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.

 dragoonmaster101 wrote:
If they are shelving fantasy why do you guys think they just made new models for it... They aren't that stupid. I may take this time of panic to build up a skaven force!

Couple reasons:

1. GW thinks abut short term gains, not long term.
2. GW makes many decisions that make sense to their board, but not to any/most of us discussing it online.
3. They blew up the world already-what options are available besides starting anew?

4. They're not shelving fantasy, they're giving it a makeover.

 Vermis wrote:
You've got me there, PRND. But I'll let you into a wee secret: that edition you like? That eighth edition? There's a whole lot of other people who stopped playing it, and stopped buying stuff for it, for largely the same reasons. I don't have to play the game right this instant to read about the worsening financial reports, the gamers staying away in droves, and aaaall their complaints that let me know that 8th ed is still clunky, rubbish, buy-to-win, business-as-usual Warhammer. That's why it's dying. That's why GW threw up their arms in clueless exasperation and blew up the planet. That's why they're shaking that ol' rules snowglobe harder than usual. Or did you honestly think that GW were taking 30+ years to conscientiously and very gradually toil their way towards a completely balanced, elegant, and affordable wargame?

You can blame me for it if you like. Wouldn't be the first time. But that doesn't make GW more benevolent, or make 8th ed more popular or longer-lived. It drove players off and now it's gone too.

Do you remember how people reacted to sixth edition? Or seventh edition? Or eighth edition? The release of each drove players off in droves.

And one of those edition releases invalidated every army book out there. The fact that people stay away from eighth bears no correlation to the ruleset itself.

As for eighth being clunky. I remember the units of 5 chaos knights that destroyed entire armies(And I'm talking literal armies.), or that chaos army of 11 models that tabled people. Eighth is far less of a bad ruleset than any of the previous books we've had. And that is a fact.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

 Vermis wrote:
You've got me there, PRND. But I'll let you into a wee secret: that edition you like? That eighth edition? There's a whole lot of other people who stopped playing it, and stopped buying stuff for it, for largely the same reasons. I don't have to play the game right this instant to read about the worsening financial reports, the gamers staying away in droves, and aaaall their complaints that let me know that 8th ed is still clunky, rubbish, buy-to-win, business-as-usual Warhammer. That's why it's dying. That's why GW threw up their arms in clueless exasperation and blew up the planet. That's why they're shaking that ol' rules snowglobe harder than usual. Or did you honestly think that GW were taking 30+ years to conscientiously and very gradually toil their way towards a completely balanced, elegant, and affordable wargame?

You can blame me for it if you like. Wouldn't be the first time. But that doesn't make GW more benevolent, or make 8th ed more popular or longer-lived. It drove players off and now it's gone too.

Do you remember how people reacted to sixth edition? Or seventh edition? Or eighth edition? The release of each drove players off in droves.

And one of those edition releases invalidated every army book out there. The fact that people stay away from eighth bears no correlation to the ruleset itself.

As for eighth being clunky. I remember the units of 5 chaos knights that destroyed entire armies(And I'm talking literal armies.), or that chaos army of 11 models that tabled people. Eighth is far less of a bad ruleset than any of the previous books we've had. And that is a fact.

Indeed.

And anecdotal evidence warning, but I've literally never seen as many people playing Fantasy as I have in 8th. Once everyone had adjusted, 8th seemed to draw back in a lot more players than it purportedly lost. It was next to impossible for me to find games in 6th/7th that weren't organized events, tournaments, or campaigns, but in 8th that's never been an issue, especially where I am now as WHFB and Warmahordes are the only miniatures games played at my local.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

Do you remember how people reacted to sixth edition? Or seventh edition? Or eighth edition? The release of each drove players off in droves.

And one of those edition releases invalidated every army book out there. The fact that people stay away from eighth bears no correlation to the ruleset itself.

