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.

That and the recent Chaos Dwarf team for Blood Bowl.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
That and the recent Chaos Dwarf team for Blood Bowl.

Yes, that too - thank you for bringing it up!

(Which I should have mentioned as well as I have them, and it is what got me into the new edition of Blood Bowl!)

JWh85 wrote:


Oh, don't get me wrong. I know corporate speak and also know GW's spiel: I've been a GW customer since the early '90's. WH community has been reverting on itself on more than one occasion. However, they have been uncommonly upfront about what they will do in the forseeable future. I absolutely agree that they'll probably bring back at least some legacy armies in the future . But they've planned out the game for at least some time yet. I don't understand why people were upset that Cathay released before their legacy army; Kislev will probably be next. It'll be a good while before we see at least some legacy armies returning I think.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/GIi2Rgcm/total-war-warhammer-3-reinforcements-arrive-en-masse/

24 February 2024 (just over a year ago) an article on War Com about Total Warhammer 3 states:

“Fans of Warhammer: The Old World should note that there aren’t any current plans to bring Kislev or Grand Cathay to the tabletop for the foreseeable future.”

That was clearly untrue, unless GW considers foreseeable to be 12 months which is obviously nonsense.

bobthe4th wrote:

JWh85 wrote:


Oh, don't get me wrong. I know corporate speak and also know GW's spiel: I've been a GW customer since the early '90's. WH community has been reverting on itself on more than one occasion. However, they have been uncommonly upfront about what they will do in the forseeable future. I absolutely agree that they'll probably bring back at least some legacy armies in the future . But they've planned out the game for at least some time yet. I don't understand why people were upset that Cathay released before their legacy army; Kislev will probably be next. It'll be a good while before we see at least some legacy armies returning I think.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/GIi2Rgcm/total-war-warhammer-3-reinforcements-arrive-en-masse/

24 February 2024 (just over a year ago) an article on War Com about Total Warhammer 3 states:

“Fans of Warhammer: The Old World should note that there aren’t any current plans to bring Kislev or Grand Cathay to the tabletop for the foreseeable future.”

That was clearly untrue, unless GW considers foreseeable to be 12 months which is obviously nonsense.

I think 'foreseeable' in GW-speak just means the current hype-cycle of 3-6 months.

'3-6 months'... yeah I don't think so. What's their lead time for development again?

Mchagen wrote:
'3-6 months'... yeah I don't think so. What's their lead time for development again?

3-6 months for their public hype machine. They want nobody on the outside to know anything further than that.

Mchagen wrote:
'3-6 months'... yeah I don't think so. What's their lead time for development again?

The Marketing department on the Warhammer Community Page is reporting marketing to the customers.

The style of marketing GW has gone for over the last decades its generally short term. Focused on immediate to around a 3 month window with sometimes a few more months here and there. The only time they've ever really broken with that is if something goes wrong along the way and something gets significantly delayed or in the case of the very initial marketing for Old World returning. And even then all we basically had was some concept art for Kisleve and a picture of a square base.


"foreseeable future" in marketing talk from GW is a few months out - its not a year out or years out.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think it was prwtty clear from the getgo that what you just describrd was GWs intent in the first place.

While you're likely right, that is not a good way to inspire me to spend money on their products.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JWh85 wrote:
GW's aim has been clear from the beginning: they want the players of the legacy factions to play them in AOS.

That they put an emphasis on Bretonnia, now Cathay and in the future probably Kislev isn't surprising as those were some of the most popular factions in Total War.

They want both old players back and an influx of the Total War fans, I think.

As most legacy armies are playable in AOS (as a dark elf player I'm sad though) GW can have their cake and eat it too.

I keep being amazed by how upfront GW has been about the near future for legacy armies and people who keep being surprised and disgruntled about it.

Never said I was surprised by GW's antics. Once they blew up the game in the name of corporate greed, they pretty well lost the ability to surprise me. And I'm less 'disgruntled with GW' and more 'departed the GW Hhhobby entirely' at this point.

