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.

Cronch wrote:AT is 8mm if I recall. Anyway, I still don't see the answer to question "who will buy new models", if as people want, they just largely restart production of old moulds? Not from people with 2000 or 10000 points of models collected over years, which is what most of the fanbase that still wants TOW consists of.

Why the assumption that people would only ever own one army? Look at 40K, most players on these boards alone own three or more armies for that game. Why assume any different with W:TOW?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
They won’t just remake old stuff. It’ll be new stuff so they can sell you new stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Why 8mm? GW has never done 8mm so why now? Why not 6mm(epic, AT) or 12mm(warmaster)?

How many scales GW needs

The new adeptus titanicus and aeronautica imperialis are both 8mm scale. If GW decide to redo epic, it will likely be at 8mm as well.

I thought the old 15mm warmaster was a pretty good scale, and could look quite good.

We pretty much know this isn’t going to happen in any scale other than the usual, so seems pointless to speculate otherwise.

I wasn’t really speculating so much as stating fact.

If it’s several years off, it could really be anything. All we know is it’s set in te old world and uses square bases. A reduction in scale might be good as it could allow people to reproduce battles of the scale they have played in the total war games.

It won't be Warmaster. At all. GW lost their ass once on Warmaster, I can't see them trying to pitch the same thing again. WFB wasn't losing money, it was still the 3rd top selling mini game. Given all press releases suggest squares set in the Old World, I don't see it being anything short of exactly that: squares in the Old World. Not clumps of asteroids at the End Times, not fly speck small models despite the 7 people who actually played Warmaster wishing REALLY hard for it, Squares in the Old World.

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
We don't know anything about it except the name at the moment. So assuming it is 32mm scale is also wishlisting at this point. Any discussion of it is wishlisting.

No, assuming 32mm is a very, very safe assumption. The idea that GW will create some random new fantasy scale just wont happen.

 auticus wrote:
I have a high feeling that none of the old models are coming back. I don't see on what logical plane of existence GW would go back to that, especially since a good portion of moving to AOS was to get rid of generic fantasy models that could be obtained cheaper elsewhere.

If the style will not be the generic fantasy that WHFB was, then bringing that setting back is pointless. Vampire Counts without gothic aesthetics are not Vampire Counts anymore; High Elves without tall hats and silver armour are not High Elves.
So if they are not bringing back previous (or still-existing-in-AoS) kits, how would they remake them? What would a box of Skaven Clanrats look like if they made a new one - would it really differ much from the existing kit? Enough to make it anew?

GW's output of plastic is pretty impressive, but there is no way they can afford to make 10+ plastic kits for about 15 factions, nor would be willing to invest that much for a side-venture, nor would they have the time to develop those (Sisters took how long for just 1 range?).

It's true that there would, at present, be considerable overlap with the AoS range. Perhaps the next few years will see some new kits come out with the AoS aesthetics, replacing sets made for WHFB and re-releasing them later, packaged just for W:TOW. Some core set may be repackaged with both logos on the box, just like various Daemons have been Fantasy and 40k.
In addition to a new rules set, I expect that a poster above was correct in thinking they'll create a little something or two for all factions. Entice players to add to their existing collections and start new armies by updating the kits who most need it: Tomb King's basic skeleton warriors, Rat Ogres, zombies, Chaos Marauders, Kroxigors, Tree kin, Slayers, etc. I reckon every army has a few sets that really could do with an update, while also having a decent range of sets that are still excellent or at least good enough. Three years seems a realistic timescale to create something along these lines, maybe with a larger overhaul for some headlining factions (e.g. High Elves, redoing their basic core units that haven't aged well), if they release them in waves focussed on particular factions/battles/areas. They certainly could also invest in more niche things they know would be popular with veterans no matter how grumpy they are, like Teutogen Guard.

 Just Tony wrote:
It won't be Warmaster. At all. GW lost their ass once on Warmaster, I can't see them trying to pitch the same thing again.

