Switch Theme:

Has GW lost the ability/talent/innovation to create new games?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

First and foremost, I don't play GW games anymore. Historics is more my thing these days, but I still keep one eye on GW developments.

And as people know, the new Necromunda is with us. And it looks fantastic.

And the re-launch of Space Hulk a few years back, brought a tear to my eye. The miniatures and tiles were amongst the best I've ever seen.

And Blood Bowl looks pretty damn good. And if they do Mordheim, I've no doubt that will look good as well. And play good.

I used to play these games when they first came out, and the gameplay is superb.

BUT, and it's a big but...

These are remakes. And no matter how wonderful they are, they're remakes.

Where are the game designers and the talent to give us new games like Bloodbowl, Space Hulk, and Necromunda. For all its faults, GW used to be pretty good at trying something new in the 1980s and 1990s.

They can't keep doing remakes forever, and maybe there is a new game I've overlooked?

What's dakka's view on this?

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in us
Monstrous Master Moulder




Rust belt

Honestly I believe people buy these games off nostalgia (the older gamers) and the young gamers just because he heard the 40 year olds talking about it. My buddies ( all of us are 40+) bought into BB and I did not. I though B.B. sucked back in the 90’s and after a few games my buddies stopped playing because they forgot how bad they hated it before. But just like anything, cloths, games, styles, etc etc everything seems to come back around.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




ShadeSpire's pretty new for them.
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 Chute82 wrote:
Honestly I believe people buy these games off nostalgia (the older gamers) and the young gamers just because he heard the 40 year olds talking about it. My buddies ( all of us are 40+) bought into BB and I did not. I though B.B. sucked back in the 90’s and after a few games my buddies stopped playing because they forgot how bad they hated it before. But just like anything, cloths, games, styles, etc etc everything seems to come back around.


Nostalgia can only take a company so far IMO


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Baron Klatz wrote:
ShadeSpire's pretty new for them.


No disrespect to Shadespire fans, but I had a good look at it, and it doesn't look much to write home about. The Skeletons are fantastic, but the gameplay sounds like it's being done better elsewhere.

For example, Osprey Games do a lot of this kinda stuff.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/11 12:37:05


"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




UK

I don't think GW lacks innovation, but I think that they have a large fanbase that remembers a lot of great legacy games. They'd be fools not to bring those games back and make good on the market and marketing that's already there.

Don't forget many of these games are re-releases that the fanbase has been after for years so it makes good business sense to go after them first. They don't have to invest as much nor take as big a risk in bringing them to the market.

I think that coupled with their new focus on tighter rules will make for some great times ahead for gamers.
   
Made in gb
[MOD]
Et In Arcadia Ego





Canterbury

Silver Tower ?

Battle for Calth ?

Burning of Prospero ?

Shadows over Hammerhal ?

Assassinorum: Execution Force ?

Gore Chosen ?

Lost Patrol ?

Stormcloud Attack ?




Yes several of them "trade off of", so to speak, the warhammer quest name from yore but mechanics wise they're certainly different.

.... do any games really use d12s anymore ..? Got a player with a great axe in a p'finder campaign but I don't think we use them for owt else these days ?





The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
A great Hope fell
You heard no noise
The Ruin was within.
 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 Overread wrote:
I don't think GW lacks innovation, but I think that they have a large fanbase that remembers a lot of great legacy games. They'd be fools not to bring those games back and make good on the market and marketing that's already there.

Don't forget many of these games are re-releases that the fanbase has been after for years so it makes good business sense to go after them first. They don't have to invest as much nor take as big a risk in bringing them to the market.

I think that coupled with their new focus on tighter rules will make for some great times ahead for gamers.


Don't get me wrong - chasing the nostalgia dollar is a good short-term move, but it's just that. Short term.

Dreadfleet was and is a favourite of mine, but the reaction to it seem to be muted, especially on dakka.

Perhaps they're afraid of getting their fingers burned again?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 reds8n wrote:
Silver Tower ?

Battle for Calth ?

Burning of Prospero ?

Shadows over Hammerhal ?

