Continuing Rumors of WHFB 9th (Post-End Times) in Early Summer 2015

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.

**Platuan4th**

RiTides wrote:
I play 35 point games of Hordes all the time. It's my preferred point level.

Indeed, it's the preferred points through most of the southern US from what I've seen(outside of the larger events).

**angelofvengeance**

Agree very much with sourclams & DINLT's point here. No point flogging a dead horse. Got to try something else to get customers interested in the brand again.

**fullheadofhair**

See, what I don't get is if GW want to keep WFB going with minimal cost is go back to 7th ed - tweak the few issues that there were and then call it good. Games do not have to keep evolving, especially ones with such a rich background and diversity as exists in GW.

So many people left after the release of 8th Ed, myself included.

Yes, prices are high for WFB and as a truely mass combat system the core troops need to come down significantly to ever get me interested. I don't mind pay $60 to $80 for a three man unit of killyness or even $20 for a general/ hero. I accept that numbers sold v's cost to make make that particular item more expensive. However, I don;t expect to pay more than $1.50 to $2 for a core trooper - expecially when I need 200+

When it comes to models I would do what Perry/ Warlord/ victrix do - sell complete units in the typical size used. $50 for a box of 40 orcs or empire militia.

A cut in price for books just like FOW did would also be a good idea. They just cut prices by 30% - I dropped out of FOW because of prices when moved to new edition. The book and army bookes were too expensive - well, now I have a rule book and two faction books. I get some models from Battlefront but my tanks elsewhere because BF charge far too much for 5 tanks.

If GW cannot make money from their current model, they need to revisit how they made money in the past - not create something new and untested or you could possibly accelerate the 8th ed effect.

**PhantomViper**

fullheadofhair wrote:

If GW cannot make money from their current model, they need to revisit how they made money in the past - not create something new and untested or you could possibly accelerate the 8th ed effect.

This^^

A thousand times this.

They need to get back to the time where the game was dominating Europe. Destroying everything in the hopes of making something that is completely untried, especially given GW's track record with newer rules systems, is not the way to revitalize Fantasy, its just the way to burn whatever is left into the ground.

**sourclams**

fullheadofhair wrote:
If GW cannot make money from their current model, they need to revisit how they made money in the past - not create something new and untested or you could possibly accelerate the 8th ed effect.

I'm assuming the loss of shelf space and general decline/market share loss is a real constraint for them as a company, though. To return to how they made money in the past also seems to involve a shift away from this direct-only order format and basically everything they've done from a business structure standpoint (which was horrible and short-sighted and I'm not defending it at all).

**Chopxsticks**

On the topic of pricing I cant help but notice when price is mentioned its also mentioned along side quantity of models required. So is it a price issue or is it a model count issue?

I have to say model count. I know I dont speak for everyone but a lower model count table top game is just what I need. We talk about breathing new life, I for one have a handful of friends that have been enjoying my collection and wanting to play, but a $100 investment in books before you even get to the models is very off putting.

As for price, I can justify the cost if I dont need as many models, I just bought the Dragon Ogres last night for a Pathfinder game, and the level of detail is amazing, the extra bits, the options, I dont know what other company Im gonna get that from. I would use GW models to proxy other games in a heart beat.
Those Dark Elf Witches, would love a box! $50 (online) for 10, ouch, yes, BUT if you only need 5 for a table top game and could make 5 of each, $50 for the enjoyment of painting and kit bashing those models would be fine imo. Knowing you need 40 for a current game is ball busting..

Having said that though, if the game is to be played large skirmish than ya, price needs to drop alot, make core cheaper and recoup that money on the large center piece models.

**sourclams**

Chopxsticks wrote:
On the topic of pricing I cant help but notice when price is mentioned its also mentioned along side quantity of models required. So is it a price issue or is it a model count issue?

I speak only for myself but I perceive it as both. There's 3 issues, I'm going to order them from most to least impact (IMO):

1. Entry cost and overall cost
2. Amount of models needed to play (tying in with overall cost)
3 or 2b. Majority of 'ranked' models completely pointless but still demand significant assembly/painting time

I have already seen locals replace individual ranked figs with some sort of large scenic piece 1x5+ bases wide; instead of 5 more generic dudes with spears it's a chaos portal or a religious shrine or trees/scenery.

