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.

 Hubris wrote:
As long as they don't take away the option to just play one of the armies in the combined armies idea if a player wishes then i don't see the problem, sure as always players obsessed with a win percentage will just take all the best units from each but i would rather the options exist for others like myself who would build well thought theme armies from the models they like, then punish us because others can't play nice.

Well lets take combined elves as an example. In your book, there are rules for all the elf units with no distinction, but you can just not take those other units.
So when the Dwarves just get rolled into a book with Empire and Brettonia, (probably) I'll just only take Dwarven units.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Hubris wrote:
As long as they don't take away the option to just play one of the armies in the combined armies idea if a player wishes then i don't see the problem, sure as always players obsessed with a win percentage will just take all the best units from each but i would rather the options exist for others like myself who would build well thought theme armies from the models they like, then punish us because others can't play nice.

Well lets take combined elves as an example. In your book, there are rules for all the elf units with no distinction, but you can just not take those other units.
So when the Dwarves just get rolled into a book with Empire and Brettonia, (probably) I'll just only take Dwarven units.

Exactly no harm done really, where as someone like me who has always liked the fluff about the Dwarf communities in the Empire can now decide to add some Empire to the Dwarven units i already own to flesh out the army, assuming that rumour is true.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
At this point I think there's little chance of me being happy with the result as my WHFB armies are Bretonnians, Lizardmen and Wood Elves. It seems the WE are just going to be swallowed by "Elves", Bretonnia swallowed by "Human" and it seems like Lizardmen are in for a big change, squatted? Losing the Slann? Being a stupid bubble army? Not sure at this point... but I've learned from experience to expect the worst from GW.

Give the "bubbles" a chance. I think there's a great opportunity to make a really good world here that will be much more interesting than the generic tolkienesque map we had before (which you can still set your games on, if you wish).

As for the lizardmen,

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Hubris wrote:
As long as they don't take away the option to just play one of the armies in the combined armies idea if a player wishes then i don't see the problem, sure as always players obsessed with a win percentage will just take all the best units from each but i would rather the options exist for others like myself who would build well thought theme armies from the models they like, then punish us because others can't play nice.

Well lets take combined elves as an example. In your book, there are rules for all the elf units with no distinction, but you can just not take those other units.
So when the Dwarves just get rolled into a book with Empire and Brettonia, (probably) I'll just only take Dwarven units.

Yeah, you can do that, but it's still not going to be the same. It's like when Allies hit in 40k. People were like "oh yeah, I'll just not take allies". Even if those people still stick to that mantra, they haven't stopped Allies radically changing the game.

 Hubris wrote:
As long as they don't take away the option to just play one of the armies in the combined armies idea if a player wishes then i don't see the problem, sure as always players obsessed with a win percentage will just take all the best units from each but i would rather the options exist for others like myself who would build well thought theme armies from the models they like, then punish us because others can't play nice.

No I'd prefer people weren't encouraged to just take models from different armies piecemeal. I like my WHFB to be Bretonnians vs Wood Elves, not Generic Elves vs crazy mixed Humans/Dwarfs/Ogres. Especially with GW who can't balance armies and it will inevitably produce cookie cutter mixes that are randomly stronger than other armies.

Not that I have a problem with allying armies, I just prefer it to be done at a gamer-level ("oh, you have 2000pts of Bretonnians? Well me and a mate have 1000pts each of High Elves and Wood Elves, lets play?") than at a core rules level ("hmm, the Dwarf cannon is vastly better than the Empire cannon... I'll take that one... these Bretonnian troops by far make the best Knights, I'll take those, those Empire infantry blocks seem to work best, I'll take those").

The removal of structured and unique armies has not benefited 40k, I don't think it'll benefit Fantasy.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Hubris wrote:
As long as they don't take away the option to just play one of the armies in the combined armies idea if a player wishes then i don't see the problem, sure as always players obsessed with a win percentage will just take all the best units from each but i would rather the options exist for others like myself who would build well thought theme armies from the models they like, then punish us because others can't play nice.

No I'd prefer people weren't encouraged to just take models from different armies piecemeal. I like my WHFB to be Bretonnians vs Wood Elves, not Generic Elves vs crazy mixed Humans/Dwarfs/Ogres. Especially with GW who can't balance armies and it will inevitably produce cookie cutter mixes that are randomly stronger than other armies.

Not that I have a problem with allying armies, I just prefer it to be done at a gamer-level ("oh, you have 2000pts of Bretonnians? Well me and a mate have 1000pts each of High Elves and Wood Elves, lets play?") than at a core rules level ("hmm, the Dwarf cannon is vastly better than the Empire cannon... I'll take that one... these Bretonnian troops by far make the best Knights, I'll take those, those Empire infantry blocks seem to work best, I'll take those").

The removal of structured and unique armies has not benefited 40k, I don't think it'll benefit Fantasy.

Got half way through a big response, decided not worth it, lets just agree we come at the game from a different perspective and local players.