I think modern GW is more willing to try things. Aeronautica was never a terribly popular game but for whatever reason GW decided to try it again.

If the style will not be the generic fantasy that WHFB was

whfb never was generic? They made use of generic races, but aside from Empire and Brets (so the two historical human factions that just got some sprinkles of fantasy dusted on them) they had fairly unique looks. At the very least the skull density per model made it unique to other lines. Their art was always far more elaborate than what the models of the time could handle, so expect more bling, more in like with art than with the barebones pre-8th models that dominated the line.
I mean, IF they decided to launch a new line like they did with every single returning Specialist game to date.

Cronch wrote:

If the style will not be the generic fantasy that WHFB was

whfb never was generic? They made use of generic races, but aside from Empire and Brets (so the two historical human factions that just got some sprinkles of fantasy dusted on them) they had fairly unique looks. At the very least the skull density per model made it unique to other lines. Their art was always far more elaborate than what the models of the time could handle, so expect more bling, more in like with art than with the barebones pre-8th models that dominated the line.
I mean, IF they decided to launch a new line like they did with every single returning Specialist game to date.

Nevermind that people like to use 'generic' to describe 'historical influences'. How many wargames or even fantasy settings have their mainstay human faction's aesthetic based off the Holy Roman Empire? None that immediately come to mind.

To be honest, this just seemed like more of a marketing ploy to take some of the wind out of Mantic's sails than anything concrete. 3+yrs down the track isn't something GW mentions on the regular. And to be honest, since they blew up the world, I've not had much interest in returning or playing AoS.

8th ed was needlessly complex and took ages to play, even at 2k sized games. For them to have something which would be more streamlined would mean taking a leaf from Kings of War and having a universal ruleset which each group uses, but I can't see that happening. Pairing back from 8th ed would still see some of the poor ruleset remain, and I really don't want to go back to that, even for nostalgia's sake.

The main buster of all this is that going back to square bases when AoS is round divides your player group unnecessarily. Those who made the choice to swap over are likely to be upset about either having to rebase or figure out some way to represent their troops on the field, which won't be easy due to ranking problems and base size difference. And the old school people aren't likely to want to cross over, seeing AoS as a bad decision made by GW.

If they do bring back the Old World, at least let them have their old names back. I can't be bothered with trying to figure out what the name is now for the different factions now they've moved away from calling things "High Elves" or "Dark Elves". I don't think the names help them as much as they think, as you can still make something which looks like a High Elf, no matter what it is now called, and have people buy it to proxy in their games. Waste of time.

I think I'll stick to KoW's much easier to play ruleset, the fun of multibasing units, and keep using the lore I like from Warhammer to make my armies. If I want to see some game breaking units, spells and abilities, I can always load up Total War Warhammer 2 and drop a Skaven nuke in-game on somebody.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Why 8mm? GW has never done 8mm so why now? Why not 6mm(epic, AT) or 12mm(warmaster)?

How many scales GW needs

The new adeptus titanicus and aeronautica imperialis are both 8mm scale. If GW decide to redo epic, it will likely be at 8mm as well.

I thought the old 15mm warmaster was a pretty good scale, and could look quite good.

Eh no. Measure them if you wish but they match fluff size in 6mm pretty much spot on(well 5.7mm or so).

8mm comes from misunderstanding when designers noted MARINES would be 8mm. But funny that, space marines are taller than humans and the Xmm tends to refer to humans. Now of course if we make it Xmm refers to space marine size it's 8mm allright. It's just more understandable if we assume Xmm refers to human size like every other use of Xmm tends to be

And when you measure titans and match them to fluff size(32m for warlord etc) you'll find out 8mm is way off the mark.

Since marines are all that exists in 40k, it makes sense to scale all new games to them

tneva82 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Why 8mm? GW has never done 8mm so why now? Why not 6mm(epic, AT) or 12mm(warmaster)?

How many scales GW needs

The new adeptus titanicus and aeronautica imperialis are both 8mm scale. If GW decide to redo epic, it will likely be at 8mm as well.

