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.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I don't understand this idea that the smaller games don't introduce people to the larger. When Necromunda and Gorkamorka were first released the rules very much mirrored the version of 40k at the time meaning that transition was fairly easy

Because the miniatures aren't shared by both games. Well, gorkamorka might have been good for Ork players, but the Muties and Diggas suffered the same fate as the Necromunda models.

A true introduction skirmish game would involve all the factions for warhammer or 40k but on a smaller scale so players can develop that same Warband into an army. This is why kill team having boxed sets would be a good idea imo.

I never played Mordhiem but I understand it suffered a similar fate.

And this isn't to say GW skirmish games weren't great games that I would love to see return. I think my sig shows I am a die-hard Necromunda fan.

Let's be clear, nobody plays either Warhammer for the stimulating play and ferocious dedication to balance.

We play the games, or build and paint the models, or both, because we love the background. Only a real affinity for the background is really going to form a bond strong enough for most people to undertake the investment of time, money and space to participate.

The likes of Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor etc do that job just fine.

Sure, were they to redesign those games, it would be smart to design it to smooth the transition as much as possible, but the influence they've had, alongside the likes of Heroquest and Space Crusade for my generation, can't be denied or underestimated.

Man, Kill Team boxed sets is a genuinely great idea! To be fair, the Cadian Armoured Fist effort was pretty much a killteam by itself, I think.

I think that I agree with both sides in the Mordheim issue: I can see that it served as a gateway drug, but it could have been a lot more focused on doing that, if it had featured all the WFB factions, and used their normal units. Mordheim had a lovely background and model selection - really, much darker and more atmospheric than the full game at that time - but the focus on that background really limits its ability to serve as gateway. I mean, I play High Elves and Tomb Kings. I don't see how I could have gone from a Marienburger force to one of those. If we are getting some skirmish effort then I think that having all the normal factions in it would really be great for introducing players to The Beautiful Game.

Also, on the camera phone thing: no need to get angry over a sarcastic comment. Though sad no spy-like tracing of the map took place!

 Azreal13 wrote:
Let's be clear, nobody plays either Warhammer for the stimulating play and ferocious dedication to balance.

We play the games, or build and paint the models, or both, because we love the background. Only a real affinity for the background is really going to form a bond strong enough for most people to undertake the investment of time, money and space to participate.

The likes of Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor etc do that job just fine.

Sure, were they to redesign those games, it would be smart to design it to smooth the transition as much as possible, but the influence they've had, alongside the likes of Heroquest and Space Crusade for my generation, can't be denied or underestimated.

Would of been cool to integrate them into something like a mercenary company or something.

 theHandofGork wrote:

HobbyBox wrote:

I really feel sorry for Bretonnian players. After the WE release, there was a teaser video showing a Bretonnian peasant with something flying overhead. Then, there was rumors abound that they were finally getting a book after 10 years and countless editions of waiting. That was all followed up by 7 weeks of 40K releases and then Nagash, which blows up their most favorite land mark. Then, with each ET book, they just keep twisting the knife - killing Louen in Glottkin and then saying that the Lady in the Lake was really just an Elvish goddess that was misleading them in Archaon.

I have a full Brett army that sees very little game time right now. I hope for the best with whatever WFB is turning into, but it seems the writing is on the wall for us Brett players.

While I'm still interested in seeing just what GW does with WFB I'm resigned to the likelihood that my Brett army is destined to be used in KoW or broken up into Frostgrave warbands.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I don't understand this idea that the smaller games don't introduce people to the larger. When Necromunda and Gorkamorka were first released the rules very much mirrored the version of 40k at the time meaning that transition was fairly easy

I think it would be hard to say that Mordheim/Necromunda 'never' influenced people into trying their big-brother counterparts.

But I would question just -how much- they influenced people, and to what percentage/size they did.

Like many here, I started 40k and WHFB long before Mordheim or Necromunda were produced. And, we all likely know of people who have started up one or both of those games long after both of those games were no longer in print. But I am sure we could all find someone who played 40K/WHFB (or still do), thanks to one of those games. Are they 'gateway' games? Sure. Were they 'good ones'? That's quite subjective.

The idea that those games were also 'cutting into' sales of their larger scale versions is also an interesting consideration. Were there players who played Necro/Mord that MIGHT have played WHFB/40K if not for those smaller-scale (cheaper) games? Or would those players have never touched a GW game at all if not for them? It's hard to say, really, and ultimately it really comes down to personal experience and opinion.

