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.

It's not a massive assumption when they literally show off a WHFB square base.

Warmaster flopped pretty hard and they've been touchy about even doing Epic again (which was successful). Hell, we've had detailed concept art of the Ice Guard and those definitely wouldn't be done for an Epic/Warmaster scale game.

If they were going to remake Mordheim they'd either do just that - they've had no issues straight up resurrecting other specialist games - or reboot it in the Mortal Realms.

It's the people claiming "IT MIGHT NOT BE WHFB!" who're making the massive assumptions here.

Tick tock.

Yeah, nobody's saying "IT MIGHT NOT BE WHFB!". I said that the square base thing is nothing but speculation...which it is. Because as I mentioned we know literally nothing about how Warhammer: The Old World is going to work. We have a name, we have a vague idea of the timeframe in WHFB's history it will sit in, and we know that it's The Old World not AoS.

It might be good speculation to assume that the square bases come back(I'm still leaning towards "no" since they don't even stock the things on their webstore anymore) but it's still far too early and ridiculous to be telling people crap like "don't worry about X, Y is coming in three years!".

Games Workshop is not the same company it was twenty years ago when Warmaster was released. You're the only one who's making assumptions. The rest of us are saying that there is literally not enough to determine anything concerning the rules or models for The Old World.

 Stux wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
We literally know nothing about how Warhammer: The Old World is going to work. The square thing is speculation, at best, right now.

I keep seeing this but I honestly don't know why people keep trying to make this point for any reason than to sound condescending.

They showed off a square base, they're explicitly bringing back the Old World, they've gone so far as to compare it to Horus Heresy (which is the scale scale as 40k). They probably didn't mention "Yes this is literally 9th edition WHFB" because they knew that's where everybody's head would go.

They have pretty much no reason to return the game on round bases as opposed to using the resources on more AoS models. "But what if it's just the setting" doesn't work either because there's Legends for that kind of thing, nor would they need three years for that.

Still some massive assumptions in here.

While its certainly POSSIBLE its Horus Heresy for Sigmar, theres so many other things it could be.

Even if it is a full size battle game (which it might not be, could be skirmish scale).
Even if it's the same scale models (which it might not be, could epic/inquisitor/something else).

Even then, it doesnt mean any models from WHFB will be compatible with it.

We just dont know.

And, being 2-3 years away, I'm not at all concerned with it yet.

It does make a ton of sense to me that a company that no longer makes square bases would start a new game with square bases. Great business decision.

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
It does make a ton of sense to me that a company that no longer makes square bases would start a new game with square bases. Great business decision.

I'm not seeing the problem. If they make a new game with square bases, they just start making square bases again. They only don't make them now because none of their current games use them.

 Ghaz wrote:
Games Workshop is not the same company it was twenty years ago when Warmaster was released. You're the only one who's making assumptions. The rest of us are saying that there is literally not enough to determine anything concerning the rules or models for The Old World.

Exactly this.

I just think its foolish for people with old WHFB armies in their cabinet to feel like this will definitively be the opportunity to dust them off and use them again.

It MIGHT be. But it's too early to say, and all people making this assumption are doing is potentially setting themselves up for s huge disappointment.

 Stux wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
Games Workshop is not the same company it was twenty years ago when Warmaster was released. You're the only one who's making assumptions. The rest of us are saying that there is literally not enough to determine anything concerning the rules or models for The Old World.

Exactly this.

I just think its foolish for people with old WHFB armies in their cabinet to feel like this will definitively be the opportunity to dust them off and use them again.

It MIGHT be. But it's too early to say, and all people making this assumption are doing is potentially setting themselves up for s huge disappointment.

Especially given that if you're a WHFB fan every game session is that opportunity. You've got the models. You've got friends/people to play with. You've either got your old books in storage, PDFs, or can get them cheaply enough. So what are you waiting for?
"But other people don't have those books/know how to play those editions".... So. They won't have the new books/know how to play that in 3 years & that won't stop them. Might as well play some WHFB in the here & now vs waiting to maybe play in 3 years.