I thought the old 15mm warmaster was a pretty good scale, and could look quite good.

Eh no. Measure them if you wish but they match fluff size in 6mm pretty much spot on(well 5.7mm or so).

8mm comes from misunderstanding when designers noted MARINES would be 8mm. But funny that, space marines are taller than humans and the Xmm tends to refer to humans. Now of course if we make it Xmm refers to space marine size it's 8mm allright. It's just more understandable if we assume Xmm refers to human size like every other use of Xmm tends to be

And when you measure titans and match them to fluff size(32m for warlord etc) you'll find out 8mm is way off the mark.

I don’t have any AT stuff to measure, but the AI stuff is definitely 8mm, and yes I’ve measured it, and AT is supposed to be the same scale as AI.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Why 8mm? GW has never done 8mm so why now? Why not 6mm(epic, AT) or 12mm(warmaster)?

How many scales GW needs

The new adeptus titanicus and aeronautica imperialis are both 8mm scale. If GW decide to redo epic, it will likely be at 8mm as well.

I thought the old 15mm warmaster was a pretty good scale, and could look quite good.

Eh no. Measure them if you wish but they match fluff size in 6mm pretty much spot on(well 5.7mm or so).

8mm comes from misunderstanding when designers noted MARINES would be 8mm. But funny that, space marines are taller than humans and the Xmm tends to refer to humans. Now of course if we make it Xmm refers to space marine size it's 8mm allright. It's just more understandable if we assume Xmm refers to human size like every other use of Xmm tends to be

And when you measure titans and match them to fluff size(32m for warlord etc) you'll find out 8mm is way off the mark.

I don’t have any AT stuff to measure, but the AI stuff is definitely 8mm, and yes I’ve measured it, and AT is supposed to be the same scale as AI.

Is that 8mm referencing humans or Marines?

I can tell you for a fact that if you compare a Primaris Marine (aka the size a Marine should be in relation to human sized models) with an Imperial Knight, in Titanicus that translates to an 8mm tall Marine next to a Knight with the same pose as the 40k one.

It's stupid and cliched, yes, but GW's 8mm statement for Adeptus Titanicus is only correct if you assume the point of reference is Marines. If it's normal people, Titanicus is 6mm scale.

Because of GW's Marine fetish it's unfortunately quite necessary to define terms or else we may be talking about different things.

One advantage to keeping the old scale is a ready made playerbase. There are old grognards like me with dusty shelves who would slap an army down on the table given half a chance.

I always enjoyed WHFB when I played it (5th-6th ed). I said at the time that Fantasy was won in the movement and psychology phases, while 40k was won in the shooting/assault. AoS (while fun) never scratched that same itch. I liked the blocks of troops maneuvering around. I think a smaller scale might help with that playstyle, but I didn’t invest in Warmaster when it came out, as it didn’t have an established base, nobody had armies, and none of the locals were going to invest in it.

Selling new models to new players is great, and changing the scale would ensure new sales. But it also means that there is a lag time getting the game up and running, as people collect new armies and get them painted. Keeping things the same as before would let them leverage legacy players to hit the ground running.

And honestly, seeing what they are doing with modern plastics, most of us older players would probably pick up the new models anyway.

 Geifer wrote:

Is that 8mm referencing humans or Marines?

I can tell you for a fact that if you compare a Primaris Marine (aka the size a Marine should be in relation to human sized models) with an Imperial Knight, in Titanicus that translates to an 8mm tall Marine next to a Knight with the same pose as the 40k one.

It's stupid and cliched, yes, but GW's 8mm statement for Adeptus Titanicus is only correct if you assume the point of reference is Marines. If it's normal people, Titanicus is 6mm scale.

Because of GW's Marine fetish it's unfortunately quite necessary to define terms or else we may be talking about different things.

They have clearly stated that AT/AI models are one fourth of their 40K size, and this has been true for all models they have released thus far. Modern 40K humans are 32(ish) mm tall. 32/4=8. Thus AT/AI is 8mm scale.