As for eighth being clunky. I remember the units of 5 chaos knights that destroyed entire armies(And I'm talking literal armies.), or that chaos army of 11 models that tabled people. Eighth is far less of a bad ruleset than any of the previous books we've had. And that is a fact.

No, they didn't. 6th edition and Ravening Hordes was extremely well received and heralded a period of unprecedented growth in Fantasy.

7th edition's reception was "meh" since the changes to the core mechanics were pretty minor, only the very last couple of books caused people to leave because they were so unbalanced (DE, VC and the final nail in the coffin, Chaos Demons).

And when the vast majority of people that left in 8th say that it was because of the rules, then you have to start thinking that it was because of the rules.

If a unit of 5 chaos knights managed to destroy an entire army it was because their opponent was extremely inept, because that was the thing that previous editions had that 8th lacks, you actually needed to use tactics to win the game and if you played poorly you lost big. In 8th all you need is to roll good dice.

8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Platuan4th wrote:

Indeed.

And anecdotal evidence warning, but I've literally never seen as many people playing Fantasy as I have in 8th. Once everyone had adjusted, 8th seemed to draw back in a lot more players than it purportedly lost. It was next to impossible for me to find games in 6th/7th that weren't organized events, tournaments, or campaigns, but in 8th that's never been an issue, especially where I am now as WHFB and Warmahordes are the only miniatures games played at my local.

And if that was even remotely true in a global scale instead of your very limited local environment, Fantasy wouldn't have dropped from the number 2 spot to the number 7 or 8 in the most sold miniature wargames ranking.

PhantomViper wrote:


8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

Competitive WHFB has never taken place on such a large scale before 8th. While 8th absolutely needs a few changes from a competitive perspective, it still provides a very solid and good basic job. If you really think that GW decided to re-start (read: kill off) WHFB because of 8th's ruleset, then you don't know anything about GW or WHFB.

 Sigvatr wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:


8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

Competitive WHFB has never taken place on such a large scale before 8th. While 8th absolutely needs a few changes from a competitive perspective, it still provides a very solid and good basic job. If you really think that GW decided to re-start (read: kill off) WHFB because of 8th's ruleset, then you don't know anything about GW or WHFB.

Do you have any proof of any of those statements? Because I remember the days of 6th edition GTs with hundreds of participants, I remember the days of local store tournaments filled to capacity and with waiting lists. And now? All I see is big tournaments with less people than ever and local store tournaments have stopped because no one ever showed up.

And GW decided to revamp WHFB because of dwindling profits -> those profits are falling because less people are playing -> less people are playing because the rules are crap.

Addendum: Its very hard to make any type of comparison for this data, but I went and took a look at one of the most iconic events in WHFB, the ETC. It seems like the number of participants from 2013 to 2014 dropped from 256 to 200 and that the accompanying ESC that at its peak added a further 220 people, was down to just 60 in 2013 and in 2014 was dropped completely?

This is all just anecdotal, I know, but it doesn't seem to point to a growing competitive meta for Fantasy.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:


8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

Competitive WHFB has never taken place on such a large scale before 8th. While 8th absolutely needs a few changes from a competitive perspective, it still provides a very solid and good basic job. If you really think that GW decided to re-start (read: kill off) WHFB because of 8th's ruleset, then you don't know anything about GW or WHFB.

Do you have any proof of any of those statements? Because I remember the days of 6th edition GTs with hundreds of participants, I remember the days of local store tournaments filled to capacity and with waiting lists. And now? All I see is big tournaments with less people than ever and local store tournaments have stopped because no one ever showed up.

And GW decided to revamp WHFB because of dwindling profits -> those profits are falling because less people are playing -> less people are playing because the rules are crap.

Less people are playing because the price point to start or expand has gotten redonkuless....8th is pretty solid as a ruleset, with minor tweeks needed in the magic section, steadfast rules, and probably cannons.

 quickfuze wrote:

Less people are playing because the price point to start or expand has gotten redonkuless....8th is pretty solid as a ruleset, with minor tweeks needed in the magic section, steadfast rules, and probably cannons.

