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.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Valander wrote:
While it's incredibly unlikely, and the "source" of SpikeyBits is about as reliable as reading tea leaves, I actually would buy into a 10mm or smaller size game. That's an itch I currently don't have a good scratcher for.

People be doing Kings of War in 10mm, there's also Warmaster... "Remastered" I think. Forest Dragon patreon is doing a wonderful job resculpting the armies.

One of the 'features' of KoW (I hate it personally) is the scale doesn't matter. You can play it at 64mm, 10mm or with cardboard chits on a graph paper if you want. It makes no difference (other than the look).

Aash wrote:
Just saw this:
https://spikeybits.com/2021/02/rumors-warhammer-old-world-not-28mm-scale.html

Does anyone know if this rumour has popped up elsewhere? Any chance it might be true, and if so what are people's thoughts?

Clickbait. And it's worked well, apparently.

Kings of War is model agnostic which is great, and the rules support that but the scale still matters. People who do smaller scale typically house rule it to either do half measurements or do cm instead of inches.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Prove it. I've seen a lot of people claiming this on the basis that they announced the same day KoW 3rd released, except thats not true - KoW3 released October 21st, 2019 (and was announced 6+ months previous to that), the Old World announcement was made on November 15th. If GW was trying to kill Mantic hype they had a lot of opportunity to actually do so - and didn't.

Yea I don't have a recording of Rountree twirling his moustache while giving out orders...

I know it wasn't same day but it was just as people were starting to get their books (late as usual for Mantic) and there was some real chatter about the game. Nothing else happened in that time to prompt GW to break all their conventions and make an annoucement out of nowhere for something 3 years in advance when they had nothing but a working title to show. Nothing but a playerbase at the hegiht of excitement for regiment fantasy battles. The fact that it did come 3 weeks late helps, if anything, my assertion, as it shows that GW had absolutely no plans for such a game until they saw the sudden buzz around KoW and then they scrambled to greenlight something, anything, overnight (in corporate terms) to steal that thunder. The sad part is that it worked wonderfully well. I saw soooo many exclaim that day "Oh bugger getting into KoW then, I'm just gonna wait for GW to take me back"

Heres the thing though - KoW 3rd was very publicly announced in April 2019. GW had 7 months to come up with more than just a logo (and I assume they did come up with a lot more than just a logo, even if they claimed otherwise). Its not like all of a sudden KoW 3 released and Rountree saw it and said "ANOTHER COMPANY IS MAKING MINIATURE GAMES!?? THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, REBOOT WHFB TOMORROW!". They could have simply killed KoW3 dead on arrival by announcing it on the actual release day instead of waiting almost a month for people to have an opportunity to pick it up.

The more reasonable interpretation is that they had finished doing their bi-monthly battle sister bulletin charting the development of the sisters of battle army box about 2-3 weeks prior, had done a series of articles fully revealing the contents of the box set and results of the development work, etc. over the prior 4 days, and were launching preorders for said box the next day. Its reasonable to conclude that they wanted to continue to spotlight long-term internal development of a product in the same way in order to maintain existing/capture new attention and build hype for future releases. There are really only a handful of possible things they could do that would capture popular interest the way the sisters did, things like a squat army for 40k, a battlefleet gothic reboot, etc. Bringing back Warhammer Fantasy? Probably the biggest thing on that list and a surefire way to grab headlines. Its a no-brainer. Did KoW possibly influence the decision on some level? Maybe - but GW is a big corporation and big corporations don't just do this kind of gak overnight on a whim. Its more reasonable to conclude that bringing back WHFB in some capacity was always part of the plan and that plan was already in motion regardless of KoW 3rd edition. After all - Jervis Johnson (remember, hes a "long term strategy manager") was one of the leaders and major influencers behind the creation of Age of Sigmar, as well as being a huge fan of WHFB itself. Killing off WHFB to launch a new alternative title so that you can then reinvent and rerelease WHFB over an extended timeline and away from public scrutiny while building a new community to support it certainly seems like a long term strategy to me, one which was probably planned out as early as when Age of Sigmars develop was first launched.

Does GW really "worry" about people re-using old models? Space Marines as an army have few new concepts within them and yet sell like crazy. Even Primaris are basically just marines on larger bases and tanks that over instead of crawl

Space Marines are an "evergreen" product for GW, they make up like 30% of GWs total revenue on their own or something like that. Thats not true of any other faction/model range within GWs catalog, so judging GWs actions on the basis of space marines isn't really helpful.

The only time its an issue is if no one is buying the new stuff and with GW's current sales and design record I can't see them being afraid of that.

That was precisely the issue with old WHFB though, so I don't really see that much of anything has changed other than the fact that GWs audience has potentially grown and theres more new blood to sell to - but overwhelmingly that audience has grown for 40k and Age of Sigmar, and doesn't necessarily translate to The Old World.

Warmaster scale provides something new, but at the same time that scale of games isn't as popular; it isn't as well supported and its far more of a gamble for GW.