If they would make a fantasy game in a smaller game, 8mm for that too would be a good bet, but I really doubt that this will be a Warmaster redux, and if it were many people would be understandably pretty annoyed.

 Crimson wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

Is that 8mm referencing humans or Marines?

I can tell you for a fact that if you compare a Primaris Marine (aka the size a Marine should be in relation to human sized models) with an Imperial Knight, in Titanicus that translates to an 8mm tall Marine next to a Knight with the same pose as the 40k one.

It's stupid and cliched, yes, but GW's 8mm statement for Adeptus Titanicus is only correct if you assume the point of reference is Marines. If it's normal people, Titanicus is 6mm scale.

Because of GW's Marine fetish it's unfortunately quite necessary to define terms or else we may be talking about different things.

They have clearly stated that AT/AI models are one fourth of their 40K size, and this has been true for all models they have released thus far. Modern 40K humans are 32(ish) mm tall. 32/4=8. Thus AT/AI is 8mm scale.

If they would make a fantasy game in a smaller game, 8mm for that too would be a good bet, but I really doubt that this will be a Warmaster redux, and if it were many people would be understandably pretty annoyed.

Age of Sigmar has a lot of really big stuff invovled in the lore and battles so would work well for a smaller scale - I find the old 6mm epic models look really good next to the "8mm" AT models.

It does seem likely its more 28/32mm rather than any other scale.

 Crimson wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

Is that 8mm referencing humans or Marines?

I can tell you for a fact that if you compare a Primaris Marine (aka the size a Marine should be in relation to human sized models) with an Imperial Knight, in Titanicus that translates to an 8mm tall Marine next to a Knight with the same pose as the 40k one.

It's stupid and cliched, yes, but GW's 8mm statement for Adeptus Titanicus is only correct if you assume the point of reference is Marines. If it's normal people, Titanicus is 6mm scale.

Because of GW's Marine fetish it's unfortunately quite necessary to define terms or else we may be talking about different things.

They have clearly stated that AT/AI models are one fourth of their 40K size, and this has been true for all models they have released thus far. Modern 40K humans are 32(ish) mm tall. 32/4=8. Thus AT/AI is 8mm scale.

If they would make a fantasy game in a smaller game, 8mm for that too would be a good bet, but I really doubt that this will be a Warmaster redux, and if it were many people would be understandably pretty annoyed.

I'll take your word for it, but if the choice is between what GW says and what my ruler indicates...

Besides, has GW ever officially switched to calling their models 32mm scale? If so, that has completely passed me by. I assumed they just silently dropped the scale reference when the ever increasing size of them made reference to 28mm farcical.

Plus, GW can't even keep scale straight at a single scale. A fixed conversion rate may be the most accurate thing they've ever done, and it doesn't do a damn thing if the foundation for the reference is flawed.

I'm not looking for a Warmaster remake myself, but it does have its bright side. When you assume that GW wants you to buy fully new armies for Old World and they'll do their best to make it happen, at least changing up the scale ensures that they have to release completely new, modern sculpts instead of making you use the same zombies for another twenty years. And as has been repeatedly pointed out, it would facilitate the epic army sizes at a more palatable price.

But realistically I doubt GW will go with anything but their main scale. Titanicus has a really good reason to be smaller scale in its titans. The Old World doesn't have many things of titanic size, and those that it has don't commonly make an appearance. That's more of an AoS thing.

 Crimson wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

Is that 8mm referencing humans or Marines?

I can tell you for a fact that if you compare a Primaris Marine (aka the size a Marine should be in relation to human sized models) with an Imperial Knight, in Titanicus that translates to an 8mm tall Marine next to a Knight with the same pose as the 40k one.

It's stupid and cliched, yes, but GW's 8mm statement for Adeptus Titanicus is only correct if you assume the point of reference is Marines. If it's normal people, Titanicus is 6mm scale.

Because of GW's Marine fetish it's unfortunately quite necessary to define terms or else we may be talking about different things.