I think, in general, everybody wants a painted or good-looking army. The high price tag is one barrier to entry, but I really do feel that needing to lovingly craft 80 men to then relegate into this visual sea of anonymity is another barrier.

**Chopxsticks**

Agreed! I am one of those with Unit fillers. I play Skaven, Empire, and Vampire Counts. Rank and file models NEVER RANK so unit fillers serve 2 purposes for me.

I also cannot muster the will power to paint more than 10 core models before it bores me.

I think my Area must not care as much which saddens me. My game store usually has to cancel WHFB tournaments and when I go to watch 40k everyone is playing with only assembled models. most not even base coated.

I am more into the hobby aspect of it though so I think thats why rules and fluff are not bothering me as much. I paint far more than I have ever played.

I know for a fact for ME and ME only, smaller games will attract my friends to play. I know "play 500 point games" which yes we could do, but that does restrict the models we have access to.

Not to bring up Warmachine yet again... but there is something to be said for a system that rewards you for not taking multiple of the same model

**Wayniac**

Chopxsticks wrote:
On the topic of pricing I cant help but notice when price is mentioned its also mentioned along side quantity of models required. So is it a price issue or is it a model count issue?

It's a combination of both. You have a lot of models and a high price for them, especially in WHFB where you tend to get 10 models in a box and want at least 20 or more to make a good size squad.

Even if they reduced the model count so that a box of 10 guys was "normal", you'd still be paying a lot for a box of 10 guys. It wouldn't address the full problem.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chopxsticks wrote:
Not to bring up Warmachine yet again... but there is something to be said for a system that rewards you for not taking multiple of the same model

To be fair though, this isn't exactly the case. Warmachine has Force Allocation, so you can't take multiples without some theme lists that basically restrict you to only that (Butcher2's theme force springs to mind). A lot of it also has to do with the fact most infantry are only good or better with their UA, and most of the time the UA is limited to 1, so you only take one unit.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

If GW cannot make money from their current model, they need to revisit how they made money in the past - not create something new and untested or you could possibly accelerate the 8th ed effect.

Unlikely to ever happen. GW has too many competitors eating away at its market share (Mantic, FOW etc) , and of course, rightly or wrongly, GW have alienated a section of their former customers with certain decisions over the year (finecast, pricing, lack of news on future products etc etc)

Even in 7th edition, there was too much dead wood -they got away with it at the time, but GW can't turn the clock back. They're in decline (not terminal in my view) but they do have to cut their cloth to fit their circumstances in the here and now.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

angelofvengeance wrote:
Agree very much with sourclams & DINLT's point here. No point flogging a dead horse. Got to try something else to get customers interested in the brand again.

9 times out of 10, I'd go for evolution over revolution any day of the week, but Fantasy, as it stands, is on life support. What have GW got to lose?

**JohnHwangDD**

Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

But I'd like to see GW try!

**wuestenfux**

Well, I think it's a chance to turn Fantasy around.
Let's wait for the implementation.

**JohnHwangDD**

Rick_1138 wrote:
@JohnHwangDD Your avater is distracting, please provide more similar pictures so that one is less distracting.....

Sorry, I can't hear you over the awesomeness of my avatar.

**Phydox**

I would imagine this "future of WHFB" is something similar to what GW is doing in 40k with the Shield of Baal, and Red Tide (or whatever its called). Thats why theyre talking about "bubbles" and stuff. The core armies and rulebook probably won't change except to release new ones.

Even If this new edition of WHFB is the nail in its coffin and the line is discontinued, there's plenty of competitors rules to use (and earlier GW editions of fantasy!) Just choose your favorite. Im not gonna stress about this, so few people play fantasy in this area. Usually, If I find a fantasy player they havn't played in years and we play a mash of editions anyway.

Army detachments for Fantasy might be cool though.

**pretre**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Rick_1138 wrote:
@JohnHwangDD Your avater is distracting, please provide more similar pictures so that one is less distracting.....

Sorry, I can't hear you over the awesomeness of my avatar.

Haven't you had that avatar for years?

Heck, I've got avatars off and I still knew which one you had.

