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.

 nathan2004 wrote:
I think a lot of us that have existing collections face a rebasing dilemma if they change base size, be very interesting to see how this is handled hopefully through movement trays.

That way it doesn't stomp on new players collections and allows stuff that's more dynamic to be ported over if players wish from AoS on larger bases. I think this makes the most sense.

It's already handled. Look up Oathmark movement trays for 20mm bases.

Oathmark uses 25mm for all non-monstrous infantry. When it came out, it took all the laser-cut MDF movement tray companies out there about five minutes to start offering 125mm frontage trays for 20mm square bases.

Just that formation changes are an essential part of the game, so you need a tray for every possible formation you ant to use

 Psychopomp wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
I think a lot of us that have existing collections face a rebasing dilemma if they change base size, be very interesting to see how this is handled hopefully through movement trays.

That way it doesn't stomp on new players collections and allows stuff that's more dynamic to be ported over if players wish from AoS on larger bases. I think this makes the most sense.

It's already handled. Look up Oathmark movement trays for 20mm bases.

Oathmark uses 25mm for all non-monstrous infantry. When it came out, it took all the laser-cut MDF movement tray companies out there about five minutes to start offering 125mm frontage trays for 20mm square bases.

Thank you

 streetsamurai wrote:

Chikout wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 herjan1987 wrote:
I run a small news page for Warhammer The old World and one of my followers, who was at Adepticon said the following information about the game:

The smallest base size will be 25 mm

Tomb Kings skeletons, horse riders, chariots are comming back, aswell as Bretonnian men-at-arms, long bowmen and plastic knight kit.

Stater set will be Tomb Kings vs Bretonnians

And there are going to be new models aswell for both sides


This is said to be coming from some UK sources, that he was talking to.

Tomb Kings skeletons coming back would completely ruin any interest I have in them. Well, old kits for both, really. There’s a reason I didn’t start either of them when WHFB was still around, because they still had a lot of old models. That was like 10+ years ago.

Surely this means new plastics for those listed kits. We already seen the knights' helms.

Yep, no way are they bringing these old disgusting kits back. That would kill tow in the egg

Why would anybody expect they won´t release new models? It would be an idiotic decision by GW.

Especially as they're releasing new factions anyway, like Kislev and its various bear-related units.

Mr_Rose wrote:The problem is that the tomb kings skeleton kit was literally the fourth ed skeleton kit with a shield sprue thrown in. It was never very good and the wear on the die was beginning to show even then. By the end of WFB, it was nearly impossible to build due to tiny contact points being obscured by mould slips. If that particular pair of dies still exists, I shudder to think how bad fresh casts out of it will be.

It's like GW hasn't figured out the concept of the Master Mold...

They do have masters.

Whether they green light new expensive mold is another thing if sales aren't all that big.

tneva82 wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
I don't understand the folks on here that say bringing back old kits is going to kill TOW...Making the old kits made to order is great for the folks (and clearly they are out there given the second hand market) who want to fill out/complete their army(armies) without having to pay out the teeth for it. Those who aren't fond of the old kits can just ignore the MtO and get the rules if they want to try the game out and wait for the new kits to drop. Which we all know will come....how is this a bad thing?

You invent idea of mto. Rumour didn't say mto.

What people are objecting is old kits put to shelf. You want tomb king skeletons, you buy the old kit.

No, that was me who threw the idea out since there is no solid information on the topic, people shouldn't assume that the old kits will be getting a new shelf release when MtO or Direct Only are other options

People shouldn't also make up ideas it would be mto when there's no evidence or even rumour.

And looking at 40k/aos/hh it's not like idea of mix of old and new kits at same time is unlikely/rare.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
I don't understand the folks on here that say bringing back old kits is going to kill TOW...Making the old kits made to order is great for the folks (and clearly they are out there given the second hand market) who want to fill out/complete their army(armies) without having to pay out the teeth for it. Those who aren't fond of the old kits can just ignore the MtO and get the rules if they want to try the game out and wait for the new kits to drop. Which we all know will come....how is this a bad thing?

You invent idea of mto. Rumour didn't say mto.

What people are objecting is old kits put to shelf. You want tomb king skeletons, you buy the old kit.

No, that was me who threw the idea out since there is no solid information on the topic, people shouldn't assume that the old kits will be getting a new shelf release when MtO or Direct Only are other options

GW did made to order for some of their metals. Aren't there logistical problems with doing made to order plastics?