They have clearly stated that AT/AI models are one fourth of their 40K size, and this has been true for all models they have released thus far. Modern 40K humans are 32(ish) mm tall. 32/4=8. Thus AT/AI is 8mm scale.

If they would make a fantasy game in a smaller game, 8mm for that too would be a good bet, but I really doubt that this will be a Warmaster redux, and if it were many people would be understandably pretty annoyed.

They've also clearly stated that the "8mm" scale reference they used was Marines, which were also 32(ish)mm tall in 40K at the time they started this project.

The fact is the game doesn't have a scale, beyond "1/4 40K size in any given instance", because 40K doesn't have a consistent scale. Sometimes that works well(Titans & Knights being the size the models are and Marines being ~8mm tall actually match the in-setting size numbers quite well in 1:260 scale - or "6.8mm" if you want to describe it by the size a regular human would be - but the more models GW add the less consistent that will be), sometimes it doesn't(AI, which is all over the joint).

Really glad the exact same ‘what scale is AT’ argument has spilled out of the AT thread to the Old World thread, of all places.

Anything that keeps that Epic flame burning is OK by me!

Besides, not much else to talk about here now either - Thanks Obama GW!

I’d love it if this game was in a smaller scale, but yeah, safe bet is that it’ll be in ‘GW 32mm‘ scale...

I think the real question is what models might find their way into both systems.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
I think the real question is what models might find their way into both systems.

In theory anything can make it into AoS; the setting is so vast that heck you could proxy Space Marines into it and have them as counts-as Stormcast without much trouble.

Going the other way there's pretty much anything from the current armies with an Old World connection. I'd say Skaven would likely be pretty interchangeable since they've pretty much escaped the Old World almost totally in-tact. They basically don't change at all. Orruks could actually benefit as their model line is very bland right now - heck before GW removed Greenskins they had 3 variations all doing the same thing. All with a big warboss; a changing warlock; a basic grunt with axes; a basic board riding unit etc... Basically they were all themes along the same line spit into 3 forces. It's even more apparent now that Gloomspite broke away and Orruks don't even have goblin elements to diversify their force as much.

Elves are oftne shown to have very strict and long lasting design views so they might well be pretty similar in the AoS and Old World setting - cone head helms etc....

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
We don't know anything about it except the name at the moment. So assuming it is 32mm scale is also wishlisting at this point. Any discussion of it is wishlisting.

No, assuming 32mm is a very, very safe assumption. The idea that GW will create some random new fantasy scale just wont happen.

No, it's really not. 32mm means you could use your old models, and we can already see GW would rather not see that happen from their rescaling of AT and AI.

There is also no reason for a 3 year development schedule if they let you use existing models. At their standard rules quality, it would take GW one weekend to poop out a new rulebook. 3 years means they're doing a new miniature line.

Although, now that it seems confirmed that this is a Forge World thing, that means they will have more limited production capacity. So I can't see them making entire new ranges for the large number of Fantasy factions. But obviously they are doing this to sell some new models, so it will be interesting to see what direction they decide to go in,

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Although, now that it seems confirmed that this is a Forge World thing, that means they will have more limited production capacity. So I can't see them making entire new ranges for the large number of Fantasy factions. But obviously they are doing this to sell some new models, so it will be interesting to see what direction they decide to go in,

Uhh thats bad news - unless the Horus Heresy Marine range is concluded soon then its unlikely they will have much capacity (or interest) in doing other things.

My money is on a dark elf vs high elves sundering boxed game and faction support.

You erd eet eere first nobz.

 Yodhrin wrote:
They've also clearly stated that the "8mm" scale reference they used was Marines, which were also 32(ish)mm tall in 40K at the time they started this project.

The fact is the game doesn't have a scale, beyond "1/4 40K size in any given instance", because 40K doesn't have a consistent scale. Sometimes that works well(Titans & Knights being the size the models are and Marines being ~8mm tall actually match the in-setting size numbers quite well in 1:260 scale - or "6.8mm" if you want to describe it by the size a regular human would be - but the more models GW add the less consistent that will be), sometimes it doesn't(AI, which is all over the joint).

