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.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Overread wrote:

 jojo_monkey_boy wrote:
*GW advertising the return to square bases with a promo shot indicating as much*

Dakkadakka: "Let's debate how they're going to release this new game on round bases in movement trays because..."

Because if GW don't the market will because many will want to use the same models in both AoS and Old World and might not want to have to collect the same army twice to put them on different bases.


How many want to do that is hard to say, it depends on how well Old World picks up on its own and how well AoS maintains itself. Old World is a very bold move by GW because they are literally competing with themselves with the same scale and fantasy setting system in their own library.

"Don't the market"? What does that even mean?!!??!?!?


The problem is that AOS players are now petrified that this release will cannibalize their playerbase and are in full cope and seethe mode over it. The prevailing theory is that AOS being the only game in town (heh, perfect opportunity for that idiom) in a GW sense keeps WFB players in their playerbase. This is why they gak on any progress that this game might be making developmentwise, doomsay any press releases, and constantly feed debunked fan theories back into the mix on the regular to chatter the feth out of any press releases. Notice that those tactics move the actual news posts down about five pages. This isn't a bug, it's a feature.

Ok....
I said it both ways that Old World could out-compete AoS and that AoS could out-compete Old World. Heck I've earlier noted that if one game really did fall flat on its face chances are GW could simply roll the models into the other game without much work.
Furthermore the market is the customers - if GW doesn't provide ways to cross play the armies then people will come up with their own methods. Just the same as how they came up with methods to run Demons in both 40K and Old World back in the day.

All these base ideas make perfect sense, if we assume that GW is trying to tantalise AoS players into the Old World for some reason. I don’t see why, as they would then be cannibalising their own sales… would an AoS fan suddenly up their hobby spend to play both? Probs not.

It would seem like the sensible bet is that GW is after the cash of those that have slipped out of their bubble, the guys still happily playing older WHFB or migrated to Kings of War or something like that. Suddenly invalidating large swathes of these people’s current armies by some large scale basing change is a risky move, given that these people have already proved resistant to rebasing to play the new hotness.

The thing said "comes round again".

Therefore boomerang bases.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The thing said "comes round again".

Therefore boomerang bases.

Seems irrefutable to me

Luke82 wrote:
All these base ideas make perfect sense, if we assume that GW is trying to tantalise AoS players into the Old World for some reason. I don’t see why, as they would then be cannibalising their own sales… would an AoS fan suddenly up their hobby spend to play both? Probs not.

It would seem like the sensible bet is that GW is after the cash of those that have slipped out of their bubble, the guys still happily playing older WHFB or migrated to Kings of War or something like that. Suddenly invalidating large swathes of these people’s current armies by some large scale basing change is a risky move, given that these people have already proved resistant to rebasing to play the new hotness.

I mostly agree, while I could see the merit in some of these ideas, I doubt GW are going to try and accommodate peoples' AoS collections. However I think there's a good chance they do go for square bases but also change the base size slightly.

 RustyNumber wrote:
Except it stuffs everyone who ever used any 20mm models in WFB... Will be interesting how GW play the base size game given the 25 round vs 20 square difference...

By the end of WFB's lifespan, most infantry base sizes were inadequate for the models they were supposed to support. Trying to place 2022 GW models on them would upgrade the situation to woeful inadequate.

Hell, I remember the old, one piece plastics and how well those could fit on ranked up bases. 45 degree Clanrats, anyone?

Luke82 wrote:
It would seem like the sensible bet is that GW is after the cash of those that have slipped out of their bubble, the guys still happily playing older WHFB or migrated to Kings of War or something like that. Suddenly invalidating large swathes of these people’s current armies by some large scale basing change is a risky move, given that these people have already proved resistant to rebasing to play the new hotness.

I suspect people vastly overestimate how much GW is banking on the old guard to carry the product. They already chose to not be a GW customer once, with a certain amount of vehemence in many cases. Getting some of them back would be nice, but I assume GW has bigger market expectations than a fraction of the current WFB and KoW playerbase.

Yeah, I have a hard time believing that GW is still going to use 20mm bases. It's not even about height, but GW's models tend to be pretty beefy as well. Even skinny humans like Traitor Guard would be very packed on a 20mm and might have some of their gear get in the way of each other. Dwarfs got wide, too.