Doesn't mean I don't miss playing WFB, though. Especially as I look over some 12,000 points of minis I can use in TOW... and three times that many points I can't.

 Overread wrote:

Mchagen wrote:
'3-6 months'... yeah I don't think so. What's their lead time for development again?

The Marketing department on the Warhammer Community Page is reporting marketing to the customers.

The style of marketing GW has gone for over the last decades its generally short term. Focused on immediate to around a 3 month window with sometimes a few more months here and there. The only time they've ever really broken with that is if something goes wrong along the way and something gets significantly delayed or in the case of the very initial marketing for Old World returning. And even then all we basically had was some concept art for Kisleve and a picture of a square base.


"foreseeable future" in marketing talk from GW is a few months out - its not a year out or years out.

Top notch statement there, marketing department handles marketing... well done.

They had Cathay in development with a slot in their release calendar a year+ out which is the very definition of their foreseeable future. You can spin it all you want with excuses for what they do with marketing speak, but the reality was they wanted to hide Cathay for the first year so they could push the old models.

Keeping it a secret is fine, that's their option and I respect it, but they don't need to use such misleading terminology in their public statements.

 Vulcan wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think it was prwtty clear from the getgo that what you just describrd was GWs intent in the first place.

While you're likely right, that is not a good way to inspire me to spend money on their products.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JWh85 wrote:
GW's aim has been clear from the beginning: they want the players of the legacy factions to play them in AOS.

That they put an emphasis on Bretonnia, now Cathay and in the future probably Kislev isn't surprising as those were some of the most popular factions in Total War.

They want both old players back and an influx of the Total War fans, I think.

As most legacy armies are playable in AOS (as a dark elf player I'm sad though) GW can have their cake and eat it too.

I keep being amazed by how upfront GW has been about the near future for legacy armies and people who keep being surprised and disgruntled about it.

Never said I was surprised by GW's antics. Once they blew up the game in the name of corporate greed, they pretty well lost the ability to surprise me. And I'm less 'disgruntled with GW' and more 'departed the GW Hhhobby entirely' at this point.

Doesn't mean I don't miss playing WFB, though. Especially as I look over some 12,000 points of minis I can use in TOW... and three times that many points I can't.

Who says you can't? Is GW going to come into your home and burn down everything you own if you do? It's our game - we can make it like we like - even if they don't officially support it. The renegade pack that square hammer released is a good start.

A month before the current daemon prince kit was first previewed, i commented on a warcom facebook post about i dont remember what that the then-current daemon kit was crap and it would be great if they could redo it. They responded saying there was no plans to on the horizon or something like that. A month later, poof.

 nathan2004 wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think it was prwtty clear from the getgo that what you just describrd was GWs intent in the first place.

While you're likely right, that is not a good way to inspire me to spend money on their products.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JWh85 wrote:
GW's aim has been clear from the beginning: they want the players of the legacy factions to play them in AOS.

That they put an emphasis on Bretonnia, now Cathay and in the future probably Kislev isn't surprising as those were some of the most popular factions in Total War.

They want both old players back and an influx of the Total War fans, I think.

As most legacy armies are playable in AOS (as a dark elf player I'm sad though) GW can have their cake and eat it too.

I keep being amazed by how upfront GW has been about the near future for legacy armies and people who keep being surprised and disgruntled about it.

Never said I was surprised by GW's antics. Once they blew up the game in the name of corporate greed, they pretty well lost the ability to surprise me. And I'm less 'disgruntled with GW' and more 'departed the GW Hhhobby entirely' at this point.

Doesn't mean I don't miss playing WFB, though. Especially as I look over some 12,000 points of minis I can use in TOW... and three times that many points I can't.

Who says you can't? Is GW going to come into your home and burn down everything you own if you do? It's our game - we can make it like we like - even if they don't officially support it. The renegade pack that square hammer released is a good start.