You guys keep saying that but that isn't what the people that have stopped playing state is the reason for leaving, those people say it was the rules.

PhantomViper wrote:

 thedarkavenger wrote:

Do you remember how people reacted to sixth edition? Or seventh edition? Or eighth edition? The release of each drove players off in droves.

And one of those edition releases invalidated every army book out there. The fact that people stay away from eighth bears no correlation to the ruleset itself.

As for eighth being clunky. I remember the units of 5 chaos knights that destroyed entire armies(And I'm talking literal armies.), or that chaos army of 11 models that tabled people. Eighth is far less of a bad ruleset than any of the previous books we've had. And that is a fact.

No, they didn't. 6th edition and Ravening Hordes was extremely well received and heralded a period of unprecedented growth in Fantasy.

7th edition's reception was "meh" since the changes to the core mechanics were pretty minor, only the very last couple of books caused people to leave because they were so unbalanced (DE, VC and the final nail in the coffin, Chaos Demons).

And when the vast majority of people that left in 8th say that it was because of the rules, then you have to start thinking that it was because of the rules.

If a unit of 5 chaos knights managed to destroy an entire army it was because their opponent was extremely inept, because that was the thing that previous editions had that 8th lacks, you actually needed to use tactics to win the game and if you played poorly you lost big. In 8th all you need is to roll good dice.

8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

This.

6th Edition *expanded* the player base. Whatever players left in 5th were more than made up by new players coming in. 6th made a much larger portion of one's army playable, rather than just the Heroes allotment. Armies actually had to look something like an army. It is dishonest argument to say that 6th had a next effect to drive players away.

7th rules didn't drive anyone out. 7th was a cleanup of 6th, and a pretty decent one at that. 7th basically took every FAQ issue from 6th (and there were a lot, due to the new ruleset and large number of players), and addressed all of them in the rules, fairly cleanly. The problem with 7th was the later Army Books, specifically Daemons, Undead & DE having power levels far greater than everything else in the game, coupled with a slower release schedule that allowed them to dominate for far too long.

As note above, 8th was so bad, that GW had to wipe the slate clean. That is the opposite of good. Whether this is army books or rules, is hard to say, but it's very fair to say that 8th is the worst edition. It forces old players to convert units to hordes, while raising the barrier for new players in an unreasonable way. Whereas in 5th and 6th, there were a lot fewer minis needed to have a decent army.

I thought the price to get in to fantasy was about the same as 40k.

I mean you can make an Ogres army pretty cheaply, and all of the battalions are about the same price as 40k box sets. The only other expense really is the movement trays.

I had recently bought some models and am working on a wood-elf fantasy army. (Okay, so I bought the models when the Wood Elves were released and am just now assembling and painting them )
But it didn't feel like I was spending a hug sum of money to start it up compared to starting Orks or Space Marines.

I don't know why people keep claiming to know the reasoning behind the switch. And why people keep claiming to know what is actually going to happen with fantasy.

But what I do know is that if they decide to completely stop making fantasy and stop supporting it, that people will still play it.

Although I doubt they will drop it all together. They just released a Khorne fantasy set AFTER releasing the world explodes information.

 Guildsman wrote:
This happened:

(spoilered due to big image)

Spoiler:

If I were a store owner, I'd be eyeing my WHFB racks and feeling mighty uncomfortable right about now.

Looking at your post, it appears that nobody survived the end times. Not even the dwarfs.
I guess it's time to say goodbye to WHFB, The Dwarfs, and maybe even GW as we once knew it.
Goodbye, dwarfs.
Nice knowing you...
*Goes off and cries himself to sleep*


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But anyway, this thread has been exalted.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:


8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

Competitive WHFB has never taken place on such a large scale before 8th. While 8th absolutely needs a few changes from a competitive perspective, it still provides a very solid and good basic job. If you really think that GW decided to re-start (read: kill off) WHFB because of 8th's ruleset, then you don't know anything about GW or WHFB.