A claim that isn't necessarily well supported or true. Defining "warmaster scale" less as "10mm" and more as somewhere between "6mm to 15mm", or even "10mm to 15mm", theres a huge array of manufacturers and options out there. Battlefront is a privately held company, but there have been rumors for years now that their annual revenues make them the second largest player in the industry behind GW (no numbers to support that claim and I believe that has tapered off somewhat since the mid-2010s, that being said the gulf between GW and some of the bigger firms in the industry that I have seen numbers for is pretty big, so even if this claim is true Battlefront might still only be like 1/6th the size of GW) - their principal product ranges are obviously all 15mm. Beyond them theres a handful of bigger firms doing games in that scale range, such as Catalyst (Battletech, 6mm) and now Warlord ("Epic Battles"), and if I was to guess more businesses out there that have 6mm-15mm miniatures offerings than there are those with 28mm offerings based on the number of different manufacturers I have in my own collections. 15mm and smaller remains massively popular among the historical gaming crowd, possibly moreso than 28mm is, where its generally seen as the preferred scales from WW2 forwards, as well as for mass battle games of any period). The main reason why there isn't much of a "big player" in that arena is because theres no "moat" for historicals - i.e. no way to protect your IP or stave off competitors or really establish yourself in a niche which will allow you to grow revenues - which makes the rumors about Battlefront all the more impressive if they are true.

Also, don't mistake correlation for causation - yes, most of the bigger players in the industry are slinging 28mm miniatures currently, but that isn't necessarily because 28mm is an inherently more sellable scale. A large segment of the industry is defined by GW's "collaborators" (i.e. those companies spun off by GW veterans who have 28mm miniatures in their pedigrees and have stuck with what they know) and "competitors" (i.e. those companies who are trying to establish themselves as major players in the industry and are seeking to imitate GWs formula in order to do so, and thus jump into 28mm because thats what the biggest player in the industry is doing). GW themselves bucked industry trends by getting big with 28mm minis at a time when the norm was actually more 15mm scale (and to a lesser extent 6mm, to say nothing of naval wargaming scale trends), which themselves had usurped the more popular 25mm minis being used in ages longer past.

Heck, the one game that was able to challenge Warhammer 40ks sales in the past decade (X-Wing), is more or less 6mm scale. Yes, its a disingenuous comparison because vehicles vs infantry, etc. but I think the main takeaway is that the right scale for your game varies with your subject matter. In this case, an infantry based game it would seem the obvious answer is 28mm given that thats what most games that focus on infantry do - but thats a trap. Your "baseline" in a rank and file game is not one infantryman, its a block of infantry, and that requires a different scale in order to make it usable. In the past, during the early days of rank and file wargaming, the most popular games out there were Napoleonics played at 25mm with 1:20 or 1:60 ratio units, which were then usurped by 15mm miniatures first popularized by Miniature Figurines Ltd (aka Minifigs) which lead to a shift in the tabletop industry towards 15mm figures that lasted well into the late 90s when GW started getting big. GWs own market dominance caused the shift away from 15mm back towards 25/28mm minis... but then WHFB died, principally for reasons that could have potentially been avoided by using smaller minis. Today rank and file games are nowhere near as popular as they were prior to the rise of GW (when Napoleonic era wargaming was the most popular period to play), and I would guess theres a strong correlation there to the scale of the miniatures being used and also to WHFBs own failure to survive.

In any case, theres not much good data out there, but one of the more interesting pieces on the topic I've found is this: http://www.wargames-romania.ro/wordpress/articles/stateofwar/what-scale-to-choose-for-wargaming/

Summarized:

I gathered up close to 530 answers to this question: what scale did you choose for wargaming? And while the answers provided statistical data, what is most interesting is the actual reason for which people chose a certain size/scale.

Before i start to dive into the subject, keep in mind that:

1. I have not visited game specific forums for this endeavor. Not much point going on a 40k forum to ask: hey guys, what scale do you play? when you know the answer is 28mm. Not much point visiting a Flames of War Forum also, when the answer is clearly 15mm.
2. Allot of the people that answered have indicated multiple scales, so the results add up to more then 530 some. It simply does not matter if they prefer one scale to the other once they have invested in multiple scales. And some respondents actually could not choose a favorite scale out of those that they owned.
3. Take the data with a grain of salt. The statistical spread is still small, even at 530 respondents. A good thousand more would be required for a somewhat good accuracy and they would have to come from multiple countries.

A good 30.33% of people have answered that they own and play with 6mm miniatures.

15.54% of gamers like the 10mm size.

A whooping 53% of gamers own and actively play with 15mm miniatures.

Just 19% of gamers are actively involved in what is best known as a modelling scale (1/72).

52.05% of wargamers also invest in “God’s scale”. [25/28mm miniatures]

That's my only worry, that AoS gets left behind and as a result has its growth and marketing stunted.

Doubtful. The Old World has three big things stacked against it as it currently stands (assuming no changes to scale, etc.)

