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.

I don’t know how people are hating on Warcaster already when we know so little about it. I mean, a game company is trying to expand and make more games! Clearly GW is in desperate straights to be putting out that new chaos warband game of theirs. And new Apocalypse?! That’s twice the desperation!

It’s a new game that shares the IP of their core game, but set in a different time period. It wants to be more focused on the Battlegroup, and will feature customizable leaders and jacks instead of all set characters and loadouts. None of that sounds terrible yet.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
(although I actually don't think GW handled AoS badly. Warhammer was dying and they decided it was better to put a crossbow bolt through it's skull instead of allowing it to limp along for another decade). If it's really true that Warmahordes has been basically abandoned then what harm can this do? They can use the original game as a stepping-off point to create an entirely new game system with a unique style and aesthetic of its own.

More like they wanted an excuse to add Sigmarines to Fantasy, but couldn't find a reasonably way to do it within the bounds of the existing lore, so they just opted to toss the baby out with the bathwater.

AoS coming out of WHFB was far too drastic a move that stemmed from GW - still at the time proudly boasting it didn't listen to customer research - being unwilling to try and understand why it's sales were falling (namely that the barrier to entry and a 2000 army was much, much, much higher than the already expensive 40k due to the way Cores worked and the ruleset being trash below 1000pts). AoS was pretty much dead on arrival, but it flatlined around the time Roundtree took the helm, so they were able to salvage what was left with the General's Handbook. The rest of it's 'success' just came naturally from GW as a whole doing well, but it still holds pretty much the same popularity share compared to 40k as Fantasy did back in the day.

As merciful as I've been on my opinion of PP compared to GW, Warcaster 5000 sounds about as absurd as AoS and not in a good way.

lol no.

Warhammer was dead.

AoS is the opposite of dead.

GW did the right thing in taking Fido out for his last walk.

 AduroT wrote:
I don’t know how people are hating on Warcaster already when we know so little about it. I mean, a game company is trying to expand and make more games! Clearly GW is in desperate straights to be putting out that new chaos warband game of theirs. And new Apocalypse?! That’s twice the desperation!

It’s a new game that shares the IP of their core game, but set in a different time period. It wants to be more focused on the Battlegroup, and will feature customizable leaders and jacks instead of all set characters and loadouts. None of that sounds terrible yet.

I agree, it was just badly represented in the OP calling it Warmachine 5.000 and the old game being changed to Warmachine Age of Oblivion, making it sound like a GW parody. I see it as PP coming to terms with the end of Warmachine and trying to give players a similar, but fresh, experience.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I don’t know how people are hating on Warcaster already when we know so little about it. I mean, a game company is trying to expand and make more games! Clearly GW is in desperate straights to be putting out that new chaos warband game of theirs. And new Apocalypse?! That’s twice the desperation!

It’s a new game that shares the IP of their core game, but set in a different time period. It wants to be more focused on the Battlegroup, and will feature customizable leaders and jacks instead of all set characters and loadouts. None of that sounds terrible yet.

I agree, it was just badly represented in the OP calling it Warmachine 5.000 and the old game being changed to Warmachine Age of Oblivion, making it sound like a GW parody. I see it as PP coming to terms with the end of Warmachine and trying to give players a similar, but fresh, experience.

Exactly, it's corny and kinda dumb, but if Warmachine really is dead then they need to cut their losses and try and retain a sense of humour while doing it.

Murdering your darlings is the hardest thing a writer or designer ever has to do, but recognising when to do so is one of the most precious skills you'll ever have. GW did it and made it a success and basically set the template. If PP can manage it, then fair play to them.

I don’t think this is replacing Warmahordes. I think they’re adding a 2nd game.

They've already stated that there are more narrative events coming for warmachine after oblivion. Even if they wanted to move on from Warmachine it would be really dumb to do so until the new game(s) were established enough to loose the revenue from the first game.

 ImAGeek wrote:
I don’t think this is replacing Warmahordes. I think they’re adding a 2nd game.

They are adding a new game, which will allow them to be more experimental than changing Warmachine proper. It still revolved around the concept of warcasters and jacks, and apparently uses some of the same mechanics, but being able to design your casters and jacks directly, as well as having smaller unit sizes of only 3-5 models. I also wouldn't be surprised if Warcaster starts off with plastic models rather than resin (it probably won't, but it would be the smart thing to do). So, to me, it seems like it is a new version of Warmachine, but with less baggage, and I'm sure that if it is successful, it will become the blueprint from which Warmachine mk4 could potentially spring.

