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.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: If the game is all you care about, why even weigh in in the setting? The game means nothing to me (and others) without a compelling setting, a reason to care. Like the rules, hate the rules, they are their own thing and appeal to a different group of gamers.
MaxT wrote: It’s a weird hill to die on, there’s a wealth of stories, characters, campaigns that can be told within the Old World setting regardless of if in multiple generations of its timelines future it changed into something else. It’s your opinion and that’s cool, but it’s certainly a massive minority one.
It doesn’t appear to be a “massive minority” here, or anywhere else The End Times comes up. Of course, we don’t know how many more people who feel this way have already left and aren’t even sticking around to post about it.
If your point was simply "The End Times sucked balls" then we're in violent agreement. But your point seems to be "The End Times sucked, therefore every form of Warhammer story/game/period set before or since also now always sucks forever more". Which is simply not the case.
No, my point is that it IS the case—for me, and apparently plenty of other former WHFB fans. Having a terrible ending to the setting makes it unenjoyable to revisit any pert of the story. I also won’t ever go back and watch nBSG because of the bad ending. It is common in fandoms, such as video game fandoms, for a setting-ruining finale to affect enjoyment of any earlier part of the franchise.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/12 23:47:37
No, my point is that it IS the case—for me, and apparently plenty of other former WHFB fans. Having a terrible ending to the setting makes it unenjoyable to revisit any pert of the story. I also won’t ever go back and watch nBSG because of the bad ending. It is common in fandoms, such as video game fandoms, for a setting-ruining finale to affect enjoyment of any earlier part of the franchise.
Which is fair. I suspect that a lot of the disconnect there will come from whether or not people agree that the End Times was a setting-ruining finale, or simply a progression of the setting.
I think one difference is that something like nBattlestar Galactica is one story. Yes broken into seasons, but ultimately its one single story start to finish.
Something like Warhammer Old World is not a single story but a setting, a world. Within it are many stories which can stand on their own merits all on their own. Yes the world ends in the end; but honestly you can say the same for any setting you love. Almost any world or setting will end or change significantly if written out far enough. Heck technically Middle Earth and Lord of the Rings, being a mythology for the Norse, "ends" with modern day reality.
Yes the very end of the world is there and GW did give it a very end of the world event; but there are so many stories and epic sagas and events and characters, peoples, races, nations and more that are born, grow, develop, flourish and die all within that huge span of time until the end.
The vast majority of existing lore and books about Old World don't connect to the end times; they are just stories about characters, peoples, races and all. Old World coming back is just a focus on one era of the setting. Just like the End Times are one era.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: It is common in fandoms, such as video game fandoms, for a setting-ruining finale to affect enjoyment of any earlier part of the franchise.
I just finished the (so far published) ASOIAF novels and I certainly feel like I could go back and enjoy the TV show for a second time as far as they followed the written material.
I understand the "hump" of disappointment where they took the setting but the setting has so much history and depth I find it odd people will be turned off WFB forever. And if they are, why are they here discussing it still? We're lucky to be getting TOW at all, and if there's new models or updated ancient kits then even the disgruntled will have something new for playing 6th edition or whatever they like.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/13 00:57:35
If they use percentages to establish comp then I am out immediately. One of the many things that 8th Edition did that sealed me off of keeping up with Games Workshop games completely was percentages along with some of the other piss poor game design choices. If this is essentially eight but without monstrous cavalry, then I'm out.
Also, the last thread we had was locked because of the whole bunch of people nitpicking a bunch of minutiae from outside sources drowning the news thread with complete pendantry. Why are we starting this over again, people?
They've said a mix of rules plus some new ones, I get the feeling that 6th edition is the basis, which is excellent.
If it's based on 6th I will be all in...
nathan2004 wrote:I don’t get it, we enjoy Horus heresy (or I do) knowing the ending to that story. Are Luna wolf/sons of Horus players bitter at their genefather getting killed?
Don't use "we" when it obviously doesn't apply. I knew people who refused to play any special characters who were dead in the lore.
triplegrim wrote: Have to say I am relieved to see greatswords, as I have 3×25 of them painted up.
I also do like the fairly moderate fantasy elements. No hordes of pegasi or demigryps, but real hard men.
Do you guys think comp will be lords, heroes, troops, special and rare? And with % or with a number or picks, lik 0-4 special for a 2500 army?