But with some new Bret stuff being shown off, I would expect that they at leave have been looking into making new kits

 Just Tony wrote:

Mr_Rose wrote:The problem is that the tomb kings skeleton kit was literally the fourth ed skeleton kit with a shield sprue thrown in. It was never very good and the wear on the die was beginning to show even then. By the end of WFB, it was nearly impossible to build due to tiny contact points being obscured by mould slips. If that particular pair of dies still exists, I shudder to think how bad fresh casts out of it will be.

It's like GW hasn't figured out the concept of the Master Mold...

There is no master mould for the steel tools used for injection moulded plastics. The moulds are cut from blocks of steel. Remaking them means cutting a fresh one from digital files, if the original design is modern enough, or pantographing an original master model, or potentially nowadays some kind of scan of the original to produce a digital file. But there's no master mould from a which new mould can be made directly.

if, as it seems at the moment, the plastic injection machines are running all the hours they can to support the current release rate a MTO of plastic sprues may tie up the machines too long to be viable (as there will typically be down time when a mould is changed, which usually also means clean up of the machine itself as well. The internet suggests 30 mins to an hour for a 'smooth' change, but i'd guess longer for old moulds that don't quite line up right any more as the could require a fair bit of adjustment to get the casting just right)

metal MTO will be a lot easier as they come from a different machine (or might even be subcontracted? i had thought GW had got rid of all the old metal casting machines or converted them for finecast, but maybe they've bought more)

Greenfield wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

Mr_Rose wrote:The problem is that the tomb kings skeleton kit was literally the fourth ed skeleton kit with a shield sprue thrown in. It was never very good and the wear on the die was beginning to show even then. By the end of WFB, it was nearly impossible to build due to tiny contact points being obscured by mould slips. If that particular pair of dies still exists, I shudder to think how bad fresh casts out of it will be.

It's like GW hasn't figured out the concept of the Master Mold...

There is no master mould for the steel tools used for injection moulded plastics. The moulds are cut from blocks of steel. Remaking them means cutting a fresh one from digital files, if the original design is modern enough, or pantographing an original master model, or potentially nowadays some kind of scan of the original to produce a digital file. But there's no master mould from a which new mould can be made directly.

I certainly expect tooling a new mold to be out of the question for any made to order products.

So it would come down completely to whether or not the original mold has survived and is in their possession.


Made to order resin or metal makes a whole lot more sense. I seriously doubt that they'd reproduce any of their old plastic kits in resin or metal. I'd expect them to make new sculpts before that.

Nostalgia is not the reason i am excited about the Old World. I finally get to play Warhammer again. Warhammer does not play like KOW. In Warhammer the models matter. The units take wounds models are removed, units are reformed. Heroes and wizards join units and become part of the unit, this does not exist in other games like Kings of War. In other games Skirmishers are just another block, in Warhammer skirmishers are fluid and move and bend between the blocks.

As to new models or rereleased older models, it truly does not matter. If GW's goal it make the game playable on day one older kits would be required. Going this rout would also cost GW nothing since the kits and molds are in cold storage. I would not be surprised if GW releases metal models on the website, given the success of the Steel Legion's return.

The base rumour make no sense. Why would GW make it more difficult for people to jump right in to the game, when they have already said that we can use our old models. Also GW makes very little money on bases, i really do not think that the GW would release bags of bases on release day so we could rebase our models. very silly.

There's nothing been stopping you from playing it any time at all. GW suddenly deciding to sell it again shouldn't have been a catalyst if you wanted to play.

 Paymaster Games wrote:
The base rumour make no sense. Why would GW make it more difficult for people to jump right in to the game, when they have already said that we can use our old models. Also GW makes very little money on bases, i really do not think that the GW would release bags of bases on release day so we could rebase our models. very silly.

I think that is re: new boxes of models, not something written in the rulebook that forces you to rebase your army.
A bit like it happens in 40k, where new models come out with (sometimes wildly) different base sizes than in the past, but there is no official requirement to rebase (aside from certain tournament circuits like WTC).

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
There's nothing been stopping you from playing it any time at all. GW suddenly deciding to sell it again shouldn't have been a catalyst if you wanted to play.

As someone who's been able to get semi-regular 8th Ed games since AoS started, THIS. You'd be surprised how many people are willing to still play if someone just asks.

This is a side note mostly - It is hard to find players for dead games. It does not matter how much you love a game, if you can not find the people to play against its kind of a moot point.