Well, given that in 40k a marine is much the same height as a 40k human, being 8mm marine is still going to be roughly 8mm human as well.

If we say 40k is 28 to 32mm (which is true of the humans in the game, not just the Marines) then divide that by 4 and you get 7 to 8mm for AT / AI.

I think AI is actually reasonably consistent, not sure why you say it's all over the joint? It's roughly 1/200 scale, which is close to 8mm human scale. The old AI was, from memory, about 1/270 to 1/300 depending on which aircraft, which is the ballpark for a 6mm human. The only thing that I think was an outlier was the old Fighta Bommers, which were pretty small, but I don't believe they had a fluff size anyway so you couldn't pull a scale off them, but the new Fighta Bommers have grown so I think it's all pretty consistent now.

I think the problem comes from 40k, if a Warlord Titan has been undersized in 28-32mm scale, then when it's shrunk by 1/4 for AT, it's also going to be a bit undersized for 7-8mm, but it still seems to me that the target is ~7-8mm humans rather than 8mm marines and 6-7mm humans.

But anyway, it would be pretty cool to have a reduced scale WHFB. You could have 1 sprue with a few different unit types represented, and 2 or so sprues per faction (not dissimilar to Epic 40k, where you'd buy an "ork" sprue that would give you the parts to make a whole range of different ork units).

Woooot in the eefffffff is goin on!?

GW are doing that thing where they promise a release in the future that will be amazing and fix things, but never actually does. Just stringing people along.
The scale and audacity is the greatest I've seen from them, but still that old trick.

Fenriswulf wrote:To be honest, this just seemed like more of a marketing ploy to take some of the wind out of Mantic's sails than anything concrete. 3+yrs down the track isn't something GW mentions on the regular. And to be honest, since they blew up the world, I've not had much interest in returning or playing AoS.

Could be. I've given up on GW because of how they treat their game and customers (would rather be treated like a player who happens to buy stuff), rather than a grudge about how they treated their own IP.

Nevelon wrote:One advantage to keeping the old scale is a ready made playerbase. There are old grognards like me with dusty shelves who would slap an army down on the table given half a chance.

I always enjoyed WHFB when I played it (5th-6th ed). I said at the time that Fantasy was won in the movement and psychology phases, while 40k was won in the shooting/assault. AoS (while fun) never scratched that same itch. I liked the blocks of troops maneuvering around.

um... Ever try Kings of War? I really recommend it and it sounds like you would too.

Mr Morden wrote:

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Although, now that it seems confirmed that this is a Forge World thing, that means they will have more limited production capacity. So I can't see them making entire new ranges for the large number of Fantasy factions. But obviously they are doing this to sell some new models, so it will be interesting to see what direction they decide to go in,

Uhh thats bad news - unless the Horus Heresy Marine range is concluded soon then its unlikely they will have much capacity (or interest) in doing other things.

Unless this is some validation that they will about have to use old kit to bulk out production. Just because the writing is headed up by FW doesn't mean the minis won't be pressed at GW proper.

Argive wrote:My money is on a dark elf vs high elves sundering boxed game and faction support.

You erd eet eere first nobz.

I would hit that like it was my job. A Hel Fenn boxed set would be nifty too.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
They've also clearly stated that the "8mm" scale reference they used was Marines, which were also 32(ish)mm tall in 40K at the time they started this project.

The fact is the game doesn't have a scale, beyond "1/4 40K size in any given instance", because 40K doesn't have a consistent scale. Sometimes that works well(Titans & Knights being the size the models are and Marines being ~8mm tall actually match the in-setting size numbers quite well in 1:260 scale - or "6.8mm" if you want to describe it by the size a regular human would be - but the more models GW add the less consistent that will be), sometimes it doesn't(AI, which is all over the joint).

Well, given that in 40k a marine is much the same height as a 40k human, being 8mm marine is still going to be roughly 8mm human as well.