If they use percentages to establish comp then I am out immediately. One of the many things that 8th Edition did that sealed me off of keeping up with Games Workshop games completely was percentages along with some of the other piss poor game design choices. If this is essentially eight but without monstrous cavalry, then I'm out.
Also, the last thread we had was locked because of the whole bunch of people nitpicking a bunch of minutiae from outside sources drowning the news thread with complete pendantry. Why are we starting this over again, people?
Isn't 6th the only edition that didn't use percentages? Off the top of my head, 3rd, 5th and 8th all did. Not sure about 7th.
7th used slots as well, not percentages.
Dysartes wrote:
Just Tony wrote: f they use percentages to establish comp then I am out immediately. One of the many things that 8th Edition did that sealed me off of keeping up with Games Workshop games completely was percentages along with some of the other piss poor game design choices. If this is essentially eight but without monstrous cavalry, then I'm out.
...what've you got against percentages, Tony?
Especially when I'm pretty sure you only need to be able to work out 50% and 25% of your total points budget to get the brackets - would it be less painful if they gave you a table with the breakdown for different sizes of game, but the % as a reference point if you were playing a value outside the defined ones?
Kodos is going to cover it...
kodos wrote:
ccs wrote: I just want a decent rank & file fantasy game.
oh well, then this is the worst possible place to look at (and without the story, there is not much left be excited about)
if you want a decent R&F game from GW, War of the Ring or Warmaster are your best option
the only reason I even care a litte about that game at all is the story line
the chance is very low that I play it even if the story is good as I don't expect much from the rules (and GW will find a way to mess it up anyway), but if the story is bad too, I am not even going to buy the books
Just Tony wrote: f they use percentages to establish comp then I am out immediately. One of the many things that 8th Edition did that sealed me off of keeping up with Games Workshop games completely was percentages along with some of the other piss poor game design choices. If this is essentially eight but without monstrous cavalry, then I'm out.
...what've you got against percentages, Tony?
Especially when I'm pretty sure you only need to be able to work out 50% and 25% of your total points budget to get the brackets - would it be less painful if they gave you a table with the breakdown for different sizes of game, but the % as a reference point if you were playing a value outside the defined ones?
the main problem in the past with % was the difference between Hero Hammer and an R&F game
if it is again all about Heroes and with the units being just there to increase the HP pool, there is not much point in making an R&F game
Warmaster? Yeah, play the game that did so well GW pulled store support and threw it into Fanatic hospice after 6 months.
No, my point is that it IS the case—for me, and apparently plenty of other former WHFB fans. Having a terrible ending to the setting makes it unenjoyable to revisit any pert of the story. I also won’t ever go back and watch nBSG because of the bad ending. It is common in fandoms, such as video game fandoms, for a setting-ruining finale to affect enjoyment of any earlier part of the franchise.
And the citizens of the Empire as depicted in WH:TOW don't care because they're all long-since dead by the time The End Times takes place. That's not to sound flippant. But everything fails eventually. Should a player refuse to play in an historically based campaign about Imperial Romans versus barbarian invaders because the empire eventually collapsed? I'm not seeing it. I played Tomb Kings in WHFB. It was already a given that they were going to fail in their long-term goals. Didn't mean that I wouldn't play them.
The game setting itself made it impossible that the mortal races could permanently defeat Chaos. The most that any of the mortals in the setting could hope for was to make sure that there was still a world for those who came a century later. In that respect, those living in the period covered by WH:TOW succeeded.
On a less serious note, I'll point out that this is what Chaos players were working toward for the last few decades.
Eumerin wrote: Should a player refuse to play in an historically based campaign about Imperial Romans versus barbarian invaders because the empire eventually collapsed? I'm not seeing it.
I think what you're not seeing is that different things appeal to different people for different reasons. Different things can even appeal to the same person for different reasons!
The open ended nature of WHFB is one of the things that was specifically appealing versus other settings (including historical settings). The "frozen in time" aspect is something that was genuinely appealing to many people. Personally, I never really saw the desire to advance the settings when it is that, a setting... I understand why some people wanted that advancement but for me, I liked the fact it was a static setting where anything could happen next.