Do you have any proof of any of those statements? Because I remember the days of 6th edition GTs with hundreds of participants, I remember the days of local store tournaments filled to capacity and with waiting lists. And now? All I see is big tournaments with less people than ever and local store tournaments have stopped because no one ever showed up.

The Wargamers USA WHFB Masters series is doing very well in 8th, from what I understand. They currently require a tournament to have at least 60 players before they can be accepted as a qualifier and even local events such as the Carnival of Chaos in New Orleans are well capable of meeting that number when they had no where near the numbers before 8th that they have now.

Just because your country and area is having issues doesn't mean they all are.

*Makes toast to the dwarfs*
*continues to be heartbroken*
*begins to hope that the dwarfs come back in 9th*

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
*Makes toast to the dwarfs*
*continues to be heartbroken*
*begins to hope that the dwarfs come back in 9th*

Eh, I know everyone's all concerned about Bubbles or whatever, but I have a feeling it'll be a case of "same but different". All the armies will be there, most of the same names will be there, the history and each character's backstory and personality will just be slightly different and there'll be a new creation story involving Sigmar rather than the Old Ones.

 Icculus wrote:


But what I do know is that if they decide to completely stop making fantasy and stop supporting it, that people will still play it.

This. Actually some of the tightest/best rules sets have been developed by the community post support of the actual game. Look at Epic or BFG....even the WHFB fan fiction dexes for Cathay and the likes are pretty good. The game will live and continue, probably in a better form even if GW did kill it off.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
*Makes toast to the dwarfs*
*continues to be heartbroken*
*begins to hope that the dwarfs come back in 9th*

Eh, I know everyone's all concerned about Bubbles or whatever, but I have a feeling it'll be a case of "same but different". All the armies will be there, most of the same names will be there, the history and each character's backstory and personality will just be slightly different and there'll be a new creation story involving Sigmar rather than the Old Ones.

*Tearfully* Well, if the dwarfs come back, then I will be happy. But for now, I'm still sad.

@DarkAvenger: 6th was worse than 8th, and that's fact? Because people didn't know how to shoot a single unit of Knights? Give me a break. Sounds like you had a crappy group. So I say you're wrong. Also fact. Because a unit of 5 Knights of Chaos has always been killable. I've wasted them when a better general than me was using them. You need better "evidence". Otherwise you'll get called out. A lot. And deservedly.


Let me list what killed chaos Knights in 6th:
Cannons
Bolt throwers
Other Knights on the charge
Mass handguns
Redirecting units with a bait and switch
Casket of doom
Other Chaos Knights

Seriously, every army had something that could handle them.

 Icculus wrote:
I thought the price to get in to fantasy was about the same as 40k.

It's about the same, if your concept of 40k is Boyz-heavy Orkz, Gaunt-heavy Nids, or full-Mech Guardsman-heavy Guard played at 2,000 points - literally the most expensive ways to play 40k possible, and all sub-par in effectiveness.

WFB 8E is an expensive edition, due to the shift toward Hordes.

I was under the impression that as the edition has aged Monstrous Cavalry and Cavalry stars were becoming more prevalent than infantry hordes. Mistaken?

 Platuan4th wrote:

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
*Makes toast to the dwarfs*
*continues to be heartbroken*
*begins to hope that the dwarfs come back in 9th*

Eh, I know everyone's all concerned about Bubbles or whatever, but I have a feeling it'll be a case of "same but different". All the armies will be there, most of the same names will be there, the history and each character's backstory and personality will just be slightly different and there'll be a new creation story involving Sigmar rather than the Old Ones.

Kind of like how Crystal Pepsi was the same but different. How did that turn out?

