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.

 Alpharius wrote:
47 pages in - are we out of rumors?

We seem to be out of news...

I'm thinking this thread needs to be closed, and when we actually have some new rumors or...news, we can start another one?

Well, it's been a fun ride. I don't imagine we will have anything concrete for a month or two. This thread seems to have succeeded in bringing these big rumors to light with the WHFB community, which I feel is the most important aspect. Should these changes to WHFB come to pass, hopefully there will be a minimum of people who get caught spending large sums of money on a game that radically changes in a few month's time, in which case we've done our good deed to the gaming community.

Well theres the combined orcs and ogres rumour which seems to be confirmed with the new end times book. What with grimgor being incarnate of beasts and his abilitys affecting orcs and ogrss?

 Alpharius wrote:
47 pages in - are we out of rumors?

We seem to be out of news...

I'm thinking this thread needs to be closed, and when we actually have some new rumors or...news, we can start another one?

I'm pretty sure more news will pop up, and I think it is best to just keep it here.

 Crazyterran wrote:
So, who wants to play 8th and ignore this abomination of a new game?

*raises hand* There has been a recent revival of WHFB in my local group, I think we're all just going to stick with 8th if 9th goes the way all the rumors are pointing.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
47 pages in - are we out of rumors?

We seem to be out of news...

I'm thinking this thread needs to be closed, and when we actually have some new rumors or...news, we can start another one?

I'm pretty sure more news will pop up, and I think it is best to just keep it here.

IF it can stay on topic?

Sure.

If not?

Well...

We are seeing a lot of contention because people are really worried about what will happen to a game that they have invested in - it brings out all of our poo flinging instincts.

A lot of what I am reading is making me very nervous - and I would say that I am doubtful of the veracity, except I remember what happened with WotC and 4th edition D&D (which proves that even large companies will burn bridges that they are standing on when the start the fire). When a company gets panicked about one of their properties... they can do really stupid things.

It is all too easy to picture the panicked GW behemoth destroying the game with its frenzied thrashing about.

They know something is wrong, they want sales to recover.

But they are unwilling to admit that the failure is their own fault. That they need to reconnect with their audience.

Heck, they need to know what that audience is.

So, it seems all too likely that they are producing a version of Warhammer that has been trampled by a panicked mammoth.

I honestly think that GW would benefit, in a financial manner, from releasing the rules and army books for older editions - either as e-books or as printed 'collector's editions'.

If nothing else, it would give them data points about which editions maintain enough loyalty to be worth pursuing.

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules - my copy has started shedding pages. (My favorite edition of the game - and the version most compatible with Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. Not a coincident.)

But given that the armies have changed so very much from those halcyon days of yore it is unlikely that they would go that far back.... (Back when all the armies could be contained in a single book - and the Slann were pretty much renamed bullywugs....)

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules - my copy has started shedding pages. (My favorite edition of the game - and the version most compatible with Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. Not a coincident.)

this is why i own 3 copies of that book (one that barely qualifies as a book anymore, i have to say this whole thing really make me a bit nauseous, i have a lot of history in this game, a lot of fond memories of friends and my own kids that involve "The Hobby" and every one of them to a man says the same thing when they look at these rumors...i did not start playing fantasy to have small skirmish battles.

its funny, my gaming group has been discussing for some time prior doing some old chaos champion campaigns that culminated in large scale chaos battles...i guess GW may be giving me a reason to go totally oldhammer.

 knighthaunter wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules

this is why i own 3 copies of that book (one that barely qualifies as a book anymore, i have to say this whole thing really make me a bit nauseous, i have a lot of history in this game, a lot of fond memories of friends and my own kids that involve "The Hobby" and every one of them to a man says the same thing when they look at these rumors...i did not start playing fantasy to have small skirmish battles.

If you played back in 3E-5E, I'm pretty sure that your battles were far smaller than what GW currently pushes in 8E.

 Ozymandias wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
So, who wants to play 8th and ignore this abomination of a new game?

*raises hand* There has been a recent revival of WHFB in my local group, I think we're all just going to stick with 8th if 9th goes the way all the rumors are pointing.

Same here. I'm scouting to pick up those gaps in my armies and all the books I need, just in case these rumors bear out.

So, it seems all too likely that they are producing a version of Warhammer that has been trampled by a panicked mammoth.