Was it the ONLY thing that was appealing about WHFB? Of course not. Was it something that everyone found appealing? Of course not. But there are many fans who are going to be turned off by the end times... IMOGW should just let players pretend the end times didn't happen if that's what players want to do. If they wanted to reassure AoS players that TOW isn't going to replace AoS, they just had to say that, rather than picking at the scars of WHFB players.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/13 06:14:44
Eumerin wrote: Should a player refuse to play in an historically based campaign about Imperial Romans versus barbarian invaders because the empire eventually collapsed? I'm not seeing it.
I think what you're not seeing is that different things appeal to different people for different reasons. Different things can even appeal to the same person for different reasons!
The open ended nature of WHFB is one of the things that was specifically appealing versus other settings (including historical settings). The "frozen in time" aspect is something that was genuinely appealing to many people. Personally, I never really saw the desire to advance the settings when it is that, a setting... I understand why some people wanted that advancement but for me, I liked the fact it was a static setting where anything could happen next.
Was it the ONLY thing that was appealing about WHFB? Of course not. Was it something that everyone found appealing? Of course not. But there are many fans who are going to be turned off by the end times... IMOGW should just let players pretend the end times didn't happen if that's what players want to do. If they wanted to reassure AoS players that TOW isn't going to replace AoS, they just had to say that, rather than picking at the scars of WHFB players.
There is nothing stopping you ignoring the end times and then playing old world or any version of fantasy. I still enjoy Star Wars as in my head cannon all the awful Disney sequels are poorly written fanfiction.
Right but the thing is, it's not going to change. They aren't going to say it didn't happen because that would drop sales of AoS. You'd get the AoS people whinging.
Believe me when I say I GW getting rid of WFB in the first place was the stupidest thing they have ever done and I have zero time for AoS and everything about it. But GW were still very clearly going to say that the End Times still happened. They will probably continue to do so because there's nothing that can be done about that. That's more to assuage the AoS people that they won't suddenly be sidelined and dropped. If Fantasy is a massive success, maybe AoS will get booted gently to the side.
This is a "reinvigoration" of WFB, set in a time period that allows them to create this timeless setting.
Warhammer is all about creating your own story so you can continue to do that.
Rather than picking at old scars, consider this as a balm for some old wounds. Fantasy is on the horizon, that is a good thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/13 07:20:48
Overread wrote: I think one difference is that something like nBattlestar Galactica is one story. Yes broken into seasons, but ultimately its one single story start to finish.
Something like Warhammer Old World is not a single story but a setting, a world.
and this is the problem, you can read GW's post as "this is a story were we have already seen the ending" and not as "this not just a story but a world with many stories"
maybe it is just because some people don't think GW is able to get it right, it is not like the latest story part of 40k turns out good, but there is the possibility that instead of building the world again and get us the many stories, they just make a End-Times Prequel (and instead of new stories start explaining why the End Times had to happen exactly as it did)
it is not about what happend with the End Times and that the story is already done
it is the fear that the new story is again about the same End Times and GW likes doing those things (as some of the HH stories also try to lay down events for 40k, so that you know that something bad in the year 40.000 happend because in the year 30.000 someone pressed the wrong button)
and the End times was a bad written story, the first book was ok and then it got worse.
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
Olthannon wrote: Right but the thing is, it's not going to change. They aren't going to say it didn't happen because that would drop sales of AoS. You'd get the AoS people whinging.
Believe me when I say I GW getting rid of WFB in the first place was the stupidest thing they have ever done and I have zero time for AoS and everything about it. But GW were still very clearly going to say that the End Times still happened. They will probably continue to do so because there's nothing that can be done about that. That's more to assuage the AoS people that they won't suddenly be sidelined and dropped. If Fantasy is a massive success, maybe AoS will get booted gently to the side.
This is a "reinvigoration" of WFB, set in a time period that allows them to create this timeless setting.
Warhammer is all about creating your own story so you can continue to do that.
Rather than picking at old scars, consider this as a balm for some old wounds. Fantasy is on the horizon, that is a good thing.
My point is they don't have to say anything. Why start an article off on a bad note?
If you want people to think about how they can create their own stories in the WHFB universe, don't start your article with "Don't forget we killed this setting, and we aren't unkilling it, it's dead, if you pick up this game, you're officially playing in a dead setting. That army you're collecting? It's dead. Do you remember how we killed it? In case you forgot how we killed it, let me mention it and the thing we replaced it with once again to remind you".