I do find it funny that GW would stop producing Necro/Mordheim for that reason: the thought that they would 'force' people into the larger scale games by removing the smaller-scale option just seems so... silly. Of course, back in the 90's, there weren't the plethora of alternatives that we have today. So now, if GW was smart, they'd realize that the market is drastically different from 1995, and =get on board= that scale of 'intro' to their bigger games - rather than fight against it.

My Gateway game into GW and 40K was the mid 90s Spacehulk set.

"Wait I can get more aliens and big dudes to shoot them? Tell me more!"

 FacelessMage wrote:
My Gateway game into GW and 40K was the mid 90s Spacehulk set.

"Wait I can get more aliens and big dudes to shoot them? Tell me more!"

Mine too.. but that rolled into 40k then.. I used the genestealers for a genestealer cult army..

If you buy any game you want to be able to cross utilize your miniatures.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Let's be clear, nobody plays either Warhammer for the stimulating play and ferocious dedication to balance.

We play the games, or build and paint the models, or both, because we love the background. Only a real affinity for the background is really going to form a bond strong enough for most people to undertake the investment of time, money and space to participate.

Ah... I play the game because it allows me to maneuver large units. That, and because I can actually find people who play WFB, as opposed to (for example) KoW.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Let's be clear, nobody plays either Warhammer for the stimulating play and ferocious dedication to balance.

We play the games, or build and paint the models, or both, because we love the background. Only a real affinity for the background is really going to form a bond strong enough for most people to undertake the investment of time, money and space to participate.

The likes of Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor etc do that job just fine.

Sure, were they to redesign those games, it would be smart to design it to smooth the transition as much as possible, but the influence they've had, alongside the likes of Heroquest and Space Crusade for my generation, can't be denied or underestimated.

You're making an assumption on why people play the game based on why you play the game. I am sure that somebody plays the game because they like the way they look or because they enjoy the gameplay (not everyone cares about balance). Just don't make sweeping generalizations.

 Micky wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Does anyone know if current codex books will still be used?

They got pulled from the shelves, so probably not. The assumption is a "ravening hordes" type model.

Ravening hordes?!?!

40KNobz11 wrote:

 Micky wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Does anyone know if current codex books will still be used?

They got pulled from the shelves, so probably not. The assumption is a "ravening hordes" type model.

Ravening hordes?!?!

When we went from 5th-6th the points costs and the system for selecting armies changed dramatically and the 5th books were invalidated. We got a booklet titled Ravening Hordes which had simplified army lists and magic items for our armies which would function in 6th until the new Army Books were released.

 Eldarain wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:

 Micky wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Does anyone know if current codex books will still be used?

They got pulled from the shelves, so probably not. The assumption is a "ravening hordes" type model.

Ravening hordes?!?!

When we went from 5th-6th the points costs and the system for selecting armies changed dramatically and the 5th books were invalidated. We got a booklet titled Ravening Hordes which had simplified army lists and magic items for our armies which would function in 6th until the new Army Books were released.

I see. Never really played fantasy just collected armies haha! I play 40k

Ill deffinatly give 9th a go though!

Okay, let me clarify a few points, since I've been in my local GW in the last couple weeks.

All the fantasy rulebooks, codexes, end times, etc. have been pulled from the shelves. You can still buy them. You'd have to ask. They're in the back.

(Whether you should or not is another thing...Who knows.)

Our local GW, since we're US has decided to open on the 4th, holiday be . Apparently they were given the choice.

There's NO way this is a board game. You do not pull all the rulebooks and codecies and leave a huge shelf space with 10-20 "Age of Sigmar" placecards for a stand alone board game.

 Schlyne wrote:
Okay, let me clarify a few points, since I've been in my local GW in the last couple weeks.

My local FLGS has been given sign-up "I'm interested" sheets from Games Workshop, with a name & email slot. They've also been told to pull the Fantasy books. I didn't ask specifically, but I'm assuming they'll be credited back for it when it's sent back -- along with their annual stock balancing return stuff, where they'll send back old unsold codex books and all that kinda thing. It's worth noting that no models have been pulled or taken off the order list.

I should mention the signup sheet looks pretty empty, because nobody knows what "the product" is. Like, a book, a box with a hundred models, a box with 20 models... Of course, they are assuming is the next WHFB, even though their rep hasn't specifically stated so.

It would be an epic let-down if it were anything else

Yes. The full line of fantasy models has not changed on the wall and the old demo kit is still on the table. The starter boxes are in the back, but I believe the fantasy demo kit is still on the demo table. I'm sure if you went in and asked about how fantasy works and wanted to know (in general), the manager would at least be able to show you some painted models.