However, I don't think WMH is popular enough right now to support two full miniature lines - but I'm not sure how many models WMH players are buying as it is. Factions only get two or three models a year, generally, and people who've been around for a while probably have all the faction models they need. So I think that Warcaster, with all new models, new factions, new gameplay will represent a better business opportunity than keeping the WMH line going infinitely. Being resin, rather than cheap, mass produced plastic means that PP can not keep all their models in print all the time, and supporting a line that is, what, 13 factions now?, seems impossible.

I don't think WMH will die outright, but there's no doubt that it is at an unsustainable level right now. Warcasters could replace WMH as PP's main game, and if done well, could last well past when WMH becomes PP's Warhammer Fantasy Battles.

 ekwatts wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
(although I actually don't think GW handled AoS badly. Warhammer was dying and they decided it was better to put a crossbow bolt through it's skull instead of allowing it to limp along for another decade). If it's really true that Warmahordes has been basically abandoned then what harm can this do? They can use the original game as a stepping-off point to create an entirely new game system with a unique style and aesthetic of its own.

More like they wanted an excuse to add Sigmarines to Fantasy, but couldn't find a reasonably way to do it within the bounds of the existing lore, so they just opted to toss the baby out with the bathwater.

AoS coming out of WHFB was far too drastic a move that stemmed from GW - still at the time proudly boasting it didn't listen to customer research - being unwilling to try and understand why it's sales were falling (namely that the barrier to entry and a 2000 army was much, much, much higher than the already expensive 40k due to the way Cores worked and the ruleset being trash below 1000pts). AoS was pretty much dead on arrival, but it flatlined around the time Roundtree took the helm, so they were able to salvage what was left with the General's Handbook. The rest of it's 'success' just came naturally from GW as a whole doing well, but it still holds pretty much the same popularity share compared to 40k as Fantasy did back in the day.

As merciful as I've been on my opinion of PP compared to GW, Warcaster 5000 sounds about as absurd as AoS and not in a good way.

lol no.

Warhammer was dead.

AoS is the opposite of dead.

GW did the right thing in taking Fido out for his last walk.

Warhammer was "dead" because of GW's mismanagement. AoS is the opposite of dead because after an initial period of mismanagement, GW stopped mismanaging it.

In other words, GW are perfectly capable of reviving a "dead" game when they adopt sound business practices like reducing the barrier to entry and engaging with their community, and so all GW did by "taking Fido out" was expend a huge chunk of effort and money that they didn't need to, because AoS looks to be about the same level of popularity as WHFB was at its height - GW wanted another market-smashing 40K-alike, but they just can't grasp the idea that even if you add Space Marines to it a fantasy IP won't sell as well as a sci-fi or sci-fantasy one.

Not sure of the thinking behind trying to pick a fight with 40k when 40k is its at the strongest its been for years, X-Wing got away with it as late 7th was suffering from a number of issues and cos Star Wars

still it'll be interesting to see what occurs

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Not sure of the thinking behind trying to pick a fight with 40k when 40k is its at the strongest its been for years, X-Wing got away with it as late 7th was suffering from a number of issues and cos Star Wars

still it'll be interesting to see what occurs

I don’t think it is picking a fight with 40k really. Different scale (20-30 models is a fair bit smaller than 40k) and possibly a more ‘proper sci-fi’ aesthetic if the title card is anything to go by, rather than the space fantasy of most of 40k.

I was mostly a spectator with WarmaHordes from the earlier days...book three or so for WM? I got pulled in with Hordes, but only friendly play at home. Liked the Hordes lore snd even sculpted a few models for shark-based Tharn/Blindwater. For me the player interaction and community on their own forums was too abrasive to try and get involved there. A combination of pricing (often of DREADFUL PVC minis; cleaning my Warpwolves from the starter was haunting), the multipart PVC warbeasts often being worde sculpts than their metal ancestors, faction bloat and fiction "bloat" killed it for me (seriously, stuff happening in magazines I have to import, plus a deluge of big books, new fsction books, revised faction books...figuring out a reading order alone was horrible if you didn't keep up for a bit). And GW getting better.