I honestly think that GW would benefit, in a financial manner, from releasing the rules and army books for older editions - either as e-books or as printed 'collector's editions'.

If nothing else, it would give them data points about which editions maintain enough loyalty to be worth pursuing.

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules - my copy has started shedding pages. (My favorite edition of the game - and the version most compatible with Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. Not a coincident.)

But given that the armies have changed so very much from those halcyon days of yore it is unlikely that they would go that far back.... (Back when all the armies could be contained in a single book - and the Slann were pretty much renamed bullywugs....)

Yes this to support older editions would provide those playing bigger, square-based games a way to enjoy the mass-movement style of Warhammer Fantasy, assuming if GW really does change WHF to a circle-base skirmish game. I
EDIT: Damn I was trying to quote that!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 knighthaunter wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules

this is why i own 3 copies of that book (one that barely qualifies as a book anymore, i have to say this whole thing really make me a bit nauseous, i have a lot of history in this game, a lot of fond memories of friends and my own kids that involve "The Hobby" and every one of them to a man says the same thing when they look at these rumors...i did not start playing fantasy to have small skirmish battles.

If you played back in 3E-5E, I'm pretty sure that your battles were far smaller than what GW currently pushes in 8E.

In my case we had some pretty danged big battles - enough to fill the length of a Ping Pong table on each side. Each player bringing a part of the army. I can't remember the points values from back then, but it was lots.

Mostly Ral Partha minis - and some of those players now use those same figures, and that same table, for running Battlesystem games. (The one by TSR, from back in the eighties.)

My area is rich in Grognards.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 knighthaunter wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules

this is why i own 3 copies of that book (one that barely qualifies as a book anymore, i have to say this whole thing really make me a bit nauseous, i have a lot of history in this game, a lot of fond memories of friends and my own kids that involve "The Hobby" and every one of them to a man says the same thing when they look at these rumors...i did not start playing fantasy to have small skirmish battles.

If you played back in 3E-5E, I'm pretty sure that your battles were far smaller than what GW currently pushes in 8E.

In my case we had some pretty danged big battles - enough to fill the length of a Ping Pong table on each side. Each player bringing a part of the army. I can't remember the points values from back then, but it was lots.

Mostly Ral Partha minis - and some of those players now use those same figures, and that same table, for running Battlesystem games. (The one by TSR, from back in the eighties.)

My area is rich in Grognards.

The Auld Grump

That's us as well, we played on a ping pong table to, this myth that the game was small back in these days (3rd/4th we were mainly out of the game for most of 5th) just isn't true for the people i know, sure for the times it was still a spendy game, but people also were more apt to play with non GW armies back then, the dwarf player in my group hardly had any GW figures in his army. really most of the battles we had then by model count were significantly larger than the 3k or so battles i play today. We played in a pretty tight group of people so i cant speak for the averages of other people but the battles we did back in that era were typically pretty huge.

 knighthaunter wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 knighthaunter wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I can say that I would buy a copy of the third edition rules

this is why i own 3 copies of that book (one that barely qualifies as a book anymore, i have to say this whole thing really make me a bit nauseous, i have a lot of history in this game, a lot of fond memories of friends and my own kids that involve "The Hobby" and every one of them to a man says the same thing when they look at these rumors...i did not start playing fantasy to have small skirmish battles.

If you played back in 3E-5E, I'm pretty sure that your battles were far smaller than what GW currently pushes in 8E.

In my case we had some pretty danged big battles - enough to fill the length of a Ping Pong table on each side. Each player bringing a part of the army. I can't remember the points values from back then, but it was lots.

Mostly Ral Partha minis - and some of those players now use those same figures, and that same table, for running Battlesystem games. (The one by TSR, from back in the eighties.)

My area is rich in Grognards.

The Auld Grump

That's us as well, we played on a ping pong table to, this myth that the game was small back in these days (3rd/4th we were mainly out of the game for most of 5th) just isn't true for the people i know, sure for the times it was still a spendy game, but people also were more apt to play with non GW armies back then, the dwarf player in my group hardly had any GW figures in his army. really most of the battles we had then by model count were significantly larger than the 3k or so battles i play today. We played in a pretty tight group of people so i cant speak for the averages of other people but the battles we did back in that era were typically pretty huge.

