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.

Is it me or does anyone else find it very odd that the last 3-4 months has been devoted to Warhammer 40k? Will Fantasy be given a similar treatment? What do you all think?

An attempt to pad the financial reports by back loading it with the better selling system?

Fantasy had the Wood Elves out only a few months back. With 40K then following strong on its heels plus with a new edition which has likely increased the focus on 40K.

There is also some argument that 40K is getting more attention because of its higher selling numbers and the need to pad up the numbers; although this would have been choices made many months ago (takes a while to design and make products for mass production).

Fantasy needs not only some new models but also a big slew of advertising and marketing by GW to help boost its sales. There's some hope/expectation that the wind down of the Lord of the Rings line as the 3rd film comes out will leave shop space and marketing space to allow fantasy to get more attention (heck wouldn't surprise me if fantasy getting a touch less attention was part of a marketing plan to allow the LotR line to get more - at least initially when you consider that they are roughly targeting a similar market).

I don't think that fantasy will get the same treatment as 40k. More people play 40k so more money for gw.

I would really like to see games workshop do a 3 or 4 month straight release to do brettonia, beastmen and skaven to finish up the updated armies but I doubt that will happen.
Even the brettonia rumours are constantly being pushed back and are barely any rumours about them in the first place.

Just want a new skaven hardcover army book and some new models lol

It makes me sad that 40k gets so much more attention. I mean, I started with 40k, and have gotten into Fantasy recently, and the more I play Fantasy, the more I like some aspects of it over 40k. Also, Tomb Kings need some models, and Brettonians need to hurry up and come out.

Some people might argue that all the attention that 40k is getting isn't very good for the game. I'm quite glad that fantasy is a lot more stable.

Thats what I heard. Fantasy needs to get some love though and soon, as at this rate it is really dumb that GW keeps screwing fantasy over in favor of 40k. Too much attention will push people away, and I think its a stupid move just after releasing the new 40k rulebook.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
Will Fantasy be given a similar treatment? What do you all think?

I hope not.

Take that Wolfthing. Awfully priced. Ugly, poorly designed, close to no details, doesn't look even barely functionnal.

Just looks like that flyer was originally built by Mek Specialist Garlen Tygrol who tried to build his own Viper (Mork II) out of an old cockpit, a couple spare engines... he told his grots he needed a frame, and was just appalled when he saw what they'd found... a dumpster bin. He proceded to thouroughly kick their asses...
"What am I going to do with that piece of crap?" (even Orks have standards)
"Hey... why not?"
Specialist Tygrol just proceded to convert the flyer to a mini-landa, and called her the StormOrk (Mork I).

During the Great War, the StormOrk was looted by Space Wolves, who found that flyer to be wonderful and quite elegant (they're Space Wolves...) and named her "FluffyPuppy". They procedeed to build more of these highly advanced ships (remember, they're just Space Wolves...), and found the original name engraved in the ship's hull.

The StormWolf was born.

It's all about forging a narrative, isn't it?

Yes lets look at where fantasy is.

8th is 4 years old. For the most part there are some annoying rules (Cannons, Steadfast, BoTWD, the entire skaven armybook, and Portaglyph to name a few.) But the game is pretty well balanced an army can win (provided a good general and list concept.)


If it comes to army books only 4 need to be powered up (Beastmen, Brettonia, Tomb Kings and Orcs and Goblins) 1 needs to be powered down (skaven), Selfishly I would alsso like Lizards to be more interesting.

All the armies require some finecast and metal models to be re-released. But the vast majority of these are various character sculpts where releasing in-box solutions such as the high elf prince/noble or archmage makes sense.

Overall the game is in fine health 40k was in trouble and they responded. Next summer is probably ours as we should have a book or 2 over then next year and then the new edition should release.

Brettonians are coming up soon, as they're in the most need of a new book/models. And Skaven and Beastmen shouldn't be too far behind.

Also, yeah they need to fix Cannons. Those are obnoxious.

^ not sure why you think the entire skaven book is annoying rules wise? Also not sure why you think that it is so over powered. Maybe just bad experience with them but I don't think that they are over powered or anything. Just saying lol

 chiefbigredman wrote:
^ not sure why you think the entire skaven book is annoying rules wise? Also not sure why you think that it is so over powered. Maybe just bad experience with them but I don't think that they are over powered or anything. Just saying lol

No i'm a skaven player. The book is a bit ridiculously complicated. So i would like to see the books weirdness fixed a bit so it didn't require 3-4 cross referenced rules per turn.

 captain collius wrote:

 chiefbigredman wrote:
^ not sure why you think the entire skaven book is annoying rules wise? Also not sure why you think that it is so over powered. Maybe just bad experience with them but I don't think that they are over powered or anything. Just saying lol

No i'm a skaven player. The book is a bit ridiculously complicated. So i would like to see the books weirdness fixed a bit so it didn't require 3-4 cross referenced rules per turn.