1. The remnants of a largely toxic fanbase and community that are antagonistic and hostile towards the now significantly larger AoS fandom, as well as generally trending hard towards gatekeeping and bigotry which will alienate many in the increasingly diverse and welcoming AoS and 40k playerbase.
2. A not insignificant number of people who insist that they will only use their existing collections or won't pay GWs prices and will source their miniatures from Mantic or other 3rd party manufacturers, etc. If those commitments that I have seen popping up on facebook and reddit are held, then The Old Worlds potential will probably be stunted by the very same people who seem to want the game most (ah, irony!), who for the most part are largely the same audience that caused WHFB to fail in the first place.
3. GWs own limitations of support for the range. If the "Horus Heresy" comparison is as apt as many expect it to be, then the game will never outgrow AoS proper, simply because the minis range will be largely expensive forgeworld resins that price out a large portion of the potential playerbase. Even if it does get plastic support, its reasonable to expect the game to be relegated to "specialist games" status - it would be hard for WHFB to overtake AoS when its only seeing a handful of releases every 3 months.

I doubt that. Plastics molds are extremely expensive. I could see them throwing them in a storage locker somewhere but not disposing completely.

Its more expensive to hold inventory of something that has no value to you, especially when space is at a premium (as is currently the case at GWs production and storage facilities), and especially when you know that you are going to be replacing them with a new set of molds for a new kit that supercedes the old ones. Even moreso when you have to maintain those molds - you don't just stick them on a shelf and walk away, at a minimum you need to regularly clean them and "condition" them, often you're keeping them in environmentally controlled storage to minimize the potential for rest/deterioration/corrosion - that costs money. Defacing and disposing of steel production molds is pretty common in the plastics industry when it comes to obsolete product lines (often they get used as infill for land reclamation projects), or just molds that have been around the block and have worn out from being used so many times. Increasingly they are often recycled - not sure on the exact process I've heard some say they are melted down and reforged into a new slab/slug or similar. Often old molds simply get re-used for a new one which to some extent is where scale-creep comes from - you're overcutting an existing mold to produce a new one. I.E. If you have a mold for a bretonnian knight (for example) and decide that you need to use that mold for something else, you recut it to produce whatever that is, but in order to do so the new item needs to occupy a bigger cavity than the old one because you need to remove the existing material from the mold in order to do so, thus making your new sculpts a bit larger,1-2 mm at a time.

I believe GW will stay with the 28mm size models. Warmaster didn't sell enough to stay alive.

None of the Specialist Games did, and yet Blood Bowl, Necromunda, Adeptus Titanicus, etc. are all back. Warmaster was actually more successful than most of the specialist games, more than most people realize.

For a start, if people can dust off old armies? Instant player base. That is the grail of any war game.

If you're a game designer, yes. If you're a miniatures designer? No. GW primarily sells *miniatures*, the money it makes by selling rulebooks is a drop in the bucket compared to the money it makes by slinging plastic. It doesn't care about having an instant player base, what it wants is a line of customers for new plastic miniatures stretching as far as the eye can see on release day. Like, if this was an Osprey blue book wargame, yes - by all means an instant player base is the grail, but to GW or an outfit like GW that instant player base is overrated and not entirely desired.

The concept art they've shown is pretty clearly intended for 28mm scale

Its actually intended for video game art/model assets, so uhh....

 Valander wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Valander wrote:
While it's incredibly unlikely, and the "source" of SpikeyBits is about as reliable as reading tea leaves, I actually would buy into a 10mm or smaller size game. That's an itch I currently don't have a good scratcher for.

People be doing Kings of War in 10mm, there's also Warmaster... "Remastered" I think. Forest Dragon patreon is doing a wonderful job resculpting the armies.

The current "hard part" (which is probably not all that hard, honestly) is finding models in that scale for fantasy. Or, at least, that involves a little Googling and definitely online purchases. I know of a few ranges, but honestly not too impressed with them, so my "hope" would be a good model range, too. But, unlikely, so I'll just get to work on some of the mountain of backlog of other crap I have anyway.

Edit: Of course, I do have a 3d printer, so I could probably find cool stuff to scale down...

Like I said, Forest Dragon patreon

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Valander wrote:
While it's incredibly unlikely, and the "source" of SpikeyBits is about as reliable as reading tea leaves, I actually would buy into a 10mm or smaller size game. That's an itch I currently don't have a good scratcher for.

People be doing Kings of War in 10mm, there's also Warmaster... "Remastered" I think. Forest Dragon patreon is doing a wonderful job resculpting the armies.

Yes, but they also are annoying to deal with

Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

chaos0xomega wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

The concept art they've shown is pretty clearly intended for 28mm scale

Its actually intended for video game art/model assets, so uhh....

No, it wasn't. That's not what was said about the TW:W collaboration.

From the TW:W3 FAQ:

Is all this new Kislev and Cathay content for Total War: WARHAMMER III legit?