Like, the article literally says...
"One of the most important aspects of Warhammer: the Old World is the setting itself. Obviously, this is the World-that-Was, a world of legend destroyed by the machinations of the Ruinous Powers of Chaos at the culmination of the End Times – an event that doomed the denizens of the Old World to oblivion and heralded the birth of the Mortal Realms and the Age of Sigmar.
It’s important to remember, though, that even though the setting is returning, these events still happened, and that the Old World was destroyed. The End Times had long been foreshadowed in the background of Warhammer Fantasy Battle. "
How many times in 4 sentences can they mention the world is dead and how they killed it, it's almost impressive, what a great way to engender positive vibes about the game
They even use the word "obviously", a word I was taught to avoid using in writing because to the people who were already thinking about it you don't need to tell them it was obvious and to the people who weren't thinking about it you're effectively talking down to them.
As for Fantasy being on the horizon being a good thing, meh, we'll see how it turns out. I have the utmost faith in GW's ability to screw it up and making it highly unappealing.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/01/13 07:39:03
Olthannon wrote: Right but the thing is, it's not going to change. They aren't going to say it didn't happen because that would drop sales of AoS. You'd get the AoS people whinging.
Believe me when I say I GW getting rid of WFB in the first place was the stupidest thing they have ever done and I have zero time for AoS and everything about it. But GW were still very clearly going to say that the End Times still happened. They will probably continue to do so because there's nothing that can be done about that. That's more to assuage the AoS people that they won't suddenly be sidelined and dropped. If Fantasy is a massive success, maybe AoS will get booted gently to the side.
This is a "reinvigoration" of WFB, set in a time period that allows them to create this timeless setting.
Warhammer is all about creating your own story so you can continue to do that.
Rather than picking at old scars, consider this as a balm for some old wounds. Fantasy is on the horizon, that is a good thing.
My point is they don't have to say anything. Why start an article off on a bad note?
If you want people to think about how they can create their own stories in the WHFB universe, don't start your article with "Don't forget we killed this setting, and we aren't unkilling it, it's dead, if you pick up this game, you're officially playing in a dead setting. That army you're collecting? It's dead. Do you remember how we killed it? In case you forgot how we killed it, let me mention it and the thing we replaced it with once again to remind you".
Like, the article literally says...
"One of the most important aspects of Warhammer: the Old World is the setting itself. Obviously, this is the World-that-Was, a world of legend destroyed by the machinations of the Ruinous Powers of Chaos at the culmination of the End Times – an event that doomed the denizens of the Old World to oblivion and heralded the birth of the Mortal Realms and the Age of Sigmar.
It’s important to remember, though, that even though the setting is returning, these events still happened, and that the Old World was destroyed. The End Times had long been foreshadowed in the background of Warhammer Fantasy Battle. "
How many times in 4 sentences can they mention the world is dead and how they killed it, it's almost impressive, what a great way to engender positive vibes about the game
They even use the word "obviously", a word I was taught to avoid using in writing because to the people who were already thinking about it you don't need to tell them it was obvious and to the people who weren't thinking about it you're effectively talking down to them.
As for Fantasy being on the horizon being a good thing, meh, we'll see how it turns out. I have the utmost faith in GW's ability to screw it up and making it highly unappealing.
At a guess I think GW wants to make it very clear that they will continue to support AoS. I can just imagine the drama if GW did not appear to be planning on continuing to support their Fantasy Space Marines (which I acknowledge with a sense of irony evolved from sci-fi Knights).
Would I be far off base in thinking GW just intends to make a 28mm square based analog tabletop version of their proven successful Total War Warhammer setting? How does Cathay and Kislev fit in all this?
I wonder just how Grimdark it will all be, ie will they lean more into the darker elements of later editions… such as the Wood Elf driven “great lie” of Bretonnian faith…
How many times in 4 sentences can they mention the world is dead and how they killed it, it's almost impressive, what a great way to engender positive vibes about the game
They even use the word "obviously", a word I was taught to avoid using in writing because to the people who were already thinking about it you don't need to tell them it was obvious and to the people who weren't thinking about it you're effectively talking down to them.
As for Fantasy being on the horizon being a good thing, meh, we'll see how it turns out. I have the utmost faith in GW's ability to screw it up and making it highly unappealing.