Our local GW is also throwing some sort of release party on the 11th for Age of Sigmar. So cupcakes and cookies and maybe some contests/mini games.

Vulcan wrote:
Ah... I play the game because it allows me to maneuver large units.

Plenty like that, that actually concentrate more on maneuvering large units than on the attacks and wounds and saves and rank bonuses of individual minis. ("Amazing facts! Did you know that other systems have infantry blocks that stick around and fight back without needing 'steadfast' and 'step up' rules tacked on?") The number of even just those that let you slot in your WFB minis might surprise you.

That, and because I can actually find people who play WFB, as opposed to (for example) KoW.

Give it time.

 skink007 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Let's be clear, nobody plays either Warhammer for the stimulating play and ferocious dedication to balance.

We play the games, or build and paint the models, or both, because we love the background. Only a real affinity for the background is really going to form a bond strong enough for most people to undertake the investment of time, money and space to participate.

The likes of Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor etc do that job just fine.

Sure, were they to redesign those games, it would be smart to design it to smooth the transition as much as possible, but the influence they've had, alongside the likes of Heroquest and Space Crusade for my generation, can't be denied or underestimated.

You're making an assumption on why people play the game based on why you play the game. I am sure that somebody plays the game because they like the way they look or because they enjoy the gameplay (not everyone cares about balance). Just don't make sweeping generalizations.

I'll make sweeping generalisations as I see fit, thanks very much. If you disagree with my generalisations then feel free to refute them, but I stand by what I said, neither Warhammer offers particularly stimulating gameplay and neither Warhammer is well balanced (although I'll concede FB is probably better in both cases.)

Plenty like that, that actually concentrate more on maneuvering large units than on the attacks and wounds and saves and rank bonuses of individual minis. ("Amazing facts! Did you know that other systems have infantry blocks that stick around and fight back without needing 'steadfast' and 'step up' rules tacked on?") The number of even just those that let you slot in your WFB minis might surprise you.

Hardly plenty, and virtually none with any sort of coverage/playing scene.

Only one that has any sort of exposure is kings of war.

If you know of plenty then id like to see the names.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Gee, that's funny - the first part of the quote had you saying pretty much that....

No, it didn't. You even quoted the relevant part. I'm going to assume you can understand the difference between an event occurring seldom enough to not be relevant and an event not occurring at all.

What you consider relevant scale is statistical error for me. Don't play Gotcha! with me using your casual evidence, because I have my own, and I understand how irrelevant it is to the subject at hand.

Mordheim is a poor introduction to WFB, for objective reasons not related to your personal success story with the game. Had it been better, your fifty could have been a hundred. Or two hundred.

So, you do realize that I am disagreeing with the 'relevant' part, hmm?

And that I in fact, I did say that it was a 'relevant number'.

So, yes - I disagree with you.

Mordheim acted as a gateway - and demonstrably so.

You may disagree - but since I know of many, many examples of exactly that happening - and that is more people than are currently playing Warhammer in my area.

By any scale, 50% of an areas gaming is relevant. You may be saying that the total number of gamers in my area is irelevant.

The number of Warhammer players is dropping.

GW is losing areas - not just a gamer here, a gamer there.

Because people want to play what is being played. The same force that made Warhammer the big gorilla is starting to turn people away from Warhammer - if a group is playing something else, then new players are introduced to that something else.

At the same time that the number of players started dropping GW dropped the smaller scale game that got people interested in fantasy wargaming in the first place.

So, the number is relevant. GW is hemorrhaging sales, and in the game where you seem to think that adding new players by way of having a gateway game isn't 'relevant'.

If the sales were growing, then you might have some chance of being correct - but since sales are dropping?

No.

What is actually happening is that GW has been trying to change Warhammer to being played with larger armies, with large monsters... and selling the miniatures in boxes small enough that you need several boxes to get a single unit.

And that strategy has not been working.

Instead of squeezing more money out of the game, the sales are dropping enough that the folks at GW are not even bothering to call the new game Warhammer.

But, hey, now they are trying for a smaller scale....

There does not need to be a 100% overlap between a skirmish game and the full scale game - a gateway is not necessarily even a game by the same company.

Nearly all of those people playing Warhammer in my area played D&D long before deciding to try Mordheim and then Warhammer.

And if you do not think that D&D - played with a different system, with a much, much smaller number of figures than Mordheim, let alone Warhammer, is not 'relevant' then you are just being silly.

More people play D&D than Warhammer. More people are exposed to D&D than Warhammer.

D&D was and is the gateway to fantasy gaming, Mordheim and the older, smaller scaled Warhammer, was the gateway to fantasy wargaming.