Yes! Games Workshop has expanded and created these factions, and partnered with us

From The Warhammer Community article:

the Games Workshop creative studio is hard at work on Warhammer The Old World, a project that will see the return of the world-that-was to the tabletop, and their designs have fed directly into the development of Total War: Warhammer

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/02/03/watch-kislev-battle-a-bloodthirster-in-the-first-trailer-for-total-war-warhammer-iii/
th
Concepts made for the Old World project were then used in TW:W3, not the other way around with CA asking GW to make them for them in the first place. GW did the concepts for TOW, not as something intended for TW:W3.

There is nothing to suggest The Old World is going to be a Warmaster reboot but they've just neglected to mention that for well over a year.

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

Zeroes and ones

chaos0xomega wrote:

The only time its an issue is if no one is buying the new stuff and with GW's current sales and design record I can't see them being afraid of that.

That was precisely the issue with old WHFB though, so I don't really see that much of anything has changed other than the fact that GWs audience has potentially grown and theres more new blood to sell to - but overwhelmingly that audience has grown for 40k and Age of Sigmar, and doesn't necessarily translate to The Old World.

Except that the End Times proved this to be false when the new stuff flew off the shells in literal minutes. The problem wasn't that WHFB players weren't willing to buy anything, it's that GW weren't really producing anything TO buy. The two years prior to the End Times saw Dwarfs and Wood Elves receive new models and that's it. GW seemed to learn their lesson with the End Times. albeit too little, too late for WHFB, which is why new model releases aren't necessarily tied to codex/battletomes anymore.

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

It's a 3D printer patreon so you get files that you either pay to have a firm print for you or you print at home on a 3D printer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arbitrator wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

The only time its an issue is if no one is buying the new stuff and with GW's current sales and design record I can't see them being afraid of that.

That was precisely the issue with old WHFB though, so I don't really see that much of anything has changed other than the fact that GWs audience has potentially grown and theres more new blood to sell to - but overwhelmingly that audience has grown for 40k and Age of Sigmar, and doesn't necessarily translate to The Old World.

Except that the End Times proved this to be false. The problem wasn't that WHFB players weren't willing to buy anything, it's that GW weren't really producing anything TO buy. The two years prior to the End Times saw Dwarfs and Wood Elves receive new models and that's it.

Not only that. Old World hadn't had the marketing not hte right marketing in a long while which resulted in a split so that you had 2K army oldguard around and a few newbies who often burned out before they got to 2K points. Thing is rank and file is rather boring at 500points and for many armies it just didn't work well at those point values. You had to hit 1.5K and 2K to get the game going well.

So many burned out before they got there and with fewer and fewer getting into it its a self perpetuating problem.

GW clearly realised this and its why they've gone hard for things like killteam and warcry as their own games not just rules in the back of the big rulebook. Marketing the game as their own thing generates a LOT more focus and interest in them. It helps bridge that gap to 2K points and big armies. Heck the vast majority of AoS is Old World models still and many of the new models are by no means so outlandish that they would have not fitted in the Old World. Heck the Lumineth are just High Elves re-imagined; the Dwarves could easily have abandoned their old dogma of not using technology and had airships; the new Chaos forces for the 4 Gods EASILY would have fit into the setting. Nothing in the new Slaanesh models wouldn't have worked in Old World

The problem wasn't the setting, it was model support, marketing, concepts and a bunch of other things that lined up to add to the problem. Top of the list was GW not doing proper market and consumer research as well (At least at their top end) which resulted in managers setting targets for staff to meet which weren't really what the market wanted.

lord_blackfang wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

Zeroes and ones

Overread wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

It's a 3D printer patreon so you get files that you either pay to have a firm print for you or you print at home on a 3D printer.

Oh one of those.
Nothing worth my gold coins.

I, for one, am hoping for single sprues of 1/72 scale models wherein each sprue has a 20-model regiment, and are all element/unit based.

when coke classic came back it wasn't something new...just saying

 NAVARRO wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

Zeroes and ones

Overread wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

It's a 3D printer patreon so you get files that you either pay to have a firm print for you or you print at home on a 3D printer.

Oh one of those.
Nothing worth my gold coins.

As the co-owner of a 3D printing service, I can tell you resin 3D prints are just as good as resin cast miniatures.

STLs aren't, if you don't own a 3d printer

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

The concept art they've shown is pretty clearly intended for 28mm scale

Its actually intended for video game art/model assets, so uhh....

No, it wasn't. That's not what was said about the TW:W collaboration.

From the TW:W3 FAQ:

Is all this new Kislev and Cathay content for Total War: WARHAMMER III legit?

Yes! Games Workshop has expanded and created these factions, and partnered with us

From The Warhammer Community article:

the Games Workshop creative studio is hard at work on Warhammer The Old World, a project that will see the return of the world-that-was to the tabletop, and their designs have fed directly into the development of Total War: Warhammer

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/02/03/watch-kislev-battle-a-bloodthirster-in-the-first-trailer-for-total-war-warhammer-iii/
th
Concepts made for the Old World project were then used in TW:W3, not the other way around with CA asking GW to make them for them in the first place. GW did the concepts for TOW, not as something intended for TW:W3.