The OP said he wants to SELL these models. You will still be able to sell the models on squares. Hell, some people like me still play older editions where we use square bases. Depending on the models involved and the price, I might be interested myself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
It does make a ton of sense to me that a company that no longer makes square bases would start a new game with square bases. Great business decision.

When you think about how much money was left on the table that they were basically enabled Kings Of War's success, it makes PERFECT sense to try to recapture the market.

Great business decision.

When a company, particularly a company with a lot of stock holders and a high overall worth such as GW, makes a business decision... it typically had a lot of marketing analysis done before hand.

Data that normal people like you or I don't have access to to be able to really make an informed judgement on.

If they decided to go back after the older game, its because in their survey and marketing analysis they've discovered that there is a lot of money to be made and a lot of interested parties by people (like me) that want the old world and want the square base version of the game.

What did i do with 160 square based Goblins? I cut off the bases and put them on circles? What did i do with 280 Beastmen? I sold them and rebought the army to make it new and fresh b.c i hated swapping the bases, and i wanted a new theme (ps i still kept some of it like Centigors and metal heroes).

But, the game is IMO 600% better, i played WHFB from 5th till 8th and i'm having more fun in AOS than i ever did in all of Fantasy time. Even tho i am playing Beastmen, a army that is consider hard to play and win (just like in fantasy) i still can win with better players which i do. In fantasy i lost 90% of my games just b.c how fantasy worked and beastmen were trash. The mechanics on AoS is what i like more, not just the balance.

Don’t go round. WFB will be back. AOS isn’t a breakaway hit.

Pancakey wrote:
AOS isn’t a breakaway hit.

It's not 2015 anymore. Sigmar is doing excellently. Just because it's still second to 40k doesnt mean it hasn't been huge hit.

 Stux wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
AOS isn’t a breakaway hit.

It's not 2015 anymore. Sigmar is doing excellently. Just because it's still second to 40k doesnt mean it hasn't been huge hit.

According to the stats I have seen, AOS is significantly more popular than Fantasy during its last edition. Despite the catastrophic way the End Times were handled and the chaos of the first edition of AOS with its constant restructuration, the game seems to have stabilised and is growing in a rather previsible way (which is a good thing since that kind of hobby is relying on band loyalty and a sense of continuity).

epronovost wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
AOS isn’t a breakaway hit.

It's not 2015 anymore. Sigmar is doing excellently. Just because it's still second to 40k doesnt mean it hasn't been huge hit.

According to the stats I have seen, AOS is significantly more popular than Fantasy during its last edition. Despite the catastrophic way the End Times were handled and the chaos of the first edition of AOS with its constant restructuration, the game seems to have stabilised and is growing in a rather previsible way (which is a good thing since that kind of hobby is relying on band loyalty and a sense of continuity).

Why is it that every time someone references apparent sales vs. sales on AOS vs WFB they always choose the lowest point in WFB's life while clutching at the highest of AOS's to date? It's like comparing the looks of two celebrities where you select one at 21 years old and the other at 90 years old.

 Just Tony wrote:

epronovost wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
AOS isn’t a breakaway hit.

It's not 2015 anymore. Sigmar is doing excellently. Just because it's still second to 40k doesnt mean it hasn't been huge hit.

According to the stats I have seen, AOS is significantly more popular than Fantasy during its last edition. Despite the catastrophic way the End Times were handled and the chaos of the first edition of AOS with its constant restructuration, the game seems to have stabilised and is growing in a rather previsible way (which is a good thing since that kind of hobby is relying on band loyalty and a sense of continuity).

Why is it that every time someone references apparent sales vs. sales on AOS vs WFB they always choose the lowest point in WFB's life while clutching at the highest of AOS's to date? It's like comparing the looks of two celebrities where you select one at 21 years old and the other at 90 years old.

You have to make the #s fit your narrative somehow....

ccs wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

epronovost wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
AOS isn’t a breakaway hit.

It's not 2015 anymore. Sigmar is doing excellently. Just because it's still second to 40k doesnt mean it hasn't been huge hit.