On a basic level i just don't agree with everyone being punished/restricted because some players can't play nice or choose not to because they must win at all costs to make themselves feel good/boost their ego over a game of toy soldiers.

Edit: Just to add that the ally system has benefited my local 40k playerbase, again who you choose to play etc.

To me it's not even about some random WAAC players ruining it for everyone else, I just prefer the cohesiveness of distinct armies (which has nothing to do with the number of books and everything to do with how the rules are written).

I'm not against taking mixed forces, it's just to me they should always been an expansion to the basic rules, not part of the basic rules like they are in 40k.

Allies are an option. OPTION. Option

 Fellwing wrote:
Allies are an option. OPTION. Option

Everything is an option, allies are an option that I don't think should be part of the core rules

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Fellwing wrote:
Allies are an option. OPTION. Option

Everything is an option, allies are an option that I don't think should be part of the core rules

Exactly. Pretty much everything in the game is optional, but the inclusion of it still hugely impacts the game. Tournaments are full of them, you have to prepare your army for it, people are gradually going to get used to it and normalise it, etc...

If I was going to trim down the list, it would look something like this


Order

Kingdoms of Men(Empire/Bretonnia)
Dwarves
Uluthani/Seelie (High/Wood elves)
Lizardmen
Tomb Kings


Destruction

Realms of Chaos (Mortals/Daemons/Beastmen)
Orcs & Goblins (Maybe Ogres here too)
Naggarothi/Unseelie (Dark/Wood elves)
Skaven
Vampire Counts


This setup gives you 5 armies on each side. There is the option to put ogres in with O&G; or you could roll undead into a single evil faction, with ogres given a heavy Dogs of War flavor on the side of order.

 iLLiTHiD wrote:
If I was going to trim down the list, it would look something like this


Order

Kingdoms of Men(Empire/Bretonnia)
Dwarves
Uluthani/Seelie (High/Wood elves)
Lizardmen
Tomb Kings


Destruction

Realms of Chaos (Mortals/Daemons/Beastmen)
Orcs & Goblins (Maybe Ogres here too)


Naggarothi/Unseelie (Dark/Wood elves)
Skaven
Vampire Counts


This setup gives you 5 armies on each side. There is the option to put ogres in with O&G; or you could roll undead into a single evil faction, with ogres given a heavy Dogs of War flavor on the side of order.

Oh man, you just reminded me 5th edition Realm of Chaos, I'm looking at that big awesome box on my bookshelf right now!!!

OK if GW puts some work into the combined army books and makes something on a comparable level to Realm of Chaos then I will be stoked. Think about it; that box was a freaking event. I knew people who picked it up that didn't even play Chaos just because it was so unique.

I can also see Undead going back to their earlier edition roots. They used to be one big combined army that had everything from zombies and mummies being commanded by a Liche, or Vampire or Tomb King.

The odd one out is still Lizardmen. While I don't see them getting lopped off I have trouble seeing who they would be combined with, given their fluff.

I saw the photos of Dwarfs and Ogres, but I dunno if I buy that as a straight alliance. I could see Dwarfs being rolled into the armies of man since they have such deep ties to each other. Ogres could go along side them as well, or could go O&G (giving them a suitable book ally)

 More Dakka wrote:

 iLLiTHiD wrote:
If I was going to trim down the list, it would look something like this

I saw the photos of Dwarfs and Ogres, but I dunno if I buy that as a straight alliance. I could see Dwarfs being rolled into the armies of man since they have such deep ties to each other. Ogres could go along side them as well, or could go O&G (giving them a suitable book ally)

In the latest book

Spoiler:

the Dwarves as an independent nation are pretty much wiped out and the only Ogre Mercs / Allies betray them - all their holds are burning / despoiled except one and that look about to fall with their High King having his head sawed off as a trophy on the last page

sounds drastic...

 Fellwing wrote:
Just read a few rumours which give food for thought. I am far from gullible but they seem credible so just wanted to post my thoughts.
it seems significant to me for a start that end times book 3 and 4 contain basically the two armies from island of blood, which suggests to me that GW is trying to flog as many IoB boxed sets before 9th hits. therefore i don't see how the rules can change that drastically, prob just an overhaul like 40k 7th.
I'm definitely getting into WFB this year, got a Legions of Chaos army planned but unsure as to whether i should learn 8th edition too much if that makes sense, i might just be better off learning a new ruleset from scratch (which, in my opinion, will be more like 40k, the rules of which i am very familiar with)
regarding rumours of only 6 factions i can only speculate this
Chaos/Skaven
Humans/dwarfs
Elves
Orcs and Goblins/Ogre Kingdoms
Undead
lizardmen

seems a bit drastic?

any thoughts??

as far as i know ogres become a part of th humans and most of the humans band together. also all the elves unite and the dwarves join the humans. lizardmen i dont think will be around anymore and all undead and tomb kings unite and skaven sort of ally with the united chaos armies but are still seperate. so really most of the current armies will still be playable but are united in one army book for every few factions. finally i dont think you should buy any new models untill 9th comes out for several obvious reasons. sorry for my bad grammar im doing this on xbox with a screaming baby

screaming baby

Ha been there done that. By the way has anyone told you yet that this is the easy part?