May be worth remembering that Blood Bowl models prior to the resurrection of Specialist games were on 25mm bases with pitches to match, and GW didn't hesitate to go up to 32mm bases and just sold new pitches that fit the embiggened models. I could see Old World go the same. Technically you'd still be able to use your old 20mm based collection by spacing them out on a regimental base, if you're not bothered by how that looks. That may be as much of a comprise as we can expect from GW, since they said they want people to be able to use their old armies. Technically viable, but not in such a way that it fetters new model design.

Well GW also said previous models would be usable.

So unless they are going to use 25/32 square bases for even old models...

And GW hasn't ever actually required or expected regimental bases and it doesn't work that well neccessarily as you needed to know exact spot specific models were.

GW always says earlier models can be used. And with movement trays it doesn't always matter how big your base is, so long as the movement tray itself is the right dimensions and can track health of the unit well. In the end with movement tray games the models are purely there as an ID And health marker. The game doesn't rely on real line of sight (in the same way skirmish games do) and the movement is as a single block.

The only debate is on how many models you can or cannot rank up for the visual aspect and for the ease of tracking wounds

All the models that came from WHFB are one thing, most barely fit in their old bases. Good luck getting the models made for AoS to fit anywhere in a square formation, movement trays would have to be huge.

Old orcs are difficult enough to rank up. Even going from the old Empire plastics to the 7th(?) edition ones is a tough task. New Chaos/Vampires? no chance.

WHFB fans are adept at ranking up new stuff on old base standards… just check the FB pages anytime anything that fits in the Old World is released and you can see folks ranking them up, new chaos and vamps included.

I’ve even got Stormcast happily ranked up on 25s, they make great bases for Slaanesh warriors.

Luke82 wrote:
WHFB fans are adept at ranking up new stuff on old base standards… just check the FB pages anytime anything that fits in the Old World is released and you can see folks ranking them up, new chaos and vamps included.

I’ve even got Stormcast happily ranked up on 25s, they make great bases for Slaanesh warriors.

Anything I've seen requires turning the models in odd directions, everything looks awkward and bad, doesn't fit at all, unless you have pictures to show?

Goose LeChance wrote:
New Chaos/Vampires? no chance.

People who play WHFB are a masterwork of patience at getting units to rank up and proving people wrong about AoS models and square bases.







You may have a point regarding the new Chosen(they're BIG), but for the majority of the line, someone's figured it out with patience.

It's often not hard to get the models in a line, but once you hit the 2nd rank, and even if you do manage to get them lined up you need to number the bases because you'll never get them to line up again if you forget the order.

Which has been a thing for decades. That's part and parcel to playing the game.

 Platuan4th wrote:
Which has been a thing for decades. That's part and parcel to playing the game.

Still fecking annoying and a point many people hate, lol. When I started WHFB all my armies ranked up reasonably well (maybe not everything did across the range, I dunno, but my armies did).

 Platuan4th wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:
New Chaos/Vampires? no chance.

People who play WHFB are a masterwork of patience at getting units to rank up and proving people wrong about AoS models and square bases.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

You may have a point regarding the new Chosen(they're BIG), but for the majority of the line, someone's figured it out with patience.

As much as i am impressed by your puzzle solving with the ranking, foot overhang with the ogor triggers me on a base level.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:
New Chaos/Vampires? no chance.

People who play WHFB are a masterwork of patience at getting units to rank up and proving people wrong about AoS models and square bases.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

You may have a point regarding the new Chosen(they're BIG), but for the majority of the line, someone's figured it out with patience.

As much as i am impressed by your puzzle solving with the ranking, foot overhang with the ogor triggers me on a base level.

*Ogre

 Overread wrote:
GW always says earlier models can be used. And with movement trays it doesn't always matter how big your base is, so long as the movement tray itself is the right dimensions and can track health of the unit well. In the end with movement tray games the models are purely there as an ID And health marker. The game doesn't rely on real line of sight (in the same way skirmish games do) and the movement is as a single block.

The only debate is on how many models you can or cannot rank up for the visual aspect and for the ease of tracking wounds

Well. You would need mark edges of spefific models...

You don't think trays are going to face off each other face to face center point to center point? Players will aim to have no more models in combat than neccessary. If corner to corner isn't allowed then.