FAQ is annoying but I find I know the book pretty well so I don't have to be to confused

Whats the big problem with cannons?

pm713 wrote:
Whats the big problem with cannons?

the cheap points costs and the fact that they are str 10 doing d6 wounds have pretty much invalidated monsters universally. Its a big debate cannons should be powerful and they only hit in a straight line but if you look at any competitive scene you will see a major lack of monsters because of that reason. No one wants to lose 200+ points on turn one because someone single shot it with a cannon. I disagree that cannons should be lowered in strength but for monsters i really think doing d3 or d3+1 wounds may be a better solution to prevent the single shot dead monster.

 captain collius wrote:
8th is 4 years old. For the most part there are some annoying rules (Cannons, Steadfast, BoTWD, the entire skaven armybook, and Portaglyph to name a few.) But the game is pretty well balanced an army can win (provided a good general and list concept.)

The age of a game doesn't matter much. In fact, as gamers it shouldn't matter at all unless it's bad. I just looked at some convention schedules coming up and I saw games I hadn't played in over 20 years. And it's the same rules. Further, you mentioned some ITEMS. Those could take one sentence in one FAQ to fix. OR, you could just house rule it yourself. Hardly needs a 500 page book for that.

I'm really impressed with how stable 8th is.

I don't think the power level is innappropriate; it's a big old lump of steel travelling extremely fast. Frankly getting shot through the head *should* be a one-hit kill, even for a Dragon. I don't think that D6 Wounds is unreasonable force, and while S10 could easily be S8, few monsters have a Toughness high enough for there to be any difference.

I think the accuracy is a far bigger problem because they are still working on the assumption that you cannot pre-measure. A cannon is effectively BS4/5 depending on base size, that ignores all negative modifiers to hit. It could be aiming at the nose of a Goblin at 60", hidden within a forest, in a unit and under the effects of Nightshroud. And it would still have a hit rate of over 50%? I admit I have not learnt the maths to memory but it's far higher than an emplaced piece of medieval/napoleonic artillery has any right to be.

There is no reason that they should not use the BS stat other than making them weaker. The mechanics need to be updated to account for pre-measuring and there should be more counters to it than staying out of sight or hiding behind fences. A cannon shot should suffer some loss of accuracy when it is firing through cover, units, magic etc.

 DukeRustfield wrote:

 captain collius wrote:
8th is 4 years old. For the most part there are some annoying rules (Cannons, Steadfast, BoTWD, the entire skaven armybook, and Portaglyph to name a few.) But the game is pretty well balanced an army can win (provided a good general and list concept.)

The age of a game doesn't matter much. In fact, as gamers it shouldn't matter at all unless it's bad. I just looked at some convention schedules coming up and I saw games I hadn't played in over 20 years. And it's the same rules. Further, you mentioned some ITEMS. Those could take one sentence in one FAQ to fix. OR, you could just house rule it yourself. Hardly needs a 500 page book for that.

I'm really impressed with how stable 8th is.

I agree. 8th is very solid imo. The BoTWD is pretty powerful but not unbeatable, only demons really have an issue with it but that is a problem with the demon book vs the high elf book. Steadfast isnt broken and i play ogres. I am NEVER steadfast and still manage to break those blocks that keep steadfast. What about the all chariot WoC army? they never have steadfast but still manage to win games.

Oh and the skaven book is not busted whatsoever, its old yes and needs an update but its not OP if anything its a weaker.

skaven and beastmen NEED updates as there are virtually no competitive builds for them anymore but I do see tomb kings and brets winning games when handled by experianced players. Hell brets won best general at the crossroads GT. Tomb kings and brets need updates because of age, mostly brets.

I think if anything the 9th edition of fantasy will be COMPLETELY different or it will be like 7th was for 40k and just be some minor changes no major reworking. If they tried to change it moderatly then i think the game will go to hell.

Steadfast needs to be tweaked to help cavalry, also if you are hit in the flank with a large enough unit, you should lose steadfast. Its no broken but it needs a few changes.