Gateways are relevant.

And at this point, Warhammer is losing its relevancy - and is being replaced by other options.

My local area is probably a weird example - a whole bunch of folks changed over to Kings of War, and continued using their Warhammer armies. The group hovers between twenty and thirty players. And they bring new players in. *EDIT* CORRECTION - the mailing list for the local fantasy gaming group is over a hundred people... When the Hell did that happen?... Mostly SCA folks, but still....

At the same time, people have been buying minis from a wider selection of companies than was the case when a GW game dominated the area.

Yes, none of the companies are selling as many of the figures used in the armies as GW used to - but each of those miniatures is not only a lost sale for GW but a sale that has gone to their competition.

The dwarf army shared between me and my girlfriend is about 80% Mantic (for no better reason than the minis were inexpensive, and looked decent for the price). The heroes are by Reaper and Stonehaven, and the berserkers are Avatars of War.

Another player's undead army is a similar mix - and the owner sold off his all GW undead army to buy Mantic. Which meant that the sold army was also money not going into GW's coffers.

At every step of the way GW is losing relevancy - and part of that loss is giving up on the gateways into the H-H-Hobby.

So, never believe that a gateway is not 'relevant'.

The Auld Grump

 Azreal13 wrote:

 skink007 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Let's be clear, nobody plays either Warhammer for the stimulating play and ferocious dedication to balance.

We play the games, or build and paint the models, or both, because we love the background. Only a real affinity for the background is really going to form a bond strong enough for most people to undertake the investment of time, money and space to participate.

The likes of Mordheim, Necromunda, Inquisitor etc do that job just fine.

Sure, were they to redesign those games, it would be smart to design it to smooth the transition as much as possible, but the influence they've had, alongside the likes of Heroquest and Space Crusade for my generation, can't be denied or underestimated.

You're making an assumption on why people play the game based on why you play the game. I am sure that somebody plays the game because they like the way they look or because they enjoy the gameplay (not everyone cares about balance). Just don't make sweeping generalizations.

I'll make sweeping generalisations as I see fit, thanks very much. If you disagree with my generalisations then feel free to refute them, but I stand by what I said, neither Warhammer offers particularly stimulating gameplay and neither Warhammer is well balanced (although I'll concede FB is probably better in both cases.)

Well i will refute at least one of your sweeping generalizations. I play WHFB because i find the game fun, and my friends and i have a good time playing the game.

Also making "sweeping generalizations" is typically considered a poor debate and point / counter point ploy. Defending making sweeping generalizations when it's pointed out that your making them, or it's insinuated that you're toeing the line of making them, with "I'll do what I want, buster, and you can't stop me." is even less effective rhetorical device, bordering on childish.


Your statement was that "we" (to wit - "people") play, collect, or paint the game because of the background, and that's a prima facie untrue statement nearly impossible to support. I've bolded it in the quote above so there's no misunderstanding. Many painters on this forum have stated that they don't play the game but paint the pieces because they like / love the models. Many people, despite the incredibly vocal opposition otherwise, enjoy playing GW games (however in the spirit of good debate - i actually agree with you that I would doubt that there are many people that play WHFB because they find it the most balanced game on the market. I'd find that statement as ridiculous as your present it to be).

So those arguments of your are sweeping generalizations. All of 13 seconds of searching the forums returned threads that would prove both your contention false.


There's no doubt GW makes a metric ton of dumb mistakes, their market share is shrinking, and the ship is taking on water faster than it can be bailed out proverbially, but stating the only reason why anyone plays GW games or buys the models is an affinity for the background of the game is again, a prima facie series of untrue statements. It's a set of statements that isn't even defensible for someone who frequents this forum as often as either you or I do.

I like their games, but they as a company do a ton of stupid things, and i don't blame people who have said "enough is enough". However your arguments as presented are flat out ridiculous.

You were doing so well!

Then you called my contention that people need to be invested in the background to justify the investment of time and resources ridiculous and poof! your whole stance looks on decidedly more shaky ground.

It's blatantly not a ridiculous thing to say, let alone flat out ridiculous.

But I do despair slightly that more than one person seems to have taken my reference to "nobody" as literally nobody ever. That'll teach me to talk like a normal person in the domain of the po-faced and the literal that is the internet.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Mordheim acted as a gateway - and demonstrably so.

Yeah, a poor one. Which was my point from the start.

As for the rest, I already told you I don't care about exchanging casual evidence. I get your position. Mine is different. And they lived happily ever after. The End.

zacharia wrote:

If you know of plenty then id like to see the names.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/631498.page#7512199

Hardly plenty, and virtually none with any sort of coverage/playing scene.