First you've got to find people willing to play it instead of by-the-book TOW or AoS.

That's my real beef with GW at this point. WFB, you could easily find someone to play. Now, you've got people playing TOW, AoS, Kings of War, The 9th Age, all sorts of other games, and several past editions of WFB. Finding a group that plays the one you prefer is increasingly difficult.

chaos0xomega wrote:
A month before the current daemon prince kit was first previewed, i commented on a warcom facebook post about i dont remember what that the then-current daemon kit was crap and it would be great if they could redo it. They responded saying there was no plans to on the horizon or something like that. A month later, poof.

This is part of what I've been posting about. If their customer service department, or marketing department, etc. doesn't know, or does know and can't reveal information their response would have been better as; 'we don't know' or 'it's within the realm of possibility,' respectively--rather than blatantly lie or mislead when information is limited or secretive.

 Vulcan wrote:

Doesn't mean I don't miss playing WFB, though. Especially as I look over some 12,000 points of minis I can use in TOW... and three times that many points I can't.

You have 12k pts of WHFB stuff that doesn't have Old World stats??

If you miss playing WHFB.... Why don't you do something about that?
There's other WHFB players out there, seek them out!

Mchagen wrote:
'3-6 months'... yeah I don't think so. What's their lead time for development again?

years, so for Cathay they would have already started working before the first release
but this doesn't mean that anyone not involved in the working process would have known, but be as well that for some of the designers that they didn't know about it until adepticon

in addition, the marketing team knows nothing, they know just what they needed to write the next day and not more
and a good marketing time never writes that they don't know as the community should not get the feeling of secrecy but open communication (and that they are told everything)

ccs wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

Doesn't mean I don't miss playing WFB, though. Especially as I look over some 12,000 points of minis I can use in TOW... and three times that many points I can't.

You have 12k pts of WHFB stuff that doesn't have Old World stats??

If you miss playing WHFB.... Why don't you do something about that?
There's other WHFB players out there, seek them out!

No no, you got that wrong, they have 36000 (!) points they can't use in TOW.
I'm not into that game but I thought all armies got rules and only some profiles were left out?

Boring observation but the legacy armies would make money and GW likes money. That's always going to make it likely they show up at some point unless the whole project has been judged a failure.

I think their marketing is aimed at not cannibalising current sales. If there was some 3 year road map for all GW products it would undermine that kind of FOMO drive.

They want you buying say Brets last year because Dark Elves were never coming and Cathay was not in the foreseeable future. Not conflicted because Cathay was set to be out in 18~ months and Dark Elves might be out in 2027 depending on reception. Perhaps especially when the expected customer for the product is older and so time appears to pass faster.

It's the same as not saying a model will be refreshed because they don't want to hurt sales of the old one. Or at least not until it's time to build hype for the new product.

My guess would be it is 12k across the 9 factions in the two Big Books, and 26k across legacy factions (while also catching any models from the "core" factions where there may not currently be profiles).

Even though I'm not a collector of them, I do wish GW would get off the fence about non-Witch-Elf-Dark-Elves - the fact we're getting teases for an AOS incarnation of Chaos Dorfs before we're seeing Dark Elves over there is ridiculous. If that was going to be the case, Dark Elf Raiding Fleets really should've made it into TOW as a non-legacy list.

That's the same for all firms - they want you buying today not saving for tomorrow and GW has weekly new products all year round for the most part. They don't need to choke their marketing with stuff coming in a year because they've got a dozen new kits next week and a halfdozen the week after and the week after and the week after. There isn't even a marketing slot for next years stuff to slip into.



My impression is after Cathay they could still do legacy armies but it hits two problems

1) New people and some old fans won't want the legacy army "as much" because now there's a brand new army with ALL NEW amazing mdoels and those 30-40 year old sculpts lose some of their attraction

2) Your early legacy army customers are going to start slowing down on buying. Those Brets players will start not buying more and more horses because they can see the awesome new Cathay and they really want to see their knights look just as good. So now they are entering a waiting mode for updated models.