Assassinorum: Execution Force ?

Gore Chosen ?

Lost Patrol ?

Stormcloud Attack ?




Yes several of them "trade off of", so to speak, the warhammer quest name from yore but mechanics wise they're certainly different.

.... do any games really use d12s anymore ..? Got a player with a great axe in a p'finder campaign but I don't think we use them for owt else these days ?






Several of those games you list look fantastic, but for want of a better expression, they feel a bit 'samey.'

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but none of them have alternative activation, do they?

It's a more common feature in games these days, and it's one I like

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/11 13:11:26


"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in us
Auspicious Aspiring Champion of Chaos




Also remember that they are beholden to stock holders. Going off the beaten path is a gamble. Gambling does not make stock holders happy.
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka





West Michigan, deep in Whitebread, USA

Frankly, games like Epic (or in this case Titanicus), Blood Bowl and Necromunda might as well count as new games. I mean come on, just because some old grognards have ancient collections doesn't mean games like that should never be able to be bought ever again. I am 35 and have been with GW products for 20 years, and I don't even have a collection of Epic stuff.

So who am I to complain if I can 'soon' play a version of Epic 40k that doesn't need to be bought from either Ebay or have every new purchase shipped to me from England (i.e. from Vanguard, who has the best selection to play Epic other than Onslaught minis here in the US).

Many of the games GW is cashing in nostalgia with are older than half the gamers buying them nowadays, so I'm actually happy to see them again, even if they are 'retreads'.



"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."  
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Baltimore, MD

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
No disrespect to Shadespire fans, but I had a good look at it, and it doesn't look much to write home about. The Skeletons are fantastic, but the gameplay sounds like it's being done better elsewhere.

For example, Osprey Games do a lot of this kinda stuff.


Have you actually played it? Shadespire has a lot of stuff in it that's clearly pinched from other games (how many truly unique mechanics are there?), but it does not play exactly like any game I've played yet. the deck building aspect, the board creation aspect, and the limited activations all lead to a lot of interesting choices. I wouldn't dismiss it until you play it. Yeah, the actual combat mechanics are lifted from x-wing, but that's not a bad thing!

There's a whiff of "no true Scotsman" in this thread. GW has released plenty of new games, mostly notably Age of Sigmar. Most of their box games didn't take off, but people do play them.

It sounds like your questioning if GW can still make super original games that you will love and will be popular. That's a tough question, and the answer is probably "not likely." They haven't created a game not tied to a prior world since LotR, and shadespire is one of the few games they've made that don't clearly mine the Talisman/Warhammer quest vein, or the specialist games vein.

My Painted Armies
: Co. B, 37th Praetorian IG: 11,000pts
Cygnar: 350pts
KOW Ogres: 4500 points
Loyalist Emperor's Children: 2500 points 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




UK

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Don't get me wrong - chasing the nostalgia dollar is a good short-term move, but it's just that. Short term.

Dreadfleet was and is a favourite of mine, but the reaction to it seem to be muted, especially on dakka.

Perhaps they're afraid of getting their fingers burned again?



It's only short term if GW design it as short term. Under the old CEO Dreadfleet was short term by design. It was a one off "all in one box" game designed to not require any further support after release from GW. It made some waves, but because of its design and the market its aimed at it was going to die off, esp once GW stopped selling the boxed sets and thus any semblance of long term support was gone.

These more recent releases are at least aimed at being medium to long term games. GW is putting dedicated teams behind them which means continued support; this in turn means more fanbase support. Gamers HATE buying into a game franchise that will die off - that is stop getting new releases, stop getting updates, stop getting marketing and thus steadily dry up in sales and new gamers.


I think GW is instead seeing the value in medium to long term game support and community interaction. Blood Bowl and Shadspire are both getting releases and Necromunda also has more releases on the table planned out.




And yes as said these might as well be near new releases; the market has indeed moved on and its been many years since these older games were around. Furthermore GW is revising the rules and systems so even for long term fans there are changes to get into.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Silver Tower / Battle for Calth / Burning of Prospero / Shadows over Hammerhal / Assassinorum: Execution Force / Gore Chosen / Lost Patrol / Stormcloud Attack ?