**JohnHwangDD**

sourclams wrote:
This is an interesting thread.

At face value, from the perspective of a vet Fantasy gamer, this seems pretty bad.

But overall, I think these changes would be good, if executed well.

Fantasy overall is kind of like a dying elven civilization. It's this big, grand, over-arching structure that is becoming less and less relevant to today's gaming sphere, with a lot of significant breakpoints (primarily around model count, cost; secondarily around game length, rules bloat/complexity).

If you back off and really look at Fantasy, it's a skirmish game, but the base unit size is not one model as most other skirmish games are, it's a block of half a dozen to dozens of individual figures.

If you did keep the same core game 'feel' but break these ridiculous model counts down, I could see the appeal of that game. It'd be more like super-Mordheim than Fantasy-lite, and I think that would generate interest/momentum for the line. Overall that would be good.

But it wouldn't be the same grand structure, obviously. I would expect the system to lose a lot of its character, and what remained would be more simplistic, but also probably more adaptable and fertile ground for advancement.

The time of the Elf is over, this is the Age of the Orc.

Now, these two things obviously aren't mutally exclusive. You could have ::gasp!:: both. From the perspective of a manufacturing company watching declining sales and market share, though, it does make sense to drastically cut or scale back the Fantasy line in this sort of fashion, though. It's actually pretty standard restructuring practice.

I agree with pretty much all of this. GW mismanged Fantasy very badly.

IMO, Boneripper is really the best metaphor for what Fantasy has become - a bloated monstrosity with too many things going on. End Times is good, stripping away the unnecessary stuff to clean up the backstory and clear the slate to rebuild anew.

Also, Super-Mordheim is a great idea. Mordheim is, by far, my favorite GW Fantasy game. Well-balanced out of the box, yet still having great variety and playability. I would love a Mordheim II, and if WFB 9E is the way we get it, I'm all for it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Rick_1138 wrote:
@JohnHwangDD Your avater is distracting, please provide more similar pictures so that one is less distracting.....

Sorry, I can't hear you over the awesomeness of my avatar.

Haven't you had that avatar for years?

Heck, I've got avatars off and I still knew which one you had.

Yup. It's been a fan favorite, and (unlike GW) I aim to please the masses...

**Crimson**

Chopxsticks wrote:
On the topic of pricing I cant help but notice when price is mentioned its also mentioned along side quantity of models required. So is it a price issue or is it a model count issue?

I have to say model count. I know I dont speak for everyone but a lower model count table top game is just what I need. We talk about breathing new life, I for one have a handful of friends that have been enjoying my collection and wanting to play, but a $100 investment in books before you even get to the models is very off putting.

As for price, I can justify the cost if I dont need as many models, I just bought the Dragon Ogres last night for a Pathfinder game, and the level of detail is amazing, the extra bits, the options, I dont know what other company Im gonna get that from. I would use GW models to proxy other games in a heart beat.
Those Dark Elf Witches, would love a box! $50 (online) for 10, ouch, yes, BUT if you only need 5 for a table top game and could make 5 of each, $50 for the enjoyment of painting and kit bashing those models would be fine imo. Knowing you need 40 for a current game is ball busting..

Having said that though, if the game is to be played large skirmish than ya, price needs to drop alot, make core cheaper and recoup that money on the large center piece models.

Absolutely, and this is why going with smaller unit sizes and possibly skirmish style are sensible moves. But none of this requires bubble worlds or fantasy space marines. I can deal with drastic overhaul of the rules, I'd probably even welcome it, but destruction of the setting is a deal breaker.

**JohnHwangDD**

PhantomViper wrote:
fullheadofhair wrote:

If GW cannot make money from their current model, they need to revisit how they made money in the past - not create something new and untested or you could possibly accelerate the 8th ed effect.

They need to get back to the time where the game was dominating Europe. Destroying everything in the hopes of making something that is completely untried, especially given GW's track record with newer rules systems, is not the way to revitalize Fantasy, its just the way to burn whatever is left into the ground.

You guys realize that ship has sailed, right? That the age of the Internet, Kickstarter and steampunk miniatures wargaming has completely obsoleted the old GW way that you long for.