And we were small compared to the WWII games - who would use the floor at the Armory gymnasium. (The Armory was just that - a National Guard Armory, and is closed now.)

The Auld Grump


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On topic - Warhammer has been a large scale game since at least third edition - though second edition had some excellent small scale scenarios. McDeath, Lichemaster....

I think that instead of trying to forge into new territory the folks at GW need to look at what used to work, and try to recapture that feeling.

I think that most of the damage being done to the property is what they are doing with the forces involved - having a big box o' halberdiers worked a whole lot better than needing to buy four boxes to make one unit.

I loved the poseable plastic infantry boxes when they first came out - and used them for a lot of games, not just Warhammer.

Then they lost the posability. I can't help but think that they got rid of the ability to build your own models, and even combine pieces across sets, because people were using them for games other than Warhammer.

Then they dropped the numbers of figures in a box. Then they had the gall to wonder why sales were dropping.

Then they started focusing on units that had built in elite versions - and charged the prices for the elite unit.

Now... over the top pieces of dung in all the armies. Eagles pulling trailers. Top heavy war altars. Skeletons surfing on giant metal cobras....

I don't love them any more.

More and more, I am thinking that ninth edition is going to be the last nail in the coffin lid for Warhammer - and the corpse has already started drawing flies.

The Auld Grump - Kings of War is filling the hole for me - but I miss at least liking Warhammer.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
I loved the poseable plastic infantry boxes when they first came out - and used them for a lot of games, not just Warhammer.

Then they lost the posability. I can't help but think that they got rid of the ability to build your own models, and even combine pieces across sets, because people were using them for games other than Warhammer.

Then they dropped the numbers of figures in a box. Then they had the gall to wonder why sales were dropping.

Then they started focusing on units that had built in elite versions - and charged the prices for the elite unit.

I can't imagine GW got rid of posability because people were buying the kits. That makes no sense, even for GW. GW got rid of posability, because it took up more space on the sprue and it raised the bar to entry compared to a simpler snap-fit kit that a child could assemble. The improved ranking and durability don't hurt, though.

The reduced figure count was naked profit-taking, but consider Girl Scout Cookies. Quick, how many Thin Mints per box? 40? Wrong. That just got cut to 32 cookies, -20% less stuff. And they raised the price from $4 to $5, a +25% price hike. Combined, for the same 160 cookies, we went from $16 (4 boxes of 40) to $25 (5 boxes of 32) - a +56.25% price increase. Those fething money grubbing monsters bumped the price of cookies so much, it makes GW look saintly and restrained.

The 2-in-1 and 3-in-1 kits aren't a bad thing, but yes, the prices went up even further! Pity, as some of those kits are quite pretty.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
I loved the poseable plastic infantry boxes when they first came out - and used them for a lot of games, not just Warhammer.

Then they lost the posability. I can't help but think that they got rid of the ability to build your own models, and even combine pieces across sets, because people were using them for games other than Warhammer.

Then they dropped the numbers of figures in a box. Then they had the gall to wonder why sales were dropping.

Then they started focusing on units that had built in elite versions - and charged the prices for the elite unit.

I can't imagine GW got rid of posability because people were buying the kits. That makes no sense, even for GW. GW got rid of posability, because it took up more space on the sprue and it raised the bar to entry compared to a simpler snap-fit kit that a child could assemble. The improved ranking and durability don't hurt, though.

The reduced figure count was naked profit-taking, but consider Girl Scout Cookies. Quick, how many Thin Mints per box? 40? Wrong. That just got cut to 32 cookies, -20% less stuff. And they raised the price from $4 to $5, a +25% price hike. Combined, for the same 160 cookies, we went from $16 (4 boxes of 40) to $25 (5 boxes of 32) - a +56.25% price increase. Those fething money grubbing monsters bumped the price of cookies so much, it makes GW look saintly and restrained.

The 2-in-1 and 3-in-1 kits aren't a bad thing, but yes, the prices went up even further! Pity, as some of those kits are quite pretty.

You're getting ripped off by the Girls Scouts in SoCal dude. I bought cookies this past weekend for $3/box.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
I loved the poseable plastic infantry boxes when they first came out - and used them for a lot of games, not just Warhammer.

Then they lost the posability. I can't help but think that they got rid of the ability to build your own models, and even combine pieces across sets, because people were using them for games other than Warhammer.