If Gw adds too many legacy armies at once you end up like Sisters of Battle in metal - everyone WANTING stuff but waiting for an update and GW so overloaded with armies to support they cant put the product out fast enough.

Overread, the legacy armies often have newer and better sculpts than the current crop of old world armies. It's more likely that with properly supported legacy armies that the sales of shoeless empire and fugly tomb king armies drop off a cliff if you can instead field the new saurus, grave guard or stormvermin that have all been recently updated.

Along with people having legacy collections of the legacy armies, one of the driving factors behind people wanting supported legacy armies is that they have cool models.

Yeah but those are Age of Sigmar armies and GW is VERY militant on splitting the two lines entirely.

Instead of putting square and circle bases in each box or doing what Conquest do and put rounds on the model with square slot-in adaptors; GW are instead making them two fully separate lines.

So if they brought Lizardmen back they wouldn't get their new AoS models - they'd get their previous generation Old World models just like Slaves to Darkness have.

Or they'd do what they did with Beastmen - anger AoS fans by pulling the army from one game to shove into another. Honestly I was surprised they did it once and I don't think they could do it a second time without AoS collapsing

GW wants legacy armies in TOW, but not for people to buy those models, but to give the system an existing playerbase that makes it easier to sell new armies to new players

the point of not supporting them is to phase out those armies (and players) over time and get new people in, those who don't know what was there before

PS: and I am pretty sure Beastmen are by now just in internal joke for GW that players if said faction need to rebase them on a regular basis without ever getting new models

 Overread wrote:
Yeah but those are Age of Sigmar armies and GW is VERY militant on splitting the two lines entirely.

Unless they are not, of course. What annoys me most about this specific topic is how inconsistent GW is with it:

- You get rules for Chaos Giants, usable by both WoC and BoC, but no model to buy for them. Unless you get the one listed for AoS (which is of course the right choice in this context, since the model was originally designed to be usable by Chaos factions). Could you technically use the one from the O&G range? Sure, but it is not sold as such, and the "AoS kit" actually gives you parts to build a "proper" Chaos Giant (again, as it was meant to do so).

- You get rules for Squig Herds, Squig Hoppers (with rules options they never had before), Mangler Squigs, Fanatics, Stone Trolls, River Trolls, Spider Riders and Arachnarok Spider for O&G, but no models for any of them in their regular TOW range (with the Troll variants only being sold as MtO models for a short time last year). Unless you buy from the AoS GSG range of course. From which the Squig Hopper kit also builds Boingrot Bounders, being represented in TOW by rules for cavalry spears and light armour, something not possible in previous editions of WHF and clearly meant with the intention to "just use the AoS models". I am also really generous with the Giant Cave Squig mount option here: you technically get one in the Nightgoblin Command, but are off way cheaper (and with more options) with the AoS model again.

- As for more O&G shenanigans: remember Savage Orc Bosses, Savage Orcs and Savage Orc Boar Boyz? They can all be fielded using the TOW rules, just use the Warpaint option. Remember the kits (and blister) for their models, currently not available at all? They were sold as AoS items until their culling last year alongside the Beastmen. I expect a similar story as for Beastmen, and the kits returning at some point in the not too distant future.

I feel like I forgot something, but all of this shows how not militant GW actually is. For some cases they are clearly willing to provide TOW rules only covered by AoS kits, and not all of them cover things available in the past (see Boingrot Bounders).

 Overread wrote:
Or they'd do what they did with Beastmen - anger AoS fans by pulling the army from one game to shove into another. Honestly I was surprised they did it once and I don't think they could do it a second time without AoS collapsing

What's more baffling: Dark Elves do not even represent such a massive part of the CoS range. It is not the same situation. Beastmen lost all of their AoS range and got legend'd completely. The Elven parts of CoS were also in parts cut already in the past, with the remaining kits not being that big of a portion of the CoS range anyway. I feel sorry for anybody playing AoS with only DE models, but how many of them are out there anyway?