According to the stats I have seen, AOS is significantly more popular than Fantasy during its last edition. Despite the catastrophic way the End Times were handled and the chaos of the first edition of AOS with its constant restructuration, the game seems to have stabilised and is growing in a rather previsible way (which is a good thing since that kind of hobby is relying on band loyalty and a sense of continuity).

Why is it that every time someone references apparent sales vs. sales on AOS vs WFB they always choose the lowest point in WFB's life while clutching at the highest of AOS's to date? It's like comparing the looks of two celebrities where you select one at 21 years old and the other at 90 years old.

You have to make the #s fit your narrative somehow....

You're not wrong...

 Just Tony wrote:
Why is it that every time someone references apparent sales vs. sales on AOS vs WFB they always choose the lowest point in WFB's life while clutching at the highest of AOS's to date? It's like comparing the looks of two celebrities where you select one at 21 years old and the other at 90 years old.

Okay then, when was WFB greatest year in terms of sales and let's compare it with the greatest year of AOS in sales. Considering how big GW got in the last ten years compared to what it was in the 90's (during the days of glory of WFB), the best years of sales for WFB were probably right before End Times and thus lower than those of AOS. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Well we arent arbitrarily picking the best point for Sigmar. We're picking where it is NOW. Which happens to be a really strong point.

The original statement was that it isnt a hit of a game, so obviously we look at the current state of the game.

You won't have the sales data at WHFB's peak, which was 6th and 7th edition. WHFB 8th killed a good chunk of the game when it was released in 2010 because WHFB took what was wrong with the game and then amplified it and made it even more unappealing.

Regardless. The original post that stemmed this chest-beating about whose side has the more followers and is therefore ultimately "right" was half right and half wrong.

It was wrong in trying to denounce AOS as not selling or that it would go away anytime. It won't. It is a game designed to appeal to the masses down to the child-level. Some people will get angry at that statement but sorry - thats pulled from dev interviews where they said they wanted to remove ALL barriers of entry and make the game easy to play and not require a ton of rules that even younger children would be able to pick up the game and have fun with it. I'm not saying thats good or bad, because its not either it just depends on what game you are after.

I have a strong feeling it does sell more than WHFB because of that alone though. Because it is a game that can be done well with minimal effort and little to no rules mastery, and because it appeals successfully to a much wider base than WHFB ever did.

However it was right in that the whfb portion will be back. We already know an old world project is coming in 2-3 years. We just don't know what it entails or if those square bases will still be useful.

Well reasoned, and I agree with the majority of it.

Still think we need to wait and see on what exactly the Old World project is though.

“Fantasy used to sell really well in its golden age”

And then it didn’t so they squatted it.
GW is a company so to them, £££ is everything.
The golden years mean nothing if the game has died and wasn’t turning enough profit.

That’s not cherry picking dates, that’s common sense.

AoS so far seems to be doing better and as a result, gets far more love from GW.


GW may seem clueless at times, but when it comes to making cash, they know more than most.


Don’t get me wrong, I thought the train wreck that was AoS would be cancelled before it’s first year.
Not the case though and it seems to be doing really well.



In terms of the WHFB rumour it’s just that, a rumour.
No one knows anything more than that.
Trying to base an entire argument on assumptions gets nowhere.

The old-world project is not a rumor. It was confirmed as happening. We just don't know any details about it other than their cryptic puns and marketing memes.

I have little hope that it will be anything more than AOS set in the old world and using square regiment trays like conquest or KOW uses, but with the same design principals as AOS (free summons, mortal wound spamming, bad balance, and a game centered around buffing synergies and list building), but it will be something in that setting.

Shrug, I’m fine that it’s simplified so anyone can play it. I’ve got a son now, and I figure if AoS/GW are still around in 7 years (no reason to assume they won’t), he might want to play games with dad. If it’s easier for him to pick up, then bonus! WHFB was great for “deeply” tactical planning w/hit and runs, range guesses, movement shenanigans and flank attacks. But I don’t need that anymore. I tried to hang onto WHFB because my two oldest friends want nothing to do w/AoS but want to play fantasy again. Since launch, we haven’t gotten a single game of WHFB in. We all have kids now and live 3-4hrs apart from each other. I’d say WHFB is dead for us, and I’ll take living game I can play in a few years with my son over a dead game I’d have to wait 15 years for him to truly grasp and enjoy.