In fairness, Lost Patrol is also a re-release, but its original release was so quiet I missed it and know no-one who bought it first time round, so I'm happy for it to stay in the list. It's also good fun, where the tile placement is a key dynamic of the game. It's different, and it's fun.

Stormcloud attack was different. I hated it, but it was different.

Gangs of Comorragh is great fun, and plays not SO different from X-WIng (feel free to disagree). Again, a different game dynamic.

Gore Chosen also feels different, and again has been great fun.

I'm still building Calth & Prospero, so haven't played these yet.

Assassinorum didn't grab me. I grabbed it for the miniatures, but I don't rule out a beer and "Let's give it a go".

Nor have I played Silver Tower or Hammerhal, so can't comment on these.

Dreadfleet & Sigmar are both of course original. I enjoyed Dreadfleet and dig it out from time to time. I've toyed with Sigmar, but still have healthy local Fantasy 7, so haven't played it much.

All told, there ARE some new games, and some of them play well. I am happy to find the OP's comment unfounded, in my experience.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/11 22:46:50


 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






I think that right now, GW is trying to regain some of what it lost.

Innovative?

Maybe not.

But they do seem to actually be trying to bring back some of the old veterans they did such a good job of losing over the past decade.

Some may never fully come back - I sold off my Dark Angels and have no intention of ever getting into 40K again.

In part, I made a choice - I could repurpose my Warhammer Fantasy armies for Kings of War, but had no use for the Dark Angels, outside of a game that I had not played since... well, meeting the girl I am now married to - who also plays Kings of War.

And I have always been a bigger player of fantasy than Grim Dark SF.

A friend of mine that has jumped with both feet into the new 40K tells me that it was a bit like going back to 2nd edition. He preferred 2nd edition to everything that came after, while I liked 3e better than anything before or after.

I liked 3e 40k better than 2e for the same reasons that he liked 2e more than 3e.... It was more of a wargame.

I am not as offended by not liking the next to most recent editions of 40K, like I was for the last gasps of Warhammer Fantasy - Age of Sigmar is not what killed Fantasy - it was just GW admitting that they had killed it.

Age of Sigmar just catches the anger that the slow death of WHFB left behind.(Plus, the original free rules really did suck.)

On the other hand... I am kind of embarrassed to admit that I have already pre-ordered Underhive.

Innovation is not all that some people think it's cracked up to be - 4e D&D was innovative, Pathfinder was not. Pathfinder is still around, 4e has been replaced by a less innovative 5e.

An engineer will tell you that innovation fails nine times out of ten. A biologist will tell you that engineers are optimists.

I will take a less innovative game that I enjoy over an innovative game that I loathe.

If Newcromunda is as good as I hope - or even fairly close, I may even give up on grousing about AoS....

The Auld Grump

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in gb
Most Glorious Grey Seer






Age of Sigmar. New.

Shadespire. New.

Dreadfleet. New.

Deathwatch Overkill. New.

Gangs of Commoragh. New.

So to answer the OP? Evidence suggests not, no.

Fed up for Scalpers? Why not join us? 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Necromunda is a new game. It shares a setting with the old editions, but it's not simply a reprint of the rules.


And to add to Grotsnik's list, Betrayal at Calth, Burning of Prospero, Imperial Knight Renegade, Officio Assassinorum: Execution Force, two kinds of Warhammer Quest and Stormcloud Attack. I've not played the Horus Heresy games, but all the rest are fun games.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/11/11 23:44:16


 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Bird from Hell






Yes, GW has lost the talent, if they ever had any in the first place. They can technically create new games (something anyone can do), but the only ones that are at all worth playing are just reboxings of GW's existing IP. Spending a few minutes writing some rules to pretend that your flyer discount box set is not just a discount box, rules that hardly anyone will ever play and most people will have completely forgotten about within a few months, is not something worthy of praise. And half of them don't even have new models, just literal repackaging of GW's existing kits for a clear minimum-effort product. GW hasn't managed to put out a truly new and innovative success in decades.