Reading between the lines, I took it as a management of audience expectations. This isn't the first article they have done but the news is slow. There's a lot of feedback that gets built up and sifted through. They didn't expressly say so much about this in earlier articles from what I remember, so clearly they must have needed to do that based on audience/ stakeholder reaction. A lot of WFB fans will be expecting End Times to have never happened and that all will be well again. So I think yes they deliberately went overboard just to make sure people reduced their expectation of that. As stated, it's also for AoS purposes. Consider this from a GW point of view, if they say End Times didn't happen then it confirms that this entire thing was a gigantic blunder. And it was. We all know that, it was a flamingo up. But they can't say that, despite that being on their minds constantly. There was not many people at GW who were happy with what happened either.
As for their need to use obviously. I would only say you need to look at the previous TOW thread to see that in fact, people do need reminding of the obvious.
ccs wrote: I just want a decent rank & file fantasy game.
oh well, then this is the worst possible place to look at (and without the story, there is not much left be excited about)
if you want a decent R&F game from GW, War of the Ring or Warmaster are your best option
On Old World being the worst choice without GWs story..... I disagree.
I've quite enjoyed several editions of WHFB without caring one iota about the story.
I've long enjoyed playing 40k & now AoS that way as well.
So I'm sure I'll have no issues not caring about the story in OW.
Concerning Warmaster & the ME game:
I won't disagree on thier quality.
I've got Dwarves for ME & Kislev for WM.
What I'm lacking currently is ANY interest in these games from others. Either within my own circle or reasonably local.
So they're both on the list of things I tend to play at gaming conventions.
Warmaster? Yeah, play the game that did so well GW pulled store support and threw it into Fanatic hospice after 6 months.
Please tell me you're joking...
That's not fair to the system. It is a good game that got canned by the sales team well before it even made it to release thanks to the poor sales of the last edition of Epic. There was an article on goonhammer yesterday digging into the history of Gorkamorka with some of the ex GW people and Warmaster was included in some of the detail See the article. It was supposed to come out with plastic armies and everything
Shuma-Gorath wrote: Special Character wise, who apart from gods, undead and daemons are actually around during this setting?
Ikit Claw, Aekold Helbrass (other warriors of chaos?) maybe some elves and/or dwarves?
Ok this who i know was alive or active during the 3 Emperors Period
If i missed any i am sorry
It looks to be a bit more specific than just the general 'Three Emperors' period (which was a bloody long time); based on what they've indicated (and who's King of Bretonnia), we're probably somewhere around IC 2200-2250. Maybe a little later. Depends if they stick to the idea that Bretonnian Kings have extended lifespans or whatever that was by the end. Or there was just an exceptionally long reign. Anyway:
Empire - Magnus the Pious - might be around but we don't know exactly how close to The Great War they're going. Could not have been born yet.
GreenSkins - Gorbad Ironclaw - has been 'missing' for about 400-500 years by the time ToW is slated to take place. Last seen alone and surrounded by an army of dwarfs.
Vampire Counts - Vlad and Isabella Von Castein, Konrad Von Carstein, Mannfred Von Carstein - all have been 'killed' by this point. The Vampire Wars are approx 50 years behind this point.
Bretonnian - Repanse de Lyonesse - been dead for about 200 years.
Dogs of War/ Tilea - Leonardo da Miragliano - also probably dead about 150-200 years. Asarnil is alive and kicking, albeit he's probably still in Ulthuan. The rest likely won't have been close to being born.
Dwarfs - Indeed likely that most of them will have been alive at least.
Wood elves, High Elves, and Dark Elves - Potentially any of them really. Obviously Malekith, Morathi, Orion, Ariel etc. We know the Twins are around and about to do significant stuff. Alarielle is around, as are Belannaer and Korhil.
Shuma-Gorath wrote: Special Character wise, who apart from gods, undead and daemons are actually around during this setting?
Ikit Claw, Aekold Helbrass (other warriors of chaos?) maybe some elves and/or dwarves?
Ok this who i know was alive or active during the 3 Emperors Period
If i missed any i am sorry
It looks to be a bit more specific than just the general 'Three Emperors' period (which was a bloody long time); based on what they've indicated (and who's King of Bretonnia), we're probably somewhere around IC 2200-2250. Maybe a little later. Depends if they stick to the idea that Bretonnian Kings have extended lifespans or whatever that was by the end. Or there was just an exceptionally long reign. Anyway:
Empire - Magnus the Pious - might be around but we don't know exactly how close to The Great War they're going. Could not have been born yet.