Kodos is right, and its not just GW per se - several of the top end major tournament/event organizers have basically said in private conversation that they are allowing legacy armies for now because they cant fill tables without them, but that once demand reaches the point that the events are selling out and theres significant enough excess demand they are going to cut suppoet for legacy in their events as they are losing out on a lot of support or whatever from GW over it.

Also, I keep going back to Chorfs as an example point as to why legacy factions are not on the docket. Theres no competition for them, theres no chaos dwarf army in AoS (yet), the entire model range is in resin and will not be used by any future AoS army, its an "evil" faction so it could have given TOW fans the much desired but ultimately unnecessaey and arbitrary "balance" of 5 good vs 5 evil factions, even though they are more modern aculpts than most of TOW the prive point on the army would limit that from impacting sales of old TK models, etc.

And yet, they are legacy.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Kodos is right, and its not just GW per se - several of the top end major tournament/event organizers have basically said in private conversation that they are allowing legacy armies for now because they cant fill tables without them, but that once demand reaches the point that the events are selling out and theres significant enough excess demand they are going to cut suppoet for legacy in their events as they are losing out on a lot of support or whatever from GW over it.

Always amazes me how consistently TOs cuck for GW over some nebulous potential of future "support" at the expense of getting the game played. Same with adamant refusal to allow prints or recasts in many events.

 Darnok wrote:
the "AoS kit" actually gives you parts to build a "proper" Chaos Giant (again, as it was meant to do so).

Including the proper base!

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Darnok wrote:
the "AoS kit" actually gives you parts to build a "proper" Chaos Giant (again, as it was meant to do so).

Including the proper base!

Indeed! And it is hilarious.

Well as I wrote January last year (in another forum)

"...for GW forseeable future is 6-12 months, maybe 18." Seems I was spot on.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

bobthe4th wrote:

JWh85 wrote:


Oh, don't get me wrong. I know corporate speak and also know GW's spiel: I've been a GW customer since the early '90's. WH community has been reverting on itself on more than one occasion. However, they have been uncommonly upfront about what they will do in the forseeable future. I absolutely agree that they'll probably bring back at least some legacy armies in the future . But they've planned out the game for at least some time yet. I don't understand why people were upset that Cathay released before their legacy army; Kislev will probably be next. It'll be a good while before we see at least some legacy armies returning I think.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/GIi2Rgcm/total-war-warhammer-3-reinforcements-arrive-en-masse/

24 February 2024 (just over a year ago) an article on War Com about Total Warhammer 3 states:

“Fans of Warhammer: The Old World should note that there aren’t any current plans to bring Kislev or Grand Cathay to the tabletop for the foreseeable future.”

That was clearly untrue, unless GW considers foreseeable to be 12 months which is obviously nonsense.

I think 'foreseeable' in GW-speak just means the current hype-cycle of 3-6 months.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Kodos is right, and its not just GW per se - several of the top end major tournament/event organizers have basically said in private conversation that they are allowing legacy armies for now because they cant fill tables without them, but that once demand reaches the point that the events are selling out and theres significant enough excess demand they are going to cut suppoet for legacy in their events as they are losing out on a lot of support or whatever from GW over it.

Always amazes me how consistently TOs cuck for GW over some nebulous potential of future "support" at the expense of getting the game played. Same with adamant refusal to allow prints or recasts in many events.

by now there are enough people making good money with tournaments, so they do anything to keep the money flowing

I wouldn't start counting my chickens yet if I were whoever that tournament organizer is. The Old World tournament players might not be Horus Heresy players, but they're not 40K players either, they'll be very resistant to the idea of bucking off the legacy factions. GW doesn't do anything for tournaments anyway, organizers are far more likely to write their own set of competitive game rules and army lists than dump armies because GW won't update the legacy army lists. That's very much the wrong crowd to be planning to approach with that kind of mindset.