In fact, I'd go beyond your comments about the secondary games and argue that GW doesn't even have the talent to maintain its core IP anymore. 8th edition 40k is a dumpster fire of bad game design, following the dumpster fire of bad game design that was 6th and 7th editions. Sure, it managed to fix some of the most obvious flaws with 7th edition, but people give GW way too much credit for that. Most 40k players could have fixed things like invisibility and formations with a few minutes of effort, and nothing about GW's solutions to those problems is particularly innovative or elegant. And in every part of the game where GW has gone beyond applying the obvious solution, into designing new mechanics, the new work is utter . It's the work of talentless cash cow milkers who should have been fired 10+ years ago. They'd arguably have been better off reprinting 5th edition and pretending that the entire recent history of the game never happened.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in nl
Moustache-twirling Princeps




We'll find out soon enough eh.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Age of Sigmar. New.

Shadespire. New.

Dreadfleet. New.

Deathwatch Overkill. New.

Gangs of Commoragh. New.

So to answer the OP? Evidence suggests not, no.


Yeah. Look by now everyone and their mother knows my feelings about AoS as a setting, but there's no denying it was a substantial departure in terms of rules and plenty of people seem to like them so I assume they're not drastically more flawed on the whole than any other game, and despite having zero desire to play it Shadespire is a total departure from the norm for GW, even old "more creative" GW of the 80's and 90's - not only a game focused nigh-exclusively on short-form competitive play but also designed from the off with an organised play system in mind and obviously intended as a direct challenge to a segment of the market presently dominated by a competitor(I mean gak, old-GW wouldn't even admit they had competition). The boardgames they've been coming out with, while sometimes a bit thin since they've largely been used as vehicles for flogging big boxes of models, aren't bad by any stretch.

I can't say I like every decision GW have made recently, even after their wee internal revolution, but these days they're not even close to the ossified, creaking, hidebound entity that shut down every avenue of creative output possible in order to focus on their two "core games" and then still managed those so badly that one was taken out the back and shot.

I need to acquire plastic Skavenslaves, can you help?
I have a blog now, evidently. Featuring the Alternative Mordheim Model Megalist.

"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






AoS is just a very watered down version of warhammer, there was nothing innovative or new about it. Part of what really annoys me about it is the half assed nature of the game,. it and 8th 40k to me seem to be a massive step backward in game design.
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Bird from Hell






 thekingofkings wrote:
AoS is just a very watered down version of warhammer, there was nothing innovative or new about it. Part of what really annoys me about it is the half assed nature of the game,. it and 8th 40k to me seem to be a massive step backward in game design.


And let's not forget that AoS on release day was a complete disaster that nearly killed off GW's entire fantasy line. It's only after a couple of years of work to salvage the mess that AoS is even remotely playable. So let's not give GW too much credit for game development with AoS.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I could see that complaint at AoS' beginning but it's come a pretty long way from it's humble start as a simple game set-up with the 4 pages of rules. (That and piling-in, wound allocation as well as warscrolls for quick rule references are pretty innovative for a GW game.)

To each his own though.
It's only after a couple of years of work to salvage the mess that AoS

Really just a little over one year, if that, as Facebook feedback,quick faqs and the Ghb fixed the worst competitive problems.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/12 03:07:50


 
   
Made in es
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets




Vigo. Spain.

If Videogames and Movies can do it, why not GW?

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Myrtle Creek, OR

Betrayal at Calth and Deathwatch Overkill are actually pretty decent self-contained games. I picked both up and have played through the campaign for each. Everyone who I've played them with thought the games themselves were engaging and they liked them enough to play full campaigns.

Betrayal @ Calth uses alternating activation.

Also, Newcromunda looks to be an adaptation of 40k8 which is, itself, an adaptation of AoS---both fine rule sets for doing what every war game pretty much does:
Move. Shoot. Close Combat. Morale (with possible addition of psionics, magic or ECM as another add-on activity).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/12 04:46:42


 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Bird from Hell






Baron Klatz wrote:
(That and piling-in, wound allocation as well as warscrolls for quick rule references are pretty innovative for a GW game.)