GreenSkins - Gorbad Ironclaw - has been 'missing' for about 400-500 years by the time ToW is slated to take place. Last seen alone and surrounded by an army of dwarfs.
Vampire Counts - Vlad and Isabella Von Castein, Konrad Von Carstein, Mannfred Von Carstein - all have been 'killed' by this point. The Vampire Wars are approx 50 years behind this point.
Bretonnian - Repanse de Lyonesse - been dead for about 200 years.
Dogs of War/ Tilea - Leonardo da Miragliano - also probably dead about 150-200 years. Asarnil is alive and kicking, albeit he's probably still in Ulthuan. The rest likely won't have been close to being born.
Dwarfs - Indeed likely that most of them will have been alive at least.
Wood elves, High Elves, and Dark Elves - Potentially any of them really. Obviously Malekith, Morathi, Orion, Ariel etc. We know the Twins are around and about to do significant stuff. Alarielle is around, as are Belannaer and Korhil.
In the article they mentioned the setting being 'a couple of decades before the GWaC', so i'd say around 2250-2280, but 2200 at the earliest is also not out of the question.
This led us to events well known to fans of the Old World, the Great War Against Chaos and the Siege of Praag, two centuries before the End Times. More precisely, we decided to look into the decades prior to this legendary world-changing event.
Shuma-Gorath wrote: Special Character wise, who apart from gods, undead and daemons are actually around during this setting?
Ikit Claw, Aekold Helbrass (other warriors of chaos?) maybe some elves and/or dwarves?
Ok this who i know was alive or active during the 3 Emperors Period
If i missed any i am sorry
Spoiler:
It looks to be a bit more specific than just the general 'Three Emperors' period (which was a bloody long time); based on what they've indicated (and who's King of Bretonnia), we're probably somewhere around IC 2200-2250. Maybe a little later. Depends if they stick to the idea that Bretonnian Kings have extended lifespans or whatever that was by the end. Or there was just an exceptionally long reign. Anyway:
Empire - Magnus the Pious - might be around but we don't know exactly how close to The Great War they're going. Could not have been born yet.
GreenSkins - Gorbad Ironclaw - has been 'missing' for about 400-500 years by the time ToW is slated to take place. Last seen alone and surrounded by an army of dwarfs.
Vampire Counts - Vlad and Isabella Von Castein, Konrad Von Carstein, Mannfred Von Carstein - all have been 'killed' by this point. The Vampire Wars are approx 50 years behind this point.
Bretonnian - Repanse de Lyonesse - been dead for about 200 years.
Dogs of War/ Tilea - Leonardo da Miragliano - also probably dead about 150-200 years. Asarnil is alive and kicking, albeit he's probably still in Ulthuan. The rest likely won't have been close to being born.
Dwarfs - Indeed likely that most of them will have been alive at least.
Wood elves, High Elves, and Dark Elves - Potentially any of them really. Obviously Malekith, Morathi, Orion, Ariel etc. We know the Twins are around and about to do significant stuff. Alarielle is around, as are Belannaer and Korhil.
In the article they mentioned the setting being 'a couple of decades before the GWaC', so i'd say around 2250-2280, but 2200 at the earliest is also not out of the question.
This led us to events well known to fans of the Old World, the Great War Against Chaos and the Siege of Praag, two centuries before the End Times. More precisely, we decided to look into the decades prior to this legendary world-changing event.
Yeah, it's not entirely clear on a specific timestamp; the indication was that Louen Orc-Slayer was King; who declared an Errantry War in 2201 according to the 5th Ed book so we could be seeing the latter years of his, presumably rather extensive, reign.
I think they're aiming for a general feeling of 'World War II is on the horizon' because british.
Because British? Not sure quite what you mean by that. Like, a general 'big war is looming', sure. It's hardly a unique sentiment to one major conflict.
Kind of feel people are going to get that "nothing is really happening" setting. Because where can they go? Yes we can explore the characters of the mortal generation before the Great War - but you can't obviously have "The Great War decades before the actual Great War that everyone forgot about."