Never said Creative Assembly had anything to do with the design work.

Note the title of the video featuring Andy Hoare and Mark Bedford: "Designing Kislev and Cathay for Total War: Warhammer III", as posted by the official Warhammer Youtube account. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STAxzrnd0aA


Also, perhaps curiously, it would be weird if Cathay was designed for The Old World given that they don't actually ever mention that being the case at all, anywhere - they have only ever said that *Kislev* will be coming to The Old World, and thats it. In fact, on facebook warcom was asked about Cathay for The Old World, and the only thing they would say is basically "we don't have anything to announce on that but stay tuned for future updates!" - weird that Cathay was designed for TOW (as you purport) but they won't confirm that they are releasing them for TOW despite apparently announcing them in that article, don't you think?

Its been discussed elsewhere that the development of TWW3 has influenced the development of TOW directly and was part of the impetus for the inclusion of Kislev in TOW.

There is nothing to suggest The Old World is going to be a Warmaster reboot but they've just neglected to mention that for well over a year.

Flip side of that is the announcement article for TOW said something to the effect of "So far the only thing we have figured out is the logo, next comes everything else" (paraphrasing a bit). I would assume that implies that *nothing* about the game is a given or really set in stone. The same article also said nothing about Warhammer Fantasy Battle (the game) making a return, only the setting. Every article on the topic thus far has basically not stated anything about WHFB (again, the game) making a return or paralleling anything to said game. There is nothing to suggest The Old World is going to be a Warhammer Fantasy Battle reboot but they'e just neglected to mention that for well over a year. Indeed, all of what we have seen so far has deviated quite a bit from what one might expect if this was a simple WHFB reboot (mainly a change in timeline, and thus far a pretty different roster of factions).

Except that the End Times proved this to be false when the new stuff flew off the shells in literal minutes. The problem wasn't that WHFB players weren't willing to buy anything, it's that GW weren't really producing anything TO buy. The two years prior to the End Times saw Dwarfs and Wood Elves receive new models and that's it. GW seemed to learn their lesson with the End Times. albeit too little, too late for WHFB, which is why new model releases aren't necessarily tied to codex/battletomes anymore.

Do you have any actual evidence for the claims of stuff flying off the shelves? Because the only objective source of sales data (no matter how flawed it might be), icv2, does not have Warhammer Fantasy show up in the top 5 non-collectible miniatures game rankings at all during the entirety of 2014 and 2015 (iirc WHFB dropped off the list for the final time in 2013). Also, pretty sure your timeline on releases is inaccurate, the End Times kicked off in mid 2014, 2 years prior also included sizable updates for Dark Elves and IIRC the High Elves and Empire are on the edge of that timeframe as well. Not bad considering GW was only doing 3 updates per year for both systems at the time and that didn't usually translate to sizable new releases - 40k had to contend with the same limitations and didn't suffer the same downturn.

Not only that. Old World hadn't had the marketing not hte right marketing in a long while which resulted in a split so that you had 2K army oldguard around and a few newbies who often burned out before they got to 2K points. Thing is rank and file is rather boring at 500points and for many armies it just didn't work well at those point values. You had to hit 1.5K and 2K to get the game going well.

So many burned out before they got there and with fewer and fewer getting into it its a self perpetuating problem.

GW clearly realised this and its why they've gone hard for things like killteam and warcry as their own games not just rules in the back of the big rulebook. Marketing the game as their own thing generates a LOT more focus and interest in them. It helps bridge that gap to 2K points and big armies. Heck the vast majority of AoS is Old World models still and many of the new models are by no means so outlandish that they would have not fitted in the Old World. Heck the Lumineth are just High Elves re-imagined; the Dwarves could easily have abandoned their old dogma of not using technology and had airships; the new Chaos forces for the 4 Gods EASILY would have fit into the setting. Nothing in the new Slaanesh models wouldn't have worked in Old World

The problem wasn't the setting, it was model support, marketing, concepts and a bunch of other things that lined up to add to the problem. Top of the list was GW not doing proper market and consumer research as well (At least at their top end) which resulted in managers setting targets for staff to meet which weren't really what the market wanted.

Sounds like a lot of excuses to me. I'm not convinced that WHFB could work as a killteam or warcry game, if you consider the average size of those games maxes at about 10-12 models per side, its hard to imagine a rank and file game with the same model count. What does that look like? 2 units of 6 guys a pop in 2 ranks of 3? 1 unit of 12 guys in 3 ranks of 4? Neither of those really seem like a feasible basis for a game. Realistically a rank and file "skirmish" sized game is looking at probably around 30-40 minis depending on playstyle (2-3 units of 10-15 infantry each, one unit of 5-10 cavalry, a hero or two, and a monster/warmachine). At GW's prices thats basically a full 40k army.

its also weird to me how the pro-WHFB crowd responds to the AoS model range. Half the time its "these models are atrocious World of Warcraft inspired garbage and couldn't hold a candle to my refined and sophisticated gentlemans WHFB minis." The other half of the time its "these models are right at home in WHFB, there was no reason for them to end the setting, they could have sculpted and released these as part of WHFB instead".