With Cannons I feel that there should be range modifiers, like for each X number on inches the shot is at -1 to hit and -1 strength so for example if it was every 10 inches if the cannons target was 20 inches away it suffers -2 to its BS and -2 to its strength...just my opinion its probably a rubbish idea

 DukeBadham wrote:
With Cannons I feel that there should be range modifiers, like for each X number on inches the shot is at -1 to hit and -1 strength so for example if it was every 10 inches if the cannons target was 20 inches away it suffers -2 to its BS and -2 to its strength...just my opinion its probably a rubbish idea

cannons dont use BS. So...

 Rommel44 wrote:
Steadfast needs to be tweaked to help cavalry, also if you are hit in the flank with a large enough unit, you should lose steadfast. Its no broken but it needs a few changes.

Why does cavalry need help? I've seen this idea pop up a few times and it still baffles me. Are people really thinking that Silver Helms and Dark Riders are not already the dominant Core units for their armies? Do Knights need to be made even better than they already are in comparison to State Troops? Or are people really thinking that Demigryph, Mournfang and Skullcrushers are struggling right now?
Boar Boyz are fairly mediocre, and Cold Ones don't see much use outside of a delivery system. But otherwise cavalry seems to be thriving right now. Steadfast or not, cavalry is still the preferred Core choice for nearly every army that can take them, and even the Special or Rare selections see regular use even in hard tourney lists.

Cavalry is a choice because armies that can take them usually have very low point core. So it's a way of getting your core tax out of the way and having some fast, high armor units--that don't do a whole lot. Silver Helms cost twice as much as the other core and can get 2+/6+ at M9.

But you don't see a lot of marauder cavalry because WoC has access to Chaos Warriors and such.

I agree that 8th is a great edition and if I'm honest, I hope we don't get what 40k is getting right now. All WFB needs is some updates to the old books as mentioned and we're all good. Yes there are some 'bad' rules but there are always a few in any edition. Given how happy I am with the state of WFB right now I'd say I'm pretty happy to stick with what we have rather than roll the dice and potentially end up with an allies matrix, fliers, etc, etc.

I think 8th is amazing.
It is fun and balanced.
Being my love of Skaven I would love to see plague monks get a new sculpt and maybe some pox rat cavalry.
But all we need are a few updates and new sculpts and fantasy will be just fine.

 namiel wrote:

 DukeBadham wrote:
With Cannons I feel that there should be range modifiers, like for each X number on inches the shot is at -1 to hit and -1 strength so for example if it was every 10 inches if the cannons target was 20 inches away it suffers -2 to its BS and -2 to its strength...just my opinion its probably a rubbish idea

cannons dont use BS. So...

Its been a while since I played sorry :(

 Throt wrote:
I think 8th is amazing.
It is fun and balanced.
Being my love of Skaven I would love to see plague monks get a new sculpt and maybe some pox rat cavalry.
But all we need are a few updates and new sculpts and fantasy will be just fine.

And a new skaven book.

 Rommel44 wrote:
Steadfast needs to be tweaked to help cavalry, also if you are hit in the flank with a large enough unit, you should lose steadfast. Its no broken but it needs a few changes.

The problem isn't cavalry, its human cavalry, somewhere along the line GW decreed that all humans must be 3s across the board and anyone wanting to change this suffers pain of execution.

I play alot of 40k and WFB is way more balanced. Sure the magic phase can't be erratic. I play Beastmen in WFB and I can win games. Steadfast can be annoying but I see why its there. Frankly without it my Gors would be unplayable.


Calvary is decent but they can be hit or miss as well. They could be better. Maybe they pass through a unit if they win combat res not overrun where they could engage another unit but they aren't held up by the combat. I don't know I sometimes find if cavalry doesn't get they flank they often just get bogged down and neutered.

Cannons are silly. I wish I had something that accurate in 40k. They are damn near laser guided. They should loss strength for every 12" they travel or just be less accurate. Maybe they scatter 1D6 they resolve it. Crap almost anything would help with them.

Overall I think its a really great game. Those are the only things that jump out to me. I find it need far superior tactics to win. I run a heavy minotaur list and frankly it depends on the movement phase and sometimes the magic phase if I win a game. If I move well and anticipate well I win. When I don't I lose. Now sometimes the magic phase beats me and I can't stop that (I don't take alot of magic). Sometimes its overwhelming and sometimes its a total non factor.

I would like to see steadfast become "Unit takes half CR as a Ld penalty"

There is something to be said for having 2 more guys than your opponents but if they just slaughtered 10 of yours for no casualties in return it's gonna be a bit disheartening.

This keeps a tangible benefit "Oh I lost by 4 but I'm only at a minus 2" while not making it silly "Oh you slaughtered us by 12 wounds without taking a single casualty but we have slightly more men than you so we're fine"