Give it time.

And maybe, actually getting to know and organise with all those 'strangers' that constantly meet in the same place to play. I know it's a stretch asking some gamers to be more social, but it does help.

I dont know but I always imagined that our hobby life was an agglomeration of experiences. The hobby will be stronger if you have more options to choose from. In the case of GW I believe that games like spacehulk, warhammer quest etc are exactly what enriches the mainstream big ranges, not the other way around.

So Yes Im convinced that other games based on the same universe will provide you a better overall experience and has the potential to introduce people from different backgrounds into 40k or WFB.
More exposure = more people exposed I think?

Which brings me to the following point, replacing a mainstream mass battle wargame like WFB for a skirmish caricature is not exactly expanding the scope of options or enriching the hobby experience. Its actually reducing and compressing the enjoyment. Yes many want a skirmish and they deserve to have one!... as long as its not at the expense of the folks that supported that mass battle wargame for decades.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

Yeah, a poor one. Which was my point from the start.

Yeah, a poor one.

 NAVARRO wrote:
Which brings me to the following point, replacing a mainstream mass battle wargame like WFB for a skirmish caricature is not exactly expanding the scope of options or enriching the hobby experience. Its actually reducing and compressing the enjoyment. Yes many want a skirmish and they deserve to have one!... as long as its not at the expense of the folks that supported that mass battle wargame for decades.

In all honesty, Fantasy has never been a true 'mass battle' wargame and the attempt to turn it into such with 8th edition is one of the reasons it lost so many players. Up to 3rd edition it was an skirmish game. 4th-5th was a big skirmish/dark ages small battles game. As it should be. Fantasy works on a system (individual models that attack and are killed as such) that simply can't support any serious 'mass battle' attempt.

A return to its skirmish roots could be a good move, but it's unlikely the current GW game designers can craft a decent ruleset, and other of the core issues of the game (the ridiculously high prices of everything) won't likely be addressed. In fact, it may get even worse with those boxes of five infantry miniatures at 45€.

 Vermis wrote:


And maybe, actually getting to know and organise with all those 'strangers' that constantly meet in the same place to play. I know it's a stretch asking some gamers to be more social, but it does help.

And FLGS owners should just let people not buying product take up space. Truly, you folk in the UK are incredibly nice. Again, if you're not playing the new version, you're not buying new product (except maybe general supplies like paint and glue); what reason does a game store have to let you in the door if you're just going to NOT buy anything and then actually encourage others to do the same?

Reading about the change up in Warhammer puts me in mind of the Red Dwarf episode where they were dealing with the despair squid.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_qIkXfxyB-8

I envision the players being introduced to the new setting in a similar fashion to the linked segment. Instead of Rimmer saying, "Jump starts the second Big Bang?", in that tone, put, "Bubbles of reality?" in it's place. I think that's the general reaction most players are having.

 agnosto wrote:

 Vermis wrote:


And maybe, actually getting to know and organise with all those 'strangers' that constantly meet in the same place to play. I know it's a stretch asking some gamers to be more social, but it does help.

And FLGS owners should just let people not buying product take up space. Truly, you folk in the UK are incredibly nice. Again, if you're not playing the new version, you're not buying new product (except maybe general supplies like paint and glue); what reason does a game store have to let you in the door if you're just going to NOT buy anything and then actually encourage others to do the same?

As mentioned a while back, in the UK the FLGS is a rare, nigh-on mythical beast. There are a few big ones that also have large web presence (Darksphere, Firestorm, Element, Wayland) but as far as 'local' stores go, it's just the odd GW and toy/craft/hobby stores that will stock a shelf or two of GW stuff. Most gaming gets done at independent clubs or at home, where organisating non-'official'/non-current gameplay is far easier to do. There's little of the anonymity that seems prevalent from what I've read of the American FLGS scene, it's much more about the social aspect then just showing up to play games, at least in my experience.

I do find it odd that same sort of social gaming doesn't form there as (presumably regular) players frequently meet in stores, but perhaps the places do get enough footfall that you won't often end up playing the same people with any kind of regularity? You raise a good point about stores not necessarily selling new stuff, but that could just as well apply to 'current' games as well? It's an extreme example, but would you say the same about someone who has finished building an army and has no one intent to expand it/start another? Surely the store isn't making money there either?

Or the store could just charge a fee for table use, which could then be redeemed against a purchase? So you spend $X to play for the afternoon, if you buy something that day you get X back off that?