Often times its the same person giving both opinions in different conversations about the same mini.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sounds like a lot of excuses to me. I'm not convinced that WHFB could work as a killteam or warcry game, if you consider the average size of those games maxes at about 10-12 models per side, its hard to imagine a rank and file game with the same model count. What does that look like? 2 units of 6 guys a pop in 2 ranks of 3? 1 unit of 12 guys in 3 ranks of 4? Neither of those really seem like a feasible basis for a game. Realistically a rank and file "skirmish" sized game is looking at probably around 30-40 minis depending on playstyle (2-3 units of 10-15 infantry each, one unit of 5-10 cavalry, a hero or two, and a monster/warmachine). At GW's prices thats basically a full 40k army.

its also weird to me how the pro-WHFB crowd responds to the AoS model range. Half the time its "these models are atrocious World of Warcraft inspired garbage and couldn't hold a candle to my refined and sophisticated gentlemans WHFB minis." The other half of the time its "these models are right at home in WHFB, there was no reason for them to end the setting, they could have sculpted and released these as part of WHFB instead".

Often times its the same person giving both opinions in different conversations about the same mini.

But of course - both statements can be true at the same time depending on the point of view and context.

As for smaller games. Warcry is nothing like AoS full rules; meanwhile Underworld is a boardgame. There's no reason to preserve the rank and file if GW made a smaller skirmish game to compliment Old World. They'd just have built it differently from the ground up. Perhaps working better with a battlebox/getting started set so that it worked right off the box (with a little room to modify for different armies contents etc...). There are many ways they could have promoted smaller model count games to help promote the game and to provide a vector to introduce people. They've done it with AoS. All it needed was identifying the problems and developing the solutions to those problems. Namely burnout before you got ot the "proper 2K games" region. Even AoS today uses armies of generally comparable size (perhaps a touch smaller for some

 lord marcus wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

Zeroes and ones

Overread wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Those Forest dragon minis are casted in what?

It's a 3D printer patreon so you get files that you either pay to have a firm print for you or you print at home on a 3D printer.

Oh one of those.
Nothing worth my gold coins.

As the co-owner of a 3D printing service, I can tell you resin 3D prints are just as good as resin cast miniatures.

I have no doubts about the advancements in quality. I do however do not believe 15mm should be cast in anything else but metal. Regarding the STL. Zbrush printers etc I could post a huge wall of text about my feelings how this affects the industry but its not the time and place. But thank you nevertheless Marcus.

 Overread wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sounds like a lot of excuses to me. I'm not convinced that WHFB could work as a killteam or warcry game, if you consider the average size of those games maxes at about 10-12 models per side, its hard to imagine a rank and file game with the same model count. What does that look like? 2 units of 6 guys a pop in 2 ranks of 3? 1 unit of 12 guys in 3 ranks of 4? Neither of those really seem like a feasible basis for a game. Realistically a rank and file "skirmish" sized game is looking at probably around 30-40 minis depending on playstyle (2-3 units of 10-15 infantry each, one unit of 5-10 cavalry, a hero or two, and a monster/warmachine). At GW's prices thats basically a full 40k army.

its also weird to me how the pro-WHFB crowd responds to the AoS model range. Half the time its "these models are atrocious World of Warcraft inspired garbage and couldn't hold a candle to my refined and sophisticated gentlemans WHFB minis." The other half of the time its "these models are right at home in WHFB, there was no reason for them to end the setting, they could have sculpted and released these as part of WHFB instead".

Often times its the same person giving both opinions in different conversations about the same mini.

But of course - both statements can be true at the same time depending on the point of view and context.

As for smaller games. Warcry is nothing like AoS full rules; meanwhile Underworld is a boardgame. There's no reason to preserve the rank and file if GW made a smaller skirmish game to compliment Old World. They'd just have built it differently from the ground up. Perhaps working better with a battlebox/getting started set so that it worked right off the box (with a little room to modify for different armies contents etc...). There are many ways they could have promoted smaller model count games to help promote the game and to provide a vector to introduce people. They've done it with AoS. All it needed was identifying the problems and developing the solutions to those problems. Namely burnout before you got ot the "proper 2K games" region. Even AoS today uses armies of generally comparable size (perhaps a touch smaller for some

I guess, but at that point you've basically stripped away the defining feature and core experience of Warhammer Fantasy gameplay by turning it into a skirmish game. Kill Team works as a "starter" game because it uses most of the 40k core rules with slight tweaks and still provides a similar gameplay experience true the 40k setting. I've never really thought of Underworlds as being a "starter" game for AoS, to me it always seemed something separate, and Warcry is an odd duckling because its marketed like AoS Kill Team, but AoS Skirmish is intended to be the equivalent experience. In this sense, Warcry is intended to be more like the AoS version of Necromunda (but with greater miniatures crossover).