Regarding pricing, I'm actually hazy on what happened since I stopped thinking about PP years ago, but the European distributor did something with discounts, my online stores of choice and F"L"GS all stopped carrying it over this and I simply stopped caring, because stuff like Bearka or any other 40mm base stuff and cavalry was ridiculosly priced even *with* some discount. If I could get amazing deep sales from MM without the brutal shipping fees to EU added I might have a different view there, but at retail here, no. Especially if it's inconvenient to buy, too! My new FLGS that's actually close never started carrying it. Trollblood bear tamer is tempting, as are quite a few Tharn things, but I'd have to go out of my way to order models for a locally deader than dead system with prices I found to high while it was alive and they might come in a material I hate. Yeah, I'll have to make do without them or a Khador jack amd MoW horde

Now a scifi setting? Ehhh. Nope. I liked Hordes more, snd I actually dislike their futuristic elfs and those recent models (for a dungeon crawler or something?) so scifi WM is not interesting to me at all.

 Yodhrin wrote:

Warhammer was "dead" because of GW's mismanagement. AoS is the opposite of dead because after an initial period of mismanagement, GW stopped mismanaging it.

In other words, GW are perfectly capable of reviving a "dead" game when they adopt sound business practices like reducing the barrier to entry and engaging with their community, and so all GW did by "taking Fido out" was expend a huge chunk of effort and money that they didn't need to, because AoS looks to be about the same level of popularity as WHFB was at its height - GW wanted another market-smashing 40K-alike, but they just can't grasp the idea that even if you add Space Marines to it a fantasy IP won't sell as well as a sci-fi or sci-fantasy one.

There's more believable fiction in the last season of Lost than what you wrote here.

A rank and file miniatures game is never going to achieve mass market penetration these days. Miniature gaming is no longer made up of historicals and grognards. You're talking relatively popular, but WHFB was as popular as it was when the market was MUCH smaller and had fewer competitors. If AoS is as relatively popular to 40k as WHFB was, it's in a market that is huge comparatively. AoS is considerably more popular than WHFB ever was as a total of units sold and money made. According to ICv2, AoS is the second highest selling miniature game, ahead of Legion, X-Wing, Warmachine, Hordes, Infinity, Malifaux, Kings of War, Song of Ice and Fire, and so on. In a much more crowded marketplace, and in one that initially HATED AoS, that's a pretty darn big accomplishment.

Guys, this isn't about WHFB or AOS, kindly take it to a thread of its own, thanks!

It's kind of interesting in that people are trying to make what Warhammer evolved into, and not what Warhammer started out as. It'll be interesting to see what sort of direction that PP take, especially since they have legitimate successes like Monsterpocalypse. Now that I could see becoming a Warhammer-style massed game in a decade or so.

Eh. Thats how Warmachine started too. It was supposed to be about the warcaster and the battle group (3-4 warjacks), then adding a squad or two of supporting infantry.

But it quickly became apparent that warjacks were the least efficient things possible, and Infantry Machine was born. Then rather than rein it in, PP pushed point limits up. First to 500, then to 750 (and in later editions reworked points), which emphasized infantry spam even more.

Maybe they learned a lesson, but I expect they'll decide on expanding the range and adding more and more, and that 20-30 models will become 50-70 soon enough.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Not sure of the thinking behind trying to pick a fight with 40k when 40k is its at the strongest its been for years...

They aren't trying to pick a fight with 40k. They are diversifying their line so that they have models they can sell to players that don't overlap with what they already offer. If WMH dies, it'll likely take down everything associated with it (such as their Undercity board games, Riot Quest, the min-crate line, and so on). It's putting all their eggs in one basket, that is currently falling out the 18th story window. Changing genres allows them to have their cake and eat it too.

It's actually a really good idea. In fact, I'd even go as far as to suggest that it might be something that most miniature/game companies will inevitably do once they reach a certain size - just like how all miniature games seem to get a skirmish board game (Underworlds, Aristeia, Riot Quest). Wyrd launched The Other Side, Modiphius is turning Fallout into Skyrim, Knight models added Harry Potter to their Batman, Warcry is probably fantasy Necromunda, Arcadia Quest is becoming Starcadia Quest, Zombicide becomes Starbicide, Frostgrave got Ghost Archipelago, and so on. Corvus Belli is just now starting to diversify with Aristeia and the dungeon crawl they announced. They almost certainly have a fantasy line under development (and have mentioned that they started out making fantasy miniatures and miss it).