I'm kind of conflicted about the fluff. If 9th is too similar to previous background, then it renders the whole End Times moot, a bigger, more embarrassing Storm of Chaos. But if the fluff is too different from the older stuff, then it will probably lack the charm that drew me into Warhammer, and it will certainly lack all the depth of a setting that developed through RPG supplements, Black Library novels and in-universe literature, and several editions of Army Books. It probably won't be as forgettable as Kings of War's current background, but it does risk becoming lifeless, stale, or even less original that the, uh, original.

 Eldarain wrote:
I was under the impression that as the edition has aged Monstrous Cavalry and Cavalry stars were becoming more prevalent than infantry hordes. Mistaken?

Perhaps. Either way, you need to buy a LOT of new minis if you want to compete.

Let's just hope after 9 editions GW finally gets it right... Lol

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

This.

6th Edition *expanded* the player base. Whatever players left in 5th were more than made up by new players coming in. 6th made a much larger portion of one's army playable, rather than just the Heroes allotment. Armies actually had to look something like an army. It is dishonest argument to say that 6th had a next effect to drive players away.

7th rules didn't drive anyone out. 7th was a cleanup of 6th, and a pretty decent one at that. 7th basically took every FAQ issue from 6th (and there were a lot, due to the new ruleset and large number of players), and addressed all of them in the rules, fairly cleanly. The problem with 7th was the later Army Books, specifically Daemons, Undead & DE having power levels far greater than everything else in the game, coupled with a slower release schedule that allowed them to dominate for far too long.

As note above, 8th was so bad, that GW had to wipe the slate clean. That is the opposite of good. Whether this is army books or rules, is hard to say, but it's very fair to say that 8th is the worst edition. It forces old players to convert units to hordes, while raising the barrier for new players in an unreasonable way. Whereas in 5th and 6th, there were a lot fewer minis needed to have a decent army.

If 6th and 7th were so great, then how come nobody is still playing them? If 8th is so terrible then why is it that so many people are still saying it's the best edition GW has produced thus far?

The fact that you're still moaning on about hordes shows how little you know about the current state of the game. Nobody runs hordes unless they're forced to, and the armybooks that need hordes to functions aren't the best ones by a long shot. It's true that hordes were powerful initially, but monsters, solo characters, monstrous cavalry, and cav buses have since risen to ascendance.

The game is fundamentally different from what you are representing it to be, and as a result your opinions on its comparative merits have little to no relevance to this discussion.

 Eldarain wrote:
I was under the impression that as the edition has aged Monstrous Cavalry and Cavalry stars were becoming more prevalent than infantry hordes. Mistaken?

I think Monstrous Cavalry becoming more prevalent has quite a bit to do with the fact that we're actually seeing more Monstrous Cavalry units to begin with, unless you're an Elf army.

I still think that the Wild Riders should have been Monstrous Cavalry though...

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

6th Edition *expanded* the player base. Whatever players left in 5th were more than made up by new players coming in. 6th made a much larger portion of one's army playable, rather than just the Heroes allotment. Armies actually had to look something like an army. It is dishonest argument to say that 6th had a next effect to drive players away.

7th rules didn't drive anyone out. 7th was a cleanup of 6th, and a pretty decent one at that. 7th basically took every FAQ issue from 6th (and there were a lot, due to the new ruleset and large number of players), and addressed all of them in the rules, fairly cleanly. The problem with 7th was the later Army Books, specifically Daemons, Undead & DE having power levels far greater than everything else in the game, coupled with a slower release schedule that allowed them to dominate for far too long.

As note above, 8th was so bad, that GW had to wipe the slate clean. That is the opposite of good. Whether this is army books or rules, is hard to say, but it's very fair to say that 8th is the worst edition. It forces old players to convert units to hordes, while raising the barrier for new players in an unreasonable way. Whereas in 5th and 6th, there were a lot fewer minis needed to have a decent army.

