Warhams-77 wrote:
@Binabik15

Look at bitsshops and ebay for the turtle Needs patience but these things can be found cheap after a while

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
so if their new product fails to live up to that legacy that is a failure on their part not the customer's

That is a severely entitled viewpoint. The trade name itself is not a representation that the product will live up to anyone's nostalgia. GW wants to make a dungeon crawler board game leveraging their IP. "Warhammer Quest" is a perfectly appropriate title for that product, whatever a given customer would prefer or might expect. It's easy to tell if someone has a genuine interest in a product because they will look at it for what it is, rather than what it (apparently) "ought" to be.

I despise that word, "entitled", it's such a load of BS and is always deployed to shut down criticism that can't otherwise be refuted.

Almost everything about the way GW are pushing nu-WHQ is based on evoking the nostalgia people have for the original game, and even if it were not GW would have to be literally deaf, dumb, blind, and clinically stupid not to recognise that evoking a brand with a strong emotional component to it IS going to create expectations - it's their job, literally their job, to manage those expectations effectively. If they're incapable of effectively communicating to people what the product they're selling is, that's their problem and it's total horse manure to lay the blame for the fallout of that failure on the heads of potential customers.

If GW were to next "bring back" Mordheim using Mordheim's branding, talk about returning a "classic", repeatedly reference the original in their marketing etc, then you're damn right they would be responsible for creating an expectation that what people would be getting would be close enough to the original to justify such close comparison. If the resulting product wasn't set in Mordheim, had none of the factions of Mordheim, and completely dropped the complex post-game sequence for a much simplified system that barely met the definition of campaign progression, then calling people who react badly to the total disconnect between the product on-offer and the product "sold" to them by the marketing "entitled" is just petty trolling.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

RoperPG wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
A company does not get to use the name of a cherished cult product

Wow, entitled much?

When making a new, AoS based, board game, GW had any amount of opportunity to choose a different style or name at the very minimum.

That would be the dumbest move they could do, because they already own the branding for Warhammer Quest. So, make a new Warhammer Quest. What they did was in fact the smartest thing they could do. Use their pre-existing brand that has name recognition.

In which case they must also bear the burden of dealing with the history of that brand and the reasons it has name recognition.

This isn't controversial, it's not some random thing people are inventing for this one release by GW "because they just be AoS haters y'all", creating and managing expectations is literally the whole fething point of marketing. GW can use the brand they own in any way they see fit, but if they choose to use one in a way that substantially departs from what made the brand valuable in the first place and they not only fail to adequately explain those changes but actively play on the original version, they don't get to piss and moan about all the meanie-weenie gamers who're not judging the new version solely on its own merits and it's not faaaaair

Binabik15 wrote:

Speaking of bits/bitz, still looking for advice on a witch hunter conversion now that the Militia kit is gone. I thought maybe a Skitari as a foundation for the cloak, but they're so scifi that I might be just as fast sculpting him from scratch. Where's the kitbash fun in that, though.

Jack Flask wrote:

 malfred wrote:
Link? What are they talking about?

Not sure if you were talking to me but the Tenebrael Shard and Mistweaver Saih are the two elf heroes in The Silver Tower.

The Tree-Revenants are the picture on the left in this facebook link from the post I quoted
https://www.facebook.com/GWWarhammerAgeofSigmar/photos/pcb.475067626023369/475067359356729/?type=3&theater

If you squint really hard it looks like it says "Tree-Revenant".

 Kanluwen wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:

 malfred wrote:
Link? What are they talking about?

Not sure if you were talking to me but the Tenebrael Shard and Mistweaver Saih are the two elf heroes in The Silver Tower.

The Tree-Revenants are the picture on the left in this facebook link from the post I quoted
https://www.facebook.com/GWWarhammerAgeofSigmar/photos/pcb.475067626023369/475067359356729/?type=3&theater

If you squint really hard it looks like it says "Tree-Revenant".

Which suddenly makes the removal of Treekin make so much more sense.

In the fluff, Treekin were the souls of slain Wood Elves animating a body made out of woodland detrius. They were basically Wooden Wraithguard.
In the fluff, the host body for Orion was slain during the ceremony to bring him forth and revived by the forest of Athel Loren via a seed placed within his heart and the ivy that was visible on his arms and legs.