All this does is give GW scope to make new characters.
Tyel wrote: Kind of feel people are going to get that "nothing is really happening" setting. Because where can they go? Yes we can explore the characters of the mortal generation before the Great War - but you can't obviously have "The Great War decades before the actual Great War that everyone forgot about."
All this does is give GW scope to make new characters.
Old world had thousands of years of history. They can't detail everything completely before everybody in this forum is dead from old age anyway without even inventing post-end time alternative history.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/13 10:34:55
It's a fictional magic setting, they can do whatever they please with it. Hell you could have some majestic wonderful oh-gak-the-forces-of-good-push-back-chaos-and-win then have some cosmic ultragod step in and say "nope" then revert the timeline back on track because they want the end times to happen. That specific kind of rug pull can be pretty gak if done poorly mind you...
I'm not married to WFB as I never played more than one edition, but if it means interesting stories and setups them I'm happy to see retcons and "oh yeah this stuff happened 400 years ago we just never mentioned it before"
Also can some of you fine fellows please learn to trim your damn quotes, no one needs to see 4 nested quotes if you're only responding to the last paragraph
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/13 10:44:40
Tyel wrote: Kind of feel people are going to get that "nothing is really happening" setting. Because where can they go? Yes we can explore the characters of the mortal generation before the Great War - but you can't obviously have "The Great War decades before the actual Great War that everyone forgot about."
All this does is give GW scope to make new characters.
If it keeps the setting alive as a backdrop for WHFRP, Black Library books, for the possibility of a remake of Mordheim, another release of Warhammer Quest in the old World or even a new boxed game set in TOW, as a backdrop for video games and other media that's gonna be more than enough for a lot of people. Having a supported mainline game with regular apperances and support on the community pages and in WD is a very good thing for aspects of the hobby that go much farther than the Fantasy Battles game.
Would I be far off base in thinking GW just intends to make a 28mm square based analog tabletop version of their proven successful Total War Warhammer setting? How does Cathay and Kislev fit in all this?
IIRC they said somewhere that at the moment there are no plans to bring Cathay (and I believe maybe also Kislev) to the tabletop game, or something to that effect. I'm sure someone will come back with a direct quote that clarifies that thats not exactly what/how they said it and theres room for more interpretation there, but I recall it being something along those lines.
As stated, it's also for AoS purposes. Consider this from a GW point of view, if they say End Times didn't happen then it confirms that this entire thing was a gigantic blunder. And it was. We all know that, it was a flamingo up.
Yeah, no. While the rollout of AoS left much to be desired, the fairly large jump in GWs revenue and profit following the death of WHFB and the launch of Age of Sigmar tells us that WHFBs death was actually a pretty smart business move that resulted in financial success that WHFB never delivered them.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/01/13 12:59:15
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
IIRC they said somewhere that at the moment there are no plans to bring Cathay (and I believe maybe also Kislev) to the tabletop game, or something to that effect. I'm sure someone will come back with a direct quote that clarifies that thats not exactly what/how they said it and theres room for more interpretation there, but I recall it being something along those lines.
I think they've pretty explicitly said the opposite; Cathay as a setting (and a more detailed Kislev lore) have been developed by Andy Hoare and The Old World team, initially for the CAdevs to create the Total War versions (albeit with different characters in the case of Kislev) but with a view to bringing them into the tabletop. How soon after launch that happens is anyone's guess but it's definitely in the works based on what they've said thus far.
chaos0xomega wrote: Yeah, no. While the rollout of AoS left much to be desired, the fairly large jump in GWs revenue and profit following the death of WHFB and the launch of Age of Sigmar tells us that WHFBs death was actually a pretty smart business move that resulted in financial success that WHFB never delivered them.
GW's revenue was flat (slightly down) for the financial year after they killed WHFB and released AoS, AoS having been released near the start of the financial year, and revenue started to rise 1 year before the 2nd edition of AoS. So it wasn't exactly a raging success of a launch, you generally don't want to be flat on revenue in the year you release your new main product line. I'd say GW's revenue started rising when they started diversifying more, around when the revenue started rising was also when BB, Necromunda, Warhammer Quest and Underworlds first came out, and yes also them investing into new AoS releases also which they hadn't been doing for WHFB.