If 6th and 7th were so great, then how come nobody is still playing them? If 8th is so terrible then why is it that so many people are still saying it's the best edition GW has produced thus far?

The game is fundamentally different from what you are representing it to be, and as a result your opinions on its comparative merits have little to no relevance to this discussion.

At least 50% of the population has below-average intelligence.

My group quit playing Fantasy entirely when 8th came out, so that's pretty relevant as to which editions are good or bad.

PhantomViper wrote:
8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

And if that was even remotely true in a global scale instead of your very limited local environment, Fantasy wouldn't have dropped from the number 2 spot to the number 7 or 8 in the most sold miniature wargames ranking.

PhantomViper wrote:And GW decided to revamp WHFB because of dwindling profits -> those profits are falling because less people are playing -> less people are playing because the rules are crap.

PhantomViper wrote:You guys keep saying that but that isn't what the people that have stopped playing state is the reason for leaving, those people say it was the rules.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
As note above, 8th was so bad, that GW had to wipe the slate clean. That is the opposite of good. Whether this is army books or rules, is hard to say, but it's very fair to say that 8th is the worst edition. It forces old players to convert units to hordes, while raising the barrier for new players in an unreasonable way. Whereas in 5th and 6th, there were a lot fewer minis needed to have a decent army.

This. Quoted because people don't seem to get it, or don't want to get it. GW isn't seeing a fall in sales and game playing, or blowing up the planet and background and old mini ranges, because 8th was a raging success.

Sigvatr wrote:If you really think that GW decided to re-start (read: kill off) WHFB because of 8th's ruleset, then you don't know anything about GW or WHFB.

I think that's kind of amusingly ironic. But... yeah. GW is actually killing off WHFB because it's not selling. Though that's because the costs are rising too high and the rules are rubbish. Particularly those rules that prompt you to buy more of those rising-price minis.

Seriously, rules aren't the only quitting complaints: I've seen plenty deflate in defeat at the prices too. But for all that coo about 8th's balance (after the end of 7th I don't wonder), I see a lot put off by the added randomness, the cost of hordes that just plant in the middle of the table (I wonder if some people are confusing the levelling effect of more dice rolls and immovable infantry blocks as balance...), the brokenness of magic, the increasing reliance on monsters, etc.

Platuan4th wrote:
The Wargamers USA WHFB Masters series is doing very well in 8th, from what I understand. They currently require a tournament to have at least 60 players before they can be accepted as a qualifier and even local events such as the Carnival of Chaos in New Orleans are well capable of meeting that number when they had no where near the numbers before 8th that they have now.

Just because your country and area is having issues doesn't mean they all are.

Just because your country and area isn't having issues doesn't mean that GW isn't sinking 8th ed.

Also: hurrah. There are at least 60 players in the US so far. Any increase?

quickfuze wrote:
This. Actually some of the tightest/best rules sets have been developed by the community post support of the actual game. Look at Epic or BFG....even the WHFB fan fiction dexes for Cathay and the likes are pretty good. The game will live and continue, probably in a better form even if GW did kill it off.

Some will play on, but the specialist games were less susceptible to the culture of 'support' that 40K and WHFB are subject to. I.e. not just the supply of essential models for the armies but the constant addition of new and redone models - 'something to buy' (heck, when even a lot of the 'essential models' didn't appear, SG gamers knew they'd have to look elsewhere and to themselves) - and the acceptance of regularly scheduled shakeups just 'cos. Perhaps 8th ed will be pulled under the umbrella of Oldhammer, but I'm sceptical that the nostalgia factor of the later editions, constantly looking forward to new stuff, will be as great.

Eldarain wrote:I was under the impression that as the edition has aged Monstrous Cavalry and Cavalry stars were becoming more prevalent than infantry hordes. Mistaken?

So instead of big immovable hordes we've got big irresistible monsters. Hurrah.

Chute82 wrote:Let's just hope after 9 editions GW finally gets it right... Lol

Said it before - what makes you think they want to get it 'right'?