Those aren't innovative at all.

Pile-in moves are just a copy of what 40k has already been doing for decades. Changing the timing of it slightly (because initiative doesn't exist anymore) is not an innovative mechanic, it's just the most straightforward implementation of an existing mechanic.

Wound allocation is just the simplest possible method: the owner removes models until there are no wounds left. You might as well claim that rolling a D6 is an innovative mechanic by that standard.

Warscrolls are not a game mechanic, they're just a slight change in how the rules are presented. Consolidating (almost) everything onto a single page is not a new idea, and arguably it's not even a good idea because it replaces USRs with each unit having its own special snowflake rules.

Really just a little over one year, if that, as Facebook feedback,quick faqs and the Ghb fixed the worst competitive problems.


Ok, a little shorter than I remember, but the basic point stands: the game as GW originally created it, with all of its "innovation", was an unplayable mess on release day that nearly killed off GW's entire presence in the fantasy market. The fact that they averted a complete loss at some later point doesn't change the fact that AoS is not an example of good game design.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 privateer4hire wrote:
Also, Newcromunda looks to be an adaptation of 40k8 which is, itself, an adaptation of AoS---both fine rule sets for doing what every war game pretty much does:
Move. Shoot. Close Combat. Morale (with possible addition of psionics, magic or ECM as another add-on activity).


Disagree. 8th edition 40k is absolute that only looks good because 7th edition was borderline unplayable by the end. It's full of incredibly stupid design choices, poorly balanced, very limited in strategic depth, and generally another edition where the rules are the masochistic endurance test you slog through as the price of using the models and fluff you love.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/12 04:52:43


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On wound allocation the fact that your opponent decides where the wounds go and what models are removed seems more impressive an idea than you're giving it credit for as it causes a shift in tactics and how a unit to unit battle can go as your opponent can still control the fight even on the defensive.

Warscrolls also allow " special snowflake" rules as well. Remember all the instant win special rules that were proven false at AoS' beginning? Those couldn't have happened if everything was bland.


the game as GW originally created it, with all of its "innovation",


Really I think it was less a case of wanting to be innovative and more GW wanting to start from basic scratch and build a game anew over time as they added to it. Which certainly has worked out. (Though the start and Kirby's lingering influence was a undeniably rocky start)

Also, "unplayable" is incorrect as the game today is the same just with much more bells and whistles. You mean it was uncompetitive and a poor tournament game. Otherwise it worked fine as Open play which is still supported and used by players.


   
Made in us
[DCM]
Bird from Hell






Baron Klatz wrote:
On wound allocation the fact that your opponent decides where the wounds go and what models are removed seems more impressive an idea than you're giving it credit for as it causes a shift in tactics and how a unit to unit battle can go as your opponent can still control the fight even on the defensive.


The fact that a mechanic has strategy involved does not make it innovative. "The owner of the unit removes casualties of their choice" is the simplest wound allocation mechanic possible, an obvious option that is regularly used elsewhere and was often suggested by the players. GW's own games have even used it in the past.

And, to be clear, I like the mechanic. I think it's an improvement over the more complicated mechanics that GW has used in the past, and have advocated for it in previous editions of 40k. But it isn't innovative.

Warscrolls also allow " special snowflake" rules as well. Remember all the instant win special rules that were proven false at AoS' beginning? Those couldn't have happened if everything was bland.


What? You're missing the point here. It's not about bland vs. interesting, it's having each unit have literally identical rules with different names. Unit A has "hateful rage" and re-rolls 1s to hit, Unit B has "ultrasmurf tactics" and re-rolls 1s to hit, etc. The warscroll mechanic, by removing USRs out of a desire to put everything on a single page for each unit, makes this problem considerably worse.

Also, "unplayable" is incorrect as the game today is the same just with much more bells and whistles. You mean it was uncompetitive and a poor tournament game. Otherwise it worked fine as Open play which is still supported and used by players.