WHFB definitely wasn't pulling in much revenue towards the end, the last edition was divisive and GW basically were barely supporting for several years before they killed it.
I remain unconvinced that they couldn't have made WHFB into a money maker again versus killing it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/01/13 13:30:53
chaos0xomega wrote: Yeah, no. While the rollout of AoS left much to be desired, the fairly large jump in GWs revenue and profit following the death of WHFB and the launch of Age of Sigmar tells us that WHFBs death was actually a pretty smart business move that resulted in financial success that WHFB never delivered them.
8th felt like it was set up to fail, from a design perspective, a release perspective, and a commercial perspective. Designing a game that's going to result in multiple big blocks of infantry being the best way to play combined with hiking the cost and/or reducing the contents of infantry kits, and not releasing many of the things that were probably needed (or botching them) all conspire to result in a game that GW had put in a position where it was hard to get new people into and where there wasn't much new for existing players to buy.
Of course it wasn't a major revenue driver during that edition after the initial edition launch - which normally sees a sales spike - and until the start of The End Times (where people actually had new stuff to buy).
If you don't give a game the conditions it requires to thrive, don't be surprised when it doesn't.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
As stated, it's also for AoS purposes. Consider this from a GW point of view, if they say End Times didn't happen then it confirms that this entire thing was a gigantic blunder. And it was. We all know that, it was a flamingo up.
Yeah, no. While the rollout of AoS left much to be desired, the fairly large jump in GWs revenue and profit following the death of WHFB and the launch of Age of Sigmar tells us that WHFBs death was actually a pretty smart business move that resulted in financial success that WHFB never delivered them.
That fairly large jump didn't happen.
Revenue for 2014-2015 (cut off date is a month before the release of AoS) was slightly down and the 16.5 million profit higher only because the previous year saw an exceptional 4.5 million spend (without tracking that down, at a guess that was the new website that cost around that number).
Revenue in 2015-2016 (almost exclusively the duration of AoS's life, with the last month or so of that period with the promise of a quick release of the General's Handbook to fix AoS) revenue was ever so slightly lower again and profit a tiny bit up at 16.9 million. That year was propped up by an additional 4.5 million in royalties (Total Warhammer), without which post-AoS-launch numbers would have been down from the previous year.
2016-2017 was the first year to see massive increase in revenue and profit, this being the the post- General's Handbook period, as well as Gathering Storm and 8th ed marketing kicking in in the second half of that period.
Source: Publicly available investor reports on GW's website.
I'm not going to chase down exact dates but at some point GW also embraced modern marketing and start collecting sets showed up to an all around positive effect. One which was not apparent in the direct wake of the AoS launch, which means it either didn't happen or catch on that early, or its positive effects did not outweigh the negative impact AoS (and 40k 7th ed) had on GW's financials. Either way, the claim that AoS sold inherently better than Warhammer Fantasy is unsubstantiated. AoS became successful after GW invested in it in a way they never did for Fantasy.
The launch of AoS resulted in the replacement of the company's CEO and the production of a book to fix a game at what had at the time been unprecedented speed for GW. Those are not the result of sudden financial success or a smart business move.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote: Love how the whole point of this new thread was for it to not be a discussion thread and that lasted until literally the first new post on WarCom.
The issue with discussing the newest article is that it's the same as previous articles: nothing of substance with a side order of some pretty artwork. Until GW changes what information they release the discussion of their tranquilized sloth of a hype article isn't going to go much different than any other time.
As a reminder, we are now over three years after the announcement of The Old World and you needn't look further than the first post to see what we (and GW) have to show for it. Three years is a long time to discuss anything to death, especially when you consider the eagerness with which people want to engage with the project.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/01/13 13:58:49
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
tneva82 wrote: Old world had thousands of years of history. They can't detail everything completely before everybody in this forum is dead from old age anyway without even inventing post-end time alternative history.
This is an interesting idea.
So if they release the edition and its explicitly 30 years before the Great War with Chaos, do you think they'll then flit around to say the War of the Beard, that time when the Skaven almost conquered the Empire, the Vampire Wars a generation or two earlier and so on? I guess nothing stops them, Fantasy tried to be a bit temporally agnostic, but I suspect they won't.
We're lucky to be getting TOW at all, and if there's new models or updated ancient kits then even the disgruntled will have something new for playing 6th edition or whatever they like.