**CREEEEEEEEED**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

But I'd like to see GW try!

Dwarves, my army is just war machines and a few dudes, makes 2000 points.

**PhantomViper**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
fullheadofhair wrote:

If GW cannot make money from their current model, they need to revisit how they made money in the past - not create something new and untested or you could possibly accelerate the 8th ed effect.

They need to get back to the time where the game was dominating Europe. Destroying everything in the hopes of making something that is completely untried, especially given GW's track record with newer rules systems, is not the way to revitalize Fantasy, its just the way to burn whatever is left into the ground.

You guys realize that ship has sailed, right? That the age of the Internet, Kickstarter and steampunk miniatures wargaming has completely obsoleted the old GW way that you long for.

Why? None of that has any bearing on the way that the game was in 6th edition.

Why does any of that invalidate a return to a game model that had fewer models per side and was more focused on tactical play?

**Talys**

JohnHwangDD wrote:

You guys realize that ship has sailed, right? That the age of the Internet, Kickstarter and steampunk miniatures wargaming has completely obsoleted the old GW way that you long for.

There is not one Kickstarter company that has anything remotely resembling a collection of miniatures, and there are many people (like me) who simply find steampunk unappealing.

It's not very exciting for me to see a Kickstarter startup with 3 miniatures, no matter how pretty, or one boardgame. I need to see a realistic path to hundreds of miniatures (at least WMH size) and a solid amount of fluff before I become invested in a game world. Believe it or not, there are some people that find small companies unattractive, because they don't have a regular release schedule, and you never know if they'll be around in a few years. And what if the only sculptor is hit by a truck, or wins the lottery?

The only real competition to 40k/WHFB in the modelling world is WMH and Reaper, and they really only compete on the small miniature scale. They just don't have enough larger miniatures. Plus, nobody else does multipart plastic yet, which is pretty key to the whole modelling thing. All of the board games and small scale squad games won't ever grow to the size of GW, unless they adopt some of GW's escalation practices, because you just can't sell enough people enough stuff to be a hundred million dollar a year company.

**JohnHwangDD**

CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

Dwarves, my army is just war machines and a few dudes, makes 2000 points.

I said "smaller", not "shorter".

Those Imperial Knight Titans are 350-400 pts per model, and have the firepower of 2 main battle tanks. They're very badass.

For 1500 pts, it's 4 models. For 1850 pts, bump to 5 models. Do your Dorfs compare to that?

**Chopxsticks**

I think I am overly optimistic but I cannot see GW abandoning Large scale rank and file Warhammer. I know they are cray cray! but I cant imagine they are that crazy... right..

To have pumped out so many models and units in recent months with square bases leads me to believe both formats will be supported.

Its not far fetched either, and I guess we will not know until its official.

What is interesting is the new models come with rules and combined stat blocks in the box. If there is anything I am most interested in is how they plan to handle pre-existing stat blocks aka Mournfang and Demigrypgh riders. I think things of that nature would be hotter topics. Will they stream line all that stuff? or is just all going away.

@competition I think GW is in a pretty good spot for mould quality on there plastic sprues. Which sucks because until another company can come out with the scale range/quanity/quality I think GW gets the freedom to price hike. I have limited experience in this but off the top of my head I think Avatars of War would be the only next up company with good detail, but are there models not fixed position? I guess I lump GW into a different level because of all the extra bits their sprues provide.

**wuestenfux**

A new system with a few factions would make sense.
This could help to develop a tight rule set, see WMH.
It would then be clear that there will model and units which are no longer promoted.

**Mithrax**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

Dwarves, my army is just war machines and a few dudes, makes 2000 points.

I said "smaller", not "shorter".

Those Imperial Knight Titans are 350-400 pts per model, and have the firepower of 2 main battle tanks. They're very badass.

For 1500 pts, it's 4 models. For 1850 pts, bump to 5 models. Do your Dorfs compare to that?

Several editions ago, it was possible to create a 3-4 model 2000 point Tzeentch Warriors of Chaos list. I honestly cam't remember which edition exactly though.

**Deadawake1347**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

Dwarves, my army is just war machines and a few dudes, makes 2000 points.

I said "smaller", not "shorter".