What's honestly surprising is that it took PP this long to do it. I mean, they dabbled a bit with Level 7, but PP reached the level where they should've broken off into a second genre miniature game a while ago and never did. I think that maybe they got burned pretty hard with MonPoc 1E and were afraid to commit to a second game system fully. It's taken them 20 years to create a second miniature game (though MonPoc only doesn't count on a technicality).

Voss wrote:
Eh. Thats how Warmachine started too. It was supposed to be about the warcaster and the battle group (3-4 warjacks), then adding a squad or two of supporting infantry.

But it quickly became apparent that warjacks were the least efficient things possible, and Infantry Machine was born. Then rather than rein it in, PP pushed point limits up. First to 500, then to 750 (and in later editions reworked points), which emphasized infantry spam even more.

Maybe they learned a lesson, but I expect they'll decide on expanding the range and adding more and more, and that 20-30 models will become 50-70 soon enough.

+1.

Despite being years past burnt out on PP, I like the game at a very small, battlegroup-oriented scale, but I feel like PP never figured out how to encourage players to properly do that. Some characters could run groups well, but that usually became mostly their thing, and it never felt like the system got that working. I think I'd be very tempted by the new game if I trusted them to do a good job keeping it as a quick game with a real core of battlegroup guys, but, well, I don't so I'm not.

I'd like to start with the bad; that pitch for this game is absolutely horrible and unprofessional. It looks like it was written by someone who was notified they had to pitch this new game 10 minutes before the presentation.

Other than that I could potentially be interested in this. I played a lot of WM the first half of 1st and really enjoyed it. The mechanics of how the Warcasters and their Jacks work was really cool, and I thought it was a well thought out game. I didn't really play competitively, so I didn't experience too much infantry machine. Smaller battlegroups and model counts in a science fiction setting could be really cool. I just hope they tone down the shoulder pads as big as torso aesthetic.

I will mention I am not familiar with the most recent edition of the game and how those rules are. Either way good luck to PP.

 Sabotage! wrote:
I'd like to start with the bad; that pitch for this game is absolutely horrible and unprofessional. It looks like it was written by someone who was notified they had to pitch this new game 10 minutes before the presentation.

They said it would be playable at the 2020 Lock & Load, which says to me that it must be fairly far along in development. My guess is that they just didn't want to distract from the impending releases of the Infernals, Oblivion, and Riot Quest (all of which are launching by Sept, some of which were available to the fans at L&L). They may have learned a hard lesson sharing Riot Quest too early. Also, Gen Con is coming up.

But I agree. They needed something to tease excitement. There's not enough here to know whether to be excited or not.

Rules wise, I think Warmachine is the best its ever been. Battlegroup actually functions and is an integral part of the game and there are a huge number of lists and casters that provide dynamic and thematic play experiences like almost nothing else on the market. The competitive diversity is higher than its ever been, though the current crop of outliers are a bit more problematic than the outliers last year or the year before.

Where the game is at its worst is the community sadly. PP made some unpopular decisions but the way the community reacted to them is where the real damage was done. I've never really seen people actively will death upon something they collectively love(?) so fiercely and for the most part it was over some pretty minor stuff. I think a lot of it is just that MK2 had devolved into such a narrow band of highly specific competitive options that the player base was too invested in to handle change. I'm not really sure overall, but I'm still shocked at how the community reacted to blood in the water.

 LunarSol wrote:


Where the game is at its worst is the community sadly. PP made some unpopular decisions but the way the community reacted to them is where the real damage was done. I've never really seen people actively will death upon something they collectively love(?) so fiercely and for the most part it was over some pretty minor stuff. I think a lot of it is just that MK2 had devolved into such a narrow band of highly specific competitive options that the player base was too invested in to handle change. I'm not really sure overall, but I'm still shocked at how the community reacted to blood in the water.

You should check out the shadowrun subreddit. Makes all of this look pleasent as there are people still upset that anything but 1st &2nd editions exists and regularly torpedo any post there with people not playing/enjoying the shadowrun setting wrong. So basically 18-20 years or complaining if not longer. I'm sure there will be people still attacking Privateer and Warmahordes 10 years from now over MK2 & 3 changes.

 Monkeysloth wrote:

You should check out the shadowrun subreddit. Makes all of this look pleasent as there are people still upset that anything but 1st &2nd editions exists and regularly torpedo any post there with people not playing/enjoying the shadowrun setting wrong. So basically 18-20 years or complaining if not longer. I'm sure there will be people still attacking Privateer and Warmahordes 10 years from now over MK2 & 3 changes.