This is one of the reasons i am looking forward to the Old World, i will have people to play against again.

 Paymaster Games wrote:
The base rumour make no sense. Why would GW make it more difficult for people to jump right in to the game, when they have already said that we can use our old models. Also GW makes very little money on bases, i really do not think that the GW would release bags of bases on release day so we could rebase our models. very silly.

People who already re-based squares to (bigger) circles for AoS won't have to re-base them back if the squares are now the same size as the newer squares.

 Paymaster Games wrote:
I would not be surprised if GW releases metal models on the website, given the success of the Steel Legion's return.

Not sure I'd call the latest M2O a success, unless you've got access to sales data the rest of us haven't - those prices are pants-on-head crazy.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Paymaster Games wrote:
The base rumour make no sense. Why would GW make it more difficult for people to jump right in to the game, when they have already said that we can use our old models. Also GW makes very little money on bases, i really do not think that the GW would release bags of bases on release day so we could rebase our models. very silly.

People who already re-based squares to (bigger) circles for AoS won't have to re-base them back if the squares are now the same size as the newer squares.

Bigger bases also would allow for a bit more freedom designing models and still have them rank up.

why it might be true:

it screws 3rd party models that uses the old base sizes and make it harder to use models based for other games (see the similar change from 25 to 28mm Bases in 40k)
while it would work with models re-based for AoS (so keeping those happy that stayed in the GW bubble)

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
There's nothing been stopping you from playing it any time at all. GW suddenly deciding to sell it again shouldn't have been a catalyst if you wanted to play.

The trick is, as always, that it takes TWO to play. And finding that vital second player can be difficult with 'dead' games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
why it might be true:

it screws 3rd party models that uses the old base sizes and make it harder to use models based for other games (see the similar change from 25 to 28mm Bases in 40k)
while it would work with models re-based for AoS (so keeping those happy that stayed in the GW bubble)

Why doing it would be a disaster for GW:

it screws the oldhammer players over.... AGAIN.

Well GW never promised old bases would remain usable.

But we'll see. If GW intends seraphon, slaves to darkness etc models be usable they need bigger bases than old 25mm squares. So will there be multiple different base sizes, fewer unified ones or are the AOS&TOW chaos/seraphon/skaven etc models incompatible?

 Vulcan wrote:

Why doing it would be a disaster for GW:

it screws the oldhammer players over.... AGAIN.

never change a running system
Specially if base size is not part of the rules at all
And screwing the oldhammer players in 40k was not a disaster either

Because veterans don't like it, is a reason for GW to actually do it

Noone is going to stop you from using models that are on old bases... Or if they do they aren't someone worth actually spending your time playing.

Bobug wrote:
Noone is going to stop you from using models that are on old bases... Or if they do they aren't someone worth actually spending your time playing.

Would be rather inconvenient to play though as nobody is going to let you have advantage in game by having smaller bases. So you need to be constantly factoring in base size they are supposed to be on.

Bobug wrote:
Noone is going to stop you from using models that are on old bases... Or if they do they aren't someone worth actually spending your time playing.

AOS was supposed to be base agnostic, and you would be able to use your squares without issue ruleswise. The player base is the ones that forced the base issue through tournament rules and the like. The EXACT same thing could happen to TOW if they go through with the base size change.

tneva82 wrote:
Would be rather inconvenient to play though as nobody is going to let you have advantage in game by having smaller bases. So you need to be constantly factoring in base size they are supposed to be on.

Pretty sure two oldhammer players who are both using "old" armies on "small bases" aren't going to get that upset by the perceived advantage of it.

It will be tournaments that kick off - like with AoS as people have said. If TOW takes off then a few years down the line showing up with your 20+ year old minis on tiny bases will probably get frowned on. As has happened every time GW up the base size.

Tyel wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Would be rather inconvenient to play though as nobody is going to let you have advantage in game by having smaller bases. So you need to be constantly factoring in base size they are supposed to be on.

Pretty sure two oldhammer players who are both using "old" armies on "small bases" aren't going to get that upset by the perceived advantage of it.

It will be tournaments that kick off - like with AoS as people have said. If TOW takes off then a few years down the line showing up with your 20+ year old minis on tiny bases will probably get frowned on. As has happened every time GW up the base size.

Yea but those 2 oldhammer players who play with their old models are pretty much irrelevant.

You think GW goes through all this to give rules to old players who don't buy new models?

No profit there. GW aims for NEW players. You know. The ones who don't have armies already. Those who buy models.