Sure I can understand that. For my $ it would be nice if they could cater to both but that train pulled out of the station years ago.

 auticus wrote:
Sure I can understand that. For my $ it would be nice if they could cater to both but that train pulled out of the station years ago.

Casual rules are the new hotness. Until they are not. You’ve seen it before. Round and round we go.

 auticus wrote:
The old-world project is not a rumor. It was confirmed as happening. We just don't know any details about it other than their cryptic puns and marketing memes.

I have little hope that it will be anything more than AOS set in the old world and using square regiment trays like conquest or KOW uses, but with the same design principals as AOS (free summons, mortal wound spamming, bad balance, and a game centered around buffing synergies and list building), but it will be something in that setting.

So any details about it are ......... rumours

Jackal90 wrote:

 auticus wrote:
The old-world project is not a rumor. It was confirmed as happening. We just don't know any details about it other than their cryptic puns and marketing memes.

I have little hope that it will be anything more than AOS set in the old world and using square regiment trays like conquest or KOW uses, but with the same design principals as AOS (free summons, mortal wound spamming, bad balance, and a game centered around buffing synergies and list building), but it will be something in that setting.

So any details about it are ......... rumours

I hardly think that when the company itself flat out tells you that they're working on x & shares a tidbit of it, that it counts as a rumor.

ccs wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 auticus wrote:
The old-world project is not a rumor. It was confirmed as happening. We just don't know any details about it other than their cryptic puns and marketing memes.

I have little hope that it will be anything more than AOS set in the old world and using square regiment trays like conquest or KOW uses, but with the same design principals as AOS (free summons, mortal wound spamming, bad balance, and a game centered around buffing synergies and list building), but it will be something in that setting.

So any details about it are ......... rumours

I hardly think that when the company itself flat out tells you that they're working on x & shares a tidbit of it, that it counts as a rumor.

The only thing that isn't a rumor is that GW said that three years out there will be a new release about the Old World. And they showed a picture of a square base. And an early drawing of a Kislev unit. That's it. Anything else is wishlisting/guesses.

I played AoS when it first came out with my Brets, and actually likes the freedom of movement. I could cluster my cavalry and snake around treelines or clump up in a way that looked aesthetically pleasing. Even the combat and all was simple and straightforward. There wasn't enough to keep me in AoS when they started putting out the new army books, because none of the new factions was remotely interesting, and I didn't want a third set of books that I had to keep track of (40k, 30k). So I play 6th when I want to rank em up, and I play AoS with my son when we want a dead simple game based on the original warscrolls and the 4 pages of rules.

 Cruentus wrote:

ccs wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 auticus wrote:
The old-world project is not a rumor. It was confirmed as happening. We just don't know any details about it other than their cryptic puns and marketing memes.

I have little hope that it will be anything more than AOS set in the old world and using square regiment trays like conquest or KOW uses, but with the same design principals as AOS (free summons, mortal wound spamming, bad balance, and a game centered around buffing synergies and list building), but it will be something in that setting.

So any details about it are ......... rumours

I hardly think that when the company itself flat out tells you that they're working on x & shares a tidbit of it, that it counts as a rumor.

The only thing that isn't a rumor is that GW said that three years out there will be a new release about the Old World. And they showed a picture of a square base. And an early drawing of a Kislev unit. That's it. Anything else is wishlisting/guesses.

Yep. They've given me 4 snippits of info.
Beyond that? Well, I guess I'll find out more as the tease things out & then in full 2-3 years down the line.
Until then? Nothing to get overly excited about. It's in the "Oh, cool. Hope it turns out decent." category.
But in the here & now that matters? When we want to play some AoS? We play AoS. When we're in a WHFB mood? We decide wich edition to pull off our shelves.