I don't think finding a more negative and self destructive community is exactly what I had in mind.

On another note, I think PP is also suffering because they seem to have both benefited most and are now suffering the consequences of the "play locally, buy online" market that we've seen over the last decade. I know a lot of places towards the end of MK2 had largely given up competing with online and moved to special order only until some of their shelves cleared. When MK3 didn't dramatically change things in that regard, a lot of that dried up completely and with it there was a pretty notable drop off of new players. As fond as I am of MK3, it didn't really do anything to change how people got into the game, with the only new player product coming out of the gate being the new battleboxes that really weren't any different from the old ones in terms of getting players into the real experience.

WM/H is actually growing in my area in the last few months.

My only worry is tourneys for warcaster will most likely look horrible every army looking the same whatever the best armament is on the caster and jacks for each army is all you'll see and you'll never see any of the other options.

Personally, the competitive thrust of the game pushed me out, and I took mk. III as the perfect opportunity to jump ship. Couple with a local playgroup that was full of people who proudly boasted about their tourney prowess and I was just done.

Add in the unit bloat, the factions slowly losing their faction identity due to every faction getting every kind of unit and you have a game that just kind of lost its way. I don't think mk. III did all the damage that it's purported to, but combine it with a resurgent GW and it was a recipe for disaster.

But in regards to WM5k, I'll look at the pretty minis, but have no intention of playing because I know how the players are in my area.

I'll add another anecdote.

I started with the B&W Prime book. Played thru Mk1, those were my learning days and i rarely won a game, but time to time, my jacks got to do something fun, and that kept me playing and working to improve.
Then came Mk2, and I started playing in tournaments. I did fair to middling, enjoyed the "loser bracket" side of them, where I met a lot of other players who just enjoyed the game.
I generally built my lists with larger battlegroups than the meta advised, but it played how I liked, and the game felt like I could field nearly anything, and have a chance to win if I played well.
But after awhile, theme lists took over, and anyone who lost a round dropped out of the tournaments.
Enter Mk3 and Theme Lists were the only way to play, if you wanted to win, and many model choices were obviously better than others that did nearly the same thing. Thus driving most lists to be cookie cutter. That's when I bailed, over 2 years ago.

I look at the models available now, and over that time factions have gained 2-3 Warcasters. That's stagnation to me. The lack of new options, and the bewildering CID/Power cycle kept me from attempting a return. Oh and all the "free" extra points in the theme lists.

Though I believe PP's greatest mistakes were twofold;

they let Dave Carl (DC), architect of Mk2, leave as Rules Lead, (Was this at the same time MK3 news leaked?),
and nearly simultaneously dissolved the Press Gang program, which kept events going.

When GW was floundering, a friend convinced me to give Mk 2 a try. I played just a little bit, but quickly realized that it was too cutthroat for my liking. Next thing I knew, it was dead in my area and I’m clinging onto a Cygnar army and starters for a few more factions, not sure what to do with them - other than the fact I’m NOT getting rid of the models.

I’d be curious to see what becomes of this, but I’m tepid to buy into it.

 Stormonu wrote:
When GW was floundering, a friend convinced me to give Mk 2 a try. I played just a little bit, but quickly realized that it was too cutthroat for my liking. Next thing I knew, it was dead in my area and I’m clinging onto a Cygnar army and starters for a few more factions, not sure what to do with them - other than the fact I’m NOT getting rid of the models.

I’d be curious to see what becomes of this, but I’m tepid to buy into it.

Do what I did and use them for Frostgrave.

I'm vaguely curious about this pure sci-fi game, but wow is that announcement half assed.

 Stormonu wrote:
When GW was floundering, a friend convinced me to give Mk 2 a try. I played just a little bit, but quickly realized that it was too cutthroat for my liking. Next thing I knew, it was dead in my area and I’m clinging onto a Cygnar army and starters for a few more factions, not sure what to do with them - other than the fact I’m NOT getting rid of the models.

I’d be curious to see what becomes of this, but I’m tepid to buy into it.

Use them for D&D? Or alt models for skirmish games?

 Barzam wrote:

I'm vaguely curious about this pure sci-fi game, but wow is that announcement half assed.

The one from the video or the blog write up that started this post?

I'm interested, for sure, but will wait and see both the models and more on the rules. There were a lot of lessons to be learned from later issues with warmachine, and I'm not sure if they have or not...