Then they dropped the numbers of figures in a box. Then they had the gall to wonder why sales were dropping.

Then they started focusing on units that had built in elite versions - and charged the prices for the elite unit.

I can't imagine GW got rid of posability because people were buying the kits. That makes no sense, even for GW. GW got rid of posability, because it took up more space on the sprue and it raised the bar to entry compared to a simpler snap-fit kit that a child could assemble. The improved ranking and durability don't hurt, though.

The reduced figure count was naked profit-taking, but consider Girl Scout Cookies. Quick, how many Thin Mints per box? 40? Wrong. That just got cut to 32 cookies, -20% less stuff. And they raised the price from $4 to $5, a +25% price hike. Combined, for the same 160 cookies, we went from $16 (4 boxes of 40) to $25 (5 boxes of 32) - a +56.25% price increase. Those fething money grubbing monsters bumped the price of cookies so much, it makes GW look saintly and restrained.

The 2-in-1 and 3-in-1 kits aren't a bad thing, but yes, the prices went up even further! Pity, as some of those kits are quite pretty.

You're getting ripped off by the Girls Scouts in SoCal dude. I bought cookies this past weekend for $3/box.

Were they restic?

Prestor Jon wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Then they dropped the numbers of figures in a box. Then they had the gall to wonder why sales were dropping.

Then they started focusing on units that had built in elite versions - and charged the prices for the elite unit.

The reduced figure count was naked profit-taking, but consider Girl Scout Cookies. Quick, how many Thin Mints per box? 40? Wrong. That just got cut to 32 cookies, -20% less stuff. And they raised the price from $4 to $5, a +25% price hike. Combined, for the same 160 cookies, we went from $16 (4 boxes of 40) to $25 (5 boxes of 32) - a +56.25% price increase. Those fething money grubbing monsters bumped the price of cookies so much, it makes GW look saintly and restrained.

You're getting ripped off by the Girls Scouts in SoCal dude. I bought cookies this past weekend for $3/box.

You're only paying $3/box???

RAAGE!!!!!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
I loved the poseable plastic infantry boxes when they first came out - and used them for a lot of games, not just Warhammer.

Then they lost the posability. I can't help but think that they got rid of the ability to build your own models, and even combine pieces across sets, because people were using them for games other than Warhammer.

Then they dropped the numbers of figures in a box. Then they had the gall to wonder why sales were dropping.

Then they started focusing on units that had built in elite versions - and charged the prices for the elite unit.

I can't imagine GW got rid of posability because people were buying the kits. That makes no sense, even for GW. GW got rid of posability, because it took up more space on the sprue and it raised the bar to entry compared to a simpler snap-fit kit that a child could assemble. The improved ranking and durability don't hurt, though.

The reduced figure count was naked profit-taking, but consider Girl Scout Cookies. Quick, how many Thin Mints per box? 40? Wrong. That just got cut to 32 cookies, -20% less stuff. And they raised the price from $4 to $5, a +25% price hike. Combined, for the same 160 cookies, we went from $16 (4 boxes of 40) to $25 (5 boxes of 32) - a +56.25% price increase. Those fething money grubbing monsters bumped the price of cookies so much, it makes GW look saintly and restrained.

The 2-in-1 and 3-in-1 kits aren't a bad thing, but yes, the prices went up even further! Pity, as some of those kits are quite pretty.

You know... either I am a genius at posing properly so the figures can be ranked up easily, or the problem is just not as bad as GW would like you to believe. I never had that problem.

And I do not believe that it is because I am a genius at posing miniatures.

I may grant you the space on the frames, but I pretty much stopped buying when they lost the poseable aspect. That was pretty much why I bought so many of the older sets of plastics. (Plus, the detail went way] down - using the smaller pieces meant a lot fewer undercuts to allow for.)

I never bothered counting the cookies for Girl Scout cookies - the point is not the cookies, it is supporting the Girl Scouts.

The Auld Grump, as long as the cookies are made with real Girl Scouts.


*EDIT* As for the Three In One and Two In One Kits... I think that they pretty much universally look like dung, at least in regards to the war machines and big monsters. Some of the infantry and cavalry look okay - but not at those prices.

IIRC, Empire Swordsmen & Militia don't rank particularly well.