Aash wrote:
Just saw this:
https://spikeybits.com/2021/02/rumors-warhammer-old-world-not-28mm-scale.html

Does anyone know if this rumour has popped up elsewhere? Any chance it might be true, and if so what are people's thoughts?

I don't believe anything I see on spikeybits unless I've previously seen it in multiple other places.

That said, I do think there's a valid assumption here. I think that everyone who's already frantically building new square based fantasy armies may be in for a rude surprise when it turns out that the Old World is actually a 10-mm regiment-based game, deliberately built to mimic the Total War: Warhammer video games. Square bases, sure, but each base holds an entire regiment of 10mm minis. Because really, all we know so far about the game is: square bases, set in the Old World, there will be Kislev minis.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

The concept art they've shown is pretty clearly intended for 28mm scale

Its actually intended for video game art/model assets, so uhh....

No, it wasn't. That's not what was said about the TW:W collaboration.

From the TW:W3 FAQ:

Is all this new Kislev and Cathay content for Total War: WARHAMMER III legit?

Yes! Games Workshop has expanded and created these factions, and partnered with us

From The Warhammer Community article:

the Games Workshop creative studio is hard at work on Warhammer The Old World, a project that will see the return of the world-that-was to the tabletop, and their designs have fed directly into the development of Total War: Warhammer

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/02/03/watch-kislev-battle-a-bloodthirster-in-the-first-trailer-for-total-war-warhammer-iii/
th
Concepts made for the Old World project were then used in TW:W3, not the other way around with CA asking GW to make them for them in the first place. GW did the concepts for TOW, not as something intended for TW:W3.

Never said Creative Assembly had anything to do with the design work.

Note the title of the video featuring Andy Hoare and Mark Bedford: "Designing Kislev and Cathay for Total War: Warhammer III", as posted by the official Warhammer Youtube account. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STAxzrnd0aA


Also, perhaps curiously, it would be weird if Cathay was designed for The Old World given that they don't actually ever mention that being the case at all, anywhere - they have only ever said that *Kislev* will be coming to The Old World, and thats it. In fact, on facebook warcom was asked about Cathay for The Old World, and the only thing they would say is basically "we don't have anything to announce on that but stay tuned for future updates!" - weird that Cathay was designed for TOW (as you purport) but they won't confirm that they are releasing them for TOW despite apparently announcing them in that article, don't you think?

Its been discussed elsewhere that the development of TWW3 has influenced the development of TOW directly and was part of the impetus for the inclusion of Kislev in TOW.

The article and the video are both in the context of Total War: Warhammer and how those factions ended up in the game, the use of "for" in the title does not necessitate that they were came up with for TW:W3 in the first place as they're discussing what Creative Assembley did with TOW concepts to realize them in-game, they still had to design them as a faction in-game. That video discussing Kislev and Cathay is also said within the article to be about "their work on an earlier period in Kislev’s history for Warhammer The Old World." so once again mentioning what's being talked about as being something done for the TOW project.

Since the first reveal multiple articles the Warhammer Community page have implied that the concepts for Kislev were done for The Old World, as they've returned to Kislev because The Old World gives them the "opportunity to revisit certain aspects of its classic lore and delve into them in greater detail". The Ice Guard concept was an "early look at one of the factions that’s in the works for the return of Warhammer’s Old World" and the Bear Cavalry specifically was said to be for a model, with the concept art shown being "a long way from being models yet, but we’ve secured some stunning concept sketches of what you’ll be able to expect." And like I already said, there's the mention of their designs feeding into TW:W3, not the other way around.

There's far more to indicate that they're concepts done for TOW in the first place rather than them being concepts GW did specifically for CA so they could put them into TW:W3 that they just decided to use for TOW anyway.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Overread wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sounds like a lot of excuses to me. I'm not convinced that WHFB could work as a killteam or warcry game, if you consider the average size of those games maxes at about 10-12 models per side, its hard to imagine a rank and file game with the same model count. What does that look like? 2 units of 6 guys a pop in 2 ranks of 3? 1 unit of 12 guys in 3 ranks of 4? Neither of those really seem like a feasible basis for a game. Realistically a rank and file "skirmish" sized game is looking at probably around 30-40 minis depending on playstyle (2-3 units of 10-15 infantry each, one unit of 5-10 cavalry, a hero or two, and a monster/warmachine). At GW's prices thats basically a full 40k army.

its also weird to me how the pro-WHFB crowd responds to the AoS model range. Half the time its "these models are atrocious World of Warcraft inspired garbage and couldn't hold a candle to my refined and sophisticated gentlemans WHFB minis." The other half of the time its "these models are right at home in WHFB, there was no reason for them to end the setting, they could have sculpted and released these as part of WHFB instead".

Often times its the same person giving both opinions in different conversations about the same mini.

But of course - both statements can be true at the same time depending on the point of view and context.