PhantomViper wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:


8th is the worst edition of Fantasy ever written, it is so bad that GW decided that the only way to redeem the game was by blowing everything up, and THAT is a fact.

Competitive WHFB has never taken place on such a large scale before 8th. While 8th absolutely needs a few changes from a competitive perspective, it still provides a very solid and good basic job. If you really think that GW decided to re-start (read: kill off) WHFB because of 8th's ruleset, then you don't know anything about GW or WHFB.

Do you have any proof of any of those statements? Because I remember the days of 6th edition GTs with hundreds of participants, I remember the days of local store tournaments filled to capacity and with waiting lists. And now? All I see is big tournaments with less people than ever and local store tournaments have stopped because no one ever showed up.

And GW decided to revamp WHFB because of dwindling profits -> those profits are falling because less people are playing -> less people are playing because the rules are crap.

Addendum: Its very hard to make any type of comparison for this data, but I went and took a look at one of the most iconic events in WHFB, the ETC. It seems like the number of participants from 2013 to 2014 dropped from 256 to 200 and that the accompanying ESC that at its peak added a further 220 people, was down to just 60 in 2013 and in 2014 was dropped completely?

This is all just anecdotal, I know, but it doesn't seem to point to a growing competitive meta for Fantasy.

So. The 200 player SCGT's that have been increasingly popular since 8th hit, the ever increasing number of events. Adepticon, ETC(Not warhammer, but anyway)

During 6th, in England, Europe, and Australia, you were lucky if you had a 100 player event. Nowadays you struggle to get below 60. You've got SCGT and Clash of swords, both of which sell out in less than 5 minutes. And I'm talking both players and reserves.

To those who say 8th is a bad edition, try playing anything between 5th and 7th. As someone who's played Warhammer since 4th. 5th to 7th are a bunch of flaws riddled with rules shoved in there.

6th was the era where you had small units capable of destroying armies, which led to the same few builds being all you ever saw.

7th was the era where you went to a GT and all you saw was DE, VC, or DoC. 25 dice + magic phases were not fun. As you couldn't plan against them.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

6th Edition *expanded* the player base. Whatever players left in 5th were more than made up by new players coming in. 6th made a much larger portion of one's army playable, rather than just the Heroes allotment. Armies actually had to look something like an army. It is dishonest argument to say that 6th had a next effect to drive players away.

7th rules didn't drive anyone out. 7th was a cleanup of 6th, and a pretty decent one at that. 7th basically took every FAQ issue from 6th (and there were a lot, due to the new ruleset and large number of players), and addressed all of them in the rules, fairly cleanly. The problem with 7th was the later Army Books, specifically Daemons, Undead & DE having power levels far greater than everything else in the game, coupled with a slower release schedule that allowed them to dominate for far too long.

As note above, 8th was so bad, that GW had to wipe the slate clean. That is the opposite of good. Whether this is army books or rules, is hard to say, but it's very fair to say that 8th is the worst edition. It forces old players to convert units to hordes, while raising the barrier for new players in an unreasonable way. Whereas in 5th and 6th, there were a lot fewer minis needed to have a decent army.

If 6th and 7th were so great, then how come nobody is still playing them? If 8th is so terrible then why is it that so many people are still saying it's the best edition GW has produced thus far?

The game is fundamentally different from what you are representing it to be, and as a result your opinions on its comparative merits have little to no relevance to this discussion.

At least 50% of the population has below-average intelligence.

My group quit playing Fantasy entirely when 8th came out, so that's pretty relevant as to which editions are good or bad.

In other news my family hates shakespear so he was a gakky writer. Whether an edition is good or bad is solely based on personal prefference. Just because your group hates it doesn't mean it isn't good, it means you don't like it.

I think the real killers (at least in my area) to WHFB is the rising cost of the product, not attracting the younger crowd, and no support for it in local stores.