I think they might be expanding upon those two concepts to have slain Elves reanimated by the forests of the Realm of Life. Sold on that, if so.

 NAVARRO wrote:
Fimir lord, Khorne dragon, a huge beetle and WHQ? Man this is the golden age of Fantasy or what?

 VeteranNoob wrote:
Insanely excellent stuff coming out today.
@Mannfred there's always the ignore button. I've made fine use of it so far on these forums

Azazelx wrote:

I've been following this thread without commenting, and aside from the obvious question (Why is a GW standalone Fantasy boardgame release thread bizarrely embedded into an AoS thread, despite being it's own thing - unlike DW:O, or Renegade, or even piddly little Last Patrol??) It seems that you're mostly here for a fight, since you appear fixated on having the same pointless circular argument about it not being a straight re-release of the 21-year old original. Are you the same poster who mentioned that you had major issues with the ridiculous pantomimes embedded in the legacy model rules when AoS came out due to ASD-specific discomfort? That's a serious question, asked deadpan with no emotion or judgement embedded in it.

Warhams-77 wrote:

Spoiler:

From Warhammer Fest - pic taken by HeelanHammer on Twitter

Edit: Could someone please put the huge pic posted earlier on this page into spoiler tags. Thanks

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

Spoiler:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
so if their new product fails to live up to that legacy that is a failure on their part not the customer's

That is a severely entitled viewpoint. The trade name itself is not a representation that the product will live up to anyone's nostalgia. GW wants to make a dungeon crawler board game leveraging their IP. "Warhammer Quest" is a perfectly appropriate title for that product, whatever a given customer would prefer or might expect. It's easy to tell if someone has a genuine interest in a product because they will look at it for what it is, rather than what it (apparently) "ought" to be.

I despise that word, "entitled", it's such a load of BS and is always deployed to shut down criticism that can't otherwise be refuted.

Almost everything about the way GW are pushing nu-WHQ is based on evoking the nostalgia people have for the original game, and even if it were not GW would have to be literally deaf, dumb, blind, and clinically stupid not to recognise that evoking a brand with a strong emotional component to it IS going to create expectations - it's their job, literally their job, to manage those expectations effectively. If they're incapable of effectively communicating to people what the product they're selling is, that's their problem and it's total horse manure to lay the blame for the fallout of that failure on the heads of potential customers.

If GW were to next "bring back" Mordheim using Mordheim's branding, talk about returning a "classic", repeatedly reference the original in their marketing etc, then you're damn right they would be responsible for creating an expectation that what people would be getting would be close enough to the original to justify such close comparison. If the resulting product wasn't set in Mordheim, had none of the factions of Mordheim, and completely dropped the complex post-game sequence for a much simplified system that barely met the definition of campaign progression, then calling people who react badly to the total disconnect between the product on-offer and the product "sold" to them by the marketing "entitled" is just petty trolling.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

RoperPG wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
A company does not get to use the name of a cherished cult product

Wow, entitled much?

When making a new, AoS based, board game, GW had any amount of opportunity to choose a different style or name at the very minimum.

That would be the dumbest move they could do, because they already own the branding for Warhammer Quest. So, make a new Warhammer Quest. What they did was in fact the smartest thing they could do. Use their pre-existing brand that has name recognition.

In which case they must also bear the burden of dealing with the history of that brand and the reasons it has name recognition.

This isn't controversial, it's not some random thing people are inventing for this one release by GW "because they just be AoS haters y'all", creating and managing expectations is literally the whole fething point of marketing. GW can use the brand they own in any way they see fit, but if they choose to use one in a way that substantially departs from what made the brand valuable in the first place and they not only fail to adequately explain those changes but actively play on the original version, they don't get to piss and moan about all the meanie-weenie gamers who're not judging the new version solely on its own merits and it's not faaaaair

You have literally been railing against everything GW has done since the End Times were announced. You whined that the arrival the End Times was going to bring your WFRP game to crashing halt (but, you know, only if you let it). You've complained that the destruction of the World-That-Was meant you could no longer enjoy games and battles set in that world, as if GW came to your house and burned all your old books. You've been nothing short of incensed at Age of Sigmar simply because GW dared to do something different and not up to YOUR expectations. And now you complain about the new Warhammer Quest because it's not a total reprint of an ancient product - which, by the way, is set in a world GW no longer supports. Your surprise at this is baffling.

Dude, seriously: Stop. You're going to give yourself an aneurysm.

You do nothing but detract from the new releases, seemingly without giving the product a chance to stand on its own merits. You rail, you whine, you complain, and you and moan. Enough. It's clear that you are never going to buy into the Age of Sigmar. And that's fine That's okay. You don't have to, believe it or not.

But please get your head out of your backside and stop expecting that everything GW releases is going to exactly meet YOUR personal and very specific expectations. If it hasn't become clear by now, GW has decided to take THEIR product in a different direction - for better or for worse. I'd therefore suggest staying out of the News and Rumors threads, because this pattern is only going to keep repeating itself, you've become a broken record.

EDIT TO ADD: Obviously, I'm not saying you can't continue to post in this fashion, since I'm not a mod. What I am saying is that if it were me, I wouldn't be spending so much time being so completely negative - it can't be healthy to be that negative.

Half-donkeyed attempt to get back on topic:

LOVE the models, and I'll get this just for those if nothing else. I'm genuinely hoping the game itself is fun, too, and I'm hoping for good things to come.

Edit to fix a tag.

I don't think the complaint is that WHQ - SIlver Tower is not a 'total reprint of an ancient product - which, by the way, is set in a world GW no longer supports'. I think its more reasonably put that there is an acceptable debate about whether the standalone game should have been set in the existing WHFB setting as opposed to placing it in the AOS setting. From a strategic perspective GW have probably rightfully identified the success of the WHQ brand name as providing a potential shot in the arm to AOS. From a personal perspective I am disappointed they didn't continue on using the WHFB setting for WHQ because that is what made it successful in the first place. However what's done is done and a lot of those models are very nice indeed so I'll be tempted to get them; how good the game plays is still to be seen. Having put the AOS treatment on WHQ it really seems to indicate that GW might do the same for Blood Bowl which in my view would be a big mistake. Hopefully they stick with the gritty Old World setting for the new edition of Blood Bowl.

Warhammer Armies: Wood Elves wrote:The Oak of Ages grows acorns all year round, but sheds them only when Ghyran, the Wind of Life, reaches its height. These magical seeds are diligently gathered by Ariel's handmiadens, and planted in those regions of the forest that have been ravaged by war or wildfire. Such is the bountiful magic in these acorns that they can grow from seed to sapling, to towering oak in a matter of seconds. This magic too is the reason that the seeds must be gathered swiftly upon their fall. The last squirrel that consumed an acorn from the Oak of Ages stomped much of King's Glade flat, and was brought down only by the combined armies of three high realms.

 NAVARRO wrote:
Fimir lord, Khorne dragon, a huge beetle and WHQ? Man this is the golden age of Fantasy or what?

 pancakeonions wrote:
Hmm. Could we start another thread where we discuss AoS specific stuff that's not related to Warhammer Quest? It's hard to filter back and forth. No interest in AoS, but super keen on WHQ.

Thanks!

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Out of curiosity, when GW does AoS bundles like Count Vilescu's Host... do the included kits come with their full sprues and build options, or is it just allowing you to make the EXACT units mentioned?

 ImAGeek wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Out of curiosity, when GW does AoS bundles like Count Vilescu's Host... do the included kits come with their full sprues and build options, or is it just allowing you to make the EXACT units mentioned?

The kits come with all options. There's no way for them to separate the models easily as the options are spread around the sprues.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Out of curiosity, when GW does AoS bundles like Count Vilescu's Host... do the included kits come with their full sprues and build options, or is it just allowing you to make the EXACT units mentioned?

The kits come with all options. There's no way for them to separate the models easily as the options are spread around the sprues.

Amazing. Thanks. Some of these discounted bundles are suddenly terrific.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I feel people have a right to be aggrieved. It's almost like GW is hedging their bets. They're not sure if the product can sell on its own merits as a stand alone, so they're hoping that people will buy it for AOS and the WHQ badge seems to have been tacked on for some cheap nostalgia.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
See, what I can't wait for is the "star collecting" box for Tzeentch. It's gonna happen. Khorne and Nurgle already got it. Tzeentch and Slaanesh will eventually hit. If they only went with current stuff, I'd predict it would have one box of all the plastics so far (Slaanesh would likely have an exalted chariot kit/option in its box). Those are what I'm really waiting on...
I figure Tzeentch is closer now that they have new toys though.