As for smaller games. Warcry is nothing like AoS full rules; meanwhile Underworld is a boardgame. There's no reason to preserve the rank and file if GW made a smaller skirmish game to compliment Old World. They'd just have built it differently from the ground up. Perhaps working better with a battlebox/getting started set so that it worked right off the box (with a little room to modify for different armies contents etc...). There are many ways they could have promoted smaller model count games to help promote the game and to provide a vector to introduce people. They've done it with AoS. All it needed was identifying the problems and developing the solutions to those problems. Namely burnout before you got ot the "proper 2K games" region. Even AoS today uses armies of generally comparable size (perhaps a touch smaller for some

I guess, but at that point you've basically stripped away the defining feature and core experience of Warhammer Fantasy gameplay by turning it into a skirmish game. Kill Team works as a "starter" game because it uses most of the 40k core rules with slight tweaks and still provides a similar gameplay experience true the 40k setting. I've never really thought of Underworlds as being a "starter" game for AoS, to me it always seemed something separate, and Warcry is an odd duckling because its marketed like AoS Kill Team, but AoS Skirmish is intended to be the equivalent experience. In this sense, Warcry is intended to be more like the AoS version of Necromunda (but with greater miniatures crossover).

The key is that Underworlds and Warcry can both get a person playing with models with 1 purchase. Underworld even does coloured plastic and pushfit; you can be playing in the 5 mins you clip the models out of the sprue. The key is that what game you play when you start doesn't really matter. What matters is that you're getting social interaction; gaming; reward and engagement with the community and game side of the hobby. All the things that basically support and encourage you to buy more models; build and paint them and field them in greater numbers.

So you start with Underworld; one box and you've got a few games; so yo uthen move to warcry after a bit. A few more models in the box and you have to glue them together; but you get it done and again you're playing with 1 purchase very fast with the other gamers. A few more boxes and you're on your way to a meeting engagement at 1K points. By that point you're into it enough that the move to 2K isn't a huge barrier and you're all enthusiastic and should be socially bound to the group you're playing with.


In contrast with the Old World you could game at 500points, but it wouldn't work well and you might well lose a LOT just because of the army you chose not even working at 500points. Even up to 1K its not really working. So you don't get that same immediate reward and social connection. It's EVEN worse if the community that's left was mostly older gamers with 2K armies who really only want to and know how to play at that point level. So suddenly you've got that 2K hump of models ot build and paint to get over to get into the social side of the game.

Possibility of a larger scale? GW could be looking at Conquest and salivating at what they could charge for Stormcast sized Kislevites.

Warhammer Old Worlds will be 1/6 Scale.

You heard it here first.

I think the old world is going to be smaller scale,

but Spikeybits is so unreliable i'm almost convinced it's 28mm now

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I think the old world is going to be smaller scale,

but Spikeybits is so unreliable i'm almost convinced it's 28mm now

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Not making TOW at their usual scale means the game is DOA for the vast majority of the market they're aiming for. That's a recipe for failure before a single product is launched.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I think the old world is going to be smaller scale,

but Spikeybits is so unreliable i'm almost convinced it's 28mm now

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Not making TOW at their usual scale means the game is DOA for the vast majority of the market they're aiming for. That's a recipe for failure before a single product is launched.

Yup. It is always said 'but then people could use their old armies and not buy new ones' but the reality is that (generally speaking) players who keep playing, keep buying. We have seen plenty of times over the decades that wargames live or die on their community; even a great game with great models will fail if there is no one around to play it with. When people can proxy their existing minis they go 'oh hey maybe I can try this out...'

There is also the factor of WHFB kits that are still around, still good, and need nothing more than square bases to work. The number of unit options that would not need new sculpts because of that is quite large.

And at 28mm any TOW kit becomes an AoS kit with the simple addition of a free warscroll download.

And finally, there is plain old cashing in on nostalgia. People want that. Especially these days.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
And finally, there is plain old cashing in on nostalgia. People want that. Especially these days.

I admit I suck at predictions because I always underestimate the mental inflexibility of grognards.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
And finally, there is plain old cashing in on nostalgia. People want that. Especially these days.

I admit I suck at predictions because I always underestimate the mental inflexibility of grognards.

One day long in the future you'll be a Grognard!

You'll be at the club, announcing proudly that you finally found someone online who unearthed the old Gloomspite moulds and has managed to find an old plastic casting machine to put them into limited production again. You'll show off the classic plastic mangler to young kids and youths who will be shocked that you use plastic to make models and that its not even complete. That you have to use hand skills to cut, clean, assemble and paint the model! Meanwhile they'll be using their GWHoloboxes which let them edit fully 3D holographic models down to the smallest nanopixel. They'll not understand the fun in moving the physical model around on the table - oh but how would you do line of sight or movement when you can't have the computer lasers calculate it for you!

And then in that moment you'll realise that even though you might own a Mk1 Holobox somewhere in a shoebox under your bed, you have become Lord Blackfang Grognard!