I have a *bunch* of old Empire infantry, NOS. Wanna buy it? I'll give you a fair price.

Going forward, I'm thinking maybe just give $5. Girls and I both probably come out ahead with a straight charitable donation.

I rather like the look of the HE 2-in-1 Shadow Warriors / Sisters of Avelorn kit:

$50 is a bit steep, but I might try to hunt them on discount for Mordheim.

If you start talking about how you're eating Girl Scouts, I think you'll go to jail.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
IIRC, Empire Swordsmen & Militia don't rank particularly well.

I have a *bunch* of old Empire infantry, NOS. Wanna buy it? I'll give you a fair price.

The Militia are kind of a special case - they were intended for a skirmish game, and, I think, were fielded as skirmishers in one of the older editions of Warhammer. They weren't really intended to rank up.

But I never had that problem with the Swordsmen/Halberdiers... problems with the halberds losing their blades, yest. Ranking up, no.

Going forward, I'm thinking maybe just give $5. Girls and I both probably come out ahead with a straight charitable donation.

I rather like the look of the HE 2-in-1 Shadow Warriors / Sisters of Avelorn kit:

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Shadow-Warriors

If you start talking about how you're eating Girl Scouts, I think you'll go to jail.

As I said, the infantry and cavalry 2-in-1 sets can look decent - and I will definitely give you your example as looking downright good. *EDIT* Until I saw the bow and sword combo... Watch the High Elves being unable to shoot arrows and not be able to effectively deflect blows! Put either the bows or the swords away, dummies.

But looking at the pieces of phlegm for the sphinx thingies, the war altar thingies, and Mortis Engine thingies... they are brown and sound like a bell. (Dung!) As do the huge chested gryphons that were saddled by the Empire. (But lots of good eating on those things! Plenty of white meat!)

The Auld Grump

The Militia are definitely "special" - they are terrible for ranking up.

I kinda want a set of Shadow Warriors because the posing and options look good. Very stylish bodies for weapon swaps.

I've kind of ignored the WFB monsters since they moved to plastic. I think the newest monster I own is the Forest Dragon, but it could be the "bullhead" Keeper of Secrets. Sure, the new stuff has lots of detail, but I rather like the Lizardmen dinosaurs. Those look they'd be a lot of fun to play with. Pity they're so expensive.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
but I miss at least liking Warhammer.

That sums it up perfectly.

Help me out here - is any of this actually On Topic?

It's not, not off-topic Alph.

Are 3-in-1 kits and giant Monsters not the rumored direction of WFB? Same with Grimdark (tm) High Elves like the Shadow Warriors?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Are 3-in-1 kits and giant Monsters not the rumored direction of WFB? Same with Grimdark (tm) High Elves like the Shadow Warriors?

I hope not. I got really excited when those shadow warriors came out, then they turned out to be the same 5 models repeated with no options or possibility and I suddenly regretted buying 40 of them.

Well, that's pretty disappointing. OTOH, for Mordheim, maybe that's OK.

 Alpharius wrote:
Help me out here - is any of this actually On Topic?

Not really, no. Just a lot of griping. Is the griping deserved? Probably. But griping is neither News nor Rumors. I keep checking this thread when I see new posts, hoping there might be something new, but no luck.

And with the way GW handles public announcements... there will be no announcement until a few weeks before the new game is released.

I swear to Gogamagog, GW does the opposite of advertising...

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
And with the way GW handles public announcements... there will be no announcement until a few weeks before the new game is released.

I swear to Gogamagog, GW does the opposite of advertising...

The Auld Grump

That is their way.

In all honesty though, they do need to wait until Archaon is released before they can really start getting into specifics about drastic changes for a new edition (or entirely new game). They put resources into the End Times so they really need to allow that to earn the money it can on its own before it starts charting the future publicly. So, IMHO, there is nothing wrong with their silence at this point.

However, I will agree that it has affected my plans for the future. I've been working on putting together an Empire army for some time and was just about to start pumping away at it. Now, looks like they are in for some pretty massive changes, meaning it is really hard to devote lots of time to prep them for tournaments if 9th Ed invalidates units from my army.

I will agree, if there is still no word of the changes a few weeks after the Archaon book is released, it probably is the time to pull out the torches and pitchforks and start moving on Nottingham and Memphis. Until then, I'll just sit back, watch and hope things improve.