It only works "fine" in open play because you don't play the game as-written, you play a custom version of the game with self-imposed limits on army construction. If you play strict RAW and choose the optimum strategy at all points the winner of every game is the player with the most money to spend on GW models.

(And that's on top of idiotic stuff like models on sufficiently large bases being unable to be engaged in melee combat because the rules require contact between the models, not between the bases.)

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/12 05:55:00


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





it's having each unit have literally identical rules with different names. Unit A has "hateful rage" and re-rolls 1s to hit, Unit B has "ultrasmurf tactics" and re-rolls 1s to hit, etc. 

That's exactly what I meant. AoS does have cases of what you mean but that's mostly with the standard soldiers where as heroes, monsters and the flavorful units can do things like zombies turning enemy slain units, giants falling down, steamtanks performing self repairs, Overlords grappling hooking to a new position, Fyreslayer heroes staring down an enemy to bring down their bravery, etc.

It only works "fine" in open play because you don't play the game as-written, you play a custom version of the game with self-imposed limits on army construction. If you play strict RAW and choose the optimum strategy at all points the winner of every game is the player with the most money to spend on GW models. 


Also exactly what I meant, it was bad for tourneys but fine for friendly games and gentlemen agreements. Definitely not a bad way to play in my book when among friends.
   
Made in au
Deadshot Weapon Moderati





Newcastle NSW

 reds8n wrote:
Silver Tower ?

Battle for Calth ?

Burning of Prospero ?

Shadows over Hammerhal ?

Assassinorum: Execution Force ?

Gore Chosen ?

Lost Patrol ?

Stormcloud Attack ?




Yes several of them "trade off of", so to speak, the warhammer quest name from yore but mechanics wise they're certainly different.

.... do any games really use d12s anymore ..? Got a player with a great axe in a p'finder campaign but I don't think we use them for owt else these days ?






Several of those games you list look fantastic, but for want of a better expression, they feel a bit 'samey.'

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but none of them have alternative activation, do they?

It's a more common feature in games these days, and it's one I like



So it's not that GW can't create new games, it's that you don't like the new games

The Four Winds Tribe has returned to claim the Underhive for House Escher 
   
Made in jp
Longtime Dakkanaut





You should listen to the interview James Hewitt did for Necromunda with drive thru fm. It goes into a lot of this stuff. For many years even under the new management GW boardgames were explicitly pitched as a miniature delivery system with designers explicitly being told not to slave over these projects too much.

It has been easy to see the Hewitt games which had more put into them: betrayal at Calth, Gorechosen and silver tower being three classic examples. Compare them to stormcloud attack, the knight game and gangs of commoragh and you can easily see the difference. While those games are fun enough the Hewitt designed games are clearly a step above. The reason is that Hewitt refused to do half arsed game design.

According to him the ethos has changed (perhaps as a result of the success of silver tower and bloodbowl) The first game that has been built under this new ethos is Shadespire.
I am sure that most will agree that Shadespire is a big improvement for GW. I am looking forward to seeing what Dave Sanders (that game's designer) does next.


We also have one more original Hewitt game coming next year for GW as well as the revamped adeptus Titanicus.
So essentially the answer will come in the next couple of years.

Is Shadespire the first step on the path to greater things or is it a fluke and we will go back to games that are ok but never remarkable?
   
Made in gb
Screaming Shining Spear





In a rare display of me not blaming GW for their general malaise I think the problem lies with players

There is no reason for GW to make an effort if people keep buying subpar products (not the mini's as swirly gak aside they are solid) from them rather than looking elsewhere but for reasons unknown people seem GW brand loyal to fault

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/12 10:06:26


"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED." 
   
Made in es
Krazed Killa Kan




Barcelona, Spain

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Several of those games you list look fantastic, but for want of a better expression, they feel a bit 'samey.'

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but none of them have alternative activation, do they?

It's a more common feature in games these days, and it's one I like


I'm pretty sure that both HH games did have alternate actiivations, same as gorechosen (which was only one model, so hard to make a IGOUGO properly)
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: