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.

 vipoid wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

No it won't. Because nothing will do that, short of GW coming round to their houses and setting every miniatures they own on fire. Even then, half of them would probably still praise GW for giving them the opportunity to reinvent their collections with more of GW's new models.

Considering the fanaticism I've seen with the AoS advent... I am inclined to believe in this

Suit yourselves, guys. Having played it, I'm even more glad that I got rid of my 40k stuff. And my friend is unloading his eldar fast. It'll be hitting eBay shortly. He had watched me play it, so he's not just taking my word on it.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Suit yourselves, guys. Having played it, I'm even more glad that I got rid of my 40k stuff. And my friend is unloading his eldar fast. It'll be hitting eBay shortly. He had watched me play it, so he's not just taking my word on it.

Have you invested in any alternatives?

Yup. Got a 200 model Enforcer army for Warpath lined up, about $500 worth of X-Wing that I paid full retail for, Deadzone, Dreadball, 8th edition fantasy, KoW, WM/H...yeah, I'm not short on other options. If I could have found anyone still playing 5th edition 40k, I might have kept my stuff. But I didn't.

You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

Details please, what were the mechanics involved?

It was done with all big models: Bloodthirster, Khornemower, Knight, Hive Tyrant, couple other things. Each model had the equivalent to a war scroll. Since all big stuff, they lowered things: each model had one attack (clearly would go up to make better than infantry), 3-5 wounds, not armor for things like Knights/Khornemower, attacks hit on a 3+ (Bloodthirster), 4+ (knight), some things had shooting attacks and they had what they were wounded on written on the stat card/warscroll. Yelling out/roaring gave re-rolls to attacks and such like that. It was shown at the same time 7th edition was going out. I thought nothing of it for a while, just left it as a joke/crap game until discussing AoS a few days ago, and it hit me I had played it a year ago. Only with 40k BIG units.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

You may all now engage in wild hysterics, unfounded panic, regretful analysis of your past financial habits, and rage-filled tangents unrelated to 40k. Bonus points will be awarded for blind support for WMH and/or references to GW stock and quarterly profits.

For those of you already engaged in such, carry on.

Lastly, please choose a well-ventilated area for those of you intending to set your minatures on fire. We wouldn't want to see you doing anything irrational

I have absolutely NO idea when it's landing. But it's been in development since before 7th edition hit. Sadly, what I've listed is quite literally all I have at this time.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

You may all now engage in wild hysterics, unfounded panic, regretful analysis of your past financial habits, and rage-filled tangents unrelated to 40k. Bonus points will be awarded for blind support for WMH and/or references to GW stock and quarterly profits.

For those of you already engaged in such, carry on.

Lastly, please choose a well-ventilated area for those of you intending to set your minatures on fire. We wouldn't want to see you doing anything irrational

Dang it, I laughed so loudly on your account I actually got a warning from my boss.

Exalted!

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise. What I can see is them rebooting the rules though - which could quite honestly be a GOOD thing, since the "Starter game" is already there - AoS - so they could give 41k or whatever they call it a more advanced ruleset than what AoS has. Maybe even for free.

Disclaimer: I'm a way too optimistic person.

nekooni wrote:
Disclaimer: I'm a way too optimistic person.

Perchance do you expel several spectrums of light from your behind, good sir?

nekooni wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise.

I wonder if GW had another property with decades of deep, well-written lore behind it? Lore that, perhaps, made the game itself interesting? Surely they wouldn't have done anything to brutally destroy such lore...

 Spinner wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise.

I wonder if GW had another property with decades of deep, well-written lore behind it? Lore that, perhaps, made the game itself interesting? Surely they wouldn't have done anything to brutally destroy such lore...

Yes, but can you really compare Fantasy with 40k? At least I was under the impression that the 40k universe, lore, merch, spinoff games, video games and so on are on an entirely different level.

*edit* I should add that I am very biased on this since I never found Fantasy interesting, so maybe it's just that bias playing tricks on me and I'm completely off.

nekooni wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise.

I wonder if GW had another property with decades of deep, well-written lore behind it? Lore that, perhaps, made the game itself interesting? Surely they wouldn't have done anything to brutally destroy such lore...

Yes, but can you really compare Fantasy with 40k? At least I was under the impression that the 40k universe, lore, merch, spinoff games, video games and so on are on an entirely different level.

If they've done it to the initial brand, the very brand that established their position as the company to go to for Fantasy wargames, what stops them from doing it to 40k?

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

nekooni wrote:
Yes, but can you really compare Fantasy with 40k? At least I was under the impression that the 40k universe, lore, merch, spinoff games, video games and so on are on an entirely different level.

If they've done it to the initial brand, the very brand that established their position as the company to go to for Fantasy wargames, what stops them from doing it to 40k?

Financial viability? From what I understood Fantasy was dying, and GW in general had problems getting new people into the hobby (both 40k and Fantasy are not very accessible to someone new to wargaming) - so killing off a not-very-profitable line and turning it into an easily accessible "entry level game" might turn out pretty good for them.
Having two entry-level games and nothing to progress to (an advanced, more complex game like 40k) would be a great service to the hobby - since people would run off to other manufacturers once they grow out of AoS - but wouldn't be very smart of GW. Not that they're famous for being that, granted.

GW has tried to increase profit with more units- introducing hull points to incentivise weight of fire rather than quality of fire, increased squadrons, as well as increasing the number of wounds the average MC has. This tied in with the more inclusive use of flyers, super-heavies and a generally faster meta game (rapid fire having full range while moving, 2D6 assaults and hitting moving vehicles easier) all works to make the game feel less tactical and more list-dependant than in 4th-5th edition. It also feels like GW has tried to turn the game into something more PC-like with the 'true' LOS and other recent gameplay elements; some of which work (pre-measuring distances, the Run move) while others just seem to stretch the game into something it was never meant to be.

But of course GW making a profit isn't a bad thing in itself, as it keeps the hobby in the mainstream and thus bringing in new players; I just wonder if Chess would have survived the test of time if it was bringing out new and ever more powerful codex books every 3 years. (no reference to Regicide intended).

 SDFarsight wrote:
GW has tried to increase profit with more units- introducing hull points to incentivice weight of fire rather than quality of fire, increased squadrons, as well as increasing the number of wounds the average MC has. This tied in with the more inclusive use of flyers, super-heavies and a generaly faster meta game (rapid fire having full range while moving, 2D6 assaults and hitting moving vehicles easier) all works to make the game feel less tactical and more list-dependant than in 4th-5th edition. As well as driving production sales it also feels like GW has tried to turn the game into something more PC-like with the 'true' LOS and other recent gameplay elements; some of which work (pre-measuring distances, the Run move) while others just seem to stretch the game into something it was never meant to be.

But of course GW making a profit isn't a bad thing in itself, as it keeps the hobby in the mainstream and thus bringing in new players; I just wonder if Chess would have survived the test of time if it was bringing out new and ever more powerful codex books every 3 years. (no reference to Regicide intended).

I'm pretty sure that there wasn't like one smart guy in like 300BC who came up with Chess and since then everyone played Chess the same way. Abilities of the models probably changed from time to time until we finally came to modern chess. Of course you wouldn't notice "power creep" at all if all you ever do is play with the same Army List and your opponent playing the very same list as well.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise.

I wonder if GW had another property with decades of deep, well-written lore behind it? Lore that, perhaps, made the game itself interesting? Surely they wouldn't have done anything to brutally destroy such lore...

Yes, but can you really compare Fantasy with 40k? At least I was under the impression that the 40k universe, lore, merch, spinoff games, video games and so on are on an entirely different level.

If they've done it to the initial brand, the very brand that established their position as the company to go to for Fantasy wargames, what stops them from doing it to 40k?

Fantasy may have been the first, but 40k very quickly eclipsed it in popularity and revenue. At the time that it was scrapped, fantasy wasn't pulling in nearly as much as 40k. Because Fantasy isn't a master of GW's profits the way 40k is, they can afford to experiment with it a little (or a lot).

Initial brand fantasy may be, but the principal brand it is not. Hell, the introduction of Sigmarines was an attempt to make fantasy more like 40k

 asorel wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise.

I wonder if GW had another property with decades of deep, well-written lore behind it? Lore that, perhaps, made the game itself interesting? Surely they wouldn't have done anything to brutally destroy such lore...

Yes, but can you really compare Fantasy with 40k? At least I was under the impression that the 40k universe, lore, merch, spinoff games, video games and so on are on an entirely different level.

If they've done it to the initial brand, the very brand that established their position as the company to go to for Fantasy wargames, what stops them from doing it to 40k?

Fantasy may have been the first, but 40k very quickly eclipsed it in popularity and revenue. At the time that it was scrapped, fantasy wasn't pulling in nearly as much as 40k. Because Fantasy isn't a master of GW's profits the way 40k is, they can afford to experiment with it a little (or a lot).

Initial brand fantasy may be, but the principal brand it is not. Hell, the introduction of Sigmarines was an attempt to make fantasy more like 40k

And you'll note how well that's been received.

40k might have eclipsed Fantasy in revenue, but I'm willing to bet AoS doesn't make nearly as much as either one of them, and the background was easily on par with that of 40k - at least. Anyone looking at it should have been able to see that changing it wasn't the answer to any of the game's problems...

But we're dealing with the company that has no problem coming up with ridiculous new faction names so they can slap a trademark on it - or, in the case of 'aelfs', because they THINK they can slap a trademark on it - and that sort of behavior is certainly already entrenched in 40k. Astra Militarum, anyone?

 Spinner wrote:
And you'll note how well that's been received.

40k might have eclipsed Fantasy in revenue, but I'm willing to bet AoS doesn't make nearly as much as either one of them, and the background was easily on par with that of 40k - at least. Anyone looking at it should have been able to see that changing it wasn't the answer to any of the game's problems...

But we're dealing with the company that has no problem coming up with ridiculous new faction names so they can slap a trademark on it - or, in the case of 'aelfs', because they THINK they can slap a trademark on it - and that sort of behavior is certainly already entrenched in 40k. Astra Militarum, anyone?

My local meta simply doesn't have any Fantasy OR AoS players, so I really have no indicator there - and none of the others are remotely interested in AoS outside of it being part of a joke. YMMV when it comes to that, though.

I can see the lure of the new models - heck, even I was thinking about picking up a few just for painting them - and the indirect effect of getting more people interested in the hobby and switching over to 40k.

Yes, AoS certainly antagonized large parts of the existing WHF player base. But it wasn't that huge anyhow. Let's see how AoS evolves from here and wait until GW comes out with the financial results before we deem it an utter failure. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if AoS managed to eclipse WHF - at the bare minimum I think it has the potential to do so within a few years simply by being much more accessible. "Get new players" is the mantra at GW now, as opposed to "keep the playerbase happy". They'll have to do something about that, though - which is why I hope for a reboot of the 40k rules "non-AoS-style".

Going back to the financial results, these give evidence of losing customers over maybe 10 years and actual revenue declines over the past three years.

If all the decline can be ascribed to WHFB, then 40K has nothing to fear. However for various reasons I think 40K has become part of the problems too.

nekooni wrote:

 SDFarsight wrote:
GW has tried to increase profit with more units- introducing hull points to incentivice weight of fire rather than quality of fire, increased squadrons, as well as increasing the number of wounds the average MC has. This tied in with the more inclusive use of flyers, super-heavies and a generaly faster meta game (rapid fire having full range while moving, 2D6 assaults and hitting moving vehicles easier) all works to make the game feel less tactical and more list-dependant than in 4th-5th edition. As well as driving production sales it also feels like GW has tried to turn the game into something more PC-like with the 'true' LOS and other recent gameplay elements; some of which work (pre-measuring distances, the Run move) while others just seem to stretch the game into something it was never meant to be.

But of course GW making a profit isn't a bad thing in itself, as it keeps the hobby in the mainstream and thus bringing in new players; I just wonder if Chess would have survived the test of time if it was bringing out new and ever more powerful codex books every 3 years. (no reference to Regicide intended).

I'm pretty sure that there wasn't like one smart guy in like 300BC who came up with Chess and since then everyone played Chess the same way. Abilities of the models probably changed from time to time until we finally came to modern chess. Of course you wouldn't notice "power creep" at all if all you ever do is play with the same Army List and your opponent playing the very same list as well.

Well of course there was development to it, I'm not saying that things have to be perfect in their 1st edition, and indeed I like there being more codexes (or rather, more races)- the more the better! What I meant is that the balance and the gameplay in general seems to be 2nd in priority to bringing out new attractive armies.

nekooni wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
And you'll note how well that's been received.

40k might have eclipsed Fantasy in revenue, but I'm willing to bet AoS doesn't make nearly as much as either one of them, and the background was easily on par with that of 40k - at least. Anyone looking at it should have been able to see that changing it wasn't the answer to any of the game's problems...

But we're dealing with the company that has no problem coming up with ridiculous new faction names so they can slap a trademark on it - or, in the case of 'aelfs', because they THINK they can slap a trademark on it - and that sort of behavior is certainly already entrenched in 40k. Astra Militarum, anyone?

My local meta simply doesn't have any Fantasy OR AoS players, so I really have no indicator there - and none of the others are remotely interested in AoS outside of it being part of a joke. YMMV when it comes to that, though.

I can see the lure of the new models - heck, even I was thinking about picking up a few just for painting them - and the indirect effect of getting more people interested in the hobby and switching over to 40k.

Yes, AoS certainly antagonized large parts of the existing WHF player base. But it wasn't that huge anyhow. Let's see how AoS evolves from here and wait until GW comes out with the financial results before we deem it an utter failure. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if AoS managed to eclipse WHF - at the bare minimum I think it has the potential to do so within a few years simply by being much more accessible. "Get new players" is the mantra at GW now, as opposed to "keep the playerbase happy". They'll have to do something about that, though - which is why I hope for a reboot of the 40k rules "non-AoS-style".

FWIW, I live in an area where WFB is still popular. If people playing in the local store is any indication, it is even more popular than 40k.

In my locale, gamers are convinced that AoS is just a fun side-game. They still play games with the last WFB rules as though AoS was never released.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As far as Atra Militarum goes:

And look at how well THAT went. Because clearly a shattered based is a better prospect than it was.

But I digress. You are correct in saying it wasn't the biggest seller for GW, but it was the base of it all. The 40k system came from Fantasy, as well as a lot of its original playerbase. The foundation.

I guess that what I mean is that for GW nothing is sacred if it means they can profit a little, or at least think they can.

Is X-Wing any fun? I see alot of people playing that recently.

If they go AoS on WH40k, that would be the end of GW

cheers
Kahnawake

 jasper76 wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
And you'll note how well that's been received.

40k might have eclipsed Fantasy in revenue, but I'm willing to bet AoS doesn't make nearly as much as either one of them, and the background was easily on par with that of 40k - at least. Anyone looking at it should have been able to see that changing it wasn't the answer to any of the game's problems...

But we're dealing with the company that has no problem coming up with ridiculous new faction names so they can slap a trademark on it - or, in the case of 'aelfs', because they THINK they can slap a trademark on it - and that sort of behavior is certainly already entrenched in 40k. Astra Militarum, anyone?

My local meta simply doesn't have any Fantasy OR AoS players, so I really have no indicator there - and none of the others are remotely interested in AoS outside of it being part of a joke. YMMV when it comes to that, though.

I can see the lure of the new models - heck, even I was thinking about picking up a few just for painting them - and the indirect effect of getting more people interested in the hobby and switching over to 40k.

Yes, AoS certainly antagonized large parts of the existing WHF player base. But it wasn't that huge anyhow. Let's see how AoS evolves from here and wait until GW comes out with the financial results before we deem it an utter failure. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if AoS managed to eclipse WHF - at the bare minimum I think it has the potential to do so within a few years simply by being much more accessible. "Get new players" is the mantra at GW now, as opposed to "keep the playerbase happy". They'll have to do something about that, though - which is why I hope for a reboot of the 40k rules "non-AoS-style".

FWIW, I live in an area where WFB is still popular. If people playing in the local store is any indication, it is even more popular than 40k.

In my locale, gamers are convinced that AoS is just a fun side-game. They still play games with the last WFB rules as though AoS was never released.

I haven't looked into AOS enough to judge it fully, but from what I've seen and heard it's a desperate attempt to put marines into WFB when the lack of marines really isn't addressing what I, as a 40K-only player, find off-putting about WHFB. Personally I haven't played WHFB because despite loving the fluff (I bought the Skaven codex just for reading, and I really liked the WHFB mod for Medieval 2 Total War), there just doesn't seem to be anything really special that 40K doesn't have. Chaos is more or less the same but with power armour- even the 40K Chaos Deamons were pictured with their square WHFB bases when they first came out. There's giants, but 40K has titans. There's nothing really wrong with Fantasy, I just don't see anything in it which justifies me moving over to a different game system. There is the awesome fluff of a pseudo-Holy Roman Empire fighting against Orcs etc, but there's novels for that. If I had unlimited funds then I could see myself putting together a Skaven or Dwarf army, but even then I'd wonder if it's worth it when it can be hard to find other people to have matches with. I guess 40K's success is partially self-perpetuating; people play it because there's no point in spending £500 on an army that in their local club only a Dwarf player with a surprisingly relevant beard is playing. I generalise of course, but that's been my experience.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
As far as Atra Militarum goes:

Spoiler:

As mentioned in another topic, I really want this to get better, not concerned how. GW just starts making stuff better? Great! GW gets some sense knocked into them by financial issues? Great! GW dies and someone better ends up with the IPs? Great!

Just as long as 40k remains and doesn't get the AOS treatment though, I should be fine. I've only been around in 7th and even I am scared of that happening!

@SDFarsight: I've never played WFB, so I'm not familiar with the rules.

To me, the barrier to entry has always been the models. While I think some of the WFB models are awesome, the majority of them are too cartoon-y for my taste.

Plus, when I started TT gaming, LoTR was still somewhat popular, and that really was an awesome game, so there was never really a reason for me to look into WFB too much. Taking on LoTR always confused me, as it seemed like a direct competitor to WFB...why would they want to divide their own market?

Anyway, I think I'm rambling, so I'll stop.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
As mentioned in another topic, I really want this to get better, not concerned how. GW just starts making stuff better? Great! GW gets some sense knocked into them by financial issues? Great! GW dies and someone better ends up with the IPs? Great!

Just as long as 40k remains and doesn't get the AOS treatment though, I should be fine. I've only been around in 7th and even I am scared of that happening!

Sorry to disappoint, but it IS coming. I've played it. Or at least a version of it. A full year and change before AoS hit. Heck, played it the weekend 7th was actually hitting retail shelves, if memory serves.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Spoiler:

 asorel wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
You wanna be afraid? Age of Sigmar IS coming for 40k. I played it with a group of others and a GW rep a year and a half before AoS hit. Didn't know what I was playing at the time, but it was awful. I hate 7th (as a lover of 4th and 5th). This is much, much worse. Prepare for the end times. They're coming, and they will make 40k fanboys weep.

I don't see it being an End Times at all. The 40k lore is what makes 40k so great and interesting, they HAVE to know that removing all of that lore will kill the franchise.

I wonder if GW had another property with decades of deep, well-written lore behind it? Lore that, perhaps, made the game itself interesting? Surely they wouldn't have done anything to brutally destroy such lore...

Yes, but can you really compare Fantasy with 40k? At least I was under the impression that the 40k universe, lore, merch, spinoff games, video games and so on are on an entirely different level.

If they've done it to the initial brand, the very brand that established their position as the company to go to for Fantasy wargames, what stops them from doing it to 40k?

Fantasy may have been the first, but 40k very quickly eclipsed it in popularity and revenue. At the time that it was scrapped, fantasy wasn't pulling in nearly as much as 40k. Because Fantasy isn't a master of GW's profits the way 40k is, they can afford to experiment with it a little (or a lot).

Initial brand fantasy may be, but the principal brand it is not. Hell, the introduction of Sigmarines was an attempt to make fantasy more like 40k

And look at how well THAT went. Because clearly a shattered based is a better prospect than it was.

But I digress. You are correct in saying it wasn't the biggest seller for GW, but it was the base of it all. The 40k system came from Fantasy, as well as a lot of its original playerbase. The foundation.

I guess that what I mean is that for GW nothing is sacred if it means they can profit a little, or at least think they can.

I'm not suggesting that AoS was an intelligent decision, or that GW execs hold anything sacred. My point was that, on some level, they are aware that changing a product to such a major degree could have a negative impact on profits. Because Fantasy isn't as large a source of profit, GW decided that attempting a redesign was worth the risk, because they lost profit wouldn't break the company. In contrast, 40k is the franchise that is keeping the firm alive. Messing with it in any significant way is a very large risk where profits are concerned. I would imagine that it is for a similar reason that the timeline has remained frozen in place. Advancing it entails fixing something that already "works" to some degree. Age of the Emprah won't happen until true desperation sets in.