Those Imperial Knight Titans are 350-400 pts per model, and have the firepower of 2 main battle tanks. They're very badass.

For 1500 pts, it's 4 models. For 1850 pts, bump to 5 models. Do your Dorfs compare to that?

The problem being that those four models are $140 each, so the four of them cost $560. Which, seeing as how the original point was the fact that getting a usable, average sized army was too expensive, doesn't really help your side. An average sized army should not require a half a grand or more investment. Which for most games is not an issue.

**Wayniac**

Mithrax wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

Dwarves, my army is just war machines and a few dudes, makes 2000 points.

I said "smaller", not "shorter".

Those Imperial Knight Titans are 350-400 pts per model, and have the firepower of 2 main battle tanks. They're very badass.

For 1500 pts, it's 4 models. For 1850 pts, bump to 5 models. Do your Dorfs compare to that?

Several editions ago, it was possible to create a 3-4 model 2000 point Tzeentch Warriors of Chaos list. I honestly cam't remember which edition exactly though.

Probably 5th, but could be further than that since I recall you still had to have some kinds of troops in those days.

**12thRonin**

Mithrax wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Death By Monkeys wrote:
Can you make a small, elite WHFB army? Sure, but it's harder to do than in 40k.

Harder? When a 40k army can be just a handful of IKs, I'd suggest it's flat out impossible to make a WFB army that is smaller and more elite.

Dwarves, my army is just war machines and a few dudes, makes 2000 points.

I said "smaller", not "shorter".

Those Imperial Knight Titans are 350-400 pts per model, and have the firepower of 2 main battle tanks. They're very badass.

For 1500 pts, it's 4 models. For 1850 pts, bump to 5 models. Do your Dorfs compare to that?

Several editions ago, it was possible to create a 3-4 model 2000 point Tzeentch Warriors of Chaos list. I honestly cam't remember which edition exactly though.

You also had HE Dragon Princes that actually rode, you know, dragons.

**Yodhrin**

Crimson wrote:
Chopxsticks wrote:
On the topic of pricing I cant help but notice when price is mentioned its also mentioned along side quantity of models required. So is it a price issue or is it a model count issue?

I have to say model count. I know I dont speak for everyone but a lower model count table top game is just what I need. We talk about breathing new life, I for one have a handful of friends that have been enjoying my collection and wanting to play, but a $100 investment in books before you even get to the models is very off putting.

As for price, I can justify the cost if I dont need as many models, I just bought the Dragon Ogres last night for a Pathfinder game, and the level of detail is amazing, the extra bits, the options, I dont know what other company Im gonna get that from. I would use GW models to proxy other games in a heart beat.
Those Dark Elf Witches, would love a box! $50 (online) for 10, ouch, yes, BUT if you only need 5 for a table top game and could make 5 of each, $50 for the enjoyment of painting and kit bashing those models would be fine imo. Knowing you need 40 for a current game is ball busting..

Having said that though, if the game is to be played large skirmish than ya, price needs to drop alot, make core cheaper and recoup that money on the large center piece models.

Absolutely, and this is why going with smaller unit sizes and possibly skirmish style are sensible moves. But none of this requires bubble worlds or fantasy space marines. I can deal with drastic overhaul of the rules, I'd probably even welcome it, but destruction of the setting is a deal breaker.

So much this. I'd love for GW to refocus on smaller games(if they're genuinely not capable of supporting big and small at the same time any more for Fantasy), but the only reason I've stayed invested with GW for so long despite their abysmal business decisions and awful customer relations is their IP. If they take that away - and there's no point in folk dissembling, literally ending the world then advancing the timeline a couple of centuries off-screen to come back with new factions is effectively scrapping the Warhammer setting - then the question is whether they gain enough people from A; 40K players who like the idea of Fantasy Space Marines, B; old Fantasy players who don't care about the setting at all, and C; totally new people, to offset those they'll lose as a result of removing the one thing left that was keeping them around.

**JohnHwangDD**

I distinctly remember planning an Empire Army for 5th, based around an Lord on Emperor Dragon supported by a handful of Handgunners and another handful of Halberds. But that would still have been 2 dozen models.

Lizardmen would have been similar with a SMP, skinks and Stegadons.