of Mage Knight, War Machine, Flames of War, AT-43, etc. it may just be too much for GW to hope for another big sales bump.

White dwarf actually used to be a general gaming magazine. I still have some from the late seventies that extol the virtues of runequest, gamma world, etc.  Really the only thing by GW that was in there was citadel miniatures. I dont think they even owned citadel at that time. (I could be wrong on that one though).

No, GW has shown they have no interest in promoting the wargaming hobby past their own little microcosm. They have tried very valiently  (though fruitlessly) to make the GW world seem like the only possible way to wargame.

This type of attitude could be one of the causes of their downfall, by not recognizing and promoting the hobby as a whole, as they used to.

I think that as much as we all complain about prices/not enough games/little kids we all have bought their stuff have we not? And they can't take away your old rule books/specialist games books & models. If you all are really pissed off about where GW is going then hold some massive tournament somewhere only using say 3rd edit 40k rules or only use Ravening Hordes lists (if you still have those books) as a sign to show GW that we like their games the way they are and granted they may need a tune up every once in a while there still great. This would also create tournaments that almost exclusively have veteran or at least somewhat veteran players which is always nice.

IMO I hate 4th edit 40K because they just changed everything around and made the wording in the old books contradictory to the new rules. Then they have to release these FAQ's/Errata?s that just cause more arguments then solutions. And I fear that the same thing will happen when the new Fantasy book is released. This is because the FAQ's/Errata?s are released in no particular order & people don?t always know when the new ones are available.

Personally I would be content Just using the 3rd edit rule book with all my armies & books that make since and just get new models every once in a while. Not bothering to deal with new rules or throwing away a cool conversion that is no longer legal.

Or am I just some crazy person stuck in nostalgic moments?

I would like to see a board game like space hulk released but NOT with the miniatures. have it playable with each army in some way and then when the kid buys the game he also can pick which two forces he wants. Say all you need is a box of marines or stealers or have specially packaged "Space Hulk team packs."

Fully playable in 40k as well and a very nice intro to the hobby for kids. If the kid comes in buys the board and two forces to play with and that is it then fine that is still a sale you did not previously make. I was intimated at first of getting into the hobby as it seemed so complicated the rules with so much to remember and so expensive. This avoids both problems. Plus veteran games would buy the space hulk game for nostalgic reasons.

I wouldn't use any WRG stuff as a paragon for miniatures play. DBx is written in the style of Star Fleet Battles-- that is to say the tax code is more interesting and readable. The rulebook gets redone alot, with every revision to stop some power player gap in the rules, which doesn't work because you're dealing with somewhat complex topics and a group of players who want to try to look for misstatements for their own gain. The bunches of armies still only produce a few (<20) "competitive" armies for events (and not the ones you'd expect from historical effectiveness), which doesn't say much about the army design process. WAB seems to be the growing game for ancients, not any of the WRG stuff. At least that's the way it seems from the HMGS-East events I've been to over the last couple of years.

I admit I'm going off my proevious experience with WRG products (DBx mainly), not the new ruleset. So please disabuse me of any wrong notions here. But if it's anything like what WRG stuff, it's worse designed than GW games, and has a horrible technical English to it (Bakerese) to makes it also mostly unreadable. 

Raymond

Unless White Dwarf gets any better, I suspect GW could drop the magazine completely and advertise in other wargame magazines for less money.

Of course I could be wrong. Maybe there are bunches and heaps of paying customers that just can't wait to get their paws on the next White Dwarf...

Indeed there is- apparently the sales have been up 5% for WD in the last three months.

There were rumors of specialized "game packs" a while back that apparently fell through, but I liked the idea.   It would be a small, cheap boxed set with basic troops and a few specialty troops with a scenario included.  It's a shame they didn't go with that.

I think they could do great if they managed to aquire license to make the Fallout Tactics tabletop game.I have the rules on pc but playing with paper cut outs is far less interesting that painting -real- clean power armour of the BoS,mutants or ghouls(SM,Orks and nurgle/zombies respectivelly).And i mean not by making it compatible,no.
Make the actual minis.

I would also really like a rehaul of Necro(my gaming club is restaring it here so im happy but still),Battlefleet and the rest.Make 40k things compatible with necro,make new things in Inq etc.

New armies would probably include a full Kroot army (with actual vehicles,good rules and lots of funner options) or the...eeerr....oh yeah.Hrud.that would be something i'd like to see

Let's not forget Man'o'War. I still have a Chaos expansion box and Tzeench Minis for that one...

More Snakes on a Plane Volumes from BL ("SOP").

Frankly this needs to be a new core product for GW. GW could progress through the lives of various SOP characters and antagonists. Further, they could go back in time to the origin of the snakes.

They could even develop a miniature gaming line akin to Space Hulk, with heroes doing battle on a cardboard mockup of the plane. The collectors edition could have the plane made of brass etched pieces from FW. Expansions sets could move the game system to SOB (snakes on a bus); SOS (snakes on a ship) and the backwards in time epic SOG (snakes on a galleon). Alternate scenarios could be created aka What if Spartacus had a piper cub and SOP's when facing Crassus and Lucullis? Would SOI (snakes on an ironclad) have impacted the epic Monitor vs. Merrimac battle? Were neo-con SOP's really behind the Kennedy assassination?

I agree that Space Hulk (or similar) could be a really good idea for GW. Even a Space Hulk/Necromunda fusion, perhaps: Make the setting a hive world but instead of the 'healthy' Necromunda underhive, have it under attack by multiple enemies. "Good guy" forces would be Guard (Perhaps a local guard variant roughly equal to Veteran Squads), Inquisition, and of course Space Marines along with possible support for hive gangs. "Bad Guys" could be one or two of the common 40k lineup: Tyranids (Or just Genestealers), Chaos, etc.

One thing I'd like is support for a Necromunda-style campaign system. This could be a good way to have it tie in to 40k, too... Try to set it up such that the rules can interlock so a campaign finale might have lead-ins to a 40k-style battle.

The terrain could be a mix of cardstock (for simple 'starter' terrain with options to upgrade to the CoD stuff or similar hand-built.

I'd also love to see it embrace the 'cinematic' style GW prefers to write in a bit more. For example, I'd love to see campaign 'upgrades' to allow weird alliances, equipment, wargear and such, but in a limited and structured way.

I think the idea would fail due to GW's current attitude, however. I don't know if anyone could take the current rules and boil them down to the small rule-book a game like this should have and make it better than the current 40k rules, at least without being seen as a threat to the core games (even if they're floundering).

I wonder if the popularity of Combat Patrol is worrying GW as it's built for comparatively tiny armies?

Don't forget the obligatory "Samuel L Jackson And Cart" mini (direct exclusive).

Posted By Balance on 09/13/2006 11:59 AM


I wonder if the popularity of Combat Patrol is worrying GW as it's built for comparatively tiny armies?

I wonder if the popularity of Warmachine and Flames of War are worrying GW...