If we say 40k is 28 to 32mm (which is true of the humans in the game, not just the Marines) then divide that by 4 and you get 7 to 8mm for AT / AI.

I think AI is actually reasonably consistent, not sure why you say it's all over the joint? It's roughly 1/200 scale, which is close to 8mm human scale. The old AI was, from memory, about 1/270 to 1/300 depending on which aircraft, which is the ballpark for a 6mm human. The only thing that I think was an outlier was the old Fighta Bommers, which were pretty small, but I don't believe they had a fluff size anyway so you couldn't pull a scale off them, but the new Fighta Bommers have grown so I think it's all pretty consistent now.

I think the problem comes from 40k, if a Warlord Titan has been undersized in 28-32mm scale, then when it's shrunk by 1/4 for AT, it's also going to be a bit undersized for 7-8mm, but it still seems to me that the target is ~7-8mm humans rather than 8mm marines and 6-7mm humans.

But anyway, it would be pretty cool to have a reduced scale WHFB. You could have 1 sprue with a few different unit types represented, and 2 or so sprues per faction (not dissimilar to Epic 40k, where you'd buy an "ork" sprue that would give you the parts to make a whole range of different ork units).

The point is that by accident or design, quartering a 32mm Marine and a 40k scale Titan/Knight results in an 8mm-ish Marine and an AT scale Titan/Knight that are "correct" relative to each other based on their sizes in the setting at 1:260 scale, the Titans aren't undersized. As soon as you start adding other things from 40K at that same 1/4 size reduction such as the AI planes, it goes wonky because the 40K sizes aren't consistent with each other. And I don't see why the target would be 8mm humans when they explicitly used 8mm Marines.

And I still think GW would be daft to do Old World as a smaller scale - Warmaster was cool, but it wasn't all that popular and I doubt it's what most people would wish for as the only revival of WHF.

 Yodhrin wrote:
And I don't see why the target would be 8mm humans when they explicitly used 8mm Marines.

My point was that 8mm Marine is 8mm human if all you're doing is 1/4 of 40k scale, because at 40k scale there's not a significant height difference between Marines and humans.

How tall is a 40k Warlord compared to an AT one? Does the 40k Warlord match what it should (roughly) be in 40k scale, or is it undersized as well? If you say the Warlord is 1/260, that would make it about 5" tall, so is the 40k one about 20" tall?

Given they've said AT is 1/4 of 40k scale, that to me still puts it closer to 8mm scale than 6mm scale for a human, because there's no chance in hell that 40k humans are only 6x4 = 24mm scale models. 40k vehicles are roughly in the 1/48 to 1/56 range (closer to 1/48 I think), which when quartered puts you at roughly 1/200-ish.

I still don't think the AI stuff is wonky. Thunderbolts are big, they're supposed to be big, they're big in the fluff. If you measure the old resin Thunderbolts you get pretty close to 6mm (for a human) and if you measure the new ones you get about 8mm (for a human). I think it's more likely the Warlord has been overshrunk relative to its fluff size (given it's such a big model in 40k) than the AI aircraft are too big. EDIT: Though from what I've been reading, I'm just wondering if it's an issue of the Warlord not having a well defined fluff height.

And I still think GW would be daft to do Old World as a smaller scale - Warmaster was cool, but it wasn't all that popular and I doubt it's what most people would wish for as the only revival of WHF.

To be honest I wasn't really collecting when Warmaster came out (period of hiatus), was it well managed by GW and just unpopular, or was it mismanaged, because that's what's killed a lot of specialist games IMO?

Simple stuff can sometimes put people off as well, like I remember Warmaster units were often presented as being in narrow formations with deep ranks that weren't terribly aesthetically pleasing to my eye.

I can only comment from my own local area on warmaster. It was cool. But no one wanted to play it because they didn't want to get into another main game, and also did not want to have to collect another scale's worth of terrain to play the game.

Combined with a lot of people hated the command rules because they didn't have god-power over their units and didn't like that a unit could fail a leadership roll and thus bring your turn to an end and do nothing.