No way GW is dropping Lizards entirely, they just gave them a bunch of new kits.

Of course! They're probably just building it up. Lizards will have a very dramatic return I'm sure!

I suspect that GW is actually going to keep all codexes separate. What time have they ever made things cheaper for us?

 dragoonmaster101 wrote:
I suspect that GW is actually going to keep all codexes separate. What time have they ever made things cheaper for us?

Valid point! The more releases the better, in their eyes.

 Fellwing wrote:

 dragoonmaster101 wrote:
I suspect that GW is actually going to keep all codexes separate. What time have they ever made things cheaper for us?

Valid point! The more releases the better, in their eyes.

Big overview book with the basics for armies, then "supplement" codexes with the more detailed lists for the individuals.

Another valid point! They do seem to be very fond of supplements at the moment

That's because it allows them to carve out content that WOULD have been in the codex, repackage it & sell it to you at a premium. Hell sometimes they don't add ANYTHING. They literally just take stuff away, repackage the old stuff & cut some out for a supplement without so much as a single new unit.... I swear I'm not still bitter over the latest Dark Eldar release which is why I have stopped playing 40k completely...

A lot of video game companies have beenn doing the same thing with their day 1 DLC gak or even worse On-Disc DLC. GW is just following the model that works well in that sector. I mean if they at least waited and released the suplement 6 months or so after the main book to resurge interest it would at least appear as though they weren't putting us through the wringer.

I seriously don't like this "supplement" culture they have going where "supplement" means $50 for 4 pages of rules on top of the $50 I spent for the actual codex, on top of the $80 for the actual rule book. I'd much rather see the cost of the armybook go up to $60-$65 and include the extra 4 pages for the supplement rules.

I am under no delusions this hobby is expensive. But the supplements are the straw that broke the camels back for me. There is zero reason they couldn't just add those into the codex / armybook except greed. But GW is a publicly traded company accountable to their shareholders and their shareholders only care about their dividend checks. I guess I'm so passionate because I love this game, but the road it's going down is a road I cannot will not follow and one I feel will lead to ruin in the pursuit of short term gains.

I know a store owner who actually allows printed out PDFs of the supplements rule sections and he won't stock them because he feels they're complete bs. If you want one he can order it but his words are "I sure as hell wouldn't pay $50 for 3 pages of rules and I don't expect you to either".

That is a store owner I'd like to buy a beer for!!

I really just cant imagine GW dropping any of the armies, I understand the combining of Bretonia and Empire as well as the combining of the chaos forces. But I can not imagine them dropping a popular army like Lizardmen or shoving Dwarves into the realm of man.

Does anyone think that these rumors are scaring people off from buying new units or starting armies? Wouldn't GW be smart just to get 9th out asap and get people buying WHFB again.

 ripcord wrote:

Does anyone think that these rumors are scaring people off from buying new units or starting armies? Wouldn't GW be smart just to get 9th out asap and get people buying WHFB again.

Yes. Everyone in my group is on a purchasing freeze. I have gone from about a box a week to one box since Archaon and even then only because it was 30% off and I had $20 in store credit so I got a DE Dragon for under $20.

They would be smart to take a lesson from Privateer Press or Wyrd games & actually be open with their players. Nobody is going to rip off GWs new system if they inform their playerbase. PP does webacsts detailing upcomming changes & WHY they did it. Wyrd does an open beta , both companies are growing immensely. Hell almost every week in my area someone from 40k or fantasy picks up a WM/H all in one starter box.

I am honestly sitting with about 300$ that i was gonna start a new army with but now i'm just gonna wait till 9th. Maybe i wont wanna start a new army.

There's literally no evidence for any of this...

The advancing fluff doesn't squat any faction, it kills off all the factions. So either 9th is set pre end times or it takes place in an alternate timeline. Either way nothing we can predict.

We have a few End Times specific groupings of factions that can ally. However this is specific to the End Times setting and doesn't suggest 9th will have fewer books. It specifically names which books are needed.

Perhaps we will see a Ravening Hordes style 6th edition launch because of fundamental changes followed by in depth updates in distinct books. However at this point there's no logic to squatting any faction, although I suspect Brettonia may see large updates due to age and neglect, perhaps unrecognizably so.

I've basically said screw it with buying for the games. I'm just buying models that look cool to me, now. To be fair, I'm actually allowed to mix'n'match now in 40K and Ally in Fantasy, so that's not really a big issue.

 ripcord wrote:
I am honestly sitting with about 300$ that i was gonna start a new army with but now i'm just gonna wait till 9th. Maybe i wont wanna start a new army.

This is definitely the smart play at this point. Even if nobody gets squatted who's to say 9th editions rules won't be the cluster feth that 40k has become with supplements & allies all over the place?