XXXXXX
--YYYY--

Where YYYY's don't overlap even 1mm left or right...

tneva82 wrote:

You don't think trays are going to face off each other face to face center point to center point? Players will aim to have no more models in combat than neccessary. If corner to corner isn't allowed then.

I'd be very surprised if TOW doesn't have a rule requiring maximization of frontage contact considering it's been in the game since 6th ed.

Luke82 wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

Goose LeChance wrote:
New Chaos/Vampires? no chance.

People who play WHFB are a masterwork of patience at getting units to rank up and proving people wrong about AoS models and square bases.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

You may have a point regarding the new Chosen(they're BIG), but for the majority of the line, someone's figured it out with patience.

As much as i am impressed by your puzzle solving with the ranking, foot overhang with the ogor triggers me on a base level.

*Ogre

I know what i said.

Ranking puzzle is something I don't miss. It was pain with models that were designed to rank up, it would be a nightmare with the current models. Increasing the base sizes to match their round equivalents would alleviate the issue and make the game playable with either base shape.

Base size increase is possible, they already pushed it to the limit long before AoS.

It still won't make the giant AoS models fit in a square tray without heavy conversion work, unless the space between each model is large enough to fit the action poses. AoS models weren't designed to rank up... It's going to look bad.

Ranking puzzle can be avoided with round bases + movement trays. I've switched my Skaven to that system and never looked back since.

I'm with BertBert on this; my Plaguebearers are so much easier to do work with on round bases in a movement tray designed to hold rounds.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Which has been a thing for decades. That's part and parcel to playing the game.

Still fecking annoying and a point many people hate, lol. When I started WHFB all my armies ranked up reasonably well (maybe not everything did across the range, I dunno, but my armies did).

You haven't played Chaos and built chaos knights if you can state this with a straight face.... same with barbarians for that matter.


Sincerly someone that recently built 10 chaos knights and an lord and banner bearer based upon chaos knight kit.



Ironically the blood warriors fit perfectly on bases for reasons i only can assume as them being initially planed for squares.

Personally i wouldn't be mad if GW would give us a bit bigger base sizes for cav.

 Overread wrote:
Because if GW don't the market will because many will want to use the same models in both AoS and Old World and might not want to have to collect the same army twice to put them on different bases.

GW want you to buy their models twice. Why would they make things easier for you?

If you want to go out and make a movement tray to fit round bases into a square formation, I'm sure they'd happy for you to try.

 Overread wrote:
Old World is a very bold move by GW because they are literally competing with themselves with the same scale and fantasy setting system in their own library.

They wouldn't really be competing products though. Based on what we know, the old world is going back to some amalgam of the previous game's rules. AoS is fundamentally a different game in every capacity from WFB of old. The setting isn't really comparable either. AoS is a much "higher" fantasy game than WFB was. The only similarity is they're both "fantasy."

 Platuan4th wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

You don't think trays are going to face off each other face to face center point to center point? Players will aim to have no more models in combat than neccessary. If corner to corner isn't allowed then.

I'd be very surprised if TOW doesn't have a rule requiring maximization of frontage contact considering it's been in the game since 6th ed.

You can maximize yourself without maximizing opponents. That was usual through 2000's.

Center to center maximize both required in 8e to give magical infinite movement once you touch with charge move.

Shifted and amended all to round bases and AoS, not going back to squares ever again!

At this point this would be trolling x2.

Been a bit cold with the old world news I just moved away from all that years ago with the implosion. Bit cheeky to even suggest its back.

 Overread wrote:
GW always says earlier models can be used. And with movement trays it doesn't always matter how big your base is, so long as the movement tray itself is the right dimensions and can track health of the unit well. In the end with movement tray games the models are purely there as an ID And health marker. The game doesn't rely on real line of sight (in the same way skirmish games do) and the movement is as a single block.

The only debate is on how many models you can or cannot rank up for the visual aspect and for the ease of tracking wounds

Which would be turning the model removal aspect of WHFB and turning into a game of KoW. Something the WHFB players are always eager to call laughable.
Also, if the newer models don't rank up on their 20mm/25mmn squares, isn't that just pointing towards proof of scale creep?

When it's finally released, I can see the initial box set being like the new HH one. Two sets of opposing identical human models, and you can pick a huge selection of colour schemes to say where they're from.